Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Voxman

Armour that moves through rubble ??

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Voxman:

Is there any armour for either Axis or Allies that can move through Building Rubble ?

Even light armour ?

Is there any thought for the new CM, ie, after CMAK, to have more options for moving and placing vehicles and guns? ie, letting guns set up in certain types of buildings, and letting vehicles move into,say, light and medium buildings, with a higher chance of bog, and damaging the building? Like the Kelly's Heroes shots of the Tigers smashing through the buildings. I know that AFV's can smash through the smaller, lighter buildings.

I know I have read of guns setting up in buildings, at least factories, in Stalingrad, and it seems to me that a 37mm or 50mm gun could be manuevered into even a heavy building. Maybe letting them set up there, but then unable to move?

If this has been discussed, sorry, I didn't find anything when I did a search for "vehicles entering buildings".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kelly's heroes aside, IRL tankers are generally loathe to drive through buildings, for a number of reasons. Structural elements of the building, such as large timbers, can easily throw a track. Worse for heavy tanks like the Tiger, if the building has a basement of any kind, a large heavy AFV stands a good chance of falling right through the first floor and ending up stuck for good.

This doesn't mean that tanks didn't occasionally drive through buildings IRL - they did. It's just that I'm not sure how important such a feature is to modeling realistic tactical combat. Eventually, though, if CM started to model a wider variety of buildings, including such features as whether or not they had a basement, I suppose you could allow tanks to smash through the smallest, lightest buildings for the fun factor if nothing else.

It would also be nice to eventually see the kind of high (2-3m) masonry wall that is quite common in some European cities and towns. Some of these walls are actually rather thin (one brick thick) and so could probably be driven through by at least heavy tanks. A "light high wall" and "heavy high wall" would allow the game engine to differentiate between walls that could be knocked down, and those that couldn't.

I don't think the current engine can handle damage to terrain by passing vehicles, though. At least, in CMBO, driving through bocage with an allied tank didn't leave a hole in the bocage - the tank just passed through leaving the bocage undisturbed. IRL, the hedgerow cutters installed on Shermans and Stuarts smashed a big hole in the bocage, which of course meant that following units could pass more easily, etc. This makes me suspect that even if high walls make it in to CMAK, we might have to live with them being "unbreakable" until CMX2. It would eventually be nice to see this kind of deformable terrain in the game model though.

As far as guns and such in buildings, I think you can make a reasonable case that large, open buildings like barns, sheds, warehouses, and factories would be relatively easy to site and hide a gun. I have my doubts about the tactical value of such a placement (for one thing, the building becomes a nice, big target that can be knocked down around the gun), but in certain situations it might be worthwhile. What is probably needed here is some new building types, like, "Shed", and "Barn", "Warehouse" etc. that would allow guns and maybe even small vehicles to be placed inside. This would also have the nice side benefit of adding more variety to the building types in the game and thereby enhancing the graphics.

I'd love to see a Bavarian farmhouse with a large thatched-roof barn next to it and a few outlying sheds in the game, rather than just a cluster of generic buildings representing a farmsetead. IMHO, the tactical ramifications of such new building would be minor, but it would make very nice eye candy. . .

Cheers,

YD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as an aside, a scenario designer can place tanks and guns INSIDE heavy buildings by putting the building ON TOP of the tank/gun. If you want it rubbled, then you destroy that building (I think that will work). The drawback of course is that it cannot move once placed thusly. Would make for realism in terms of guns and a nasty surprise for the unsuspecting victim smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love seeing those old movies made during the war of tanks busting threw buildings......mowing down trees....but in reality the tankers avoided those obsticles at all costs because even a small branch could throw a track! :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YankeeDog, you ever see the movie D-day? The hotel the in Oesteerman (or whatever the hell it's called) had a german gun in the basement. I was thinking along those lines. It'd be like a cheap pillbox and the advantage is not many people would suspect a gun there. Heavy buildings are harder to take down in CMBB so it could stand the pounding for a few turns anyway. Much better than the alternative (foxhole or slit trench).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what some modder might do is to make a gun or mg bunker look like one of the houses already in CM and maybe add a gun barrel sticking out

I had seen pictures in the Time Life books on how the Germans made pillboxes look like houses and sheds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Juardis:

YankeeDog, you ever see the movie D-day? The hotel the in Oesteerman (or whatever the hell it's called) had a german gun in the basement. I was thinking along those lines. It'd be like a cheap pillbox and the advantage is not many people would suspect a gun there. Heavy buildings are harder to take down in CMBB so it could stand the pounding for a few turns anyway. Much better than the alternative (foxhole or slit trench).

I think you're thinking of the movie "The Longest Day." In any event, a scene just like the one you describe takes place in "The Longest Day." I've also seen Real Life photos of actual guns setup inside buildings in a similar manner. Sometimes, it looks like the structure is actually just the fabricated facade of a building designed to conceal a bunker. Other times, it does looks as if a real building was modified, probably by combat engineers, to serve as a concealed gun emplacement.

As you note, this kind of placement is actually currently possible to model in CM, at least for scenarios, by placing the gun on the tile in the editor first, and then placing the building and/or rubble around it. An AT gun inside a heavy building can be quite nasty in CM, but as defender I'd generally rather have a gun in a trench - even a large, heavy building can simply be knocked down around the gun, especially if enemy tanks can get LOS to the building, but stay out of LOS of the gun itself. Guns in trenches, especially if the trenches are placed on the fighting crest of a hill, are really tough to take out in CMBB. Here, at least, The Longest Day is in sync with CM - in the movie, once the tommies manage to enlist the help of a Sherman the tank neutralizes the gun by simply knocking the building down around it.

There is currrently absolutely no way of placing guns inside structures in QBs, though, and in Scenarios players are limited to the specific placements designers give them. In the future, it might be nice if CMBB allowed the defender to have/purchase a 'fortified building' as a fortification type in CM. One 'fortified building' would give you a marker (kind of like a TRP) that you could then place over any one building in your setup zone, and said building would be converted in to a 'fortified builiding', with sandbags behind the exterior walls, windows and other frangible material removed, etc. Such buildings would offer better cover, be harder to knock down, and could also be assumed to have been sufficently modified by combat engineers to allow AT guns to be placed inside. This would add a nice element of realism for town/city fighting, where 'hardened' buildings were sometimes used as defensive strongpoints. You could probably also allow the 'fortified building' marker to be placed over a rubble tile, since rubble can also be hardened to create a pretty effective strongpoint, and a few hours work by a Combat Engineer team would certainly allow an AT gun to be placed inside the remains of a destroyed building.

You can kind of fudge a fortified building in the scenario editor right now by placing a trench inside the building in the same way you can get a gun inside a building, but again this is limited to scenario designers, and can't be used for QBs or by player in the game. In any event you can't place a gun inside a building even if there is a trench inside.

Some good possibilities for the future. . .

Cheers,

YD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by YankeeDog:

Kelly's heroes aside, IRL tankers are generally loathe to drive through buildings, for a number of reasons. Structural elements of the building, such as large timbers, can easily throw a track. Worse for heavy tanks like the Tiger, if the building has a basement of any kind, a large heavy AFV stands a good chance of falling right through the first floor and ending up stuck for good.

This doesn't mean that tanks didn't occasionally drive through buildings IRL - they did. It's just that I'm not sure how important such a feature is to modeling realistic tactical combat. Eventually, though, if CM started to model a wider variety of buildings, including such features as whether or not they had a basement, I suppose you could allow tanks to smash through the smallest, lightest buildings for the fun factor if nothing else.

According to God, Honor, Fatherland, the pictorial history of GD, German tankers were actually ordered not to drive through buildings or otherwise use their vehicles as bulldozers; potential damage to optics was another reason given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by YankeeDog:

I don't think the current engine can handle damage to terrain by passing vehicles, though. At least, in CMBO, driving through bocage with an allied tank didn't leave a hole in the bocage - the tank just passed through leaving the bocage undisturbed. IRL, the hedgerow cutters installed on Shermans and Stuarts smashed a big hole in the bocage, which of course meant that following units could pass more easily, etc.

And I must admit this bugged me considerably when BO came out and was one reason I avoided games with bocage in them—a real bummer when you are trying to play in Normandy settings. I do hope that this will get improved upon in the engine rewrite.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by YankeeDog:

As you note, this kind of placement is actually currently possible to model in CM, at least for scenarios, by placing the gun on the tile in the editor first, and then placing the building and/or rubble around it. An AT gun inside a heavy building can be quite nasty in CM, but as defender I'd generally rather have a gun in a trench - even a large, heavy building can simply be knocked down around the gun, especially if enemy tanks can get LOS to the building, but stay out of LOS of the gun itself. Guns in trenches, especially if the trenches are placed on the fighting crest of a hill, are really tough to take out in CMBB.

YD [/QB]

Imho Guns in trenches are quit easy to take out ( i lost many guns in trenches )

A few arty shells or some mortar shells and the gun is knocked out, takes mostly 2-3 turns the most when using small mortar.

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Monty:

Imho Guns in trenches are quit easy to take out ( i lost many guns in trenches )

A few arty shells or some mortar shells and the gun is knocked out, takes mostly 2-3 turns the most when using small mortar.

Monty

Valid point. Guns in trenches are very difficult to take out with DF HE weapons like the guns on most AFVs, but still relatively easily taken out by mortars, or off-board arty if you've got he shells to spare.

Units in buildings (guns included) are easily damaged by DF HE, but are much less vulnerable to mortars and off board arty.

I guess it depends on what kind of toys your opponent brought with him to the sandbox. . .

Cheers,

YD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...