![]() |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Quote:
Quote:
Then what does this mean ? Quote:
In one of these posts you say Quote:
Don |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Quote:
I could have done all that stuff to a corrected OOB myself, but you have specifically stated that full OOB mods have relatively little chance of ever getting to the game at this point. I thought it would be easier for you and better use of my time to post them as corrections and suggestions list for the official OOBs. For me personally it would be easier just to put make a modified OOB and post it on these forums and let you to sort it out, if you wish, but I wanted others to have the best chances of benefiting from the research I have done knowing that only a small number of people actually use player-contributed OOB mods. Now, I do appreciate the fact that there has been a lot of stuff going on here since late summer and I have certainly contributed my fair share of that. But as promised, I will not contribute any new OOB stuff until you give the permission and next year I will try to be even more critical of what I post here. |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Your "just small modifications" took up most of a week to track down spin off effects in other OOB's. The cumulative affect of all this enthusiasm for "error" correction is me working 12+ hour days just to try to get in front of it before Christmas. It's all well and good to say FH X should be 202 range not 206 but SOMEBODY ( me ) has to track all the other ones in any other OOB and since there has been such enthusiasm for "National naming" I can't just enter 152mm booglegun in to my search engine and expect to find them all because some may be named 15.2cm booglegun ( etc etc ) so they also have to be cross checked by range so one "simple" line can take an hour or more of time.
I have seen me work a full day and only get the equivalent of one page of work done because every item ate up 20X the time to sort out than it did to write down, The Finn OOB has been through the hands of more Finns than I ever expected to have to deal with and I have no doubt you won't be the last. Michals tearing another Poles OOB apart....... one I thought was in excellent shape ( ditto the Finn ). I doubt there is a unit in that OOB now that hasn't had some effect to it even if it's just a photo or a weapon tweaked and I'm MAYBE 1/3 the way through. I've started work on other OOBs for a few days just for a change of scenery and because I was starting to get a *bit* pi$$ed off about the whole process You may think you offered a few "suggestions" but anything that any other OOB could use has to be checked as well or I ended up with more error reports down the road and I had thought by now I would be able to cruise through a game work season and actually be able to start thinking about adding something new to the game but that idea went out the window a month ago. Between WW2 and MBT I have 249 pages of "errors" and "suggestions" and I am just past halfway through them and that is only because I get up in the morning and work 12+ hours then start again the next day. Some "retirement" The problem with people making their own changes is they only do one OOB and we end up right back to the problem we started with and most years I end up with 100 or so pages but this year...... this year has just totally spun out of control with WW2 ( do you guys ever actually play the game or just troll through the OOB's for something to do ? ) and there's also a major rewrite going on with an OOB in MBT as well but that has been farmed out and I hope it's going to turn out well. What I do know is there will be a huge number of re-issued scenarios but those always get done last, after I have locked down the OOB's and that's a half weeks worth of work Don |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Quote:
As for the Finnish OOB, it actually was in pretty good shape as far as the things most people care about were, namely tanks and infantry. Artillery does not interest people so much and that's where the "errors" mostly lied. On the other hand I have a special interest in artillery and AAA stuff. Then some of the corrections were based on data that the earlier Finns probably did not have, since Jaeger Platoon site did not have it yet. There's stuff there that isn't available in any secondary sources, or if it was, the books are long out of print. Still, if I had known how much stress this would put on you, I would have been more critical of what I post here. I have a great respect for the fact that you still update this game after more than 10 years, and yes, I do play it, although admittedly I would have time to play it more, if I didn't care about the OOB stuff at all. |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Here's an example of information that while accurate, has only limited game application
Weapon 103 203mm H 17 Hwtz: max. range only 11,200 meters (201). It had been 209. A gun with a range of 11,200 meters would be 12,248 yards and that would only translate to 202 and the ONLY time any of that is of any use to the game is when there is off map counter battery fire and that whole routine is a simple abstraction because that's all it needs to be. Where did 209 come from ? I have no idea. It could have been a bad source, it could have been a cut and paste error, it could have been a number of things but when things like that are reported the only way to prevent " Hey what's up with this ?. The Rurristani gun has 8 more range then the Fredonia version" is if I track them all down and that takes time when one is named 143mm H-23 and another is named 14.3cm H/23 and another is named 5.6in M1923. That's only a slight exaggeration and that's just the way it is and why I have tricks to find things but that depends mainly on the info in each OOB being more or less the same kind of wrong. Last night I spent 3 hours sorting though one short error report that had me checking the HEpen for every gun in SPWW2 and finding far more non "standard" number than the original complaint suggested there may be and that has generated a note to run the same check on SPMBT where there are 3x more OOB's to be wrong and I figure it may have taken 5 minutes to issue an error report ( and it's valid otherwise I would have just ignored it ) and that spun into 3 hours work in one game and I hope it won't turn into 9 hours work in the other but .......... BUT........... most of this will never really impact game play to any degree that battles are won and lost because an artillery unit has one less HEPen than it should. But it is an error I want eliminated because one day I hope to get to a point where OOB work isn't all I do between October and March. This year was the games "Katrina" Minor point but in MOBHack help this..... Each kilometre over 10km adds "1" to the range. •10km - 11.4km = 201 •11.5 - 12.4 = 202 •12.5 - 13.4 = 203 should read ( and will with the next patch ) Each kilometre over 10km adds "1" to the range. •9.5 km - 10.4km = 200 •10.5 - 11.4 = 201 •11.5 - 12.4 = 202 •12.5 - 13.4 = 203 Don |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Quote:
I'm sorry that I wasted your time - and wasted mine, trying to rework large, but in many places inaccurate (and in several - seriously inaccurate) Polish OOB. I confess, that by the way I've also indicated minor issues, that I've spotted, to make it more perfect. I thought, that this year I started early enough... A proposal about me correcting an OOB with complete notes is interesting - but we all wish it was earlier... Michal |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Where did I say you wasted my time ? I'm trying to get this mess sorted out so I don't have to go though phase 2 next year. You are the one telling me the units that we put in to fill gaps weren't used....... OK, expect gaps then
What you should have done is contacted Blazej and worked with him to correct it , his name IS on the OOB and I would expect there would be few communication problems. I would have happily accepted an OOB from him as he's been down that road with me before, but I'm already too deep for that now Don |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
Quote:
Michal........perhaps you could explain why on one hand you are telling me that unit 408 should be the " original 8mm wz.14 Hotchkiss " then in the next line tell me to change weapon 121 to 8mm wz.25 HMG when unit 408 is the only unit weapon 121 is used in ? |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
I must have done it in case wz.25 MMG isn't removed - or I didn't check the users, only indicated what's wrong with this weapon...
edit: I probably made a mistake - it should be naturally 8mm wz.14, not wz.25. Sorry. Unfortunately, the issue of Hotchkisses MMG in 1939 isn't well researched (and only in March there is announced a new book on the subject). What is sure is, that: 1) Hotchkiss was least popular MMG in 1939 (after wz.30 and Maxim wz.08), used probably only by some of second line Obrona Narodowa units and some militia, 2) wz.25 was less popular, than wz.14 (apart from TMG use). BTW: the only #690 Renault NC-27 was armed with #12 37mm wz.18 L21, not TMG (ammo load like FT-17?). Michal |
Re: Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)
1 Attachment(s)
I've managed to find a decent photo of Polish pre-war 81mm mortar.
Current photo pm30563 shows probably a British one, judging from helmets, although it's hard to say. If you don't find it useful, skip it. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.