Alternate WW2 | Hearts of Iron 4 Style - 1/2 

ME TOO BRUH

This time, I think, I nailed it. However I know I will not get the views I want haha

​@mushvigabbasov3951 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaáaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaáááaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaáaa😅😅

Thanks, actually, team AXIS is more efficiently led than more powerful. Japan and Germany and Italy combine their strategies rather than doing whatever they want. Italy did not attack Greece, Japan waited extra 7 months to attack USA and etc.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 how's the 2nd part doing?

Simultaneously drawing several fronts and events are the hardest ones. Until 1941, I used Wikipedia for events. Thanks for appriciation.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 ypur welcome! and keep producing these, as i said, these are awesome.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 when part 2 tho

Any expected dates

Also sorry for the caps

@@jeaniusedits6094 I am quite busy these days, I really don't know when but it will come out.

@@jeaniusedits6094 Sup again

Yes, it's a dream for all internet users.

Part II is a dream of humanity

Ok this was great. I'm just going to assume this is an axis victory scenario, or at least, I can't see any way for the allies to win. This is at best a stalemate scenario for the allies. Can't wait for part 2

One thing I've noticed about most WW2 scenarios on RU-vid is that: 1: The allies usually win 2: When the axis wins, it's usually due to something really unrealistic happening in the scenario, such as Moscow falling early on and the USSR immediately capitulating Now, there is a slight chance I am wrong and my words age poorly. But I am going to assume this scenario is axis victory or stalemate favoring axis. Writing these scenarios is harder because it's difficult to find an ending that makes sense. The allies are just too much bigger than the axis and impossible to fully invade. An invasion of continental US is impossible. Even operation Sea Lion is very hard. It would take many years of outproducing the allies for Germany to build those capabilities. The USSR is a bigger priority anyway. Ultimately the only way for axis to win is for the allies to lose the will to fight and agree to an armistice. Here's what I'm thinking; 1: Japan will not lose in the Pacific like it did in real timeline. It will likely lose some islands to the US, but it will retain control of the west Pacific at a minimum. Having more time to prepare, a better Pearl Harbor, ending the war with China, and winning Midway are all factors. And I suspect the US's will to fight will be a lot shakier than in real world, with the situation in Europe being so dire (despite Roosevelt saying Europe is his priority) and opening a front through Africa being impossible. 2: The US will still develop nukes. I don't see why it shouldn't. However, it won't be able to establish sufficient air superiority over Japan to nuke it (not that Japan would surrender even if the US could nuke it, as the USSR has no chance of invading Japan). So I think the US may use its nukes across the English Channel against Axis military positions, though the nukes won't be game-changing. I could also see the US trying to knock out a minor axis power like Spain or possibly Turkey (if it joins Axis) with nukes, as I take it bombing mainland Germany is impractical. 3: Egypt is barely hanging on, and the UK can't resupply it efficiently. Axis will control North Africa. They will likely control Middle East too if Turkey joins Axis. Operation Torch is impossible due to Spain's involvement in the war. 4: I doubt Axis could conquer all of the USSR. I think they will take a large part of European Russia, possibly even Moscow, to the point where the USSR will be too exhausted and beaten to seriously counterattack. Ultimately this would force a stalemate with Stalin being overthrown and a new, weaker government accepting some sort of armistice. 5: With the USSR out of the war, North Africa & Middle East under Axis control, and US navy crippled in the Pacific, the US and UK will sign an armistice. Then a cold war will start with the Germans developing a nuclear program.

@@Unofficial_YT It very helpful to share your ideas. I literally dont know who is going to win the war. It may end in 1955 with allied victory or 1947 Axis or 1945 Stalemate. IDK.

​@@mushvigabbasov3951 Here's how an allied victory could go, if you choose to go that route: To win the war, the allies first need to control North Africa. If Turkey joins Axis, it's over for the allies. Turkey has to stay neutral, possibly requiring even more concessions from the UK. This is also why the allies can't invade Iran. The UK also has to hang on to Egypt, as difficult as that is without Gibraltar. The main country creating a problem here is Spain. The allies will have to deal with Spain to be able to invade Morocco and Algeria. Nuclear weapons are a key allied advantage. In real timeline, US used 2 nukes in 1945. Assuming the war continues throughout the late 40s, the US will have many more nukes it can use. Granted, Japan will be out of reach at least for a while. What I'm thinking is the US could attempt an amphibious assault in Morocco. While this isn't a sustainable strategy in the long-term due to the sheer extent of Axis superiority, the US could try to temporarily gain air superiority over Spanish airspace. This would allow it to use nukes against Spanish industrial and population centers. Let's say this happens in 1945. The US won't have nukes ready for a while, but obviously the Axis wouldn't know that. Spain's morale, I imagine, is not even comparable to Japan's. This could effectively knock Spain out of the war, forcing them to sign an armistice with the allies in fear of being nuked further. This paves the way for allied superiority in the Mediterranean and an offensive in North Africa. It would definitely be slower than in real timeline though. Once the allies have done their part in Africa, it's up to the USSR to survive. The USSR needs to be able to not only hold on to the Caucasus but also drive the Germans back. Japan taking Vladivostok as well as Finland taking Murmansk makes it harder for the allies to resupply the USSR. Thus, the USSR cannot counterattack to the extent it did in the real timeline, though it can definitely repel further offensives. The Pacific War would be a lot harder for the US, with most of its forces destroyed, Venezuela being a distraction, and Europe being the priority anyway. I do think Japan would still ultimately find itself on the retreat, but at a much slower rate than in real timeline. Japan would also be safe from nukes. But I do think there could be another Sino-Japanese war, which would entangle Japan more and make it harder to concentrate on the Pacific. Assuming the US maintains the will to fight, they will *eventually* win against Japan. Finland is a weak link for the Axis; the USSR could try to take back Murmansk. Taking back Leningrad would also be a big propaganda victory for the Soviets. Meanwhile, the US should be able to use several nukes every year. I'm thinking it should concentrate its nuclear and bombing campaign on Italy, demoralizing and destabilizing it. Sicily and Sardinia could be invaded. A ground invasion of Italy is also possible, though going any farther than the Alps is out of the question. Possessing nukes and always keeping the enemy in the dark in terms of when/where nukes will be used could deter Turkey from joining the Axis. If Italy falls, I think Greece may be able to join the allies. This would pave the way for an allied invasion of the minor Axis powers. The USSR could do an invasion of the Ukraine and connect their lines with the US and UK in Romania, especially if Romania backstabs Germany like it did in the real world. Everything I'm talking about here is obviously extremely long, bloody, and tedious though. Ultimately though I think that superior industry and the possession of nukes would give the allies a shot at victory... in the mid-late 50s. And no, I do not think the Germans could develop the bomb due to infrastructure issues. Not to mention the oil shortage that would be even more pressing in a drawn-out war where the USSR can defend the Caucasus. There is an obvious ethical question to using nukes so liberally though. It's not like with Japan where the US could at least make the argument it was to prevent a ground invasion. This would involve repeatedly and deliberately targeting civilians to demoralize the enemy, as well as an unwavering commitment to pursue total victory.

Me to, when I was a child, I always watched this kind of videos and now I am creating my own version, which I think is better.

Yes

Probably 10 million years later, after big bang happens 46 tlillion times.

I put Chuchill's "We will never surrender" speech and it got copyright claimed xd

part2 will never come. Life is like that.

If the video had like 100k views in 3 months, I would have srarted making II part already. I hope you understand me. When I am bored enough and feel like doing all the hard work, I will make it. Just not now :/

We all know it won't come. Reality is cruel. Sad

Bilemiyorum, Altan....

Yea, I was thinking about cities and rivers but it was going to be verrry complicated.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 well other than that the video itself is very well made

I am still making the 2nd part, I am at year 1947 and I still dont know 😂.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 Can’t believe it’s that indecisive lol

@TheSwindler-3p1c The probably will end in 1950 god damn it.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 looking forward to it! I’m guessing this’ll be your longest one yet 👍

I hope too.

Yes, I will share upcoming projects. One is Switzerland vs Neighbours.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 alright

@@mushvigabbasov3951 bro

@@mushvigabbasov3951 bro

1 Googolplex years later I think

You dont know if the USSR lost in scenario, it is not done yet.

I will, some day...

I literally don't know who is gonna win the war.

I don´t know where it is but I know where my exams and social life are. I am sorry but it is not easy to make such videos. Look how detailed it is.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 I know I know

Probably when his channel has 1,000 subscribers

When Russia Surrender.

Never

Will be released this summer.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 Thanks you !!! Amazing!

@@mushvigabbasov3951 you're lying! Now Autumn!

Yes

@@mushvigabbasov3951 The following episode should have August Revolution in Vietnam and Republican Revolution in Germany

USA America joins war almost 7 months later than IRL and Japan stops war in China, at least, for a while. Japan´s attack on Pearl Harbor is successful in this timeline and they occupy Midway as well. Japans main doctrine is ´Strike South´ which is based on naval power. America had already way bigger industry than Japan or Germany at that time but the important question is that are they gonna be mobilize the industry faster and more efficiently. Spain IRL, Hitler refuses Spanish demands but in this timeline, Germany HAS to gather more allies around herself. That is why Hitler accepts to give Italy land in Savoy in exchange for Rhodes islands. Turkey also is an potential ally of Germany. Spain can also guard the coastline against an US invasion. Loss of Gibraltar is a HUGE loss for UK. Now they have to supply Egypt by travelling around Africa. Fall of Malta is also a super buff for AXIS aerial superiority in Africa. USSR Loss of Murmansk and Vladivostok cut supply from UK and USA. Now it will be much harder to supply Russia without destroying Japan or Germany, but Germany is also unable to push more forward into the Russian heartland because they have infrastructure issues. Also they have to help Spanish war effort.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 USSR can be still supplied over Iran which should most probably be occupied by USSR and British like irl. Also I bellieve that Allies can ressuply Soviets over port of Arhangelsk

@@mushvigabbasov3951 Also I dont think that Axis would be able to seize Murmansk and overall Kola peninsula. That area is literall Arctic tundra that has horrible weather and night lasts during majority of the year, it would be impossible for Axis or Fins to field blitzkrieg tactics trought area with no infrastructure at all. Only way Allies were able to ressuply Murmansk was because of the port and some railways and thats all they needed for supplying USSR HOWEVER Lend lease equipment from US only made up some 4-7% of USSR's war effort and it played just a minor role in all of that Also there is one important thing that you left out. Yugoslavia Yugoslav Partisans controlled considerable parts of Yugoslavia at different periods of time and the Axis were totaly unable to reduce their effectives(IRL they controlled 2/3s of Montenegro when Operation Barbarossa started and they even made several kind of states during all that like the Bihać Republic or the Užice Republic There were various rebel factions in Greece that gained lots of ground So I think that it would be in the interests of Allies to get Turkey on their side by promising gains of ethnic Turkish lands in Bulgaria so that British, Americans and Free French could launch offensives into Balkans and link up with all the rebelious factions there and form up another front against Axis

@@markorstb Arhangelsk is a possibility for sure but White Sea freezes during winter. Allies dont touch iran because turkey will be puahed towards axis. Americans supplied more than 400.000 trucks for the USSR during the war. We cannot say it is very small contribution. America irl did Asia First doctrine but in my timeline it is Europe First. Because UK and USSR are in true danger of capitulation. I have only problem about greece. They support allies but unable to join the faction.

@@mushvigabbasov3951 Dont you think that Soviets would be able to push the Japanese back at Far East? Japanese couldnt advance further from Vladivostok due to tundras. Still the Allies could supply the Soviet lend lease equipment trought other ports like Petropavlovsk at Kamchatka or Anadyr at the Bering Sea Another suggestion: Dont you think that Allies might try to appease the neutral Sweden? Swedish enigma code breakers irl helped Allies to reveal the location of infamous Bismarck while it was docked in Norway while they also helped by supplying info from broken codes to the Polish Armija Krajowa. Other than this more Swedes volluntered to the Allied cause irl(over 8.000 joined Norwegian resistance and Swedes helped to establish a exiled Norwegian military police of 15.000~ troops). So in this risky situation dont you think that Allies would try to organize a landing at port of Narvik and that way cut of the Swedish steel export to Germany(which irl sold around 40% of steel that Germans used for their military machinery)and so that Allies force Sweden to join Allies and trade with them instead, possibly forcing Finland to peace out and sign a separate peace with USSR and withdraw from Murmansk