Please don't. I will be removing myself from this thread at once. I do not regard it as credible at all and in the interests of peace and quiet I shall walk away.
The betrayal of the Kaiserliche Marine and the resurrection of the Reichsmarine
- Thread starter Gudestein
- Start date
-
- Tags
- reichsmarine ww1 ww2
Coulsdon Eagle
Monthly Donor
Sadly so do I. I do enjoy a good naval TL but this is just slipping into onanistic tendencies.
So you posted a rant about how the Germans ITTL could not have practiced combined carrier attacks, and when you are called out because, well actually, they didnt, you just attack everything else before removing yourself in the interest of peace and quiet?
Thats not really the way to remove yourself in the interest of peace and quiet.
Well, tried that.
Didn't help.
I inserted myself in early July into this thread with some quartions, comments and critics.
For over a fortnight I tried hard to ... "help" the quality of this thread by pointing at minor, medium as well as asb-bordering mayor flaws especially to the 'historical' (politics, economics, social, press, ...) side of the thread. I pointed several times into the directions at least some research should be done for some - sometimes IMHO necossary MAYOR - rewrite. I even made such a VERY mayor rewrite (Chapter 19), quadrupling not only the number of words but even more the content and plausibility-value.
I ... 'managed' at least, that @Gudestein made - aside taking my rewrite as a whole - some wee, tiny, cosmetic changes on some other chaperts/post of utter unnecessaryness.
Then
I quitted.
Didn't help either, as it looks.
And - unfortunatly - though I had been in earlier times a loyal 'defender' of @Gudestein this time I have to agree to @Cymraeg , @oldironside and @Coulsdon Eagle :
This thread has degraded beyond being worth to be left in this section :
"Discussion"
It has degraded into a game of Battleship with wish-what-I-want ships and fleets their conditions of coming into being made of hand-wavered patchwork of selected items of historical developments without much (if any) coherence.
No plausible explanation of the necessary economics in every phase of the Weimar republic.
Complete passing over of the consequences of his change of naval leadership, position and perception and the role all the navalist events influenced the Weimarian politics through its whole existence.
Btw :
What happened to your "POD-heros" Scheer and Hipper ?
Then in Chapter 31 suddenly as if nothing had ever changed before Hitler and Raeder appear with Hitlers attitude to the navy rather thoroughly changed. However : it's nowhere near any sese been explained how this happend.
Would have probably costed too much time before comming to the - as it seems - REAL reason of this thread :
to wallow in wishfull alternate ship designs and wishfull hindsight-ladden Kriegsmarine tactical, operational and strategical doctrine-developments
The continued ignorance of possible and more important probably reactions/butterflies elsewhere - esp. MN and RN - seems to me only th rather negligable cocoa-powder on the cream-foam on a cappuchino ... of bad made alternate history.
IMHO opinion this thread isn't worth even to be moved to ASB-section, as it lacks the coherent development of a story and being patchy even in its combination of hand-waves
Maybe there should be introduced kinda new section on this forum :
TECHNICAL WHAT-IFs and WISHED-FORs
Where also all these discussions on choices of another rifle for ordionnance or different selection of piston-rings for a certain aviation-engine or ... what someone would like to see in a fictional navy, airfore, tankforce etc.
Last edited:
FBKampfer
Banned
Had to take a break from reading. Can only really manage keeping up with two at a time with real life going on.
Anyways, have came around, TL greatly improved since early on.
I notice you picked up some ideas from my "wank the Deutschland class" thread. I've always had a soft spot for them, along with the Scharnhorsts (which I am sad did not get built. Still holding out for a future German battlecruiser to bear the name).
Can't wait to see the RN get the thrashing they so richly deserve.
Anyways, have came around, TL greatly improved since early on.
I notice you picked up some ideas from my "wank the Deutschland class" thread. I've always had a soft spot for them, along with the Scharnhorsts (which I am sad did not get built. Still holding out for a future German battlecruiser to bear the name).
Can't wait to see the RN get the thrashing they so richly deserve.
Yes, it would have so much better if that nice Mr Hitler had won.
FBKampfer
Banned
1) This has NOTHING to do with Hitler or the holocaust. Both have had only the scarcest mention and sideways nod thus far.
Germany got royally and unfairly screwed at the end of WWI, in no small measure thanks to the UK, and the German Fleet becoming a capable fighting force again is a great timeline.
You can kindly go get bent with a wire brush for that.
2) underdog stories are great; they make some of the most celebrated and popular stories throughout history. A UK wank is exactly the opposite, and impossibly boring. EVERYONE knows exactly how that story ends. Since I (and presumably most other people) have no interest in deep throating a G3 battlecruiser, I doubt most would read beyond the first page where they realize it's a UK wank.
3) if it is a vested interest of yours, go write the damn TL yourself.
1. A German victory with Hitler in charge means a more complete Holocaust, whether you like it or not. "Qnly the scarcest mention and sideways nod" are typical Wehraboo tactics for dodging the real implications of their fantasies.
2. You refer to this as a story and in that you are right. It is not a plausible AH timeline, it is just a story, a fictional account, a fact light wank. The elements that make a good time line (research, butterfly development, etc) are all missing in favour of an almighty Britscrew. I have no problem with that in the writers forum, but it is an insult to the properly researched timelines that appear in post 1900. This is not an underdog story. It is a wank. There is no tension. Everybody knows how this story will end.
3. Write the timeline? I already did. https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...-carriers-in-wwii.234421/page-13#post-6570857
Guys, seriously.
I will not comment on the content of the TL etc, I will only say this:
If you don't want to read it, then don't. Why bother to complain about the timeline / story when you obviously hate it? If you hate it that much, why are you reading and complaining about it?
Just stop reading it - You will be much less stressed about it and the mods won't need to come in here to moderate the comments et al.
I will not comment on the content of the TL etc, I will only say this:
If you don't want to read it, then don't. Why bother to complain about the timeline / story when you obviously hate it? If you hate it that much, why are you reading and complaining about it?
Just stop reading it - You will be much less stressed about it and the mods won't need to come in here to moderate the comments et al.
I agree I don't understand why we have three pages maybe more of gripping about the story. If you don't like it we understand you don't like it. We respect your opinion but some of us do, respect ours, respect the author who is putting his time into writing it. You don't have to read it the are hundreds of threads on this form for you to read. I keep seeing these type of arguments pop up on people's stories and I cannot ever wrap my head around them.
We write fiction weather it is this story or others. This story is no less credible than something like What madness is this, or its redux, or to kill an Admiral, or even my own (I like both mentioned stories no negative intent intended).
That's my peace I'm not weighing in on this anymore than I have already have
Peace to all.
We write fiction weather it is this story or others. This story is no less credible than something like What madness is this, or its redux, or to kill an Admiral, or even my own (I like both mentioned stories no negative intent intended).
That's my peace I'm not weighing in on this anymore than I have already have
Peace to all.
I don't post much on these forums, I just like to read for the most part. But I like this timeline. I thank the author for his writing and hope that he continues. Is this timeline possible? Maybe not, but I'm here because I like reading about alternate possibilities. Some more plausible than others. While I respect everyone's opinion if you dislike this story then stop reading it.
Anyway thanks to all, enjoy your evenings, and lets get back to the story please. Thank you.
Anyway thanks to all, enjoy your evenings, and lets get back to the story please. Thank you.
Kick
You do give quite a few warnings to very direct and similar personal attacks.
Anyways, sorry that it provides a nuisance. Not what I desire, but it would be straight forward according to forum rules to enforce a break.
First of all, thank you again for the earlier comments.
But keep in mind that offering advice does not entitle you to demand obedience.
The wrapping is unnecessarily harsh, specifically considered the earlier admissions that the implications of the POD were not sufficiently fleshed out, to justify the direction I took it.
To write it like you want it, I have a handful of books to read, and maybe I will, if I like were the TL can go. I chose to let it go on rather than make the rewrite, and if the potential I see in it I find to be worth exploring further, sure, it would be rewritten in a few years.
Right now the disagreements were we parted were based on how the different naval WW1 would change the perception of the marine, and hence to support if could receive in German society. You preferred real-politik, I maintain that a difference in perception and unified purpose is a major change that could drive big changes. Would they be the specific changes of this TL? Probably not, predicting a new and different past can be almost as difficult as predicting the future. As it is written, I fully admit it is a "could have (maybe even with very low probability), not a "would have".
As for the level of detail? I dont have the time, sorry. You have to use your imagination and fill in the blanks or ask questions. Like what happended to Hipper and Scheer? They died from natural causes as in OTL. Not too much to ask, although I would have loved to write an update on the transition of power I chose not to.
So admittedly, the TL plowed ahead with few updates mostly focused on detailing how the Kriegsmarine designed new ships according to the doctrine of TTL. The aim of the timeline is to explore what the Germans could have done with adequate preparation for the doctrine they pursued IOTL. That was the intention and with limited time available, it was were I focused.
Regarding the implications of the German rearmaments abroad, were the counterresponse has been found insufficient in addition to the admitted inadequate detailing:
So, ITTL the German have a plan and deception is part of it. IOTL they used deception too and the British picked up on it sometimes, but fail to react in a consistent way. Take a look here:
https://www.academia.edu/11159334/_...ical_intelligence_and_the_German_Navy_1936_39
ITTL the Germans build more ships earlier, but the outwards appearnce of the ships would be less threatening than IOTL. IOTL the British believed falsely that the Deutschlands could be upgunned but didnt react, why would they react differently to real rumors until they are maniefest?
IOTL, the British felt they could better ships than their foes, and were willing to accept their cheating, as long as they pretended to be within treaty limits and the British were not willing to abrogate the treaty system in face of German rearmament. ITTL, they drop the pretense at the same time as OTL, why would they act different ITTL? Keep inmind that from late 1938, as IOTL they would do everything they could to rearm, but now the official policy as IOTL would be to delay war even more than than OTL.
A very factual difference is that ITTL the Germans build two carriers which almost did IOTL. So, the thread is manifested earlier. How should the British react ITTL? IOTL they didnt insist on clumsy two pilot fighters because they wanted to perform badly, they deemed it necessary. So off course they did the same here, and they got a full complement of air craft whic is a substantial departure from OTL.
IOTL again they thought the deck park was to much of a strain, and sure it is in the NOrth Atlantic. The Germans have a different doctrine, partly because so did those they learned from and partly because winning these engagements is the most important and producing a few hundred aircraft more to replace losses from attrition is not important when they might lose their carriers breaking into the Atlantic.
ITTL, a working and continuously more experienced german shipbuilding industry is a premise, that allowed them to rapidly convert liners that were designed for the carrier role into carriers. This is a trick not employed IOTL, but I found it a very intelligent move according to the doctrine ITTL. Is it ASB to have the Germans employ intelligent tactics?
Following these conversions the Germans would practice like hell in the Baltics and elsewhere. The British would pick it up and they would think "holy shit", lets not go to war before our own carriers are ready and when the Germans start employing naval monoplanes, they would start on the sea harriers (that was mentioned pre-war). Unfortunately, the introduction of the monoplanes came not too long before thewar broke out.
So that is how the British found them qualitatively and quantitatively behind.
That the British then get smashed when they offer battle with insufficient air cover (as they did IOTL), that can hardly come as a surprise.
So, with the exception that this is admittedly an exploratory "could have" and not a thoroughly researched, authorative "would have", I hope these answers suffice. If interested readers and/or die hard critics wants to continue probing issues that have not been answered, please do so, but without any insults. Its really is a bad habbit, and why would you need to?