v8.403 Public Beta Released

[soldier]

Statistically the 150mm has the same accuracy, larger warhead, more killing power, longer range and better penetration as opposed to more rounds and twice the ROF for the 75mm. I know which one I'd rather have shooting at me [:D]

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

It was intentional. Some, me for instance, might disagree that the combat effectiveness of a 170mm gun is a lot more deadly than that of a 75mm gun, given the ammunition you have listed. Although over twice the size, it is not twice the 'power', if we define 'power' as a combination of penetration factors (where it bests the 75mm, 61mm vs. 23mm) and HE kill factors placed on target (where it is bested by the 75mm, 11*3 ROF=33 vs. 6*6 ROF=36) x ? rounds of ammunition. Other factors, such as range, movement factors, number of men, size and the like produce values of 29 points for the 75mm and 68 points for the 170mm, when both are given 50 rounds of ammunition. One might argue that an 8" gun is more 'powerful' than a 50mm mortar, but not when the mortar has 1000 rounds of ammunition and the 8" gun has 2 rounds of ammuntion.

One must keep in mind that artillery is just a delivery system for high explosive. The amount of high explosive that can be delivered and at what rate are more important than how big the gun is. Larger guns cost more to make and were the routine charging for the cost of building the gun, the 170mm would cost significantly more. But, the routine is not charging for unit cost or rarity, only combat effectiveness (or transport effectiveness in the case of transport).

Hope this Helps explain the mathmatics of the recosting routine...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: soldier

I installed the patch onto 8.4 with depot mod applied, the prices quoted are from soviets in 41 with all historic ratings applied. Same thing with the German guns, much cheaper and virtually no difference in prices despite a massive difference in the calibre of the weapon in question.
75mm with 80 shots costs $87
105mm with 50 shots costs $85
150mm with 30 shots costs $90
170mm with 25 shots costs $92
I don't think anyone would disagree that the combat effectiveness of a 170mm barrage is a lot more deadly for those under it than a 75mm pea shooter yet the difference in cost is only $5. A bit odd that a gun over twice the size and twice the power costs the same. I guess I'll have to leave the pricing option off, I think heavy and effective weapons should cost substantially more.
Is this unusual pricing for indirect artillery an intentional change or an unexpected result ?

[soldier]

I guess the 75 actually puts more HE on the park than the 150

[soldier]

On the other hand a 75 probably won't blow a gun emplacement, or knock a panther on its side whereas the 170mm may well do

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

Yes, but only slightly more. With the same ammunition allotment, the 170mm does cost much more, because of the longer range, penetration and splash factors, in spite of the fact the 75mm has a higher accuracy. So, the 170mm is a more 'powerful' gun, with an equal ammunition allotment.

The equations ignore reputation and just calculate objective values. That is why the cost of the Sherman might seem a bit high, compared to German tanks.

Of course to the equations, a unit name means nothing. So, I could create a Tiger tank with 10mm armor and mounting a 20mm gun, which would cost very little. That would not mean that a Tiger tank was not an awesome beast. It would just mean that I had modeled the tank, badly.

If you see any more unusual values, please check out the gun values, armor, speed, rate of fire (ROF) and other factors. They will explain the costs. I actually found some out of line costs, such as the T-34/76c in the OOB I was using for tests. Upon checking, I found that all the other T-34 types had an ROF of 4, while the 'c' model had a 6 (fancy auto-loader, I guess), which explained the cost anomoly.

Have Fun...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: soldier

I guess the 75 actually puts more HE on the park than the 150

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

It is, however, over three times as likely to hit the Panther.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: soldier

On the other hand a 75 probably won't blow a gun emplacement, or knock a panther on its side whereas the 170mm may well do

[264rifle]

Dear sirs.
Bigger guns were much more effective at putting explosives on target. 75mm guns usually fired shells that weighed from 12 to 15 pounds and contained about 1lb of explosive. 100-105mm gun shells weighed about 30-35lb and contained 3-4.5 lb of explosive. 150-155 shels weighed 90-100lb and carried around 12 to 15 lbs of explosive.

Real life doesn't always translate to the game very well. Dead is dead, a 150 won't kill a solder any deader than a 75.

Splash damage might have to be looked at. How many hexes does a single 75 shell affect? How many hexes does a 150 shell affect? Even if the spash damage to an ajacent hex is less than a single hit from a 75 there is still some effect. Over lapping splash damage could mean that a hex gets splash damage from 2 or more shells in a barrage and thus recieve the equel of a 75 hit.

[RockinHarry]

Mike, I have some question re the figures for "Batch options --> Standardize small arms & artillery ammunition" in the new V5 OOB editor:

What exactly are these "standard" ammo figures based on? IE when applying the function, infantry units receive "60 ammo" for their slot1 primary weapon. I remember from the past it was mentioned these ammo figures (not tank or other vehicle main gun ammo) are decided for to last for an "average" length SPWAW game (of how many turns?) and are less representing true ammo loads. Can you explain?

thanks[:)]

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

Well, the ammunition for vehicular units were left unchanged. Only infantry and artillery types were modified. Vehicular units have to pay for the ammunition, if the calculate unit cost function is used, so no one is getting cheated.

The code assumes that one turn firing is about 30 to 90 seconds firing. It further assumes that one turn is about two to five minutes. The rest of the time, each turn, is spent looking for enemy units, communicating with headquarters, looking for micro-terrain within the hex and moving to it to improve defense, planning, explaining to squad members what the plan is or arguing about what it should be, making tea, hiding, wandering around in a state of confusion, creeping in the wrong direction towards a perceived and non-existent enemy unit, arming the wrong ammunition type and then reloading the correct type, watching Tiger I tanks pass by while aiming guns towards the spot where the tank destroyer commander is certain that non-existent Tiger II tanks will be appearing and doing anything else which might frustrate the player, who has a birds eye view of the battle field with a far better battlefield awareness than the unit.

So, an allotment of 60 for an infantry unit, means they can fire for 10 minutes all out or about 20 minutes (the average length of a firefight) at three game shots per minute. The editor menu function gives U.S. Army more ammunition, early war Soviets less, late war Germans less and others average, relative to each other. Importantly, the infantry unit has to pay for the ammunition, if the calculate unit cost function is used, so no one is getting cheated.

If the player expects to run out of ammunition, he should buy an ammunition truck and re-supply the rear units (assuming he has two companies up front and one to the rear, he can rotate). My own tests show that although some units may run low on ammunition, late war Germans for instance, a little fire discipline (hold fire to within effective range) can stretch the ammunition out long enough to finish the scenario.

Artillery is assumed an abstracted allotment for 3 to 8 fire missions (depending on artillery piece). U.S. Army is assumed a greater allotment. Soviet artillery is assumed a smaller allotment, as there are more tubes in a battery and Soviet artillery was often not used to call fire missions during the firefight (they usually bombarded before the firefight), due to lack of artillery communications with front line infantry. Once again, the artillery unit has to pay for the ammunition, if the calculate unit cost function is used, so no one is getting cheated.

Hope this Helps...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Mike, I have some question re the figures for "Batch options --> Standardize small arms & artillery ammunition" in the new V5 OOB editor:

What exactly are these "standard" ammo figures based on? IE when applying the function, infantry units receive "60 ammo" for their slot1 primary weapon. I remember from the past it was mentioned these ammo figures (not tank or other vehicle main gun ammo) are decided for to last for an "average" length SPWAW game (of how many turns?) and are less representing true ammo loads. Can you explain?

thanks[:)]

[RockinHarry]

Thanks for the Info Mike! You already answered more than I´d asked for!:) Related question, if we speak of game turns, do you mean player half turns or the whole 2 player turn where OP fire is counted as well?[&:]

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

At the end of the turn, the shots are regenerated. Opportunity fires are subtracted from the shots you would get next turn.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Thanks for the Info Mike! You already answered more than I´d asked for!:) Related question, if we speak of game turns, do you mean player half turns or the whole 2 player turn where OP fire is counted as well?[&:]

[Major Destruction]

ORIGINAL: 264rifle

Dear sirs.
Bigger guns were much more effective at putting explosives on target. 75mm guns usually fired shells that weighed from 12 to 15 pounds and contained about 1lb of explosive. 100-105mm gun shells weighed about 30-35lb and contained 3-4.5 lb of explosive. 150-155 shels weighed 90-100lb and carried around 12 to 15 lbs of explosive.

History teaches us that the 150 delivered far more kill factor than the 75.
When it was introduced, the French 75 could fire up to 20 rounds in a minute. This superceded the earlier guns to an extent that a single 75 could replace the firepower of an old battery. Once a target was selected, a battery of new 75's could saturate a target grid 100 metres square with over 100 rounds per minute.

Germany produced the 105mm howitzer which was almost identical in appearance and size as the old 77mm gun. Also, it could be hauled by a standard 6 horse team. The new 150mm howitzer (new for 1914) was very similar. In 1914 the German 210mm howitzer was the largest calibre weapon that could be hauled into place and set up to fire almost immediately.

Howitzers can fire from closer range because of their angle of elevation. A battery of 75's firing at the typical 16 degrees of elevation could fire hundreds of rounds at a battery of 150's in the lee of a hill and never score a hit. However, the howitzers could lob larger heavier shells over the hill onto the battery of 75's. Guns tend to fire at the sides of targets, while howitzers can use plunging fire to land their payload on the tops of targets.

A French 75 carried a payload of .688 kg of explosive while the 105 was about 50% larger with just over 1 kg. The 150 carried a 6 kg payload and the 210 had 18 kg of explosive.

A battery of four 105's could do as much damage as ten 75's- and the 150's could do better again. The rate of fire of the German howitzer was not much less than that of the French 75 or the German 77.

Nothing much changed from 1918. The French 75 was still in use and the German howitzers little advanced from their original design. Apparently, ammunition did evolve as stated by 264rifle above.

If the costs are not acceptible, perhaps this is because the weapons have not been properly modelled?

[264rifle]

I know that trying to come up with a pricing formula is very hard, very difficult work. This is even more true when trying to compare apples to broccoli let alone oranges.

factoring in ranges is one point. Does the formula use the same value per hex or a sliding scale of graduated steps???

How many points are awarded for the ability to counter-battery fire with out most other guns being able to counter fire back???

If a large caliber long range gun battery is purchased for just 10-15 points more than a small caliber battery how valuble are those 10-15 points???
Knowing that counter battery fire is out of the players control what does a longer range battery bring to the game ????
IN a 10 game trial run how many times will the "BIG" guns counter battery fire??? and to what effect???? how many times will they knock out an opposing battery???? how many times will they suppress an opposing battery???? and for how many turns???? Is the loss of several turns of use of the target battery worth 10-15 points???? is the protection of your longer range guns from counter battery fire worth 10-15 points????
The smaller guns may have "more" turns of fire.
How this averages out I don't know[&:]
But is the next size bigger gun battery worth only the cost of a sniper or recon team???
Or in some cases the price of a pack mule?????

Back to comparing oranges and broccoli[;)]

Trying to compare transport units to offboard combat assets in going to be darned near impossable but maybe the formula needs a little tweaking for comparing some of the less mainstream (ie, tanks and infantry) units????

[Korpraali V]

Hi!

I don't have 8.403 yet, but still have a question:

What is the penetration value of Panzerfaust HE ammo? I have few times used all the HEAT ammos and after that hit for ex. HT with HE ammo. Klinggg... Should their HE penetration be equal to HEAT penetration? Would the troops still use HEAT ammunitions first against enemy vechiles?

What about the bazookas etc. Which had two kinds of ammo and which is to represent the fact that AT-weapons were also used effectively against the infantry?

Thanks!

[264rifle]

I don't think there was a HE round. Since the game won't shoot AP at infantry I think (help on this one?) the designers or OOB peaple changed a couple of of the rounds to HE so a unit could at least get a few shots at each target type. Germans maynot have fired at troops in the open very often with them but I feel that plenty were fired in house to house fighting or at entrenchments. Game engine does't know the difference so we live with the coprimise.[:)]

[Korpraali V]

Yes, I know it is probably a compromise. But shoud HE ammo still have penetration value? That would make few of them multiuse fausts while most of them would still be spared to armored targets.

[chief]

If I read a post by Alby last night the only Zook with HE will be the US M?/M9. I believe this is historical reasoning. "NOW DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER" I only writes what I sees..........[:D][8D]

[Alby]

yes only Bazookas now have a few HE rounds.
Pzfausts, Pzschreks, Piats, and AT Rifles no longer fire an HE round.
[:)]

[Korpraali V]

Ok. Thanks for the info!

[MemoryLeak]

Every time I think something will be simple it goes to hell quickly. I have been a member fo ages. So I log in to the members area to download this new patch. I can't find it anywhere. It's no wonder it takes so long to correct bugs when they have to be as nerdy as posible just to create a site to download patches from. It makes you want to grab them by the shirt collars and shake them into reality