Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !

[Epoletov_SPR]

thatguy96 said:
I think what Epoletov was suggesting was that it perhaps be more extreme.

Yes, it so.




Still a question and the offer.

If the transport helicopter bears arms, unless it should not take less soldier inside?

[Suhiir]

I seem to recall a story about the Russians dropping guys in crates of straw into snowbanks during early WW II.
No clue if there's any truth to the story, probably not, but it is amuseing.

[thatguy96]

Epoletov_SPR said:
If the transport helicopter bears arms, unless it should not take less soldier inside?

I think that it should represent whether or not a helicopter with weapons fitted A) has the necessary room to carry troops and B) the necessary lift capacity to carry them.

[Suhiir]

Good example of this is the H-19 Chickasaw used by the USMC between 1951-1962.
It was primarily a troop carrier (10 man capacity), but the armed version (2 X M1919 MG's and 2 pods of 2.75" rockets) couldn't carry any troops.
The engine just wasn't powerful enough to carry men and armament.

[Epoletov_SPR]

I understand that it is a lot of work for modification in WinSPMBT, but I offer this idea that transport helicopters with arms could take passengers less.

[thatguy96]

Do you have an example in game that's specifically bugging you? I can't think of an example of a helicopter in game that has an unreasonable carry capacity. Mi-24s can carry a small number of people in addition to a full armament load, as can the Mi-8/17. Helicopters such as armed H-34s or UH-1A/Bs could not.

[PlasmaKrab]

Epoletov, you mean reducing the carry capacity or armed transport helicopters?
Like an Mi-8TVK (or whatever) with full complement of S-5 pods and Falanga missiles could take less troops than the basic Mi-8T?
Isn't that already the case? I know in my OOBs the armed Mi-8 has a carry of 124 against 132 or similar, but off the cuff I can't remember the official version.

If you're thinking that armed helicopters should not be able to carry significant troops, I'm of the opinion that if there is room, there should be the possibility to carry something. Even if it is not used in the game.

[KraMax]

PlasmaKrab
---------------
I agree with you.

[Epoletov_SPR]

PlasmaKrab said:
Epoletov, you mean reducing the carry capacity or armed transport helicopters?
Like an Mi-8TVK (or whatever) with full complement of S-5 pods and Falanga missiles could take less troops than the basic Mi-8T?
Isn't that already the case? I know in my OOBs the armed Mi-8 has a carry of 124 against 132 or similar, but off the cuff I can't remember the official version.

If you're thinking that armed helicopters should not be able to carry significant troops, I'm of the opinion that if there is room, there should be the possibility to carry something. Even if it is not used in the game.

The helicopter has the limited carrying capacity.
Also I think if to take a maximum of the weapon then with a landing the helicopter will not fly up.
Here already there was an example such a case, it is described above.

=================================

To limit use no partroop infantry and others units in parachute landings.
For example, having increased death rate at landing."

Why do we want to make Paratroops ungainly and thoroughly useless?

Isn't that a wee bit silly?

Wished to tell, that infantry without preparation of parachute jumps, it was less often used thus.
They to themselves will break legs at landing!

Or to make it the greater penalty of morals at landing, it is terrible in fact to jump with a parachute for the first time moreover in rear of the enemy!