Vetch Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 Did a search but couldn't find the answer to this one. Do overlapping minefields provide a better chance that someone walking in a given piece of terrain will step on a mine? Or is overlapping two (or more) minefields a waste of resources? In other words, can minefields "stack" to increase the mine density in a given piece of terrain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyamoto Musashi Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vetch: In other words, can minefields "stack" to increase the mine density in a given piece of terrain? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That would seem to make sense, but I've done it both ways and it doesn't seem to make much difference. I've come to the personal conclusion that your resources are better used by trying to cover a wider area with the minefields (and using them to either funnel or corral the enemy or by placing the fields in spots where you know the enemy wants to come through, such as the middle of the map near the road on VoT). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 1, 2000 Share Posted June 1, 2000 Yes you can "stack" them if you wish, but it's generally more effective not to. One minefield effectively "denies" that spot to the enemy. Adding more doesn't deny it "extra". Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted June 1, 2000 Share Posted June 1, 2000 I was screwing around last night and placed about a dozen anti-personal minefields overlapping each other about as close as I could (usually you can get 3 close together, 1 in the middle and one each overlapping the outer edges) and then i marched a US company straight into the field. OH MY GOD! The Horror!!! in short, YES it makes a difference. When a unit walks through a single minefield they will commonly only take a single casuality. In my HIGH DENSITY field, unit were taking 4 and 5 casulties! They would take 1 or 2 and some would break and run and set off more and more mines as they ran away. VERY GORY! I LOVED IT! So yes, it makes a difference! Didn't test on mine clearing of a high density field though. Also as Charles say's, minefields are defensive area denial weapons and untilizing them in this way is a waste of resources. You should use them to CHANNEL thew enemy where you want them and not count on them to casue large amounts of casulties... Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex Proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-31-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted June 1, 2000 Share Posted June 1, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I was screwing around last night and placed about a dozen anti-personal minefields overlapping each other about as close as I could (usually you can get 3 close together, 1 in the middle and one each overlapping the outer edges) and then i marched a US company straight into the field.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is the sort of thing I am most anxious to have the full version's editor for. Gawd, this brings back memories of Myth and piling up dozens of sack charges under dozens of wights, then putting the rest of my army all around the area, then having the wights mass suicide, just to see if any bloody chunks would reach the edge of the map..... ------------------ -Bullethead jtweller@delphi.com WW2 AFV Photos: people.delphi.com/jtweller/tanks/tanks.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts