To diversify our blogs, we'd like to start off this series of war facts and narratives. At the end of the day, we're making a game that portrays the strategy, realism and authenticity of WWII, so we hope our readers enjoy our posts in the same way as we love finding out all the surprising bits and pieces that you are often miss.


When a design of a vehicle or weapon concept is proposed to high command, it is usually because a terribly desperate need for it is required and often a replacement for an older existing military concept or role.

Did you know?
The formidable M26 Pershing was delayed in its production and deployment (until the very end of the war) because the army chiefs were not completely sure there was a "terribly desperate need" for it.

However, the Assault Gun was neither a replacement/improvement of an existing concept nor proposed by a team of acknowledged military figureheads. In fact, it was the bright proposal of Erich Von Manstein in 1935. He thought that for the coming conflicts a new vehicle was needed, one that was supposed to work alongside infantry and:

• Provide direct infantry support, it needed a gun capable of causing substantial damage and not rely on indirect artillery support.
  
• It needs adequate speed to accompany motorised infantry and be able to relocate to subsequent enemy strong points.
  
• It does not need any unnecessary equipment. It needs no turret, because it will exclusively shoot in the direction of frontal enemy forts. It needs no secondary armament because it will be surrounded by infantry.
  
• The vehicle should be substantially protected to soak up damage and get close to enemy fortifications unharmed.
  
• From the simplicity and straightforward design scheme, it should hence be cheap and easy to produce.

Thanks to Manstein's extraordinaire performance in the start of the war, plus his constant pressuring, his proposal was accepted. On the chassis of the Panzer III, the first Sturmgeschütz III (Assault Gun III) arrived to breach the Stalin line on Operation Barbarossa in 1941.

Did you know?
Erich von Manstein is often considered the most capable and respected Axis Field Marshall of WWII.

The first StuGs to see combat were armed with 50mm of armour and the short-barreled 75mm StuK 37 L/24 (derived from the standard kwk 37). Not only were they very effective in their role of supporting infantry, but thanks to their added protection (compared to other german tanks of the time) and due to their loadout of multiple HEAT shells, they proved to be extremely useful against the superior soviet T-34 and KV tanks.

Following the success of the Anti-tank role, after 1942 the StuGs shifted their focus as tank destroyers, with the StuG III Ausf F presenting the fearsome long-barreled StuK 40 L/42 (derived from the kwk 40). Aware that these new variants were no longer as effective in the infantry support role, German High Command ordered the design of a variant for an improved iteration of its original role. As a result, the Sturmhaubitze 42 Ausf G (Assault howitzer or StuH 42; Ausf G) was developed, this time, using a powerful 105mm howitzer instead of a 75mm.


HD Link

Like many german vehicles, the design principles and technical specifications allowed continuous improvement of the design without too radical changes to the original scheme. The Ausf G, which is being modelled for Gates of Hell in both it's early and late production variants, raised the armour to 80mm and gave the vehicle secondary armament to be able to engage enemy infantry. The late production variant included a streamlined mantlet, known as the "Pig-head", and a remotely controlled roof MG, similar to that of the Hetzer.

Did you know?
The rotatory MG developed for the Hetzer and StuG was in some ways derived from the remotely actioned defensive MG's used on the Messerschmitt 210 and 410. The USA later reverse engineered the mechanisms to develop an improved MG defense system for the B-29 Superfortress, which not only was it remote-controlled, but computer-assisted.

Until the end of the war, while Hitler proposed massive tank projects that were barely feasible, Manstein and Guderian (amongst others) pressured the industry to keep producing reliable and cheap fighting vehicles like the StuG. As a result, this became the most common tracked vehicle of the Wehrmacht from 1943 onwards.

Pictures of all the mentioned variants which we have not yet showcased, coming soon.

Worth mentioning are the Soviet Assault Guns developed during WWII as well, namely the SU-76, SU 122, SU/ISU 152, and to an extent, the KV-2. More detail about each one on our specific vehicle blogs in the future.

To diversify our blogs, we'd like to start off this series of war facts and narratives. At the end of the day, we're making a game that portrays the strategy, realism and authenticity of WWII, so we hope our readers enjoy our posts in the same way as we love finding out all the surprising bits and pieces that you are often miss.


When a design of a vehicle or weapon concept is proposed to high command, it is usually because a terribly desperate need for it is required and often a replacement for an older existing military concept or role.

Did you know?
The formidable M26 Pershing was delayed in its production and deployment (until the very end of the war) because the army chiefs were not completely sure there was a "terribly desperate need" for it.

However, the Assault Gun was neither a replacement/improvement of an existing concept nor proposed by a team of acknowledged military figureheads. In fact, it was the bright proposal of Erich Von Manstein in 1935. He thought that for the coming conflicts a new vehicle was needed, one that was supposed to work alongside infantry and:

• Provide direct infantry support, it needed a gun capable of causing substantial damage and not rely on indirect artillery support.
  
• It needs adequate speed to accompany motorised infantry and be able to relocate to subsequent enemy strong points.
  
• It does not need any unnecessary equipment. It needs no turret, because it will exclusively shoot in the direction of frontal enemy forts. It needs no secondary armament because it will be surrounded by infantry.
  
• The vehicle should be substantially protected to soak up damage and get close to enemy fortifications unharmed.
  
• From the simplicity and straightforward design scheme, it should hence be cheap and easy to produce.

Thanks to Manstein's extraordinaire performance in the start of the war, plus his constant pressuring, his proposal was accepted. On the chassis of the Panzer III, the first Sturmgeschütz III (Assault Gun III) arrived to breach the Stalin line on Operation Barbarossa in 1941.

Did you know?
Erich von Manstein is often considered the most capable and respected Axis Field Marshall of WWII.

The first StuGs to see combat were armed with 50mm of armour and the short-barreled 75mm StuK 37 L/24 (derived from the standard kwk 37). Not only were they very effective in their role of supporting infantry, but thanks to their added protection (compared to other german tanks of the time) and due to their loadout of multiple HEAT shells, they proved to be extremely useful against the superior soviet T-34 and KV tanks.

Following the success of the Anti-tank role, after 1942 the StuGs shifted their focus as tank destroyers, with the StuG III Ausf F presenting the fearsome long-barreled StuK 40 L/42 (derived from the kwk 40). Aware that these new variants were no longer as effective in the infantry support role, German High Command ordered the design of a variant for an improved iteration of its original role. As a result, the Sturmhaubitze 42 Ausf G (Assault howitzer or StuH 42; Ausf G) was developed, this time, using a powerful 105mm howitzer instead of a 75mm.


HD Link

Like many german vehicles, the design principles and technical specifications allowed continuous improvement of the design without too radical changes to the original scheme. The Ausf G, which is being modelled for Gates of Hell in both it's early and late production variants, raised the armour to 80mm and gave the vehicle secondary armament to be able to engage enemy infantry. The late production variant included a streamlined mantlet, known as the "Pig-head", and a remotely controlled roof MG, similar to that of the Hetzer.

Did you know?
The rotatory MG developed for the Hetzer and StuG was in some ways derived from the remotely actioned defensive MG's used on the Messerschmitt 210 and 410. The USA later reverse engineered the mechanisms to develop an improved MG defense system for the B-29 Superfortress, which not only was it remote-controlled, but computer-assisted.

Until the end of the war, while Hitler proposed massive tank projects that were barely feasible, Manstein and Guderian (amongst others) pressured the industry to keep producing reliable and cheap fighting vehicles like the StuG. As a result, this became the most common tracked vehicle of the Wehrmacht from 1943 onwards.

Pictures of all the mentioned variants which we have not yet showcased, coming soon.

Worth mentioning are the Soviet Assault Guns developed during WWII as well, namely the SU-76, SU 122, SU/ISU 152, and to an extent, the KV-2. More detail about each one on our specific vehicle blogs in the future.

Hello chaps! We’ve been quiet for a while, here’s a little report about what we’ve been doing for the last weeks.


You know what they say. A Picture is worth more than a thousand words so here we have a brief summary of a couple thousand words.


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link

Comment on what you like and what you don’t.

Have a lovely summer time and see you in a bit! And no, that doesn’t mean we’re taking any vacations from the depths of hell ;)

Hello chaps! We’ve been quiet for a while, here’s a little report about what we’ve been doing for the last weeks.


You know what they say. A Picture is worth more than a thousand words so here we have a brief summary of a couple thousand words.


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link


HD Link

Comment on what you like and what you don’t.

Have a lovely summer time and see you in a bit! And no, that doesn’t mean we’re taking any vacations from the depths of hell ;)

Today we shall give some insight into what we are up to.


The team keep working on the singleplayer and multiplayer maps for the game. As you would expect, all singleplayer and most multiplayer maps are based on real locations, and it takes a lot of time just to collect information and references about the general direction of the scenario - only then can the actual mapping commence. We extract real height-maps and define the unique flavour of each map. Sometimes the terrain of a region has massively changed since WWII - so we need to contrast with images of the time. We also need to consider how suitable for gameplay our selected terrains are - we are making a game after all, and
sometimes mappers scrap some of their work and start again. And of course once the map is progressing, assets are needed for it from the 3D department.












While the continuous flow of 3D models for units and vehicles continues, there is a massive effort going into updating flora. As maps get bigger - we must make the extra mile to deliver good performance. Therefore we concluded we wanted to invest a lot of time in optimising what is mostly seen on the terrain - trees, bushes, landscape elements, etc. It takes 5 times more time on average to make our assets now - but we hope it will be worth it.










Our internal testing goes on and occasionally we add new features. Our latest idea was to give some vehicles the ability to deploy sandbags or other defensive means while they are holding a position. For this to be achieved, the unit must be static



While the construction goes on, the vehicle is completely unresponsive. You will need to sacrifice a couple of seconds of inactivity to obtain a defensive advantage element. If you later decide to move the unit - we’re debating what happens here. Should the un-mounting of the fortification take place? Should it be reusable? Should it stay there?

However during our testing we came to the concerning statistic that over 80% of the fortifications were blown to smithereens before the unit was considering repositioning. So we never came to decide. On the bright side: the additional defences did their job - right?

Maybe you want to throw us your thoughts about this, if you wish to, please do.

Other issues we recently tackled were mainly frustrating aspects of the gameplay. No longer must infantry stand up to collect weapons such as bazookas or RPG’s.

We also are considering allowing infantry support tanks (like the Panzer IF or Na-ispug tractor) the ability to capture flags - something that previously was only allocated for infantrymen - but in war these units were supposed to fight together!

Today we shall give some insight into what we are up to.


The team keep working on the singleplayer and multiplayer maps for the game. As you would expect, all singleplayer and most multiplayer maps are based on real locations, and it takes a lot of time just to collect information and references about the general direction of the scenario - only then can the actual mapping commence. We extract real height-maps and define the unique flavour of each map. Sometimes the terrain of a region has massively changed since WWII - so we need to contrast with images of the time. We also need to consider how suitable for gameplay our selected terrains are - we are making a game after all, and
sometimes mappers scrap some of their work and start again. And of course once the map is progressing, assets are needed for it from the 3D department.












While the continuous flow of 3D models for units and vehicles continues, there is a massive effort going into updating flora. As maps get bigger - we must make the extra mile to deliver good performance. Therefore we concluded we wanted to invest a lot of time in optimising what is mostly seen on the terrain - trees, bushes, landscape elements, etc. It takes 5 times more time on average to make our assets now - but we hope it will be worth it.










Our internal testing goes on and occasionally we add new features. Our latest idea was to give some vehicles the ability to deploy sandbags or other defensive means while they are holding a position. For this to be achieved, the unit must be static



While the construction goes on, the vehicle is completely unresponsive. You will need to sacrifice a couple of seconds of inactivity to obtain a defensive advantage element. If you later decide to move the unit - we’re debating what happens here. Should the un-mounting of the fortification take place? Should it be reusable? Should it stay there?

However during our testing we came to the concerning statistic that over 80% of the fortifications were blown to smithereens before the unit was considering repositioning. So we never came to decide. On the bright side: the additional defences did their job - right?

Maybe you want to throw us your thoughts about this, if you wish to, please do.

Other issues we recently tackled were mainly frustrating aspects of the gameplay. No longer must infantry stand up to collect weapons such as bazookas or RPG’s.

We also are considering allowing infantry support tanks (like the Panzer IF or Na-ispug tractor) the ability to capture flags - something that previously was only allocated for infantrymen - but in war these units were supposed to fight together!

On April 29, 1945, the first Soviet soldiers crossed Spree through the damaged Moltke bridge and attacked “Himmler’s house”. The next day, Soviet units targetted the Reichstag. After artillery, mortar and “Katyusha” fire, the assault began. In the evening of April 30th the Red banner was waving on the Reichstag’s top and on May 2nd, Berlin’s garrison surrendered.

After the suicide of Hitler and the fall of Berlin, many German soldiers and generals understood that the end of the war was close. On the evening of May 8, in Karlshorst, the unconditional surrender of Wehrmacht forces on all fronts was signed. May 9th, Soviet tanks arrived into Prague and liberated it from the last German soldiers.

War is now over. 72 years since the end of the Largest conflict of all time, which our game narrates.

Today, Let us remember those who fought in the hard battles, burned in a tank, went on the brutal attacks, and fought in hand-to-hand combat through those terrible years. Let us remember those who did not survive and those who fought for their respective Motherlands and Fatherlands in that war.

On April 29, 1945, the first Soviet soldiers crossed Spree through the damaged Moltke bridge and attacked “Himmler’s house”. The next day, Soviet units targetted the Reichstag. After artillery, mortar and “Katyusha” fire, the assault began. In the evening of April 30th the Red banner was waving on the Reichstag’s top and on May 2nd, Berlin’s garrison surrendered.

After the suicide of Hitler and the fall of Berlin, many German soldiers and generals understood that the end of the war was close. On the evening of May 8, in Karlshorst, the unconditional surrender of Wehrmacht forces on all fronts was signed. May 9th, Soviet tanks arrived into Prague and liberated it from the last German soldiers.

War is now over. 72 years since the end of the Largest conflict of all time, which our game narrates.

Today, Let us remember those who fought in the hard battles, burned in a tank, went on the brutal attacks, and fought in hand-to-hand combat through those terrible years. Let us remember those who did not survive and those who fought for their respective Motherlands and Fatherlands in that war.

Today’s devblog covers a rather casual topic. But we thought you might like to hear about it :)


In Gates of Hell we are keen on making many relevant variants of vehicles so that players can see the development of armoured designs and be able to feel it’s evolution. Let’s start off with one of the most iconic tanks of all time: The T-34. From it’s initial early design, the L-11 gun was replaced to better counter enemy tanks one year after its introduction. Soon afterwards the turret was redesigned for better survivability and spacing. In 1943 the T-34/85 appeared as the replacement to deal with enemy heavier tanks, and then we got the flamethrower variant (OT-34), and others.

A more drastic example is the german Panzer III: Started off as a breakthrough tank with an outdated 37mm peashooter, then became gradually upgraded in firepower and armour to the point that tripled its initial armour layout. And as if that was not a significant enough evolution, it finally ended up as an infantry support tank, the sort of opposite of what it was originally planned for. And let’s not even speak about the designs for tank destroyers and self-propelled guns that came out of the Panzer III’s chassis...

And so, when you end up with 6 variants of the Panzer III which are based on the same hull and hence some look similar, we sat down to think about how we could make them look different for those players that do not have the eagle-eye to spot the differences instantly, which is what we want! Obviously, all the modelled variants play different and have their unique characteristics, otherwise they would not have been made. But it’s a question of how unique-looking each one can become.

We started making details for each separate tank model like tarps and nettings, segments of tank tracks, fuel supplies, etc. We looked into old photographs and references to see what sort of accessories we could model into the vehicles, to bring some liveliness and be able to differentiate any similar variant of a tank.


HD Link

Time was invested in fine tuning these details and making them animated with the motion of the tank, to make them look like they’re truly hanging out there.



And after some of our tanks were dressed up and started to look all fancy, there was the cheeky developer who saw a tree trunk hanging from the side of the tank (which were used when the tank got stuck in mud). He instantly suggested: Aaah! Extra side armour! Excellent!

While this was not the original idea, we do think this works out pretty well! It allows us to make proper improvised tank protection as some WWII tank commanders were desperate to have:




We are making custom additional material presets for the “armour”, these being wood and sand, which are not as tough as alternative metal spaced armour protection, but it’s something that might miraculously save your ass!

We built on the existing game shielding code so that your armour pieces will be wrecked and dropped with blastwaves, but now wooden objects will also shatter (plus we’re experimenting with allowing them to get burnt, too) and sandbags will also have their own taste. And finally we randomised some of the “armour enhancements” in the game so even with all the different tank variants, you will not even have 2 tanks alike. But one thing is certain - you probably end up a little lighter than you were after an encounter with the enemy!

Today’s devblog covers a rather casual topic. But we thought you might like to hear about it :)


In Gates of Hell we are keen on making many relevant variants of vehicles so that players can see the development of armoured designs and be able to feel it’s evolution. Let’s start off with one of the most iconic tanks of all time: The T-34. From it’s initial early design, the L-11 gun was replaced to better counter enemy tanks one year after its introduction. Soon afterwards the turret was redesigned for better survivability and spacing. In 1943 the T-34/85 appeared as the replacement to deal with enemy heavier tanks, and then we got the flamethrower variant (OT-34), and others.

A more drastic example is the german Panzer III: Started off as a breakthrough tank with an outdated 37mm peashooter, then became gradually upgraded in firepower and armour to the point that tripled its initial armour layout. And as if that was not a significant enough evolution, it finally ended up as an infantry support tank, the sort of opposite of what it was originally planned for. And let’s not even speak about the designs for tank destroyers and self-propelled guns that came out of the Panzer III’s chassis...

And so, when you end up with 6 variants of the Panzer III which are based on the same hull and hence some look similar, we sat down to think about how we could make them look different for those players that do not have the eagle-eye to spot the differences instantly, which is what we want! Obviously, all the modelled variants play different and have their unique characteristics, otherwise they would not have been made. But it’s a question of how unique-looking each one can become.

We started making details for each separate tank model like tarps and nettings, segments of tank tracks, fuel supplies, etc. We looked into old photographs and references to see what sort of accessories we could model into the vehicles, to bring some liveliness and be able to differentiate any similar variant of a tank.


HD Link

Time was invested in fine tuning these details and making them animated with the motion of the tank, to make them look like they’re truly hanging out there.



And after some of our tanks were dressed up and started to look all fancy, there was the cheeky developer who saw a tree trunk hanging from the side of the tank (which were used when the tank got stuck in mud). He instantly suggested: Aaah! Extra side armour! Excellent!

While this was not the original idea, we do think this works out pretty well! It allows us to make proper improvised tank protection as some WWII tank commanders were desperate to have:




We are making custom additional material presets for the “armour”, these being wood and sand, which are not as tough as alternative metal spaced armour protection, but it’s something that might miraculously save your ass!

We built on the existing game shielding code so that your armour pieces will be wrecked and dropped with blastwaves, but now wooden objects will also shatter (plus we’re experimenting with allowing them to get burnt, too) and sandbags will also have their own taste. And finally we randomised some of the “armour enhancements” in the game so even with all the different tank variants, you will not even have 2 tanks alike. But one thing is certain - you probably end up a little lighter than you were after an encounter with the enemy!