Trenches, and protection

[Armorgunner]

In hilly, and sometimes other terrain, trenches often sink down. But are they still giving the same protection, as they are on flat ground? When they look like they should. If you put a unit there?

 

 

 

 

 

[Armorgunner]

One thing more. Can I change the direction of the trench, without adding Another trench? And in that case, how?

[Erwin]

IIRC trenches give same protection regardless of terrain (altho terrain itself may add something).

 

[MikeyD]

You need two trench lengths (or lengths of barbed wire) at minimum in order to orient the trench the way you want. You can then take away the extra trench and *hopefully* the one remaining will stay in the position you want.

Trench protection is abstracted though its hard to say what is being abstracted and how much. When I did a quick test of them in CMSF2 awhile back the trenches seemed to be giving the same amount of protection as the in-ground 'ditches', in that if you aren't cowering in the bottom of the trench you're likely to get shot in the head while trying to engage the enemy.

[Armorgunner]

19 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

You need two trench lengths (or lengths of barbed wire) at minimum in order to orient the trench the way you want. You can then take away the extra trench and *hopefully* the one remaining will stay in the position you want.

Trench protection is abstracted though its hard to say what is being abstracted and how much. When I did a quick test of them in CMSF2 awhile back the trenches seemed to be giving the same amount of protection as the in-ground 'ditches', in that if you aren't cowering in the bottom of the trench you're likely to get shot in the head while trying to engage the enemy.

The first part of your anwser. Don´t work, if I take one away, It returns to it´s original stance.

The second part:  Though fun to read. Was not an answer, to my other question?

Edited February 24, 2020 by Armorgunner

[Armorgunner]

19 minutes ago, Erwin said:

IIRC trenches give same protection regardless of terrain (altho terrain itself may add something).

 

It was not the terrain itself, I was talking about. But the trenches sinking down, to almost invisible. And if I, put a pixeltruppen there. Will this unit be as protected, as a unit in a trench. Where the trenche is on totaly flat grounnd

[Erwin]

My understanding is that a trench is a trench is a trench and give "x" amount of protection no matter where placed or what it may look like.

[Armorgunner]

1 minute ago, Erwin said:

My understanding is that a trench is a trench is a trench and give "x" amount of protection no matter where placed or what it may look like.

Mine too. But with a platoon, above the trenches. Like there was no trenches. becouse the trenches is sucked down in to the hill/mountain. I just want to know, if they still offer the same protection. Even if the pixeltroppen are on top of them, not in them 

[Erwin]

I see what you are getting at.  I don't have an answer to that.  However, I can tell you that the CM system is not WYSIWYG regardless of what some claim.  There are graphics effects in CM that may or may not be reflected in how the engine calculates results - ie: some in-game graphic effects are eye candy only, others visuals do affect how things happen in the game.  

[MikeyD]

Oh oh! One thing I just thought. The 'half buried trenches' on hillsides at setup may not be buried during gameplay. I just looked at the CMFI scenario 'Riva Ridge' which has lots of German trenches on a mountainside. During setup they appeared half buried in the terrain. Once you hit 'go' the trenches become entirely visible

[com-intern]

2 hours ago, Erwin said:

I see what you are getting at.  I don't have an answer to that.  However, I can tell you that the CM system is not WYSIWYG regardless of what some claim. 

If anyone has played tabletop wargames like Warhammer 40k  - Flames of War - etc.. Those are a pretty good approximation of what is happening in engine.

Whether a figure is hit is WYSIWYG. A bullet must intersect the model for a hit to occur. However, once a figure his hit they then get a cover-save and armor-save (in modern). What this means is that if a solider is in a trench they can be hit multiple times, but as long as they make their cover save they will not be wounded.

So while being in a trench is inherently more protective than non-trench terrain due to the cover-save a badly placed trench would allow more WYSISWYG hits meaning that more dice must be thrown. If a soldier has a 66% save that is pretty good, but if his physical place in the world  allows him to be hit by 20 bullets he would be better off with a 33% save and better physicial position

 

 

19 hours ago, Armorgunner said:

Mine too. But with a platoon, above the trenches. Like there was no trenches. becouse the trenches is sucked down in to the hill/mountain. I just want to know, if they still offer the same protection. Even if the pixeltroppen are on top of them, not in them  

They would (well should) receive the cover-save from trench terrain. However, the trench model would not prevent them from being hit - so they would be more vulnerable than men prorperly in a trench.

[Xorg_Xalargsky]

It's possible to design a map so that trenches are sunk appropriately. I assume that makes them far more defensible, albeit with the disadvantage of revealing their position through the depression in the ground.

[RockinHarry]

So far I´d fairly good results with sunken trenches (-1m blue ditch locked). Usually the terrain mesh is the best cover vs. direct fire, but sunken trenches don´t give that much further protection vs. indirect fire. Though I haven´t experienced one yet, that sinking down of fortification objects into the ground might reveal some bug, like the one for pillboxes when sunken ones get vulnerable to any sort of Arty. Big problem in V4 currently.

FOV could be bits of an issue vs human players, but not when playing vs the AIP. Some clever map edits still could make a human player guess about sunken trenches, but placing unoccupied dummy positions would be a further option. QB map makers can take this into consideration by adding a good number of ditch locked terrain just for that purpose.

[DougPhresh]

When trenches are on uneven terrain I often wonder if the 2ft protruding above ground on a single side does any good. IIRC hits by small arms are modeled on a per-pixel scale and not abstracted, meaning that those trenches are not doing much if anything.

[domfluff]

On 2/25/2020 at 3:22 PM, Erwin said:

I see what you are getting at.  I don't have an answer to that.  However, I can tell you that the CM system is not WYSIWYG regardless of what some claim.  There are graphics effects in CM that may or may not be reflected in how the engine calculates results - ie: some in-game graphic effects are eye candy only, others visuals do affect how things happen in the game.  

It's not *just* WYSIWYG, and that's an important distinction.

We know, for example, that line of sight and line of fire work differently. That line of sight is based on a system similar to Advanced Squad Leader, with intervening terrain tiles abstracting "hindrance", but the actual firing solution is calculated 1:1. The results of a hit are then subject to abstraction, including what we assume to be some kind of "saving throw".

This flitting between 1:1 representation and abstraction is something of an ugly marriage - it'd definitely be easier to abstract more and represent less, since having a man to man representation means you can see when things don't play out as assumed (like moving into the "wrong" door).

[snarre]

i think there is bug on ground tiles , if you place trecnh to long grass, wheat field and place your camera high altitude . you can see trench line shape on that field . 

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, snarre said:

i think there is bug on ground tiles , if you place trecnh to long grass, wheat field and place your camera high altitude . you can see trench line shape on that field . 

Yeah so much for not having trenches dig into the ground because of fog of war issues...

[snarre]

i mean this , you can see shape of trench line on ground.

Edited March 2, 2020 by snarre

[Armorgunner]

7 hours ago, snarre said:

i mean this , you can see shape of trench line on ground.

ouch, thats a new one to mee. Only in long grass though?

Edited March 2, 2020 by Armorgunner

[Freyberg]

I'm reminded of a Bob Newhart sketch or an old joke about a doctor.

Edited March 2, 2020 by Freyberg

[snarre]

at least this type of field , im not test all different ground types. it can all sou delete fir-trees on some cases. I hope that some beta tester can catch this up.

Edited March 3, 2020 by snarre

[Aquila-SmartWargames]

On 2/25/2020 at 7:28 PM, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

It's possible to design a map so that trenches are sunk appropriately. I assume that makes them far more defensible, albeit with the disadvantage of revealing their position through the depression in the ground.

I´m currently in a playthrough of dragonwynn´s CMRT Kursk campaign and I believe he did something similar in the 2nd scenario. Even with plenty of AFV support it was some of the hardest trenches I had to overcome so far. 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Aquila-SmartWargames