Jump to content

Fortification Durability Tests


Recommended Posts

Good idea, although I have yet to detect any difference in durability in-game. Does anyone have any "concrete":p evidence indicating the contrary?

No joy using an immob halftrack as a bunker. Mortars quickly killed it both times I played; the first time a deathstar on-map 81mm and the second time by the initial barrage. I'm going to remove the 81, make some other tweaks and replay again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in addition to the preponderance of empirical evidence, I can say with certainty that trenches more or less do not do the job one would think they do in battle.

Even being placed behind the crest of a ridge, on a hvy forest tile, with trees, and on Hide... my boys die are dying like flies to medium mortars in all battles that they are in use.

At least foxholes do not have ends that let the shrapnel fly down and strike more troops outside that tile.

------------

Have you tried a long line of foxholes instead of trenches, sunken 1 meter below grade?

----

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even being placed behind the crest of a ridge, on a hvy forest tile, with trees, and on Hide... my boys die are dying like flies to medium mortars in all battles that they are in use.

You are joking right? Think about what mortar shells bursting in trees would do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit I have no idea what is and isn't possible with mods, but could one use an assault gun instead of a halftrack to make it more survivable? ie: make the main gun invisible?

You can't put passengers into a fighting vehicle, and even if the main gun were invisible it'd still be there as far as the engine were concerned, and able to fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are joking right? Think about what mortar shells bursting in trees would do.

They were not ALL placed in trees. ;) I was hopeful that the trenches would reduce, not amplify, the effects of treebursts. The negative effects that I was trying to convey were in regards to direct hits, with explosions either in or just outside the trenches. The troops that were not in trees fared no better. Sometimes the boys just have to ride out the occasional barrage, and I was trying for the greatest protection value. I found that it is better to be in a foxhole than a trench, at least by these anecdotal experiences.

Less room for ricocheting shrapnel I suppose.

Even had an HQ that was surrounded on three sides by trenches, and he got slapped by a shell that burst on the other side. He was NOT on hide, but still the protection value that I assumed was present... was not. :)

Trenches could use some love. Nothing major, just another half-meter or so depth and about a half-meter less width. Add another course or two of sandbags to trench walls and it should be fine.

Slit trenches with occasional firing steps/slits would be a nice addition, that could be alternated with our current trenches. Trade an ever-present GREY LOS line(no room for everyone to take a position) for more protection from indirect fire.

I still have an itch that I am missing a work-around though. This editor has hidden depths that I have yet to plumb. If I can bury an eight story house/bunker, I can find a way to ride out a lousy 81mm barrage.

-----------

By the way, I am not attempting to ask for invincibility here. Just a little better than the wholesale slaughter that LLF has shown, and I seem to experience, with the current fortification values.

When the bodies get two or three deep, it is time to send a memorandum, with endoresement requested, to the Commandant of Engineers.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even being placed behind the crest of a ridge, on a hvy forest tile, with trees, and on Hide... my boys die are dying like flies to medium mortars in all battles that they are in use.

Rofl! That doesnt happen to be the trench behind the crest of a ridge on a heavy forest tile in trees that I'm attacking right now is it?

Btw it's a single 81mm on D/F ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon: Forgive my ignorance re modding, but in the example I gave, you could simply deprive the main gun of ammo.

I know a tank can't carry passengers (dammit, dammit!) but I thought it would at least make a decent bunker. And you never know, east front CM2 may allow for passengers (dear god on high I hope so... along with flamethrowers).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too toyed with all that sunken trenches and buildings around long time ago and at last I figured, it´s not much worth the efforts. It looks crappy most the time and does not give the results we desire. We can´t make effective underground shelter. Period. Protecting trenches by sinking 1m works some and protecting houses by raising surrounding terrain 1m (instead of sinking the house) works some too. 1m terrain alterations is the maximum that can be halfway worked into the terrain mesh, without revealing what´s under, or behind. Anymore is suspiciously looking (to a a human player) and leads to another problem. If fortifications can not be concealed/camouflaged, then majority of their worth is already lost. Another is troops density and trench arrangements. Trench segments need to zig zag every other tile (every other 8m AS) as the real ones and there shouldn´t be more than 3-4 guys in each segment. Otherwise you have death traps. Compare some with the real stuff here:

http://www.allworldwars.com/German%20Field%20Fortifications%20on%20the%20Eastern%20Front.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, just to be clear, that particular shot (in my OP) doesn't show the kind of fighting positions I'm trying to model in CMBN, but rather unimproved "air raid" trenches in the main camp, hastily improved once the siege began. The glum looking kids manning them have the look of service troops.

The hilltop* fighting positions in the various CRs consisted mainly of fighting positions sited to command various key avenues of approach while minimizing exposure to ranged direct fire (easier in some cases than others). With a few exceptions (e.g. Gabrielle) the main purpose of the trench network was to allow covered movement among these positions, not to be manned themselves WWI style, except as a fallback. That's similar to what is shown in a lot of RockinHarry's document.

* Elianes and Dominiques, east of the river. The Huguettes, located in rice paddies bu the airstrip, were built differently.

A nice gallery of overhead imagery is here

dbp_jean-pouget_neadbp-03c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

 

The answer to hardening bunkers against 81mm turns out to be quite simple, with no trees needed (might need them to shrug off the 120mm heavies though!)

 

Per my earlier tests, 81mms cannot (AFAIK) destroy bunkers outright, but near misses can cause substantial casualties (4-5 out of 9 max capacity) through the firing aperture to the occupants, who won't HIDE or Cower. Sandbags, walls and other barriers won't sit close enough to the bunker (or vice versa) to mask it.

 

The solution: stick a destroyed halftrack (or any other AFV) up athwart the vulnerable aperture. Zero casualties in 5 playtests in spite of numerous direct hits (the wreck was set ablaze twice, but there's no cookoff effects -- it just looks neat!). The track takes all the punishment, although the (Veteran/High) bunker occupants max out the Pin meter and suffer morale effects.

FortTest_Track.jpg

 

So it doesn't look quite so odd, I swapped the M5 Brit halftrack wireframe for a wood bunker. It's still a HT for all game purposes, just looks like a bunker.

FortTest_Track2.jpg

 

With that problem solved, I now move on to the 120mm indirect mortar barrage (1 tube firing a Maximum 51 shells including spots), which has more devastating effects on both the (Point) target bunker and its surroundings, as you can see from this screenie.

FortTest_120mm_1.jpg

 

The bunker was KOed and the squad evacuated, only to be massacred in the nearby trenches. 9 of 9 casualties. And the next bunker over was also killed and it wasn't even a target.

Kids, I'm visiting Dien Bien Phu in a few weeks and it's entirely possible that will bring me out of CM hypersleep.

I haven't played CM since early 2013 and have no experience playing with engines 2.0 and 3.0.

Just curious: did the far too easily spotted and far too flimsy fortifications (bunkers, trenches, foxholes) get any love for the issues I flagged in this old thread? Or can you still basically shoot dug in infantry out of their emplacements at range with light HE or MGs over the course of a few minutes without ever having to assault? Because that would make a DBP series kind of pointless.

Merci bien!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having made a fairly stupid mistake of digging in on the forward slope of a hill in CMFI, I'm very happy with the effect of trenches at least:

https://youtu.be/kPjkD3gCRJM

This kind of incoming fire went on for fully 30 minutes at (seemingly) this rate (and continued thereafter, but not as intense) - the platoon in the trenches were badly suppressed (and one squad, Green with a poor leader, went as far as breaking and running behind the hill - I eventually sent them back in), but they took *zero* casualties throughout, and were there to deal with the eventual German assault (repulsed with grenades and mortar fire, mostly).

The 17pdrs weren't so lucky of course.

Definitive? Certainly not, but they clearly did the job here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kids, I'm visiting Dien Bien Phu in a few weeks and it's entirely possible that will bring me out of CM hypersleep.

I haven't played CM since early 2013 and have no experience playing with engines 2.0 and 3.0.

Just curious: did the far too easily spotted and far too flimsy fortifications (bunkers, trenches, foxholes) get any love for the issues I flagged in this old thread? Or can you still basically shoot dug in infantry out of their emplacements at range with light HE or MGs over the course of a few minutes without ever having to assault? Because that would make a DBP series kind of pointless.

Merci bien!

I think not that much has been changed up to the latest version of V3.11. From my observations it appears that HE near hits at pillboxes aren´t that lethal anymore through apertures, or not doing any harm at all, incl. suppression effects. There might be differences between log bunkers and concrete pillboxes, although I can´t tell ATM. What you attempted from your screenshots above, still works best at the moment. Sinking trenches into -1m ditch locked tiles helps vs. direct fire some. Same for foxholes and bunkers, despite the FOW issues, when these are placed in sunken terrain tiles due to the underlying mesh alterations which are highly suspiciously looking at least for a human player. However, I believe making a halfway realistic DBP scenario should be possible with the given means, so I suggest you give it a try in V3.11. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kids, I'm visiting Dien Bien Phu in a few weeks and it's entirely possible that will bring me out of CM hypersleep.

I haven't played CM since early 2013 and have no experience playing with engines 2.0 and 3.0.

Just curious: did the far too easily spotted and far too flimsy fortifications (bunkers, trenches, foxholes) get any love for the issues I flagged in this old thread? Or can you still basically shoot dug in infantry out of their emplacements at range with light HE or MGs over the course of a few minutes without ever having to assault? Because that would make a DBP series kind of pointless.

In my experience, even the wooden bunkers are now invulnerable to indirect fire from anything smaller than 105mm artillery, and I'm pretty sure not even the 105mm will do anything. Direct fire 75mm will still take out wooden bunkers though, after a couple of hits. Concrete bunkers seem extremely tough, but played very little with those, so can't say exactly how tough.

All bunkers are still quite easily spotted. Not sure if they are less easy to spot now than back then - I had not discovered the game yet back in 2012 when you did your tests.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

LLF, what great news that you've resumed tinkering with your DBP mod.

By now have you already been on your trip to the actual place? (let's see some travel pics!)

There's a terrific new board/VASSAL wargame now -- Dien Bien Phu: The Final Gamble -- that would make an excellent op layer to run a campaign using your mod. It has some ingenious mechanics for supply and for reinforcements, too:

http://grognard.com/originals/dbpfg_rv1.html

Just wanted to add my words of encouragement.

 

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

×
×
  • Create New...