Remove ads

Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

Reader mode
Skychan said:
I like the Schreiber chapters. They're a lot of fun and usually have a lot more tension in them due to the danger he's in personally. I feel that they have a lot more inherent danger in them because of it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, that and the fact that he has no true good choice. Best case? Several hundred thousand of his countrymen are dead. Worst choice? Germany in ruins, an even MORE vengeful allies and the Soviets with his home. It's like watching a tragedy, but in the same time as a Comedy...
 
SisterJeanne said:
Theoretically help them hold out long enough for the nukes to be used in Europe instead of Japan?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
By being good enough to keep the british and americans wary of the channel defenses so they concentrate in Italy instead of doing the landings at Normandy therefore not reaching Germany roughly at the same time that the soviets and getting the entire of his country occupied by the russians, forever.
 
Archduke said:
I'm not exactly certain how Schreiber could make it worse for Germany than OTL...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Less material going to the eastern front as Germany continues to waste it on their pointless surface. Complete destruction of German resistance prior to the July plot, slower western response in Europe.
 
SisterJeanne said:
Theoretically help them hold out long enough for the nukes to be used in Europe instead of Japan?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The way I see it. The only somewhat good outcome is that Schreiber and the German resistance surrender to the Allies after a successful coup just before the Western Allies and the Soviets enter Germany. That way, Germany will not be completely destroyed like in the original timeline when Nazis refused to surrender even though the Allies entered Germany itself in 1944 and 1945.
 
Last edited:
newwriter said:
The way I see it. The only somewhat good outcome is that Schreiber and the German resistance surrender to the Allies after a successful coup just before the Western Allies and the Soviets enter Germany. That way, Germany will not be completely destroyed like in the original timeline when Nazis refused to surrender even though the Allies entered Germany itself in 1944 and 1945.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Doing so however, will risk another round of 'stab in the back' myth. I don't think WAllies want that to happen. Want it or not, at the very least, WAllies have to march deep into Germany to show the German they have been decisively beaten.
 
Last edited:
newwriter said:
The way I see it. The only somewhat good outcome is that Schreiber and the German resistance surrender to the Allies after a successful coup just before the Western Allies and the Soviets enter Germany. That way, Germany will not be completely destroyed like in the original timeline when Nazis refused to surrender even though the Allies entered Germany itself in 1944 and 1945.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Part of the trick will be to bypass Eisenhower, he was a man that honored his commitments to the Yalta agreements regarding the rate of advance and the limits of the western and soviet areas of occupation, he delayed allied advance towards Berlin (to be fair he didn't want to waste allied lives) and denied Doenitz a conditional surrender that would gave more terrain to the allies than to Moscow to the point he warned the germans that if they attempted it he would refuse even personal surrenders. Such a plan would be needed to be negociated with the direct support of Churchill while taking all possible measures to prevent Stanlin from hearing it.
 
newwriter said:
The way I see it. The only somewhat good outcome is that Schreiber and the German resistance surrender to the Allies after a successful coup just before the Western Allies and the Soviets enter Germany. That way, Germany will not be completely destroyed like in the original timeline when Nazis refused to surrender even though the Allies entered Germany itself in 1944 and 1945.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
the issue is that your setting up ww3 given how you have basically have a repeat of the end of ww1.
 
BF110C4 said:
Part of the trick will be to bypass Eisenhower, he was a man that honored his commitments to the Yalta agreements regarding the rate of advance and the limits of the western and soviet areas of occupation, he delayed allied advance towards Berlin (to be fair he didn't want to waste allied lives) and denied Doenitz a conditional surrender that would gave more terrain to the allies than to Moscow to the point he warned the germans that if they attempted it he would refuse even personal surrenders. Such a plan would be needed to be negociated with the direct support of Churchill while taking all possible measures to prevent Stanlin from hearing it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Eisenhower was merely following Allied policy, including both unconditional surrender and zones of occupation, that had been established long before. Plus, Stalin wasn't going to let the WAllies walk into Berlin. He could have the VVS hit the WAllied spearheads then, when the WAllies come to him asking for an explanation, he would expressing profuse sorrow over the "tragic case of mistaken identity" and suggest that if the WAllies stick to the agreed upon demarcation of the Elbe such incidents could be avoided. Of course, a lot depends on how things develop IATL: if things go well enough for Schreiber, then the WAllies might be lunging towards Berlin as the Soviets are still moving through Poland and the Balkans. If they go poorly enough, then the Red Army's storming Berlin just as the WAllies are landing in France. And everything in between, naturally.
 
Last edited:
... given that Schreiber is supposedly going after convoys for Russia... I wonder if crippling Lend-Lease a bit (not to the point where the Allies call it as a bad option, but enough that Russia feels it), would delay the Soviet build-up and final positions to the point where the Allies decide that waiting would work against them.
 
HolyDragoon said:
... given that Schreiber is supposedly going after convoys for Russia... I wonder if crippling Lend-Lease a bit (not to the point where the Allies call it as a bad option, but enough that Russia feels it), would delay the Soviet build-up and final positions to the point where the Allies decide that waiting would work against them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
not likely, at most he'll be able to hit one convoy before its flooded with allied 16in gunned battleships that will tear any further attempts a new one/ bomber command grows a brain and starts targeting the fjords the same way they did the French ports.
 
Spectre said:
not likely, at most he'll be able to hit one convoy before its flooded with allied 16in gunned battleships that will tear any further attempts a new one/ bomber command grows a brain and starts targeting the fjords the same way they did the French ports.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Plus, the majority of L-L came down the Pacific and Iranian routes, which Schreiber can't even touch. As it was, Tirpitz was able to shut down the North Atlantic route for a while in 1942 simply by being where she was... right as Stalingrad started.
 
Last edited:
HolyDragoon said:
... given that Schreiber is supposedly going after convoys for Russia... I wonder if crippling Lend-Lease a bit (not to the point where the Allies call it as a bad option, but enough that Russia feels it), would delay the Soviet build-up and final positions to the point where the Allies decide that waiting would work against them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

At this point in time, it's probably not enough to matter one way or the other. For one thing, right now while England can and is sending convoys, they have to juggle the shipments with their need to rebuild British forces. Also the situation is a rough analogue of OTL Norwegian Sea deployments with Tirpitz stationed in Norway as a threat to the convoys. Shreiber's on the beach while Bismarck is repaired, apparently she suffered damage either from RAF bombing or during the Channel Dash that redeployed her to Germany from France.
 
Germany doesn't see the Russian front as lost until the surrender at Stalingrad. Too much front and not enough troops even with 800K Ukrainian volunteers. That the Italians held their flank as long as they did was frankly amazing.

Now in Destiny timeline, if Rommel pulls his typical OTL Rommel behavior and blatantly ignores his supply lines? An overextension that gets Rommel's nuts chopped off by either capture or death would have massive morale effects in Germany.
 
Last edited:
Spectre said:
not likely, at most he'll be able to hit one convoy before its flooded with allied 16in gunned battleships that will tear any further attempts a new one/ bomber command grows a brain and starts targeting the fjords the same way they did the French ports.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is the other problem. Sooner or later the RN forces countering Tirpitz and Bismark will include a few USN battleships (either the NorCals or SoDaks) which rather outclass the pride of the Kriegsmarine. Plus KGV and Duke of York who are rough peer competitors.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Germany doesn't see the Russian front as lost until the surrender at Stalingrad. Too much front and not enough troops even with 800K Ukrainian volunteers. That the Italians held their flank as long as they did was frankly amazing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, even then many Germans held out hope they could achieve a negotiated settlement that left them with at least some of the territory they picked up. The delusion even persisted past Kursk and it wasn't until the Soviets obliterated three Army Groups in mid-'44 that even this thin hope fell away. After that, the dominant delusion was a miraculous break in the alliance between the Anglo-Americans and the Soviets.
 
Last edited:
Until Stalingrad finally falls though, the overall impression is still of Germany being at its height. So 1942 is still very much peak Axis time if you will. 1943 is when the major reversals start cascading on each other. Especially once Italy decides to nope out.
 
SisterJeanne said:
This is the other problem. Sooner or later the RN forces countering Tirpitz and Bismark will include a few USN battleships (either the NorCals or SoDaks) which rather outclass the pride of the Kriegsmarine. Plus KGV and Duke of York who are rough peer competitors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I wonder if the Royal Navy will send in the midget subs again to cripple Tirpitz. I'd like to see a replay of Operation Source, almost as gutsy as Operation Chariot.

Operation Source - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
Actually, you have to wonder how much of Schreiber's uptime knowledge could help. Even if the WAllies don't want to play along, he could potentially interdict allied convoys with superb accuracy and make it easier on ground forces driving into Russia.
 
theJMPer said:
Actually, you have to wonder how much of Schreiber's uptime knowledge could help. Even if the WAllies don't want to play along, he could potentially interdict allied convoys with superb accuracy and make it easier on ground forces driving into Russia.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
will they still be the same as in OTL though...
 
Actually, where exactly IS the Soviet Navy anyway? I don't remember much about their contribution... at all come to think of it...
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top