Soviet auto-loaders

[kevineduguay1]

I may do that soon Don, but right now Im helping on 2 other projects.

Reality is a factor!

[Pepper]

Maybe instead of being hyper-technical on what is a relatively minor point that, it appears to me from the threads I've read, is inherent to teh game engine and can't much be adjusted regardless, why not make your own OOB to demonstrate a "superior" set of values, and shop it around.
I'd personally prefer to see the programmers, who are remarkably dedicated to the users and extremely busy, focused on other issues that seem to be a little grander in scheme (like the 60+ fixes they are releasing in the patch).
Just my thoughts.

[narwan]

"On the other hand my point was made even by your tests that after full movement a 1950s era T-10 still had the same ROF as most of the Abrams on the field"

Now lets turn that back into 'reality'. Shouldn't both vehicles have 0 shots after using their full movement? After all, they either just spend the entire time allowed for a turn 'moving' leaving no time left for firing at all, or if there still is time left (to fire), they should be able to move faster in a turn (using that time to keep moving instead of firing).
But that's not how the game works. As in any model of (part of) reality abstractions need to be made to simplify things. Otherwise you wouldn't have a model but reality itself. A good model distinguishes itself not by it's processes (what you seem to be focused on) but by it's outcomes. For instances, the game makes no distinctions between KIA, WIA (physical or otherwise), MIA, POW's, and deserters. It has only a broad category named 'kills' (with the occassional 'group surrender'). Works fine because for the model it doesn't matter how the enemy troops were taken out of the fight, just that they are.
Same with your ROF. The real question is whether an accurate balance of fighting power is achieved, of which the ROF is only part.

You mention 2-part ammo as a factor for ROF, well, speed is also a factor; the faster a vehicle is moving the bumpier the ride and the harder the task for the loader. At the end of the round the Abrams is moving much faster than the T10 (if both use their full movement) so it's loader should get a bigger penalty than the T10's loader, shouldn't they? Would that penalty be bigger, equal to, or smaller than the 2-part ammo penalty?

[kevineduguay1]

nar wan,

You make some excellent points about movement being a factor. In the game, if a unit fires it will lose movement points. It can fire its full ROF and still have a little movement left.

In the open, on clear ground, in the game, the Abrams moved at 19MPH. This is below what it is capable of. The only source I have on hand now claims that the road speed is 45MPH and its cross country speed is virtually the same. The lower speed in the game allows with some reality that the Abrams could retain some of its ROF.

The T-10M on the other hand in the same conditions in the game moves at 12MPH.
The T-10 was a little easier to look up.
Max road speed for the T-10M is stated as 31MPH. Cruise speed on roads is 22MPH.
Max cross country speed is stated as 12MPH.
So your right, the T-10 should have one shot left after moving its full movement allowance. The one round in the tube.

And yes 2 part ammo with out an auto loader is a bad thing.
A 122mm HE shell comes in at 25kg, thats about 55 to 56 pounds, AP is slightly heavier. Then you have the case and powder charge to deal with.
A 120mm M256 compleat round (M829A3) weighs less than 56 pounds. That is about the same as the HE shell alone from the 122mm gun.
Which loader would tire faster?

[narwan]

"Which loader would tire faster?"

The one not being bounced up and down by the tank moving at high speed (over uneven terrain)!

Still, when moving at the same speed, the Abrams has a shot more. If it moves 50% faster it has about the same number of shots. Looks like a fair advantage to the Abrams to me...

[kevineduguay1]

nar wan,

At high speed the Abrams crew describes the experiance more as flying. This is not true of most Soviet tanks or 50s, 60s, 70s, era tanks. Even now they only have a modified suspention of a T-54.

[scJazz]

REALITY CHECK!!!

The term ROF found in the OOBs is not a 1 to 1 reflection of the actual rate of fire of any weapon in this game!

Don and Andy have said as much in this thread and others.

ROF in the OOBs is one count that one factor in determining the actual ROF of a unit. The ROF figure also appears to have some consequences on other values as well. Therefore could we please just drop the whole bloody subject about weapon system X having only a ROF of 4 when weapon system Y has 5? Most especially drop it if the complaint is related to such and such Western weapon system should blast the hell out of such and such ex-WP weapon system!

Finally as Don and Andy have pointed out multiple times as well don't sit and look through the OOBs and complain about foo being to low/high without whipping out a test scenario and seeing what screwing around with a value does!

[kevineduguay1]

Yes scJazz, they are right to a point.

At experiance 75 to 99 an M1 Abrams has a ROF of 4. If it moves a little more than its full movement allowance the ROF is reduced to 3. Full movement reduces this to a 2 ROF.

T-80UMI BARS with experiance from 50 to 74 has a ROF of 3+1 Reflex ATGM. An Abrams in the same experiance class has a ROF of 3, as do any tank not armed with a gun tube launched ATGM.

When you put the Russian tanks in the experiance range of 75 to 99, their ROF jumps to 4 main gun rounds plus 2 ATGM shots if the tank sits still. In a test scenario at least one Russian tank when I played the Russian side was able to fire off all the main gun rounds and all the ATGM for a total of 6 shots.
In this range the Russian built tanks with gun tube launched ATGM have a 2 shot advantage over the Abrams or any other Western tank for that matter.
The Russian 2 shot advantage continues through the 100+ experiance ranges.
At the extream experiance rating of 255 the Abrams or any tank without a gun tube launched ATGM has a ROF of 9.
A Russian built tank with a gun tube launch ATGM capable main gun can fire 9 rounds a turn, plus 4 ATGM.
Now it is true that if the Russian built tanks move more than 3 or 4 hexes they tend to loose the ability to fire their ATGMs, this is as it should be.
Do I have a solution? Yes, but not the knowledge to make it happen.
Useing the experience rating to reflect ROF works well with a hand loaded main gun. But when trying to illustrate a mechanical device (auto-loader) that is not really effected by how fast a human can move or how well he is trained. It is IMHO that weapons of this type (with tank main armmament auto-loaders) have there own class and have their ROF hard coded.
Just an idea.

[kevineduguay1]

There may be a temporary solution. If you raise the ROF of Western tanks to 14 this will raise the on board ROF of their main guns by 1. This will at least help. Going higher, (like into the 20s or more) have effects that could tip the balance of play too much.

Test it! I did!

Edit, This should only apply to Western tanks after the Russians have gun tube launched ATGM.

Edit, P.S. DRG ROF can be changed!

[Marcello]

Some interesting bits

http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/

"What makes T-64-style autoloader notably faster than that of T-72 is the presence of 'sequence' mode. When it is enabled, the loading mechanism continuously loads the rounds of the same type without any gunners intervention. In addition, the rotation of the carousel to get the new round is done immediately after the previous round has been loaded, in parallel with the firing procedure. This allows to perform all the blocking loading operations in under 5 seconds. T-90 has received similar advancement in autoloader logic.

Advances in the autoloader design along T-64 and T-80 line also include the reverse rotation of the carousel thus allowing much faster cycles when the magazine is partially depleted."

Of course the above does not apply to older T-72s and the accurate representation of barrel fired ATGMs
is a problem in the game, just like ERA.BUT the fact that your T-80UM can pump out rounds as fast as an Abrams is not really a mistake.With an adequate loading plan for the autloader it should be able to do that.