Matrix Games Forums

A new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936War in the West coming in December!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 8:27:18 PM   
wodin


Posts: 8012
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Daz what movement is the HQ foot or wheeled..if wheeled the HQ might not be able to get there due to impassable terrain..?

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 91
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 8:50:32 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BigDuke66,

In RL no good commander would change the orders after the troops have crossed the assault line. By that time the die is cast and you should just wait. If you do change the order then the attack will be replanned and yes you will end up back at the FUP if you had assigned one. My advice is to pause and issue the attack orders with all the setting you desire, then let it be.


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Now a point I don't look thru, I adjusted some values(As far as I can see just ONLY Aggro, ROF, Ammo) for a bat. attack and as these new orders arrive with the attack already rolling the 3 companies attacking get the order to fall back to the FUP for a reorg task, I can't imagine that it should work that way, shouldn't these kind of adjustments be put into the rolling attack "on the fly"?



quote:


From Manual

Some other situations which generally don¡¦t cause replans or incur orders delay are listed below. The list isn¡¦t complete, so there is still room for you to experiment and discover some of this for yourself, but in general anything not specifically mentioned below will probably incur orders delay.

Move or Defend Orders
„b Changing Speed, Route, Aggro, ROF, and Losses
„b Changing Frontage, Depth, and Facing
„b Changing Formation, except for In-Situ, which does incur orders delay

Attack or Probe Orders
„b Changing Speed, Route, ROF, and Losses
„b Changing Frontage, Depth, or Facing
„b Changing Formation (except for In-Situ) during the move to FUP, or sometimes (but not always) during the assault


You might need to do some more tests to see if there was not something else going on BigDuke, because as far as I case see from the manual, you should not have needed a replan, unless it was the agro change?


Thanks for pointing to this. Indeed it could be the aggro setting but as the manual isn't up to date anymore I would like Arunja to confirm this.
But still I would expect to have a delay happen but not simply breaking off while attacking, falling back to the FUP and than start the show again without a real rearrangement of the attack and just redoing what they already did before.

From the manual:
Aggression ( aggro ) refers to how aggressive or assertive the unit is and how much initiative the unit
is likely to exercise. Units with high aggro lose less morale and are more likely to fire or attack.

Would a change here really cause a complete replan???

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 92
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 10:28:36 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

Daz what movement is the HQ foot or wheeled..if wheeled the HQ might not be able to get there due to impassable terrain..?


Both units are using foot tables mate.
The one that abandoned the attack due to lack of time did actually get moving again in the end, but took a while, The first one as far as I can tell just fell into some big hole, and never managed to climb out again lol.

Back to the ammo again Dave, sorry mate I must be driving you nuts with it by now

Ok so we have agreed that the ammo expenditure is about right now, but some of the old scenarios are still set up for when ammo used to last forever.
Look at this screen of Elsenborn.
Peiper group arrived on map at D1 18.56, even though their Depot was on map it was not available until D2 1800. With each unit now burring through its entire on hand supply in 30 min that makes most of Peipers group useless for 23.5 hours within the first 24 hours of arriving on map.
Well I know most of that will be spent moving but still seems a bit excessive.

Do you think the old scenarios might need a bit of tweaking, to account for the new ammo expenditure, or is that how it happened historically, and they were out of supply for the first 24 hours of the offensive?





Attachment (1)

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 93
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 11:21:46 PM   
wodin


Posts: 8012
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
This is where you'd think these units with trucks and halftracks in the estabs would have lots of ammo on hand..enough for a couple of days fighting.

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 94
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 11:39:51 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
At least for now a high ROF setting isn't advisable at all. Saw some companies also burn away their ammo with this setting and being not really useful after that.

I wonder if there isn't a chance for redistribution of ammo under units that are making an attack together, I saw some battalion attacks were 1 company runs into an enemy company and burns away its ammo while the other companies don't meet the enemy and so still have plenty of ammo left.
Or what about a re-planing of the attack in such cases, units still attacking while being out of ammo doesn't make much sense so letting them switch to at least defend seems necessary, that is more or less what the player also does because if he pulls out such companies on the attack the whole attack gets re-planed anyway so maybe an automatic rearrangement while attacking would be good here.

At least I would prefer are redistribution of ammo.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 95
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 11:51:04 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Just checking my running Elsborn ridge scenario and what wonders me is the some battalion don't seem to have a supply base at all.
An example if the I Bat 9 FJ Regt, it shows -No Supplying Base- although 1 company has already run out of ammo and the ammo setting for the bat. attack was set to Max.

Other units seem to have bases further away, example here I Bat 27 Fus Rgt that has the 12 VGD as base but its own base the 27 Fusilier Rgt would be a bit closer, also the 12 VGD Base has no ammo anymore and so it doesn't wonder that the high ammo settings didn't seem to have an effect on ammo supply.

So what's up here? I can only imaging this comes from the way the scenario starts with battalions in place but some regiments coming in later as reinforcements.
A way of clearing up these messed supply chains seems necessary.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 3/15/2013 11:54:46 PM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 96
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 11:54:01 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
A reinforcement entering will not get a supply base till the next resupply event.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 97
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 11:56:20 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
And a reinforcement that should take a part in the supply chain?
As said some bat. seem to skip there regimental bases and draw from the divisional bases, what is a problem because they usually provide ammo for the artillery units on the map what is already a high drain lloking at how much artillery there is for the German side.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 3/16/2013 12:12:36 AM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 98
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 12:35:26 AM   
jimcarravallah

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 1/4/2006
Status: offline
The issue you experience isn't that far removed from real world operations.

Sound supply support planning requires allocating sufficient stowage space to carry an amount of supplies for "normal" combat operations from the time the unit enters combat until it can be included in its higher headquarters' next "regular" resupply cycle.

For most heavy units, resupply is on a 12 or 24 hour "standard" cycle with special deliveries for emergency requests (limited by the amount of supplies on hand and the amount of transport needed to meet emergency needs).

So, a lag on receiving "new" supplies for several hours after arrival on the battlefield is "normal" though not desirable if the arriving unit expends all its ammo and fuel in the first hour of operation.


_____________________________

Take care,

jim

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 99
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 12:46:16 AM   
wodin


Posts: 8012
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Like the re planing idea when a unit runs out of ammo..it should want to swap out of the front line for another coy..or the leaders would decide to do it I'd have thought. If that happened when possible it would ease any micro management due to ammo shortages.
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

At least for now a high ROF setting isn't advisable at all. Saw some companies also burn away their ammo with this setting and being not really useful after that.

I wonder if there isn't a chance for redistribution of ammo under units that are making an attack together, I saw some battalion attacks were 1 company runs into an enemy company and burns away its ammo while the other companies don't meet the enemy and so still have plenty of ammo left.
Or what about a re-planing of the attack in such cases, units still attacking while being out of ammo doesn't make much sense so letting them switch to at least defend seems necessary, that is more or less what the player also does because if he pulls out such companies on the attack the whole attack gets re-planed anyway so maybe an automatic rearrangement while attacking would be good here.

At least I would prefer are redistribution of ammo.


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 100
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 1:18:11 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

The issue you experience isn't that far removed from real world operations.

Sound supply support planning requires allocating sufficient stowage space to carry an amount of supplies for "normal" combat operations from the time the unit enters combat until it can be included in its higher headquarters' next "regular" resupply cycle.

For most heavy units, resupply is on a 12 or 24 hour "standard" cycle with special deliveries for emergency requests (limited by the amount of supplies on hand and the amount of transport needed to meet emergency needs).

So, a lag on receiving "new" supplies for several hours after arrival on the battlefield is "normal" though not desirable if the arriving unit expends all its ammo and fuel in the first hour of operation.



Well if that's the case I don't mind that it works that way but like real world operation some form of improvisation needs to be folded into it.
As I said a redistribution under the attacking companies seems to me the best way to keep the operations rolling and the bridge the time till resupplies arrive.

Now when looking at the amount of ammunition that is carried it always looks like a lot because of those high numbers but just taking it down to the single weapon level makes clear that this is often not the case, I just checked a unit with StG 44 and see that the don't have enough ammo(50 shoots) per weapon for 2 full magazines, that doesn't seem to be enough for serious assaults at all.

A question to this, is the ammo shown in the E&S the TOTAL amount that the unit has in the weapons & in reserve? So in the case of this unit meaning that they have a full magazine(30 shoots) and one reserve magazine(20 shoots)?

Maybe if the E&S would show besides the total amount also the number of rounds per weapon it would give the player a better understanding how high or low the ammunition level is that the unit carries and would so better understand what the unit can or cannot do.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to jimcarravallah)
Post #: 101
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 1:33:12 AM   
Rock64

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/16/2012
Status: offline
Navwarcol you must have missed this post by Dave

"I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer."

It's not an accurate statement. TO&E would have a FO and a artillery radio or two, but according to the greenbook, the majority of the missions were called in over wire.


(in reply to navwarcol)
Post #: 102
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 2:42:08 AM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Guys,

I think some of the discussions here warrant their own threads. Some of the questions and debates arising from them are deep and general enough to go for quite a few thread pages.

Something I think would help a lot for people to get feedback (from Dave and others) or advice on how to conduct operations effectively within the engine possibilities, is that whenever one of us comes across a situation which leaves him or her mystified or wondering whether "they're missing the point", they open up their own thread on the War Room, and share saved games and screenshots to illustrate the issue or topic.

I think it's a bit of shame that the knowledge being shared here gets "lost" as many different discussion get mixed up in one single thread.

(in reply to Rock64)
Post #: 103
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 8:07:59 AM   
loyalcitizen


Posts: 204
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline
I am playing the latest .258 patch and the scenario All-American Over Nijmegen. Since it is a long scenario, I have saved and come back to it over several days. When I load a save, all units that were previously on In-Situ and Auto Facing are suddenly now have the Auto (Facing) box UNCHECKED and have the arrow facing due north. This happened when I loaded the scenario on Day 2, and now on Day 5.

Units that I had personally dictated a facing to maintain that facing.

Help!

< Message edited by loyalcitizen -- 3/16/2013 8:08:59 AM >

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 104
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 8:44:10 AM   
loyalcitizen


Posts: 204
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline
All-American Over Nijmegen is now over. The Somerchen objective in the suburbs of Nijmegen has overwhelming Allied forces, yet I do not get ownership of the objective? I certainly have WAY more than 10 times the combat power of the single German unit in the area. Please help me understand why the objective isn't under my control.



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by loyalcitizen -- 3/16/2013 8:46:16 AM >

(in reply to loyalcitizen)
Post #: 105
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 8:51:49 AM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Loyalcit, It's mainly an 'occupation' objective - meaning you get very little for being in there at the very end of scenario, but get incremental points for being in there, in control, during the whole scenario. When did you actually get effective control? If it was only at the end then you wouldn't get many vic points from that. Is this what you meant?

As to it showing up as 'yours' in the Objective list. Pass. Don't know how much control you need to achieve that. But I would have thought if you have significant enemy within the objective range circle then even if you outnumber them it might be that they stop you having possession. I'm not sure, but I thought you could also be prevented having possession by barrages and such like. Could be wrong on that.

I always find the Objective definition circles too wide, personally. (Maybe it's the cheat in me...) You can reduce them easily enough in the scenmaker.

< Message edited by phoenix -- 3/16/2013 8:56:40 AM >

(in reply to loyalcitizen)
Post #: 106
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 4:54:23 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

The issue you experience isn't that far removed from real world operations.

Sound supply support planning requires allocating sufficient stowage space to carry an amount of supplies for "normal" combat operations from the time the unit enters combat until it can be included in its higher headquarters' next "regular" resupply cycle.

For most heavy units, resupply is on a 12 or 24 hour "standard" cycle with special deliveries for emergency requests (limited by the amount of supplies on hand and the amount of transport needed to meet emergency needs).

So, a lag on receiving "new" supplies for several hours after arrival on the battlefield is "normal" though not desirable if the arriving unit expends all its ammo and fuel in the first hour of operation.



Well I wish someone would schedule it in for later arrival then because it's p****g me off just sitting there with 232 men, and 114 trucks, and 369 tons of ammo for the whole day, just 3km down the road while my digital soldiers, are bleeding, and dying with no ammo
Lazy g**s.

(in reply to jimcarravallah)
Post #: 107
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 9:38:50 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3642
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loyalcitizen

I am playing the latest .258 patch and the scenario All-American Over Nijmegen ...


I thought that the latest Beta build doesn't address the HttR add-on until it becomes officially Patch 4 and all the kinks are worked out?

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to loyalcitizen)
Post #: 108
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 9:45:19 PM   
AndrewKurtz

 

Posts: 531
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
I thought it didn;t come with converted HttR scenarios, but that if you are patient, it would convert them when the scenario opens.

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 109
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/16/2013 11:46:44 PM   
jimcarravallah

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 1/4/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: loyalcitizen

I am playing the latest .258 patch and the scenario All-American Over Nijmegen ...


I thought that the latest Beta build doesn't address the HttR add-on until it becomes officially Patch 4 and all the kinks are worked out?


The initial Beta Update resulted in a longer to load time for HttR scenarios than BftB, but the HttR scenarios were playable once loaded.

Opening with the new software didn't correct the problem for a subsequent "new" game on my machine.

If I recall correctly, it was an issue with compiling maps so supply routing would work with the beta release.

I ended up installing the Beta Patch, then opening the HttR maps with MapMaker and later the scenarios with ScenMaker, and once loaded in the appropriate program, saving them back to the same name.

I was later told that doing this with ScenMaker was sufficient, but that was after I did the MapMaker load and save, which seemed to work. I did the ScenMaker just to be safe on those scenarios I hadn't checked following my MapMaker excursion.

A good recommendation was to save the post-patch compiled files to a different name to avoid problems with the recompiled files becoming corrupted.

If the new names end up working, it'd be a good idea to use them to overwrite the original files so the configurations and file structures match.

Hope this helps.




_____________________________

Take care,

jim

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 110
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/17/2013 3:59:02 AM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loyalcitizen

All-American Over Nijmegen is now over. The Somerchen objective in the suburbs of Nijmegen has overwhelming Allied forces, yet I do not get ownership of the objective? I certainly have WAY more than 10 times the combat power of the single German unit in the area. Please help me understand why the objective isn't under my control.


loyalcitizen,

can you upload a saved game?

(in reply to loyalcitizen)
Post #: 111
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/17/2013 7:11:36 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Nothing big but maybe these typos in the estab could be corrected:
12,8cm PjK 80 L/55
7.5cm PjK 42 L/70

10,5cm StuH 42 L/28 ammo is mixed up, AP ammo in the Aper slot and HE rounds in the Aarm slot.

What's the 12.2cm HE there for? No weapon uses it.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 3/18/2013 7:29:31 AM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 112
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/17/2013 7:42:51 PM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 631
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rock64

Navwarcol you must have missed this post by Dave

"I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer."

It's not an accurate statement. TO&E would have a FO and a artillery radio or two, but according to the greenbook, the majority of the missions were called in over wire.



Rock, I did miss that, sorry!

(in reply to Rock64)
Post #: 113
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/19/2013 1:22:55 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Nothing big but maybe these typos in the estab could be corrected:
12,8cm PjK 80 L/55
7.5cm PjK 42 L/70

10,5cm StuH 42 L/28 ammo is mixed up, AP ammo in the Aper slot and HE rounds in the Aarm slot.

What's the 12.2cm HE there for? No weapon uses it.


Think the Pjk (Panzer jager kanone) and KwK (Kampfwagen kanone) are both correct, but the term Pjk is used for tank hunter AFV (JPz IV L70 and JagdTiger) and such, which have a slightly adapted version of the standard Kwk.

The 12,2cm HE actually should belong to the captured russian howitzers (12,2cm sFH 396 (r)), usually to be found in german static divisions and later VAK (Volks Artillerie Korps) units. But you´re right, this gun has the 12.8cm HE ammo assigned. Obvious oversight.

Can confirm about the 10,5cm StuH 42 L/28 ammo to be interchanged. HE is in AARM and AP in APER. This should only effect amounts of resupply though.

Good catches.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 114
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/19/2013 1:47:41 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Well I never heard of a Pjk, it's either KwK for Kampfwagenkanone or PaK for Panzerabwehrkanone.
The KwK is usually mounted in a tank while to PaK is either as a standalone gun or mounted into a tank Destroyer.
See a small overview here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kampfwagenkanone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerabwehrkanone

Regarding the Russian artillery, not sure what Germany used as AT ammo for it or if it still had an AT capability at all.
If it still had AT capability I doubt that the values of the 12,8 can be use as that gun was coming from a PAK development where already real AP ammunition was produced while the Russian type 12,2 used HEAT as anti-tank ammo.
And in case the 12,8 ammo was used as base to make all the performance values of course those have to be redone too, it's not enough to simply change that ammo to 12,2 that doesn't alter any of the guns performance values.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 115
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/19/2013 3:27:00 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Well I never heard of a Pjk, it's either KwK for Kampfwagenkanone or PaK for Panzerabwehrkanone.
The KwK is usually mounted in a tank while to PaK is either as a standalone gun or mounted into a tank Destroyer.
See a small overview here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kampfwagenkanone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerabwehrkanone

Regarding the Russian artillery, not sure what Germany used as AT ammo for it or if it still had an AT capability at all.
If it still had AT capability I doubt that the values of the 12,8 can be use as that gun was coming from a PAK development where already real AP ammunition was produced while the Russian type 12,2 used HEAT as anti-tank ammo.
And in case the 12,8 ammo was used as base to make all the performance values of course those have to be redone too, it's not enough to simply change that ammo to 12,2 that doesn't alter any of the guns performance values.


Here´s some quote from Lexikon der Wehrmacht, regarding Panzerjager, or Panzerjagd Kanone:

Für die 7,5-cm-Panzerjäger-Kanone 42 waren 55 Granatpatronen vorhanden.

Von dieser ab Juli 1944 gelieferten Waffe, anfänglich als Pak 42 bezeichnet, später Panzerjagdkanone bzw. Sturmkanone genannt, wurden bei den Firmen Gustloff und Skoda 1.329 Stück produziert.

Es war eine etwas geänderte 7,5-cm-KwK 42, wie sie im Panzer V montiert war. Das Alkett-Fahrzeug trug in der Bezeichnung ein »A«, wog 28 t, war etwas schmäler, aber 2.350 mm hoch. Durch die lange Kanone und die 80-mm-Frontpanzerung hatte sich das Gewicht verlagert, die Fahrzeuge waren kopflastig und im Gelände nicht besonders beweglich. Bei der Truppe hießen diese Jagdpanzer »Guderian-Enten«. Trotz der hohen Feuerkraft war aber selbst der Generaloberst nicht von der Notwendigkeit dieser Fahrzeuge überzeugt.

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/panzer4.htm

With regard to the russian 122mm, my guess would be that there was no accurate data available for it and thus as substitute, the 128mm ammo data was used in ESTAB instead. Off course that´s wrong and needs some fixing

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 116
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/19/2013 5:24:14 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Indeed, but the short form of Panzerjagdkanone or Panzerjägerkanone still seems to be PaK, so if an abbreviation is used it should stick to the usual scheme and don't invent new ones.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 117
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/19/2013 5:46:00 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Indeed, but the short form of Panzerjagdkanone or Panzerjägerkanone still seems to be PaK, so if an abbreviation is used it should stick to the usual scheme and don't invent new ones.


Agree. In Fritz Hahn, Waffen und Geheimwaffen des deuschen Heeres 1933-1945, they´re named "12,8cm Pz.Jg.Kanone 80" and "7.5cm PzJgK 42", but I actually do not mind much if that is shortened to just PjK. Though "PzJgK" would sound better to me too.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 118
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/24/2013 7:35:52 AM   
loyalcitizen


Posts: 204
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline
Just got a CTD in Race for Bastogne under the latest patch. It was right after a bridge had been constructed and routes were being recalculated. Recalculating things seems to be problematic.
No, I don't have a save, it happened that early.
After restarting a new game of the same thing, I played through 3 days of the scenario with no issues (so far).

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 119
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.129