PG-HQ Forums › Panzer Grenadier › General Discussion v
Another PoE problem.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
Another PoE problem.
11-08-2012, 04:44 AM,
#1
plloyd1010 Offline
First Sergeant
*****
 		Posts: 3,489
Threads: 357
Joined: Jun 2012
Another PoE problem.
Shouldn't the OT130[attachment=230], really be a OT-26?
And look like this:[attachment=231]
Website Find
Reply
11-08-2012, 06:12 AM,
#2
larry marak Offline
Recruit
*****
 		Posts: 1,343
Threads: 194
Joined: May 2012
RE: Another PoE problem.
Why? The OT-130 replaced the OT-26 in 1933, though I have no idea what the active service life was of either model. I do know that the OT-130 used a larger turret than the OT-26.
Find
Reply
11-08-2012, 06:33 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-08-2012, 06:41 AM by plloyd1010.)
#3
plloyd1010 Offline
First Sergeant
*****
 		Posts: 3,489
Threads: 357
Joined: Jun 2012
RE: Another PoE problem.
3 reasons:
1. The scenario book calls for OP-26's.
2. The OOBs I've seen many references to the OT-26, few OT-130's. There do not seem to have been very many present for these battles.
3. Flamethrower tanks should have red DF values.

P.S. The OT-26 and HT-26 are synonymous.
Website Find
Reply
11-08-2012, 06:57 AM,
#4
JayTownsend Offline
Colonel
*****
 		Posts: 1,862
Threads: 193
Joined: May 2012
RE: Another PoE problem.
Most likely too late now as the Power of the East was a download supplement but this information on the AP.
Find
Reply
11-08-2012, 11:37 PM,
#5
larry marak Offline
Recruit
*****
 		Posts: 1,343
Threads: 194
Joined: May 2012
RE: Another PoE problem.
As Jay tried to type, pass the info on. PG Nomahan, the boxed game, is still on the boxed burner, and it why PotE isn't a candidate for laser treatment.
Find
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)