RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (Full Version)

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



Message

Voriax -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 5:54:06 PM)

Some weapon hit probability and penetration tables...first I though to post these urls to the Pz-IVc thread but they may be more useful here.

Weapon effectiveness (81 pages)
http://www.britwar.co.uk/files/phatfile/WW2eff14May02.PDF

Hit probability (13 pages)
http://www.britwar.co.uk/files/phatfile/WW2hit14May02.PDF

Penetration values (75 pages)
http://www.britwar.co.uk/files/phatfile/WW2pen14May02.PDF

Okay, this may be adding fuel to the flames but enjoy


[sm=00000016.gif]

Voriax



Frank W. -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 6:29:42 PM)

voriax: amazing links. thanx



Charles2222 -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 9:32:44 PM)

Just a short note on this fighter-bomber sort of thing. While 20mm. cannon may have had trouble, in the Stuka 37mm. I don't think that's so much the case. At home I have a large book on Rudel, and they actually have a photograph of an JS-II that was destroyed by his plane. I think it's the only JS-II he ever got though, and how many oppotunites he had I do not know.



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 9:57:00 PM)

Checking...

1. Not around for a few days, what is the "The Bitch and moan" post???

2. Did Jagtiger really ran that fast in WWII? or is there a error whilst editing? It seems like Jadgtiger can ran faster than a Tiger II. Is that true?

3. When I select the Cez. Flak 3cm, it is armoured but not in the German unit, is there a different between the 2?



JJKettunen -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 10:04:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

Just a short note on this fighter-bomber sort of thing. While 20mm. cannon may have had trouble, in the Stuka 37mm. I don't think that's so much the case. At home I have a large book on Rudel, and they actually have a photograph of an JS-II that was destroyed by his plane. I think it's the only JS-II he ever got though, and how many oppotunites he had I do not know.


Do note that I'm not questioning the killing ability of that gun, but efficiency of all aircrafts in adverse conditions...



Voriax -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 10:16:28 PM)

Howdy

1. Take your pick, there are plenty of those around.

2. According to 'Achtung Panzer' they should have same speed. So, slow down the JagdTiger?

3. Not sure..there was a vehicle that had the same halftrack chassis but with a box like shielding. But this vehicle carried a 76,2mm ATG. Perhaps just a mistake?

Voriax



BulletMagnet -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/6/2004 11:34:49 PM)

quote:

1. Not around for a few days, what is the "The Bitch and moan" post???


Its a place where people can unload all of the unhappy thoughts about the oobs and the rest of us dont have to filter through it to find out whats new with the oobs.Think of it as the head or latrine.Feel free to use it anytime...[:D]



Major Destruction -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 3:18:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: o4r

2. Did Jagtiger really ran that fast in WWII? or is there a error whilst editing? It seems like Jadgtiger can ran faster than a Tiger II. Is that true?

3. When I select the Cez. Flak 3cm, it is armoured but not in the German unit, is there a different between the 2?


2. Chamberlain and Ellis quote 38km/hr; Tiger II 35km/hr.
Could be a mistake since they have the same engine and the Jagdtiger is 2 tons heavier.

3. Are you refering to the 3.7cm FlaK LKW?
This is a German unit in the Czech OOB. It has no armour. Should it? How much?

Or some other unit?



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 11:04:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: o4r

2. Did Jagtiger really ran that fast in WWII? or is there a error whilst editing? It seems like Jadgtiger can ran faster than a Tiger II. Is that true?

3. When I select the Cez. Flak 3cm, it is armoured but not in the German unit, is there a different between the 2?


2. Chamberlain and Ellis quote 38km/hr; Tiger II 35km/hr.
Could be a mistake since they have the same engine and the Jagdtiger is 2 tons heavier.

3. Are you refering to the 3.7cm FlaK LKW?
This is a German unit in the Czech OOB. It has no armour. Should it? How much?

Or some other unit?


So No. 2 is confirmed a mistake in 8.01 OOb.

No.3, if u go to the Cezch, there is a unit called German SP Flak 3cm, it is armoured. But in german unit, it is still referring to the same vehicle but it is not armoured.

Ok,

Question 4: PIV short 75/24, when does it HEAT (actually I think it is a hollow round) became available. In H2H, it was already available in 1939 September but in SPWAW 6 to present version it was not available until quite late in the war (somewhere mid of 1942) so which is which?



Voriax -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 11:20:46 AM)

o4r, could you give the unit number for this flak? I cannot find any 3cm flak units in the Czech oob.

3,7cm flak LKW, 2cm Flak LKW???

Only armoured flak unit is the SdKfz-6/2, unit number 46

Voriax



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 6:34:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Voriax

o4r, could you give the unit number for this flak? I cannot find any 3cm flak units in the Czech oob.

3,7cm flak LKW, 2cm Flak LKW???

Only armoured flak unit is the SdKfz-6/2, unit number 46

Voriax

Yup, that is why I am refering to. Why only that unit has armoured and the one in German is not. Is the game trying to refer to another chasiss?

By the way, how about the hollow round in 75/24. I have practically check the whole web site, I can find one telling us when does that gun has hollow round. In H2H, the problem is that everyone use PV IV because that hollow round available at early stage of the war can kill practically any tank even up to T-34 at desirable range.

Since this is a fresh start of oob discussion or improvement. How do we know what was registered and what was not.

Example like the available year of PV IV D, I hope it was changed back.



JJKettunen -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 6:43:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: o4r
By the way, how about the hollow round in 75/24. I have practically check the whole web site, I can find one telling us when does that gun has hollow round. In H2H, the problem is that everyone use PV IV because that hollow round available at early stage of the war can kill practically any tank even up to T-34 at desirable range.


According to CMBB's gun data, hollow charge for that gun is available from December '41. Improved versions of it become available on January '43 and October '44.



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 6:53:06 PM)

Have anyone read "Death Traps" by Belton Y Cooper. It seems like M4 is not a match for a Tiger and later part of the war, M4 is avoiding direct confrontation with Tiger.

But in it, there is one brave M4, during the confrontation, fire smoke onto one of the tiger and their crew bailed out mistaken that their tank was on fire plus the smoke choke them whilst in the tank. He repeated again on another and it works again, unfortunately he was taken out eventually by another tank.

From this book, we could understand the effectiveness of 75mm gun vs Tiger or Panther. It seems like 75mm ability is only at short range and only to disable these 2 beast but never destroy them.

Sad [:(] for the american die during WWII. My salute[&o] for their braveness.



Kevin E. Duguay -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/7/2004 6:53:51 PM)

Both the 20mm and 37mm versions of the Flak LKW are in CZ OOB. The two units represent German unarmored trucks mounting flak guns.

There is a problem though. The 20mm LKW has 8mm hull armor. Is that correct? IMHO if they are to have any armor at all, why not turret front 8mm armor, representing the gun shields on the two weapons in question?[;)]

The Germans mounted these two weapons on just about everything that had wheels or tracks or both! Some of the trucks had lightly armored cabs and front engine covers. I have also seen pictures of truck mounted flak guns both with and without gun shields. but most seem to have retained the shield.
So this one is up to the OOB guys (Brian et all) But both vehicles should be the same except for armament. [;)]

Edit; Unit numbers, 37mm LKW is # 48, 20mm LKW is # 61



Voriax -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/8/2004 12:44:30 AM)

o4r, I'm sure some ammunition expert will answer to the 75mm heat availability. Afaik they had 3 different versions of those, each new version slightly more effective. And that during 1940 some guns got heat rounds but dunno exact types. These may be artillery guns, not tanks.
However in the game StuG B has these rounds already from May 1940 so it feels kinda odd to have to wait until June 1942 for a Pz-IV to get those...

Voriax



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/8/2004 2:50:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Voriax

o4r, I'm sure some ammunition expert will answer to the 75mm heat availability. Afaik they had 3 different versions of those, each new version slightly more effective. And that during 1940 some guns got heat rounds but dunno exact types. These may be artillery guns, not tanks.
However in the game StuG B has these rounds already from May 1940 so it feels kinda odd to have to wait until June 1942 for a Pz-IV to get those...

Voriax


Well I was wondering if those Hollow rounds were invented so early and their effectiveness was so good, they would be using them more often than the 50L42 or 50L60. I read afew books, most mentioned their 75L24 were no match against T34 or KV.

Maybe even if they are available, it was only issued a couple of round to the Pz IV. While reading Panzer Ace, it was mentioned in one of the chapter, the ace driving a Pz IV found its gun totally not effective against the T-34 and he only managed to disable a KV by aiming its barrel and destroyed it assaulting it with charges.

After reading so many books and comments from this forum, I think it is not easy to destroy a tank with a single shot any gun smaller than 75mm except from guns like 88, 75 L46 and above or the russian 76 etc. Tanks like Tiger, Russian KV are tanks required a few shot to take it out. I believe lucky shot but in general such tank required a number of shot to effective make it burn.



Alby -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/8/2004 5:28:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alby

germans , ruskies, and brits get their on board rockets,
why not the USA?? [:D]


Not exactly. The British tank mounted rocket unit was removed.
I don't rmember the reason, but they have been gone for a long time.


Who said "Tank Mounted" ??
I just said "Rockets", are the land mattresses on board still in the game??
Maybe not, havnt played brits for some time.
The point being here, The range of this weapon calls for it to be an ONboard assett.
Thanks
Alby



Kevin E. Duguay -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/8/2004 5:59:26 PM)

Any word on the U.S. M19 60mm mortar yet? Will it be changed?[&:]



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/9/2004 4:34:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

Any word on the U.S. M19 60mm mortar yet? Will it be changed?[&:]


Most likely yes. I have read an articule on that subject. What u say was quite true.



Kevin E. Duguay -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/10/2004 4:09:06 AM)

o4r,

Do you mean that someone has finnaly listened to me after 3 or 4 years of posting the same information??[&:] Please tell the others that say that nothing gets done or that no changes can happen, that if you perssist, eventually someone will listen to you. I know It's like beating your head on a rock, but reason will win, eventually!![:D]



o4r -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/10/2004 3:07:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

o4r,

Do you mean that someone has finnaly listened to me after 3 or 4 years of posting the same information??[&:] Please tell the others that say that nothing gets done or that no changes can happen, that if you perssist, eventually someone will listen to you. I know It's like beating your head on a rock, but reason will win, eventually!![:D]


I was listening to u for 3 years but look at the year we joined and the number of post we write, how to expect anyone to listen to us...



AmmoSgt -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/10/2004 8:42:54 PM)

Posting again in the hope that the spirit of reconcilation is actually taking hold and that The Honchos at Matrix are sincere in their assurances of giving folks input a fair hearing.
I would like to mention US Rifle Grenades. Some US Infantry Units have a empty weapons slot , US Infantry carried and used rifle grenades as a standard issue infantry weapon. While all US Fragmentation type hand grenades either hand thrown or rifle launched using an adapter have about the same effectiveness as any other Rifle Grenade from any other country, the M9/M9A1 AT rifle grenade was an exception. it had the same warhead of the same design and size as the Bazooka warhead, with similiar penetration capablities. Another unique thing about US rifle Grenades was the US had the M7 Booster pellet , a small additional charge that was physically inserted in the muzzle end of the grenade launcher just prior to attaching the rifle grenade. it was about the size of a 45 cal pistol cartridge and added an addition 100-150 yards to the range of the grenade above and beyond the 150 yard basic range. US Rifle Grenades could be fired from all the US service rifles inculding the M1 carbine , and most squads had at least one rifle with a grenade launcher attached , since it did not effect the standard operation of the weapon. The attachable grenade launcher was calibrated out to 300 yards to accomidate the M7 booster , which was a common ammunition issue item that came with the rifle grenade ( either the handgrenade adapter or the M9 series AT rifle grenade. )
if you need to check references all the Info can be found online in the US Army Standard Ordnance catalog at the Carslie Army barracks Library web site in Vol III IIRC. if you need exact page numbers I will be happy to find them for you.
Not asking for any big change here , just an addition to those US infantry units with open slots ( maybe even the 4 man scout teams, although in the case of the 4 man scout teams a WP rifle grenade would be the most correct ) and a check on the Armor pen values of the US AT rifle Grenade to bring it more inline with the Bazooka Pen since the warheads are essentially the same. If you wanted to it would be simple enough to make a WP rifle Grenade , simple make a regular HE Rifle Grenade except make the weapon class naplam leaving the HE kill about the same but raising the warhead size to about 7 to allow for the increased suppression that WP causes. If you chose to create a WP rifle grenade for the 4 man scout team do NOT give the Scout team any AT grenades , because it can't use both , and they are not actually out there scouting to kill tanks anyway , but the WP would be handy to mark or screen a target or signal.
These work well in my private OOB , and they have tested without any problem , but other folks here that think it might be fun to have might want to test them ( use any weapons slot in the US OOB that is obviosly not being used by a US unit ), I think I used the mosin nagant rifle and just copied the rifle grenade to that slot and made the mentioned changes play with it a little and post your thoughts.
I hope we can all give each other the benifit of the doubt and start fresh and get back to trying to make a great game even better.



BulletMagnet -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/10/2004 9:15:29 PM)

Ammosgt Out of curosity is there a site on HOW rifle grenades worked.Or could you enlighten me on how they work?Inquiring minds want to know.[&:]



Rune Iversen -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 12:57:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BulletMagnet

Ammosgt Out of curosity is there a site on HOW rifle grenades worked.Or could you enlighten me on how they work?Inquiring minds want to know.[&:]


Since the old girl is propably out shooting one of her many guns I will take the liberty of answering you[:D]

A riflegrenade launcher is intended to fill the space between a thrown handgrenade (50 M. at most) and a medium mortar (with a minumum distance of around 200M)

The Riflegrenades of WW2 worked by inserting a cup/firing device over the muzzle of an ordinary battlerifle (Garand, K98k Lee Enfield etc.) This cup would then be loaded with either a standard issue (hand thrown) fragmentation grenade or some sort of special grenade (like the HEAT round AMMO talked about). The device would be fired either by firing a normal shot, or a special blank round (depending upon country) thereby propelling the grenade downfield and towards the target.

Did taht help?[:)]



VikingNo2 -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 1:04:35 AM)

Kind of like a very short ranges mortar, aim your rifle at a angle and lob that baby in there. Modern version M203 grenade launcher, if you remeber the movie "Scar Face" it was "his little baby "[;)]



AmmoSgt -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 2:20:43 AM)

Rune you were close dang it, I had a primo K98 Mauser ( code byf 42) , a H&R Garand , a Mosin Nagant M39 ( rareish "B" barrel variant) and one of My No4 Mk2 Lee-Enfields all loaded into the car ready to go , and the dang battery was dead ,I was so depressed I went back to bed , the weather was perfect today arrrghhh.
Good job on the Rifle Grenades , but to expand some
Two types of launchers, the cup type , which happen to be just about the right size usually, to fit a tennis ball or a coke can in, with home made blanks using about 10 grains of fast pistol powder you can get maybe 250 yards out of a tennis ball. The spigot type is more like a fat barrel extension , just about the size you could fit 1 inch PVC pipe over and then stick a potato on the end of the PVC pipe , but that usually only gets you about 75 yards depending on how well the potato holds together. But anyway in real life with real grenades the cup type is pretty much totally dependant on the angle of fire for range , the spigot type has marking on the launcher and you slide the grenade down over the launcher to the mark that is right for the range , the farther you slide it down the farther the grenade goes . Most of the cup type have a special designed grenade , most of the spigot type have both special designed grenades and a adapter that you can fit a regular hand grenade into , sorta like a claw that releases the grenade in flight , I can't think of any WW2 era grenades that didn't require a blank , but some of the more modern spigot type grenades are in fact designed to trap the bullet from a regular round if you use one to launch it ( scary thought IMHO). pictures of spigot type launchers and the various hand and rifle grenades and the American secret weapon the M7 booster pellet can be found at http://www.carlisle.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=712 starting on page 26 for the launchers and the M7 " vitiamin pill" Booster charge , it has a pretty good set of pictures and an explanation of how they work , on page 36 they start with the various types of 30 cal bullets and they describe the special grenade launching cartridge there. For the Grenades they start on page 143 with pictures and details of how they work what they are made of ect.



BulletMagnet -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 2:21:18 AM)

Cool.I was wondering about the firing part.Where does the live round go once it hits the base of the device.Did the round sometimes come out? Im just curious.

sorry similtanious postings....damn spelling



AmmoSgt -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 2:24:47 AM)

Bullet , never played with any of the Bullet trap ones , so I don't know. I wouldn't use one anyway seems wrong to shoot a bullet into a grenade to me. call me old fashioned. but see above for the details on WW2 US stuff.



chief -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 2:28:54 AM)

Ammo didn't the shooter/rifleman firing the rifle grenade use a blank as the igniter (for lack of a better name) ?

Disregard found answer above[:o]



AmmoSgt -> RE: The new improved 8.1 oob thread (3/11/2004 2:33:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chief

Ammo didn't the shooter/rifleman firing the rifle grenade use a blank as the igniter (for lack of a better name) ?

In WW2 yes in every case that i can think of .. however, Chief , weapons development never stops , and in an effort to make some rifle grenades GI Proof , they developed a Rifle grenade that uses regular bullets , seems maybe late 60's early 70's , and they called it progress , seems dangerious to me , it was a NATO thing , scary is all I can say , I'll stick to a M203 thanks.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.234375