Major Pain's Projects

[Folgore]

My compliments MP, very nice units (...as usual )

[LouisXIV]

They look familiar. When I was much younger I took the Airfix 1/72 scale kits and made every version of the PzKw IV and the Sturmgeschuetz. It will be nice to have the D, E and F with the canted front plate.

Just a suggestion for some future date: The T-34/76a and b with the big flap turret hatch raised and a commander peering around it.

[Ocelo]

No offense, rather a side comment, I like the models from Stalingrad of the F1, F2, and G versions more than BK ones. But, its still nice to have our own versions of them, if needed.

Also, have you considered making a couple makeshift units, such as with damaged side skirts, or ones with a heavy wire mesh for sideskirts?

My other suggestion is more of a mapper's one: a Pz.IV seriously disassembled, ie: in an engine repair, sideskirt replacement, and gun refitment. Would be an awesome addition to maps (ie: enemy base objectives would be much more realistic), and making them as units makes mapping much easier (no worry about angle), and also opens up many scenario possibilities (which I personally would be very eager to emply in BKR and other maps )

[Major Pain]

Thanks

Ocelo, the tank repair idea is pretty good, but give me a bit more of an idea what you would like to see.

I can remove sections of the side skirts or turret skirts, or perhaps remove the gun, which would pretty much be a tank with a hull mg since the barrel change would automatically eliminate the coaxial MG until the barrel was installed. Wouldn't that cause it to be a very weak "infantry tank" if it was attacked? There are many things that could be done to build tanks with mechanical issues. How about a tank in the process of receiving new tracks or wheels. Of course, these would be sitting ducks with just turret rotation and no ability to dig in.

With some creative scripting... you could have a field tank station with several tanks being repaired, with each being replaced by new units as they are fully restored -> make it a race to have engineer trucks find a warehouse to obtain enough material before the assault begins. You could begin with a repair cost higher than normal and HP set higher to prolong the repair process. Just a thought. But I think this could be overdone if used alot. So could this be a bit much for a mission or two?

One of the things that I tried to do was build the basic components like the tracks, hulls, and turrets. It is just a matter now of selecting the parts from a library to build any tank model. So building skirts with missing plates, or tanks without cupolas isn't a big issue. The tracks contain the animation data, while the turrets and gun carriages contain the rotation and elevation data. As long a the parent-child part assignment is respected, any part can be added or removed to build the tank in a matter of minutes. Much like a mass production factory.

This applies to most trucks, tanks or other vehicles, and I believe was the original intent of the vanilla models. When I look at the source files for the vanilla models, most use common parts. You can see this clearly between the Studebakers and Shermans for instance. There are 4 original versions of the Studebaker, the US cargo, the US engineering, USSR cargo and the USSR engineering.

Each has it's own particular bed or frame. Some have the winch, some don't. The USSR engineering uses a half box bed instead of the full box with the cab overhang as the US engineering. Just for reference, the US engineering in BK was actually the style used by the RED Cross as an ambulance. The engineering or shop vesions did not have the overhang above the cab.

I haven't built the library for the T34, but it won't take long. The basic components are not that much different than the Sherman or the PzIV. Tracks are a slight different shape as is the turret and hull... but MGs are MGs and Main guns are Main guns so those parts are already in the library.

While it would easy to build "what if" or fatasy models, I tend to stick with the historical models. But I do find it interesting when I read accounts of many 'off the wall' things that were done in the field. Much like engineers coming up with ideas to rebuild one battle ready tank from the parts of 2 or 3 damaged tanks. They were quite industrious at times and did some things that no one thought of at the factory or from a design standpoint. There were many attempts to up-gun the Sherman to a 90mm in an effort to give it an edge against the 88mm Tiger, most were failed attempts due to the breach mounting issues of rotating the 90mm to fit into the Sherman T21 or T23 turret. These retrofits were actually more dangerous to the gunner than being hit by the Tiger. But many of the field upgrades did find acceptance by the ordinance board and were incorporated into later models.

The 76(w) was actually first applied in the field which reduced the explosive nature of the Sherman when it took a hit in the turret. This was a simple solution of submerging the ammo in a anti-freeze type solution instead of mounted on racks around the inside of the turret. So while I try to stay within the historical venue, some upgunned or upgrades could be added for flavor. I'm not much on building prototypes since there were hardly ever put into battle.... mostly this was found in Italy since everything that was built was employed to some degree.

Adding sandbags, tree branches, crates and other things could also be applied.

I have been trying to break the code which allows vehicles to be towed or to tow, like trailers or ammo carriages. The code already exists within the game engine because clearly trains have both a hook point and tow point. The issue is locating the correct code to allow this to be applied to any vehicle. I have had some success with the linking part, but not the un-hooking part. That cannot happen on a train. Even when I apply the "deploy artillery" command to a train, it will not unhook a car.

But as we have seen over the years, there are just some commands (functions) that do not work with other commands (functions). Even when I look at the particular modules that give the game life, changing values and parameters only has a limited effect. So I tend to believe while core parameters are in fact loaded by the game engine in the form of modules, the game engine itself overrides some of the code issues.

If this code were overcome, it could lead to an actual purpose for recovery vehicles which might add another realistic angle to the game. We shall see if anyone finally finds the answer.

I will say this... despite BK already existing for 7 years has not dampened my interest. BK II did not find acceptance in my opinion because the authors chose to move away from the open source platform that BK I allows. I think this is what keeps BK I in the forefront. As more people begin to recognize the possibilities, it draws new life and talented artists. I don't think zoom and 3-D rotation is what attracts us to a game. It is the fact that the game engine, the open-source capability and the ability to build anything is only limited by our collective imagination. If some of the code issues are finally solved, then there is much to do. So if any of you have a direct line to NIVAL, perhaps it is time that a rewrite of the game engine should open the door.

Imagine the possibilites if we could get the authors to return to BK I and provide some new source material that expands the already well-defined platform. Well, perhaps it won't happen since it may not be profitable... but one can hope.

My final advice to those of you that feel like your hanging by a thread or burned out. Don't give up or walk away. This is still the best game out there. This membership club is very diverse and talented. While we have our differences and disagreements, we are very much more the same than different. We have to remain somewhat on the same page and support the main purpose and ideas.

While many of our friends have moved on, some continue to return. We can hope that more will do so. I appreciate the fact that Aleks has provided this site so we may continue to exchange ideas, maps and more importantly, each others company.

Thanks Aleks.


Major Pain

[Desert]

There are still many things to do.

I saw only one tank with flora as a camouflage on it and I liked the idea.
I can't wait to see yours.

I remember someone mentioned Bergepanzer Tiger moving damaged tanks.
Can someone try that.
Damaged tank could be created like a field kitchen in Stalingrad and Bergepanzer Tiger as a truck.
That would be awesome for new (fire support) missions.

I can't wait to get back to work with night mission.

[darwin]

May 18, 2010 23:24:08 GMT 1 Major Pain said:

I can remove sections of the side skirts or turret skirts, or perhaps remove the gun, which would pretty much be a tank with a hull mg since the barrel change would automatically eliminate the coaxial MG until the barrel was installed. Wouldn't that cause it to be a very weak "infantry tank" if it was attacked? There are many things that could be done to build tanks with mechanical issues. How about a tank in the process of receiving new tracks or wheels. Of course, these would be sitting ducks with just turret rotation and no ability to dig in.

Say MP, I like your ideas and I think, being a former tank crewman, I can suggest a couple of changes. If the main gun is removed, the coaxial mg can still be used so long as the gun mantel is still attached to the turret. Which it should. The mg mount and controls are a separate unit from the main gun, although both can be fired together when both switches are in the "on" position. So long as electrical power to the turret controls and gun solenoid is connected, the coax mg can be fired.

In addition, there should be no reason why an immobilized tank cannot be "dug-in". Especially in BK where "digging-in" is a fairly unrealistic process anyway. If the tank is at a base repair depot it will most likely be on a paved or concrete surface and sand bags would be used both in the game and in real life. A field depot would be a little different, but a section of path stretched out would simulate hard packed earth which is where the tanks would be stored/repaired and should generate sand bags as well, I think.

Your suggestions about repairing tanks mirror a sequence I used on a map where the Soviets were attacking a German defense line that was under construction. I assigned a HP value and an engineer truck to each bunker or fortification. The engineer trucks were detailed to "repair" their assigned fortifications and then move to a road at the edge of the map. When all surviving trucks were there the script removed them from the game. It worked okay, but it's not something I'd want to have in every map.

Just some thoughts for your consideration.

[Major Pain]

Thanks darwin and Desert.

I'm still playing with the codes working out the tow issue. I can't predict right now where this will go.

I have already made more progress than anytime during the last 7 years. I can tow a tank, but it must be a special designation tank. It could defend and still attack somewhat, but it cannot move if it is not in tow, and it is a sitting duck in tow mode.

I'm still working out the tow angle. Of course it will require a recovery tank to work, so that means another special tank. At the moment, I am not happy with the result. I may show a screenshot later depending on progress.

In the meantime... because I was building a recovery tank, I thought I would show some others in the works. The DD and Deep Fording variants are almost complete as well. Does the one on the right give anyone some ideas?

Ocelo: Please note the item you suggested (barrel stand and lock). I decided to add the lights and few other things since it doesn't appear to increase the file size too bad. I am listening to suggestions on this... is it too much or should they stay? The headlights are the same size as a truck... so keep in mind the detail.

[darwin]

May 20, 2010 13:26:41 GMT 1 Major Pain said:

In the meantime... because I was building a recovery tank, I thought I would show some others in the works. The DD and Deep Fording variants are almost complete as well. Does the one on the right give anyone some ideas?

The dozer variant could be used to dig tank emplacements. Those are dug at two levels: hull down and turret down. Once dug the tank can drive first into the hull down and then forward into the turret down position. A primary and an alternate firing position are usually dug and the tank can switch between them as the battle allows.

The Calliope needs a shallow trench dug for one set of tracks in order to tilt the tank so it can get the full range of it's turret launcher. This tank could that with one pass.

Anti-tank ditches could be dug, defensive revetments constructed, roadblocks and debris pushed aside, earthen and debris roadblocks could be created, artillery firing positions could be leveled off, small ravines or stream beds could be filled in as a temporary bridges or fords, paths could be forced through minefields or young-growth woodlands, small buildings knocked down (Why can't tanks drive through wooden and masonry structures? They most certainly can in real life.). The uses of an engineering tank are pretty extensive.

I know all of this is possible because this is the type of tank I served on:

7thengineers.net/PixRVN%20Equipment/VehicM728-CEV-BW.jpg

It was a fun gig, let me tell you.

[Ocelo]

@mp: I think those details are very nice, you should dfinetly keep them.

[Major Pain]

Here are just a few Shermans that are complete...

[Desert]

Beautifull.

I could try creating a more detailed skins if you need them, and, if all the skins have the same main parts.

[Major Pain]

Once I release them you may build new skins. The biggest issue I am having is assigning specific regions of the UV to particular parts. Hulls and turrets occupy the same areas between maps. The parts that are assigned to hulls and turrets are also always in the same location between models. Since most of the hulls variants and turrets use the same componenets, this wasn't a difficult thing. It is all of the other add-ons that make it tough.

There are 10 Hull Variants:
M4
M4 Hybrid
M4A1
M4A2 Early
M4A2 Late
M4A3 Early
M4A3 Late
M4A4
M4A4(105)
M4A3E2 (Jumbo)

The M4, M4A2 Early, M4A3 Early and M4A4 were basically all the same, using a 56 degree slope on the front armor. The driver area had hoods that were welded onto the front that extended enough forward to allow hatches.

In 1943, the M4A2 and M4A3 both were changed to a 47 degree front armor, thus removing the driver hoods. This made it possible to use larger hatches.

The M4A1 remained about the same throughout production except for minor modifications. The M4 was built with the 56 degree slope and a Hybrid Composite Model. The M4A4 remained the same throughout the war with the 56 degree slope, except the M4A4(105) used the 47 degree slope.

There were 3 Turrets:
T21 (T4 or M4 Turret) that housed the 75mm Gun
T23 that housed the 76mm Gun
T27 (M4A3E2 Turret) specially designed for the Jumbo
** T26 (M26 Pershing Turret) Never used

The Jumbo Turret was based on the T23 Turret and could easily mount the 75mm or the 76mm gun. Many were upgunned in the field.

The Firefly used the M4 and M4A4 hulls with the standard 75mm Turret with an extension or box welded to the rear. This allowed enough breach travel room for the 17pdr.

M4A4 turrets also had the turret extension that housed radio equipment.

There were 4 primary guns used in the M4:
75mm M3
75mm M4
76mm M1
17pdr (76.2mm)
*90mm was a field upgun but only a couple.

There were 3 specific track and 5 fender designs, mostly only width (or grouser) modifications. There were two fender designs that incorporated side skirts. US Tank Doctrine did not allow the use of side skirts on the M4, but several Allies required them.

A wide variety of equipment was designed for the M4 and the M3 chassis/hull was used for several purposes.

So when you look at all of the different hull/turret/gun combinations, you begin to understand why there were so many variants built. I've identified around 60 different variants built between 1941-45. Some are short runs and not worth building for BK.

As the US used the M4 Sherman for the primary Battle Tank, the Germans used the PzIV. The PzIV had two basic hulls and only one turret. They added a storage compartment to the rear of the hull on later versions. They used 3 different guns, all 75mm. The later versions (H & J) had side armored skirts added to the turret and hulls. There were about 13 primary variants, with another 21 variants for Tank Destroyers and other purposes.

This concludes todays History Lesson.

[Desert]

Thanks.

[darwin]

Sweet!!

[Major Pain]

Squire

Don't worry about critism, it is always welcome.

I didn't post the Ausf J because there isn't really anything different between the H & J as far as the model goes. The distinguishing difference between the H & J and the others were the addition of armored or mesh skirts on the hull and turret.

The H2 was not an official variant, but there has been some reference to it in the past. The H was usually carrying hull skirts, while the H2 had both hull and turret skirts. That seemed to similar in the J as well but the J did not have Zimmerit and only had wire mesh skirts. The final variant, Ausf J, was greatly simplified to speed production. The electric turret motor was removed. The number of return rollers was reduced from 4 to 3. There were about 3600 PzIV-J variants built, followed by the PzIV-H at about 3000, far more than all other variants combined out of nearly 8900 PzIVs.

With Germany's declining ability to build production models, they resorted to a variety of measures to keep tanks on the line. Some damaged tanks that were retrievable were simply rebuilt, uparmored and perhaps upgunned to the 75mm KwK 40 L/48 gun. Not all of the H & J models had the storage container on the hull, some were built without the coaxial MG. It just depended on what was available, and what they could strip.


EDIT------------------------------->
Here is another Sherman Variant...




Anyone want an armed Engineer Tank? It will sport both the Hull MG and the Turret MG...

This will be only a Recovery/Engineer Unit. It will Repair units and buildings, but it will also be capable of towing up to 50 tons.

I'm still working on it... I may finally be able to build some tanks that can be towed with this Recovery Tank. It still needs a few things but I thought I would show it in progress.

Due to the complexities of the game engine and command parameters, this unit will not "entrench" or "attack unit". But it will attack or defend if enemy comes into its visual range. Some of these were armed with a mortar, but this one will not.