Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

The game engine cannot deal with rifle calibre AP ammo without making riflemen and LMG etc light armoured vehicle slayers, which makes APC and armoured cars rather pointless things to have. Thus it is not going to be done ever. (Rifle calibre AT rifles are an exception.)

Game armour is a minimum of 1 cm - even if the vehicle had only 5-7mm or whatever. Light armour is bullet proof.

Subject done and dusted, we have heard this topic several times before and we don't want to hear it again.

Andy

There is really no reason to give infantry and LMGs AP rounds, since they most of the time didn't have them in real life, either. AP rounds were typically issued to HMGs/MMGs in limited numbers (often they were not available in practice), and especially to armored vehicles which had no better anti-tank weapons, for example the PzKw I, German halftracks and Italian tankettes.

That said, I won't be pressing the matter any further, since you seem to be firmly decided that it's not open to discussion and I don't want to waste my time on a fool's errand.

[Pibwl]

Back to the Polish:

Originally Posted by Pibwl

Mistake as for year - it should start in some 8/37. We don't need another type of spotter plane, but it
According to Morgała, all Potez XXVs (units 624-627) should be armed with #190 wz.33 MG, not Vickers.

After re-thinking, it could start around 8/36, Unfortunately, available publications don't mention when they entered service, but a conversion of 50 aircraft was ordered in 1936, and a prototype flew in 4/36. After tests, it underwent some fixes and was tested again in 7/37 (hence 8/37), but the series might have been already used. It wasn't an advanced design anyway - a modernization of old airfames.

I wanted to write, that we don't need another spotter, so it's better to turn it to an actual bomber. Bomb load should be 4x50 and a bunch of 12 kg bombs (it could take 24, but too big number won't be practical). Possibly after modernization it could take more bombs, but there is no information.

And a self-correction - all Potez XXVs (units 624-627) should be armed with 7.9mm Vickers, not 7.7mm Vickers (it was late at night, when I wrote it...).


Captured tanks:

628 Panther G - best icon would be sand 4091 for all uses - they are always depicted as sand, and obviously weren't repainted green

BTW: formation 254 Captured Tank should have experience modifier around -10 (two tanks were captured during Warsaw Uprising, and their crews were improvised - luckily they didn't have to fight against German tanks, though appeared useful in support)

There should be also added captured Hetzer and SdKfz-251 in 8/44-9/44.

629 PzKw IIIg - a book says, and photos confirm, that they were Pz IIIJ (short gun), so armour should be modified according to German tank.
At least in one memoires they were called "Mk III" - I don't know if it was a rule, though I don't expect Polish soldiers to call them "PzKpfw".
They were used since 7/42 only (now 6/41)
Proper icon is desert 4029 only (used in Egypt)

Apart from formation 252 Captured Tank (used since 5/42 - see below), there should be created 3-tank Capt Tank Plt, used since 7/42 (Polish Carpathian Lancers were assigned for the Nile Delta defence in Egypt, in case of German breakthrough).

By the way, I've just found source, that Pak-38 AT guns were used by the Polish in 7/42 - ? (possibly 10/42, when the regiment was withdrawn)


630 PzKw IVh - I don't know what it is supposed to be - there is known a tank manned by the 2nd Corps in Italy, but rather as a mascot. It could remain as for now, as a curiosity.

631 AB-41 - according to one source, it was acquired in 5/42 (now 6/42). Only one is known to be used, but as a commanding vehicle.
The only icon should be desert 350.
Rear-shooting BMG could be removed.

[zastava128]

BTW: formation 254 Captured Tank should have experience modifier around -10 (two tanks were captured during Warsaw Uprising, and their crews were improvised - luckily they didn't have to fight against German tanks, though appeared useful in support)

There should be also added captured Hetzer and SdKfz-251 in 8/44-9/44.

This actually raises another question: do such "one-off" or "disposable" vehicles need to be included in the OOB at all? Aren't they already covered by the "Set Captured" function under the "Allies" tab?

Also, I think vehicles used purely for training and "mascots" shouldn't be included.

Of course, it's Don and Andy's decision in the end.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by zastava128

This actually raises another question: do such "one-off" or "disposable" vehicles need to be included in the OOB at all? Aren't they already covered by the "Set Captured" function under the "Allies" tab?

Also, I think vehicles used purely for training and "mascots" shouldn't be included.

Of course, it's Don and Andy's decision in the end.

Pretty much the case - such items can be left for scenario designers to utilise for one-offs.

Things like the the Australian captured Italian armour, which was used fully for a few months, do deserve inclusion since someone just might want a few in his campaign core.

Of course - every OOB designer is free to add such things to say a training or captured tank formation for "flavour". But 2 items used for a month or so, likely not.

Andy

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by zastava128

This actually raises another question: do such "one-off" or "disposable" vehicles need to be included in the OOB at all? Aren't they already covered by the "Set Captured" function under the "Allies" tab?

Also, I think vehicles used purely for training and "mascots" shouldn't be included.

I won't defend PzKpfw IVH (unless I find it actually fired at Germans), but the rest may stay - one should first know, which captured equipment could be used, to be historically accurate.

There was a whole platoon of PzKpfw-IIIs used, and they had a chance to see action (bigger, than Polish Crusaders used for training in the UK). Autoblinda was, sadly, only one, but it gives much flavour (http://odkrywca.pl/forum_pics/picsforum25/ab41_d10.jpg) and it also could see action.

As for Warsaw Uprising vehicles - Panthers were two, and they fought actively. Also at least two SdKfz-251 were used. Hetzer was one, but, shamefully, it wasn't actually used (kept in reserve, until it was bombed in a garage).

BTW: it would be good to add also insurgent Kubuś improvised APC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubu%C5%9B
As Błażej suggested, a good-looking icon is 2845 (possibly even it's the one?). It could be used in 8-9/44, crew=2, size=4 (quite big), carry=10, weight=10, speed=some 15 (no precise data), no radio, no FC, no RF, armour 1 all around (or 2 - it was of thin plates, but double-layer spaced, and well-sloped).
The armament is usually given as 7.62mm DP LMG and flamethrower, though it probably was variable through service.

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

631 AB-41 - according to one source, it was acquired in 5/42 (now 6/42). Only one is known to be used, but as a commanding vehicle.
The only icon should be desert 350.
Rear-shooting BMG could be removed.

I think the standard has been that rear-facing machine guns are modeled as normal machine guns as long as there are enough weapon slots to do so after all forward-facing machine guns and TMGs have been included. Or do you mean that the machine gun was physically removed from the captured vehicle?

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

I think the standard has been that rear-facing machine guns are modeled as normal machine guns as long as there are enough weapon slots to do so after all forward-facing machine guns and TMGs have been included. Or do you mean that the machine gun was physically removed from the captured vehicle?

I meant, that IMO rear-shooting MGs should be removed from all vehicles, but of course it is up to decision of SPWAW staff.
Since armoured cars usually attack targets in front of them, it would be impossible to fire a gun and CMG, then to turn back to enemy and fire rear MG in the same move (unless the car wanted to withdraw). Rear MGs were in reality useful only in peculiar and probably rare conditions, so IMO it's more accurate to never use rear MGs, than to use them all the time.
BTW: it's the same for T-35, which could not fire from both 45mm guns at the same target without turning a tank, but it's another story.

[Mobhack]

Rear Mgs - it is up to the OOB designer to determine if they are usefully placed or not. As with some odd armoured car I added to Swiss "blue" OOB that had one in each corner - there I made the decision to give it 2 since probably 2 would bear in each direction.

Many Japanese tanks have their "co-ax" in the turret rear, as do some KV and IS series.

SP does not have any concept of "rear" armament - see the UK Archer tank destroyer.

In the great scheme of things, its neither here nor there quite frankly. It might get some rivet-counter's underwear in a twist should you include one, but who really cares about that?!

Andy

[blazejos]

Just do like to mention about subject of horse carts with Machine-gun called Taczanka. They were invented by Russians during civil war after revolution and they were intended as a machine-guns which can follow cavalry and give them immediately support without complicated unpacking and preparations. Poles copies this idea from soviets during 1920 war they were used by Cavalry army. Around 1928 standardisations happens and first model Taczanka wz.1928 was created with german maxim 1908 HMG was build icon for such type is 3491 they was equipped in three horses and can keep the speed of cavalry units but wasn't prepared for AA shooting.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by blazejos

Just do like to mention about subject of horse carts with Machine-gun called Taczanka. ...
...Around 1928 standardisations happens and first model Taczanka wz.1928 was created with german maxim 1908 HMG was build icon for such type is 3491 they was equipped in three horses and can keep the speed of cavalry units but wasn't prepared for AA shooting.

Indeed, if there's an icon, it's worth to add earlier model of taczanka, with wz.08 MG, available in 1/30-9/39, with radio 01. But, probably, its wz.08 MG should be AAMG as well. It isn't written directly, but according to a new booklet on Polish Maxims, a cavalry mount for wz.08 HMG, taken from the Schwarzlose, "enabled quick conversion for AA fire", comparing with MG-08 sledge mount. Probably there was an additional mast mounted (it could be mounted on some Polish trucks, carts and even horse wagons). I'll attach a photo of early taczanka.

Then, unit 548 Taczanka, apart from icon 3492, should be available from 1/36.
There could be "wz.28" or "wz.36" added to names, but it's not necessary IMO.


649-654 Austin AC's - in fact, in cars, that survived until the end of 20s, most probably armament was changed to standard-caliber 7.92mm MGs, first of all wz.05S (German MG-05/S). Weapon #200 could be renamed so, #202 is redundant.
(more on Austins http://derela.republika.pl/austin2.htm)

655, 656 Ford Tf-c - one of them is perfectly redundant - they differ only in a machinegun's name, with the same performance.

BTW: weapon 207 7.92wz.08/15TMG has class 3 instead of 5, and range 30, while weapons 200 and 202 have range 20 (they were all the same Maxims - it should be at least 24 - or 30 since they were water-cooled?)

668 Wz.29 [armoured truck] - it should be renamed Ursus and represent a different Police lightly armoured Ursus truck (it had no specific name, but I'd call it: "Ursus (panc.)" - short for "armoured"). I'll attach a proper photo - a current one shows unarmed loudspeaker car of unclear purpose (it isn't known, if it belonged to the army or police).
It actually could have an armament of rifles in loop-holes, maybe even wz.25 TMG (it had even a turret with some weapon mounting, but the photos doesn't show weapons).
Carry capacity was probably more - some 10.

693 Fiat 3000 L5/30 - Poland bought one Fiat 3000 in 7/31 (now: 1/30), most probably with MG armament (twin MGs, #224 fom Italian OOB) (if it was armed at all...).
"L5/30" Italian designation should be deleted.

699 TK-3 [prototype tank] - I'd call it "TK-3 nkm".

700 TKS-B [prototype tank] - not much improvement over TKS, but if we want to be precise, it was broken down in 1938 (rebuilt to TKS-D SP gun - http://derela.republika.pl/tkw.htm)

702-703 TKD [prototype tank] - it had no any special AP (sabot) ammo (it should increase HE by 5).
If we want to keep within facts, they weren't built of armour plates - maybe apart from a gun shield - http://derela.republika.pl/tkw.htm
Two units in the same class are redundant (I guess it was supposed to represent newer camo, which is a vague difference). Since a whole platoon of these vehicles was actually used for experiments and training (and even a reclaiming of Zaolzie province), I suggest to change class of unit 703 to 39 SP-gun, make it available in 5/32-3/39 (before the war only) and create a formation of two vehicles like "Prot. SPG Plt" or "Exp. SPG Plt" (until 9/39).
Unit 702 should be available then in 5/32 to 9/39.

704 TKD - there was no vehicle with 47mm Vickers gun, BUT it should be changed to actually used in combat TKS-D prototype, with #13 37mm wz.36 L45 gun, ammo: 68 rounds in total, crew 4, available 4/37-9/39, class 39 SP-gun, photo 29799.

715 220mm Battery - radio should be definitely 91, not 92 - it was a siege artillery of very dubious usefulness, rarely met in field.

725, 726 3in Mortar - photo should be 601 instead of a generic Soviet one.