Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update for GC42-43West

A forum to discuss custom scenarios, campaigns and modding in general.

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Design, Panzer Corps Moderators

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Thu Aug 02, 2012 5:42 pm

There's no need to increase the cost of overstrength, since that automatically increases with elite reinforcement cost increases. But this component should increase strategic choice in elite reinforcing in 1943 and beyond. Basically elite reinforcements in battle are unaffordable, and elite reinforcements in the deployment stage are expensive. Overstrength becomes very expensive especially in 1944. Choose wisely which units you want to have as super units and which as average units, instead of simply having all units run around with 4-5 stars.

I think I might tone down the exp upgrade penalty a bit to compensate for the significantly increased cost of elite reinforcements.

orlinos
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:29 am

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by orlinos » Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:21 pm

deducter wrote:Updated to 1.73, with lots of small changes here and there. The following are the biggest changes:
1. Strategic bomber costs increased in 1939-1942 and again in 1943. I want to encourage the player to use more ground attack planes (Ju 87G and Fw 190F/Fw 190G in 1943 and after).[...]
11. Panzer IVD and all vehicles with its short-barreled 75 mm gun INI to 5. [...]
I was hoping to have finished the late DLC’s before Africa campaign comes – and give my response but I took a break from Panzer Corps and found my skills lacking after return. So I am playing the early DLC’s AGAIN. Stupid me.

I took a quick dislike to yet another increase in bomber costs, (as usual), but I think it works fine. I do not dare sending even my Heinkel unguarded unless I really must and the enemy air force is weakened. So I do use more Stukas, as intended.

I am not quite sure how I feel about the INI decrease to Panzer IVD. This tank is already like a whining baby for me (until upgraded later on) - prone to air strikes, expensive and only useful against infantry. Yet, at my last playthrough I learned to use it effectively – guarding it from aircrafts and using it to mow through soldiers in the clear.

This time I tend to leave it in reserve, since it’s often more cost effective to just use artillery with infantry and Stukas.

Last time I was playing the DLC ’40 I chose the French path, now I’m against the British. Their infantry is deadly even in the open, so maybe that’s why I’m having problems, not because of the INI decrease.

Have to play more.
Piotr 'Orlinos' Kozlowski

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:44 pm

orlinos wrote:
I took a quick dislike to yet another increase in bomber costs, (as usual), but I think it works fine. I do not dare sending even my Heinkel unguarded unless I really must and the enemy air force is weakened. So I do use more Stukas, as intended.
The thing with strategic bombers is that I was worried that an advanced player will ignore the TAC and go only for STR, since those units have several advantages in the later stages of the war: 1)At high experience/overstrength they can reduced ammo to 1, which effectively takes that unit out of combat 2)They don't take return fire from units with AA -1, so they don't lose strength to attrition. I felt, given the circumstances, I had no choice but to increase STR cost. That said, The Ju 87G and the FW 190 are both amazing in 1943/1944, provided you have an opportunity to use them. The Red Air Force is truly out in force.
I am not quite sure how I feel about the INI decrease to Panzer IVD. This tank is already like a whining baby for me (until upgraded later on) - prone to air strikes, expensive and only useful against infantry. Yet, at my last playthrough I learned to use it effectively – guarding it from aircrafts and using it to mow through soldiers in the clear.
This tank actually now has the same combat stats as in vanilla except it has GD +1. The Panzer IVD works well once you can get it to 2 stars, and once you suppress infantry, at least once even in the open, with artillery. I think having at least one or two Panzer IV is very useful, since those work very well against soft targets like cavalry in the open and artillery. And if you get an attack or INI hero on your Panzer IV it'll be a powerhouse.

Patch 1.10 has a reform units cheat, which is huge! Provided that reforming a unit costs at least the same prestige as buying a new unit, I think I will play with that option. So no more worrying about losing your units, although it'll still be a bad thing to lose a unit since the exp gets reset to 0.

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:27 pm

The new patch 1.10 has a lot of nice changes, so I'll try to get v1.8 of this mod out ASAP because of all the new features.

I have a list of questions I'd like to solicit some input on:

1)Motorcycle infantry: what would be best? Having these units be the German equivalent of cavalry, with move = 5 and spotting = 3? Or limit spotting to 2? Do motorcycle battalions have better training/weapons than standard infantry?

2)Flamethrower tank: I want to try an experiment whereby I make this unit a "close" hard unit, meaning that when it attacks in close terrain it will attack the close defense of the defending unit. This unit will have many drawbacks to compensate for this advantage: lowish INI, low GD, standard CD of 2, low HA.

3)Brummbar: Not quite sure what to do with this unit atm. I'm thinking of making it something similar to the StuH 42 without the switch mode but with slightly better ammo to compensate. Alternatively the StuH 42 could be changed to have range = 2 instead of range = 1. Soliciting input here.

4)Changes to towed units, such that all towed ART/AT/AA can be transported either by trucks or by the new Sdkfz 7, while infantry can be transported by trucks or the Sdkfz 250/1 and Sdkfz 251/1.

5)Difficulty setting tweaks: Now that I can change the difficulty settings, I want to make some changes. I'm assuming anyone playing this mod will play at minimum at "General" level. I want to keep General and FM, along with the original 3 bonus difficulty levels, but that opens up 3 new difficulty levels that I can play around with. Does anyone have some interesting ideas? We can name these after other German generals with varying effects. I would like to have 100%, 75%, 50%, and 25% prestige levels.

6)I'm tempted the up the exp gain rate slightly for units with 200 or greater experience.

The following are some changes that I already know I will make:

1) Panzer II to recon class in 1942.

2) Panzerjager IB will be upgradeable to the Marder II for balance reasons

3) Elite reinforcements will cost progressively more in 1942, 1943, and 1944/1945. To compensate, the expupgrade penalty will be reduced slightly.

4) Various late war Soviet fighters will have their AA reduced slightly to compensate for the massive increase to the cost of elite reinforcements during this period.

I think this mod will be best played with the new cheat code "reform units," since it lessens the frustration of permanently losing a prized unit during a playthrough. Since the reformed unit comes back with 0 exp, it will be very expensive in terms of prestige to get it back up to 3-4 stars late in the war.

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:48 pm

The new Sdkfz 7 tractor is a nice addition, by default it's set to be the only transport for certain units like the 88 gun and the various heavy artillery.

In the process of reorganizing the various transports, I can't quite decide on how I want to proceed. Do I maintain a similar system whereby the Sdkfz 7 is the sole transport for heavy artillery? Or do I simply make it so that all towed ART/AA/AT can be transported by both the Opel and the Sdkfz 7. I think this latter approach is better for gameplay and it is also simpler. Infantry gets trucks/APC, while towed units get trucks/Sdkfz 7.

Also, is it unrealistic to allow the Sdkfz to tow various light artillery pieces like the Pak 36, the 10.5 cm leFH, the 20 mm FlaK?

Chris10
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:06 am
Location: Spain

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by Chris10 » Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:46 pm

deducter wrote: Also, is it unrealistic to allow the Sdkfz 7 to tow various light artillery pieces like the Pak 36, the 10.5 cm leFH, the 20 mm FlaK?
Indeed it is ...as their numbers were limited the SdKz 7 (8 tons) only towed heavy stuff (8,8-cm-FlaK 18/36/37 and 15cm sFH 18 sometimes.
The even heavier guns like 10,5 cm Flak, 15cm Kanone, 21cm Mörser were towed by SdKfz 8 (12tons).
And SdKfz 9 FAMO (18 tons) were mostly used in pairs as tank salvager but also to transport the 30cm Mörser for example.

Although for gameplay this ony may be semantics...a question of philosophy

flakfernrohr
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by flakfernrohr » Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:03 am

deducter wrote:The new patch 1.10 has a lot of nice changes, so I'll try to get v1.8 of this mod out ASAP because of all the new features.

I have a list of questions I'd like to solicit some input on:

1)Motorcycle infantry: what would be best? Having these units be the German equivalent of cavalry, with move = 5 and spotting = 3? Or limit spotting to 2? Do motorcycle battalions have better training/weapons than standard infantry?

2)Flamethrower tank: I want to try an experiment whereby I make this unit a "close" hard unit, meaning that when it attacks in close terrain it will attack the close defense of the defending unit. This unit will have many drawbacks to compensate for this advantage: lowish INI, low GD, standard CD of 2, low HA.

3)Brummbar: Not quite sure what to do with this unit atm. I'm thinking of making it something similar to the StuH 42 without the switch mode but with slightly better ammo to compensate. Alternatively the StuH 42 could be changed to have range = 2 instead of range = 1. Soliciting input here.

4)Changes to towed units, such that all towed ART/AT/AA can be transported either by trucks or by the new Sdkfz 7, while infantry can be transported by trucks or the Sdkfz 250/1 and Sdkfz 251/1.

5)Difficulty setting tweaks: Now that I can change the difficulty settings, I want to make some changes. I'm assuming anyone playing this mod will play at minimum at "General" level. I want to keep General and FM, along with the original 3 bonus difficulty levels, but that opens up 3 new difficulty levels that I can play around with. Does anyone have some interesting ideas? We can name these after other German generals with varying effects. I would like to have 100%, 75%, 50%, and 25% prestige levels.

6)I'm tempted the up the exp gain rate slightly for units with 200 or greater experience.

The following are some changes that I already know I will make:

1) Panzer II to recon class in 1942.

2) Panzerjager IB will be upgradeable to the Marder II for balance reasons

3) Elite reinforcements will cost progressively more in 1942, 1943, and 1944/1945. To compensate, the expupgrade penalty will be reduced slightly.

4) Various late war Soviet fighters will have their AA reduced slightly to compensate for the massive increase to the cost of elite reinforcements during this period.

I think this mod will be best played with the new cheat code "reform units," since it lessens the frustration of permanently losing a prized unit during a playthrough. Since the reformed unit comes back with 0 exp, it will be very expensive in terms of prestige to get it back up to 3-4 stars late in the war.
@deducter.............
Here is what Nico and I came up with when Bebro made the icon of the Brummbaer:


nikivdd wrote:

flakfernrohr wrote:

nikivdd wrote:Brummbar.
Has anyone attempted to assign unit parameters in equipment file? Or any suggestions?



Pretty similar to a GRILLE 15cm L/12 specs I imagine. Used the same ammunition as the sIG 33. Also similar gun to the sIG 33 that had a L/11 15cm gun which was used to develop the L/12 which was shorter and in a ball mounting of the superstructure. All of this family used the Infanteriegeschutz 33 cannon or its variations.



Would a range of 2 and 5 ammo be reasonable? What do you think?



The tables in the game for the sIG 38T show a range of 3, ammo of 4, movement at 4, rate of fire 9 and initiative 5. The Sturmpanzer is the same.

Since the Brummbar (Grizzly Bear, I love that name), is an improved version cannon on a PzIV Chassis, a higher range, more ammo and more movement would be in order I think. Certainly a more initiative due to the enclosed fighting compartment on the hull which was heavily armored.

I would give at least a range of 3, ammo 5 as you say because of a larger hull area on the PzIV chassis. Then I would up the movement to at least 5 (the same as Hummel). Perhaps the initiative should be a little higher to for the enclosed fighting compartment and the Germans felt very confident in the Brummbar and the close defense and air defense should be higher than an open fighting compartment vehicle. The rate of fire could maybe be tweaked since this cannon was set on a ball like a tank and the loading and sighting procedure improved.

I am NO expert, just my $.02. The Brummbar was really a bad a** artillery and support tank, just very heavy due to the armored superstructure. They improved it three times before production ceased.
Old Timer Panzer General fan. Maybe a Volksturm soldier now. Did they let Volksturm drive Panzers?

Chris10
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:06 am
Location: Spain

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by Chris10 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:10 am

flakfernrohr wrote: I would give at least a range of 3, ammo 5 as you say because of a larger hull area on the PzIV chassis. Then I would up the movement to at least 5 (the same as Hummel). Perhaps the initiative should be a little higher to for the enclosed fighting compartment and the Germans felt very confident in the Brummbar and the close defense and air defense should be higher than an open fighting compartment vehicle. The rate of fire could maybe be tweaked since this cannon was set on a ball like a tank and the loading and sighting procedure improved.
All Sturmpanzer: > Sturmpanzer I, Sig33, Stuh 42 and Sturmpanzer IV Brummbär shall have a range of 2. Right now they are either overpowered with range 3 or underpowered with range 1 (StuH42)
Reasons
1. The gun : The sIG33 and its derivations had only a max fireing range of aprox 5000 m
2. Technical reasons: Low launching angle due to vehicle limitations
3. No PanzerHowitzers : Sturmpanzer as the name suggests are close combat vehicles for Infantry support and no artillery support vehicles for long range fire support...

In PzC East Iam going to class artillery ranges as follows:

Range 1:
StuG IIIB - due to its mini stub gun

Range 2: max range between 4000-7000m
7,5 cm Art
Sturmpanzer I
Sig33
Stuh 42
Sturmpanzer IV Brummbär > higher GD than PzIV > same front armor thickness as Tiger I (100mm), side armor 50mm compared to PzIV 30mm
Wurfrahmen 40
Panzerwerfer 42
21 cm Nebelwerfer 42
30 cm Nebelwerfer 43 >max range 4800m
Sturmpanzer 38t (Grille) > (sig38tM)

Range 3: max range over 8000m
10,5cm
15cm
17cm
21cm Mrs
Panzerhaubitze Wespe
Panzerhaubitze Hummel
15cm Nebelwerfer 41 > max range 10.000m

that should be it I think

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:30 am

I thought the Grille and the Sturmpanzer I/sIG33 had the same gun, so why would they have different range?

I'm thinking of making the Brummbar a special heavy assault gun. This weapon was supposed to have great firepower even though it was armed with a derivative of the sIG 33. I think ammo = 4 range = 1 SA = 15 HA = 10 ROF = 9 in 1943, in 1944 ammo = 5. Cost will be higher than the StuH 42.

The idea is to make this unit a specialized fire support weapon used on the frontlines. It will be suitable for cracking tough defensive positions and heavily entrenched units.

Chris10
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:06 am
Location: Spain

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by Chris10 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:34 am

deducter wrote:I thought the Grille and the Sturmpanzer I/sIG33 had the same gun, so why would they have different range?
I realized this and edited the post while you were posting :P ...

flakfernrohr
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by flakfernrohr » Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:24 pm

deducter wrote:I thought the Grille and the Sturmpanzer I/sIG33 had the same gun, so why would they have different range?

I'm thinking of making the Brummbar a special heavy assault gun. This weapon was supposed to have great firepower even though it was armed with a derivative of the sIG 33. I think ammo = 4 range = 1 SA = 15 HA = 10 ROF = 9 in 1943, in 1944 ammo = 5. Cost will be higher than the StuH 42.

The idea is to make this unit a specialized fire support weapon used on the frontlines. It will be suitable for cracking tough defensive positions and heavily entrenched units.
Deductor and Chris: The Brummbaer was much more expensive and complicated to manufacture than any of the other similar types of Infantry support armored vehicles. Only about 300 were built in four variations. The cannon was an improved version, both in the gun and the mounting, of StuH 43 L/12. In the 3rd variation the gun was made lighter and designated the StuH43/1. Both had a range of 4,700 meters, but the sIG33 had only a capacity for 10 rounds while the Brummbaer had a capacity of 38 HE explosive rounds. Greater firepower, easier loading and laying of the gun for target sighting.

Here are the stats for the Brummbaer from the recent mod done by Churchy and Matuchi on the DMP forum:

BRUMMBAER:
Sturmpanzer IV 4 421 4 39 6 1 1 5 19 14 -1 1 14 12 3 1 0 Brummbaer.png 1.4.1943 1.3.1945 0 Sturmpanzer IV Brummbär fortkiller StuGATY
Old Timer Panzer General fan. Maybe a Volksturm soldier now. Did they let Volksturm drive Panzers?

Chris10
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:06 am
Location: Spain

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by Chris10 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:32 pm

flakfernrohr wrote: Deductor and Chris: The Brummbaer was much more expensive and complicated to manufacture than any of the other similar types of Infantry support armored vehicles....
I know Flakki... :) ...That and the fact that it was highly armored led to the decision to assign command of the Brummbär units to the Panzer Corps and not the Artillery Command so it ended up being at the disposal of mobile Panzer Corps and not so much as Infantery support unit

flakfernrohr
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by flakfernrohr » Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:35 pm

Chris10.....don't you guys be pulling too many claws and teeth from my beloved "Grizzly Bear". :lol:
Old Timer Panzer General fan. Maybe a Volksturm soldier now. Did they let Volksturm drive Panzers?

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:43 pm

The thing is, adding another range 2 artillery with high CD is pointless. I already have such a unit in my mod, which is the Grille H. Admittedly the Brummbar will probably have GD = 18, so it'll be a very high GD unit, but having it be range 2 but equipped with the stats of the sIG 33 (in my mod SA = 10 HA = 5) seems redundant.

The DMP stats look way too high, 19 SA and 14 HA is a lot, although it is balanced somewhat by its lower ammo. Basically the their idea is what I want to try in my mod, except attack values will be lower. I think it should be fine, as a close support artillery with excellent firepower and defenses.

Here's what I'll do about the Panzer II Flamm

Panzer II Flamm close flag added, meng flag removed, rott flag added, PzII family removed, ROF 14 to 10, ammo 10 to 4, INI 3 to 2, CD 6 to 2, speed 5 to 6, cost 350 to 560, date available to 22.6.1941.

This unit is a unique tank that performs best in close terrain. It is absolutely devastating to suppressed soft targets in close terrain, however, its performance is poor against unsuppressed AT/infantry and also against tanks. It is a very situational unit, most useful for combat in urban terrain.

Note this unit receives SA +2 in 1943 to compensate for the increased GD of infantry in that year and GD +2 AD +2 to improve survivability a bit.

I'm conflicted about the motorcycle infantry. I think I'll change the movetype to all-terrain with move = 5 and keep its spotting of 3, along with increasing cost to 347, stats will be reduced to that of standard wehrmacht infantry. Otherwise this unit is too good. Of course it'll receive an upgrade in 1943.

flakfernrohr
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:56 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by flakfernrohr » Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:05 pm

I have to admit, these guys are very interesting to use in Panzer Corps:


I made masks for the first two and they look better in different colors. Haven't messed with the third icon.
Attachments
kradbmw75a.png
kradbmw75a.png (22.32 KiB) Viewed 1291 times
GER_BMW.png
GER_BMW.png (21.22 KiB) Viewed 1291 times
BMW.png
BMW.png (53.49 KiB) Viewed 1291 times
Old Timer Panzer General fan. Maybe a Volksturm soldier now. Did they let Volksturm drive Panzers?

ThvN
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by ThvN » Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:21 pm

Hello everybody, sorry to barge into this thread, I checked out deductor's manual, nice work, and if you need input I might be able to help with a couple of things.

I see a lot of posts about the self-propelled sIG 15cm variants, I don't know a lot about them, but it might help to get some basics parameters, so I looked them up. First of all, the range of the basic gun is different depending on the charge they used. The maximum charge (no. 6) gave 4700 meters. I don't know how many game hexes that would mean, you are better at this I guess. I cannot work it out as the 7,5cm and the 10,5cm artillery have about the same range in reality (10.000m)but the game (and your mod) gives it range 2 and 3 resp.? Is there a balance reason for that?

The Sturmpanzer I or Stupa (I'll not use the official name) had the gun simply put on PzI chassis, with a shield mounted around it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/deckarudo/ ... 5031307664

So the gun had identical elevation and sights. This would mean that Sturmpanzer I, with the maximum powder charge loaded and firing the basic HE shell, could theoretically reach 4700 meter. I don't know if they could safely use all charges or only the lighter ones on the Sturmpanzer. The special demolition charge (Stielgranate 42) had a much lower charge and could reach 1000m. There was also a hollow-charge (HEAT) projectile which could pierce 178mm armor at a 30degree angle at a range of 500m. Because its is a HEAT the penetration won't vary very much with range or muzzle velocity, one source quotes 157mm at 1500m (still with 30deg angle).

The thing weighed 8500kg, so mobility was bad. I often see the same performance statistics given as the PzI B (its donor chassis), but it was slightly worse. Let's compare:

Speed: PzI 40km/h, Stupa 35km/h top speed. Speed in terrain for PzI is given as 19km/h, so Stupa would be relatively worse (I can make a rough estimate if you want).

Fuel consumption/range: both model carried 146 liter fuel, but Stupa was about 10% less economical. Range for PzI varies with source, but is usually given for the 'A' model, 'B' was worse, about 180km on-road/130km off-road. I have one claim explicitly for the Stupa which says 160km on-road/120km offroad.

It only carried three shells for the gun, the rest was carried in a supply vehicle (halftrack) which also carried some of the crew. Oh yes, armor: hull 13mm, shield 10mm.
38 build around jan-feb 1940, organised in six sIG-Kompanien (Nr.701-706), six vehicles each. Apperently in use until 1943.

Sources:the internet, and books: Sturmgeschütze: Entwicklung und Fertigung der sPak (Walter J. Spielberger) and Kraftfahrzeuge und Panzer der Reichswehr, Wehrmacht und Bundeswehr (Werner Oswald)

I'll go make dinner now, I'll continue later with some other bits. Any questions/observations/criticisms, just let me know.

ThvN
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by ThvN » Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:56 pm

deducter wrote:The new patch 1.10 has a lot of nice changes, so I'll try to get v1.8 of this mod out ASAP because of all the new features.

I have a list of questions I'd like to solicit some input on:

1)Motorcycle infantry: what would be best? Having these units be the German equivalent of cavalry, with move = 5 and spotting = 3? Or limit spotting to 2? Do motorcycle battalions have better training/weapons than standard infantry?
I don't know much about them, managed to google this for the Kradschutzen: http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/Ger ... 201940.htm So, basically mounted infantry, with slightly heavier weapons carried. Sort of a cross weapons-wise between regular ('light') infantry and Grenadiere.
2)Flamethrower tank: I want to try an experiment whereby I make this unit a "close" hard unit, meaning that when it attacks in close terrain it will attack the close defense of the defending unit. This unit will have many drawbacks to compensate for this advantage: lowish INI, low GD, standard CD of 2, low HA.
Sounds nice, but I have a question about the Close Defence or CD; what exactly is it supposed to represent? Is it a combination of armor and short-range defensive weapons? Or is size, stealth and visibility (infantry) also to be considered when making adjustments for vehicles? Or other things?
3)Brummbar: Not quite sure what to do with this unit atm. I'm thinking of making it something similar to the StuH 42 without the switch mode but with slightly better ammo to compensate. Alternatively the StuH 42 could be changed to have range = 2 instead of range = 1. Soliciting input here.

4)Changes to towed units, such that all towed ART/AT/AA can be transported either by trucks or by the new Sdkfz 7, while infantry can be transported by trucks or the Sdkfz 250/1 and Sdkfz 251/1.
I'll look up some things for you, will post them later.

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:59 pm

I like the current implementation of the Sturmpanzer I and the Grille H, and with the new Sturmpanzer II there'll be a nice upgrade series

My thoughts are that the sIG gun needs to be buffed slightly in my mod, ROF goes from 9 to 10. Otherwise here are the stats, all of which share a family for balance reasons:

All guns have range = 2 SA = 10 HA = 5 ROF = 10

Sturmpanzer I cost = 498 move = 4 fuel = 35 ammo = 4 GD = 3 AD = 5
Sturmpanzer II cost = 547 move = 5 fuel = 45 ammo = 5 GD = 4 AD = 6
Grille H cost = 495 move = 6 fuel = 46 ammo = 6 GD = 11 AD = 11

The idea is that the upgrade from the Sturmpanzer II to the Grille H is free.

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by deducter » Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:01 pm

CD is supposed to represent how resistant a unit is to attack in close terrain by infantry. There's no strict armor rating or anything like that. Generally, I allow special infantry (paratroopers, mountaineers, combat enginers) +1 CD, and various heavy assault guns like the ISU-152 and the Brummbar will also have excellent CD. Most medium tanks have 2, heavier tanks have 3 or 4.

ThvN
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Grand Campaign Unit Revisions - Update GC45East!

Post by ThvN » Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:33 pm

deducter wrote:CD is supposed to represent how resistant a unit is to attack in close terrain by infantry. There's no strict armor rating or anything like that. Generally, I allow special infantry (paratroopers, mountaineers, combat enginers) +1 CD, and various heavy assault guns like the ISU-152 and the Brummbar will also have excellent CD. Most medium tanks have 2, heavier tanks have 3 or 4.
Thanks for the explanation. Your other suggestions seem fine, but I wasn't sure about the CD, I was wondering because the Flammpanzer may have thin armour, it was small and quite mobile. Also, additional smoke generating equipment, and the armament (two movable flamethrowers covering the front arc, and one machine gun) could be operated from under armour and was designed for close-range combat. But I think CD 2 would work well if it's supposed to represent 'passive' ability to resist attack.

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps : Scenario Design”