Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 7/23/2003 11:36:46 PM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TIMJOT
[B]I dont think Germany ever would have had the capacity to complete the Z plan, just another Hitler delusion. The 300 Uboats were doable though. [/B][/QUOTE]

And in Operation Drumbeat, the U-Boat war against America, Doenitz wanted to send 100 U-boats to attack along the Eastern Seaboard of the United States. In reality, all he had were six boats.

Even so, Jan 13, 1942, was the beginning of America's Second Pearl Harbour, as 25 ships were sunk, and over the course of the next 6 months, another 550 ships were sent to the bottom.

This period of U-boat activity along America's shores represented one-quarter of all U-boat sinkings in the war, and was the most successful U-boat operation of WWII.

What defence would there have been against 300 U-boats in 1939-40?

Churchill once said that the only thing that ever really frightened him, was the U-boat. . .

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 91
Appreciation - 7/24/2003 4:06:51 AM   
herbieh

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 8/30/2002
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
I really understand where the matrix guys are coming from.
If you had the ability to produce a war game that you have been dreaming about all your life, would you develop it?
WITP will answer my heartfelt desires that were born the day I played my 1st war game, now finally they are coming in reach.
I appluad the efforts of these guys
Thanks.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 92
- 7/24/2003 4:53:18 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
David, that is pretty much what I expected. The scale of this game is simply too large to be profitable due to the insane investment in time and resources just to get it done. This is why simulators have pretty much completely vanished from the market. The investment to return is always negative.

Perhaps we can all commit to buying a double copy, or even better a special edition signed version for a higher price to help out the cause directly from Matrix (to keep the costs in house as much a possible). I think if you actually told people just how little money gets back in the hands of the dev team/publisher per copy sold, most folks would be shocked!

When I saw this one, I pretty much figured this was Gary's dream chance to write the game he always wanted to.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 93
- 7/24/2003 5:39:36 AM   
Snigbert

 

Posts: 2956
Joined: 1/27/2002
From: Worcester, MA. USA
Status: offline
[B]Does anybody know why 2by3 have put there third game on hold[/B]

It's only 3 guys, and they're working on a mammoth project. One game at a time! :)

[B]We have not given up so don't give up on us. Its so hard to run a business and love what you do [/B]

Hey, I'm buying a copy and I get one for free anyway for being a tester. I want to support the only company that would be willing to tackle a game like this. I'm also buying a copy for my friend who is a borderline wargamer who would be put off by the price but I think will love the game.

_____________________________

"Money doesnt talk, it swears. Obscenities, who really cares?" -Bob Dylan

"Habit is the balast that chains a dog to it's vomit." -Samuel Becket

"He has weapons of mass destruction- the world's deadliest weapons- which pose a direct threat to the

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 94
- 7/24/2003 5:40:31 AM   
bilbow


Posts: 741
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Concord NH
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag

Perhaps we can all commit to buying a double copy, or even better a special edition signed version for a higher price to help out the cause directly from Matrix (to keep the costs in house as much a possible). I think if you actually told people just how little money gets back in the hands of the dev team/publisher per copy sold, most folks would be shocked!

Great idea Frag. The play value is certainly there at any price.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 95
- 7/24/2003 6:04:18 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
message coming soon

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 96
- 7/24/2003 6:12:50 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B][B]Does anybody know why 2by3 have put there third game on hold[/B]

It's only 3 guys, and they're working on a mammoth project. One game at a time! :)

[B]We have not given up so don't give up on us. Its so hard to run a business and love what you do [/B]

Hey, I'm buying a copy and I get one for free anyway for being a tester. I want to support the only company that would be willing to tackle a game like this. I'm also buying a copy for my friend who is a borderline wargamer who would be put off by the price but I think will love the game. [/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks to all those supporting Matrix and 2by3 in our trying to provide WitP. If David can arrange for the logistics, we'd be happy to sign the special edition copy.

As for what we at 2by3 are doing, you'd be surprised. We are currently working on WitP and another project which we hope to announce within 2 months and ship early next year. It is the antithesis of WitP, and a product we think will have widespread appeal and allow us to make a few dollars so we can pay for all the time spent on UV and WitP (which have paid us minimum wage for the 4-5 years the 3 of us will have worked on these 2 games although if WitP does ok they will have kept us afloat).

As for the Russian Front game, we do hope to get back to it sometime as it was 80% designed and the database and basic map were done as well as some of the coding. I don't expect to get back to it until late 2004 at the earliest however so it will have to wait.

In the meantime, go out and support Matrix whenever you see a game you are interested in as they are one of the few companies today dedicated to bringing you new top quality wargames.

Joel

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 97
- 7/24/2003 6:30:47 AM   
madflava13


Posts: 1530
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline
[B] It is the antithesis of WitP, and a product we think will have widespread appeal and allow us to make a few dollars [/B]

Sometimes I think you guys drop hints to keep us on the edge of our seats... Let the rumor mill commence!

Seriously though, 2by3 and Matrix are top notch outfits and we all appreciate your hard work on these projects. Keep it up.

_____________________________

"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 98
- 7/24/2003 6:36:14 AM   
Damien Thorn

 

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joel Billings
[B]
As for what we at 2by3 are doing, you'd be surprised. We are currently working on WitP and another project. It is the antithesis of WitP, and a product we think will have widespread appeal and allow us to make a few dollars [/B][/QUOTE]

Frogger for the X-Box? :)

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 99
- 7/24/2003 9:57:09 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]David, that is pretty much what I expected. The scale of this game is simply too large to be profitable due to the insane investment in time and resources just to get it done. This is why simulators have pretty much completely vanished from the market. The investment to return is always negative.

Perhaps we can all commit to buying a double copy, or even better a special edition signed version for a higher price to help out the cause directly from Matrix (to keep the costs in house as much a possible). I think if you actually told people just how little money gets back in the hands of the dev team/publisher per copy sold, most folks would be shocked!

When I saw this one, I pretty much figured this was Gary's dream chance to write the game he always wanted to. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm with you on this one Mr Frag.

The past year I have derived more entertainment from UV than any other computer game ever.

Ever.

If the level of enjoyment deserves a corresponding cost, I should have paid 3 figures for UV.

I am more than willing to underwrite GGs "dream game", because I know I will enjoy it more than anything else anyone else could possibly develop.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 100
- 7/24/2003 8:16:42 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joel Billings
[B].........................

As for the Russian Front game, we do hope to get back to it sometime as it was 80% designed and the database and basic map were done as well as some of the coding. I don't expect to get back to it until late 2004 at the earliest however so it will have to wait.

...........................l [/B][/QUOTE]

So turn the coding over to us game-programmer-wannabies (under strict NDA of course) and we will finish the first cut for you - for free!

As far as sticking with you - we are right with you all the way. I plan to buy two copies of WitP - one for me and one for my brother who would never play the board game with me (maybe he'll play the computer game against me though).

One thing I am sure you have considered and perhaps should re-consider is producing monster games without AI - only head to head or PBEM. Yeah, I know - no AI = lower sales figures etc. But it seems like with large games the AI is not overly competent and a TON of development time is burned up creating even a low-IQ AI. For a game like WitP you are gonna get most of the sales (I'm guessing) from fans who have played UV. And from what I have read on the forum almost everyone says PBEM is the way to go. You don't expect to set the gaming world on fire with WitP saleswise anyway so...

Enough rambling for now. Just know that we are with you all the way!:)

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 101
- 7/25/2003 1:22:26 AM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sonny
[B]So turn the coding over to us game-programmer-wannabies (under strict NDA of course) and we will finish the first cut for you - for free!

As far as sticking with you - we are right with you all the way. I plan to buy two copies of WitP - one for me and one for my brother who would never play the board game with me (maybe he'll play the computer game against me though).

One thing I am sure you have considered and perhaps should re-consider is producing monster games without AI - only head to head or PBEM. Yeah, I know - no AI = lower sales figures etc. But it seems like with large games the AI is not overly competent and a TON of development time is burned up creating even a low-IQ AI. For a game like WitP you are gonna get most of the sales (I'm guessing) from fans who have played UV. And from what I have read on the forum almost everyone says PBEM is the way to go. You don't expect to set the gaming world on fire with WitP saleswise anyway so...

Enough rambling for now. Just know that we are with you all the way!:) [/B][/QUOTE]

I am forced to agree. As the game gets larger...diminishing returns set in. The AI, as such, cannot replicate or approximate
Grand Strategy. The Consumer MUST be willing to settle for less.

_____________________________

“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 102
- 7/25/2003 2:09:42 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joel Billings
[B]Thanks to all those supporting Matrix and 2by3 in our trying to provide WitP. If David can arrange for the logistics, we'd be happy to sign the special edition copy.

As for what we at 2by3 are doing, you'd be surprised. We are currently working on WitP and another project which we hope to announce within 2 months and ship early next year. It is the antithesis of WitP, and a product we think will have widespread appeal and allow us to make a few dollars so we can pay for all the time spent on UV and WitP (which have paid us minimum wage for the 4-5 years the 3 of us will have worked on these 2 games although if WitP does ok they will have kept us afloat).


Joel [/B][/QUOTE]

Oooo......could it be? No....that would be too perfect. But one can remain hopeful. I am now successfully put on the edge of my seat :D

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 103
- 7/25/2003 4:46:08 AM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Von Rom
[B]...

What defence would there have been against 300 U-boats in 1939-40?

Churchill once said that the only thing that ever really frightened him, was the U-boat. . . [/B][/QUOTE]


The same defence as was there when 300 U boats were around. It is very easy to allow one side to have an assumed advantage, but you have to allow the other side to do what it would have done to counter. If Ge built up 300 operational subs before the war, UK would have stepped up escort production, and anti-sub research. Britain remembered 1917, and would in no way have allowed 300 subs to be built, yet remain as in RL.

The quote from Churchill is true, however, in hindsight the U Boat war after 1941 was one of intermittant 'happy times' in amongst some very poor showings. Only the lack of US convoys on the east coast gives any decent results after 1941. It was rather a ghastly threat, that didn't usually live up to the nightmare. Rather than 300 subs at the start of the war, a MUCH more realistic (and frightening) prospect would be a proper U Boat staff, and more coherent radar, anti radar, and other scientific research, and a set of codes that weren't pretty much readable by the Allies. This last is probably the closest to a 'single deadly change' to alter history, if you want one.

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 104
- 7/25/2003 5:22:12 AM   
siRkid


Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CommC
[B]Gulp .... the interview says the AI vs AI of the full WITP main campaign 41-45 takes 4 days of computing time....

lets see .... 4 years of one day turns.... 1400 some odd turns at 4 hrs per turn thats 730 gaming days at 8 hrs per day. So playing everyday, all day 8 hours a day, it will take 2 years to finish a game. Hummm. [/B][/QUOTE]

I would call that a gret return on investment. How many other games can bost 3500+ hours of playing time.:D

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 105
- 7/25/2003 5:45:33 AM   
Fred98


Posts: 4430
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline
"It is the antithesis of WitP"


That probably means its not naval and probably not even war related - maybe science fiction.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 106
- 7/25/2003 6:18:37 AM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by HMSWarspite
[B]The same defence as was there when 300 U boats were around. It is very easy to allow one side to have an assumed advantage, but you have to allow the other side to do what it would have done to counter. If Ge built up 300 operational subs before the war, UK would have stepped up escort production, and anti-sub research. Britain remembered 1917, and would in no way have allowed 300 subs to be built, yet remain as in RL.

The quote from Churchill is true, however, in hindsight the U Boat war after 1941 was one of intermittant 'happy times' in amongst some very poor showings. Only the lack of US convoys on the east coast gives any decent results after 1941. It was rather a ghastly threat, that didn't usually live up to the nightmare. Rather than 300 subs at the start of the war, a MUCH more realistic (and frightening) prospect would be a proper U Boat staff, and more coherent radar, anti radar, and other scientific research, and a set of codes that weren't pretty much readable by the Allies. This last is probably the closest to a 'single deadly change' to alter history, if you want one. [/B][/QUOTE]

Hi :)

To counter a threat, a person must recognize it as a threat. If a weapon (such as a U-boat) is built in secret, then no counter is built for it.

Before WWII the British and Canadians did not prepare for a U-boat war, because ALL of Germany's U-boats were built in secret. Just like Japan's Superbattleships (the Yamato and Musashi).

In WWII, the British and Canadians had the good fortune to have two years to build up anti-sub warfare measures against the U-boat threat. Fortunately, the Germans only started the war with 65 U-boats. All 65 had been built in secret. Doenitz wanted to start the war with 300 U-boats.

Even so, when the German U-boats struck the American east coast in 1942, both the British AND Germans were shocked at how unprepared the US was to counter the submarines, even though the war had been raging for two years.

Considering the devastation wreaked upon the UK with these few boats, one can only imagine what 300 U-boats (built in secret) could have done in a similar time period.

Imagine 300 submarines prowling the Atlantic in 1940: hundreds more merchant ships would have been sunk; more warships would have been sent to the bottom; supplies to the UK would have fallen to a trickle; transports carrying men, weapons, and supplies would have been sent to the bottom. . .

And any thoughts of invasion would have to be postponed until hundreds of U-boats were destroyed. . .

During the pre-war years, Germany engineered a well-thought out plan to build submarines and torpedoes in secret as well as to train future submariners in a number of different countries. Three submarine prototypes were financed by the Krupp front, IVS, in Holland. Another six U-boats were built in Finland. And one 750-ton boat (E-I) was built in Spain. The IVS also financed a plant for building torpedo tubes and torpedoes in Spain. German sailors in mufti were assigned to conduct the trials of the submarine prototypes in Finland and Spain. Other Reichsmarine personnel established a submarine school in Turkey to train Turkish submariners to man three submarines IVS had sold to Turkey. The school also trained German submariners and another submarine school, disguised as an anti-submarine school, was to be established in secrecy on the Naval Academy grounds at Murwik, a town near the city of Flensburg.

The team at Krupps became responsible for all future U-boat designs, and its front organization, IVS, was responsible for obtaining contracts for Finland, Spain, and Turkey, in which were built prototypes that would later be used for building future U-Boats. The navy was primed by Hitler's promises of future expansion to place secret orders for U-Boat material before the public renunciation of the Versailles Treaty. As a result a startled world was confronted by an apparently miraculous expansion of the U-Boat Arm. By September 1939 65 U-Boats had been completed.

Cheers!

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 107
- 7/25/2003 6:38:06 AM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Von Rom
[B]Hi :)

To counter a threat, a person must recognize it as a threat. If a weapon (such as a U-boat) is built in secret, then no counter is built for it.

Before WWII the British and Canadians did not prepare for a U-boat war, because ALL of Germany's U-boats were built in secret. Just like Japan's Superbattleships (the Yamato and Musashi).

In WWII, the British and Canadians had the good fortune to have two years to build up anti-sub warfare measures against the U-boat threat. Fortunately, the Germans only started the war with 65 U-boats. All 65 had been built in secret. Doenitz wanted to start the war with 300 U-boats.

Considering the devastation wreaked upon the UK with these few boats, one can only imagine what 300 U-boats (built in secret) could have done in a similar time period.

During the pre-war years, Germany engineered a well-thought out plan to build submarines and torpedoes in secret as well as to train future submariners in a number of different countries. Three submarine prototypes were financed by the Krupp front, IVS, in Holland. Another six U-boats were built in Finland. And one 750-ton boat (E-I) was built in Spain. The IVS also financed a plant for building torpedo tubes and torpedoes in Spain. German sailors in mufti were assigned to conduct the trials of the submarine prototypes in Finland and Spain. Other Reichsmarine personnel established a submarine school in Turkey to train Turkish submariners to man three submarines IVS had sold to Turkey. The school also trained German submariners and another submarine school, disguised as an anti-submarine school, was to be established in secrecy on the Naval Academy grounds at Murwik, a town near the city of Flensburg.

The team at Krupps became responsible for all future U-boat designs, and its front organization, IVS, was responsible for obtaining contracts for Finland, Spain, and Turkey, in which were built prototypes that would later be used for building future U-Boats. The navy was primed by Hitler's promises of future expansion to place secret orders for U-Boat material before the public renunciation of the Versailles Treaty. As a result a startled world was confronted by an apparently miraculous expansion of the U-Boat Arm. By September 1939 65 U-Boats had been completed.

Cheers! [/B][/QUOTE]

Except that the German magnetic torpedoe fiasco was just as bad as the USA torpedoe fiasco.
Thus hurting the effort quite a bit

_____________________________

“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 108
- 7/25/2003 6:47:27 AM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chiteng
[B]Except that the German magnetic torpedoe fiasco was just as bad as the USA torpedoe fiasco.
Thus hurting the effort quite a bit [/B][/QUOTE]

True.

In the first two years of the war, the U-boats were sinking a lot of allied ships.

Now multiply all those Allied losses by 5 (with 300+ U-boats), and we can begin to see why Churchill feared the U-boat. Everything had to be brought by ship across the Atlantic Ocean.

With more U-boats, it is more likely that Germany could have dominated the Mediterranean. Or at least stopped a great deal of the Allied supplies (such as tanks, aircraft, food, and fuel) going to North Africa. This also could have meant that Rommel might have received many of the supplies the Italians were sending to him (but were being sunk by British ships). Could the U-boat have turned the tide in the North African campaign? After all, the Battle of North Africa was a battle for supplies.

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 109
U-Boats - 7/25/2003 7:16:31 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline
Hi, The U-boats were sinking ships faster then could be built.
But the Germans also kept forcing neutral countries with merchant marines onto the allied side. When Norway went allied it brought more ships then the Germans had sunk up to that point. ( Add in Denmark, Holland, and Greece)
After 1 year of war the allies had more ships then when it began. We won't get into what occured when the USA entered the war. (Even though the Germans had their best period of sinking ships it did not make up for the net gain in shipping for the allies)(along with the USA many South American merchant marines came along when their countries declared war on Germany and Japan)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 110
Re: U-Boats - 7/25/2003 11:31:06 AM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mogami
[B]Hi, The U-boats were sinking ships faster then could be built.
But the Germans also kept forcing neutral countries with merchant marines onto the allied side. When Norway went allied it brought more ships then the Germans had sunk up to that point. ( Add in Denmark, Holland, and Greece)
After 1 year of war the allies had more ships then when it began. We won't get into what occured when the USA entered the war. (Even though the Germans had their best period of sinking ships it did not make up for the net gain in shipping for the allies)(along with the USA many South American merchant marines came along when their countries declared war on Germany and Japan) [/B][/QUOTE]

Hehe - The Germans had the equipment and the brains - but as everyone knows Hitler just didn't know how or when to use them properly.

:D

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 111
- 7/25/2003 7:27:55 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe 98
[B]"It is the antithesis of WitP"


That probably means its not naval and probably not even war related - maybe science fiction. [/B][/QUOTE]

Lets look at it logically(?).

War -> Peace
Pacific -> Atlantic

So it will be about peace in the Atlantic. Aha! A game about shuffling papers and making speeches at NATO!!!
:D

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 112
300 U boats - 7/25/2003 7:44:01 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
Do you actually think that building 300 U boats would not have provoked a building boom by the allies? Just building the small navy Germany had at the start of WW2 instigated new construction by the French, US, Britain, all of which were completed or nearing completion. When one starts pondering what ifs, one has to keep an open mind.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 113
Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 9:15:50 PM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
[B]Do you actually think that building 300 U boats would not have provoked a building boom by the allies? Just building the small navy Germany had at the start of WW2 instigated new construction by the French, US, Britain, all of which were completed or nearing completion. When one starts pondering what ifs, one has to keep an open mind. [/B][/QUOTE]

Hi :)

As noted above in an earlier post, most of Germany's initial 65 U-boats were built in secret. Most submariners were trained in secret.

300 U-boats (at least many of them, would also have been built in secret). The problem was not material or opportunity, but Hitler's lack of strategic vision, and his desire to start the war sooner, rather than later. . .

One must also not forget, that building 300 U-boats would have meant an expanded submarine building program. So it is highly likely that instead of 1,000 subs being built throughout the course of the war, it could easliy have been many times that number. . .

Even so, the USA had had the opportunity to observe the German U-boat from Sept 1939 until Jan 1942 (more than two years of actual war), and yet still had almost no defense against them when they struck along the eastern seaboard on Jan 13, 1942 (despite warnings from British intelligence), and sank ship after ship for another 6 months. . .

A bit of information:

WWI and WWII

In World War I, the "primitive Imperial Navy U-boat force had come very close to imposing a war-winning maritime blockade aginst Great Britain. Had Germany built large numbers of U-boats rather than big ships for the High Seas Fleet, and had the Kaiser authorized unrestricted U-boat warfare in the first year of the war, [Admiral Karl] Donitz concluded, Germany could have achieved an early and decisive naval victory over the Allies. With proper organization and planning and modern submarines and new tactics, he believed victory could be realized in the war he saw coming" (Clay Blair, Hitler's U-Boat War: the Hunters 1939-1942, Random House, NY, 1996, p.37).

In addition to World War One, had Hitler put more resources into building and utilizing U-boats in the Second World War, the German Navy "might well have defeated England (and thus denied the United States that island base from which to mount a joint American-British invasion of German-occupied Europe). . ." (Michael Gannon, Operation Drumbeat Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1990, p.xix). Admiral Donitz "easily imagined the crippling blow he could have delivered with a three-hundred-boat fleet in that first year before British defenses stiffened" (Ibid., p.75).

With regard to North America, Donitz originally wanted to send one hundred submarines to attack the United States, but he only had twelve U-boats "to strike simultaneously against offshore North America from Halifax in the north to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, in the south" (Ibid., p.74). This large number of submarines would have caused untold devastation.

Operation Paukenschlag (Drumbeat): the War Against America

With the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbour on Dec 7, 1941 Hitler was bound by a promise to Japan to also declare war on the US. He did so promptly on December 11 and after that all restrictions on German U-boats not to attack American shipping were removed. This opened up a whole new field for Dönitz who immediately drew up plans for a devastatingly swift blow on the US eastern seaboard. "When the Fuhrer declared war on the United States. . . Donitz would be poised to strike a blow against the United States as sudden and as jarring as a beat on a kettledrum. And that, he decided, was what he would call it: Operation Paukenschlag ("Operation Drumbeat")" (Gannon, Operation Drumbeat, p.xvii).


On January 13, 1942 six German U-boats initiated a surprise attack along the east coast of the United States that resulted in America's Atlantic Pearl Harbour. Just two months after suffering the crippling Japanese attack at Hawaii, the Americans were once again taken by surprise (despite being warned by British intelligence). On that first day German U-boats sank 25 ships. Over the course of six months, wave after wave of U-boats attacked shipping off the American and Canadian coasts. The result? "The United States had virtually no defense against the U-boats and, in the first six months of 1942, lost 585 ships totaling over 3,081,000 tons" (Hawkins, Vincent B., "Doentiz, Karl", in Brassey's Encyclopedia of Military History and Biography, Ed. by Franklin D. Margiotta, Brassey's, Washington: 2000, p.276).

"The ships sunk in the campaign in the Americas in this period constitute about one-quarter of all Allied shipping sunk by German U-boats in World War II. Thus, the campaign was the single most important of the war in terms of sinkings achieved in a relatively brief time period for effort expended - the high-water mark of the U-boat war" (Clay Blair, Hitler's U-Boat War: the Hunters 1939-1942, Random House, NY, 1996, p.694).

Admiral Donitz had been right - the United States was defenseless against his U-boats - they had proven to be the perfect silent killers.



Cheers!

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 114
Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 9:48:03 PM   
TIMJOT

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
[B]Do you actually think that building 300 U boats would not have provoked a building boom by the allies? Just building the small navy Germany had at the start of WW2 instigated new construction by the French, US, Britain, all of which were completed or nearing completion. When one starts pondering what ifs, one has to keep an open mind. [/B][/QUOTE]

I think Von Roms, point was, had the 300 subs been built in secrete. You could argue that the chance of bulding 300 subs in secrete is zero and I would agree.

Most likely an increase of U-boat production prior to the war would have boosted British DD and other escort production. As well as prompting increased ASW and convoy training.

However if you take into account the sorry state of the UK ship building industry pre-war and the fact that its would have been very doubtful that existing BB and CV programs would have been cancelled midstream, then there wouldnt have been enough contruction capacity to make a significant difference in ASW capability. Regardless, its doubtful that the US would have any better prepared. Historically they had 2 years of observing U-boat warfare and were still caught completely unprepared.

On the flip side you would also have to assume that the production of 300 subs would require the cancellation of the Bismark and Tirpirtz.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 115
Re: Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 10:05:49 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Von Rom
[B]Hi :)

As noted above in an earlier post, most of Germany's initial 65 U-boats were built in secret. Most submariners were trained in secret.

300 U-boats (at least many of them, would also have been built in secret). The problem was not material or opportunity, but Hitler's lack of strategic vision, and his desire to start the war sooner, rather than later. . .[/B][/QUOTE]

Excuse me...what is this fantasy that Germany built the U boats in secret? They DESIGNED them in secret, but the existance of the German submarine programme was know about. The Anglo-German naval treaty of 1935 allowed Germany:

"(f) In the matter of submarines, however, Germany, while not exceeding the ratio of 35:100 in respect of total tonnage, shall have the right to possess a submarine tonnage equal to the total submarine tonnage possessed by the Members of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The German Government, however, undertake that, except in the circumstances indicated in the immediately following sentence, Germany's submarine tonnage
shall not exceed 45% of the total of that possessed by the Members of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The German Government reserve the right, in the event of a situation arising which in their opinion makes it
necessary for Germany to avail herself of her right to a percentage of submarine tonnage exceeding the 45% abovementioned, to give notice to this effect to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and agree that the matter shall be the subject of friendly discussion before the German Government exercise that right."
(quote from a Note from the UK Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the German Ambassador, London) (ref http://www.warships1.com/W-INRO/INRO_Anglo_German_Agreement_1935.htm)

There is a view that this was agreed to by Britain because thay knew it was happening anyway, and by Germany because they couldn't build fast enough to exceed the treaty levels anyway.

[QUOTE] [B]Even so, the USA had had the opportunity to observe the German U-boat from Sept 1939 until Jan 1942 (more than two years of actual war), and yet still had almost no defense against them when they struck along the eastern seaboard on Jan 13, 1942 (despite warnings from British intelligence), and sank ship after ship for another 6 months. . . [/B][/QUOTE]

I did grant that, however this was very much against the developing run of losses on the North Atlantic. I have never understood (and nor did the UK sources I have read) why on earth the US was caught out so badly.

[QUOTE] [B]A bit of information:

WWI and WWII

In World War I, the "primitive Imperial Navy U-boat force had come very close to imposing a war-winning maritime blockade aginst Great Britain. Had Germany built large numbers of U-boats rather than big ships for the High Seas Fleet, and had the Kaiser authorized unrestricted U-boat warfare in the first year of the war, [Admiral Karl] Donitz concluded, Germany could have achieved an early and decisive naval victory over the Allies. With proper organization and planning and modern submarines and new tactics, he believed victory could be realized in the war he saw coming" (Clay Blair, Hitler's U-Boat War: the Hunters 1939-1942, Random House, NY, 1996, p.37).[/B][/QUOTE]

No challenge to that, although he discounts the huge difference that the convoy made (even without effective anti sub detectors and weapons). I think it would be interesting to see what a greater U Boat war would have done in WW1. Also, early unlimited UBoat attacks might bring in the US earlier, and politically and emotionally were very difficult (which is why they were interupted).

[QUOTE] [B]In addition to World War One, had Hitler put more resources into building and utilizing U-boats in the Second World War, the German Navy "might well have defeated England (and thus denied the United States that island base from which to mount a joint American-British invasion of German-occupied Europe). . ." (Michael Gannon, Operation Drumbeat Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1990, p.xix). Admiral Donitz "easily imagined the crippling blow he could have delivered with a three-hundred-boat fleet in that first year before British defenses stiffened" (Ibid., p.75).

With regard to North America, Donitz originally wanted to send one hundred submarines to attack the United States, but he only had twelve U-boats "to strike simultaneously against offshore North America from Halifax in the north to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, in the south" (Ibid., p.74). This large number of submarines would have caused untold devastation.

Operation Paukenschlag (Drumbeat): the War Against America

With the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbour on Dec 7, 1941 Hitler was bound by a promise to Japan to also declare war on the US. He did so promptly on December 11 and after that all restrictions on German U-boats not to attack American shipping were removed. This opened up a whole new field for Dönitz who immediately drew up plans for a devastatingly swift blow on the US eastern seaboard. "When the Fuhrer declared war on the United States. . . Donitz would be poised to strike a blow against the United States as sudden and as jarring as a beat on a kettledrum. And that, he decided, was what he would call it: Operation Paukenschlag ("Operation Drumbeat")" (Gannon, Operation Drumbeat, p.xvii).


On January 13, 1942 six German U-boats initiated a surprise attack along the east coast of the United States that resulted in America's Atlantic Pearl Harbour. Just two months after suffering the crippling Japanese attack at Hawaii, the Americans were once again taken by surprise (despite being warned by British intelligence). On that first day German U-boats sank 25 ships. Over the course of six months, wave after wave of U-boats attacked shipping off the American and Canadian coasts. The result? "The United States had virtually no defense against the U-boats and, in the first six months of 1942, lost 585 ships totaling over 3,081,000 tons" (Hawkins, Vincent B., "Doentiz, Karl", in Brassey's Encyclopedia of Military History and Biography, Ed. by Franklin D. Margiotta, Brassey's, Washington: 2000, p.276).

"The ships sunk in the campaign in the Americas in this period constitute about one-quarter of all Allied shipping sunk by German U-boats in World War II. Thus, the campaign was the single most important of the war in terms of sinkings achieved in a relatively brief time period for effort expended - the high-water mark of the U-boat war" (Clay Blair, Hitler's U-Boat War: the Hunters 1939-1942, Random House, NY, 1996, p.694).

Admiral Donitz had been right - the United States was defenseless against his U-boats - they had proven to be the perfect silent killers.



Cheers! [/B][/QUOTE]

This , whilst true, is still missing the point I was making. There IS undoubtably a number of U Boats that would win the war for Germany, or at least force a stalemate in their favour. I do not know whether 300 from day 1, or 500, or 1000 is the number. However, Germany could NOT build up a force of 300 by 1939 without some response by the Western Europeans. (Or even at all - has anyone got any idea what the German ship building industry was capable of in 1935-39?)

If you want to play 'what if games' a MUCH more realistic one is the one a mentioned earlier: keep the historic number of U Boats at the start of the war, and introduce a full, competant U Boat staff, proper scientific research once U boat losses start rising, and elimination of the almost religious faith in Naval Enigma. This would (to me) produce a more likely set of changes, without giving the Allies stimulus to counter them. If you still are not content, you could then up the U Boat production rate by 10% or so, due to better prioritisation.

The 300+ U Boats by Sept 1939 is in the same catagory as a full Plan Z fleet by 1942 I am afraid...it would have been countered, and probably wasn't even possible.

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 116
Re: Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 10:05:38 PM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TIMJOT
[B]I think Von Roms, point was, had the 300 subs been built in secrete. You could argue that the chance of bulding 300 subs in secrete is zero and I would agree.

Most likely an increase of U-boat production prior to the war would have boosted British DD and other escort production. As well as prompting increased ASW and convoy training.

However if you take into account the sorry state of the UK ship building industry pre-war and the fact that its would have been very doubtful that existing BB and CV programs would have been cancelled midstream, then there wouldnt have been enough contruction capacity to make a significant difference in ASW capability.

On the flip side you would also have to assume that the production of 300 subs would require the cancellation of the Bismark and Tirpirtz. [/B][/QUOTE]

All of this assumes: 1) that the Allies would know about the building program; and 2) that they would willingly act upon this information.

During the years immediately leading up to World War Two, Hitler instituted a vast program of secret rearmament in ALL branches of the armed forces, and not just in U-boats.

By 1939, the German military had grown to an impressive size. "In four years [since 1935] its peacetime strength had been increased from seven to fifty-one divisions [including thirty infantry and five Panzer divisions]. . . Since 1925, all tank construction and training had been done in secret in the USSR.

The German Air Force, which had been entirely built up since 1933, had grown to a strength of 260,000 men, with twenty-one squadrons consisiting of 240 echelons." If not for Churchill's repeated warnings over a number of years (and the intelligence he was receiving) about Germany's secret aircraft construction (and Britain's last-minute fighter construction program), Britain could very well have lost the air war in the Battle of Britain. Even when the British Gov't had the actual information about Germany's aircraft construction, it continued to lie to the British people and to Parliament, because it simply did not want to upset the "peaceful" mood it wished to establish.

And let us not forget, that even when presented with overwhelming evidence, Stalin still refused to believe that Hitler would invade the USSR, even on the very eve of Barbarossa.

In support of this powerful and growing military, by 1939 Germany had the "most powerful armaments industry in the world, which in time of peace had already equalled, and in part excelled, the production performances of the First World War" (Bullock, Alan Hitler: A Study In Tyranny (Penquin Books: N.Y.; pp.511-12).

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 117
Re: Re: Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 10:22:48 PM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by HMSWarspite
[B]Excuse me...what is this fantasy that Germany built the U boats in secret? They DESIGNED them in secret, but the existance of the German submarine programme was know about. The Anglo-German naval treaty of 1935 allowed Germany:

"(f) In the matter of submarines, however, Germany, while not exceeding the ratio of 35:100 in respect of total tonnage, shall have the right to possess a submarine tonnage equal to the total submarine tonnage possessed by the Members of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The German Government, however, undertake that, except in the circumstances indicated in the immediately following sentence, Germany's submarine tonnage
shall not exceed 45% of the total of that possessed by the Members of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The German Government reserve the right, in the event of a situation arising which in their opinion makes it
necessary for Germany to avail herself of her right to a percentage of submarine tonnage exceeding the 45% abovementioned, to give notice to this effect to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and agree that the matter shall be the subject of friendly discussion before the German Government exercise that right."
(quote from a Note from the UK Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the German Ambassador, London) (ref http://www.warships1.com/W-INRO/INRO_Anglo_German_Agreement_1935.htm)

There is a view that this was agreed to by Britain because thay knew it was happening anyway, and by Germany because they couldn't build fast enough to exceed the treaty levels anyway.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Germany had planned for a secret U-boat fleet well before 1935. It takes years of planning, prototypes, training, testing, etc to build any large military equipment.

In contravention of the Versailles Treaty, Germany had sub prototypes built, and conducted training, in several foreign countries. I mentioned many (not all) of these initial U-boats were built in secret. While Germany was building U-boats that met the limits of the Anglo-German Naval Treaty, it was also building additional U-boats in other countries as well as its own.

The success of these few U-boats in the first years of WWII speaks for itself. That more U-boats could have been built (but for Hitler's lack of vision), also points to the fact that even greater losses (and disaster) would have been incurred.

Even with these few U-boats, and the fact that Germany was NOT running its economy at full war production, it is clear that the initial first few years of WWII was still a very close call. . .

On the one hand you say that the Allies could counter or prepare for any U-boat increase or threat, and yet, America's appalling lack of defense against the U-boat (even after witnessing more than two years of war), speaks volumes aqainst your own argument.

Even for Britain in the first few years, it was a close run thing.

Again, all of this with so few U-boats.

Now, if Doenitz had had his way. . .

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 118
Re: Re: Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 10:49:16 PM   
TIMJOT

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by HMSWarspite
[B]
The 300+ U Boats by Sept 1939 is in the same catagory as a full Plan Z fleet by 1942 I am afraid...it would have been countered, and probably wasn't even possible. [/B][/QUOTE]

I dont have any hard numbers, but I think that its not unrealistic that 300 U-boats were probably possible at the expence of the 2 BBs.

Probably not in secret though, but its not far fetched that production could have been partially hidden. The Kriegsmarine also had the luxury of starting pretty much from scatch and thus had much more flexibility on production decisions. The Royal Navy on the other hand enjoyed no such luxury and had a vast array of responsibilities to condsider when making production decisions.

To state that Britain could have simply matched any German increase Uboat production with correspondingly increased ASW production doesnt properly take into account the Royal Navy's limitations.

(in reply to U2)
Post #: 119
Re: Re: Re: Re: 300 U boats - 7/25/2003 11:39:52 PM   
Von Rom


Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TIMJOT
[B]I dont have any hard numbers, but I think that its unrealistic that 300 U-boats were probably possible at the expence of the 2 BBs.

Probably not in secret though, but its not far fetched that production could have been partially hidden. The Kriegsmarine also had the luxury of starting pretty much from scatch and thus had much more flexibility on production decisions. The Royal Navy on the other hand enjoyed no such luxury and had a vast array of responsibilities to condsider when making production decisions.

To state that Britain could have simply matched any German increase Uboat production with correspondingly increased ASW production doesnt properly take into account the Royal Navy's limitations. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree that the Battleships were a waste of resources. If I remember correctly, Hitler had promised his military gurus that war would not start for several years. Doneitz had planned for a 300 U-boat fleet to meet his operational planning: 100 at sea; 100 in port; 100 in transit.

If the surface fleet had been curtailed, and more attention paid to the U-boat's potential, I can envision at least double the initial 65 subs could have been built in almost the same length of time (or close to it). These would have been produced quickly since all the development, training, parts, etc had already been completed.

One of the first publicly acknowledged U-boats appeared just 42 days after Hitler renounced the Versailles Treaty; meaning it, as well as many more had been under secret construction for some time (in contravention of the Treaty).

Still, it is a lucky thing that none of this happened.

Cheers!

_____________________________


(in reply to U2)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.328