Normandy bocage hedges impassable? Really?

[PEB14]

On 8/14/2024 at 1:33 PM, Ithikial_AU said:

The colonies are doing alright actually...

Well done, Aussies, sounds like French climate do them well!

[PEB14]

Back to topic, there's an important element about bocage combat that the game completely fails to reproduce (and the mapmakers can't do much about it): the road width.

In CM roads (and distance between hedgerows) is MUCH to big. It changes a lot the battle dynamics (LOS, possibility for vehicles to bypass wrecks, etc.).

Obviously this is because of the map's square size.

[PEB14]

On 8/13/2024 at 6:44 PM, WimO said:

As a scenario player, I have sometimes given up playing existing campaigns due to the issue under discussion, i.e. that there was an absence of a reasonable number of gaps forcing the player's infantry to follow historically unrealistic lines of approach. At times I considered unpacking and editing the campaign maps but in the absence of being able to extract the Campaign text file that determines replacements etc, I avoided doing so.

@Ithikial_AU

I've paid tribute to the first maps of the "We start here" campaign, but I must confess that the map of the "Pouppeville" mission is as terrible as depicted by @WimO in the quote above. Long, gapless length of hedgerows… Even long, gapless length of low bocage… Worst, there is an area NW of Pouppeville where the fields have no entry AT ALL (no gap, no gate, not even a standard hedge or a low wall). Are the local farmers supposed to enter their fields and pasture lands using demo charges?

[JM Stuff]

I don t know if this wil be helpfull but this is a the real sizes of some tiles in terrain in CMBN.

 

and this is the sizes from some of them !

 

Edited August 18 by JM Stuff

[Vacillator]

5 hours ago, PEB14 said:

Are the local farmers supposed to enter their fields and pasture lands using demo charges?

Sounds like these are areas we didn't get to in testing .

[JM Stuff]

Are the local farmers supposed to enter their fields and pasture lands using demo charges?

1 minute ago, Vacillator said:

Sounds like these are areas we didn't get to in testing .

Yes, one day that I was playing CM, I dont saw any open hedges to enter in a empty square, that will let give me facility to conturn a german position, so there are probably hedges model in 3d not really appropriated, or the map designer dont was not paying attention to this ?

[Ithikial_AU]

9 hours ago, PEB14 said:

@Ithikial_AU

I've paid tribute to the first maps of the "We start here" campaign, but I must confess that the map of the "Pouppeville" mission is as terrible as depicted by @WimO in the quote above. Long, gapless length of hedgerows… Even long, gapless length of low bocage… Worst, there is an area NW of Pouppeville where the fields have no entry AT ALL (no gap, no gate, not even a standard hedge or a low wall). Are the local farmers supposed to enter their fields and pasture lands using demo charges?

Probably missed a few but there was also some intent in this mission, given the map size and force narrow enemy force dispersion, to railroad the player towards the objectives and avoid time wasting. ie. Use the roads to a greater extent as the US forced did that morning. Going on 60 minutes of contact spotting and not seeing a single German because you've wondered all over the map isn't fun for the player and I'd probably have complaints now for other reasons  . The other option was to disperse the German forces across the map, which wouldn't be historically accurate. In this vicinity the Germans largely remained bottled up in their strongpoints and villages on the morning of 6th of June. Artistic license to speed things up a touch was the name of the game in this one - and keep the player somewhat following the historical routes taken by the US forces.

 

[PEB14]

5 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

Probably missed a few but there was also some intent in this mission, given the map size and force narrow enemy force dispersion, to railroad the player towards the objectives and avoid time wasting. ie. Use the roads to a greater extent as the US forced did that morning. Going on 60 minutes of contact spotting and not seeing a single German because you've wondered all over the map isn't fun for the player and I'd probably have complaints now for other reasons  . The other option was to disperse the German forces across the map, which wouldn't be historically accurate. In this vicinity the Germans largely remained bottled up in their strongpoints and villages on the morning of 6th of June. Artistic license to speed things up a touch was the name of the game in this one - and keep the player somewhat following the historical routes taken by the US forces.

 

I get (part of) your point: the intent is clear (channel the player towards the German), but the intent itself sounds strange to me: the scenario goal is not to track and chase the enemy but to occupy and touch various locations, whether they are occupied or not. From this point of view, I don't understand the purpose to channel the player towards the enemy: the player is supposed to know where he's going, independantly of the enemy actual positions!  As a player I feel frustrated by this terrain feature, because I lose some attack options (I wanted to manoeuvre Pouppeville's eastern end from my left flank, which is completely blocked by these closed fields - so I know have to redeploy my troops and make another move).

Additionnally, the briefing is clear regarding the fact that Germans are supposed to be hidden in the urban areas.

As this map design makes the north side of Pouppeville basically useless, and as there are no objectives in this area, why not just make the map smaller but cutting dow<n the North side?

Just for the fun, I'm 30 minutes into the scenario and have indeed had only very distant contact with enemy troops running far, far away...

[Ithikial_AU]

6 hours ago, PEB14 said:

As this map design makes the north side of Pouppeville basically useless, and as there are no objectives in this area, why not just make the map smaller but cutting dow<n the North side?

Just for the fun, I'm 30 minutes into the scenario and have indeed had only very distant contact with enemy troops running far, far away...

Ahhhhh... keep playing. Forces coming of the beach.

[PEB14]

On 8/19/2024 at 1:56 PM, Ithikial_AU said:

Ahhhhh... keep playing. Forces coming of the beach.

Don't worry I will. And as I gave up the Utah Beach scenario they should show up late…

I just need more time to blast the whole jungle-like, impenetrable bocage to get my way through!

[Sgt Joch]

Personally I do not see an issue. "Bocage" in CMBN works as well as could be expected given the limitations of the CMx2 system.

This is how the U.S. Army described Normandy 1944 "Bocage" :

Quote

For centuries, Norman farmers had followed the practice of enclosing the plots of their arable land, pastures as well as orchards, with thick hedgerows. The hedgerow country in the U.S. sector started about ten miles inland from the Normandy beaches and extended in a wide swath from Caumont on the American left to the western coast of the Cotentin Peninsula. The hedgerows are sturdy embankments, half earth, half hedge. At their base, they resemble dirt parapets and vary in thickness from one to four feet, with heights that range from three to 15 fifteen feet. Growing out of this earthen wall is a hedge that consists of small trees and tangles of vines and brush. This vegetation has a thickness of between one to three feet and varies in height from three to fifteen feet. Originally intended to serve as fences to mark land boundaries, to keep in livestock, and to prevent the erosion of the the land by sea winds, the hedgerows surround each field, breaking the terrain into numerous walled enclosures. Because the fields are small, about 200 by 400 yards in size, and usually irregular in shape, the hedgerows are numerous and set in no logical pattern. Each field has an opening in the hedgerow that permits access for humans, livestock, and farm equipment. For passage to fields that are not adjacent to regular highways, numerous wagon trails run through the hedgerows.

Doubler, "Busting the Bocage: American Combined Arms Operations in France, 6 June-31 July 1944, (pp. 14-15)

Doubler-Bocage.PDF (army.mil)

Now I have no doubt that infantrymen using simple tools could easily make a hole through a "Bocage" hedge that they could fit through in a few minutes, but you have to consider the tactical/command restrictions. If soldiers/scouts come upon a bocage hedge for the first time, they have to 1) recon where any gaps/holes may be, 2) discuss the approach with the CO, 3) make a gap or hole that they can fit the squad/platoon/company and equipment through. All this takes time.

Now all the tools are available to make all possible variations: Bocage, Low Bocage, Hedges and gaps for all of them. So you want to make it hard, use Bocage with no/few gaps, you want to make it easy or simulate a Bocage Field which has been reconned, prepped and an attack plan worked out before hand, use lots of gaps and/or engineers with demo charges.

All the tools are there for scenario makers to use.

 

Edited September 10 by Sgt Joch

[PEB14]

1 hour ago, Sgt Joch said:

Personally I do not see an issue. "Bocage" in CMBN works as well as could be expected given the limitations of the CMx2 system.

This is how the U.S. Army described Normandy 1944 "Bocage" :

Doubler, "Busting the Bocage: American Combined Arms Operations in France, 6 June-31 July 1944, (pp. 14-15)

Doubler-Bocage.PDF (army.mil)

Now I have no doubt that infantrymen using simple tools could easily make a hole through a "Bocage" hedge that they could fit through in a few minutes, but you have to consider the tactical/command restrictions. If soldiers/scouts come upon a bocage hedge for the first time, they have to 1) recon where any gaps/holes may be, 2) discuss the approach with the CO, 3) make a gap or hole that they can fit the squad/platoon/company and equipment through. All this takes time.

Now all the tools are available to make all possible variations: Bocage, Low Bocage, Hedges and gaps for all of them. So you want to make it hard, use Bocage with no/few gaps, you want to make it easy or simulate a Bocage Field which has been reconned, prepped and an attack plan worked out before hand, use lots of gaps and/or engineers with demo charges.

All the tools are there for scenario makers to use.

 

I agree (except, probably, for the low bocage hedge, which is treated differently in CMBN than in other game, which is neither necessary nor logical).

That's basically what I told in my first post:

Quote

NB: CMBN allows the designers to model both impassable and permeable hedges, thanks to the holes concept, so this post is absolutely no attack against the game!

Hence no issue with the tools, the problem is how the scenario makers use them. And BP2 is a perfect example, with some nice looking maps (like Ste-Marie-du-Mont) and some crazy stuff (like Pouppeville).

And if you want beautiful and very real looking bocage, go and see @George MC's map here: