12.7mm does it deserve the range?

[DRG]

chuckfourth said:

<snip> ie I am talking about "indirect" MG fire. Z fire is blind fire, we could quibble about the naming here all day but blind fire is not what I meant.
Anyway neither of these two points is particularily relevant.

I can understand that giving some LVTs armour of 1 instead of the correct 0 was for the game purpose of making them less sinkable. However I am at a loss as to what the game purpose would be for giving the 12.7mm calibre a bonus 25% increase in range. Would you be able to tell me what that game purpose is?
Best Regards Chuck.

Because we decided to allow that in the game. I know you don't agree with that answer but that's the way it goes. We also told you more time than I care to count that we include MOBHack with the game to allow personal preference OOB customization but that always falls on deaf ears.

Do other people have a problem with this design decision ?
No.
Have we had other complaints about it ?
No.
Did anyone else chime it with support for your ideas on this since you posted it a month ago?
No.
Do Andy and I think this is an issue worth pursuing?
No.

Can you see a pattern ?

Now lets deal with this "area fire" issue. Yes, it is true the game does not directly model "area fire" in the sense of firing indirect like mortars or artillery but it DOES allow you to Z fire through smoke and over trees at targets than may or may NOT be see by other units on your side but not by the HMG unit itself so you can call this "area fire" or "blind fire" or "Z fire" or whatever you like but it simulates indirect HMG fire and it is ONLY available to tripod mounted weapons and a 50 cal or 12.7 MMG should have better range than a 303 or 7.92 round....yes ? so this is the compromise that gives those guns a better ability to create a beaten zone out of LOS.

Does this mean they get a longer than is likely normal direct fire range ?
Yes.

Is that maximum 40 hex direct fire range used much in the game ?

No.

So the game DOES model area fire. You just prefer to ignore that it does. The game manual says this about the "Z" key

"Z -- Fire direct area fire at a hex, no requirement for a target to be located there (AKA suppressive fire)."


You can use that "Z Key" game feature to spray the tree line right in front of your troops with fire from any type of unit OR you can use it for tripod mounted MG's to fire into a unseen "beaten zone" ( area fire ) it serves both purposes

"suppressive fire" "beaten zone" "area fire" call it what ever you like but it's an ability give to tripod mounted MG's to fire into areas they cannot see directly therefore it is "area fire" and the large calibre MG's a modeled to allow them that ability further than standard bullet MG's

So in the end, you disagree with this design decision and we disagree with you so it stays as is.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
Hard to say if anyone else is concerned because Andy has specifically instructed other people not to respond to my posts.
Ok lets call it "indirect HMG fire" as distinct from "Z" fire which doesnt go through trees.
The allocation of the extra range to 12.7, 13.2 and 15mm calibres depends on the combination two factors.

1. "indirect HMG fire" is only available to tripod mounted weapons.
2. The 12.7, 13.2 and 15mm calibres have a higher maximum range than the 7.62 and 7.92 calibres.

So because the extra 500m range is modelling indirect HMG fire then why do non-tripod mounted weapons (ie capable of direct fire only) in these calibres also get the bonus 500m?
In particular, weapon 101 (15mm Besa TMG) in the Great Britian OOB is a turret mounted main gun. I would just note here that prior to v6 this calibre actually did have a range of 30.
For the USA the weapons that are not HMGs but have the bounus 500m range are 140 "50 cal M2 AAMG", 143 "50 cal M2 AAMG", 153 "50 cal M2 TMG" and 215 "50cal Quad AAMG".
And for the Soviet Union weapons 141, "12.7 DShK AAMG", 152 "12.7mm DShK TMG" and 153 "12.7mm DShK CMG" same not HMGs.
No doubt there are others.
So these weapons dont conform to condition 1.
Even though AA does have a tripod, it is a simple afair not designed to lock the gun into small fixed arcs required for area fire.

For point 2. yes and no.
yes but not under 2000m.
From message number 20827 in the old DOS forum.
"Don't be absurd - dopplar radar measurements have shown that
rounds of that caliber(7.62) go unstable at about 2000 m"
and the proof
http://www.fulton-armory.com/fly/fig28.htm
One can see from the graph that this particular bullet loses its stability 14 seconds into its flight Carl says this is about 2000m you can probably derive the exact distance from the area under the graph if you are a genius.
My point is this, both 7.62/303/7.92 and 12.7/13.2/15.0 calibres are capable of putting out unaimed rounds to 2000m
So at ranges under 2000m both the big and small calibres should have the same indirect fire range, 2000m.
For example
A 50 cal can put a bullet out to 7000m or so.
see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_machine_gun
so the vickers can put a round out to 4100m
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG3
MG3(close enough for MG34 and 42 max range.) can put a round out to 3750m
I think the extra 500 m shouldnt be allocated unless the guns are firing further than say 3500m. Also because of the better ROF and lower recoil the smaller calibres put more bullets into the beaten zone. ie they are 'better' at indirect fire.

Ive certainly used HMGs out to 40 hexes to great effect.
I did some tests.
With visability set to 50 in June 44 I direct fired the american MG section 50 cals (1 per section 6 shots per gun) at german inf coy squads moving along a metal road at full speed.
range result (men killed 6 shots per gun)
1850 0
1800 1
1800 0
1800 1
1850 0
2000 0
2000 2
1550 0
1600 4
1600 1
1650 0
1550 2
1550 2
1650 0
1650 4
1600 1
Notwar winning but certainly annoying
Then I though what if it wasnt marching german infantry but panzer grenadiers trundelling along in their trucks?
I started with a truck in pretty much every adjacent hex. the trucks are loaded and moving at full speed.
range result(6 shots)
2000 8cm mortar destroyed,5 casualties 2 mg sections retreating, 2 pinned squads.
2000 1 Opel destroyed, 2 casualties 4 pinned squads.
2000 5 casualies 6 dismounted squads.
So i then removed every second column so there was a space between each column and moved forward a bit.
1800 3 casualties, 4 dismounted squads.
1850 opel immobilised, 6 casualties, 5 squads dismounted.
1900 4 casualties 4 dismounted squads.
1950 4 casualties 4 dismounted squads.
So I removed every second column again so no effects on any column other than the one Im firing at,
1800 2 casualties, 4 dismounted squads.
1850 3 casualties 1 mg destroyed, 3 squads dismounted.
1900 Opel destroyd, MG destroyed 1 casualty. 3 squads destroyed.
1950 1 casualtie 3 squads dismounted.

Note the particular susceptability of soft tagets carrying crewed weapons. The carried weapons often lose all their entire crew when forced to dismount in this way.
Try it, you can shoot up soft vehicles very easily at this range.

So in answer to your question
"Is that maximum 40 hex direct fire range used much in the game"
I would say that the extra range can be used to great benefit. And the situation of being able to cover a road in this way is possible in any open or medium cover type terrain.
Also just generally the 12.7 calibre is actually a bit heavy for a HMG calibre ROF is slow and barrels arnt quick change so they cant keep up th sort of sustained fire that the 7.62/7.92 calibres can. Because of this the smaller calibres are actually better suited to indirect area fire. They larger calibre HMGs were often actually allocated as AA and found there way to ground targets because people liked their greater punch.

Just in passing unit 112 Matilda I* has been given weapon 101 in error it actually should have the .5 inch vickers MG (12.7mm) I mentioned this already in the DOS forum.

Best Regards Chuck.

[DRG]

We have no problem with the range of the heavy calibre MG's as they stand now in the game and as I said in summation to my previous post...."So in the end, you disagree with this design decision and we disagree with you so it stays as is." To say this issue is getting stale and repetitive is an understatement. Either accept it or find something else to do with your time.

Your claim that it's... "Hard to say if anyone else is concerned because Andy has specifically instructed other people not to respond to my posts." is just laughable, all you have to do is scroll up a bit to see that claim is false as it is for most every thread you start that ends up being longer than a couple of posts and you know it.

I will, however, look into the Matty 1's gun issue for you.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
Yes of course I realise that it is in fact your game and Im quite happy for you to set ranges at whatever you deem appropriate. My intention is merely to show you the inconsistencies in the justification supplied for the "extra" range. Again I thank you for your time and response.
I would just point out one further thing, which when rereading you response I think you may not be aware of. The nontripod 12.7mm calibre weapons now out-range the 20mm calibres in direct fire. 20mm is limited to 1500m so in this case bigger rounds have a worse range. Ironic isnt it?
Best Regards Chuck.

[DRG]

chuckfourth said:
Ironic isnt it

Life's full of little Ironies Charles. The example I provided was not intended to be a "justification supplied for the "extra" range " since most of the .50 and 12.7mm etc etc MG's have had a 40 hex range since the games were first created an event that predates the addition of the ability to fire through smoke and over trees by over four years or so. It was more of an example of how the added range benifits those weapons in that aspect of the game. So yes, I will grant you that my comment that " this is the compromise that gives those guns a better ability to create a beaten zone out of LOS " could be construed as some kind of "justification" for the added range but the "added" range for those weapons has existed in the game since day one. If you found examples of weapons of that type being increased from 30 to 40 it is more likely than not in response to someone else complaining about "inconsistancies". As well, 20mm guns like the one the SdKfz 222 carries have had a 30 hex range for just as long as the majority of the HMG's have been 40 which no one, besides you seems to have a problem with. Ironic isnt it?

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
I greatly enjoy playing your game, thanks again for providing it. I play your game because It is historically accurate. As you know when I find something A-historic I like to point it out. When its something debateable like this it sometimes take a few posts to get to the root of the problem.

Because people think your game is historically accurate (and it 99% is) then they may come to believe that 12.7mm calibre outranges 20mm and that 76.62 tripod monted MGs can only indirect fire to 1500m. Both off these propositions are wrong as Ive detailed above.
In the former the sights are the limiting factor.
If there were any real reason for the extra range for the 12.7mm calibre (under 2000m) Im sure there are several posters who would be most happy to jump in and ram it down my throat. The fact that this hasnt happened would be the best proof that giving 7.62 and 12.7 different indirect fire ranges under 2000m is incorrect.
IMHO The fix would seem simple, just give the non tripod 12.7 etc weapons (detailed above) in the calibres the correct range (1500 same as 20mm) and give the tripod mounted 7.62 and 12.7 MGs the same indirect ranges.
As you say the 12.7 and 13.2 have had the extra range for some time. The 15mm calibre got its range increase after v6 perhaps the OOB designer responsible for the change is aware of why the 15mm calibre should get the extra range? I wuld suggest that if he did so without any justification he did so in error.
As you say it is my problem but I would have thought you would be striving for as realistic as possible OOB.
Best Regards Chuck.

[narwan]

You are forgetting that 20mm guns usually have both HE and AP ammo and only one range for the two, unlike the 12,7mm hmg's and their likes (which carry only HE). So comparing the two is comparing apples and oranges. The 20mm's and up have to make the best of 1 range simulating the abilities of both types of ammo. As the AP rounds usually have less range than the HE rounds it may well seem that the HE range for these weapons is too short. But if it were raised, the AP range would be too high. So compromises need to be made. The HMG's have no such restriction.

Narwan

[Nox]

chuckfourth said:

Just in passing unit 112 Matilda I* has been given weapon 101 in error it actually should have the .5 inch vickers MG (12.7mm) I mentioned this already in the DOS forum.

Best Regards Chuck.

Unit 027 "Matilda I" already has the 0.5 vickers MG, why should unit Unit 112 "Matilda I*" also have the same arnament that would make two identical tanks?

Now maybe changing the other Matilda I weapon to 0.30 cal MG would make more sense...

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matilda_Mk_I

[DRG]

Nox said:
Unit 027 "Matilda I" already has the 0.5 vickers MG, why should unit Unit 112 "Matilda I*" also have the same arnament that would make two identical tanks?

Now maybe changing the other Matilda I weapon to 0.30 cal MG would make more sense...

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matilda_Mk_I

Yes, it would, wouldn't it ? I've see the same info on other websites as well during my research. http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedki...ry/matilda.asp

Gives a good breakdown of the Matilda 1's armament

Don