Pillboxes

[mav1]

Why are pillboxes so hard to knock out by Infantry with grenades. A few grenades through the slit would do the job. But I have had some Infantry take between 15 to 25 mins to knock out a pillbox.

[Ace Pilot]

This game clearly doesn't work for you. Why do you keep playing?

[Wicky]

Originally posted by mav1:

Why are pillboxes so hard to knock out by Infantry with grenades. A few grenades through the slit would do the job. But I have had some Infantry take between 15 to 25 mins to knock out a pillbox.

Clue: Imagine you've lost your front door keys but the back door is unlocked - What do you do next?

[Battlefront.com]

Ace Pilot,

This game clearly doesn't work for you. Why do you keep playing?

Maybe he is playing a different game? I can think of a few others that actually don't work right

Steve

[Dogface]

Why does he keep posting questions about CMx1 in the CM:SF forum?

See mav1, now would be the perfect time to do a

Dont worry you dont even have to scroll up to the top just click on the pic.

[ August 19, 2006, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: Dogface ]

[Capt. Toleran]

mav1, try it in a FPS simulation and see how easy it is. Call of Duty 1 had a few situations like that, it can be very difficult if the bunker is manned by competent men to hit a tiny window with a fairly heavy metal "rock" and not have it bouce back at you. Anything that doesn't make it in the window is going to surpress you, not them.

[Battlefront.com]

There is a reason that the Germans were able to hold out as long as they did in the West. If bunkers, trenches, and other defenses were so easy to take out the Allies would have been slugging down Weizenbier in Berlin in August

Steve

[rudel.dietrich]

ATGMs have made bunkers alot less of a challenge these days :cool:

[Patrick Brazil]

Mmmmmmm....

Weizenbier in Berlin in August......

[Battlefront.com]

ATGMs have made bunkers alot less of a challenge these days

I've got some high speed camera footage of TOW-2s slamming into a room and a bunker. As you say, it's really taken the fun out of being in a bunker

The Stryker MGS is designed for taking out bunkers too. Having a dedicated company level asset like that should be real interesting to see in action.

Steve

[John Kettler]

mav1,

Smart pillbox crews/occupants of fortified structures often used chicken wire and the like to keep out grenades. Many pillboxes also had stepped embrasures to keep out ricochets, fragments and not quite accurately thrown grenades. Some were even fitted with movable armored embrasure covers.

Regards,

John Kettler

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />ATGMs have made bunkers alot less of a challenge these days

I've got some high speed camera footage of TOW-2s slamming into a room and a bunker. As you say, it's really taken the fun out of being in a bunker

The Stryker MGS is designed for taking out bunkers too. Having a dedicated company level asset like that should be real interesting to see in action.

Steve </font>

[Battlefront.com]

MGS uses a modified gun that was on the M1 Abrams. It has an autoloader and its ammo load is quite small. IIRC 18 rounds. However, due to its intended role this isn't seen as a practical issue of concern. 1 or 2 rounds should be all that is necessary for a single target.

It is hard to imagine that a break in the action for reloading wouldn't present itself before the ammo load ran out. Remember that the Stryker Rifle Company packs a ton of firepower. Mass infantry targets should be hit by organic mortars or higher level artillery while armor taken out by organic Javelin or higher level Stryker ATGM. Unlike US Tank Destroyer doctrine that had Tanks doing one thing and Tank Destroyers doing another, the Stryker Rifle Company has all the capabilities it needs organic to its own formation. Higher level units, such as Stryker ATGM, tanks, and artillery should only be needed for occasional missions rather than every day missions. Whether this will work well against a conventional force is unknown since a Stryker Brigade has not had a chance to be used this way.

In WWII the flaw was that these assets were not organically assigned to infantry units and therefore when the infantry ran into something it wasn't assured that they would have the tools necessary to get the job done. And when the threat was armor they might, might, have either Tanks or Tank Destroyers availble. And by golly, whichever was available was going to be used regardless of what the field manuals said. If that meant having to use Shermans to tackle Tigers or M-10s to take out bunkers, well... that's what what happened. As we know, this didn't work out so well.

Steve

[ August 19, 2006, 07:56 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />ATGMs have made bunkers alot less of a challenge these days

I've got some high speed camera footage of TOW-2s slamming into a room and a bunker. As you say, it's really taken the fun out of being in a bunker </font>

[mav1]

So can pillboxes be knocked out with artlllery fire in the game? I would like to know the opinions of others, rather than stating my opinion and getting on the nerves of others.

[Wicky]

In CM or in CM:SF?

In CM do a search in CMAK for 'Pillbox' - there should be a thread titled 'Attacking AT Bunkers' posted in Sept 2005

scroll down and read a reply from JasonC dated September 26, 2005 11:43 PM.

Think of these forum archives like a library and learn to use them.

[mav1]

Thanks Wicky