Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Carry/loading issues for units:

 
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 >> SP:WaW Training Center >> Carry/loading issues for units: Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/13/2005 4:23:18 PM   
TheDesertRat


Posts: 119
Joined: 9/11/2005
Status: offline 		The OOB editor manual says:
“Carry capacity over 222 indicates the ability to load a vehicle”

In a small test using the following units from the v8.3 UK OOB
squad of 5 men – carry cost = 5
Universal Carrier – carry cost = 124
Bedford 3 ton – load ability = 129

In a game test it was possible to load the Universal carrier and the 5 man squads onto the 3 ton Bedford.
This does not appear to tie in with the statement from the editor manual??
Post #: 1
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/13/2005 4:52:21 PM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline 		The general rule is that each vehicle has a carry cost (weight) of 220 plus twice the size

In the British OOB certain small vehicles break this rule so that they can be loaded into the cargo gliders for airlanding purposes. Therefore their carry cost is reduced to a value below or equal to the maximum carry capacity for the glider.

You will also find this is true of Jeeps in the US OOB

Did the Americans have a glider that was capable of carrying a Jeep?

As a side note, the US OOB should make the carry capacity of the C-47 sufficiently large so that the pack howitzer can be parachute dropped.

(in reply to TheDesertRat)
Post #: 2
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/13/2005 5:50:54 PM   
TheDesertRat


Posts: 119
Joined: 9/11/2005
Status: offline 		In a way since the universal carrier, unloaded, is close, just on the plus side of over weight, for a 3 ton truck; this could be a "reasonable" weight for the carrier.
The issue of the C-47 and pack how, is a different issue. Not that I am disagreeing with the concept of having the gun/aircraft available for such a role.
That could also aply to the 3.7" how in the ANZAC OOB which was a pack one as well.
Niether gun can be loaded in the plane, yet I gather this was done.

So in a rough way all vehicles are meant to have a weight of 220 + (2 x its size) ?

Using that then
Universal carrier wold be 220 + 2x2 = 224 ?
and a jeep then is 220 + 2x2 = 224 ?

Which means that even a single jeep could not fit in a Hamilcar glider, carry 223.







(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 3
Unit Weight?? - 10/13/2005 6:15:19 PM   
TheDesertRat


Posts: 119
Joined: 9/11/2005
Status: offline 		Continuing with Unit weight the OOB Editor manual says
"The weight should be either 100 or 200 if the speed is 0 + the crew".

I would assume that the matter of speed here is mainly for guns. But most guns have a speed of values in the range of 0 - 2.
SO is it a cse that if its a gun the speed for weight purposes is considered to be 0?

(in reply to TheDesertRat)
Post #: 4
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/14/2005 3:30:27 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheDesertRat

So in a rough way all vehicles are meant to have a weight of 220 + (2 x its size) ?


Yes, but you will notice that many seem to have the weight 222 plus twice the size. I do not know if this is intentional or simply an error that has crept in. AFAIK the weight of a vehicle has an influence on the overrun function and also on the chance to pass another vehicle on a wooden bridge (depth of water also comes into play). So there could be more to this than I know.

quote:


Which means that even a single jeep could not fit in a Hamilcar glider, carry 223.


Exactly. Therefore, rather than increase the carry capacity of the glider to 224 to accomodate the jeep or carrier or tetrarch, the weight of the jeep or carrier has been reduced to 'fit' into the glider.

This also allows a truck to 'carry' or tow a jeep or carrier. This is not outside the realm of reality.

(in reply to TheDesertRat)
Post #: 5
RE: Unit Weight?? - 10/14/2005 4:31:55 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheDesertRat

Continuing with Unit weight the OOB Editor manual says
"The weight should be either 100 or 200 if the speed is 0 + the crew".

I would assume that the matter of speed here is mainly for guns. But most guns have a speed of values in the range of 0 - 2.
SO is it a cse that if its a gun the speed for weight purposes is considered to be 0?


It appears that the manual is out of date. Originally, guns had a speed greater than 0 then at some point they were assigned a speed = zero then speed was reintroduced to allow certain guns to be manually moved by the crew.

'Small' guns (the size is subjective) have a carry cost of 100 plus the crew size. Examples are ATG's and howitzers that can be hauled by a truck or light tractor.

'Large' guns have a carry cost of 200 plus the crew size. Such guns can only be hauled by gun teams, heavy trucks, artillery tractors or similarly specialised vehicles.

Typically each OOB is custom designed so that certain vehicles are 'made to measure' for certain guns. Obviously the game does not allow for too much detail outside of fudging the carry cost/capacity and use of the x3 code for formation unit selection.

(in reply to TheDesertRat)
Post #: 6
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/14/2005 4:44:47 AM   
TheDesertRat


Posts: 119
Joined: 9/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

AFAIK the weight of a vehicle has an influence on the overrun function and also on the chance to pass another vehicle on a wooden bridge (depth of water also comes into play). So there could be more to this than I know.

This is am interesting point and its a pity there is not a lot outlining teh logic of the underlying process.

quote:


This also allows a truck to 'carry' or tow a jeep or carrier. This is not outside the realm of reality.

The original example was not a problem from my point of view just a query on the various statements and getting clarification.

As for weights I dont have a problem with teh current weight of jeep or carrier but they do look out of place cf the Kuebelwagen, 223.

(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 7
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/14/2005 6:06:29 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline 		There are nuerous units with odd values. Most of them are simple mistakes. Others, like one of the Italian heavy guns which fired only shrapnel and therefore has a tiny warhead size and large HE Kill value, is not.

(in reply to TheDesertRat)
Post #: 8
RE: Carry/loading issues for units: - 10/14/2005 6:21:52 AM   
TheDesertRat


Posts: 119
Joined: 9/11/2005
Status: offline 		Thanks.

Seems that there is still lots not covered in may of the out of date manuals but burried in people's knowledge.

The hard part is in asking the questios to find it all and get it in some form of order.

(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 9
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SP:WaW Training Center >> Carry/loading issues for units: Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.109