OOB Modding without cheating

[Starmyth]

I'll state the obvious (at least to me). Modding OOBs so the units you use have lots of ammo available. Tanks and such have at least two specific limitations: size of the ammunition, weight of the ammunition. Should you happen to add extra ammunition, then the speed of the unit should be reduced. One way around this is to add a towed ammunition carrier which could be created. Of course, there are the normal ammunition carriers. This can create some dramatic fireworks should it ever be hit. I was bored, just thought I would mention it.

[PatG]

The PBEM engine checks to make both sides are using the same OOB. If they don't match, it will let you know. If your opponents are asking you to use their up-ammoed OOBs in PBEM then the choice is yours.

I'm not sure how much ammo you would have to add to the average tank to see a serious degradation in performance. Given that you can (un-historically) put a section of men on the average tank - say 1600 lbs or so of meat, adding 10 or 20 shots of main gun ammo isn't going to make much of a weight difference. If you need to re-load, then the normal ammo carriers will do the trick.

[Marek_Tucan]

I'd say degradation of performance would come rather from the confined space - you MAY sick some extra shells in but you limit already cramped space (not to mention post-penetration survivability etc.)

EDIT: As for external storage, bar special cases like Churchill Crocodile fuel trailer, too impractical I'd say.

[PatG]

Agreed about cramped conditions- but Starmyth was talking about reducing speed. As for trailers, apart from the Crocs, I have seen trailers for Jeeps, 251s, M3s, and various tankettes. However, I would have to put most of these in the ammo carrier class - none had facilities to reload on the fly.

[Starmyth]

That is what I meant. An external munitions carrier of some type would have the ammunition close. Likely it would then be too close. The carrier could be untowed for actual combat.
Cramped space would definitely be a problem if the additional ammunition was inside the tank. I don't have any idea what tank HE and AP rounds weigh. Of course, larger rounds would be heavier.

[PanzerBob]

I do know that Panzer crews and StuG crews especially loaded as much ammo they could when possible. Running out of ammo in battle is not a good thing.

[Mobhack]

The game really only can handle the "book" values for things. it is a fact that is verifiable. Different ammo loads are allowed e.g. by having the CS tank variant of an MBT, with a more anti-grunt loadout, more prevalent in MBT though (e.g. a T64 with more HE, less AP and no tube ATGM).

In real life, crews did load extra ammo. The tanks at Beda Fomm had well over the book value - the extra 2 pounder rounds were on the turret floor. US Sherman crews sometimes loaded extra loose ammo, and it was this that helped the "tommy cooker" label for the vehicle, as the unprotected propellant charges would contribute to a "cook off" on penetration.

The best way, is to use the scenario editor, should you have info that the tanks at X real-life situation had an overload of ammo, and edit the ammo load. Build a scenario where the special situation applied, in other words. And possibly, you might be able to reduce the survivability number as well, to reflect that having loose cartridges sloshing about the crew compartment was not healthy!

Cheers
Andy

[Starmyth]

Not healthy indeed! I am certain that many 'real life' crews were saved from destruction by having extra shells while others did not fare as well when the enemy ammo penetrated the armor and hit ammo in the crew cabin.

[PanzerBob]

I know StuG crews wanted to have plenty of ammo especially in their direct support role to the infantry which used up ammo quickly.