Coastal Artilley

[chuckfourth]

HI Don
Can I say great to be working for you on this one.
Couple of Questions before I get stuck in,
Why do you want me to check that all indirect fire class 10 Naval guns with accuracy of 60 have firecontrol and Rangefinder values of 0?

Before I look at Coastal guns could you give me some definitions? heres mine see how yours compare(as they relate to coastal guns).
Accuracy; the muzzle velocity of the gun.
Rangefinder; Value determined by the presence and use of some type of rangefinding device (0 for none?)
Firecontrol; Quality of the optics, for tanks etc but for coastal guns maybe use of bracketing by guns in the same battery, use of naval type target predictors and radars might be relevant?

Ive had a look around to give myself a bit of background on RA nd FC values before I dig into the OOB's, heres what Ive found so far thats relevant to the two guns Ive used as examples.

http://www.museumscenterhanstholm.dk...es_1945/_PRINT
"Battery Hanstholm 1, four 17 cm guns, emplaced in 1941. Manned by 1/118 MAA. Casemated, field of fire 335o to 235o. Range 28,000 yards. Two searchlights, radar set. Old German guns (1902) from ships. Eleven-meter range finder"
Now the 88 with a 1m Rangefinder gets a rangefinder value of 8 so do you think the 17cm guns 11m rangefinder value of 6 looks a little low? and Maybe the Firecontrol of 6 looks low also as the gun may have a radar in attendance as well.
Search the article with "range finder" Youll find that nearly all the largere calibre guns have a large naval type rangefinder in attendance.
For the iItalians I found this,
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Telemeter_Range-Finder
"For naval and harbour defence purposes the Barr and Stroud range-finder is very largely used throughout the world. In Italy a Barr and Stroud instrument, with the large base of 5 metres, was in 1908 under trial for coast artillery.
So in all likelyhood the 305mm gun had at least a 5m rangefinder, again the current rangefinder value of 6 may be a little low.

One last thing before I begin, could you please tell us why AP rounds have been removed from the coastal guns in-game?
Thanks in advance Chuck.

[DRG]

Chuck

You're not "working" with me on this one. I'm done with this as of now. I have quite enough to do with the MBT upgrade. The errors that were initially found have been fixed and MBT has been checked to ensure none existed there either. I have corrected any land based unit and ON MAP naval vessel that used a "Naval" weapon with 60 accuracy and there were less than a handful that qualified . Things like the Japanese "150mm Gun Empl" still use a "Naval gun" but that one is, and always has been, set up with the correct accuracy for a land based gun.

The reason I wanted you to check all indirect fire class 10 Naval guns with accuracy of 60 have firecontrol and Rangefinder values of 0 is had you done that first before running to the forum with this complaint you would know that NONE of the indirect fire class 10 Naval guns with accuracy of 60 HAVE firecontrol and Rangefinder values other than zero. For naval guns firing off map this IS their firecontrol and Rangefinder. It's a "game thing" to simulate FC and RF in naval vessels and it's applied equally to all. Check away for your own info. I already know the answer. You wasted a lot of effort trying to convince me to make changes to the OOB's based on two of the units that were in error.

"Coastal guns" are the ones named "Coastal guns" or used in forts specifically named that way like the Italian "Art Costiera" or the Greek "Coastal Defence" or the German "Coastal Fort". ALL have RF and FC and none ( now ) use a "naval gun" with 60 accuracy . The 60 accuracy is reserved exclusively for off map weapons simulating naval gunfire

The coastal guns as a rule have the AP removed because with it they are too deadly on LC with it. It's a "playability vs Realism" issue. naval vessels, and LC fall into that category, are treated like vehicles but whereas a vehicle may be destroyed with one shot naval vessels rarely are and giving something like the Brit 9.2 or the German 17cm AP makes them too deadly on LC do the decision was made long ago not to give them AP and none do. You can plink away at LC with the AT guns used in bunkers. They have AP but we have to give them AP because they are primarily "land based" as is the game in general.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
Well I reaslise that my posts are an unwelcome distraction from whatever it is you are trying to do for the game at the moment, sorry for that. But if you do have the inclination in the future, could I suggest that the best solution would be to use a redundant class to create a new class "naval vessels". Maybe this would then allow you to give the boats the correct "unsinkable" but take plenty casualties qualities of a real vessel? Then the various coastal guns can have the correct rangefinder, fire control values and AP shells as well as modeling the effects of indirect fires and AT round fire on barges etc better.
Dont forget no navy attacked any large calibre coastal guns throughout the entire war precisely because such guns are so deadly against ships
Best Regards Chuck.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by chuckfourth

Dont forget no navy attacked any large calibre coastal guns throughout the entire war precisely because such guns are so deadly against ships
Best Regards Chuck.

These large calibre coastal guns with the naval range finders and firecontrol.......... what was their primary target Chuck ?

It's a simple answer so keep it short

Don

[chuckfourth]

Ships

[DRG]

Yes Ships

Naval warships to be exact. Any big ship really. You don't plink at LC's with 12 inch guns. The ships that carry the LC you would but that is beyond the scope of the game

Do you see any large naval vessels/ warships in the game ??

Answer.. no. Not the kind ships the 12 inch gun in the Difesa Costiera fort was meant to deal with. Patrol boats and the like don't count. What those guns are meant to deal with are what we class as off map targets but these are on map assets and on map assets cannot shoot at off map targets. To use the guns the way you envision they are designed to be used with all the naval RF and FC should mean these are made off map artillery to engage the naval "guns" the player doing the beach landing bought. But the game doesn't work like that. Off map guns do not use RF and FC and on map LR artillery cannot engage off map guns and there is no mechanism in the game to get into CB fire with naval guns and we have no intention of adding any.

So really those units should be pulled but I'd get more people complaining if I did. There are things in this game we have added over time because others thought it a wonderful idea to do so. Costal/River naval craft and large calibre coastal batteries are two of them I personally could have lived without. Just keep in mind those big guns wouldn't be used to fire at LC over open sights so use the smaller guns that have the AP to defend the beach against the LC and leave those big forts for decorations in sceanrios


Don

[RERomine]

Why not must pull them? You guys define the scope of game so if it's beyond that scope, that's all there is to it. The river boats could go, also, IMO. It was designed as a top down, turn based, tactical recreation of land warfare, correct? There might be rare instances where such units did were involved during the war, but was it significant enough to warrant inclusion. Even in WinSPMBT, how often did the "Brown Water Navy" get tied up in company/battalion land battles in Vietnam?

With respect to the 12in Italian guns, first would any right minded force attack where they were present without neutralizing them first? It's not like they can be hidden that well. If their intent was to engage enemy warships, transports, etc., I question whether they would be capable of being depressed low enough to even engage a landing craft. With any fortification, if it was originally intended as anti-shipping, it doesn't seem like it should be in the game.

So, Don, Andy, when are you going to draw the line and say, "This is it" and move on to the next project?

[Imp]

With respect to the 12in Italian guns, first would any right minded force attack where they were present without neutralizing them first?

The only reason I can see for there original inclusion & hence the restrictions placed on them is so scenario designers could have targets for just such purposes. Air drops on Norways coastal forts etc.
Probably as the works been done they may as well stay but agree there is no need to pamper to everyones requests if people want stuff that plays no real purpose in the game like tank transporters for a specific rare situation they can build them in the OOB editor.
Updating combat units as new info becomes available & sweeping changes like those in the recent patch are what impact on the game & I thank you for them.
The little things you have provided me the tools to implement myself

[chuckfourth]

Hi Don
By all means pull the Italian 12 inch gun, but there -are- relevant (ie large) targets for it to hit in the OOBs,
the British OOB for example has these vessels
Unit 508 "Merchant Marine" size 8, probably much larger than 8.
Unit 515 "Coast guard" size 17; 5" gun, (cant find out what this is supposed to be.)
Unit 514 "Insect class" size 17; 2 * 6" guns, Length : 72 m Width : 11 m
Unit 513"Patrol boat" size 12; 4" gun, (armed trawler?) Length : 45 m Width : 7 m
from
http://members.lycos.co.uk/Indochine...boats.html#LCG

Unit 102 "LCG (M)(1)25lbr" size 12; 2 * 25 pdrs, Length : 47.08 m Width : 6.91 m
Unit 103 "LCG (M)(1)17lbr" size 12; 2 * 17pdrs, Length : 47.08 m Width : 6.91 m
Unit 101 "LC(R)" size 6; 160 4.6" rockets, (Length : 47.08 m Width : 6.91 m?) (should maybe be size 12 also?)
As a comparison in the USA OOB
Unit 745 "LCM" size 6 (USA) Length : 13.6 m Width : 4.27 m
seems to have the correct picture and looks a big enough target for a 12 inch gun, to me anyway, and is a lot smaller than the example vessels in the british OOB.

I understand your reasoning but as the coastal artillery cant fire at the battleships ect, wouldnt it be reasonable that they plink away at these sizable targets instead? I mean if you think the landing force is going to have your guts for garters then maybe you would be tempted to shoot even at those small but very slow very thin shelled landing craft, maybe you could put short fuses in your shells and get them to explode rather than just leave a big hole.
But thats the 12 inch gun.
What about coastal guns like the jap 150mm and german 170mm? surely these would be happy to shoot at landing craft?

All the small coastal guns are impudent because without AP shells British units like 515, 514, 513, 102 and 103 seriously outgun them, which is the reverse of reality. I dont know about the german 170mm but I imagine some of the Jap 150mm saw action.
So really -all- the coastal guns whithout AP rounds are just senario decorations and should be pulled.
From
http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=72
"At about 0900 in the morning of 20 Nov 1943, Marines boarded the Higgins landing crafts and started for Betio. At 0441, the Japanese coastal guns opened fire"
So would it be possible to give the smaller coastal guns their AP? After all they are largely ex naval ordinance and do have AP rounds.
Best Regards Chuck.