What if...

What if Hitler didn't make so many mistakes like diverting troops to the Caucasus every so often wasting fuel (over stretching his forces). Trying to figure if Germany could win the war. So what mistakes did you think he made which could of been big enough to influence the war

Mistake #1 - he started the war.

cephalos wrote:
Mistake #1 - he started the war.

QFT

Well we wouldn't have Company of Heroes without it, is a vague way of looking at it :OOOO
Sorry didn't mean it like it's worded :/

Last edited January 10, 2012 at 11:02 PM by Icebreaker125

Lol man you're serious? I would have given a fuckin' million copies of Company of Heroes if the war had never been breaking out. What's worse - A world war with millions of casualties or one less game on the globe?

Icebreaker125 wrote:
Well we wouldn't have Company of Heroes without it, is a vague way of looking at it :OOOO

It's also a pretty dark way to look at it. I cannot take you seriously when you post this.

Hitler could have finished off England if he would have eliminated the British Airdromes first, then worried about shock and awe followed by an invasion. This would have crippled the western allies ability to attack him. Also, to many resources were wasted in Africa. That was an unnecessary front, regardless of Italy's current incompetence. (No offense Cranial) I always used to say that Germany should not have invaded Russia but it seems Stalin would have attacked anyway as there were documents uncovered that point to a Soviet invasion of Nazi held Europe. But this is just a thought.

MaxiKing6 wrote:
Lol man you're serious? I would have given a fuckin' million copies of Company of Heroes if the war had never been breaking out. What's worse - A world war with millions of casualties or one less game on the globe?

well... no Blitzkrieg, no CoH, no Sudden Strike, no Call of Duty, no BF1942, no Medal of Honor, no Hearts of Iron 1/2/3, no Wolfenstein, no Men of War... and it's just the beginning of the list. Also no Cold War era games, and many, many more.

Basically remember that CoH is based on WW2... so Icebreaker is somehow right... however I agree with Maxi - games aren't worth it. Hell I could even play Sims only if the war didn't happen...

Cranialwizard wrote:

Icebreaker125 wrote:
Well we wouldn't have Company of Heroes without it, is a vague way of looking at it :OOOO

It's also a pretty dark way to look at it. I cannot take you seriously when you post this.

Guys I think this was meant to be a joke :P. Obviously a $15 dollor game isnt worth around 40-50 million casualties (dead, wounded, etc) ::)

I think Hitler did not consolidate his forces and over extended his forces too much. He was fighting 3 fronts and one of which was a waste IMO (Battle of Britain) and lost many good German pilots. Operation Barbossa (I think thats the name) in Russia Hitler probably didnt have to launch until later (Stalin was reported to have been very surpised by this news and at first was in denial). The entire war itself was launched too early as the Italians were not ready yet (supplies and troop wise). And once Hitler started taking command and sending out semi dumb orders (no retreat or aid in stailngrad IIRC) it was game over :P

If I remember right Germany werent ready either. The german navy would have been ¨war ready¨ somewhere about 1946 they told Hitler. And he was all like FUCK THE RULES <3

HerrVoss wrote:
Hitler could have finished off England if he would have eliminated the British Airdromes first, then worried about shock and awe followed by an invasion. This would have crippled the western allies ability to attack him. Also, to many resources were wasted in Africa. That was an unnecessary front, regardless of Italy's current incompetence. (No offense Cranial)

None taken, but I would like to point that Rommel regarded Italians as braver soldiers in Africa than his own. Italians also fought on the eastern front.

Cranialwizard wrote:

HerrVoss wrote:
Hitler could have finished off England if he would have eliminated the British Airdromes first, then worried about shock and awe followed by an invasion. This would have crippled the western allies ability to attack him. Also, to many resources were wasted in Africa. That was an unnecessary front, regardless of Italy's current incompetence. (No offense Cranial)

Italians also fought on the eastern front.

Hmmm this I honetly didn't  know :P. How many where on the Eastern Front ???

Plenty, plenty enough that the Italians designed a Tank Destroyer (which never made it to the Eastern Front BTW) to combat the T-34 after they saw how weak their current weapons were. They were one of the largest contributors to that front after the Finnish and Hungarians. They served at Stalingrad IIRC and throughout the Southern USSR.

neosdark wrote:
Plenty, plenty enough that the Italians designed a Tank Destroyer (which never made it to the Eastern Front BTW) to combat the T-34 after they saw how weak their current weapons were. They were one of the largest contributors to that front after the Finnish and Hungarians. They served at Stalingrad IIRC and throughout the Southern USSR.

Did they still use Italian gear or did they use German gear ???

They used mainly Italian gear but I have heard and seen photos of Italians armed with PPSh-41s and using captured T-34s similar to the Germans

Fishhunterx wrote:

neosdark wrote:
Plenty, plenty enough that the Italians designed a Tank Destroyer (which never made it to the Eastern Front BTW) to combat the T-34 after they saw how weak their current weapons were. They were one of the largest contributors to that front after the Finnish and Hungarians. They served at Stalingrad IIRC and throughout the Southern USSR.

Did they still use Italian gear or did they use German gear ???

Italian for the most part. But I'm sure they may have used German tanks in certain divisions. They most likely captured enemy weapons too... Italy was an agrarian society when the war broke out and thus they did not have the manufacturing capacity for tanks and weapons as did other countries like Germany and USA.

I would love to see the typical COD ww2 game where you got to fight this ¨rare¨ nations. An example that you in the Russian campaigne in Stalingrad in various levels fight italians for example. That would be awesome!  I know people are like why not let the player be one the axis side? But sadly in our world there is never going to be a game where you play on any side associated with the holocaust and such horrible themes. Well, at least not in the nearest couples of years :> I know that COD: The big Red one actually were kind of unique because there you fought italians and even Vichyfrench troops! :D

I think the EF forum are Pros when it comes to going off topic in threads btw XD
I would like to blaim Hitler being the main reason. A guy with war experiance from ww1 trying to lead a ¨modern¨ global conflict instead of letting his educated in the genre generals do that .
Well well, Its only a good thing it happen to be that way. The bad guys lost! :>

IIRC Hitler had an old style of commanding where what he said goes and no one said other wise and if you did you got in trouble. And if you broke the rules or disobeyed command you got into even more trouble :P. Not what an effective leader should do.

Sommarkatze wrote:
I think the EF forum are Pros when it comes to going off topic in threads btw XD

I agree ;D. Professional spammers :D

I would assume that this thread isn't off topic as it points out mistakes related to the Germans and the axis side in general.

It's well known that Hitler had a shitty command authority and had excellent generals at his side but when it came time to lay the law down he made bad decisions. Had the war dragged on for another year perhaps the outcome may have differed because of German technological advances like the Jet Plane.

I don't think the ME262 would have made such a difference if the war dragged out even a year or two longer. The British already had the Gloster Meteor which worked quite well and the Americans would have P-80 Shooting Stars by September 1945. Both of those were mass producible designs and the ME262 wouldn't have the numbers to beat them while fending off the American Bombers

For all the German technological advances, chances are: They were still screwed :P

Screw the what if..., even Hitler wasnt borned, WWII will erupt anyway except that the belligerents are now the Allied and Communism Forces. Then the game industry still find ideas to make a worldwide millions-billions $ worth bussiness. At least we don't have games about cold war after that. Forget about Hitler please except when you just put something longer than 1 meter and sharp to his ass.

I remembered there is a sign Africa wrote about Italian soldiers in WW2 like something: "Had enough courage but not enough fortune". Confirm?

Dann88 wrote:
I remembered there is a sign Africa wrote about Italian soldiers in WW2 like something: "Had enough courage but not enough fortune". Confirm?

The Italians are infamous for being ill-couragous...but I really do think it was a reason of bad luck and equipment. Carcanos froze often in colder conditions for a good example.

Basically the Italians weren't prepared for the war and IMO Japan wasn't necessarily ready either to face the US (even though hstorians say that WW2 started when Japan invaded Manchuria, so theoretically they started it off) but Hitler said "Fuck it! Im starting my blitz anyways!".

And reports say that Stalin believed that Hitler was honest in his peace treaty (forgot the name) so really, Operation Barbossa was unnecessary that early on in the war. Sure you have the element of surprise but that doesnt account for crap if you dont actually have something to surprise them with :P

Fishhunterx wrote:
And reports say that Stalin believed that Hitler was honest in his peace treaty (forgot the name) so really, Operation Barbossa was unnecessary that early on in the war. Sure you have the element of surprise but that doesnt account for crap if you dont actually have something to surprise them with :P

I agree, it may have been too early for Hitler to strike, but on that same token, neither was the USSR. Given the option to strike one or two years in the future I think Stalin may have been the aggressor, especially with the T-34 in mass production. At the beginning of the war Stalin was in "Oh Shit" mode.

I forget when the T-34 actually started coming into production (someone enlighten me) But Stalin wouldv'e had a crap load of them. Then again, Hitler would have a crap load of panzers too (cause they dont all haul their ass to Stalingrad just to freeze :P). In fact if Hitler didnt need to attack USSR then he could've gven Rommel the forces he needed to take the Suez Canal and control the reasources he needed.

Also Japan may have been pissed that the US had set up an embargo on them, but attacking Pearl Harbor was like on of the last few victories of the war on their side. The turing point of the Pacific is considerd to be Midway which IMO is kinda sad. After that its mainly losses and destruction :'(. And by doing this, the US then had the green light to begin assaulting Germany's and Itlay's forces.

In addition beofre Pearl Harbor the US had been lead leasing supplies and tried to stay neutral. Now it was sending as much stuff as it could in order to end the war. And US wase certainly ready to outproduce Germany's factories :-X

Hitler could have won the war if he hadn't declared war on the US for the lulz

Hitler declaring war on the U.S kinda shows loyalty to his allies, Japan had started that war, so for better or worse he joined (he might not have had too)

BTW, never invade Russia  :P

dragonmith wrote:
(he might not have had too)

He HAD to declare the war.

In a way war is a healthy to our human nature, if it wasnt for wars we wouldnt have some technology we use today such as nuclear powered things and even cars! (since the egyptians created the wheel for military purposes) otherwise it would have been in way where every country is a whole ( which is highly unlikely)

War can help technologically but it takes a huge toll on our reasources

Urmm the people of Phoenicia invented the Wheel from whence it spread across the world, Matt.

And war is a necessity. Its called population control. Like we could use some war against China right about now, or better yet India vs. China, great way of decreasing out worlds population. A swathe of MG bullets at a time.

Well Im pretty sure there are better ways to maintian population than through machine guns  :P

neosdark wrote:
Urmm the people of Phoenicia invented the Wheel from whence it spread across the world, Matt.

And war is a necessity. Its called population control. Like we could use some war against China right about now, or better yet India vs. China, great way of decreasing out worlds population. A swathe of MG bullets at a time.

You guys gave nuclear tech to Pakistan. Now look where that got you. They gave it to Iran and North Korea. The wheel was developed separately across many cultures.

neosdark wrote:
A Like we could use some war against China right about now

sounds like another mod i know.....

If Im correct the wheel originated in Mesopotamia. Or around the region :P

I disagree that the Luftwaffe was "easily beaten" It was a near thing. "Never have so many owed so much to so few"... etc

Sealion could never have succeeded without the neutralization of the Royal Navy. For all of the Kriegsmarine's innovations during the interwar years I don't think it was up to the challenge. Especially since the Poles had given the Brits the German Enigma naval code in 1936 or so. The allies knew all the sailing orders for the Kriegsmarine through out the war.

Otto wrote:
I disagree that the Luftwaffe was "easily beaten" It was a near thing. "Never have so many owed so much to so few"... etc

Sealion could never have succeeded without the neutralization of the Royal Navy. For all of the Kriegsmarine's innovations during the interwar years I don't think it was up to the challenge. Especially since the Poles had given the Brits the German Enigma naval code in 1936 or so. The allies knew all the sailing orders for the Kriegsmarine through out the war.

Seems like the allies were map hacking

Cheaters always win but only real players enjoy the victory.

The Battle of Britain was full of close calls, and strange turns. The Luftwaffe started strong by attacking coastal radar sites and airbases. The initial bombing of London was accidental IIRC, but it continued nonetheless. Otto is right, the Luftwaffe was very close to finishing off the RAF when they halted operations.

However, a number of strategists and historians have looked at Operation Sealion and concluded that getting onto British soil was not the serious issue Germany faced. They could get onto Britain, but not in sufficient numbers. What little forces they did manage to land could not have lasted against a halfway decent British resistance, let alone a strong one. The technology of the time just wasn't sufficient to allow Germany to pull off such an operation.

I continue to believe his biggest mistake was not allowing his generals to command, all the orders had to have been approved by him, another was the fact that had he taken out the RAF's airfields/airdomes instead of bombing London, he'd have been able to take out Britain in late '41 early '42.  The only thing Hitler could have done about Stalin is to build up an iron wall to the east, convince Japan not to attack the US and get the US to help in the war with the USSR. Hitler would have had nukes by '47 if that had happened, and the USSR would be seen as Nazi Germany is today, the 1000 year Reich could have still been around.

Phi wrote:
I continue to believe his biggest mistake was not allowing his generals to command, all the orders had to have been approved by him, another was the fact that had he taken out the RAF's airfields/airdomes instead of bombing London, he'd have been able to take out Britain in late '41 early '42.  The only thing Hitler could have done about Stalin is to build up an iron wall to the east, convince Japan not to attack the US and get the US to help in the war with the USSR. Hitler would have had nukes by '47 if that had happened, and the USSR would be seen as Nazi Germany is today, the 1000 year Reich could have still been around.

Public Opinion in the US would have never allowed that to happen. Though the US played it's Neutral card until Pearl Harbor, if anything, it would have never lended a hand to the Axis powers, they already had too much of a heavy investment economically in the Allies and culturally with the English.

Same way in WWI. Even if the US didn't code break the Zimmerman note, they still would have sided with the Allies unless attacked by one of them. They had much less economic ties to the Central Powers and did not share a common anything with them in all actuality.

Trooper425 wrote:
The Battle of Britain was full of close calls, and strange turns. The Luftwaffe started strong by attacking coastal radar sites and airbases. The initial bombing of London was accidental IIRC, but it continued nonetheless. Otto is right, the Luftwaffe was very close to finishing off the RAF when they halted operations.

However, a number of strategists and historians have looked at Operation Sealion and concluded that getting onto British soil was not the serious issue Germany faced. They could get onto Britain, but not in sufficient numbers. What little forces they did manage to land could not have lasted against a halfway decent British resistance, let alone a strong one. The technology of the time just wasn't sufficient to allow Germany to pull off such an operation.

The reason behind the failure of Luftwaffe in Battle of Britain is simply; lack of strategic vision.

When Luft engaged the operation, they had the largest fleet ( 2500 planes ), they had the best bombing squads, zillion of good hunter pilots and technologically superior equipment. That figures gave Goering an overconfidence and couldn't decide what to destroy first. They wasted time by attacking convoys for 2 weeks, then to train stations ( why?), factories, coast defense emplacements and even to fishing shacks. Large manpower simply was wasted by lack of strategical planning.

Even RAF admits that if German Air force would focus on only the airports, none of the new produced Spitfires would have a chance to take off to engage the bombers so the Operation Sealion would be successful. However commanders didn't do that and they divided their forces to attack unnecessary targets.

More tragic thing about what kind of mind was behind this force is ; radar. Axis knew what is a radar but they completely misunderstood it's function. 1940 June when they ddetected the radar of British forces, instead of avoiding it they said "Oh it's good that they see us, so they can bring whatever they have so we can destroy all at once" Lol. Ofc RAF was not that idiot so acc to radar reports they always divided their hunter squadrons and harras the incoming enemy from diff points so the made Luft annoyed, stalled them in order to finish their fuel and run back before making huge damage.

So when the Luft becomes let's say "useless", they began Terror doct. Night bombings to industrial areas etc. but instead of strategical focusing, they again discussed the tactical aspects and couldn't make the necessary damage again. When they checked the intelligence reports saying that British industry is expanding despite the bombings, they simply got stunned.

Battle of Britain is the best example of self failure because of your enormous power. 

Didnt read nothing till now.
Just the Subject.

Here is my point of view - Russians build thanks that are easy to build faaster and in large numbers.
Americans did the same.

Germans dont do it that way. They try to invest much time in tehnology. And their thanks in 1v1 fights are better, but they lack in numbers and production.

Soviets (according some film I found somewhere) where down to 1 tank factory , but they produced so fast and so many tanks that Germans cant stop them.

I am not historican , so maybe I am wrong, but for now I believe that Germans didnt manage to produce enought numbers of their tanks and their 1,2, .... 100 or 1000 supertanks cant save their asses ... and they didnt.

IMO: Hitler's greatest ally in winning Germany was himself, and his greatest enemy when losing Germany was himself

Bread wrote:
IMO: Hitler's greatest ally in winning Germany was himself, and his greatest enemy when losing Germany was himself

I dare say QFT

@ Dreamerbg: Your analysis of Soviet and Amis production philosophy is not bad but I don't think it holds water for the Germans. The Pz III chassis, (Stug) and the Pz Iv chassis were far and away the most produced and had the largest kill rates of all weapons in the Heer. The Germans early on had a misconception regarding the effectiveness of their light tanks and medium tanks. Although the Pz VI was in development quite early Germany sold the equipment to produce Cast Cuervilinear Armor to the Soviets in 1938. This came back to haunt them when the Sovs used this equipment to producew the IS2 and IS3 series of tanks. The Germans just didn't think this level of tecnology would be required in this war!

Keep in mind, the German war machine was tooled for a 5 month war. Then Hitler decided, hell ,why not invade Russia. It's not like dozens of military armies that vastly overpowered the Russians and then froze to death have anything to teach me. In fact, let me delay a bit while I fap and try to get off on England after I take over France and the low countries.

The 'cheap' T34 far outclassed anything the Germans had when they first encountered it. Only their better coordination and use of their armor permitted them to beat the T34. Even in France, the Char B1 bis and Valentine/Matilda were nigh invulnerable to anything the Germans had,  it was their poor use that got them killed. The only thing the Germans had that could stand a remote chance vs. Allied armor was an 88 screen, and only Erwin Rommel made sense to employ in any significant capacity, and even then, only towards the end of the battle.

Germany was prepared for a fast war of sweeping success, basically, "5 PG -> T2 -> 2+ IHTs -> baserush and fuck teching" was their gameplan. It was Hermann Göring's utter incompitence with the Luftwaffe, and Hitler's singleminded obsession with Stalingrad that (IMHO) ultimately doomed the German war machine--disregard "Oh, if they'd just produced the Pz IV, they'd be fine". The Russians still would have outperformed them in every production capacity, and the Pz IV production lines would be an even bigger target--when they would get put out of action via Anglo-American bombing raids, the entire Germand armored output (instead of part of it) would be destroyed.

Hey Volks!

Your analysis is pretty good. Germany was banking on a lightning war. The Nazi's sold the equipment and technology to build IS tanks to USSR in 1938. They didn't think they would need them. -On the other hand the Tiger was planned for quite early. Goering was a clown and Hitler was obsessed with micromanagement which certainly played havoc with the military planning and execution. His Stand or Die orders at Stalingrad were repeated many times. In particular at El Alamein and in Tunisia his obsession cost the Heer the services of Panzer Army Afrika. If these troops had been allowed to retreat then evacuate to Sicily. This would have delayed Allied Operations in Sicily and Italy and made the Italian Theater much more costly then it was. It was bloody enough anyway. Without airbases in Italy the Amis air assault on Oil production would have been much less effective. By Summer of 1944 Patton remarked on the use of horse drawn artillery in France.

Hitlers's interference with Guderian's decision to focus on anti-tank production in late 1941 when Guderian was Panzer Inspector General was questionable to say the least. Similarly the pursuit of Super Heavy tanks must be viewed as a waste of resources. However German AFV production increased every month up until late winter of 1944-5. The Allied bombing campaigns did not prevent that.

The Air onslaught did however cripple the aircraft industry. Here again one wonders what the effects on aircraft production might have been without the resources devoted to oddities like ME 463. Goerings's decision to employ the ME 263 as a bomber  must also be viewed as contributing to the problem This aircraft could have been employed perhaps 18 months earlier as CAP and might have seriously hampered the Allied air effort. In the long run the loss of German fighter pilots led to the success of the air campaign. Of approximately 6000 fighter pilots in the Luftwaffe only a couple hundred survived the war.

Your analysis of Soviet production is good but does not consider one salient issue. Hitler did not plan for Amis intervention. He did everything he could to prevent the Japanese from provoking the USA into war. Must of been interesting to see his reaction on December 7 1941!  :P Amis and British lend-Lease efforts allowed the Soviets the opportunity to concentrate their production on AFVs. The trucks and aircraft provided relieved the Soviets of the need for multiple production lines. The P39 and AirCobra had their greatest successes when flown by Soviet pilots. IIRC 4 of the top 10 Soviet Aces flew these planes. They were used as CAP not Ground Attack incidentally.

Another factor contributing to Allied success was their premere supremacy in the field of code breaking. Time and again both Japanese and German efforts were thwarted by Anglo Allied prior Intel. Thanks to their Polish Allies the Brits obtained the German naval code in 1936. They knew the sailing dates and virtually every communique of the Kriegsmarine throughout the war. The Soviets were very successful with their espionage efforts as well but they apparently concentrated on obtaining information about the USA. Stalin knew about the bomb before President Truman did.

In the long run I think Germany's Russian Adventure was doomed to failure. The strength of the Communist System, (compared to the Tsarist system), wouldn't have been toppled as in 1917. Without the prospect of a negotiated settlement I don't think Hitler could have prevailed against the strength and tenacity of the Soviet peoples on their home turf.

Pac-Fish wrote:
For all the German technological advances, chances are: They were still screwed :P

Germans pimped their already pimped out rides. Russians were like: Germans are pimping their stuff again........USE LARGER GUNS!!!!! (BL-10 152mm anyone? *cough*) TIME TO UNPIMP HIS RIDE!!!!!!!!! So that is why they were quite screwed.