• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Crs Wants You!   01/18/2019

      CRS is looking for some volunteer live support chat staff.  Are you up for the assignment?  If so,  please send an email with your interest to,  Jobs@corneredrats.com
brady

KISS- GAME CHANGING IDEAS KEPT SIMPLE

65 posts in this topic

KISS- GAME CHANGING IDEAS KEPT SIMPLE,

So the idea is we suggest something really simple that could in theory be implemented on the cheap that would switch it up a bit for us all:

 

UMS- Make it harder to kill say one or two HE charges instead of just a grenade

WACKY LAFFY- add a couple spots for inf to ride on it

Let- the 251 tow a PAK 40

Suggest your own below...

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh the old 251/Pak40 chestnut. I looked into this in some detail a few years back. IIRC The Pak40 is right on the limit in weight of what the 251 was rated to tow, and whilst it was capable of "moving" a Pak40 - and was frequently used for that purpose, it was not used as the dedicated tow vehicle over distance or rough ground. This was mainly because the 251's steering was poor off-road, and much more so if towing (anything at all), so it was always a choice of last-resort.

Soldiery, from any nation, in any war, will always  use what's to hand if it saves pushing something unweildly or heavy, no matter how much QM sobs about burned-out clutches etc! A more representative tower is the HT, as that was easily capable of towing the gun, it's crew, and a modest load of ammunition for it too - unlike the 251.

To save anyone the trouble, yes, if you look online you'll find several pictures of 251's with Pak40's 'behind them', however, these were only used if nothing more appropriate was to hand. The question to ask yourself is what if the shoe were on the other foot - would you want to see 17 pdrs or 25 pounders towed with Universal Carriers if someone were to turn up a photograph of some clot "towing" one with one?.... Or a Jeep?

(My uncle spent some months towing 17 pounders around after D-Day - with a turret-less Crusader! These heavy-guns would complete bollocks the transmission of lighter vehicles)

My suggestion as per spirit of the thread:

Add the Universal Carrier, and turretless Sherman (as Ram Kangeroo APC)

Edited by fidd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been through this before.

The Sd Kfz 251 is based on the Sd Kfz 11, same engine I believe.

The Kfz 11 was designed to tow the 10.5 cm left 18 gun, at between 4 and 7 thousand pounds.

The Pak 40 was 3000 pounds and Bofors L/60 4000 and L70 11,000 pounds.

 

Seems pretty clear the 251 should be able to tow the Pak 40 and Bofors (L/60) relatively easily.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

251/22 has a pak 40 mounted . should end the argument on whether u can tow it or not. Happy for that to happen when Allies get an armoured HT that can tow a non flipping atg gun :) 

 

Bayonets !  - Brit contact grenades the thrown variety type 69 i think - US rifle grenades also contact - can use 60mm mortar rounds on that too

Edited by goreblimey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, goreblimey said:

Bayonets !  - Brit contact grenades the thrown variety type 69 i think - US rifle grenades also contact - can use 60mm mortar rounds on that too

2

Ooh I like it....no excuses about not dying THIS TIME!

Share this post


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

Bayonets !  - Brit contact grenades the thrown variety type 69 i think - US rifle grenades also contact - can use 60mm mortar rounds on that too

O- wow... The Italians had contact grenades as well, so they could add both 

 

In fact the breda model 40, while similar to the typical German stick grenade in appearance, was impact fused as well so a stop gap solution might just be to make the Italian soldiers stick grenade, thier using the German one for the time being, impact fused...

Edited by brady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, fidd said:

(My uncle spent some months towing 17 pounders around after D-Day - with a turret-less Crusader! These heavy-guns would complete bollocks the transmission of lighter vehicles)

My suggestion as per spirit of the thread:

Add the Universal Carrier, and turretless Sherman (as Ram Kangeroo APC)

c041_5.jpg

Above, the Crusader Gun Tractor.

The UC will be an all-new model. That's hard.

The Sherman Kangaroo and the Crusader Gun Tractor, by comparison, would be easy per Scotsman's prioritization criteria over in Motor Pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jwilly said:

c041_5.jpg

Above, the Crusader Gun Tractor.

The UC will be an all-new model. That's hard.

The Sherman Kangaroo and the Crusader Gun Tractor, by comparison, would be easy per Scotsman's prioritization criteria over in Motor Pool.

Well that would give the allies a nice APC, in tier 3-4.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goreblimey said:

251/22 has a pak 40 mounted

Sd.Kfz 241/4 Its the medium tow version, was supposedly for hauling PAK 38 and PAK 40

15175982686_699de2750d_b.jpg

They all have tow pintles though, so i'm really not sure what the difference is?  Engine and drive train is same. Maybe different pintle? or maybe Politics or some dumb reason? you got me.
I'd hook a flak 36 37mm gun on the back of this and shoot them coming and going and never stop :) 
bd2e25177b59dc25b00d072cf5ed1f2b--armore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove FB missions from active battles tab.

Include navy  in active battles tab.

Exclude non fms attack missions in active battles tab.

Exclude missions that are not tied to AOs in active battles tab.

(Make all of the above changeable in settings for pros- but make these preset for the noobs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ebert100 said:

Include navy  in active battles tab.

They are, you have to go to your navy persona to see them, same with Airforce.
Same criteria apply as in ground missions as far as showing in active tab.
 

13 minutes ago, ebert100 said:

Exclude non fms attack missions in active battles tab.

That could have an unintended bad effect.
Sometimes there may not be an FMS up for what ever reason.
Even if it was only for a few minutes, a person would log in and see 0 missions and say to heck with that and leave.

I think it would be better to give them more prespawn info on the mission and what is going and let them decide, on rather than to hide the mission from them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add a x 10 points mulitiplier if the defined mission objective is achieved. 

Point attack/defence: does the Target CP get captured? Yes/No

 

Area Attack/defence: does the town get captured? Yes/No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add a x 10 points mulitiplier if the defined mission objective is achieved. 

Point attack/defence: does the Target CP get captured? Yes/No

 

Area Attack/defence: does the town get captured? Yes/No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Silky said:

No firing whilst moving at Jogging speed or higher with any Firearm

You made a typo, i fix it for you
No charge. :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ebert100 said:

Remove FB missions from active battles tab.

Include navy  in active battles tab.

Exclude non fms attack missions in active battles tab.

Exclude missions that are not tied to AOs in active battles tab.

(Make all of the above changeable in settings for pros- but make these preset for the noobs)

Include navy and air ground missions in sane active battles tab as the army missions.

the problem with the existing system is only vets can figure it out, and I actually miss it half the time, the new guys need all the help they can get and we all need them to go to these missions...

37 minutes ago, Silky said:

No firing whilst running with a LMG

Just simply make it bi pod only fire...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, merlin51 said:

what the difference is? 

Possibly configured for ammo storage, or a different gear ratio ?

Share this post


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

Just simply make it bi pod only fire...

You can't
The Bren, the FN, and even the MG 34 were designed with the capacity for shoulder fire. (even if awkward)
Especially the bren and the fn, but even though more awkward the MG34 actually had a special trigger so you weren't spewing ammo.

And they were all designed to be usable in an controlled advance.
Not sprinting or running or jogging of course, but in kind of a staggered motion yes.

300px-Australian_Bren_gun_training,_June
Aussie troops 1943 training, walking fire excercise.
Those are brens.

We want to lose the silliness part, but not by taking something real away 

 

Share this post


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

You can't
The Bren, the FN, and even the MG 34 were designed with the capacity for shoulder fire. (even if awkward)
Especially the bren and the fn, but even though more awkward the MG34 actually had a special trigger so you weren't spewing ammo.

And they were all designed to be usable in an controlled advance.
Not sprinting or running or jogging of course, but in kind of a staggered motion yes.

300px-Australian_Bren_gun_training,_June
Aussie troops 1943 training, walking fire excercise.
Those are brens.

We want to lose the silliness part, but not by taking something real away 

 

It’s the sprint firing that should stop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

force a box click from mission leaders by revising the current (useless and mostly meaningless ) selectable mission descriptors on the create mission screen (you know: resupply, point attack, point defense, area defense etc in left bar)  so they become useful and COLOUR CODED (by tick in box colour like current FMS green tick or mission text colour in active battles tab, or any tab for that matter)

> Attack Missions (ie. linked to active A0 with FMS)  : green

> Defense Missions (linked to active DO) :  red

> FB Missions (defend, blow, check) : yellow

> Other Missions (whatever they may be including defaulting to this when an AO mission FMS goes down) : blue 

 

Share this post


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

Introduce a forced crouching stage to prevent repeated prone/standing change 

Why ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elemnate “that action not alowed “ when your default setting is prone and your sprinting, many times this can get u killed because it forces you to stand up instead of going prone. 

Share this post


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

It’s the sprint firing that should stop. 

At this point I would take even this half meashure and be happy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.