Jump to content

DevBlog Issues


John Kettler

Recommended Posts

Devs and Moon,

In looking at the DevBlogs, I see several issues that need addressing from a technical standpoint. Under Repair, it says that sending crew below protects the men, but this is hardly true for PT boats and similar unarmored vessels. In fact, it could be argued that it's actually more dangerous to be below, in that not only is there projectile threat, but secondary missile threat as rounds come pounding through the flimsy hull. A rifle bullet would penetrate the hull of a WW II destroyer, and massed .50 cal. MG strafing caused astronomic casualties in Japanese troop transports in the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, not to mention shredding the escort vessels. Of course, what does go away is aimed fire against individual, small groups on gun mounts and such if the crew is below decks. Deeper draft vessels could, depending on configuration and aspect and angle of incoming fire, also gain some crew protection for men below the waterline.

Under Damage Modeling, there is the bald assertion that torpedoes hit below the armor belt, so no need to model it for damage purposes. Untrue, as shown here in a discussion of anti-torpedo bulges/anti-torpedo blisters and later more streamlined protection measures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-torpedo_bulge

Here's an actual example of an anti-torpedo blister retrofit (BB35 Texas), showing the hull contours before and after. Note that the retrofit occurred well before World War II.

http://www.bb35library.usstexasbb35.com/structure/dimensions/DIMENSIONS.html

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does seem a little silly. But reading all of the accounts in the PT boat books I have now their does not seem to have been too many fatalities to small arms fire in most missions. And certainly the germans had armour around their bridge areas.

At log range this is semi believeable, a lot of battles seem to have been about smoking it up and whizzing around at long range until you find a gap to rush in with torps.

Offcourse a short range battle is entirlely different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello John, your post didn't go unnnoticed. Here is a response from the devs I am posting on their behalf:

I'll start with the last question of the anti-ship defense. There are no ships in PT Boats that are large enough to have anti-torpedo bulges (also known as anti-torpedo blisters). The biggest ships in the game are German cruisers Admiral Hipper and Blücher.

http://www.battlefront.com/images/stories/PTBoats/image002.jpg

During the Norway invasion Blücher sustained more than 20 hits from the land artillery (the Norwegians were shooting from the distance less than 500 m, basically a point-blank range), but the cruiser sunk after two hits from the land torpedo guns. So there is no need to talk about the anti-torpedo defense of destroyers and transports.

image004.jpg

Crew protection is a bit more complicated issue. Our system is, in fact, a compromise, as it does not take into account the shell movement inside the hull and the possible damage to the crew done by hull fragments.

Nevertheless, the idea that the crew has more chances to survive the small arms fire below the deck is true. It is obvious for a large ship, as even a civilian craft has a steel sides no less than 0,5 inches thick and several steel partitions.

Even the crew of a PT boat is not so defenseless as it may seem. Of course, a 20mm Oerlikon or a 40mm Bofors can pierce the boat from side to side. But the bullet or the shell still has to find a crewman. For example, the free-board of an 80-feet Elco boat is approximately 24 m long and 1 m high. So an enemy gunner has to shoot at random, covering the area of 24 m x 2 m. Besides, not all of the boat compartments are lightly protected. For example, the engine-room of a PT boat is constructed so that the crew is between two engines.

image006.jpg

The photo of the engine-room of a German Schnellboot shows that the crew is protected not only from machine-gun fire but from shells as well. Besides, many PT boats had special armor plating.

image008.jpg

For example, Elco boats, Schnellboots and Komsomolets boats had armored superstructures (the armored cabin of a Schnellboot is clearly different from a regular one). Komsomolets boats and Fairmiles had armor plating that protected the gunners from small arms fire.

image010.jpg

And it is not all. The hull of a Schnellboot was into parts by 7 partitions. Four of them were made of steel, and three – from an aluminum-copper-magnesium alloy. Komsomolets boats also had several metal partitions.

One might think that an 7-12 mm armour plating does not provide an sufficient level of protection. But I would like to remind you that the same armour had the famous IL-2 that was practically invulnerable to the cannon fire from the most directions even from several dozens of meters – much to the surprise of the German pilots.

In any case, German boats often went into action against superior forces and returned without heavy casualties. The photo shows that the German crewmen were not too worried by the heavy fire.

image012.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devs and Moon,

Appreciate your fascinating and informative reply, but regret to inform you Hipper and Blucher both have anti-torpedo blisters. This detailed discussion is quite clear on this issue. (Fair use)

"All of them had anti torpedo bulges on their hulls."

http://www.chuckhawks.com/heavy_cruisers_part2.htm

This confirms the info, adding additional material about an anti-torpedo longitudinal bulkhead.

http://www.navypedia.org/ships/germany/ger_cr_hipper.htm

Seems to me that there are two ways to get a torpedo hit below the belt: catch the cruiser heeling in a turn or engage her with a torpedo using a keel breaking magnetic pistol. Am not aware these were fitted to PTs or similar vessels. ISTR both the U.S. and Germany tried them in subs and gave up in despair.

Some major Blucher sinking groggery

http://www.admiral-hipper-class.dk/bluecher/gallery/gallbluechersinking.html

http://www.admiral-hipper-class.dk/bluecher/miscellaneous/oscarsborg_bluecher_wreck_site_today/oscarsborg_bluecher_wreck_site_today.html

The associated forum is a gold mine of amazing data and very knowledgeable people.

http://bismarck-class-forum.dk/index.php

Apparently, if you register, Antonio Bonomi will let you download for free a comprehensive set of technical drawings of the Hipper, Blucher and Prinz Eugen.

http://forum-marinearchiv.de/smf/index.php?topic=4305

While we're on cruisers, will there be Japanese ones to "play" with in the Pacific? I've read that PTs encountered them as early as Bulkley's squadron in the Philippines. See, for example, PT attacks on the Kuma off Cebu and the Abukuma torpedoing by a PT at Surigao Strait.

http://www.americainwwii.com/stories/squadronoffuries.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Abukuma

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really see this as a major concern, but perhaps that's because I have next to no interest at all in anything bigger than a DD being in the game (and damned few of those.)

The vast, vast majority of work done by MTB's and MGBs in the war was coastal work against smaller craft like their counterparts, barges and coasters. Frankly I'm a bit concerned with the emphasis on larger ships in the screenshots and videos. The historical actions that MTBs and MGBs participated in were more than exciting enough without "sexing up" the opponents.

I hope that the emphasis in the game will be on the smaller boats and not the larger.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Shaw,

I basically agree with your views, but my position is to, if possible, make sure things are properly modeled in the sim, in order to get historically valid outcomes. If we're going to make torpedo attacks, I think it's worthwhile to make sure the target's vulnerability or lack thereof to the PT's main weapon is properly depicted. Light cruisers were often used as destroyer squadron leaders, and the Japanese sent everything up through battleships down the Slot to bombard Henderson Field and resupply and reinforces Japanese troops on that island.

Here's a great piece illustrating exactly what I'm saying, in an overview of U.S. Pacific PT operations.

http://www.eaglespeak.us/2009/09/torpedo-boats-in-solomons-campaign.html

I share your concerns regarding the apparent posturing of the game, as seen in recent updates.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devs and Moon,

Just read the IGN interview---Aaiiieee!!! Did I really just read that in a game whose main title is PT Boats that the Americans, who BTW coined the term PT, for Patrol, Torpedo, aren't in? Perhaps I hallucinated or passed out, or maybe my hot chocolate was spiked? Regardless, please tell me I didn't read what I think I did! If, somehow, my nightmare is true, then please tell me you'll do an add-on or second game with them in it.

Also, regarding damage modeling, I grok the basic straight physics concept, but how will you treat shell hits (additional energy derived from detonation) and things like AP-I MG and light cannon fire?

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devs and Moon,

Just read the IGN interview---Aaiiieee!!! Did I really just read that in a game whose main title is PT Boats that the Americans, who BTW coined the term PT, for Patrol, Torpedo, aren't in? Perhaps I hallucinated or passed out, or maybe my hot chocolate was spiked? Regardless, please tell me I didn't read what I think I did! If, somehow, my nightmare is true, then please tell me you'll do an add-on or second game with them in it.

Also, regarding damage modeling, I grok the basic straight physics concept, but how will you treat shell hits (additional energy derived from detonation) and things like AP-I MG and light cannon fire?

Regards,

John Kettler

Take it easy John :D

The game was named ages ago and they really can't change it now. I'm sure that the original decision was made for two reasons that are closely related ...

1. US Marketability ... The US MTB is the PT Boat and to make it marketable in the US you've pretty much got to cater to that audience. Is it more than just a tad disingenuous ... sure it is, but technically correct as I point out below.

2. Descriptiveness ... in the US certainly and probably in much of the world, a PT Boat IS the definitive MTB. So if you want to sell a game with a title that conveys what it's about ... you'll use the term PT boat.

And, of course, there ARE PT Boats in the game IIRC ... they're just crewed by Russians as they were in real life. Here's a list of PTs ordered by the US and many, as you can see, were transferred to the USSR.

http://www.ptboats.org/20-06-05-boatdata-001.html

Joe

p.s. The Med add on/version that is rumored to be coming will undoubtedly have US crewed PTs as they were quite prevelant in that theater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Shaw,

Was unaware we'd supplied any to Russia, but then, my ignorance of WW II Russian torpedo boat warfare is huge, along with the Russian Navy in WW II in general. I know a bit about the submarines, a smattering on naval landings, and some of the history of the battleship Marat and a couple of cruisers and that's about it. Oh, I've read Leonov's Blood On the Shore! Am sure there was some coverage of Russian naval ops during the War in Gorshkov's Sea Power and the State, but I'm afraid it has been lost due to lack of use.

There's a bit on our PTs and their fate in Russian hands here.

http://www.warboats.org/soviet.htm

Nice overview of global torpedo boat operations and who had what.

http://www.2worldwar2.com/pt-boats.htm

Many WW 2 Russian small naval vessels shown here, to include some very peculiar riverine craft. And, yes, those are a BM-13 Katyusha launcher and a T-34/76B turret on the BKA-1125 River Armored boat!

http://henk.fox3000.com/Aer2.htm

Russian underwater archaeological catalog for the Baltic, to include several Russian torpedo boat wrecks.

http://www.baltic-sunken-ships.com/page.phtml?id=0&mid=4&lng=EN

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mllaneza,

Welcome aboard! Cool site with some great info and pics on some pretty obscure naval topics.

Regards,

John Kettler

Indeed, welcome. I've been watching this game for, literally, years now ... my pre order is already in because ... well, because I've been waiting years now damnit.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...