SPwaw OOB Feedback

[o4r]

Originally posted by o4r
The Krupp L2H143 or the one that accompany the 2 * 81 mortar. It has a AA MG but the photograph didnt show. Ok, here is one that had it. It is also called Krupp Kfz 81.

In SPWAW they always dont allow any thing bigger than a heavy artillery on a truck. You ever wonder why the rating of Bussing Nag is 218. See this picture.

It carry a Pz 1

[o4r]

Ever wonder what is the name of the ammo truck picture they used to represent the ammo truck.... it is actually a German Maultier.

Because German trucks proved totally unable to operate successfully during the firs winter of the Russian campaign in 1941 and 1942, it was thus decided to producea low cost half track to take over many of the trucks duties. (If you see properly at most of German heavy truck, they are designed like Tiger which overlapping each other so they frost during winter) The Wehrmachtsschepper could not produced in sufficient number to fulfill this need so Opel and Daimler Benx chassis were fixed to tracked assemblies from PzKpfz II tank. The new Maultier as it was known was a reasonable success although lacking the mobility of proper halftracks. By late 1942, the Maultier was being pressed into service as a launch vehicle fpr thje Nebelwerfer rocket launcher, with 3000 conversions being orderef by the German Army. In combat Maultiers were orgainised into Nebelwerfer Brigades. So it is more commonly seen as a rocket launcher rather than a ammo truck.

Whoever place the picture, it must be good faith....

[o4r]

The picture inserted for British ammo truck look like a Bedford MWD.

It first appear around 1937 and was based on a commerical 2 tonnes truck with a modifited chassis to increase ground clearance. The Bristish war office ordered 2000 in Aug 1939. It was deliveried being constructed to carry 2 pounder AT gun. It was orignated designed with a fitted canvas hood and collapsibe windscreen and later in 1943 replaced by an enclosed cab. Finally about 200000 was produced and used till 1950.

[o4r]

They post a picture and it placed it used in 1949 cause I think they dont want it in the tactical map...

[o4r]

This 60 sec waiting is killing, everytime I wait, I puffed one ciagrette so if I send 20 pictures, I think I finished a pack.... this is bad man.... though I know it will actually take you 400 ciagrette a day to kill you instantly and 2000 cups of standard cup size coffee to do the same.

This picture is the most important of all. Without it there is no moderm artillery. Every gun will fire and push back. This is the first gun to able to fire and stay in postion but nobody respect it. You can consider it to the father of all modern artillery.

Here it is.

No more picture, 60 sec is terrible,

[o4r]

Sorry about 21cm gun, Here it is.

[ruxius]

Wow...boys ..if only you could find a picture of Iraqi infantry in 1940...1941..for me !

[o4r]

Originally posted by ruxius
Wow...boys ..if only you could find a picture of Iraqi infantry in 1940...1941..for me !

Iraqi had infantry then??? That I didnt know but will try and get back to you.... hmmm.....that arabic warrior type ????

[o4r]

I have take a look at Panzer Leo H2H. Pretty impressive. Sometime I think the lbm picture is preferance. The 1st copy of picture for SP I, I dont remember quite well but I remember later development, every one replace those war time pictures with color picture drawn. But Panzer Leo now replaced back with the war time picture. But his version is actually better.

Sometime it let me wonder what the hell those programmer writting war game program get their data of weapon from where? I think there are alot here that can become a consultant. Panzer Leo is certainly one I would recommend.

The only dislike features is that all the unit in German is written in German. What if I am a Chinese, or a Japanese or a Polis and written the country unit in my language. All these data are solid hard to get data and yet due to the fact of compability problem with language, it is unable to be intergated. It is certainly a loss in the end.

I have played SP for a long long time and wont let go casue it is a fact I cant find another one like this which is consider quite realistic at least in the armour and gun rating. As for rating of country capability is still in doubt. But accepted the fact, the rating is based on overall of the all average rather than any indiviuals.

[BryanMelvin]

OOB Update News

The OOBs I am working on use a standard Naming convention and are compatible with ALL OLDER SPWAW SCENARIOS AND CAMPAIGNS.

It was decided that this was was a must. If a new mode of oobs came in - then all older scenarios as well as campaigns ever done would be worthless as no one could play these anymore. This would produce much grief for many scenario designers and their work. It would set the spwaw gaming world back as everyone will have to download a whole new game and then again another new game version, then another etc... Fewer people would play spwaw than before.

To avoid this, Matrix wants oobs to be compatible with older scenarios and campaigns and this we are doing. Several new units were added to oobs that have no effect on older scenarios and more info on these will be released in time.

All in all, the new oobs have cleaned up units, formations, weapon data, as well as armor rates when necessary. What we have is a revised set of oobs that now work very well with current Mech.exe and produced better effects.

There are coding issues that one may or may not understand that effect game. Armor Pen and HE pen is another. These are set for effects at about 100 yards. From these, the rest of the math is done at longer ranges. Angle and slope hits at long ranges can produce armor defence rates that are high due to the shell glancing off the armor etc.., - which does happen.

What the new oobs do is improve the exsisting effects of penatration while changing nothing in the mech.exe. In other words - a math fix was accomplished which improve the game. 37mm ATGs, for example, can immobilize Heavy armor more than before with side and rear shots. The Tiger Tank is more deadly at long ranges as well as short ranges and will not waste ammo firing endlessly never hitting anything. The Tiger crews will accomplish this even using current default experiece/morale rates current game system uses. The Nashorn is now a very deadly weapon system. Armor combat has be improved. HMGs and MMGs and LMGs are more effective. British Troops fire is more effective. There are many changes - to numerous to write about here
You will soon see the oobs yourselves!

Just a last note - One thing I may not be able to do is a new set of LBM's in time of the soon release of the new oobs but patches can be made of these at a future date.

[o4r]

Originally posted by ruxius
Wow...boys ..if only you could find a picture of Iraqi infantry in 1940...1941..for me !

If you are Italy, I still cant find the Iraq infantry you are mentioning. But I do have a color picture of an Italian Colonial Army in 1942, I think is is Syrian and the other is from East African, it is also an Italian Colonial Army in 1940.

From British the Abyssinian Solider serving in the Abyssinian Patriot Army in 1942.

I have 1 type of Syrian, 1 type of tribe arabic race also served the French.

But there is no Iraqi.

[o4r]

Actually talking about Iraqi. I hope every here who love warfare so much learn from the 2nd World War.

I think alot of ppl all over the world had enjoyed peace like what our fore father had enjoyed during 1919 to 1938. Actually the falls of French is partial their and British Fault. When Hilter tested on the allied reaction by taking the rhineland, the 2 big brothers was worried but only protested like what the NATO is doing now.....in the other word, talking cXXk.

Against ppl like Hilter is exactly dealing with ppl like the dictators of Iraqi. By Force..... you talking to him is like talking to an animals. If Natio continue to be lead by coward like what they doing now, sooner or later, the world will go chaos again.

Sometime peace enters only after a war. Looking all back, ISO standard or what the UN community wants is paper works.... see this investigation report that report.... maybe by year end they need to audit their ISO Standard as such before going to war, they have a Quality Manual to mantain.

[ruxius]

Hello o4r, thanks for your researches about my question...
not clear why conversation turned to talk about peace and actual Irak , sorry it was not my intention...(also ideas about here can be as you may figure quite different depending on who is talking about but this thread does not match to politics so I will not open any discussion here ,hope you will understand )

I was looking for Iraqi infantry because in the 1941 the Irak was a British colony who revolted and tried to join the Axis to get indipendence...Also WB designed a scenario that way...

I was simply looking to some good picture just to create a new unit like that for that purpose, but I only found news about that small campaign but no picture of infantry...

that's why I was asking about your help...my thought was for enriching as much as possible OOBs

Your picture about Ethiopian soliders may be interesting for me..I have already got my one..but if yours looks better....
can you post it here please ?

Bye
Ruxius

[o4r]

Originally posted by ruxius
Hello o4r, thanks for your researches about my question...
not clear why conversation turned to talk about peace and actual Irak , sorry it was not my intention...(also ideas about here can be as you may figure quite different depending on who is talking about but this thread does not match to politics so I will not open any discussion here ,hope you will understand )

I was looking for Iraqi infantry because in the 1941 the Irak was a British colony who revolted and tried to join the Axis to get indipendence...Also WB designed a scenario that way...

I was simply looking to some good picture just to create a new unit like that for that purpose, but I only found news about that small campaign but no picture of infantry...

that's why I was asking about your help...my thought was for enriching as much as possible OOBs

Your picture about Ethiopian soliders may be interesting for me..I have already got my one..but if yours looks better....
can you post it here please ?

Bye
Ruxius

Sorry, Ethiopian referring to which one I mentioned. I am not very familiar with African country.

[KG Erwin]

I just bought Gordon Rottman's USMC WWII OOB book, a fantastic piece of work. I found some info on the Raider OOBs which correct some errors in 7.1. Firstly, the 1st and 2nd Raider Cos, formations 1075 & 1079, should include a lt mortar plt (1121), not med mortar, a MMG section (1113) and an Inf-AT section (1112). The raider battalion organization also includes a Weapons Co, which should replace the HCo (1077). This Raider WCo has a company HQ, 4 sections of MMGs (1113), a lt mortar plt (1121), and an Inf-AT section (1112). Note: the 1st Raiders originally did have a 81mm mortar platoon, but these weapons were left in the States.

[BryanMelvin]

Originally posted by KG Erwin
I just bought Gordon Rottman's USMC WWII OOB book, a fantastic piece of work. I found some info on the Raider OOBs which correct some errors in 7.1. Firstly, the 1st and 2nd Raider Cos, formations 1075 & 1079, should include a lt mortar plt (1121), not med mortar, a MMG section (1113) and an Inf-AT section (1112). The raider battalion organization also includes a Weapons Co, which should replace the HCo (1077). This Raider WCo has a company HQ, 4 sections of MMGs (1113), a lt mortar plt (1121), and an Inf-AT section (1112). Note: the 1st Raiders originally did have a 81mm mortar platoon, but these weapons were left in the States.

Thanks for the details - this is what I need for Formations fixes

[o4r]

Talk about changing of OOB,

I am presently preparing a short presentation on the topic of artillery which I quite disagree with most saying on AT and artillery pieces.

Short to say,

some field artillery pieces like Russian FH 76.2 mm gun are actually located as field artillery to Russian rather than true AT gun and they are given AT round to goes against tanks. But the sole main purpose is still as a artillery pieces but they were actually change to AT and lost their capaability as a FH. Guns like 88 are use very commonly as artillery pieces are not able to do so in our SPWAW version.

So some AT gun are acutally artillery pieces and should be given the capability as a artillery pieces. Even Armerican Sherman or Russian SP 152 are commonly used as a artillery pieces.

In fact any artillery pieces are able to use as a artillery if they are given HE round. Only some AT gun are specialist and should be classified as AT gun but the rest should be consider as artillery pieces and given back their capability but with more AT rounds.

[Wild Bill]

I'm very pleased with these modifications and additionis. More nice tools and more accuracy. My heartiest kudos to the OOB team under Captain Marauder Melvin...WB

[Bernie]

Originally posted by BryanMelvin
Can anyone chime in on current version 7.1 OOBa and let me know if you have seen any Formation oddities as well as imput on Formations, Weapons, etc..

In the works are a new set of OOBs due for release soon from Matrix. Many of the issues and errors of 7.1 oobs have been corrected.

I would like to hear from anyone on 7.1 oobs so that I can recheck the new ones to see if I missed anything.

Nation OOBs that I need info on would be:

Italy
Poland - 1939
Japan

as well as any imput on other Nation's oobs

In a current PBEM with Orzel we've discovered some problems with the French Char B1 tanks. Specifically, the 75mm SA gun is both waaayyy too accurate and has been issued AP shells in addition to HE. From the research I've done all indications are that the Char B1 never used the 75mm in an anti-tank role, and AP ammo for it was not available. Also, with an ACC of 28, I feel it doesn't accurately portray the difficulties of using that gun. It was a fixed mount, with no traverse at all, the entire tank had to be "aimed" to use it. I've also seen some indications that the Char B1 actually had a 37mm SA gun, rather than the 47mm SA in the game. According to one source I found, the Char B1 bis (an upgraded version of the Char B1) replaced the 37mm with the 47mm, and added thicker armor (60mm vs 40mm). Also, all the resources I've seen indicate that both tanks only had a single MG, not the two the OOB shows for the Char B1 bis.

[ruxius]

uhm..still wondering about weapon size = 222

Manual says that is not an error but a special game code meaning that weapon will consider no difference between HE and AP rounds..only target makes the difference...

That said it may seem explosives could be that way...
what I ask your help for is about 20mm caliber AA guns...
why ONLY 20mm ? and not also 37mm 40mm 75mm 90 mm ?
Do you know any special reason for that ?
Thx