Aircraft designations??

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Aircraft designations??

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 >> Aircraft designations??

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Aircraft designations?? - 9/17/2000 11:46:00 PM

Peregrine Falcon

Posts: 165
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

This may be small issue considering all the bug-threads there are now, but I like to still bring this up...

Why Japanese aircraft designations use allied codenames like "Zero, Betty & Tony"??

I think this is strange because almost all other units are named using their original (homeland) designations. Why is this?

Are these codenames more familiar? Not to me anyway, and I think there are others as well...(?) So instead of "Ki-84 Frank" please rename it to "Ki-84 Hayate" This is really how it should be

Maybe I am too meticulous about this, but hell, somebody has to be

And two small suggestions: It would be more realistic if some bunkers/billboxes would have multiple (4?) firing angles, no just one forward... Also some carrying capacity to larger fortifications (including bunkers) would be nice... Feedback and comments ARE VERY welcome

(meantime I'll just wait for v4.1)

_____________________________

--Peregrine Falcon--

Post #: 1

- 9/18/2000 1:28:00 AM

Grumble

Posts: 471
Joined: 5/23/2000
From: Omaha, NE, USA
Status: offline

have to respecfully disagree about A/C. To many folks, including WW2 historians the Allied codename is much more recognizable than the official Japanese name. I would suspect this is due to the enormous amount of readily available literature that also uses the codenames.

_____________________________

"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 2

- 9/18/2000 2:07:00 AM

xavier

Posts: 55
Joined: 5/16/2000
From: belgium
Status: offline

It would be more realistic if some bunkers/billboxes would have multiple (4?) firing angles, no just one forward... --------------------- I'm agree with you about this point. Large bunkers should have the capacity to fire at other angles than one forward. And why not turreted bunkers too ? ------------------ xaal

_____________________________

xaal

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 3

- 9/18/2000 2:29:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Turreted bunkers are in version 4. THere is no way to have multiple arcs of fire in forts.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 4

- 9/18/2000 4:07:00 AM

Peregrine Falcon

Posts: 165
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

Everyone has right to disagree

It's true (it was to me too earlier) that allied codenames are easier to remember but the thing is that they _are not_ original/official Japanese designations. Maybe codenames are easier to remember, (to some, that is) BUT... That is how units should be named in SPWAW, it's tough. But better get used to it. One good example is the "PzKpfw-VI", it used to named "Tiger". First, I was confused

- but what the hell. It's better. But anyway. If somebody say Ki-61 is 'Tony' it's their pain. I call it 'Hien' (it helps if you know some Japanese, I do

) Maybe WW2 historians use these codenames more often, but mainly historians from the Allied side (US/GB)... Cheers

quote:

Originally posted by Grumble: have to respecfully disagree about A/C. To many folks, including WW2 historians the Allied codename is much more recognizable than the official Japanese name. I would suspect this is due to the enormous amount of readily available literature that also uses the codenames.

[This message has been edited by Peregrine Falcon (edited September 17, 2000).]

_____________________________

--Peregrine Falcon--

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 5

- 9/18/2000 4:23:00 AM

Peregrine Falcon

Posts: 165
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: Turreted bunkers are in version 4. THere is no way to have multiple arcs of fire in forts.

Turreted bunkers? You mean these two gun emplacements in 4.0 or something new in 4.1? (if you mean concrete mounted German tank turrets - that would be great!) There is however one turreted coastal gun(?) that I havent been able to locate (Japanese OOB) that has 8" gun. It's nowhere to be found!

And what's the deal with these caves/coastal guns that can change direction they face? I have posted couple of posts about these but no reply so far... Are they fixed in 4.1?

_____________________________

--Peregrine Falcon--

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 6

- 9/18/2000 4:34:00 AM

Tom Proudfoot

Posts: 1357
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: Alameda, CA
Status: offline

How do you get them to change direction? I haven't been having any luck trying to repeat that. Is it a particular nation's bunkers? Thanks, Tom

_____________________________

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 7

- 9/18/2000 5:00:00 AM

Peregrine Falcon

Posts: 165
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Tom Proudfoot: How do you get them to change direction? I haven't been having any luck trying to repeat that. Is it a particular nation's bunkers? Thanks, Tom

Well, I dont know if caves/coastal guns do the same thing in other OOB's (haven't tested much - I think they do) - but in Japanese OOB all caves and coastal guns are buggy

Just select this cave/coastal gun, and then right click any enemy unit in vicinity. ZAP! Instant change of direction (towards enemy unit of course) I first found out in 1.0 that some bunkers do this, but when I noticed after updating to 2.3 that this bug still exists....Oh dear... And I just love defensive operations...

_____________________________

--Peregrine Falcon--

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 8

- 9/18/2000 5:14:00 AM

Tom Proudfoot

Posts: 1357
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: Alameda, CA
Status: offline

Ok... I'll try those. I was trying MG nests and forts. Tom

_____________________________

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 9

- 9/18/2000 10:41:00 AM

victorhauser

Posts: 318
Joined: 5/29/2000
From: austin, texas
Status: offline

I agree that the official Japanese designations should be used for their aircraft. After all, their official designations are used for their ground equipment. For you purists, it's possible to edit your Japanese OOB until the OOB is officially updated. As shown below, not all Japanese aircraft had official Japanese nicknames. "Val" = D3A1 "George" = N1K1-J (N1K2-J later) Shiden KAI "Mary" = Ki-32 "Nick" = Ki-45 Toryu "Lily" = Ki-48 (I or II) "Tony" = Ki-61 (I or II) Hien "Claude" = A5M "Oscar" = Ki-43 (I or II) Hayabusa "Nell" = G3M "Betty" = G4M "Sally" = Ki-21 (I or II) "Zeke" or "Zero" = A6M Reisen "Jack" = J2M Raiden "Peggy" = Ki-67 Hiryu "Nate" = Ki-27 "Tojo" = Ki-44 (I, II, or III) Shoki "Helen" = Ki-49 (I or II) Donryu "Frank" = Ki-84 (I or II) Hayate "Judy" = D4Y Suisei Note: Japanese Army aircraft designations began with the letters 'Ki' (such as Ki-84) and Japanese Naval aircraft mixed numbers and letters (such as N1K2-J).

_____________________________

VAH

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 10

- 9/18/2000 12:09:00 PM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

Or even better, have both if they would fit. Could be a learning experience either way. G4M - Betty Wild Bill ======================== ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 11

- 9/18/2000 5:07:00 PM

Peregrine Falcon

Posts: 165
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by victorhauser: I agree that the official Japanese designations should be used for their aircraft. After all, their official designations are used for their ground equipment. For you purists, it's possible to edit your Japanese OOB until the OOB is officially updated. As shown below, not all Japanese aircraft had official Japanese nicknames.

I have already edited my OOB's... Although it was a real disappointment to found out how long these unit names can really be... Only 15 characters... So replacing 'Oscar' with 'Hayabusa' was really out of the question....

Oh well. I stick to 'Ki-43 II' Purist? Me? Oh yes please

One quick note. Maybe this belongs to OOB-thread, but I found out why I could not find this 8" Coastal Gun when buying troops (Japan OOB, UK as well?)...Wrong unit class. Was 'Lend lease tank' when it should be 'Turret tank destroyer' Maybe this is already fixed...

_____________________________

--Peregrine Falcon--

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 12

- 9/19/2000 3:22:00 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Peregrine Falcon: Why Japanese aircraft designations use allied codenames like "Zero, Betty & Tony"?? I think this is strange because almost all other units are named using their original (homeland) designations. Why is this?

PF, I don't disagree with your main point. If the Japanese had designations they commonly used, we should use them. The issue isn't always that clear. IIRC, in WWII it was the British who assigned names to many of the American tanks they received via lend-lease (Lee, Grant) before they had received "official" American names. I read that by the late '80s even the Soviets were referring to their own aircraft by the common NATO designation ('Foxbat, 'Flogger' etc.) instead of their own.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Peregrine Falcon)

Post #: 13