Author Topic: Siege of Tobruk 64  (Read 6849 times)

Offline Toddel

  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
  • Donate for the biggest BattleField Mod Supporter!!
    • View Profile
Siege of Tobruk 64
« on: 29-03-2009, 11:03:50 »
"If you have a suggestions or want to give us some Feedback about this Map you can Post it here!"

Offline emiik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #1 on: 20-07-2009, 17:07:11 »
It's possible to have a lot of fun playing Siege of Tobruk, but in the other hand, it can be sometimes very frustrating map. Most of this frustration I have, is because of the bofors AA guns. Everyone knows that bofors is a mad raping machine if placed in a wrong place. In my opinion, almost all of the boforses in this map should need some small tweaking to make them less infantry bane. I don't know if mappers intention was to make all the boforses in this map mostly versus infantry, but giving too much view for those guns really take out the fun when they are pretty quick to repair and have infinite ammo.

So here is my suggestions:

1. Firstly Forte Solaros bofors. That thing is so badly placed that i would like to cry. It can keep attacks with trucks and halftracks from southern hills totally at bay. Also if any infantry makes it to the south ditches, or even to the flag, bofors can still easily take them out. The worst thing is that if axis captures Tobruk HQ flag (middle one), bofors can cover most of the approach from HQ flag to Forte Solaro flag.

Simply just remove this bofors altogether. Does there really have to be 3 guns at the front line when there is only one stuka? No.

2. Tobruk HQ bofors. No that bad, but still can be used to rape Forte Solaros and the HQ flag area aswell. Maybe add some objects to block the view of that thing, like done here:



3. Forte Airentes bofors is not really a bad problem but one can cover the area between Bir Baccara and Tobruk HQ with it by shooting into the horizon.

4 Tobruk Outskirts bofors. This one can be a real nuisance. It can totally cover the northern approach to the Outskirts (best way to attack as infantry), which can be seen here:



Again, objects to block view or maybe replacement of the gun to do the fix.

Which can also be done, is to dig in some bofors' like the one in Bir Baccara flag. Truly a perfectly placed bofors. Only can shoot into the air and the view to flag is blocked by objects:


 

That's about all I have in mind this time.
« Last Edit: 28-07-2009, 11:07:30 by emiik »

Offline Stonechater

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #2 on: 21-07-2009, 11:07:07 »
And replace one or two of those shitty italian tanks with pz3! Last times(4-5) Ive been playing this map the germans have never brooken through the first line and dearby bleed to death.

Offline Biiviz

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.975
  • Eggs!
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #3 on: 21-07-2009, 11:07:19 »
I've had the complete opposite experience with this map. The Brits usually get slaughtered and the first line of flags fall within 10 minutes.

Offline Ts4EVER

  • Banner of THeTA0123
  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 7.708
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #4 on: 21-07-2009, 14:07:11 »
Stonechater is right, recently the aussies win more often than the Germans, dunno why.

Offline Sturmbocke

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #5 on: 21-07-2009, 16:07:24 »
Germans have ├╝ber tankers and ace pilots, but not much normal infantry. Germans can't get to trenches and if they can, they won't survive long.
"If a Tiger appears, send out a troop of four Sherman to destroy the panzer and expect only one to come home"

Offline Ts4EVER

  • Banner of THeTA0123
  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 7.708
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #6 on: 21-07-2009, 17:07:47 »
There might be some truth to that. The key to winning Tobruk (as Germans) is cleverly supported infantry and artillery.

Offline Kubador

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.531
  • Flippin' Warbears since 1988
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #7 on: 21-07-2009, 18:07:00 »
Five bofors against one stuka doesn't seem fair. I support the idea of (at least) digging in those guns.

Germands can break trough quite easily. They only need artillery and a dedicated spotter, full infantry squad and tanks moving in the field - there's no way aussies can stop that.

Offline Ionizer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.524
  • Carrier of Squirrel Flu
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #8 on: 21-07-2009, 20:07:49 »
I know it's not completely necessary, but are there plans to change the Panzer3 (Early)s to the correct model of Panzer3s for this map?  I'm not entirely sure what version that is, maybe E or G?  Or will that be corrected when the mod moves to Early Western/Blitzkrieg/Early Eastern Front and the correct version will be made and then maybe reskinned into North African paint jobs?

Also, I think the Pz3 (Early) has more armor on the front than the Pz3 (Late), where it should be the opposite or they should be equal, right?
 

Offline Kelmola

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.853
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #9 on: 21-07-2009, 21:07:49 »
Also, I think the Pz3 (Early) has more armor on the front than the Pz3 (Late), where it should be the opposite or they should be equal, right?
Ausf. A through C: 15 mm all around (except top 10 mm and bottom 5 mm)
D through G: 30 mm all around (top & bottom still 10/5 mm)
H: sides 30 mm, front & rear 30 mm + 30 mm additional plate (total 60 mm)
J: sides 30 mm, front & rear 50 mm solid plate
J1, L, M: sides 30 mm, rear 50 mm, front 50 mm + 20 mm additional plate (total 70 mm)
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_3#Armor

Offline Ionizer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.524
  • Carrier of Squirrel Flu
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #10 on: 22-07-2009, 01:07:20 »
Also, I think the Pz3 (Early) has more armor on the front than the Pz3 (Late), where it should be the opposite or they should be equal, right?
Ausf. A through C: 15 mm all around (except top 10 mm and bottom 5 mm)
D through G: 30 mm all around (top & bottom still 10/5 mm)
H: sides 30 mm, front & rear 30 mm + 30 mm additional plate (total 60 mm)
J: sides 30 mm, front & rear 50 mm solid plate
J1, L, M: sides 30 mm, rear 50 mm, front 50 mm + 20 mm additional plate (total 70 mm)
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_3#Armor


Right, I meant in game.  In game, I think the J-Early has that 20mm additional plate instead of the J-Late (on all maps, I think).  Which inadvertently makes Siege of Tobruk harder for the 2-pounder armed Aussies (right now, you need 3 or more frontal, non-deflected hits from a 2lber to kill a Pz3J[early]).  If we can't have the proper version (I think E or G) for this map, at least make it's placeholder not unrealistically powerful.  I know it was probably just something that slipped through the cracks and is probably already fixed (the extra armor plate thing), so I'm not too worried about it.
 

Offline Ts4EVER

  • Banner of THeTA0123
  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 7.708
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #11 on: 22-07-2009, 07:07:38 »
Is this your impression from gameplay or did you check the code?

Offline Kubador

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.531
  • Flippin' Warbears since 1988
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #12 on: 22-07-2009, 17:07:41 »
IIRC it was reported earlier and confirmed that pz3 late recieves dmg from 2pdr in frontal armor while the early version's front is impenetrable to those AT guns.

Offline Safe-Keeper

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #13 on: 23-07-2009, 00:07:44 »
That's one hell of a first post from emi'.

Offline Kelmola

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.853
    • View Profile
Re: Siege of Tobruk 64
« Reply #14 on: 23-07-2009, 00:07:22 »
IIRC it was reported earlier and confirmed that pz3 late recieves dmg from 2pdr in frontal armor while the early version's front is impenetrable to those AT guns.
Sorry, but just looking at the armour thickness, that's just... retarded. (Have not played enough as a tanker to confirm that - I just feel that Crusader 1's and 2pdrs always one-shot me whenever I'm driving a Pz3.)