Best place for an infantry platoon to be in a mortar barrage....?

[Redwolf]

I would assume wooden bunkers/shelters beeing similarly vulnerable to direkt HE/AP, as in CMX1.

That wasn't my question. In CMx1 an AT gun outside a bunker was very robust because it could never receive any direct fire from anything larger than smallarms. A tank would never fire it's main gun at the AT gun. It would always fire HE into the ground next to it. Once in a bunker the AT gun is instantly toast because now it is a vehicle and the CMx1 would use direct fire like when firing on an enemy tank. So in CMx1 you actually made your situation worse by putting a roof over your head.

[gunnergoz]

Rankorian: More or less agree. The best defense is to not draw fire in the first place by trying to move from cover to cover so you are out of observation once you reach your destination. Shorter legs if possible because those long jogs in the open are real invitations to join a mortar-murder-fest.

If the rounds do start coming, I run like heck if cover is near by and issue the hide order once there.

If that is not possible and you are really stuck in the open, the last, desperate thing to do is to try to hide in place but this is generally the last order you may ever give those particular troops.

My two bits, your mileage may vary.

[LongLeftFlank]

You can "sink" the bunker into the ground (change elevation of terrain) to lower its profile to something more like a roofed entrenchment Doesn't look great and distorts surrounding terrain but you can't have it all.

I am definitely thinking that the blast effect (i.e. "cratering"'impact on terrain, not the lethality against unprotected pixelflesh) of the regular frag medium mortar rounds is overmodelled. Light and medium mortars would be over 90% of the arty that a tactical leader could hope to have "on call" for non preregistered targets in the timeframe of a typical CM scale battle. Were it so easy to obtain annihilation fire with mortars against dug in infantry (i.e. basically exterminate them instead of mainly pinning them down), the AARs I've been reading would be very different. I will test more but something seems off....

[RockinHarry]

That wasn't my question. In CMx1 an AT gun outside a bunker was very robust because it could never receive any direct fire from anything larger than smallarms. A tank would never fire it's main gun at the AT gun. It would always fire HE into the ground next to it. Once in a bunker the AT gun is instantly toast because now it is a vehicle and the CMx1 would use direct fire like when firing on an enemy tank. So in CMx1 you actually made your situation worse by putting a roof over your head.

Would be interested to know as well. Some of that is covered in this thread, but probably leaves some particular questions unanswered:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=97443

[RockinHarry]

You can "sink" the bunker into the ground (change elevation of terrain) to lower its profile to something more like a roofed entrenchment Doesn't look great and distorts surrounding terrain but you can't have it all.

I am definitely thinking that the blast effect (i.e. "cratering"'impact on terrain, not the lethality against unprotected pixelflesh) of the regular frag medium mortar rounds is overmodelled. Light and medium mortars would be over 90% of the arty that a tactical leader could hope to have "on call" for non preregistered targets in the timeframe of a typical CM scale battle. Were it so easy to obtain annihilation fire with mortars against dug in infantry (i.e. basically exterminate them instead of mainly pinning them down), the AARs I've been reading would be very different. I will test more but something seems off....

I tried some in the demoes editor, but due to the abcense of units, I used some flavor object (shack) instead. A "direct height" spot, sourrounded by "direct height" about 2-3 meters higher does the trick, although the "hole" is still a bit large and smooths out at the edges. In order not to make it too suspicious to a human player, the surrounding terrain needs to be of rather rough and varied nature.

Btw, this is actually the game modders standard "expedient" in games like Battlefield 2 or Armed Assualt 2 which inherently do not provide "underground features", nor small 3D submeshes editable to serve as foxholes or trenches. Whole new 3D models were created (house with basement, a 3D trench with surrounding terrain ect.), that would finally be imported to the standard game and then "molded" into holes and depressions of the standard ground mesh. Unfortunately BFC does not support import of user made 3D objects.

With the fix on the foxholes in oncoming patch 1.01, some of the mortar lethality should probably be lessened. Yet the lethality of US mortars with super quick fuzes and treebursts, lack of overhead cover still should be very noticable.

Remains the "balancing" issue in user made scenarios and QBs, with regard to availability of artillery assets.

[gunnergoz]

I just ran into this in a "Combat Lessons Learned" pamphlet from 1944 and thought a contemporary take on the subject might interest some of you:

Move forward to Safety

When the enemy drop heavy mortar or artillery fire on you the safest place to go is toward the enemy. This is substantiated by many from the field.

Here are a few:

“When artillery falls, close with the enemy troops to get out of Jerry’s barrage."

-Technical Sergeant Leonard Walker, Infantry Platoon Sergeant, 29th

Division, France.

“One good lesson which I learned as squad leader is that when you’re attacking and the enemy throws mortar and artillery on you, the best thing to do is lead your men forward and get close to the enemy. That is the safest place to be. Then you can drive him out.‘

-Sergeant William Van Houten,

Infantry Squad Leader, 29th Division, France.

“When moving forward in the attack, we normally move farther than Jerry’s old positions, because the minute he knows you’re in his-old foxholes he can zero in on you with his mortars and 88’s.“

-First Lieutenant Philip Stern, Infantry Platoon Leader,

29th Division, France.

[Broken]

You can "sink" the bunker into the ground (change elevation of terrain) to lower its profile to something more like a roofed entrenchment Doesn't look great and distorts surrounding terrain but you can't have it all.

I am definitely thinking that the blast effect (i.e. "cratering"'impact on terrain, not the lethality against unprotected pixelflesh) of the regular frag medium mortar rounds is overmodelled. Light and medium mortars would be over 90% of the arty that a tactical leader could hope to have "on call" for non preregistered targets in the timeframe of a typical CM scale battle. Were it so easy to obtain annihilation fire with mortars against dug in infantry (i.e. basically exterminate them instead of mainly pinning them down), the AARs I've been reading would be very different. I will test more but something seems off....

Even worse, panicked troops will get up from their prone hide positions and run to more "protective" terrain, even if that terrain is the target of the mortars. I am speaking of on map mortars. I haven't tested if this AI behavior happens when the mortars are off map.

I have been using the following gamey tactic against squads on the edge of covering terrain such as dense forest: aim the mortars slightly into the covering terrain. Units on the edge of the impact zone will panic and RUN into the impact zone like they were being sucked down a blackhole.

The AI could be improved by treating both on map and off map mortars as indirect fire and have troops hug the dirt whether they are panicked or not. Either that or have them run away from the impact zone, even if that is where the best cover is.