Slitherine

asuser wrote:Hello T2_2112,

i would make a first shot for the Do 24 after a little bit of time (currently i'm still exhausted from the Ferdinand/Elefant project). In the meantime please check pages 21 + 24 for another sea aircraft stuff (BV138). Please give me a call if this is the right quality for your needs. Mostly i make icons also from a copy of historical black/white pictures and then coloring with a airbrush function (GIMP). Additional i use original scale drawings to make the panel lines for a better detail. In summary, all that is very time consuming and i want to have a good feeling if i make this work.

Greetings!

TANK you so much. I love ur BV138 so much cos i always want seaplane @ recon in PzC. I downloaded it before.

TANK you again for Do 24.

rezaf wrote:

T2_2112 wrote:Could you pls help me make a nice Do 24 from this ??

I'm sure Guille will make a wonderful icon for you - if you want, though, you can use this one in the meantime:

_____
rezaf

Wow, NICE i will use this without BIG IU pic, TANK you so much.

guille1434 wrote:
T2_2112: Very nice Dornier flying boat... I think that my partner Asuser will be able to make a good icon for it, he likes seaplanes very much (look at his Bv-138!)

And a general request: Could someone please share with us a good image of a King Tiger (Tiger II) Henschel in the correct perspective to make a replacement for the stock game icon of this tank? I would prefer, if possible, a model with the production (Henschel model) turret... I hope I am not being too "picky"... _:-)

Sure, he can do it, but let he rest 1st.

For Tiger II, i dont these pics meet ur demand or not, but i spam it here. Both Porsche and Henschel turret (with track protect).











Tell me if it not good enough.

Hello,

T2_2112: Ok i would try to make the Do 24 job. The icon from rezaf is good (perfect PC angle) but i think it's the Do 24 ATT post war version (you can indentify that point by the angle cutted wings) and not the Do 24 T or K version (round wing outline). The Kingtiger pictures are great but the angle of view is a little bit flat, can you go a little bit "higher"?

Guille:
The new Flame- Hetzer is a killer! Great job also with the fire and smoke. I saw that idea first time with the SdKfz251-16 flame version from Puma. One step closer to reality...

I found some Kingtigers in my spare box, so look at it for a starting point. We could make the new Kingtiger together like the Tiger I project. The same could we do with the version with the Porsche turret. The original pictures don't show the perfect angle and are colored, so we have to correct something. Especially the turret, chain/wheels area, tools and tow cables can we make with a new look. What do you mean?:

Greetings!

asuser wrote:Hello,

T2_2112: Ok i would try to make the Do 24 job. The icon from rezaf is good (perfect PC angle) but i think it's the Do 24 ATT post war version (you can indentify that point by the angle cutted wings) and not the Do 24 T or K version (round wing outline). The Kingtiger pictures are great but the angle of view is a little bit flat, can you go a little bit "higher"?

Greetings!

Could you pls point that pic ?? I have 3 version in last post. For 3 last pic i can do anything else.

Here the re-done, PzC Orig can see @ the bottom with camo

T2_2112 wrote:Wow, NICE i will use this without BIG IU pic, TANK you so much.

You're welcome.

guille1434 wrote:Rezaf: Thanks for your sharing of that icon! Its a very good one for use as a start, and I think there is not much to improve about it. You helped a lot!

I'm only glad you're not mad because I posted this here - this thread is your lawn, after all.

asuser wrote:The icon from rezaf is good (perfect PC angle) but i think it's the Do 24 ATT post war version (you can indentify that point by the angle cutted wings) and not the Do 24 T or K version (round wing outline).

This might very well be the case - I'm not too good at properly emphasising these little details, but I TRY to find something to base an icon on that has at least a reasonably good angle. Maybe you can mess around with the icon to make it fit, or maybe you just start from scratch.

I only posted this one as a "better than nothing" icon.
_____
rezaf

Hello,

rezaf: Sometimes i'm too amorously with the details, so please do not be angry with me...


T2_2112: Also sorry, i was a little bit unclear, i mean the big UI pictures left/right with a higher camera view. The vehicle is good looking at this pictures. It is better for icon making to catch the fine details from a bigger picture. The result is then also better.


Guille: If there is time for your needs of a new Kingtiger we could it shift to the pimp up project file and make it together a little bit later (after Jagdpanther, Do 24), ok?


Greetings!

asuser wrote:Hello,

T2_2112: Also sorry, i was a little bit unclear, i mean the big UI pictures left/right with a higher camera view. The vehicle is good looking at this pictures. It is better for icon making to catch the fine details from a bigger picture. The result is then also better.


Guille: If there is time for your needs of a new Kingtiger we could it shift to the pimp up project file and make it together a little bit later (after Jagdpanther, Do 24), ok?

Greetings!

herre

You can of course use whatever fantasy-working units what you want.
I just wanted to point on the fact that they were unable to fire with direct-fire. I never have read such a story where a Hummel, Wespe, or Sig(38) destroyed any armored vehicle in direct-fire mod.
"The gun’s elevation downwards is possibly lacking on some SPGs"
That's the point!
The other SPGs are another theme - I spoke about these three ones.
To give them AT capability is like giving the capital ships anti-submarine capabilities.
But as I wrote in the beginning: there is no problem with that - only to know that they are non-historical.

Horst wrote:
Seriously, SPGs like the Sturmpanzer I (Sturm = assault) were used in direct-fire mode, and that's what the "AT-mode" presents. Of course, it was avoided to use these lightly armored self-propelled artillery units against targets like tanks in reality, but I bet in emergency, any big gun is better than no gun, and that's what I want to have in my game too if cornered.
The gun’s elevation downwards is possibly lacking on some SPGs (Hummel -3° vs. StuG IIIG -6°), but on the other hand, their sidwards traverse was even better compared to StuGs, e.g. +/- 15° for Hummel vs. +/- 10° StuG IIIG.
The initiative value can nicely control how well these lightly armored SPGs with their AP or HEAT shells fare against real assault guns and tanks.

I like my AT-modes by Guille!

Hello to all.
Does anyone out there remember a discussion about a 'switchable' pioneer/airfield unit? Does this unit exist where might I find it
Also, has anyone ever attempted making different kinds of bunkers? You know, AT bunker, MG bunker, infantry bunker. Maybe a Air Defense HQ bunker with 'radar' trait?
My apologies if this post is on the wrong thread, but this thread is my favorite
Greetings from Virginia

Hello stan23,

to make a new unit/icon for special member needs is the biggest fun for Guille and me (like Mine Pioniere). So please explain, how the Pioniere/Airfield unit should look like and what the function they has. Then we could see whats possible.

Bunkers...I know that Guille love this stuff and he has something on his workbench. Some days ago I made also some new versions of different bunkers and I sent this stuff Guille for further improvement. So please be patient with your wishes, we are busy on the "Hardware" stuff and if something finished, you are here at the right place...

Please check also some older pages of this thread, there are some new bunkers...

Greetings!

Hi Asuser
The bunkers would probably be easy to do. The AT bunker should have the barrel of a PAK sticking out of it and probably be made of concrete. The MG bunker could be made from sandbags maybe and have a heavy MG in it.
Regarding the Airfield Pioneer, in pioneer/travel mode they could look like any other pioneer, but in non combat poses and unarmed, maybe with a Sdkfz251/3 with the tall antenna fully extended up, and in airfield mode, I don't know, maybe some sort of field landing strip with a control tower in the background. Let's see if the community has any suggestions
Greetings from Virginia

Ok, some answers to the various topics mentioned in the few last posts...

Asuser: you are right... things are a bit "overloaded" now, and I sometimes try to make much in little time... This is not a good recipe for making quality work... So lets put that Konig Tiger in the freeze for awhile and focus in the previous work. I was asking because I do not like very much the look of the stock game icon for that tank (specially the turret, the hull I guess is ok). You are rifgt also about the modern Do-24... something looked different about those wing tips! You are like an eagle!
Also, thanks for the nice words about the Flamm Hetzer!

Rezaf: No problem with people posting stuff here... The only thing I ask anybody here is to be repecful and friendly to the other users. Graphics, technical/doctrinal data, etc... any knowledge is always welcomed. I am a perpetual learner of Second World War stuff...

T2_2112: Thanks for the pictures, they can be useful. But, I don't like very much the looks of that Porsche turret front armor and gun mantlet... The big pictures are beautiful, on the other hand!

Uhu: The main concept I imagined for the direct fire versions of Wespe, Hummel, and all SP artillery in general is not to go with those vehicles in a tank hunting happy hour (a low enough initiative value, plus the low armor values of those units should make that tactic suicidal), but to be used, in an emergency, as direct fire assault guns against fixed targets (like fortifications) and infantry, and also in a desesperate self-defense scenario... It would be great if sometime in the future, fortifications could be "discriminated" from tanks and other armoured vehicles by introdicing a new category of target: "Fort" or maybe "Structure"... With the same idea, units would add a new attack value... "fort attack". This way units with heavy, hard hitting guns could be very effective against forts but not against tanks, a good example of this could be the mentioned Sp Arty, and of course, railroad guns.
For example, US forces used the "Long Tom" self-propelled 155 mm guns in direct fire against the Siegfried line fortifications, and the soviets used heavy SP and towed artillery in direct fire mode when attacking Berlin,as it was already mentioned.
That adition would be nice, because tanks and field fortifications are very different kind of targets indeed.
Having checked my main reference book (Encyclopedia of World war Two German tanks by Camberlain, Doyle and Jentz) all of the three mentioned vehicles (Wespe, Hummel, sIG 38(t) could depress their guns to zero degrees, but it is not mentioned if the guns could be fired when in that position, but I asume that they could...

Stan23: Some new and original bunker units are in the working, by Asuser and also by me. The Flak bunkers, for example are sitting from a long time ago in my "to do" list. Expect some news in the not so distant future. If I am not mistaken, in the "Afrika Korps" mod made by the DMP modding team, there was a unit that switched into an airfield...

About Flamm Hetzer: Asuser, Horst, Nikivdd, Stan23... Thanks guys for the nice words! This is the "fuel" that makes the icon-converter machine go on "turbo-mode" I appreciate you a lot, friends, and I am very glad to help modders and gamers to improve this gaming experience!!!
Asuser: It is true, my friend the idea was taken from some Puma icons I downloaded... By the way, the smoke plume should look familiar to you... as it was "borrowed" from your very nice german locomotive icons (BR50 and BR52) I could not help to "recycle" things!

Two more that remainded...

T2_2112: Wire mesh schurzen are cool... I wish I could make a icon with them that looks good enough... Again... have you some icons images (viewed directly from the side) of, say, a Pz IV with those? (Or any other vehicle will do, of course...)

Horst: Thanks for the very interesting images! Very interesting... I wonder what that guns were firing at, set at such low angles!

Ok, here is another request, fullfilled.
As asked by Nikivdd, here is a "switchable" version of the Wespe 10,5 cm Sp Howitzer...
First, comes the indirect fire mode icons.
Have fun!

By the way... Thanks Nikivdd for your nice comments about the Flamm Hetzer, and also for sharing those two custom-camouflaged units. I like very much those schemes, specially the "smoke" one... Would you be so nice to share the skin fileds, please?

And in second place, the direct fire mode icon...
Enjoy!

An announcement: I have re-uploaded the whole Gotha P.60 family of unit icons... I just tried to give the aircraft a no so inclined bank angle, just by shortening the far side wing... The difference may be a subtle one, but I think it helps with the "PzCorps look". So, go grab them, if you like, or stick with the previous ones. Sorry for the inconvenience!

guille1434 wrote:Two more that remainded...

T2_2112: Wire mesh schurzen are cool... I wish I could make a icon with them that looks good enough... Again... have you some icons images (viewed directly from the side) of, say, a Pz IV with those? (Or any other vehicle will do, of course...)

Here you are





and the infos

http://stugiii.com/schurzen.html

@Guille: Thanks for the switchable Sig38 and Wespe

We all know that certain switchables are not historical, but nobody is obligated to use the switch The AT versions in my e-file are not overpowered, merely useful to give the final blow to a heavily damaged unit. The disadvantage is also that for the remainder of the turn, it cannot function as it is primarily intended (give fire cover).

As requested: the smoke skin for the DCS program.

The Hummel and Wespe in AT mode was already created here, but not in the many pretty camo shemes. Just in case someone already wants to toy around with the Hummel in its "unhistorical" AT-mode:
viewtopic.php?p=361913#p361913

Only God knows, but we mortals have absolutely no clue about the combat history of every single tank artillery unit out there in WW2 seventy years ago. Even if there is a ninety-years old WW2 veteran here browsing and claiming its Hummel wasn’t ever buzzing in direct-fire mode, he has most likely no idea how the other 700+ Hummel units somewhere else acted differently. Same wisdom is invalid for all the know-it-all post-war book authors. They possibly interviewed some veterans and read some reports, but never all!
240 Hummels got lost in 1944 on the eastern front alone, and I can’t imagine they all got down only by enemy artillery fire, aircrafts, infantry or mechanical failure or lack of fuel. There must be a situation when they had to defend themselves from whatever attacking vehicle. There were thousands of Soviet tanks swarming around in 1944 after all. So many died and not always someone survived to report.
On Wikipedia, God knows from what historical source this info is, it is written that the Hummel could fire directly at enemy tanks, but it should only be done in emergency:
http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... tze_Hummel

Well, technically, what I humbly know is that low-velocity guns, like that of many tank artillery vehicles, don’t have such flat ballistical projectile trajectories like that of a high-velocity 88 mm gun of a Tiger II. That’s why a negative gun elevation is hardly needed as long as you don’t park your SPG on an unfavourable slope or get bumped by a flat assault gun.
What I also know is that the German 10.5 cm and 15 cm calibres got issued AP and/or HEAT shells, and these were most likely reserved for direct-fire situations.
Most likely fact is also that the 10.5 cm leFH 18 towed guns, next to the 88 Flak, were also used against French tanks which breached sometimes the German lines in 1940. Okay, not self-propelled but at least a case where true artillery was used against tanks in anti-tank role, and these guns most likely couldn’t frontally stop tanks, like the B1, with HE shells alone:
http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx ... art_id=494

Whatever, every single battle we do in PC isn’t historically anyway. Units, terrain, manoeuvers, losses…all differently like it was in the past. Therefore, let the big guns directly blast whenever we want and forget about "unhistorical"!

I completely agree with Horst and Nikivdd... The At switch should be made not as a "super-assault-gun" but an emergency or "last resort" resource to be used when needed, but not as an in-game exploit. What Niki mentioned, losing its capability to provide support fire to nearby units is an important balancing disadvantage if in a turn you decide to use the unit in a direct fire mission. After all, this is what "Multipurpose Units Mod" is all about!

The challenge would be to carefully balance the values in the eqp file for both unit states as to make the players want to use those units in its intended role (artillery) and to make its use in direct fire combat only as a result of a deseperate situation...

Thanks Nikivdd for sharing the smoke camo skin!!!
By the way: A new Hummel "switchable pack" is coming soon, as you requested!

T2_2112: Thanks for the excellent images of the Pz IV with wire-mesh schurzen!

Here Panzer III L/N