Japanese Infantry Guns

[Jumbo]

Nice points Jim. And it's my understanding that the Shermans and M10's that were commonly used for indirect fire missions were pretty effective too. As for myself, I do not want to see this game changed a whole lot. But I would like to see artillery, And perticularily heavy artillery a bit more effective on hard targets. Basically having a greater chance to cause disrupts on armor.

Mr. Roadrunner,

In regards to American SP artillery. Some time back, I did see that we got a new unit (M12 Direct Fire) into the Matrix game. This unit has a much stronger hard attack value than your regular M12 SP gun. It was quite common for the U.S. army to employ them in direct fire missions against bunkers and heavy armor. It's my understanding that they were extremely effective when called on to do either or. The M12's 155mm gun solid AP shot projectile weighed an astonishing 100lbs. This type of shot didn't just give it the ability to penetrate a tanks armor. It was known to actually demolish the German tank. As I remember this new M12 direct Fire unit has a max strenth point value of 2. This enables them to effectively perform select direct fire missions without being too strong in the game.

[Huib Versloot]

Mr. Roadrunner,

In regards to American SP artillery. Some time back, I did see that we got a new unit (M12 Direct Fire) into the Matrix game. This unit has a much stronger hard attack value than your regular M12 SP gun. It was quite common for the U.S. army to employ them in direct fire missions against bunkers and heavy armor. It's my understanding that they were extremely effective when called on to do either or. The M12's 155mm gun solid AP shot projectile weighed an astonishing 100lbs. This type of shot didn't just give it the ability to penetrate a tanks armor. It was known to actually demolish the German tank. As I remember this new M12 direct Fire unit has a max strenth point value of 2. This enables them to effectively perform select direct fire missions without being too strong in the game.

In the role of direct fire the M12 was aimed, by looking through the empty barrel. Effective against pillboxes from short distance where the shell's trajectory was flat, but near impossible to hit tanks that way. I would be interested in an account of a tank hit by an M12 in combat since it seems very unlikely to have ever happened.

[K K Rossokolski]

I suppose this thread as it has developed could include the case of the Brit 3.7" AA gun -very equivalent to the 88, but because it was an AA gun, doctrinally forbidden for use as a surface target weapon. Any thoughts on whether it could/shoud be used in scens where these guns are included in the Orbat?

Cheers
KKR

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Rod, I was going to take it to the silly point of 50 cal MG's being able to cut down a tree. And the MG 42 having such a high rate of fire it could shoot the leaves out of a tree. :rolleyes:
If they could do that in "real life" why can't the developers add the 50 cal as a "roadblock" maker? And, the MG 42 firing in a woods would make it clear terrain?

:chin: :pig: LOL!

Herr Huib, you are correct about the 155 being sighted by looking down the tube. :bow: But, I have only the memory of what I have read, in the past, to add my agreement. :smoke:
I'm also sure that penetration tables will not allow the larger calibre guns from taking out armored vehicles. But, there are no concussion effects tables to look at? :dunno:

I just think tinkering with the game is not going to improve it.
Fix what's wrong in the coding. Add new and interesting units that actually took part in combat, in sufficient numbers.

It's the simple things?



Ed

[K K Rossokolski]

I am trying to be quite serious, Ed, remembering the 3.7 AA has been mentioned here before..... the "point" about the .50cal/MG42 I find demeaning. I am merely trying to raise points which some might think worthwhile discussing seriously!!! We have just had some very significant changes to our game -are these tinkering?

However, continuing the general theme, which has developed to include the use of Arty against tanks, what about the use of arty to reduce minefield strength, or maybe giving regular infantry some capability to clear -certainly I could see an argument for infantry clearing blocks.

Please remember I have no idea of how the codes used might be capable of modification.

KKR

[Herr Straße Laufer]

:( Forgive me Rod. It was not my intention to demean your intentions here. I was not really speaking as much to you as to the others who would rush to make changes without thinking "down the road a ways".

I understand your point and the capablilities of the 3.7 AA. And, you made a point in line with the way the argument was going.

My intention was one used to get some others back on track and not go off half cocked to make many changes that will eventually make the CS game no longer the CS game we know and love.
I've seen it creeping in the way a few things were done in view to the scale as well as some of the dynamic issues of unit interaction. It has been creeping into discussions over time?

CS is an old and trusted game that needs tweaking. Not a complete makeover.

[K K Rossokolski]

Fair enough Ed, no hard feelings, and let me take this opportunity to wish you and yours all the very best for Christmas and the New Year.

Cheers
RodC

[Mr. Guberman]

Rod,

Sent you back your bloody Mokpalin...

Cheers
Curt

[Hobbes]

Nice points Jim. And it's my understanding that the Shermans and M10's that were commonly used for indirect fire missions were pretty effective too. As for myself, I do not want to see this game changed a whole lot. But I would like to see artillery, And perticularily heavy artillery a bit more effective on hard targets. Basically having a greater chance to cause disrupts on armor.

Mr. Roadrunner,

In regards to American SP artillery. Some time back, I did see that we got a new unit (M12 Direct Fire) into the Matrix game. This unit has a much stronger hard attack value than your regular M12 SP gun. It was quite common for the U.S. army to employ them in direct fire missions against bunkers and heavy armor. It's my understanding that they were extremely effective when called on to do either or. The M12's 155mm gun solid AP shot projectile weighed an astonishing 100lbs. This type of shot didn't just give it the ability to penetrate a tanks armor. It was known to actually demolish the German tank. As I remember this new M12 direct Fire unit has a max strenth point value of 2. This enables them to effectively perform select direct fire missions without being too strong in the game.

I only had a moment to quickly scan this very interesting thread. I certainly think heavy HE is far too ineffective in the game. In fact I had to abandon one scenario design as an historical German armoured assault was stopped by indirect HE fire alone, something I couldn't model in the game.

However major changes to the game could have very extreme consequences on the balance of existing scenarios.

On a similar note to the original post, I decided to drop the Centaur Mk IV 95mm Howitzer from my Hell's Corner scenario as it could not use indirect fire - it still can't in the ME version. Maybe this could be amended or maybe it should only be used as direct fire unit? Anyone know anything about the Centaur?

Cheers, Chris

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Hi Chris,

Good points.

I often see these things in terms of "you make one change and you get a hundred more effects you never thought of", like in the movie "The Butterfly Effect"?

We'll see what Matrix wishes to do about viewing their actions with regard to the impact on the whole?

Ed