Redefining minecraft

[el cid again]

It appears that cruisers do not lay mines - that they cannot be assigned to mine warfare task groups - and so they will never lay mines.

It appears that MLE also are in the same boat - the designation seems to be for escort vessels that no longer carry mines - and if applied to a real MLE - which can do either or both missions - it won't work - for the same reason: they cannot be assigned to mine warfare task groups.

So I am working my way through the data set - changing MLE to ML or DM - and sometimes former ML which do NOT carry mines to MLE.

What to do about cruisers? I guess we call them DM - many true CLM had no armor - but I find it frustrating to have to do it this way.

I will use prefix indicators to tell players what the ship really is - in the ships name or class name. Thus you might get a DM CML in this case.

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Do you actually know what MLE means or just guessing?

[Historiker]

Indeed, this is very disappointing.
I've made dozends of test runs and what I've found out, that only DMs and MLs seem to be able to lay mines. IRL, (nearly) every ship was able to lay mines and inferior nations did that. Nearly every German Ship except the BBs and CAs was able to lay mines, from the CLs over the DDs and MSW to the PTs - every one of them was used for mining operations.
The same is with mine clearing. In witp, only MSWs and DMSs are able to clear mines efficiantly without any serious danger of hitting one. IRL, many other ships were used for that task, too - and performed well!

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Do you actually know what MLE means or just guessing?

Well - in terms of what it meant to whoever put it in WITP - no - I guess I do not know. I know what it should mean - and how ships work IRL.
Many ships could mount either mines or DC on their mine rails - and some ships had separate DC throwers not related to their mine rails. Dual purpose was a feature of a number of designs - and those SHOULD BE the vessels designaed MLE. But unless code was miswritten - and the MLE omitted by mistake from the ships that can lay mines - I think it meant "former minelayers now escort vessels" to whoever did WITP.
Never mind that anything with "ML" in its designation should LAY mines - as distinct from MS - for SWEEP mines. And since WWII MH for HUNT mines.

I have problems with Matrix and mine warfare - they say I want "mines in the Pacific" - because I think mines should be able to do what they could do - and not be swept as a mere neuscence - that is the Matrix term - at full speed. I told a USN very senior officer about high speed minesweeping in the game and he said "I want some of those" What I want is - any ship with mines will lay mines - any bomber can lay mines - and sweeping is a slow and painful thing - which never completely gets rid of the mines if there were more than a few to begin with.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Indeed, this is very disappointing.
I've made dozends of test runs and what I've found out, that only DMs and MLs seem to be able to lay mines. IRL, (nearly) every ship was able to lay mines and inferior nations did that. Nearly every German Ship except the BBs and CAs was able to lay mines, from the CLs over the DDs and MSW to the PTs - every one of them was used for mining operations.
The same is with mine clearing. In witp, only MSWs and DMSs are able to clear mines efficiantly without any serious danger of hitting one. IRL, many other ships were used for that task, too - and performed well!

Wierdly - add the MSW to the list that will LAY mines. Some Aussie ones do in WITP. Go figure. I guess because they can join a mine warfare task group - IF they also have mines - they will drop em. An accident no doubt. That probably means DMS also would work - IF the ship had mines defined on it.

[Historiker]

I have problems with Matrix and mine warfare - they say I want "mines in the Pacific" - because I think mines should be able to do what they could do - and not be swept as a mere neuscence - that is the Matrix term - at full speed. I told a USN very senior officer about high speed minesweeping in the game and he said "I want some of those" What I want is - any ship with mines will lay mines - any bomber can lay mines - and sweeping is a slow and painful thing - which never completely gets rid of the mines if there were more than a few to begin with.

Our naval forces are still (sic!) sweeping mines in the north and east sea - some 400 in the last 10 years.

Wierdly - add the MSW to the list that will LAY mines. Some Aussie ones do in WITP. Go figure. I guess because they can join a mine warfare task group - IF they also have mines - they will drop em. An accident no doubt. That probably means DMS also would work - IF the ship had mines defined on it.

Well, then they'll work only if they're into a group with a usual ML. A ship with mines that is a MSW doesn't have the option "Lay mines / Don't lay mines" after what I've seen.

[bbbf]

The problem has been the unrestricted access to mines in WITP - if every craft could lay mines, if there is a MLE present or a large enough port, they can lay minefields in the tens of thousands of mines. 
 
How many mines wre produced by the combatants during WWII?
 
AE is meant to address this by having usable pools of mines that will be tracked.

[el cid again]

the structure is present to track mines - it is inherent in the device file code- it just needs activation

and the restrictions on mine laying prevent massive minefields - far too effectively -

you must sail to a level ten port (there is supposed to be an exception to this but I am not sure it works) - and almost no airplanes lay mines

the mines that are laid are way too weak - not in effect - but in chance of being detected and swept

At night the chance of detection is almost nil - and at high speed at night it is impossible - but if you put a DMS in your task group - it will detect, clear and widen the field - never mind the truth

A lot of tings could (and should) be done to address this bug -

as a technical analyst I am trained to identify all problems - just because it is intended does not make it less a bug

and I will at least make it so ships with mines can lay them - the entire Soviet DD fleet will now be DMs - with DL, DD or DE as part of the class name so you know what they really are

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Indeed, this is very disappointing.
I've made dozends of test runs and what I've found out, that only DMs and MLs seem to be able to lay mines. IRL, (nearly) every ship was able to lay mines and inferior nations did that. Nearly every German Ship except the BBs and CAs was able to lay mines, from the CLs over the DDs and MSW to the PTs - every one of them was used for mining operations.
The same is with mine clearing. In witp, only MSWs and DMSs are able to clear mines efficiantly without any serious danger of hitting one. IRL, many other ships were used for that task, too - and performed well!

Battleships were equpped with mine-clearing gear!

[Historiker]

The problem has been the unrestricted access to mines in WITP - if every craft could lay mines, if there is a MLE present or a large enough port, they can lay minefields in the tens of thousands of mines.

How many mines wre produced by the combatants during WWII?

AE is meant to address this by having usable pools of mines that will be tracked.

Let ten of them cost 1 HI point - or something like this. In this case, a mine-fanboy will have to pay for his passion, but if they get more effective, he'll also benefit from this!

[DuckofTindalos]

It's been taken care of.

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Sid, in game MLE is a tender-mine storage.

[DuckofTindalos]

And a ship type that never actually existed in real life, hence the confusion, and the MitP (Minefields in the Pacific) problem...[:D]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Indeed, this is very disappointing.
I've made dozends of test runs and what I've found out, that only DMs and MLs seem to be able to lay mines. IRL, (nearly) every ship was able to lay mines and inferior nations did that. Nearly every German Ship except the BBs and CAs was able to lay mines, from the CLs over the DDs and MSW to the PTs - every one of them was used for mining operations.
The same is with mine clearing. In witp, only MSWs and DMSs are able to clear mines efficiantly without any serious danger of hitting one. IRL, many other ships were used for that task, too - and performed well!

Battleships were equpped with mine-clearing gear!

Well - maybe. But it isn't magic.

My ten thousand ton APA had paravanes - while my three thousand ton destroyer did not.

But they can in principle be fitted to any ship.

A paravane is a wire strung from a special underwater body - designed to make the wire move away from the ship - towed from the bow.

It is hoped the wire snags a mine cable - making the mine visible. Riflemen then can shoot the mine - and cause it to detonate.

But this is inherantly dangerous and slow work. You must see a mine so close to the bow you might hit it. You must stop dead if you foul a mine too close to detonate - and either disarm it - that takes hours and may blow it up anyway - or back off until you are able to shoot the mine.

What paravanes do not do is give you the power to proceed fast through a minefield.

There IS a way to clear a minefield fast- IF the ships clearing it are expendable!

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Sid, in game MLE is a tender-mine storage.

What in the world is that?

ML means mine layer.

Ugly - but thank you.


So much for a system that mostly uses USN designations - but mixes them with other things. You cannot read the code and trust it to mean what it says.

[el cid again]

I have found why a class of Dutch minelayers probably did not work - or at least woud not rearm.

I have converted a class of ships to an Allied mine support craft - so it may be possible to rearm mineships if these are present - and there already was one such ship. Apparently such a ship must be classified right and have a cargo capacity to work.

I have converted MLE escort vessels mainly to PC - or to ML or DM - as is most appropriate according to the case.

I have converted minelaying destroyers to DM with class name indicators DL, DD or DE - for the USSR and French.

I have converted cruiser minelayers to DM with CLM in the name of the class.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Sid, in game MLE is a tender-mine storage.

What in the world is that?

ML means mine layer.

Ugly - but thank you.


So much for a system that mostly uses USN designations - but mixes them with other things. You cannot read the code and trust it to mean what it says.

Like I said, MLE is a made-up ship type. It'll be gone in AE.

[el cid again]

Praise the Lord - his blessings are manifold - you just have to wait long enough for some of them.

And praise to whoever fixed this.

Now - can we do something about "instant" minesweeping?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Praise the Lord - his blessings are manifold - you just have to wait long enough for some of them.

And praise to whoever fixed this.

Now - can we do something about "instant" minesweeping?

You gotta be patient.

[treespider]

Cid may find this link useful...

fb.asp?m=1645669