Freak Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 In a current pbem I am in, I decided to take a rifle platoon to a near by stone wall. My enemy is at about the same level as my troops are at the stone wall. My platoon is being fired at from a MG team and a platoon at 425m at aprox the same level, and from a platoon at 215m away at aprox the same level. (the level looks the same). I am able to get clear LOS from my troops to my enemy, and my enemy has clear LOS to my troops. What I am wondering is, since I have yet to go a full turn under this condition (hiding behind the stone wall), my question is will my platoon suffer serious casualties in this condition? I know it is impossibe to know right now as it is war, but I want to expect concelment from this condition, not get blown away. I do not know how bad my casualty rate will be. I do not know how it is under this situation with a full turn going by. So I have a choice to move the units to a safer location. The only thing I do know is, I lost one soldier on the way to the wall of the 3 squads. I have supporting fire and few hmg teams, but I am just wondering about the conelement of fire behind a stone wall at the same level (or so, hard to tell exactly). If I am able to LOS is this a bad sign I am not being conceled behind the wall or protected? This is the stuff that I really need to know about walls and concelment. In the manual, it says that being behind a wall can even take on incoming tank fire becouse it is so thick at the same ground level. So in short I am conceled by the wall even thoough I have a LOS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 You will receive the benefits of cover from the wall, but not necessarily concealment. Just be sure that you are behind the wall, and not on it. If you are listed as on the wall, it means your troops are standing on it, not behind it. That is not good! ------------------ "Don't lie to me, Gustav! You're a stinkin' Mac user!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 As I understand it the wall porvides cover but not concealment, sort of the opposite of summer wheat which provides concealment but not cover. I could be wrong of course, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freak Posted February 9, 2001 Author Share Posted February 9, 2001 ok great! thanks guys for your replies! Ill give it a try and let you know my results! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 As far as cover goes, foxholes behind wall are about the best for protection from small arms. Troops taking cover there have a 0% exposure. This is an especially good place to put guns, because they can rotate faster than if they were in trees. Bad news is, foxholes in the open don't provide much cover or concealment from fighter bombers or VT arty. Oh, and if you want to use hedges (not bocage) for cover, your units must be in the hedge, not behind it. They don't give very much cover, though. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. -Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska [This message has been edited by 109 Gustav (edited 02-08-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freak Posted February 9, 2001 Author Share Posted February 9, 2001 Now I am wondering if I should hide my squads (behind the wall) or let them fire at the enemy, and let them make their own decisions regarding their protection by being behind the wall. hmmm...decisions decions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Freak, Last month, I did some tests concerning the benefits of being behind a wall. I put some german squads on defense behind a wall(in foxholes). I took the side of the americans about 100m away, some were on the ground(even with the germans) and some were on hills or on the second story of a building. The result is that I found the walls offer good concealment and good cover from all of the americans. In fact, some of the germans remained hidden for several turns dispite the fact that I had squads targeting the area. The original purpose of my test was to see if elevated squads had an advantage over squads that were level with the enemy. According to the exposure % displayed when targeting the Germans, the US squads on the hills and second story buildings did not have a difference. Sure, the Germans took some casualties, but the wall seemed to offer cover and concealment almost as good as a building. Keep in mind that the Germans were in fox holes. Your situation does not have foxholes, but your enemy is over 400 meters away, which means that they are in pretty good cover. If you order them to hide, they will probably disapear from the enemy (and save some ammo by not shooting back at a 400+m target) Hope I helped. [This message has been edited by Pak40 (edited 02-08-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I've never noticed that walls give much protection, or at least not nearly the protection I would expect. It seems to me that if men are pinned behind a stone wall, they should be impervious to just about any direct fire, even without foxholes. [This message has been edited by Leonidas (edited 02-08-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freak Posted February 9, 2001 Author Share Posted February 9, 2001 Leonidas: Yes, that is what I was hoping as well. I am not sure how this will work out but, we shall see. I mean, it seems if one is on its stomach behind a wall hiding, he should not be able to be shot from an enemy 200 and 400m away at roughly the same ground level. But this is CM and its not always modeled perfeclty...no matter...lets see how this works out...further input welcomed... [This message has been edited by Freak (edited 02-08-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Originally posted by Leonidas: I've never noticed that walls give much protection, or at least not nearly the protection I would expect. It seems to me that if men are pinned behind a stone wall, they should be impervious to just about any direct fire, even without foxholes. [This message has been edited by Leonidas (edited 02-08-2001).] They are. Their exposure to the enemy is 0%, which is pretty close to being impervious to DF. Try playing hotseat games against yourself, with one side behind a wall, and the other side shooting at them. You have to be within 15m of a wall to gain protection from it, IIRC. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. -Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts