tex64

Post-1.36 Road Map Suggestions & Thoughts

9 posts in this topic

Here are my thoughts, what are yours?

Just some thoughts on what I would like to see added or developed once we are beyond 1.36:

1.  Mortar Development

  • Expanded development of mortars and allowing indirect fire be more effectual with range and lethality. 
  • We should have an indirect fire gun to engage the enemy at ranges beyond 500m.
  •       Weight Bomb Weight  Range Range – Special Rounds Variants    
    Country Equipment Calibre Lbs Kilos Lbs Kilos HE Smoke Illumination Heavy Unique 1 Unique 2 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
    FR 50mm Modele 37 50mm     15oz 0.43 460m 460m              
    FR 60mm M2 60mm 43.43 19.7 2lb 14oz 1.3 1000m 1000m   950m          
    FR M1 (US lease) 81mm  136 62 6.87 3.11 3290m 1000m   M46 Heavy HE M56 Heavy HE M57 WP M3 HT (mounted) hand cart  
                                   
    GB SBML 2-inch 50.8mm       1.02 457m 457m 457m            
    GB ML 3-inch, MK II 81mm 126   10lbs 4.54 1463m 1463m 1463m            
    GB ML 3-inch, MK V 81mm 126   10lbs 4.54 2515m 2515m 2515m       UC (dismounted)    
    GB SB 4.2-inch 106.7mm 1,320 599 20 9.07 3018m 3018m         UC (dismounted)    
                                   
    US 50mm Modele 37 50mm     15oz 0.43 460m 460m              
    US 60mm M2 60mm 43.43 19.7 2lb 14oz 1.3 1000m 1000m   950m          
    US M1 (US lease) 81mm  136 62 6.87 3.11 3290m     M46 Heavy HE M56 Heavy HE M57 WP M3 HT (mounted) hand cart  
                                   
    GE 5cm leGrW 36 50mm 30.8 14 1.98 0.9 520m                
    GE kz 8cm GrW 42 8cm 58   7.72 3.5 1097m 1097m 1097m   Target marking   airborne    
    GE 8cm schwere GrW 34 81.44mm 125 56.7 7.72 3.5 2400m 2400m 2400m   Target marking   250/1    

2.  Armor Recovery Vehicles (ARVs)

  • Allows for RTB/RES on tracked, engine damaged, and flipped tanks:
  • Successful mission allows for DECREASED supply ticket (XX% reduced from standard supply ticket - maybe even the HIGHER the Tier vehicle, the GREATER reduction in the ticket as more important vehicles would be priority repaired in the rear area)
  • Recommended ARVS:  M32A1B1 for the Allies (modeled after the M4A1 but for development purposes may I suggest the M4A2 lower hull) and the Berge Pzkw IV for the Axis as a universal ARV for all Axis platforms (including the Tiger).  It's ahistorical, I know, but we already have the running kit in game so an inexpensive development cycle.  No need to have to model the Panther to get to the Berge Panther or the Sdkz 9s and gang them together. 
  • Use of the AFV crane/hoist - no need to worry about a transport trailer, etc as we can carry the AFV on the hoist for the RTB.  I have tested the strength of the hoist using a freighter and another AFV in an unsecured position.  I can maintain a connection to the lifted piece equipment AND sail at a speed of 9 knots (16.67 kmph) indefinitely but as I approach 10 knots of speed I lose the connection.  I have tested this multiple times on the training server.

3.  Flamethrowers

  • Using the same development lines of thought as the smoke shells from AFVs (fire/ignite the stream) but would obviously need it to cause damage
  • Must have the ability to fire and move (no-LMG type restrictions)
  • Friendly Fire for this unit would have to be ON so a separate class, maybe,
  • Extremely rare unit but a terrifying unit when used appropriately.

4.  Suggested UI Improvements / UI Short-Cuts

  • In the new UI we should include the LAT/LON of an object, tag, or contact report when we hover over it.  This is really important as we develop different weapons for indirect fire
  • Use of .alt = what is my present altitude (you would know your altitude in relation to sea-level.  This is helpful for indirect fire.
  • Use of .alt HAYBES = you would know the altitude of the city you are about to bomb, etc versus having to consult your City chart.
  • Use of .grid = what is my present LAT / LON versus having to use the Map Informational page and looking at a particular field. 
  • Use of .grid PLAYER1 = what is the present LAT / LON of PLAYER1 (similar to a .join command)

5. Contact Report Dispersion

  • It would be nice but not sure how it would work but can we build in a dispersion for contact reports?  Everything gets laser-marked now which was certainly not the case back in WW2.  I am a huge advocate of the contact report but all you need is one set of Mark I eyeballs to ruin your day as your opponent spawns the super-sappah/shrek-zooka or Thor's Spar of DB7 to rain lightning down on you.  
  • There is a certain randomness now to the contact report but an experienced player can provide such an accurate mark that one feels like your fighting a 2019 war with a 1940 skin.

6.  Ingame Navigational Aids

  • This is primarily for the Navy boys as they need a good way to map out a good route to their target, the number of nautical miles to reach their objectives, and a generic way to determine sailing time to the objective.  A good tool is Sea-Seek provided by Google Maps that I played with the other night and thought would be a good out of game tool.

7. Server Tracked Fired Shells from Self-Propelled Guns &/or CS-type platforms

  • This is really needed as CRS has developed AFVs that during WW2 provided direct and indirect fire.  Factor in the heavy vegetation environment to include berms, bushes, and copses of trees, etc that platforms cannot fight as designed. I would estimate that the average engagement range for any gunned platform in WW2OL is at or under 500m.  These are numbers that CRS should be able to pull from their data as Tank X at lat/lon XYZ is engaging TANK Y at lat/lon 123.
  • By tracking the rounds, those platforms can fire at range while contributing to their sides efforts in a more realistic way than currently.
  • This also clears the way for other platforms that carry other indirect fire platforms (EX: US M5 HT w/ mortar, howitzer, etc or GE 250/1 HT w/ mortar)

Apologies for the long post,

tex

Edited by tex64
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love having a lot of that, but may I suggest not forcing a tow for the ARV, just a successful RES if parked next to the disabled but still alive tank?  Just give the ARV a unique camo job and it will be a primary target- the test will be if it survives getting to the rescue tank.

 

I wouldn't count on the flamethrower on this engine- just too much to ask of it IMO.

 

On the marking, i think it's ok given that many people mark badly so they introduce natural fog of war in, and the mark to me simulates a whole reporting/comms structure that the much larger battalion/regiments plus we would be operating in this amount of space for a battle would have.

 

What's not realistic is the calling in of air strikes.  I'd say make that a specialized inf unit, a Forward Observer with personal rangefinders and radio.  Make only 1-5 of those per brigade/town list, and they are the only ground units whose marks go on air maps (air guys can mark on air maps, of course).

Share this post


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

I wouldn't count on the flamethrower on this engine- just too much to ask of it IMO.

Old CRS said in a design-capabilities discussion that flamethrowers and other incendiary weapons were not developable yet because a bunch of corollary mechanics...Burning states for all the world elements, Destroyed states for the vegetation elements, zoned damage states for large buildings, fire spread within a building or between proximal buildings, more difficult ignition and fire extinguishing in rain, illumination at night, and injury/damage for infantry and other soft targets entering into a fire zone or indirectly exposed to a fire weapon...don't exist, and resources to develop them all don't exist yet either.

It also was discussed that world damage models would need to become more complex. A burned tree is Destroyed but still stands; a tree knocked down by a tank or a bomb is Destroyed and laying on the ground. And, a large building might have two rooms on the first floor on fire, but the rest of the building in undamaged condition...until the fire spreads horizontally or vertically...and the fire would cause those rooms to be lightly damaged, then heavily damaged, before the building's structural integrity was affected.

AFAIK, all of that information remains valid.

Edited by jwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#3 most likely will not happen, even if it is possible from a game engine->model standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, #3 has been stricken.  More thoughts, ideas, and feedback needed . . . :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2019 at 2:10 AM, tex64 said:

Here are my thoughts, what are yours?

Just some thoughts on what I would like to see added or developed once we are beyond 1.36:

1.  Mortar Development

  • Expanded development of mortars and allowing indirect fire be more effectual with range and lethality. 
  • We should have an indirect fire gun to engage the enemy at ranges beyond 500m.
  •       Weight Bomb Weight  Range Range – Special Rounds Variants    
    Country Equipment Calibre Lbs Kilos Lbs Kilos HE Smoke Illumination Heavy Unique 1 Unique 2 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
    FR 50mm Modele 37 50mm     15oz 0.43 460m 460m              
    FR 60mm M2 60mm 43.43 19.7 2lb 14oz 1.3 1000m 1000m   950m          
    FR M1 (US lease) 81mm  136 62 6.87 3.11 3290m 1000m   M46 Heavy HE M56 Heavy HE M57 WP M3 HT (mounted) hand cart  
                                   
    GB SBML 2-inch 50.8mm       1.02 457m 457m 457m            
    GB ML 3-inch, MK II 81mm 126   10lbs 4.54 1463m 1463m 1463m            
    GB ML 3-inch, MK V 81mm 126   10lbs 4.54 2515m 2515m 2515m       UC (dismounted)    
    GB SB 4.2-inch 106.7mm 1,320 599 20 9.07 3018m 3018m         UC (dismounted)    
                                   
    US 50mm Modele 37 50mm     15oz 0.43 460m 460m              
    US 60mm M2 60mm 43.43 19.7 2lb 14oz 1.3 1000m 1000m   950m          
    US M1 (US lease) 81mm  136 62 6.87 3.11 3290m     M46 Heavy HE M56 Heavy HE M57 WP M3 HT (mounted) hand cart  
                                   
    GE 5cm leGrW 36 50mm 30.8 14 1.98 0.9 520m                
    GE kz 8cm GrW 42 8cm 58   7.72 3.5 1097m 1097m 1097m   Target marking   airborne    
    GE 8cm schwere GrW 34 81.44mm 125 56.7 7.72 3.5 2400m 2400m 2400m   Target marking   250/1    

The French Brandt 60mm and 81mm mortars were license-copied with minor changes by USA. Basically, they were the same weapons. The French ones would have T0 availability. No reason for the French to get the US ones via Lend-Lease, as long as the French haven't been defeated.

The French (Brandt again) developed the original 120mm mortar. The USSR bought a license and made their own, and the Germans captured some, liked them, and began building their own.

I'm pretty sure the caliber of the Brit 3 inch mortar was 76mm, not 81mm. 

The US never actually had any of, or used, the French 50mm mortar. That's just a CRS game artifact that hopefully will go away once the 60mm is modeled.

The kurz and schwer 81mm mortars were the same caliber, I think.

USA also used a copy of the British 4.2 inch mortar.

French Brandt 120mm:

120mmpuissant.jpg

brandt120mm.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree on the French kit, my reference material gave deference to the French models of development but the nomenclature in the text (for the large caliber) was all USA hence how I added it in my spreadsheet.  No offense to Brandt as his design was a great leap forward that everyone copied.  In the GE & USSR sections, they heavily referenced copying of the French 120mm.  I omitted the 120mm mortars as the 6000m range is a little extreme for the present game, imho.

Updated a few typos on my spreadsheet, thanks,

tex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought of an interesting way to do the ARV through the PPO engine - create a one pixel PPO that the ARV can build that allows armor rtb. ARV pulls up, does a 2-3 minute "build", and there you go.

Share this post


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

Just thought of an interesting way to do the ARV through the PPO engine - create a one pixel PPO that the ARV can build that allows armor rtb. ARV pulls up, does a 2-3 minute "build", and there you go.

I would personally prefer to see armor getting towed back to base. Give it a decent amount of points (say 50) to give new players needing rank something to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.