TOE Errata (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message

Update -> TOE Errata (2/8/2012 12:44:00 PM)

I noticed that Air units got massive errata included in to the updates.
The ground forces TOE is also in need of fixing, especially Finnish Forces are a HUGE mess! I will try to work on them during my free time (hah, what is that???).
Anyway, just curious; Did the person who wrote Finnish forces speak Finnish? If he didn't pat him in the back for job well done without language. On the other hand, if he speaks Finnish smack him for not doing his research properly! [:-]
Oh, it seems that after quick peek into the games German TOE listings and their actual historical organization charts there seems to be some cleaning to do also.

More to follow later on, I hope[:'(]



Apollo11 -> RE: TOE Errata (2/8/2012 1:46:46 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

I noticed that Air units got massive errata included in to the updates.
The ground forces TOE is also in need of fixing, especially Finnish Forces are a HUGE mess! I will try to work on them during my free time (hah, what is that???).
Anyway, just curious; Did the person who wrote Finnish forces speak Finnish? If he didn't pat him in the back for job well done without language. On the other hand, if he speaks Finnish smack him for not doing his research properly! [:-]
Oh, it seems that after quick peek into the games German TOE listings and their actual historical organization charts there seems to be some cleaning to do also.

More to follow later on, I hope[:'(]


We have original Finn doing the Finns - don't you worry...

What TOE data is not OK and for what scenarios?


Leo "Apolo11"



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/9/2012 8:30:36 AM)

OK, here is a really quick answer, I have to comb through the whole Finnish TOE before giving exact fixes to all the problems. But as you can see there are major fixes to come.

DISCLAIMER: I have no knowledge of the person who did Finnish TOE so this is nothing personal towards anybody!

Here is the material I use for Finns, these are available almost in any public Finnish library:

References:
Jatkosodan Historia vol.1-6, (History of Continuation War vol. 1-6) Sotatieteen Laitoksen Julkaisuja, WSOY, Porvoo 1988.
Jatkosodan Pikku Jättiläinen, (Little Giant of Continuation War) Toim. Leskinen ja Juutilainen, WSOY, Helsinki 2006.
Hyökkäyksestä Puolustukseen, (From Assault to Defence) Vesa Tynkkynen, Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulu Taktiikan laitos, Julkaisusarja 1/1996.
Jatkosodan Tiellä, (On the Road of Continuation War) Toim. Palokangas, Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulun Sotahistorian Laitoksen ja Sotamuseon Julkaisuja, Gummerus kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä 2004.
Suomalaiset Panssarijoukot 1919-1969, (Finnish Armored Troops 1919-1969) P. Kantakoski, Karisto Oy, Hämeenlinna 1969
Punaiset Panssarit (Red Tanks), P. Kantakoski, Ilves-Paino Oy, Hämeenlinna 1998

Now to the Quick and Dirty. [:D]

Missing weaponry (devices):

7,62 mm Maxim M/32-33
- Standard Finnish MMG, modified heavily from original Maxim 09.

7,62 ItKk/31-40 VKT
- Finnish AAMG

20 ItK/39 M, Madsen
- Danish GP 20mm automatic gun, mainly used for AA by Finns (Coastal units and Navy)

20 ItK/40 VKT "Vekotin"
- Finnish 2x20mm AAgun

Ground elements:

-Russian MMG should be changed to above M/32-33

-SG43 never used by Finns

-0134 (FT-17) Removed during Winter War for use as billboxes

-0152 (Rifle Squad) 1+8 men (=9) not 10 (same with other squads composition)

-0154 (Submachine Squad) No such a thing in official Finnish infantry TOE

-Missing Jääkäri (Jager) squad all together, should take the place of above unit, different weaponry and uses
bicycles for transportation (speed 12 and classification as bicycle infantry, PLEASE add this classification to list since Germans and other Axis are also using bicycles a lot!!)

-AT-inf units missing men and weaponry

-Finns did not use German 75mm infantry gun

-Artillery units have to be rethought, too many models in real Finnish TOE to be included in the game but not proper as it is right now either.

-Missing Landsverk Anti (AA-tank) used in Armored Division

COMBAT ENGINEERS (this same problem is in every nation!)
-Should not have FT included as part of squad weaponry, this gives way too many FT for divisions!
-Finnish Division had 48 engineers but only 12 FT, so we have 400% increase as things are right now. (German inf. div. had 20 FT, game gives 36!)

TOE
These seem to be off by most cases.
Here is short example:
Summer -41 tank Battalion:
(game 30xT-26)
Real TOE:
BA-10 x3
T-26 x48 (3 Co each 12x T-26)
T-26FT x 5
T-28e x2 (10/41 6+1xT-34)
BT-7 x6
Engineer x3

Other notes:
Air Force needs to be checked, some of the things don’t feel right. Like Finland licence build Blenheims during the war but no Factory in the game.
Cities are missing all AA units.
Map seems to have some mistakes

Anyway, I will start posting fixes with explanations in the forum as time permits.



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/9/2012 8:35:04 PM)

The most important part not to be missed in any thread on TOE errata:

German Infantry Division Artillery TOE after 42, total fail, since the issue that the current setup was supposed to fix was rectified months ago.



Denniss -> RE: TOE Errata (2/9/2012 10:06:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

The most important part not to be missed in any thread on TOE errata:

German Infantry Division Artillery TOE after 42, total fail, since the issue that the current setup was supposed to fix was rectified months ago.
Do you have some details on this ?



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/10/2012 7:15:59 AM)

quote:

Do you have some details on this ?


I just checked infantry divisions (41a, 42, 43 and 44) in GENERAL TOE(OB) and actually there is a problem with
the Divisions Artillery Rgt composition.
Official German TOE (1.Welle) gives 3xBn with 12 105 how each (=36x105 how) and 1xBn with 12x150 How (in some cases one battery of 150 how was replaced by battery of 105 gun for longer counterbattery reach but this was not a norm).

So division should have 36x105 how and 12x 150 how (or 8x150 how and 4x 105 gun but lets forget this option for now since it would not be general TOE(OB))

41a TOE(OB) is OK with Artillery

from 42 TOE(OB), 11/41, onward to 44 the Divisional artillery has been reduced by 9x105 how and 3x150 how so that the numbers for the rest of the war are only 27x105 how and 9x150 how.

I have no idea where that comes from.
It should not have anything to do with production versus casualties since the normal game mechanism takes care of that. The only two explanations that comes to mind are that either it is a typo accident or somebody desided that German inf. div. would be too strong from 1942 on. [&:]
Be as it may, this should be fixed in every scenario ASAP!.



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/10/2012 9:56:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

The most important part not to be missed in any thread on TOE errata:

German Infantry Division Artillery TOE after 42, total fail, since the issue that the current setup was supposed to fix was rectified months ago.
Do you have some details on this ?



Pertti showed what the TOE should be.

The current TOE was put in because that was the de facto establishment of most German Infantry Divisions after 41. This was due to low rate of gun production in 41 (due to worries that munitions production wouldn't be able to keep up), heavy losses in the first Blizzard and the ramping up of production in 42,43 being essentially negated by the heavy losses at Stalingrad and Tunisia. After that production more or less was able to keep up with losses until mid 44.

The production system in WITE after release produced artillery too quickly, so to keep things "historical" the TOE was adjusted down. However, many patches ago, the issue with super quick Artillery production was fixed, however the wrong TOE data was kept, again forcing German players down the "historical" path.




TAIL_GUNNER -> RE: TOE Errata (2/11/2012 3:39:18 AM)

quote:

(German inf. div. had 20 FT, game gives 36!)


Pertti, do you know how these were allocated?

I would guess they would all be in the Pioneer Battalion, because the Pioneers attached to each Infantry Regiment were actually men with basic Pioneer training pulled from the Infantry Regiments for light engineering duties only. In fact they should probably not be counted in the game at all...

But how could 20 FT be used in 27 Pioneer squads?



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/11/2012 7:08:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

quote:

(German inf. div. had 20 FT, game gives 36!)


Pertti, do you know how these were allocated?

I would guess they would all be in the Pioneer Battalion, because the Pioneers attached to each Infantry Regiment were actually men with basic Pioneer training pulled from the Infantry Regiments for light engineering duties only. In fact they should probably not be counted in the game at all...

But how could 20 FT be used in 27 Pioneer squads?


Each Pionier Platoon normally had 1 FT in the platoon HQ element (together with the ATR). This is definitely the case for the early stages of the war, due to how heavy and unwieldy FT's were I doubt very much 1 was ever issued to each squad. FT's should probably be a separate element like MG, ATR's etc.



TAIL_GUNNER -> RE: TOE Errata (2/11/2012 7:29:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

quote:

(German inf. div. had 20 FT, game gives 36!)


Pertti, do you know how these were allocated?

I would guess they would all be in the Pioneer Battalion, because the Pioneers attached to each Infantry Regiment were actually men with basic Pioneer training pulled from the Infantry Regiments for light engineering duties only. In fact they should probably not be counted in the game at all...

But how could 20 FT be used in 27 Pioneer squads?


Each Pionier Platoon normally had 1 FT in the platoon HQ element (together with the ATR). This is definitely the case for the early stages of the war, due to how heavy and unwieldy FT's were I doubt very much 1 was ever issued to each squad. FT's should probably be a separate element like MG, ATR's etc.


I've seen that elsewhere, 3 FT per Pioneer Coy (1 per Platoon). But this would only give 9 per Infantry Division. The TOE for Welle. 1-4 Infantry Divisions on Lexicon-der-Wehrmacht also says 9 per Division.

I believe later in the war this allocation doubled to 6 FT per Pioneer Coy.

But in 1941, even for a Panzer Division which has the 8 extra Teileinheit Infantry-Pioneer Platoons, I come up with a grand total of 17.

And I agree with you, the FT teams should be separate from the Pioneers. I'm thinking two-man teams with one FT, one rifle, one pistol...

ChadG



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/11/2012 8:59:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

quote:

(German inf. div. had 20 FT, game gives 36!)


Pertti, do you know how these were allocated?

I would guess they would all be in the Pioneer Battalion, because the Pioneers attached to each Infantry Regiment were actually men with basic Pioneer training pulled from the Infantry Regiments for light engineering duties only. In fact they should probably not be counted in the game at all...

But how could 20 FT be used in 27 Pioneer squads?


Each Pionier Platoon normally had 1 FT in the platoon HQ element (together with the ATR). This is definitely the case for the early stages of the war, due to how heavy and unwieldy FT's were I doubt very much 1 was ever issued to each squad. FT's should probably be a separate element like MG, ATR's etc.


I've seen that elsewhere, 3 FT per Pioneer Coy (1 per Platoon). But this would only give 9 per Infantry Division. The TOE for Welle. 1-4 Infantry Divisions on Lexicon-der-Wehrmacht also says 9 per Division.

I believe later in the war this allocation doubled to 6 FT per Pioneer Coy.

But in 1941, even for a Panzer Division which has the 8 extra Teileinheit Infantry-Pioneer Platoons, I come up with a grand total of 17.

And I agree with you, the FT teams should be separate from the Pioneers. I'm thinking two-man teams with one FT, one rifle, one pistol...

ChadG


One would have to know where the original information about 20 FT's per Division came from.

2 man teams sounds sensible.



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/11/2012 9:43:36 PM)

....



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 12:38:04 PM)

Sorry, I did not put the source for the 20xFt info. It wasn’t my intetion to start here a discussion for the German engineer update. I merely wanted to point out the fact that FT were not a standard one/squad equiptment for the engineers in most countries.
Right now I am quite busy with Finnish mess known as TOE(OB) in WITE.
Here is the source and quick summary of the FT numbers in each division.

WAR DEPARTMENT TECHNICAL MANUAL
TM-E 30-451
HANDBOOK ON GERMAN MILITARY FORCES
WAR DEPARTMENT • 15 MARCH 1945

Infantry Division, Old Type Engineer Bn. 20xFT (HQx2FT, Co'sx6FT)
Infantry Division, 1944 Type, Engineer Bn. 20xFT
Infantry Division, Two-Regiment Type, Engineer Bn. 14xFT
Volks Grenadier Division, Engineer Bn. 12xFT (Co'sx6)
Army Mountain Division, Mtn Engineer Bn. 20xFT
Army Motorized Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=26xFT)
Army Armored Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Pz. Gren. Regt. (Armd) 24xFT, Pz. Gren. Regt. (Mtz) 18xFT, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=68xFT !)
SS Armored Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Pz. Gren. Regt.x2 (Armd) 48xFT, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=74xFT !)
Air Force Parachute Division, Engineer Bn. 20xFT

This looks to be the numbers around 1944/45. I think that 1941 these numbers were lower, also it seems to me that Sd Kfz 251/16 is counted as 2 flamethrowers worth in these calculations.

Anyway, the fact is that engineers TOE needs to be corrected (along with other units). Problem is that there is not enough room in the division slots for all the combat equiptment that were used. That is one reason I posted the other threat on Division Display Change. I will answer for Schmart tomorrow about the benefits of the change.



ComradeP -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 12:49:45 PM)

Something to keep in mind for the Finns is that they used so many different kinds of equipment that part of it was abstracted (for example: there are fewer Finnish artillery gun types in the game than they in real life) and one thing to keep in mind for the game as a whole is that not all elements in a TOE were actually there in the way the game presents them, as some adjustments were made to make them give the desired result if that wasn't possible with including elements elsewhere, such as in squads/as a part of another ground element.



JJKettunen -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 3:32:39 PM)

Pertti, you sound like a real muppet.



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 5:52:29 PM)

quote:

Something to keep in mind for the Finns is that they used so many different kinds of equipment that part of it was abstracted

Yes, I think I was refering to this when I said:
quote:

Artillery units have to be rethought, too many models in real Finnish TOE to be included in the game but not proper as it is right now either.

Anyway, Let me show you this week the first part of fixes so you can see what I mean with the TOE chances.

Keke:
quote:

Pertti, you sound like a real muppet

Sorry, I don't get this. [&:]
Maybe it is a generation cap or possible a canyon [:D]. For me the Muppets are cute huggable creatures like Kermit the frog and so on. Since I don't feel like at huggable Haavisto boy would you please clarify the meaning, vaikka suomeksi jos on helpompaa![8|]



JJKettunen -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 6:04:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti
Sorry, I don't get this. [&:]
Maybe it is a generation cap or possible a canyon [:D]. For me the Muppets are cute huggable creatures like Kermit the frog and so on. Since I don't feel like at huggable Haavisto boy would you please clarify the meaning, vaikka suomeksi jos on helpompaa![8|]


Muppet

a person who defies explanation with regard to common sense and logic, exhubing an air of confidence that is mutually exclusive to that of their accomplishments or ability




Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 6:13:39 PM)

WOW, did I step on your toes or do you just want to compare our relative academic accomplisments?

Like I pointed out in earlier post (
quote:

DISCLAIMER: I have no knowledge of the person who did Finnish TOE so this is nothing personal towards anybody!
) this is nothing to do with anybody's person.
Just want to fix the facts as far as the game engine permits.

So, let's just forget the personal things and see how we can together better this whole game series!



JJKettunen -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 6:48:38 PM)

You have no clue how much the Finnish forces were improved from their original sorry state, and why every detail was not included. Calling them a huge mess is just pure slander.



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 8:08:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

Sorry, I did not put the source for the 20xFt info. It wasn’t my intetion to start here a discussion for the German engineer update. I merely wanted to point out the fact that FT were not a standard one/squad equiptment for the engineers in most countries.
Right now I am quite busy with Finnish mess known as TOE(OB) in WITE.
Here is the source and quick summary of the FT numbers in each division.

WAR DEPARTMENT TECHNICAL MANUAL
TM-E 30-451
HANDBOOK ON GERMAN MILITARY FORCES
WAR DEPARTMENT • 15 MARCH 1945

Infantry Division, Old Type Engineer Bn. 20xFT (HQx2FT, Co'sx6FT)
Infantry Division, 1944 Type, Engineer Bn. 20xFT
Infantry Division, Two-Regiment Type, Engineer Bn. 14xFT
Volks Grenadier Division, Engineer Bn. 12xFT (Co'sx6)
Army Mountain Division, Mtn Engineer Bn. 20xFT
Army Motorized Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=26xFT)
Army Armored Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Pz. Gren. Regt. (Armd) 24xFT, Pz. Gren. Regt. (Mtz) 18xFT, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=68xFT !)
SS Armored Division, Recon Bn. 6xFt, Pz. Gren. Regt.x2 (Armd) 48xFT, Engineer Bn. 20xFT (=74xFT !)
Air Force Parachute Division, Engineer Bn. 20xFT

This looks to be the numbers around 1944/45. I think that 1941 these numbers were lower, also it seems to me that Sd Kfz 251/16 is counted as 2 flamethrowers worth in these calculations.



Thanks. In general I've found wartime Intelligence reports to be not very accurate when it comes to details. To be fair, it's difficult to say what the "paper" TOE is when "real" TOE varied as much as it did. I've got some late war KSTN's on PDF, I'll see if I can find anything on the subject.



Seminole -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 8:14:51 PM)

The Finnish OOB in my two games (as Soviet) seems to go into significant decline after mid-August.

Do they have units withdrawn, or am I bleeding them that badly?

In one game they peaked in total men at 380k in late July, declining to 281k by late November. 60k of that drop happened in essentially one week in late October!

In my other game they peaked at 372k total men in mid October, and fell as far as 297k by late January.

The first game there was a prolonged fight along the northern Ladoga shore, but in the second essentially static along a defensive line I established at the choke point north of Ladoga.



jaw -> RE: TOE Errata (2/13/2012 9:44:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

You have no clue how much the Finnish forces were improved from their original sorry state, and why every detail was not included. Calling them a huge mess is just pure slander.


As the person responsible for the "original sorry state" I take no offense here in the hope of seeing a truce called in this Finnish Civil War so that legitimate issues can be addressed in a calm and respectful manner.

To begin with, if ANYBODY wants to see something fixed in the data base the public forum (even the private development forum) is the least efficient place to see that happen. As I have said before the best thing to do is to email me directly at jawirth@comcast.net. Denniss, Pieter and even you Jyri will agree that one gets much faster response when you email me directly.

Second, Jyri is my primary expert on Finnish forces so any change to their equipment and/or organization will be run by him before it becomes official. If anyone doesn't like that arrangement they can appeal to Joel but that's my position.

Now that we're clear on the ground rules let's put the knives away and send your comments/questions directly to me.

Thank you,

Jim Wirth



TAIL_GUNNER -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 1:46:15 AM)

@Pertti - thanks for the info...that's good stuff.

@MechFO - It's my understanding flame-throwers weren't shown on the KStN. You will need the corresponding KAN file which should be the same number and date as the KStN.

@jaw - Good post. I'm sure there'll still be debates 300 years from now as to what, who, and how many were there regarding the epic scope of this War in the East.
I can only imagine what a monumental effort it was to create all these hundreds of TOEs from scratch for this great game. Hats off to you and your crew.
I also mean no disrespect in the slightest with regards to my own "mods"...I'm just some nut-job that would rather tinker in the editor than play the game...
ChadG



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 2:21:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

@MechFO - It's my understanding flame-throwers weren't shown on the KStN. You will need the corresponding KAN file which should be the same number and date as the KStN.



You don't find FT's per se but you find the number of Flammschützen, I assume 2 Flammschützen corresponds to 1 FT.

I found something useful with KSTN No. 1118 A+B Panzer Pio Kp for Pz Gren Regiments, motorized and armoured, Kriegsetat 44.

Pz Pio Kp for the mot Pz Gren Reg has:

3 motorized Platoons à 4 Squads, 1 MG per Squad, each platoon with 4 Flammschützen -> probably 2 FT's
6 Panzerschreck

armoured Pz Pio Kp for the arm. Pz Gren Reg has.

2 mot Platoons à 4 Squads, 1 MG per Squad, each platoon with 4 Flammschützen
1 arm. Platoon with 3 Squads, 2 MG's per Squad, no Flammschützen (1 x 251/17)
1 arm. FT platoon with 6 x 251/16
3 Panzerschreck

EDIT: The early war KSTN's that I have don't explicitly mention the number of Flammschützen, even if equipment clearly indicates that there must be some in the unit. Also, on second thought, since all FT's were 1 man versions, 4 Flammschützen might very well mean 4 FT's....FT production really ramped up in 43/44, so 4 FT per platoon might actually be possible.
As an aside I have found that the arm. FT platoon had 5 x 251/16 in 43.

Also, since this thread is getting crowded with other stuff I'll start posting in the other thread if I find anything.



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 7:00:24 AM)

quote:

To begin with, if ANYBODY wants to see something fixed in the data base the public forum (even the private development forum) is the least efficient place to see that happen. As I have said before the best thing to do is to email me directly at jawirth@comcast.net.

OK JAWS, I will send you e-mail when I get the things done. Do you want scans of the relevant original sources (comes to quite a few pages! = 100+ pages) or just word files that list the needed changes with references?
By the way, I do not see any Civil War going on from my point of view since there has been no comments on the facts that I posted (post#2).
I do acknowledge and apologize for poking Keke just for fun in order to get him blow some steam out of his system (post #15).



JJKettunen -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 8:02:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

By the way, I do not see any Civil War going on from my point of view since there has been no comments on the facts that I posted (post#2).


Just as an example: I requested those Landsverks, but the reply was that they are not needed because there were only a few of them, and because SP-AA-units don't work properly in the game anyhow.

Considering the fact that the Finnish front is only a small sideshow in the game, it was pretty understandable that majority of smaller details were left out.

Oh, and if you have a problem with the Finnish air forces, then you have a problem with Jatkosodan historia too. Major map and production changes were not possible when I got on board. So please don't spew out garbage anymore.



Update -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 10:36:28 AM)

Keke what’s wrong with your attitude?

quote:

Pertti, you sound like a real muppet.

Muppet
a person who defies explanation with regard to common sense and logic, exhubing an air of confidence that is mutually exclusive to that of their accomplishments or ability

You have no clue how much the Finnish forces were improved from their original sorry state, and why every detail was not included. Calling them a huge mess is just pure slander.

So please don't spew out garbage anymore.


Lighten up before you get a heart attack!

Since this whole TOE thing is purely an academic excercise (no real bullets flying here) let me give you a piece of advice from somebody whose been kicking around the globe (literally) close to a half a century. I heard it long ago from my mentor professor in the USA before my final thesis defence debate.
quote:

Never get rattled and never EVER get personal during a debate.

In the first case it shows that there is something iffy going with your research and the second case has two possible outcomes. One: You are right but nobody cares since you went for personal level. Two you are wrong, the other person gets fed up with you, proves your research wrong and trashes publicly your academic reputation so badly that it ruins your career and therefore your life!

Anyway, let’s leave all this behind and talk about the relevant things.

quote:

Just as an example: I requested those Landsverks, but the reply was that they are not needed because there were only a few of them, and because SP-AA-units don't work properly in the game anyhow.


This is really worrisome since Germans have a huge number of AA units in this category. Also, the Landsverk Anti is already in the game as Nimrod (official designation 40M Nimrod) for Hungary (#287)

The reason why I mentioned checking the Finnish Air Force is the Fieseler Fi 156 Storch which stuck to my memory from the export-import reports. Finland purchased 2 of these planes in 1938 (arrived 1939 I think) and no more. The game imports from Germany (starting 10/41) 30 of these planes. So there might be some other programming slips in the data bases.

I try to get the infantry TOE(OB)’s for JAWS this week before next weeks ski vacation here in Finland.



JJKettunen -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 11:09:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

Keke what’s wrong with your attitude?



quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

The ground forces TOE is also in need of fixing, especially Finnish Forces are a HUGE mess!


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

In the first case it shows that there is something iffy going with your research and the second case has two possible outcomes. One: You are right but nobody cares since you went for personal level. Two you are wrong, the other person gets fed up with you, proves your research wrong and trashes publicly your academic reputation so badly that it ruins your career and therefore your life!


I'd say you definitely have some weird attitude issues. Perhaps you have been "kicking around the globe" in your mind for too long, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti
I try to get the infantry TOE(OB)’s for JAWS this week before next weeks ski vacation here in Finland.


I fail to see what's the point because they didn't make it in the first place, but be my guest. There are more important issues to deal with in any case.



jaw -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 1:15:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

quote:

To begin with, if ANYBODY wants to see something fixed in the data base the public forum (even the private development forum) is the least efficient place to see that happen. As I have said before the best thing to do is to email me directly at jawirth@comcast.net.

OK JAWS, I will send you e-mail when I get the things done. Do you want scans of the relevant original sources (comes to quite a few pages! = 100+ pages) or just word files that list the needed changes with references?
By the way, I do not see any Civil War going on from my point of view since there has been no comments on the facts that I posted (post#2).
I do acknowledge and apologize for poking Keke just for fun in order to get him blow some steam out of his system (post #15).



Pertti,

I need specific reference the data base such as "I think TOE so and so should have this" or "Ground element so and so is wrong/missing, etc.". I do not want "raw" data except to substantiate some change requested. I should warn you that even with verification unless we are talking a major data mistake that has a game effect (very unlikely with respect to the Finns) the chance that any further changes would be made is very low in the current version of the game. When we get to the War in the East 2.0 project I expect that we will have a much improved data system which will allow for greater variation than the current product. That will be the time to throw in everything and the kitchen sink.

Jim



MechFO -> RE: TOE Errata (2/14/2012 3:06:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pertti

quote:

To begin with, if ANYBODY wants to see something fixed in the data base the public forum (even the private development forum) is the least efficient place to see that happen. As I have said before the best thing to do is to email me directly at jawirth@comcast.net.

OK JAWS, I will send you e-mail when I get the things done. Do you want scans of the relevant original sources (comes to quite a few pages! = 100+ pages) or just word files that list the needed changes with references?
By the way, I do not see any Civil War going on from my point of view since there has been no comments on the facts that I posted (post#2).
I do acknowledge and apologize for poking Keke just for fun in order to get him blow some steam out of his system (post #15).



Pertti,

I need specific reference the data base such as "I think TOE so and so should have this" or "Ground element so and so is wrong/missing, etc.". I do not want "raw" data except to substantiate some change requested. I should warn you that even with verification unless we are talking a major data mistake that has a game effect (very unlikely with respect to the Finns) the chance that any further changes would be made is very low in the current version of the game. When we get to the War in the East 2.0 project I expect that we will have a much improved data system which will allow for greater variation than the current product. That will be the time to throw in everything and the kitchen sink.

Jim



Will you also accept errata for other forces? The German Arty TOE being an obvious, easy, yet unfixed case.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.0625