Remove ads

Democracy's Torch (Sky plays Darkest Hour)

Reader mode
Theravis said:
On the naval front though.... I would stand behind a carrier-based navy, because we should be focusing on army/air force/THEN navy. We haven't got a huge need for force projection in the near future, carriers are currently inoffensive, and we really need an army and an air force for self defense against almost all of Europe before we have to worry about naval endeavors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But, at the moment, our nation has little money, and the reconstruction costs of the Nazi Uprising are going to wear on that. Perhaps, in the future, we will become the naval power we should be. But first, let's make our home great once more.
 
Burning Baron said:
But, at the moment, our nation has little money, and the reconstruction costs of the Nazi Uprising are going to wear on that. Perhaps, in the future, we will become the naval power we should be. But first, let's make our home great once more.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
....I'm agreeing with you. Naval LAST. Army, then Air Force, then Navy in our military reconstruction.
 
Aircraft carriers provide a convenient end around Versailles Treaty limitations. Also, Germany can look at what the US and Japan have already developed and go from there. Germany doesn't have to reinvent the wheel or come up with battlecruiser conversions. Since it's only 1933, we have time to plan and look at what other nations will be doing.

And when it comes to rebuilding the army, well, how that will look will depend on what sort of national strategies we decide on. Since the Nazis aren't in power and building towards a lebensraum expansionism, we may not need to go with a mass conscription program. But admittedly this is all mental exercises until we can get the economy on track.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Aircraft carriers provide a convenient end around Versailles Treaty limitations. Also, Germany can look at what the US and Japan have already developed and go from there. Germany doesn't have to reinvent the wheel or come up with battlecruiser conversions. Since it's only 1933, we have time to plan and look at what other nations will be doing.

And when it comes to rebuilding the army, well, how that will look will depend on what sort of national strategies we decide on. Since the Nazis aren't in power and building towards a lebensraum expansionism, we may not need to go with a mass conscription program. But admittedly this is all mental exercises until we can get the economy on track.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Speaking of: Eugen Strauss, DNVP, 35 votes for
[X] Stimulus

The German people have suffered enough.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Aircraft carriers provide a convenient end around Versailles Treaty limitations. Also, Germany can look at what the US and Japan have already developed and go from there. Germany doesn't have to reinvent the wheel or come up with battlecruiser conversions. Since it's only 1933, we have time to plan and look at what other nations will be doing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Eeeeh. There's only so much one can derive from public photos. We'd need to get technical info... which we can't without good relations and/or spying.
MagisterAurelius said:
And when it comes to rebuilding the army, well, how that will look will depend on what sort of national strategies we decide on. Since the Nazis aren't in power and building towards a lebensraum expansionism, we may not need to go with a mass conscription program. But admittedly this is all mental exercises until we can get the economy on track.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Tanks. Tanks are the future, anything else is unacceptable. :V
 
Always Late said:
Eeeeh. There's only so much one can derive from public photos. We'd need to get technical info... which we can't without good relations and/or spying.

Tanks. Tanks are the future, anything else is unacceptable. :V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sweden.

Sweden (modern Sweden) has a 100% tank-destroyer doctrine, because they have a self-defence army.
 
theJMPer said:
I kinda wanna play a Catholic who hates the goddless commies and wants to protect Poland in gratitude for what they did at the Seige of Vienna.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, it would be something unique :V

Always Late said:
Those are actually banned as characters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah. Nazis are never going to come to power, and are very unpopular with the average German right now anyway. There will probably always be a few of them clinging on in the Reichstag (no Hitler-in-charge=no De-Nazification) but they'll never be near a majority.

I imagine there could be fun in playing someone getting increasingly bitter at their chance for power thrown away, but I personally prefer (and it goes the same for the Communists) to have characters in the major parties that can actually influence things. Or the minors (BVP for example) that support the majors.

Comrade Jeff said:
There's still Prince Louis Ferdinand Von Hohenzollern who as I know greatly admired American democracy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Theravis said:
Frankly, I'd rather see either a totally off-the-wall candidate, or the Hohenzollerns back, because PRUSSIA.

So consider me a Louis Ferdinand supporter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Louis Ferdinand is probably the singular most liberal potential Kaiser, yes. For a certain value of liberal.


*I note I say potential. Barring the DNVP ending up large and in-charge which would require the SPD making ludicrous errors or some such, a restoration is a pipe-dream.


Re: Military buildup


There is an event in....'39 or so (at least in the last version I played, dunno on this one) that is something along the lines of 'Mobilize the Reichswehr'. It's based off a similar event for regular Germany (in this case Wehrmacht) that gives you a lot of outdated- seriously, most are 1918-tech -infantry units. Twenty? Thirty? Maybe even 40-50? Don't remember and I'm not checking because I want to go into this blind.

But we've got at least the potential to get a decent army in '39 or so. Problem being that said army is outdated and would require quite a bit of time to rearm with modern weapons. A lot of time, because lots of units and very outdated units.



Also, tanks. I always go for tanks, because a well-done Blitz doctrine with combined arms divisions (my preferred mix is three armored+one motorized infantry-to-be-replaced-by-one-mechanized-when-researched) can obliterate defense lines. Have enough of those with enough infantry and arty backing, and enemies will melt.

So...Guderian will be happy?


(will update as soon as I have Destiny updated. May reach the first really major unique-to-mod event for Germany in this update too. And that is an important one for quite a few reasons)
 
Skywalker_T-65 said:
But we've got at least the potential to get a decent army in '39 or so. Problem being that said army is outdated and would require quite a bit of time to rearm with modern weapons. A lot of time, because lots of units and very outdated units.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It actually doesn't take as much time as you might think. By 1939, I always have enough IC that I just give the bare minimum to everything other than "Upgrades" and give the newly freed IC to "Upgrades." Within two months, the entire army will have been updated. Albeit, it will take longer to give them all standardized attachments such as artillery or engineers.
 
Always Late said:
*Imagines Jadgpanthers as far as the eye can see*
I am so hyped.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually the StuG III had the best combat record and largest production run out of all the OTL German armored fighting vehicles. Jadgpanthers would be more complex and expensive to build and maintain. If you want the best bang for your buck, the StuG III is the way to go.


 
Flatpanzers were pretty cheap and effective too.

Jagdpanzer IV - Wikipedia

At least when they weren't being used as a stand in for tanks.

Guderian didn't like them because they took chassis away from regular Pz.IV production. History would of course vindicate him as at the end of the war there weren't enough tanks to go around.
To the right is the Jagdpanther.

This is a JgPz.IV L/70 (A). Same tank, different manufacturer, different gun. The L/70 variants used the 75mm L/70 from the Panther series tanks. The (A) denotes this variant was produced by Alkett. Hence it being called the Jagdpanzer Alkett. The main difference is the height of the vehicle.
 
Last edited:
Skywalker_T-65 said:
Also, tanks. I always go for tanks, because a well-done Blitz doctrine with combined arms divisions (my preferred mix is three armored+one motorized infantry-to-be-replaced-by-one-mechanized-when-researched) can obliterate defense lines. Have enough of those with enough infantry and arty backing, and enemies will melt.

So...Guderian will be happy?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As will Rommel, the Nishizumis, and Diana.:D
Skywalker_T-65 said:
(will update as soon as I have Destiny updated. May reach the first really major unique-to-mod event for Germany in this update too. And that is an important one for quite a few reasons)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hoo boy.
WhiteDragon25 said:
Actually the StuG III had the best combat record and largest production run out of all the OTL German armored fighting vehicles.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
WhiteDragon25 said:
Jadgpanthers would be more complex and expensive to build and maintain. If you want the best bang for your buck, the StuG III is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I know, I know, just let me dream damn it!/kidding
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Aircraft carriers provide a convenient end around Versailles Treaty limitations. Also, Germany can look at what the US and Japan have already developed and go from there. Germany doesn't have to reinvent the wheel or come up with battlecruiser conversions. Since it's only 1933, we have time to plan and look at what other nations will be doing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, because we all know how Germany's naval record has been.
 
Night_stalker said:
Yes, because we all know how Germany's naval record has been.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's the thing: A carrier is part ship, part aircraft. So long as the planes and the plane-assisting areas like radar and Fighter Direction are good, the ship engineering is of secondary concern. That's not to say that it's not important, but a well-made carrier is useless if its aircraft are shit.
 
Always Late said:
That's the thing: A carrier is part ship, part aircraft. So long as the planes and the plane-assisting areas like radar and Fighter Direction are good, the ship engineering is of secondary concern. That's not to say that it's not important, but a well-made carrier is useless if its aircraft are shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They also need good crews for things like damage control. Remember, poor damcon led to the losses of Taiho, Shinano, and Lexington.
 
Always Late said:
That's the thing: A carrier is part ship, part aircraft. So long as the planes and the plane-assisting areas like radar and Fighter Direction are good, the ship engineering is of secondary concern. That's not to say that it's not important, but a well-made carrier is useless if its aircraft are shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I was more thinking what's the point of a carrier?

We have no overseas possessions, so it's not useful on guard duty.

We don't have plans to tick off anyone with a navy worth mentioning....
 
Night_stalker said:
We don't have plans to tick off anyone with a navy worth mentioning....
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For now. The filthy communists are going to be an issue though. Especially if they go after Latvia and company, Finland, Sweden, etc. We may not be the most militant, but I doubt we'd let the Bear just chomp on northern allies like that. (Germany has an Iron for Marks deal with Sweden at this time)
 
Night_stalker said:
I was more thinking what's the point of a carrier?

We have no overseas possessions, so it's not useful on guard duty.

We don't have plans to tick off anyone with a navy worth mentioning....
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Power Projection. A carrier is a mobile airfield, with a strike range longer than any battleship or submarine. Whether its making strikes from the Baltic sea on targets behind the Soviet lines or throttling merchant shipping, air power is the best answer.
 
Dirtnap said:
For now. The filthy communists are going to be an issue though. Especially if they go after Latvia and company, Finland, Sweden, etc. We may not be the most militant, but I doubt we'd let the Bear just chomp on northern allies like that. (Germany has an Iron for Marks deal with Sweden at this time)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but Russia's navy is worse then ours, so meh.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top