 |
|
Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11) +--- Thread: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob (/showthread.php?tid=49766) Pages:
1
2
|
Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - cavalry corps - 01-15-2009 My first discussion is on encosed SP units ( Stug, SU152 ETC ) . This discusison is related to the alt oob I have played now nearly three alt version campaigns to the finish so I feel qualified to comment. First of all I like the alt OOB Its factual and the fire values of all units seems good ( especially infantry ) . I think that the defence value of these enclosed SP units is generally way too high. ( Not in tems of actual armour but in terms of tactical mobilty - which needs to be reflected in defence values as we have nothing else). These guns were I understood were cheaper to build than turret units and used to give infantry support from enemy armour or give infantry support to supress enemy units with fire before assault. Most importantly in the game they should be designed to be stacked with infantry to be protected fom enemy infantry assault. In my games I see these units operating openly without any regard to the dangerous issues these units should face . esp the SU152 - its lethal even to assault when isolated but on its own it should be easy to take out. I would have thought for enclosed SP units, work out the actual armour values but then for enclosed SP units halve it. This will mean players will dig them in ( to recover defence against enemy armour ) , not assault with them and not leave them without infantry support. They still get their good fire values when they fire - thats fine. If these SP units were as good in real action as in the game no turret tanks would need to be built ... but they were. Open SP guns already have low defensive values which seem ok already. So thats my call to arms... no doubt Edward VM will have something to say:bow: My key bord in kacjkered so forgive typos Regards michael RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - cavalry corps - 01-15-2009 Someone may say ( in some games) many of these have one step lower morale but I think thats the wrong way to go. Michael RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - raizer - 01-15-2009 well a lot of those units used Tankodesantniki-or the simpler term- tankos :) these guys used to ride on the SPs and protect them from infantry...there is no way to reflect it in the game but maybe a higher defense can be attributed to them. They were so successful that the germans used there own version. There were some StuGs at kursk, for the first time, had dedicated Begleit assault riders-escort troops. These dudes were armed with 44s and smgs and after kursk became popular ways to protect SPs from close assault. The tankos caught on after kursk...so taking a SU 152 on its own, sure infantry could knock it about, like an elephant, but there are numerous historical instances of them having dedicated infantry support RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - FLG - 01-15-2009 raizer Wrote:well a lot of those units used Tankodesantniki-or the simpler term- tankos :) Raizer can you recommend any web sites which covers this. It os the first time I have heard of Tankodesantniki, I am eager to know more. RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - JDR Dragoon - 01-15-2009 An example would be this: http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/structure/AFV/SPguns/strspgun.htm Notice that most of the soviet late war SP Gun formations have at least a company (or even a battalion) of infantry attached as standard. RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - raizer - 01-15-2009 well Im partial to the flames of war website-they are a miniature company and have very simple but very effective rules and great figures-a nice game can be played in 2.5 hours...there is alot of great knowledge at this website, from people all over the world who write on battles, units, hereos, etc... here is a simple link to some tankos they talk about http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&art_id=907 this link to tankos might bring you to the main site...but if you go down to the spotlight sections there are tons of good articles etc...on all sorts of units, etc...I think the tankos are on page 14 or 15 or 16 of the spotlight section and you can read about the german versions-the begleits that rode on stugs at kursk btw here are some pzgrens I painted and they are 15mm http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m296/raizer_02/pzgrens.jpg RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - FLG - 01-15-2009 Tanks for the links guys RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - Volcano Man - 01-15-2009 This discussion is probably better for vmods.com forum. That said, the defense values of the TD units are calculated like everything else in the db with the same formulas. The problem of course is that some of the massive TDs have extremely thick frontal armor which makes their defense rating pretty high. The weakness of the TD units is their anemic assault factor, which is "4" at highest. Of course when you have a massive TD like the Jagdtiger or ISU 152, it doesn't really matter since the defense is > 25 (it can still be effective in assaults despite its low assault factor). The other problem is that this is indeed an operational level game where we can't really model shots on rear or sides which is why the calculations take into account the full 360* armor of a vehicle. That said, I could certainly see justification in adding a condition to TD defense calculations where the final result is reduced by 1/2 (rounded up) to take into account restricted mobility and keep them inclined to remain as a standoff weapon. The question is whether or not the _Alt community thinks that is realistic or not and for that, this is why I say you should put this discussion on the vmods.com forum. http://www.volcanomods.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=29&func=view&catid=2&id=793#793 *added link* RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - Volcano Man - 01-15-2009 JDR Dragoon Wrote:An example would be this: Yes indeed, "tankos" are already factored into the defense ratings of the late war German / Russian TDs. RE: Discussion number 1 on the Alt oob - cavalry corps - 01-16-2009 OK thats interesting about these co. units - they are not dipicted in any game but I see how the ratings could be use a bit to reflect this Discussion is now posted a the VM site Michael |
){kind=link}