Matrix Games Forums

To Charles: Just guessing, but
CMG = Cupola Machine Gun (?)

Charles22,
I think it is Co-axial Machine Gun (CMG).

(That's the one next to the Main gun in the turret) I know most of you know that but just in case someone didn't


Semper Fi,


------------------
Semper Fi!

Overlord

there is something wrong with the KV1 Flame tank. It has 100 FlameShots available. I do not know if this is right, but i thing it isn't.

m

Sizes were in general reduced in general deliberately. Some may be mistyped. Most everyting was reduced by 1.

I reduced the size of non-turreted things by one compared to turreted thing by 1 - often this was done based on "unit class" through a spreadsheet, so things with a "odd' unit class assingment for OB purposes may have been skewed a bit - that is likley what happend with the HT's as many are "weird" unit types like SP-ATGM.

MG ranges are distint by type, Coax and Turret types have longer ranges, then AAMGs, then Bow. That is intentional. SOme may have gotten mixed up...

FOr "popular" tansk I tried to refelct some things like the "round nose" of the cast hull, the fact that often times they had lots of "stuff" on them that slightly increases thickness but effectively reduces slope, etc. There are so many Sherman idiosyncricies that geting them all reflected properly is about impossible.

A compromise with the Tiger front turret - based on some results in Jentz book. I know we didn't do such a thing for all tanks, but the Tiger seemed to warrent "special case" status...

One model Panther is given a penalty becasue of a common shot trap...I forget which one.

Also - we are looking for someone familiar with OOB editing to take the reigns of future OOB edits.

Anyone interested drop me an email. I was going to move the mailing list to a forum, but got several requests to keep it as email form folks overseas who pay by the minute and find email cheaper and more convenient.

SO drop me a line if you are interested in thei prestigious volunteer position. There are quite a few folks chaffing at the bit to help out, but we need a point man to consolidate and check change proposals and send them in for "officialization".

Paul: Thanks for the clarification on the issues I posted. I rather thought that something as sweeping as the size change, if indeed it affected more than just a German OOB oversight, would have been relfected as a mention in the changes instigated with this version; I'm sure it'll play out fine.

One last thing. I usually refer to the TMG as the 'turret machinegun', but isn't this term being intermingled with the CMG term? I'm sorry, but it confuses me when I see it so commonly referred to as TMG, and then, if indeed it is the same thing, that people will call it a CMG. When I hear CMG, particularly in the same game, I'm thinking it must be something different.

I like the PZIVC having a longer range on the MG, as it's one more reason to buy it, but I just want to make sure that such a seeming snafu wasn't a mistake, but more in the order of an enhancement. Certainly a BMG would have limited range for it's being positioned so low. The infantry losses are definitely higher in this game from main gun fire, than they were before. Now maybe people will more seriously consider purchasing those PZIVCs (which has AP shot anyway) and SGIIBs.

I try to use "TMG" if teh MG is teh only turret weapon (ie PzI) CMG if it is secondary to a main gun.

I just didn't have time to document fully all teh changes yet...

IN a nutshell:

Weapons:

Weapon accuracy was increased a lot, HE kill of larger warheads increased, penetration in general reduced.

Units: Speeds increased (but breakdowns ata high speeds will getcha), size reduced, added "targeting mod" to help better distinguish SP-AT guns, Assault guns, "poor" tanks (either by turret slow, lack of turret manning or both), FC and RF adjustments, size reduced, ROF adjustments, SOme armor tweaks.

Formations - added 2nd line infantry, onboard Rockets for scenario designers (set date to 12/49)

There is still a lot of room for enhancing the OOBs, but I must move on to work another game...You interested Charles//

thanks for the quick replies Paul! any feedback though on the Pz-III/ Pz-IV 'hull' slope issue? Personally (2.2cents worth) figured that using superstructure armor and slope was better than lower hull.


Leonidias;

actually i'm hoping its not a typo! as i'd been one of those suggesting that flame tanks needed to have their flamethrower ammo vastly increased, given that the 'average' Flame shot does not produce devastating results.

i always found it frustrating having to ultra conserve the limited 'shots' avail to flame tanks in intense assault type scenerios. So many tasks, so few shots!

Paul: Yes, I thought you might have been hinting me earlier. Sorry, though, I'm not the best typer in the world, nor do I notice much beyond the Gerry OOBs (except when the Ruskies start getting out of line). As well, I don't have that much time to play it (mostly on the weekend) anyway. I might be something of a help regarding Gerry stuff, but even there I'm sure there are those who have more knowledge. Given my minimal Gerry knowledge, it's my hope to contribute some things that remain a bit hidden on them, and hope that those with knowledge on the Soviets/Americans/Brits, can do the same.

I did notice some of the speed differences and so forth, or at least thought I did. When there's so many changes, it's easy to think that you're imagining things sometimes.

Yes, I did figure, assuming we were working on some of the formulas of old that I've seen, that indeed the mere act of reducing vehicle size would amount to more lethal hits, but also should make fire more inaccurate. Can you imagine Paul? Imagine, one day, we will no longer have tanks 'sizes', but one day we will actually have REAL tank dimensions to act as the targets. Won't that be something, none of this semi-generic stuff? Surely, gun fire must've been modeled that way at one time (An 88 being represented as a 5 damage level, while a 75 would giving a 4). It's destiny, one day we will have REAL tank dimensions modeled.

A short one: The 28mm FJ AT in the german
OOB has no ammo.

Originally posted by Mike Tremblay:
I also noticed the odd sound effect for the ATR's. Until I read the above posts, I thought it might have been deliberate. It might be appropriate for the Lahti, the Solothurn, and the Japanese Type 97, as they were capable of automatic fire, but the others were bolt-action rifles so maybe the sound of the sniper rifle would be fitting for them.

Thx,

Finnish 20mm Lahti AT-rifle was semi-automatic, not full-automatic. Allso full-automatic version existed but it was intended as a cheap improvised AA-gun and was
never produced in big numbers.

Originally posted by Mac:
The Imp. Sniper in the Finnish OOB has the Lahti but has only HE ammo... should propably have AP ammo instead.

This is sniper, it is not indended for antitank use (there should be AT-rifle unit for that use), it was intended to represent improvised Finnish sniper using 20mm Lahti AT-rifle as improvised sniper weapon. Historically during during trench-period of Continuation War 20mm Lahti ATR's were used for sniping soviet infantry from long ranges. For this use HE grenades were the usual ammunition used.

Originally posted by JTV:
This is sniper, it is not indended for antitank use (there should be AT-rifle unit for that use), it was intended to represent improvised Finnish sniper using 20mm Lahti AT-rifle as improvised sniper weapon.

Ok, sounds fine, but with kill rating of ONE! The sniper would do better with a regular rifle. For a 20mm rifle with HE-ammo that sounds a bit off .


------------------
Markku "Mac" Rontu

"Understanding is a three-edged sword,
your side, their side and the truth."
- Sheridan in B5

Originally posted by headhunter:
A short one: The 28mm FJ AT in the german
OOB has no ammo.

It has, 30 rounds of APCR

Voriax

Originally posted by Kharan:


Väinämöinen/Ilmarinen's secondary guns were all 105mm, not 100mm.

We did create special weapons for the Väinämöinen/Ilmarinen but for some reason they have vanished from the OOB's weapon list. Paul?

I read someplace that the weapon lists are now locked solid so I'd let the secondary gun be that 100mm L60, put a 40mm (2) AA gun as 3rd weapon and 20mm Quad AA as 4th gun.
These would be the closest o the correct from the current weapon list.

Those responsible for the Finnish OOB could go through the leader names and eliminate some that sound more like Libyan. (Jackzell, Harvi, Wiik, Vadonen, Horelli, Guistio, Wadolin, Jenetz, Genemaki etc.)

These are indeed bit funny...unfortunately afaik these names are not in a separate file a'la SPWW2 so changing them may or may not be easy...comments, coders magnificent?

Voriax

An error from before. The first two Polish infantry squads listed in the encyclopedia are still at 1 9 strength!!! No wonder so many of my guns are malfunctioning in my campaign starting against Poland!!!

Unless we get a leader to step up and take charge of further OOB mods. There will be none "officially" comming for a while.

I will assist, but we need a leader to organize the work.

[This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited September 13, 2000).]

Would it be possible to make ASDN's utilities for OOB-> spreadsheet spreadsheet -> OOB public?
I cannot imagine creating OOBs everybody would be happy with, and consistent individual changes would be much less pain!

just a thought!

Sure - Drop me a line and I'll send them to you.

German long campaign, '41, a SP mortar platoon costs significantly less than a mortar platoon ! (both 81mm)
Shouldn't it be the other way round ?