Does CMFI Allow You To Place Foxholes?

[HistoryBuff1962]

Hi. I just purchased the complete version of CMFI. In the 1st generation of the CM games I could decide whether or not to give foxholes to my troops during the setup phase of a generated battle. Maybe I missed it in the online manuals, but I can't seem to find any foxhole commands or options. Am I missing something? Any help would be appreciated.

[A Canadian Cat]

Nope things have changed. Foxholes, trenches, wire, mine fields etc are purchasable units from the Fortifications group. So you can only put troops into foxholes if you buy the fox holes first.

So, for a quick battle you can buy your own along with the rest of your troops (be careful experiment first there may be restrictions on where you can place them).

For a scenario if the author gave you foxholes inside your setup zone you can move them around and place units inside them during setup.

[Wicky]

There was in the original CM the ability to place foxholes and fallback foxholes in defence set-ups but I can't recall seeing this in Cmx2 engined games. I believe you have to purchase them, and other defensive fortifications in quick battles.

[Lanzfeld]

Yes that is one of the areas where CMx1 shined brighter than CMx2. Foxholes & trenches.

[HistoryBuff1962]

Thanks for the responses, guys.I suppose it may sound like whining but it hardly seems fair that the player has to PAY for foxholes. Any infantryman of any of the armies involved was capable of making some sort of foxhole with even the most simple and crude tools available. To this day you can see simple rock cairns on the Tunisian battlefields constructed by troops when the ground was too rocky. I don't mind paying for trenches or bunkers-these represent substantial investment of time and effort by the troops. Oh, well. I was also unaware of the elevation limits mentioned by Lanzfeld. While the Panzerschreck had bigger back blast than the American Bazooka it was copied from, the Panzerfaust, to my knowledge, did not. There is film footage of women and elderly Volksturm recruits being taught to shoot Panzerfaust's with one hand,by grinning Wehrmacht instructors who are obviously trying to put the trainees at ease about the lack of serious recoil/backblast.

[akd]

Thanks for the responses, guys.I suppose it may sound like whining but it hardly seems fair that the player has to PAY for foxholes. Any infantryman of any of the armies involved was capable of making some sort of foxhole with even the most simple and crude tools available. To this day you can see simple rock cairns on the Tunisian battlefields constructed by troops when the ground was too rocky. I don't mind paying for trenches or bunkers-these represent substantial investment of time and effort by the troops. Oh, well. I was also unaware of the elevation limits mentioned by Lanzfeld. While the Panzerschreck had bigger back blast than the American Bazooka it was copied from, the Panzerfaust, to my knowledge, did not. There is film footage of women and elderly Volksturm recruits being taught to shoot Panzerfaust's with one hand,by grinning Wehrmacht instructors who are obviously trying to put the trainees at ease about the lack of serious recoil/backblast.

there is no recoil because of the backblast.

[womble]

Thanks for the responses, guys.I suppose it may sound like whining but it hardly seems fair that the player has to PAY for foxholes. Any infantryman of any of the armies involved was capable of making some sort of foxhole with even the most simple and crude tools available.

Points aren't about what's available. They're about game effect. Every infantryman carried a weapon; should that be ignored in points calculations? Now, I'm not arguing that the points cost reflects their in game efficacy accurately, either one way or another, nor am I suggesting that points costs have always reflected this effect consistently.

Availability is reflected in Rarity points. You'll note that Allied fortifications tend to have higher rarity value, since they're meant to be on the operational offensive in the campaigns represented in the game.

[A Canadian Cat]

Points aren't about what's available. They're about game effect.

Indeed. My overall impression is they cost too much - in quick battles. On defense I would like to use mines, wires and hedge hogs to create funnels and kill zones but after buying some of those there is hardly enough left over to actually defend.

I like playing scenarios that have fortifications.

Having said that I am right now setting up for a defense in CW Seven Winds ->

Not happy with the fact that there is a small / skinny setup zone full of useful fortifications that cannot be used to setup the defense the way I want. But that is for another day.