Marco Bergman Posted October 8, 2000 Share Posted October 8, 2000 Could someone who has actual experience please tell me how foxholes and weapon pits are constructed? Are they really just a hole in the ground, or are they usually lined with sandbags or boards or something? The reason for this is that I was playing around with the foxhole texture (1209), with the aim of making it look more 3D, and also more obvious. The game doesn't show them untill you CAN see them, so I'd prefer them to stand out a bit more. I quickly made a version with a nice ring of sandbags which looks OK, but is it even approximatly true to life? I would add the picture to this post, but I can't figure out how to add a picture that isn't on a web-site to this message... ( and yes, I did read the FAQ. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest barrold713 Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 I cannot say how the game determines this but I would guess that it makes foxholes an abstraction as to any amount of additional protection added to the generic hole in the ground. I assume this is done with the idea that the extra protection provided is essentially insignificant in game terms to model this separately. In real life the defensive structures would grow exponentially with the amount of time spent working on them. I don't think this is modeled in CM which makes scenarios involving attacks against long established defensive walls make them seem not so formidable. Not that the defenders aren't capable of chewing up large numbers of units in these battles, but they don't have the appearance of menace that I would think they would have had in reality. For further information and probably some direct input from BTS, I would see what a search for earlier threads on defensive structures brings up. ------------------ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb discussing what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyShot Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 I think that texture (1209) may also be used as a shell crater, which would obviously cause some problems if you added sandbags and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhammer Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 One thing I must say I dislike about CM is that I can frequently spot the foxholes before I spot the troops, in my opinion, unrealistic. Dig a hole, get in, throw some branches over it...I would like to see a change that makes it so that you do not see an occupied foxhole until you spot the occupants. Make foxholes as spottable as men. The problem could be the "hide" command as you can't issue a "hide" command to a hole in the ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Bergman Posted October 9, 2000 Author Share Posted October 9, 2000 You are correct, LuckyShot. Turns out that the foxhole graphic is shared by very large shell holes, so a sand-bagged hole is out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wilhammer: One thing I must say I dislike about CM is that I can frequently spot the foxholes before I spot the troops, in my opinion, unrealistic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not so. Earthworks, especially of the hasty variety, are easily spotted due to the color of disturbed soil, etc. On the other hand, if the occupants are "laying low", you might well not see them until you are right up on them. And I should add that in playing the game, my troops often do not spot a foxhole until the troops occupying it open fire. Michael [This message has been edited by Michael emrys (edited 10-09-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacestick Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 Marco A firing pit is built in three stages and accomodates two men, first a 6'x2'trench is dug to a depth of 4' 6" perpendicular to direction of the enemy. Stage two involves the digging of two sleeping bays , one at either end of the fighting bay running towards the enemy so as to form a "u". The sleeping bays are dug to the same dimensions as the fighting bays and are provided with 18 inches of packed earth overhead protection. The overhead protection begins at ground level and extends downwards so that no silohette is visible above ground. Stage three involves revetting the fighting bay with corregated iron held in place with star pickets strained with tauntened wire. The 18 inches of packed earth provides protection from arty/mortar splinters, the revetment process strengthens the pitwall to prevent collapse from near arty misses Camouflage is progressive during all satges of the construction. The topsoil is put aside during the initial construction to be used in the last stage of concealment to cover the exposed spoil and the signs of earthworks. Excess spoil is sanbagged or removed from the site and dumped in places such as creek beds etc. Improvements are undertaken on an ongoing basis as time permits and includes digging sumps and drainage for the fighting bays and crawl trenches to join with the other pits in the platoon and the cutting of fire lanes so as to give clear view at ground level. The pit when complete is a 6' by 2' hole and should only be visible from a matter of feet to someone on the ground but is easily spotted from the air. To provide some form of concealment from the air a frame is constructed from light wood and covered with camouflaged hession Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 Don't forget a grenade sump! In the bottom of the fighting area you would dig another hole, about the diameter of an entrenching tool, on an angle, as deeply as you could. The theory was that an incoming grenade could be kicked down the hole and covered with the steel pot from your helmet. This was considered "better" than unassing the hole under heavy fire to escape a grenade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzai Bob Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 We were taught in the US Army you make 2 gernade sumps. One on either side of the foxhole, angled 45 degrees or so and as stated as deep as possible. If a gernade is chucked into your hole ya kick it in a sump and dive to the other side of the hole till it blows. if ya kicked one in and held a steel pot on the hole, I think you would kiss your paws goodbye. Just my 2 pfennings worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groundpounder Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Don't forget a grenade sump! In the bottom of the fighting area you would dig another hole, about the diameter of an entrenching tool, on an angle, as deeply as you could. The theory was that an incoming grenade could be kicked down the hole and covered with the steel pot from your helmet. This was considered "better" than unassing the hole under heavy fire to escape a grenade.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think the sump would work too well with the odd shape of the German "potato masher" type of grenade. Also a definite ixnay on the steel pot over it! That would add more schrapnel! groundpounder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43ordcoy Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 I think the quality of the foxholes all depends on the time you have to build them.i served with the british army,and didnt ever build any of the type some of you described.the holes i dug consisted of a 6'x2' hole, the excavated earth was used to boost the amount of cover in front of the trench.no grenade wells.and i'm sure the germans probaly did something different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 The time to build the foxholes as described above is usually beyond most of the actions you would see in the time frame that CM covers (for the Allies), with a few exceptions of some Siegfried Line "wait-outs". I've often heard of foxholes being only one to two foot deep. This is obviously not ideal, but depending on the ground conditions and exhaustion level of the troops, this happened quite a bit (on the advancing Allied side). Hopefully CM2 offers a couple of more levels of entrenchments. I heard a saying (in a desparately joking tone) that the Germans thought that the Russians could dig holes anywhere and anytime in a matter of minutes and once they had been in place for 24 hours you wouldn't be able to get them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted October 9, 2000 Share Posted October 9, 2000 In the Dutch army I have digged two types. The large one as described as the U form with frame,sump and sandbags(about 200 small ones) these were camouflaged in the country and you could not spot them from 50 meters away(earth that was left was thrown away a few meters from the hole,and if possible camouflaged as well.This took me and my buddy nearly 12 hours.And believe me there were guys very handy in camouflaging .The British troops were masters in it,once on a nato exercise we had to attack a british position and when we were about 100 meters away from there suspected position we saw the silhouets from some vehicles in the tree line turned out to be Chieftain tanks and with them was a referee who said that we were all killed.After that their supporting infantry showed up some of them were right in front of us (Hidden in normal grasslands) What we called a foxhole was nothing more than a small undeep digged out hole in front of your tent(about 40 cm deep where you could lay down during an attack and keep your head down)not very protective though and sure not to grenades or shells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts