Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by DRG

Which does not answer the question. There is a 08 as an AAMG in the OOB now so why would I need a second Taczanka in 1936. Michal posted, let him answer

Sorry, I just stick my nose everywhere

Seriously, I just wanted to point out that an MG on a high mount is really not yet a proper AAMG. For sure you could shoot at aircraft with one, but it would have been more for psychological reasons than in any real hope of hitting or even significantly harassing the aircraft.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

Sorry, I just stick my nose everywhere

Seriously, I just wanted to point out that an MG on a high mount is really not yet a proper AAMG. For sure you could shoot at aircraft with one, but it would have been more for psychological reasons than in any real hope of hitting or even significantly harassing the aircraft.

Which is all any tank commander's AAMG is in the game, so that is what it will be treated as. Especially since it is now built into the AI pick list in the AA section for that period and I don't want to change that.

Andy

[DRG]

Seriously, I just wanted to point out that an MG on a high mount is really not yet a proper AAMG. For sure you could shoot at aircraft with one, but it would have been more for psychological reasons than in any real hope of hitting or even significantly harassing the aircraft.

Michal already said the weapon was set up to "enabled quick conversion for AA fire" and that would presuppose it was AA capable....... now can we PLEASE wait for an answer from the guy who posted the info ? All I want to know is why I should have two of these units when one seems to cover everything with the new icon and a AA capable 08 MG

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

Which is all any tank commander's AAMG is in the game, so that is what it will be treated as. Especially since it is now built into the AI pick list in the AA section for that period and I don't want to change that.

Andy

Actually, the commander's machine gun was practically always provided with a simple ring AA sight in WW2, either flip-up or detachable one depending on the weapon. US tankers usually did not have them on after North Africa and Sicily, since they faced decreasing air threat, but they were still part of standard equipment.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

Could you please clearly explain what it is you want me to do here .

What point would there be in having one start 1/30 and another start 1/36 if the MG.08 is a AAMG ? There is no purpose to having 2

Earlier taczanka (wz.28) should be armed with wz.08 AAMG, later one (wz.36) - with new standard wz.30 AAMG (both weapons should be added). Yes, both could be fitted with detachable AA sights. Firstly I didn't suggest creating the second tankette, but since we have beautiful true icons for both, they shouldn't be wasted

As for flamethrowers: personally, I would vote to have them in human-only units. There were few flamethrower platoons on a front, so the Germans had little chance to meet them.

Originally Posted by DRG

I'm not sure which graphics program you use to create your photos but does it give you the option of choosing either colour matching or error diffusion dithering when you apply the pic palette with it ?

I've never checked this option - which one should I use?

Originally Posted by DRG

Also, the game does not like non standard sizes and pm29522_wz34_Image4.lbm is only 159 wide. I have corrected it but it saves me a lot of time I don't have much to spare when I don't have to check everything

I must have cropped too much - sorry.

Michal

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

Earlier taczanka (wz.28) should be armed with wz.08 AAMG, later one (wz.36) - with new standard wz.30 AAMG (both weapons should be added). Yes, both could be fitted with detachable AA sights. Firstly I didn't suggest creating the second tankette, but since we have beautiful true icons for both, they shouldn't be wasted

Done

Originally Posted by DRG

I've never checked this option - which one should I use?

If possible use diffusion dithering. It smooths the transition better between colours / tones for photos with a limited palette.

like this...... the dithering version is on the right. Less blocky in the background ( this was enlarged 2x for clarity )



I rarely use colour matching anymore though occasionally a photo turns out better using colour matching 99% are now done using the dithering option

[Pibwl]

Unit 668 Wz.29 - with a change to Ursus armoured truck, better icon would be 1373, with wide rear compartment (of M-H AC)

Unit 415 40mm AA-Gun - in fact they were used from mid-36 only - there were no light AA guns before at all (I don't know how about a pick list - if there's a need to keep Flak all the time, there might be created 7.92mm wz.08 AAMG in this class)
If the date is changed, it needs changes in formations 075, 076 (there didn't exist such special mixed platoons and they are better removed BTW), 328, 329, 330


Units worth to add:

- C2P light tractor - like unit 428 C7P tractor, but icon 2753, picture 29484 (29485 shows a prototype), carry=110 (in fact 3 soldiers), speed 15, size 2, radio=0, no armour (the same for C7P as well), used from 7/37

They should be used in formations 328, 330 AA-Gun Pl (M) (before their advent there will be other tractors or limber)

- 75mm De Dion - 75mm SPAA gun, used sometimes against tanks - like eg. unit 057 3RO 90L53 in Italian oob, but: photo 29868, green icon 342, available 1/30-9/39. Should be fitted with engine hood armour and gun's forward shield.
Armament should be 75mm wz.18/24 AAG (to be added), with specifications like 033 75mm wz.97 FG. In fact it carried no AP ammo, but several tanks were destroyed with HE. 180 rounds of ammo were carried by ammunition truck in fact. Possibly class 52 SP-AT vehicle will be better.

There should be added formations: 2 vehicle platoon and 4 vehicle battery.

- partisan HMGs, used mostly during a Warsaw Uprising (8-9/44), but also in some partisan skirmishes since 11/39 until the end. Possibly they should be separated from 04 Machine gun class, and create units with one HMG only (eg. class 193 MG unit?).
There should be: wz.30 HMG (11/39-end, real Warsaw Uprising photo 29365), MG-34 (some 1941-end), Soviet Maxim (1944-end, weapon #122 if it hasn't been chaned)


Formations (only few changes):

121, 122 Marine ATR, Marine ATR Co - there were no such big AT rifle units in (so-called) Marines - formations to be removed. ATR in unit 216 should be enough.

153 SP-AA Section - better name is SP-AAMG Platoon. In fact there were 3 taczankas in a platoon.

[Pibwl]

When I finally dived into regular infantry formations of 1939, I've found major error, that should not wait until next season. Now, there can't be assembled a correct infantry platoon at all and it's very underpowered.

A platoon in 1930-39 is formation 300 Rifle Platoon, consisting of:
- one class 40 Heavy inf.
- one class 1 Inf.
- one class 64 Medium Inf.

In fact, all three squads were identical.
In both regular and reserve infantry each squad had an LMG. Lacks of LMGs could be encountered only in part of second-line units, like Obrona Narodowa (which is treated separately), and few improvised units, non representative for a bulk of the Polish infantry at all. So, all Rifle units without LMG have no reason to exist.

In reality a platoon had a 5-men HQ section, which included a marksman, in 1939 changed to AT-rifle.
I don't know, if it's better to add AT-rifle to one squad (preferably Heavy infantry class), or to add unit 405 wz.35 AT-Rifle to a platoon of three identical squads. In the first option, we should artificially increase a squad from 19 to 20 men.
In the second option, there should be a different platoon with a marksman, and only after 6/39 it could be replaced with a platoon with AT-rifle (assuming, that all units opened their top-secret only-in-case-of-war boxes). The platoon with a marksman could remain to choose in 1939 also anyway, but the one with AT rifles should be on a pick list.

Besides, 46mm grenade launchers were never used by rifle squads, but were used in a whole GL section with 3 GLs on a company level (long time ago, when I corrected SP-1, I also thought, that one squad in a platoon should receive a GL, but many things were written since that time).

So, as for Class 40 units:
282 Rifle Squad - with SLR and SMG - was extremely rare (radio should be 3), but it should have LMG.
283 Rifle Squad - without LMG - should be removed
288 Rifle Squad - without LMG, with 46mm GL - to be removed
289 Rifle Squad - without LMG - should be removed
302 Rifle Squad - without LMG, with 46mm GL - to be removed
303 Rifle Squad - the same unit as above with different radio
307 Rifle Squad - early unit with LMG 05/15 and Lebel rifle, available until 1936 - there could be kept an unit with French rifles (rather Berthier) until end of 1934, BUT by the end of 1930 all regular infantry units were given wz.28 LMG instead of 08/15, so it should be changed (BTW, currently it's the only class 40 unit with LMG).

Class 1 units:
284, 300, 306 Rifle Squad - all without LMG - should be removed.

Class 64 units:
285 Rifle Squad - correct one, with LMG and 19 men
301 Rifle Squad - with additional rifle, which does not seem accurate, because a weapon in the 1st slot should be multiplied already.

Apart from a standard unit with wz.98 rifle, wz.28 LMG and some grenades, available in 1930-39, it's worth to keep one with #176 8mm Berthier Rifle and wz.28 LMG, until 12/34 (Lebels were earlier withdrawn from regular infantry, remaining in second-line duties). There also could be created newest squads like 282 Rifle Squad, with radio 3.

There should be created units:
- grenade launcher section with three #220 46mm wz.36 Mrtr and wz.29 carbines, 14 men, from 7/37 to 10/39. Ammo was probably 60 (using a section's cart; crew only carried 20).
- grenade launcher section with three #216 46mm wz.30 Mrtr, available in 2/33-10/39, radio x1 (details and ammo could be the same)
- grenade launcher section with three #218 46mm wz.16 Mrtr, available in 1/30- (say) 12/35. Details and ammo could be the same for simplicity (I have no data), but according to Polish sources, max range should be only 300 m, and it wasn't 46mm (it was a spigot mortar - http://www.bulgarianartillery.it/Bul...erfer%2016.htm)


A rifle company - formation 301 should have 3 platoons and GL section - and it would be most correct to replace its leading class 51 Light infantry unit with 7-men HQ section, but it probably won't be practical. Or we can assume, that it's a HQ squad gathered of all company logistic support soldiers, wagon drivers and cooks, excluding medical section (it would be 17 men). They should have no LMG indeed.

Regards
Michal

[DRG]

..........on the list and I have not looked into this beyond skimming this post but if the units without the LMG are a problem because they don't have an LMG why not just add the LMG ?? Do do know when you remove units it screws up scenarios?

Also, after saying "Lebels were earlier withdrawn from regular infantry" and asking me to delete about half the infantry units available......WHY is unit #305 not on this list ??


Don

[Pibwl]

I know, that removing these units will screw up scenarios, that's why they should be just renationalized - it should solve problem, and we won't have a plethora of redundant units to choose, differing in addition of an extra rifle.

Adding an LMG to each unit won't be a good idea, because now there are 12 units of three classes, while there should be only 3 or 4 in one or two classes: a standard squad with wz.98 rifle, an early one with Berthier, an experimental one with SLR (radio 3) and maybe a standard squad with ATR.

I didn't mention unit 305, because it is class 51 Light infantry (a company HQ), which I haven't checked yet. Speaking of class 51:
- 286 Rifle Squad - correct, but weapon 144 wz.29 Carbine or 173 wz.98 Carabine (should be Carbine) is more appropriate than rifle
- 286 Rifle Squad - Lebel should be changed to Berthier, and it should end in 1934
- 305 Rifle Squad with two Lebels - redundant, especially, that command sections even had less rifles, than men

A number of men in these units could be easily reduced to around 10, since they were HQ sections, with many specialized and logistic troops, not all of which had rifles and not all were involved in action (apart from necessity).

By the way, as for formation 315 MG Company, which also used Light Infantry: the fourth MG platoon should be on taczankas - so it should be replaced with formation 153 SP-AA Section - which in turn should have three taczankas and be renamed SP-AAMG Platoon.

Speaking of MGs: formation 85 MG Section should be renamed "platoon"

Oh, I forgot: regular infantry squads with Berthier rifles should also have weapon 91 VB Rifle Grnd (with unknown number of ammo, say 10 like unit #287 of 1940)

Michal