Next Campagne?

Suggestions
61

I was thinking of the:

Type 1 75mm SPH “Ho-Ni I” (premium) Ho-Ni1 (plala.or.jp)

Type 2 Gun Tank “Ho-I” (premium) Ho-I (plala.or.jp)

As counters to something like the Grant or Matty, not as arty, and Burma was not all Jungle all the time, there were large agricultural area, rice paddy’s exc, open areas, and some hamlets/villages, RR and road networks, and some town’s that could offer a varied terrain

In the link above the Sen She Sho Sho translation concerning the fighting against the Japanese offer some examples of different terrain types.

62

Huh, it should look like this, I don’t know what problems you are having on your end. Maybe bring it up with a forum moderator and they can get someone to look into it?

Screenshot (687)
Screenshot (687)1393×284 28.7 KB

63

Yes, that is the point, the M8 should match the Ha Go, so the campaign should be 43 onwards. As for British usage, the British were the one who gave it the name Greyhound, so I’m pretty sure they did use it. Now if they used it in Burma, and in any significant numbers, not sure, but as they are the best counterpart to the Ha Go, and fit the dev’s standards for historical realism, I think it would be ok to add it.

As for the Vickers, yes the Ha Go can destroy it, but the .50 cal would be far better than the 37mm, and you don’t have to expose your commander to use it, so it would be far better than the Ha Go IMO. An automatic weapon that can pen other tanks needs careful consideration in terms of balance. With the AB 41 to A13, yes the autocannon can pen it, but frontally it only works in one weak spot (sure, its the center of the turret, but my point still stands). the .50 cal would be able to frontally pen the Ha Go almost everywhere, save for one spot in the front of the turret. Thus, the Vickers would be significantly stronger than the Ha Go.

I know what the Ho Ni and Ho I are, I proposed them as counters to the M3 GMC and the Grant respectively. I wouldn’t make them premium though, you kind of need them if you want 40 levels. Also, yes, there are other places outside of the jungle where they fought in Burma, I proposed a 1945 timeframe partly because I wanted the Battle of Mandalay and to be able to fight in that temple. However, the jungles will be present in a Burma campaign regardless of when they chose to set it, so I figured it was a good way to judge the abilities of the artillery piece. Speaking of which, the Ho Ro is a 150mm artillery piece mounted on a Chi Ha chassis, and I was wondering if matching it with an M7 Priest was a good idea.

64

The M8 armored car was not widely supplied through Lend-Lease. Britain originally declined to order any in 1942, since there was already an adequate supply of light armored cars from domestic sources. This policy changed in mid-1943, and two agreements were signed for 5,000 vehicles. In fact, only 496 were delivered, the first two in 1943, 454 in 1944 and 40 in 1945. The type was uncommon in Northwest Europe, with only six in service at the end of the war, half of these with the Canadians. They were used in larger numbers in Italy. At the end of the war, there were 99 on hand with the 6th Armoured Division, 79 with the 7th Armoured Brigade, and small numbers with other units including the Polish Carpathian Lancers. Canada received two M8 armored cars for evaluation. The British army sometimes referred to the M8 as the “Greyhound” in keeping with the naming tradition of earlier Lend-Lease armored cars such as “Staghound” (T17) and “Boarhound” (T18), but this name was not common.

Ok, so it was used by them, i had thought not.

Personally I am still keen on a 42 scenario, I have played several other games where you have the Vickers facing off against lightly armored vehicles like the P II and it’s not such a problem, but I’m not too sure exactly how this game models angle of impact and how it affects penetration.

As to the priest I’m not sure, it might be an interesting addition but it wouldn’t really necessarily fit with the invasion of Burma, but then again most of his other equipment doesn’t either, at least the other British tanks, given the only thing that was in theater were Stewart’s they’re gonna have to get creative to make it work anyway….

But it seems pretty clear that there are plenty of tanks to fill out somewhere between 8 to 10 slots, and if aircraft can fill out at least 6 slots, and there are a lot of imperial Japanese aircraft possibilities, KI 27, ki 43 ( possibly two versions), ki 51, ki 48, ki 45 , ki 44 (premium), ki 21 …

65

Well the thing about the Panzer II is it has an Autocannon, which thus can match the .50 cal or the autocannon in the Vickers. Against a single shot cannon like in the Ha Go, the .50 cal or the auto cannon wins almost every time.

Well, the priest was used pretty widely among the British (they were the ones who also named that one), and in Burma, the Indian tank brigades did make good use of them. I’m just wondering if it is a good idea to add artillery pieces in general.

As for aircraft, Japan has no shortages of those for both fighters and attackers, so I’m not concerned about balancing for that. I have drafted up a complete proposal for a Burma campaign set for the Battle of Meiktila and Mandalay, but I suppose it could probably work for anythinb between 1943 to 1945. I never got around to posting it but if you want, I can dig it up and show you.

66

The thing with Burma is that if they pick the right area, the map could be used for a “42” and a 44/45 setting, with different kit for each time frame.

It would also feel different from anything they would do in the pacific, as any Pacific “campaign” they might model would likely have US marines and would likely have IJN content like IJN Planes that were not in the Burma Theater and IJN Special Naval Landing Forces, Okinawa would for example Have US marines US Army and IJA and IJN troops.

Another reason for Going Early (42) in Burma is the plane set would include on both sides some interesting planes that you would not find in 44/45 the Ki 27, and the Mohawk and the H 81 the later with the American Mercenary’s, and the Blenheim amongst others.

Shure it would be interesting to look at what you came up with for Burma.

My assumption is they would likely model the map the way they did Tunisia where it’s one large map with adjoining areas that each “layer” is fought on.

67

ok, why not, yet a little harsh.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the game. It doesnt give you the experience to judge any game mechanics or whatsoever.

68

Well, INA planes were stationed at many of the islands for various reasons, including Okinawa so they can be added there. Also, the US army won’t have any aircraft in an island campaign, because air power was mostly supplied by the Navy and Marines.

Well yes, there would be some interesting things in a 42 Burma, but even still, I don’t know if there is enough content for 40 levels. If you can figure it out though, I would love to see it and I will eat my words.

Most maps in the game already overlap with another one to some degree, so that wouldn’t be an unreasonable assumption. It does make the dev’s job easier, as they can reuse assets.

My proposal is attached below, feel free to comment as you see fit.

page0001
page00011275×1650 274 KB

page0002
page00021275×1650 259 KB

page0003
page00031275×1650 272 KB

page0004
page00041275×1650 120 KB

69

INA = IJA ?

But yes there were in many of the areas, not all for example not in the marshals.

USAAF Planes were involved in many of Island battle though, on Okinawa they were, But Not the Marshals, They were is Solomons Campagne, along with RNAZF planes, I think even Iwo Jima had some USAAF Planes in support Flying out of Saipan.

Really depends on the Specific Battle.

70

For the ATR : Type 97 automatic cannon

Level 11, the Ki 61 might be an option hear

Level 15, The D4Y was not in Burma as it was an IJN plane, KI 48 or Ki 45 might be a better option the Vultee A-31 Vengeance might be a better choice if you went with the Ki 48 (thinking the Dive Bomber Variant) (Ki 45 should have the option for two 250 kg bombs)

For the SMG’s you could start out with the MP 28 then the MP 34, and use the Type 100 later (as these were all used by the Japanese, though not all by the IJA)

Fighter two this is where you might but the Ki 44 with it’s exceptional climb rate it would be more a fit against the P 51, assuming your saving the Ki 84 for later.

Attacker two, again I would not use the IJN Plane hear, but use an IJA option a KI 84 or the Ki 61, or the Ki 45 all could carry two 250 kg bombs, the kI 45 might fit better with the Beaufighter as well

Nice piece of work that list btw

71

Another Allied plane option might be the P 47, the British did use them in theater in one of the attacker options.

72

pacific for sure.

even tho i would like to see kursk (as a vehicle focused batle kinda like warthunder on enlisted) , for me that i trully enjoy destroying tanks i m sure i would love that…

kinda hard to argue with a campaign focused only on tanks and planes, but for sure i would play it ALOT.

73

Yes, my mistake, I meant IJA. From what I remember, the air cover provided for most of the island hopping campaign was done by carrier groups, but I could be wrong. Regardless, the island hopping campaign is the only place where you can get the Navy and Marine aircraft, so I would focus my attention on those.

For the ATR, yes I am aware of the type 97 automatic cannon, but the issue is it is a semi-automatic gun like the PTRS-41, which I don’t think would match the Boys ATR that much. The UK also doesn’t really have anything to match it, so I opted to not include it.

Yes, I’m aware the IJN did not have any aircraft in Burma, but the Ki 45 in War Thunder (where this game steals models from) does not have any bombs, and the and the Ki 48 is not there, although the Humbler Mk IV isn’t either, so I might change that later. Nonetheless, it’s the same issue I have with the B7a2, I know it wasn’t in Burma, but many of the Ki aircraft in WT don’t have bombs for some reason when they should.

I like the Spitfire against the Ki 44 a bit better due to the Spitfire’s lack of bombs, but I suppose that selection of fighter aircraft can be shifted around a bit.

I opted to start with the Type 100/40 SMG because it has an ROF of about 400 RPM, making it one of the slowest SMGs of the war, except it doesn’t even have the stopping power of the Grease gun to compensate. The Type 100/44 has a more reasonable ROF of 800 RPM, so I opted to put it later. I’d prefer not to use the MP-28 because it will come with the 20 round mag, and the MP 34 is already on the list.

I considered the P-47 with an 6 M8 rockets and a 500 pound bomb instead of the A-36, but I opted for the A-36 because it had less .50 cals and worse flight performance, which would make it more on par with the D4Y.

74

I was thinking more along the lines of how effective the ATR’s would be against the Armor they were intend to by used against, the Japanese ATR would be modestly useful against the Allied Tanks, and the Boys would defiantly be useful so in that light the Japanese are still at something of a disadvantage

There is no Ki 84 in war thunder ?

And yes it’s odd they have no bombs modeled

75

Well the issue is people will then turn the ATR against Infantry (like they already do), and then the Type 97 will become way more effective than the Boys ATR. Furthermore, the presence of the Armored Cars in the beginning of the campaign should make it so that whichever ATR Japan gets, it will be able to kill them easily, the same way the Boys ATR should be able to kill any of the early Japanese tanks, but struggle with the later ones.

The Ki 84 is in WT, but I don’t really want to put it as an attacker as it doesn’t have the bomb load, and I already filled out all the fighter slots to my liking already.

76

Well then the Ki 84 could be a premium plane, it’s really the best foil for the P 51

77

I think the Ki-61 would work well enough as a counter to the P-51, but to be honest, probably either the Ki 61 or the Ki 84 would work. I just chose the Ki 61 so there could be a progression that was similar to that of the Mustangs.

78

Bin mir sicher wenn sie mehr Geld investieren, investieren sie automatisch mehr Zeit.

Problem is F2P, many Players play 2-3 matches and go to Forum cry+suggest