Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> The War Room



Message


Erkki -> Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/19/2010 10:03:32 PM)

While I'm new to the game, actually nearly every heavy-duty strategies, I'm not new to military aviation history, which belongs to my hobbies, or simulators; been (mostly flight) simming nearly last 10 years...

So far in my BTR campaign the 4th is about to rise, casualties are 111:305(of 152 x B17, 10 x B26, 16 x misc. bombers); Bomber Command hasnt showed its ugly face yet. While casualty rates look great, way below max sustainable casualties, I think so are the Allies'(apart from B17s perhaps, 50/day [:D])

I'm pretty sure some of these questions are answered in the game manual(which I didnt bother to read all through), but hwg...

Squadrons; can squadrons be completely wiped out, or can they be created(ie. if I'd have been rather succeffull in avoiding Spitfire strafe attacks and had lots of extra pilots and planes...)? Or will I just have very weak and/or overstrong squadrons?

How does the reinforcement pool work? Will it automatically, at the end of each turn, ship squadrons missing aircraft the aircraft they need provided that there happen to be enough in the pool, or what?

The German radars, in BoB the radars scanned above 3000ft(long range, white) and above 500ft(smaller, red), I have a _feeling_ that this is not the case in BTR... Or is it?

Aircraft have cruise speeds and top speeds; however speed is(or should be) altitude-dependant... Is this modelled? If it is, is there any way info on how top speeds varying depending on altitude are modelled could be dug up? Or do planes just get positive/negative bonuses at some altitudes?

Lastly... I dont quite get how some of the statistics of the aircraft are, ie. how does A6 have more durability but less endurance compared to A5, when they are practically the same aircraft with different outer wing weapons? How about P51D's gun rate compared to FW190A6: 18 vs 20... Thats 6 wing mounted HMGs vs. 2 wing mounted 20mm cannons, 2 20mm cannons in wing roots and 2 MGs in hull, with comparable ammunition, reliability, but if I dont remember wrong USAAF itself estimated a single cannon to be worth 3½ of HMGs; shouldnt FW's gun rate by that logic be at least somewhere around 42...? Many others too, just those two rose to my mind first...

Lastly... Anyone ever seen B-534s get a single kill? [8D]




Hard Sarge -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/20/2010 5:01:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erkki

While I'm new to the game, actually nearly every heavy-duty strategies, I'm not new to military aviation history, which belongs to my hobbies, or simulators; been (mostly flight) simming nearly last 10 years...

So far in my BTR campaign the 4th is about to rise, casualties are 111:305(of 152 x B17, 10 x B26, 16 x misc. bombers); Bomber Command hasnt showed its ugly face yet. While casualty rates look great, way below max sustainable casualties, I think so are the Allies'(apart from B17s perhaps, 50/day [:D])

I'm pretty sure some of these questions are answered in the game manual(which I didnt bother to read all through), but hwg...

Squadrons; can squadrons be completely wiped out, or can they be created(ie. if I'd have been rather succeffull in avoiding Spitfire strafe attacks and had lots of extra pilots and planes...)? Or will I just have very weak and/or overstrong squadrons?

naw, you get the squadrons you get, you can't get rid or make new ones, the AI picks who needs planes, pilots, but some units have reinforcement pilots that come in


How does the reinforcement pool work? Will it automatically, at the end of each turn, ship squadrons missing aircraft the aircraft they need provided that there happen to be enough in the pool, or what?

The German radars, in BoB the radars scanned above 3000ft(long range, white) and above 500ft(smaller, red), I have a _feeling_ that this is not the case in BTR... Or is it?

do you get red and white circles ?

Aircraft have cruise speeds and top speeds; however speed is(or should be) altitude-dependant... Is this modelled? If it is, is there any way info on how top speeds varying depending on altitude are modelled could be dug up? Or do planes just get positive/negative bonuses at some altitudes?

no Speed is not modelled by Alt, a hassle, mostly, where found, the best speed at alt was used

Lastly... I dont quite get how some of the statistics of the aircraft are, ie. how does A6 have more durability but less endurance compared to A5, when they are practically the same aircraft with different outer wing weapons? How about P51D's gun rate compared to FW190A6: 18 vs 20... Thats 6 wing mounted HMGs vs. 2 wing mounted 20mm cannons, 2 20mm cannons in wing roots and 2 MGs in hull, with comparable ammunition, reliability, but if I dont remember wrong USAAF itself estimated a single cannon to be worth 3½ of HMGs; shouldnt FW's gun rate by that logic be at least somewhere around 42...? Many others too, just those two rose to my mind first...

would be very interested to see where the USSAF ever said anything like that, they thought the cannon was bad, a 50 puts out a whole lot more lead per second then the 20 mm did, and a lot of times, the damage done with the 20 mm, was surface damager, while the 50 went though what it hit, 30 mm is a little different round, and, if the 20 mm were so good, why did a lot of German pilots take the outer wing guns off of there planes ?


the A-6 is starting to take on weight, those outer guns are heavier then what the A-5 had, plus it had more armor, and new plumbing, which lets it carry "PaK" weapons that the A-5 doesn't


Lastly... Anyone ever seen B-534s get a single kill? [8D]

think it will be HARDer with Harley changes to combat, but yea, I have seen them get kills, depends on what they hit and when

but they are a bit outclassed by this time





Erkki -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/20/2010 8:11:22 PM)

Heya again.

About squads... Thought so, gotta live with it I guess, not much of an issue anyways.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

do you get red and white circles ?


Freye and Mammuth radars.

quote:

would be very interested to see where the USSAF ever said anything like that, they thought the cannon was bad, a 50 puts out a whole lot more lead per second then the 20 mm did, and a lot of times, the damage done with the 20 mm, was surface damager, while the 50 went though what it hit, 30 mm is a little different round, and, if the 20 mm were so good, why did a lot of German pilots take the outer wing guns off of there planes ?


the A-6 is starting to take on weight, those outer guns are heavier then what the A-5 had, plus it had more armor, and new plumbing, which lets it carry "PaK" weapons that the A-5 doesn't


Well, afaik, the USAAF never fit a cannon to most its fighters because it couldnt get a gun of its own work properly; it did work in the hull of the P38, but F4U1-C had terrible reliability problems... The German MG151/20 fires nearly at the same rate of fire as the Browning M2, the 151/20 firing 71,25kg/minute worth of lead(if all ammo is of the lightest ammo type, Minengeschloss), max weight for an M2 round is(according to wikipedia) 52g, weight of fire being 44,2kg/min... In shot energy/time M2 is closer, however AP rounds of the MG151 are heavier and have considerable higher muzzle speed than the Minengeschloss, and M2 doesnt have any kind of explosive effects in its ammo unlike the cannon, improving its long-range lethality and probability of putting shrapnels in places not directly reachable say, firing from 6 o clock.

I dont see anywhere the M2 being any more or less reliable than the MG151; simply cant find anything supporting the relative gun rates... FW shoots nearly same amount of rounds that are far more lethal, less guns convergence issues due to only 2 guns being mid-wing, comparable amount of ammunition(in shooting time), comparable reliability.

Interesting discussion on the topic: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/armor-penetration-20mm-vs-50-cal-911.html

Also IL-2's ubi.com forums have probably a thousand+ pages on topics "50 cals porked?" "cannon is too powerful" etc. [:)]

Another thing with the guns is with the MK108, it doesnt seem to be much more effective than the MG151.

I'd disagree: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoLLDi-M3fk [:D]

Granted its probably very hard to hit with, thanks to it low muzzle speed...

Dont get me wrong, I dont think the game is biased, after seeing a single Ju-88C shoot 7 x Lancaster IIIs and RTB in a single sortie, that cant be it, I really hope its not "balance" of some misunderstandments... BTW, Also look at Tempest, Typhoon and Spitfires; you'd think 4 x high-ROF cannons would be better than 2 cannons and 4 peashooters, especially when the 4 have even longer firing time and more ammo. On the 3,5:1 ratio, I kind of regret throwing it up as now I have to dig it up somewhere, I'll come back to it(remind me if I dont).

Though it could be that the gun rate doesnt tell all about the firepower; theres probably more behind it than just destructive power and mac shooting range... Just cant bother testing, in-game it feels "correct" enough!

BTW, how easy is it the PBEM? Are the turn files how many mb on average?




Derfel -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/20/2010 10:10:49 PM)

This site gives a very good comparison of the different gun:

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

The reason for dispensing with the outer guns on the German fighters waas to lighten the aircraft as it was needed to shoot down Indianeren (fighters), not Dicke Autos (Heavy Bombers) as their aircraft was envisioned to do in the planing years of 1943.

One will see that the German fighters coming in production in late 1944 were divided into 2 specific types. A light aircraft to combat enemy fighters and a heavy fighter whose role was to combat enemy bombers.

All that said much of this game is a closed black box, where the outcome of combat feels "right" might just bee your own feeling [;)]




Hard Sarge -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/21/2010 1:29:08 PM)

The German MG151/20 fires nearly at the same rate of fire as the Browning M2, the 151/20 firing 71,25kg/minute worth of lead(if all ammo is of the lightest ammo type, Minengeschloss), max weight for an M2 round is(according to wikipedia) 52g, weight of fire being 44,2kg/min... In shot energy/time M2 is closer, however AP rounds of the MG151 are heavier and have considerable higher muzzle speed than the Minengeschloss, and M2 doesnt have any kind of explosive effects in its ammo unlike the cannon, improving its long-range lethality and probability of putting shrapnels in places not directly reachable say, firing from 6 o clock.

odd, the Mine round was faster then the AP round, by about 100 M/s, 805 to 705, with the 50 cal, being 889

so, the 50 does have a higher Rate of Fire, and has higher MV also, plus, the simple fact that it carried a lot more ammo, and basicly, is going to be firing 6 or 8 barrels, to the FW's 2 (4 if using the outer guns, and needs to be on target, but different ROF and spread then the root guns)

also, from your other post, don't look like you having any trouble with the LW firepower



the root guns had 250 RPG, and the outer guns had 140, and those root guns, are going to be much more slower, then any gun used for a Stat Test, there ROF was linked to the RPM of the Props




Erkki -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/21/2010 2:50:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

The German MG151/20 fires nearly at the same rate of fire as the Browning M2, the 151/20 firing 71,25kg/minute worth of lead(if all ammo is of the lightest ammo type, Minengeschloss), max weight for an M2 round is(according to wikipedia) 52g, weight of fire being 44,2kg/min... In shot energy/time M2 is closer, however AP rounds of the MG151 are heavier and have considerable higher muzzle speed than the Minengeschloss, and M2 doesnt have any kind of explosive effects in its ammo unlike the cannon, improving its long-range lethality and probability of putting shrapnels in places not directly reachable say, firing from 6 o clock.

odd, the Mine round was faster then the AP round, by about 100 M/s, 805 to 705, with the 50 cal, being 889

so, the 50 does have a higher Rate of Fire, and has higher MV also, plus, the simple fact that it carried a lot more ammo, and basicly, is going to be firing 6 or 8 barrels, to the FW's 2 (4 if using the outer guns, and needs to be on target, but different ROF and spread then the root guns)

also, from your other post, don't look like you having any trouble with the LW firepower



the root guns had 250 RPG, and the outer guns had 140, and those root guns, are going to be much more slower, then any gun used for a Stat Test, there ROF was linked to the RPM of the Props



My mistake. MG rounds are lightest though... Why wouldnt P51/47 having all their guns mid-wing, have similar convergence & dispersion problems as FW with its 2 outermost guns? Sure P51 has more firing time(though not in all guns), but I dont understand how, considering how much more effective the 151/20 was, would result in FW's gun rate dropping nearly to the P51's level... It should be way above, more than double before running out of outer cannon ammo.

And yeah I dont have problems with the firepower and P51 vs. FW vs. 109 arent only weird ones in relative gun rates... Typhoon, Tempest and Hurri IIc vs. Spitfires(they all have 16, even Hurricane though it has/should have only very little ammo) at least too, I'll look through the statistics today, I hope I find something that would explain it, as I still dont think the probably simplified-into-one-number gun rate tells too much at all.

BTW, is there a way to stop squadrons from automat(/g)ically upgrading into a later comparable aircraft? Any tips on how to get allied recce planes down, so far only G.55s and Re.2005s have been able to catch any of them...




Hard Sarge -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/21/2010 4:36:36 PM)

your not thinking it though

the wing guns on the Allied fighters, are all wing guns, the guns on the FW will be nose mounted, wingroot (which will be very close to the center line still, so set up as nose guns) and wing guns, trying to link the wing guns, to match the aim point of the nose guns, is going to be very HARD

(the weapon load out for the 109 Z never made any sense to me, 4 Mk108's and 1 Mk103, if the aimpoint for the 103 is on target, the 108s are going to be missing, if the aimpoint for the 108s are on, the 103 is going to be missing, unless totally pointblank)

the trouble with your thinking is the 151/20 is that much more effective, people playing with stats, say it must of been, not the pilots who flew for either side, you have predetermined that the 151/20 is better, so it got to be better

you say you are a flight simmer, well so am I am, from IL-2, you got to know what Olaf thinks about the 151/20 and what he thinks about the 50 cal, both of the stink, the only gun that was any good, was anything made in Russian

you also mentioned something about the P-38 having a 20mm, well, remember, that is not what it was suppost to have, that was changed with the RAF plane order, and then the yanks seen, that the 37 just wasn't doing anything, and so changed there's to the 20 also

for how the game shows firepower, I had asked Harley to change how it reads, he never did, I wanted it to be EffxPenxweapon, instead of just Effxweapon, that would show a little better difference betwen MG and Cannon

for recon birds, you need something fast, what you can't catch, you can't shoot down, that is intended





Erkki -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/21/2010 9:07:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

your not thinking it though

the wing guns on the Allied fighters, are all wing guns, the guns on the FW will be nose mounted, wingroot (which will be very close to the center line still, so set up as nose guns) and wing guns, trying to link the wing guns, to match the aim point of the nose guns, is going to be very HARD

(the weapon load out for the 109 Z never made any sense to me, 4 Mk108's and 1 Mk103, if the aimpoint for the 103 is on target, the 108s are going to be missing, if the aimpoint for the 108s are on, the 103 is going to be missing, unless totally pointblank)


I am... Why couldnt all the guns be pointed to the same point? They were in real life too... In that case guns being in different positions and having different muzzle speeds would only effect deflection shooting, and even that little unless done at extreme ranges. Dont think the rounds dropped much, typical firing ranges, 300 to 0 meters, at all anyways. But yeah gun rate being just power and not power*penetration would/might effect all of or most of it.

quote:

the trouble with your thinking is the 151/20 is that much more effective, people playing with stats, say it must of been, not the pilots who flew for either side, you have predetermined that the 151/20 is better, so it got to be better


Know any quotes or interviews by/on anoyne who got to test effectiveness of mgs, hmgs and cannons in combat?

quote:

you say you are a flight simmer, well so am I am, from IL-2, you got to know what Olaf thinks about the 151/20 and what he thinks about the 50 cal, both of the stink, the only gun that was any good, was anything made in Russian


Well in IL-2 the ShVak has B-20's values, simple mistake, no? [:D]

Though I think the M2 is pretty good in il2, "turbolasers" we sometimes call them, very easy to score hits(though less so damage) from impossible deflections and ranges, though out of converge point they do next to nothing(stypid point convergence unlike the box in spit, p40 etc).

Guess I have to start producing more G.55s against recons!




Nicholas Bell -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/21/2010 9:59:23 PM)

Don't think you should simply look at the gun rating in the stats.  Better to look at the individual weapon status as range and penetration play their part.  Also remember the effective values are not linear in effect, and the critical hit routines are convoluted.  Harley is not given to explaining his code to help us understand.  I guess he thinks it is going to spoil our fun.  While I don't agree with this, it's his code and no amount of past badgering has made him change his tune on revealing how things work in the game. 

Recon interception is realistically difficult.  Geometry is important - you never want to be chasing from the start.  Sometimes better to intercept the recon on it's return leg when you can better calculate it's path.  I don't agree that the G55s are the only way to go.  In my current campaign the AI controlled 109s and 190s have taken a heavy toll of my high flying recons.  And the Italian planes required 2 engines instead of one to simulate production problems, so the engines quickly become a bottleneck.

You are correct in your comment about 1 20mm being worth 3+ .50 cals - I just read the same report recently.  I personally am not one who believes the .50 cal was the best thing since sliced bread, but it did the job against fighters and lightly constructed bombers, and was all the USAAF needed.  The USN disagreed and wanted the 20mm's, but as you point out there were serious problems with US 20mm cannon and ammo production standards (and bureaucracy).  What was really unfortunate was this thinking carried on after the war.  In game, the 4 20mm gunned RAF fighters realistically portray why the rest of the world was switching to cannons.




Erkki -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (2/22/2010 11:08:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell

Don't think you should simply look at the gun rating in the stats.  Better to look at the individual weapon status as range and penetration play their part.  Also remember the effective values are not linear in effect, and the critical hit routines are convoluted.  Harley is not given to explaining his code to help us understand.  I guess he thinks it is going to spoil our fun.  While I don't agree with this, it's his code and no amount of past badgering has made him change his tune on revealing how things work in the game. 


And best so! Nothing spoils fun as knowing exactly how the game works, unless if you want to be real competetive in it... Which is, playing against AI especially, kind of pointless.

quote:

Recon interception is realistically difficult.  Geometry is important - you never want to be chasing from the start.  Sometimes better to intercept the recon on it's return leg when you can better calculate it's path.  I don't agree that the G55s are the only way to go.  In my current campaign the AI controlled 109s and 190s have taken a heavy toll of my high flying recons.  And the Italian planes required 2 engines instead of one to simulate production problems, so the engines quickly become a bottleneck.


Just noticed that myself, oh dear... 109s and 190s have been unable to catch a single recon plane, even mossies, so far, I've only had success in bouncing low alt PR. Spitfires and catching F4s and F5s in their returning flight with G.55s and Re.2005s placing a very high altitude patrol on their flightpath and giving a chase once it gets close.

quote:

You are correct in your comment about 1 20mm being worth 3+ .50 cals - I just read the same report recently.  I personally am not one who believes the .50 cal was the best thing since sliced bread, but it did the job against fighters and lightly constructed bombers, and was all the USAAF needed.  The USN disagreed and wanted the 20mm's, but as you point out there were serious problems with US 20mm cannon and ammo production standards (and bureaucracy).  What was really unfortunate was this thinking carried on after the war.  In game, the 4 20mm gunned RAF fighters realistically portray why the rest of the world was switching to cannons.



Another thing I find supporting the use of the HMGs was logistics: it must have been a bureucratical and logistical nightmare to produce at least 9 different guns and 20+ different ammunition types when Americans could do it with 3 guns and 6-8 ammo types, most planes using just one gun type and 2 types of ammo... And nearly the same with engines!




Roko -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (4/19/2010 4:37:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

The German MG151/20 fires nearly at the same rate of fire as the Browning M2, the 151/20 firing 71,25kg/minute worth of lead(if all ammo is of the lightest ammo type, Minengeschloss), max weight for an M2 round is(according to wikipedia) 52g, weight of fire being 44,2kg/min...


military .50 cal Browning (12.7 x 99 mm) projectile weight :
M2 AP 45.8 g
M8 API 40.34 g
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/50_ammo.html

52g projectile must post-war commercial ( eg Barnes .50, 800 grain )






Erkki -> RE: Newbie commander - BTR, sitting in Galland and Speer's seat (4/20/2010 6:36:14 AM)

Right, so its firepower relative to cannons is even lower. That 3,5:1 far and 2,5:1 close when considering the explosive content and shrapnels' effects cant be too much off.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.449219