Danish belts doesn't make sense

[Longshanks51]

The Danish belts (or Skagerrak) is the area of sea between Denmark and Norway, you can only pass through if the north of Denmark is controlled by someone not hostile to you.

As the UK I got into a war with Denmark because they decided to form a faction with Bangladesh out of the blue. I had trouble naval invading because you can't pass through that area of sea. And all their docks are on the opposite side.
I had to land troops on the side facing the UK and then build a dock so they could be supplied.

While areas like the Panama canal and Suez make sense because the gap of sea is small so ships could be stopped.

But the problem I have with the belts, is that the distance between Denmark and Norway is big, its about 130km or 80 miles.
So what's exactly stopping enemy ships from passing through, especially in this case when the British navy massively outnumbers the Danish fleet.

I think the Danish belts shouldn't have the strait system, it should be a normal passable sea like the English channel.

 

[Balesir]

I think this is a good point. I have had issues with UK fleets getting trapped in Oslo (Norway being an ally) because Germany has taken Denmark (vanilla historical scenario). This doesn't really make much sense given that the straits of Dover are open to pass...

Thanks for the heads-up - I'll add it to the Waltzing Matilda mod.

 

[Praetori]

The Danish belts (or Skagerrak) is the area of sea between Denmark and Norway, you can only pass through if the north of Denmark is controlled by someone not hostile to you.

As the UK I got into a war with Denmark because they decided to form a faction with Bangladesh out of the blue. I had trouble naval invading because you can't pass through that area of sea. And all their docks are on the opposite side.
I had to land troops on the side facing the UK and then build a dock so they could be supplied.

While areas like the Panama canal and Suez make sense because the gap of sea is small so ships could be stopped.

But the problem I have with the belts, is that the distance between Denmark and Norway is big, its about 130km or 80 miles.
So what's exactly stopping enemy ships from passing through, especially in this case when the British navy massively outnumbers the Danish fleet.

I think the Danish belts shouldn't have the strait system, it should be a normal passable sea like the English channel.

Historically the area was heavily mined and naval artillery actually blocked meaningful access to and from the Baltic. German naval guns in occupied Denmark and Norway, Hanstholm and Vara respectively, had ~55km range with special shells and covered all but a few km wide gap in the middle.

While in in-game terms the Devs probably could have made some building or special decisions or NFs to accomplish this but the question is if it's of such pivotal importance that there's need for more advanced mechanics than for other straits.

 

[Longshanks51]

Historically the area was heavily mined and naval artillery actually blocked meaningful access to and from the Baltic. German naval guns in occupied Denmark and Norway, Hanstholm and Vara respectively, had ~55km range with special shells and covered all but a few km wide gap in the middle.

Historically yes. But in this situation only I was only at war with Denmark, so even if there were naval guns, ships could just move closer to Norway and be out of range.
And while mines are a mechanic in the game they don't block ships from traveling through, they damage ships or sink them.

While in in-game terms the Devs probably could have made some building or special decisions or NFs to accomplish this but the question is if it's of such pivotal importance that there's need for more advanced mechanics than for other straits.

Well in terms of consistency, why does this strait exist in the game when the English channel doesn't have one. The strait of Dover in only 33km (20 miles) wide, which is about 4 times smaller than the Danish belts.

The strait system should be changed so that both sides of the strait have to be controlled by you or an ally to block enemy ships.

 

[Praetori]

The strait system should be changed so that both sides of the strait have to be controlled by you or an ally to block enemy ships.

That would make Gibraltar or potential Öresund-strait traversable by all until both sides have been occupied (forcing a ahistorical UK war with Spain for "historical access").
If any development-time is to be spent on the issue I would suggest they do it properly instead of just making another wonky mechanic.
One could argue that the provinces required for control of the specific Skagerrak 'strait' as presented in-game should be one specific northwestern province in Denmark and one in Norway would be a 10min fix from PDS (which I'm fairly sure is possible to mod as well) but it would probably requre some serious QA/playtesting because it might cause very strange stuff to happen with the AI.

 

[Vlad123]

That would make Gibraltar or potential Öresund-strait traversable by all until both sides have been occupied (forcing a ahistorical UK war with Spain for "historical access").
If any development-time is to be spent on the issue I would suggest they do it properly instead of just making another wonky mechanic.
One could argue that the provinces required for control of the specific Skagerrak 'strait' as presented in-game should be one specific northwestern province in Denmark and one in Norway would be a 10min fix from PDS (which I'm fairly sure is possible to mod as well) but it would probably requre some serious QA/playtesting because it might cause very strange stuff to happen with the AI.

In fact, if both sides must be in the hands of the same alliance (or at war with the same enemy) it is a problem, unless Paradox differentiates the problem: that is, it creates the Double occupation yes / no rule. If it is active it is all normal: you must occupy both sides of the strait. If it is set to no only one of the two to block the enemy if the other is neutral.

 

[Balesir]

In actual fact it is definable in the game by individual strait. For the Danish Belts it looks like this:

#Øresund - (Østersøen <-> Kattegat/Skagerak/Nordsøen)
adjacency_rule
{
    name = "DANISH_BELTS_STRAIT"

    contested =
    {
        army = no
        navy = no
        submarine = yes
        trade = no
    }
    enemy =
    {
        army = no
        navy = no
        submarine = no
        trade = no
    }
    friend =
    {
        army = yes
        navy = yes
        submarine = yes
        trade = yes
    }
    neutral =
    {
        army = yes
        navy = yes
        submarine = yes
        trade = yes
    }
    
    required_provinces = { 6287 3277 3325 3260 394 }
    
    icon = 2455
    offset = { -26 0 -13 }
}

So, I think it should be possible to define this as passable if contested and not if enemy held (on both sides). I think it would be best passable for submarines even if enemy held, in fact.

 

[Sbrubbles]

Historically the area was heavily mined and naval artillery actually blocked meaningful access to and from the Baltic. German naval guns in occupied Denmark and Norway, Hanstholm and Vara respectively, had ~55km range with special shells and covered all but a few km wide gap in the middle.

View attachment 654125

While in in-game terms the Devs probably could have made some building or special decisions or NFs to accomplish this but the question is if it's of such pivotal importance that there's need for more advanced mechanics than for other straits.

The solution could be easily done with in-game mechanics. Have both the northern danish and southern norwegian provinces be necessary for control of the straits. If both are owned by the same faction, all enemy trafic is stopped. If only one is owned by the faction, it is contested and ships can come as go as usual (presumably, each ship hugging their faction's side).

Oops, didn't read the thread to the end to see people already answered. Yeah, each straight/canal can have it's own rules and on what happens when it is open/contested/closed

 

[Ksyr]

The strait used to be east of Denmark, but it lead to huge problems with suiciding AI in the battle for Norway so it was moved.

 

[Praetori]

The strait used to be east of Denmark, but it lead to huge problems with suiciding AI in the battle for Norway so it was moved.

Yup. Any changes to the mechanics or required provinces would require some serious playtesting to ensure that the AI doesn't go bonkers when access is changed.

Though with the added mechanics since release nowadays it could probably be solved by getting Allied AIs to put a blocker on the North Sea sea-zone.

 

[Meglok]

The strait used to be east of Denmark, but it lead to huge problems with suiciding AI in the battle for Norway so it was moved.

This right here. The current system was an abstract compromise of the historical situation. The allies would constantly send their ships into the Baltic and get trapped when Denmark fell.

Historically the allies learned very fast that between the Luftwaffe, E boats, mines, and coastal forts sailing into the southern Norway area wasn't worth the risk, much less getting caught in the shallow and narrow Belts. The game doesn't model it well, but blocking the Straits where it is now is the best result.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

While in in-game terms the Devs probably could have made some building or special decisions or NFs to accomplish this but the question is if it's of such pivotal importance that there's need for more advanced mechanics than for other straits.

That's just because they haven't made the Scandinavia DLC yet.

 

[Balesir]

The strait used to be east of Denmark, but it lead to huge problems with suiciding AI in the battle for Norway so it was moved.

I can see that justification earlier on, but if the problem is the AI the best solution might be to handle it as the Channel is now - the German AI has "avoid the Channel if at war with the UK" as a setting. Without it, it suicides all its U-boats even before the fall of France...

 

[Emren]

Historically the area was heavily mined and naval artillery actually blocked meaningful access to and from the Baltic. German naval guns in occupied Denmark and Norway, Hanstholm and Vara respectively, had ~55km range with special shells and covered all but a few km wide gap in the middle.

View attachment 654125

All true, however, that long-range artillery was not installed in the fortifications until 1943. And in game terms it should probably require lvl 2 heavy battery tech, if were to get realistic. In addition to the decision on a special construction project.