Insane shipping losses / shipping balances

[DarkHorse2]

1.02.52 Release
T9
GC41 vs AI

---

Despite the fact that Germany had over 3 times as much merchant BRT/GRT as did the Soviet Union, the following is the current shipping points at the start of Turn 9. (see below)

In 9 weeks, Germany has lost 11 (or more) shipping points in the Baltic Sea - a sea that was largely uncontested until 1944. This is a loss of 11 out of 21 shipping points, for a loss rate of 52%.

That is because the game is obviously coded to route all German naval shipping past Malta on their way to Riga.

To seriously consider that the Soviet Union had more shipping available in Lake Ladoga than did Germany in the entire Baltic Sea in 1941 is pure fantasy.

---

WiTE2_GE_Shipping_T9.JPG (10.82 KiB) Viewed 991 times

WiTE2_SU_Shipping_T9.JPG (15.26 KiB) Viewed 991 times

[K62_]

I used to feel similarly about this mechanic (which hasn't changed in recent versions) but, after further reflection and comparison with more detailed naval simulations such as WitP, I've come to realize that the naval model in WitE2 is highly abstracted. The game does not represent individual cargo ships of the German or Soviet navy any more than it simulates warships, submarines, minefields, naval search missions etc. So the attrition and addition rates don't simulate actual losses and construction of German merchant ships during WW2.

The numbers should be thought of as a more abstract usable cargo lift which is more on the lines of "what was the Kriegsmarine willing to risk in the Baltic?". The answer to this question is probably: not very much. In '41 there was a real risk of Soviet minefields, submarines and their pretty strong fleet-in-being. After '41 these risks lessened but there was also much less to gain as the AGN railways were in good order by that point.

We must also remember that supplying AGN was not the point of maximum concern for the Kriegsmarine - either globally or even within the Scandinavian sea area. A lot of cargo ships and other naval resources were dedicated to bringing in Swedish iron ore and Finnish nickel, which were essential for the German war economy. AGN had other means of supplying itself as necessary.

The game overall does a nice job of simulating naval supply as a useful addition in the Baltic, but not to the point where the player feels they don't need to convert any rail in this area (which the Germans historically did). It actually errs on the side of the Axis by providing a similar capability in the Black Sea, which historically did not exist. Any reduction in the abstracted attrition rates for cargo ships would lead to very unhistorical outcomes such as being able to drive on Leningrad or Maikop with naval supply alone. That would not make the game any better IMO.

[ShaggyHiK]

Not everything is so simple, with Ladoga, shipping was there in the summer, even barges with food were sinking from the storm. Lake Ladoga is not calm enough. The Gulf of Finland was almost never used by the German fleet. There was simply no transportation to Tallinn in the summer-winter of 1941-42, and it was not easy to be, Tallinn was taken late, it was mined, they did not have time to clear mines, and then the port was ice-bound.

Active shipping was to Riga, I gave indicative figures here earlier. 120.000-213.000 thousand tons per month. Data for 1943 from June to December.

And yes, the losses of German ships are very high, although mine explosions occurred during any period of the war.

All the same, the Germans had a naval industry that made it possible to produce small ships, boats and navigable barges for repair and replenishment of losses, while the Soviet fleet, to a greater extent, did not have such capabilities until 44.

In addition, the Germans could make more flights, but with less cargo, but in the end receive a decent amount of cargo.

The chance of losing in the game is quite high, however, it would not be true to say that there was no contest.

The fleet in the game is not presented as an active force, and the Soviet fleet and naval air force tried to contribute, albeit not systematically.

It should also be said here that most likely you are not making sorties to mine the Gulf of Finland. Although in real conditions the German naval air force made a huge number of sorties to mine the bay and patrol the Gulf of Finland.

If this is extrapolated, without these actions, Soviet submarines (which are not in the game) could relatively easily break into the Baltic Sea and act on communications.

[ShaggyHiK]

We must also remember that supplying AGN was not the point of maximum concern for the Kriegsmarine - either globally or even within the Scandinavian sea area. A lot of cargo ships and other naval resources were dedicated to bringing in Swedish iron ore and Finnish nickel, which were essential for the German war economy. AGN had other means of supplying itself as necessary.

You underestimate the importance of such transportation. Moreover, the German fleet was able to ensure the supply of the Baltic grouping in 44-45 after the encirclement. In the game, such an environment will lead to an instant defeat of the German troops, simply because there will be no supply in the ports due to the lack of ships.

It is also worth noting here that the Germans underestimated the capabilities of their fleet and did not give it an active task of supplying groups, they missed their opportunities. In 41-43 years.

That is, they could give better results if they had such a task before them.

[DarkHorse2]

To say it is abstract is stating the obvious. Of course it is abstract. Everything in WiTE2 is abstract.

But rather it is counters, points, chits or beads, there is still a reasonable expectation of appropriate proportions in capabilities and casualties.

I have already posted background data, in other threads, on the historical capabilities and losses for the Baltic Sea. Nowhere have I asserted that Germany did not incur losses. However, it was never close to 52% over a nine week period.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6&t=393870
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6&t=393837

What is currently in play in WiTE2 is not remotely representative of anything regarding World War 2 transport capabilities in the Baltic Sea - despite the level of abstraction.

[ShaggyHiK]

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6&t=393837
What is currently in play in WiTE2 is not remotely representative of anything regarding World War 2 transport capabilities in the Baltic Sea - despite the level of abstraction.

The use of the Gulf of Finland, even if the Germans took Leningrad under a huge question, most likely it would have taken the whole summer of 42 years to mine the mines laid by the Germans themselves. Especially Soviet productions, and in winter the ports of the Gulf of Finland freeze and are also not suitable for transporting goods by sea.

[ShaggyHiK]

That is, there is a double-edged sword here.

Firstly, Germany's opportunities in the Baltic were not endless. Therefore, it is possible to give exactly the historical version of ship capabilities only if the ports will not work during the winter period. Limiting bandwidth. Throughout the year.

Secondly, it is obvious that the throughput was limited by the capabilities of the ports, and not by the strength of the merchant fleet.


If we give the German fleet closer to real numbers without prior limitation, yes. We will get a situation where the German has just an endless supply in the Baltics.

[ShaggyHiK]

The logistics bottleneck in the Baltic is that Tallinn is freezing. And it is not available for navigation in winter, and other ports except Riga are not adapted to receive and / or unload ships.

The depths there do not allow ships with a large draft to come close to the shore.

In general, to begin with, developers must come up with a different system for implementing shipping, port capacity, and a decision on how to implement port freezing. Secondly, to determine the actual capabilities of ports for unloading and loading cargo, as well as to review the availability of port facilities, if possible, to really participate in the delivery of goods. Thirdly, the ships themselves should become smaller. The idea that Germany was supplied with powder ships of 8000-10000 thousand tons is rather not true, a ship of 2000-3000 thousand tons was considered a large ship in the Baltic.

[DarkHorse2]

In 1939, Germany possessed the 5th largest merchant marine fleet in the world.

In the course of the next twenty years, however, it experienced a nearly complete recovery, principally through construction in German shipyards with the aid of large subsidies from the German Government and of foreign loans. By 1924, six years after the end of the war, Germany had regained a shipping fleet of nearly 3 million gross ton.

The output of German yards by 1938 was second only to that of the United Kingdom.

---

MerchantMarineFleet_1939.JPG (77.67 KiB) Viewed 820 times

[ShaggyHiK]

In 1939, Germany possessed the 5th largest merchant marine fleet in the world.

What is the use of the number of ships if the ports cannot accept such a number?

[Denniss]

I believe the soviets als suffer high ship losses in the caspian sea, their pool their is quickly reduced to the basic 5 ships
There's also the odd isse that soviets gets lots of ships for baltic even if their control is reduced to Leningrad. don't know what happens if Leningrad falls

[DarkHorse2]

In 1939, Germany possessed the 5th largest merchant marine fleet in the world.

What is the use of the number of ships if the ports cannot accept such a number?

Interesting question.

Expressed in tons, this is a measure of a port’s transportation capacity. Each undamaged port level (number
of port ‘factories’) generates 15000 tons of port capacity.

Baltic State Port Sizes (excluding Tallinn)
------------
Riga - 4
Parnu - 2
Ventspils - 2
Liepaja - 2
---------------
10 x 15000 = 150,000 tons of port capacity

150,000 / 1250 = 120 Shipping Points !

Riga alone can accept 48 Shipping points.
((4 x 15k) / 1250 = 48)

[ShaggyHiK]

In 1939, Germany possessed the 5th largest merchant marine fleet in the world.

What is the use of the number of ships if the ports cannot accept such a number?

Interesting question.

Expressed in tons, this is a measure of a port’s transportation capacity. Each undamaged port level (number
of port ‘factories’) generates 15000 tons of port capacity.

Baltic State Port Sizes (excluding Tallinn)
------------
Riga - 4
Parnu - 2
Ventspils - 2
Liepaja - 2
---------------
10 x 15000 = 150,000 tons of port capacity

150,000 / 1250 = 120 Shipping Points !

Riga alone can accept 48 Shipping points.
((4 x 15k) / 1250 = 48)

In the game, yes, this is an infinite supply.

In reality, there was no such throughput.

There were certain reasons for this, which I mentioned above.

Give the player in the game, an infinite supply, the source of supply from which they left the first wite1??


Some balancing is needed here. Wite2 abandoned the wite1 system, where the supply was almost unlimited, taking a step forward.
Giving the German or Soviet player huge numbers of fleets with no change in naval supply and the ability to influence it effectively results in an infinite supply opportunity, and I am against a rollback of the supply system to the level of wite1.

In addition, you need to understand the level of real traffic. As far as I understand, no one seriously considered this issue, perhaps due to the loss of documents.

Probably the same Ports of Leipai and Ventspils mostly worked for transportation to Riga, and not on their own.

As such, I have no documents. So our discussion with you rests on a certain amount of speculation and assumptions.

[DarkHorse2]

I think you are confused. Or maybe you do not understand WiTE2's logistic system?

150k port capacity != Infinite supply. (or infinite freight)
(150k is finite; much less than infinite)

There is nothing that approaches infinite in any of this.

[ShaggyHiK]

I think you are confused. Or maybe you do not understand WiTE2's logistic system?

150k port capacity != Infinite supply. (or infinite freight)
(150k is finite; much less than infinite)

There is nothing that approaches infinite in any of this.

Are you laughing? This is a huge amount of cargo that covers most of what is needed in the troops of Army Group North with a margin.


The same only Riga could really be used as a port. Supplies. Pärnu, as far as I have an idea, was not able to take in any ships other than river ships, which is why it was almost never used for supply.