Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >>

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 5/26/2002 1:09:12 AM

Charles2222

Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline

RockinHarry:

quote:

I think the difference between the Lost Victories Wittmann scenario and the current V7.1 test is that the new armor system (armored skirts values=Face hardened, cast ect.) is not implemented in the Lost Victories scenarios. Probably would have taken another 3 months to convert 250 scenarios!

That certainly sounds reasonable.

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 31

- 5/26/2002 2:30:14 AM

laatokka

Posts: 14
Joined: 9/8/2001
From: Suomi, Helsinki
Status: offline

Air to ground rockets should be much less effective against tanks that they are in game. British got 1/6 hit change at best when they test fired their rockets against mock up tank in open field. Soviet rockets were even more inaccurate. US study of their jabo efficienty in normandy brought disappointing results. Pilots overclaimed vehicle kills almost 10fold. When battlefields were studied, it was found out that only tiny fraction of german panzers were actually destroyed by rockets or bombs. Airattacks had more of supressing effect which halted german advances and made green tankers even abandon their panzers. When german tanks couldn't maneuver they were more easily defeated on ground. It was also noticed that it needed direct hit from rocket to destroy a panzer. There was quite a few Panzers found intact... undamaged, but abandoned with many rocket craters nearby. Bombs weren't much more effective. You would need almost direct hit with 500kg bomb to kill mid/late war medium tank. It wasn't unusual tho that crew abandoned their tank in panic after bomb near miss or even hit with no serious damage. High velocity cannon were found most efficient tank killers. 23mm Vya in Il-2 37mm BK 3,7 in Ju-87 37mm BK 3,7 in Hs-129 37mm NS37 in p39 40mm ? in Hurricane II and so on. Ju87 was definetely most succesful of LW tank killers in WW2s. Il-2 was same for soviets.

_____________________________

---------------------
laatokka aka illo

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 32

- 5/26/2002 8:00:19 AM

Grenadier

Posts: 981
Joined: 5/10/2000
From: Newport Beach, CA USA
Status: offline

Red Baron and I combined to make this scenario as a bonus for those that did well so if you are playing it you are at least on the path to a marginal victory in Lost Victories. In order to make sure the player had a decent chance of killing the T-34's Red baron made some modifications to the gun and ammo. This was tested several times to get the balance and timing for reaching the VO's down. It is a cat and mouse battle and Wittmann used many of the tactics he later used at VB, like a reconnaissance on foot and firing from ambush. There is a 10 page scction in the book Tiger Ace that describes this battle. There are other accounts that imply the tanks were not all T-34's but as this is supposed to be Wittmann we stayed with the T-34's. Wittmann was not a fervent Nazi but a caring human being who put the welfare of a wounded Russian before his own after this battle, asking Dietrich to make sure the Russian was taken care of.

_____________________________

Brent Grenadier Richards

__________________

[url=http://

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 33

Solution to the Stuka G problem - 5/26/2002 10:45:30 AM

Kevin E. Duguay

Posts: 1044
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Goldsboro, North Carolina
Status: offline

The problem with the Stuka G is that the 37mm guns should only carry AP or APCR ammo. After all this aircraft was a tank buster in this configuration. The Stuka G could also carry a bomb load if the 37mm guns were removed.
As far as aircraft not attacking infantry targets, could this be a problem of the ammo mix? Even aircraft with just mg armmament have AP rounds to expend. And this is just a thought, could it be that as long as the aircraft has AP rounds it will only attack targets with some type of armor factor? Don't have time to test this idea out right now but I sure would like to see the results!;)

_____________________________

KED

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 34

- 5/26/2002 12:02:25 PM

V-man

Posts: 151
Joined: 12/10/2001
From: Indiana
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tiggwigg
[B]
the important thing is to knock-out the light tanks first (BT's and t-26)...as others have observed, this can be very hard, taking up to 5 hits in some cases...[/B][/QUOTE]

This is easy. Any defense should have as much depth as possible.

Using your own lights forward (lose the armored cars) to shoot up *his* lights, using artillery to break up his formations by cratering the landscape, you eliminate his recon screen and then start dictating the engagement,

_____________________________

"You see, in this world there's 2 kinds of people, my friend:
Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 35

Re: Solution to the Stuka G problem - 5/26/2002 4:07:23 PM

Panzer Leo

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin E. Duguay
[B]The problem with the Stuka G is that the 37mm guns should only carry AP or APCR ammo. After all this aircraft was a tank buster in this configuration. The Stuka G could also carry a bomb load if the 37mm guns were removed.
As far as aircraft not attacking infantry targets, could this be a problem of the ammo mix? Even aircraft with just mg armmament have AP rounds to expend. And this is just a thought, could it be that as long as the aircraft has AP rounds it will only attack targets with some type of armor factor? Don't have time to test this idea out right now but I sure would like to see the results!;) [/B][/QUOTE]

To avoid confusion on ammo loads for planes:

The HE ammo shown is the complete ammo for a type of guns, bombs or rockets. This can be single bombs or salvos for auto cannons.
The AP ammo is actually the NUMBER of GUNS of a single type.
.50 cal with HE 20 and AP 6 has to be read as 6 .50 cal aircraft cannons with 20 salvos each.
There is only one ammo type for aircraft cannons in the game and that's HE (and that stands for all other types, too).

hope that helps...

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 36

- 5/27/2002 12:35:07 PM

Kevin E. Duguay

Posts: 1044
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Goldsboro, North Carolina
Status: offline

Planes suck VS infantry. Tried a little test and even when attacking from the rear one aircraft still went about 15 hexes out of its way and beyond enemy lines into the frendly zone to attack the halftrack that spotted for the attack. Aircraft are to reluctant when it comes to attacking infantry. Can any body fix this? Talk about a reality crunch, Stuka out of bombs(that hit my halftrack) but still goes out of its way to attack armor with its puny 7.92mm MGs instead of the pile of infantry 12 hexes away that was its assigned target. Just a glitch? I can hear the conversation now " Ive got infantry about to over run my right flank. We need an air strike to help neutralize the threat." " Sure thing, as soon as we blast your OP into oblivion and maybe get a tank or two we'll get back to ya. Have a nice day." BUY ARTILLERY it listens better!!:mad:

_____________________________

KED

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 37

Re: Solution to the Stuka G problem - 5/27/2002 3:21:32 PM

laatokka

Posts: 14
Joined: 9/8/2001
From: Suomi, Helsinki
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin E. Duguay [B]The problem with the Stuka G is that the 37mm guns should only carry AP or APCR ammo. After all this aircraft was a tank buster in this configuration. The Stuka G could also carry a bomb load if the 37mm guns were removed. As far as aircraft not attacking infantry targets, could this be a problem of the ammo mix? Even aircraft with just mg armmament have AP rounds to expend. And this is just a thought, could it be that as long as the aircraft has AP rounds it will only attack targets with some type of armor factor? Don't have time to test this idea out right now but I sure would like to see the results!;) [/B][/QUOTE] Ju-87g-1 and g-2 BK 3.7s didn't use plain AP ammo at all. They use only APCR (wolfram cored "hartkern" special ammunition) BK 3.7 was derieved from german 37mm Flak 36. Ju 87g-1 without BK 3.7s was actually Ju 87D-5(all 7.9mm guns except for rear gunner were removed from all G-1s). D-5 was able to carry BC1400 (1400kg) armor-piercing bomb or 1xSC500(500kg) and 2xSC250(250kg) bombs. In SPWAW 37mm Flak 38 has AP value of 48 and BK 3.7 has AP value of 40. IRL I would assume performance to be similar with same ammunition, since same weapons are in question. BK 3.7(Flak 36) APCR penetrated over 70mm of armor at point blank ranges. (75mm T-34/85 side turrets were regularly penetrated). So Ju 87G-1 just doesn't have guns to be tank killer which it was IRL. In short. BK 3.7 SPWAW armor penetration at 50m 40mm. REAL armor penetration at 50m 75mm. (APCR)

_____________________________

---------------------
laatokka aka illo

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 38

Re: Re: Solution to the Stuka G problem - 5/27/2002 4:12:01 PM

Panzer Leo

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by laatokka
[B]

Ju-87g-1 and g-2 BK 3.7s didn't use plain AP ammo at all. They use only APCR (wolfram cored "hartkern" special ammunition) BK 3.7 was derieved from german 37mm Flak 36.

Ju 87g-1 without BK 3.7s was actually Ju 87D-5(all 7.9mm guns except for rear gunner were removed from all G-1s). D-5 was able to carry BC1400 (1400kg) armor-piercing bomb or 1xSC500(500kg) and 2xSC250(250kg) bombs.

In SPWAW 37mm Flak 38 has AP value of 48 and BK 3.7 has AP value of 40.
IRL I would assume performance to be similar with same ammunition, since same weapons are in question. BK 3.7(Flak 36) APCR penetrated over 70mm of armor at point blank ranges. (75mm T-34/85 side turrets were regularly penetrated).

So Ju 87G-1 just doesn't have guns to be tank killer which it was IRL.

In short.
BK 3.7
SPWAW armor penetration at 50m 40mm.
REAL armor penetration at 50m 75mm. (APCR) [/B][/QUOTE]

Do you have some good links or so...I can't find any sources for 37mm FlaK APCR ammo...?

_____________________________

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 39

- 5/27/2002 7:06:59 PM

laatokka

Posts: 14
Joined: 9/8/2001
From: Suomi, Helsinki
Status: offline

Other little errors I found. FW 190G-2 has wrong cannons. should have 2xMG151/20 no MG/FFs. Ju-87B rarity is at 2. It was one of most common LW ground attackers in early war. Hs129B-3 rarity is at 1. It was very very rare. AFAIK used by only 1 test squadron. Also Hs129B-3 with 75mm PaK 40 had 7.9mm mgs removed and designation changed to Hs 129B-3/Wa (Waffentrager) Also 190s all were very usual ground attackers. Even A models from fighter squadrons. 190F-8 was mostly used with 500kg and 4x50kg bombs, AFAIK rockets we have in SPWAW were only in test units in 44-45. Here my scetch for usual attack planes/loadouts for LW, if someone wants to edit his OOBs more realistic: Bf 109E-1/B (Feb 1939-1940) 4xMG 17, 1x250kg bomb. rarity 1. Bf 109E-4/B (Dec 1939-1943) 2xMG 17, 2xMG/FF, 1x250kg bomb. rarity 0. Bf 109F-4/B (July 1941-1943) 2xMG 17, 1xMG151/20, 1x500kg bomb. rarity 1. Bf 109G-2/R1 (Oct 1942-1944) 2xMG 17, 1xMG151/20, 1x500KG bomb. rarity 1. Bf 110C-4/B (Aug 1940-1943) 4xMG 17, 2xMG/FF, 2x250kg bomb, 4x50kg bomb. rarity 1. Bf 110D-2 (Jan 1941-1943) 4xMG 17, 2xMG/FF, 2x500kg bomb. rarity 1. Ju 87B-1 (1937-1940) 2xMG 17, 1x500kg bomb, 4x50kg bomb. rarity 1. Ju 87B-2 (Jun 1940-1943) 2xMG 17, 1x500kg bomb, 4x50kg bomb. rarity 0. Ju 87D-5 (Jun 1942-1949) 2xMG 17, 1x500kg bomb, 2x250kg bombs. rarity 2. Ju 87G-1 (Apr 1943-1949) 2xBK 3,7. rarity 3. FW 189A-1 (June 1940-1949) 2xMG 17, 4x50kg bombs. rarity 2. FW 190A-4 (Jul 1942-1943) 2xMG 17, 2xMG151/20, 2xMG/FF, 1x500kg bomb. rarity 1. FW 190A-6 (Jun 1943-1944) 2xMG 17, 4xMG151/20, 1x500kg bomb. rarity 1. FW 190F-2 (Jan 1943-1944) 2xMG17, 2xMG151/20, 1x500kg bomb, rarity 1. FW 190F-3 (Jan 1944-1949) 2xMG17, 2xMG151/20, 1x500kg bomb, rarity 1. FW 190G-2 (Dec 1942-1943) 2xMG17, 2xMG151/20, 500kg bomb, rarity 1. FW 190G-8 (Jan 1944-1949) 2xMG151/20, 1000kg bomb, rarity 2. FW 190F-8 (Jan 1944-1949) 2xMG 131, 2xMG151/20, 6x280mm rockets. rarity 3. FW 190D-9 (Oct 1944-1949) 2xMG131, 2x151/20, 1x500kg bomb. rarity 2. Hs 129B-2/R1 (Jun 1942-1943) 2xMG 17, 2xMG151/20, 2xstreuwaffen. rarity 2. Hs 129B-2/R3 (Jun 1942-1943) 2xMG17, 2xMG151/20, 1xMK101. rarity 1. Hs 129B-3/Wa (Jan 1944-1949) 1x75mm PaK 40. rarity 3. Me 410A-1 (Jan 1943-1949) 2xmg17, 4xmg151/20, 4x250kg bombs. rarity 2. Me 262A-2 (Jul 1944-1949) 4x30mm MK108, 2x500kg bombs. rarity 3. Hs 123 (June 1936-1944) 2xMG 15, 4x50kg bombs. rarity 3.

_____________________________

---------------------
laatokka aka illo

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 40

- 5/27/2002 9:02:42 PM

AmmoSgt

Posts: 1002
Joined: 10/21/2000
From: Redstone Arsenal Al
Status: offline

IIRC from working on the OOB's a while back , The Aircraft MG's and Cannon arew handled differently in all aspects inculding Pen and HE Kill . Leo already pointed out the difference in what the numbers under ammo meant. I am not sure exactly how the Pen and HE Kill Differ but they were Off Limits on changing them to match same weapon on a ground mount. I strongly suggest you contact PaulV for a full explanation of how the system differs , if you want to change things and have it come out matching researched book values.

_____________________________

"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which

(in reply to gdpsnake)

Post #: 41