Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd like to know too. The manuals seems to mention nothing about this at all. I have found some useful info in old posts here on the forum, but an official explanation of how exactly minefields, detection and marking works would be nice.

There is some info in these old posts:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good detailed explanations of how to detect minefields - and the limitations of sappers/engineers in detecting mines. SORRY! Just clicked you already linked that one. For some reason I know can't delete the link. One below might clarify some more issues not covered in this above thread.

And the above should answer your questions - hopefully.

Edited by George MC
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to detect minefields other than 1) walking into one and getting blown up - so use inf for that not valuable engineers, or 2) if you KNOW where a minefield is, an engineer can mark it by sitting next (or in) it for a period.  The more experienced the engineers, the faster the sign goes up.  But, no one can clear a minefield other than a mine-clearing tank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can find the mines with either regular infantry or engineers (they might do it bit faster) but it takes a lot of time. Usually several turns for single mine tile and it is chance based effect so there is lots of variance. But yes, in principle you can find the mines without getting anyone killed first. Best thing is to have your infantry/engineers crawl into the suspected minefield with slow movement and have them wait in situ for few turns until they find the mines. 

However in practice this takes too much time plus you need to have pretty good idea where the mines could be before you can even attempt to find them and then mark them as mentioned above.

Mines and engineers in general have been discussed before and I myself as an engineer find the whole subsection of the game seriously lacking. Good thing to remember is that even if you manage to find and then mark the minefields, the marked mine field is still dangerous: vehicles can't get through marked minefields and infantry should only move through slowly or risk injury. Hunt might be the second best alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, H1nd said:

You can find the mines with either regular infantry or engineers (they might do it bit faster) but it takes a lot of time. Usually several turns for single mine tile and it is chance based effect so there is lots of variance. But yes, in principle you can find the mines without getting anyone killed first. Best thing is to have your infantry/engineers crawl into the suspected minefield with slow movement and have them wait in situ for few turns until they find the mines. 

However in practice this takes too much time plus you need to have pretty good idea where the mines could be before you can even attempt to find them and then mark them as mentioned above.

Mines and engineers in general have been discussed before and I myself as an engineer find the whole subsection of the game seriously lacking. Good thing to remember is that even if you manage to find and then mark the minefields, the marked mine field is still dangerous: vehicles can't get through marked minefields and infantry should only move through slowly or risk injury. Hunt might be the second best alternative.

As a field artilleryman, the whole UXO system is seriously lacking in game, I agree. 

I would have thought that the HUNT function could be used by sappers/engineers to hunt for minefields. But then I guess I get the idea behind a minefield taking longer to detect and therefore requiring a unit to remain, more or less, stationary until it is detected. I guess knowing that they can be detected, helps. With that in mind, I'm going to playaround with a scenario that I just so happened to know where the minefield is. Once I do, I'll make a new post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with niall. CM, whether x1 or x2 has always been about (relatively) small scale engagements. The kind of massive minefields that required hours of detection and/or clearance is outside of it's remit. I think the way the game handles "nuisance value" small minefields is spot on. Our troops stumble into them, the sappers/engineers/pioneers "Mark" them, then we carefully move through them. Sounds spot on for WW2 small unit actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, niall78 said:

I think the portrayal of minefields is quite good. I find clearing minefields to be outside the scope of CM in any case. Never once have I read of anyone properly hand clearing a minefield while under direct fire - it simply doesn't happen at the pointy edge of a battle.

Well, my reference is an old friend, who served with the engineers in the Bundeswehr. He always used to say, that they could not even clear a training minefield under training conditions a few weeks after it was layed. Incorrect, or better not sufficiently precise, mine lay plans and soil movement made it impossible to find all mines.

Imagine that without plan, with 60 year older equipment, in the dark, under time pressure, with people shooting at you. Certainly no room for substantial clearing work within the CM scale and time  frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

I have to agree with niall. CM, whether x1 or x2 has always been about (relatively) small scale engagements. The kind of massive minefields that required hours of detection and/or clearance is outside of it's remit. I think the way the game handles "nuisance value" small minefields is spot on. Our troops stumble into them, the sappers/engineers/pioneers "Mark" them, then we carefully move through them. Sounds spot on for WW2 small unit actions.

Maybe it is about small scale to you but I myself and many others enjoy 1.5h+ long battalion level battles with multiple tactical phases where tactical breaching of minefields is relevant. Especially in modern settings. In ww2 tittles I can overlook it to a certain degree but in CMBS it is a glaring deficiency that limits the scenario design almost entirely to meeting engagements or unprepared blocking actions. Anyone that states otherwise simply does no grasp the magnitude and relevance of mine warfare in prepared defence and attacking them. Naturally mine warfare is never particularly pleasant or enjoyable as gameplay aspect so it is no wonder it is at the bottom of priorities for devs. We would not want to ruin our gameplay experience with too much realism now would we?

Removal of AT-mines is probably the biggest headache since in reality it is pretty quickly done once you have located them. AP-mines are also quickly removed once you locate them but they are usually more numerous and much much more dangerous. SO since we already can mark the minefields which is in real life the nro1 most time consuming thing in mine removal, why cant we just remove or defuse them as well? We also have to remember that CMx2 battles are already faster than real life battles so mine removal could also be accelerated a bit.

-H1nd

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, niall78 said:

I think the portrayal of minefields is quite good. I find clearing minefields to be outside the scope of CM in any case. Never once have I read of anyone properly hand clearing a minefield while under direct fire - it simply doesn't happen at the pointy edge of a battle.

Tell that to Finnish combat engineers... we drilled combat breaching days on end with bangalore torpedoes. In ww2 engineers were often called to breach fortified positions and in addition to busting bunkers i'm pretty sure it involved lots of mine defusal and breaching. And that is also a thing to remember: all you need to do is deactivate mines. It was quite commonplace to quickly remove detonators but leave the mine itself in place in case of boobytraps. Once again.. finding the mines is the hard thing. Removing or deactivating them is the easy and fast thing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread reads like we are talking across each over slightly different topics.

Clearing minefields in the sense of making the are entirely safe to one day be returned to farming or urban development (i.e. get them all up and or destroyed) is something that will not be happening even in a 4 hour CM battle.  Hence the out of scope comments.  On the other hand cutting a path Xm wide for an assault quick and dirty using bangalore torpedoes or flail vehicles or explosives is something that would be in scope.  Currently in CMBN we have flail tanks but no bangalore torpedoes nor away to simulate them.  We also have the mine marking and in addition we have artillery but that's not really a sure thing.  In CMBS we have nothing at all besides marking AP mines. 

Right now we either have no tools or insufficient tools (depending on the title) to simulate the methods armies have to deal with mines at the pointy end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't often see mines used as 'genuine' belts of minefields in the game because the gameplay just comes to a halt. Its rather like battleship and Xylophone rocket artillery in that way. You use it a couple times just to witness its effect, but since it badly unbalances gameplay you avoid it. Using mines as 'booby traps' at a crossroads or obvious maneuver point is more common. All bets are off playing QB against a human opponent, of course. He might just spent ALL his points on mines and artillery rockets! Though he'd have difficulty finding anyone to play a second game with him.  ;) 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, H1nd said:

Tell that to Finnish combat engineers... we drilled combat breaching days on end with bangalore torpedoes. In ww2 engineers were often called to breach fortified positions and in addition to busting bunkers i'm pretty sure it involved lots of mine defusal and breaching. And that is also a thing to remember: all you need to do is deactivate mines. It was quite commonplace to quickly remove detonators but leave the mine itself in place in case of boobytraps. Once again.. finding the mines is the hard thing. Removing or deactivating them is the easy and fast thing.

 

I might be mistaken but I thought the main use of the Bangalore torpedo was to clear wire obstacles without directly approaching them under fire? 

I can see how they might detonate mines but I've never heard of them being deployed with mine clearance as their primary objective. 

We are of course missing them from the game even if their use would probably be limited to assault scenarios on emplaced positions by specialist assault squads - as per their historical use.

Personally I don't see guys sitting in minefields screwing out detonators under fire after sniffing out the mines in the first place as very realistic. Again it's not something I've ever heard of anyone doing under fire and not something I'd expect to achieve more than we can already achieve in game in any case - a relatively safe path if care is taken.

In game I usually just avoid minefields unless it's a very long timed game and I had ages to pick my way though it safely or the minefield is completely unavoidable in which case I factored in casualties as part of the scenario expectations. Just as was the case in real life I'd assume.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I don't often see mines used as 'genuine' belts of minefields in the game because the gameplay just comes to a halt. Its rather like battleship and Xylophone rocket artillery in that way. You use it a couple times just to witness its effect, but since it badly unbalances gameplay you avoid it. Using mines as 'booby traps' at a crossroads or obvious maneuver point is more common. All bets are off playing QB against a human opponent, of course. He might just spent ALL his points on mines and artillery rockets! Though he'd have difficulty finding anyone to play a second game with him.  ;) 

 

In my mind we see tactical minefields in CM. Hastily laid affairs by the local forces. They'd displace a lot of this stuff if they moved position. Proper minefields laid by engineers are out of the scope of CM because - as you say - a mission wouldn't be fun played with the whole map covered in 'professionally' laid mines.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, niall78 said:

I might be mistaken but I thought the main use of the Bangalore torpedo was to clear wire obstacles without directly approaching them under fire? 

I can see how they might detonate mines but I've never heard of them being deployed with mine clearance as their primary objective. 

 

Yes obstacle clearing is the original use of ww2 bangalore torpedoes. How ever similar devices are used even today to clear mines and obstacles. I dont know if there is a better word to describe them in english. Finnish word for them is "putkiraivain" which directly translates as "pipe like machine used in demining" so I prefer to use the the "bangalore torbedo". Other translations could be "pipe explosives" or "breaching pipe" or something like that. The "modern" bangalore torpedo is 20-40 meters long and is assembled in situ from smaller 2m long pieces. It is pushed manually or by AFV into the minefield and then detonated to clear a roughly 1m wide path across.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, H1nd said:

Yes, I missed StieliAlphas comment entirely (probably posted it while i was writing) so I was not responding to it.

Yes, my Point was indeed, if those guys could not clear mines properly under controlled conditions on a tactical level, there is no chance to do something "meaningful" under combat conditions on the micro-tactical level. 

In CMBN, it's good enough for me to flail through with a Crocodile. Which certainly leaves some mines behind for the following infantry. Sounds realistic enough for me.

If there are no similar tools in CMBS, it indeed sounds like an issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The mechanical elements needed to have mine clearance using extensible tubes filled with HE are already there, as can be seen by the fact that it is occasionally possible to arrange sympathetic detonation of mines when using Demo Charges to breach linear obstacles (if the obstacle is close enough to the mined AS). All it needs is for the "Blast" command to be valid in any AS, not just ones with breachable obstacles.

A quick Google reveals assertions that the original intent of the Bangalore Torpedo's designer was to neutralise booby traps/UXO, while going on to imply that the primary use changed in WW1 when barbed wire became the primary obstacle to be defeated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, H1nd said:

Maybe it is about small scale to you but I myself and many others enjoy 1.5h+ long battalion level battles with multiple tactical phases where tactical breaching of minefields is relevant. 

 

 

I find your omission of my use of "(relatively)", whether deliberate or not, somewhat baffling. I think my views on the game's scale match those expressed by BFC on Page 16 of the Beyond Overlord manual. Where the difference between CM and previous "click fest" games is discussed. Therefore your assumption that I don't enjoy long, or larger battles is wide of the mark, as I regard all of them as being (relatively) small scale.

In the meantime I stand by my comment that the game handles WW2 minefields accurately. As for CMBS, if I want to know how it handles minefields I will use the Black Sea Forum NOT the Final Blitzkrieg one   

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

I find your omission of my use of "(relatively)", whether deliberate or not, somewhat baffling. I think my views on the game's scale match those expressed by BFC on Page 16 of the Beyond Overlord manual. Where the difference between CM and previous "click fest" games is discussed. Therefore your assumption that I don't enjoy long, or larger battles is wide of the mark, as I regard all of them as being (relatively) small scale.

In the meantime I stand by my comment that the game handles WW2 minefields accurately. As for CMBS, if I want to know how it handles minefields I will use the Black Sea Forum NOT the Final Blitzkrieg one   

I accept that your opinion differs from mine and I probably came forward too harshly in my comment. Lets just leave that at that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 8/29/2016 at 4:03 AM, niall78 said:

I think the portrayal of minefields is quite good. I find clearing minefields to be outside the scope of CM in any case. Never once have I read of anyone properly hand clearing a minefield while under direct fire - it simply doesn't happen at the pointy edge of a battle.

I would have to disagree and refer you to the book entitled "The Anvil of War" which was written by several German commanders on the Eastern Front. The book itself is about military improvisations during offensive and defensive operations. There are several sources which point to German engineers moving with combat units in order to perform DETECTION and MARKING them for clearance later on, which is what I would like to see done in game.  I agree that mine clearance would not take place until after or before the engagement, however marking and route clearance absolutely occurred before, during, and after combat operations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I believe that engineer/sapper units should have an ability called "Detect mines" that slows them to a crawl, they cannot return while detecting mines, and when detected, the mines are MARKED (keyword). There absolutely exists precedence for this occurring while under fire before and during World War II, and while time consuming is not the same as the clearing of a minefield.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...