Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ian77

More Matties in Brit Inf Brigade than Arm Brigade

21 posts in this topic

Please tell me CRS screwed up the spawn lists again.

 

There are 12 Matties (out of 41 total tanks) in a British Infantry Brigade. That is more than in an Brit Armoured flag.

Two Brit Inf flags field more Matties than the BEF ever possessed.

Axis have 3 x Stug Bs and 4 x 232s in an Inf Flag

French have only 24 tanks to spawn per inf flag.

 

Edited by ian77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 of those are CS tanks with 0 anti tank ability. Smoke and HE only combat support tanks.

Share this post


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

8 of those are CS tanks with 0 anti tank ability. Smoke and HE only combat support tanks.

They dont need AT ability there are no axis tanks, well sorry there are 3 axis tanks, maybe the 4 regular matties will manage to kill them? Surely even the most one eyed biased allied player cannot think these spawn lists are the least balanced or historically accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's still a mattie, it can drive up to a CP and cut with impunity thanks to their invincibility. with 12 even the doubled sapper supply won't help

 

if this stays axis will log from the BS. enjoy rolling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ian77 said:

There are 12 Matties (out of 41 total tanks) in a British Infantry Brigade. That is more than in an Armoured flag.

Historically, there should be zero Matilda IIs in a 1940-41 British armored unit. They should have only cruisers and lights.

If they have any Matildas, that's unrealistic.

OTOH, all of the tanks "in" (historically, attached to) a 1940-41 British infantry unit should be infantry tanks or lights. No cruisers.

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


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

Historically, there should be zero Matilda IIs in a 1940-41 British armored unit. They should have only cruisers and lights.

If they have any Matildas, that's unrealistic.

OTOH, all of the tanks "in" (historically, attached to) a 1940-41 British infantry unit should be infantry tanks or lights. No cruisers.

My issue isn't with regard to the ahistorical distribution of Matties, but rather that in our GAME we currently have 3 x Stugs and 4 x 232s in total in an Axis Inf Flag

There are 24 tanks in a french inf flag, and 41 in a brit inf flag. Of those 41 brit "inf" tanks, 12 are matties.

We were told inf flags were to see tank number cut back, well axis have seen all tanks removed from an inf flag, and have 3 assault guns and 4 scout cars. I personally don't really see doubling Matty numbers as reducing tanks in a Brit Inf flag.

My issue is not that every 15 hours the BEF can spawn c.500% of the total number of Matties that the BEF ever had, but rather the imbalance in the GAME between what the axis and allied playerbase have available tospawn.

 

S! Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In another thread, BMBM said that total Matilda II production was about 3000 through 1941. That number (actually 2987) actually was through the end of production in 1943.

We need a document from the British National Archives to get actual production numbers: AVIA 46/188, "Monthly Deliveries of Infantry and Cruiser Tanks by Firms, 1939-43". This is referenced in "British Tank Production and the War Economy, 1934-1945: Important Considerations for Industry" by Benjamin Coombs. The former document doesn't seem to be online, or in online library catalogs.

The original production contract for Matilda II was let to Vulcan Foundry. Most prior British tanks had utilized riveted construction, so Matilda II's complex-for-the-time alloy steel castings required new capabilities. Vulcan struggled with the castings and had difficulty with the overall assembly. Not counting prototypes, two combat-ready Matilda IIs had been completed by Septtember 1939, and 23 by late April 1940. Ruston & Hornsby was added as a second manufacturer. Ruston & Hornsby's predecessor company had experience building tanks during WWI. Nonetheless their production ramp-up was difficult due to the castings, plus the general powertrain complexity. After gradual increases, their greatest production months were April and June 1942, with 24 tanks completed each month.

Per Coombs, all of British industry built 1379 tanks of all kinds during 1940.

Of the total 2987 Matilda II tanks built, one source says the Soviet Union received "between one and three thousand". Presumably the lower number is closer to correct.

Australia also received Matilda IIs.

A large number of Matilda IIs went to North Africa, to 7 RTR and 4 RTR.

If France had not fallen and BEF had remained engaged, and other-conflict-zone history was unchanged, it's not at all clear where additional Matildas for the BEF would have come from. Possibly the Soviet Union and North Africa numbers could have been decreased. In any case it doesn't seem that "considerable numbers" could have been supplied to BEF in 1940, when production rates were low for all makers.

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW-- once again axis is screwed, make sure to increase the allied numbers, so when you decrease it is still remains the same as before, OLD WALMART TRICK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, xcas said:

WOW-- once again axis is screwed, make sure to increase the allied numbers, so when you decrease it is still remains the same as before, OLD WALMART TRICK

Thank you for your support .... that is exactly what I wanted to do screw one side over. 

 

Just think about bout what you are saying.   Really beginning to understand what DOC went threw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, OHM said:

I will take a look as soon as I get home from work 

while you're at it have a look at air numbers. or, don't - depends on what you're going for though. if this is supposed to be historical then hurricanes need to out number spitfires 3:1 throughout 1940, and about 2:1 through most of 41. As per @pachy precisely zero fighter groups were supplied with d520s at the outbreak of the BoF in may 40. Prior to capitulation iirc 4 GCs had been cobbled together. w/e you do numbers wise with the 520 in tier0 h75s should massively out number 520s as well as h81s. h81s which were diverted and not deployed until early 41 but w/e.

 

are we going for history? if we are then swing that bat correctly or don't swing it at all. if we aren't going for history, great w/e, just make sure its balanced.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an error with the Mattie’s... when get home I will make the fix and I will also need to reset the supply for all units on both sides to get the over supply out.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also, again since history is what we're going for here - the luftwaffe combat strength should be literally twice that of both france and britain combined. again, are we going for 'hard' history here or just doing something new and different? i'm fine with either but i'd prefer balance.

from wikipedia:

Quote

The Luftwaffe divided its forces into two groups. In total, 1,815 combat, 487 transport and 50 glider aircraft were deployed to support Army Group B, while a further 3,286 combat aircraft were deployed to support Army Groups A and C. The combined Allied total was 2,935 aircraft, about half the number of the German force

Edited by madrebel

Share this post


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

Really beginning to understand what DOC went through. 

I spent a lot of time peripherally involved with some of Doc's work. Definitely a smart, hard working dude. Folks who thought he was too abrasive never walked a mile in his moccasins. He did an excellent job at three peoples' work, considering all the cr_p and minimal support he got from both sides and above.

2 people like this

Share this post


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

are we going for history? if we are then swing that bat correctly or don't swing it at all. if we aren't going for history, great w/e, just make sure its balanced.

+1 S!

 

We cant really have history, so PLEASE can we at least have balance?

Why does every tinkering with Spawnlists and Tier equipment always seem to result in a cockup? Does no one do QA, and look at spawn lists and think "7 tanks v 41 tanks (regardless of type!) Oh that must be an error" and seek confirmation that the numbers are correct?

 

S! ian

Share this post


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

Historically, there should be zero Matilda IIs in a 1940-41 British armored unit. They should have only cruisers and lights.

If they have any Matildas, that's unrealistic.

OTOH, all of the tanks "in" (historically, attached to) a 1940-41 British infantry unit should be infantry tanks or lights. No cruisers.

You know I did a full differentiated brigade design along these lines years ago, with the idea of approximating 1940 ToE.

 

I had the Matties in as infantry support not armor, precisely along your lines. 

 

There is something inside somebody's head or formula that is not properly addressing the Matty game effect or dealing with the fact that the game requires a certain amount of assault capability across open spaces to execute town attacks, infantry units did this with artillery but we don't have that so tanks are it.

 

Also, this doctrine thing isn't right.  If we were doing doctrine correctly the inf/armor thing would be different, if you want to use the pool concept fine but the Axis would have something like 4 armor divisions (2 armor brigade 1 inf), 1 mech division (current 1 armor 2 inf), and 4 all inf divisions with a lot less trucks. 

 

I'd have number of trucks affect brigade movement speed, short the French, load up the Axis panzer divisions and starve the inf, and have good overall truck lift for the BEF.  And of course outrageous truck count for the Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ian77 said:

+1 S!

 

We cant really have history, so PLEASE can we at least have balance?

Why does every tinkering with Spawnlists and Tier equipment always seem to result in a cockup? Does no one do QA, and look at spawn lists and think "7 tanks v 41 tanks (regardless of type!) Oh that must be an error" and seek confirmation that the numbers are correct?

 

S! ian

We ARE the QA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CRS definitely has QA for Development work, i.e. coding.

It's hard to do QA on Production work without soaking up a lot of time and (non-existent) resources...and another thing that we grouse at CRS about is being so slow, in spite of all of CRS being fewer people than actively have commented in this thread.

Share this post


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

We ARE the QA.

Well if we are the QA publish the spawn lists and we will all spot the glaringly obvious. I mean this is just so staggeringly unbalanced that an infant learning to count knows 7 is much less than 24 (french Inf Flag AFVS) - they probably have still not learnt to count as high as 41, which should be a good clue to "balance"

 

"Spawn lists are now balanced " - Bmbm. I dont know what is more annoying, the clear fallacy of his statement or the smug picture that accompanies it.

 

I despair, I really do..... 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ian77 said:

Does no one do QA

30,000 lines of sql, a human being could make a typo
specially one who has been at work for 10 hours, then comes home and spends another 8 doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.