Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

1.) Carry capacities for some vehicles

a.) Unit 16 (M3s) has carry capacity 12. This should probably be 13, like other medium tanks.

b.) Unit 162 (IS-II) has carry capacity 13, even though being mine clearing tank. Should probably be 0.

c.) Unit 655 (T-26 Dozer) has carry capacity 6, even though it is engineer tank. Should probably be 0.

d.) Unit 224 (T26 M1933) has carry capacity 3. Should probably be 6, like other T-26 tanks.

e.) Unit 339 (T-27) has carry capacity 103, while classed as artillery prime mover. Considering the small size of the vehicle, this might be realistic, but makes the vehicle relatively useless as artillery tractor. Giving it carry capacity 106 would allow it to haul various light guns around the place.

f.) SU-85, SU-85M and SU-100 (units 33, 34, 193, 194, 195, 652) all have carry capacity 6. Considering that these vehicles were all built on T-34 chassis (like SU-122), I think it would be reasonable to give them carry capacity 13.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

2.) Ammo loadout inconsistencies for some MG units

a.) Maxim HMG units have different ammo loadouts for main weapons as follows:
- Unit 57 (Maxim HMG[2]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 443 (Maxim HMG[3]) ammo 90 per MG
- Unit 610 (Maxim HMG[1)] ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these all to 90.

b.) SG43 MMG units also have different ammo loadouts:
- Unit 58 (SG43 MMG[2]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 442 (SG43 MMG [3]) ammo 90 per MG
- Unit 612 (SG43 MMG [1]) ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these all to 90.

c.) DT AAMG units also have different ammo loadouts:
- Unit 192 (DT AAMG[1]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 441 (DT AAMG{3]) ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these both to the same value, though I am not sure whether that should be 90 or 120.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

3.) Support weapon placement in some infantry companies

a.) Formation 106 (Guards Mech Co) has support assets (MG section, two anti-tank teams and two halftracks) attached to the third platoon, rather than to company HQ.

b.) Formation 290 (Mountain Co) has MG section attached to the third platoon rather than to company HQ.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

4.) Comments on some AT formations:

a.) Formation 72 (Rgt Inf-AT Co) has currently a rifle squad as company HQ. However, according to Zaloga's Red Army Handbook the company HQs for these formations were pretty spartan, e.g. just four men in December 1942 TOE. Thus, I would suggest changing the company HQ to a scout squad, as is the case with platoon HQs. Gamewise, this would also make company HQ size 0 like the rest of the company.

b.) Formation 73 (Inf-AT Sec/M) is probably misnamed, and should be called platoon (Pl) instead of section (Sec). The HQ unit seems to be rifle squad, this could be changed to scout squad like for the foot AT rifle platoons. Finally, the three trucks are all attached to the third section, they could instead be each attached directly to a different section.

c.) Formation 180 (Hvy AT-Gun Bty) and formations 181-183 (Hvy AT-Gun Pl) have currently six guns per battery and three guns per platoon. However, the historical strenght for such formations was four guns per battery and two guns per platoon (according to Zaloga's Red Army Handbook).

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

5.) Comments on some artillery formations:

a.) Formation 217 (Guards IG Sec) and 218 (Guards IG Pl) should have same size as non-guards infantry gun units: 2 guns for platoon, 1 gun for section.

b.) Formations 53 (Guard Mortar Bn), 109 (Guard Mortar Pl) and 110 (Guard Mortar By) seem to be stronger than the actual historical formations. According to Zaloga, such a battery should have four launch-vehicles (currently eight), which makes a platoon two vehicles. Battalions consisted of two, or in some cases three, batteries. (Please notice that those formations only apply to the vehicle-mounted versions, ground-mounted launchers seem to have different organisation though Zaloga does not provide much detail on it.)

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

6.) Comments on some off-map artillery formations:

a.) Formation 55 (Lt Howitzer Bn) contains currently 4 batteries. Pretty much all the light artillery battalions feature 3 batteries, the only exception being a 2 battery version (which formed one third of the battalion in infantry divisions for a while, see also next comment). So I would suggest changing this formation into three battery format.

b.) Formation 58 (Artillery Rgt) contains 8 batteries. Infantry division indeed fielded such formations (consisting of 5 batteries of 76.2 mm guns and 3 batteries of 122 mm howitzers, and organised into three battalions) but only for part of the war. I would suggest changing the availability dates for this formation to be from 4/42 until 12/44.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

7.) Comments on anti-aircraft formations:

a.) Formations 111 (AA Gun Battery) and 19 (AAA platoon) contain currently 6 and 3 guns, respectively. While 6 gun batteries indeed existed for a while in infantry divisions, 4 gun battery structure was continously in use through the whole war. In either case, platoons were 2 guns each.

Possible suggestions:
- Changing formation 19 from three to two guns (and maybe re-naming it as "AA Gun Platoon" for the sake of consistency)
- Changing availability dates of formation 111 to be from 8/41 until 12/42
- Introducing new AA gun battery formation with four guns, available from 9/39 until 12/46

b.) Formations 18 (SPAA section) and 20 (SPAA Platoon) currently contain two and four vehicles, respectively. While I have no hard evidence, I would presume that SP AA guns would follow the same organisational model as regular AA guns (4 guns per battery).

However, truck mounted AAMGs seem to have employed different organisational model, being typically organised into platoons of three vehicles. These could be found attached to a number of formations (such as infantry regiment), or organised into companies (with two, three or even six platoons per company).

If you want to take into consideration the difference between SP AA guns and SP AAMGs, this will require using different unit type and formation for each. My suggestions in this case would be as follows:

- Formation 18 is renamed "SPAA Platoon" and availability dates adjusted to be from 1/42 to 12/46 (matching availability of unit 40 (GAZ-AA-37).
- Formation 20 is renamed "SPAA Battery" and availability dates adjusted to be from 1/42 to 12/46 (matching availability of unit 40 (GAZ-AA-37).

- Units 39 (GAZ-AAMG), 133 (GAZ-DShK AAMG-3) and 590 (Gaz DShK AAMG) are adjusted to a new unit class, such as 181 (AA Truck).
- Furthermore, unit 590 (Gaz DShK AAMG) should have its availability adjusted in order not to leave gap. Based on Zaloga it seems to me that this unit could be set to be available as early as 9/39.
- And finally, a new formation (SP AAMG platoon) should be added, with availability from 6/37 until 12/46, and containing three vehicles (unit 39).

I am afraid that this is quite a lot of fiddling, but I think that moving the SP AAMGs into their own formation would be useful, especially since these sort of AAMGs platoons tend to pop up as part of a number of other formations. However, if you feel this is too much work for limited gain, feel free to ignore this part.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

The issue with moving AAMG's to their own class is unless the picklists are adjusted the AI will never pick them......right now it will

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

I must admit that I had not considered AI picklists. Probably quite important when it comes to Soviet forces, where AA-weapons are quite rare outside dedicated AA-units.

(This is quite a doctrinal difference from e.g. US approach, where AAMGs were liberally sprinkled to vehicles all over the place, including a portion of trucks and jeeps.)

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

8.) Conscript co (formation 115) has morale modifier of -10, while Conscript Pl (formation 134) has morale modifier of -8. I presume both should be the same.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

9.) Conscript squads (units 228 and 229) are size 2, even though they are regular infantry squads. Should probably be size 1 instead.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

That's deliberate

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Thanks for the info, I was not aware that it was by design.

Out of curiosity, are there other infantry units out there that have been designated as size 2 by design?

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

10

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1449404354

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Thanks for the list! I must admit that I have not really spent much time playing with Slovak, Czech or Polish LWP forces, so would have probably never spotted those on my own.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

I spotted an inconsistency in gun icons, but on the occasion, I found several old notes - just in case...


004 T-26 M1933 - Russian sources say, that turret had max armour 15 mm, without exception on gun mantlet (now 3). Unless we want to give them better chance of survival.
Roughly a half of produced T-26s were fitted with a radio (initially less, towards the end of production more). If a radio chance is not increased, it could receive more ammo - standard tanks (without radio and rear MG) carried 124 gun rounds (or even 136 according to other book) - now 100.

Same for unit 224, and, as for armour and radio chance, newer models 337, 338, 360

10 OT-133 - there's no mention, that flamethrower tanks received thicker armour - max 2.

33 SU-85 - precisely, SU-85 (and #303 T-34/85 M.1943) should have a gun D-5, not ZiS obr.44, with basically the same data.
BTW: ZiS obr.44 was more widely known as ZiS-S-53

42 BA-64 - first series was made by 24 April 42, and used in combat in summer (now 3/42). The MG was in fact AAMG (like in SdKfz 221)
Same for Polish LWP #044, Yugo #010, Czech #260

BTW: I'm not sure, if 6x4 armoured cars on truck chassis, like BA-3,6,10, British Lanchester, SdKfz-231 6-rad, should be in fact A/T-wheel - their cross-country capabilities were rather poor.

43 M5 Halftrack - US vehicles were delivered with armament (.30 or .50 MG) and very rarely were fitted with DShK (rather trucks in AA role only). Better name could be just Halftrack, because there were some 401 M5, 419 M9 and 342 M2 delivered (there is no Soviet designation known).

BTW: it would spoil several formations, but in fact the Soviets didn't "waste" precious APCs for regular infantry, which were happy to ride in trucks or on tanks. According to book by M. Bariyatynski on lend-lease vehicles, halftracks were used only as recce and staff vehicles - however only 118 out of some 1200 were used that way, while great majority were employed as gun tractors... I'd delete all Mech formations except for:
#24 Halftrack Pl (more likely reduced to 3 vehicles)
and #97 AT-Gun Pl/M, but with heavy AT guns (they could haul 100mm guns and 85mm AA ones indeed).
Anyway, it's worth to duplicate it as class 32 Scout vehicle, like M3A1 Scout Car, in spite of its greater capacity.

44 GAZ Truck - icon should be some open platform truck - the best seems 3179/3181. Now it has canvas all over a body, like some troop carrier, while GAZ-AA were simple trucks with a separate cab, rarely even seen with platform canvas.
Same for #465 and Polish LWP #284 and Yugo #016

45 ZiS Truck - best icon for ZiS-5 seems 3170/3172, with narrower body, and especially a nose. Yet it's bigger than GAZ.
Same for Polish LWP #175

46 Jeep - first jeeps (to be precise: Bantam) were delivered and used as early, as in autumn 1941 in battle of Moscow (now 7/43). Willys /Ford jeeps (both known just as "Willys", not jeep) were delivered from mid-42 (M. Bariyatynski's book)

If we'd like to be precise, Bantam BRC could be copied from US oob (#368) (unarmed, basic icon could be 99 to be different from Willys)

As well as other utility vehicles, they were also used to tow light AT guns (units 400-403) - there could be a formation added.

47 45mm L46 AT-Gun - there is a new icon 8022 (like unit 279)
Same for 401

48 45mm L66 AT-Gun - icon should be 8023, with longer barrel (like unit 190)
Same for 402 and Polish LWP #137, 139

49 57mm L73 AT-Gun - icon 8023 is rather long 45mm gun - ZiS-2 was bigger piece, with the same carriage as 76mm ZiS-3 (8025), but with long barrel - so the best seems icon 8024. Previously there was used 2101, but it doesn't look too good.

Same for 197, 283, 376 and other ZiS-2 units using 8023 or 2012 icons: Polish LWP #140-142, Yugo #142, Hungary #183, nat/Chinese #50, com/Chinese #50, German #332

52 76.2mm 02 FH - better name is "obr02 FH", like others. However, with such range (13km), it should be not basic obr.02, but modernized obr.02/30 - the same applies to its weapon 037

54 37mm AA-Gun - better icons might be similar 2809/2810


74 BM-8 Katyusha - truck variant on ZiS-6 had 36 rockets (now 24) (BM-8-36, late war one from 1942 on US trucks - even 48 - BM-8-48)

92,126 M3A1 Scout Car - known just as M3A1 Scout ("Skaut" in Russian).

111 BM-13 Katyusha - its combat debut was in 7/41 (now 1/41) - before the war there were only experimental vehicles built. Officially commissioned in 8/41 (would need change in formations 53, 109, 110).

112 85mm Gun - better icon for 85mm AA seems bigger 2813/14

113,132 100mm AT-Gun - much more similar (or maybe even proper) is icon 8028 (a picture https://weaponsandwarfare.files.word...pg?w=584&h=376 )

It seems, that the photo is 122mm howitzer - there is a correct one: https://www.quartermastersection.com...mg/100mmAT.jpg

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

It was in fact one gun (BS-3 obr.44), but their weapons differ in range. According to an article in Polish Poligon (by Russian author), they have been delivered already in late 1944. There's no info, that new longer range ammo was developed in 5/45 - it used BR-412 full AP rounds with unknown range and BR-412B APBC rounds with a range 4000 m, although it isn't known when exactly specific rounds were introduced. Anyway, if we want to keep two guns, then #113 should be available earlier and end in 12/46.

114 BT-2 - first serial tanks were commissioned in 3/32 (now: 10/31), but only from mid-32 they were fitted with guns [book by M. Svirin] (in 10/31 only three iron tanks were made). Gun had 92 rounds.
Would need change in formations 05 and 153 first date.

Also from 1933 part of unarmed BT-2 received two paired DT machineguns in addition to a separate DT - there could be added such unit.
photos:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BT-2_MG.jpg
http://ww2tanki.ru/images/tanki/sove...nk-bt-2-24.jpg
a drawing is pm27828.
There are known photos of such tanks destroyed in 1941.

134 AOP light truck - better photo might be GAZ truck 00166, now it's Dodge WC-62 (in rare in the USSR 6x6 version in addition).

Or maybe it's better to replace it with an early light staff car, like GAZ-A, commonly used by the army. There is similar (or the same?) photo 27596. The rest could be copied from some generic Wheel-only class utility vehicle, like British #286 Austin. Good icon is 2746/2748. It could also be copied as an early utility vehicle.

192,441 DT AAMG [1] - picture is 12.7mm DShK on non-AAMG mounting. DT was a tank machinegun, that could be dismounted (photo: 21033), although rather not used as a dedicated AAMG, though it was possible... We already have a single Maxim AAMG from 1930, so it might be easily deleted.

223 Il-10 "Beast" - later US codename should be removed IMO

280, 403 47mm L32 AT-Gun - Russian sources on artillery don't mention existence of pre-war 47mm AT-Gun at all (especially not "obr.35").
Only, according to Russian Wikipedia https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/47-%D0...%C3%B6hler_M35, 96 Latvian and 4 Estonian Bohlers were seized in 1940 - although their usage was surely limited. Then, their specifications should be changed. New icon for Bohler seems 8029.

On the other hand, Wikipedia mentions usage of captured Polish (and Finnish) 37mm Bofors in 1941 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/37-%D0...BE%D1%80%D1%81 (if it's copied, note, that a proper icon is 8000)

Also, 5800 of 2pdr guns were delivered from late 1941.

281, 282 76.2mm obr.42, 76.2mm ZiS-3 FG - new icon, probably dedicated for this gun (with muzzle brake) is 8026.
Same for #196

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)


318 SU-12 (SU-76) - IMO it should be named just SU-76. SU-12 name is redundant, since it was a developement stage designation, while it was commissioned as SU-76. Sabot ammo appeared only in 4/43 (and from 5/43 there appears SU-76M).
Front turret armour should be 4 (3) - it was sloped 35 mm in this variant (thinned in SU-76M)

336 Komsomolets STZ - STZ is redundant, but it could be designated T20 Komsomolets (same for 108,333 Komsomolets)

352 76.2mm obr36 IG - long and heavy F-22 divisional gun rather wasn't used as infantry gun.
It could be replaced with 76.2mm obr43 IG (Polish LWP unit #222, with its weapon, used from late 1943)

353 76.2mm 36 FG - new proper icon is 8024. Better name seems "76.2mm obr36 FG", in accordance with the others.

354 76.2mm 39 FG - new proper icon is 8025. Better name seems "76.2mm obr39 FG", in accordance with the others.

362 122mm 30 FH - better icon is 2115 - current has too long barrel (it was only L/15). Better name is "obr30 FH", or in fact "10/30 FH"

364 BA-27 - size should be 3 (now 2), speed only 45 km/h (now 27)

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

...to confirm this: upper view http://armor.kiev.ua/wiki/images/thu...2014_08_12.jpg
After re-thinking, better name than "obr30 FH" would be "obr.10 FH" - it was basically obr.1910, only modernized in 1930.

366 122mm 31 FG - better name is "obr31 FG". An icon is too light gun (and has a shield) - best seems 2123 (picture https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2012...35825_art2.jpg)
Winter icon seems an error.
Same for Polish LWP #158

367 122mm 31 Bty - same for the name

370 122mm M-30 FH - icon has too thin and long barrel for 122 mm howitzer, and doesn't resemble this piece at all. Best icon seems 2167 - it's also quite light, but has good proportions (picture http://technicamolodezhi.ru/rubriki_.../1971/art6.jpg)
Same for Polish LWP #154, German #133, Czech #186, Yugo #56, Hungarian #185, Finnish #182

385 37mm obr 15 IG - there is no info on 37mm infantry guns in a Russian encyclopedia on Russian WW2 artillery. Possibly it is trench gun Rozenberg obr.15 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/37_mm_trench_gun_M1915, but according to Russian Wikipedia https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/37-%D0...BE%D0%B4%D0%B0 it was withdrawn as soon, as in 1919. According to article https://web.archive.org/web/20070929....php?nid=18073 , unspecified 37mm guns were withdrawn from battalion artillery in 1931, as obsolete. Might be easily removed.
Same for #350

462 Jeep (AOP) - same remarks, as for #46 - delivered from mid-42, not counting Bantams.

466 ZiS Truck - same remarks, as for 45 (best icon is 3170/3172, with narrower body) (and without cargo, as personnel carrier)

517 T-26E - first were made and used in combat in 2/40, by the end of Winter War (now 4/40). Armour should be better - 15 to 40 mm plates were used (without standardization), so I suggest 4/4/3/ 4/4/3. Drawings show extra armour on rear as well.

There should be also added screened OT-133 (might be called OT-133E), also used at the same time, starting from Winter War. It also should have lower speed.

BTW: according to Baryatynski's book, all T-26 flame tanks were in fact designated in documents KhT-26, -130, -133 ("Chemical tank"), and they are called OT in post-war literature. Probably the same applies to OT-27, which in a monograph is called by the author: "OT-27/KhT-27". Russian spelling XT-26 is tempting, but might be confusing ;)

568 Maxim(x4) AAMG - it was accepted already in 1931
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97...BE%D0%B4%D0%B0 , although there's no information, when exactly they started to appear (now 1/37). There's no information about less typical 569 Maxim(x2), but I assume it was the same.

586 STZ-5- speed was only 21 km/h (now 10)

588 76.2mm BPK RG - a picture is actually 65mm prototype RPG. Photos are here:
http://www.cris9.armforc.ru/rva_bpk.htm
http://lavandamd.ru/index.php?option...10-04-15-42-05
Officially adapted in 8/32.

593 OT-27 - according to Russian book, produced from late 1932 (now 6/35) (it had 32-36 l of mixture, enough for 30 shots or 28 seconds). It also should have DT BMG.

595 OT-131"exp" - it had a flamethrower and 45mm gun instead of CMG (according to M. Kolomiets book)

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Speaking of the 122mm battery, is the range given (210 hexes) correct? The 203mm battery has a given range of 208, while the 152mm's are even less. Rather unusual, no?

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=49723

64 122mm obr 31/37 - 210, real 19.7 km = OK

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

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.

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 ;)

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

It has always been crew size + weight.......if crew is 5 and gun weighs 1 then it needs a vehicle with a carry capacity of 6 or more to transport it

...but DO NOT even THINK about producing a list of " corrections" for this..... I'm NOT interested. All we did this for was to make it easier on players looking to find a vehicle that could transport a gun without the " surprise" on deployment that the vehicle chosen cannot tow the gun..... that will no longer be an issue but I am NOT going to start adjusting carry caps and weight to existing guns and vehicles.... whats there now is what it stays.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

BELIEVE ME............It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to be more "tired" of this constant nit picking than I am.....

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

At the risk of being considered as a nit-picker, I would also like to take the opportunity to add in a few comments about various units and formations:

a.) Unit 358 (T-26TU M1932) is armed with a long-barrelled 37 mm gun, with an ammo load of 160 HE rounds, 62 sabot rounds and 0 AP rounds. I presume that this is an accidental carry-over from unit 176 (T-26TU M1931), which is armed with a short-barreled 37 mm gun. Thus, maybe the sabot rounds (or at least most of them) on unit 358 should be replaced with regular AP ammo.

b.) Units 170, 171 (both MS-1/T-18), 176 (T-26TU M1931) and 364 (BA-27) are armed with weapon 12 (37 mm PP pbr. 15R), with range 64 (representing an infantry gun used for indirect fire). However, the actual armament for these vehicles apparently was a local variant of the French 37 mm Puteaux gun - a weapon which in other OOBs has a range of 35 hexes but is missing from the Soviet OOB. I would suggest adding such a weapon entry to the OOB and re-arming the mentioned vehicles with this weapon.

c.) Units 009 and 528 (both M3L) are currently class 12 (light tank) while other lend-lease tanks in this OOB are of class 120 (lend-lease tank), including other light lend-lease tanks.

d.) Unit 374 (107 mm Mort Sect) is currently class 5 (mortar). Considering the size of this weapon, maybe class 152 (heavy mortar) would be more appropriate.

e.) Unit 274 (Para Mortar) is armed with weapon 217 (82 mm para mortar), with a range of 20 hexes. As far as I am aware, the Soviet military did not develop any paratrooper variants of their mortars in the timescope of this game, with the airborne forces employing same mortars as regular infantry. Thus I would suggest re-arming this unit with regular 82 mm mortars instead. (For those interested in organisational information, for most of the war airborne battalions seem to have included a mortar company armed with six 82 mm mortars.)

f.) Speaking of airborne units and mortars, airborne rifle companies historically had a tiny mortar platoon of three 50 mm mortars, operated by a handful of men. Such armament unfortunately seems to be missing from the para companies currently present in game (at least formations 008, 054, 161 and 168). Instead, these have a MG section that seems not to have been part of the historical airborne rifle company organisation, with the airborne units concentrating all of their MGs in a battalion level MG platoon/company. Thus, I would suggest replacing the MG section in the mentioned formations with a new para support section (armed with rifles, three 50 mm mortars and a crew somewhere between 9 and 12 men).

g.) Glider formations 140 and 142 become available only at 1/43, while the G-11 glider (unit 200) that is used in these formations becomes available 1/42 (and there are no other units than gliders in these two formations).

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Keep in mind that the light AA-guns in the game (as well as historically) fired bursts rather than single rounds. This is represented in game with a limited ammo load and high HE kill rating.

For example the 37 mm AA-gun in this example has a HE kill rating of 11 per burst, while a 37 mm gun firing individual rounds would have a HE kill rating of 1. Taking this into account, I think the ammo load in the game sounds quite reasonable.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

That is correct. The shots represents bursts of fire for weapons like that in both games and has for now going on 2 decades.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

I do NOT have the time or inclination to get into debates with people about their nit picking ...YES some things may be legitimate errors but it's been going on for 20 years and it's getting old

a/ did you bother to review the "sabot" weapon stats for the weapon Unit 358 uses ?? There is a significant improvement on range and penetration over the one used for unit 176 so I see no reason to change that unit, Unless someone produces proof I can confirm It represents AP ammo that did not have the effective range of it's HE ammo and that is.........( I assume.....am I expected to remember every detail of every unit added to these games ??)..... why it's been set up like that. As stated in the game guide " sabot" can also represent AP ammo that does not have the effective range of it's HE ammo but ..OF COURSE that now opens up a new can-o-worms with any other unit that uses that weapon......and why this is all getting very , very tiresome..... I USED TO enjoy developing these games further but we're both getting worn down. This is a weapon on a vehicle that contributed NOTHING of significance in the half decade it existed in the mid 1930's... how do you define "nit-picking"?? Actual"sabot" ammo did not even exist during this vehicles service life so it's "sabot" is short(er) range AP

c.)...... and that's not " nit-picking" ?? How does it's unitclass affect the game or gameplay ? And if you'd bothered to look you would have found the M3L is ALSO in the OOB as WC120 "lend-lease" so we have allowed it to appear in both the lend least formations AND the regular light tank formations...so why do you think that is a problem for you given it's been like that for AT LEAST a decade and a half ?

e.) Unit 274 (Para Mortar) is set up as an infantry unit for direct fire only which is why it has the reduced range. It is a game design decision that also exists in other OOB's as well

f.) see above. It *may be* that this was intended to represent those 50's.....IDK. I cannot be expected to remember the reason every unit in both games was added and why but I will spend the time to investigate. What I DO know is unit 274 has been set up like that for at least 15 years

That's all I'm going to comment on.....if it changes for next release I either agreed with you or saw no reason to disagree. If it doesn't change don't assume I "overlooked" it

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

OK thanks. So does 200 or more hex range automatically classify artillery as off-map? Reason I ask is 'cuz in a recent Russian long campaign battle the AI opponent put 10.5cm Haubitzen with range of 202 ON the map. Would that make them capable of hitting Russian off-map arty? Thanks.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Only arty in the off map classes can CB....there could be on map pieces that have >200 range but they do not CB

Don

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

Sorry to butt in, but it might be an error indeed, easy to fix. The only other unit to use long-bareel #14 37mm L46 B-3 is #114 BT-2, which has ordinary AP ammo only, and there's no reason why T-26 should have sabot. A performance of "sabot" in this gun is excellent - penetration 7 @20 hexes - better than long US 37mm. Therefore I believe it should be ordinary AP (with average value pen = 5).

BTW: there were few T-26 with B-3 gun - some 20-30 according to Kolomiets. Ordinary gun-armed twin-turret T-26 (#176) was also rarer - some 450 per 1627 twin-turret tanks, what could be reflected in rarity code.

BTW2: L/20 tank gun #12 37mm PP obr.15R is always referred to as "Hotchkiss gun" or "Hotchkiss PS" in Russian sources. Apparently the barrel length was unchanged comparing with the French one, however it got a different recoil mechanism (adapted from not-produced PS-1 gun, which was also supposed to get new barrel and stronger ammo, according to M. Svirin).
It could be renamed, since, as I wrote before, obr.15 Rosenberg infantry gun (a different Russian L/19 design) wasn't used anymore in the 1930s.

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

I will make the change only because I am sick and tired of arguing about this crap and I am being as polite as I possibly can. As for rarity code..... this is one thing that makes me despair more than ever.....given all the years you have been making comments about this game you have never seemed to learn that rarity code ONLY affects AI purchasing.....it has NOTHING to do with human play or how rare a piece of equipment might be in RL ( not that 450 units is "rare" )NOTHING. and we have explained that many times in the past and it is clearly stated in MOBHack help............. as well that tank 176 is ALREADY set to rare

That is the last OOB " suggestion" I want to hear from ANYONE

Merry F%$#*% Christmas

Re: Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations
 

I only meant, that unit 358 (T-26TU M1932) should be never picked by the AI, while MG-armed 222 T-26 M1931 could be more common, than the gun-armed 176. Sorry to annoy you :(

Merry Christmas to you anyway :)