Mike Wood, OOB Question please help

Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (Full Version)

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

Message

omegaall -> Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/13/2006 12:18:42 PM)
Mike in the thread Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> OOB question The discussion is re weapon slots for vehicles and how they operate per unit class. From what I can see it might be a situation some units could be miss clased. In the post by FlashfyreSP, he raises teh point of how the slots did or do operate, with respect to the OOB EDitor. Post link http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1060017 The big question I suspect that will now hang is which unit classes actually have turret properties and which don't. Could you please shead some light on this aspect of unit class property. Thanks

Alby -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/13/2006 5:57:21 PM)
Its an Icon thing if the unit does not have a turret Icon to go along with it, then of course the turret wont spin. the question is, is it losing any accuracy by "spinning" [&:]

Mike Wood -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 12:51:41 AM)
Hello... No. No, it is not. Just an icon thing. Bye... Michael Wood quote: ORIGINAL: Alby Its an Icon thing if the unit does not have a turret Icon to go along with it, then of course the turret wont spin. the question is, is it losing any accuracy by "spinning" [&:]

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 1:48:01 AM)
Mike; Thanks for this info. helps with few vehicles .. forgot to check on this: Is it correct then that if a vehicle has a turret icon then weapons in slot 1 - 3 are treated as if they are in the turret ?

Mike Wood -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 9:08:04 AM)
Hello... No. Weapon slots #1 and #2 are turret. Bye... Michael Wood quote: ORIGINAL: omegaall Mike; Thanks for this info. helps with few vehicles .. forgot to check on this: Is it correct then that if a vehicle has a turret icon then weapons in slot 1 - 3 are treated as if they are in the turret ?

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 1:43:34 PM)
Thanks Mike. Just to get this clear I hope, Weapon slots #1 & #2 are for the turret weapons and will if the vehicle has a turret provide 360 degree arc. Slots #4 I know is a hull weapons so I gather from this slot #3 is also a hull weapon. This would mean that if a vehicle was immobilised, speed equal to zero, then only weapons in slots 1 and 2 would work. So if I was to model a Stuart I for the Western Desert as M3 gun – slot #1- turret coaxial MG slot#2– turret BMG - slot #4 -front hull Putting an Anti Aircraft MG in slot #3 would mean that really it could only shoot to the front if the vehicle was immobilised. In reality then the concept of an AA MG in slot #3 may be thought of as only having a 360 degree arc if the vehicle is mobile? It’s a bit like putting an AA Bren in slot #1 of a Bren carrier it really can only shoot to the front as it has no turret. The concepts are slowly making sense on how the weapon slots work.

FlashfyreSP -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 4:08:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: omegaall Thanks Mike. Just to get this clear I hope, Weapon slots #1 & #2 are for the turret weapons and will if the vehicle has a turret provide 360 degree arc. Slots #4 I know is a hull weapons so I gather from this slot #3 is also a hull weapon. This would mean that if a vehicle was immobilised, speed equal to zero, then only weapons in slots 1 and 2 would work. So if I was to model a Stuart I for the Western Desert as M3 gun – slot #1- turret coaxial MG slot#2– turret BMG - slot #4 -front hull Putting an Anti Aircraft MG in slot #3 would mean that really it could only shoot to the front if the vehicle was immobilised. In reality then the concept of an AA MG in slot #3 may be thought of as only having a 360 degree arc if the vehicle is mobile? It’s a bit like putting an AA Bren in slot #1 of a Bren carrier it really can only shoot to the front as it has no turret. The concepts are slowly making sense on how the weapon slots work. Yes, which is why the typical weapon load for a tank is: #1 Main Gun, #2 AAMG, if mounted, #3 CoAxial MG, #4 Bow MG. Granted, once the tank is immobilized, the CMG in #3 won't fire outside the FA (frontal arc) which is unrealistic as it occupies the turret, but restricting the AAMG may be more unrealistic. If you assume that the gunner, loader, and driver are working to re-mobilize the tank, and the CO is manning the AAMG to keep away the infantry, it makes a kind of sense. As for the Bren Carrier (grrr...no such thing, it's a Universal Carrier), some versions did have a Bren AAMG mounted on them. The gun was on a post-type mounting above the engine compartment. Some Carriers were converted to Machingun Carriers, mounting the Vickers HMG on a bracket across the centerline engine housing. Mainly designed to transport the gun; the MG could be fired from the vehicle, although with reduced traverse.

Goblin -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/21/2006 5:30:33 PM)
quote: This would mean that if a vehicle was immobilised, speed equal to zero, then only weapons in slots 1 and 2 would work. All weapons would work, but some would only fire in the direction the vehicle was facing when it was immobilized. Goblin

Mau Fox -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 1:16:20 AM)
Yo guys! Actually, the Bren carrier is not precisely the same thing as a Universal carrier, although most people use the terms interchangably. The "Universal" carrier was a wartime design intended to replace several specialist-type carriers (thus the name 'universal') including the very similar Bren carrier, Scout carrier, and some of the Dragon carriers that were really light artillery tractors. At a glance it is pretty hard to tell them all apart, but they are slightly different vehicles. Concerning the weapons on board I have to say that the Bren Carrier mounted a .303 Bren or Vickers MMG/HMG in the front part hull of the vehicle, aside the driver. Often, supplementary Bren gun was mounted on the centre of the vehicle for AA purposes. As war went on other version of this versatile vehicle were made. As for example the WASP mounted a flamethrower in the front part of the hull instead of the Bren/Vickers MG. However, if I were a WWII soldier asked to go into the cauldron, it would be a hard choice between the Italian CV33 and the Brits carrier. At least the Italian tankette was not open topped. [:D] Mau Fox. [image]local://upfiles/15888/85B013ED41C04C028611E372209F12AD.jpg[/image]

FlashfyreSP -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 2:25:34 AM)
Mau Sorry to disagree with you, but the use of the word "Bren" in regards to the Carrier was never used officially, except in reference to it's armament. For more info, I recommend Osprey's book "Universal Carrier 1936-1948: The 'Bren Gun Carrier' Story". In a nutshell, the first vehicles were Machinegun Carrier Mk Is, designed to carry the Vickers MMG into battle. Another version, armed with a either a Bren LMG or Boys ATR in the bow, was known as the Scout Carrier. Other versions followed, but none of them were ever officially 'Bren Carriers'.

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 3:53:05 AM)
Actually to be honest with respect to this particular discussion I don't think the name used actually makes any difference.. Else we will have to use the correct terms such as Scout Carrier, Universial Carrier, Machine Gun carrier etc .. all being different and official terms or we go fully official.. for conversational issues which this all is it is of little signifience..

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 4:14:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FlashfyreSP Yes, which is why the typical weapon load for a tank is: #1 Main Gun, #2 AAMG, if mounted, #3 CoAxial MG, #4 Bow MG. Granted, once the tank is immobilized, the CMG in #3 won't fire outside the FA (frontal arc) which is unrealistic as it occupies the turret, but restricting the AAMG may be more unrealistic. If you assume that the gunner, loader, and driver are working to re-mobilize the tank, and the CO is manning the AAMG to keep away the infantry, it makes a kind of sense. As for the Bren Carrier (grrr...no such thing, it's a Universal Carrier), some versions did have a Bren AAMG mounted on them. The gun was on a post-type mounting above the engine compartment. Some Carriers were converted to Machingun Carriers, mounting the Vickers HMG on a bracket across the centerline engine housing. Mainly designed to transport the gun; the MG could be fired from the vehicle, although with reduced traverse. But I have seen case I think in the game where on an immobilised tank the weapon in slot#3 has bee firing .. and that was firing to the rear not the front arc.. SO this is a little confusing ..

KG Erwin -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 4:39:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: omegaall quote: ORIGINAL: FlashfyreSP Yes, which is why the typical weapon load for a tank is: #1 Main Gun, #2 AAMG, if mounted, #3 CoAxial MG, #4 Bow MG. Granted, once the tank is immobilized, the CMG in #3 won't fire outside the FA (frontal arc) which is unrealistic as it occupies the turret, but restricting the AAMG may be more unrealistic. If you assume that the gunner, loader, and driver are working to re-mobilize the tank, and the CO is manning the AAMG to keep away the infantry, it makes a kind of sense. As for the Bren Carrier (grrr...no such thing, it's a Universal Carrier), some versions did have a Bren AAMG mounted on them. The gun was on a post-type mounting above the engine compartment. Some Carriers were converted to Machingun Carriers, mounting the Vickers HMG on a bracket across the centerline engine housing. Mainly designed to transport the gun; the MG could be fired from the vehicle, although with reduced traverse. But I have seen case I think in the game where on an immobilised tank the weapon in slot#3 has bee firing .. and that was firing to the rear not the front arc.. SO this is a little confusing .. "The Medal of Honor is presented to Robert Howard McCard, Gunnery Sergeant, U.S. Marine Corps, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as Platoon Sergeant of Company A, Fourth Tank Battalion, Fourth Marine Division, during the battle for enemy Japanese-held Saipan, Marianas Islands, on 16 June 1944. Cut off from the other units of his platoon when his tank was put out of action by a battery of enemy 77-mm. guns, Gunnery Sergeant McCard carried on resolutely, bringing all the tank's weapons to bear on the enemy, until the severity of hostile fire caused him to order his crew out of the escape hatch while he courageously exposed himself to enemy guns by hurling hand grenades, in order to cover the evacuation of his men. Seriously wounded during this action and with his supply of grenades exhausted," { NOTE THIS}" G/Sergeant McCard then dismantled one of the tank's machineguns and faced the Japanese for the second time to deliver vigorous fire into their positions, destroying 16 of the enemy but sacrificing himself to insure the safety of his crew. His valiant fighting spirit and supreme loyalty in the face of almost certain death reflect the highest credit upon Gunnery Sergeant McCard and the U.S. Naval Service. He gallantly gave his life for his country."

FlashfyreSP -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 7:03:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: omegaall Actually to be honest with respect to this particular discussion I don't think the name used actually makes any difference.. Else we will have to use the correct terms such as Scout Carrier, Universial Carrier, Machine Gun carrier etc .. all being different and official terms or we go fully official.. for conversational issues which this all is it is of little signifience.. Exactly. How better to differentiate between the unit classed as "Scout APC" and the unit classed as "Prime Mover"? Or the "Tracked APC" classed unit from the "Utility Vehicle" unit? Being called by their official names makes it easy to identify which of them is the recon version and which is the artillery transport model on the map. Besides, why would you call it a 'Bren' Carrier when it only has a Vickers machinegun mounted? I'm firmly on the side of using as many official names and designators as possible; exceptions can be made for some units whose 'nicknames' are easier to use than their ordnance numbers.

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 3:24:24 PM)
The issue here is not what the vehicle is called as that has really little meaning to the issues I questioned. This is one of the issues : quote: ORIGINAL: omegaall But I have seen case I think in the game where on an immobilised tank the weapon in slot#3 has bee firing .. and that was firing to the rear not the front arc.. SO this is a little confusing .. So to bring this all back onto the thread topic OOB question and in detail weapon slots and how they work.. I reinterate the above issue .. What is thisabove vehicle doing? The weapon in slot #3 is firing and it should, according to everything here, not be doing so; or is this weapon actually considered by the game engine to be in the turret?

Goblin -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 6:07:26 PM)
I haven't seen it happen. My StuG's, etc fire only where they should be able to when immobilized. As a matter of fact, a German mortar halftrack in my game last night got immobilized, and could not fire its AAMG to the side, which was most annoying...Might be specific to the unit mentioned, omega; which was it? Goblin

omegaall -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 11:08:30 PM)
It was the M3 Lee - US army OOB. quote: ORIGINAL: Goblin I haven't seen it happen. My StuG's, etc fire only where they should be able to when immobilized. As a matter of fact, a German mortar halftrack in my game last night got immobilized, and could not fire its AAMG to the side, which was most annoying...Might be specific to the unit mentioned, omega; which was it? Goblin

Goblin -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/22/2006 11:45:09 PM)
Good possibility, omega. I am sure there are glitches and odd things going on (like the AAMG in my example above). I don't have a US campaign going to try one out right now though. The weapons should fire based on the weapons class (AAMG, BMG, CMG, etc), not on the hull/superstructure setup. There would never be mistakes then.... Goblin

Goblin -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/23/2006 2:37:14 AM)
I just found that the SdKfz 250/9, although showing a turret icon, always turns towards the enemy to fire its 20mm gun. This is getting confusing now... Goblin

FlashfyreSP -> RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help (2/23/2006 3:38:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Goblin I just found that the SdKfz 250/9, although showing a turret icon, always turns towards the enemy to fire its 20mm gun. This is getting confusing now... Goblin Because it is a 'Recon Haltrack' classed unit. The "halftrack" classes are all non-turreted classes, so the game 'spins' them to face their target. With the M3 Lee unit, omegaall, some version of this have a .30cl CMG in both the #2 and #3 weapon slots; one is the 'true' coaxial MG, the other is not, so the possibility exists that one of the MGs would fire to the rear, as this would be a turret weapon firing. If this is in fact the same unit you are describing, isn't it possible it was the #2 weapon that fired, not the #3? Or is there some other weapon in #2?

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.78125