Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Hans on November 05, 2000, 08:47:00 PM
-
I wouldn't mind seeing some 75mm anti-tank guns in bunkers at each base. Naturally, we all know what these would do. Stop the AA Ostwind from being used as a base killer.
But now that would make ground assaults impossible.
So, for every measure, there has to be a countermeasure. The M7 Priest. It can outrange the 75mm AT guns and knock their bunkers out. Its also a 105mm gun. It would probably be even more usefull to a ground assault than a Ostwind, since it wouldn't be odd at all to see one shelling a base.
Hans.
Fly Bishop, for we have God on our side (I think).
-
Originally posted by Hans:
So, for every measure, there has to be a countermeasure. The M7 Priest
Screw the Priest. We've got an 8" gun cruiser in 1.05. Make sure the new terrain makes every base in gun range, get someone to forward spot the fall of shell and BOOM no more AT guns.
Of course, this would mean you probably wouldn't need any tanks, either :-)
-
Torgo, how about long range shore batteries? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Try hitting a target behind a hill with the flat trajectory of a naval gun (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
It's possible but wasn't very easy.
- Jig
-
I like the idea of mobile arty in the form of a M7 or a Hummel (M7 had more ammo). Good combined arms concept forming up there.
Naval guns have a variable trajectory like any other gun. They were frequently used to nail anything within absolute range, hills or no. If you ever drive into Mobile, Alabama, you will get to see a sign that roughly says "You are 27 miles from the Battleship USS Alabama, and within range of her guns".
About 30-45 minutes later you can see the ship as you pull into town.
Just for reference though, an 8 inch gun is about 210mm, vs. 155mm for a Hummel and 105mm for a Priest. That isnt a liniar progression, since the 210mm is about 4 times the weight of a 105 if I remember correctly.
In other words, it'll compleately bugger a field in short order. But it'll be easy to kill from ground or air. But protected by Panzers, which are protected by mobile flak... Combined arms concepts (like the AT gun) would do allot to address the imbalances people see. These things worked like they did for a reason.
Thog
-
As taken from: Warships1.com US Navy Guns page (http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNUS_8-55_mk12-15.htm)
Ammunition Mark 15 8"/55:
APC [armor piercing; superheavy] 335 lbs
APC [standard] 260 lbs
HE 260 lbs
Range Mark 15 8"/55:
335 lbs APC shell: 30,000 yards
260 lbs HE shell: 29,800 yards
8" converts to 203mm.
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
-
mobile artillery goes there where no ship can go..
How about having rail guns with 270mm guns or something like that (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
or 300mm rockets... (if i remember right, germans had 210mm and 300mm rockets)
those rockets sure does alot damage.. but are bit inaccurate for direct fire.
Also russians rocket launchers would be neat (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) katysha, or how it was spelled
-
One thing to consider is that since we always fly aircraft in our arenas, distance perceptions become really distorted.
27 Miles sounds like alot, and it IS if your a foot slogger, or driving a boat. To an aircraft thats nothing.
The 8" gun comes out to my quick calculations to a range of 17 miles.
The standard sector in AH is 25 miles, so the shipboard artillery will have to be within .7 of a sector to hit something.
How fast can a Ju88 with two torpedo's make a 17 mile trip?
See my point? Don't get me wrong, I can't wait to see 1.05 and the Navy
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
The Panzer has gun that makes a fine AT weapon. And it's about as automated as that Osty is too, which is as it should be.
I'm all for adding more ground weapons!! Variety is the spice of the warring life (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 11-06-2000).]
-
Salvo capacity sits rather high with these Mark 15's. 3-4 rounds per minute works out to be 27 to 36 rpm for the ship. Figure 2-3 hits to blow each hangar and you've got a real mess. A single 3 minute salvo would level an entire Medium Field in short order. Here's where things get fun. If you don't put fields within range of a Cruiser's guns, people will get bored. Then again, if you work it as above with 2-3 hits per hangar, people will scream about it.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. My biggest worry is how they're working the sighting. Either a Lat-Long system [cheap GPS] or direct observation by a forward observer. The latter could be done, but they'd have to really make improvements. I was hearing strikes on my Panzer this morning from an Ost shooting in the dirt 50 feet in front of himself. I was a LONG ways off. I did have one idea, regarding artillery. Below are a few ideas of mine, from a post on arty a while back.
My ideas regarding Arty:
Indirect fire could be done with a range card just like the real thing. HTC could publish a small range card for arty use. When in the gunner position you would have two scales. One vertical scale indicating elevation, the other a compass. As you moved the gun, each would change in relation to gun movement. In short, put a compass ring around the Panzer's turret and add an elevation indicator.
Instead of laser-guided shells, your accuracy would be minute-of-hangar instead of minute-of-angle.
Minute-of-angle is one inch [24mm] at 100 yards. Minute-of-hangar would be about 120 feet of accuracy variation at 5 miles. This could be done by adding in various effects. Wind effects, ground instability, dispersion, and recoil effects and you've got a gun capable of nailing a hangar at 5 miles. At 7 miles you should be able to hit a field with some degree of accuracy.
Now, you could increase the range those effects happen at to compensate for each gun caliber. 8" APC standard shells can be fired a long way [17.1 miles]. Say minute-of-hangar accuracy at 12 miles, minute-of-field accuracy at 17 miles. This might work, depending on how it comes together.
Sights would be simple enough, as you could do what I proposed above. Place a compass ring around the turret, and add an elevation marker. The compass ring would give you degrees in 10º increments, elevation would be done in 5º steps. Naturally there'd be hash marks indicating each degree.
Turret control for these guns is beyond me, although you could take one idea a little further. I figure two possible choices as far as gun control go:
1) Allow more than one person to join as gunner. You could simply read off your sight indications to them for accurate hits.
2) Work it as now, with a single gunner on board. All 3 turrets would track the one you're in, just like bomber guns. You could fire each turret in the following manner.
A: Single fire. Each gun is fired independantly of the other guns.
B: Linked fire. Firing the #1 gun in a turret would cause all 3 #1 guns to fire.
C: Mass linked fire: Pull the trigger once and all nine 8" guns open up.
Gun selection could be done like engine select in bombers, only with a seperate key. Use Alt-1 as Single Fire, Alt-2 as Linked Fire, and Alt-3 as Mass Linked Fire.
What do you think?
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
[This message has been edited by flakbait (edited 11-06-2000).]
-
I wonder how accurate those would be from 20 miles..
it is quite long distance and it doesn't need more than a small error and you'll miss
plus waves in the sea, even though you have some sort of stabilizers in the turret.
-
The USS Missouri currently holds the long distance record, A direct hit with one of her 16 inch guns at 28 miles, the target was a 55 gallon Drum. It is historically accurate to say that no fire is more devastating or more accurate than naval Bombardment. Remember in WW2 acceptable Gunnery was hitting a moving Ship at greater than 20 miles with at least 10% of your rounds. A battle ship is not that big when you think about it.
Including Naval Bombardment would be devastating and reinforce the terror that a naval task group had in WW2. Even a destroyer with it's pop guns (5 inch 127mm) were devastating to Shore installations and were persecuted as soon as they were detected. If the Bombardment is allowed Ships will control the Costal Zone.
So to answer the question, Naval fire is very accurate.
UncleBuck
UncleBuck
-
Last time I check, it was called "Aces High".
I don't mind the ground and now naval aspects but they should be secondary as this is an air combat flight sim first. Your sim isn't out yet. It's called WW2OL. I'm in this for the planes as I love WW2 aircraft, the pilots and the battles they fought. The rest of it is okay as long as it doesn't alter the flying. Lag, cpu requirements, lag, lag,... have to be considered every time you add another gizmo.
Flying 1st! The rest I can do without.
Eagler
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
Last time I check, it was called "Aces High".
But but.. there are tank aces and ship aces as well..
and who knows which cloud they're in.. maybe they're as high as in heaven already (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Hmm...as I recall, this thread was about adding AT's at bases. I concur with this concept, with AT guns that could out-range an Osty, but would be about an even match against a panzer (panzer should have slight edge in range). The would be AI controlled, just as the ack/flak is, but would not be laser sighted. Rolling into range of one and stopping should result in your death within say 20-30 seconds at max range, unless you begin moving again.
The point to having AT guns at the bases is so there's no free ride for the tankers. If I JABO a base from the air, I have to take out the ack, thereby risking my own skin. An Osty should have to take the same risk. If I take a buff, I'm safe from the ack (tho not the flak); likewise I'm safe in a tank that outranges the ack and should slightly outrange the AT's.
------------------
Sabre, a.k.a. Rojo
(S-2, The Buccaneers)
-
It would be kind of tough to take out a field, if the AT gun kills you in 20-30 seconds like you say. Unless you're a crack shot, it takes longer than 30 seconds to get the range on something as small as a gun emplacement. There are already AT guns at the fields. They're called Panzers.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
There are only panzers at a field if players decide to spawn them.
There needs to be an effective anti-tank defense for a base.
An Ostwind is strictly an anti-aircraft vehicle. Is it? NO! Its also capable of being used as a base attack vehicle that is SUPERIOR to a panzer. This strikes me as being bass ackwards. This is an obvious bug. These Ostwinds are not intended for this use, but they are. Its wrong.
So, add some AT guns to take you out before you can get close enough, but also add the M7 Priest or the German Hummel self propelled howitzers to take out the AT gun bunkers.
So, you can still take out a base with just two ground vehicles. An artillery unit, then a troop delivery half-track.
Tanks are for killing other ground vehicles, and AA units are for killing airplanes.....and that should be their only use.
Hans.
[This message has been edited by Hans (edited 11-07-2000).]
-
Hummel and 155mm shells (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
even Wespe would be fine by me..
hmm, I think that one falls to same caterogy with M7.. and more likely it would be M7 because yanks dont have other than halftracks..
I'd like to have that one SdKfz 251 artilery spotting vehicle (of course I don't remember those sub versions)
that would be neat with upcoming artillery pieces (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
One thing that you forgot, Hans...
If you dive bomb a field, you have plenty of speed to run from anyone who decides to intercept you, or plenty of time to do couple bomb runs with a buff.
but in tanks, you have very limited speed and you can't hit targets too accurately from long ranges, where from anyone can dust you out.
I could hit moving tank beyond 3k easily.. big bug in here too, for 75L48 cannon, now make that target stable and trying to kill AT-guns..
plus that defender would have zillion tanks if VH still stays up and right in range to shoot the enemy attacker.
You do have zillion planes too when hangars are up, but it takes you few minutes to climb, while in tank you can just begin shooting as soon as you get out of VH.
AT-guns would be great, but it would make vehicles quite much next to useless if you're being suppressed..
If Ostwind gets fixed against buildings, then it will make things even harder because tanks 75mm seems to be fairly ineffective compared to air or ostwind assault.
It takes over a minute to kill hangar and 1/4 of your ammunition (if full HE load)
Well.. it would obviously need some more tweaking with these things
Maybe we'll find answer from the artillery when those appears.
-
Again to stop the ostwind from destroying buildings just put a limit on the degree it can depress its guns. It would only take a few degrees say 10 to make it useless as an anti-tank or hardned target weapon. It would still be able to shoot AC easily. then if you really want to rape a field team up with a tank or two and provide AA cover for them as intended.
UNCLEBUCK
-
why not install 2-4 (depends on bases size)
88mm anti tank guns?
manable of course, not AI controlled.
------------------
-------------------
Habicht
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
"Die Ta 152 war meine Überlebensversicherung in den letzten Tagen des Krieges" OFw Willi Reschke, Ritterkreuzträger, 38 Abschüsse
[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 11-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by UncleBuck:
Again to stop the ostwind from destroying buildings just put a limit on the degree it can depress its guns. It would only take a few degrees say 10 to make it useless as an anti-tank or hardned target weapon. It would still be able to shoot AC easily. then if you really want to rape a field team up with a tank or two and provide AA cover for them as intended.
UNCLEBUCK
and add extra weight on the spitfires so they wouldn't turn like zekes....
come on, wake up, that would be against ostwinds specifications (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
just fix the damage model for buildings..
-
So then what stops an aircraft from attacking an Ostwind below the 10 degree angle Buck? Hmmm? It seems to me that no matter what you do someone, somewhere isnt going to like it. You change something one way to stop a certain vehicle from doing something and then someone else will come up with a way to take advantage of it. Its a never ending cycle.
-
Well the area that you would be trying to get under with a depression limit would be very hard to exploit. As you come in you would be hard pressed to stay out of the guns arc. this also causes the driver to be smart and use terrain to your advantage, Hull down or what not to make the deficiency of the vehicle less apparent. I agree someone will complain about everything but this fixes a problem. I wonder if the Positioned actually had a gun that could be depressed that far. the Soviet ZSU is a descendent of the Osti and it is limited to a 27 degree angle of depression. The main problem is that the person taking advantage of the firing arc of the OSTI is doing exactly the same thing as they do to attack a bomber, stay out of the guns. the Osti on the other hand is destroying fortifications it was never intended to attack.
UncleBuck
-
Ostwind has can point its gun at the ground few yards in front of it..
Another thing why its turret was open, was gun traverse... closed turret would limit it.
that gun could point 85 degrees upwards too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
The Ostwind was able to depress its gun enough for ground attack. And how is the ZSU related to the Ostwind....other than the fact that they both have guns and shoot at aircraft?
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
Hummel and 155mm shells (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
even Wespe would be fine by me..
hmm, I think that one falls to same caterogy with M7.. and more likely it would be M7 because yanks dont have other than halftracks..
I'd like to have that one SdKfz 251 artilery spotting vehicle (of course I don't remember those sub versions)
that would be neat with upcoming artillery pieces (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hummel mounted the 150mm gun not a 155mm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (the FH length, most of the other SP-Art 150mm carries, usually Stugs, had the SiG short barrel version)
You get your Hummel, I get my M-12 GMC and it's 155mm FH.
Stuh 42's would be a little better then the Wespe...better armor and a better gun (in most areas anyway). The US M-37 (an M5 light tank chassis combined with the M2 105mm) is about in the same category, it's quite a bit faster then M7, frontal armor is about half (but in AH it would probably be worth the speed since the M7 hasn't got much of a chance against taking damage.
I think the FO HT your thinking about is the SPW 250 Beob, they also made a wheeled version, the SPW 253. US had some interesting jeep a Dodge WC's (what would become the Powerwagon) modifications that had an armored hood for FO work.
-
Doh.. always keep messing up 155mm and 150mm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Guess I should restudy those vehicles a bit after while..
Theres also 251 version for it, somewhere...
I tried to find one page where I saw very good list of 250/251 versions, but blah.. didn't find it.
hmm.. wheeled version could be neat, should be faster than tracked one, right?
-
Actually, Ground defense "Otto" makes perfect sense. If planes can't attack a field without dealing with Otto, why should ground vehicles? It would also limit the Flak vulching.
------------------
Vila <Flying Pigs>
Oink! Oink! To War!
-
Originally posted by Hans:
I wouldn't mind seeing some 75mm anti-tank guns in bunkers at each base. Naturally, we all know what these would do. Stop the AA Ostwind from being used as a base killer.
But now that would make ground assaults impossible.
I disagree here. Now that we're back to the old terrain with the spawn points far enough away from the fields to make the Osty driver have to work for his kills, I dont think theres any reason for AT guns at bases.
With the exception of field 27? (field SW of 1) it takes an Osty 15-20 minutes to drive within range of a field. Thats about how long it takes to fly a fully loaded Chog there.
AT guns would be cool and so would the Priest but I think things have calmed down on the VH front.
-Ding
-
Originally posted by Vila:
Actually, Ground defense "Otto" makes perfect sense. If planes can't attack a field without dealing with Otto, why should ground vehicles? It would also limit the Flak vulching.
Put one of those 40mm ack at each field and we'll see how long those Ostys last (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-Ding
-
155mm is in Paladin.. M1919A6 right? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
my addiction in steel panthers (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 11-08-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
155mm is in Paladin.. M1919A6 right? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
my addiction in steel panthers (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 11-08-2000).]
Yup. I've been known to use SPWAW for a quick reference. Some of the designations of AFV's and guns are off, or partial, but it makes looking up the correct figures that much easier when you have half of it.