Jump to content

Prepared positions?


Echo

Recommended Posts

I have not seen any reference to this feature. Can't be sure, but from what I understood nobody would sacrifice mobility over a hull down position, the modern battlefield does not approve the use of this method, which, if it ever had a sense, it was 70 years ago. 

modern-marines-06-0413-lgn.jpg

 

 

It absolutely does approve of prepared positions (It varies obviously, the battlefield is a fickle beast!)  for modern armor, every combat engineer formation (As far as I am concerned, and my friend who is an US army combat engineer) has specialists who can dig prepared hull-down positions like the one above. If I am not mistaken (Again, pnzrldr will probably come in here and tell me how stupid I am hehe) US armored formations also have specially equipped vehicles for entrenching tanks. The Russians on the other hand have there tanks designed in such a way to where they can dig in by themselves, its hard to describe, but its got something to do with the shape of the front of the vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what the current practice for the Israeli army is, but at least as recently as the '73 war, they were assigning a bulldozer to each company of tanks so that they could dig in on the fly. This might amount to little more than pushing up a berm in the direction of the enemy, but I guess the thinking was that every little bit helped.

 

BTW, I can't see how that would degrade mobility much. As far as moving in or out of a prepared position, that was quickly done. Actually preparing a position would of course take some time, but a simple berm for each tank would take only a few minutes each.

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenario designers can approximate them in the Editor using the ditch lock feature. See below:

 

A 2m entrenchment, which provides full hull down at medium/long range and partial HD closer, but partially blocks LOS of the entrenched vehicle.

16034653600_843d19c269_c.jpg

 

Or

 

A 1m entrenchment, which provides partial hulldown, but full LOS.

16034500058_a31ac9b6bc_c.jpg

 

The downside of this method is that your entrenchments are always visible on the map. So, your opponent knows where they are.

 

However, if the map allows you to put a lot of them in, you could keep him guessing which ones you're actually using and in a modern environment, air recon would probably pick them out pretty quickly anyway. So the lack of FoW as to their location is more realistic than in a WWII setting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenario designers can approximate them in the Editor using the ditch lock feature. See below:

 

A 2m entrenchment, which provides full hull down at medium/long range and partial HD closer, but partially blocks LOS of the entrenched vehicle.

16034653600_843d19c269_c.jpg

 

Or

 

A 1m entrenchment, which provides partial hulldown, but full LOS.

16034500058_a31ac9b6bc_c.jpg

 

The downside of this method is that your entrenchments are always visible on the map. So, your opponent knows where they are.

 

However, if the map allows you to put a lot of them in, you could keep him guessing which ones you're actually using and in a modern environment, air recon would probably pick them out pretty quickly anyway. So the lack of FoW as to their location is more realistic than in a WWII setting.

I still don't see the difference, why is number one only viewed partially? The guy can't see what's infrint of him? Or the tank gun can't shoot, but the commander can see. also. How do you quote multiple things at once? Also, just put the trenches in obvious places where.... No forget it. Id say they are useless
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't see the difference, why is number one only viewed partially? The guy can't see what's infrint of him? Or the tank gun can't shoot, but the commander can see. also. How do you quote multiple things at once? Also, just put the trenches in obvious places where.... No forget it. Id say they are useless

 

Probably, the gunner's site/gun is being partially obstructed. Each crew member can only see what their position allows them to see. The Commander is higher than the gunner.

 

I would guess that vehicle height makes a difference. Perhaps modern vehicles have more clearance height, being taller? We'll see...

 

Another thing to consider in scenario design. You could fake out your opponent for awhile with these.

 

I haven't taken the time to figure out the new multi-quote system yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably, the gunner's site/gun is being partially obstructed. Each crew member can only see what their position allows them to see. The Commander is higher than the gunner.

 

I would guess that vehicle height makes a difference. Perhaps modern vehicles have more clearance height, being taller? We'll see...

 

Another thing to consider in scenario design. You could fake out your opponent for awhile with these.

 

I haven't taken the time to figure out the new multi-quote system yet.

no you're right, faking out is a good tactic, that's a really good one. Let them bomb the tench, then put your tank in there for a minute, then put it somewhere else.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick note to folks new to the series:

 

Foxholes and trenches for infantry must be spotted by your units to be seen. They do not change the terrain, but are denoted by graphics that appear on the map when they are spotted. The same goes for bunkers in the WWII titles.

 

So, they are subject to full Fog of War, unlike the vehicle entrenchment "hack" we have been discussing for the last few posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick note to folks new to the series:

 

Foxholes and trenches for infantry must be spotted by your units to be seen. They do not change the terrain, but are denoted by graphics that appear on the map when they are spotted. The same goes for bunkers in the WWII titles.

 

So, they are subject to full Fog of War, unlike the vehicle entrenchment "hack" we have been discussing for the last few posts.

no way, you're joking. That's a lot more useful then.
Link to post
Share on other sites

no way, you're joking. That's a lot more useful then.

Yes, it's true. I meant to add that in my first post, but forgot.

 

Same goes for sandbags and barbed wire.

 

You've also got mines (can sometimes be spotted, but usually you find them the hard way) and Target Reference Points. Target reference points allow for arty missions without spotting rounds (SRs let your opponent know arty is on the way soon). So...your opponent doesn't know they're coming! Of course, he can't see where the TRPs are (they can never be spotted).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's true. I meant to add that in my first post, but forgot.

 

Same goes for sandbags and barbed wire.

 

You've also got mines (can sometimes be spotted, but usually you find them the hard way) and Target Reference Points. Target reference points allow for arty missions without spotting rounds (SRs let your opponent know arty is on the way soon). So...your opponent doesn't know they're coming! Of course, he can't see where the TRPs are (they can never be spotted).

dude I will use the hell out of barbed wire. It's so useful.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay I can see the problem - the in the case of the T-34-85 is 2.45m tall - and the 1m takes it to the top of the tracks - then at 2m that is just above the gun height.  What happens if you make a 2m dug in position two action squares long  but make the front square 1m dip so the residing tank is sloping up hopefully allowing the gun to peak over the top.

 

 

Things will differ depending on the vehicle and might need some adjustment i.e. M1A1 height 2.44m, T-90 2.22m etc.) 

 

T-34-85.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and when building in the Editor, terrain tiles are 8 x 8 m sqares and depth can be altered in increments of 1 m. That's for the "hack."

 

Again, foxholes, trenches, barbed wire, sandbags, bunkers etc. are all independent items that appear on the map only when they are spotted by units.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, guys. I just put a King Tiger into a 2m deep "hack" trench and it had clear LOS, along with full hulldown status at medium/long range (partial HD at very close range).

 

Here's a screenie:

 

16196907986_bbf4d27511_c.jpg

 

So, it looks like it's a question of how modern tanks will match up with the 1m depth increments, if you want to use the vehicle entrenchment hack idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...