MOS:96B2P Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Claymores would be very interesting to see implemented. I'm sure it would be basically impossible with the engine, but the idea of having a useable and faceable mine equipped by certain units... pretty neat Combat Mission Shock Force has IEDs that can be command detonated and that is in the oldest game engine. So, claymores might actually be possible. Similar to a CMSF IED but instead of a 360 degree blast a directional blast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H1nd Posted May 6, 2015 Author Share Posted May 6, 2015 How do the IEDs function in shock force? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) How do the IEDs function in shock force? The below is some of the information on IEDs from the CMSF game manual. CMSF also has car bombs (VBIEDs) IEDs: Improvised Explosive Devices (i.e. bombs). Three different types, in various sizes, are simulated in the game. The size determines the strength of the explosion and therefore ability to cause damage and casualties. The different types determine reliability as well as the distance at which the triggerman can be positioned. Wire – shortest distance (about 100m), 10% failure chance Radio – medium distance (about 300m), requires line of sight, 20% failure rate Cell phone – long distance (about 600m), 10% failure chance IEDs typically consist of the bomb itself and the triggerman. The bomb is placed during the setup phase like any other unit. Once placed, it cannot be moved again. The triggerman, however, can be relocated. Edited May 6, 2015 by MOS:96B2P 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delliejonut Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Yeah that's probably why it wouldn't work. The IEDs were a great concept, but a claymore would have to be placeable and directional in an action square after the game has started. Also I think it would need a triggerman, or is there a motion sensing variety? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Yeah that's probably why it wouldn't work. The IEDs were a great concept, but a claymore would have to be placeable and directional in an action square after the game has started. Also I think it would need a triggerman, or is there a motion sensing variety? You can rig a claymore to a tripwire... though apparently that's a "field expedient" adaptation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H1nd Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 Ottawa agreement declares all tripwire triggered explosives as "ap-mines" but i dont know if uds had signed that agreement. Rus and ukr certainly have not and both have claymore analogues. In any case it might indeed be quite hard to model directional blast. As for the "triggerman" claymores could be assigned under individual infantry squads that act as the triggerman. It is a squad level weapon after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 <snip> a claymore would have to be placeable and directional in an action square after the game has started. Also I think it would need a triggerman <snip> This would be the best and most useful way to have the claymores in the game. However if this was to much coding etc maybe deploy them during the set up phase similar to a traditional minefield. The triggerman could be the squad that has the claymore in the special equipment area. (Maybe the team leader). Then unlike a traditional minefield the player could allow the two man OpFor scout team to pass by the location of the claymore but set it off when the main force enters the kill zone. Maybe engineers would have a certain ability to spot and disable them? Okay now I am just getting carried away.......... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I gather, too, that the game already models explosions/shrapnel in the patterns they historically tended towards, so directionality of effect might not be a "new" function needed in the engine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H1nd Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 Claymores certainly would give infantry more staying power when fighting from prepared positions. Main weakness of modern mechanized forces is the relatively modest manpower and thus very limited tolerance for casualties. If defending infantry can negate the tremendous fire superiority from mech enemy as well as its mobility (mines, terrain, fortifications, decoy position etc) it should force mech enemy to dismount. This places the dismounted infantry at risk from artillery and claymores. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delliejonut Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Ottawa agreement declares all tripwire triggered explosives as "ap-mines" but i dont know if uds had signed that agreement. Rus and ukr certainly have not and both have claymore analogues. In any case it might indeed be quite hard to model directional blast. As for the "triggerman" claymores could be assigned under individual infantry squads that act as the triggerman. It is a squad level weapon after all. I picture a claymore as kind of a wide-spread CAN round. There's a powerful explosive effect to be sure, but most of the killing power is in the ball bearings. They fly in a 60 degree cone away from the blast, doing the most damage around 50 meters but still dangerous to 100. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.