WWW - Germany shouldn't be able to navally supply Japan

[Gort11]

In the recent World War Wednesday games I've seen something that bugged me. Germany is basically shut out from the sea by Allied blockade, and all it really has out there are a few submarines. Despite this, Germany was able to ship a huge lump sum of infantry equipment - apparently instantaneously - to Japan, as well as setting up a constant supply of newly-produced infantry equipment (20% of its total production), which presumably goes by sea.

Nations should need control of the sea or risk losing their convoys in order to do things like this. Have I misread what happened, or is there a rather major oversight in the current build of the game?

 

[Chosrau]

Do we know if he is actually properly blockaded? Yes, he does not have naval superiority, but that doesn't mean England is necessarrily using it's fleet to interdict his convoys. I do remember a huge allied fleet sitting in the baltic sea, near the danish isles, at some point.

Secondly, just because it shows that 20% of his produced equipment get's shipped out, doesn't mean the same amount arrives in Japan.

Would be nice to see some numbers on german convoy losses in the next session.

 

[bkuepers]

Exactly Chosrau. There were also convoy losses displayed when he was modifying the lease lend in one the WWW videos so everything thing in fact did not make it through. I wish I could remember which one.

 

[Denkt]

Germany can supply Japan because UK don't raid the convoys in the needed scale. If UK put raiders in each startegic area the convoys need to travel through then few will reach Japan.

 

[Mannstien]

Germany can supply Japan because UK don't raid the convoys in the needed scale. If UK put raiders in each startegic area the convoys need to travel through then few will reach Japan.

If the RN was not patrolling any region along the route of transport it is feasible which is why the AI should be patrolling them and not just Johan because whether they are transporting new maps or guns they still have the same chance of getting sunk. It is probably for stream reasons or because it's an unfinished game but convoys should perhaps be tuned up a bit to cost more IC if you will. Also I probably would be switching quite a few of my lines to newer equipment at least for Infantry instead of stockpiling as Germany, perhaps as someone else it would be different in for instance I'm playing as a minor power but have great efficiency on my lines so instead of quickly shifting them I do it a bit slower and stockpile a bit for future allies in my faction whom might need them.

 

[Denkt]

Yes convoys are a bit cheap but the developers have said that if the convoys is sunk you risk to lose what it transported. However from what I have seen in the stream UK have at best only done a halfheartedly try for sea supremacy with very little increase in dockyards and ship research and now they have to pay the price.

 

[Axe99]

As others have said I'm not sure if we know enough to know whether the convoys are being intercepted appropriately. What we do know:

- whenever we see pictures of the Atlantic on either players' screen, there are a stack of little battles - so there's presumably some interception going on.
- shipping stuff anywhere takes convoys, so lend-lease should be interceptable.

All being well, we'll find out more details soon. I expect with the breakneck pace they've been playing WWW at, they haven't spent a lot of thought on either on interception or blockade-running.

 

[Mannstien]

As others have said I'm not sure if we know enough to know whether the convoys are being intercepted appropriately. What we do know:

- whenever we see pictures of the Atlantic on either players' screen, there are a stack of little battles - so there's presumably some interception going on.
- shipping stuff anywhere takes convoys, so lend-lease should be interceptable.

All being well, we'll find out more details soon. I expect with the breakneck pace they've been playing WWW at, they haven't spent a lot of thought on either on interception or blockade-running.

I think they should do a 1 hour play through of the Pacific or perhaps try plan Z with Germany and show us more of the Naval aspects, a bit more complex then what Jakob did with his Finland 5 finger job but I think it would answer a lot of questions.

 

[LordOfWar16]

You should always be able to do it if you wanted. The question is if the lend lease will actually reach its target, due to convoy raiders etc. Should the USA be unable to support the british, only because germany has an huge wall of submarines in the atlantic and has sea superiority? No.

 

[Invader_Canuck]

Do the supplies get physically transported, or do they just magically appear? That's the big question I guess?

 

[Kagemusha]

Considering how huge the worlds oceans are, I have no problems imagining, how trade ships (especially if, perhaps, travelling under false flag) may evade being brought up.

Just remember in WW I the light cruiser Emden and its Collier, which both operated in the Indian ocean as raiders and, despite being actively searched by the english fleet, evaded it ... and was able to pick her battles at will.
Or the Bismarck in WW2 which, despite the active search by the english fleet and its damages and the fact that the english fleet had a rough idea where he Bismarck was, was able to evade the english ships for a considerable time.

Or remember the problems of the german U-Boats, to actually find the enemy convoys

Therefore it sounds realistic to me, to have "just" a certain chance (that can be increased by increasing the number of ships patroilling) to detect convoys (or single ships)

 

[Axe99]

Considering how huge the worlds oceans are, I have no problems imagining, how trade ships (especially if, perhaps, travelling under false flag) may evade being brought up.

Just remember in WW I the light cruiser Emden and its Collier, which both operated in the Indian ocean as raiders and, despite being actively searched by the english fleet, evaded it ... and was able to pick her battles at will.
Or the Bismarck in WW2 which, despite the active search by the english fleet and its damages and the fact that the english fleet had a rough idea where he Bismarck was, was able to evade the english ships for a considerable time.

Or remember the problems of the german U-Boats, to actually find the enemy convoys

Therefore it sounds realistic to me, to have "just" a certain chance (that can be increased by increasing the number of ships patroilling) to detect convoys (or single ships)

I'm going from memory, so this is a bit hazy, but the Axis did try and run limited surface trade but found it untenable very quickly, having to resort to using submarines.

 

[Count Drew]

There is usually a cost for everything. I remember the Mega Subs in News Reels that supplied German in WW1. That was just strange..right from America too..

I just watched The Battle of The Atlantic again. Usually ships follow trade routes, due to various reasons. Intelligence, radio, detection abilities all were huge in finding Convoys or U-Boats. Air was noted in being massive cause with air power/bases you can cover a huge area. I am sure trading with Japan or sending her resources is very possible. Also that the items sent could be interdicted. I don't recall if they were interdicted in WWW. Germany really pumped up Japan big time and there is no land trade route/rail. That even if existed would be overloaded carrying Far East German Divisions their supplies.

I recall in old Multiplayer Titles when a player wanted to unload a massive amount of resources on a poorer player there was no mechanism to stop that. A bit gamy... I can also imagine if one side has a method of delivery, better intel, plenty of transport, uses various smokescreens to keep their intentions hidden(remember the Allies hide an entire Army from the prying eyes of German Recon planes up to D-Day) that something could or would get through. Though would I have sent Divisions on an ocean that might sink? Likely not. Would I do it if I was hard pressed in keeping my own resources flowing, no. Also I believe historically German Isolation was thorough. If you open up the Suez and Japan threatens say India...bases for which the Royal Navy can interdict supplies begin to get hurt. Much like in WW1 when the Rails opened up to the Ottomans supplying them direct.

Any nation can be cut off...entirely I think with enough ships... Germany was in a corner begging borrowing and stealing for ball bearings in WW2 later. I am sure that a full blockade is why British Convoys were in such dire straights a lot of the Royal Navy was working it's rear off in all sorts of Theaters... Germany was starving in WW1 so that blockade was real complete. Surface Ships raid as well...

 

[frolix42]

Considering how huge the worlds oceans are, I have no problems imagining, how trade ships (especially if, perhaps, travelling under false flag) may evade being brought up.

"False flag" smuggling was contained under the Navicert system. Even if a ship flew the flag of a neutral country, and was travelling to a neutral European port, the British Navy inspected it for wartime materials.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany_(1939–45)#The_Navicert

Two months into the war, the Ministry reintroduced the 'Navicert' (Navigational Certificate), first used to great effect during WWI. This system was in essence a commercial passport applied to goods before they were shipped, and was used on a wide scale. Possession of a Navicert proved that a consignment had already been passed as non-contraband by His Majesty's Ambassador in the country of origin and allowed the captain to pass Contraband Control patrols and ports without being stopped, sparing the navy and the Ministry the trouble of tracking the shipment. Violators, however, could expect harsh treatment. They could be threatened with Bunker Control measures, refused further certification or have their cargo or their vessel impounded. Conversely, neutrals who went out of their way to co-operate with the measures could expect 'favoured nation' status, and have their ships given priority for approval. Italy, though an ally of Hitler, had not yet joined the war, and its captains enjoyed much faster turnarounds by following the Navicert system than the Americans, who largely refused to accept its legitimacy.

So as soon as a "false flag" ship didn't obey the Navicert, the British would know it was German. Or as soon as the British inspected the "false flag" ship, it wouldn't be too difficult to uncover that everyone on board was German

Just remember in WW I the light cruiser Emden and its Collier, which both operated in the Indian ocean as raiders and, despite being actively searched by the english fleet, evaded it ... and was able to pick her battles at will.
Or the Bismarck in WW2 which, despite the active search by the english fleet and its damages and the fact that the english fleet had a rough idea where he Bismarck was, was able to evade the english ships for a considerable time.

Practically IRL Germany was shut out of oceanic maritime trade during both world wars. There is a big difference between the raiders you mention and cargo ships. Cargo ships are much larger, much more noticeable, much slower, they need to refuel much more often. Trading with Sweden across Kattegat was fraught, especially in the late war, even with Norway and Denmark occupied. And German really wanted to trade with Japan, but using surface ships was simply an impossibility. So much so that Germany resorted to using cargo submarines which is an extremely inefficient way of transporting materials.

And the German surface raiders weren't particularly successful. Here is how the German fleet fared in the first months of the war:

At the start of the war a large proportion of the German merchant fleet was at sea, and around 30% sought shelter in neutral harbours where they could not be attacked, such as in Spain, Mexico, South America, America,Portuguese East Africa and Japan.[20] Twenty-eight German bauxite ships were holed up in Trieste and, while a few passenger liners, such as the New York, St Louis and Bremen managed to creep home, many ended up stranded with goods deteriorating or rotting in their holds and with Allied ships waiting to capture or sink them immediately if they tried to leave port. The Germans tried various ways of avoiding the loss of the ships, such as disguising themselves as neutral vessels or selling their ships to foreign flags, but international law did not allow such transactions in wartime. Up to Christmas 1939, at least 19 German merchant ships scuttled themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken by the Allies.[21] The pocket battleship Graf Spee herself was scuttled outside Montevideo, Uruguay, where she sought repairs to damage sustained during the Battle of the River Plate, after the British spread false rumours of the arrival of a vast naval force tasked to sink her, an early success for the Royal Navy.

It doesn't seem to me that the British had too much trouble with the German merchant fleet. The German merchant ships caught in the open seas when the war broke out didn't have anywhere to refuel and couldn't make it home.

Or remember the problems of the german U-Boats, to actually find the enemy convoys

These problems were largely due to the fact that the German U-Boats were hiding from the British Navy. The Kreigsmarine didn't have Aircraft Carriers to launch patrol aircraft, or really any surface ships at all to pinpoint these convoys. These are obstacles the Allies are unlikely to have when searching for hypothetical German convoys.

Therefore it sounds realistic to me, to have "just" a certain chance (that can be increased by increasing the number of ships patroilling) to detect convoys (or single ships)

Ok maybe something like 1% chance of success, and even that is pretty generous, with no chance of breaking even on the investment. If historically there were a reasonable chance of success for surface blockade running, the Germans wouldn't have felt the need to use cargo subs.

 

[fellaz007]

"False flag" smuggling was contained under the Navicert system. Even if a ship flew the flag of a neutral country, and was travelling to a neutral European port, the British Navy inspected it for wartime materials.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany_(1939–45)#The_Navicert


So as soon as a "false flag" ship didn't obey the Navicert, the British would know it was German. Or as soon as the British inspected the "false flag" ship, it wouldn't be too difficult to uncover that everyone on board was German



Practically IRL Germany was shut out of oceanic maritime trade during both world wars. There is a big difference between the raiders you mention and cargo ships. Cargo ships are much larger, much more noticeable, much slower, they need to refuel much more often. Trading with Sweden across Kattegat was fraught, especially in the late war, even with Norway and Denmark occupied. And German really wanted to trade with Japan, but using surface ships was simply an impossibility. So much so that Germany resorted to using cargo submarines which is an extremely inefficient way of transporting materials.

And the German surface raiders weren't particularly successful. Here is how the German fleet fared in the first months of the war:


It doesn't seem to me that the British had too much trouble with the German merchant fleet. The German merchant ships caught in the open seas when the war broke out didn't have anywhere to refuel and couldn't make it home.



These problems were largely due to the fact that the German U-Boats were hiding from the British Navy. The Kreigsmarine didn't have Aircraft Carriers to launch patrol aircraft, or really any surface ships at all to pinpoint these convoys. These are obstacles the Allies are unlikely to have when searching for hypothetical German convoys.



Ok maybe something like 1% chance of success, and even that is pretty generous, with no chance of breaking even on the investment. If historically there were a reasonable chance of success for surface blockade running, the Germans wouldn't have felt the need to use cargo subs.

FYI...

A nice sum up of this discussion can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_runner#Axis_blockade_runners
A more complete and exhaustive summary will be here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany_(1939–45)

The Allied blockade seemed to have been less effective between the Fall of France and the war entry of the USA, because the RN was to heavily committed in other ventures besides blockading Germany (e.g. protecting their own SLC, preparing against Sealion, etc.).

All in all the Germans managed to get some 16 out 32 surface blockade breakers to Japan.

 

[Gunburned]

Correct me if im wrong but isnt the german player supplying his armies via land from germany? If he was he wouldnt need ports.

 

[TheDungen]

I think you underestimate just how large the worlds oceans really are. Even today with sattelites it's a fairly common occurence to lose track of ships, even ships that want to be kept track of. Back then, well aside from blocking the harbours there's not much even the brittish navy can do.

 

[Gort11]

I think you underestimate just how large the worlds oceans really are. Even today with sattelites it's a fairly common occurence to lose track of ships, even ships that want to be kept track of. Back then, well aside from blocking the harbours there's not much even the brittish navy can do.

There's no indication that a single ship was lost (or even used) sending the infantry weapons to Japan. I don't think anyone's arguing that you should be able to attempt a massive supply effort from Germany to Japan, only that it should be expensive in lost supplies and lost convoys if your enemy controls the sea.

It also looks like the supplies don't take any time to arrive, either.

I'm happy to have a little bit of suspension-of-disbelief for the sake of simplicity, but all allied countries effectively having a massive teleporter linking both of their countries they can instantly send huge quantities of equipment through stretches it a bit too far.

That said, a quick reassurance that this kind of supply actually does use ships and takes reasonable losses if a blockade is in the way would shut me up pretty sharpish - I'm not convinced I have all the facts yet after all.

 

[Count Drew]

The British Navy owned the major arteries to Japan and had the ships to police anything going there plus nearly all the ports between. I suppose it's always possible depending on the 'situation' and people will always tell you something is impossible but I think they are narrowly thinking on what the situation was historically. The Brits had control of the seas(my GrandDad was a merchant seamen in the British Navy) At some point being a merchant seamen in the British Navy was the worst life expectancy that existed(of any service in the British Armed Forces). Though vital... Nobody even discus what would happen if the North Atlantic was swamped with 300 U-boats in '39

Would 90% of the Royal Navy be off policing the seas? Many major RN Ships were sunk by U-boats(tech was slow as well as tactics to catch up with the times) Blitz on the seas