Axis naval tactics

Can we have a thread about the axis naval powers and the tactics they use during their naval campaigns? I really want to know how the Kriegsmarine were able to put the USN and the Royal Navy in the backfoot during the Atlantic campaign. Or how the Imperial Japanese navy manage to trounce the British, Dutch, and American Navy during their pacific campaign. Was their tactics simply superior to the allies? Was the Allied naval command incompetent? Are there any books that explore the axis naval tactics?

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You need to take in consideration that the morale of troops are just as important than tactics and weapons they have. There’s a reason why the US army of the Philippines capitulated to the IJA after a month of fighting. It doesn’t matter if you have advance weapons, if you’re troops are on the verge of collapse due to poor morale, tactics and weapons won’t save you. That’s why the Kriegsmarine and the IJN were such feared enemies. They were motivated.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Kriegsmarine
      >feared
      pick one
      >IJN
      >feared
      Not after June 1942

      In both Germany and Japan, Morale was absolutely abysmal after their initial success turned to ash and they realized that they wouldn't be allowed to stop until everything they had was plowed into the ground.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Kriegsmarine
        >feared
        The Allies feared the Kriegsmarine. Why do you think the Royal Navy was terrified of confronting Bismarck after she had sunk the Hood?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >terrified
          >cockslapped it within two weeks

          Don't get me started on the absolute fucking clown show that was German capital ship design you fucking shit sucking wehb.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            lol wat. Sure sinking Hood upset the Brits, but it didn't stop them from sinking Bismarck not too long after. And that terrified the Kriegsmarine so much they stopped venturing out with their surface fleet.

            You need to watch more movies, anon.

            https://fb.watch/hZW_3D-d1m/

            https://i.imgur.com/NwCO5Ra.jpg

            >be bismarck-chan
            >yayy! we did it priz eugen-chan! we sunk the Hood and beat up that bully prince of wales!
            >oh fuck, they're still shadowing us?
            >what is that destroyer doing coming ov- shitshitshit
            >oh fuck planes
            >run priz eugen, I can't keep up
            >proceedes to get gang raped so hard that Rodney breaks her turrets from the sheer volume of fire
            nah.

            You guys talk a lot of shit, but all it does is prove my point that Bismarck was made to rule the waves and lead the Kriegsmarine to victory.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >be Bismarck
              >sink Hood with a lucky shot under Hood's armor belt because of Hood's bow wave
              >become target of Allied wrath
              >perish immediately
              >Germany to this very day has never even caught up to French naval power

              clearly even Kraut autism is no match for Anglosphere naval autism

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              didn't do much ruling for long

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >but all it does is prove my point that Bismarck was made to rule the waves and lead the Kriegsmarine to victory.

              what a ship is made to do and what it does are different things, Bismarck was made to rule the waves, what she did was sink a old and unmodernised battlecruiser and then run, fail to run away successfully and then get blown to shit before sinking.

              NB yes I said sinking not scuttling, I said this because bismarck was sinking when the scuttling charges were set off, the scuttling charges made her sink faster, fucker was sinking with or without them

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              This is a set-up for a Sabaton sing-a-long, isn't it?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >got put down by some interwar battleships after getting taunted by a Polish ship
              >feared
              My guy, Tirpitz took more resources to put down and all she did was hang out in Norway for a few years.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          lol wat. Sure sinking Hood upset the Brits, but it didn't stop them from sinking Bismarck not too long after. And that terrified the Kriegsmarine so much they stopped venturing out with their surface fleet.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You need to watch more movies, anon.

          https://fb.watch/hZW_3D-d1m/

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >be bismarck-chan
          >yayy! we did it priz eugen-chan! we sunk the Hood and beat up that bully prince of wales!
          >oh fuck, they're still shadowing us?
          >what is that destroyer doing coming ov- shitshitshit
          >oh fuck planes
          >run priz eugen, I can't keep up
          >proceedes to get gang raped so hard that Rodney breaks her turrets from the sheer volume of fire
          nah.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          there's a difference between "we do not want to go and shell a port while being raped by land-based bombers" and "we are afraid of fighting this ship"
          it may be of interest to you that whenever the bismark was known to be at sea literally everyone in the RN and RAF were told to fucking find it and the entire home fleet poured out to try and get a hit in
          that they failed to find it many times is just because of the horrifying incompetence than fear

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/A8YDEGk.jpg

          [...]
          [...]
          [...]
          You guys talk a lot of shit, but all it does is prove my point that Bismarck was made to rule the waves and lead the Kriegsmarine to victory.

          >Send a overweight and under-gunned ship out alone
          >It get one loose victory
          >It knocks out its own fucking radar
          >Fucking dies
          Bravo, you bumbling morons!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Bismark only sank because there were liberal spies in the Germany Navy and they relayed the Bismark's exact position.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah, just imagine if the british didn't use such underhanded tactics.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Philippines garrison didn't have great equipment or tactics.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/1yKOoHs.jpg

      Uboats were based
      Adding girls to military stuff is cringe.

      It's that simple, really.

      https://i.imgur.com/xHNw4Kq.jpg

      >Kriegsmarine
      >feared
      pick one
      >IJN
      >feared
      Not after June 1942

      In both Germany and Japan, Morale was absolutely abysmal after their initial success turned to ash and they realized that they wouldn't be allowed to stop until everything they had was plowed into the ground.

      >tfw translation will never be finished

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        56712722
        This bait isn't even half cooked. (You) denied.

        I desperately want to see yuri boatsluts getting shreked at Leyte Gulf.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the real shame is that they never made an american ship orgy for ulithi anchorage.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Try having an "official TL" that you cant even access in the "official" app

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this is some bizarre cope, and I say that as someone who thinks that the RN performed shamefully during WWII and the USN was completely disorganized for the first year and a half.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the USN was completely disorganized for the first year and a half
        In six months, the USN had broken the back of the Teikoku Kaigun at Midway and a year later, in the summer of 1943, was in an even stronger position. What the fuck are you talking about year and a half?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The USN was stumbling through things in the first year or so. Their carrier ops were often clumsy and commanders often had no idea what the fuck they were doing once night fell.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's just a lack of experience
            Not knowing how to put together strike packages is one of those things that needs to be learned (and Yorktown was doing it by midway), while it's somewhat unfair to expect the totally green USN surface forces to be able to match the Japanese light forces, who had been training for night engagements for 20 years

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I agree with that, but there were elements that were just bad. If a sub out of Australia spotted something, their report first had to go to COMSUBSOWESPAC, then COMSOWSPAC, then COMSOPAC before finally getting to the ships at sea. This could take hours.

              And yet, in 6 months they had destroyed the IJN's main strike force. The remainder of the war was mopping up.

              Midway brought the US roughly to parity.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Midway brought the US roughly to parity
                Midway brought the US ahead in fleet carrier strength, although the IJN has a couple more light carriers with about half the usual complement of a fleet carrier

                Post Midway, the
                >USN
                had Enterprise, Hornet, Saratoga, with veteran crews; and Wasp

                >IJN
                had Shokaku and Zuikaku, mostly manned with instructors and training cadre

                they also had two or three light carriers but they were mainly occupied ferrying aircraft to the Guadalcanal AO and their combat performance was dismal

                and by early 1943 the first Essex-class CVs were available to tip the scales, while the next fleet carriers the Japs completed were in 44

                it was definitely not apparent then but in hindsight, Midway was the death blow of Japanese ambitions in WW2

                I don't think disorganized is the right word, but in chaos would be accurate. They did suffer a massive loss at Pearl Harbor and traditional naval doctrine around Mannehaim (sp?) was still the rule of law. Carriers were of major interest, but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king. Additionally the Navy's very first cryptography organization sprung up and they made amazing gains to decode Japanese comms and then reliable use it to anticipate Japanese actions. They did succeed and cause the world to breathe easy, but it was not by any means orderly.

                >Carriers were of major interest, but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king
                Nah
                by December 1941 the world knew carriers were the decisive capital ships of the battle fleet; even the RN knew it, though they risked one, just ONE action without carrier cover (because HMS Indomitable couldn't repair and reach in time) and paid the price for it.

                However, battleships and heavy cruisers were still an essential part of the fleet, though defensively, even into the mid-50s, because carriers couldn't fight at night or in mist.

                https://i.imgur.com/Juphn2l.jpg

                >but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king
                ????
                That was dispelled rapidly and while there were some battleship admirals who popped up now and then, they mostly were beaten into line. Even career battleship officers like Fletcher, Halsey, and Brown quickly accepted the aircraft carrier as the principle weapon of naval warfare. The Gilbert Islands raids, attacks on the Japanese landing forces in New Guinea, and other early actions showed lessons that the US leadership did not ignore. Coral Sea removed the last of the holdouts and by the time of Guadalcanal, naval commanders were making decisions around the needs and protection of the carriers, even at the expense of abandoning landing ships.

                > traditional naval doctrine around Mahan (ftfy)
                They followed Mahan's principles in regards to as maintaining lines of communication and establishing strong points, but they absolutely did not follow the core tenant of his that you should seek the enemy fleet and destroy it in pitched battle. The Japanese went all in on Mahan and their dogma of Kantai Kessen did not do them any favors.

                If anything, the US strategy in the Pacific has more in common overall (emphasis on overall) with Corbett's ideas. The campaigns, such as the Solomons, always sought to isolate the offensive theater and achieve overwhelming local superiority while preventing enemy replenishment. Using submarines in commerce raiding instead of fleet pickets was more in line with Corbett's principle of directly attacking enemy lines of communication. The Americans also sought to decline battle until they could use strategic maneuver to achieve tactically advantageous battles.

                >they absolutely did not follow the core tenant of his that you should seek the enemy fleet and destroy it in pitched battle
                They did - King's and Nimitz's priorities were always "sink the carriers" first, support the Army second - but they didn't neglect the island campaign or sub/convoy interdiction, the latter probably influenced by WW1 experience, whereas the IJN mainly neglected these other areas and did a lot of lolwut adhoc improvisation, possibly due to lack of resources... no shit given they were killing themselves just building something that juuuust might conceivably take out the US Navy's extant combat divisions

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >King's and Nimitz's priorities were always "sink the carriers" first
                No, it wasn't. If that was their priority, then they would have actually sought out and directly challenged the Combined Fleet. They never did that unless they had prepared an ambush like Midway or had a decisive tactical overmatch like the Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf.

                The key priorities in the early stages of the Pacific War for the American admirals were to secure the areas north of Austrailia, maintain supply lines to forward staging areas, and preserve the fleet as a fighting force while strength is built in the homeland.

                Obviously when the enemy was encountered, they wanted to win and tried to destroy the enemy, but they never went out looking for those fights in the early war. The American admirals would have done that if they were following Mahan's philosophy of sea control like that anon claimed they were.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >If that was their priority, then they would have actually sought out and directly challenged the Combined Fleet
                Even Mahan himself didn't advocate for that, in his battle plan to fight the RN. Operationally, he advocated a combined amphibious-high seas strategy of attacking overseas territories (in his given example, Canada) and harrassing supply lines, taking the fleet engagement only when favourable. Geostrategically, he had a much more balanced view that included trade protection, an aspect the Japanese totally ignored. The Japanese version of Mahanian doctrine was autistically extreme; the USN strategy was more akin to original Mahanian theory.

                >Obviously when the enemy was encountered, they wanted to win and tried to destroy the enemy, but they never went out looking for those fights in the early war
                Exactly
                >The American admirals would have done that if they were following Mahan's philosophy
                Respectfully disagree

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think we've talked ourselves to a stalemate. I respect your opinions, but disagree. But being as this is a boat sloots thread, I'm going to have to insist you post pictures of immodestly dressed warships.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous
              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >They never did that unless they had prepared an ambush like Midway or had a decisive tactical overmatch like the Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf.
                Isn't that the most sane way to challenge them?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Their carrier ops were often clumsy
            Everyone's carrier operations were clumsy. Aside from rehearsed events like Pearl Harbor and the Doolittle raid, everyone was fumbling around trying to figure out how to use carriers while also being attacked by carriers.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Everyone's carrier operations were clumsy
              Not the Japanese, their carrier ops with CarDiv1-3 were top notch.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And yet, in 6 months they had destroyed the IJN's main strike force. The remainder of the war was mopping up.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not to mention the torpedo crisis, which produced some hilarious fuckups.
            Pic related is what happened when a sub tried to kill the oil tanker Tonan Maru and probably took the icing on the cake of shitty torpedoes.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I'm surprised no sub commander ever strangled someone at the BoO for that shit.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I don't think disorganized is the right word, but in chaos would be accurate. They did suffer a massive loss at Pearl Harbor and traditional naval doctrine around Mannehaim (sp?) was still the rule of law. Carriers were of major interest, but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king. Additionally the Navy's very first cryptography organization sprung up and they made amazing gains to decode Japanese comms and then reliable use it to anticipate Japanese actions. They did succeed and cause the world to breathe easy, but it was not by any means orderly.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king
            ????
            That was dispelled rapidly and while there were some battleship admirals who popped up now and then, they mostly were beaten into line. Even career battleship officers like Fletcher, Halsey, and Brown quickly accepted the aircraft carrier as the principle weapon of naval warfare. The Gilbert Islands raids, attacks on the Japanese landing forces in New Guinea, and other early actions showed lessons that the US leadership did not ignore. Coral Sea removed the last of the holdouts and by the time of Guadalcanal, naval commanders were making decisions around the needs and protection of the carriers, even at the expense of abandoning landing ships.

            > traditional naval doctrine around Mahan (ftfy)
            They followed Mahan's principles in regards to as maintaining lines of communication and establishing strong points, but they absolutely did not follow the core tenant of his that you should seek the enemy fleet and destroy it in pitched battle. The Japanese went all in on Mahan and their dogma of Kantai Kessen did not do them any favors.

            If anything, the US strategy in the Pacific has more in common overall (emphasis on overall) with Corbett's ideas. The campaigns, such as the Solomons, always sought to isolate the offensive theater and achieve overwhelming local superiority while preventing enemy replenishment. Using submarines in commerce raiding instead of fleet pickets was more in line with Corbett's principle of directly attacking enemy lines of communication. The Americans also sought to decline battle until they could use strategic maneuver to achieve tactically advantageous battles.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Kriegsmarine and the IJN were such feared enemies. They were motivated.
      >Kriegsmarine
      >Feared
      https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1106112/umfrage/truppenstaerke-und-verluste-der-deutschen-u-bootsfahrer-im-zweiten-weltkrieg/
      80% EIGHTY 80% PER CENT LOSS RATE bro. Being a German submariner was literally more dangerous than being a Chinese infantryman.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No amount of morale, skill, or tactics will beat an overwhelming advantage in logistics. Japan was doomed the instant they attacked the USA. It was merely a question of how long it took.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >No amount of morale, skill, or tactics will beat an overwhelming advantage in logistics.
        Explain the Philippines.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Explain the Philippine
          Japan had an overwhelming advantage in logistics on top of everything else.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Sounds like an excuse.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Sounds like a butthurt weeaboo can't accept getting schooled

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Uboats were based
    Adding girls to military stuff is cringe.

    It's that simple, really.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it slep time bunner

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner!

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner

      >be Bismarck
      >sink Hood with a lucky shot under Hood's armor belt because of Hood's bow wave
      >become target of Allied wrath
      >perish immediately
      >Germany to this very day has never even caught up to French naval power

      clearly even Kraut autism is no match for Anglosphere naval autism

      to this very day has never even caught up to French naval power
      To be fair, it was always intended to be a fraction of Britain's. Pre WW1 Willy had a oneitis crush on Britain and thought they kept rejecting his alliance offers because Germany didn't have a strong navy and therefore was of no real help to a strong, global maritime power. So he wanted a navy at 40% of GB's strength. Postwar, they were limited by treaty and couldn't build up, even stealthily. Post WW2, well lmao goodbye military.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it slep time bunner

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner. Also fuck you, my wife is a battlecruiser. Is yours?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It slep time bunner

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ABDACOM was a clusterfuck in the first few months of the Pacific War; navies from several different nations who hadn't done much training or preparation together and didn't even all speak the same language. Nonetheless, even the IJN didn't always seem particularly competent during that period, such as when their fleet of over a dozen destroyers and cruisers took about an hour and a half to sink two Allied cruisers at Sunda Strait, with some of their ships even missing with all of their torpedoes and shells at less than 5km. Not to mention their reckless torpedo spam accidentally sinking a few of their own ships.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >FEED ME HEAVY CRUISERS

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think the USN and the Royal Navy were just unprepared to deal with Germany and Japan at the same time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You realize the USN put the IJN and Kreigsmarine on the critically endangered list within 6 months of entering the war, after losing most of the Pacific Fleet in a surprise attack, right? Let that sink in.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >USN
        >Kreigsmarine
        NTA but excuse me? the RN did most of that

        the USN was truly disorganised when it came to the Atlantic, not believing their RN advisors or in convoying against Uboats (!), directly leading to the Second Happy Time of Uboat success

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the RN did most of that
          What? Losing for 3 full years until the US had to bail them out before Hitler starved them?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the vast majority of kriegsmarine losses against the allies were to the RN, no major kriegsmarine surface vessel was sunk by the USN and the majority of convoy escorts were RN or RCN

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Aviation defeated the kriegsmarine, and bong naval aviation was trash.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Kriegsmarine were able to put the USN and the Royal Navy in the backfoot during the Atlantic campaign

    They really didn't. They had some early success until the RN changed tactics. At no point were logistics lines or allied freedom of movement seriously curtailed.

    Uboat crews suffered 90% loss rate. This is the highest casualty rate of any arm of service for any country on WW2.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The IJN and Kriegsmarine manhandled a feeble RN, who were incompetent at naval aviation and had far too few smaller warships.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i wonder how post-WWII history would have played out if the IJN hadn't shown the force projection to attack Hawaii and convinced the US that the next reasonable course of action to prevent such an attack was to conquer the entire fucking Pacific Ocean

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What did the bongs mean by this

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the Japs turned it into this absolute banger

      I love how smug the singer sounds in this rendition

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Inferior ship sinking song.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Raep botesluts

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Kriegsmarine was defeated by a searchlight taped to the wing of a B-24.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I really want to know how the Kriegsmarine were able to put the USN and the Royal Navy in the backfoot during the Atlantic campaign
    German Submariners had a higher mortality rate than fucking Soviet POWs in German camps lmao. "Backfoot" my ass, the Kriegsmarine was annihilated.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that like more than 50% of all WW2 myths, any claims about krautmoron ships and tactics being good comes directly from the British being incompetent and covering their asses to cope

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ignoring the Germans because they were the second worst navy of the war, only beating out the soviets
    The Japanese entire strategy was based on the idea of the kantai kessen, the decisive naval battle against America (and specifically America, they hyper focused on America to the point of not really being a good general purpose navy to fight anyone else)
    The idea would be that per USN doctrine, the American battleships would set sail and sail across the pacific. Along the way Japanese carrier and submarine forces would harry them to attrit the larger American fleet. Once they reached the designated spot (said spot changed over the years), the Japanese light forces including the kongos, which were doctrinally not capital ships, would commit to a mass night attack and the following morning the Japanese battleships would clean up
    All of their design and training decisions were in pursuit of this battle. This is why they had good torpedoes, but also why they made their cruisers deathtraps by giving them said torpedoes. This is why their light forces were so proficient at night battles until the Americans caught the hang of it, this is why they had such large modern submarines and then didn't use them for convoy raiding, this is why their light forces were so completely fucking bad at asw

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Japanese knew how to fight a real war, unlike America. Which allowed them get an early lead on them from the start. It’s why American marines and sailors were afraid to be taken prisoners by the Japanese.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the women just magically disappeared, not like they were stuffed into an IJA brothel or anything
      yeah right

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      "The Japanese knew how to [commit warcrimes], unlike America. Which allowed them to [dishonorably murder POWs and civilians] from the start. It’s why American marines and sailors [viewed them as subhumans and were 100% justified in keeping their skulls as trophies and firebombing Tokyo]."

      Your original post had some spelling and grammatical errors so I corrected them. You don't have to pay me, I'm just happy to help out.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        considering what amerifats have turned into they deserved it t b h

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You are not allowed to talk

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      HOWEVER

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >May 44
        >12 to 1 odds
        >LATER advance into a war of insanity
        the absolute cope
        it was insanity long before then
        perhaps from the very start

        Reminds me of the stories my grandfather used to confess when he was starting to unravel.
        Is all war this callous or was the pacific war a special kind of fucked?

        what did Granddaddy do?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Don't want to spill too much to what he told us, but it was common knowledge in the family that the only way he was able to get the gold for my grandmothers ring was off of killed prisoners and corpses (re-cast of course). Funded the luxuries of the wedding too as they were both very poor. Grandmother almost gloated that he stole the weddings/rings of 6 Japaneses girls so that he could bring her one.
          What chills me is stuff like this, that I don't hear a lot about in other wars. POWs in hellish conditions, sure, but never just killed out of convenience or because it was easier to pilfer gold from a dead body than a live one. Even a hateful massacre in the heat of the moment gives some humanity to the enemy, and in the pacific it seems that this was often absent.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "Behind every fortune lies a crime", Mario Puzo said.

            I dunno man. On the one hand, you are right, it is frankly murderous; on the other, who's to say that we "peaceful" folk have not, one way or another, in our own ways done someone else to death (or as near as) by more societally approved methods? Such as beating a business competitor flat, for example.

            I dunno. The older I get, the more I see of such things in the world, the only conclusion I have is that we humans truly can't see all the consequences, direct and indirect, of our actions; and so may God have mercy on us all.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Battles in which grandpa fought?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Battle of Los Angeles

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Reminds me of the stories my grandfather used to confess when he was starting to unravel.
      Is all war this callous or was the pacific war a special kind of fucked?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The pacific war was a special kind of fucked. War is never clean but the barbarity and callousness of imperial Japan dragged things down to the the uglier end of the spectrum.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I realize that you are an edgy little gay but let me make something clear to you
      the laws of war do not exist for one side to willingly hamstring themselves out of honor or whatever
      war crimes are, by their very nature, reciprocal.
      faking surrender is not "muh based know how to fight a war", it simply means that the other guy will stop accepting your surrenders.
      Killing prisoners isn't "muh based know how to fight a war", it just means that the other side will react in kind
      playing dead just means that the other side will shoot any bodies they see
      it didn't come to this but every side kept massive quantities of gasses near the front line, just in case the other side decided to use it (and this is why the nips were willing to gas the chinese but never had the balls to try to pull that shit against the americans)
      these tricks don't really give one side an advantage for more than about 5 minutes.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hate threads like these because people always ignore the contributions of the Soviet Red Fleet during the war. They fought against the Romanians, Bulgarians, Finnish, and German navies, yet they never get discussed about.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because they sucked shit, you pinko fuck.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Regale us with tales of the great soviet fleet.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Soviet Submarines, although suffering great losses due to German and Finnish anti-submarine actions, had a major role in the war at sea by disrupting Axis navigation in the Baltic Sea. And that’s not mentioning how the Black Sea fleet’s ships were damaged by minefields and Axis aviation, but they helped defend naval bases and supply them while besieged, as well as later evacuating them. Heavy naval guns and sailors helped defend port cities during long sieges by Axis armies.

        The Soviet navy should be talked about more. Despite facing six different navies, they still came up on top.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Tonnage of ships sunk?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Soviet S-class submarine sank 82,770 of merchant shipping and seven warships, which accounts for about one-third of all tonnage sunk by Soviet submarines during the war.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Was their tactics simply superior to the allies? Was the Allied naval command incompetent?

              I dunno, you tell me, who won the war?

              >B-but muh numerical superiority!!!

              Oh you mean like at Midway? Where the Japanese lost FOUR CARRIERS for the price of one American carrier despite having a 4 vs 3 numerical advantage?

              That's cute. USN Subs sank 30% of the Japanese navy (540,192 tons) and 54.6% of all Japanese merchant shipping (4,779,902 tons). They are perhaps the single biggest undiscussed factor in bringing Japan to its knees.

              Also I'd like to mention that the USN Submariners had a 22% casualty rate making it the most dangerous job in any branch of the US armed forces, which seems bad until you realize that German submariners, while incredibly successful in the early war, had a fucking 90% casualty rate.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Lacks the scale of the German and American campaigns. Don't know much about the soviet campaign, but if there isn't anything that stands out about them like the American torpedo issues or the technology being introduced over time in the Atlantic its not surprising it doesn't get much focus.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >which accounts for about one-third of all tonnage sunk by Soviet submarines
              so, about a quarter million tons on all fronts
              how cute
              >HARKS

              I'm surprised no sub commander ever strangled someone at the BoO for that shit.

              The operations department had their own fuckups to worry about, such as patrolling for Jap merchies in the open Pacific, when any retard could look at a map and tell that the East China Sea and South China Sea were the key Jap SLOCs. Once they solved the torpedo problem, AND sacked the prewar sub commander, then the USN sub campaign got into high gear. But that was only in I think '43 and '44.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What great battles did the Soviet navy take part in ?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Well, if you have to know, the Barents Sea submarine campaign which they won. The Battle of Vyborg Bay which they won and captured Viborg Bay islands from the Finnish. Then there's the submarine campaign in 1942 in which the Soviet Submarines decimated the Germany's transport ships. Despite the circumstances in which they found themselves, the red fleet conductive themselves admirably.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It's all mediocre.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Nothing mediocre about it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Those three are so cute.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Thank you animes I think Russian naval tradition is a bit underrated and people like to focus on that one massive fuck up in Japan.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      THEY
      TOOK
      THE
      BEST
      DICK!!!

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Fucking lmao
      L m a o

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/HNrjZhh.jpg

        >If the Russians had built the world's best battleship, it would have been the world's best battleship.
        No shit, Sherlock. It's just: They didn't.

        Consider this.
        >Admiral Ushakov
        >A large, 100,000-ton ship with powerful armor, one of the variants of the post-war battleship project (Project 24) with nine 457 mm guns as her main battery artillery.

        >nine 457 mm guns in three triple turrets
        >425-450mm belt armor
        >maximum speed 30 knots

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Consider this.
          >Tillman IV
          >80,000 tons
          >twenty-four 410mm guns
          >450mm belt
          >25 knots

          It's really stupid of the devs to go into paper designs because it opens the door to lots of weird shit

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's goddamn beautiful. The story behind it is hilarious too.
            >USN is perpetually underfunded
            >Senator Tilllman hates spending money on the Navy
            >Every new ship proposed costs more money than the last one since that's how technological progress works
            >This pisses Tillman off to no end
            >Goes to the Navy and demands that they just design the biggest fuck off ship and be done with it
            >Navy says no
            >WWI happens in Europe
            >Tillman still hates the Navy, but he hates the Germans and Wilson's neutrality more
            >Will give money to the Navy to kill Germans, but still just wants to pay for the biggest ship and not have anymore incremental funding increases
            >Navy relents and cooks something up just to get him to fuck off
            >Constrained only by the maximum physical dimensions of the Miraflores Locks, the Navy designs 4 monster ships
            >Tillman picks the most ridiculous one for further development

            The Tillman IV-2 was the finalized design.
            80,000 Tons, 25 knot speed, just under 1000 feet long, 15x 18" guns, and an obscene amount of armor. Tillman dies just afterward, but the Navy used the design studies to help make the South Dakota class.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/FrFcxdR.png

              Consider this.
              >Tillman IV
              >80,000 tons
              >twenty-four 410mm guns
              >450mm belt
              >25 knots

              It's really stupid of the devs to go into paper designs because it opens the door to lots of weird shit

              Comparison between the designs and some other battleships.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And it would have sucked balls because it was manned by Russians.

          All that potential wasted. Or, would have been.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >If the Russians had built the world's best battleship, it would have been the world's best battleship.
      No shit, Sherlock. It's just: They didn't.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Since when did PrepHole started supporting the Royal Navy and the United States Navy over the Kriegsmarine and the Imperial Japanese Navy?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      royal navy and kriegsmarine are both cringe. bongs because their navy was second rate but they pretend it wasn't because of pride, and krauts because their navy wasn't even third rate but gets propped up anyway just to make the bongs look less pathetic.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      wehraboos and weaboos have literally always been mocked on PrepHole you fucking newfag

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >t. wehb
    Any krautlarp kope about "muh superior German engineering" is quickly dispelled the moment you start reading actual history on the Kriegsmarine or WW2 naval warfare, who despite being more than adept at scuttling unarmed and unescorted tonnage became ineffectual the moment translantic convoys got armed escorts, then obliterated after they encountered any mildly competent adversary.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Everyone talks about the IJN and the Kriegsmarine, but what about the Regia Marina? How bad or good were they?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They were pretty mid, there was no real pitched massive naval battle in the Mediterranean. Both the British and Italians were afraid to commit.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They were pretty mid, there was no real pitched massive naval battle in the Mediterranean. Both the British and Italians were afraid to commit.

      Taranto really kneecapped them early on.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Italians had no fuel and couldn't operate, yet still dominated the Med.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's because they only had to deal with the French navy. Which was in a sad and pathetic state.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They dominated the Med vs the incompetent bongs.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Why do you keep on insulting the British? Without their help, the United States Navy wouldn’t have won the Pacific War.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The british were easily the best navy in europe and in a neutral scenerio they were a match for the IJN, but as it was the royal navy would have lost a pacific war, and aside from a token force at the end of the war that didn't change the balance much, didn't do much to destroy the japanese
                pesronally I shit on the bongs becuase 50% of all ww2 myths come from the bongs coping over one thing or another

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The british were easily the best navy in europe
                when your competition is the germans and the italians that's like winning the special olympics

                >in a neutral scenerio they were a match for the IJN
                what did the bongs have to challenge the nip kido butai? keep in mind they were the only country to lose a fleet carrier to gun fire.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                the british carriers were explicitly designed to operate within strike range of land based enemy air cover under less than air superiority and with the assumption that they cannot maneuver
                frankly, the japanese carriers were the worst designed of the 3 major carrier powers at the beginning of the war, seemingly taking the worst aspects of both the british and american carriers, with none of the advantages of either.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              They couldn't deal with a handful of biplanes.

              https://i.imgur.com/d7vSwF3.jpg

              Why do you keep on insulting the British? Without their help, the United States Navy wouldn’t have won the Pacific War.

              What gives you that impression?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              they got blown out in every fleet action and failed to stop the RN and RAF closing the supply lines to north africa and surrendered to the RN

              Aviation defeated the kriegsmarine, and bong naval aviation was trash.

              >Aviation defeated the kriegsmarine, and bong naval aviation was trash.

              british naval aviation was a mixed bag, the swordfish sunk a greater tonnage of axis shipping than any other aircraft during the war and proved very useful operating from escort carriers in the ASW role, other carrier aircraft were mixed to poor, largely because the interservice rivalry and lower priority meant that development was troubled at best and some designs were hampered by a insistence on including a navigator on all planes meaning the firefly for example which should have been a single seater was a two seater.

              but then the aviation that beat the germans was largely shore based using medium and heavy bombers as maritime patrol aircraft and ASW planes and anti shipping strike craft with sunderlands also doing a lot of long range ASW work.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >swordfish sunk a greater tonnage of axis shipping than any other aircraft during the war
                Source?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >fleet action
                Minor hairpullings are not fleet action. The bongs couldn't transit the Med, a small pond. That says it all.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Matapan was a fleet action, calabria was a fleet action

                and the british could tranist the med, shore based aircraft were the biggest problem in that regard and even a maximum effort by the luftwaffe and italians wasnt able to cut off malta or prevent the invasions of north africa and italy.

                I dont know why you are so heavily invested in hating 'bongs' but try and match facts to reality once in a while please, be a cock if you must but try not to be a ignorant cock

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                it's just the regular "nuuu bongs bad bongs bad bongs bad"
                you can tell by how he doesn't even try expounding on his position

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >duck pond
                >fleet action
                Choose one.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >shore based aircraft were the biggest problem
                For the bongs, as their naval aviation was trash.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                a carrier in range of shore is always going to be outnumbered by enemy aircraft aircraft that can generally be bigger and with better performance than carrier based ones.

                the RN was never going to be able to build enough carriers to equalize that disparity, so the fact that they won in the med anyway suggests they werent too terrible

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Tldr. The bongs naval aviation was trash, which is why they were defeated on a small duck pond by a minor opponent.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                seethe and cope

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >seethe and cope
                Yes, the incompetent bong military forces them to do this plenty.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >which is why they were defeated on a small duck pond by a minor opponent
                as has been pointed out before the british won in the med, decisively in fact

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, as everywhere else, the bongs were being defeated there and the US had to come in and save them.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The Med was basically a British naval fiefdom and they did exceptionally well there. US naval involvement was pretty much fire support, transport, and supply.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, the bongs couldn't even transit the Med, they were being BTFO so badly. So as usual, the US had to save them.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Citatoin needed, you are essentially pulling bullshit out your ass at this point, you keep making these statements without any actual fucking evidence.

                either provide a fucking source or admit your error apologise and then fuck off back to whatever hole you crawled from

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Weak bait trolling gets you nowhere.

                >No, the bongs couldn't even transit the Med, they were being BTFO so badly. So as usual, the US had to save them.
                Might as well repeat these historical facts.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                thats the issue, its not a fact, you need to provide some actual evidence for it to be a fact, as it stands its just your own fucking delusion.

                actual evidence or STFU

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No, the bongs couldn't even transit the Med, they were being BTFO so badly. So as usual, the US had to save them.
                Might as well repeat these historical facts

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                back up these facts with actual evidence or shut the fuck up, pick one.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No, the bongs couldn't even transit the Med, they were being BTFO so badly. So as usual, the US had to save them.
                Might as well repeat these historical facts

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                don't bother anon, it's just warriortard

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                why is he not rangebanned at this point?

                dude brings nothing to the table and just shits up otherwise ok threads?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                PrepHole is janny under-resourced but I've managed to get him shut down for weeks occasionally. just report and sage all his threads, eventually they'll stomp out all his devices.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Weak bait trolling gets you nowhere.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                What country's naval aviation wasn't trash?

                a carrier in range of shore is always going to be outnumbered by enemy aircraft aircraft that can generally be bigger and with better performance than carrier based ones.

                the RN was never going to be able to build enough carriers to equalize that disparity, so the fact that they won in the med anyway suggests they werent too terrible

                >a carrier in range of shore is always going to be outnumbered by enemy aircraft
                It was often the opposite in the pacific.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The bongs were the bottom of the barrel, is the point.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They could transit the Med but why put your boats at risk when they can just go around it?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >They could transit the Med
                And be annihilated by a literal who enemy.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >largely shore based
                Yes, and that was trash as well.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > I really want to know how the Kriegsmarine were able to put the USN and the Royal Navy in the backfoot during the Atlantic campaign

    They literally never did and they were very open about this. Thus why they focused their efforts on convoy raiding and submarines (which became horrifically less effective after the proliferation of sonar and deck-mounted depth charge launchers). The Bismarck was an anomaly, not the rule.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >They literally never did and they were very open about this.
      Do you know nothing about the Die Glückliche Zeit and Zweite glückliche Zeit? Those operations literally crippled the Royal Navy and the United States Navy for a time.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why are you so delusional?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >literally crippled the Royal Navy and the United States Navy
        oh really?
        did they ever have to curtail their operations due to lack of fuel?
        remind me again, who won the Battle of the Atlantic?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >oh really?
          Operation Neuland disrupted United Kingdom petroleum supplies and United States aluminum supplies. Not to mention Gulf of Mexico should have been an American lake, yet the Germans made sure it wasn't.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            so did they ever have to curtail their operations due to lack of fuel?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Did you not read my post?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >disrupted supplies
                is not the same as
                >disrupted supplies to the point where operations had to be curtailed

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is shipping considered the navy now?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Cute ships.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >literally crippled the Royal Navy and the United States Navy for a time
        Are you ESL or are you just so dense you don't understand what "crippled" means? The U-boat campaign at no point came close to disrupting allied naval operations and at absolute best had only fleeting and imperceptible effects on industrial production.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You talk a lot of shit about the Kriegsmarine, which is what I expect from an American who can't handle the fact that other navies could rival it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Kriegsmarine

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >posts sunk battleship
              You point, anon?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A majority of the ships at Pearl Harbor were recovered and the ones that were loss were replaced in a year. Kriegsmarine couldn’t do that

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think the difference is that the USN had multiple battleships and indeed managed to refloat or repair pretty much all of them bar arizona after pearl, whereas the kriegsmarine never had many capital ships and failed to recover from the loss of the ones it did have, also the ones it did have werent great

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            bruh, we turned the Kriegsmarine into a war trophy and now kids walk around it and are told by tour guides how much they got fucked on by aerial radar and destroyers.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You talk a lot of shit about the Kriegsmarine, which is what I expect from an American who can't handle the fact that other navies could rival it.
            other navies could rival the USN, the kriegsmarine was not among them

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >other navies could rival the USN
              Japan was the only axis power that rivaled the US navy, and it took us 4 years to decimate them.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Six months. The rest of the time was clean up.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A yeah, they weren't actually crippled at midway (although they lost carriers, their actual losses were surprisingly light, the Japanese navy was less mobile but was still strong), it was guadalcanal that broke the back of the IJN

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                see

                >Midway brought the US roughly to parity
                Midway brought the US ahead in fleet carrier strength, although the IJN has a couple more light carriers with about half the usual complement of a fleet carrier

                Post Midway, the
                >USN
                had Enterprise, Hornet, Saratoga, with veteran crews; and Wasp

                >IJN
                had Shokaku and Zuikaku, mostly manned with instructors and training cadre

                they also had two or three light carriers but they were mainly occupied ferrying aircraft to the Guadalcanal AO and their combat performance was dismal

                and by early 1943 the first Essex-class CVs were available to tip the scales, while the next fleet carriers the Japs completed were in 44

                it was definitely not apparent then but in hindsight, Midway was the death blow of Japanese ambitions in WW2

                [...]
                >Carriers were of major interest, but the battleship in the Naval World was still the king
                Nah
                by December 1941 the world knew carriers were the decisive capital ships of the battle fleet; even the RN knew it, though they risked one, just ONE action without carrier cover (because HMS Indomitable couldn't repair and reach in time) and paid the price for it.

                However, battleships and heavy cruisers were still an essential part of the fleet, though defensively, even into the mid-50s, because carriers couldn't fight at night or in mist.

                [...]
                >they absolutely did not follow the core tenant of his that you should seek the enemy fleet and destroy it in pitched battle
                They did - King's and Nimitz's priorities were always "sink the carriers" first, support the Army second - but they didn't neglect the island campaign or sub/convoy interdiction, the latter probably influenced by WW1 experience, whereas the IJN mainly neglected these other areas and did a lot of lolwut adhoc improvisation, possibly due to lack of resources... no shit given they were killing themselves just building something that juuuust might conceivably take out the US Navy's extant combat divisions

                it was over for the IJN at Midway, Guadalcanal was just mopping up the cruisers

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I disagree
                look at the losses. The japanese advantage going into the war was the fact that they had skilled aircrew that had been fighting together for years. With a few notable exceptions (like tomonaga), the japanese air crews made it out of midway mostly intact. Yes four carriers being sunk hurt, but it wasn't crippling
                the attrition of the japanese light forces and pilots over guadalcanal is what decisively broke the IJN

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the japanese air crews made it out of midway mostly intact
                but not intact enough to continue fighting without drafting the instructors. from then on it was a constant deterioration in aircrew quality with every pilot lost.
                >Yes four carriers being sunk hurt, but it wasn't crippling
                destroying two-thirds of the IJN's total WW2 active fleet carrier force was absolutely crippling.
                After Midway, Japan was no longer capable of offensive fleet actions.

                >but what about the battleship fleet
                would've been hilariously raped if ever a battleship vs carrier fleet action developed

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >but not intact enough to continue fighting without drafting the instructors
                They were doing that from day 0. It's hilarious just how fucked Japanese training was

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the attrition of the japanese light forces and pilots over guadalcanal is what decisively broke the IJN
                IJN went into attrition mode because they were already fucked. If they had carriers left they wouldn't have been sending their planes piecemeal to their deaths.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          > bong detected
          Until the US got involved, the bong retards were getting raped

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    *misses*

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      AMERICANS ARE USING HACKS!

      Their AA always explode at the perfect altitude, it's bullshit. Even when closing and changing altitude, they have the shells pop at perfectly the right time. I don't care how good their gun directors are, there is zero way they are setting timing fuzes that well. I asked Hitler-chan and he said it isn't like that on the European server.

      Ban America pls, OP and Hacks >:[

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the type 96 didn't miss often when it was used right, that is holding burst until the target was within a 300m range ceiling. unloading accurate bursts at short ranges dropped the RPB of the type 96 to only 7 rounds.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >used right, that is holding burst until the target was within a 300m range ceiling
        So, it was fucking worthless

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Has anyone ever wondered how an invasion of japan would’ve looked like?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Extremely depressing.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>>/a/

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      But this is PrepHole related.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe in spirit.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >bongs think they're the greatest navy ever
    >somehow can't stop the invasion of Norway despite having more capital ships in the Home Fleet and in theater than the KM has ships
    >get utterly BTFO in the pacific to the point where Australians prefer to be attached to USN forces than be led by an RN admiral
    >stuck on convoy protection duty for the rest of the war
    >b-b-but we beat up the italians in their pond RN NUMBA ONE

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      To be fair, the RN had their own thing going in the SW Pacific from 1945 on. The Australian preference for being with the USN would have been down to equipment and operations as they were long accustomed to American ways of doing things.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >>b-b-but we beat up the italians in their pond RN NUMBA ONE
      The Italian Navy was pretty fucking handicap, trying to claim victory over them is low.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *