Profile of Zyllen

I don't disagree that the arming of UK was recognised as a de facto involvement in the war. But that isn't what I'm talking about; what I'm talking about is planning that should have happened long before the war started. The problem that Germany faced was cutting Britain off from its global network of supplies, which would necessarily require unrestricted warfare. This means deciding to sink American and other ships quite regardless of whether they are sympathetic to Britain. Submarine war did not start after Lend-Lease etc.; they were deployed by the BDU with sealed orders before the war began.

You're asking me to accept that Germany would have been able to kill US non-combatant citizens, and destroy US shipping, which is a strategic capacity, and reasonably expect that the US would do nothing about it. That's absurd.

The answer is yes, The Americans are a zealous people when it comes to defending their country but even they would recognize that sending ships filled with ammunition ,that you know is going to be used against the Germans, is going to provoke the Germans in attacking your ships. The war between Germany and the USA started only because of pearl harbour. At that point several thousand usa sailors met their death in the cold waters of the north sea.

But even so unrestricted submarine warfare wasn't the only option. They could have easily go for aerial supremacy and bomb the ports and industry or mine the ports. And if my focus was the British i would send the whermacht to north Africa. if they could capture the Egypt and Morocco the British empire would be cut in half while while having access to the oil of saudi araby.

And do not forget that British empire in 1941-2 was facing a 2 front war with the Japanese attacking their colonies.

"On 1 February 1917, Germany began unrestricted submarine warfare against all ships in the Atlantic bearing the American flag, both passenger and merchant ships. Two ships were sunk in February, and most American shipping companies held their ships in port. Besides the highly provocative war proposal to Mexico, the telegram also mentioned "ruthless employment of our submarines." Public opinion demanded action. Wilson had previously refused to assign US Navy crews and guns to the merchant ships. However, once the Zimmermann note was public, Wilson called for arming the merchant ships, but antiwar elements in the United States Senate blocked his proposal."

I would also suggest you read that part. their was a very strong antiwar movement in the america's during both world wars.

I'm afraid you're not grasping the salient point. Germany can have as much industry as it likes, but without the raw materials to put through those industries, it's pretty much helpless.
.

Correct but at the same time you are over blowing the situation by a rather huge margin. Germany still managed to wage war against the soviet union for 4 whole years. So raw resources where not the immediate problem and they could definitely could have sustained a war against Britain for a few years. Also keep in mind that in the absence of war against the soviet union the german/soviet trade pact would have in all likelihood continued.

Remember that Hitler invaded the soviet union because he wanted Germany to be resource autonomous.
He would be better of however if he just neutralised the British and opening the trade routes again

Well, the U-boat campaign certainly could have brought the UK to it's knees, in theory. But they didn't have enough U-boats at the start of the war either. As for planes, well, I dunno about specifically Nazi incompetence; aircraft production climbed through-out the war too.

Increasing production to "several times" that of the UK? Seems unlikely to me.

At this point Germany controlled the bulk of the industrial assets of Europe. and Germany alone already had a higher industrial base then great Britain. Not to mention germany had a much shorter supply chain i that was not nearly as vulnerable.

have ever played command and conquer? the British vs Germany situation would be like this: they both have their bases next to one another but Germany has 8 barracks continually pumping out troops while the brits have only 2. the brits do have 10 other barracks spread out across the map. who is going to win?

Germans of course because of concentration of power.

Its the same reaspn why the Japanese gave British such an ass kicking

Even if Hitler had succeeded in beating RAF and launching an invasion of UK, I am sure that the Brits would have turned the Island into a Meat Grinder. It is completely different thing to beat the French, the Norwegians or the Belgians and occupy their country, than to conquer the Brits. Whatever they say, they are not so civilized or nice when it comes to warfare.

They would probably have killed every single German soldier who set their foot on British soil.

What makes you think that? the British inland is not particularly well suited for defence. the British morale was already low after france and the repeated attacks of the luftwaffe. the britisch army had taken a beating after dunkirk. If the Germans successfully managed to cross the channel they we would be the first in thousand years to do so. it would have been bone shattering blow to morale as a whole.

Except for time of arrival and having a turret (being able to get behind AND shoot)

how is this an advantage compared to the su76 that can fully use its 60 range and is a lot more safer to use?

smoke, a good vet ability, actually GREAT vet ability that can be used to do everything from stun to wipe retreating squads

I still consider additional range penetration and free arty barrages a way better deal.

...also not in the same late game tier as a REAL (relative to the unit) tank destroyer.

It doesn't matter what you think. If its a LV hunter its badly overpriced with 2 222 or aec doing a way better job in pure cost efficiency. if its a medium tank hunter it simply has to little penetration. and i dont want a buff that will put it on par with other TD's because it does come earlier but i do expect it to be able to penetrate most medium tanks 66% of the time and not 40 % of the time it does now.