Matrix Games Forums

Originally posted by Lars Remmen:
Hello,

I don't think the Germans used anything but 7.92mm in the infantry formations. 13mm and 15mm were used as an aircraft- and anit aircraft weapon. But if you have sources that suggest otherwise do contact the OOB people.

The MG 131 was developed and manufactured by Rheinmetall, had a caliber of 13mm, a length of116.8 cm and weighed 20.5 kg in the aircraft role. The breech system of this air-cooled recoil-operated belt-fed weapon was essentially an enlarged version of that used on the Solothurn MG 30. FOR IT´S GROUND COMBAT ROLE IT WAS MODIFIED BY ADDING A BIPOD AND A SHOULDER PIECE. Barrel length was 55.0 cm. The original rate of fire of 930/min was reduced for the ground role;

Originally posted by Larry Holt:

If a hex is 50 ACROSS, the average reversing is only 25 meters, not such a long distance.

To me, this line looks like a logical error

And one more question, when will all of that .txt files be used?
And check that prices of Soviet infantry that I mentioned somewhere else.

Originally posted by Alby:
The MG 131 was developed and manufactured by Rheinmetall, had a caliber of 13mm, a length of116.8 cm and weighed 20.5 kg in the aircraft role. The breech system of this air-cooled recoil-operated belt-fed weapon was essentially an enlarged version of that used on the Solothurn MG 30. FOR IT´S GROUND COMBAT ROLE IT WAS MODIFIED BY ADDING A BIPOD AND A SHOULDER PIECE. Barrel length was 55.0 cm. The original rate of fire of 930/min was reduced for the ground role;

Hello,

You are probably right. But my point was on how common the weapon was. Do you know about that? That would be interesting to know!

BTW: A 13mm MG with a BIPOD!?! In one book (I forgot its name) the MG131 was compared to the .50! And that is quite a mouthful on its heavy tripod! But great fun to shoot *G*

------------------
Lars
Nec Temere - Nec Timide

Ancedotal to be sure, but I've talked A LOT with German veterans and when it came up, nearly all wished they had "something" like the US .50.
If someone has sources that show the 13mm and 15 mm weapons were issued and employed in a ground role, (other than "produced")please post them. Thanks.

Originally posted by Blackbird:
To me, this line looks like a logical error

And one more question, when will all of that .txt files be used?
And check that prices of Soviet infantry that I mentioned somewhere else.

I mean, since we do not know where in the hex a unit is, the average location is the center (sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, etc.) from the center to the next hex is 25 meters. Does this seem logical?


------------------
An old soldier but not yet a faded one.
OK, maybe just a bit faded.

I'll look into the MG131 when I get home, never heard of it's use among troops, maybe was what mounted on some halftrack for AA use? Don't have my books with me here, till later!!

------------------
Mike Amos
Meine Ehre Heisst Treue

If its not in the German Army Handbook, then the US Army did not consider it a threat. Might it have only been used on the Russian Front?? That would expplain some of its obscurity in th West...

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
I mean, since we do not know where in the hex a unit is, the average location is the center (sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, etc.) from the center to the next hex is 25 meters. Does this seem logical?

Ofcourse it does. But that is not the average distance from hex to hex.

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
I mean, since we do not know where in the hex a unit is, the average location is the center (sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, etc.) from the center to the next hex is 25 meters. Does this seem logical?

Why go from the center to edge of the hex? If you move from one hex to another should you consider that you moved to the same location in BOTH hexes?

Otherwise why not consider being 1mm (yes, 1 milimeter) inside one hex and moving 1 mm into the next hex? Why that is ONLY a movement of 2mm. Wouldn't that make your case much stonger to refute? I would like to see someone make a case that tanks can't reverse a paultry 2mm, even in the heat of battle!

Sorry, if your movement was great enough to warrent moving from one hex to another, you probably moved 'around' 50 meters, ie. a whole hex.

BA Evans

If a 13mm hvy MG is anything even close to a M2 50cal (12.7mm) and somebody was mounting that puppy on a bipod... and if ya had troops that could manage that on a bipod..wouldn't actually arming those troops be kinda redundant, and what would the armor rating for extremely heavy and large infantry be? would they be a size 2 or 3 unit ? just joking..sorta

Hi Larry,
I read your post above and just want to say- all good points- I'm just arguing my points rationally and have no real world experience (wait- I have experienced the real world- just not in terms of tanks).

I was actually thinking of your story about the M1 (didn't remember it was you) when I suggested a high rate of hazard if reversing was implemented.

I will have to disagree with you however, on the point that, given random placement in a hex, the average movement from one to another not be 25 meters, but will be an infinitely small number over 50 meters, (where you see a reverse of 25, I see a reverse of 89 meters etc.).

Anyway, thanks for chatting it up...

Cheers,

------------------
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

These fev things I miss in the 20 centurys most powerful game.

1. Taking abandoed and surrenderd enemy tanks in to your own army.
Those crews of your own army, running around in the battelfield, ought to be able to (depending on experiens) drive tanks and vehicles with redused performance and use surenderd Pannsarfaust`s or Basokas.
(I know the time frame)

2. It would be more realistik if you cud schoos witch amo you would shoot with, HE or AP an so on.

3. Possibility to easy load information from the internet to the ensyckopedia of your own SPWAW.

4. I think the russian tanks are too expensive.

5. new tornaments every six month.

6. A commercial version of this game,
that means no bugs.

Thank(s) for a wonderfull game.


[This message has been edited by Tortfeasor (edited January 10, 2001).]

Originally posted by Tortfeasor:
These fev things I miss in the 20 centurys most powerful game.

1. Taking abandoed and surrenderd enemy tanks in to your own army.
Those crews of your own army, running around in the battelfield, ought to be able to (depending on experiens) drive tanks and vehicles with redused performance and use surenderd Pannsarfaust`s or Basokas.
(I know the time frame)

2. It would be more realistik if you cud schoos witch amo you would shoot with, HE or AP an so on.

3. Possibility to easy load information from the internet to the ensyckopedia of your own SPWAW.

4. I think the russian tanks are too expensive.

5. and a reverse gear on the tanks.

6. new tornaments every six month.

7. the point system is too narrow,
i mean if you play 100 games and you loose everyone you still can win the tornament anyway, thats not a good general.

8. A commercial version of this game,
that means no bugs.

Thank(s) for a wonderfull game.


[This message has been edited by Tortfeasor (edited January 10, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Tortfeasor (edited January 10, 2001).]

Commercial version means no bugs? I beg to differ.

Tomo

I have been playing the game since it came out.
Hmmm not sure what has been changing, havent been inhabiting the message boards basically.
But I like the way the game has evolved.
I can see that some requests are a bit, well just to demanding.
I play Advanced Squad Leader, a game of eeeeexcrutiating exactitude.
You get to back up, rotate, remain in motion, position the vehicle juuuuust so, but it is highly unlikely Steel Panthers will ever adequately emulate a board game and all its myriad misc counters.
Software has its limits guys, you sometimes have to accept them.


------------------
Winning all the time is as boring as losing all the time

Possible bug in Ver 4.5: During Sieg River scenario of U2R, the computer assigns a platoon (4 x Sherman with roof mount 4.5" rockets = "T-34")of OBA in which the fourth unit refuses to fire anywhere on the map except the upper left corner - handy to fire on my troops,not the enemy however. Other three are OK AND Support purchase of eight more T34's, they also fire anywhere on the map with no restrictions.

Not a one-time glitch, either. Repeated the non-firing unit from the previous scenario final screen. Have saved the Final screen and the Choose forces screen from following scenario, can zip and mail.

Odd situation, lots of other arty and it fires just fine, both onboard and off.

Bing

Originally posted by Bing:
Possible bug in Ver 4.5: During Sieg River scenario of U2R, the computer assigns a platoon (4 x Sherman with roof mount 4.5" rockets = "T-34")of OBA in which the fourth unit refuses to fire anywhere on the map except the upper left corner - handy to fire on my troops,not the enemy however. Other three are OK AND Support purchase of eight more T34's, they also fire anywhere on the map with no restrictions.

Not a one-time glitch, either. Repeated the non-firing unit from the previous scenario final screen. Have saved the Final screen and the Choose forces screen from following scenario, can zip and mail.

Odd situation, lots of other arty and it fires just fine, both onboard and off.

Bing

I.ve seen many upper left hand corner explosions while playing tcp/ip, wonder what is causing that??