75/76/88-mm AT-Guns - emplacements only...

[XAHTEP39]

This topic is the logic continuation of my old topic about 88-mm Pak 43 - http://forum.bkmod.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=524.
BK-mod is a most realistic of CoH-mod, but it is a game, therefore there is many gameplay simplification, which imitate real factors.
Crewman-moved heavyweight heavy AT-guns (75-mm Pak 40=1500 kg, 76-mm M5-2600 kg & QF 17 pounder=3000 kg, 88-mm Pak 43=4500 kg) is one of this imitations. And yes, I suggest to remove this imitation.

"Motto": "Heavy-AT = only emplacements or HT-based (as rewarded)".

Becouse heavy AT-guns is only defensive weapon, crewman-moved ability turns AT-gun as supporting attack by "steps" or "rearward insurance" of attack units - it is a role of crewman-moved light (37-mm) and medium AT-guns (50/57-mm) (use extra pen shells/HE-shells/vet-status for support attacking forces against Armor/Emplacements)

There are simple (add/remove for Doctrines, balance issue...) and complex (more sophisticated balancing between doctrines, maybe necessary additonal coding/modeling...) variants.

SIMPLE variant.

- Heavy AT-guns emplacements for all doctrines;
- 88-mm Pak 43 is only emplacement in DEF-doc with 100 fire-range (all 88-mm Flak 36 has 85 fire-range in 4.9.3 );
- Units, who build AT-emplacements: Engineers (and probably Riflemans in Inf-doc?)/Sappers (and royal eng-sppers in CW-RE)/Pioneers/PGrens (and/or Assault Pioneers)
- Probably, bounces for Doctrines aimed on fortifications (Inf/RE/Def/SE): reduce building time,cost and increase HP (such as CT-upgrade of WH-Def);
- 5 crewmans for medium AT-guns (such as present heavy AT-guns);
- Rewarded units are staing the same : HT with heavy AT-Guns on board;
- something else?

COMPLEX variant.

- points of simple variant;
- light and medium AT-guns can ability to "dig in" (should vet-status), such as vet Jagdpanzers/Stugs etc; "dig in" is visible (or propably also "ambush" with big vet?) unit with some resistance against near blasts & rifle-fire and range as "ambush"-position;
- something else?

VERY-COMPLEX variant (probably unrealizable by coding).

- all heavy AT-guns stay as present time, but it requires to tractor, such as HTs or truck, which transport AT-gun from main base to position;
- following at this point balancing editions...

Thanks for attention, DEVs !

[Butterkeks]

VERY-COMPLEX variant (probably unrealizable by coding).

- all heavy AT-guns stay as present time, but it requires to tractor, such as HTs or truck, which transport AT-gun from main base to position;
- following at this point balancing editions...

I remember a discussion about that, if I'm not mistaken it was in the old forums. Devs said there that this is actually possible, but the AT-Guns bug like hell if they are pulled by HTs or trucks.

So it is possible, but looks like shit

SIMPLE variant.

- Heavy AT-guns emplacements for all doctrines;
- 88-mm Pak 43 is only emplacement in DEF-doc with 100 fire-range (all 88-mm Flak 36 has 85 fire-range in 4.9.3 );
- Units, who build AT-emplacements: Engineers (and probably Riflemans in Inf-doc?)/Sappers (and royal eng-sppers in CW-RE)/Pioneers/PGrens (and/or Assault Pioneers)
- Probably, bounces for Doctrines aimed on fortifications (Inf/RE/Def/SE): reduce building time,cost and increase HP (such as CT-upgrade of WH-Def);
- 5 crewmans for medium AT-guns (such as present heavy AT-guns);
- Rewarded units are staing the same : HT with heavy AT-Guns on board;
- something else?

Idk...
The problem with emplacements is that they are very easy to detect. When I play CW, often my ambushed 17 pdr is the only thing that prevents me from being steamrolled in mid game by Axis tanks.

So what I fear is simply that now you can instantly see where the enemy Paks are and they get useless. Also it will be impossible to deploy new AT Guns once Panther G is fielded (Recon sight).

So from my point of view it would be not so good idea. I'd actually like it for historical/realism reasons, but not for gameplay reasons


If we start discussing about gameplay simplification, we actually would need to change 80% of the game XD

[Eldrak1911]

VERY-COMPLEX variant (probably unrealizable by coding).

- all heavy AT-guns stay as present time, but it requires to tractor, such as HTs or truck, which transport AT-gun from main base to position;
- following at this point balancing editions...

Or, instead of doing them pulled by something, we could use the same ht werhmacht got, that can deploy 75mm/88mm at gun almost everywhere (The Sd.Kfz. 251/7 Halftrack (28mm sPzB) of the defensive doc iirc).

I suppose that this possible to add such a thing to other nations. By doing this, it'll counter this variant :

Units, who build AT-emplacements: Engineers (and probably Riflemans in Inf-doc?)/Sappers (and royal eng-sppers in CW-RE)/Pioneers/PGrens (and/or Assault Pioneers)

since only this ht would be able to deploy at-gun.

Heavy AT-guns emplacements for all doctrines;
- 88-mm Pak 43 is only emplacement in DEF-doc with 100 fire-range (all 88-mm Flak 36 has 85 fire-range in 4.9.3 );

So, Heavy At Guns for all, except 88 pak 43, right ?

light and medium AT-guns can ability to "dig in" (should vet-status), such as vet Jagdpanzers/Stugs etc; "dig in" is visible (or propably also "ambush" with big vet?) unit with some resistance against near blasts & rifle-fire and range as "ambush"-position;

Imo, the ambush system is fine as it is right now. Or, we could add some conditions to the ambush capacity. Being in heavy cover, i.e.

[Butterkeks]

Imo, the ambush system is fine as it is right now. Or, we could add some conditions to the ambush capacity. Being in heavy cover, i.e.

If you can't move your AT Guns + need cover to camouflage it, it's gonna be a real pain in the ass.
We all know the strange spawn behavior of CoH

[Eldrak1911]

Yeah, that's right ^^

If warhawks or Markr is passing here, could you guys please explain us the way that The Sd.Kfz. 251/7 Halftrack (28mm sPzB) is working ? For the spawn of the AT-Gun, cause iirc, we can't choose the direction of the at gun that get built by it.

[Warhawks97]

pak emplacments for all docs? I dont like it. I mean where would be the reason to get certain docs (inf, CW except RAF, def doc) if all could just get many different emplacments. And arent we currently in a situation where players complain a lot about emplacments.

I might get a look into it today evening/night. I am currently spending up to 12 hours a day, somtimes till 5 am in corsix to increase my skills there. So i think i should find some time to check it but i doubt that the direction the gun faces after spawn is choosable. I might be wrong though.

The "pak cover only in cover" is kind of impossible. IIrc markr already made tests by himself and the issue was that the entire crew had to be in cover. But you know how they somtimes jump arround elsewhere^^. Its similiar as the def doc "special" grenade that requires squad being in cover. But often one men is simply not in this cover and so they cant use the ability; in this case here the ambush.

[Eldrak1911]

pak emplacments for all docs? I dont like it. I mean where would be the reason to get certain docs (inf, CW except RAF, def doc) if all could just get many different emplacments. And arent we currently in a situation where players complain a lot about emplacments.

Perhaps is this possible to "change" the non emplacement at-gun in some of mix emplacement and non emplacement.

Let me explain it : It would be an nude at emplacement. Just the gun, you build it, and then, the only thing possible would be a rotation, like the Pak 43/88mm in coh 2
And then, if you want some more protection, just build some sandbags around it !

[XAHTEP39]

Ouu, good, we have constructive discussion, tovarschi!
Okey, problems of suggested method is revealed, but some new suggestions are reveal itself.

US-Inf, CW-RA, WH-Def has arty howitzers without bags, are you agree, that this guns is not moved? Yes.
This arty howitzers are builded by Engineers/Sappers/Pioneers.
I Suggest similar decision for heavy AT-guns.

Okey, heavy AT-guns emplacements will be allow only for US-inf (Engs), CW-RA (Sappers, Royal Engs), WH-Def (Pioneers), PE-SE (PGrens or/and SturmPions) after CT-upgrade. - we avoid to "spam" AT-emplacements by all.

But 75/76-mm heavy AT-guns without emplacements (such as unemplacements arty howitzers) will be allow for all doctrines, but:
1) it will be builded (builded, not produced from Barracks!) by Engs (probably riflemens for Inf-Doc)/Sappers&RoyalEngs/Pioneers/PGrens and/or SturmPions (probably by PGrens only in SE);
2) it will be produced (thanks, Eldrak1911!) by Sd.Kfz. 251/7 Halftrack (28-mm sPzB) (only for WH-Def) and by each ammunition vehicles in all of 12 doctrines (GMC CCKW Ammunition Transport Truck / @#%^№!!!??? what is CW ammo-vehicle ??? rewarded C15TA Armored Truck is necessary to be present for all CW-docs such as ammo-vehicle / Sd.Kfz. 11 Ammunition Transport / Sd.Kfz. 252 Light Ammunition Halftrack).

WARNING/ACHTUNG/ВНИМАНИЕ! Guys, please note, that I select ammo-vehicle for heavy AT-guns`s spawrole not by chance - this decision imitates towing AT-guns & deploying on position (producing AT-guns by ammo-trucks require some time - similar mecanic as WH-Def Sd.Kfz. 251/7 Halftrack now) and supply ammunition for AT-guns (Now ammo-trucks load APCR/HEAT/HE rounds for vehicles and AT-guns too), therefore logistic role (especially ammo-vehicles, which also can "produced" heavy AT-guns) will be increse.

Next. Heavy AT-guns without emplacements have ambush-ability at start (as present time), if it is realizable, that vet-status will give ability to "dig in" (such as JagdPanzers/Stugs etc) with save ambush-ability, but AT-gun doesn`t reverse fire-sector in "dig in" position, must to cancel "dig in" to reverse-opportunity (therefore it will be similar present AT-empacements but hugely light and without reverse-opportunity).
P.S. probably "dig in" ability may to be allow for light and medium vet-status AT-guns.

Next. Probaby, if it necessary, that heavy AT-guns can be moved short distance:
- by whole gun-crew (without losses),
- it must to be non-cost activeted ability (such as "sprint" by each INF-squad) with short active-time, slow-speed (such as moved Pak 43 now yes, it is very heavyweight) and long cooldown.

Next. Increase gun-crew:
- Medium 50/57-mm AT-guns = 4-5 crewmans (at present = 3) with appropriate popcap;
- Heavy 75/76-mm AT-guns = 6-7 crewmans (at present = 5) with appropriate popcap;
- Extra heavy 88-mm Pak 43, which I mean as only building emplacement in WH-Def with 8-9 popcap.

The problem with emplacements is that they are very easy to detect.
So what I fear is simply that now you can instantly see where the enemy Paks are and they get useless. Also it will be impossible to deploy new AT Guns once Panther G is fielded (Recon sight).
So from my point of view it would be not so good idea. I'd actually like it for historical/realism reasons, but not for gameplay reasons

Yes, gun-emplacement is equipped position with clear side and arty-periscopes, so maybe this can to increase sight (not fire!)-range (not against ambush units) to prevent early detection by tanks. It is normal, usually static AT-position first to see enemy moved tank

- 88-mm Pak 43 is only emplacement in DEF-doc with 100 fire-range (all 88-mm Flak 36 has 85 fire-range in 4.9.3 );

So, Heavy At Guns for all, except 88 pak 43, right ?

Yes, 88-mm Pak 43 is extremly heavy AT-gun and this is rarely weapon, so it should to be allowed only for WH-Def as emplacement variant.


I understand, that it is very complex suggestion, which requires some additional balance-checks, that I don`t mention there. Therefore I try to make suggestion about heavy AT-guns used presents tested mecanics (building non-emplacement heavy AT-guns such as non-emplacement arty-howitzer / "dig in" such as Jagdpanzers & StuGs / produced by additional vehicles such as only Sd.Kfz. 251/7 Halftrack now / crewman-moved such as "sprint" INF ability now)

[Butterkeks]

Ouu, good, we have constructive discussion, tovarschi!

Of course, since Tiger1996 left there is no one to distract from the topics and push the same suggestions in every topic

The problem with emplacements is that they are very easy to detect.
So what I fear is simply that now you can instantly see where the enemy Paks are and they get useless. Also it will be impossible to deploy new AT Guns once Panther G is fielded (Recon sight).
So from my point of view it would be not so good idea. I'd actually like it for historical/realism reasons, but not for gameplay reasons

Yes, gun-emplacement is equipped position with clear side and arty-periscopes, so maybe this can to increase sight (not fire!)-range (not against ambush units) to prevent early detection by tanks. It is normal, usually static AT-position first to see enemy moved tank

No no, my point is, that once detected it's very easy to kill it. If an enemy tank gets killed by an ambushed at gun, he still doesn't know where it is. And if he finds out where it is, I can simply switch positions. With emplacements this is impossible.
So I spend a lot of ressources for an AT Gun that is in that second dead in which the enemy finds out that I have it.

[Warhawks97]

Sounds weird but i already played with that idea that at least US 76 pak and 17 pdr as well as Pak43 would be only available as emplacments due to their weight (guess thats why in vcoh they are made that way).

Allis having, as mobile heavy AT, their TD´s for very cheap cost but good guns.
The axis, since they dont really have cheap and mobile TD´s, would be the only faction having heavier AT (75 mm pak) as mobile weapon. From a realistic point of view the axis 75 mm was pretty light. 1,5 tons or so. US and 17 pdr 3-5 tons something like that. The other "realism factor" would be the way of how mobile heavy AT works. Allied, due to the endless ammount of fuel, relied actually always on vehicles and tanks carrying their 75 and 76 mm guns while axis could not.


From a gamesytle point of view the allied would relay a lot more on fuel, therefore being designed a lot more flexible that allows to controle more areas. Meanwhile axis being less mobile in return for extremly powerfull charges once they get late armor out.

For the same reason i suggested to remove more or less all non vehicle arty from US (howitzers, except AB who could drop the 75 mm still) and in return working a lot more with mobile (therefore fuel costing) SPG´s (105 sherman, priest).

It would give a completely new gamestyle and huge diversity between the factions having more a feeling what faction is supposed to be what, to do what and how to do what.

In this scenario, US would be fuel hungry but 100% mobile faction with some more static stuff for inf. CW camp bomb (25 pdr for all and basic unit) with slow advance and Axis a "beast" that can go rampage in late game if they manage to defend and collect enough fuel. Though costly rampage.

I am dreaming again, sorry:D

But yeah, just wanna say that such kind of ideas already crossed my minds. But thought i could get only support for it in terms of arty (but apparently didnt:P).

[Eldrak1911]

I am dreaming again, sorry:D

Yeah, that's kind of a complete rework here ^^