ww2 .exe

[piero1971]

I remember seeing a ww2 .exe with specific equipment like panzerfaust, etc

did anyone remember which scenario it was?

[nemo]

Iñaki Harrizabalagatar's Fall Blau (http://www.the-strategist.net/RD/scenarii/display_scenario.php?Id=616) has a modified .exe. At work now, can't download and see whether there are Panzerfausts or not in it but you might want to check.

[JMS]

Ben Turner modded an exe for use on his version of Europe Aflame that had a lot of new equipment.

[piero1971]

yes, it's Ben's one. I'll look at it... the Fall Grau one had some modifications but did not notice which ones.

[Ben Turner]

yes, it's Ben's one.

You shouldn't use the EA2.exe for another scenario because I changed all the aircraft ranges to account for the unusual scale of that scenario.

There is another .exe with the right ranges and a lot of the same equipment which I could send you if you like.

[Crazy Dutch]

There is another .exe with the right ranges and a lot of the same equipment which I could send you if you like.

Ben

If I may made a suggestion. Why don't you upload it, then can everybody download it, if they wil have it?

[piero1971]

You shouldn't use the EA2.exe for another scenario because I changed all the aircraft ranges to account for the unusual scale of that scenario.

There is another .exe with the right ranges and a lot of the same equipment which I could send you if you like.

I would like to see it - as I think, when I saw it that the infantry additions were great and I am thinking of modifying some of the ww2 scens that I really like to use that -exe.

[Ben Turner]

If I may made a suggestion. Why don't you upload it, then can everybody download it, if they wil have it?

So it is written.... so let it be done!

http://www.tdg.nu/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1133393601

Be sure to read the text first (apologies for its length) and feel free to comment on the .exe.

[piero1971]

from TDG


a) equipment that was omitted by Norm for reasons I cannot explain. The attack version of the FW-190 is the best example of this (several thousand were built). Also a heavy motorcycle squad, based on a German organisation which had two light machine guns and more manpower than usual.
b) rare equipment from the late 30s. Stuff like the Lithuanian Anbo VII and a Dutch armoured car.
c) equipment which was designed, but never used. This includes vehicles produced in considerable numbers, like the American M6 heavy tank, various French bits and peices and some high-tech German stuff.
d) extremely speculative things and crap that I simply made up. Beware in particular of new late war jet aircraft and heavy bombers, but also of French equipment after 1942. I could only extrapolate so far based on information available on the internet.
e) copies of existing common equipment types. Some of these are located near the originals, but most are in the Self-Propelled Guns & Mortars section. I made these to allow multiple replacement pools for different nationalities.
.

this is very good (hope the Tiger I tank has better gun!!:D) I really hope Matrix takes these excellent equipment ideas into the newer version (with new AA values, and modern equipment fro JMS and XIX from Chuck and Inaki. anything less I'd be disappointed!

[Ben Turner]

from TDG

You could discuss it there. That'd make more sense.

this is very good (hope the Tiger I tank has better gun!!:D)

I didn't modify any of the existing equipment types except weights and cosmetic changes.

[Panzer-War]

Maybe my exe is a step in the direction of what you are looking for Piero. It was intended for a 1930's to modern era time period. Lots of modified equipment as well as new equipment types, and yes tigers have increased punch. Haven’t messed with it much lately hopeing in any new version of TOAW that designers will be able to add and modify equipment for there scenarios.

Short summary of changes:

New Infantry types and weapons
Early Panzers have increased AP rateings
Heavy tanks such as the Tiger II have increased armor rateings

Last one got me thinking that maybe a new unit tag such as a - for such heavy tanks would be necessary for certain terrain types like forest and bocage.

Take a look if you like (couldn't post it here file to large you can find it under TOAW Misc DLs)

[piero1971]

thanks! I will look for this file as well.

[Ben Turner]

Early Panzers have increased AP rateings

Far from an ideal solution. Giving them recon is more appropriate.

Heavy tanks such as the Tiger II have increased armor rateings

Based on what?

[Panzer-War]

Well since I am planning on doing a WWII scenario in the near future, I decided to work on a WWII exe thinking something like 1930-1955 era. Was wondering if anyone thought I should put in hypothetical equipment like Panther II or models that only a small number where actually produced like the Pz I C Air portable tank.

[Panzer-War]

Far from an ideal solution. Giving them recon is more appropriate.


It’s Ideal if I want better AP rateings for them.


Based on what?

I was dissatisfied with the Kill death ratio compared to lesser AFV. At lest that’s one of the reasons I remember (started this exe over a year ago). It’s likely that I will reduce it some.

[Ben Turner]

Well since I am planning on doing a WWII scenario in the near future, I decided to work on a WWII exe thinking something like 1930-1955 era. Was wondering if anyone thought I should put in hypothetical equipment like Panther II or models that only a small number where actually produced like the Pz I C Air portable tank.

You might as well- especially if you're designing a strategic-level scenario. Players love that kind of stuff.

[piero1971]

for nazi germany post 1945 planes, look at www.luft46.com

[Ben Turner]

for nazi germany post 1945 planes, look at www.luft46.com

Yeah- that's an eye-opening site. Bear in mind, though, that a lot of the concepts shown there were nowhere near to becoming operational aircraft. As a rule of thumb, if its wildly different from anything which actually saw action during the war, it wouldn't have been available operationally until about 1948, if ever.

[Panzer-War]

I beleive that I'm getting close to finishing a WWII exe. To start off with I have removed all post 1955 equipment from the data base, and have moved open toped/turreted vehicles from the tank section to the Anti tank vehicles (exe M10/Maraders). As well I have rearranged the British and American Tank sections in the hope of more easily finding desired tank types. I have been thinking about trying some new unit types such as towed AT guns with motorized movement defense strength something like a squad and active instead of passive defender stance. If anyone can provide me with or point me to toes for squads or other infantry formations for the minor countries I would appreciate it. Below is a list of new equipment types, note some have replaced old equipment types.

Infantry & Support Troops

Heavy Motorcycle Squad
Rifle Squad + LMG
07-15 Rifle Squad
Rifle Squad GPMG
Rifle Squad PnzFst 30
Rifle Squad GPMG PnzFst 30
Rifle Squad PnzFst 60
Rifle Squad GPMG PnzFst 60
Rifle Squad PnzFst 100
Rifle Squad GPMG PnzFst 100
Type 38 Rifle Squad
Type 38 Rifle Squad + LSW
Enfield Rifle Squad
Enfield Rifle Squad + Bren
M1 Rifle Squad + BAR
M1 Rifle Squad + BAR+
Heavy Rifle Squad + LMG
Automatic Rifle Group
Infantry Group
SMG Squad (early)
SMG Squad (late)
M/31 Suomi Group
M9 Bazzoka
M20 Bazzoka
RPzB
PIAT
Eng Construction Squad

Guns & Mortars

Bren Gun Team
WC Medium MG
GPMG
Vicker's .303 WCMG
M2 .50 HMG
45mm/L46 AT Gun
45mm/L66.2 AT Gun
155mm GPF Gun

Tanks

AC1 Sentinel
Ram Mk II
Char B1
Char B1 ter
Pzkpfw 38t A
Pzkpfw 38t E
Pzkpfw 38t G
Pzkpfw IC
Pzkpfw IID
Pzkpfw IVC
Pzkpfw V Panther D
Pzkpfw V Panther G
Pzkpfw V Panther II
Sturmgeschutz III (early)
Sturmgeschutz III F
Sturmgeschutz III G
Sturmgeschutz III G (Late)
M15/42
P26/40
KV-1
T-34/76
T-43
IS-I
A-13 Mk-II Cruiser
A-13 Mk-III Covenanter
A-13 Mk-III CS
M6 Heavy Tank
M4/75 Sherman (early)
M4/105 Sherman (early)
M29 Heavy tank

Fixed Wing Aircraft

Ju-89
Me-109E Emil
Me-109F Friedrich
Me-109G Gustav
Me-109K
Ju-87B
Ju-87D
Ju-87G
FW-190D Dora
FW-190F
FW-190G
Hs-132
FW Ta-183
J7W
La-9
La-11
MiG-7
Hurricane I
Hurricane IIC
Hurricane IID
Sea Hurricane
Spitfire I
Spitfire II
Spitfire V
Spitfire IX
Spitfire XIV
P-51B
P-51D
P-51H

Bellow are some planes from the site you posted Piero that I am considering adding.

Ju EF 132
Ju 488
Ju EF 100
Fw Ta 400
Fw 238
ME P.1101
BxV p197
BxV P211.01
ARE 560

As well considering and IS-I/100 model

[piero1971]

from luft 46, one has to see what planes Germany could have come up realistically in 1945-1946.

from the good book : "Last talons of the Eagle"

the ones that seemed in advance stage of design and even testing were:

Ju287 http://www.geocities.com/h_zoeller/ju287_a1.jpg (similar to an Il-28)

the ramjet fighter (cant' rememebr from my head ... Me288?)

and the new jet fighter plan P1109 ? i think.. on which the soviet designed the mig-15.. that would have been a killer in 1946! http://www.aircraftdesigns.com/jets.html

[Panzer-War]

There is one distinct difference between the Mig15 and the German aircraft that come to mind the Mig15 used a copy of a Rolls-Royce engine. Not sure if the German engine would have been as powerful. 1946 seems very optimistic for it I think at the earliest in any sizable numbers would have been 1947/1948.

[piero1971]

you may be right.

although one should never understimate the genius of german scientists as well as the mismanagement of german design and production.

[Panzer-War]

Kind of a pre release sugestions are welcome unit rateings are still subject to change. below is other equipment I have added.(about to post it)

Rifle Section
M1891 Rifle Squad
NL Rifle Team
NL Rifle Team + LSW
NK Rifle Squad
NK Rifle Squad + LMG
Rifle Team
Rifle Team + BAR
M1891/30 Rifle Squad
M1891/30 Rifle Squad + LMG
M1891 + LMG's
NK SMG Squad
PPSh SMG Squad
PPSh SMG Squad + LMG
Reconnaissance SMG Team

46mm Mortar

SdKfz251/1 81mm Mortar
SdkFz251/1 120mm Mortar

V1
V2

Kangaroo
M3 Halftrack

M10 GMC Wolverine (Late)
M18 GMC Hellcat (Late)

Type 3 Chi-Nu
Type 4 Chi-To
M4/76 Sherman (Late)
M4 Sherman Jumbo/76 (Late)

Frigate
Destroyer (Late)
Light Aircraft Carrier

H-13 Sioux

Ju EF100
FW-238H
Me P.1101
Ju EF132

[Panzer-War]

Was wondering if anyone had opinions on them, Such as the dual 35mm (AP 73), 40mm (AP 31), and the M16/M19 SPAAG (AP 63) been considering reducing them.

[Panzer-War]

Planing on realesing this in the next week or so.

changed the icon id for smg recon to a smg instead of a rifle
reduced the range for the 4.5inch gun to 18 kilometers
Reconnisance Rifle teams Anti personel rateing has been raised from 1 to 2
Added the Me-109T Träger
Added the Ju-87C
Mosquito MkII now has AP rateing of 2 instead of 0
Added the M39 AUV (Armored Utility Vehicle)
Added South Korea squad
improved the armor for the M59,M75,and Lvtp5 +1
Added a tachanka
Added a Truck + HMG
Reduced the AP rateing for the Dual 35mm, 40mm, M16/M19 SPAAG by half

[Telumar]

Opinions on AA anti personnel ratings?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was wondering if anyone had opinions on them, Such as the dual 35mm (AP 73), 40mm (AP 31), and the M16/M19 SPAAG (AP 63) been considering reducing them.

For sure, these are powerfull weapons if used against infantry, but i also think their AP strengths are rated way too high. What about decreasing their AP values and raising their defence values? Such weapons may be difficult to handle for offensive purposes (weight, size, horizontal adjustment..),except the self-propelled ones. But i think it is still difficult (and deadly) for an infantry man to run against such an AA gun.

I'm not that interested in weapon technology, so this is just an estimation..maybe some research could enlighten you (and me).:halo:

Looking forward on the release:toast:

[Ben Turner]

For sure, these are powerfull weapons if used against infantry,

The problem is in whether or not they will wind up actually getting used against infantry. So in 1944, that AP value isn't really justified. In 1951? Most certainly.

but i also think their AP strengths are rated way too high. What about decreasing their AP values and raising their defence values? Such weapons may be difficult to handle for offensive purposes (weight, size, horizontal adjustment..),except the self-propelled ones. But i think it is still difficult (and deadly) for an infantry man to run against such an AA gun.

The defence strength of armoured equipment is calculated from its armour value (5+1/10th armour value, round down). So it is impossible to change it independently.

[General Staff]

...One should never understimate the genius of german scientists as well as the mismanagement of german design and production.Yes. Incredible. I'm not an aviation expert by any means, but looking through these I see an A4 Tank Killer, a VTOL Harrier and a variety of other airborne weaponry. Did the postwar powers steal these designs? Truly remarkable...

[Panzer-War]

For sure, these are powerfull weapons if used against infantry, but i also think their AP strengths are rated way too high. What about decreasing their AP values and raising their defence values? Such weapons may be difficult to handle for offensive purposes (weight, size, horizontal adjustment..),except the self-propelled ones. But i think it is still difficult (and deadly) for an infantry man to run against such an AA gun.

I'm not that interested in weapon technology, so this is just an estimation..maybe some research could enlighten you (and me).:halo:

Looking forward on the release:toast:

Telumar It is nice to hear your opinion as well your interest in this project!

[Panzer-War]

An AA rateing of 73 for the dual 35mm just seems way to high to me when you consider that it is more than twice that of every tank in the List.

[Ben Turner]

Yes. Incredible. I'm not an aviation expert by any means, but looking through these I see an A4 Tank Killer, a VTOL Harrier and a variety of other airborne weaponry. Did the postwar powers steal these designs? Truly remarkable...

These were just concepts, and I doubt that anyone would bother copying such a concept. The Germans never got anywhere near building all these futuristic aircraft. Bear in mind that even from the first jet flight to the first operational jet fighter took five years (due to technical difficulties not prioritisation).

[Legun]

You could add also some Polish equipment:
AC wz.34 - version with 37mm gun
TKS with 20mm gun
TK and TKS should be recon vehicle as their closest cousins are - Carden-Loyd Mk VI and L3/35.
The database misses Czech 100mm howitzer, used by Polish and Hungarian army, too.

[Telumar]

Originally posted by Ben Turner:
The defence strength of armoured equipment is calculated from its armour value (5+1/10th armour value, round down). So it is impossible to change it independently.

Yup. But i meant the defence values of non-armoured equipment (dual 35mm, 40mm etc.) ..what about that?

The problem is in whether or not they will wind up actually getting used against infantry. So in 1944, that AP value isn't really justified. In 1951? Most certainly.


Totally agree. We are talking about a ww2 exe. So, if Panzer-war wants, 1951 could be ignored.

[Ben Turner]

TK and TKS should be recon vehicle as their closest cousins are - Carden-Loyd Mk VI and L3/35.

These tanks were certainly in reconaissance units- but whether they should have the capabilities afforded by recon in TOAW is a matter for debate.

The database misses Czech 100mm howitzer, used by Polish and Hungarian army, too.

I used the 100mm Gun for this.

[Ben Turner]

Yup. But i meant the defence values of non-armoured equipment (dual 35mm, 40mm etc.) ..what about that?

These are passive defenders; their defence strengths only serve to control how easily the equipment is destroyed, and has no effect on whether or not the unit will retreat-before-combat.

[General Staff]

These were just concepts, and I doubt that anyone would bother copying such a concept.Well they did. And they were eventually built.

[Panzer-War]

AC wz.34 - version with 37mm gun.

Added.

TKS with 20mm gun.

Still considering, do you know what gun this was or have penetration data/length of the barrel?


TK and TKS should be recon vehicle as their closest cousins are - Carden-Loyd Mk VI and L3/35.

The questions is would they have been employed in the reconnaissance role? From what I know I don't think so and believe this is why they never received it (support role to infantry and cavalry).


The database misses Czech 100mm howitzer, used by Polish and Hungarian army, too.

I used the 100mm Gun for this.

This is why I have not done much with the artillery section as generally one can find a substitute for most guns currently. I have thought of reorganizing and renameing the Howitzers/Guns by nations (It for the most part would be chrome).

Example German section.

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/4990/chrometillerygermany4mj.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Example U.S. section

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/5880/chrometilleryus8tg.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Legun]

About TKS 20mm - I don't know exactly data, but it you can compare barrel's length:
http://www.brookhursthobbies.com/images/Alby/743.gif
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/Pol-TKS-20mm.jpg

to
http://www.brookhursthobbies.com/images/Alby/828.gif

According http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/polandtk3.htm:
20 mm (13/16 inch) anti-tank cannon.
Between 1936/39 work was carried out to up-gun the tankette by mounting a 20 mm automatic cannon in a large ball mount.The Polish 20mm FK cannon was ready in 1938 and its mounting on TK-3 and TKS tankettes was started in 1939. Twenty three were upgraded before the events of 1939 overtook the upgrade.

TKS was used by recon units, only.

[Legun]

These tanks were certainly in reconaissance units- but whether they should have the capabilities afforded by recon in TOAW is a matter for debate.

If you suggest to remove TOAW recon status form L3/35 and Universal Scout Carrier, too - I could agree.

[Ben Turner]

If you suggest to remove TOAW recon status form L3/35 and Universal Scout Carrier, too - I could agree.

I'd a) remove it from the L3/35 and b) do what Colin did, and create a third tracked carrier with neither recon nor transport.

[Panzer-War]

TKS /20mm added.

I think that I will go ahead and release it as version 1.0. As working the chrometillery into it will probly take a few more weeks to get done, and plan on haveing it in an updated version.
This should give an Idea of how it is shapeing up.


http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/3371/56ty.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Ben Turner]

This should give an Idea of how it is shapeing up.

Neat. Looks like you've been pretty thorough

Ultra Pendantic Comment: shouldn't the Type 4 Howitzer come after the Type 96? So far as I'm aware, Type 4 refers to 1944 whereas Type 96 refers to 1936...

[Panzer-War]

Thanks Ben

Still need to do minor nations as well U.S.S.R.

According to one of my sources the 150mm type 4 howitzer was introduced to the Japanese army in 1915.

[Ben Turner]

According to one of my sources the 150mm type 4 howitzer was introduced to the Japanese army in 1915.

Yeah. I see the same data. The Japanese must have changed systems at some point between the wars.

[Legun]

I'd a) remove it from the L3/35 and b) do what Colin did, and create a third tracked carrier with neither recon nor transport.
It could be easier to remove recon ability from "Scout Carrier" - it should work the same as with TKS - a recon vehicle without recon value :confused:
The problem is, that the tracked recon vehicles were much better for recon purposes than ACs. And for sure they weren't 36 times worse (see discussion about recon abilities). Now, only few tanks have recon ability - AMR-33/35, FCM-36 (a mistake, I suppose), Carro Veloce L3/35 and L6/40, Carden-Loyd, T-37:40, T-60 (doubtful - used as a battle tank) T-70 and M24 Chaffee. I would like to add recon abilities to all recon tanks - Mk-VI, Stuart&Cromwell (but remainig standard verisons for MBT purpose), Pz IIL, Pz I-II-35-38 (for "Blitzkrieg shock" scenarios) and TK-TKS.

[JMS]

Yeah. I see the same data. The Japanese must have changed systems at some point between the wars.

No, the Japanese system was based on the years a emperor had been in power, so the type 95 of something is older than the type 0 of something else

[Ben Turner]

No, the Japanese system was based on the years a emperor had been in power, so the type 95 of something is older than the type 0 of something else

Clearly no emperor had been in power for 95 years, and no new Emperor came to power in 1940 (when the type zero showed up). The system the Japanese were using in the 30s and 40s was based on the Japanese year with the first two digits stripped off, so far as I can recall.

[JMS]

Clearly no emperor had been in power for 95 years, and no new Emperor came to power in 1940 (when the type zero showed up). The system the Japanese were using in the 30s and 40s was based on the Japanese year with the first two digits stripped off, so far as I can recall.


http://www.artelino.com/articles/japanese_calendar.asp

Japanese Calendar
Japanese art objects, mainly Ukiyo-e of the 19th century often have date stamps that are based on the Japanese calendar. You might find expressions like Meiji 10. There are the Edo, Meiji, Taisho, Showa and Heisei periods. Starting with Meiji, the Japanese calendar period changed when the Japanese Emperor passed away.



Edo: 1603 until September 7, 1868

Meiji: September 8, 1868 to July 29, 1912
Taisho: July 30, 1912 to December 24, 1926
Showa: December 25, 1926 to January 7, 1989
Heisei: began on January 8, 1989

[Ben Turner]

http://www.artelino.com/articles/japanese_calendar.asp

Japanese Calendar
Japanese art objects, mainly Ukiyo-e of the 19th century often have date stamps that are based on the Japanese calendar. You might find expressions like Meiji 10. There are the Edo, Meiji, Taisho, Showa and Heisei periods. Starting with Meiji, the Japanese calendar period changed when the Japanese Emperor passed away.



Edo: 1603 until September 7, 1868

Meiji: September 8, 1868 to July 29, 1912
Taisho: July 30, 1912 to December 24, 1926
Showa: December 25, 1926 to January 7, 1989
Heisei: began on January 8, 1989

The difficulty is that none of this fits with a Type 95 anything.

[Panzer-War]

I plan to have an updated version in roughly a month’s time with chrometillery in it.
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8646/62qq.jpg (http://imageshack.us) http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/3842/34ep.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/2557/21uk1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/7083/11cp2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Ben Turner]

Some points;
The Czechs had various other armoured vehicles (most notably a tankette) which are worth including.
There are more French tanks which were prototypes in 1940. Those should be in there.
Black Prince and Tortoise- British heavy tank and self-propelled gun respectively- would be neat.
Make sure you fix the error with one of the Belgian tanks.

[Panzer-War]

The Czechs had various other armoured vehicles (most notably a tankette) which are worth including.

Overlooked the tankettes and plan to get them in the next version.


There are more French tanks which were prototypes in 1940. Those should be in there.

I can only think of two others the R-40 and the AMX-38 (still looking for more info on the second) plan to get them in the next version as well.


Black Prince and Tortoise- British heavy tank and self-propelled gun respectively- would be neat.

The Black Prince I originally decided not to put in because, the prototypes were not completed until early 45 and it was abandoned in favor of the 'universal tank'. I might go ahead and put it in.
The Tortoise I left out for the same reasons as the T-28 as I doubt there practical uses among others but I will reconsider them.


Make sure you fix the error with one of the Belgian tanks.

Are you referring to the original armor values of the t-13&t-15?

[JMS]

For the Japanese you could add the names and a couple of vehicles more:

Name/armor/anti-armor

Type 89 Chi-Ro /2/ 1
Type 92 Combat Car /1/ 0
Type 94 Te-Ke /1/ 0
Type 95 Ha-Go /1/ 4
Type 94 Te-Ke/Ke-Ke /1/ 4
Type 97 Chi-Ha /3/ 5 - 57mm IIRC
Type 97 Shinhoto Chi-Ha /3/ 6 - 47mm gun
Type 98 Ke-Ni /1/ 5
Type 2 Ho-I /4/ 0
Type 1 Chi-He /5/ 6
Type 3 Ke-Ri /1/ 5
Type 3 Ke-Nu /2/ 5
Type 3 Chi-Nu /5/ 13
Type 1 Ho-Ni /2/ 13
Type 2 Ka-Mi /1/ 5 (amphibious)
Type 3 Ka-Chi /5/ 6 (amphibious)
Type 4 Chi-To /5/ 15

BTW, it's Bazooka, not Bazzoka ;)

[Ben Turner]

I can only think of two others the R-40 and the AMX-38 (still looking for more info on the second) plan to get them in the next version as well.

http://france1940.free.fr/armee/otdb1.html

Thinking of the FCM F-1 reminds me- have you got the weight data right for all your new vehicles right? Note that the weight value in the BioEd is a red herring.

The Black Prince I originally decided not to put in because, the prototypes were not completed until early 45 and it was abandoned in favor of the 'universal tank'. I might go ahead and put it in. The Tortoise I left out for the same reasons as the T-28 as I doubt there practical uses among others but I will reconsider them.

I figure that if the war went on to 1946-7 then they might very well get used. Unless you're running short of space, might as well go with it. While I'm on it, the 32 pounder AT gun ought to be in there if it isn't already.

Are you referring to the original armor values of the t-13&t-15?

Yeah, though there may have been something else. Looking at the reality, neither of these vehicles was terribly impressive.

[Panzer-War]

Hmmm I thought I checked the spelling of bazooka thanks for pointing it out to me JMS. I will reinspect the Japanese tank section.

[Panzer-War]

http://france1940.free.fr/armee/otdb1.html

Thinking of the FCM F-1 reminds me- have you got the weight data right for all your new vehicles right? Note that the weight value in the BioEd is a red herring.

Forgot about that site.
As of now I am planning to get the ARL V 39,G1r (originally left this one out because of sketchy specs), Gendron AM 39, Panhard AM 40 P. The SOMUA S 40 rates the same as its predecessor and that’s why it didn’t get in there. Well I think I have the weight data right, please specify about the red herring.


I figure that if the war went on to 1946-7 then they might very well get used. Unless you're running short of space, might as well go with it. While I'm on it, the 32 pounder AT gun ought to be in there if it isn't already.

Ya im going to go ahead and add it.

[Ben Turner]

Well I think I have the weight data right, please specify about the red herring.

I don't recall the exact equation, but as it turned out, TOAW weight of armoured vehicles is actually based on the defence strength in the BioEd (and TOAW defence strength is based on the armour value). The BioEd weight value doesn't do anything at all.

[ralphtrickey]

I don't recall the exact equation, but as it turned out, TOAW weight of armoured vehicles is actually based on the defence strength in the BioEd (and TOAW defence strength is based on the armour value). The BioEd weight value doesn't do anything at all.
I can't speak for 1.04, but for the Matrix Edition, I'm not sure that's true. Weight is weight, and is used for transportation, at least.

[Ben Turner]

I can't speak for 1.04, but for the Matrix Edition, I'm not sure that's true. Weight is weight, and is used for transportation, at least.

Well, I'm talking about the numbers read by the BioEd. Changing the number in the 'weight' field doesn't do anything.

[Panzer-War]

Been working on the next version and hope to get it finished up soon, Now that I finally got some of the books I ordered. I am thinking the Chrometillery will probably look like this.

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/3358/chrometillery8sn.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


edit-

Happy Legun
A whole Czech section :)

[jlbetin]

Heu,

sorry as I have a small knowledge about French 1935-1940 tanks, you must split all French light tanks at least in 2 categories the ones with the awfull 37mm gun 1918 and the 37mm model 37.
The 1st one was good enough to destroy infantry trench and machine guns nest the second one was a real pain for all german tanks, panzer IV included

Missing is the D1 with the excellent 47 mm model SA34 gun, fight during torch against US forces and then in 1943 within the French 19 CA against Von Arnim in Tunisia with the AMC S35

R35 with 37/SA38 -> R40 at least 2 btn in 1940
H35 some got IIRW the 37/SA38
H39 at least 1/3 received the SA38 mainly the section leaders in many BCCs, as the firefly for Brits in 1944

you may have a look here http://www.chars-francais.net/de1930a1940.htm

Der Wander1940Fan

[Panzer-War]

The R40 is already in there for V1.1, The D1 I originally left out because it rates roughly the same as the D2 I will reexamine both and might put it in. And I am thinking of adding another H39 model with the shorter 37mm gun.

[jlbetin]

The R40 is already in there for V1.1, The D1 I originally left out because it rates roughly the same as the D2 I will reexamine both and might put it in. And I am thinking of adding another H39 model with the shorter 37mm gun.

Would be more realistic as our stupid generals let French army with 2/3 of H39 with the 37 mm model 1918.

concerning the D2 it is a shame that this tank was not produced in higher quantity he was using the the 47 SA 35 one of the best french gun, the same installed in the somua S35.
General De Gaulle when he was commanding the 4 DCR was fond of this rustic and powerful tank

Der WanderBCC

[Ben Turner]

Would be more realistic as our stupid generals let French army with 2/3 of H39 with the 37 mm model 1918.

I really don't think it would have made much difference.

[jlbetin]

I really don't think it would have made much difference.


Hi Ben,
German strategy was based on mobility, all books I read demonstrated that French tanks moves were chaotics, the lack of battle coordination by radio was the underlying reason. But in melee fights German gunners got a lot of difficulties to kill french tanks due to their armour thickness.
If French guns would have been more effective especialy at mid-distances the German loss rate would have been far more higher.

Would it have change the final result?

the Sedan breakthrough would have occured the same,
the big Tanks battles in Belgium would have been far more costly for German
The Arras or Abbeville battle could have worked?But in fine French collapse would have occured the same may be in July?

For me the French defeat was sealed when General Lafontaine lost more than 9 hours before pushing his main counter attack the 14th of May
and when General De Flavigny, rather than sending all his forces against Stonne, have widespread them in small units to create defensive stoppers

Those 2 days were France lost the war

Der WanderDCR&DLM

[Ben Turner]

Hi Ben,
German strategy was based on mobility, all books I read demonstrated that French tanks moves were chaotics, the lack of battle coordination by radio was the underlying reason. But in melee fights German gunners got a lot of difficulties to kill french tanks due to their armour thickness.

Sure. This wasn't the issue, though. The Battle of France was not decided by tank vs. tank engagements.

As it was, the French had a major edge in armour. Adding even more won't make much difference.

The Arras or Abbeville battle could have worked?

The French didn't participate very heavily in these counterattacks due to their cumbersome doctrine and command structure. So it doesn't matter all that much what equipment they were using.

For me the French defeat was sealed when General Lafontaine lost more than 9 hours before pushing his main counter attack the 14th of May
and when General De Flavigny, rather than sending all his forces against Stonne, have widespread them in small units to create defensive stoppers

Those 2 days made France to lost the war

In my view the French lost the war before it even started with a faulty view of modern warfare and an (entirely understandable) reluctance to repeat 1914-8.

[jlbetin]

In my view the French lost the war before it even started with a faulty view of modern warfare and an (entirely understandable) reluctance to repeat 1914-8.

About French mistakesin Doctrine, no problem
It is the work of Pétain since 1921

But if those 2damn Générals have behaved properly, the Sedan door would have been closed letting enough time for the French reinforcement to stop or slow down the Von Kleist panzer Korp, and French and British troops won't have been pocketed in Flandres.

Ben to avoid polution on this ww2.exe thread I propose you to open a thread about 1940 campain, it would interest many of other toaw players

Do you agree?

Der WanderTOAWModerator

[Ben Turner]

About French mistakesin Doctrine, no problem
It is the work of Pétain since 1921

But if those 2damn Générals have behaved properly, the Sedan door would have been closed letting enough time for the French reinforcement to stop or slow down the Von Kleist panzer Korp, and French and British troops won't have been pocketed in Flandres.

The thing is that the French reacted in the way they did because of the doctrine. They expected the Germans to develop their assault on Sedan in the way they would do it themselves. So far as Gamelin was concerned, it was not possible for the Germans to cross the Meuse until they had first brought up their heavy artillery.

Ben to avoid polution on this ww2.exe thread I propose you to open a thread about 1940 campain, it would interest many of other toaw players

Do you agree?

Surely as the Wanderer yourself you don't object to threads wandering off course?

[jlbetin]

The thing is that the French reacted in the way they did because of the doctrine. They expected the Germans to develop their assault on Sedan in the way they would do it themselves. So far as Gamelin was concerned, it was not possible for the Germans to cross the Meuse until they had first brought up their heavy artillery.



Surely as the Wanderer yourself you don't object to threads wandering off course?

Ben as we discuss it I opened a May June 1940 Campaign thread and at last I posted my May june 1040 article, the link is is the 1st post of the thread

Der WanderWriter

[Panzer-War]

jlbetin, I have decided not to add another H39 model. Mainly in terms of TOAW there is little difference between the two models and don't feel it’s worth adding another H39 model. If you have your heart set on modeling it I would suggest useing the H35/38 as a substitute as I believe this would work better.

[Panzer-War]

About ready to release it just trying to make sure I catch any errors.

WWIIEXE V1.1
New Equipment
ARL V39
Semovente 149/40 SP Gun
Panhard AM 40 P
T-33 Tankette
LT-H Tank
Char Léger 40R
AMX-38
Renault G1R
Char Moyen D1
Super Churchill (Black Prince)
32 pounder ATG
Dual 37mm AA Gun

Modifications
M40 artillery range increased to 24 kilometers
M12 artillery range increased to 18 Kilometers
Char B1Bis speed reduced to slow motorized
Char B1Ter speed reduced to slow motorized

I am considering trying to put together some type of document to explain the new equipment and maybe provide a brief histories (about a paragraph I suppose), maybe suggested substitutions as well. Anyone think it would be worth doing?

[jlbetin]

jlbetin, I have decided not to add another H39 model. Mainly in terms of TOAW there is little difference between the two models and don't feel it’s worth adding another H39 model. If you have your heart set on modeling it I would suggest useing the H35/38 as a substitute as I believe this would work better.

The H39 in your WW2.exe is the H39 with 37SA17? or with the 37SA38 gun ?

Der WanderNotSoSure

[Panzer-War]

The H39 model is set up with the longer 37mm, The H35/38 model is set up with the shorter 37mm.

[jlbetin]

The H39 model is set up with the longer 37mm, The H35/38 model is set up with the shorter 37mm.

Ok I come back on one of your decision

To declare B1BIS as slow movement is very strange

its speed is 25 KM/H on road
D2 tank has a speed of 23 KM/H
FCM36 25 KM/H
R40 20KM/H
R35 19 KM/H

OK Somua S35 has 40 KM/H on road and
H39 36,6 KM/H

Yes they are supposed to go along with Infantry but sometimes they were used as TANKS 13 and 14 may 1940 at Stonne, Montcornet 18 may 1940
Abbeville 28may-2 June 1940 inside real Tank divisions, the DCR.
and often in many desesperate batlle during the FALL ROT in June 1940

Der WanderGénéralPrioux

[jlbetin]

The H39 model is set up with the longer 37mm, The H35/38 model is set up with the shorter 37mm.

So to modelize correctly the Hotchkiss tanks in French army
1/3 must be H39 with SA38 (the longer one) and 2/3 with the H35/38

Regards

Der WanderCapitaineBillote

[Ben Turner]

Ok I come back on one of your decision

To declare B1BIS as slow movement is very strange

its speed is 25 KM/H on road
D2 tank has a speed of 23 KM/H
FCM36 25 KM/H
R40 20KM/H
R35 19 KM/H

OK Somua S35 has 40 KM/H on road and
H39 36,6 KM/H

The threshold for "slow" seems to be around 35kph. If you look at some of the other tanks that are motorised (slow) there's no major discrepency. The Centurion is "slow" with a road speed of around 35 kph. On the other side of the divide is the King Tiger with something like 37 kph.

Perhaps what we need is "slow" plus "excruciatingly slow" for the first world war tanks and the Matilda I

[Panzer-War]

So to modelize correctly the Hotchkiss tanks in French army
1/3 must be H39 with SA38 (the longer one) and 2/3 with the H35/38

Regards

Der WanderCapitaineBillote

Yes this is what I suggest you do; I think it will work well.

[Panzer-War]

Ok I come back on one of your decision

To declare B1BIS as slow movement is very strange

its speed is 25 KM/H on road
D2 tank has a speed of 23 KM/H
FCM36 25 KM/H
R40 20KM/H
R35 19 KM/H

OK Somua S35 has 40 KM/H on road and
H39 36,6 KM/H

Yes they are supposed to go along with Infantry but sometimes they were used as TANKS 13 and 14 may 1940 at Stonne, Montcornet 18 may 1940
Abbeville 28may-2 June 1940 inside real Tank divisions, the DCR.
and often in many desesperate batlle during the FALL ROT in June 1940

Der WanderGénéralPrioux

Is it really so strange? There are several examples of vehicles in the standard exe of tanks that are faster and are tagged as slow motorized. Do you think that the B1bis with (think in terms of miles) roughly 17mph should be rated the same speed as a sherman or a panther or other vehicles up to 29mph max speed? They will still be faster than infantry without transport, Also if a designer wishes to speed the unit up they can put trucks or any unit with the transport capability into the unit to speed them up.
I am going to come through and eventually reduce all vehicles that can only achieve a max speed to 19mph to slow motorized.

jlbetin please note that if I come off as flameing you I did not intend it that way, as I respect and appreciate your opinion.

[Panzer-War]

Perhaps what we need is "slow" plus "excruciatingly slow" for the first world war tanks and the Matilda I

Perhaps for the really slow vehicles less than 10mph they could be tagged as very slow instead of slow motorized. As well possible for the 16-19mph group could be tagged as fast horse instead of slow motorized, just a thought.

[jlbetin]

Is it really so strange? There are several examples of vehicles in the standard exe of tanks that are faster and are tagged as slow motorized. Do you think that the B1bis with (think in terms of miles) roughly 17mph should be rated the same speed as a sherman or a panther or other vehicles up to 29mph max speed? They will still be faster than infantry without transport, Also if a designer wishes to speed the unit up they can put trucks or any unit with the transport capability into the unit to speed them up.
I am going to come through and eventually reduce all vehicles that can only achieve a max speed to 19mph to slow motorized.

jlbetin please note that if I come off as flameing you I did not intend it that way, as I respect and appreciate your opinion.

Flameing me certainly not, I just want to share informations and permit a good debate between designers and toaw players, I do not own the truth, I just have information I want to share

Do not worry as long as you do not treat me as "a surrendering French" :D, there will be no pbm between us

Der wanderDemocrat&Republican

[Ben Turner]

Perhaps for the really slow vehicles less than 10mph they could be tagged as very slow instead of slow motorized. As well possible for the 16-19mph group could be tagged as fast horse instead of slow motorized, just a thought.

The trouble is that they would then be treated as infantry for movement. So they would be able to enter badlands, and not pay increased costs for various terrain types, etc.

[Panzer-War]

Flameing me certainly not, I just want to share informations and permit a good debate between designers and toaw players, I do not own the truth, I just have information I want to share

Do not worry as long as you do not treat me as "a surrendering French" :D, there will be no pbm between us

Der wanderDemocrat&Republican

I definitely don't think of you as "a surrendering French" funny thing is I think of you more as "a fighting French". :)

[Panzer-War]

The trouble is that they would then be treated as infantry for movement. So they would be able to enter badlands, and not pay increased costs for various terrain types, etc.

Ya I figured it would be problematic but thought it could possibly be managed for the really slow tanks that operate primarily as infantry support. Definitely think TOAW could use a very slow motorized for those vehicles in the 1-10 mph category.

[Panzer-War]

WWIIEXE V1.1
New Equipment
ARL V39
Semovente 149/40 SP Gun
Panhard AM 40 P
T-33 Tankette
LT-H Tank
Char Léger 40R
AMX-38
Renault G1R
Char Moyen D1
Super Churchill (Black Prince)
32 pounder ATG
Dual 37mm AA Gun

Modifications
M40 artillery range increased to 24 kilometers
M12 artillery range increased to 18 Kilometers
Char B1Bis speed reduced to slow motorized
Char B1Ter speed reduced to slow motorized
FCM36 speed reduced to slow motorized

You reminded me of the FCM-36 jlbetin. :)

[jlbetin]

You reminded me of the FCM-36 jlbetin. :)

could have been a very good tank if again

was not equiped with the 37/SA18,
had no radio
ordered in so few numbers (100),
But it was the only french tank using a diesel motor

Did you have a look there ? http://www.chars-francais.net/de1930a1940.htm (http://www.chars-francais.net/de1930a1940.htm)

Der WanderViveLaCavalerie

[Panzer-War]

I had forgotten about it because it’s in the recon section. Yes I have looked at that site before and can see that it is good. You have posted about the site before correct? Is there an English version of the site?

[jlbetin]

I had forgotten about it because it’s in the recon section. Yes I have looked at that site before and can see that it is good. You have posted about the site before correct? Is there an English version of the site?

No sorry but if you need help in translation I'll do my best to help you

Der WanderTradutoreTraditore/TranslatorTraitor

[Ben Turner]

You reminded me of the FCM-36 jlbetin. :)

Did you already remove the recon value? Very inappropriate for a tank with no radio.

[Panzer-War]

I had left it alone assuming it was intended for the recon role probly put it on hold to work on other things. Now that I have looked into it I will remove it from the recon section and remove the recon tag. The thing I don't get is why it was ever placed in the recon section? As in what I have read about it I never see any mention of use in a recon role and always as an Infantry tank.

[Ben Turner]

I had left it alone assuming it was intended for the recon role probly put it on hold to work on other things. Now that I have looked into it I will remove it from the recon section and remove the recon tag. The thing I don't get is why it was ever placed in the recon section? As in what I have read about it I never see any mention of use in a recon role and always as an Infantry tank.

I think the reason it was given a recon capability is that it was a cavalry tank. There again, IIRC so was the Somua. Norm moves in mysterious ways.

[Panzer-War]

Am moveing towards V1.2 and am contemplating changes to the aircraft ranges. Thus far this is where I am currently the first column is what the value will be changed to and the second is the old value.


Country new old

Germany

Hs-123 420 340
Ju-86 700 560
Me-109(early) 280 260
Me-109E Emil 300 270
Me-109F Friedrich 390 290
Me-109G Gustav 390 290
Me-109K 280 290
Me-109T Trager 300 270
He-112 500 440
Ju-87B 380 310
Ju-87C 380 310
Ju-87D 720 610
Ju-87G 160 410
Do-17 580 460
He-111 950 820
Ju-88(early) 780 680
Ju-88(Late) 880 780
Me-110 480 440
Me-110G 480 440
Do-217 1100 920
Do-217 J/N 1100 920
Fw-190A(Late) 370 340
Fw-190D Dora 340 400
He-177 600 480
Hs-129 340 270
He-219 900 800
Me-410 800 670
Ta-152 500 480
FW Ta-183 500 480

France

VG-33 550 480
Morane-Saulnier406 360 320
Bloch 210 620 520
Amiot 143 580 480
Amiot 354 1200 1000
LeO 451 1150 920
Potez 63 610 490
Breguet 691 640 540

Italy

CR-42 Falco 350 310
CR-42N Falco 350 310
G. 50 Freccia 300 270
BR.20 1400 1200
G.55 Centauro 750 660
Z.1007bis 1000 800
SM.81 960 770
SM.79 940 760
SM.84 900 730
Ba 65 260 220
M.C. 200 Saetta 380 350
M.C. 202 Folgore 330 300
M.C. 205 Veltro 420 410
Re.2001 500 440
Re.2002 500 440
P.108 1700 1400
Re.2005 Sagittario 550 500

Japan

A6M Reisen (early) 1440 1240
G3M 2170 1750
Ki-21 1320 1080
Ki-51 520 420
J2M Raiden 860 760
Ki-67 Hiryu 1850 1520
G4M 2960 2410
Ki-49 Donryu 1450 1180
Ki-27 780 680
Ki-43 II Hayabusa 800 700
Ki-44 Shoki 780 680
B5N 980 800
B6N 1520 1220
D3A 690 590
Ki-32 960 780
Ki-45 Toryu 1100 900
Ki-48 1160 960
Ki-61 Hien 460 440
Ki-100 820 720
Ki-102 900 800
N1K Shiden 870 570
P1Y Ginga 2620 2120
J7W 400 450
D4Y Suisei 730 630

U.S.S.R.

TB-3 1590 1290
SB-2 580 480
MiG-3 340 330
MiG-1 300 290
IL-4 2100 1700
Pe-2 650 600
Pe-8 2280 2180

USA

B-17 (early) 2420 1920
B-17 (Late) 2580 2080
B-26 (early) 940 740
B-26 (Late) 910 710
A-20 Havoc 800 700
SB2C Helldiver 810 710
P-51B Mustang 620 520
P-51D Mustang 1200 1000
P-51H Mustang 1200 1000
B-25 Mitchell(early) 1170 870
B-25 Mitchell(Late) 1170 870
B-29 Superfortress 2940 2640
P-61 Black Wido 2300 1900
B-24 (early) 2260 1830
B-24 (Late) 1650 1350
F4F Wildcat 590 490
F6F Hellcat 780 680
TBF Avenger 960 780

Great Britain

Wellesley 880 710
Blenheim 900 800
Beaufighter (early) 860 760
Beaufighter (Late) 1160 940
Beaufort 1230 1030
Tempest 500 1000
Typhoon 420 620
Battle 770 670
Albacore 700 600
Fulmar 610 510
Firefly 940 840
Barracuda 540 440
Halifax 1500 1200
Whitley 1260 1060
Lancaster (early) 1370 670
Lancaster (Late) 2030 1450
Stirling 1800 1500

[jlbetin]

Did you already remove the recon value? Very inappropriate for a tank with no radio.

Again an anti-french action of Ben Turner, FCM36 had very good communication tools for recco:lier:

Voice and Flags !!!!!:clown:

Tsssss you are an insincere Brit a virgin burner !!!!:upset:

Der WanderHastings1066;)

[jlbetin]

I think the reason it was given a recon capability is that it was a cavalry tank. There again, IIRC so was the Somua. Norm moves in mysterious ways.

Very seriously I do not think FCM was designed nor ordered by the Cavalry department
For me I think it was ordered by the infantry department. It is an infantry tank not like the Somua, as you pinpointed it, which was ar eal cavalry tank, an "AMC" automitrailleuse de combat

My 00,02 Euro

Der WanderParStGeorgeViveLaCavalerie

[Zeitgeist]

sorry for bein new But i have to ask

does this work with TOAW III ?

[Ben Turner]

Very seriously I do not think FCM was designed nor ordered by the Cavalry department

You're right. I was remembering wrong.

Tsssss you are an insincere Brit a virgin burner !!!!

She deserved it. She was a witch.

[Ben Turner]

sorry for bein new But i have to ask

does this work with TOAW III ?

Not as yet. Hopefully it will be possible to import the changes to a modified TOAW III executable when the latter becomes available (which it should do in due course).

[Panzer-War]

1.1 is the latest public version you can get it here.

http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1064

Currently it is only for COW when an editor for TOAW III becomes available I plan to update it, which hopefully will be sooner than later.

[jlbetin]

1.1 is the latest public version you can get it here.

http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1064

Currently it is only for COW when an editor for TOAW III becomes available I plan to update it, which hopefully will be sooner than later.

Be Patient I work for all of us

Der WanderCoder:nuts:

[Panzer-War]

Didn't mean to be impatient maybe a little eager :halo:, Anyway I appreciate your efforts jlbetin.

[Panzer-War]

Trying not to rush it and make sure everything was converted correctly, maybe try and get a read me together if I have the time.

http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8140/wwiidbtoawiiitt1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Veers]

Awesome. :D

[Telumar]

Awesome. :D

Ditto that! I think i will use it for one of my projects (however this doesn't mean they will definitely see the light of the day).
@Panzer-War: Maybe with a text file that documents all the changes etc. :shy: EDIT: Okay, you plan to do so, nice.

[Panzer-War]

Well I was thinking of something with acrobat describing new equipment and with images. Just so long as it doesn’t take to long, don't have a lot of patience for writing :halo: .

[Panzer-War]

The AA values have been reduced to there standard values, And I added a few USMC Squads. I put together a small read me, it’s not much but I suppose it is a start.

V1.2 equipment additions:

USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR
USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC M1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC BAR Squad

[Marko]

The AA values have been reduced to there standard values, And I added a few USMC Squads. I put together a small read me, it’s not much but I suppose it is a start.

V1.2 equipment additions:

USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR
USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC M1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC BAR Squad


Looks good.

[Veers]

The AA values have been reduced to there standard values, And I added a few USMC Squads. I put together a small read me, it’s not much but I suppose it is a start.

V1.2 equipment additions:

USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR
USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC M1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC BAR Squad
Where was it released?

[Telumar]

Where was it released?


Here in the download section: http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1064 I wouldn't have known or found it if he wouldn't have posted a link over at Matrix.

Btw, my inbox is sooo empty... :cheeky:

[Marko]

The AA values have been reduced to there standard values, And I added a few USMC Squads. I put together a small read me, it’s not much but I suppose it is a start.

V1.2 equipment additions:

USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR
USMC M1903A1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC M1 Rifle Squad + BAR's
USMC BAR Squad

Is this also the modified Korean War .exe or do we use the old Korean War .exe?

[Telumar]

Do you plan to include the various german vehicles (SdKfz 250 series, Ostschlepper, other towing vehicles, SdKfz 251/7 etc.) that are not incooperated in the equipment database as someone suggested over at Matrix?

If so, do you want to discuss it here, need some help, make a community effort or something like that?

Also, about the british rifle squads, which one is for the later stage of the war (43-45)?

[Veers]

Also, about the british rifle squads, which one is for the later stage of the war (43-45)?
There probably wouldn't be a seperate squad for late war, as, if memory serves, the Brits used the Bolt-Action Leee Enfield straight through.

[Telumar]

Ah thanks. Just looked in wikipedia, you're right, it was the Lee Enfield Rifle No 4 Mk I respectively MK I*.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee-Enfield

[Panzer-War]

Where was it released?

Here in the download section: http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=1064 I wouldn't have known or found it if he wouldn't have posted a link over at Matrix.

Sorry just assumed everyone here would figure out that it is posted here or already know where to find it.

[Panzer-War]

Is this also the modified Korean War .exe or do we use the old Korean War .exe?

Yes Korean War 1950-1953 was converted to use the WWII exe and Korea 50-53 V1.2 will use the WWII-Db V1.2. If I remember correctly the beta used an exe project of mine witch was intended for pre WWII on. Eventually I came to the realization that the project was to ambitious and difficult to balance the wide range of equipment types, and decided to split them up into two exe projects.

[Panzer-War]

Do you plan to include the various german vehicles (SdKfz 250 series, Ostschlepper, other towing vehicles, SdKfz 251/7 etc.) that are not incooperated in the equipment database as someone suggested over at Matrix?

If so, do you want to discuss it here, need some help, make a community effort or something like that?

Also, about the british rifle squads, which one is for the later stage of the war (43-45)?

I will take a look at them, suggestions are always welcome. I would prefer to keep the discussion on one board but either way is fine and will check both boards (going to matrix next).
As for the British squads I would suggest the ten man one with the bren team for most of WWII. If I recall correctly very early on they used an eight man squad then later added a bren team to the squad. Please don't quote me on that as it is off the top of my head.

[Telumar]

I will take a look at them, suggestions are always welcome. I would prefer to keep the discussion on one board but either way is fine and will check both boards (going to matrix next).
As for the British squads I would suggest the ten man one with the bren team for most of WWII. If I recall correctly very early on they used an eight man squad then later added a bren team to the squad. Please don't quote me on that as it is off the top of my head.

Thanks. Been reading a book about the Anzio landings which focuses on the british side and it seems they all had a bren gun team, but i was not sure if this was true for all squads.

Another thing: When i take a german squad without GPMG and add a seperate GMPG team this unit is stronger than the german squad with GPMG included. Is this because the german squad has 10 men plus the GPMG's two men (reflected in the defence value of the team) that would be 12 while the stand-alone squad with GPMG included has only 10 men (defence 10)?

And another question, you don't distinguish between the german MG34 and MG42, the latter one being significantly better than the MG34. Why?

Sorry about all these questions.:shy:

[Panzer-War]

Another thing: When i take a german squad without GPMG and add a seperate GMPG team this unit is stronger than the german squad with GPMG included. Is this because the german squad has 10 men plus the GPMG's two men (reflected in the defence value of the team) that would be 12 while the stand-alone squad with GPMG included has only 10 men (defence 10)?

I am not quite sure what you are referring to here, at first I was thinking you were referring to the attack defend values for the units in the editor. When I tried to duplicate it they came up the same. So I am assuming that you took the basic rifle squad with a GPMG team and compared it to a rifle squad GPMG. Either way I would not put much stock in those values as I recall they primarily where chrome in ACOW. Also I recall haveing a lot of passive defender equipment in a unit would have a negative effect on the unit. As well the AP rateing is still greater for the Rifle Squad GPMG than the rifle squad or the GPMG Team alone.
A German squad would have been 10 men with the GPMG organic to it.



And another question, you don't distinguish between the german MG34 and MG42, the latter one being significantly better than the MG34. Why?

Sorry about all these questions.:shy:

Initially I did have one version for them both the MG42 (haveing in game an AP value of 5) and the MG34 (haveing in game an AP value of 4). I decided when I started the WWII exe that this was too high and concluded on generalizing the two guns into one (AP Value 4 equivalent to that of the .50 M2 Browning). I agree the MG42 is better than the MG34 but it is not exactly going from a .30 Browning to an MG42. If you have your heart set on differentiating them I would suggest you use one of the MG teams with an AP value of 3 for the MG34. I may split them up again and give the Mg34 an AP value of 3 have to think about it though.

Don’t mind the questions at all.:)

[Veers]

Does the game use the 'higher' values for calculating things, or the 1/8th values?

[Panzer-War]

Does the game use the 'higher' values for calculating things, or the 1/8th values?

Don't know, suppose Ralph might know.

[ralphtrickey]

Does the game use the 'higher' values for calculating things, or the 1/8th values?
Can you please rephrase the question?

[Veers]

Can you please rephrase the question?
Heh heh. When you're using BiEd to edit a piece of equipment you enter a value for the AP of said piece of equipment. This value could be, for instance, 24. Right next to that number would be a '3', because the first number has been reduced to 1/8 of the original. The question is, therefore, does the game use the first number, 24, or the second number, 3? The answer to that question will answer the question of whether there is a point to putting in a 23 in the first column.

[ralphtrickey]

Heh heh. When you're using BiEd to edit a piece of equipment you enter a value for the AP of said piece of equipment. This value could be, for instance, 24. Right next to that number would be a '3', because the first number has been reduced to 1/8 of the original. The question is, therefore, does the game use the first number, 24, or the second number, 3? The answer to that question will answer the question of whether there is a point to putting in a 23 in the first column.
It uses the three right now.

Norm used the same matrix for both entering the equipment, then it's transformed to be used by the program after loading. That also accounts for some of the funny column names:clown: The code actually has macro names for things like AAMG, etc. so that the numbers are in the code, to make it easier to change. I may try to import/export the 'real' names eventually.

I'd say to take the time to put accurate values in now, in case the formula changes in the future.
:eek:

[Veers]

Thanks Ralph.

[Veers]

I didn't notice any unique Chinese squads. Were you unable to find a reliable source? Does anyoen have a reliable source?

[Panzer-War]

I don't recall being able to find any Squad TOEs. I suppose there may not have been anything specific since there equipment varied widely for this period.

[Veers]

I don't recall being able to find any Squad TOEs. I suppose there may not have been anything specific since there equipment varied widely for this period.
Right'o.00