Really, would stuff have really changed if Germany took Moscow?

[No idea]

Further scenarios that could possibly have produced a German victory:

-Hitler doesn't halt his Panzers at Dunkirk and the BEF is captured. England is forced to accept peace; the Allies are out of the war. No second front, no lend-lease for Russia.

-Hitler doesn't impulsively switch from bombing airfields and other military targets vital to England's defense, to civilian targets in response to the RAF's night raid on Berlin. The already on-the-verge-of-destruction-RAF isn't allowed crucial time to recover and is instead eliminated. Operation Sealion commences and the English, who are so outgunned that they have individual artillery pieces defending several miles of ground, are no match for the combined Heer and Luftwaffe. England is forced to accept peace; the Allies are out of the war. No second front, no lend-lease for Russia.

-Operation Barbarossa is not delayed.

-Japan invades the USSR from the East.

-Germany doesn't delay total economic mobilisation until 1943, but instead does this early in the war, at least by 1941.

1. I doubt Engalnd had surrendered. They were an island. Untouchable by Hitler. And England could force lots of men into the military. Sure, they would be far less trained, but they had them.

2. Sealion was unfeasible even with the RAF destroyed. Germany hadnt the shipping to invade the UK in force with the brithish navy still untouched.

3 and 4. Explain how that would havelead to Stalins surrender.

5. That is the only thing that could have affected the outcome, imho. And only if Germany doesnt declare war on the USA in dec 1941.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

In a life or death struggle you dont surrender until the enemy takes your country or kills the bastard leading it (Stalin, in this case). Same happened with Germany in 1945

The Central Asians, however, weren't really in such a struggle as much as the Slavic populace were. Would it be impossible for them to kiss goodbye to the Union once the burden falls mostly on their shoulders?

 

[Lamahorse]

The Germans never had the manpower to police / murder the whole of Eurasian Russia. Even if the USSR collapsed, Germany would have still bled to death on the Steppe.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

1. I doubt Engalnd had surrendered. They were an island. Untouchable by Hitler. And England could force lots of men into the military. Sure, they would be far less trained, but they had them.

2. Sealion was unfeasible even with the RAF destroyed. Germany hadnt the shipping to invade the UK in force with the brithish navy still untouched.

3 and 4. Explain how that would havelead to Stalins surrender.

1. is to let the British people think that the war would bring pointless death of lots of fine young men when the cause (Poland) is lost and beyond reach, and the biggest ally (France) has already peaced out barring oversea resistence, and bringing the boys back home would be the best way to salvage the situation. It would be a white peace rather than surrender. Also the plan was that most of France were to be returned to the Pétain government sans a strip at the border if the war ends, so that could save Germany a lot of trouble.

2. If absolute domination of the sky were achieved, then it's extremely dangerous for RN to leave port. C.f. how Japan trashed the RN in the Indian Ocean or how US trashed the Japanese fleet late in the war. But I agree that Germany still needed years to get a proper landing fleet which means Hitler can kiss Barbarossa goodbye.

4. If Japan didn't poke the hornet's nest, then the IJN could easily blockade the Russian Far East, forcing half of the lend-lease tonnage (according to Wikipedia) to either go through Persia or the Arctic Ocean. While the Kwantung Army probably would take lots of damage, the Soviet Union wouldn't be able to swiftly defeat them either without sacrificing the other front.

The Germans never had the manpower to police / murder the whole of Eurasian Russia. Even if the USSR collapsed, Germany would have still bled to death on the Steppe.

Was the steppe that full of Slavic and Jewish people?

 

[D Inqu]

Actually Stalin moved a large amount of industry into the Urals (It's even one of the national focuses in HOI4) incase the European part of the USSR was compromised.

True, but even with that, the bulk of the population was still in the European part

With notable quantities of manpower in the Central Asian SSRs and a fair amount of industry moved into the Urals and into far western-Siberia, it wasn't only the European part that mattered.

Central asia had no meaningful manpower reserves. The population of these countries exploded in the second half of the 20th centrury (e.g Uzbeksistan 30 million today, 6 million in 1950, 4.7 million in 1926). In 1941, it was a poorly developed region with a relatively small population. Recruiting them in larger numbers was not possible, as the recruits from remote areas had low level of literacy and often poor command of Russian language.

 

[Pr088]

As historian I can say the failed capture of Moskow was important.
For several reasons, including some before mentioned:
1. USSR gouvernement only started moving war-industry towards the Urals after the German attack. Therefore most of the factories were still located in the western part of the USSR or in the Moskow area.
2. Moskow was, as mentioned by others, the crossroads of railyways and therefore a vital point.
3. Most headquarters and staff, ranging from army staff to political and economic planners were located in the capital city.

Taking Moskow would take the supply lines, command lines and economic planning. It would simply be desasterous.


Excuses for my mediocre English. For more info on the move of war industry, see some of the quotes at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=22442

 

[No idea]

I never said it would be meaningless, what i said is that wouldnt have lead Stalin to surrender. And, in the long run, it would have made no difference

 

[D Inqu]

1. is to let the British people think that the war would bring pointless death of lots of fine young men when the cause (Poland) is lost and beyond reach, and the biggest ally (France) has already peaced out barring oversea resistence, and bringing the boys back home would be the best way to salvage the situation. It would be a white peace rather than surrender. Also the plan was that most of France were to be returned to the Pétain government sans a strip at the border if the war ends, so that could save Germany a lot of trouble.

Well by 1940, there was no major casualties on the British side. And being a large empire, they had plenty of manpower in the former dominions and from colonies. They knew full well, that they have naval superiority and that like in WW1, a the interdiction of naval trade will damage resource poor Germany badly. In short they knew that so long as they hold out, long term, Germany loses.

A white peace and a creation of a German superstate in Europe was literally the worst nightmare for British foreign policy, it was never going to happen.

2. If absolute domination of the sky were achieved, then it's extremely dangerous for RN to leave port. C.f. how Japan trashed the RN in the Indian Ocean or how US trashed the Japanese fleet late in the war. But I agree that Germany still needed years to get a proper landing fleet which means Hitler can kiss Barbarossa goodbye.

It was never going to be possible though. German air production, aircraft range and aviation fuel production capacity were simply not sufficient for that. With them fighting an industrially developed country with nearby home bases and aircraft carriers, it was impossible.

If Japan didn't poke the hornet's nest, then the IJN could easily blockade the Russian Far East, forcing half of the lend-lease tonnage (according to Wikipedia) to either go through Persia or the Arctic Ocean. While the Kwantung Army probably would take lots of damage, the Soviet Union wouldn't be able to swiftly defeat them either without sacrificing the other front.

Japan's land forces were already overstretched in China, where they struggled to make any significant advance. Opening another front against the 1+ million Soviet forces in the far east would mean the collapse of their whole china strategy and loss of Korea.

 

[hkrommel]

Well by 1940, there was no major casualties on the British side. And being a large empire, they had plenty of manpower in the former dominions and from colonies. They knew full well, that they have naval superiority and that like in WW1, a the interdiction of naval trade will damage resource poor Germany badly. In short they knew that so long as they hold out, long term, Germany loses.

A white peace and a creation of a German superstate in Europe was literally the worst nightmare for British foreign policy, it was never going to happen.

This. If you include the commonwealth the Brits had far more manpower than the Soviets.

EDIT: Found it from another thread:

Manpower numbers actually favored the western allies:

USSR Population in 1941 (remember that this is a likely inflated number): 196.7 million

USA Population in 1941: 133.4 million

Commonwealth Population (UK, Canada, Australia, India) in 1941: 454 million

The total population of the western allies including the Commonwealth: 587.4 million vs. 196.7 million Soviets

If you just take the US, the UK, and Canada that's still 191.4 million (the UK being 46.5 million and Canada 11.5 million).

This is to say nothing of the Free French and any other areas the west would be able to liberate.

 

[Praetori]

I mean, they were already having supply problems by that time.

The battle for Moscow would have made Stalingrad look like a minor skirmish.

Not necessarily true as the lengthy defense of Stalingrad was really only possible due to the German inability to surround the city itself (due to the Volga). Regarding Moscow they went for a full encirclement but too little too late. The road lay basically open with a start in August and the weather was favorable, not so with the actual October start. The two part plan called for the encirclement of Moscow through Typhoon and then it's gradual capture through Operation Wotan.
Now the Soviets would probably not have yielded Moscow without a fight but as the battle of Berlin showed it's not feasible to defend a completely encircled city of such large size for any extended period of time. A single lifeline for supplies though is enough to protect and hold a bridgehead and even counterattack (as shown in Leningrad, Stalingrad, Normandy and numerous pacific battles).

And judging by the losses the Soviets took early in the war, they were not about to surrender any time soon.

The Soviet leadership looked at the possibility of negotiating with the Germans and surrender Ukraine and other parts of the European Soviet holdings in '41 but once the strategic alliance between the western powers and the USSR was formed they became pretty convinced that time was on their side and that winning was possible. The Germans had a good chance in 41 had they not delayed Typhoon and again in '42 to take the Caucasus instead of grinding their forces down in Stalingrad. After that it was a done deal. In reality as soon as war was declared on the US it could only have ended as it did, sooner or later or with US nukes being dropped in Europe.

Really, other than it being the capital (and it wasn´t a capture the flag match anyways) would it have changed much in the long term?

Anything could've happened. The German general staff had it right though, the battle for Moscow drew in the majority of the Soviet reinforcements and had they gone full tilt at the city then any other substantial counterattacks than around Moscow by the Soviets would have been secondary at most. Leningrad would surely have fallen and most of the northern front as well just because the infrastructure north of Moscow is what supplied the resistance there.

Now it's impossible to say what the end results would've been. Germany would probably still have declared war on the US and thereby lost the war. Although we would've seen much of it being waged in the middle-east and the Med instead.

 

[Secret Master]

We aren't talking about death squads or murdering the civilian population in the HOI4 forum.

Thread closed.