Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Ww2 germany vs soviet union
 | 
Brazil Karl_Tanner 
1v1. No western front. No nothern africa, no lend lease. Who would win?
2019-09-04 15:05
Topics are hidden when running Sport mode.
#1
 | 
Armenia PANZERSHARK
Third Reich 16:0 Soviet ez
2019-09-04 15:06
9 replies
In this scenario 10/10
2019-09-04 15:54
actually its not Nazis vs Soviets its Nazis vs Winter and Winter is stronger
2019-09-04 17:27
6 replies
this
2019-09-04 17:41
1 reply
in fact maybe but the real reason is #86
2019-09-04 17:44
read bout how germans kept their defence in 1941 winter,they could win it ez in next year after first winter
2019-09-04 18:25
2 replies
but in fact they`ve lost the war, because of braindead Hittler. he just wanted asap conquer Soviets and he was ready to do it in any way
2019-09-04 18:46
1 reply
I`m tired to repeat. Just read #86
2019-09-04 18:52
#203
 | 
Denmark c0re_
+1
2019-09-04 21:01
+1
2019-09-05 16:24
Third Reich wins this one easily
2019-09-04 15:06
107 replies
#9
 | 
Norway N3sHie1k
russian winter > germany so suc of ok ?
2019-09-04 15:09
106 replies
Yes russian winter but not russian ppl
2019-09-04 15:16
105 replies
#93
 | 
United States Gabriel955
they started the invasion in may if russia didnt have the lend lease act aka american supplies the germans would have ran them over way faster, even with the shitty summer rain conditions.
2019-09-04 16:05
103 replies
stop saying "russia" all the time, it was ussr. Millions of Ukrainians and other nationalities who were occupied by moscvin communist regime were forced to fight for stalin and died. Without Ukraine, Bilorus and many other , moscovia alone would lose without any tiny doubt.
2019-09-04 16:13
30 replies
#97
 | 
United States Gabriel955
ok my bad USSR lmao
2019-09-04 16:15
29 replies
What`s funny?
2019-09-04 16:16
28 replies
#99
 | 
United States Gabriel955
that you got upset because i said russia but we all know what i meant. we call nazi germany, germany but thats not a problem even though they had countless nations fighting for them too.
2019-09-04 16:17
27 replies
Absolutely bad and inappropriate comparison, cynical and stupid
2019-09-04 16:23
23 replies
#103
 | 
Georgia Broozman
This is really sad, when everyone saying that Russia won WW2 and that they're forgeting about other 14 republics, cmon...
2019-09-04 16:22
12 replies
did they have a centralized government or were they controlled by the USSR?
2019-09-04 16:23
11 replies
they were occupied by moscvin communist regime
2019-09-04 16:24
10 replies
ok then how is it any different then poland austria czechoslovakia in nazi germany then?
2019-09-04 16:25
9 replies
They won the war, so their narrative prevails.
2019-09-04 17:26
6 replies
what lmao thats the most retarded thing ive ever heard. thats like saying "hey the romans beat the greeks so their history and facts are automatically correct" thats so fuckin dumb hahahah
2019-09-04 17:39
5 replies
I didn't say they were correct, you autist.
2019-09-04 17:41
4 replies
so their narrative prevails = so theyre right? or am i actually retarded.
2019-09-04 17:42
3 replies
It means they tell the story and, therefore, they're not as judged as the nazis were. In fact, the Soviets committed as many cruelties, if not more than the nazis.
2019-09-04 17:49
2 replies
oh yeah thats true, but... that has nothing to do with what we were talking about hahah
2019-09-04 17:47
Much much more
2019-09-04 17:48
at least the fact that there were tens of millions occupied "soviet" citizens more than Poles, Chechoslovakians and Austrians.
2019-09-04 17:34
1 reply
the amount of people doesnt change the facts
2019-09-04 17:37
lol no its not
2019-09-04 16:22
9 replies
you damn cynic and besides just ignorant. German allies fought on German side of their own free will unlike countries occupied by moscow.
2019-09-04 16:27
8 replies
why are trying to use big words without any explanation of them "nappropriate comparison, cynical and stupid, damn cynic and besides just ignorant."
2019-09-04 16:28
wtf lol no they didnt maybe austria did but all the other ones were conquered same with denmark belgium netherlands.
2019-09-04 16:29
4 replies
#200
 | 
Denmark flapdur
Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, Croatia and Finland all fought with Germany against the Soviets, At any time between 1941 and 1944 there were 500000-900000 allies fighting with the germans. Mazepa is right about that. Also some nazi/anticommunist volunteers from occupied countries, including at least 2000 danes, fought in german military units. They also raised anticommunist units from occupied areas within the Soviet Union. But all these allies, except the Finns, were of poor quality with inferior equipment, and were used in the "quiet" sectors.
2019-09-04 20:32
3 replies
im not saying hes wrong but he got mad because i said russia instead of ussr aka not ukrain lmao but he called nazi germany "germany" even tho nazi germany had all the countries you stated above fighting for it so its pretty much the same as calling the soviet union russia he was being a little hypocritical thats all.
2019-09-04 21:03
2 replies
#208
 | 
Denmark flapdur
Basically we all agree here, it´s just the details people disagree on. No biggie
2019-09-04 22:07
1 reply
ye true
2019-09-04 22:18
it might not be exactly the same but its not a bad comparison
2019-09-04 16:29
Sure,Checzslovakia definetly wanted to help the Germans after they took lands from them
2019-09-05 11:07
The USSR wasnt just Russia?
2019-09-04 20:16
2 replies
hello
2019-09-04 20:32
1 reply
lmao
2019-09-04 21:05
#100
 | 
Libya Pattapain
oh sweet americans, you help your best enemy urss <3
2019-09-04 16:20
7 replies
without the ussr europe would have been fucked your whole country was wrecked in like 6 months so... the blood of the USSR won WW2 along with the money of the US
2019-09-04 16:22
6 replies
#109
 | 
Libya Pattapain
with the weapons you sell to us. no money no weapons. and a german world be great too
2019-09-04 16:26
4 replies
lol jesus you think a world run by nazi's would be good?
2019-09-04 16:27
3 replies
#119
 | 
Libya Pattapain
they wanted to create united states of europe, based on american model, but you didn't want. europe is the biggest market and an europe weak means usa strong. USA are involved in every steps of the modern EU. And now all the europeans country fight each other for shitty things
2019-09-04 16:38
2 replies
yeah fuck the EU tbh but usa has a bigger GDP than all of europe combined rn so idk. EU has like 18.8 trillion USA is 19.39 trillion.also i dont think it was just us england and france wrote the treaties at the end of the war too made NATO as stuff
2019-09-04 16:52
1 reply
#121
 | 
Libya Pattapain
the english are always in the bad moves ! US gives so much money that we can't refuse their help.. but now we have many debts
2019-09-04 17:15
USA also smoked mid and took mid control with the north africa theatre, and stoped italy from sitting on cat and protecting A site. Also England and then USA left them money fucked and on save rounds late in the game, and lurked with fake pressure to make bad rotates away from stacked A site It was pretty well played team game, but russia did have to play trade game while the rest of the play developed, but that was also their call
2019-09-04 18:10
Some American names supported Hitler way more openly than the Soviets and our supplies did little to nothing in the outcome. It was the sacrifice of the Soviets and their will to win.
2019-09-04 17:33
61 replies
bro what! do you know what the lend lease act was we supplies their whole army after they got run over for like 400 miles too moscow
2019-09-04 17:35
56 replies
That's what we're told, it's meant to be true but that wasn't nearly like that. Yeah, we helped here and there, just like Ford was allowed to sponsor Hitler like his ole bud and while we were fooling around aside, they had a massive loss count and had some pressure on mind to come out as winners.
2019-09-04 17:40
55 replies
i know henry ford was a known nazi sympathizer so was FDR he turned back jews when they tried sailing here on a boat. but that doesnt change the fact that we sent millions of tons of materials to the soviets from 1943-1945.
2019-09-04 17:41
54 replies
Didn't say we were greedy bastards at all but we called ourselves victors, there had to be contribution. Just not on the same level as the Soviets, they basically did all the job and even if there wasn't any handy from us, they'd do it either way.
2019-09-04 17:44
51 replies
they would have lost without us VS the war would have taken longer if we didnt help them. so....
2019-09-04 17:45
50 replies
No, of course not. Soldiers haven't gotten any of what they were supposed to get, it was the wonder of men with will to survive, children and women were working like slaves for men who existed just to save the country, to be able to defend themselves against terror. It would perhaps take a little longer but our contribution was laughable, considering the role we took after it ended.
2019-09-04 17:47
49 replies
dont get me wrong either like the soviets paid the ultimate price to end the war but you dont win war with will to survive lmaoo maybe in the stories brother, you win with weapons amunition tanks artillery rail lines for supplies all things sent to the soviets by the USA.
2019-09-04 17:49
what do you mean role we took after
2019-09-04 17:50
46 replies
You overrate the word supply in this context, we were nice handymen, no denying but how much do you know about the Soviets during that time? They did so much in so little time, every living being was put in use, relatives come from there, you can tell when people lie, I'm sure you have no clue how it was there.
2019-09-04 17:52
41 replies
2019-09-04 17:55
my relatives are from Hungary so i know a good amount about the eastern front in WW2. they obviously put the manpower together but what would they have been able to produce without the materials from america their country was in shambles the soviets were a brave people tough people too but no one can win a war on will alone
2019-09-04 17:56
39 replies
Yes and that's where my doubt of your knowledge comes from, as I said, women and child were all working everyday to supply the front in all needs, we contributed as well. It was a reign of terror. But saying that they'd lose without us is a standup material, telling you.
2019-09-04 17:58
38 replies
lol so no weapons, ammunition, artillery,factory materials and army rations at all or the bare minimum they can produce for their army of 2 million and you think theyd win agaisnt the germans on a defensive retreat. women and children were working nice dude that means so much.
2019-09-04 18:01
36 replies
They did a major work, the major supply was coming from their own country. What supplies we were giving barely ever came to them, it disappeared midway as usual. And those tiny bits that they were receiving had little to no impact since they had to do everything themselves anyway. On a daily basis and not once beneath the full Moon.
2019-09-05 03:21
35 replies
what are you talking about they didnt have the material capacity to produce anything their whole western half aka the populated wealthy(kinda) half was in ruins the allies controlled the baltic sea and danish starights they shipped supplies right up through finland into the soviet union. little to no impact hahhaah. allowed them to keep fighting and win the war is what it did.
2019-09-05 15:49
34 replies
As I told you, it barely got where it was supposed to get, they had a lot of Major industrial spots elsewhere aside from Moscow and Stalingrad, they were more than capable of producing means on their own, exactly what they were doing while we kept bitching and wishing they'd lose.
2019-09-05 16:23
33 replies
you gotta be fake flagging
2019-09-05 16:25
32 replies
I gotta be valuing truth over blind patriotism, you mean, in that case, it gotta be true. Been good to know you but you know it's not so.
2019-09-05 16:26
29 replies
u damn liar or just mad
2019-09-05 16:28
here is truth u shameful liar youtube.com/watch?v=9IFmBQS8FDc&t=1s
2019-09-05 16:28
bro no youre actually doing exactly what youre saying im doing blind russian lover cause your family is from there saying women in children working in factories won the soviets ww2
2019-09-05 16:31
26 replies
Not saying that, I say it had a lot more impact than our supplies throughout all span of war.
2019-09-05 16:33
25 replies
delusional
2019-09-05 16:34
14 replies
Keep believing we're the greatest nation in the world and whatever place we step in turns into paradise, there are spots reserved for every American in heaven, I checked out, be assured.
2019-09-05 16:35
13 replies
i never said were the greatest nation or any of the shit you just said thats how i know youre are being weirdly bias and emotional im just saying we saved the eastern front in ww2
2019-09-05 16:43
12 replies
It's sad that you think so, because our assistance wasn't half as significant, if you had some insights and personal vocals from down there. If you only could, we're getting taught to think we contributed to every good in the world.
2019-09-05 16:44
11 replies
personal vocals from down there what tf does that mean hahah. i never said anything about "every good in the world" im talking about the lend lease act contributing the push the soviets needed to win the war faster than it would have taken
2019-09-05 16:56
10 replies
So now we came to the spot that it wasn't deadly necessary, this time around it's a sin not to agree with you. It cut across shortly, a lot of people saved but they'd have it done either way. Still we're in good.
2019-09-05 16:57
9 replies
its not a sin its just false that you think the lend lease act did nothing you just look dumb trying to be a rebel or some shit haahha
2019-09-05 17:03
4 replies
I'm not saying it did nothing, take care of your comprehension. I said all I had to, don't want to repeat myself.
2019-09-05 17:04
3 replies
And those tiny bits that they were receiving had little to no impact since they had to do everything themselves anyway. On a daily basis and not once beneath the full Moon.
2019-09-05 17:05
yeah ok buddy
2019-09-05 17:05
1 reply
It was an emotional reply in response to your claim that the Soviets would lose it without it.
2019-09-05 17:06
you say im trying to be a patriot but youre just doing the same thing but opposite tryna to be like extra anto american with 0 facts behind anything you s ay
2019-09-05 17:04
3 replies
Not everything can be proven with facts at any given time, life is not only the science. Sometimes it requires some common sense and the track of history, I don't mind US at all.
2019-09-05 17:05
2 replies
lol commone sense can usually be backed by facts
2019-09-05 17:09
1 reply
Yeah and I'm saying it's not always the case. Not everything has a direct proof to it.
2019-09-05 17:10
maybe from 1938-1941 when the major factories were still in tact
2019-09-05 16:35
9 replies
The major factories hadn't only been placed in the western part of USSR, what a wide grasp, they had just as much further East.
2019-09-05 16:36
8 replies
they took the baltic countries, ukraine east of the volga, southern russia and the caucasus regions, moscow metropolitan are, and almost the full remaining areas of european russia
2019-09-05 16:46
7 replies
They had Siberia untouched, pretty much Far East and North line.
2019-09-05 16:48
6 replies
yeah wow the almost wasteland part of the soviet union
2019-09-05 16:49
5 replies
You understimate the value of that region, milking those plains off for the needs of war is a matter of short time and Stalingrad wasn't lost completely.
2019-09-05 16:51
4 replies
268# you have to be a fake flag russian
2019-09-05 17:10
3 replies
This tongue wag has no place in my schedule. If you want to really talk about it, I'm gonna invite you to my Steam profile, otherwise I'm gonna lean back and erase my mind from this conversation, if you don't mind.
2019-09-05 17:11
2 replies
lol all good man
2019-09-05 17:12
1 reply
I don't want to leave like a hater or a constantly mad person. It's an itchy topic for some for a several reasons. If there's nothing else to be said, have a good one.
2019-09-05 17:13
or completely mad/brainwashed pro-moscvin leftie or just paid bot
2019-09-05 16:27
1 reply
+1
2019-09-05 16:31
Didn`t you forgert about it? youtube.com/watch?v=9IFmBQS8FDc&t=1s
2019-09-04 18:05
he is leftie... moscowlover
2019-09-04 17:54
2 replies
lol
2019-09-04 17:57
1 reply
proven so many times
2019-09-04 17:57
you are brainwashed by moscvin propaganda so hard
2019-09-04 17:56
all this pathos is pure buulshit cuz exactly those people made it possible for koba to turn into bloody maniac stalin
2019-09-04 17:52
War was lost by Germany in 1941 when they invaded USSR. They could not have done much better than what happened in reality. They had generals with brilliant tactical skills which helped them in early stages to achieve good kill ratio, but they were doomed from the beginning on the strategic layer. They just could not continue to wage war on the WW2 Eastern front scale for longer than 6 months. All their fuel was burned by then, best soldiers were in the grave, so after the initial sucker punch they went on a downward spiral, which was a logical outcome. As you have written, lend-lease started pouring in in meaningful volumes in 1943, so after the critical time for USSR was over. Lend-lease surely helped a lot ion the latter stages of the war, but its absence would have just prolonged the war for USSR. Just read statistics about war production of USSR and comparison of how much lend-lease was in percentage to that. Not trying to diminish its role, it helped a lot, especially allowing USSR to focus its production on other critical items. As for North Africa, the forces committed by Germany were not comparable to their Eastern Front armies in any way. Of course, without North African campaign, a few hundred thousand more men and some more fuel and materiel would have helped them a little, but that was not in any way game changing.
2019-09-04 23:05
1 reply
2019-09-05 11:27
did you know that up to 41 ur beloved ussr delivered to its "not officiall" ally 3d reich a huge pile of resources, provisions, and more? but then that`s what happend - #86 I could tell for hours how ussr won that war, thankfully to what war crimes etc, but in ur case it`s no sense
2019-09-04 17:40
3 replies
Your brainwashed opinion holds no relevancy here. Bandera worship lessons down the corridor.
2019-09-04 17:42
2 replies
clown
2019-09-05 11:27
it`s not "opinion" it`s Facts!
2019-09-05 11:27
#201
 | 
Denmark flapdur
You´re right. US supplies for England and Soviet Union were absolutely vital. Most important contribution was 500000 reliable US trucks to the Soviets - made them more mobile than the germans towards end of the War. Fun Fact: Soviets wouldnt admit to their population, that they received aid. They said USA (written on vehicles) what short for "Kill SOB Hitler" in russian letters, and they went to some lenght to not have allied vehichles in propaganda photos. Only 20-25% of german units were fully motorized - the reason why so many soviets escaped german encirclements in 1941and 1942 was that the walking german infantry took too long to tie the noose.
2019-09-04 20:47
1 reply
Walking German infantry inflicted loss after loss on Western allies before Germany lost their best men in the Eastern Front. I believe, casualty ratio in Western Europe in 1939-1940 was 11-1 in favor of Germans, and they were fighting 2 greatest world empires at the time (UK and France) with more than half of the world supplying and fighting for them.
2019-09-04 23:13
#94
 | 
United States Gabriel955
wrong person
2019-09-04 16:05
germany
2019-09-04 15:06
Germany probably. But also depends when the Russians would call quits. The vast landscape of Russia could stretch the supply lines very far.
2019-09-04 15:08
3 replies
They could hang on for a long time sure but with basically limitless supplies and millions of men. There's no way the red army could stand up to the wehrmacht.
2019-09-04 15:13
2 replies
No amount of supplies can win you a war if you can't get them to the front. Russians used the scorched earth strategy, which also included the demolition of railways and important roads. Although the government would fall with Moscow, the remaining Russians would probably continue fighting. If the majority of the Russian army died, the remainder would likely retreat to the Siberian region to carry out guerilla style attacks.
2019-09-04 15:18
1 reply
Did you not even read my comment? It would take a long time but they would lose eventually. Even if the Germans had to rebuild the entirety of the soviet union there's no way they could lose.
2019-09-04 15:19
Germany no question
2019-09-04 15:08
Russia can comeback any way Bcs country is too big
2019-09-04 15:08
11 replies
Axaxaxaxaxaxazaz
2019-09-04 15:09
siberia big? yes russia big? no
2019-09-04 15:36
8 replies
Siberia is Russia
2019-09-04 17:37
5 replies
China
2019-09-04 17:41
1 reply
noy even historically wtf
2019-09-04 18:00
and btw russia is moscovia who stole Ukraine` s name and history. u r moscvin that speak moscvin and live in moscovia
2019-09-04 17:42
2 replies
CoolStoryBob, i don't care about 3rd world
2019-09-04 18:00
1 reply
haha, swagger moscvin well well
2019-09-04 18:02
And where is Siberia?In Russia
2019-09-05 11:11
1 reply
in ice w/o any inhabitant
2019-09-05 13:34
Rush B cyka blyat ez win Kappa
2019-09-04 16:29
Germany.
2019-09-04 15:10
eaaaasy for germany, ruski no chance without help
2019-09-04 15:10
16 replies
Deutschland too strong back then
2019-09-04 15:14
"russia" is not ussr
2019-09-04 15:51
No way, they were pretty much alone with the outdated weaponry and still humilated you way back to Berlin.
2019-09-04 17:35
13 replies
Yeah they were pretty much alone apart from half the world...
2019-09-04 17:39
11 replies
Half of the world's contribution was so small that it's no sin calling Soviets are the only actors in that scene. And don't exaggerate, it wasn't even close.
2019-09-04 17:41
10 replies
Half the world on Germany's back tho on other fronts of the war.
2019-09-04 17:42
9 replies
With the pussying Britishmen? They got wrecked everywhere and still hesitated about the second front? They'd keep on sucking the thumb if it wasn't for Stalin.
2019-09-04 17:45
8 replies
You dumb, germany revolutionized warfare and was way above everyone else. They lost because they bit off more than they could chew.
2019-09-04 17:54
7 replies
Yeah and where I disagreed with that? Have some self control.
2019-09-04 17:55
5 replies
Are you actually brain damaged? I cant be bothered honestly, I hope this is bait.
2019-09-04 18:35
4 replies
So this is what I get for having some basic respect to you. Alright, expected.
2019-09-05 03:22
3 replies
Maybe acquire basic cognitive abilities before talking nonsense.
2019-09-05 11:28
2 replies
I'd apologize and do what you say had you not killed yourself in this conversation within a couple of posts. I hope you'll take over your anger.
2019-09-05 11:29
1 reply
Thanks for sharing.
2019-09-05 11:30
2019-09-04 17:56
without lendlease ussr would lose or would lost more few dozens of millions
2019-09-04 17:43
germany
2019-09-04 15:12
2 replies
nt mazepa
2019-09-04 15:41
1 reply
#92
 | 
Ukraine juerz
but its true
2019-09-04 16:03
#14
 | 
Poland humen))))
Russia would lose their army and create new peons who would be killed anyway
2019-09-04 15:14
If German soldiers get winter clothes and enough food and other equipment they will win easily
2019-09-04 15:14
22 replies
#18
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
Hahaha, stupid germans, they didn't even know what russian climate is and how to prepare their soldiers
2019-09-04 15:15
12 replies
True
2019-09-04 15:16
20million soviets soldier dead VS 5 million Germans bylat
2019-09-04 15:28
9 replies
#40
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
What it changes?
2019-09-04 15:29
8 replies
Russians no tactics. They just rush without smoke and flash to Germans
2019-09-04 15:29
2 replies
#43
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
ok
2019-09-04 15:30
1 reply
No fake no refrag. Just bad soldier. But u can't win if u are outnumbered 20 - 1 because u have to reload and we know that every silver can have lucky headshot
2019-09-04 15:31
heres the results i.imgur.com/57F6qEI.png
2019-09-04 15:37
4 replies
#67
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
we talk about the war not this, turn the brain on, man
2019-09-04 15:44
3 replies
u should, cant u see how russias population got affected by the war?
2019-09-04 15:45
2 replies
#72
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
please, read the topic again and think a bit
2019-09-04 15:46
#74
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
russias population is obviously affected by the war.
2019-09-04 15:46
Very True
2019-09-04 15:42
If you aren't baiting and really think so, I would highly recommend you (*getting a brain) reading something about the actual war, lmfao I suppose you’ve never actually heard of the whole “plan Barbarossa” thing, which was, you know, the actual invasion plan xdddd People thinking Germany lost because of the climate or anything like it don't know shit. It was a factor, a big one. But it’s not even close to the actual reason they lost.
2019-09-05 17:14
8 replies
You mean Victor Suvorov`s "Icebreaker" or what?
2019-09-05 17:17
7 replies
No, I don't mean that. It is an interesting book, though
2019-09-05 17:46
6 replies
And what do you mean then?
2019-09-05 17:47
5 replies
I mean that the germans never thought it would last long enough for it to be winter. Plan Barbarossa was for a swift, decisive attack and it failed. That’s the reason they crumbled in winter. Not that “the silly germans didn't know it’s cold in the east))))” as the lad above is implying
2019-09-05 17:57
4 replies
Yes, correct, but it`s very important to understand and remember #86
2019-09-05 18:05
3 replies
No it is not important whatsoever. There is absolutely no confirmation of that anywhere in the documents and, even if there is, we will not see any of those until Russia has a government that lives off something other than lies and “great memories of the past”. I don't believe in anything other than facts and facts are always something there is definitive proof of, hence I don't and won't believe in such things.
2019-09-05 19:44
2 replies
So did you read "Icebreaker" or you didn`t?
2019-09-05 21:34
1 reply
I did I still don't fully believe it and the book kinda sounds like fiction
2019-09-06 10:19
#17
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
Why the fuck these folks think these factors were actually crucial?
2019-09-04 15:14
19 replies
Because they were?
2019-09-04 15:16
1 reply
Yes, they were
2019-09-04 15:49
-Germany was fighting a two front war -Had shit allies in the forms of Italy (who was just useless) and Japan who didnt help at all and just focused on taking over territory in the Far East
2019-09-04 15:20
15 replies
#24
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
there was no fight in western front during 1941-1942 when nazis actually had a chance
2019-09-04 15:19
4 replies
What do you mean? The britis were bombing the hell out of Germany during this time.
2019-09-04 15:22
1 reply
#32
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
haha, the britis were bombed by Germany during this time.
2019-09-04 15:25
Well, having no front doesn't mean you don't need troops to keep your borders
2019-09-04 15:55
1 reply
#87
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
then read how many divisions were kept in other fronts
2019-09-04 15:57
#28
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
USSR didn't have actual allies who would really fight for them until the end of the war was decided
2019-09-04 15:20
4 replies
#34
 | 
Poland Xpi
1. Germany lost some equipment and TIME on the western front 2. They had to station a certain amount of Luftwaffe in France 3. No need to waste resources on fleet. Ergo: Just the pure presence of UK helped the USSR
2019-09-04 15:26
3 replies
#38
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
it's said that there's now western front in this game => Germans couldn't have used the resources of western countries occupied by them.
2019-09-04 15:29
1 reply
The most important resourse was oil and they didn't find any in the west. That's why they invaded the soviets in the first place.
2019-09-04 15:32
no blitzkreig no win for germany
2019-09-04 16:02
And how about Pearl Harbor? This was a major loss to USA, dont u think so?
2019-09-04 15:43
3 replies
That was probably the biggest mistake Japan decided to do. USA was neutral in WW2 and only sold supplies to Britain and allies and didn't want to join in until Japan decided to bomb Pearl Harbor. Then Germany decided to declare war on us soon after which was another big mistake Hitler decided to do besides invading Russia.
2019-09-04 15:48
2 replies
hitler was forced to make preventive blow cuz he knew stalin gonna start "free" Europe not later than August 41.
2019-09-04 15:57
Yeah for sure m8 . IT was very hard to battle at 2 fronts even to Germany Army
2019-09-04 21:51
do you understand that war will be equal if blitzkreig dont happen german attack our borders and destroy 90% of airplanes and a lot of tanks + they were too fast
2019-09-04 16:01
cause they wanna think that
2019-09-05 16:36
germany probs soviets equipment was poor af and so was their leaders' decision making
2019-09-04 15:20
#27
 | 
Turkey Fefalas
Germans already won the war at some point but they pushed too much and they were not ready for climate. They just needed hold crosshair and wait. But they push and lost to the eco-eenemy.
2019-09-04 15:20
Impossible to say - too many factors would have to be cleared up first. I'd favor the Germans, since they could have an army and airforce almost twice the size they did historically when starting Barbarossa without other fronts or wars - on the other hand, the Soviets would be more prepared, if they had not considered Germany somewhat occupied with the other theatres of war.
2019-09-04 15:25
3 replies
#36
 | 
Poland Xpi
Stalin knew that Hitler is preparing for war but even when the Germans attacked he did not believe it
2019-09-04 15:27
2 replies
As I said - Stalin thought the Germans wouldn't risk a multi front war - if there were no other fronts, he would have been much more cautious.
2019-09-04 15:29
stalin prepared to "free" Europe. hitler knew it and was forced to make preventive blow.
2019-09-04 15:53
Germany likely could conquer the European part of Russia which has the most people,industry etc but they couldnt conquer the other 2/3 of the country unless Russia gives up completely(and that probably wouldnt happen)
2019-09-04 15:24
#33
 | 
Ukraine ksay
germany probably
2019-09-04 15:25
depends, who is attacking? Germany have better infrastructure and technology but they wouldn't perform well on the harsh conditions of ussr and poorer infrastructure.
2019-09-04 15:26
Russia lost 20million soldier and Germany only 5 million. With all resources and without allies Ez4Germany.
2019-09-04 15:29
20 replies
#47
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
USSR lost 9 to 11 million soldiers, all other is innocent civilians killed by germans.
2019-09-04 15:33
3 replies
Who was coach and igl of Russia? They had noob tacic. Imagine IGL tells u to just run straight to the enemy line no stop full blyat
2019-09-04 15:34
2 replies
Coach Stalin play a lot Death Matches and like eco rounds First rounds USSR play without kevlar and with 1 rifle to team
2019-09-04 15:40
Who was coach and igl of France and UK who lost miserably in 1939-1940 when the deck was stacked in their favor (1-11 casualty rate against Germans in that period)? As for USA, they were fighting outside of their territory the whole war, and it took them a while before they started scoring victories. They lost badly to Germans in their initial fights. No wonder USSR didn't fare well initially, but managed to make a great comeback - while France capitulated after only 6 weeks of the Battle of France. Don't forget French army at that time had more men and better tanks than Germans and they had BEF and RAF fighting for them as well). After initial setbacks, USSR scored great victories against best German units. Western allies struggled after they opened second front even with overwhelming numbers, complete air superiority, massive advantages in artillery, tanks and about everything else against sub-par German units.
2019-09-04 23:35
not "russia" but ussr, don`t be dumb
2019-09-04 15:50
15 replies
In Germany everyone says Russia. U also never mention Romanians, Hungarians etc.
2019-09-04 15:52
14 replies
I don`t care how they say in germany. Ukraine, Bilorus and many other countires were occupied by moscvin communist regime.
2019-09-04 15:54
13 replies
Yeah that's why we say Russia because they were the enemy not occupied regions
2019-09-04 15:56
8 replies
Ok, but occupied territories were forced to fight on ussr side... soviet criminal commanders brought hundreds of thousands Ukrainians and other nationalities in attack just like cannon fodder
2019-09-04 16:00
7 replies
Show me at least 1 NOT Ukrainian source Xd
2019-09-04 17:46
6 replies
you are nobody to demand something
2019-09-04 17:49
5 replies
fucking liar tho
2019-09-04 18:04
4 replies
he is right btw Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and etc. All these countries were involved in the conflict. So if u say Soviet Union = Russia, than u must be o iq putin supporter.
2019-09-04 19:02
3 replies
these is republics of ussr ofc they wss involved. Germany starts war against USSR (all republics) not only RSFSR I mean he is lying about occupation. All leaders of these countries made a declaration about uniting in USSR in 1922
2019-09-04 19:32
2 replies
That was forced, that was result of terror, mass murders and opression etc. you are disgusting liar like average so called "russian" (moscvin) who live in complete fakes created already for 350 years by moscvin propagandists.. You know nothing true not only about Ukraine but even about ur own "russia"(moscovia)
2019-09-04 20:13
1 reply
So u live in Independent country and know all truth
2019-09-05 10:37
just have to ask this, were your ancestors happy about living in communist regime or were they supporting a superpower like third reich?
2019-09-05 17:09
3 replies
Half fought for Ukraine`s independence in UPA against germans, soviets and army kraowa. Half was forced to fight for damn soviets.
2019-09-05 17:12
2 replies
hmm, thanks for reply man.Respect ukraine happy for ya that there is no more a soviet union
2019-09-05 17:17
1 reply
Thank you man!
2019-09-05 17:17
#44
NiKo | 
Germany DeSaar
Germany will win
2019-09-04 15:30
Winter in Russia wins.
2019-09-04 15:34
8 replies
#50
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
here we go again...
2019-09-04 15:35
3 replies
What?
2019-09-04 15:37
1 reply
#55
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
2019-09-04 15:38
So u agreed with me???? Men starving frostbite lack of supplies etc etc.
2019-09-04 15:39
Winter wasn't the only reason and I hate this meme.
2019-09-04 15:35
3 replies
What? Wasn’t a meme. The winter kicked the shit out of the German forces.
2019-09-04 15:38
2 replies
Ure talking about winter like it has only affected germans
2019-09-04 15:46
1 reply
Well yea it effects everyone and all the equipment but the Russians understood home soil better
2019-09-04 15:52
#57
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
USSR won not because of winter, lend-lease or other shit They won because the population was made brainwashed and slaves by Stalin during 30s, pretty much like Germans by Hitler, but USSR would win because of more population and vast hard to conquer territory.
2019-09-04 15:38
3 replies
#59
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
When you say no western front you probably mean no occupied countries in the east, no allies on german side like finland or romania etc. Nazi Germany in 1939.9.1 borders wasn't able to conquer USSR
2019-09-04 15:39
I understand all that and not saying they would only win because of the winter. I’m just saying the climate has a huge part especially if u don’t equip ur men for it
2019-09-04 15:41
1 reply
#69
 | 
Ukraine alexo22
That's just a part of the art of war, you need to know your conditions. it's nazi's fault they thought ussr could be conquered in 3 months.
2019-09-04 15:45
tbh, if stalin knew hitler would attack, and wouldn't be caught by surprise, i think USSR could win alone, they had a better industrial capacity and 2x the manpower of germany
2019-09-04 15:40
theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/easter.. in WW2 9 ot of 10 Germans were killed on the Eastern Front. Just sayin'. Not the way we expected after playing all those games, huh?..
2019-09-04 15:43
#70
 | 
Poland aiken
Sounds like Terran vs Zerg.
2019-09-04 15:45
#82
 | 
Kazakhstan Tripper^^
Soviets
2019-09-04 15:54
Russia hur duh hur duhhh did you see how the real war went?
2019-09-04 15:59
1 reply
ussr, not "russia". And what is that you wrote there?
2019-09-04 16:30
Since USSR barely won with all those factors I'd say Germany definitely
2019-09-04 16:08
2 replies
+1111
2019-09-05 16:26
so close brother +1
2019-09-05 17:10
#105
 | 
Libya Pattapain
in russia there is a jew state so I don't think germany would win this war
2019-09-04 16:22
#107
 | 
Brazil Nickzim
That depends. If the USA couldn't provide suplies to the USSR then the Third Reich would beat them easily.
2019-09-04 16:25
Nobody wins the war, everyone loses
2019-09-04 16:25
If there is trade outside and no battle of britain, germany. If attacked in 1939-1940, soviet union, if 1941-1942 60/40 for germany, if attacked later, soviet union... rly depends on a lot of things. like if germany had hungary, italy, finland, romania and bulgaria, in that scenario germany.
2019-09-04 17:18
#123
 | 
Europe zeroflo
i have to say third reich
2019-09-04 17:19
If dumbass Hitler's dumbass strategic plans remain the same(it will btw), it's ez for Soviet Union. That fool tried to move on when it's winter and German soldiers didn't have equipment for cold weather. So 2 Million extra soldier only means extra dead soldier.
2019-09-04 17:19
1 reply
2019-09-04 17:24
USSR, pretty easy. Way too huge and actually honorable people who'd defend, not attack.
2019-09-04 17:37
USSR almost won it alone, only then allies joined...
2019-09-04 18:06
4 replies
germany and uusr started ww2. then ussr was 2 years not ofiicial Germany`s ally while supply it with a lot of resources, provision and more. Later hitler learned stalin gonna start "free" Europe not later August 41 and was force to make preventive blow. now answer urself - why anti-hitler coalition would start help ussr from the beggining? you like average "russian"( moscovin) live in complete fakes of moscvin propaganda, lies around you everywhere in everything.
2019-09-04 18:17
3 replies
Do you seriously think I'm gonna read anything from you? xD
2019-09-04 18:18
2 replies
I don`t care it will not change essence
2019-09-04 19:29
1 reply
Don't need to answer me with your bullshit then.
2019-09-04 19:31
Germany probably, when they can import oil and everything its easy.
2019-09-04 18:39
Ez4germany. Soviets had retarded tactics
2019-09-04 19:05
Story of 1 German Tiger tank beating 50 Russian T34 tanks at the battle of Kursk! youtu.be/tMDWWFKQgLQ Many other interesting stories on that channel.
2019-09-04 20:59
russia would eat germany tbh German army: Some turks with german passport not even coming to the fight
2019-09-04 22:04
4 replies
USSR is not only Russia.
2019-09-04 22:16
3 replies
ye im talking about 2019
2019-09-04 22:18
2 replies
My post clearly says ww2
2019-09-05 14:38
1 reply
yes but idc what u wrote
2019-09-05 14:49
if it was solely 1v1, germany wins ez. far superior tech and tactics
2019-09-05 16:25
#248
Dosia | 
Russia Rapu
Allies went into battle only when it became clear who wins. So the answer is obvious: we would have won without their help.
2019-09-05 16:36
USSR men outnumbered nazis for sure but the technology nazis had could destroy the ussr easily
2019-09-05 16:53
#278
 | 
Sweden Trkmag
Soviet
2019-09-05 17:16
Soviets for sure, but with more casualties.
2019-09-05 17:16
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.
Now playing
Thumbnail for stream
Argentina
Luken
1906 viewers
Top streams
All(12)
Casters(6)
Streamers(5)
Organizers(1)
Argentina
Luken
(1906)
Brazil
felps
(1381)
Brazil
mch
(1318)
Brazil
hen1
(1310)
Portugal
zorlaK
(911)
Brazil
Jogando Junto
(246)
United Kingdom
ESL TV
(228)
Brazil
danoco
(223)
Argentina
nikoz
(187)
Argentina
bichop
(108)
Canada
JKranny
(35)
Argentina
NikoM
(33)