Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Germany vs Japan What IF

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Germany vs Japan What IF

    What if...instead of the British Isles off the coast of France, the 4 islands of Japan are there instead. The Japanese empire owned what the British owned but only in the in the European area (Gibraltar, Malta, etc). It produced the same military as it did in WWII.

    Its 1940, its army has just been expelled from Europe by the Wehrmacht and France, its last remaining ally, surrenderd. On the bright side, the IJN has stopped the German invasion of Norway and destroyed the German surface fleet.

    America on the other side of the Atlantic wants to help but can't politically.

    How does the war progress?

  • #2
    Its too different. No Manchuria or East Indies to use as raw material for industry.
    First Counsul Maleketh of Jonov

    Comment


    • #3
      I guess they perform worse than the UK in the air battle (production capacity, radar, etc.).
      With water in between, the Germans still can't get there though.

      Comment


      • #4
        1939:
        I assume Japan is allied with Poland and France. Japan declares war an hour after Poland is invaded and sinks the German fleet with torpedoes from G3Ms.
        Japan does not waste the Polish sacrifice and invades Norway and Denmark, the imperial navy enters the Baltic and introduces troops, artllery, tanks and planes into Poland. destroys a large number of German bombers and allows the Polish army to last longer. Japanese troops disembark along east Prussia and capture it in 2 weeks, with the Poles attacking from the south.
        Japan also presses France to invade together the poorly defended Ruhr, depriving Hitler of much of its industry.
        Germany which in real life almost ran out of ammunition by the time the Soviets invaded, runs quickly out of ammunition fighting simultaneously the Poles, Japanese and French.
        Hitler is lynched before the armistice.
        Seeing the allied response, Mussolini joins the allies and Stalin never invades Poland or Finland. Poland remains free and receives East Prussia, France keeps the Ruhr. Japan keeps the rest of Germany.

        Actually with Japan there in 1938, instead of Britain, WW II starts the moment Germany tries to annex the Sudeten, so Czechoslovakia, Poland, France and Japan defeat Germany, even before it gets to milk Czech industry.
        Last edited by Draco; 18 Sep 12, 00:58.

        Comment


        • #5
          I highly doubt this is Britian now invading China

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
            I highly doubt this is Britian now invading China
            Like India, you mean?

            Wow, how's that for a concept?
            A British Colonial Empire that has China for a Crown Jewel, in India's place. That alone and your looking at a real power-house.

            Draco;
            I thought you were really on to something, until this part-
            Actually with Japan there in 1938, instead of Britain, WW II starts the moment Germany tries to annex the Sudeten, so Czechoslovakia, Poland, France and Japan defeat Germany, even before it gets to milk Czech industry.
            Japan, in such an aggressive and vigilant time in it's history, became an ally of Germany, and by far their most effective one. I think you might be pushing it there.
            And, Japan's land-Army would not have fared any better than the UK's vs the Wehrmacht. Probably worse, in fact.

            Comment


            • #7
              Japan had a fourth of Germany's industrial capacity and a third of Great Britain's, additionally, Japan is incredibly resource poor compared to Britain or main land Europe. Japan simply would not be able to replace losses to it's fleet like Britain was able to, which in OTL is part of the reason why it lost to America; while Japan started out with a more formadible navy than America; it never really could replace it's losses very well, while America could come back to every battle stronger than before.

              The IJA is also not going to be beating the Heer anytime soon, virtually every time Japan had to fight a European theater style land battle against an industrialized power it lost and lost hard. Khalkin Gol, Saipan, and Manchuria attest to that. So Japan is definitely going to be curb stomped off the continent in short order. Then of course; there's the fact that the German Wehrmacht as a whole was more advanced than the Japanese military, a disparity that's only going to grow as time goes on.

              The Japanese military's hardware didn't advance very much past what it had when it started the war in OTL, while the German military toolkit of the second half of the war was radically different from the first half. Yes Germany had a problem with distributing their advances effectively, but it's better than Japan slugging it out with largely interwar period tech throughout the entire damned conflict. When we compare tanks for example, Japan will only really remain able to compete in armoured warfare up until the Panzer III becomes standard, once the Panzer IV becomes the mainstay the IJA will be utterly outclassed.

              As for machine guns, German infantry tactics revolved around the medium machine gun and it shows, with their large number of cheap, reliable, and effective automatic weapons, while Japan's primary machine gun was...outdated...to say the least when the war started. On the matter of airplanes, the Zero is nice and all, but once Germany starts cranking out their latter era planes, well you can expect a repeat of what happened when America and Britain got hellcats and the later versions of carrier based spit fires. Additionally, Japan doesn't even remotely have the capability to engage in strategic bombing to the same extent that Britain was able to.

              The IJA isn't going to be succeeding where the British army failed because as a whole the IJA was substantially worse than the British army, Japan is a significantly weaker power than Britain in most every regard, and if this scenario means that Britain joins the Axis in Japan's stead, then the bulk of the IJN is going to be busy slugging it out with the Royal Navy while simultaneously trying to deal with the U-boat fleet in the Atlantic and the Italian fleet (and depending on what Japan does after the fall of France; the Vichy French navy too) in the Mediterranean. And let's remember that Japan's navy is both smaller and less able to absorb losses than Britain's was.

              Really, swapping Britain and Japan's spots in the Allies and Axis makes things a whole lot better for the Axis and an awful lot worse for the Allies.
              Standing here, I realize you were just like me trying to make history.
              But who's to judge the right from wrong.
              When our guard is down I think we'll both agree.
              That violence breeds violence.
              But in the end it has to be this way.

              Comment


              • #8
                Japan lost to America because the US navy was huge. Germany has no KM after Sept 2 (sunk by airplanes).
                Britain lost several ships, including a carrier, a Polish destoyer, etc, in Norway, which Japan never loses because it captures Norway, destroys the fleet at the outset and occupies or blockades Kiel, etc, by controlling the Baltic. Besides, Japan has the powerful French navy and the small Polish navy on its side, which it draws into action much more effectively than Churchill did, the first (and most incompetent) lord of the admiralty.

                Actually, during the invasion of Germany, allied ships enter the Rhine, Mossele and Ruhr to support the troops with their artillery and AA and to transport them along the rivers, so they can advance fast.

                German tanks in 1939 are few and lousy (mostly Pz I and II that are susceptible even to the portable and inexpensive 25 mm Hotchkiss gun (French) and French tanks are much better and more numerous in Germany (German tanks are in Poland). Most of the 88 mm guns are busy in Poland and not very useful in urban warfare.
                Although French planes are deficient, in contrast to Britain Japan introduces all its best planes into the fight from day one. Japan and France are buying planes from America and the P-36s, Buffaloes and P-40 prove quite useful. Most importantly, Germany is rapidly running out of oil and vehicles, because Stalin cannot supply it and Romania is France's ally, so sorties are greatly reduced and many planes destroyed on the ground. Germany has no home fighter command, so allied bombers destroy the RR nodes and paralyze transportation. By September 20, the French control most of the south and the Polish and Japanese control Silesia so Germany cannot continue fighting at all without coal or oil. I already mentioned that they couldn't fight because they soon run out of ammunition (with Göring and Todt in charge of production, Germany invaded Poland with ridiculous amounts of ammo and succeeded only because Stalin invaded Poland and France and Britain did absolutely nothing during the invasion).
                The allies had fabulous resources at their disposal, but only Poland used its resources deftly, France and Britain slept.
                Germany lost half the 200,000 vehicles with which it invaded Poland. With Japanese planes and troops there, Germany would have lost all its vehicles in Poland and East Prussia.
                Last edited by Draco; 20 Sep 12, 11:59.

                Comment


                • #9
                  National Geographic showed a home movie made by Eva Braun when Hitler received the telegram with the British declaration of war on Sept 3, It's the only time that I have seen him afraid. He invaded Poland because he assumed that the allies would do nothing, just like in Czechoslovakia. He was extremely lucky that the allies took days to declare war and did almost nothing after declaring war. All the German generals knew that Germany did not stand a chance in hell if it had to fight on two fronts against the British, French and American industries. The allies simply assumed that it was wiser to wait behind the Maginot for the Germans to attack.
                  The Japanese would not wait. They would have been ready to counter attack at any moment.
                  It is not the size of your industry or your armed forces, it is how efficiently you use them. Finland in WW II and the Boers in SA being the best examples of this.
                  What good is it making hundreds of Hurricanes and excellent Spitfires if you send Gladiator biplanes to Norway and Greece? What good is it to have airplane carriers when your enemy doesn't, and having lots of battleships, cruisers, submarines, etc, but you allow battlecruisers to sink one of your carriers? or having better tanks than the Germans if you don't use them until the Germans invade and then you use them in the worst possible way?
                  What is the use of having the huge French navy, if it will not fight Germany but rot in Africa to be attacked by Britain after the armistice or scuttled when Germany invades Vichy? Wouldn't Napoleon have used French resources a million times better, invading Germany by land and sea with everything he had?
                  Last edited by Draco; 20 Sep 12, 17:38.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Draco View Post
                    It is not the size of your industry or your armed forces, it is how efficiently you use them. Finland in WW II and the Boers in SA being the best examples of this.
                    May I point out that they also lost in the end.

                    Originally posted by Draco View Post
                    Although French planes are deficient, in contrast to Britain Japan introduces all its best planes into the fight from day one. Japan and France are buying planes from America and the P-36s, Buffaloes and P-40 prove quite useful.
                    And Japan throws it’s very small and highly trained corps of pilots into the battle and loses most of them before the Battle of Japan. Then they have none to stop Germany from bombing their ships.
                    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      There will never be a battle of Japan if Germany falls for lack of ammo, petrol, coal, etc, and even if there were one, Germany could never invade Japan without a navy.

                      Only the British (Dowding) would keep idle hundreds of their best planes before, during and after the BoB to defend their country after losing all its allies, instead of beating the enemy with the Polish, French and Brtish armies, air forces and navies, a truly unbeatable combination if used properly.
                      .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The Japanese get their @$$e$ handed to them.

                        It's 1940. That means Ki 15 Nates and A5M Claudes. The Ki 43 and A6M Zero are still on the drawing board. Their land based bombers are ill-suited to take on any sort of opposition. The only thing the G3M has going for it is range. The Ki 21 bomber is a sitting duck with a few .30 machineguns on wobbly mounts for defense.

                        Basically the Japanese in 1940 are a much more aggressive and fanatical equivalent of the Italian military.
                        They are ill-equipped in antitank guns, their artillery is obsolesent at best.
                        Their best fighters are fixed landing gear open cockpit planes with a couple of .30 caliber machineguns on them.
                        Hell, one of their best bombers is the Italian BR 20 that they bought in quantity for use in China.

                        Given that they are turning out a handful of pilots a year, that their entire army is only about 24 divisions, that they haven't got anything in the way of tanks to stand up to even the Pz II let alone a Pz III or IV or a Pz 38t they are so doomed.

                        Yea, they have a navy. But, their tactics and operational doctrine is not going to cut it in Europe particularly if they have to go in aganist the Luftwaffe. They will get shot to pieces and have no planes and pilots in nothing flat.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          And remember, since we're effectively swapping Britain and Japan's spots on the two camps, the Axis is going to get a lot more powerful with the might of Britain behind it. The IJN is going to end up at the bottom of the ocean as it tries to fight the Kriegsmarine, Italian Navy, Vichy French navy (depending on what Japan does after France falls), and the Royal navy all at once. Once it's navy and air force are destroyed, crossing the channel to invade Japan would be more doable (but still very difficult) for Germany. Or Germany could just surround it with U-boats and the Luftwaffe and strangle the resource poor islands to death (really, Japan is one of the most resource poor places in the world.)

                          Once Japan capitulates, Germany can throw itself at the Soviet Union without any distractions and will likely do a lot better. This means that the Axis will have a pretty much unshakeable grip over the continent if/whenever America gets involved. And even the united states would need a nearby base to launch any major operations.

                          Really you needed all three of the Major players in the allies to achieve the kind of results we got in OTL. Take away Britain and Germany will overrun Europe, bring down the soviets and have an impenetrable fortress that America will have an arse of a time getting to. Take away America and Britain and Russia would likely achieve a stalemate at best, as cracking fortress Europa would be out of the question without America's materiel aid if Britain doesn't outright starve out of the war and Russia doesn't collapse without America's materiel aid letting them focus on building guns, tanks, and planes. Without the soviet union, Germany has vastly more resources to deploy against the western allies, delaying any sort of victory by a hell of a lot.

                          Trying to patch the gaps that you'd open up by taking out one of the three principal players by slotting in a much weaker nation is not going to work at all. The thing about World War 2 is that it was at it's core more of a war of resources than a war of tactics. And Japan is no way in hell going to win a war of resources against Germany or even do remotely as well as Britain did.
                          Last edited by Czin; 21 Sep 12, 03:42.
                          Standing here, I realize you were just like me trying to make history.
                          But who's to judge the right from wrong.
                          When our guard is down I think we'll both agree.
                          That violence breeds violence.
                          But in the end it has to be this way.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hitler lost over 300 planes to the mighty Polish air force and AA. Polish pilots would do much better with 200 Ki-27s and A5Ms than with a few PZL P.7s. Dutch pilots did pretty well with a few fixed landing gear D.XXIs, considering that they faced formidable odds. The Japanese do have Zeroes by Sept 1940. French pilots would also do better with Ki-27s and A5Ms in addition to MS.406s.

                            Like I said, the Germans don't stand a chance without ammo, especially in Germany against the large French forces backed by excellent tanks and artillery and dozens of destroyers.

                            The Japanese use their brain (unlike the British) and acquire 1,000 inexpensive, portable Hutchkiss guns and 100,000 rounds from the French in June 1939, more than enough to wipe out the ridiculous German tin tanks and the few vehicles, which are also susceptible to Polish artillery (Hitler lost a few hundred tanks in Poland).

                            The Italian navy, army and air force joined the allies when they saw Germany losing its navy in the first days and promptly invaded successfully, remember?

                            When Stalin sees Germany losing, he would probably also invade Czechoslovakia and Austria (which is under attack by the Italians in the south) to get a piece of the bounty.

                            Romania was France's ally and if the allies were beating Germany and Stalin did not invade Czechoslovakia and Austria, Romania would probably invade them.

                            Germany was completely unprepared for war, it had little ammo, fuel, tanks (and lousy), AA, field artillery, trucks, etc, and had almost all its forces facing Poland. It succeded only because Britain and France did not attack.

                            In the end, this comparison is completely unfair, since Japan has only come out of the middle ages a few decades before the war and already had better carrier planes than the British. Facing Europe, Japan would have centuries of industrial, naval and military experience.
                            The point is that the allies had formidable resources but used them in the worst possible way, making Hitler more powerful as time passed, until Britain was left alone, facing an extremely strong Germany. In 1939 Germany was an extremely vulnerable bully and would have easily crumbled on two (or more if Italy and the USSR or Romania attack) aggressive fronts.
                            Last edited by Draco; 21 Sep 12, 11:34.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X