Norwegian Ships (Neutral?)

[RustySubmarine]

Originally Posted by Missing Name

The damned Norwegian shipping. I modified basic.cfg so that NEUTRAL=1. In other words, sinking a neutral grants credit. I only use this for convoys - if it's in an enemy collection, fair game. Then we run into the real life fuzziness of "neutral" US escorts guarding an enemy ship. In that case, also fair game.

Don't abuse it and go raid New York harbor before 8 December 1941!

So in other words, if a Norwegian ship is travelling in the protection of a convoy, then it is quite in order to sink it, but if travelling alone, it is classed as a neutral and should not be attacked?

Even if it may or may not be carrying British supplies, I think attacking it would not be breaking any rules as far as BdU would be concerned, as it may more than likely be under British control, but with a Norwegian crew.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by RustySubmarine

So in other words, if a Norwegian ship is travelling in the protection of a convoy, then it is quite in order to sink it, but if travelling alone, it is classed as a neutral and should not be attacked?

Not in the stock game. It's not that sophisticated. It only reads what the file says. If you modify it the way Missing Name did then all Neutral ships will give full credit, period.

I'm a bit more masochistic. I modified my 'Neutral' listing to give zero credit. I'm neither penalized nor rewarded. Based on real-life court-martials I also modified my 'Friendly' ships to read -1 rather than -10. Every sinking of a friendly ship resulted in the u-boat kaleun being found not guilty.

[CaptBones]

Thanks Steve; that's the best method that I've heard of to-date.

The problem is a "game" problem and you've got a great "game" solution there. I say that because in real life the solution during the earliest months of the war was to stop (or at least attempt to stop) any neutral vessels and carry out inspection as required by the Prize Regulations. A quick review of sinkings on "uboat.net" reveals many instances of "neutral" shipping being sunk after U-Boats followed the procedures required by Prize Regulations.

When the niceties of Victorian behavior were dispensed with later on, any vessel sailing in convoy or otherwise escorted, or failing to show running lights at night and/or steering an evasive ("zig-zag") course, even if flying neutral flag or displaying neutral ID, was a valid target that could be attacked without warning.

As you noted, all that is, or at least was, apparently too much to be coded into SHIII (or even GWX) and the original solution to ID vessels was simply to strictly follow the status of each nation regarding its involvement in the conflict, by "official" date of engagement (and which side it was on, of course). It's not just an annoyance regarding Norwegian ships either, I've been equally challenged to decide what to do about Greek shipping encountered in the first year of the war and Dutch ships seen in the first few months as well.

I think I'll give your "fix" a try. I wonder if it would be a good method for SHIV ATO/OM also; I get tired of letting all those "neutral" ships go by, knowing that the game doesn't care if they're "neutral" or not and will give me full credit for sinking them if I decide to "cheat" a litlle...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by CaptBones

When the niceties of Victorian behavior were dispensed with later on, any vessel sailing in convoy or otherwise escorted, or failing to show running lights at night and/or steering an evasive ("zig-zag") course, even if flying neutral flag or displaying neutral ID, was a valid target that could be attacked without warning.

It was even worse in the First World War. U-boats would always stop and inspect ships, so the British developed the first Q-Ships. They not only had hidden guns, they had extra crew trained to abandon ship, so the u-boat would be tempted to pull right alongside. It was because of that the Germans started torpedoing ships while submerged, and when they did the Brits accused them of cheating.

As you noted, all that is, or at least was, apparently too much to be coded into SHIII (or even GWX).

It is buried in the basic code. It could be changed, but to do so would be illegal, so no, it can't be done.

I wonder if it would be a good method for SHIV ATO/OM also;

They are exactly the same in that regard, and so is SH5.

I get tired of letting all those "neutral" ships go by, knowing that the game doesn't care if they're "neutral" or not and will give me full credit for sinking them if I decide to "cheat" a litlle...

I never attack neutrals, even with the changes, unless they are in a convoy. Even then I try to avoid it if I can.

[MantiBrutalis]

Neutral ships in enemy waters? Supplying the enemy. In an enemy convoy? Fair game too. Up till today I even had NEUTRAL=-1. Don't care about some virtual points, I'm in it for the fun and explosions. And being historically precise is fun for me.

[BigWalleye]

GFY, MB! I like your approach. There's more to playing the game than just playing the game. Sometimes you have to do what's right.

[RustySubmarine]

I think I will treat a lone Norwegian ship as a neutral, but if I find one within a convoy, then I will treat it as an enemy vessel.

[CaptBones]

Doing "what's right" means (or used to mean) complying with the law, including International Law. A neutral ship sailing alone, in enemy waters or not, was still a neutral ship and could only be attacked and captured/sunk if it was proven to be carrying "contraband" or war materials...and food, as well as most raw materials (among other things) were NOT considered "war materials" or contraband back in those "good old days." In fact, passenger vessels, even those of belligerent nations, were deemed as exempt by definition, because they should only be carrying civilian passengers and non-contraband/war material cargoes and should always be sailing with normal running lights and steering normal ("straight") courses in normal shipping lanes.

The Prize Regulations (issued by all Navies) clearly required neutral ships to be stopped, their papers examined, and if questionable, they were to be inspected to confirm the nature of the cargo, before taking any hostile actions. The impossibility of submarines/U-Boats (safely) complying with those Regulations resulted rather quickly in the emergence of "unrestricted submarine warfare", first during WW I and then again after the first few months of WW II. But, even before that became a reality, the Germans announced a Blockade of the British Isles in an attempt to maintain some degree of legitimacy WRT International Law (now, don't everybody start taking sides and turning this into a political gripe session please ).

So, if you're going to be "historically precise", then you need to have a full understanding of what the historical situation was and how it evolved over the course of the first year or so of the war. It changed significantly and had a direct impact on the behavior of U-Boat Commanders. The North Sea and the North Atlantic were not merely shooting galleries.

BTW, I have personal experiences in interdicting "neutral" shipping in a Blockade Zone and had the pleasure of burning/sinking a couple of thousand tons of contraband cargoes, including a running gun battle with an armed Junk...too bad that was on a surface ship though, might have been more of a "challenge" on a submarine, since they didn't have decks guns anymore!