Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Mike Wood, OOB Question please help

 
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 >> Mike Wood, OOB Question please help Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/13/2006 12:18:42 PM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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

Post #: 1
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/13/2006 5:57:21 PM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		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"


_____________________________



(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 2
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 12:51:41 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline 		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"



(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 3
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 1:48:01 AM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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 ?

< Message edited by omegaall -- 2/21/2006 1:57:44 AM >

(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 4
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 9:08:04 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline 		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 ?


(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 5
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 1:43:34 PM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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.


(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 6
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 4:08:45 PM   
FlashfyreSP


Posts: 1193
Joined: 7/6/2002
From: Combat Information Center
Status: offline
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.

_____________________________


(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 7
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/21/2006 5:30:33 PM   
Goblin


Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline
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

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to FlashfyreSP)
Post #: 8
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 1:16:20 AM   
Mau Fox


Posts: 113
Joined: 3/27/2005
Status: offline 		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.

Mau Fox.







Attachment (1)

(in reply to Goblin)
Post #: 9
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 2:25:34 AM   
FlashfyreSP


Posts: 1193
Joined: 7/6/2002
From: Combat Information Center
Status: offline 		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'.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mau Fox)
Post #: 10
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 3:53:05 AM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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..


(in reply to FlashfyreSP)
Post #: 11
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 4:14:29 AM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline
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 ..

(in reply to FlashfyreSP)
Post #: 12
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 4:39:41 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
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."


_____________________________


(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 13
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 7:03:08 AM   
FlashfyreSP


Posts: 1193
Joined: 7/6/2002
From: Combat Information Center
Status: offline
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.

_____________________________


(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 14
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 3:24:24 PM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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?

(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 15
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 6:07:26 PM   
Goblin


Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline 		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

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 16
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 11:08:30 PM   
omegaall


Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline 		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


(in reply to Goblin)
Post #: 17
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/22/2006 11:45:09 PM   
Goblin


Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline 		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

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to omegaall)
Post #: 18
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/23/2006 2:37:14 AM   
Goblin


Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline 		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

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to Goblin)
Post #: 19
RE: Mike Wood, OOB Question please help - 2/23/2006 3:38:01 AM   
FlashfyreSP


Posts: 1193
Joined: 7/6/2002
From: Combat Information Center
Status: offline
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?

_____________________________


(in reply to Goblin)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Mike Wood, OOB Question please help 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

0.844