Comparing WW2 Militaries

I’m bored, and in the mood. I will be comparing the militaries of the 8 major powers in WW2. This is nothing scientific and I’m not actually making a research paper, this is all for fun.

I will be using 4 different elements:

Land Military effectiveness and power

Air/Naval Forces effectiveness and power (these tend to be tied together)

Economy and Industry (Logistics will be lumped in here too)

Leadership and Organization (Intelligence can be thrown in here too)

The ranking will be from 1-5 uh… tanks for each one.

Our countries:

German Reich

United Kingdom (along with Commonwealth)

Third Republic of France, Vichy and Free France

Kingdom of Italy and Italian Social Republic

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

United States of America

Empire of Japan

The Chinese United Front (I’m gonna lump them together)

We go one by one and look at each factor, then eventually rank them 8-1

First: German Reich.

Land Military: Where do we start? This land force conquered nearly all of Europe, its soldiers were very well trained and equipped with advanced weaponry, at least until the Endsieg. It numbered around 5 million men at its height. German land vehicles, while often too expensive and low in number, where very high quality and effective when used as intended. While there were some issues brought on by other elements, it did its job extremely well and took over a vast portion of Europe. 5 Tanks.

Air & Naval forces: A little bit less impressive. The German navy had some good ships, but they were outclassed by Western nations and relatively easily defeated by them. Their submarines and that form of warfare was powerful, but it never compared to the allied navy and didn’t damage their logistics enough to really have enough of an effect. The Luftwaffe is more interesting. In the early part of the war, it was extremely effective, the bane of The allied powers and inflicting significant damage on the Reich’s enemies. Their planes were very advanced and German pilots were well trained and accomplished astonishing things against their enemies. However the Soviet and Allied Air Forces managed to overpower and bring it down in the later section of the war. I will give this element 3.5 Tanks.

Economy and Industry: This is possibly the most important of the elements. Is Germany as amazing of an economy as it is a military? Ha! No. The German economy, while large, was still out produced easily by all major powers it was facing for most of the war, Britain being the only exception. German logistics were surprisingly primitive, relying on horse drawn carriages for supplies. They were going to use Rhine river barges if Sea-lion ever came to shove. This was the weakest point of the German War effort, they relied on Holocaust slave labor for 25% of their GDP in later years and everyone knows about their oil and manpower issues. I can only give Germany 3 Tanks for this, unfortunately.

Leadership and Organization: Germany has a very talented and well trained officer class. Generals were experienced and brought the best strategies, tactics and doctrine that Germany had to offer. The problem here does not lie with your average officer, but rather the top. Yes, good old Shitler and his top generals. Hitler has basically complete command over his military. If you wanted power, you’d go through him. Any one he favored would gain more control and could bring down rivals. This led to a weird game at the top ranks of the Reich’s military where everyone tried to gain his favor, and people who didn’t, such as Rommel would be screwed. Along with this Hitler and his generals made dumb mistakes. Some of these were from Hitler, such as launching the battle of the bulge, while others, such as Operation Citadel were caused by his generals. Blunders such as these usually got worse as the war dragged on. Because of this weakness, I will have to award Germany only 4 tanks here.

Next Faction: the United Kingdom and Commonwealth

Land Military: This was not the main focus of the British military, but where they did fight, they generally did well enough. The Africa campaign and fights in France show decent competence from the Brits, and their Soldiers were well trained. British tanks weren’t the best (something tells me someone is gonna go after me for saying that) but they did their job well enough. That’s how I’d describe the whole British and commonwealth armies. They weren’t the main focus of the empire, that was air and sea. Their numbers just weren’t high enough, and it’s very likely major operations such as D-day, which Commonwealth forces preformed greatly I might add, wouldn’t have been possible without US manpower. While Commonwealth land forces

were great, they just weren’t focused on as much and quite that special. They get 3.5 Tanks.

Air and Naval Forces: Now we are talking! The Royal navy needs no introduction, starting as the largest and most powerful fleet on earth during the war and remaining a highly potent force! Their ships were stellar, and they succeeded in the vast majority of their goals. The Air Force is also excellent, with planes such as the Spitfire being some of the best in the world, they single handedly managed to even defeated the Germans in the Battle of Britain. Still, defeats in air and sea against the Axis in France, Norway, Malaysia and Singapore does weigh the Commonwealth down a little, and the very overstretched placement of all these forces around the world caused issues. The Commonwealth will receive 4.5 Tanks.

Economy and Industry: Much like the Army, it did its job. Britain was able to produce enough to survive against the Germans, and make any landings impossible. Sometimes British industry even managed to slightly outproduce Germany. Still, one can’t forget how much support the US gave here. While Britain probably wouldn’t have lost without it, all that money, ships and other support given significantly helped to further the British war effort. I will give the Commonwealth 3.5 Tanks here.

Leadership and Organization: The Commonwealth had pretty good of everything here. British Generals weren’t godlike geniuses, but they tended to be smart and could be relied on to succeed against the Germans when needed. Churchill is a bit overrated in my opinion as many of his bad decisions such as India are understated while his role in preventing a British surrender is a bit overrated. Still, the Commonwealth command structure was good, officers led better and better as the war went on, and British intelligence was possibly the best in the war. I believe they comfortably earn themselves 4 tanks.

Next is France and its later states.

Land Forces: Early in the war, French tech was some of the best. Their tanks were snatched by the Germans and used to great effectiveness in many campaigns. The average soldier was not a coward by any means. Of course though, they did lose. But Free French Forces after show great skill in the places they did fight. Algerian and Moroccan Free forces straight up won Monte Cassino for the allies, and Free French forces fought like hell in their country when liberating it from the Nazis. The Vichy French also fought relatively well, with French forces actually holding the Reichstag to the last man. French tech was pretty good for its time, and while the defeat does way heavily, later fighting allows me to give the French a solid 3.5 Tanks.

Naval and Air Forces. Less impressive. The French navy was strong, but the land defeat led to its most major contribution being its destruction by the British in Algeria. The Air Force was rather advanced, but it didn’t accomplish very much and was outmatched even early on by the RAF or Luftwaffe. There actually isn’t too much to say here, 2 Tanks.

Economy and Industry: Thanks to resources from its colonies and thriving industry it could have been said to be pretty good, but it was still outmatched by the Germans. Low population growth and the government being kinda broke also made them worse than the Germans. And of course the defeat by Germany losing Free France any real industry kinda sucked for them. Other than whatever the allies decided to give them, or that they could capture and maybe build in a small amount of African factories, they didn’t have much. Vichy France didn’t fare much better; most of their resources were stolen by the Germans. Because of all this, France only gets allotted 2 Tanks.

Leadership and Organization: TERRIBLE! No use of radios and a strict top-down command structure was very ineffective. Their leaders made terrible decisions that lost France the war. Only competent generals like De Gaulle provide any recompense for this element, 1.5 Tanks.


CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

22 Replies

How tf does Japan get a solid THREE tanks for leadership? 3 tanks would imply that they actually knew what things such as "morals" and "ethics" are. Clearly they don't as shown by their behavior at Nanking, Mukden (unit 731 goes brrr on chinese civilians), habit of killing/eating/r4ping prisoners of war and civilians, and being so degenerate that no country in Asia is untouched by their sins. Killing over 8 million Chinese instead of idk japanezing them to obtain support from within the country they're fighting does not seem like a good decison. I would give 1 tank for allowing and sometimes encouraging all the r4pe, massecering, cannibalism, killing of POWS, and creating death camps. The entire Japanese military is also one of the worst behaved armies in existence, with them r4ping, killing, destroying, pillaging, and burning everything that they see when invading other countries. This type of performance does not deserve anything higher than a 2 tanks rating.

Being a patriot is not something I should be ashamed of.

Huh… I think it was pretty clear that I meant military competence, as in ability to win battles? If warcrimes made a military worse then the US would not be a functional military…

Japan had competent generals, experienced soldiers and managed to inflict crushing defeats on the far larger Chinese and American militaries. Sure, they were pieces of shit who committed genocide, but so were the Germans and they got a higher rating that you didn’t even mention… Morals and ethics does not factor into how competent a military command is when it comes to winning wars, which Japan did well to an extent. Like what’s next, the Mongols were weak as well? Hell, China did some shady stuff in Korea, does that make them incompetent? No! They still won battles! That’s all that matters here, I’m not ranking best countries but best militaries solely from a military standpoint. If I went that personal then Fr*nce and the Bri’ish would not have gotten so lucky.

It is dumbfounding, where did I mention that I would count an army’s behavior towards civilians? Sure, Japan and Germany would get literally 0 in that case, but that has nothing to do with this! I actually gave them such a low rating like 3 because of that brutal fanaticism that led them to make reckless actions, they would have gotten a higher rating had they not been maniacs anyway… what’s the point?


CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Discussions
Quick Launch