Mines - lets talk about them

[Mowers]

I have never seen a friendly minefield (in areas of up to 600 mines)
I have never hit a mine
I have never seen an enemy ship hit a mine

Do mines really exist?

Can ANYONE confirm that mines really exist?

[WallysWorld]

I think I saw some mines when I had a campaign battle near Port Arthur. As the Russians, I saw a bunch of large faint circles in the water near the harbour entrance. I assumed that those were my own mines. The Japanese task force chasing me stayed out of the circles except for one cruiser that went briefly into the area, but left right away.

[Daedalus]

I have never seen a friendly minefield (in areas of up to 600 mines)
I have never hit a mine
I have never seen an enemy ship hit a mine

Do mines really exist?

Can ANYONE confirm that mines really exist?

I saw a Japanese DD hit a mine out side of port authur. It went down like a stone and it was night and the shore guns where not firing. Yep they are there.

[Mowers]

I saw a Japanese DD hit a mine out side of port authur. It went down like a stone and it was night and the shore guns where not firing. Yep they are there.

Thats good news.
Where you able to see the minefield?

[saddletank]

IIRC the manual says minefields are invisible. You only find them the hard way. The basic outer/inner port defences of mines are shown on the mini-map and by large faint circle outlines on the tactical map.

[Daedalus]

Thats good news.
Where you able to see the minefield?

No, I could not see them, but when in a big battle last night I saw 3 Japanese CAs come by me damaged And when I went back to the main screen after the battle my mine layers had to replace mines back up to the 600 that they put down. So the Japanese ships must have tried to get into the port when I was away.
The other time the battle was just out side of Port Authur and I saw the DDs hit the mine and blowup.

[Bullethead]

IIRC the manual says minefields are invisible. You only find them the hard way. The basic outer/inner port defences of mines are shown on the mini-map and by large faint circle outlines on the tactical map.

I have only seen this around Japanese ports--Takeshiki is the best example. There, on the minimap, there's a huge circle of brownish hashmarks about 1/4 the width of the minimap at zoom level 1, centered on the port itself and extended miles out to to sea all around it.. This huge circle is invisible in the battlespace, except that if your POV is inside this circle, the cursor says "Outer Base Defenses" when you have it over empty water. Also, you cannot give turning orders to your ships inside this minimap circle unless your POV is outside the circle.

Much closer to the port of Takeshiki is an inner, smaller circle visible in the battlespace as a bunch of large, dark, translucent dots on the water tiles. This inner circle of dots isn't noticeable on the minimap, but when the cursor is over one of these tiles, you see "Inner Base Defenses". The width of the circle of dotted tiles is maybe 3 or 4 tiles wider than the strait between the north and south islands at Takeshiki, but still much wider than the circled anchor port symbol itself.

At Port Arthur, things are considerably different. There is no huge circle on the minimap. Instead, there's just a small arc of hashmarks between the Tiger Tail Peninsula and the main coastline, just blocking the entrance to PA itself between the lighthouses. In the battle space, the area within the circled anchor symbol says "Inner Base Defenses", and the area covered by the arc of hashmarks in the minimap (which is only a few tiles widers than the anchor symbol) says "Outer Base Defenses". IOW, the PA minefield is extremely small compared to the Takeshiki minefield, despite the fact the Russians have the ability to lay way more mines than the Japanese.

The bottom line is that the PA minefield is utterly useless, because it doesn't extend AT ALL into the waters outside PA where fights take place. The only ships at any risk to mines at PA are those trying to go inside the harbor itself. I saw 1 DD with a jammed rudder run onto the port symbol and blow up during a PA night attack battle once, but there is zero chance of mines affecting the course of a battle in the roadstead.

Another gripe I have with minefields is that the manual says that the owning player knows where his mines are but the enemy has to "find out the hard way". This does not match what you see in the game. Both players, friendly and enemy, see the hashmark pattern on the minimap and the cursor info about where inner and outer defenses are.

I would like to see the following changes made:

Fix the problem with not being able to give orders to ships inside the circle shown on the minimap
Resize/reposition the PA minefields to the same standard as the IJN minefields
Continue to allow both players to see the hashmarked circles on the minimap. However, for the owning player only, show some minefield symbols in the battlespace scattered about inside the big circle, showing where the mines really are within this big circle.

[Mowers]

Day 70 and 6000 mines later laid in every port between PA and Japan and not a single Japanese ship hit. I know this because I just got to see the full Japanese fleet.

Nor have I hit a single mine whilst entering enemy ports 10s of times.

Now, it could be that I have been fantastically lucky. Somehow I doubt it, I have done about 20 times more sailing hours than the Russians historically did but havent hit a single mine.

The Japanese who are constantly at sea havnt hit a mine (resulting in ship loss) either. Nor have the Japs attempted to mine the ports between PA and Korea. Why not?

I can only conclude that this feature is broken or is very badly modelled and something needs to be done. Its a game breaker for me. With mines playing no real or historical role then beyond raid ship lanes, which the Japanese AI doesnt move to defend once its lost its anti-raiding fleets, there is nothing to the campaign in terms of gameplay.

[Daedalus]

Day 70 and 6000 mines later laid in every port between PA and Japan and not a single Japanese ship hit. I know this because I just got to see the full Japanese fleet.

Nor have I hit a single mine whilst entering enemy ports 10s of times.

Now, it could be that I have been fantastically lucky. Somehow I doubt it, I have done about 20 times more sailing hours than the Russians historically did but havent hit a single mine.

The Japanese who are constantly at sea havnt hit a mine (resulting in ship loss) either. Nor have the Japs attempted to mine the ports between PA and Korea. Why not?

I can only conclude that this feature is broken or is very badly modelled and something needs to be done. Its a game breaker for me. With mines playing no real or historical role then beyond raid ship lanes, which the Japanese AI doesnt move to defend once its lost its anti-raiding fleets, there is nothing to the campaign in terms of gameplay.

Now that is strange as I have had Japanese ships damaged by my mines, I have also had some of there ships listed as lost when at the end of a battle because of mines. Did you send this to SES Support? If you have not you might as they may see something that needs worked with.

[Mowers]

Now that is strange as I have had Japanese ships damaged by my mines, I have also had some of there ships listed as lost when at the end of a battle because of mines. Did you send this to SES Support? If you have not you might as they may see something that needs worked with.

How did you know that these ships that were listed as lost at the end of the battle were sunk by mines? Does it tell you that? Or could it have been fire or water pumping issues?

Has anyone ever run into a mine on the strategic map?

You say you have had ships damaged by mines. This is on the tactical map when approaching the concentric rings of mines around harbours right? Right now thats the only "type" of minelaying that anyone has reported which doesnt reflect the historic deployment of mines.

[Daedalus]

How did you know that these ships that were listed as lost at the end of the battle were sunk by mines? Does it tell you that? Or could it have been fire or water pumping issues?

Has anyone ever run into a mine on the strategic map?

You say you have had ships damaged by mines. This is on the tactical map when approaching the concentric rings of mines around harbours right? Right now thats the only "type" of minelaying that anyone has reported which doesnt reflect the historic deployment of mines.

One way I new was that all my ships that where able to fight where with my fleet I was using, and the second way I new was that after I went back to the main screen my mine layers had to put more mines out to get my port back up to 600 mines. I was down about 18 mines.
When the ships came into the night battle they had damage and smoke coming out of them. They where running at slow speed. And you could see the damage at the water line of the ships. None of my other ships could have done this as they where damaged to the point of sinking and where at rest at the port getting repaied. It took almost a month before they where ready.

But this is the way that I new the mines had done the damage. And the battle was at night and the shore battries did not fire.

[NormKoger]

Last week while I was running some tests on the campaign game, I experienced a very strange "battle". My Vladivostok cruisers were returning to port after an uneventful cruise around the Japanese islands when just outside of Vladivostok a battle finally spawned. A lone Japanese auxiliary cruiser was lurking just outside the base. But wait - it already had a black dot. The thing was sinking. At first I was concerned that I had run into a bug. I couldn't figure how this could have happened. I knew I had not encountered this ship before. Then I looked at the log. The aux cruiser had hit a Russian mine about 20 minutes before my cruisers spotted it and spawned the battle. I got there just in time to watch it sink.

[saddletank]

When I was playing the Russian campaign the Japanese had an old weak cruiser called 'Sumo', I distinctly recall seeing it in a couple of Sea of Japan area fights.

Now I'm playing the Japanese campaign and I simply don't have that ship, never have done right from day 1.

Could it have been lost to a mine very very early on?

If you have losses to mines are you notified of them?

[Mowers]

Is it that people are finding that their ships are deployed in the concentric mine rings around harbours at the begining of a scenario and thus then hitting a mine?

Or do mine fields ever appear "away" from the harbour? aside from the concentric mine fields?

has ANYONE ever lost a ship on the strategic map?

[Bullethead]

Is it that people are finding that their ships are deployed in the concentric mine rings around harbours at the begining of a scenario and thus then hitting a mine?

As the Russians, many times I've had ships spawn at the beginning of a battle inside the infamous "Takeshiki Circle". However, I've always managed to get them out of it undamaged. I do occasionally hear a loud explosion while my ships are inside the circle, but I never see any source for it--no flash, no splash, and no damage done. I wish, however, that NO ship would ever spawn inside a minefield circle. Going into minefields should be a battle-only tactical decision. Besides, the inability to give turning orders to ships within the circles, unless the POV is outside the circle, is a real pain.

Or do mine fields ever appear "away" from the harbour? aside from the concentric mine fields?

You can only lay mines at ports and naval bases, not in the open sea (rather unrealistic IMHO, at least for coastal areas). Because of this rule, all minefields are centered on port symbols (circled anchors) on the map. Unfortunately, there is no consistency between the size of the minefield areas around the ports.

has ANYONE ever lost a ship on the strategic map?

I haven't, but that's because don't send my ships to hexes I know have enemy mines. Someday maybe I'll run a purely test campaign and spend a lot of time in enemy minefields just to see if I can lose a ship on the campaign map.

[Mowers]

You can only lay mines at ports and naval bases, not in the open sea (rather unrealistic IMHO, at least for coastal areas). Because of this rule, all minefields are centered on port symbols (circled anchors) on the map. Unfortunately, there is no consistency between the size of the minefield areas around the ports.

Thanks Bullethead.

So basically mines only work if your ships randomly appear in the concentric circle at the begining of a map and appear to have no effect on the strategic map.

So in effect mines are all but worthless at the current time?

Can I suggest that this is examined, is this what was really intended? Its a core part of the conflict and seems very strangely implemented at the moment.

[saddletank]

No, mines on the campaign map do work. I had an encounter off Port Arthur yesterday evening and when it started I noticed yellow dots on 2 of my ships. One DD had 71% steering damage and another had 22% propulsion damage. I assume these are mine damage I'd run into previously.

However what I would like is a pop up event saying your ship had hit a mine. So you can check te TF and send the cripples home. Ship damage can't be inspected closely on the camapign screen, only in battle and by then it's too late to find out :)

[pthomas]

hey bullethead......it just occurred to me that maybe the inability to maneuver in the minefield area is a function of the fact that the AI takes over maneuvering in tight places (i.e. to avoid torpedoes, etc.).....maybe we can't set maneuver points within the circle because they wouldn't be valid anyways.......like to hear from the devs on this point

[saddletank]

As the Japanese retreating from a stronger Russian force I steered as course into Mansanpo harbour. And once in the mine marked zone I could not issue turn orders. I assumed this was to represent my ships moving down a swept channel.

The pursuing Russians turned aside at the edge of the marked zone.

Likewise as Russians entering Port Arthur I have experienced the same effect.

[NormKoger]

So basically mines only work if your ships randomly appear in the concentric circle at the begining of a map...
Actually, the circles around bases are base defenses. These are treated as minefields of varying densities, (inner is much more dense than outer) and they are independent of the number of player deployed mines in the battle space.

If mines are deployed in an area where a battle spawns, they are then placed as separate fields. I think the reason you are not seeing them is that the contrast of the mine graphic on the water surface is very low - perhaps too low on some systems. I noticed the other day when running a test that the mine graphics near ports have become more subtle than they used to be - and I think this happened as a result of a driver change. Tomorrow I plan to install a new set of drivers that just became available for my card. If the mines are still difficult to see, I will play around with adjusting the graphic alpha value.

[Bullethead]

Tomorrow I plan to install a new set of drivers that just became available for my card. If the mines are still difficult to see, I will play around with adjusting the graphic alpha value.

Thanks for the word. I'm glad you have mines in discrete clumps within the circles :).

I don't have the luxury of changing my vid driver. Because I've got a laptop, I can't get drivers direct from ATI but have to wait on Dell to make a version, and no telling when that'll happen. As it stands right now, the on-water minefield graphics are totally invisible to me, so please tweak their visibility whether you can see them or not :).

[alanschu]

How long to mines take to load?

I just started a campaign as the Russians, and I'm chilling inside port waiting for mines, but it's still 0. I have only gone about a day into the campaign however.

[saddletank]

As soon as you order a make ready and plot a mission you should find you have mines loaded.

[Brommer]

You should also be aware of a small bug:
If you have a task force loaded with mines running around somewhere at sea, save the game and reload it, the mines will be gone. I´m quite sure this has not been fixed with 1.018.

[saddletank]

That's interesting. I thought a mine-capable TF only loaded mines when you gave it a mine laying mission. Just because a ship can lay mines does not mean it carries mines everytime it leaves port. In modern parlance you have to give it the load-out for the task assigned to it. Varyag (which carries racks for 22 mines) can't be sent to patrol off Tsushima to sink a few Marus and on the way home be told to lay mines off Chemulpo. You have to send it out on a minelaying sortie first, then when that job is done you can go on a raiding cruise.

Kind of like a modern MRCA, you can bomb then go on CAP but don't try going on CAP with your bombs still on the pylons.

At least that is the way the software seems to be working in the games I'm playing.

[Mowers]

I am now in day 320? Or more of the campaign (its May 1905) and I have yet to lose a single ship on the strategic OR tactical map to enemy mines.

I have yet to see a single ship (although I suspect one) be lost through my placement of some 15,000+ mines being laid in key military points between PA and Korea. Neither in the tactical battles or strategic battles.

I am also pretty sure, through testing, that not a single transport was sunk despite some 10,000 mines being laid in key Japanese and korean transport ports over some 60 days.

Norm? Anyone? Whats the deal? Do mines really work?

[saddletank]

Mowers, if you've not lost a ship to mines maybe the enemy isn't laying any?

How do you know what ships the enemy has lost to mines? There is nothing to tell you until the end of the game (and I haven't heard a report from anyone who's reached the end of the game if there is a loss report).

You claim to have laid 25,000+ mines in 320 days. That's 78 every single day. I suggest that you are exaggerating as that minelaying rate is clearly impossible to the ports you describe (Elliot Isles, Chemulpo, Assan Basin and the small civilian ports between PA and Chemulpo). Going further afiled to the Tsushima Strait region will take such a long voyage turn around time you cannot possibly lay 25,000+ mines in this time.

Note also there is a 600 mine cap at each port, but with a 50% half life attrition rate per week at military ports and 50% per month at civilian ports it would be impossible to maintain this 600 cap at so many ports with thelimited resources 1st Pac Sqn has available. I therefore think the number of mines in the water at these ports is a lot less than you think. Only Elliot Islands, Chemulpo and Assan Basin are worth mining anyway, too little activity at the others and too distant to Tsushima I think.

Sorry to disagree with you but I think your calculations went wrong somewhere.

[Mowers]

Mowers, if you've not lost a ship to mines maybe the enemy isn't laying any?

maybe!


How do you know what ships the enemy has lost to mines? There is nothing to tell you until the end of the game (and I haven't heard a report from anyone who's reached the end of the game if there is a loss report).

I have got a year into the game and the only Japanese ships that appear to be missing are ones that I have sunk.


You claim to have laid 25,000+ mines in 320 days. That's 78 every single day. I suggest that you are exaggerating as that minelaying rate is clearly impossible to the ports you describe (Elliot Isles, Chemulpo, Assan Basin and the small civilian ports between PA and Chemulpo). Going further afiled to the Tsushima Strait region will take such a long voyage turn around time you cannot possibly lay 25,000+ mines in this time.

78 a day isnt difficult.
3 mine fleets, one with 500, another with 500 and a third with DDs etc makes another couple hundred. Each fleet goes on a mission at least once a week.
Thats at minimum 1200 a week. Times 52 weeks thats over 62,000 mines.
I have one 500 mine minelayer in Vladivostock and it can often get 3 missions done in a 2 week period.

So no, not exagerating to make a point. But lets say 5000 of the 20,000 were double counted at the peninsular of Korea. Still thats still 20,000. Thats only 16 missions worth for each group.




Note also there is a 600 mine cap at each port, but with a 50% half life attrition rate per week at military ports and 50% per month at civilian ports it would be impossible to maintain this 600 cap at so many ports with thelimited resources 1st Pac Sqn has available. I therefore think the number of mines in the water at these ports is a lot less than you think. Only Elliot Islands, Chemulpo and Assan Basin are worth mining anyway, too little activity at the others and too distant to Tsushima I think.

Sure they decline over time - but thats not my point....

I do mine at Tsushima quite alot though in the hope that a transport might hit a mine.

But right now, after alot of mining, I do not believe that transports or military fleets hit mines in strategic mode which doesnt make any sense :(




Sorry to disagree with you but I think your calculations went wrong somewhere.

disagree away! :)

If being wrong means I get to the bottom of this then great!

[saddletank]

Yup, we do need Norm to drop by and put this one to bed :)

[Hud]

Just a question and sorry if it is obvious and has been covered before. Is it possible for the Japanese to mine Vladivostok? I am playing the Japanese in my current campaign and it would be rather usefull if I could. I have been mining Port Arthur like mad, about 200 or so but the squadron there seemed to get out unscathed.

[Daedalus]

Just a question and sorry if it is obvious and has been covered before. Is it possible for the Japanese to mine Vladivostok? I am playing the Japanese in my current campaign and it would be rather usefull if I could. I have been mining Port Arthur like mad, about 200 or so but the squadron there seemed to get out unscathed.

I have been keeping an eye on this thread, and I just thought of something. We have ships laying mines and keeping them up to the limit. I wonder if we also have mine sweepers looking for mines to let the ships out!
I do not know if this is what is up but I would like to get Jim,s or Norm,s word on if they are looked for. Because if this is what is up then one would understand why it is so hard to see a ship hit. But I do know that I have had japanese ships damaged around port authur by mines.

[saddletank]

I wonder if we also have mine sweepers looking for mines to let the ships out!

Yes, the manual does state that at military ports enemy minesweepers will remove mines which is one reason why the attrition rate off military ports is higher.

[Daedalus]

I looked for that twice in the manual and did not see it. I thought I had, thanks now I will quit looking. :) But I thought it had said there where minesweepers working the ports.

[Bullethead]

Just a question and sorry if it is obvious and has been covered before. Is it possible for the Japanese to mine Vladivostok?

Sure, you can lay mines at any port or naval base, whether friendly, enemy, or neutral, and that includes Vladivostok. Whether it's worth the trouble is a different matter entirely, however.

For the sake of argument, assume that all the problems noted in this thread so far with minefields don't exist. Pretend mines are deadly and all fields extend into areas where enemy ships might actually venture. The question then boils down to whether or not it's a good idea of the IJN to put offensive mines at Vlad.

IMHO, offensive mining at Vlad is a waste of time. At the start of the campaign, the entirety of the IJN's minelaying capability is contained within the 2nd Destroyer Squadron, which together IIRC can carry only 56 mines. Even if all problems with mines are resolved, that's still got to be insignificant compared to the Russian capability, so don't expect much from these DDs. Furthermore, all these ships begin the campaign on the Port Arthur front, and if you do the version of the campaign where you play out the attack on Port Arthur, you might lose some of them. But even assuming you've got them all to start with, you still have to get them to Vlad, which requires either some base-hopping with a 24-hr delay at each base, or mixing in some cruisers with them to give them the necessary range to reach Vlad.

Either way, by the time you accomplish all that, you very likely will already have disposed of the Vlad forces. The 21-knot ACs can get there much quicker, blockade Vlad, and usually kill the Russian cruisers by 14 Feb. Then there's no need for mines at Vlad.

[Hud]

Thanks Bullethead. You are correct in what you say and as always, having read your posts the advice you give is sound. Problem is I have failed my Emperor, my country and my people. Not only have I allowed the PA squadron to escape to Vlad, but the 2nd Pacific Squadron as well. I am desperately trying to retreive the situation and mining Vlad is one desperate idea. After having destroyed the Vlad squadron in the 1st few weeks of the war. I believe there is only the one honourable thing left to do.

[Mobeer]

Sure, you can lay mines at any port or naval base, whether friendly, enemy, or neutral, and that includes Vladivostok. Whether it's worth the trouble is a different matter entirely, however.

Are you sure about this?
I just tried starting a new human vs human campaign. I get no option to mine any defended naval base. I only get the option to mine for friendly, neutral or undefended enemy naval bases.


IMHO, offensive mining at Vlad is a waste of time. At the start of the campaign, the entirety of the IJN's minelaying capability is contained within the 2nd Destroyer Squadron, which together IIRC can carry only 56 mines.

Both Japanese destroyer squadrons can lay mines, giving a total of 152 mines on 19 destroyers. These can keep Port Arthur heavily mined if used every other night from the naval base near Port Arthur, even if a few destroyers are lost.

The Japanese will also receive a mine layer as a reinforcement, which carries about 32 mines and is much slower than the destroyers. Even so it can still get to and from Port Arthur in a night mission.

[Mowers]

But has anyone ever lost a ship on the strategic map to a mine?

[Daedalus]

But has anyone ever lost a ship on the strategic map to a mine?

I don't know if anyone has or not. I think that is what we are looking for, to see if they have. I do know that I have gone from the strategic map to a battle and had a japanese ship sinking as it was leaving my port area.
This had to happen while on the strategic map as he was not close enough to the port to have hit a mine while in the battle map.

[Mowers]

I don't know if anyone has or not. I think that is what we are looking for, to see if they have. I do know that I have gone from the strategic map to a battle and had a japanese ship sinking as it was leaving my port area.
This had to happen while on the strategic map as he was not close enough to the port to have hit a mine while in the battle map.

Or did the ship in the opening seconds of a tactical map hit a mine?

Apparently there are mines random on the harbour map in addition to the concentric mines immediately around a habour

I have had that happen.

Has anyone ever noticed that a ship was missing or got a message that one of their ships had ever hit a mine on whilst not on the tactical map.

[Daedalus]

Or did the ship in the opening seconds of a tactical map hit a mine?

Apparently there are mines random on the harbour map in addition to the concentric mines immediately around a habour

I have had that happen.

Has anyone ever noticed that a ship was missing or got a message that one of their ships had ever hit a mine on whilst not on the tactical map.

I don't think so, the ship was far enough away from the port that I do not think it could have been in the mine field.
When I say we where near the port we where but not close like when you have a battle just outside of the port. I can't tell you how far we where from the port as I did not check, but we where out quite away.
Now can I say that this is what happed with out thought, no. But I am all but sure that it hit the mine before I got into the battle map.
Norm has a post here also where he had something like this happen to him and the mine had to strike the ship out side of the battle map.

[saddletank]

But has anyone ever lost a ship on the strategic map to a mine?

I have never been told about it but then in the Japanese campaign I'm playing I have never had a cruiser called Suma which I know is in the fleet list. Maybe I lost her very early on to a mine... if so I got no notification.

[Daedalus]

I have never been told about it but then in the Japanese campaign I'm playing I have never had a cruiser called Suma which I know is in the fleet list. Maybe I lost her very early on to a mine... if so I got no notification.

Yea, I have had that happen to me also. But I always thought that I was just not up on the game and missed the notice. I also had an anoucement that some CA,s had entered the game but never have seen them. But they may be in the fleet on it,s way to the war.

[saddletank]

The Japanese get 2 CAs which spawn at Masanpo (the Nisshin and Kasuga) about March 1904 and they get 2 PCs and about 3 DDs that spawn at Sasebo later in 1904 and early in 1905 all in single ship batches. Their minelayer spawns at Masanpo late in 1904. I think it works out to about 8 ships in total. The Russians only get the 2nd Pacific Sqn.

Rats, sorry, going off topic again...

[Bullethead]

Are you sure about this? I just tried starting a new human vs human campaign. I get no option to mine any defended naval base. I only get the option to mine for friendly, neutral or undefended enemy naval bases.

Hmmm.....

I was sure about it, because I know I used to mine defended naval bases. But to make sure, I just tried to mine Port Arthur, and it didn't work.

However, it TRIED to work. That is, I got the mine icon order button when hovering over Port Arthur, and the DDs' info panels all said they were going there to lay mines. So everything looked OK to that point. But when they left port, they hadn't loaded mines (they had 0/xx). When they got to PA, the turned around and came home. There was never any message saying they'd laid mines, and no IJN mines were shown at PA on the campaign map.

Just sent in a bug report about this.

BTW, thanks for correcting me on the IJN mine capacity.

[saddletank]

As the Japanese I've been laying mines at Port Arthur successfully for months. Everything shows up OK in the port flyout. There's actually nowhere else useful for the Japanese to mine.

[Mobeer]

I think there's some confusion over defended vs. undefended Naval bases. I can mine undefended naval bases (e.g., Port Arthur) but not defended naval bases (e.g., Vladivostock). The difference in status appears on the popup for the base, and is also signified by the presence of the shield icon.

A defended base (Tokyo):
17487

An undefended base (Port Arthur):
17488

[saddletank]

I think you have that the wrong way round. An anchor with a circle round it is a MILITARY port. An anchor without a circle is a CIVIL port. I haven't come across the descriptions 'defended' and 'undefended' although I guess they are synonymous with MILITARY and CIVIL.

Maybe Vlad can't be mined because of the ice?

[Bullethead]

I think you have that the wrong way round. An anchor with a circle round it is a MILITARY port. An anchor without a circle is a CIVIL port. I haven't come across the descriptions 'defended' and 'undefended' although I guess they are synonymous with MILITARY and CIVIL.

No, there are defended and undefended military bases, as opposed to civil ports. You can see this on the map when you put the cursor over them. If the naval base (circled anchor) is defended, you will see the words "Defended naval base" in the flyover text box. If it isn't a defended naval base, then it says nothing about defenses.

Sasebo, Masanpo, Kure, Kobe, and Ominato or whatever are Japanese defended naval bases. Elliot Islands, Takeshiki, and Yokasuka are undefended naval bases.

The Russians only have 2 naval bases, Vladivostok and Port Arthur. The former says it's a defended naval base, whereas PA says nothing. Which is strange, because it's got all those shore batteries.

I think that the difference is that a defended naval base automatically has thick minefields around it. How else can Vladivostok say it's got Russian mines there at the start of the campaign, when there's no minelaying ships within hundreds of miles, while PA, with all the minelayers, has no mines unless the player lays them? But if that's the case, why are the minefields at Port Arthur uselessly trapped inside the inner harbor where no ship ever ventures in battle, and where they'd be a hazard to all the lighters, scows, and bumboats?

I've obviously been assuming too much. All along I've been thinking PA was a defended base because of the shore batteries, and had never snapped to it not saying it was defended until just now :angry:

But anyway, I can't lay mines at PA. Haven't tried at Vlad yet.

[saddletank]

But anyway, I can't lay mines at PA. Haven't tried at Vlad yet.

As a Russian player, or Japanese?

[Bullethead]

As a Russian player, or Japanese?

As the Japanese.

My Japanese minelaying experience is that I can only lay defensive mines at my own bases via ships resting in port. Because this works, I know mines are available at the bases where my minelayers live. However, they refuse to load them up for offensive missions to Port Arthur, even though they accept minelaying orders for that target.

[saddletank]

I can lay mines fine at PA as Japanese, based on Elliot Island. I got the minefield up to 450-odd once. It attrites away like a sandcastle at high tide though if you don't keep working away at maintaining it - and it's this 'treadmill of drudgery' part of maintaining the minefield I just can't agree is realistic. I gave up after about 6 weeks, it was too much like my day job...

[Daedalus]

As the Japanese.

My Japanese minelaying experience is that I can only lay defensive mines at my own bases via ships resting in port. Because this works, I know mines are available at the bases where my minelayers live. However, they refuse to load them up for offensive missions to Port Arthur, even though they accept minelaying orders for that target.

Bullethead try what I did, I took my minelayers and put just a few ships with them and sent them as there on convoy, when I did that they seemed to work. Also I had them get ready before I setup the voyage track for them. Let me know how this works for you , or if you have already done this.

[Mowers]

Well this thread has had nearly a 1000 views now and not a single person has said that :

1) They have had a single incident of a transport ship being sunk by a mine

2) They have had a single ship sunk on the strategic map


I can only assume that mines dont work.

Roll on the next patch and lets hope it makes mines have a realistic effect! ;) :yummy:

[Daedalus]

Well this thread has had nearly a 1000 views now and not a single person has said that :

1) They have had a single incident of a transport ship being sunk by a mine

2) They have had a single ship sunk on the strategic map


I can only assume that mines dont work.

Roll on the next patch and lets hope it makes mines have a realistic effect! ;) :yummy:

Hmm, what they are saying is that there does not seem to be any good way to tell! I think that they have as in mine. But like the others I can not prove it.

[alanschu]

I have had some instances when a fight starts off in mined waters that a Japanese ship has started off immediately sunk.

Don't know if it was a mine or not.

[Daedalus]

I have had some instances when a fight starts off in mined waters that a Japanese ship has started off immediately sunk.

Don't know if it was a mine or not.

That is what I have seen also. And the damage was on the waterline of the ship. I have had this happen more than once in battles, and I do think that some if not most are damaged due to mines.
Maybe Norm or someone can fix something that will let us know if a ship or ships are sunk or damaged by mines.

[saddletank]

Well this thread has had nearly a 1000 views now and not a single person has said that :

1) They have had a single incident of a transport ship being sunk by a mine

2) They have had a single ship sunk on the strategic map


I can only assume that mines dont work.

Roll on the next patch and lets hope it makes mines have a realistic effect! ;) :yummy:

No, I have already categorically said I have lost a ship - the Suma, but I cannot say how it was lost. We do not know if mines don't work, or if they do work but we can't tell, as there is no report from mine losses.

Norm has also stated on this forum that they DO work and WILL sink ships on the map and I tend to not think Norm would come out here and tell us whoppers.

[Daedalus]

No, I have already categorically said I have lost a ship - the Suma, but I cannot say how it was lost. We do not know if mines don't work, or if they do work but we can't tell, as there is no report from mine losses.

Norm has also stated on this forum that they DO work and WILL sink ships on the map and I tend to not think Norm would come out here and tell us whoppers.

I agree, and when Norm states something I take it as fact inless he says other wise. I think we can count on them working. I know that what happend to me was a ship that was damaged by the mines, there was just no other way that I could see. I am going to carry on as they work because I do think they do.

All the mines that where layed in the english channel in the war you would have thought that every ship that went through there would have been sunk, and not that many where compared to the mines that where put down.

[saddletank]

I think the problem is one of feedback - we just have no idea if ship X was lost to mines or it strayed too close to some shore batteries, or it just ran into Korea by mistake ;)

In WWI ships (esp subs) would just vanish and you'd never know what happened but the loss of surface ships without you eventually finding out it was a mine loss or torpedo etc were very very rare. Maybe after a week or a month (if the ship was alone) you'd find out from wreckage washed ashore etc. If the ship was lost in the company of others we definitely need a report of what happened on the day it happened.

[Bullethead]

If the ship was lost in the company of others we definitely need a report of what happened on the day it happened.

I dunno. Remember, navies are big bureaucracies, and the natural order of things in bureaucracies is that survivors and bad-news messengers get hanged. Knowing this, no doubt our in-game captains agree amongst themselves, after the loss of one of their fellows to a mine, to report that the missing ship just lost company in a fogbank and will no doubt turn up later safe and sound. If (when) this doesn't happen, then the missing ship's captain will be blamed for coming to grief while skylarking off on his own, or possibly suspected of defecting or deserting. In any case, no taint will adhere to the others who were there at the time of the mining :D.

[Mowers]

No, I have already categorically said I have lost a ship - the Suma, but I cannot say how it was lost. We do not know if mines don't work, or if they do work but we can't tell, as there is no report from mine losses.

You said you lost it on the TACTICAL map. NOT the strategic map?

Or did I misunderstand you?

I have also lost a ship on the tactical map - that is not my point - read what I have written again!



Norm has also stated on this forum that they DO work and WILL sink ships on the map and I tend to not think Norm would come out here and tell us whoppers.

Dont be silly, this is a serious thread, no one is accusing anyone of lies. Lets try and stick to sensible debate here. Its too early in the morning for anything else!

What I am saying is that NO ONE has said that they have lost a single ship on the STRATEGIC map and that I nor anyone else has seen any evidence of transports being sunk by mines. Therefore I think its a fair assumption that mines are not working realistically and thats hardly contencious.

[Mowers]

Hmm, what they are saying is that there does not seem to be any good way to tell! I think that they have as in mine. But like the others I can not prove it.

Nor can I and I cant take apart the program to demonstrate the point. Some input would be useful from the developers because I cant prove anything.

But right now I am fairly confident that mines dont work in game in any meaningful or realistic way.

[saddletank]

Mowers, no I lost a ship on the strategic map. Or rather what happened was I never found a ship I know is in the lists. Like I never recieved it in the first place. Or it was a possible very early mine casualty before I began keeping paper scribble records of what I had where.

[Mowers]

I see total mine stocks have been limited. Good news.

However, I see nothing yet that confirms that mines work on the strategic map OR effect shipping.

Whats the plan or situation? :)

[NormKoger]

It would in theory bend the fog of war, but I imagine it wouldn't hurt too much if I made sure that mine strikes were reported in the permanent news record. That should resolve the question once and for all for folks who have not directly experienced campaign map mine strikes.

[Zouave]

Re mines: having just about finished reading A Naval History of World War I, it's clear that the naval commanders spent just as much time, if not more, worrying about mines than they did about enemy ships. Mine laying was also a major focus of both offensive and defensive operations. Wasn't Kitchener lost to mine on his way to Russia?

Re mines in the game, I failed to notice one of those lone minefields outside Port Arthur during a battle, and watched as my line of BB's sailed right through it. I heard two explosions, but did not see any noticeable damage.

[Mowers]

It would in theory bend the fog of war, but I imagine it wouldn't hurt too much if I made sure that mine strikes were reported in the permanent news record. That should resolve the question once and for all for folks who have not directly experienced campaign map mine strikes.

Thanks!
I think its fair to say that if one was to lose a ship to a mine, regardless of whether its a transporter or a war ship that you would know about it unless the ship was alone and didnt have wireless. Still, you ought to be told that a ship was actually missing !

[saddletank]

I would not want to see enemy (AI) mine losses reported in the news that the player reads, that would be giving too much away.

[Mowers]

I would not want to see enemy (AI) mine losses reported in the news that the player reads, that would be giving too much away.

Yep, knowing YOU have lost a ship is a must, knowing that the enemy has lost a ship to a mine is not realistic. The Japanese went to great lengths to hide lost ships.

[ADM_SCHEER]

Yep, knowing YOU have lost a ship is a must, knowing that the enemy has lost a ship to a mine is not realistic. The Japanese went to great lengths to hide lost ships.

I would rather see a damage scorecard at the end of the game which lists the condition of all ships that had played in the campaign and what their fate had been including sunk by who or what. (I realize that many ships can contribute to the sinking of a ship, but you should be able to make the award based on who did the most or first critical damage)


I've got my graphics turned up to 'full detail' and I am able to see friendly mines scatterd in the vicinity of the port where I laid them. For me they are actually easier to spot on the minimap, they look like a small smudge or island when you put the cursor on it the telescope view shows you the pointy little devil under the surface. Looking at the combat screen you can see the mine under the surface also if you put the cusor on the mine in the water it will tell you Danger Minefield!

I have tried without success to lure IJN into these fields but so far no luck. But I have had my own ship blow up trying to cut the corner too close to the Elliott Island.

All in all I believe Mines are working correctly.

Scheer out

[Manic Moran]

I'm beginning to think that the AI knows where the 'scattered' mines are.

I've got a fairly heavily mined area around Port Arthur, Elliot Isles, and that W place South of the Elliots. On tactical screen, there's the occasional 'Minefield, Danger!' tile. Well, I'm trying to entice the AI to drive over one of the minefields, and they perpetually appear to avoid them deliberately.

Worse, when I thought I had the enemy 'in line' with the mines, and about to run over them, the map shifted... the minefield tiles all jumped to stay in their original locations compared to the miniview world, but all the ships moved to where you'd expect. As a result, my clever lining up was all for naught.

NTM

[Haida]

I'm beginning to think that the AI knows where the 'scattered' mines are.
NTM

The mines are too scattered in my opinion. If you're the Russian and you drop 600 mines at Elliot Islands the majority of them ought to be clustered close to that base, not scattered all over. A minefield should be a barrier. Ships should not be able to maneuver their way through one.

Petropavlovsk, Hatsuse and Yashima were all lost to mines in RL, and that was just among the battleships. I haven't seen any ships lost to mines in the game. Playing the Russian side I have had 500+ mines at PA, EI and Weiheiwai simultaneously and it does me no good at all. The Japanese steam all around at will without taking damage.

[Bullethead]

The mines are too scattered in my opinion. If you're the Russian and you drop 600 mines at Elliot Islands the majority of them ought to be clustered close to that base, not scattered all over.

I agree. In real life, mines are laid in lines because the ship is steaming along and the mines are falling off the stern. If you want to make more than 1 line of mines, you either need several minelayers steaming in parallel or 1 minelayer doing a "lawn mower" pattern back and forth. The result is a rectangular array of mines.

In real life, mines are also placed where they do the most good. This means they're put where ships are expected to go. Near ports, this means in the channels and off points of land that ships entering or leaving the port by their usual paths will cut close to. Putting mines elsewhere is a waste, because the targets don't go there.

Another reason for not having scattered mines is the problems they cause friendly units. When you lay mines, you need to know exactly where they are so you can tell your buddies about them. This is possible with solid blocks of mines, but next to impossible with mines scattered all over in little clumps. In pre-GPS days, the location of a minefield on a chart was only as good as the navigation of the minelayer, which was often operating in darkness, in bad weather, and without peacetime navigation aids to check its position. History is full of examples of the position of mines not matching their charted position due to navigational errors or sloppy work by the minelayer, and friendly sinkings resulting. But at least with solid blocks of mines, you could add a margin of error around their positions and still be pretty safe most of the time. With scattered mines, the margins of error of each group would overlap, making the whole area unsafe.