Polish and Bulgarian OOBs

[SaS TrooP]

OK, please take a look now and tell me if such reporting way is OK for you. If not, I will fix it further to learn it once and for all as this is my favourite game and want to help up in its development
Provided OOB numbers, also numbers of units and weapons acquired via Mobhack program.

Now, two things: Do you want me to move Bulgaria into different topic and leave this one's name for edition or let it stay and second thing:

The VERY best way of getting new units you may have created into the official OOB set ( and your name in the credits list ) is to use the existing OOB and build your new units/ formations in an area of the OOB where there are not other units or formations then, if submitted, can be cut and pasted into the main OOB. We very V E R Y rarely accept an OOB anymore simply because we don't know what else you've done to it and we've been bitten too many times.

" I'm new to OOB editing but......"

Yes
I could try to edit Polish OOB only and provide it to you. Just 1 new unit, besides weapon changes. As I scroll through Mobhack and have experience in game edition in general I believe I could quickly crack it and implement pretty much of stuff. Stuill, you say you rarely accept the OObs. Should or should I not try it?

[DRG]

Originally Posted by SaS TrooP

Should or should I not try it?

NO, don't bother, the LAST thing I need, want or will open is an OOB from someone with zero experience with OOB work.

Go back and read Michal Derelas posts. Here's a quote about the PT-91 issue

Armour issue:
We have three versions of PT-91 in the game, with different armour: HF/TF steel 40/40, 55/59 and 60/65. In fact, all articles in the Polish military press since prototype presentation in 1993 agree, that all PT-91s present similar level of basic protection, as T-72M1, and the only change is ERA (among others, in Nowa Technika Wojskowa (nTW) 5/93, 4/98, 5/99, 8/99, 9/2007 - especially thorough are last two). Despite a hull was redesigned, but its shape and technology obviously remained the same, as in T-72M1. The Poles didn't carry works on own modern multi-layer front armour by that time - there was no such need in the 80s, because there was a fresh licence to produce T-72M1, regarded as a modern tank, and there were plans to replace it with T-72S (pity, that a licence wasn't bought before fall of communism).

Main improvement of PT-91, enhancing its capabilities over T-72M1, were to be ERA and new fire control system and vision devices (among other improvements was VIRSS system with laser warning system, a bit stronger engine, better ergonomics and crew's safety, modern firefighting system). The only element said to be strengthened, was bottom (against mines - I guess it has no effect in the game).

A production of new PT-91s lasted only in 1995-1997 years, and it is known, that they weren't later modernized in any significant way (not counting stronger engine in two dozen vehicles PT-91M). After this date, further PT-91 were obtained in a way of modernizing T-72M1 tanks in 1998-2002, obviously retaining their hulls and turrets. New and modernized tanks are virtually not distinguished, and all are named just "PT-91" tanks (modernized T-72s are designated in documents PT-91MA1, but it is never used in practice). Definitely their basic armour structure wasn't changed during the service, which would be difficult and expensive, if possible. Article in nTW 9/2007 says explicitly, that even tanks of modernized variant for Malaysia retained basic armour on T-72M1 level, despite new works on multilayer armour carried in Poland.

There were published many articles in military press, suggesting a need of PT-91's modernization. All agree, that armour protection isn't very good, but as tanks are getting old, nobody views armour strengthening to be feasible (earlier some enthusiastic authors suggested a whole new turret, with 120mm gun at best). There are suggested instead other ways to enhance the tank's capabilities, like (in order of cost/effect) new ammunition, new stabilizer, newer model of 125 mm gun, new engine and transmission, eventually new fire control system (all these things were in fact applied to the Malaysian export PT-91). As a result of limited funds, none of these proposals were accepted so far. It looks like the MoD waits until the tanks happily live their lifespan without any scars and the problem gets solved...

Therefore, all PT-91s in the game, from the beginning, should have the same armour - basically the same as T-72M1. As for sides, only rubber skirts were replaced with tin ones. It also should apply to Malaysian PT-91.


ERA issue

I'm afraid, that Polish ERAWA isn't advanced ERA, unlike Soviet Kontakt-5. According to an article by its designer A. Wisniewski, it decreases penetration of HEAT rounds by 50-70% (ERAWA-1) or over 70% (ERAWA-2) and sabot rounds by 30-40% [nTW 2-3/94].
You must decide, if it's "advanced ERA" in game terms - it doesn't stop sabot round as a rule, only decreases its penetration. Maybe it is a justification to increase basic steel armour to values similar to #010 PT-91A1 Twardy (60/65 steel armour)?... But then, isn't it double protection: increased armour and advanced ERA?
Maybe a number of ERA should be increased?

Now, this next bit's important........ IF YOU DISAGREE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT HIM AND DISAGREE. You'll find all 103 of the posts under "Polish OOB 5.5" that may explain the "strange changes" you don't understand.

About the only thing I can say I will look into is the Carl Gustav issue. There should have been an RPG avaiable and the Carl Gustav should have been made "rare"


Don