delems

Why 1944 SMG in tier 0?

260 posts in this topic

People whine about when the Grease Gun came out because they don't want the Allies to have 2 SMG's like the Axis have? Equipment parity is irrelevant I guess. Should we go back and look at ALL the equipment in the game and determine when it should actually be introduced?

Equipment parity is irrelevant, so let's start with the BAR. It was originally manufactured in 1917 and given to the British and French and they used it during WWII. So I guess the Brits and French should have it in this game in Tier 0 based on this line of thinking. Only fair, right?

Equipment parity is irrelevant, so what about the German Rifle Grenade. It was originally produced in 1942. So I guess it should be removed from Tier 0 and introduced in ... Tier 2 or 3? So no Rifle Grenade for the Germans until Tier 3. Only fair, right? 

Should we continue with idiocy?  Should we review ALL equipment for original production dates and turn this game into a worthless piece of junk that nobody wants to play? 

"OMG! Yours is more uber than mine!!!1 So I must whine until I get it nurfed back to the stone age!!!1  Haven't you Figured it Out Yet???  CRS Doesn't CARE !!!  Geez guys! Come on. Get over it already. Play the F'n game!!!   or don't

Edited by lipton
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, lipton said:

People whine about when the Grease Gun came out because they don't want the Allies to have 2 SMG's like the Axis have? Equipment parity is irrelevant I guess. Should we go back and look at ALL the equipment in the game and determine when it should actually be introduced?

Equipment parity is irrelevant, so let's start with the BAR. It was originally manufactured in 1917 and given to the British and French and they used it during WWII. So I guess the Brits and French should have it in this game in Tier 0 based on this line of thinking. Only fair, right?

Equipment parity is irrelevant, so what about the German Rifle Grenade. It was originally produced in 1942. So I guess it should be removed from Tier 0 and introduced in ... Tier 2 or 3? So no Rifle Grenade for the Germans until Tier 3. Only fair, right? 

Should we continue with idiocy?  Should we review ALL equipment for original production dates and turn this game into a worthless piece of junk that nobody wants to play? 

"OMG! Yours is more uber than mine!!!1 So I must whine until I get it nurfed back to the stone age!!!1  Haven't you Figured it Out Yet???  CRS Doesn't CARE !!!  Geez guys! Come on. Get over it already. Play the F'n game!!!   or don't

I guess that would put the Tiger (1942) in tier 2 and while the S76 (1944) would remain in tier 3. 

Oh, and reloads in game are unrealistic. Not one of them really happens that fast by the time you get the ammo out of the pouch and conduct a reload. They are all too fast. Every. Single. One. 

Edited by saronin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly!  The point is. THIS IS A GAME. They are supposedly trying to make it an even match-up. To do that, they sometimes have to make... allowances in an attempt to balance out the game as a whole. 

This isn't a Red vs Blue game. All the equipment is different. That makes this very difficulty to balance. And when working with limited resources, we get what we get. 

They  don't have the manpower to magically produce the additional equipment everyone seems to think would be the perfect solution to every problem when dealing with equipment parity and historical revalency. (did I spell that right?)

So, sometimes they take what they have on hand and put it in a Tier where it probably shouldn't be... for the sake of parity.  So deal with it. (unless you have a million dollars to donate to the cause)

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lipton said:

Exactly!  The point is. THIS IS A GAME. They are supposedly trying to make it an even match-up. To do that, they sometimes have to make... allowances in an attempt to balance out the game as a whole. 

This isn't a Red vs Blue game. All the equipment is different. That makes this very difficulty to balance. And when working with limited resources, we get what we get. 

They  don't have the manpower to magically produce the additional equipment everyone seems to think would be the perfect solution to every problem when dealing with equipment parity and historical revalency. (did I spell that right?)

So, sometimes they take what they have on hand and put it in a Tier where it probably shouldn't be... for the sake of parity.  So deal with it. 

Good. Now that that's established, move the pak 38 to tier 0 where it would arguably fit anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that help or hurt equipment parity. I really know nothing about the pak 38, so I'll leave that to you guys to argue about. :lol:

I know the Brit 2lbr is a beast and I love it. But... the French 2lbr is a royal suck-fest and I hate it. So, how does pak 38 parity work with those when compared to the pak that is in Tier 0 right now?? 

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2017 at 6:50 AM, bus0 said:

apart from posting on these here forums, when was the last time you actually killed the Char in Axis armor Merlin?

 

Does flanking it at very close range with a 38T or hitting it with HEAT count?

4 hours ago, lipton said:

so let's start with the BAR. It was originally manufactured in 1917 and given to the British and French and they used it during WWII.

You have to do it correctly though, the french would have them after the armistice, i don't believe they fielded any prior.
FN in Belgium did have license to use the design badged the FN M1930, but i have no idea of production where sold numbers etc.
That is something you would probably need to ask Scotsman, he's the man with the very expensive encyclopedia of who made sold and supplied what to where.

France has the FN29 now though, and it is not an inferior weapon, and it is getting its correct ability to be sighted in an undeployed state
as is the BREN, that would probably nullify any advantages in having the BAR, right?

I know 3rd commando used M1 garands, M1 thompsons and BARs but that happens later, and is arguably a unique situation.
But yes i suppose you could argue it as a validation of use in a later tier much as we do the M1 garand.
I guess the question would be, is it needed?

To be honest i would have to play both the corrected bren and fn29 to honestly even answer.

5 hours ago, lipton said:

so what about the German Rifle Grenade. It was originally produced in 1942.

Change the model?  Karabingranate 1913 1914 and 1917 are available since WWI
The 1917 is a cup launcher like we use now. Bring in the Schiessbecher for tier 2 ?
That solves the issue yes?

4 hours ago, saronin said:

I guess that would put the Tiger (1942) in tier 2 and while the S76 (1944) would remain in tier 3. 

Yes and no
Tiger in tier 2 yes
S76 in tier 3? technically no, if you wanted to do it right, it would be in tier 4 with the panther.
I suppose you could say leave it in tier 3 until there are some other tier 4 units for it to bunk up with?

4 hours ago, saronin said:

by the time you get the ammo out of the pouch and conduct a reload.

good luck, whenever i mention that across the board equal flaw, it gets ignored.
I'd have everyone from pistol to HMG fishing ammo out of someplace, and everyone would hate me probably.
But as far as the magical ammo in hand faerie goes, it's even steven.

4 hours ago, saronin said:

move the pak 38 to tier 0

works for me, make sure the 251 can tow it too, it ain't that heavy.

1 hour ago, lipton said:

But... the French 2lbr is a royal suck-fest and I hate it.

Confused? the french dont have a 2pdr 40mm
The have the mle34 25mm, it's semi auto breached and have decent velocity, but very little, so its about on par with the pak36 with plain AP.
This might be the one you think of as a suck fest? You'd be right, if its not a truck, HT, 252 or 232 you probably shouldnt bother shooting at it, maybe a PZII if you are lucky.

The other french atg is the mle37 47mm, that one i hope you dont dislike? It's beast mode, it actually outshoots the SA35 in the S35 and B1 and hits harder than the 2pdr.
It has range too, even including the pak38, its only real competition is the 88, and then it looks like pooh, but hey, i mean it is an 88 after all.

1 hour ago, lipton said:

Does that help or hurt equipment parity. I really know nothing about the pak 38

It gives a more even balance, and is not chronologically incorrect.
The pak36 with out PzGr40 or a Stielgranate 41 really can not be effective VS half of the tier 0 allied armor.
It earned its real life nickname of armored door knocker, because that's all it did, knock knock.
it struggles to take out any of the french armor, even an R35 can be a pain with any kind of distance or angle.
Yes, you can sometimes kill a B1 with it, but you have to darned near be on top of the B1 and the angle has to be just right and there is only 1 spot to hit it, and it actually fails many many more times than it succeeds, usually it just tracks the B1 and then the B1 hoses you to oblivion.

Even the A13 gets tough for it beyond 500m

100 m 500 m 1000 m 1500 m 2000 m
34 mm 29 mm 22 mm 20 mm

Not so stellar
Yes, the axis do have the 88, and the 88 is good, well better than good.
But the 88 is very very much a team operated thing, so much more so than any of the small pushable ATG's 

Pushing an 88 is worse than pushing a bofors, it needs an HT standing by at all times.
Proper placement and cover is very crucial because of its easily identifiable profile.
You can not use it in close range ambushes, because you can not hide.
It is a great gun, but it has to play a totally different game than the pushable ATG's.
 

Now you get a squad operated pair of 88's with HT's and FM's for AA and infantry support and you got nastiness, but we don't see that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, merlin51 said:

Does flanking it at very close range with a 38T or hitting it with HEAT count?

You have to do it correctly though, the french would have them after the armistice, i don't believe they fielded any prior.
FN in Belgium did have license to use the design badged the FN M1930, but i have no idea of production where sold numbers etc.
That is something you would probably need to ask Scotsman, he's the man with the very expensive encyclopedia of who made sold and supplied what to where.

France has the FN29 now though, and it is not an inferior weapon, and it is getting its correct ability to be sighted in an undeployed state
as is the BREN, that would probably nullify any advantages in having the BAR, right?

I know 3rd commando used M1 garands, M1 thompsons and BARs but that happens later, and is arguably a unique situation.
But yes i suppose you could argue it as a validation of use in a later tier much as we do the M1 garand.
I guess the question would be, is it needed?

To be honest i would have to play both the corrected bren and fn29 to honestly even answer.

Change the model?  Karabingranate 1913 1914 and 1917 are available since WWI
The 1917 is a cup launcher like we use now. Bring in the Schiessbecher for tier 2 ?
That solves the issue yes?

Yes and no
Tiger in tier 2 yes
S76 in tier 3? technically no, if you wanted to do it right, it would be in tier 4 with the panther.
I suppose you could say leave it in tier 3 until there are some other tier 4 units for it to bunk up with?

good luck, whenever i mention that across the board equal flaw, it gets ignored.
I'd have everyone from pistol to HMG fishing ammo out of someplace, and everyone would hate me probably.
But as far as the magical ammo in hand faerie goes, it's even steven.

works for me, make sure the 251 can tow it too, it ain't that heavy.

Confused? the french dont have a 2pdr 40mm
The have the mle34 25mm, it's semi auto breached and have decent velocity, but very little, so its about on par with the pak36 with plain AP.
This might be the one you think of as a suck fest? You'd be right, if its not a truck, HT, 252 or 232 you probably shouldnt bother shooting at it, maybe a PZII if you are lucky.

The other french atg is the mle37 47mm, that one i hope you dont dislike? It's beast mode, it actually outshoots the SA35 in the S35 and B1 and hits harder than the 2pdr.
It has range too, even including the pak38, its only real competition is the 88, and then it looks like pooh, but hey, i mean it is an 88 after all.

It gives a more even balance, and is not chronologically incorrect.
The pak36 with out PzGr40 or a Stielgranate 41 really can not be effective VS half of the tier 0 allied armor.
It earned its real life nickname of armored door knocker, because that's all it did, knock knock.
it struggles to take out any of the french armor, even an R35 can be a pain with any kind of distance or angle.
Yes, you can sometimes kill a B1 with it, but you have to darned near be on top of the B1 and the angle has to be just right and there is only 1 spot to hit it, and it actually fails many many more times than it succeeds, usually it just tracks the B1 and then the B1 hoses you to oblivion.

Even the A13 gets tough for it beyond 500m

100 m 500 m 1000 m 1500 m 2000 m
34 mm 29 mm 22 mm 20 mm

Not so stellar
Yes, the axis do have the 88, and the 88 is good, well better than good.
But the 88 is very very much a team operated thing, so much more so than any of the small pushable ATG's 

Pushing an 88 is worse than pushing a bofors, it needs an HT standing by at all times.
Proper placement and cover is very crucial because of its easily identifiable profile.
You can not use it in close range ambushes, because you can not hide.
It is a great gun, but it has to play a totally different game than the pushable ATG's.
 

Now you get a squad operated pair of 88's with HT's and FM's for AA and infantry support and you got nastiness, but we don't see that much.

IIRC the Germans had a few pak38s in 1939 or at least some gun tube, it might qualify.. equally so the French had a 88 style 75mm HAA gun that was actually used against the German armor.. It should be considered also.  The Brits would be left with 1 ATG in T0, hardly a balanced mechanism going on there unless the 3.7" HAA gun is fielded in the DF role.

 

As for the MLE34 it does ok as expected as long as you are on the flanks HOWEVER all the German 37mm APHE is over performing IIRC around 35-40% than its historical stats... As it stands now the pak36 is far superior in performance than the MLE34. Historically it was very similar.  That will be rectified soon as the Audit is in.  That being said the pak36s with AP.40 will have a light ATG that penetration is close to that of the MLE37 with the mechanics of the mle34.  Not sure if the above pak38 in T0 would be a good move.  We also know that the Czech 47mm has been modelled for entrance which further reduces the need for the pak38 in T0.

 

However that STILL leaves the allies behind in the HAA with DF sites for the AT role.. they where used in the BOF in that capacity .  The 3.7" Brit HAA gun would be a very good addition primarily because the BEF is the ugly step child matty, 6-17pdr and spit being the only exceptions across the board across all tiers. The BEF needs to be sorted out just as badly as Axis T0.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** People whine about when the Grease Gun came out because they don't want the Allies to have 2 SMG's like the Axis have? 

No, can't you read?  It wasn't invented in 1940....  It is completely wrong to be in the game at that time frame.

Get a grip, we are asking for gear not to be used years before it was even invented.  That is not an unreasonable request.

 

And if the germans had no grenadier in 1940, then yes, of course take it out!  It doesn't belong if it wasn't invented.

What is so hard to understand about this all?  A blind person could see this is wrong.  Personally, I can't even believe they ever put it in at 1940, what a blunder.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, delems said:

*** People whine about when the Grease Gun came out because they don't want the Allies to have 2 SMG's like the Axis have? 

No, can't you read?  It wasn't invented in 1940....  It is completely wrong to be in the game at that time frame.

Get a grip, we are asking for gear not to be used years before it was even invented.  That is not an unreasonable request.

 

And if the germans had no grenadier in 1940, then yes, of course take it out!  It doesn't belong if it wasn't invented.

What is so hard to understand about this all?  A blind person could see this is wrong.  Personally, I can't even believe they ever put it in at 1940, what a blunder.

 

And the FG42? It was only issued to paratroopers... how real do you want to get?  This is the problem. Two worlds colliding - RL and game.

I rather have real equipment with as close to operational as they did.. I like the idea of having equipment in their right place but it has to be balanced out. I'd be fine with having  the Tiger in T2 - let the supply reflect that its in T2. Mass Sherman and M10 hordes to combat it. I'm good with that. I personally do not care one bit if the Grease gun got tossed in at a later date - T3 because if not it will be a very rare site and all that modelling effort pretty much gone to waste but yah know.. T4 mb. I mean how often do we see a T4? Most maps end in T1 or T2. The Axis grenadier seeing some action near the end of the map..  I mean what could go wrong with the Axis pb who love that piece of equipment? I'm sure they will be pleased as punch.

However I would like to point out the difference between the Allied whiners and the Axis whiners. Allied whiners are not saying get rid of the FG42 in the infantry brigades or getting rid of the Axis grenadier and put it into T2 as a RDP item... No we complain about its shotgun effect and that our unique BEF grenadier was ejected from the game.

Axis whiners want the allied equipment reduced in numbers, GONE or moved out to a later teir. IE the BEF grenadier, the Grease gun, S76.. what ever makes it easier I guess. The one thing they forget is that there is a whole other side that likes to enjoy the game also.

I'm just waiting as a primarily allied player - when to the allies get their concerns addressed because so far - not one ounce of evidence they are even in consideration.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stankyus said:

IIRC the Germans had a few pak38s in 1939 or at least some gun tube, it might qualify

They had pak38's built in 1940, it's simply a case of did not use.
France went so fast and well, i guess the need was not there.
When they hit russia, suddenly the need manifested itself cause the pak36 did a whole lot of nothing on the T34s and the russians were not being blitzed.
 

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

88 style 75mm HAA

Thinking it is this you are thinking of?

Canon de 75 Mle 1897/33. It had no AP, it used an heavy HE round for anti armor, so it would hinge on what Scotsman could do with the ammo.
I know the axis chopped them up, put them on pak38 frames and put muzzle brakes on them and shot their HEAT and maybe AP out of them. Called it a pak97 or something.
Do not know it's real effectiveness, not sure if it would compare with the 88 or not.
I'd sure rock it in bunker windows and such though
Canon_de_75_modele_1897_used_at_Bir_Hake

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

That being said the pak36s with AP.40 will have a light ATG that penetration is close to that of the MLE37

They will but, we already know AP40 by some mechanism with be very limited in quantity (so will all tungsten ammo)
and AP40 has a downside too of sorts, it's performance drops off with range quickly, those who do not learn that will waste it ineffectively.
But yes, for a few shots the pak36 will penetrate about 64mm at 100m by 500m it has dropped to half, where as the MLE37 in theory could penetrate up to 80 @200m
and 60@500m on standard apcbc , the pak38 is comparable to this except for the few rounds of PzGr40 it would get, and then it would rock it's badboy self, at least for a few shots.

Now mind you france may have another round for the 47mm, germany was not the only country using various penetrator rounds, but they were limited for everyone because tungsten is rare and expensive and much needed elsewhere in tooling etc.
2pdrs for example used littlejohn adapters and squeeze bore ammo with a penetrator core, very effective even without the adaptor.
Id have to look at the french 47mm stuff and see what possibly may exist, i dont have my books at work.

Even not factoring in a specialty french ammo, i still think it works out?
For a few shots you can super pop a matty or b1 (Angles and range still count etc) for every shot i can wreck all your stuff kind of?

The pak 38T (ck 47mm) is a wee bit lighter in hitting than the pak38, bout 9mm less across the board or something close to that.
I dont know off hand about the use of PzGr40 in it

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

The 3.7" Brit HAA gun would be a very good addition

Would be cool, but i'd be more interested in the mechanics to make it a viable AAA gun, which in turn can be applied to the 88.
I think it also only has HE rounds and no AP? So i guess have to wait and see about the handling of heavy HE vs armor.
Mind you flak rounds are not very nice to tanks nor the lesser things around them.

Flak round through window = empty room

 

Nitpick, guys, we dont have a tier 4 yet
We only have 1 tier 4 unit so far, the M4A3 S76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

They had pak38's built in 1940, it's simply a case of did not use.
France went so fast and well, i guess the need was not there.
When they hit russia, suddenly the need manifested itself cause the pak36 did a whole lot of nothing on the T34s and the russians were not being blitzed.
 

Thinking it is this you are thinking of?

Canon de 75 Mle 1897/33. It had no AP, it used an heavy HE round for anti armor, so it would hinge on what Scotsman could do with the ammo.
I know the axis chopped them up, put them on pak38 frames and put muzzle brakes on them and shot their HEAT and maybe AP out of them. Called it a pak97 or something.
Do not know it's real effectiveness, not sure if it would compare with the 88 or not.
I'd sure rock it in bunker windows and such though
Canon_de_75_modele_1897_used_at_Bir_Hake

They will but, we already know AP40 by some mechanism with be very limited in quantity (so will all tungsten ammo)
and AP40 has a downside too of sorts, it's performance drops off with range quickly, those who do not learn that will waste it ineffectively.
But yes, for a few shots the pak36 will penetrate about 64mm at 100m by 500m it has dropped to half, where as the MLE37 in theory could penetrate up to 80 @200m
and 60@500m on standard apcbc , the pak38 is comparable to this except for the few rounds of PzGr40 it would get, and then it would rock it's badboy self, at least for a few shots.

Now mind you france may have another round for the 47mm, germany was not the only country using various penetrator rounds, but they were limited for everyone because tungsten is rare and expensive and much needed elsewhere in tooling etc.
2pdrs for example used littlejohn adapters and squeeze bore ammo with a penetrator core, very effective even without the adaptor.
Id have to look at the french 47mm stuff and see what possibly may exist, i dont have my books at work.

Even not factoring in a specialty french ammo, i still think it works out?
For a few shots you can super pop a matty or b1 (Angles and range still count etc) for every shot i can wreck all your stuff kind of?

The pak 38T (ck 47mm) is a wee bit lighter in hitting than the pak38, bout 9mm less across the board or something close to that.
I dont know off hand about the use of PzGr40 in it

Would be cool, but i'd be more interested in the mechanics to make it a viable AAA gun, which in turn can be applied to the 88.
I think it also only has HE rounds and no AP? So i guess have to wait and see about the handling of heavy HE vs armor.
Mind you flak rounds are not very nice to tanks nor the lesser things around them.

Flak round through window = empty room

 

Nitpick, guys, we dont have a tier 4 yet
We only have 1 tier 4 unit so far, the M4A3 S76

Well for one the T0 qualification has always been that to qualify as a T0 candidate was that it had to have been in action during the BoF. That used to be the primer on T0 equipment and if you go back in the forums history the primary reason why the pak38 was not a consideration by the RATs.. but all things considered now, this is a new crew and a LOT of the old balancing mechanisms that used to ground equipment decisions are now arbituary.

 

I am absolutely not talking about any field piece, I'm talking about a 88 style French HAA gun. We used to have a picture of it where it was defending a bridge in IIRC anhee and it most definitely had a AP round. I cannot remember what it was called for the life of me.. I think Patchy had posted it or had commented on it filling in the details.

 

The only thing I think that should be considered for a new pak gun in T0 is the already modelled is the 47mm. However again as a ALLIED player I want MINE too... The Axis will field a light, medium and heavy ATG in T0.  French a light and medium and the BEF a light ATG - just adding the Czech 47mm and the BEF will be outclassed by another Axis ATG in T0.  The French had a heavy (75mm) class HAA gun that had DF sites for AT work and a AP round for it. It was not only a historical weapon, it was actually used in the defense of France against Axis armor during the BoF. You cannot say the same about the Pak38. The BEF which really needs a long range gun could definitely use its 3.7" which IIRC performed similar to the 88. It also had DF sites and AP rounds produced for that role.. it was also in action during the BoF. That being said the 3.7" was a heavy gun and not nearly as practical as the 88 for front line service but that does not mean we cannot do that here.

 

I know the MLE37 had something about it that was tungsten. I'm thinking either the round was very common for a tungsten round or that the service round already had a tungsten penetrator in it... if its the later, its the round we have in the game.  I remember some discussion about it.

 

As for T4 - we do not have equipment for T4, so that is correct but we DO have continuous RDP with added supply each RDP.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stankyus said:

And the FG42? It was only issued to paratroopers

That is not quite the same though.
One is a simple fact of time of existence, the other is more of a human choice.

For example, we know that in the real BOF, frances remaining armor that was not cut off and lost was terribly deployed, and for the most part simply could not be brought to bear
on the axis army.
In game we dont force that, because it is a human choice that does not need to be.

The british were supplied M1 garands, and had an open offer for lots more.
They chose to leave them in country with the home guard, and only got used in combat by 2 british commando units outfitted by the US.
They were available for the taking, the US was willing to give more. It was a human choice by the british powers not to make use of them.

Since the equipment list in the game is static, we players can not decide different unit make ups etc, the game attempts not to enforce some other guys doctrinal decision upon us
were we would have chosen differently.
That is about all you can do until you have a system where players have a choice in the matter.
And remember, in the real WWII Fallschirmjägers use as air dropped units vanished rather quickly and they were used as ground assault troops for the majority of the conflict.
Towards the end of the war, they did not even train them how to parachute anymore.

But those are things some guy with a pencil decided, i want X here and i want A there, B and C will never group together because their uniforms clash etc.

Tiers though, that is simply did you exist yet. No dead guy's opinion or doctrine, simply do you exist in year XXXX?
If yes, you are viable for the associated tier, if no ok then lets us find your home tier.

 

25 minutes ago, stankyus said:

The Axis grenadier

He is solvable, he just needs a different model cup grenade for T0, the M1917 would be correct, then in T2 you swap him out for the current guy if you want.
So there is a proper fix, without having to remove the class entirely, which is all you want to avoid if possible

28 minutes ago, stankyus said:

I'd be fine with having  the Tiger in T2

That could be addressed easily too, if everyone would stop fighting
You put the tiger in T2, you have the tiger numbers low like the matty
You have the 75mm shermans, cause they are T2, and you have more of them and thats ok.
You have your M10's, if you did say 2 tiger per bde, you'd have like 6 M10's  something like that.
The shermans are for everything else, your stug and PZIV and PZIII etc

Brits you'd have your church 3's, i would say M10's because they did buy M10's and did use them
And your crusader, i'd assume a same number of M10's and work out the balance on the others
Im sure we can find numbers that work and feel right, yet don't feel like too much supply.

We can do this with all the units and have them all in their proper places/tiers and have it all work and play well.

The C7 and S76 sherm are the only 2 units that i don't have a home for and that we would need to agree on a temp solution for
There is no tier 4 and that is their home, but they can not go there because there is no panther for them to be with, they need opposing contemporaries, and we don't have them yet.
Can not just remove them, that which has been seen... well you know the rest.
You'd have to agree on a temporary, not really right T3 that's always going to look funky until at least 1 axis T4 unit can be made (and i would say panther over tiger II, axis need an MBT) And everyone would have to agree that hey this is just temporary its going to get redone.
Be easier if we had a panther, then at least you go say ok poof, t4 tank triad! and it would be easier i think to balance it and make it feel correct at the same time.
yes yes i know, firefly, tiger II, Pershing etc, you have to start with something to create the tier and we have those 2 units already

That would kind of put us back on track where the devs could work up triads to add?
Like ok guys this dev cycle T2 M3 grant, arl V39, PZIII M  (just picked arbitrary things dont take them literal)
Then next time a T1 air triad, then a T3 infantry triad etc, so we dont get out of order/tier units again?

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, stankyus said:

I'm talking about a 88 style French HAA gun.

Oh, ok. The 1st pic i posted is actually used in an HAA role, i just didn't link a pic in an AAA frame
French_75mm_AA_gun_Salonika_Front_WWI_LO

You mean This one though? They were used some as anti tank with a 6X scope, but had no AP that i know of, until the axis captured them and retrifitted them to be 
PAK97 anti tank guns, but i may be wrong, Scotsman is the guy to ask.
Canon_de_DCA_7.5_de_1938_au_fort_de_Pr%C
-_Flickr_-_Joost_J._Bakker_IJmuiden_(5).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, stankyus said:

The BEF which really needs a long range gun could definitely use its 3.7"

Hyde_Park_Anti-aircraft_guns_H_993.jpg

i dont know about a 94mm AP round or not though, i will try to look later.
Still, it does have a sighting scope so with HE it would be beast for shelling stuff, Hello bunker window!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stankyus said:

I know the MLE37 had something about it that was tungsten.
 I'm thinking either the round was very common for a tungsten round or that the service round already had a tungsten penetrator in it... if its the later, its the round we have in the game.

its APCBC it uses a screw on magnesium ballistics cap, gives a nice flash on impact and smokes a bit in flight.
The APC part as far as i know is standard steel projectile?
7mm9CeV.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

That is not quite the same though.
One is a simple fact of time of existence, the other is more of a human choice.

For example, we know that in the real BOF, frances remaining armor that was not cut off and lost was terribly deployed, and for the most part simply could not be brought to bear
on the axis army.
In game we dont force that, because it is a human choice that does not need to be.

The british were supplied M1 garands, and had an open offer for lots more.
They chose to leave them in country with the home guard, and only got used in combat by 2 british commando units outfitted by the US.
They were available for the taking, the US was willing to give more. It was a human choice by the british powers not to make use of them.

Since the equipment list in the game is static, we players can not decide different unit make ups etc, the game attempts not to enforce some other guys doctrinal decision upon us
were we would have chosen differently.
That is about all you can do until you have a system where players have a choice in the matter.
And remember, in the real WWII Fallschirmjägers use as air dropped units vanished rather quickly and they were used as ground assault troops for the majority of the conflict.
Towards the end of the war, they did not even train them how to parachute anymore.

But those are things some guy with a pencil decided, i want X here and i want A there, B and C will never group together because their uniforms clash etc.

Tiers though, that is simply did you exist yet. No dead guy's opinion or doctrine, simply do you exist in year XXXX?
If yes, you are viable for the associated tier, if no ok then lets us find your home tier.

 

He is solvable, he just needs a different model cup grenade for T0, the M1917 would be correct, then in T2 you swap him out for the current guy if you want.
So there is a proper fix, without having to remove the class entirely, which is all you want to avoid if possible

That could be addressed easily too, if everyone would stop fighting
You put the tiger in T2, you have the tiger numbers low like the matty
You have the 75mm shermans, cause they are T2, and you have more of them and thats ok.
You have your M10's, if you did say 2 tiger per bde, you'd have like 6 M10's  something like that.
The shermans are for everything else, your stug and PZIV and PZIII etc

Brits you'd have your church 3's, i would say M10's because they did buy M10's and did use them
And your crusader, i'd assume a same number of M10's and work out the balance on the others
Im sure we can find numbers that work and feel right, yet don't feel like too much supply.

We can do this with all the units and have them all in their proper places/tiers and have it all work and play well.

The C7 and S76 sherm are the only 2 units that i don't have a home for and that we would need to agree on a temp solution for
There is no tier 4 and that is their home, but they can not go there because there is no panther for them to be with, they need opposing contemporaries, and we don't have them yet.
Can not just remove them, that which has been seen... well you know the rest.
You'd have to agree on a temporary, not really right T3 that's always going to look funky until at least 1 axis T4 unit can be made (and i would say panther over tiger II, axis need an MBT) And everyone would have to agree that hey this is just temporary its going to get redone.
Be easier if we had a panther, then at least you go say ok poof, t4 tank triad! and it would be easier i think to balance it and make it feel correct at the same time.
yes yes i know, firefly, tiger II, Pershing etc, you have to start with something to create the tier and we have those 2 units already

That would kind of put us back on track where the devs could work up triads to add?
Like ok guys this dev cycle T2 M3 grant, arl V39, PZIII M  (just picked arbitrary things dont take them literal)
Then next time a T1 air triad, then a T3 infantry triad etc, so we dont get out of order/tier units again?

 

First part, I am not advocating the removal of the FG42 for just Paras, I was simply wanting him to draw his boundry line to what is exceptable to him in terms of "realness".

 

Second of all I'm not advocating moving the Axis grenadier to T2.. why have two grenadiers when one does the trick?

 

I am afraid that if you put the Tiger into T2 - the BEF will suffer heavily by being seriously out matched unless the Tiger is a HQ only supply. The Tiger lasts all map, the Matty - 7 days. I know you will probably disagree but the BEFs T2 supply is already out matched. Shermans and M10s - nah Just the M10. I'd except the RAM.. its more Common wealth but lets not go completely off the reservation with fighting BGE with a stand in US army until they hit the shore any more than we do already. I would take the M10 supply as a work around as long as it get immediately upgraded with the Achilles for T3. Then make the Achilles on equal footing as the StugG... you know cause by T3 balance is arbituary these days.

 

T4 looks pretty good with the Panther - Firefly M36 /S76 -  T5 Pershing and Super Pershing double whammy gift like the StugG/4G gift basket especially if the Axis field the Tiger II. Though I don't think we will see much of these as we don't see T3 often as it is.

I am dripping with sarcasim.. sorry so bitter..  I'm just about to the end of my tether with BGE with the "balance" in place.. I just cant find it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

Hyde_Park_Anti-aircraft_guns_H_993.jpg

i dont know about a 94mm AP round or not though, i will try to look later.
Still, it does have a sighting scope so with HE it would be beast for shelling stuff, Hello bunker window!

I'm really not sure about the 75 you posted, it had a movable chassis and used in the AT role in defense of some bridge.

Scotsman posted a while back some information on the Brit gun. I know it was turned into a AT gun as the 32pdr - however there could be some differences in penetration between the 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

its APCBC it uses a screw on magnesium ballistics cap, gives a nice flash on impact and smokes a bit in flight.
The APC part as far as i know is standard steel projectile?
7mm9CeV.jpg

I would expect it to be steel.. I know Patchy had posted some good information about the French using tungsten rounds for the MLE37. This was years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, stankyus said:

Second of all I'm not advocating moving the Axis grenadier to T2.. why have two grenadiers when one does the trick?

Well, because i agree, if axis had no grenadier in 1940 at all, then he could not exist in T0
And if there is one but we are using the wrong one, we should fix it, when it can be done.

Can't say hey this guys thing is wrong, fix it! Without being willing to say hey ya know, my thing isn't right either, we should fix it too.

14 minutes ago, stankyus said:

I am afraid that if you put the Tiger into T2 - the BEF will suffer heavily by being seriously out matched unless the Tiger is a HQ only supply. The Tiger lasts all map, the Matty - 7 days.

Perhaps not.
In tier 2 when the tiger would be entering, Britain should be receiving the M10's she purchased from the US
In tier 4 you will convert them to achilles with 17pdrs but thats besides the point.
Anyways, in tier 2 i am only foreseeing the tiger existing in that small limited WoW factor amount like i said above.

It wont need to exist in large amounts when there arent 1944 76mm shermans smacking at it.
And with smart tactics, a few M10's should even the odds
I doubt any sensible axis player would argue that with you and demand a ton of tigers in a tier where its not facing 1944 kit?

Until we have a T4 to move some things into, yes T3 will be an oddball and balancing 1942 tigers with 1944 shermans and C7 pill boxes is tough
when we get there, we have to find a compromise we can all live with until a t4 exists.

32 minutes ago, stankyus said:

T4 looks pretty good with the Panther - Firefly M36 /S76 -  T5 Pershing and Super Pershing double whammy gift like the StugG/4G gift basket especially if the Axis field the Tiger II

one leg at a time.
just a pather would let us shift the c7 and sherman for a start of T4, and better set up T3

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

 

one leg at a time.
just a pather would let us shift the c7 and sherman for a start of T4, and better set up T3

 

Negative - Panther enters with the Firefly and M36B, Ill take the Achilles with the Firefly. CH7 - in T4.. sounds like a great recipe for an already pissed off Allied force. Why fk the Brits anymore than they already are in T3?  Why not just replace the Brits with the Americans at that point. Unless you want to erode the allied PB any further - that sounds like a dandy.  I sure as fk wont stick around for a Panther, S76, Ch7 line up unless we are talking 5 S76s, and 8 CH7s per panther, that might get me to stick around. You see I can take a T2 with a very limited supply of Tigers and equal amounts of M10s to StugGs and mb a minimum of 6 more M10s and I'm serious about limiting them to the HQ only, T3 - why even have it if NOTHING new enters except more tigers? Sounds superb. I cannot wait to go back to using the M10 as a MBT to battle the Tiger AGAIN. That sure went extraordinary well previously with spectacular results.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, delems said:

*** People whine about when the Grease Gun came out because they don't want the Allies to have 2 SMG's like the Axis have? 

No, can't you read?  It wasn't invented in 1940....  It is completely wrong to be in the game at that time frame.

Get a grip, we are asking for gear not to be used years before it was even invented.  That is not an unreasonable request.

 

And if the germans had no grenadier in 1940, then yes, of course take it out!  It doesn't belong if it wasn't invented.

What is so hard to understand about this all?  A blind person could see this is wrong.  Personally, I can't even believe they ever put it in at 1940, what a blunder.

 

O>>>M>>>G 

Why do you care so much?  Do you not have an actual life ffs? It's only a F*cking game!  :lol:

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

German rifle grenades:

The scheissbecher cup launcher system was first fielded in 1942...the 30mm frag grenade and the 30mm HEAT grenade early in the year, the larger tapered HEAT RG in the Fall of that year. 

Those however weren't the first German WWII RGs. The Germans fielded the GG/P-40 HEAT RG with spigot launcher in 1941, and used it on Crete. CRS has already modeled it...they've shown us renderings.

Earlier, the Germans instead had the HHL-1 adhesive-attached HEAT device. No one else had anything like it. It had limitations, but if you wanted to make a hole and project damage through a horizontal armor plate, and you could get to the target, it was a good choice.

panzerhandmine005.jpg

French BARs:

There was a third major Allied force in 1940, the Belgians. They had major armament manufacturers, and fielded a number of interesting weapons, including their own (superior) version of the BAR. My view has long been that the "French" forces should be re-defined as French/Belgian and equipped with selected Belgian weapons, including BARs.

French T0 large-caliber cannons:

The French had several models of long 75mm 4-wheel-carriage mounted guns, two units of which were used to stop the Germans at a bridge on the way to Paris after the German breakthrough. Most French 75mm guns of those kinds were intended only for AA use and did not have direct fire sights. The French also had a small number of long 90mm guns on 4 wheel carriages, again intended for AA use and not provided with direct fire sights. 

The Israelis used some of these 75mm guns in 1948, and some of them are at one of their military museums, so modeling information could be obtained.

75loire02.jpg

SchneiderMle193675mmAAinTelAvivm-1.jpg

The French also used many of their 75mm field guns in both the original Mle 1897 configuration with rubber bogey wheels to permit motorized movement, and in modernized configurations on rubber-tired carriages. There also was a naval pintle-mount version. All of these had direct fire sights. The French had a wide variety of shell types for these guns, including HE, AP, smoke and shrapnel. CRS actually modeled this gun back in the early days, though I understand the model was lost over the years.

tn_75_en_action_1940.jpg

tn_75_fargo.jpg

This gun also was the recipient of an Edgar Brandt tungsten APDS shell design. I believe the French did give the Brandt company a contract for such shells, though I don't think any were delivered in 1940. But, per old-CRS's rule for game eligibility, that ordnance would be eligible for 1941 since it was contracted for. And, we do have performance data from testing. The picture below from an ordnance collection shows the break-off sabot and the light-metal aerodynamic shield. The heavy 58mm tungsten carbide penetrator-slug fitted inside.

Brandt20sabot20001.jpg

 

 

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stankyus said:

Negative - Panther enters with the Firefly

umm the firefly is a sherman, just switch out the gun.

I'll come back later when you feel better

1 hour ago, lipton said:

Do you not have an actual life

I dont

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, stankyus said:

First part, I am not advocating the removal of the FG42 for just Paras, I was simply wanting him to draw his boundry line to what is exceptable to him in terms of "realness".

 

Second of all I'm not advocating moving the Axis grenadier to T2.. why have two grenadiers when one does the trick?

 

I am afraid that if you put the Tiger into T2 - the BEF will suffer heavily by being seriously out matched unless the Tiger is a HQ only supply. The Tiger lasts all map, the Matty - 7 days. I know you will probably disagree but the BEFs T2 supply is already out matched. Shermans and M10s - nah Just the M10. I'd except the RAM.. its more Common wealth but lets not go completely off the reservation with fighting BGE with a stand in US army until they hit the shore any more than we do already. I would take the M10 supply as a work around as long as it get immediately upgraded with the Achilles for T3. Then make the Achilles on equal footing as the StugG... you know cause by T3 balance is arbituary these days.

 

T4 looks pretty good with the Panther - Firefly M36 /S76 -  T5 Pershing and Super Pershing double whammy gift like the StugG/4G gift basket especially if the Axis field the Tiger II. Though I don't think we will see much of these as we don't see T3 often as it is.

I am dripping with sarcasim.. sorry so bitter..  I'm just about to the end of my tether with BGE with the "balance" in place.. I just cant find it.

You see the conundrum though right.  It seems to be ok to speed up the introduction of the S76 by two years or delay the Tiger introduction, however you want to look at it, for the sake of balance. Yet mentioning the movement of the pak 38 to tier 0, which probably would have seen action in the BoF if France had not fallen so quickly, is blasphemy. 

You are just rich stankyus. You cry about the pak 36 over performing and cite absolute equipment lists in tier 0 while complaining about even parody between two tanks that were introduced years apart in the final tier. 

You know the 88 is nearly useless on defense and is cumbersome to use on offense. It is a boutique weapon that doesn't get used often because of its cumbersome nature. 

Why don't you just come out and say what you really want? A situation where the Axis has no real effective ATG in tier 0 against a bunch of heavy tanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, stankyus said:

First part, I am not advocating the removal of the FG42 for just Paras, I was simply wanting him to draw his boundry line to what is exceptable to him in terms of "realness".

 

Second of all I'm not advocating moving the Axis grenadier to T2.. why have two grenadiers when one does the trick?

 

I am afraid that if you put the Tiger into T2 - the BEF will suffer heavily by being seriously out matched unless the Tiger is a HQ only supply. The Tiger lasts all map, the Matty - 7 days. I know you will probably disagree but the BEFs T2 supply is already out matched. Shermans and M10s - nah Just the M10. I'd except the RAM.. its more Common wealth but lets not go completely off the reservation with fighting BGE with a stand in US army until they hit the shore any more than we do already. I would take the M10 supply as a work around as long as it get immediately upgraded with the Achilles for T3. Then make the Achilles on equal footing as the StugG... you know cause by T3 balance is arbituary these days.

 

T4 looks pretty good with the Panther - Firefly M36 /S76 -  T5 Pershing and Super Pershing double whammy gift like the StugG/4G gift basket especially if the Axis field the Tiger II. Though I don't think we will see much of these as we don't see T3 often as it is.

I am dripping with sarcasim.. sorry so bitter..  I'm just about to the end of my tether with BGE with the "balance" in place.. I just cant find it.

You need to play axis again for a while to re balance yourself mate, nothing like switching sides for a bit to wake you up and make you reliase the grass is not a green as you think it is.

God help me but @merlin51talks a lot of sense and has been pretty much on the mark for a while now, he has been balanced in his views and normally backs them up with facts, you have gone the other way its all emotion driven and feeling shat on, the only thing hurting the allies recently that i can see has been a lack of skilled (vets) population not equipment.

Edited by dm79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.