Hamstersss Posted August 13, 2002 Share Posted August 13, 2002 Can a Battleship or cruiser be added near Sevastopol in the next patch, to represent this missing fleet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Not worth it IMO - the Black Sea Fleet, like the Baltic Fleet, should be considered as part of the fortifications of it's base city (Sevastopol and Leningrad). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 14, 2002 Author Share Posted August 14, 2002 I was under the impression the two cruisers next to Leningrad represented the Baltic Fleet. Is this incorrect? For Reference Black Sea Fleet: 1 battleship 6 cruisers 18 destroyers 44 submarines Baltic Fleet: 2 battleships 4 cruisers 30 destroyers & torpedo-boats 69 submarines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Just go to the editor and fix it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 14, 2002 Author Share Posted August 14, 2002 Originally posted by Carl Von Mannerheim: Just go to the editor and fix itThen you've activated Russia, which is a bit disconcerting to Germany in 1939... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 edit it into the 1941 Campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Yeah - sorry for not being clearer. The 2 cruisers do represent eth Baltic fleet, but, IMO, they shouldn't be there 'cos teh Baltic fleet was pretty much totally penned in by the Axis control of both coasts of het Gulf of Finland, and also it jsut wasn't very effective even when it wasn't hemmed in. At this scale of theings making Leningrad a fortress is sufficient to account for the Baltic fleet. So IMO you should ditch it, not add in an equally anachronistic Black Sea Fleet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 14, 2002 Author Share Posted August 14, 2002 Originally posted by Mike: Yeah - sorry for not being clearer. The 2 cruisers do represent eth Baltic fleet, but, IMO, they shouldn't be there 'cos teh Baltic fleet was pretty much totally penned in by the Axis control of both coasts of het Gulf of Finland, and also it jsut wasn't very effective even when it wasn't hemmed in. At this scale of theings making Leningrad a fortress is sufficient to account for the Baltic fleet. So IMO you should ditch it, not add in an equally anachronistic Black Sea Fleet.I know I'm being contentious and I know it's not too big a deal, but isn't that more an issue of a lack of naval supply rules than a real game issue? Shouldn't the Russian player have the option to deploy the fleet, even if it's not any good? To me, games like this are a question of what-if, and I think a more historic set of forces (Within the confines of the game) allows for a more realistic appraisal of any what-if scenario. Case in point, the conquest of Turkey or Turkish collusion allows for Italian and German forces to pour through an unprotected Black Sea. In reality, they would have had to put up with some kind of fight, which sort of shoots any Turkish what-if in the foot. There's no sea supply rules, granted, and that makes ships a little more robust than they should be, but let's not throw the admittedly puny Russian fleets out the window just because of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 I thought there weer some sea supply rules - at least Fleets ahve a supply factor which sems to change somehow........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sol Invictus Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 The longer and farther a navy operates from a friendly port, the worse it's supply situation becomes. You dont want to fight a naval battle if your entire fleet is at Supply Level 0 while the enemy fleet is at 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norse Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 You could spend some of Russias initial MPP's on a cruiser-fleet in the Black Sea. I think, after all, it only started bombarding German units in '42, not in '41. Am I right? [ August 14, 2002, 05:16 AM: Message edited by: Norse ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvercloud Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Norse, you ROCK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norse Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Originally posted by Silvercloud: Norse, you ROCK! Not as much as you Silvercloud, you're my hero! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 This might not be a bad idea actually, it might at least make the Turkey option a bit more interesting. Anyone know of some SU cruiser/battleship names that were stationed in the black sea Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck_para Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Originally posted by Hubert Cater: This might not be a bad idea actually, it might at least make the Turkey option a bit more interesting. Anyone know of some SU cruiser/battleship names that were stationed in the black sea HubertThe cruiser SHAUMAYAN of the Black Sea Fleet. The Soviet battleship Parishskaya Kommuna (later called the Sevastopol)was part of the Black Sea fleet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Thanks! Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck_para Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Originally posted by Hubert Cater: Thanks! HubertNo prob! Of course if you want to be thankful you could name the ship after me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 14, 2002 Author Share Posted August 14, 2002 Hubert, what's your take on the Russian submarines? Italy entered the war with about a hundred, and that's represented, and Russia has about a hundred if you total the Baltic and Black Sea fleets. I'm not too sure of their quality but the Italians weren't known for the quality of their boats, either. How do you plan to represent the Black Sea Fleet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Patch Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 I've always had a soft spot for the Pamiat Merkuriya . . . although by 1939 she was just a training ship, she did fight at Sevastopol. Don't bother with the Russian submarines, they were awful - in 4 years they only sank 28 warships and 108 freighters (254,000 tons) and never interferred with the German U-Boat training in the Baltic. They lost 108 submarines doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Oh God - russian subs too?? sheesh - I dont' think I'll be downloading any such patch!! IIRC Rusian subs in the Baltic sank 156 ships according to some counts. And they lost 156 submarines doing it. The largest ship they sank was a Swedish merchant of about 10,000 tons, the largest warship was a German destroyer. Arguably their minelaying might've been their most effective weapon. Somewhere at home I've got a fairly large and comprehensive work on the Soviet navy of WW2 - it makes sad reading!! Hubert IMO the answer to the Turkish gambit is not a Soviet fleet - it is making the Dardanelles as difficult to get past as Gibralter. [ August 14, 2002, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: Mike ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 How do you plan to represent the Black Sea Fleet?I have to agree with Mike when it comes to the Russian subs, but I think a cruiser or two should do the trick and make things a bit more interesting. Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 While we're at it can we ad- (everyone in the room tackles and puts their hands over CvM's mouth) [ August 14, 2002, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: Carl Von Mannerheim ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norse Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 Hubert, please check the size and quality of the Russian fleet before doing this. If you plan to give them a couple more cruisers, then there should be room to add naval forces for Turkey, Spain and Sweeden as well. As someone pointed out in another thread, the backbone of the Sweedish fleet was a line of modern destroyers. Atleast consider this, so your final decision will be right (screw playbalance, let em deal with the harsh realities of a military defence ). ~Norse~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 (CvM) escapes from his tormentors) "And a strength five cruiser fo finland" or not... :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 15, 2002 Author Share Posted August 15, 2002 Reread my post, Mike, I wasn't advocating Russian subs, I was merely pointing out quantity. As I recall, Italian submarine forces didn't have any significant effect upon the war, either, but they're included for accuracy and they total the amount of Russian submarines. Now, if the Russian submarine fleet is of inferior quality to the Italian submarine fleet, then they shouldn't be included, but if they were just misused, then that shouldn't limit their consideration. After all, if misuse is the determining factor in not representing a unit, than the whole French Army should be out of the game. As to the inclusion of Sweeds and Turks, take a look at the makeup of the Black Sea fleet, it's not exactly a line of destroyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts