Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations

[jivemi]

Interesting. One learns something new playing this incredible game or reading the forum(s) all the time. My compliments to the error ferret, Pibwl.

Btw--and sorry if this has been covered before--he says "a practical way of calculating off-map artillery range is 190 + range in km...". Which means that batteries with "real" ranges of several kilometers' difference have actual game range differences of only several hexes. For instance: "70 10cm leFH 30(t) - 206, real 16 km = OK 71 10.5cm leFH 18 - 202, real 10.6 (leFH18) to 12.3 km (leFH18M) = pretty OK"

So how do kilometers become equivalent to hexes after 190? Am I simply dim or missing something (or both)? Thanks.

[Griefbringer]

Regarding the ranges of the off-map artillery, it should be described in the Mobhack manual. Essentially, after 200 the range values use the reduced scale. This is probably due to the range being allowed a maximum value of 255.

Keep in mind that the only practical purpose that the range serves for off-map artillery is to determine whether they can fire counter-battery missions against other off-map targets.

[DRG]

Yes.......open MOBHack help it's all laid out in a chart and has been for years so there is no need for his formula

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Griefbringer

Keep in mind that the only practical purpose that the range serves for off-map artillery is to determine whether they can fire counter-battery missions against other off-map targets.

Precisely correct, That is the ONLY reason there are increases beyond 200 to 255 as stated in MOBHack help

This range formula is vital to the counter-battery process.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

301 ZiS 42 - it was rather not a medium truck, but heavy (halftrack) truck used mainly as an artillery tractor. Max speed was 40 km/h (now 18)

Michael....... light, medium and heavy trucks are normally designated that way by carry capacity which is why the ZiS 42 HT is a medium. It's carry capaicity does not justify being a " heavy" truck unless there are special considerations being made and in this case there are not. There may be some trucks that vary between classes from OOB to OOB... a fact that does not trouble me in the least.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Griefbringer

Regarding the ranges of the off-map artillery, it should be described in the Mobhack manual. Essentially, after 200 the range values use the reduced scale. This is probably due to the range being allowed a maximum value of 255.

Keep in mind that the only practical purpose that the range serves for off-map artillery is to determine whether they can fire counter-battery missions against other off-map targets.

Also - if the battery has 200 range then it can drop fires anywhere on the map.

If however the off-map battery had less than 200 range then range is calculated as if they were at -1,-1 resulting in areas of the map that cannot be reached on the larger maps.

All off-map arty therefore should have a 200+ range - an OOB designer who puts say 120mm mortars into an off-map battery with range of 160 is in error. He should have cloned the on-map weapon and given it a 200+ range for the off-map version. (Or not have made off map mortar batteries in the first place).

Other than that the range is only useful in calculating if C/B fire can be done.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

It is not the least bit unusual that a smaller shell has a greater range and besides the resident "error ferret" already blessed the range of that gun back in 2013

Oh, that's so nice
I forgot I did such list (and you had a patience )

As for range of artillery pieces, it's mostly a matter of barrel length.

Anyway, to finish with a partial oob review:

39 GAZ-AAMG - if Maxim quad was adopted in 1931, then most probably such trucks were available earlier, than 6/37 (there isn't any info) - maybe some 1934-35, when GAZ AA (truck's designation) became more numerous.

(BTW: to be precise, GAZ-AA was produced since 1932, but I don't suggest to change availability of #44 GAZ truck - earlier there was Soviet AMO-F-15 in this class, and a handful of foreign trucks)

590 Gaz DShK AAMG - the same: there was not a reason, why the Soviets wouldn't just put DShK AAMG on trucks earlier. I believe they were available in 1941 (now 8/42).
I think, that the name should be unified with #133 GAZ-DShK AAMG-3 - best would be "GAZ DShK AAMG".

59, 191, 440, 444, 613 DShK - despite it was accepted in 1939, as "obr. 1938", but according to Tekhnika i Vooruzhenie 6/2004, deliveries to the army started in 1940.

100 ZSU-37-1 - designation was just ZSU-37 according to books.
(BTW: it carried 320 rounds of ammo - now it has 35+5. I see, that other 37-40mm SP flaks have similar ammo, but isn't it too little?..)

108 Komsomolets (APC) - they weren't used as personnel carriers in scout units at all - besides, apart from an armoured cab, the soldiers carried on external benches were totally exposed (and the only thing they could do under fire was jump off and take cover, if they managed). It should be removed IMO, and formations should be corrected.

On the other hand, in the first stage of war they were sometimes used as tankettes, supporting troops with MG fire, reportedly also used by partisans. Maybe it should be changed to #121 tankette class, with a formation of eg. two vehicles, available in 6/41- around end of 1943?

On the other hand, T-27 tankettes (#302) were still used during the Winter War, and some even were used in combat after German attack, until 1942! [a book by A. Chubachin, Military Chronicle]. As prime movers (#339) they were rather extinct after 1942. (A number of T-27 remained in far East until 1945, but I don't think it's worth mentioning).

Komsomolets as a prime mover (#336) was largely extinct by end of 1943 [a book by M. Pavlov, Military Chronicle]. They were light prime movers, used only with 45mm AT guns and 76mm IG, but I'm afraid there's no way to limit their usage? (like other light tractors, like SdKfz 10, Renault UE..)

They were never supposed to be used as dedicated ammo carriers (#333) - their number wasn't even enough for artillery.

36,91 ISU-122, 234,304 ISU-122s - all have too much ammo (should be 30).

35 SU-122 - serial production was from 12/42, and first units were created that month, combat debut was on 2/43 (now 11/42) (it would not need a change in formations, for there is #288 SU-26 until 12/42). [Military Chronicle on SU-122]

Ammo initially was 36 rounds, "finally increased to 38-40" (now 40), so maybe this unit should have 36.

199 SU-122 - heat rounds appeared in "summer 43", so maybe this unit should be available from 6/43, and #35 until 5/43. They were used in significant numbers until early 1944 only (12/46)

655 T-26 Dozer - unfortunately, Russian books on T-26 don't know dozer variant. There is only one photo of T-26 tested with a light snow plough, and some mine ploughs were tested in 1933-34, but not accepted.

However, according to Baryatynski, during the Winter War, in 2-3/40 there were introduced T-26 with disc mine rollers(!), apparently a small number. It could be reclassified, and the same icon would do (with appropriate changes in formations).


It's worth to add Dodge WC (Polish LWP #179) (maybe as utility vehicle?) - they were fairly typical from some 1942/43.

There could be added transport glider KC-20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolesnikov-Tsibin_KC-20 - the "heaviest" of all Soviet light gliders, carrying 20 troops or 2.2 ton. Pictures: http://www.airwar.ru/enc/glider/kts20.html.
Icon 2854-56 of light A-7 seems good as well.
Along with G-11 (#200) they could even carry light AT guns in parts (45mm piece weighted 560 kg without a limber).

(BTW: G-11 (#200) was able to carry only 11 men, including pilot (as the name indicates), but it is used to carry 12-men squads.)

I hope, that some info helps.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

Michael....... light, medium and heavy trucks are normally designated that way by carry capacity which is why the ZiS 42 HT is a medium. It's carry capaicity does not justify being a " heavy" truck unless there are special considerations being made and in this case there are not. There may be some trucks that vary between classes from OOB to OOB... a fact that does not trouble me in the least.

Yes, but it's "parent" 3t ZiS-5 is Heavy truck (although it's rather medium), so I thought that ZiS-42 is heavy as well, even if it is 2.2 t (according to Russian Wikipedia, I don't want to search). Sure they weren't used like GAZ medium trucks, but rather for towing guns.

[DRG]

Yes Michael, but there are no on map heavy guns in this game so the only use for a Heavy truck is to transport the heavy mortar section. Either way, there is WAY too much obsessing over trucks in this game by a tiny minority of players and I regret not putting an end to multiple truck types 2 decades ago and simply stuck with generic Light, medium and heavy truck. But it's a slippery slope...accomadate one request and then it turns into a flood and I have little interest of time to debate when a specific truck was introduce..... It's a waste of time and OOB slots and the VAST majority of players just want something that can carry what they want it to carry...ZiS-5-ZiS-4 is irrelevant. Truck light, medium, heavy nomenclature is mainly an indicator of what they can carry so that the correct carry capacity could be assigned so that players would not be offered types that could not carry the gun assigned but that started getting screwed up as more " detail " truck types were added that deviated in carry capacity from one to the other in the same class instead of sticking with generics so by trying to accommodate "historical accuracy" we created un-necessary complication.

That said, next release we have "solved" the problem of players having to be careful when buying towed guns/ mortars that the transport they pick to move it will actually carry the gun/ mortar they want to move about. Andy has added code that will ONLY list the vehicles that have the capacity to tow/ carry the gun/mortar that was selected which has allowed me to add things like Jeeps to the artillery prime mover class for light AT guns.....but if the player selects a 100mm ATG the jeep won't show as a possible transport choice.

This does not mean there is no use for Light, medium and heavy truck. I could change the Russian OOB so that the Hcy mortar were transported by prime mover class but that means 120 mm would be offered Stalinets and SOMEBODY would complain so things like the Russian Hvy Mor Pl/M will still be carried by a "Heavy Truck" Zis

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

Yes Michael, but there are no on map heavy guns in this game so the only use for a Heavy truck is to transport the heavy mortar section.

There is very heavy on-map #366 122mm 31 FG (7t), but it wasn't towed by any truck anyway

BTW: there are no motorized howitzers currently.

Originally Posted by DRG

That said, next release we have "solved" the problem of players having to be careful when buying towed guns/ mortars that the transport they pick to move it will actually carry the gun/ mortar they want to move about.

That's a great news
Out of curiosity, which carry capacity is needed to carry guns with 1, 2 or 3 weight?

If you needed info on carry capability (typical loads), in order:
* Jeep / GAZ-67: 45 mm ATG (some 0.6t)
* Komsomolets: 45mm ATG, 76mm IG (0.8t)
* T-27 - surely nothing more than above

* T-26T: 76mm AT/FG (up to 2t)
* Dodge WC: 120mm mortars (0.5t), 57mm AT, 76mm AT/G (up to 2t)

* Studebaker: 76mm FG, 122mm FH (2.5t), 100mm AT (some 3t)
* STZ-5: 76mm AT/FG, 122mm FH, 85mm AA (4.5t)
* Halftrack: 57mm AT, 100 mm AT, 85mm AA
* ZiS-42: up to 85mm AA (4.5t)

* Stalinets, Ya-12: everything including 122mm FG (7t)

It seems, that 100mm ATG was practically in the same weight class as 85mm AA.

It's worth to copy #828 Studebaker, #043 Halftrack and ZiS-42 as prime movers, since it was one of their typical uses.

Possibly there's no need to create prime mover Jeeps - Light AT guns (class 157) can be towed by utility vehicles?

As for 120mm mortar question, unfortunately I have no info, what towed them before Dodge (apart from accidental usage of Komsomolets, and of course horses), but it seems there was no need of a heavy truck... just thinking. Pre-war heavy trucks on the other hand didn't tow guns, due to lack of off-road capabilities and too low power.

-------
Misc. comments:

344 Boys Carrier (utility veh.) - it seems, that Boys carrier should rather be available as an option for APC track class (like #467 Bren carrier). As utility vehicle, one MG should be enough (Bren or DT). BTW: carriers were most often known as "Universal Mk.I".

452 107mm Howitzer - should have single-tail icon 2117 (in fact, it was 107mm Field Gun)

86 Yak-9B - it could carry only up to 4x100 kg bombs (vertically, in a bomb bay). But this special variant (B- bomber) appeared only from 12/44. Ordinary Yak-9 fighters generally aren't known to carry bombs, nor even RS-82 rockets... At that time the Soviets seem to leave ground attacks to Il-2. Only early Yaks did carry rockets. They also could carry two bombs, but bomb racks were usually removed in units to improve performance.

144 Yak-9B - ...therefore I suggest to rename it to Yak-1, which, according to books, was fitted with RS-82 rockets from 10/41 (it should also have two #159 7.62 MGs instead of 12.7 one then). It could receive a new photo.

411 Yak-9U - as well, it could be changed to Yak-1, which received bombs around the same time as rockets (10/41?).

139 Yak-9T - heavier variant, with 37mm gun. Rockets should rather be removed

660 LaGG-1 - in fact, this designation was not used, and according to Russian books it was changed from a beginning to LaGG-3 (along with increased fuel tanks). But there were no aircraft armed with 2x20mm and 2x12.7mm. First aircraft had 3x12.7mm and 2x7.62mm, then from the 12th series most typical 1x20 and 1x12.7 mm.

Also, only from the 11th or 12th series (late 41) there were introduced rockets
First aircraft entered service only in 3/41 - so the unit #660 could be an early strafer, and the unit #661 might remain, with corrected guns. Same for guns of unit #140.

That's all as for now.
...I can't promise if there will be further research, I'm tired as well