 |
|
Japanese Infantry Guns - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Japanese Infantry Guns (/showthread.php?tid=43506) |
Japanese Infantry Guns - K K Rossokolski - 12-17-2007 Despite these weapons being capable of 40-50 deg elevation, the gane restricts these to direct fire only,which I find curious. With the new developments in CS, is it not possible to allow these weapons to fire in the indirect mode? Cheers KKR RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Jason Petho - 12-17-2007 All you have to do is ask. That goes for any new unit anyone wants. Jason Petho RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Herr Straße Laufer - 12-17-2007 I thought it was a tactical usage thing? And, the lack of communication and spotters? I'll read up on it, from what I have in house. Ed RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Hawk Kriegsman - 12-17-2007 Japanese tactical doctrine prohibited infantry guns from being used indirectly. That is how the Japanese used them in battle. So no indirect capability. If you hit F2 with the unit highlighted it is explained in the notes. @ Jason Please do not change Japanese infantry guns. They were not used as indirect fire weapons. To change them would be a mistake. Thanx! Hawk RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Jason Petho - 12-18-2007 There we go, an answer as to why! Thanks Hawk! Jason Petho RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Mike Abberton - 12-18-2007 I agree with Erik, leave them be. Mike RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - K K Rossokolski - 12-18-2007 Thank you -I too consult F2 regularly, am fully aware of the IG limits (which is why I put up this post) and find this an insufficient reason to limit a weapon's physical capabilities. Are we to assume, even if the doctrinal statement is correct (I confess to personally never having read the original IJA infantry fighting doctrine) that NO Japanese infantry gun was EVER used in the indirect mode??? Come On!!!!! Does anyone know of any other CS unit that has its physical characteristics constrained by some ALLEGED doctrine? Can anyone tell me how much their employment of a particular unit in a CS game is based on: a. knowledge of doctrine pertaining to that unit b.blind obedience to said doctrine? :bang: Cheers KKR RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Jason Petho - 12-18-2007 K K Rossokolski Wrote:Thank you -I too consult F2 regularly, am fully aware of the IG limits (which is why I put up this post) and find this an insufficient reason to limit a weapon's physical capabilities. Are we to assume, even if the doctrinal statement is correct (I confess to personally never having read the original IJA infantry fighting doctrine) that NO Japanese infantry gun was EVER used in the indirect mode??? Come On!!!!! http://books.google.com/books?id=LfHdpf_wIgEC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=japanese+infantry+gun+75mm+indirect&source=web&ots=6hYEYU6Zi6&sig=ZulTq1ySos0hUIOzCEqTsqBqWQw#PPA22,M1 Here it says it was used for both? Or am I reading about the wrong gun? Alternatively, I could do the same thing as I have done with the halftacks, create a second set with different firepower characteristics. Of course, they would only work for new scenarios. Jason Petho RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - K K Rossokolski - 12-18-2007 That is correct -a google search will find a number of sites with info pointing to it being used both ways. Cheers KKR RE: Japanese Infantry Guns - Huib Versloot - 12-18-2007 All sorts of guns were used a lot for indirect fire historically: Tank guns, 88s, the Allies used various caliber AA guns for airbursts etc. But in the game, choices are made. It doesn't hurt to reconsider some of the current settings though, for if we would follow Hawks doctrine rigidly, these Jap guns are not to be used for indirect fire, but a lot of other ones would. |
){kind=link}