Jump to content
Age of Civilizations
Irish empire

World War Two Nerds?

Recommended Posts

I'm interested in WW2, albeit I wouldn't call myself a nerd. 

If you want to debate, then here are some opinions on WW2 of mine:

  • Germany could have won WW2, but only without Hitler. Even then, if they still had to invade USSR, they'd only win in the very unlikely scenario that they'd get Western support.
  • Erwin Rommel is one of the most overrated Generals of all time.
  • Heinz Guderian is what most people make Erwin Rommel out to be.
  • Erich von Manstein was one of the most brilliant strategists of WW2 and one of the main reasons Germany was so successful.
  • US involvement in the war could only be delayed, but not prevented.
  • Germany could never ever have invaded mainland Britain, even with the destruction of the RAF.
  • Hitler was the reason for both the success of Germany and the failure of it.
  • Germany produced some of the best tanks of the war, but they were exactly the kind of tanks Germany did not need.
  • The Sherman is underrated.
  • While most people say Germany would have been better without Italy, I disagree. While Italy had one of the worst armies of WW2, it still did its own fair share of helping Germany. The Italian Navy kept the Royal Navy busy so Germany could focus on the ground aspect.
  • Many people misunderstand the involvement of Baltics within WW2. The Courland Pocket saw very fierce combat, and the Latvian Legionnaires were some of the last German units surrendered. Let that sink in - the Courland Pocket held out until the Soviets had already reached Berlin.
  • While Soviets had already won by then, D-Day was still an important part of the Allied efforts to end WW2.
  • The nuking of Japan was fully and completely justified.
  • Germany couldn't have gotten nukes, even if the Norwegian resistance members hadn't blown up the heavy water stations and what not.
  • The Soviet Union had better tactics for the use of large scale tank assaults - Deep Operations/Soviet Deep Battle.
  • There was no such thing as a "blitzkrieg" tactic - it was simply generals using the tanks at their disposal to their best ability.
  • Germany was technologically superior to the Allies, but its resources deprived them of putting them to any use.

Please don't hate me for having an opinion.

Edited by Sneaky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry that was a mistake I agree with you partly about the generals. But the overrating of Rommel is an outcome of British overrating of Montgomery who was the one who drove Rommel back from Egypt.

.especially here in Ireland and the U.K we are constantly given the opinion when studying world war two  Monty was the best general/one of the best. as a result of this we look further into Monty's combat career and we can see that he  was very successful(apart from in Holland). Monty was like Russia's Zhukov the pride of the nation.to boost his status further and to boost Britain's importance, they made Rommel out to be an amazing general and only a outstanding person like Bernard Montgomery could ever defeat him right?Rommel is overrated but I think that Montgomery is definitely the most overrated general of ww2

Rommel is actually my favourite general and I know a bit about his background. He performed great in the French campaign sometimes 32 miles ahead of the main advance. it was only here hitler noticed him.in one instance he took 10,000 French prisoners losing 36 men 

the German incursion Into north Africa was just meant to be on a support mission to help the beaten Italian troops(so a small army) but Rommel was given permission to launch attacks if he saw fit. as im sure you know he drove them back to Tobruk and el Alemain. even though he made these great territorial gains for the germans he is still very overrated, while people like guderian and manstein are underrated.i think guderan was actually a better general than manstein though

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

Germany could have won WW2, but only without Hitler. Even then, if they still had to invade USSR, they'd only win in the very unlikely scenario that they'd get Western support.

First of all, i'm only kind of a nerd as i like to learn about a lot of topics. But i believe that i'm knowledgable about WWII, at least more than the average. Here's my two cents:

Not really. Hitler didn't have a much more impact on the war than, let's say, generals. The war still couldn't have been won without Hitler.

 

Also, i don't think delaying the attack on the USSR will do you any good. Germany was running low on critical things and USSR was only getting stronger. While USSR was somewhat low on production of things related to military compared to Germany, their potential was greater. And Lebensraum.

20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

Germany produced some of the best tanks of the war, but they were exactly the kind of tanks Germany did not need.

Not really against it. Massproducing the tanks they already had would've been better for them. And not wasting their money on supertanks like Maus that can be destroyed by air attacks easily.

 

20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

The nuking of Japan was fully and completely justified.

Didn't they schedule a meeting 3 days later after the nuke? I don't think they were in a hurry after the first nuke.

 

20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

The Soviet Union had better tactics for the use of large scale tank assaults - Deep Operations/Soviet Deep Battle.

But they weren't able to use them. Good tactics, poor use. Germany was better in that regard, i think.

 

20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

There was no such thing as a "blitzkrieg" tactic - it was simply generals using the tanks at their disposal to their best ability.

True, but i think the Germans were the first to do the "Tanks first, infantry later." strategy.

 

20 hours ago, Sneaky said:

Please don't hate me for having an opinion.

I will not, don't worry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JustAnUser said:

Not really. Hitler didn't have a much more impact on the war than, let's say, generals. The war still couldn't have been won without Hitler.

 

 

Hence I said, "Hitler was the reason for both the success of Germany and the failure of it."

4 hours ago, JustAnUser said:

Also, i don't think delaying the attack on the USSR will do you any good. Germany was running low on critical things and USSR was only getting stronger. While USSR was somewhat low on production of things related to military compared to Germany, their potential was greater. And Lebensraum.

2

I never implied that Germany should have attacked later. I was implying that Germany could have won against the USSR only if they managed to get Western (that is, Allied) support.

4 hours ago, JustAnUser said:

Didn't they schedule a meeting 3 days later after the nuke? I don't think they were in a hurry after the first nuke.

 

I don't really see what point you're trying to make.

4 hours ago, JustAnUser said:

But they weren't able to use them. Good tactics, poor use. Germany was better in that regard, i think.

11

You seem to be arguing against a point I never made. Albeit, the Soviets were able to use deep operations - Operation Uranus.

4 hours ago, JustAnUser said:

True, but i think the Germans were the first to do the "Tanks first, infantry later." strategy.

1

It wasn't planned, however. Hitler was himself very surprised by the success of the Wehrmacht against France. He was not at all expecting such a sudden and successful thrust against France.

 

 

12 hours ago, Irish empire said:

sorry that was a mistake I agree with you partly about the generals. But the overrating of Rommel is an outcome of British overrating of Montgomery who was the one who drove Rommel back from Egypt.

.especially here in Ireland and the U.K we are constantly given the opinion when studying world war two  Monty was the best general/one of the best. as a result of this we look further into Monty's combat career and we can see that he  was very successful(apart from in Holland). Monty was like Russia's Zhukov the pride of the nation.to boost his status further and to boost Britain's importance, they made Rommel out to be an amazing general and only a outstanding person like Bernard Montgomery could ever defeat him right?Rommel is overrated but I think that Montgomery is definitely the most overrated general of ww2

Rommel is actually my favourite general and I know a bit about his background. He performed great in the French campaign sometimes 32 miles ahead of the main advance. it was only here hitler noticed him.in one instance he took 10,000 French prisoners losing 36 men 

the German incursion Into north Africa was just meant to be on a support mission to help the beaten Italian troops(so a small army) but Rommel was given permission to launch attacks if he saw fit. as im sure you know he drove them back to Tobruk and el Alemain. even though he made these great territorial gains for the germans he is still very overrated, while people like guderian and manstein are underrated.i think guderan was actually a better general than manstein though

 

 

16

1. Rommel was a good general, I agree, but my problem is that most people make him out as the reason for the success of German tanks, especially the Northern attack into France via the Benelux. You could have put any good general in place of Rommel and they would have done just as well as Rommel did, which is why I think Rommel is overrated - he was good, but not the reason for Germany's success.

2. You can't compare Guderian to Manstein at all. Guderian was a tactician, Manstein was a strategist. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

3. I definitely agree with your 2nd paragraph, though. Monty, Zhukov and Rommel were all "media generals", pride of the nation, as you said. Albeit, Zhukov did actually deserve his spot when compared to the state of the USSR.

Zhukov was not at all a great general. The reason he became so popular was that he was a good general when compared to everyone else the USSR had. The Great Purge left a massive hole in the commanding abilities of the USSR, and Zhukov was the only competent general they had, hence he was regarded as one of the best generals of WW2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Beter Griffin
      Hey guys, Beter here.
      I would like to say that I'm working on a map based off of the one in Hearts of Iron 4!
      It will feature the two scenarios in the game along with many others that I like to make!
      I expect it to come out within a month but no promises!
      Provinces: probably 10000+ 
      Scenarios planned: 1936, 1939, Modern Day
      Latest progress update:
      I lost the data so I will reset the development
       
      Check my progress here https://trello.com/b/9c7RLqdF/aocii-hoi4-map

    • By PANTIC
      FOR SOME REASON I REMOVE A BETA V SRY :}
    • By Lucas L
      Hi! I always see scenarios of WW2, but most of them are of the same ages: 1942, 1943 and 1945.
      So today I show you a scenario that I did of WW2 of all the world, but is from 1941, when the nazis haven't declaired war on Soviet Union and USA, so there are more options than in another scenarios and the map can be more interesting and balanced.
      I am from android and I can't share a download link until the Workshop comes, but I can show you some pictures of the scenario.
      Greenland and Svalvard are disocuppied like in reality (in the game they are neutral) because I thought it would be better for the game leave them neutral.
      This scenario contains some new leaders, like Philippe Petain in Vichy France and Charles de Gaulle in "Free France" a new state that I created for the map that symbolise the French resistance, like in the reality.
      About technology: all the civilizations have the standard technology level, 0,45.
      And the last thing, you must know that this scenario contains some special things due the age (january 1941) like the Greek-Italian war that still continues.
      Update 26/03/2019:
      -Now, Suriname is not ''Netherlands'', it's a state like the Dutch East Indies that are with the allies. (Curaçao is now neutral, because in the war didn't have many importance, so now every country can take the island)
      -Relations of most of the important countries updated:
      -All the countries of the Axis aren't in war with any other state, except Nazi Germany, Italy and Vichy France.
      -Vichy France still being a member of the Axis, but is only in war with the"revolutionary movement" of Free France.
      -Germany and Italy are in war with the same states: All the members of the British Empire, the Belgian Congo, Dutch East Indies and Suriname.
      For make it clear, in the scenario:
      -Members of the axis: Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Vichy France.
      -Members of the allies: all the British Empire (United Kingdom, Dominion of Canada, Union of South Africa, the British Raj, Australia and New Zealand), the revolutionary movement of ''Free France'', the Belgian Congo, Suriname, the Ducth East Indies, and finally, Greece.
      -Members of the Kommintern: Soviet Union, Mongolia and Tannu Tuva (I didn't include the communist China zones because they were focused on beat the japans, and they weren't so organised like the other communist states, they were basically rebels until the end of the war)
      -Members of the Greater East Asia Co-Prospherity Sphere: The Empire of Japan and his vassal's states, Manchukuo and Menjiang.
      And that should be everything.
      Finally, the NEW pictures: (if you see an error, please tell me in comments and I will try to fix it) (I took pictures of important territories in the scenario and the diplomacy maps of Nazi Germany and UK) (Also, I have commited an error with Suriname, in the map it doesn't appear like a member of the Allies, but in reality Suriname it's a member of Allies)
      NEW PICTURES:
      https://imageshack.us/i/pm6QOD7Lp
      https://imageshack.us/i/porLqtKSp
      https://imageshack.us/i/pm54ufqVp
      https://imageshack.us/i/plLE5s56p
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmJfzNSNp
      https://imageshack.us/i/poi4aKRpp
      https://imageshack.us/i/poKxnxwbp
      https://imageshack.us/i/plbEviRUp
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmpa1qOFp
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmAYzzEcp
      https://imageshack.us/i/poBcZUcAp
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmucwdA0p
      https://imageshack.us/i/pl0oEHsAp
      https://imageshack.us/i/plISKrQPp
      https://imageshack.us/i/pn12MUIqp
      https://imageshack.us/i/poWQvGc1p
      https://imageshack.us/i/povSvsW3p
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmJYnr5Ep
      https://imageshack.us/i/pnBVMyzap
      Update 30/03/2019:
      Well, another update of this scenario. In this update, I have fixed the frontiers between the Slovakian State and Hungary, the Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union and Finland
      I wanna mentionate and give thanks to the user TomasC8426, because he helped me with the borders of Germany and the Soviet Union and Hungary and the Slovakian State (you can see it in comments if you want)
      Pictures of this new update: (the new frontiers)
      - Hungary and Slovakia:
      https://imageshack.us/i/plLpxq59p
      -Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union:
      https://imageshack.us/i/pnFVkzTnp
      -Finland and the Soviet Union:
      https://imageshack.us/i/pnrnzirxp
      https://imageshack.us/i/plJnwoXsp
      https://imageshack.us/i/poj7Hzk0p
      Release: waiting for Workshop...
      Thank you for reading!
    • By Lucas L
      I saw the flag of the Italian Social Republic when I was editing one of my scenarios of WW2, so I thought in make a scenario of the Italian Civil War (1943-1945) 
      But like territories change a lot, I finally made two scenarios of this war: One from november 1 of 1943 and the other from october 4 of 1944. Ironically, any of the two scenarios is balanced and one civilization is stronger than the other.
      About technology: the two civilizations in the two scenarios have the standard technology levels, 0,45.
      I'm from android and I can't give you the download links, but I can show you some pictures of the two scenarios:
      PICTURES:
      November 1 of 1943:
      https://imageshack.us/i/poJm017Mp
      October 4 of 1944:
      https://imageshack.us/i/pmznEpx8p
      Release: waiting for Workshop...
      Thank you for reading!
×
×
  • Create New...