John Kettler Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 I know that foxholes are in the game and that people are working on trenches, but is there any way to get foxholes with overhead cover into CM? Having been the particular object of lots of American artillery fire (thanks, Black Sabot!) while dug-in inside a tree line, I have become a huge fan of improved foxholes. I've learned to hate treebursts. On a related note, I see that though a tank can be dug in by the scenario designer, I was shocked to discover that this tank can't be moved at all. What tank commander in his right mind, assuming his vehicle worked, would ever willingly deprive himself of his mobility? Can this be fixed? The tank should be able to back out of the firing position even when dug in. Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 I agree with John. I'd like improved foxholes and trenches. Essentially, they'd be like bunkers for regular troops, that they could move into and out of, instead of simply something like an immobilized vehicle. Hell, I'd also like to see concrete pillboxes that troops could hide in, too. Of course, this is essentially what light and heavy buildings already are, but it just doesn't look right making a Siegfried Line out of churches, besides the fact that you can't put buildings in the same tiles as woods and such. I have the same problem with dug-in vehicles, as well. If the vehicle can't get out, how did it get in? I thought the standard procedure was to dig a wedge-shaped pit with the sloped part like a ramp, so the vehicle could drive in and out at will. Sure, the Germans often used dismounted tank turrets on concrete bases as a type of pillbox, but that is not the same thing as digging in a vehicle. This was actually a type of permanent fortification never intended to move. ------------------ -Bullethead It was a common custom at that time, in the more romantic females, to see their soldier husbands and sweethearts as Greek heroes, instead of the whoremongering, drunken clowns most of them were. However, the Greek heroes were probably no better, so it was not so far off the mark--Flashman [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 06-27-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Jonh, covered foxholes would be a nice touch. Maybe in the future. The dug in tanks aren't what you are thinking. The Germans would sometimes bury a tank all the way upto the turret. Placed in the right place it is deadly. Hard to spot, hard to hit, almost impossible to destory. Granted the crew would have to be fanatics. Because it is a suicide mission. no escape route. I know you are talking of tankers building earthern walls in front of their tanks to provide them a hull down defensive status on all sides, except for a back slope to back out of. I think this would be a great idea. Basicaly a big tank foxhole. I'm just not sure how CM's code would handle the driving in and out of it. I think thats the problem. Lorak ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apoc Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Can't one make tank boxes/positions by making an open frame stone wall? ======= | |........| | | |TANK| | | |........| | | |........| | Sometime like that! I know my artistic abilities are sad, but no need to reinforce something I already know Oh boy, no fixed pitched fonts here... *cry* [This message has been edited by Apoc (edited 06-27-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted June 28, 2000 Share Posted June 28, 2000 Apoc, That would be nice. A scenario designer could offer a few of those placed in decent places for a defensive map. Then it would be up to the player to use them or not. Pretty good idea, just wish there was something mobile that could be used. Lorak ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted July 8, 2000 Author Share Posted July 8, 2000 BTS, The search engine wrongly credits this thread to Bullethead. I started it. Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 The Search feature does not actually "credit" the thread to anyone; rather it lists the author of the first post with a match to your search criteria in a given thread. Creating hull defilade with dozer blades and other digging means was common for the defense, and still is. The wall is a nice "field expedient" but digging in was more effective, since the earth itself was your cover. The little berm piled up around the hole from the digging is nice concealment, but not terribly effective cover. Bullethead has described it well. Such digs can be interesting to back out of under fire, though, when it's bug-out time. [This message has been edited by Mark IV (edited 07-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 I also would like to see trenches, improved foxholes, etc. Also on my list: Fortified houses. Resitant to heavier firepower. Cant be entered so easily. Dugouts. Especially on the Eastern Front the troops would dig under knocked out tanks. sandbag the road wheels. Empty out gas tanks. Maybe fill the tanks with dirt/sandbags? If the tank had a belly entrance, then they would make excellent OPs. Slit trench. Ability to construct during game. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter Posted July 9, 2000 Share Posted July 9, 2000 Lewis, Good points, and I was right with you there until you added ... "Ability to construct during game". Slit trenches will sure be necessary for CM2 (and might even be a useful patch for CM1) but I doubt you could dig one in an hour (I have done it, it is hard work!). Now for troops left in defence and not engaged during a particular battle of an OPERATION....maybe we have some options? Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted July 9, 2000 Share Posted July 9, 2000 LOL Next time dont dig one into concrete. Seriously you are probably thinking of something else. A slit trench is a hasty fighting position that is just deep enough to lay down in and have some cover to the front. Depending on terrain, it would only take minutes at most since you are moving top soil. I have dug two man infantry fighting positions and they do take quite a while. Lrewis [This message has been edited by :USERNAME: (edited 07-09-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter Posted July 10, 2000 Share Posted July 10, 2000 LOL, OK, confusion about terminology. We call the quick one a 'shell scrape' and the slit trench is the real deal. Should you be able to dig a shell scrape in 30 minutes, hell yeah! Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasj Posted July 10, 2000 Share Posted July 10, 2000 I must be a difference in Service Branch terms Bruce. I know for sure the Army term is Shell scrap *also known as a hasty fighting position*, the slit trench *also known as improved fighting position*, and then the ever so popular with the troops, two man fighting position with or without overhead cover. I do not however know/remember the terms used by the other Service Branches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts