V1083c MK XVII mines not in production till 42/12

[DarkestHour]

CM Kung Wo uses Mk XVII mines as of 7Dec41 but they aren't produced till 42/12 so there are no replacements for more than a year, then you get 45 a month. Should this CM be using a different mine or should the production of 45 a month be as of 41/12?

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: DarkestHour

CM Kung Wo uses Mk XVII mines as of 7Dec41 but they aren't produced till 42/12 so there are no replacements for more than a year, then you get 45 a month. Should this CM be using a different mine or should the production of 45 a month be as of 41/12?

Considering this was the most common mine, I would agree with you that the date should be 12/41; however, if you read the information from here http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Ops-Minelaying.htm the minefields around Singapore were already laid and no further mining ops were done. From this source, it seems that very little mining was done in the Far East until 1945 and then delivered by sub and aircraft. I think that is why the devs have started mine accuring for laying at 12/42 instead of 12/41.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: DarkestHour

CM Kung Wo uses Mk XVII mines as of 7Dec41 but they aren't produced till 42/12 so there are no replacements for more than a year, then you get 45 a month. Should this CM be using a different mine or should the production of 45 a month be as of 41/12?

Considering this was the most common mine, I would agree with you that the date should be 12/41; however, if you read the information from here http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Ops-Minelaying.htm the minefields around Singapore were already laid and no further mining ops were done. From this source, it seems that very little mining was done in the Far East until 1945 and then delivered by sub and aircraft. I think that is why the devs have started mine accuring for laying at 12/42 instead of 12/41.

Brum, does that 1945 date include around Ceylon, India and the off board ports?

I think you misread it "British minelaying operations were carried out from the day that hostilities commenced until 10 May 1945 when the submarine RORQUAL laid 44 mines off Thousand Islands in the Pacific

Opps, I should have read further, but, they may have had some mine laying in the theater in 1944 (maybe in 43 also).

[DarkestHour]

As the Brits were kicked out of Malaya and DEI it would have been hard to do much mining in the area before they returned. Then they didn't need to so why bother. This a bit like the disappearing ABDA and Burma HQs. If you successfully defend Java and/or Burma, you still lose the HQs. Perhaps the mine manufacturing should reflect their presence but have a value far short of 45 to reflect their lack of use. I have read that most minelayers, particularly jap ones, did not lay mines throughout the war so I am not against the mine limitations. Primary use was probably defensive fields around major bases, not vast atoll minefields. Using them is an early war allied strategy for me, with small numbers here and there sucking up jap minesweeping assets as opposed to sinking vast numbers of ships. I still don't know if 42/12 was a mistake.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: DarkestHour

As the Brits were kicked out of Malaya and DEI it would have been hard to do much mining in the area before they returned. Then they didn't need to so why bother. This a bit like the disappearing ABDA and Burma HQs. If you successfully defend Java and/or Burma, you still lose the HQs. Perhaps the mine manufacturing should reflect their presence but have a value far short of 45 to reflect their lack of use. I have read that most minelayers, particularly jap ones, did not lay mines throughout the war so I am not against the mine limitations. Primary use was probably defensive fields around major bases, not vast atoll minefields. Using them is an early war allied strategy for me, with small numbers here and there sucking up jap minesweeping assets as opposed to sinking vast numbers of ships. I still don't know if 42/12 was a mistake.

Old gamey me, use to mine Rangoon, Akyba, Chittagong, and Diamond Harbor in WITP until the bomber activity got to heavy. I wonder why the Brits didn't mine more unless it was a limited supply of mines?

[DarkestHour]

Just finished the article. Defensive minefields were a waste(throughout the war and caused more damage to the side that laid them plus the action wasted a lot of valuable resources), few minelaying actions in 42 due to lack of minelayers, jap air power. Offensive minelaying by subs and air successful, particularly subs as they could watch enemy shipping and determine where the best place for a mine was.
 
It would seem that the game gives mines too much power as their hit ratio was minute(slightly higher for your own forces transiting the area). Offensive coastal minelaying seemed effective: '[font=arial]Use of MTB's and ML's for limited offensive minelaying in shallow coastal waters increased very considerable by the end of 1942. It proved very successful and resulted in a significant decrease in enemy coastal traffic and losses of minesweepers.'[/font]