Aerial Mining - A question for the Devs ?

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: spence

Since aerial mining has not as yet even appeared on the radar scope I have paid it little attention as yet insofar as the game is concerned. According to the article posted all variants/derivatives of B-24s, B-29s, PBY-5s of the RAAF, B-25s of the RAF, and even TBFs conducted aerial mining.
I don't have the game/editor handy. What kinds of Allied (any Japanese?) a/c can conduct the mission in the game?

supposedly any 2E bomber

Isnt there a starting date or does it work right of Dec/7/41?

starts sometime in 1943, i think - i don't recall the exact date (and i haven't got there in my PBEM yet...)

[spence]

When they did airial minning did they lay the mines right in or very near the ports or did they mine further out in the sea lanes??

Both. Japan diverted searchlights and AA batteries to some of the more "popular" mining locations but apparently to little effect. When the really "concentrated mining effort" in Japanese Home Waters began there were other things going on that tended to occupy such nightfighters as the Japanese could put up (March 45 - the beginning of firebombing campaign).

It's interesting that the USN never took a shine to aerial mining. USN a/c did very little of it. But in one instance where they did they used TBF/TBMs to mine the passages in/out of Palau anchorage to trap the shipping then followed up several regular (bomb/torpedo) raids which claimed over 100,000 tons of shipping.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: dereck

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: dereck
And as far as bomber formations not being attacked in history - YES!

Near the final months of the war bomber raids of 300-400+ B-29s ranged over Japan at will without ANY fighter opposition.

Sorry but you just make me laugh. You are talking about the final months and I am talking about 1/1/43! You send in 300 bombers to mine Truk and I have 200 fighters on CAP and my fighters just let you pass. Sorry, no offense but if you say that´s right then I don´t even think about discussing this with you anymore. Glad you don´t have to explain this to AI. And the only thing I can see here is the fanboyism judged by you. Allied fanboyism...[:-] weird Sir

[Oldsweat]

Just out of curiosity does anyone know this:

When they did airial minning did they lay the mines right in or very near the ports or did they mine further out in the sea lanes??

If they dropped the mines right in the harbors then I would think interception by CAP is reasonable.

If they dropped the mines a distance off I would think it would be much less likely that CAP could intervene to a significant extent. I mean the bombers head out like they are going to bomb some point target then just vear off and drop the mines into some area of the ocean. Hard to intercept effectively I think.

I haven't got my references handy but I think that a number of choke points away from ports were mined. There is, I believe, a map of the mined areas in Weapons That Wait but my copy is 1500 miles away. I imagine it is a playability/balance issue but I have found the rapid decay of fields away from ports a source of frustration. There are several lovely chokepoints around Borneo and the Phillipines that just cry out for minefields.

[castor troy]

[/quote]

1. PBEM changes already HAVE ruined this game for me to be honest. I tried staying at 1.3 but the pilot replacement bug and now missing leader bug have forced me to upgrade so I'm stuck with your changes.

[/quote]

dereck, sorry, but if you´re really serious with that then I think a game like command and conquer would also be just nice to play. I think there´s no doubt in that many changes have made the "game" more realistic AND better. Not just for PBEM. Of course if you play the AI (which is just to dumb to do a good operation) then you have problems if it runs out of planes, ships, HI and anything else. But you can end the game in late 43 in Tokyo ---> great. [8|]

[spence]

From reading the article about aerial mining it seems that the biggest obstacle to it's effectiveness was "an institutional or cultural lack of interest/enthusiasm" amongst senior American officers.

Japanese scientists were evidently able to devise means to sweep most of the variously triggered Allied mines BUT THEY RAN INTO AN INSTITUTIONAL OR CULTURAL LACK OF INTEREST/ENTHUSIASM AMONGST SENIOR JAPANESE OFFICERS which delayed implementation of appropriate mine-countermeasures by the IJN.

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

1. PBEM changes already HAVE ruined this game for me to be honest. I tried staying at 1.3 but the pilot replacement bug and now missing leader bug have forced me to upgrade so I'm stuck with your changes.

[/quote]

dereck, sorry, but if you´re really serious with that then I think a game like command and conquer would also be just nice to play. I think there´s no doubt in that many changes have made the "game" more realistic AND better. Not just for PBEM. Of course if you play the AI (which is just to dumb to do a good operation) then you have problems if it runs out of planes, ships, HI and anything else. But you can end the game in late 43 in Tokyo ---> great. [8|]
[/quote]

You know Castor, I'm sick and tired of people like you who think if people don't play PBEM in this game they should go to another one. I've paid good money for this just like you and I should be able to enjoy it without having idiots like you make changes to this game because of the way YOU play and not me.

These "changes" don't always make the game more realistic ... they make the game even more biased towards one side which is basically what a lot of people like. I'm not alone in thinking this from all the PMs and emails I receive agreeing with me but I may be one of the vocal ones who get sick and tired of all the hypocracy of people like you saying that changes which let the Japanese player run hog-wild while making sure the Americans get hamstringed at every turn is historic and realistic. When one person even QUESTIONED the zero bonus it was like someone committing heresy and I could see the stakes being built to burn people as soon as the thread was started.

Instead of putting code in the game PBEMers should play more realistic and then just MAYBE you'll get realistic results that you always cry about. Funny how I play pretty must historically and I don't run into any of these wild claims I read about here. It comes down to not the game but the people who play the game.

So YOU just get off your soapbox with this PBEM holier than AI play and realize there are people who only play the AI because 1) we may not have schedules for PBEM or 2) we don't want to deal with the inevitable BS that crops up.

[castor troy]

as this has gone already so far, nothing more to say as you just don´t see what´s realistically and what´s not. Perhaps you should send all your emails and pms to Matrix games to change everything towards the Allied side as you´re nothing but a fanboy (yes, the thing you didn´t like).

You´re so far away from reality that nobody can help you. So call somebody else an idiot as everybody can make his mind about your comments.

[Andy Mac]

Just to try and get back on topic does and away from discussions about the merits of tother hot topics does anyone actually know if aerial mining beingimmune to cap is a bug or a feature ?

Thanks guys

Andy

[Halsey]

It's good to see that some things never change on this forum.[;)]

Still duking it out over things that will never be changed.[:D][:D][:D]

[AmiralLaurent]

Actually it's amazing to see IJN players complaining about the way aerial mining is done in WITP. It should be Allied players that complained. Allied heavy will still be able to bomb ships or get trough Japanese CAP most of the times while Betties will get one-way ticket almost in all missions, except for minelaying that they can do outside heavy bomber range with only op losses. At this stage of the war, it will be the only way Japan may lay mine on the frontline, as both ML and subs will have a very low chance of survival.

Historically almost all aerial minelaying was done at night during the war, both in Europe and the Pacific. This was one reason of the lack of interception (but IJN nightfighters suck as in RL in WITP¨so no problem for that). Most losses were operationnal or due to AA, especially when AC went too close to ports. But only because it was at night.

This chapter of official RAAF history available online(http://www.awm.gov.au/cms_images/histor ... ers/22.pdf) is dealing with aerial minelaying in 1943-1944 in details.

[el cid again]

(but IJN nightfighters suck as in RL in WITP¨so no problem for that).

I fixed this somewhat - giving japanese planes their historical radar (which is comparable to early Allied radar). I used to think it would be in CHS - but I now doubt it. It will be in RHS.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

Actually it's amazing to see IJN players complaining about the way aerial mining is done in WITP. It should be Allied players that complained. Allied heavy will still be able to bomb ships or get trough Japanese CAP most of the times while Betties will get one-way ticket almost in all missions, except for minelaying that they can do outside heavy bomber range with only op losses. At this stage of the war, it will be the only way Japan may lay mine on the frontline, as both ML and subs will have a very low chance of survival.

Historically almost all aerial minelaying was done at night during the war, both in Europe and the Pacific. This was one reason of the lack of interception (but IJN nightfighters suck as in RL in WITP¨so no problem for that). Most losses were operationnal or due to AA, especially when AC went too close to ports. But only because it was at night.

This chapter of official RAAF history available online(http://www.awm.gov.au/cms_images/histor ... ers/22.pdf) is dealing with aerial minelaying in 1943-1944 in details.

Your statement is just what I wanted to hear and most people here are thinking. Most times the mines were layed at night. No interception - no problem with that. But why shouldn´t HUGE formations at daylight not being intercepted. Okay, here comes the 60 mile hex again into play, but that´s how it is. And advantage in later war years for the Japanese or not, I´m not up for an advantage, I would like it to be more realistic. And in my oppinion it´s not realistic that masses of bombers can lay mines at enemy base hexes AT DAYLIGHT.

[mc3744]

I’ve been away for a while and now that I’m back I see a surprisingly strong attitude from several players in the forum!
It is very clear to me that WitP is a ‘special’ game, many of us devote/d so much time to the game that we’ve become a bit obsessed with it, which partially explains the hot tempers.
I’m no moderator nor am I a saint, still I’d like to ask everybody to remember that it’s ‘only’ a game and we ARE a community. And this community is one of the thing that make this game so special.
Hence I pray everybody to try and work together to improve our gaming experience. Let’s fight in the game, not in the forum.

Hoping not to upset anybody, my two cents on the topic.

PBEM and AI are two substantially different games and I personally believe that they are barely comparable. Personally I only play PBEM, but I understand the other side, not to have to bother with house rules, waiting for the turn, keeping your own pace, and so on and so forth.
What I feel I can say for sure is that PBEM is more challenging, just try both and you’ll see.

One thing I often see forgotten in the forum is the difference between historical and realistic. Personally I like not to follow history, but to do something that could have happened.
If something did not happen and could not happen I’m against it, if it did not happen but could happen, that’s my game.

Regardless house rules and game engine it is my – rather long – experience that you loose and you win (given the same variables). Hence the player still makes a difference. When we loose we humanly tend to put the blame on a historical’ tactics or wrong game mechanics. I believe that is only part of the truth, but for few situation,
For example: in my game vs. GH he is winning only because he made a disproportionate use of the DS, but in all the games I’m winning it’s only because I’m the better player!! [:D][:D][:D]

[el cid again]

And in my oppinion it´s not realistic that masses of bombers can lay mines at enemy base hexes AT DAYLIGHT.

The Japanese invented a concept of using recon planes to locate enemy bombers at great distances and then vector fighters to intercept them from patrol lines all the way from Central Honshu to Kyushu. They were NOT limited to same hex interception and the only thing to be said for that limitiation is - it applies to both sides equally. Very late war Japanese fighter forces COULD HAVE intercepted mine layer formations - but (a) they do not appear ever to have tried and (b) the probably would not have tried. Firebombing and atomic bombing and precision bombing are awful forms of attack - and the fighter defenses were probably correctly focused on reducing them! The model simulates this to a degree. I am not happy it is not better - but no matter how good it gets I will always want better still!