The United States should be nearly impossible to conquer

[Ingros]

I only see two very unlikely ways for conquering US before 1948...
a) abomb... and it would still be difficult to get them in place to break the US
b) civil war in the US.... get some of the states on your side and then "help" them against the other states...
probably there are studies about the political views of those states at that time... i didnt read any so i dont know how the tensions where in the US between those states..

 

[Lamahorse]

We are really in the realms of fantasy.

Germany (or the USSR) with Europe under their thumb should have the resources to rival the US. Otherwise, it has to be at least possible in game because why the hell not. Who knows how the Americas should have fared under a Barbarossa style invasion (provided that the Germans can supply the logistics for it).

I'm of the view that conquering Russia would have bled the Germans of manpower over time. Time was on the Allies side after all.

 

[seattle]

Aye, I definitely agree that in-game there needs to be a way for the German player to 'win' beyond a 'it's 1948, who's got the most VPs', and if invading the US is the only option at the moment (which it may well be), then that's what'll have to do. Fingers crossed DLC or mods improves it over time .

One thing is for sure: I will hunt down this man in that high castle before he can undermine my Nazi America.

 

[amalric de g.]

Where were the majority of the Greek army located when the Germans invaded? I would guess, dug in facing the Italians at the Albanian front.

680 000 that was the number of Germans, the Italians numbered 565 000 in april 1941 according to Wiki.

Sorry messed the numbers.
680.000 was the number of german soldiers attacking Yugoslavia and Greece.
A total of 33 Divisions attacked from Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria. Only 12 Divs. attacked Greece. From this 12 Divisions only 8 Divisions and 3 Regiments attacked from Bulgaria (12. Army). The other 4 Divisions attacked from Yugoslavia.
Yes most greeks (52%) faced the italians, on a front of 150 km. Except the Central Macedonian Army, the 2. Army and the 3 ANZAC Divisions. But the 4 Divisions who attacked from Yugoslavia faced the WMA and the CMA.
The Wehrmacht captured in 12 Days 210.000 greek soldiers, thats nearly half of the greek army (430.0000).

210.000 Greeks and 3 ANZAC Divisions (estimated 45.000 soldiers) against 200.000 german soldiers. The italians with 565.000 faced 220.000 greek soldiers.

If you look on the map (frontline 04.15.1941) the italian Frontline didn´t moved one meter in 9 days.

 

[Loke]

yea, the Albanian/Greek front was not very Blitzkrieg like.... lol

 

[LUISVIGO]

USA have 10 military factories, 22 dockyards and 140+ civilian factories at the start of the game. It have one of the largest populations in the world. It produce a immense amount of resources.

It is powerful.

It can probably operate 300 military factories and 150 dockyards at the same time with little or no dependency on import. It can field an army of such size that can not be matched by Germany.

In real life it is debatable if Germany even could pull of a successful invasion of Sweden which should tell us about chances against USA, actually Germany had no chance at all against USA even if it tried to play pure defensively. Axis only really had success early in the war against unprepered enemies. Even a minor country that is well prepered could hold of a major power such as Finland vs Soviet.

You are absolutely right, given your data, Germany would have no chance, only a country as powerful as North Vietnam should be able to defeat the USA.

 

[Denkt]

You are absolutely right, given your data, Germany would have no chance, only a country as powerful as North Vietnam should be able to defeat the USA.

Germany was not the defender in the war and did lose the war completely. Vietnam was a defender and did manage to win. Germany could not win against USA because it was a aggressor.

 

[LUISVIGO]

Germany was not the defender in the war and did lose the war completely. Vietnam was a defender and did manage to win. Germany could not win against USA because it was a aggressor.

Well, North Vietnam was not the defender neither. In fact, it was the agresor against South Vietnam. Even if I was being a bit ironical, there is a truth in what I said. North Vietnam won because the american public opinion lost the will to go on with the war in Vietnam. Germany could have achieved something similar with, as you say, a purely defensive strategy.

 

[Denkt]

USA would not surrender and Germany did not have the resources left to mount an strong enough defense. If you attack USA like Japan did it will not give up.

Vietnam was in a civil war, USA was an outside aggressor who supported South Vietnam.

 

[LUISVIGO]

USA would not surrender and Germany did not have the resources left to mount an strong enough defense. If you attack USA like Japan did it will not give up.

Vietnam was in a civil war, USA was an outside aggressor who supported South Vietnam.

It was a war which involved two different countries, North Vietnam and South Vietnam. It was planned as a war of conquest by North Vietnam, so they were the agressors. It was successful because they achieved their goal, that is to say, to conquer South Vietnam. And the USA was not the agressor, not in a political sense, because they went to war to defend South Vietnam, and not in an operational military sense neither, as they never tried to invade North Vietnam. It was of course a civil war between vietnamese, but you can not argue that the USA were the agressors, as they did not start the war.

 

[Ernestas]

Well, I think of UK as an invasion force in 1939, heavily militarized they could bring USA to its knees in short war. Remember: most infrastructure in USA is located at the coasts. By having superior navy, all you would need is to pour millions of people across main cities, taking its industrial base for itself and enslaving local population. Then you would turn factories to your own production of supplies, arms and equipment while royal navy ruthlessly wipes out last remaining dock yards, cutting out USA navy support and thus effectively securing seas. You do not even have to cut off both ways. Just go to Panama with several battleships, lock it down, destroy it thus making it inaccessible for heavy ships. Retreat back and blockade remaining gap from submarines and light military ships. Rest of USA navy would have to sail across the world and with no local supply bases since you will occupy and concentrate on all coastline cities. Establishing your own concentrated defense perimeter and producing countless guns from local factories to arm your concripts.In this scenario thought, you should ally with Hitler and divide world as Britain should had done in a first place. Let Germans rule the east and later help you in your quest at finally returning USA to its minor status as it should had been.

You see, everything is possible if one has enough will to enact its goals.

 

[Red_Galiray]

Well, I think of UK as an invasion force in 1939, heavily militarized they could bring USA to its knees in short war. Remember: most infrastructure in USA is located at the coasts. By having superior navy, all you would need is to pour millions of people across main cities, taking its industrial base for itself and enslaving local population. Then you would turn factories to your own production of supplies, arms and equipment while royal navy ruthlessly wipes out last remaining dock yards, cutting out USA navy support and thus effectively securing seas. You do not even have to cut off both ways. Just go to Panama with several battleships, lock it down, destroy it thus making it inaccessible for heavy ships. Retreat back and blockade remaining gap from submarines and light military ships. Rest of USA navy would have to sail across the world and with no local supply bases since you will occupy and concentrate on all coastline cities. Establishing your own concentrated defense perimeter and producing countless guns from local factories to arm your concripts.In this scenario thought, you should ally with Hitler and divide world as Britain should had done in a first place. Let Germans rule the east and later help you in your quest at finally returning USA to its minor status as it should had been.

You see, everything is possible if one has enough will to enact its goals.

I don't think that conquering the USA would have been easy, even for the Royal Navy. Even when the American Army was practically crap at the time, their navy was very powerful, and the Royal Navy would need to come from the other side of the Atlantic. Granted, they have Canada, but even then destroying the American fleet would not be an easy task. After it is destroyed and unless they manage to take all the American Industry, the USA could mass produce a huge number of ships and planes. You only have to look at their wartime production and you can see those numbers are almost crazy. But let's say that the UK takes all the coast and destroys the Canal, so the ships produced in the other coast are ineffective. Now, occupying the USA is a very hard task. Landing troops, keep them suplied should be not that hard if the UK captures their entire coast and destroys the navy there, but having the number of troops neccesary to effectivily occupy such a huge country is a "bit" more complicated...

 

[adam_grif]

You are absolutely right, given your data, Germany would have no chance, only a country as powerful as North Vietnam should be able to defeat the USA.

How good do you think North Vietnam's chances of successfully invading and annexing the USA were? Because that is more like the situation discussed ITT. Nobody has questioned whether or not it will be possible for Germany to survive, what is being discussed is whether or not it's possible to invade the US successfully in the game. In reality, this is logistically equivalent to invading Russia across an ocean, with more industry, and the world's largest navy. Even if you defeat the conventional forces preventing you from landing, and deal with the submarines and surface raiders harassing your supply lines, you've now got to break out of your beachheads and race across the one of the largest countries in the world at a sufficient pace to prevent getting drowned in a flood of tanks and aircraft. Germany put up a tough fight for the western allies, and they had only had to hop across the channel from a far closer and superior staging area (the united kingdom), while enjoying an absurd industrial advantage, complete naval and air supremacy, and the Germans were fighting and losing a war against the USSR on the other side of their country and already bled white for manpower.

 

[Ernestas]

Uk was superpower in not just one way. With its finances it could construct superior navy, sack its oversees assets and focus everything on USA front while making pacts with Hitler to keep rest occupied. USA would not stand a chance before it got to mobilize its vast resources since Royal navy and British army would occupy a significant part of USA industry to start with. Second, traveling through the inland is pointless task. It's better to focus destroying other side of the shores in order to sack its major production centres. UK would have 2 whole years to do so before USA could actually fight UK having an upper hand. This is plenty of time to inflict harm and to force coup, replacing new government with puppets or ones who would surrender. From then on, British Empire must continue its pressure on USA in order to weaken its immense potential, but at this point, history would had went with its natural course and Germany would be controling majority of Europe and fresh, technologically superior forces would come to UK aid.


All this requires just completely unrealistic people and Stalin instead of Churchill to carry out such immense and complex plans. Weak leaders who ruled Uk at that time would had never managed to pull out something that hard.

Btw: We do not need to dominate other side. We just need to exhange navy with each other and be left with meaningful portion of it in order to launch assaults on its harbours and major industrial centers. Without USA capabilities to produce major ships, British will continue to rule the waves and thus ultimately- it will tear down the wall which is protecting USA and leave all its major cities- defenseless.

 

[seattle]

Germany was not the defender in the war and did lose the war completely. Vietnam was a defender and did manage to win. Germany could not win against USA because it was a aggressor.

They didn't even win in a conventional sense. They endured because the US didn't want a Korea 2.0. China made it clear that if the US would invade North Vietnam, they would enter the war (just like Korea). Hence the US limited its involvement to defending South Vietnam. The North would have been steamrolled within a few months if they had been on their own. Let's be clear about that.
It's hard to call someone a winner if they simply endured a beating until the bully had enough and withdrew his forces. Beating the corrupt and unstable South Vietnamese government is not that much of an achievement.

Oh yeah and let's also not forget that North Korea successfully invaded the US, but eventually was defeated by partisans. There was an entertaining documentary about that, called "Red Dawn" (the one without Patrick Swayze) or something. Basically it went like the 2003 Iraq war. North Korea steamrolls the US and then gets constantly harassed by partisans and paramilitary forces until they gave up.

 

[aceflamingo23]

Bruh every body in america got glocks in they rari. 17 shots, no 38

 

[RisingSun]

Well I gotta disagreed with this, it is not impossible to conquer USA. Just like USA didn't want to invade Japan and not willing to risk million lives on both sides. Civilians can defend too, as militia. Don't want to make it too strong, just have to bring in troops, I mean many of them if you want to overrun that areas.

 

[phantomrider]

Well I gotta disagreed with this, it is not impossible to conquer USA. Just like USA didn't want to invade Japan and not willing to risk million lives on both sides. Civilians can defend too, as militia. Don't want to make it too strong, just have to bring in troops, I mean many of them if you want to overrun that areas.

While I agree that bringing in enough troops could result in the conquest of the Americas -- what I don't see is any way that the axis could not only bring them in but keep them supplied. Nor can I see any way that the axis could launch an invasion if the game is anywhere near "realistic" in terms of supply, logistics etc on conducting an invasion of the scope needed much less develop the naval forces to take on the US Navy of the era or the the US Army Air Corps that developed.

 

[Ernestas]

Well, the only way is to supply from local infrastructure obviously. Another part is not to spread out yourself too thin, just establish hundreds of kilometers of defensive lines around coast cities and wait for inevitable counter attack. The point is to beat USA bloody at efficient Axis defenses while trying to occupy one side of USA and to cut of rest at Panama. Sadly, such massive campaign would require that Axis would had beaten USSR for good, Uk would had been brought under German heel and new age EU Union would had been established under leadership of Nazi party. Only then Axis would have enough beef to invade such giant, but that's essentially Europe vs USA.

 

[Caesar15]

Uk was superpower in not just one way. With its finances it could construct superior navy, sack its oversees assets and focus everything on USA front while making pacts with Hitler to keep rest occupied. USA would not stand a chance before it got to mobilize its vast resources since Royal navy and British army would occupy a significant part of USA industry to start with. Second, traveling through the inland is pointless task. It's better to focus destroying other side of the shores in order to sack its major production centres. UK would have 2 whole years to do so before USA could actually fight UK having an upper hand. This is plenty of time to inflict harm and to force coup, replacing new government with puppets or ones who would surrender. From then on, British Empire must continue its pressure on USA in order to weaken its immense potential, but at this point, history would had went with its natural course and Germany would be controling majority of Europe and fresh, technologically superior forces would come to UK aid.


All this requires just completely unrealistic people and Stalin instead of Churchill to carry out such immense and complex plans. Weak leaders who ruled Uk at that time would had never managed to pull out something that hard.

Btw: We do not need to dominate other side. We just need to exhange navy with each other and be left with meaningful portion of it in order to launch assaults on its harbours and major industrial centers. Without USA capabilities to produce major ships, British will continue to rule the waves and thus ultimately- it will tear down the wall which is protecting USA and leave all its major cities- defenseless.

Doesn't this all require the U.S to somehow not know this is all coming until it's too late?