Surely it will have to wait for the Soviet campaignErik2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:35 pm I have added these unit requests to the bug db.
SMG infantry unit.
This is an iconic Soviet sub-machine unit with high fire-power suitable in dense terrain like suburban and dense forests. Slightly lesser stats than regular infantry in open terrain.
M3 Half-track lend-lease. Often assigned to Guards units. Important since the Soviets have no half-track transport.
T90 SPAAG. Self-propelled 90mm anti-air.
76.2mm M1942 AT. The Soviet lacks a proper medium AT unit.
85mm M1939 AT. This is a switched version of the 85mm M1939 AA
Hurricane Mk1 lend-lease air unit.
Edit: Forgot to add a Soviet Mountain infantry unit.
Unit Issues 7.1.4
Moderators: Order of Battle Moderators, The Artistocrats
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: [Unit-Request] Soviet units
Re: [Unit-Request] Soviet units
There will be additions still, but these are not fully determined yet, and not so quick to produce.
As for specific types, I'm not a fan of the pesky T-90 as it never went into production afaik and there are alternatives that were produced, like truck mounted light AA (GAZ based) But mobile AA is certainly something that Sov lacks currently.
Re: [Unit-Request] Soviet units
According to the declassified data of the USSR State Planning Committee, the losses of the Soviet Union in World War II are 41 million 979 thousand, not 27 million, as previously thought. - The total decline in the population of the USSR in 1941-45. - more than 52 million 812 thousand people. Оver 30 million military personnel ... Germans lost 3 million with allies https://polkrf.ru/news/1275/parlamentsk ... tnyiy_polkbebro wrote: ↑Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:29 pmThere will be additions still, but these are not fully determined yet, and not so quick to produce.
As for specific types, I'm not a fan of the pesky T-90 as it never went into production afaik and there are alternatives that were produced, like truck mounted light AA (GAZ based) But mobile AA is certainly something that Sov lacks currently.
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
What does this have to do with unit types in OOB...
-
- Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
- Posts: 3700
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
I just finished replaying the mission 002_Rumyantsev, I think there was a lot of Soviet infantry in this scenario.GabeKnight wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:57 am Playing Endsieg, I've had the same impression that the endless waves of Soviet conscripts were missing. No more lambs being led to the slaugher. Heavy metal instead.
(the total number of German military dead was estimated at 5.3 million + 3.8 million civilians for a total of 9.128 million , Igor adds civilian and military casualties for Russia)
Last edited by terminator on Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:32 am, edited 3 times in total.
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
To take into account the realism of the Soviet scenarioGabeKnight wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:57 amPlaying Endsieg, I've had the same impression that the endless waves of Soviet conscripts were missing. No more lambs being led to the slaugher. Heavy metal instead.
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
30 million loss of soldiers is missing. With a civilian 42 million. Allies were included in the German losses 5.3 ... and the Japanese 2 million. So the USSR manipulatedIgor1941 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:30 amTo take into account the realism of the Soviet scenarioGabeKnight wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:57 amPlaying Endsieg, I've had the same impression that the endless waves of Soviet conscripts were missing. No more lambs being led to the slaugher. Heavy metal instead.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
- Posts: 3700
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
I think some of the Brit battleships have a very low naval def. value:
BB Renown: 25
BB Admiral: 27
The other major factions have def. values above 30 usually. Even Italy.
Again, I'm no units expert, just asking if the Royal Navy really produced such weak ships (in comparison)?
BB Renown: 25
BB Admiral: 27
The other major factions have def. values above 30 usually. Even Italy.
Again, I'm no units expert, just asking if the Royal Navy really produced such weak ships (in comparison)?
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
They were actually Battlecruisers, and had certainly lower armor = def than comparable Battleships. They were just put into the BB category here as there were only few BCs in WW2, so an extra class for those is kinda overkill.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
- Posts: 3700
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
I see! Thanks, bebro.
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
Hood was a Admiral battlecruiser and look what happened to it during the encounter with Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
The Unit Parameter "defense against artillery" is not logical for the Italian units :
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
Greek L3/33 and Hungarian L3/35 are in recon category, but should be tanks instead.
Author and maintainer of Unit Navigator Tool for Order Of Battle (http://mfendek.byethost16.com/)
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
This is often the problem with light tanks, after a while when they are outdated they are often used then in reconnaissance missions.Mojko wrote: ↑Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:46 am Greek L3/33 and Hungarian L3/35 are in recon category, but should be tanks instead.
Example T-60 :
Commitments in the war :
Committed to the Poltava region in September 1941, the T-60s played a leading role during the Battle of Moscow in the winter of 1941–1942, where they were engaged in large numbers. In the spring of 1942, sixty were sent to besieged Leningrad, camouflaged in coal barges, and on January 12, 1943, they formed the avant-garde of the 61st Armoured Brigade, which at the head of the 67th Army, broke the encirclement of the city through the frozen Neva River. During the spring of 1942, he took part in the offensive of Kharkov and then in the defence of Sevastopol and Stalingrad. He was later relegated to the escort of convoys and to the reconnaissance missions.
Last edited by terminator on Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
Another example of light tank -> the T-38 :
In PanzerCorps, the T-38 was a Recon Unit :
The T-38 tank is an improvement in the T-37 tank, produced from 1936 until the T-40 tank was introduced in 1940 at 1,482. The chassis was also used as a base for the "Komsomolets" artillery tractor. 1,090 were in service on January 1, 1941. Like his predecessor, he served until 1943 for amphibious operations and reconnaissance.
In PanzerCorps, the T-38 was a Recon Unit :
The T-38 tank is an improvement in the T-37 tank, produced from 1936 until the T-40 tank was introduced in 1940 at 1,482. The chassis was also used as a base for the "Komsomolets" artillery tractor. 1,090 were in service on January 1, 1941. Like his predecessor, he served until 1943 for amphibious operations and reconnaissance.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
- Posts: 3700
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
I did look over the unit's Bomb/Art/Naval def. values of the Italian faction during the process of my mod-making, and I think they're okay. At least from an "overall-unit-balance" point of view. Many German units have better armour, but that's to be expected. Sure, one can always argue about the stats of one unit or another, but compared with the Jap./US/Brit./Ger. roster and looking at the picture as a whole, all's good.terminator wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:50 am The Unit Parameter "defense against artillery" is not logical for the Italian units :
Even the Sahariana's high values aren't uncommon for camouflaged recon units. I guess it represents the unit's sneakiness, speed, high camouflage and being generally hard to hit with ranged attacks.
(EDIT: Just to be sure: I'm talking about the v715b3 units.csv file, I did not compare with the v714 file. Maybe I should have posted this in the beta forum. Sorry, then.)
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
Do you find logical that the Marder III which offers only a small protection to its crew against artillery bombardment has a better defense against artillery value that the Semovente 105/25 (14 vs 10)GabeKnight wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:59 amI did look over the unit's Bomb/Art/Naval def. values of the Italian faction during the process of my mod-making, and I think they're okay. At least from an "overall-unit-balance" point of view. Many German units have better armour, but that's to be expected. Sure, one can always argue about the stats of one unit or another, but compared with the Jap./US/Brit./Ger. roster and looking at the picture as a whole, all's good.terminator wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:50 am The Unit Parameter "defense against artillery" is not logical for the Italian units :
Even the Sahariana's high values aren't uncommon for camouflaged recon units. I guess it represents the unit's sneakiness, speed, high camouflage and being generally hard to hit with ranged attacks.
(EDIT: Just to be sure: I'm talking about the v715b3 units.csv file, I did not compare with the v714 file. Maybe I should have posted this in the beta forum. Sorry, then.)
If you compare Air Defense value, Semovente has better Air Defense than Marder III (12 VS 11)
Compare the values Ground Defense in Panzercorps Marder III vs Semovente M43 105/25 (11 vs 15) :
PS: Panzer Corps Wiki https://panzercorps.gamepedia.com/Panzer_Corps_Wiki
-
- Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
- Posts: 3700
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
I've said that one could always argue over one unit or another. Those closed-off tank types should offer better protection against shrapnel than the "topless" types, for sure. Not much you can do besides going into cover and waiting it out.terminator wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:35 am Do you find logical that the Marder III which offers only a small protection to its crew against artillery bombardment has a better defense against artillery value that the Semovente 105/25 (14 vs 10)
If you compare Air Defense value, Semovente has better Air Defense than Marder III (12 VS 11)
In this case you could be right. Some of the Semovente types seem to share the same chassis as the Carro Armato M-series tanks.
Still, the Marder looks quite well-protected in your pic, if the crew can find cover behind the armoured parts.
But yeah, stats are difficult. Did the Italian mechanized units had the same amount of armour on those vehicles as the Germans? Are arty-class types generally easier to hit because they are stationary? Should speedier units get higher def. values even with poor armour?
In the end, the combination of all stats defines the "whole" unit and its combat behaviour.
As I've said before, I never played PanzerCorps, so it's hard for me to compare these games, but from looking at the screenshots it seems to me as there was only one value for "ground defense" in PC instead of OoB's split "vehicle defense" and "bomb defense" (and naval defense) values. If that's true, then comparing the stats of these games is NOT fair.terminator wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:35 am Compare the values Ground Defense in Panzercorps Marder III vs Semovente M43 105/25 (11 vs 15) :
-
- Field Marshal - Elefant
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:48 pm
- Location: the land of freedom
Re: Unit Issues 7.1.4
The Finnish Landsverk II (AA and AT) has too clear texture compared to other Finnish tanks :