Better fortifications in modual?

[Flanker15]

Is there any word of there being better fortifications in the new marine modual? Right now we have a MG bunker, trenches and buildings. I'd like to be able to set up much more powerful defensive structures for blue and especially red. Covered and reinforced trenches, mountainside bunkers (tunnel systems maybe?) etc... Things that really need the full power of the blue air/artillery to break through.

[Kirq]

Reincorced buildings ( sandbags in the windows etc) would be very nice too.

[YankeeDog]

Steve has made some indications that they are planning to do some new fortification/building types eventually, but I don't think it's anything we'll see real soon.

Certainly not in the Marines module. My SWAG is more like in the WWII release, with a possible "trickle back" into the modern titles.

[MikeyD]

I can imagine significant fortifications in a WWII game, but I've got to think any major Syrian fortification encountered by U.S. infantry would have had fancy pentrator bomb holes drilled into its roof within the first hour of the conflict. If the U.S. airforce does anything well its crater runways and penetrate bunkers.

I do like the idea of an under-the-radar minor reinforced buildings that the airforce wouldn't be aware of to target. But a tank round into the building is still a tank round into the building.

[Combatintman]

Totally up for more of that - I'm thinking of trenches with overhead cover, sangars for AGLs and .50 calibre MGs for blue. If we get those then when the British module comes out you guys can wait out for some Afghanistan Platoon House scenarios from this callsign.

[the Fighting Seabee]

More fortifications = more realism. Don't forget the wire.

[Combatintman]

Sorry forgot to add in my last post - ISO containers and Hesco Bastion.

[Flanker15]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

But a tank round into the building is still a tank round into the building.

That's why I'm looking forward to better forts, right now you don't need a tank round as the 40mm GL does the job fine. I'm looking for things that you do need a tank round to beat. Also you can call in JDAMs which is super overkill for the current forts.

[Thomm]

I am thinking small, submerged bunkers here, integrated into a trench system and visible only by their exit door = minimal modeling effort.

Squads could hide in them from artillery strikes and man the trenches at a later time.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Secondbrooks]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

I am thinking small, submerged bunkers here, integrated into a trench system and visible only by their exit door = minimal modeling effort.

Squads could hide in them from artillery strikes and man the trenches at a later time.

Best regards,

Thomm

I doupt we will have any. Same goes for foxholes with mousehole. I know i'm not close of being genius, but i have feeling that we might have enginelimitiation here involved.

[Battlefront.com]

We can definitely add more stuff, though for the Marines Module there won't be any new terrain. For WW2 there will definitely be more things for the defender.

Things like tunnels and other completely subterranean types of things are definitely out. This gets into some pretty serious user interface issues and general playability problems. It's the same thing we had to tackle in CMBB with "Sewer Movement". Massively abstracted and extremely limited. There is no good way to handle that sort of stuff without spending tons of time on it.

Steve

[Secondbrooks]

Wrong thread! To cover thread this was ment.

[Paper Tiger]

It was touched on earlier in this thread so let's see if I can get a definitive answer. Are there any plans to add wire to the game at some point? Even as a flavour object?

[Combatintman]

Paper Tiger,

Why would you want wire as a flavour object? It surely has to have a purpose. Go all out and ask for it as fit for purpose - an obstacle in the same manner as it was handled in CMX1 - namely that you picked it in the force selection screen rather than placed it on the map as a terrain object.

I'd vote for that.

[Paper Tiger]

Yeah, I have a tendency to keep my requests unreasonably reasonable . I'd love to see wire fully implemented in the game but if it's too much work for Charles and the team to do, THEN I'd settle for it as a flavour object as long as it blocks infantry movement.

I suspect it will come with the WW2 module. It's hard to see how it could be omitted from that theatre.

[Battlefront.com]

I can't see wire being left out of WW2. For modern... probably when we move it out of the Middle Eastern environment (which won't be for a while yet). Maybe sooner, just definitely not for the Marines Module.

Steve

[Mord]

Steve, what are you guys leaning towards as far as defensive emplacements in the WWII version? Be nice to see some different sized bunkers, dragon's teeth and make shift positions like mounded dirt or a couple logs piled up. Any stuff that makes the battlefield look less static and I am all for it. Something the flavor objects really help with in CMSF.

Mord.

[ April 26, 2008, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: Mord ]

[Mord]

BUMPY, BUMP, BUMP.

Mord.

[Battlefront.com]

We haven't given the defensive terrain much thought. However, at a minimum I would think the following should be going in:

1. Barbed wire

2. Appropriate mine types

3. Wooden bunker variants

4. ATG bunker

5. MG bunker

6. Squad sized bunker

7. Trenches

8. Foxholes

Again, this is basically off the top of my head and not part of an official list. It's too early to be committing to specifics.

Steve

[the Fighting Seabee]

That's great, but I still disagree with any decision to leave wire out of a modern warfare simulator.

http://images.google.com/images?q=concertina+iraq&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us

[Webwing]

Once wire is in WWII it could be retrofitted in the modern warfare engine.

I think that's the general idea Steve has mentioned in other posts.

-

[Mord]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We haven't given the defensive terrain much thought. However, at a minimum I would think the following should be going in:

1. Barbed wire

2. Appropriate mine types

3. Wooden bunker variants

4. ATG bunker

5. MG bunker

6. Squad sized bunker

7. Trenches

8. Foxholes

Again, this is basically off the top of my head and not part of an official list. It's too early to be committing to specifics.

Steve

That pleases me in all my dark, itchy places. Nice off the cuff list. I am really psyched about fox holes and wooden bunker variants. That will rock if you guys can get them in!

What about gun emplacements inside buildings?

Mord.

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Mord:

What about gun emplacements inside buildings?

Mord.

I just verified that the old bug where you can put something on the ground, and place a building over and the item stays inside.. is still in CMSF. Expect T-54s and medium bunkers hidden inside buildings shortly.

[Mord]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

I just verified that the old bug where you can put something on the ground, and place a building over and the item stays inside.. is still in CMSF. Expect T-54s and medium bunkers hidden inside buildings shortly.

Oh, yeah...der...I forgot about that! I screwed around one day and made a building that looked like a garage and put a Pick-up in it along with a Uaz. It's a nice work around if they don't get to putting guns in buildings. Thanks for the reminder!

Mord.

[Mord]

Oh and Steve....you mentioned trenches...are they going to be side specific in the WWII version?

I like the fact we can draw them when making a map (I wouldn't want to lose that option), adding ditches along side roads and the like is a sweet touch...the one draw back is if someone is scanning a map and sees a trench in the middle of nowhere they can pretty much figure there will be troops placed there, or are near by. It's not that big a deal but I was wondering where your heads were at in this regard (if you've even discussed it at this stage). I am hoping fox holes will definitely be hidden.

Mord.