not sure whether you are arguing for the strategy pursued by the KM and that it was undone by number and composition of fleet? or that the strategy was flawed from the beginning?Paul Lakowski wrote:Coastal defense strategy was a non starter from the beginning ...
During 'war-time' coastal defense fleet could be mass produced as could a U-boat fleet , but heavy cruiser to be of any use had to be finished [ or at least started ] before any even war began . There fore maximum effort had to go into as many surface raiders as possible.
The Pocket Battleship design was a recognition of the fact that if allied convoys were to be escorted by trade protection cruisers, then the minimum surface raider to attack such convoys had to defeat such cruisers with ease.
or simply that it was (in either case) superior to a coastal defense fleet?