OOB 16 error report

[Marcello]

Unit n. 199 PzKw Panther F
Hull front armor should be increased from 13 to 14.

The standard value for the Panther front hull armor is 14 and all the sources I have seen so far which deal with the Panther F
such as this do not mention any weakening of the hull front armor, and decreasing the armor there would not have made much sense anyway.
Also RF value might be increased to 8 or such, as the vehicle is fitted with a proper rangefinder.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Marcello

........as the vehicle is fitted with a proper rangefinder.

Seeing as there were only a handful of complete hulls and only prototype turrets completed I don't think saying "the vehicle is fitted" is accurate but I'll give you that the hull armour is most likely wrong in the OOB and I have corrected that but I'm also pushing it's start date and the Maus to June to ensure it says a "what if" .

Don

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by DRG

Seeing as there were only a handful of complete hulls and only prototype turrets completed I don't think saying "the vehicle is fitted" is accurate

I used "is fitted" as a shorthand for "it would have been fitted, had it actually been built to the planned specifications".
The "what if" nature of the vehicle was taken for granted by me, though one could argue it was pretty close to serial production, unlike Maus or a lot of other paper wunderwaffen.

[cbo]

Originally Posted by DRG

Seeing as there were only a handful of complete hulls and only prototype turrets completed I don't think saying "the vehicle is fitted" is accurate but I'll give you that the hull armour is most likely wrong in the OOB and I have corrected that but I'm also pushing it's start date and the Maus to June to ensure it says a "what if" .

Don

I see your point about the Maus, but IIRC they actually managed to drive one off the Kummersdorf training facility in late April 1945 with the intention to fight the Russians. It broke down and was blown up, but came close to participating in the war.

cbo

[iCaMpWiThAWP]

Originally Posted by cbo

I see your point about the Maus, but IIRC they actually managed to drive one off the Kummersdorf training facility in late April 1945 with the intention to fight the Russians. It broke down and was blown up, but came close to participating in the war.

cbo

Exactly, they drove ONE, that's why it's a what-if

[DRG]

Originally Posted by cbo

I see your point about the Maus, but IIRC they actually managed to drive one off the Kummersdorf training facility in late April 1945 with the intention to fight the Russians. It broke down and was blown up, but came close to participating in the war.

cbo

If it did indeed head for the front late April I'll concede that the earlier date that was in the OOB was "accurate" but I think in this case the "test" needs to be... did it actually participate in battle? . I don't want them available to a player during any date when the war was actually being fought so somebody gets a Maus or an Panther F to fight the last battle of their campaign in Berlin. We already allow a HUGELY generous "what if" time span with the German OOB as it is. Fuel supplies aside, the war in Europe WOULD have been over in August no matter what.

Don

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by cbo

they actually managed to drive one off the Kummersdorf training facility in late April 1945 with the intention to fight the Russians. It broke down and was blown up

IOW, why the Maus and the E-100 programs were cancelled, in a nutshell.

[Marcello]

Another small issue I just noticed.

Unit n. 151 15cm Batterie has a ROF value of 4
Unit n. 735 15cm Howitzer has a ROF value of 5

Both use the same weapon n.79 15cm sFH 18

Cautiosly I would suggest Unit n. 151 ROF to be raised to 5.

Artillery weapon in the 150mm range get 4 or 5 ROF in the game.
Guns using metallic cartridges and sliding breechblocks typically and reasonably get 5, while interrupted screw bagged charges types get 4, again rather reasonably.
The 15cm sFH 18 falls in the "metallic cartridges and sliding breechblocks" camp; to be sure ROF is listed as 4 RPM in the sources and german WW2 field artillery designs were rather unremarkable but still 5 seems more consistent.

[DRG]

Well this is turning into quite a project....

Given how the German OOB is scrutinized by nearly everyone it's always interesting when something like this is discovered so I checked back to the earliest OOB I have on the computer ATM ( DOS ver 5 ) and that gave unit 151 4 ROF as well ( there were no units > 599 in Dos v5 so I couldn't check U 735 )

I checked Dos V7 and unit 151 was 4 and 735 was 5 but in Dos ver 7.01 it's 5 and 5. However in win ver 2 it's back to 4 and 5 again.

There were some odd bits of data that changed back and forth between the last Dos Version and the first Win version and a couple years back we decided the only explanation was we used a copy of the V7 OOB's as the start point for Win Ver 1 on at least some of the OOB's and that's further backed up by this latest discovery of the ROF going from 4 to 5 then back to 4.

I checked all the 150 mm type guns/ howitzers with our development database checker and 5 is the standard except in a couple of cases. Unit 151 is now 5 ROF and I'm looking into unit 330 as well but as I recal that's an old French piece ( which means the PIC's wrong ). I'm checking Hoggs book on German arty now.......... yep that the old french 155 gpf. Pic now fixed 4 ROF is correct

New problem discovered... China has the 15cm sFH 18 2 years before the German army gets it I doubt they ever saw it but I'll look into that now as well

This is now I spend my day sometimes, chasing one error that reveals another error that opens pandoras box of errors. None are showstoppers but they all need to be hunted down




Don

[Mobhack]

Nat China apparently did get a few (along with the Pz1, Sd221 etc), so these would have arrived sometime between 1927-38, when the German mission to China ended.

My best guess - use the same ISD as the German-supplied Pz1, ie 6/36 to 12/37 (when the armoured battalions were wiped at the battle of Nanking).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Develop...281927-1945%29
Assume that they had all the new German kit concentrated in these formations?.

Wiki gives an ISD of 1934 for the SfH18 in Germany, the OOB currently has 1936. Probably more believable than the nat Chinese having them first, unless export orders were expedited over home?. I would say, move the ISD in Germany back to 34, not as if it would impact anything "historical".


Andy