BFC, Request for 3-inch AT ammo change

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

Am pretty sure it was MikeyD who'd made a bunch of in-game fixes to various weapons and such, but I could well be wrong. My memory, in the face of hordes of posts, simply gets overwhelmed. Recalling where I read what is a real challenge, and I'm grateful BFC has a review whole thread feature, especially since 300+post threads are now not unusual.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Guest]

MikeyD is one of our artists. He fixes other things.

Also, this isn't a "fix" so much as a TO&E issue, it seems. So you want Steve (or possibly Normal Dude). And yes, we have all been busy. I'll alert Steve to this thread.

[akd]

MikeyD is one of our artists. He fixes other things.

Also, this isn't a "fix" so much as a TO&E issue, it seems. So you want Steve (or possibly Normal Dude). And yes, we have all been busy. I'll alert Steve to this thread.

To be clear, JK has no idea whether anything is actually wrong, has no reason to believe there is an error, and doesn't even own the game. I suppose it's possible that M10 might not have M62 APC, but there is no reason to assume so, especially if M62 was standard at the time.

I say only tell him if he buys CMFI.

[ASL Veteran]

I say only tell him if he buys CMFI.

Or just tell him that the issue has been resolved. Since he doesn't have the game he'll be none the wiser one way or the other.

[Michael Emrys]

Or just tell him that the issue has been resolved. Since he doesn't have the game he'll be none the wiser one way or the other.

I like the way that man thinks!

Michael

[John Kettler]

Phil,

Thanks! It may be merely TO&E, but it could be more, since we're talking substantial difference in terminal effects, depending on the round and the target.

akd,

To be clear, the 3-inch antitank gun, regardless of configuration, could be firing one of two different antitank rounds. The baseline round is Substitute Standard M79 AP, which is slightly better, at certain ranges, vs the Standard M62A1 A.P.C.--against RHA. There is a radical difference between the two rounds, though, when it comes to penetration performance vs face-hardened armor. I believe it's roughly 1.5 inches at 500 yards. And the German tanks have what? As I see it, there are several issues here.

1. M79 was used until a certain date, but when was that? 1a. Once that date's known, then it inevitably follows that M79 AP was the round before said date. 1b Which round does CMFI reflect, let alone GL? I've reviewed the 601st TD Battalion report for Operation Avalanche but can find no mention whatsoever of antitank ammunition, but then, I can't find an antitank engagement, either. The 601st switched to M10s at the end of the North African campaign, July 1943.

http://www.tankdestroyer.net/images/stories/ArticlePDFs/601st_TD_Operation_Avalanche_Report_Opt.pdf

2. When the M62A1 arrived in the MTO (Mediterranean Theater of Operations), did it go first to the M10 units, first to the towed 3-inch, or did both get it at the same time?

3. What we know for sure is that the commander of the 601st TD Battalion said, several times in his Operations Report for Operation Shingle, that what can only be AP shell (his terms, A.P.C.or 3-inch B.D.F.) was used in Operation Shingle and was very effective.

What's fired, when it's fired (in calendric terms) and against what all matter in the context of the game. If the M62A1 was available for the 3-inch towed gun, then it may matter for GreenAsJade in the GL AAR here, but in the larger sense, it potentially affects any U.S. player with the same 3-inch antitank weapon, whether towed or SP. The U.S. player has enough problems with heavy German armor in this period without potentially sticking the player with what may be the wrong antitank round. Also, how that weapon performs goes to the heart of its perceived usefulness in QBs, too.

akd and ASL Veteran,

Cute! Am lucky to have CMBN/CW. Now at 2.01!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Brindlewolf]

There's a scenario in PT's Scottish Corridor where you come up against some KTs and Panthers.Plenty of AT guns in that scenario alright.You won't be worrying what ammo you have in that scenario though-infact,you won't have your guns or armor for long at all.Definately a 'beam me up Scotty' scenario that one

[Battlefront.com]

The *ONLY* non-Tungston ammo available for the M-10 is the M62A1. I am now poking Charles to see what the reasoning is behind that. But it is, and should be, a very low priority. With that in mind...

May I remind you all that we voluntarily choose to answer questions. If you are going to start making demands and being loud about it, might I suggest that a) it be pretty important and that there is SOME reason to wonder if there's a problem. I know ammo type designations are not presented in the game, but after 14 years it should be presumed that we have things correct unless there is an absolutely solid reason to suspect we don't. If anything, we've earned that as well as the respect of being patient with us. It may surprise some that we do have other things going on that demand our attention, but that is in fact the case.

Steve

P.S. Answer back from Charles is that according to his research the earlier type was already out of service for M-10s by Italy's timeframe.

[John Kettler]

Steve,

I appreciate getting an answer on this, let alone directly from you!

I'm in no position to demand anything. Rather, I deem this exercise akin to trying to be noticed in a busy, noisy classroom setting. I think that, in this particular instance, it was important to press the issue, since this is a time period in which the U.S. faces some armor for which it has very few direct fire responses. The antitank round being used matters in the context of the game, which is why I pushed for (not demanded) an answer. Nor was I asking for one from you necessarily. I would've been equally happy with anyone on your end who could answer the question and, were a fix needed, get that ball rolling.

It's most useful to know the M62A1 applies to both CMFI and GL for M-10s. Would you ask, Charles, please, by way of a follow up question, whether the M10 and the towed 3-inch ATG both fire the M62A1?

I fully understand there are few of you, many of us, and that were we a pot, we'd be constantly in danger of boiling over with our questions, comments, enthusiasms and agendas (misguided or not) and, in some cases, demands and worse. Further, I get that you have lots of pots aboil, for you have many other projects going, all of which require attention. I grok that.

Nor would I in any way gainsay the wonderful reality of how highly interactive you are with us, your customers, despite a doubtless crushing workload. Do we yearn for the earlier, simpler days in which you, jointly and severally, were far more present on the one or few Forums/Fora? I'd have to say yes. And I think that to some degree colors how we who've been with BFC from the CMx1 days view our interactions with you. Halcyon days of yore and all that. Even if they weren't at times, for well do I recall how nasty some of those threads got.

So, thank you, Steve, Charles and the rest of the crew, sung or unsung, for all you have done, do and will do for us. This has been quite a ride (hard to believe how long), and it just keeps getting faster, broader and ever more exciting!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Battlefront.com]

My point is there was no reason to "push" us for an answer because there was no reason to suspect there was a problem. With the thousands of details in the game, can you imagine how quickly we would shut this Forum down if people decided they needed more information about each one of them?

The M62A1 is also applicable to the towed 76mm as well.

Thanks for your thanks, but please... let's not go down this road again any time soon. By all means ask away if there is a reason to doubt, but otherwise presume there is no reason to doubt. And if it takes us days or even weeks to answer it's not because the question isn't important, it's because there are most likely more important things consuming our limited time.

Steve

[John Kettler]

Steve,

Roger. Wilco. (Hope I don't forget!)

Would probably go grog insane (with a smile on my face) were I to be able to go through your reference library and database. Suspect other grogs would willingly line up for the same opportunity and likely SAN loss!

Regards,

John Kettler

Regards,

John Kettler

[LukeFF]

I find it ironic that JK is asking for features for a game he doesn't even own.

[c3k]

Well, having been around awhile, I would find it ironic if anyone other than JK were to ask for features for a game he didn't even own.

Ken

[John Kettler]

And I find it ironic that LukeFF, who supposedly is ignoring me, finds it necessary to keep dinging me. Additionally, I'd be remiss if I failed to note that there ARE M10s in a game I DO own. It's called CMBN, which also has towed TD units with M6 3-inch antitank guns (pertinent to same discussion). Believe both LukeFF and c3k have heard of CMBN!

I was pretty sure that the M62A1 was in use by Normandy, but now that I know for sure that cartridge was in use at Anzio, it's no longer speculation. If I could just get Ordnance to send me some of that newfangled HVAP I've heard about!

Regards,

John Kettler