|
|
Post by admiralhood on Dec 29, 2018 21:51:52 GMT -6
Most offensive minelaying in WW 2 was anti-commerce in nature. I'm having a hard time thinking of any capital ship from any nation that was lost to mines. Cruisers and destroyers (and smaller), sure. But I think most navies were able to manage the risk to capital ships. Thus, my own (unofficial) opinion is that most minelaying can be abstracted. As best I understand it, by WW2, most capital ships were large enough with appropriate construction that they could survive a mine hit - but a number were hit and seriously damaged by mines, putting them out of commission for significant amounts of time. One could make the same argument about carrier dive bombers in relation to battleships (I may have forgotten one, but I don't think a single battleship was sunk outright by carrier dive bombers) - but that didn't mean that dive bombers weren't a threat or didn't do serious damage to battleships. I'd go a step further to argue that the implication in the statement (that a weapon needs to be significant relative to a capital ship in WW2 to merit inclusion in a game that revolves around naval warfare that includes the WW2 'technology' period) isn't necessarily sound (cruisers, destroyers and submarines were all key elements of the war at sea in WW1 and WW2, and mines were very much a threat to all three in both time periods and would have been in any hypothetical conflict between them). Mines are often the 'forgotten weapons' of naval warfare in both world wars, getting little attention in most histories, even many with a naval focus - but mines accounted for the sinking of 200 warships in WW2, compared with 263 to surface actions (which I have no doubt no-one is suggested should be abstracted  ), and did substantial damage without sinking to many other warships. They were far more important to the naval warfare of the period than MTBs, for example - an element that is included in the original RtW. That said, as per my above post, I'd fully agree that the structure of RtW (and presumably RtW2) as a game doesn't lend itself well to the inclusion of mines to their historic extent without them being a fairly 'random-number heavy' (even if it wasn't random, it would appear random to the player) element that could lead to a lot of frustration, as per the frustration that popped up in relation to similar mine (and submarine) events in the original RtW. With a few notable exceptions (the Channel Dash and the blockading of Tallinn are the only two I can think of) mines were a strategic weapon, used to grind down the enemy's navy and commerce, and RtW's gameplay structure isn't well suited to integrating this kind of warfare without substantial changes (or substantial 'apparently random' frustration for players). As suc, I wouldn't argue strongly for the inclusion of more fleshed out mine warfare in RtW2, but I'll take 12 lashes with a cat o'nine tails before I'd suggest that mines weren't important historically . Something I just noticed in the RTW1 is that actually mine fields could not cause any damage to merchant ships...which is actually more important than sinking combatant warships in the real history... |
|
|
|
Post by ursamaior on Dec 30, 2018 8:34:52 GMT -6
I wouldlike to ask the developers to stick to the KISS principle.
This game is already complicated.
Aerial and sub laid minefields were nothing but a nuisance compared to other aspects which are already present.
|
|
|
|
Post by millsian on Dec 30, 2018 9:46:37 GMT -6
For what it’s worth I think that especially in European waters that you can’t ignore as major ships like HMS Belfast we’re out of action for months after mine strikes and S&G’s damage on channel dash caused by aerial minelayer.
I’m walking the dog so don’t have access to Conway which gives the figures but gardening contributes vast majority of offensive minelaying by the British in ww2.
That said it should be abstract background task - but you can’t ignore offensive mine laying
|
|
AiryW
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by AiryW on Dec 30, 2018 9:48:01 GMT -6
gardening contributes vast majority of offensive minelaying by the British in ww2. Not to mention it provided half the vegetables Americans ate. |
|
|
|
Post by millsian on Dec 30, 2018 12:20:01 GMT -6
Now have the reference books to hand
Source Campbell naval weapons of ww2
Over 40k laid in enemy waters by aircraft and over 20k by ships and subs
RAF home commands laid 48158 sank 545 merchant ships (591k tonnes) and 217 assorted warships of 147k displacement.
Hms Nelson twice damaged by mines
HMS Belfast hit mine in nov 1940 and didn’t return to service until October 1942.
Source Conways all the worlds fighting ships 1922-46
|
|
), and did substantial damage without sinking to many other warships. They were far more important to the naval warfare of the period than MTBs, for example - an element that is included in the original RtW.
