Unit Errata

Place bug reports / questions here.

Moderators: Legend, Balthagor, Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
Nerei
General
Posts: 1069
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#496 Post by Nerei » Feb 05 2020

Uriens wrote:
Feb 05 2020
SGTscuba wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Nerei wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Looking at the wikipedia article and checking the stats of the Šumadija 262mm MLRS I would say that it is not really wrong as much as it is BG going with a specific loadout for the unit. In this case most likely 12 262mm rockets instead of 4 400mm.
That is really the problem with way the game handles equipment that support multiple types of ordnance.

A good example of a similar issue is the M270A1 MLRS or M142 HIMARS in that we could argue that they should have a 300km range as both can launch the MGM-140 ATACMS. BG However is assuming they are firing basic M26 rockets.
The ATACMS missile is a missile design of its own in game though, and they do give the M270 a missile capacity to use these in lieu of its normal attack capability, I think this is a reasonable way around the problem without having 2 different units with different stats.
If i'm following this correctly you are suggesting to use missile design to complement to 'mimick' Jerina 1 missile while using normal attacks to as Jerina 2? I can see what you mean there but making a missile Jerina 1 would allow all missile launchers to be able to use them. I don't see how you can make them launchable from specific launcher only.
That is a problem with the engine in general. You can buy the P-700 Granit/SS-N 19 Shipwreck design as the US and load it onto say an Arleigh Burke which is physically impossible but totally possible in-game. You could also take a Topol-M Tel and cram like 6 ATACMS onto it or you can bring a SCUD on top of one variant of the SS-27 Topol missile. That would not be possible either but the game allows it.

User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 514
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

#497 Post by Uriens » Feb 06 2020

BTR-90 should have maximum speed of 100k/h (70k/h currently in game) and operational range of 800km (610km currently in game).

Source

User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 514
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

#498 Post by Uriens » Feb 06 2020

Also BTR-94 should have maximum speed of 85km/h and operational range of 600km. It would seem that this unit was given BTR-90 mobility values.

Source

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#499 Post by milivoje02 » Feb 06 2020

Nerei wrote:
Feb 05 2020
Looking at the wikipedia article and checking the stats of the Šumadija 262mm MLRS I would say that it is not really wrong as much as it is BG going with a specific loadout for the unit. In this case most likely 12 262mm rockets instead of 4 400mm.
That is really the problem with way the game handles equipment that support multiple types of ordnance.

A good example of a similar issue is the M270A1 MLRS or M142 HIMARS in that we could argue that they should have a 300km range as both can launch the MGM-140 ATACMS. BG However is assuming they are firing basic M26 rockets.


That said for the attack stats the 12x262mm is probably going to be better. Again going by the wikipedia article the 400mm rockets carry a 200kg warhead.
4x200kg is not really that much.
For comparison a BM-30 Smerch has 12 300mm rockets each with a roughly 250kg warhead. From what I remember each of the 12 M26 rockets of a M270 has around 190kg of submunitions. Even using the M31A1 GMLRS rockets the M270 can fire somewhere around 40-50% more warhead weight.

The range of these rockets are however not even remotely comparable and if I where guess I would say the 400mm rockets are made with range not payload in mind.


As for solution BG have added the above mentioned ATACMS as a missile unit. It might also be an option to have the Jerina I as a missile unit and keeping the launcher at 262mm.
It is not a perfect solution no but it would fit with how BG have added the ATACMS and it would give region group X a SSM missile unit. Currently there are no missile units available from 1967 to 2049.

Personally I would also say that as a 21st century rocket artillery the Šumadija with most likely 12x262mm rockets it really does not hit hard enough.
Balthagor wrote:
Jan 29 2020
Made a few adjustments, would be good for us to come back to this again when doing more corrections...
Here is a question with regards to more thorough corrections. Sometime ago you renamed your J-99 light to represent the Type 10 MBT. Now the stats are not exactly accurate for that given that you are repurposing a roughly 20 tonne light tank to represent a more modern 40-48 tonne MBT.
How thorough suggestions do you want?
Also given that you now have both have a real world and a fictive J-10 are you interested in suggestions to make the names more in line with real world naming conventions?
This essentially raises the issue of unit upgrades. Because 60% od world army equipment is upgrade. Not the production of new ones but upgrading old ones. Like endless upgrading ot tank T 72,plane F 16,plane mig 29...
As for Šumadija are concerned, the primary variant has been as a 400mm calibar with range of 285-km. Because beside her are also presented Tamnava with range od 70 km 264mm,Morava 122mm range of 40km. Generally a major modernization was done in the artillery field in Serbian army.

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#500 Post by milivoje02 » Feb 18 2020

Correction for production of land desings: add to Serbia prodcution capasity units:
4741 B-52K1 Nora 155mm----Production had start in 2006.140 pieces are manufactured for export 4 bateries for domestic use. 140 peases Serbia sell to Bangladesh,Cyprus,Kenya,Myanmmar.
2302 M-84A4 Sniper tank was in 2004 was intended for production and modernization.
2329 M-84D tank corection name to M-84AS 2010 conditions for production were achieved,The whole force of 260 tanks is in proces of upgraded to this variant
663 BVT SR-8808 Lazar 2008 enter in prodution. domestic use in Serbian army and Police force Zandarmerija.
761 BVT SR-8811 Lazar II enter in use in 2011 domestic use in Serbian army and Police force Zandarmerija. Now lazar 3 has come into use,new unit(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazar_3)
3362 BOV-1 M-53 POLO 96 pieces are in use in Serbian army.

In game the products of Serbia remained in the 80s,and from 2000 to 2017 changes have taken place,the ones I listed. A good portion of them were produced for export.
These changes should have been implemented 8 years ago in Suprem Ruler 2020. So it would be nice to at least do in Suprem Ruler Ultimate.
I would ask devolopers to do this. thanks in advance.

User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2259
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#501 Post by Zuikaku » Feb 18 2020

milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 18 2020
Correction for production of land desings: add to Serbia prodcution capasity units:
2302 M-84A4 Sniper tank was in 2004 was intended for production and modernization.
2329 M-84D tank corection name to M-84AS 2010 conditions for production were achieved,The whole force of 260 tanks is in proces of upgraded to this variant
These are even not the same tanks. You are mixing croatian and serbian variants. While these are all modernization packages, they are not the same. So, while you can ask these variants to be added, I do not see the point of removing existing variants.
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#502 Post by milivoje02 » Feb 18 2020

Zuikaku wrote:
Feb 18 2020
milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 18 2020
Correction for production of land desings: add to Serbia prodcution capasity units:
2302 M-84A4 Sniper tank was in 2004 was intended for production and modernization.
2329 M-84D tank corection name to M-84AS 2010 conditions for production were achieved,The whole force of 260 tanks is in proces of upgraded to this variant
These are even not the same tanks. You are mixing croatian and serbian variants. While these are all modernization packages, they are not the same. So, while you can ask these variants to be added, I do not see the point of removing existing variants.
I was really waiting for this question. :-) :-) :-)
Croatian and Serbian variants of modernization of m84 come in same time. Kuvat was target for medernization.Why in game are add only Croatian wariants? Way not Serbian variants two?
Or were the m 84 variants added then a compromise for both countries?
They are not essentially the same, fore exaple Serbian m 84 as is wariant with firing system like on t 90 and same sistem of protection.
And what with Nora b52? She is sell in 140 pieces? To sell a unit you must first devoloped? And lazar 1?Lazar2?lazar 3?

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#503 Post by milivoje02 » Mar 01 2020

Zuikaku wrote:
Feb 18 2020
milivoje02 wrote:
Feb 18 2020
Correction for production of land desings: add to Serbia prodcution capasity units:
2302 M-84A4 Sniper tank was in 2004 was intended for production and modernization.
2329 M-84D tank corection name to M-84AS 2010 conditions for production were achieved,The whole force of 260 tanks is in proces of upgraded to this variant
These are even not the same tanks.
M-90 Vihor was modernization of Yugoslav M 84 tank(40 years old(A little younger than F 16 :-) ) ) ( http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m90_vihor.htm) (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-91_Vihor ). Modernization came in 1985 to 1995. After war,each country called it a different name and seduced as a product of domestic industies (m 84 D,M84 A4,m 90 degman,M 2001,M 84 AS).
So you were wrong.

User avatar
Uriens
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 514
Joined: Oct 05 2005

Re: Unit Errata

#504 Post by Uriens » Mar 02 2020

I did a tons of research about Degman tank since it was needed for ex-yu regions. The links provided here actually prove Vihor to NOT a M-84 upgrade, its a whole new design which was intended to eventually replace M-84. The tank itself never entered production and only one prototype of m90 was created. Immediately after finishing prototype they went for new upgraded design (m95). Only one Degman prototype was fully developed while while older (m90) prototype was upgraded and modernized. So currently only 2 Degman tanks are operational. No ex-yu country has currently capability to make more - mold for its 125mm turret in Slovenia was destroyed in the 90's, Croatia currently has stopped development of the Degman tanks and production/purchase of any new tanks come to think of it due to internal politics. Serbia has m90 design documents in Belgrade but also has no plans for development/production of Vihor/Degmans.
In my own mod i have removed Degmans from being buildable at the start as they still lack development but added them as researchable by all ex-yu regions. They will also have better stats then the ones in currently in game since the design itself was developed until 2004 and even Israeli and other companies (like Dahl) have taken part in its development.

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#505 Post by milivoje02 » Mar 02 2020

Uriens wrote:
Mar 02 2020
I did a tons of research about Degman tank since it was needed for ex-yu regions. The links provided here actually prove Vihor to NOT a M-84 upgrade, its a whole new design which was intended to eventually replace M-84. The tank itself never entered production and only one prototype of m90 was created. Immediately after finishing prototype they went for new upgraded design (m95). Only one Degman prototype was fully developed while while older (m90) prototype was upgraded and modernized. So currently only 2 Degman tanks are operational. No ex-yu country has currently capability to make more - mold for its 125mm turret in Slovenia was destroyed in the 90's, Croatia currently has stopped development of the Degman tanks and production/purchase of any new tanks come to think of it due to internal politics. Serbia has m90 design documents in Belgrade but also has no plans for development/production of Vihor/Degmans.
In my own mod i have removed Degmans from being buildable at the start as they still lack development but added them as researchable by all ex-yu regions. They will also have better stats then the ones in currently in game since the design itself was developed until 2004 and even Israeli and other companies (like Dahl) have taken part in its development.
Yes M 90 Vihor was a new desinge. But after Yugo war none of the countries had money to star production of new tank(each country had a large number of tanks inherited from JNA) so they decided istead of new tank construction to
implement a technology of M90 vihor to M84. And there were formed 5-6 variants of M 84.The newest one is Serbian warian M84 AB1( http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m84ab1.htm).
M 84 upgrade tank,Lazar 2,Nora 155mm they should be put into production capacity of Serbia since they were introduced to the armed force 8 years ago. Nora was sell form Serbia in 3 countries,and Lazar has been promoted to lazar 3 variants.

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#506 Post by milivoje02 » Mar 07 2020

A request adding units to T and x to the group. All other groups have these units for that category so why not a T and X group.
16337 R-100 Represailles because they have no aircraft carrier.
17987 BB-E2 Froude because they have no futuristic crusier.
14255 747-400ER Boeing because they have no aer transport.
7173 W-3U-1 PZL Alligator because they have no anti sub unit.
11103 F/A-18C Hornet because because every other(over 30) country has it and and there are no aircraft capable of carrier.
5437 S-1 Pantsyr because every other country cosle to Russia have ih in tex tree in the game.
682 XA-360 AMV to x group(Slovenia and Croatia are producting Patria).

SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1931
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: Unit Errata

#507 Post by SGTscuba » Mar 24 2020

S101 Dreadnought (15602) requires on uranium according to the popup, even though its a nuclear submarine.

Also, not sure where to put this but "Military Vessels '51" has too many caps in.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040

Nerei
General
Posts: 1069
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#508 Post by Nerei » Mar 25 2020

Currently there is a decent number of Tankers and replenishment vessels that lack the DockToUnload flag. That means that means to the game they are basically amphibious assault ships which in reality they are definitely not.
These ships really lack any kind of amphibious capabilities. They actually in most if not all cases lack the ability to even transport heavy equipment.
Really they should have the DockToUnload flag.

A58 Jyoti (ID 20458)
Indian navy replenishment oiler.

AOR-953 Nanyun (Nancang) (ID 20421)
PRC Type 908 replenishment oiler.

AO-881 Fuqing (ID 20397)
PRC Type 905 replenishment oiler

AOR-512 Souteneur JSS (ID 20603)
Fictive ship from what I can find but AOR means it is an replenishment oiler.

Wave Class (ID 20087)
Royal Navy world war 2 replenishment oiler.

Dale Class (ID 20088)
Royal navy interwar replenishment oiler.

R-22T AOR Similan (ID 20457)
Royal Thai navy Type 908 fleet replenishment oiler.
Sidenote why does the PLAN variant carry 23000 tonnes of cargo while the Thai version carry 11400? The related Indian Jyoti also has 25000 tonne capacity.

AOR-886 Fuchi (ID 20469)
PRC Type 903 replenishment oiler.

AOR 81 Ciudad Bolivar (ID 20490)
Venezuelan replenishment vessel.
Sidenote the ship was build by Hyundai Heavy Industries in the ROK so region group K is more appropriate.

AOR-60 Amerika (ID 20482)
Again guessing this is fictive but also again AOR means it is a replenishment oiler.

AO.1 Kanawha (ID 20050)
First US purpose built replenishment oiler.

AO Tarvisio Class (ID 20030)
The only tarvisio I can find is an Italian tanker from 28 not 21. That said AO means it is a replenishment tanker.

AO Le Garonne (ID 20040)
I can find a french tanker commissioned in 1912 fitting this name. Like Tarvisio AO means it is a replenishment tanker



On the other hand here is a few ships that have the DockToUnload flag that probably should not

LST-1171.1E Ivan Gren (ID 20526)
LST-1000 Yunbao (ID 20601)
LST would be short for Landing Ship, Tank or basically a ship designed to drop of vehicles on a beach.

LCU-771 Thong Kaeo (ID 20118)
ROC/Taiwanese Landing Craft, Utility.

LCPL Conv Troopship (ID 20399)
LCPL would be short for Landing Craft, Personel Large. Looking at the name I would guess this represents a troop ship with infantry landing crafts attached. I would say this would qualify the vessel as being amphibious




AP-3 Costa Sur (ID 20389) and LPA-4 Bahia San Blas (ID 20116). The first one has no DockToUnload flag while the second one does. Bahia San Blas is the 2nd Costa Sur class LKA or amphibious cargo ship.
Ironically the Argentine navy has actually used Bahia san Blas as an amphibious assault ship.

While there are some differences between the vessels I am not sure there is any justification for them being separate designs. The in-game stat differences such as speed and range is hard to find any documentation for.

The question is if they should have the DockToUnload flag. I honestly think they should not. These vessel can carry and deploy landing craft as seen on this picture of Bahia San Blas.
Image


Also while on odd cases there is the LCC-19 Blue Ridge (ID 20895).
Currently it does not have the DockToUnload flag.
The Blue Ridge class is intended as amphibious command ships (and currently the two ships serve as command ships for the US 6th and 7th fleets) but looking at their facilities they really do not have much in the way of actually facilitating an amphibious assault. I would probably say they should have that flag

milivoje02
Major
Posts: 194
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#509 Post by milivoje02 » Mar 26 2020

Correction for Serbian known technologies. inserting in known technologies of Serbia all technology up to Advances Attack helicopters. Because because her army offers in production two helicopter for sale:
1 The Havk 5 (https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... ndependent)
2 Unmanned Hornet(https://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi ... helicopter)

Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”