This post gives an overview of various PoDs that might help Nazi Germany win the war. Including their necessary conditions, how they'll influence the war, and how high I guesstimate the probability that they're going to happen.
If I have to heap coincidence and dumb luck for this, I don't mind. Not even if I literally arrive at a chance of one in a million. Not because we are on Discworld, it's the principle of the thing. And admit it: It's somehow very calming to know that Adolf Nazi's chances to win are that low.
Also consider: The shorter the allowed window of opportunity, the smaller the probability of this event happening.
Note: Two independent 50/50 chances usually make a chance of 25%. Rolling eight sixes in a row'd have a chance of less than one in a million. (I'd liked it better if it had been six or seven times.) But if the chances are dependent, things look different. If e.g. Canaris' machinations are discovered, the chances for Spain entering the war grow (because Franco had been misinformed by the Abwehr). Also, Heydrich might survive. And the attack on Crete'd go different if the Nazis knew that British troops there were three times stronger than what Canaris had claimed. And if the BEF was defeated at Dunkirk, practically the whole war changes for Britain, since they'll lack experienced troops now - especially to raise and train more troops!
Only allowed percentages: <1, 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, 70, 80, 90, 95, 98, 99, >99.
Oh, and every PoD has to happen in May 1940 or afterwards - with the "Sickle cut", Adolf Nazi already got veeery lucky, it'd be very hard to top that.
-CUT-
Related to the '
Alternate Nazi personnel' column, here's perhaps the impactful potential POD which could've changed up the Nazis' roster IMHO, which ironically was only averted IOTL because of Hitler managing to roll the equivalent of at least two sixes in a row:
WI: Bürgerbräukeller Bomb exploded 30 minutes earlier?
It did come before May 1940 though, and I guess 'Adolf Nazi' would've been killed in the process (to most likely be replaced by Hermann Nazi instead), so fair enough.
For
Alternate Axis members:, not sure if it's PC to bring it up right now given current ongoing events, but what about Ukraine? A week after the start of Operation Barbarossa, the OUN-B (which had already stated its immediate goal, at the time of the German invasion of the Soviet Union, was to re-establish a united, independent, Nazi-aligned, mono-ethnic Nation state in a territory that also included parts of modern-day Russia, Poland, and Belarus) proclaimed the establishment of an independent Ukrainian State in Lviv, with Yaroslav Stetsko as premier, on 30 June 1941 in occupied Lviv, while the region was under the control of Nazi Germany, pledging loyalty to Adolf Hitler. The Nazis' response though, having been taken completely by surprise, was to choose to interpret it as an attempted coup, even after Nazi troops entered Lviv to a hero's welcome, with the German authorities telling the leadership of the Ukrainian government to disband, and the leaders of the government, including President Yaroslav Stetsko and Stepan Bandera being arrested and interned in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp. IOTL, Stetsko and Stepan Bandera were only released by the German authorities in Sept 1944 in the hope that they would rouse the native populace to fight the advancing Soviet Army (allowed to set up headquarters in Berlin, with the remnants of the OUN-B and the UIA supplied by the Luftwaffe with airdrops of arms and equipment, as well as some OUN-B leaders accompanied by assigned German personnel and agents trained to conduct terrorist and intelligence activities behind Soviet lines until early 1945)- by which stage, it was way too late.
And with
Erich Koch having been placed in charge, the more moderate, but equally supportive, OUN-M had also been swiftly and brutally cracked down upon growing strength by the Gestapo, in spite of elements within the Wehrmacht trying in vain to protect OUN-M and its members; with
Koch's leadership and tyrannical administration rapidly eliminating any chances of tapping into that early Ukrainian popular pro-Nazi collaborationist sentiment to any meaningful extent. When he spoke to the commanding generals of the German Army Groups in the summer of 1942, Adolf Hitler stated that:
"Were it not for the psychological effect, I would go as far as I could; I would say, "Let's set up a fully independent Ukraine." I would say it without blinking and then not do it anyway. That I could do as a politician, but (since I must say it publicly) I can't tell every German soldier just as publicly: "It isn't true; what I've just said is only tactics." But with Hitler having already acknowledged Ukraine's OUM as "a faithful German auxiliary" in the invasion of Poland, what if Hitler had decided that the advantage of setting up a fully independent (insomuch as Vichy France and Quisling Norway could be said to have been full independent) Ukrainian puppet state governed by the OUM would outweigh the negative psychological effect he (almost certainly mistakenly) believed it'd have on his troops, and elected to support it (since it would be "only tactics", so as to have a ready supply of far more expendable Ukrainian Slavs to die in the meat grinder on the Eastern Front killing the Russian Communist Slavs for him, reducing the loss of life to, and creating more Lebensraum for, his Aryan German master race, as well as ensuring they'd have an easier time of it extracting Ukraine's resources- with every intention of simply having its leaders rounded up and executed on trumped-up charges, revoking its nominal 'independence', and merging its territories into the Greater German Reich anyway, as soon as Operation Barbarossa had been won)?
The same could also be true of Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia; couldn't they all have potentially been Alternate Axis Members, if Adolf Nazi had decided to support their proclamations of independence after 'liberating' them from the Soviets, and installed Nazi collaborationist puppet regimes there, simply repeating the same tried-and-tested divide-and-conquer M.O. which he'd already used with great effect in Czechoslovakia (with the Slovaks being equally 'untermensch' Slavs, but with Hitler having supported the First Slovak Republic's declaration of independence, admittance as a member of the Axis powers, and participation in the Nazis' campaigns against Poland, the Soviet Union and the Holocaust IOTL- and having almost certainly intended to revoke its independence and annex it to the Greater German Reich at his leisure after having won the war)? And if Adolf Nazi had done so, how much easier would it have made Operation Barbarossa, and how much likelier would he have been to "win the war"?
And another big possibility worth mentioning, to be added to the
Alternate Nazi tech column: Nazi thermobarics. Significantly less unlikely, less technically challenging and way less expensive than the 'Nazi nuke', given that the first test with a 60kg thermobaric bomb was purportedly carried out in 1943 after it was developed within in the space of just a few months as little more than a side project at Mario Zippermayer's secret 'Hochtal' weapons research facility in Salzberg, with the Nazis only attempting to build upon this to develop and produce larger bombs with liquid oxygen at the very end of the war, and then only in the Hexenkessel (Witch's Cauldron) Project to provide a high-yield warhead for a surface-to-air missile against enemy bombers. Even in its original demonstration form (whereby coal dust was launched in a grenade, and dispersed by an explosive charge, greatly increasing their yield and effectiveness, in a reliable, low-tech and low-cost manner which easily allowed for mass-production), Zippermayer's tech could've easily played a key role for the Nazis- just imagine every platoon of Nazi soldiers being equipped with thermobaric grenades to use in all of their critical sieges in Operation Barbarossa, for example. I'd rate OTL, where the Nazis never actually used any of the thermobaric weapons that they'd developed in WW2 beyond testing, as easily a 'improbable'/negligible outcome, giving it a score/chance of <1 or 1 at most. And the chances of thermobaric weapons (which built upon the 'Brand Granate' incendiary shells that'd been developed and used by Germany back during WW1) actually being produced and utilized by the Nazis in WW2 instead, should at least count as a 99 probability-wise IMHO.