What if the Maus actually saw widespread service

>>35046625
No.
Tanks would be exactly the fucking same.
Hand held Anti armor devices would have developed slightly faster probably.
But tanks wouldn't be all that effected.

Oh, we also probably would have made a huge anti bridge effort in Europe as well.

>>35046625
No, the Germans had virtually no fuel at this point in the war.

File: 189819-L.jpg (429KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1600x1200px

>>35046625
*blocks your path*

>>35046639
Open fields would have stopped that monstrosity before it even got to the bridges.

File: 8074183589_af97a9c45b_o.jpg (85KB, 620x396px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 620x396px

>>35046639
> what is snorkeling?

File: 1501203202274.jpg (56KB, 342x342px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 342x342px

>>35046974
>tank has enough mechanical issues on dry land
>cant cross bridges
>lets turn it into a submarine
>what could possibly go wrong?

>>35046974
>engineers have to build a jetty everytime you get to a river.

>>35046625
Probably no effect, at most it speeds up the German loss by a minimal amount.

>>35046625
The cunts would have walked around it.
Or when it was being repaired (most of the time) they would just ignore it and go for the actual threat.
The maus was retarded as fuck.

>>35046625
The war would have been won even sooner, as it would have diverted insane amounts of raw materials and manpower from other actually practical designs.

File: BU11149.jpg (39KB, 445x599px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 445x599px

>>35047464
*cripples your war economy*

The Germans could have won the war if they developed the Pz III to its fullest potential. A bit widened and stretched to accomodate a larger turret ring, torsion bar suspension unlike crappy Pz IV, sloped single plate glacis and a bigger turret to house a 75 mm L/56 interim gun.

Yes. That means there are no political lobbies and cronyism, because all of German cats were disasters on strategic level.

Workhorses of German biggest victories were Czech light tanks and Panzers II, III and IV.

Because the biggest K:D ratio is achieved when your tanks are just doing maneuver warfare, and you have the strategic initiative to effect Kesselschlact and encircle large enemy forces, forcing the enemy to resort to deblocking and relief attempts, where you are on the tactical defensive, and enjoy the advantage.

StuG/JgPz. on that chassis in addition to the tank described earlier is all Germany needed to stay ahead.

>>35047482
>these fewer, larger tanks are too much of a strain on logistics and we're running out of trained crews
>so let's make worse tanks and have a lot more of them to solve the issue

As if any kind of strategically significant maneuver warfare was remotely tenable by the end of 1942 onwards (when the 'cats' started appearing) anyway.

>>35047482
>The Germans could have won the war
No. They could have done better, but they were fucked by the time they dragged Russia into it. Not enough manpower to build large numbers of decent tanks, not enough mature technology to build effective force multipliers. Still, an army of developed Pz. III and Pz. IVs crewed by 15 year olds would probably have done better than the cats by dint of not breaking down after half an hour of travelling

>>35046625
Nope. Superheavies like that were abandoned for good reason. Too slow. That's why monsters like the IS2 and KV-85 aren't too well remembered while T-34s and Panthers get the glory. They're strong in some situations but useless in maneuver warfare. If anything modern design would have advanced faster.

This is assuming they have the fuel to run them and the logistics to keep them working to a decent degree.

>>35046625
Nope.

Great tactical asset, terrible strategical, and wars are won in the strategical level.

"The enemy has this amazing tank that we cannot kill" "go around it, its slow as someone walking, who cares"

Just like the king tigers which were overengineered and constantly broke down, amazing on paper, terrible in truth.

>>35046634
>>35046639

No bridge in Europe could have supported the Maus anyway, it would have had to completely rely on snorkeling as >>35046974 stated.

>>35047560
They were done in winter 1941 already. To win the war Germany would have to take Moscow. With the fall of Moscow Soviet propaganda could take a hit large enough for Stalingrad to fall... And after Moscow and Stalingrad are done the war is basically done

>>35048136

The Soviets were prepared to retreat even further if they absolutely had to. They absolutely had the space to do so and their supply chain would grow shorter for every foot the Germans had to reach further.

Even if Stalingrad had fallen, what next? The command structure of the Soviet Union was safe, the Germans wouldnt be any closer to solving the strategic and logistical problems that lost them the war and they would just have another pile of rubble to garrison with what few men they had.

Short of "assassinate Stalin in 1940 and stage a coup" they couldn't have possibly won.

>>35046625
Dumbasses like to think the Maus was intended to be a replacement for all tanks when it's role would have been akin to a turreted tank destroyer supporting medium tanks. That being said the Stug was better for that role.

>>35047482
>retarded enough to think a tank would change the outcome of a global world war
Nazi Germany started losing in 1939

>>35046974
Better pray the bottom of that river is stone and not mud.

>>35048214
Germany lost WWII the moment they turned it into a global war. If they had maneuvered better politically to keep America and the Soviets from joining, they could have likely controlled all of Europe.

>>35046635
>No, the Germans had virtually no fuel at this point in the war.
Nuclear powered Maus.

>>35048194
I know they had space. The only way Germans could ever *win* was if Japan would join the war from the the East instead of attacking the US.

At the same time it doesn't matter how much space you have. After the fall of Stalingrad German armies can take USSR's oil fields and thus replenish their own storage. Also, most factories were still before Ural mountains.

Taking Moscow and Stalingrad provides propaganda source for Germans and undermines Soviet propaganda, and makes it more difficult for Soviets to continue to produce and properly prepare tanks and other vehicles.

All Germans had to do was to get to Ural. They would take all important cities, factories, and oil. Behind Ural mountains Soviets retained most of their minerals, but it would take years to build back their production

>>35048226
They did it in hopes to stop American convoys from getting to Great Britain... That was stupid

>>35046625
We'd probably capture a shitload of them and send them to our tank museums along with any allied super tank prototypes we'd build to counter them.

>running Mauses at Bovington
>muh dick

>>35048246
>was if Japan would join the war from the the East
They would need some sort of miracle to pacify all of Asia. Then how would the Japanese resupply their forces during the long trek? They had a lot of trouble just handling China alone.

>All Germans had to do was to get to Ural
Germany's big mistake was splitting its armored division instead of focusing attacks

>>35047467
funfact, the V1/V2/V3(or maybe just the V2 alone, i forget) cost more than the Manhatten Project

Germany lost because the Nazis were lossers who could only achieve victory against disarmed countried or by teaming up with stalin

hitler fucked Europe and was histories greatest looser deal with it the disease started in Prussia which was a toxic little shithole and destroyed the austro Hungarian empire europes defense against slavs and muslims

>>35048398
That's one of the reasons why they didn't enter the war with USSR. And through that Soviets could move their divisions from Far East back to Europe.

As for splitting the armored divisions, yes and no. What exactly do you mean by focusing attacks? Where would they focus them?

File: Typhoon run.jpg (68KB, 799x436px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 799x436px

>>35046625
>What if we faced the Maus?

>>35046625
incoming germany lost because X armchair historians.oh wait too late

>>35049143
It's not that hard to read the history books and see what could've been done better. Just like in a 100 years someone will read about 2000s and will see what could've been done better

>>35048803
the hilarious part is that the V2 did more damage to nazi germany than to the allies. More people died making the weapons than were killed in the attacks. V2s were at least as expensive as fighter aircraft that they could have been building instead, meanwhile since the V2 was impervious to interception (unlike the much cheaper V1), the british didn't even try, freeing up RAF aircraft for other duties.

>>35046974

The Maus got stuck on soft ground, imagine it trying to cross waterlogged mud and fine sand.

>>35049176
>what could've been done better
Not starting a war of aggression against the 3 most powerful countries on earth, for a start.

>>35049263
Hitler didn't want to go to war with the US. Japan fucked up. But generally, yes, I agree

>>35049315

>Didn't want to go to war with the US
>Declared war on the US

When Japan refused to attack Russia he should have ditched them.

>>35049354
Yes. Hitler shouldn't've went to war with the US. The whole idea of Total War wasn't a very well thought idea imo. It neither brought halt to American convoys nor did it bring downfall of England

File: Wrong neighborhood.jpg (43KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x360px

>>35046625

File: GDP.png (26KB, 618x341px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 618x341px

>>35047482
*blocks your path

>>35049418
>hits sherman battalion instead

>>35049245
>More people died making the weapons than were killed in the attacks.
To be fair, most people who died during assembly were foreign slave laborers in the first place.

File: 1451682977921.png (87KB, 417x234px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 417x234px

>>35048244
>have to make the Maus larger as result to protect the reactor

File: 1488571913630.png (1MB, 4832x5787px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4832x5787px

>Making expensive, useless, slow and unreliable tanks would improve Germany's standing
lmao

>>35049672
Don't you have a beach to evacuate?

>>35049697
Don't you have a refugee to welcome

>>35049697
Don't you have war crimes to commit ?

>>35048226

They invaded Russia first because they knew the Soviets intended to wait until they had overextended and exhausted themselves infiltrate communist rabble-rousers into major population centers to get people agitated against the nazis and then drop paratroopers in to "liberate" those places.
Invading first was the correct choice, or it would have been if they hadn't drunk their own kool-aid and believed they couldn't help but win because muh racial superiority.

>>35046625
Wouldn't have changed a damn thing. Heavy tanks (T-10, M103) still go into production, their failures show, and they get replaced by the MBT.

>>35048244
>1945 Germany
>Functional nuclear reactor
Dear fucking god no.

On a good note: if fusion and railguns take off, we might see a Maus-sized tank sometime soon, because of scaling issues for both technologies.

>>35049729
>Counter-terrorist actions are now war crimes

>>35049784
"terrorist"

>>35047482
>The Germans could have won the war if
NO. As soon as the USA joins (inevitable with Japan), Germany loses, it's just a matter of when.

>Make a niche specific version of the Pz3
idiots like you that want another Ausfuhrung for the sake of having a gamma of AFV's as wide as Audi has nowadays (really, look up all their models, including all other VAG subbrands) is what killed German logistics and productivity.

>>35047560
Russia alone could have been beaten.
Russian manpower backed by an American economy certainly could not.

>>35049807
>non-uniformed combatants committing acts of terror
yes, terrorists

>>35049752
That's a fucking horse not a tiger.

>>35049418
>>35049752
WW2 CAS against AFV's was hilariously ineffective, and grossly exaggerated by pilots. To the point where they claimed to have defeated entire divisions that weren't even present in their theater of operations.

File: M20superzook.jpg (2MB, 4752x3168px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4752x3168px

>>35046625

this kills the Maus

>>35049664
Slave laborers that could have been making rifles.

File: Il2_sturmovik.jpg (42KB, 650x234px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 650x234px

>>35050047
This too and there were more of those than any number of heavy tanks the Germans could ever produce.

>>35049951
>killing the other nations citizens because they aren't part of the "superior" race isn't a war crime

>>35048803
[citation needed]

Only the largest figures get close to the Manhattan project. A lot of estimatives actually place them at about 75% of the price at most.

>>35050140
Ground attack planes were shit against armor though.

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/combat-aircraft-versus-armour-in-wwii/

>>35050167
Germany probably couldn't even carry the financial costs of the Manhattan project in peacetime, nevermind in a war were they got bombed to shit.

File: Comparison_of_Landkreuzer_P_1000_Ratte,_Maus_and_Tiger_tanks.png (3KB, 280x70px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 280x70px

>>35049667
>Fuel no longer an issue

>Just make it bigger then.

It's a feedback loop.

>>35048286
Reminder that it's now THE tank museum.

File: IMG_3050.jpg (24KB, 585x235px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 585x235px

Reading the memoir of Otto carius or however it's spelled. Tigers in the mud. He says how skilled the Russian infantry were with their anti tank rifles and how they could button up (block sights) a tiger before the tank crew could identify where the enemy was. I suppose that had the Maus seen action it would have taken the Russians about 10 minutes to blind it and render it inoperable.

>>35050129
>having your slave laborers sabotage rifles instead of von Braun's ineffectual pet project
Because that worked out so well for the panther assembly lines.

>>35049784
>>35049951
Do you think the reprisal enacted upon Lidice was a just action and in line with the international conventions governing the conduct of war, to which Germany was a signatory?

>>35050160
>killing other nations' citizens because they are splitting railroad tracks and ambushing convoys is a war crime

>>35047482
>Germany manages to stretch the war out past 1945
>Allies start mass producing Pershings and Centurions

File: Is-3.jpg (313KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 1024x683px

>>35046625
They did start making heavier and heavier tanks but then there's a point where armor can't catch up to how quick guns evolve

File: T28_Front_Quarter.jpg (516KB, 1185x803px) Image search: [Google]

516KB, 1185x803px

>>35050279
And eventually everyone figured out mobility is more important than being a big fat target crawling in the middle of a battlefield.

>>35050257
>Entwiklung series enters production
>German night-vision achieves full-scale implemented
>STG 44s out the ass
>Nazi high-command drug-benders result in the frakenluftwaffe pumping out all sorts of rocket powered abortions
>Berlin gets nuked
I'd love to visit that timeline

>>35050225
No more than the Allied sinking of the Gustloff or strafing of U-156

>>35049315
>not breaking a treaty against an ally that won't invade Soviet Russia for you

>>35050578
Honestly sounds like it could be an awesome time. Hell, it might even be enough to weaken the USSR beyond any chance of them having superpower status after the war.

Or conversely, the Germans continue development enough to nuke the US.

>>35049957

Yes. I believe that is, in fact, the joke.

>>35050713
>Or conversely, the Germans continue development enough to nuke the US.
Unlikely, if only because half the German atomic weapon program thought their efforts were better put to use on creating power plants and the other half were actively sabotaging the effort. The non-existent funding and constant sabotage of the inferior heavy-water neutron moderator also helped.

>>35047482

The Germans lost the war irrevocably as soon as they failed to force the USSR to surrender in 1941.

>>35050713
>the Germans continue development enough to nuke the US.

With which airplanes?

>>35050918
Some wildly outlandish Frakenluftwaffe winged rocket.

>>35050918
>>35050951
The Krauts had this idea of a rocket powered bomber that would launch from Europe, go into a sub orbital trajectory over the US, bomb it, then land on Japan.

Of course, I doubt it would be able to carry a fat WW2 nuke. Or even be able to hit within 60 miles of the target.

>>35050965

I doubt that they'd even be able to find a runway for it by late 45-early 46.

>>35050974
underground airfields ;^)

>>35050885
>The Germans lost the war irrevocably as soon as they failed to force the USSR to surrender in 1941.
This is what a lot of the (German) veterans of that war said. They lost outside Moscow - no further progress was made except in the South and we all know how that ended up for Paulus

>>35050974
Actually I think the plan was to have it be launched by rail. So they could just set up a launch rail from a bunch of steel rails, have it take off, and dissasemble.

>>35050965
They could barely bomb Glasgow for fuck sake.

>>35050965
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silbervogel
The calculations for re-entry were wrong and it would have burned up. Although both the Ju 390 and Me 264 would have been adequate. The Horten H.XVIII, however, would have been more fun though.

>>35051019
>4 ton payload
>actually less since they would need more heat shielding

Hmm...

>Little Boy weight: 4,4 tons

RIP in peace

>>35051044
Luckily the Germans have perfect solution for that, make it bigger.

File: 1490861657989.png (1MB, 1554x1218px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1554x1218px

>>35048246
>All Germans had to do was to get to Ural
Way easier said than done, they'd have to go 1,500 km more than they did historically, which already was extremely lucky as it was. Dealing with exhausted fuel reserves, inefficient railroad operation and organization, mass breakdowns of their hundreds of types of vehicles, and fierce Soviet resistance proved to be too much for an assault on Moscow, let alone a push all the way to the Urals.

>>35051085
True. I am sure it could be done. Maybe just make it a double engine rocket and expand it a bit.

You have to admit that the idea sounds insanely cool though.

>>35049961
Whilst it was largely crap in terms of vehicles destroyed, it still made formations unwilling/worried about moving in daylight.

>>35048194
>loosing best infastructure and majority of industry base
There comes a point when they cant produce anymore
That bieng said, the nips cutting off lend lease that early would have made a difference as well

>>35050997
Would taking Moscow have been enough to force the Russians into surrendering? As important and symbolic as it was it didn't exactly work out that way for Napoleon.

>>35051689
Not really. It would make it much easier to end the USSR though. Once Moscow was down it would end in a few months.

Hitler should have focused on resources first instead of taking Moscow and Stalingrad. He needed the Oil from the Caucasus.

The Maus is actually bouyant.
It would be a literal land ship.
Put some props on and roll right into Britbonistan.

OH FOR FUCKS SAKES!

Lets just cut the bullshit and JUST PRETEND FOR ONCE THAT THE MAUS HAD LOTS OF FUEL, AMMO, DID NOT BREAK DOWN, DID NOT GET STUCK, WAS ABLE TO CROSS BRIDGES AND FIELDS WITHOUT ISSUES, WAS NOT FUCKTON SLOW AND WAS POWERFUL so what the fuck would happen then in terms of fighting against the maus now!?

FUCK!

>>35052054
Allies make bigger bazookas.

Maus is kill.

>>35052054
Allies make better Tanks to kill Maus.

File: TOG2_Tank_Bovington.jpg (246KB, 1840x1032px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1840x1032px

>>35052109
A Challenger appears

>>35052095
Krauts make bigger tank. Checkmate burger.

File: M6 heavy tank.jpg (219KB, 852x803px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 852x803px

>>35052190
Yeah, about ten or twenty. Before Simultaneously making different tanks for no other reason other than Germans are Inefficient.

>>35052190
Then the allies makes an even bigger gun

>>35047576
>IS-2 isn't remembered

I don't know what it's like in the west, but in Russia, the t-34 and is-2 are equally famous for the final victory of ww2

>>35052219
Then the krauts just go and make a much bigger tank

>>The German V-weapons (V-1 and V-2) cost the equivalent of around USD $40 billion (2015 dollars), which was 50 percent more than the Manhattan Project that produced the atomic bomb.[12]:178 6,048 V-2s were built, at a cost of approximately 100,000 Reichsmarks (GB£2,370,000 (2011)) each; 3,225 were launched. SS General Hans Kammler, who as an engineer had constructed several concentration camps including Auschwitz, had a reputation for brutality and had originated the idea of using concentration camp prisoners as slave laborers in the rocket program. More people died manufacturing the V-2 than were killed by its deployment