Page 20 of 21
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:02 am
by the_iron_duke
There's quite a few units with defensive [A.A.] capability in the standard EQ file. I'm thinking of giving most or all tanks and self-propelled units [A.A.] strength. Here are the units that might get A.A., also showing whether they have this ability in the standard EQ file.
German with A.A.:
Panzer IVH
SdKfz 234/1
StuG IIIG
Panzerwerfer 42
SdKfz 251/1
German without A.A.:
Panther G
Tiger I
Tiger II
Jagdpanther
Brummbar
Wespe
British with A.A.:
Sherman Mk.I
Firefly
Sexton
Achilles
British without A.A.:
Churchill VII
Cromwell VII
Crocodile
Daimler AC
Humber AC
Bren Carrier
Soviet with A.A.:
T-34-85
IS-1
IS-2
Soviet without A.A.:
KV-1C
SU-85
SU-122
SU-152
BM-13 Katyusha
BA-64
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:15 am
by the_iron_duke
I've been contemplating tank Close Defense today. Here are some quotes from a combat studies publication on tanks in urban warfare from early 20th century to the present.
Historically, battles for large cities are full of examples of high casualties and massive collateral damage, and the specter of a tank’s easy destruction in the close confines of urban terrain weighs heavily on commanders and military planners. However, in a historical context, the vulnerability of armor in cities is proven to be overestimated and outweighed by the ability of the tank to bring its heavy firepower to the urban fight...
The 2003 Iraq War and the subsequent occupation have shown that rather than being a mobile coffin, heavy armor still provides an overwhelming and lethal capability to any force. Its firepower, mobility, and shock combine to defeat an enemy, even those armed with modern antitank weapons. There are drawbacks though. The tank's heavy weight and large size often restrict its speed and areas of use. Blind spots and frequently restricted turret traverse and elevation hinder the tanks' substantial firepower. Historical examples and recent experience show, however, that when employing armor in combination with infantry, supporting artillery, and air power, the tank is a dominant player in urban warfare.
http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipu ... _tanks.pdf
Having done some testing, I can't see any role for tanks in urban areas or close terrain with the standard EQ file.
Tanks obviously do badly against infantry in close terrain in the game, and perform much better against them in the open.
Since Close Defense values are so low in the standard EQ file, infantry combat is much more deadly in close terrain than it is in the open. So an infantry attacking an infantry in close terrain will produce a very high kill rate.
This means even tanks' firepower advantage mean nothing in close terrain as the infantry will be producing a higher kill rate. Tanks can provide mass attack bonuses and reduce suppression there but any unit can do that.
So they are effectively without any role in such terrain.
Since I have greatly increased Close Defense for infantry, infantry do much lower damage per turn fighting each other in such places due to the terrain cover. This gives the tank its role again in urban warfare/close terrain - for its firepower. Tanks will inflict a higher comparative kill rate in close terrain than infantry, with my changes, but they will also receive heavy casualties, making infantry in close terrain slower but much more efficient.
However, tanks will have their role in urban warfare if they are used in a combined arms attack. Lots of suppressive fire and supporting mass attack bonuses will suppress the enemy, making them unable to return fire. So the tanks' higher kill rate than infantry will then make it the much more effective unit to attack with as it won't be receiving any return fire and won't sustain any damage. Of course, they could then be counter-attacked by infantry the next turn, making urban warfare a much more interesting proposition!
I'm looking forward to making an urban warfare scenario with the new stats!
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 6:04 am
by the_iron_duke
Here's a sneak work-in-progress rough beta test artist's concept preview impression of my new scenario graphics. All ground units have been re-sized to scale with each other, so all units have a 1:1 scale relationship with each other. Of the British graphics, only the Cromwell and the Crocodile have not needed re-sizing. The German vehicles are more, on the whole, to scale with each other with the Panther, Pz IV, StuG IIIG, Opel Blitz and others already to scale and not in need of size adjustment. Still a bit of fine-tuning still to do, so this picture is not the finished article.
I've also touched up a couple of the bocage hexes for my northern France scenarios.

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 8:43 am
by McGuba
Nice job!
You might also want to add crew to the towed artillery, AT and AA, though.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2014 5:32 am
by Anfield
Really like the 6 infantry idea, how much did you shrink them down? Might have to try that.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:13 am
by iceFlame
the_iron_duke wrote:I've also touched up a couple of the bocage hexes for my northern France scenarios.
Looks sharp.

The new tiles make it easy on the eyes.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2014 7:09 pm
by the_iron_duke
McGuba wrote:You might also want to add crew to the towed artillery, AT and AA, though.
I'm not sure about that. Firstly, it's a lot of extra work and, secondly, I'm not sure they are needed. I think artillery guns are clear enough and although they initially look small, as one is used to the large graphics in the standard game, one soon gets used to them.
I should also announce that McGuba has kindly let me use his fine German unit graphics, so the German tanks will be in the (authentic for 1944) yellow/green/red-brown camouflage patterns, rather than the standard (and appropriate for early war) grey colour.
Anfield wrote:Really like the 6 infantry idea, how much did you shrink them down? Might have to try that.
There appear to be two scales running in the game which a lot of units adhere to, although many other units are scaled individually and sometimes erratically. The two scales are (I shall call) infantry scale and vehicle scale.
In the 1940s the average height for British/German men was 175 cm. If you transpose a person at infantry scale to a vehicle scale graphic, they will be 2.5 m tall. So they need to be reduced from 2.5 to 1.75 which is 30%. So to convert from infantry scale to vehicle scale you can multiply the pixels by 0.7. To convert from vehicle scale to infantry scale you can divide the pixels by seven then multiply by ten.
Towed artillery/anti-aircraft appear to be at scale (although I've only done the British so far). However, they are at a mixture of scales. The light and medium guns (QF 25 Pounder, 5.5 inch howitzer, 40mm Bofors) are depicted at infantry scale, while the heavy guns (BL 7.2 inch, QF 3.7 inch) are shown at vehicle scale. This is why the medium guns, from appearance, look the biggest with the standard graphics.
The re-sized infantry will also need new gunfire animations, which I haven't started yet.
iceFlame wrote:Looks sharp.

The new tiles make it easy on the eyes.
There are four bocage tile graphics in the game. Two of them were quite clear as bocage. Another looked like bocage on the left of the graphic, but on the right looked like countryside so I added some more trees to the right hand side. The fourth graphic was really lacking in foliage and so I hadn't previously used it as it wasn't so clear as being bocage. This one I added more greenery to, including a couple of woods. I also made the muddy/snowy versions.
The sharpness of the graphics may be related to something else. It is possible to mod which terrain graphics produce a glow around the unit graphic. In the standard file, forest and cities produce a glow but bocage and countryside do not. I've currently set the glow to include these other terrains and so units, like the small infantry, appear more clearly on-screen.

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2014 3:28 am
by the_iron_duke
A scene from my infantry graphic-testing image. Starting to look like a Bruegel painting!

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:02 am
by Anfield
Thats alot of infantry! Personally id say a cross between both sizes of infantry would look best.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2014 4:32 pm
by the_iron_duke
Anfield wrote:Thats alot of infantry! Personally id say a cross between both sizes of infantry would look best.
I'm really liking having all ground units to scale with each other myself, including the infantry, so I'm going to stick with it. One can appreciate better the differences between the units - for example, the Sherman graphics were too big and after re-sizing they look a lot more puny compared to Panthers and suchlike. With towed guns, especially, one can feel the change. Rather than artillery all having a similar size, divisional medium guns are small while the heavy guns are appropriately large. Wait until you see the K. 18/Mrs 21 cm German heavy artillery - a real beast of a gun and deservedly so!
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:07 am
by iceFlame
the_iron_duke wrote:A scene from my infantry graphic-testing image. Starting to look like a Bruegel painting!
Wow, I bet that's gonna look really cool with the new muzzle flash animations! Lots of fire there... I can almost picture it now.

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:40 am
by the_iron_duke
iceFlame wrote:
Wow, I bet that's gonna look really cool with the new muzzle flash animations! Lots of fire there... I can almost picture it now.

Yeah, I made an animation for a machine-gun battalion unit today. It looks quite cool with three MG42s firing - lots of suppressive fire! I'm looking forward to doing the flamethrower animation for the engineer units...
I'm also making a new artillery sound for the heavy artillery - German K. 18/Mrs 21 cm and British 7.2" howitzer - mainly by sound-editing the pitch. (The Soviets don't have any heavy artillery units in the game - I don't know if anyone's modded any?). I'm also having fun creating a bicycle movement sound for the German fusilier unit

.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:30 pm
by the_iron_duke
Sneak infantry unit preview: paratroopers, machine-gun battalion, engineers/pioneers.

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:56 pm
by ThvN
the_iron_duke wrote:(The Soviets don't have any heavy artillery units in the game - I don't know if anyone's modded any?)
There is a 203mm gun in this unit pack:
viewtopic.php?t=30696
And one of the developers has confirmed they will add a similar weapon to the upcoming Soviet Corps, so an official one will be available somewhere in the future:
viewtopic.php?f=121&t=46306&start=100#p449027
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:56 pm
by the_iron_duke
ThvN wrote:There is a 203mm gun in this unit pack
Nice to see you back in the thread again - it's been a while...
That's a good 203mm howitzer graphic and it would be interesting to include it. I'm not sure whether or how the caterpillar tracks would affect the unit stats.
Also, anyone know much about Soviet transports? While the British and Germans have a few different transport units, the Soviets have only the Soviet Truck, M3 halftrack (not currently being used in my scenarios) and horse transport.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 9:49 pm
by McGuba
Also, anyone know much about Soviet transports? While the British and Germans have a few different transport units, the Soviets have only the Soviet Truck, M3 halftrack (not currently being used in my scenarios) and horse transport.
Quote from the first page of the Hungarian mod:
Soviet artillery tractors added:[/b]
The Red Amy preferred to use fully tracked tractors to tow their medium and heavy artillery and AA guns. A number of different types were in production in 1941, but after the German attack their production was largely stopped as production was shifted to tanks. With a little help from the Hungarian Blitzkrieg Mod I tried to make some of them:
Stalinets S-65
Conventional agricultural tractor which found its way to the Red Army as a heavy artillery tractor in increasing numbers due to the heavy losses of artillery tractors and the lack of production. More than 37.000 were produced between 1937-41, of which about 10.000 (estimate) were used by the army. It could tow even the heaviest guns, but with a max speed of 7 km/h only. Thus it has tracked movement = 3, but its quiet cheap, 24 prestige points.
High Speed Tractor Stalinets S-2
High-speed tractor in its name only, the S-2 was used to tow the 85mm AA guns and 122-203mm guns and howitzers, while doing so the tractor slowed down to 15-20km/h. Still, it is faster than the S-65, so tracked movement = 4. 1275 were produced between 1939-41, on 1 Sept 1941 the Red Army had 892.
Heavy Tractor Voroshilovets
The most powerful (350hp) tractor of the war was used to tow the heaviest 152-305mm guns at relatively high speed. This 15 ton monster is comperable only to the German 18 ton SdKfz 9 halftrack. 1123 were produced between 1939-41. Expensive, tracked movement = 5 (36-42 km/h max speed)
Yaroslavl Ya-12
The switch to tank production after the German attack caused serious demand for modern artillery tractors, thus the Ya-12 entered production in 1943, and by the end of that year 285 were produced. It remained in production until the end of the war and finally 1666 were produced. Ya-12 was used to tow the 85mm AA gun, 100mm AT gun, and 122-152mm guns and howitzers. Good speed, tracked movement = 5 (38 km/h), affordable price, but only available later in the war.
ZIS-42
The only serial-produced Soviet half-track of the war, the ZIS-42 entered production in summer 1942. Approximately 6.000 were produced. Based on the ZIS-5 chassis, the ZIS-42 had more powerful engine and three additional fuel tanks. However, it had a quite low speed for a halftrack, only 36 km/h (halftrack movement = 5), thus it has low price. It can tow 45-57mm AT guns, 76mm divisional guns, and it can also transport infantry.
Horse Transport
The Red Army heavily relied on horse transports as well throughout the war, especially in the first half. Horse transports can tow most light guns and it is the only land transport of the obsolete WWI-era spoked wheel guns (wheeled movement = 4).
Other changes:
Canvas added to Bebro's excellent ZIS-5 truck and the vanilla Soviet truck (US land-lease GMC) to match the style of the new tractors.
Sources:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=74221
http://www.o5m6.de/RussianTractors.html
Feel free to use them for your mod if you like...

Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:28 pm
by Anfield
Oh man the horses rock, dont know why the game doesnt have that for the Germans as they used them more than anythign else.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:56 pm
by McGuba
Mainly because PzC is based on Panzer General and there were no horses in that one, either.
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:07 am
by ThvN
Well, horse transport is on the list to be added for Soviet Corps!
Re: Am creating new balanced MP scenarios
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:31 am
by Anfield
ThvN wrote:Well, horse transport is on the list to be added for Soviet Corps!
Does that mean just the Soviets will get them or the Germans too?