A long road

[DRG]

Interesting.

You continue to ask for sources yet provide none of your own but I started to lose interest when you claimed

...."Accordingly, the values used in the game sould not be 23 (how the creator of this OoB got this number remains a complete mystery to me!) but 66 "

. Maybe you could "give a small overview of the references and bibliography " you are working with to help us. Or, rather than demanding we provide sources perhaps it would have been far more constructive to simply provide the information and what values YOU consider fair for this vehicle and we'll look into the issue. If the FC and RF ratings are too low I will be happy to adjust them.

Don

[loktarr]

->It seems to me that the Leclerc as a very fair representation in SPMBT: the figure 50/5 or 55/6 (Fire Control/Stabilizer) are not very différent and so hard to precisely evalue that it just seem to me that you shouldn't take account of them, knowing they are 'in game' after... 2008... so you will NEVER find sources about it because the M1A2 SEP described simply isn't in service.,


->Concerting the Leclerc in itself you have certainly seen that is size is 4, it 2 less than the M1 SEP(6), making it very hard to hit. (the average value for MBT's is 5). You should test a duel: you will be surprised by the advantage given by the size. (which was the first requisite in leclercs paln and not any aiming system), I'would be interrested in an explanation of 'How can a tank 1,5 time larger have worst caracteristics on every point than the leclerc?'

->Try to understand that the moderator are frequently asked to change anybody's caractéristics. If you don't have any precise source yourself how can you think they will accept your remarks?

->If you manage to fully justify yourself without getting angry, the experiments show that you will also be fully satisfied (about France, I complained two year ago that a fully professional army shouldn't have 70 in exp rating, you can now see it's 75).

->It seems we didn't get the same game, the early M1 you discribe as a 35/4 rating.
Hope that helps

[Gloo]

It seems to me that the Leclerc as a very fair representation in SPMBT: the figure 50/5 or 55/6 (Fire Control/Stabilizer) are not very différent...

That's correct and I agree (even though 50 against 55, that makes a sensible difference but that's not the point)... as long as we're not talking about firing/reloading on the move! I, as a french can do with the way the game fails to reflect this crucial fact; that's not a problem, really. On the other hand, the side effect of using this fact as a motivation to modify and enhance the way the game system deals with moving and firing vehicles, seems to me a really interesting point. It's also a problem when it comes to find a unit to use as a template in order to make modifications in the OoBs. Regarding the "national pride" Palsmakrab was talking about, I find it funny to see some french units really weak and hard to play with (actually it's challenging to play French against any "major" nation -even against REDs too- between 1946 and 2020 :OD). As long as it's historically or technologically accurate, where's the problem? It's just a game! A strong army doesn't necessarily make a great player but a great player can take the best out of a really poor army.

...knowing they are 'in game' after... 2008... so you will NEVER find sources about it because the M1A2 SEP described simply isn't in service

I'm not sure to understand precisely what you wanted to say but if you're talking about what will be the future of MBTs, I agree. I remember while playing SP3 a few years ago (still play it now and many others should do the same... that's very edifying to compare how this game plays compared to WinMBT or WaW) . I used to play with pairs of Leclerc MBTs and Tigre HAP/HAD. I spent some time to create these helos from scratch, using the data I had at hand. It was almost sci-fi at times but, except for the dates, I can see now it was pretty close to reality. No matter what each player decides to play with when it comes to hypothetical conflicts, or toys he uses, since the pleasure to play is present. However, here we're talking about existing materials and about how their specifications could be better reflected by the game system. Moreover I really think the movement points, and how this feature is used by the system, could be refined. After all, WinMBT has a very rich implementation of terrain natures and elevations; compared to that, the rather simple way it is treated in terms of movement points (all/half/nothing) is a bit "outdated". Don't you think?

Concerting the Leclerc in itself you have certainly seen that is size is 4 (...) you will be surprised by the advantage given by the size.

Yes, and so what? Any MBT has a big gun and therefore a HUGE advantage against a VBL. That's another fact of life. Do you suggest I should alter some characteristics of my VBL, in order to compensate this disadvantage, only because "that's unfair" ? Is this what you wanted to say? I don't get the point.

which was the first requisite in leclercs paln and not any aiming system), I' would be interested in an explanation of 'How can a tank 1,5 time larger have worst caracteristics on every point than the leclerc?'

Do you suffer from the "national pride syndrome" previously mentioned in any way? What are those "worst characteristics" you're talking about and who ever said the M1 "have worst characteristics on every point than the leclerc" ? Don't make me say what I've never said, please, or quote it clearly from my previous messages. Anyway, examples where "bigger's not better" can be found in every army of the world (remember Alexander and his elephants against Scipio's footmen... ), in every era of humanity. During the years preceding WW2, the french industry produced some of the best armored vehicles worldwide, in terms of size and armor thickness. In May of 1940, the week german panzers defeated those monsters. US Shermans did the same to Panthers and Pz V; "honeys" did the same with Pz III, and so on. Have you ever seen a B1 Bis tank next to a Pz III/IV and compared their characteristics? Can you provide any info about the superiority of the M1 Abrams over the Leclerc regarding their respective capabilities of firing while moving? Can you provide info on the superiority of its manual loading system over the automatic one used by the Leclerc, specially when moving? Can you show any example of a M1 Abrams able to drive cross-country at 40km/h, fire at a 60km/h moving target, hitting it then reloading and doing the same thing again? If so, I'll be happy to change my point of view. You see, I know Belgium is a very small country. Despite of that, they always produced the best machine guns, the best precision rifles and, additionally, the best chocolate and some of the best comics. I don't feel annoyed about such facts, nor am I annoyed knowing for certain that the Hughes AH-64 is a better attack helo than the Gazelle, or even the Eurocopter Tigre, but what annoys me is when I read that X is better than Y, while I know for certain that this is not true. I won't compare the Leclerc to the M1 regarding armor or munitions because I don't have enough data -and knowledge- about those points. I won't say french tankers are more experienced than US ones because I know that's not true. What I know from what I read at reliable sources is that a M1 loader can't do his job when his vehicle his riding at 36km/h cross country, while the auto-loader of the Leclerc has not the slightest problem in such case. Same thing, at the same speed, when it comes to fire accurately at a 60km/h moving target. Prove me I'm wrong here and I'll be happy to apologize.

Try to understand that the moderator are frequently asked to change anybody's caractéristics. If you don't have any precise source yourself how can you think they will accept your remarks?

I'm informed about that but hey man, where in hell did you get I wanted anyone of the Camo crew to change anything in the OoBs?! I've never asked for such things! What I asked for (and that's the very first sentence of my very first message (thought you'd read this one, at least... !)) was on how to handle the M1 values as a guideline to make my own modifications. I just find it hard to do that because the M1 values used for movement seemed wrong to me. So I wanted to know if the data I have at hand, saying a M1 can't fire accurately at moving targets and reload while moving at more than 15km/h off road, are wrong or correct. If that's correct, then maybe something should be done to modify the system used to represent movement speed against firing capabilities (if the data are correct, that means almost ALL the MBTs values are completely wrong too!). Additionally I asked for a bit of info about how the numbers were chosen and some references to learn from. How can you change any number if you don't have any idea about how they interact with each others? One can make tests but that's a pure waste of time.

If you manage to fully justify yourself without getting angry...

Getting angry? I've been polite and asked a rather simple question. The answer I got was disappointing and harsh, as Don treated me -at first sight- as if I was just coming here to criticize.

It seems we didn't get the same game, the early M1 you discribe as a 35/4 rating.

M1A2 SEP Abrams (I compared this one with the Leclerc serie 2), Obat 12, unit n° 316 = FC: 55 Stab: 6.
The 35/4 you're talking about are the M1 Abrams values but I never mentioned it should compare to the Leclerc serie 2.

[loktarr]

Gloo said:

... as long as we're not talking about firing/reloading on the move!

Here I don't understand: stabilization is the very figures that reflects fire on the move...

Do you suffer from the "national pride syndrome" previously mentioned in any way?

The little é... says that I'm precisly as french as you...As could my bad english

I'm not sure to understand precisely what you wanted to say but if you're talking about what will be the future of MBTs, I agree.

I was simply saying that 'Tout ça se sont des suppositions' oob's creator have done very 'long range' suppositions: if you want to die of heart disease, just look at the UK's MBT-law

Concerting the Leclerc in itself you have certainly seen that is size is 4 (...) you will be surprised by the advantage given by the size.

Yes, and so what?

You can easily check: Leclerc is 2,5 m height, the M2A1 SEP is 2,8 m height and not 2,5*1,5=3,75, so the oob creator decided to give this advantage which correspond to reality and again, at long range it give the leclerc in SPMBT a 'quasi' total superiority...

In May of 1940, the week german panzers defeated those monsters. US Shermans did the same to Panthers and Pz V; "honeys" did the same with Pz III, and so on. Have you ever seen a B1 Bis tank next to a Pz III/IV and compared their characteristics? Can you provide any info about the superiority of the M1 Abrams over the Leclerc regarding their respective capabilities of firing while moving?

Ironicaly this is because of this particular defeat, which was underlined after german's defeat in 45 (in order to give german
troops a good morale; as they always justified their defeat against Russia by the 'overwhelming odds', see US post-war reports over red army written by germans...), that French army is always seen as a big band of cowards... Everybody forget to say that the french has lost 300.000 deads in 4 weeks which is a lot for runners and that after two weeks the brave English (that's not ironical) where back home...

M1A2 SEP Abrams (I compared this one with the Leclerc serie 2), Obat 12, unit n° 316 = FC: 55 Stab: 6.
The 35/4 you're talking about are the M1 Abrams values but I never mentioned it should compare to the Leclerc serie 2.

Didn't you mention M1 with 105mm gun? There is some misunderstanding there... and again n°316 simply doesn't exist... So feel free to create an 'horizon 2010' Leclerc

After that let me had something: look at the anti-HEAT armor. Can you find a better one that the Leclerc?

The great problem here is the rof: Leclerc one is very hight but doesn't serve 'in game' because the final rof is determinated only by experience... A problem that simply isn't easily solved.
Also, you can see with a very quick comparison that the French oob is one of the most detailled in the game far beyond germany for instance...

Last point: I'm doing a campain about the French Foreign Legion Paratroops... can I hope you will be a play tester?

[Gloo]

Here I don't understand: stabilization is the very figures that reflects fire on the move...

I think there's been misunderstanding here (two french trying to debate in English... that could make a fine theme for a Woody Allen movie! ). First, the values you present are used by M1A2 SEP and Leclerc 2 while I was focusing on M1 and Leclerc 1 (even though that's a detail). Second, are you really sure 1 point, up or down, in Stab isn't that important? To me the main thing affecting the fire on-the-move capabilities is the number of Mvmt. points. Or, as i said, it should be so, imho. Since a unit without such capabilities shouldn't have any fire left after a single move (or, at most, one shot; to simulate the necessity to go to a full stop in order to acquire its target and shoot at it accurately). That could be dependent based on terrain, of course (some can shoot while moving on roads or flat and open terrain to a top speed yet to determine; some could have more than one shot but assorted of a penalty to hit, and so on). But, the demonstration provided by Cusbut render all this great theories obsolete Anyway, Stab points (and other variables, like Exp.) act as a modifier to calculate how much shots are left after moving (since that was how it worked in SP2 with points above or below 4) but I really don't know how it is handled now by WinMBT. Did you make any test with static/moving units? I didn't, so I won't be so sure, but I guess that could make difference between a hit and a miss. Since the Camo crew don't provide formulas, it's near impossible to say for certain. Anyway, Fire control, Rate of fire, and movement points are values probably mixed together (to a point) in order to render how well a MBT is able to hit a target, while remaining static or moving. These are altered by the crew experience and over factors (vision, morale, and so on). All these things are parts of a big picture, far to complex to understand since we don't have the exact algorithms used in the game code. I mainly wanted to focus on how movement rate interacts with firing/reloading capabilities. My main concern was how this is implemented and how to create a "template unit", for a given period of time, in order to use it to calculate how the others could be rated. Right now, the only thing I can rely on is that there's a table giving the ratio between terrain and movement points, and the fact that 1mvmt point equals 3km/h. I wanted to learn more but, since Cusbut showed how wrong I was to believe there's important characteristics that could make huge differences on the battlefield between MBTs, there's no point in wasting time on that subject! Let's play the game the way it's been made, as we always did.

The little é... says that I'm precisely as french as you...As could my bad english

I noticed this detail (the accentuation, not your bad English (which is, now that you mention it, VERY bad, to be honest )). But I know of many french people who only swear by the "American way of life". Some even spend their holidays on horses back, dressed as cow-boys, pretending to live in the wild west... . Not quite sure such french citizens aren't a little bit biased towards American point of view

I was simply saying that 'Tout ça se sont des suppositions'

I got that point but, as I said previously, we were talking about M1 Abrams and Leclerc 1, which were produced more than 15 years ago! That's not prospective, that's real facts and vehicles that have been battle tested for quite a while!

You can easily check: Leclerc is 2,5 m height, the M2A1 SEP is 2,8 (...) at long range it give the leclerc in SPMBT a 'quasi' total superiority...

Did you conduct tests on this? I did a quick one. It seems to give the Leclerc a slight advantage in detection terms when remaining static but I didn't find much of an advantage relative to hitting rates. Are you sure that this "little" point added to the SEP in Stab, plus the 5 points in FC, don't compensate for these 2 little points in size... ? Not even to mention the Mvmt. advantage, since Mr. Sucbut demonstrated this one's only a myth

Ironicaly this is because of this particular defeat (...) the brave English (that's not ironical) where back home...

I hope there's no Tommies around... I won't comment further on that, since I don't want to initiate politics arguments here. I'd just like to say that I'm ashamed for those, still pretending the french army acted cowardly in 1940, and that I'm thankful to the Brits they had the will and courage to make an inexpugnable fortress of their islands during that very time frame... .

Didn't you mention M1 with 105mm gun?

Absolutely correct. And I maintain the M1 Abrams has a 105mm gun. Check it out by yourself.

and again n°316 simply doesn't exist...

Seems you have a problem using MobHack, or perhaps are you referring to a different version of the game? Unit 316: OBat12 USA, has the M1A2 SEP Abrams associated to this number. I'm positive about that. Then again, check it out.

After that let me had something: look at the anti-HEAT armor. Can you find a better one that the Leclerc?

Did the M1 Abrams had a better armor than the Leclerc first series? Good question and easy to verify ) Now, if you test a fire fight between Leclerc 1 and M1A1HA (or other MBTs (haven't tested with Challys since they were using special HEAT ammunitions)) you'll find this high anti HEAT protection is not so useful! A sabot impact from these guns to the front hull (even sometimes in the FT) and the Leclerc's out for good (one hit one kill, most of the time). You still have to maneuver to find hull down positions (dream it would be as easy as it is with Combat mission ).

The great problem here is the rof: Leclerc one is very hight but doesn't serve 'in game' because the final rof is determinated only by experience... A problem that simply isn't easily solved.

Yes, as far as I know, shots number is relying on Exp. (though it also depends on suppression level). But, as Cusbut said, since even a Chally 2 can fire accurately and reload while moving at 40km/h off roads, this value isn't a real issue, isn't it? Maybe this only remains for opfire calculation purpose? Does values above 5 give an even better penalty reduction? I really can't say.

Also, you can see with a very quick comparison that the French oob is one of the most detailed in the game far beyond Germany for instance...

The detail is pushed as far as giving the french scen designers the theoretical strategic possibility to incorporate pack mules, for towing tasks, up to 2020! But I'm still wondering why this glorious military asset isn't available between 1946 and 1948? Maybe this sophisticated unit was in a development period during this very time frame?

Last point: I'm doing a campain about the French Foreign Legion Paratroops... can I hope you will be a play tester?

I've never done such things (I only play tested some of my own scens) but I'll be happy to take part! Is this hypothetical or based on real operations like Kolwesi and such?

[loktarr]

I hope there's no Tommies around...

I was just trying to say (betrayed by my very bad english once again?) that even the Brits, well-known for their tenacity had to withdraw, which was certainly the best to do. No reasons to worry here.

and again n°316 simply doesn't exist...

Ok the units exists 'in game' but in the real world it's not yet in service (arrives in 2008).

[Gloo]

Ok the units exists 'in game' but in the real world it's not yet in service (arrives in 2008).

You may be right for "real world" vehicles (haven't checked) but in game, Unit 316 reads that years of production range from 2002 to 2009.

[Gloo]

Interesting.

Great! I hope this isn't just irony, right?

You continue to ask for sources yet provide none of your own but I started to lose interest when you claimed...

You are supposed to be -or represent- the person who created these OoBs so it seemed fair that I, as an humble user, should be the one to ask for info! Apparently you think it's normal that I provide my sources first... strange attitude but I'll comply anyway. I assume though that, as I am able to read yours (the only one you provided is an english web site), using your language, you'll be able to read mines, using my language. I assume you -or whoever created these OoBs- hasn't used only US sources as references? No, I'm sure they wouldn't have done so.

Regarding this sentence: "the values used in the game sould not be 23 (...) but 66", I thought you had understood why I mistakenly reported these numbers (I'm sure you did). I thought the game turn represented 150-180 seconds instead of 60. So, according to the enlightenment you brought to me previously, my corrected assertion is that the movement numbers used could be: 25/5 for a M1 Abrams (this represents 24x3= 75km/h on roads and 5x3=15km/h off roads (its real firing/reloading capabilities while moving, as far as I know, until you provide your sources saying it can do that at 36km/h). Note that I'm not only pointing at the M1 MBT but at most of the other nations MBTs using manual loaders (RED vehicles are a bit trickier to deal with... ). Accordingly, the corrected values for a Leclerc in 1994 could be: 24/16 (72km/h on roads and 50km/h off roads). These values could be -imho- what the game should represent IF it was possible to alter the hard coded variables. But I'm pretty sure that, as you've been able to provide a reverse gear for armored vehicles, this implementation isn't impossible for your team to code. I'm sure -as you proved to be a clever man- you'll see that there's nothing more in this suggestion than a claim for a better gameplay and not pure criticism... . I don't want to use the term "realism" as I don't see this games series as a simulation but as games, nothing more than that. I like it to be as close as reality though. Especially when this claim can enhance the gameplay (that's what you did for years when you decided to start the Camo project, right?).

Maybe you could "give a small overview of the references and bibliography " you are working with to help us.

Funny how you answer my questions with questions and my requests with the same from me... / Anyway, here are some of the documents you ask for (I'm sure you know most -if not all- of these already... ). Note that the links pointing to http://minilien.com/ <=check here first if you please) are not a sneaky way to spread viruses or other malicious code! It's a fine french online utility to redirect and transform long web address, into a small and easily useable link.

About the AMX Leclerc:
Websites:
* The official port-folio from GIAT industries entitled "Leclerc Fiche technique" (technical specs.) in PDF format: http://minilien.com/?z5ZNOGqQec
* Another issue from GIAT entitled "Système Leclerc": http://minilien.com/?cb5roQEyb3.
* Just for propaganda, a small video clip (420ko Real Media): http://minilien.com/?ZvWF0GmAIE
* The pages from a commercial society (IXARM) working for the French department of defense at upgrading and refitting vehicles and weapon systems http://minilien.com/?j8gS4ml74b
* The web site of the French ministry of defense presenting the Leclerc http://minilien.com/?lCZ7fsV6Rt
* An excellent page at Freepedia: http://fr.freepedia.org/Char_Leclerc.html
* Same find of stuff at Wikipedia: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Char_Leclerc
And so on...

Books/Magazines:
* Stéphane Ferrard: Engins blindés français - Editions E.P.A..
* Tankograd: Spécial Leclerc - Editions Azimut.
* RAIDS hors-série n°3 et 5: Les chars de combat en action - Editions Histoire & Collection.
* Steel masters n°: 4 - 48 - 57.
And so on...

Some english speaking pages:
* A fine page at Army guide which is one of the very rare english sites giving an overview of its capabilities of firing on the move (though, strangely, he doesn't give the numbers he obviously knows of): http://minilien.com/?zmI1toVrYP
* A search result from Army technology: http://minilien.com/?i10L6VJaJm (curiously, there's no info about the capacities of firing while moving cross country, except the fact is quoted. Maybe it's detailed on a further page but I haven't noticed it /).
* A page of the free encyclopaedia AllExperts: http://minilien.com/?kDdBoq0Ag1
* Some interesting details about auto-loaders: http://minilien.com/?lnCXc9yimD
* For those avid of detailed photographs on almost every French military armored vehicles, here's the best worldwide source ever put online, Chars de France: http://minilien.com/?O7eSbC2J1d
And so on...

On these documents you can see the specifications of the Leclerc are as follow: 70-75km/h on roads, 50-55km/h off roads, and the capacity of firing and reloading while moving at 40-50km/h cross country. I think there's a justification here at my claim to modify the way the game represents each MBT's abilities of firing while moving off roads. But I may be wrong?

About the M1 Abrams:
Websites:
* The Military Analysis Network provides a fine page about the M1 series but remains strangely vague about its real capabilities of firing in cross country ("It has day/night fire on the move capability" (sic) "...its ability to fire reliably when moving at speed over rough ground..." (which speed? "Rough ground", does that means battered and jerky or flat on sand, stony?) http://www.fas.org/man/index.html
* The M1 Abrams page at Open encyclopedia: http://open-encyclopedia.com/
* The well known Fabio Prado site: http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/main.html
* The Wiki page about the Abrams series gives great infos about the M1 MBTs in operations and the effectiveness of its frontal armor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (interesting data during real operations casualties).
And so on...

Books/Magazines:
* Yves Debays: M1 Abrams -Editions Histoire & Collection (I think this one's also available in english).
* Steel masters n°: 45 - 54.
And so on...

All these references give roughly 30mph in cross country (48km/h) which turns in 16hexes/t in game terms. All of the english speaking sources are well documented but there's no mention of the real capabilities of the system when it comes to speak about fire on the move (max. speed while firing/reloading; against moving or static targets?)! I don't know and wonder why, as this vehicle has been issued more than 25 years from now.

Or, rather than demanding we provide sources perhaps it would have been far more constructive to simply provide the information and what values YOU consider fair for this vehicle and we'll look into the issue. If the FC and RF ratings are too low I will be happy to adjust them.

I really don't know what would be "fair", specially for others! I gave you what values I think should reflect a bit more of what's the reality "I know of" (25/5 for a M1 and 24/16 for a Leclerc) but I'm aware that these values are impossible to use with the game system features actually delivered. I don't know if you would even consider altering the way the game calculates the movements, on and off roads, but maybe there's something to do with any other algorithm internally used? Something simpler than introducing an all new algorithm? Regarding the FC and RF values, I'm not sure it would do any good here. Modifying these numbers also alter the way a unit behaves when firing from a full stop, or on roads, right? Lowering these for a M1 would be at its disadvantage in any situation else than moving off roads and that's not what's intended.
Cheers.