GreenAsJade Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 From time to time you open up a scenario and the designer has put an ATG inside a sandbag emplacement - usually central near some key location (buildings etc). It looks "realistic" to the ignorant eye... as if that's really where someone would have put that kind of thing... but really is that so? What good does it do having an ATG inside a sandbag emplacement? Given choice, wouldn't it be better hiding off to the side dug in in even scattered trees? Do the sandbags offer any tangible advantage? Ta! GaJ. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucho Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 It gives the same advantage to units entrenched or hiding behind (in ) them as stone walls do. When an infantry unit hides behind it ( at least 15m next to it), it is seeable only to 0% (=100% cover). It is hard work to dislodge guns positioned from there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by GreenAsJade: Given choice, wouldn't it be better hiding off to the side dug in in even scattered trees?NOOOOOOOO!!! :eek: You'll just lose the benefits of the foxhole due to mortar airbursts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Scattered trees = death traps. Brush, Rough, even rocky terrain is better than trees... if you've got a foxhole. Walls and sandbags act a bit like a crest. If ou ever triedt to dislodge a gun from there, you'll see why. Suggest you try "A series of misfortunes". Dug in 25pdrs vs tanks. Read the comments in the scen forum about it. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Hah - well ... we're getting some insight into my ROW performance here, aren't we ... thanks for the info! What about woods? Does the concealment from woods outweigh the airburst problems (and others)? (I guess if you can be sure that you won't get mortared then that changes things?) GaJ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 It's always a trade-off. If you fear direct fire more than indirect, go for the woods. An ATG in the woods might survive 2 turns of DF but will die in the third from a mortar barrage. In the open, it will die in the first turn from DF. Above 40mm, you usually can easily locate guns. Any decent opponent will then area fire the location and soon a bug will reveal that the unit is dead (or another marker "inf" will appear close). So woods won't conceal the position after you open up - you might just evade aimed fire (which ain't better than area fire as close counts with HE) if you hide in the next turn. Concealments of units behind walls etc is bigger than in woods. It is very hard to spot you there... until you unhide or look from high above. If there are no mortars or FOs, woods are great! Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 One significant advantage of woods over sandbags is that the TacAI considers woods to be 'cover', so units won't try to sneak away from incoming fire. The ground around sandbags (like walls) is considered to be open. It can be _extremely_ frustrating to watch your guys crawl away from what should be fairly strong positions. Foxholes in the sandbags helps. Is it possible to put trenches through the centre of a sandbag position? That would help heaps. In a sense, I'm surprised that BFC decided to make sandbags a 'terrain type' rather than a 'unit', as trenches are. It kinda blows FOW to start a scen and spy a bunch of sandbagged posns on the other side of nomans land. Gee, I wonder what's in there On the other hand, with careful scenario design (and particular attention to the briefings) that drawback can become an advantage. So it's swings and roundabouts I suppose. Regards JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 Foxholes in the sandbags helps. Is it possible to put trenches through the centre of a sandbag position? That would help heaps. Yes, you can. they need to go in via the open section. As it were. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted July 4, 2004 Author Share Posted July 4, 2004 So - let me get this straight... if you have trenches and you're defending a flag in the middle of a forest, you put the trenches (and men in them ) _outside_ the forest, if there's any whiff of artillery? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanok Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Do stone walls offer protection against small arms fire that makes it worthwhile putting infantry behind them? In my experiences, it doesn't seem to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Originally posted by Sanok: Do stone walls offer protection against small arms fire that makes it worthwhile putting infantry behind them? In my experiences, it doesn't seem to. Stone wall and sandbags do offer protection. However, since the game engine doesn't recognize the cover for the purpose of TacAI ordered autonomous commands (i.e. commands not given by the player), units behind it will very quickly try to run away from the position, search for terrain which the engine recognizes as cover. On the way back they not only expose themself fully, but since they usually run to friendly lines they even expose their more vulnerable back. More often than not, auto-sneaking will get the units into total exhaustion on top of it all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Znarf Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Originally posted by GreenAsJade: What good does it do having an ATG inside a sandbag emplacement? Given choice, wouldn't it be better hiding off to the side dug in in even scattered trees? Do the sandbags offer any tangible advantage? My scenario "Little Cassino" illustrates how sandbangs offer much better protection than hiding your guns in trees (shameless plug). Also, the AI won't try to move smaller guns from a sandbag position. Trees + Mortars = AT Gun death. The one problem I have with sandbags is that you can see them on the map, they need not be discovered. To counter this, I often put in extra sandbag positions that are unmanned to prevent the gamey tactic of bringing mortars down on sandbags before you know there is an AT gun in the sandbags. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 imo, if a designer uses one sandbag, they should do like znarf and use many. i myself have worked my way to an enemy sandbag, only to find it empty. or something on hide pops up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.