Redwolf Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Originally posted by MikeyD: I asked this same question awhile ago and the answers never were particularly authoritative. At the time the consensus was (if memory serves) about the same concealment and protection as heavy building without the overhead cover. But that was only an initial 'seat-of-the-pant' impression from the board. That assumption is wrong. The major difference is that the TacAI does recognize the building as cover, but doesn't recognize rises, walls and sandbags. Inside the sandbags you have foxhole in the open which is basically NIL when HE comes flying in. I also think walls (and sandbags) cannot actually be hit by direct fire HE, only by smallarms (resulting in lower firepower). BTW, CM buildings do not provide any overhead cover to start from. They have their basic protection value and that applies to fire or bursts from all directions. In one little test I couldn't see how dropping a pillbox into a sandbag emplacement made any difference at all to the outcome! I can't test right now but I would assume it makes it hulldown. Which would be utterly useless since CM pillboxes always die of firing slit penetrations when no Churchill AVREs are around. And since being hull-down raises the chance to get hits on the firing slit (analogous to the Panzer IV turret issue) it will actually make things worse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Originally posted by MikeyD: I asked this same question awhile ago and the answers never were particularly authoritative. At the time the consensus was (if memory serves) about the same concealment and protection as heavy building without the overhead cover. But that was only an initial 'seat-of-the-pant' impression from the board. That assumption is wrong. The major difference is that the TacAI does recognize the building as cover, but doesn't recognize rises, walls and sandbags. Inside the sandbags you have foxhole in the open which is basically NIL when HE comes flying in. I also think walls (and sandbags) cannot actually be hit by direct fire HE, only by smallarms (resulting in lower firepower). BTW, CM buildings do not provide any overhead cover to start from. They have their basic protection value and that applies to fire or bursts from all directions. In one little test I couldn't see how dropping a pillbox into a sandbag emplacement made any difference at all to the outcome! I can't test right now but I would assume it makes it hulldown. Which would be utterly useless since CM pillboxes always die of firing slit penetrations when no Churchill AVREs are around. And since being hull-down raises the chance to get hits on the firing slit (analogous to the Panzer IV turret issue) it will actually make things worse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 The target gun inside the sandbags is a foxhole in open ground, which for some reason has 45% exposure level in CM. The "wall effect" of the sandbags [typo corrected] lowers that to 30% exposure which is not too bad but by far not as good as the 8% in a trench. Furthermore, the TacAI partly NILs the "wall effect" because it "feels uncomfortable" in it because it doesn't recognize it is cover terrain. Mobile units will want to run back into real cover and I assume less mobile units face a morale hit. So I suppose it is actually very easy to get a gun out of a sandbag setup with minimal weapons. The only real benefit you get is 0% exposure when hiding but since the TacAI doesn't know that it is not too useful. What you can do is to put a trench into the sandbags, that works nicely. Unless you play a scenario like I just did where the designer is one of those who think rich use of different color setup sub-zones is good idea and all the trenches happen to tbe in the other color. [ March 26, 2004, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 The target gun inside the sandbags is a foxhole in open ground, which for some reason has 45% exposure level in CM. The "wall effect" of the sandbags [typo corrected] lowers that to 30% exposure which is not too bad but by far not as good as the 8% in a trench. Furthermore, the TacAI partly NILs the "wall effect" because it "feels uncomfortable" in it because it doesn't recognize it is cover terrain. Mobile units will want to run back into real cover and I assume less mobile units face a morale hit. So I suppose it is actually very easy to get a gun out of a sandbag setup with minimal weapons. The only real benefit you get is 0% exposure when hiding but since the TacAI doesn't know that it is not too useful. What you can do is to put a trench into the sandbags, that works nicely. Unless you play a scenario like I just did where the designer is one of those who think rich use of different color setup sub-zones is good idea and all the trenches happen to tbe in the other color. [ March 26, 2004, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 The target gun inside the sandbags is a foxhole in open ground, which for some reason has 45% exposure level in CM. The "wall effect" of the sandbags [typo corrected] lowers that to 30% exposure which is not too bad but by far not as good as the 8% in a trench. Furthermore, the TacAI partly NILs the "wall effect" because it "feels uncomfortable" in it because it doesn't recognize it is cover terrain. Mobile units will want to run back into real cover and I assume less mobile units face a morale hit. So I suppose it is actually very easy to get a gun out of a sandbag setup with minimal weapons. The only real benefit you get is 0% exposure when hiding but since the TacAI doesn't know that it is not too useful. What you can do is to put a trench into the sandbags, that works nicely. Unless you play a scenario like I just did where the designer is one of those who think rich use of different color setup sub-zones is good idea and all the trenches happen to tbe in the other color. [ March 26, 2004, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by redwolf: The "wall effect" of the trenches lower that to 30% exposure... Did you mean to type 'sandbags' instead of 'trenches'? Just curious... :confused: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by redwolf: The "wall effect" of the trenches lower that to 30% exposure... Did you mean to type 'sandbags' instead of 'trenches'? Just curious... :confused: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Originally posted by redwolf: The "wall effect" of the trenches lower that to 30% exposure... Did you mean to type 'sandbags' instead of 'trenches'? Just curious... :confused: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted March 28, 2004 Author Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted March 28, 2004 Author Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnersman Posted March 28, 2004 Author Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by gunnersman: ...I set up my 75mm gun in a foxhole in sandbags. Later in the scenario a large calibre (made big holes in the ground, I dont remember the size, it deffinitely wasnt 81mm, probably 150mm) arty round landed a few meters away and knocked out my gun. There was another instance in the same scenario where another one of my 75mm guns in an exact same type position was taken out by another 75mm field gun round landing a few meters away.I'm still not clear on a couple points. I am assuming by "sand bags" you mean that square emplacement with an opening on one side that looks like a wall. Now when you say that a shell lands some meters away, are you saying that in every case the shell is falling on the outside of the emplacement, i.e. on the opposite side of the wall of sandbags as your weapon? So this lead me to think maybe sandbags arent that great.I'd have to agree with you there. The reason that your 2pdr had a slight difficulty in killing a gun is that, lacking HE, it requires a direct hit on the gun to do it any harm. (In the game; in real life it would possibly throw up rock splinters and other debris that could wound the crew or at least drive them to take cover.) An HE shell only requires a near miss. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideas happy hunting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideas happy hunting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideas happy hunting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Rabidbvr: Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideasIn CM, unlike real life, tanks and other vehicles offer NO cover against incoming fire. A burning vehicle WILL block LOS however, which is something you might want to remember. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Rabidbvr: Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideasIn CM, unlike real life, tanks and other vehicles offer NO cover against incoming fire. A burning vehicle WILL block LOS however, which is something you might want to remember. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Originally posted by Rabidbvr: Hello one and all... Here is a little Q to ask about cover etc after a tank has been ko you would think that a tank hunter team or a LMG team which in effect are only a couple of guys would be able to draw cover from the said object... but NO you try to hide a couple of men behind one they seem to get no cover... is this me?? I have been down the side of a tank under fire and yep!! it sure stops rounds any ideasIn CM, unlike real life, tanks and other vehicles offer NO cover against incoming fire. A burning vehicle WILL block LOS however, which is something you might want to remember. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 hello one and all... Thanks for the info i was aware of the LOS factor... and would guess that if it blocks LOS when alight or not... as would seem to be the case... then it seems strange that it will not stop bullets this is a shame... well troops will have to advance under armor from now on.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 hello one and all... Thanks for the info i was aware of the LOS factor... and would guess that if it blocks LOS when alight or not... as would seem to be the case... then it seems strange that it will not stop bullets this is a shame... well troops will have to advance under armor from now on.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 hello one and all... Thanks for the info i was aware of the LOS factor... and would guess that if it blocks LOS when alight or not... as would seem to be the case... then it seems strange that it will not stop bullets this is a shame... well troops will have to advance under armor from now on.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 Originally posted by Rabidbvr: ...if it blocks LOS when alight or not... as would seem to be the case...I think you misunderstand. It is only burning vehicles that block LOS. In fact, all kinds of fires block LOS. The smoke, you see... Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 Originally posted by Rabidbvr: ...if it blocks LOS when alight or not... as would seem to be the case...I think you misunderstand. It is only burning vehicles that block LOS. In fact, all kinds of fires block LOS. The smoke, you see... Michael 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.