Thread: British oob
View Single Post
  #6  
Old February 7th, 2019, 05:02 AM

Kiwikkiwik Kiwikkiwik is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 125
Thanks: 5
Thanked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Kiwikkiwik is on a distinguished road
Default Re: British oob

Before 4/44 the British had no armoured infantry that is according to the 4 very reputable, extensively researched volumes by Mark Bevis on exactly that subject, the British war establishments concur as does every other source I've looked at, it's not just what I think, it's the consensus. If anyone has a better reference or even one that disagrees I'd be very much surprised.

Giving the British halftracks, ie armoured infantry, two years early isn't a minor detail because, artillery. Artillery is much more effective in game than in reality, this makes moving around in trucks suicide, but in reality that was the only option the British had before 4/44. Giving the British halftracks two years early gives the British army a capability they never had for those two years, the ability to move large chunks of infantry forward safe from shrapnel and bullets. This has an unquestionably big effect on gameplay. Similarly the Motor infantry was always 8 men, never 10 this also isn't a minor detail, an 8 man section plays differently and is much weaker than a 10 man section. The ubiquitous universal carrier Scout platoon isnt even in the game. That no-one has disputed any of these or the other errors I cited suggests to me that I am well on the money.

Many players probably don't even realise that the British OOB contains this amount of errors, don't you think they should be given the courtesy of a British OOB that doesn't contain major errors? after all the blurb for the game says

winSPWW2 with its amazing amount of historical detail

I'm not sure introducing halftracks 27 months early qualifies as "historical", neither do any of the many other errors I've presented in this thread.
Maybe it is time to expand your team with someone that has the time and enthusiasm to correct the OOBs? I'd be happy to help.

Hi IMP I'm not sure that the amount of info is the problem, the salient points are in there, mentioned again above, I just provide all the detail so DRG can make changes if he wishes with the least effort as I have done as much of the work I can for him already. I appreciate whatever work he decides to do or not to do. I am happy enough if he is just aware of the issues the British OOB has. However I'm not so keen to have what are major flaws in the British OOB characterised and dismissed as hairsplitting and nitpicking, H/T introduction dates two years too early and all that follows, 10 men squads instead of 8, universal carrier recon scout platoon morphed into a substantial fighting unit. All these errors effect gameplay greatly.

I would also point out that the tone of responses in the forum is hardly conducive to posting anything that could be construed as critical. Many forum members would be too frightened to post.