Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Could Germany have won the Battle of the Atlantic (WWII)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
Gunnarr

Gunnarr

Field Marshal
37 Badges
Mar 5, 2012
2.941
414
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
I got into an argument on the Hearts of Iron IV forums about the possibility of Germany completely destroying Great Britains convoys.

see here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...in-hoi4-and-its-potential-to-dominate.854710/

Given the nature of Hearts of Iron IV, this would have to be in the assumption that priorities on production could have been changed earlier during the reign of Adolf Hitler. In this scenario, it is not the question of could they have done it with what they had at the start of the war historically, but rather, could they have done it in any way possible? Starting from the day Hitler was in power and could influence such production of u boats or ships.

The argument presented to me was, if the Germans had actual functioning torpedos (rather than the often malfunctioning ones (magnetic torpedo)), and many many more u boats, and perhaps better efficiency in their production capabilites, could they have starved Great Britain completely of their convoys?
 
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-u-boat-threat.854109/

That thread likely covers a good deal of information regarding the uboats and torpedoes you bring up. My short answer is: German subs were never going to completely stifle British convoys. The British would have responded to increased subs with increased destroyers, or increased (inefficient) convoy defenses, etc. Germany might have done far more damage but I cannot see uboats winning the atlantic.

Now, a Pearl Harbor style German surprise air raid that somehow knocks out the bulk of Britain's navy, Italy having its shit together and controlling the Mediterranean, and the USA staying out of the war, sure, now we're talking!
 
No. The only way they could have "won" the battle of the Atlantic was lost to them when American ships started joining the convoys transporting cargo to Britain. Anything that would have been sufficient to hault the flow of supplies to Britain would have sparked a repeat of the Lusitania incident a hundred times over. Especially once it was clear thanks to policies such as Lend-Lease that Roosevelt was looking for a pretext to bring America into the war. As long as American ships with American sailors were in those convoys there was no way it was happening.

The last chance for Germany to win the battle of the Atlantic was just before Churchill ordered the Royal Navy to sink any French vessel that would not defect to the Free French. By tonnage the German, Fremch and Italian navies combined could have daunted Britain at sea, especially before Britain regained superiority in its own airspace. By refusing to permit French fleet elements to fall into the hands of the Vichy regime Churchill ensured that that combination of power couldn't be made, the Italians couldn't use French reinforcements to force their way into domination over the Mediterranean, and thus the three powers couldn't work together in the Atlantic.

Perhaps, just perhaps, if Mussolini had anticipated that move and ordered the Italian navy into action to intercept the British with support from the then-powerful Luftwaffe and prevent them from intercepting French warships until Vichy was able to take full control the French fleet that might have been a turning point.
 
Last edited:
Kinda hard to pull of Pearl Harbor if you dont even have torpedo bombers.

A total victory is kinda unrealistic but Germany did historically force the western powers to expend large amounts of resources fighting them and limited the flow of supplies to Russia by forcing them to take an indirect route.
 
To put it another way, "winning" the Battle of the Atlantic being Britain cut off from all supplies was as much an impossibility as "winning" the Battle of Britain being a German occupation of the island. The Battle of Britain would have been won had the Luftwaffe dealt irreparable damage to England's infrastructure and the British war enthusiasm, causing them to come to the table to negotiate. Winning the Battle of the Atlantic, likewise, would have not meant control of the seas but rather causing crippling inefficiency and weariness for British shipping. Germany wins by spending a fraction of what Britain does yet causing severe damage and forcing convoys to run so clustered and defended as to be thoroughly inefficient for the most part. They win by so subverting British military spending into defending convoys that their overseas holdings become vulnerable and exposed.

To actually control the Atlantic, basically impossible - they need to diplomatically alter the USA's participation and they also likely need Italy on top of its game, on top of a crushing destruction of British naval assets. Not likely. A good analogy would be Spanish treasure fleets in the 16th century. Privateering was never liable to completely subvert the flow back to the old world, but it could take expensive chunks out of it for a fraction of the cost, and privateers could certainly force Spain to expend resources just to protect merchant shipping and have to put the treasure fleet into a convoy, creating excessive expense for the government to protect its interests at a fraction of the cost to its enemies.
 
Germany was banned from U-boat production however they showed they could break such treaties. The problem is that UK did remember how much damage U-boat did in ww1, if germany started to mass produce them in peace time, UK would be much better prepered to counter them.

Only way I can see something of a German victory would be if they did not go to war in 1939 but waited to like 1946 which naval command had planed for. If they had built all plan z ships they may have something of a chance to win.
 
Denkt said:
Germany was banned from U-boat production however they showed they could break such treaties. The problem is that UK did remember how much damage U-boat did in ww1, if germany started to mass produce them in peace time, UK would be much better prepered to counter them.
Click to expand...

Germany and England had the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-German_Naval_Agreement
that would have allowed Germany to build up it´s navy to 35% of Englands navy
which would have taken until 1942 to do so. So at the start of the war Germany actually had allowed tonnage not yet built.

Only way I can see something of a German victory would be if they did not go to war in 1939 but waited to like 1946 which naval command had planed for. If they had built all plan z ships they may have something of a chance to win.
Click to expand...

That was the plan and even mentioned when creating the Z-Plan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Z#Operational_philosophies
 
no. even if Enigma had not been broken, once the USN got involved, it was decided. too many ships, too many planes.
 
It would take A British Maritime disaster before the USN got involved for Germany to Win the Battle of the Atlantic. Even if Germany defeated the soviets and was allowed to build a fleet in the Baltic Hitler would never have a navy to rival the Americans and British Combined. Hell the Americans could build ships and aircraft faster than the KM could even sink them.
 
keynes2.0 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont believe the Germans used one of those as a torpedo bomber until 1941. The Germans didn't have any torpedo bombers in 1939 which is the date when a Pearl Harbor style first strike would need to be executed.
Click to expand...
There have been some torpedo variatons at the start of the war but only in limited numbers. the only dedicated one was the He115 afaik. That said it was lousy in that role.
 
yerm said:
IF Italy had its shit together AND Spain had joined the Axis, now we're talking!
Click to expand...
Just take NA from France after the surrender. Gibraltar is closed and with U-Boats operating out of Casablanca the UK is in deep logistical trouble.
 
It would be kinda hard to sell the french on that plan.

Graf Zeppelin said:
There have been some torpedo variatons at the start of the war but only in limited numbers. the only dedicated one was the He115 afaik. That said it was lousy in that role.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected.
 
keynes2.0 said:
I stand corrected.
Click to expand...
In a limited way. I doubt Germany could have carried out a PH or Taranto quality strike with what was at hand.
 
I believe he means North Africa. As in, make Vicky France cede the necessary turf to close the straits of Gibraltar in the peace agreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back