question from new gamer

[Lars]

Originally posted by Dariuz Kowolski:

Will oceans have different depths so subs cant dive so deep everywhere? That would make them more vunerable to asw. If not sc2 will be unrealistic. Patroling salty water should make subs more rusty and more prone to damage.

Actually, not a bad idea.

You'd just need to add two types of hex (one shallow and one deep), and would better reflect the situation in the Med, where the problem was most prevalent.

Could also be handy for storms.

[JerseyJohn]

The problem with the original question is that WW2 subs didn't dive very deep by postwar standards. I don't know if showing deeper water would have any real meaning in that regard. In the Mediteranean the main problem was the water was clear, with subs more easily visable to aircraft.

[Soddball]

Originally posted by Fubarno:

@ Soddball - I definetly make no claims to defend Rambo's so-called "atropied" brain, but I must say that if you condemn the facts coming from the History Channel over the "facts", so frequently decietfull, coming out of the White House, then I must seriously question your faculties.

What I think you meant was the National Archives and not the White House.

If you think I'm going to defend the White House, you're sorely mistaken. Yes, I did mean the national archives, but being English didn't remember the correct term.

And I was referring to waltero's atrophied brain. We argued long and hard in the general forum over why it was unlikely that someone who had got all his knowledge of the war from GI Joe comics (as he has) could really understand it - he is under the impression that 'reading' is bad for the intellect.

[Lars]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

The problem with the original question is that WW2 subs didn't dive very deep by postwar standards. I don't know if showing deeper water would have any real meaning in that regard. In the Mediteranean the main problem was the water was clear, with subs more easily visable to aircraft.

Well, if we really want to get into this...

Cold water oceans are murky due to the bottom being warmer than the top, which brings up nutrients to feed plankton, which clouds up the water. Doesn't happen in warm water, which is why the Med (and Caribbean) is a lot clearer.

Then, in coastal areas, you also have currents and turbidity from runoff. For real fun, look at this pic of the US East Coast. You'd be safe sitting off New York Harbor in the Hudson River runoff, but screwed sitting off the New Jersey Coast.

Water clarity on US east coast

The Gulf Stream also adds a bit of spice to the US coast line by mixing things up. You wouldn't always be sure if you're sitting in a murky spot or a clear one.

So not only are we going to need Shallow and Deep, we're going to need Clear and Murky, and have them randomly move in some areas and depending on season.

btw, the last German subs had estimated dive depths of 400m, which is nothing to sneer at, even today.

[JerseyJohn]

Lars,

Interesting info, enjoyed it. Especially the part about NY & NJ coastal areas. As I'm sure you know this coastal area was a great U-boat killing ground for a while before black-outs were enforced.

I'm sure the last German subs were very much improved over their earlier models, but even they could do little more than set out on missions other than hunting surface ships; sonar was too well developed, along with aerial recons, so the accomplishment was to just get from one place to another without being sunk.

-- Anyway, if the idea is a WWII game with an accompanying scenario/game creator, I think ocean depth should be the very last thing Hubert needs to take into account.

But an interesting subject all the same.

[Lars]

Well, we've already got ice, so why not?

At the very least, Shallow would be a good add-on for storms also. No sailor wants to get stuck on a coastline in a storm, they run for deep water. Say you get caught launching a D-Day in bad weather. You'd have a chance of some of those transports going to the bottom or increased disruption after landing.

[JerseyJohn]

That I can see.

If Ike had lost his gamble and the Normandy Operation came ashore in really bad weather, I don't think it could have been pulled off.

Brings an interesting twist into things. Hope Hubert adds an opinion here.

[Lars]

Also, the type XXI would have been a killer.

link

Put a quieter prop on it, and you probably could use it today.

[JerseyJohn]

That's a great article and very interesting info. A real mega-leap from the earlier U-boats. I knew the later German subs were very good, but the type XXI is better than I'd realized.

All things considered -- the progress in jets, rockets and uboats -- it makes me wonder what the 1944 situation would have been in the West if Germany had a stable line in the USSR. If it had avoided the needless losses of winter 41, Stalingrad and Kursk, and been able to hold a defensive line somewhere east of Kursk so it's resources and production would have remained relatively intact.

[Soddball]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

That's a great article and very interesting info. A real mega-leap from the earlier U-boats. I knew the later German subs were very good, but the type XXI is better than I'd realized.

All things considered -- the progress in jets, rockets and uboats -- it makes me wonder what the 1944 situation would have been in the West if Germany had a stable line in the USSR. If it had avoided the needless losses of winter 41, Stalingrad and Kursk, and been able to hold a defensive line somewhere east of Kursk so it's resources and production would have remained relatively intact.

It would also have had to protect its resources and production from the relentless air attacks of the RAF and USAF. Germany came up with some cool kit, but that blinds people, I think, into being convinced that they had a chance. Once the 1942 Russian winter campaign was over, it was game over for the Germans.

All this stuff about jets, super subs etc reminds me of the population of Germany waiting to be saved by 'wonder weapons' when what they really needed was 10,000 more tanks, 20,000 more planes and 10 million more men.

[JerseyJohn]

That's what I'm getting at!

What would the situation have been in 1944 if Hitler didn't throw so many of his troops away in the USSR? If the 1942 Soviet Winter Campaign didn't end with the bagging of a small army group at Stalingrad (6th and elements of two others)?

The question is, what if Germany failed to win in Russia but managed to hold a stable line running from the Baltic to the Black Seas so it' European holdings had been intact?

-- As it was, they were building the jets but couldn't get enough of them in the sky because their fuel supply was already overrun in Rumania. But in this instance that isn't the case, the German jets take a sizable bite out of the Anglo-American bomber formations and they dont have free reign. Increasing production, more jets and suddenly the wonder weapons actually are saving them.

Naturally, if they're being overrun in the east, as happened historically, the wonder weapons don't mean a thing.

[Lars]

What I found interesting was that they lost 20 of the buggers in training due to RAF mining the Bay of Danzig.

Mines! We need mines!

[SeaMonkey]

Well since we're discussing modifications, I would like to see Hubert add a new sea hex to our mix. This one would have a darker tint, or a double line border, etc. and would cost twice as much for movement and have half the disclosure factor signifying a larger ocean area.

[JerseyJohn]

SeaMonkey,

That's interesting, especially on a global scale as it would help make The Cape of Good Hope and the Straits of Magellan more realistic. Also, it would be good in our traditional area's terms for the Arctic coastlines.

Lars,

I agree. Mines would make the entrance to the Baltic Sea much more realistic as well as the English Channel. In SC both are nothing more than regular ocean/sea type hexes.

[jon_j_rambo]

How about cliff hexes? Beach hexes?

[waltero]

Originally posted by Soddball:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fubarno:

@ Soddball - I definetly make no claims to defend Rambo's so-called "atropied" brain, but I must say that if you condemn the facts coming from the History Channel over the "facts", so frequently decietfull, coming out of the White House, then I must seriously question your faculties.

What I think you meant was the National Archives and not the White House.

If you think I'm going to defend the White House, you're sorely mistaken. Yes, I did mean the national archives, but being English didn't remember the correct term.

And I was referring to waltero's atrophied brain. We argued long and hard in the general forum over why it was unlikely that someone who had got all his knowledge of the war from GI Joe comics (as he has) could really understand it - he is under the impression that 'reading' is bad for the intellect. </font>

[Soddball]

Of course. A god subdued the Nazis. Not the 20 million godless Russians then?

Hokey religions and WWII magazines are no match for critical reading ability and historical references, kid.

Man, you're so stupid, it's a wonder you can breathe and type at the the same time. And you do need a class on WWII.

[Lars]

Originally posted by waltero:

The main reason I see Germany as the most power full during WWII is the God factor!

It took a God to subdue them.

MacArthur was in the Pacific.

[waltero]

The Russians alone, did not and could not defeat the Germans!

Stop being a renob! And understand that WWII games and there references are historically correct. (for the most part) When they are not accurate it is quickly pointed out and given the proper understanding.

So you go read your Hitler diaries and Reference books and I will continue to watch the history channel and read on this forum as well as play my games.

You come to your understanding and I will know the truth!

There is knowledge on this forum! People like Jersey john and many others who have all the facts.

I have read some of your post in the past, you are like a resounding gong, boring!

And for those of you who do not believe that God was a major factor in the war you are foolish!

Look at the countries that believed God would pull them through.

Do you honestly believe that the RAF could of done what they had done if there was no God?

[Kuniworth]

ask your mama what it is

[Soddball]

Originally posted by waltero:

The Russians alone, did not and could not defeat the Germans!

Stop being a renob! And understand that WWII games and there references are historically correct. (for the most part) When they are not accurate it is quickly pointed out and given the proper understanding.

So you go read your Hitler diaries and Reference books and I will continue to watch the history channel and read on this forum as well as play my games.

You come to your understanding and I will know the truth!

There is knowledge on this forum! People like Jersey john and many others who have all the facts.

I have read some of your post in the past, you are like a resounding gong, boring!

And for those of you who do not believe that God was a major factor in the war you are foolish!

Look at the countries that believed God would pull them through.

Do you honestly believe that the RAF could of done what they had done if there was no God?

So your understanding of WW2 comes from computer games and the bible. Well, I take it all back.

The Russians whipped the Germans. They crushed them, utterly. They would have beaten the Germans on their own. They had no regard for casualties, they just fought, like maniacs, for 4 years. They had help, significant material help, from Britain and America, but their manpower and their diligence was all their own. They had no god, and they won.

Deal with it.

I feel comfortable knowing that imbeciles like you are in out of the way places like Alaska where you can do no harm. It's only a shame you're entitled to vote.

[Edwin P.]

Getting back to reality,

Russia would "probably" not been able to defeat Germany on its own. The threat of allied invasions tied diverted many of its (Germany's) best generals and troops to other fronts - such as Italy, France and North Africa. If these units were available to fight Russia the USSR "may" have been defeated.

Futhermore, Strategic Bombings (and fire bombings) of Axis production centers seriously affected Germany's ability to replace its losses on the battlefield.

Note: Probably and May because in war nothing is 100% predictable given a relative balance of forces (ie WWII was not like Iraq of 1993 vs the USA or as others would say the Coalition Forces).

Jersey-John: it makes me wonder what the 1944 situation would have been in the West if Germany had a stable line in the USSR. If it had avoided the needless losses of winter 41, Stalingrad and Kursk, and been able to hold a defensive line somewhere east of Kursk so it's resources and production would have remained relatively intact.

How true, Good leadership would have spared Germany needless losses and inflicted much more damage on the Soviet Army, perhaps to the point of leading to a peace treaty in the East?

[Lars]

Originally posted by waltero:

Do you honestly believe that the RAF could of done what they had done if there was no God?

A bunch of Anglican heretics?

You sure you want to go there?

[waltero]

The nations and people of WWII understood God Was the answer in bringing the Germans to there knees!

You must know this? You can hear all about it on the documentaries that were taken at the time. The allies were always referring to God before they went into battle.

Some might say the Russkies were brave, maybe so.

I cant help but think what might of happened if the Russians did not kill there own troops? I read some where that one out of four bullets that the Russians used were on there own men.

No matter to me Soddball! If you have something intelligent to say please say it?

You seem to think that the Germans were beat before they even started?

Yes that is true, I agree but not because any other nation was mightier than Germany.

Only, Because it was prophesied about long ago. Many God fearing folk new that Germany would lose the War because of what is written.

The Living word Brother!

You can read any book you like and I might read the same book. It does not mean our understanding will be the same.

Is there only one way to learn about WWII? NO! There are many different Roads.

You are silly if you think there is nothing to be learned on this forum and the playing of games as well as documentaries and reading the General and other sources.

I do not need to be a scholar to understand WWII.

Just because I don't read every book that comes out does not mean my understanding has any less value than yours or anybody else.

Some would say WWII was not a game? Yet there are those that participated in WWII that thought of it as a game.

[Panzeh]

People really love playing with highly exaggerated stereotypical armies.

Mass human wave charges were not the only or even the most common attack the Russian army had. Comissars shooting their own men is highly exaggerated. Just because the Russians used a 'command push' doctrine instead of a 'recon pull' doctrine doesn't mean that their army was bad.

German troops weren't "inherently" better than anyone else's. They had their good units, but everyone had their good units. Tank quality is way overdone in importance in battle. Did the quality of tanks ever decide a major battle?

US, German, and Russian troops were practically equivalent in real quality. The differences came in organization, lower-level doctrine, and in the officers.