The good folks over at Extra Credits released this week's episode for WW2 - Lend Lease
- 25
- 13
- 9
Extra History - Lend Lease
- Thread starter BjornB
- Start date
-
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.
Fun to see Paradox sponsoring videos like this to get PR, instead of doing classic ads that usually are just an annoyance. With Paradox sponsoring a channel like this not only does the game get PR but Paradox also help youtubers that educate people (history in this case). Good stuff!
- 36
They make it seem like UK had a real chance of being beaten...
While it is true that German subs were a pain for the Brits, Britain was never in any real danger, to my knowledge...
While it is true that German subs were a pain for the Brits, Britain was never in any real danger, to my knowledge...
- 16
- 13
You are never in any danger at a Horror movie but it doesn't stop people being scared.
With hindsight and statistical analysis we now know that the Germans were loosing planes at an unsupportable rate and the British had the edge in production. However that certainly wasn't the viewpoint of the people living at the time.
- 12
- 3
- 1
I'm on the "they overstate the importance of land-lease" camp as well.
Saying that " without lend lease the UK almost certainly would've fallen" it's a reach, because there's no way that would've happened unless they chose to.
Saying that " without lend lease the UK almost certainly would've fallen" it's a reach, because there's no way that would've happened unless they chose to.
- 17
- 8
Interesting, but again it shows an aspect that was always ignored in HOI, the Battle of the Atlantic.
At 3:38, it clearly specify: ''it wasn't just tanks and bombs, it was foodstuffs and...''
And it looks like it's gonna be ignored again...
At 3:38, it clearly specify: ''it wasn't just tanks and bombs, it was foodstuffs and...''
And it looks like it's gonna be ignored again...
- 8
I don't think Great Britain would have fallen without Lend Lease as well, at least not in 1940/1941 where these things just started to kick in. Land lease didn't had a major effect on british aircraft production as far as I know, and thats what made german invasion plans fail rather early.
I think the impacts on Land Lease for the Soviets were far greater, at least if the question is if it helped the country to survive longer than otherwise. Great Britain would have been able to hold out without US help as the threat of an invasion was never really there after 1940, but the Soviets would have been in a far worse state in 1942 without lend lease. Not saying they would have lost without western allied help, but at least taken another hundred thousands losses more for sure.
I think the impacts on Land Lease for the Soviets were far greater, at least if the question is if it helped the country to survive longer than otherwise. Great Britain would have been able to hold out without US help as the threat of an invasion was never really there after 1940, but the Soviets would have been in a far worse state in 1942 without lend lease. Not saying they would have lost without western allied help, but at least taken another hundred thousands losses more for sure.
Last edited:
- 11
- 1
I hope devs will focus more on real historical data, even if the game must practically finished.
The Germans had a real chance at destroying the British air force in the battle of Britain, The Germans were pretty close but they didn't think they were doing much damage so they switched to bombing cities and what not (From what I remember). If the Germans had continued to destroy the British Air force and then when they had nothing of a threat left they could have moved to taking out naval bases and maybe have done Sea lion. Also If Rommel had taken Egypt that would push the British even further down the path of Surrender. Let's not even mention if the Germans had been successful at stopping the Allies from leaving Dunkirk -__-
- 7
- 4
Video coudnt be more biased against Britain. For a change am i right?
- 5
- 2
Fighter Command was having problems with trained pilots and fatigue it wasn't close enough to collapse for the Germans to win. If the Germans could have kept up the attacks for several more months then that would be a real problem not in number of planes, which actually increased, but pilots. Sea Lion only had a tiny chance of success even if the RAF loses the Battle of Britain the weakened Luftwaffe still had to stop the RN from interfering.
The video wasn't that great. Very US-centric and even managed to belittle the Commonwealth and the Allied nations efforts before the US got involved. The merchant marine of the non US allied nations didn't even get an acknowledgement of their efforts.
The video wasn't that great. Very US-centric and even managed to belittle the Commonwealth and the Allied nations efforts before the US got involved. The merchant marine of the non US allied nations didn't even get an acknowledgement of their efforts.
- 17
Very biased video.
The UK was not close to surrendering in 40-41.
The Germans were not close to winning the BOB, the myth they were is due to the UK and Germany organizing there squadrons differently (the UK squadrons were stronger / overstrength) so the UK overestimated the Luftwaffe and Germany underestimated the RAF.
Even if Germany somehow won the BOB, it still does not significantly help a Sea-lion in 40-41.
The Luftwaffe had shown itself incapable of seriously hurting the Royal navy at Dunkirk.
Even if Germany had the ability to move a few divisions over the channel (they didn't, the Rhine barge tests failed horribly), the Royal navy would annihilate the force.
LL stopped all of Germany,Italy and possibly France joining the communist bloc.
But the UK would survive without it, for 5-10 years at least.
The UK was not close to surrendering in 40-41.
The Germans were not close to winning the BOB, the myth they were is due to the UK and Germany organizing there squadrons differently (the UK squadrons were stronger / overstrength) so the UK overestimated the Luftwaffe and Germany underestimated the RAF.
Even if Germany somehow won the BOB, it still does not significantly help a Sea-lion in 40-41.
The Luftwaffe had shown itself incapable of seriously hurting the Royal navy at Dunkirk.
Even if Germany had the ability to move a few divisions over the channel (they didn't, the Rhine barge tests failed horribly), the Royal navy would annihilate the force.
LL stopped all of Germany,Italy and possibly France joining the communist bloc.
But the UK would survive without it, for 5-10 years at least.
- 14
- 1
As important as lend-lease is, EC portrayed it as necessary for winning the war, which it just wasn't. Hitler was hell-bent on attacking the Soviet Union, who alone would very probably win. In '41 they halted the Axis with little lend-lease aid. It's disappointing that they've completely ignored the Soviet role in the war, and to be frank this series seems to be poorly researched.
- 7
- 6
I disagree with you. Without the Allies help the USSR would have surely fallen to the Axis.
- 8
- 7
The germans were stopped in '41 by the mud and the winter. Yes the USSR had little lend lease at that time. But by 43-44 the USSR had replaced, and more, everything the Germans had destroyed in terms of equipment (tanks, planes, artillery, ect.) in the summer/fall campaign of 41 JUST FROM L-L. That is A LOT of equipment. Like the video said. The americans were the arsenal of democracy (allies) and everyone else supplied the manpower (aka the soviet soldier). I don't think they are leaving out the soviets. They are just looking at the policy of lend lease.
- 4
I think this is a really cool PR idea, but it's too bad I do not like Extra Credits.
- 6
Even before lend-lease as much as 30-40% of medium and heavy tanks used by the defenders of Moscow in the late stages (winter 1941) of Barbarossa were supplied by the British. This was along with 15% of aircraft. Whether removing this would have had an effect remains to be seen, but I think the lines could be held.
Britain would not have surrendered without a collapse of the Royal Navy. Even with a German victory in the Battle of Britain, this was not a certainty, but made it more likely. There was a small period where Fighter Command began to seriously doubt their capacity to continue the fight, this was the famous period where pilots would crash their planes and then try to get back as soon as possible to get up in the air again. This was before lend-lease. After this the fall of Britain became less likely.
As for the Eastern front with lend-lease. The Soviets in my opinion could have still won the war, but it would have been a longer, even more brutal one. The problem with speculative history is that removing something like lend-lease rarely has a certain or indeed clear outcome. It simply goes from something like "the Soviets were quite likely to win the war" to "the Soviets would probably win the war."
I like this series. Money well spent, Paradox. But please, dont pay the screaming lets players to promote when the game is released.
- 2