No Panzer IV.No Tiger.No Tiger II.No jadgtiger.No stug IV.What if all the germans had produced was panther since 1938.Would they have won?
>>65498834>Would they have won?no, their problems went a lot deeper than what tank they used.
>>65498834sure, why not
>>65498834Their only chance at a victory was destroying the British Army at Dunkirk. What could an all-Panther armoured force contribute towards that goal?
>>65498845No. Their only chance was keeping the US out of the war by any means necessary. This includes backing off from the UK after the battle of france. To not give either churchill or roosevelt the excuse they needed to whip up the nations for war. The strategic bombing campaign alone was justified as a response to the failed blitz and subsequent impotent terror bombing of the UK.Burgers would still find a way to try and help fucking stalin, but german chances improve if the western front activity is largely passive. With a stand-off with the low morale UK and FDR seething that the germ chuds are not giving him justification to declare war on them The whole fate of WW2 always comes back to that invulnerable factory, hidden behind gigantic oceans, spamming everybody to death
>since 1938The earliest it would or could have existed was 1942.If the Panther had been in serial production since, let's say, mid 1942 and additionally the various engineering and production, materials/manufacturing QC (e.g. final drives) issues had been solved by 1943 and the PzKpfw V would have been in full rate production and deployment by the beginning of that year in lieu of the PzKpfw IV, Germany still wouldn't 'have won'. (Even if they won a few tactical and strategic land war victories along the way) Too many logistical, critical resource supply problems and mistakes as a result of having invaded Russia.>stug IVOught never have been built or conceived, the StuG III was plenty good enough. But it was a consequence of simply not having enough AFVs available late in the war and also the arbitrary schizo nature of German high command and procurement at that late-stage time interval.As the others said, not about 'what tank they used' and (perhaps speculatively) somehow keeping the U.S. out of the war which wasn't going to happen.
Assault tanks lacking a rotating turret were ill-suited for mobile defensive operations. At the same time, their deployment could not be limited solely to ambushes.
One thing people need to remember is that your enemy is reactive. When the US's Sherman tank entered the war with its 75mm medium velocity gun, the targets it was armed to defeat were the Panzer II, III and IV which worked fine and the Panther armor was in part a response. If you lay down the Panther card in 38 as your main tank, then no one is going to faff about with 6 pounders or medium velocity 3" guns. The Panthers armor will be the first milestone everyone is trying to overcome. I don't think it's happy time will last more than a year before the Allies are rolling out solutions, perhaps ad hoc solutions at first like assault guns and then later as the standard tank gun.
>>65498834If Brits decided in 1939 to cut to the chase and only build Centurion would it have made a difference.
>>65498834>Mass final drives grenading taking their readiness rates down to early war T-34 transmission levels.It would be mobility kills all around for the Nazis and Soviets.
Since this is a retarded thread I figure I'll pitch a question for the room to debate.At the start of WWII you can grant any one primary combatant the capability to perform aerial refueling reliably. The nation you choose will be instantly granted a limited force of tanker variants of any production aircraft of your choosing, alongside the required modifications to original timeline aircraft to enable refueling. We will presume that the methodology/training/doctrine required to ensure a level of integration into the air forces has already taken place. These advances may not be transferred to allies, although nothing prevents joint operations.Which nation would benefit most from this?
>>65498834People who think Germany lost because of one thing (usually people say what if they had more stgs, what if they had more 262s, what if they had more panthers ect) are fucking stupid and don't know why Germany lost the war
>>65499145The obvious answer is giving the US fighter escorts extended range, but I don't think trying to do a2a refueling over occupied Europe is going to lead to anything but shot down tankers. Germany might have a better chance having He111 tankers over the Channel to let the 109s top off before entering British airspace
>>65498910(if referring to Germany's StuGs) Germany was on the defensive after 1942 but there were plenty of ground actions especially on the Eastern front that went both ways, and by 1943 the the Sturmartillerie, its commanders and troops (not to mention the technical/weapons modifications to the AFVs themselves) had adapted on the battlefield beyond what the original 1930s doctrinal intent of the vehicles and divisions were.RE: (lack of turret), the StuG's low silhouette was always a big advantage in defensive or offense combat.>>65499090Correct this is another thing about the 1940-45 AFV ground arms race that is relatively neglected in the 'tank tank tank' discussions. A lot of what happened in the late 1930s through the end of the war was driven by what type and caliber/power of anti-tank gun, could be deployed by each side in order to defeat what was the thickest or most-resistant armor of the enemy. Whether vehicle (AFV) or drawn-carriage mounted
What if they only produced the Type 3 Chi-Nu (三式中戦車 チヌ) instead?
Most of the weapons that brought victory to the United States were already in development before the country entered the war.
>>65499172>>65499145>a2a refueling over occupied Europe is going to lead to anything but shot down tankersThis. Aerial refuelling tankers are going to be traveling at 300 mph or (much) less, in the pre-1946 timeframe
They would have won if they only made sturmtigers.Is there anything that can survive its shot?
>>65498834they would have run out of fuel
>>65499185(You) the same one that made the Ha-Go thread?>>65499202>if they only made Jagdpanthersftfy
>>65498834Get a time machine, influence them to do that, and then we'll see.
>>65499145Japan probably, though I don't think it's terribly useful for anyone at war start.
>>65498864I mean Hitler declared war on the United States not the other way around. As with all things relating to Germany in WWII the only way to attempt better what ifs is to suppose that Hitler wasn’t a turbo retard, which if you start doing that you arguably don’t get WWII at all.Either way any delay of full American entry just means B-29’s and atomic warheads are what take out Germany, not Russia raping their way through Berlin.
Better tank question:So for long-barrel guns we had the 8.8 cm Flak, and as a result we got the 8.8cm KwK 36 & 43. We also had the 7.5 cm KwK 40 & 42. Four primary long-barrel guns above 5cm. WHAT IF, with the benefit of hindsight, ONE gun is made: a compact 8.8cm, just like the D-5T. It would be ideal for general tank use: better HE than a 7.5 without sacrificing penetration or requiring a substantial chassis. No need for the overkill of the larger guns, just take the KwK36 and make it compact.
>>65499418The best combination Germany had as of 1943 was KwK 42 in the Panther and KwK 43 in the Jagdpanther <--those should have been the two primary Wehrmacht main battle AFVs produced during the last half of the war.(with small quantities of KwK 43-armed Sd Kfz 182, and even smaller quantities of Pak 44 L/55-armed Sd Kfz 186)
>>65499185In 1938? It'd be a pretty good tank. Mobile, rugged and reliable from what we know. Turret ring larger than Panzer IV and Pather leaves some room for upgrades, although suspension might not take a lot more. If produced from 38 to 45, they would have been able to optimise production, thus stomping the price down.
>>65499418>like the D-5TLiterally everyone back then had multiple 75mm/76mm/3"/77mm etc types.Same for 88mm/90mm/3.5", and probably 100mm/105mm/4"The Soviets even managed to keep the clusterfuck going at 122mm. Plus a whole shitload of older types of 36mm/37mm/40mm and 47mm and 50mm.Doesn't make a lot of sense, but that is what you get when you have three or four different commands/bureaus/minsitries/etc. developing artillery, tank guns and AA guns (bonus if you also have AA guns and secondairy guns for ships in the mix).
>>65499540I'd argue that Chi-Nu is a good tank well into 1943, and probably through 1944 by most standards
>>65499553>effectively zero armor, one hull MG, and an OK 75mm at 20 tonsIt's a light tank on the level of Hungarian vehicles
>>65499578Adding more machine guns is the easiest thing to start with and Japanese were going to put the longer 75mm into it as soon as they got the production running. It doesn't even need a particularly compact gun to fit into that big turret.
>>65499597core point being>were going to
>>65498864I think war fever after beating France was just way too significant of a factor to entertain Germany hitting the brakes in anyway. I think the more interesting counterfactual is if France managed to hold their ground. Maybe Germany never kicks it off with the USSR because they don't want a two front war again and the whole thing settles into a long continental cold war
>>65499145>>65499172I'd say its going to be America / the bongs and for what I'm thinking the bongs need it earlier. Reliable aerial refueling would allow the air cover gap in the Atlantic to be closed a lot earlier allowing more convoy resources to make it through.
>>65498834Why is faggot OP making dozens of these retarded threads?
>>65498877The StuG IV was a stopgap vehicle built using existing hulls that had been produced for the stagnating Jagspanzer IV project, to make up for bombing damage to the StuG III hull production lines. (StuG III production fell ~90% from October to December 1943 and took several months to recover.)
>>65499758retard question slide threads generalyl indicate something exploded in Russia
>>65498834No. Germany committed innumerable errors that boiled down to a dogshit leadership.
>>65500036And there's the projection. Just as expected.
>>65499788checked, yep
>>65498834What if the Germans instead broke reality and turned their entire army into anime girls instead?
>>65500332>seething butthurt and projedting his tourist status over a marichka picCan you at least display more than one trick, vatnigger?
>>65500353>What if the Germans instead broke reality and turned their entire army into anime girls instead?
>>65499765Even with refueling I don't think that's feasible for Japan. The distance needed for a strike on California would require an absurd amount of tankers and flight crews probably needing to stay awake over a day. It would be more of a challenge than the Brits faced getting a couple Vulcans over the Falkands, and at best you get a handful of Bettys over San Fransisco?
>>65498834>The Germans had barely any fuel the whole war>What if the Germans used exclusively armor that drank fuel even faster?
>>65499162These people say these things because they think winning fights wins the war. Which, yeah, makes sense if you dont understand how war works. Sure if Germany had better tanks and more assault rifles they probably would win a lot more engagements and skirmishes. But, nah, logistics and manufacturing capacity win battles. You can have the best generals in the world and top tier weaponry but you're still fucked if you're outnumbered and cant afford to lose some stuff along the way. You're especially extra fucked if you cant resupply whatever units do stay alive.
>>65498834The army that can afford to spend 20 grenades taking one position and expending all their ammo doing it wins stuff. Even if your weapons systems are borderline sci-fi tech, you can easily get fucked over if you cant resupply it.
>>65500605>The raids did minimal damage to the runway and damage to radars was quickly repairedImpressive
>country perpetually low on fuel>country low on crews and training time/fuel for training >tank parks sat idle throughout the entire war for lack of crews and fuel>"The problem is they didn't have enough tanks"No.
>>65501559So the argies were able to use the airfield to defend the island?
>>65499758Browns are taking a lot of Ls lately so they're trying to slide.
>>65501909>Argentine ground crew repaired the runway within twenty-four hours>The runway continued to be used by Argentine C-130 Hercules transport aircraft until the end of the waryeah
>>65498845If only germany had had a unitary gasket and oiling nipple standard for their supply trucks at the onset of barbarossa, hitler would've won ww2 slam dunk. As things were, the war was inevitably lost before it even began
>>65498834>Would they have won?It takes more than a decent tank that breaks down a lot to defeat a classic balance of power dynamic. Apparently, the current meta is political/financial subversion, which is a hella boring weapon, but extremely effective if you are thinking on a multi generational timeline.
>>65501950But anon, I have a plus k/d in my Panther D (when in a downtier), clearly that means that more tonk would have win the war.
>>65501984Just like everyone else, those guys had some pretty good ideas and some pretty bad ideas.I think we are currently relearning the concept that having a limited number of extremely cool weapons isn't enough to defeat a Zerg rush (Huthi) or a strategic denial of resources (Iran).Majority rule is only good if you believe the majority isn't absolutely fucking retard. Anyways, the Panther is pretty fucking based in my book. Imagine if it had APHEFSDS. Fuck, all those lil early war 37 mm anti tank guns could have put in work with a better projectile. It's fun to bench race this stuff.
>>65502037>those lil early war 37 mm anti tank guns could have put in work with a better projectileYou rang?
>>65502079Oh, yeah. The older I get, the more I forget. So could that pen a KV2 front plate?The barrel mounted spigot mortar version that is.I'm guessing it was more of a range limitation issue?Of course, I could look it up, but I'd rather have a conversation with a (presumably) human being.
>>65499145Brits would benefit most.But I'd give it to the <spoiler>Italians</spoiler>
>>65499386Aerial refueling would let them .ake Pearl Harbor more decisive, and/or hunt down the US carriers.
>>65498834They still would have lost but at least their logistics would be simpler.
>>65499619The Soviets were never gonna just chill out
>>65498845No, if they couldn't defeat the RAF they can't invade Britain anyway and if they can't invade Britain then no matter what the longest they can hold out is August 1945 and then they get nuked.
>>65502158Operation Sealion would have been met by the Royal Navy Home Fleet.You could probably walk to France on the German corpses if that happened.
>>65502092Very limited range, only a couple hundred meters and obviously far harder to manage a hit given their *pomf* trajectory. My main experience with them is in the Combat Mission games, where the tacAI loves to try and use them even when the standard AP shell should be fine and you get to scream in frustration as your Pak38 crew slooowly elevates the gun to lob one at a Stuart
>>65502213Kek, kinda.It's all fun and games (sometimes literally) to Monday morning quarterback military engagement.Given what I know know I'd probably be an American aviator over Europe or maybe the Pascific if I were feeling cheeky. I mean, you either die or retire from the military with huge benefits and credentials.Tank crew is pretty well down on the list, above infantry.
>>65502092>>65502213The Stielgranate 41 will pen a KV2 wherever you hit it, but the thing is that low velocity AT is so ranging sensitive that even if you theoretically mortar the thing to a target at long range, the gunnery challenge to do so is daunting and will result in either slow rates of fire or tons of misses, so it wouldn’t be a usable solution if you were trying to build a force to defeat KV2 pushes. It’s really only useful to turn a city into a tank graveyard.
>>65499761>>65499761>Panzer IV, Jagdpanzer IV, HetzerDump 'em. (Use the III/IV hybrid Hummel/Nashorn SPG chassis, and decomm'd IVs for AAA picrel en masse: twin 3.7cms, and quad 3cm Mk 108s)All IVs (it was a shitty spring-bogie suspension anyway) should have been turned into SPGs after 1942, as here >>65499434 Panther and Jagdpanther as the core Wehrmacht main battle AFVs
>>65502577>quad 3cm Mk 103s(corrected*, not '108's)Zerstorer 45, the Wirbelwind upgunned from 2cm
>>65502577by the way my idea is dumb and gay
>>65500500>drank fuelchecked, if the Panther / Tiger (and most of the smaller AFVs including the III/IV self-propelled guns) had proper diesel engine powerplants it could have been mitigatedhttps://www.tankarchives.com/2020/10/how-wehrmachts-diesel-stalled.htmlhttps://oldmachinepress.com/2018/02/05/sgp-sla-16-porsche-type-203-x-16-tank-engine/Germany's overall problem was it bit off more than it could chew, you need resources, minerals and raw materials in vast supply (not just manufacturing technology + capacity alone) to win a global war
>>65499145>Americans continuing the war against Russia (Operation Unthinkable)>Germans attacking Soviet Industry & airfields/oilfields>Japanese extending their already silly carrier fighers and land based bombers/scouts operational range, particularly early war
>>65498834>a third or so less expensive than Pz. IV (progressively overloaded chassis as the war went on, and functional thickness degradation of steel quality over compensation)More of a what are those resources put towards to further leverage gains question. You could also win by having an absolutely silly quantity of U-Boats at the right time.
>>65499145In the early war it’ll be the Germans (helps them with early offensives, Battle of Britain, and Atlantic ops), but longer term it’ll be the Americans since U.S Air Force became the largest.
>>65498834no, better to make a giant pz3.
>>65502213I really fucking miss playing that game
>>65505177Germany couldn't spare diesel, the tiny amounts of it they had went to the navy.
>>65506842The OG CMx1's (BO, BB, AK) are on Steam now for not that much, if you didn't know (or WEREN'T that much, I should say; I'm away from my gaming rig right now and while I don't think it was a sale, I wouldn't swear on the Bible, you know?)
>>65506847As said in post (You) replied to Germany had a natural resources / minerals / raw maaterials scope of supply problem. You can't fight a global war in the industrial age unless that's been secured as a prerequisite. (Were trying desperately to 'secure' all that post-1940 but didn't work out for them)What's the point in having a vast mechanized army or navy (or air force) if you can't—or only *just barely* paycheck-to-paycheck—provide fuel for all the machines?Military might is only as good as your regime's access to and stacked-deep supply of resource raw materials.
>>65498845>Their only chance at a victory was destroying the British Army at Dunkirk.Not on my watch!
