Troops in buildings

[Georgie]

I didn't see anything in the patch that addressed the lack of protection in buildings. As it is now there is no reason to assault a building, just machine gun it and you will kill or wound most of the occupants. There is also no reason to occupy a building either except maybe the upper floors for spotting. The buildings of Normandy were, to my knowledge, very substantial. Maybe a trooper is going to get hit pretty easily if he is standing at a window shooting out but even then he should have the same or close to the same protection as in a foxhole. If the trooper is cowering in a building then he should have very good protection against small arms fire. Hopefully this is still being worked on for the next patch.

[slysniper]

I didn't see anything in the patch that addressed the lack of protection in buildings. As it is now there is no reason to assault a building, just machine gun it and you will kill or wound most of the occupants. There is also no reason to occupy a building either except maybe the upper floors for spotting. The buildings of Normandy were, to my knowledge, very substantial. Maybe a trooper is going to get hit pretty easily if he is standing at a window shooting out but even then he should have the same or close to the same protection as in a foxhole. If the trooper is cowering in a building then he should have very good protection against small arms fire. Hopefully this is still being worked on for the next patch.

Yes, they think they have the penetration factors correct, but like you point out, it is sometimes a joke compared to what is real. I have trucks and troops behind buildings and they still have rounds hitting them.

In the game the rounds go through both walls and penetrate trucks on the back side. I am afraid that just isnt real, no matter what type of construction.

I do not remember reading many accounts of men worried about MG rounds going through complete buildings and hitting them while on the Far side.

[womble]

As it is now there is no reason to assault a building, just machine gun it and you will kill or wound most of the occupants.

As a blanket statement, this is patently untrue, pre-patch. I've been blazing away at an upper storey window for a couple of minutes, watching the rounds ricochet off the walls; Rifle grenades dislodged 'em, not MGs.

There is also no reason to occupy a building either except maybe the upper floors for spotting. The buildings of Normandy were, to my knowledge, very substantial. Maybe a trooper is going to get hit pretty easily if he is standing at a window shooting out but even then he should have the same or close to the same protection as in a foxhole. If the trooper is cowering in a building then he should have very good protection against small arms fire. Hopefully this is still being worked on for the next patch.

Not all buildings are built the same. There has been some substantial testing of this, and if the troops are not returning fire, there are buildings which do, indeed provide excellent protection.

However, a building does have to be very substantial to stop rifle fire of the era. 7.62 is capable of going through a car and 3 skins of brick and killing people. Some of the buildings aren't modelled as this substantial, but at least some are.

For me the deficiencies are in the way troops present their vital organs to be shot at when returning fire out of windows, and in the information available about any given building as to the level of protection you might potentially expect from it.

[Georgie]

As a blanket statement, this is patently untrue, pre-patch. I've been blazing away at an upper storey window for a couple of minutes, watching the rounds ricochet off the walls; Rifle grenades dislodged 'em, not MGs.

Not all buildings are built the same. There has been some substantial testing of this, and if the troops are not returning fire, there are buildings which do, indeed provide excellent protection.

However, a building does have to be very substantial to stop rifle fire of the era. 7.62 is capable of going through a car and 3 skins of brick and killing people. Some of the buildings aren't modelled as this substantial, but at least some are.

For me the deficiencies are in the way troops present their vital organs to be shot at when returning fire out of windows, and in the information available about any given building as to the level of protection you might potentially expect from it.

Hello womble, My experience in the game has been the opposite of yours. My troops have died like flies in buildings, even through the side with no windows and I was able to do likewise through the same wall to enemy troops. How they could see each other, much less shot each other, I don't know. Do you know how you can tell in the editor which buildings offer the cover that you have described? I want to make sure I include a great proportion of those in the scenario I'm making. I thought that their exposure in buildings was simulated.:confused:

[Childress]

OK, you got me curious. I did a quick test. US vs US. One platoon in buildings, one platoon in the open. There were three buildings (variety) the firing lines were separated by a tall wall. 175m. Ran it several times. On average, the casualties for the troops in the open was two to three times higher than those in buildings.

Oddly, the original test had Germs in bldgs vs Americans in the open. And the Germans came off worse. Of course, 12 men against 9 men and different rifles. Take both these tests with a basketful of salt.

[Bemused]

Interesting, Germans (with 2 LMGs I presume) in a building vs US in the open end up losing the firefight? This would square with my experience of playing the German side I have to admit - I've been driven out of buildings by US squads in the open unless I have at least 2 to 1 squads. Still feel that MGs are undermodelled in this game.

[womble]

Hello womble, My experience in the game has been the opposite of yours. My troops have died like flies in buildings...

Oh, that's happened too At one point I refused to let any team of more than 3 men go upstairs in any building, and that at Slow, with a very short cover arc, because it seemed almost as if troops moving any faster, or who tried to shoot back from upstairs windows were about as well-protected as a balloon on a long string... I've just been fighting around a few more building types since, so I know they're not all like that. In fact, where a building's walls are considered tough enough to bounce M2, troops in upper storeys seem less vulnerable to shooters below them.

...even through the side with no windows and I was able to do likewise through the same wall to enemy troops. How they could see each other, much less shot each other, I don't know...

As I understand it (i.e in a very limited fashion) some blank-looking walls are considered porous, particularly if they're damaged. Also, there are a few buildings in scenarios where the graphics and where the engine thinks the openings are, don't match up.

Do you know how you can tell in the editor which buildings offer the cover that you have described? I want to make sure I include a great proportion of those in the scenario I'm making. I thought that their exposure in buildings was simulated.:confused:

Sorry, I'm an almost complete novice in the mapmaking department. I've only tinkered with a bit of elevation and some linear obstacles on the flat.

Interesting, Germans (with 2 LMGs I presume) in a building vs US in the open end up losing the firefight? This would square with my experience of playing the German side I have to admit - I've been driven out of buildings by US squads in the open unless I have at least 2 to 1 squads. Still feel that MGs are undermodelled in this game.

I've noticed that US rifle grenades are pretty handy for killing, suppressing and driving away enemy in buildings. But they're pretty uniformly useless in open field fights, it seems. Though 175m is a bit long for the grenadiers.

[RockinHarry]

Test playing my yet smallish MOUT scenario with 1.01.

1. Infantry can shoot far from within and into the interiors of (modular) buildings. Looks like the abstraction of buildings interior cover and concealment is rather low.

2. I had a number of US infantry shooting at german infantry in a building through outer walls without (visible) windows. I´m using mostly modular buildings and change the facade with CTRL-CLICK quite oftenly. I somehow have the guess, although the facade changes visually, the internal 3D window/door setup does not match and change properly. Can´t tell if it´s a particular building or just a random occurance.

3. A Sherman tank was able to gun down german occupants in 3 different modular buildings, with just the coax/bow MG within 1 minute and ranges between 10-30m. The Shermans reaction, tracking and engagement times were truely incredible.

My overall impression of buildings so far, is that they´re death traps most of the time. It´s mostly sufficient, to spray rifle and MG fire into them and getting the occupants killed, instead of just heavily suppressed.

Infantry squads bunch up too closely at single windows. I solve this issue partly, by splitting squads to components and assigning illogical facing commands (away from the enemy), in order to get the team members a better share of available windows. Oftentimes this is the only way to get the squad machine gunner into a useful fighting position.

[wolf66]

Interesting, Germans (with 2 LMGs I presume) in a building vs US in the open end up losing the firefight? This would square with my experience of playing the German side I have to admit - I've been driven out of buildings by US squads in the open unless I have at least 2 to 1 squads. Still feel that MGs are undermodelled in this game.

Same thing happened here in a PBEM game...... somebody is gonna explain it away with some BS excuses, but it still ain't right.

[Boche]

I downed 3 germans with 1 thompson spray ^^

[MikeyD]

I tested this out awhile ago and penetration , cover and concealment goes up sharply the larger the building you're in. Get your men into one of the cathedral building types and the only way they're going to get shot is through a window. At the opposite end you've got puny little 1 story indi cottages. You'd be safer on the lawn behind the building.

There was a local story recently. A guy comes home drunk, decided it would be fun to play with his rome mate's handgun, and accidentally shoots his upstairs neighbor through the ceiling. If he had instead been playing with his room mate's Garand he might've accidentally shot a neighbor through a wall two blocks away

[akd]

I tested this out awhile ago and penetration , cover and concealment goes up sharply the larger the building you're in. Get your men into one of the cathedral building types and the only way they're going to get shot is through a window. At the opposite end you've got puny little 1 story indi cottages. You'd be safer on the lawn behind the building.

There was a local story recently. A guy comes home drunk, decided it would be fun to play with his rome mate's handgun, and accidentally shoots his upstairs neighbor through the ceiling. If he had instead been playing with his room mate's Garand he might've accidentally shot a neighbor through a wall two blocks away

I don't think there is much relationship between the construction of modern residential buildings and pre-1944 structures in Normandy, although a wood floor is probably not going to stop a bullet. Wall construction is more relevant to the topic, however.

Conveniently, the Allies provided many cutaway views of typical Norman buildings for us to view. Couple of examples of typical urban residential structures from the PhotosNormandie Flickr stream:

Almost all buildings in Normandy at the time seem to have been of solid stone masonry construction.

[slysniper]

I don't think there is much relationship between the construction of modern residential buildings and pre-1944 structures in Normandy, although a wood floor is probably not going to stop a bullet. Wall construction is more relevant to the topic, however.

Conveniently, the Allies provided many cutaway views of typical Norman buildings for us to view. Couple of examples of typical urban residential structures from the PhotosNormandie Flickr stream:

Almost all buildings in Normandy at the time seem to have been of solid stone masonry construction.

great pictures.

but we all know the game is not modeled like these blds, that is for sure.

I find I like the stone walls in the game, they give good protection. many bldgs should be at about the same level. but they treat them like some cheap modern home that does not have much at all on the walls except a plywood board , a board of gypson and some batt insulation, Sure bullits can go through that. But find me that type of construction, even many russian structures were built better than that at that time period.

One way to get pretty good protection is to put a stone wall in front of the building, the protection on ground level is very good then.

[Bruceov2]

I find that upper floors are deathtraps except for spotters. Troops on upper floors attract all kinds of fire. Better to stay on the lower floors

[MikeyD]

I think its a 'game' thing for a player to see a building and feel obliged to put troops into it. Shouldn't one of your pixeltruppen suggest "Hey sarge, instead of climbing to the top floor of that small building so the tank can fire at us why don't we stay where we are hunkered-down behind a nice safe terrain feature?" I'm reminded of those slasher movies where you're yelling at the screen "Don't split up! Don't go into that dark room alone!" Since someone dies every time you do it perhaps you shouldn't do it.

[De Savage]

What game is missing is heavy and light buildings. Or maybe they are there, but it's hard to see which building they are. I do think cathedral and church give you good protection, but most other buildings will not.

I too would like to see larger protection inside buildings. The best strategy now is to MG and light gun duldings and soon enemy will rout and retreat. Very easy and usually assaulting is not necessary.

Also it seems gunfire is TOO ACCURATE or TOO EFFECTIVE under 50 meters. Whole squads could be wasted in seconds, even if they have some protection (woods or walls etc.). I would like to see less effective fire near the target. Now it's almost impossible to fight in urban enviroment. Now first who sees fire and suppress and other side is annihilated in seconds.

[Mirkus]

U.S. infantry, open terrain, losses: 1 soldier

German infantry in the building, losses: 2 soldiers !!!

http://www.vimeo.com/25910366

[winkelried]

From a modern German source:

7.62x51 penetrates at 100m

10cm concrete

24cm brick

30cm natural stone

90cm wood

i just played a game where i had an OP on the second floor. when fire fight at close range started the two soldiers at the windows got hit pretty quickly, the other two hiding on the floor between the windows survived since the attackers got caught in cross-fire from another building (ground floor).

Since I adapted my defensive tactics the survival rate feels better (although i have no statistics - and there are always exceptions to the rule):

- only OPs on first floors and above. no plan to fire from there.

- troops on ground ground floor or behind the building

- no troops in buildings on the edge of villages (except OPs)

to me the biggest shortcoming for buildings are the missing basements which would provide protection against artillery or direct fire.

[Paper Tiger]

What game is missing is heavy and light buildings.

I would like to see different categories of buildings too. I keep reading about stout Norman farmhouses that presented serious difficulties to attacking Allied forces. One famous example being the farmhouse at La Fiere which was a formidable structure. A very small German force held up a much stronger Allied force there on D-Day. These very old buildings, medieval manor houses, were very solidly constructed like miniature castles and were quite common in Normandy. Some are still standing today even after experiencing the rigours of combat in WW2. I certainly don't expect ALL buildings in the game to offer this level of protection but, apart from churches, I haven't found anything quite that stout yet.

[dieseltaylor]

However, a building does have to be very substantial to stop rifle fire of the era. 7.62 is capable of going through a car and 3 skins of brick and killing people.

Source of info?

http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz56/dieseltaylor/Recommendematerialsprotection.jpg

The above does not specify the type of brick which can vary considerably in density and hardness. Modern bricks are often designed to be just sufficent to the task and with good insulation properties. I suspect pre-war the bricks were not that sophisticated. Special bricks could support over 9000psi while normal hard bricks would do 4000psi.

Flint is common in Normandy and flint is three levels higher than cutlery steel on the Mho scale. And a flint wall would be thicker than a brick wall. There is a tendency to see small buildings as being more permeable to fire - a moments thought would make you realise that small dwellings would be more likely to be built form the raw materials to hand such as stone and flint.

I have not tested out V1.01 and buildings but there has been a lengthy thread on the V1.

[womble]

Source of info?

Ancient recollection of an incident in Northern Ireland reported in the news during the Troubles. While propellant technology had improved a little in the 30 or so years between Normandy and Ulster, AIUI, the round the FAL fired was substantially similar, ballistically, to the M2.

[De Savage]

I have read somewhere that in Normandy most common building material was granite. Granite is one of the most hardest rock. There are of course lighter wood buildings too.

About bullet penetration I found one site: http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/762mm_ammo.html

From 25m 7.62mm round can penetrate up to 51mm concrete or 203mm cinder block.

The 7.62mm round can penetrate a windowpane at a 45° obliquity, a hollow cinder block, or both sides of a car body.

At 50 meters, the 7.62mm ball round cannot reliably penetrate a single layer of well-packed sandbags. It can penetrate a single sandbag layer at 200 meters, but not a double layer. The armor-piercing round does only slightly better against sandbags. It cannot penetrate a double layer but can penetrate up to 10 inches at 600 meters.

The penetration of the 7.62mm round is best at 600 meters. Most urban targets are closer. The longest effective range is usually 200 meters or less.

Continued and concentrated machine gun fire can breach most typical urban walls. Such fire cannot breach thick reinforced concrete structures or dense natural stone walls. Internal walls, partitions, plaster, floors, ceilings, common office furniture, home appliances, and bedding can be easily penetrated by 7.62mm rounds.

Breaching a brick veneer presents a special problem. Rounds penetrate the cinder block but leave a net-like structure of unbroken block. Excessive ammunition is required to destroy a net since most rounds only pass through a previously eroded hole. One or two minutes work with an E-tool, crowbar, or axe can remove this web and allow entry through the breach hole.

[dieseltaylor]

BTW I don't think houses are necessarily a good place to fight from and the isolated house definitely not unless it is in a particularly good position and attackers have no decent cover. Not necessarily for a firefight but for the fact that the house needs to be cleared before an attack can proceed - this makes hiding and taking no or low casualties a good idea.

One drawback, and it is a considerable one, is that we can see if the building we attack has a back door allowing enemy troops to move in and out. And of course we know they cannot possibly use any windows at the back to move in and out no matter how logical it might seem. Perhaps in a future CM?

[rune]

U.S. infantry, open terrain, losses: 1 soldier

German infantry in the building, losses: 2 soldiers !!!

http://www.vimeo.com/25910366

Mirkus,

German squad, 4 men firing, american squad 12 men firing MAY have something to do with it.

Rune

[womble]

One drawback, and it is a considerable one, is that we can see if the building we attack has a back door allowing enemy troops to move in and out. And of course we know they cannot possibly use any windows at the back to move in and out no matter how logical it might seem. Perhaps in a future CM?

It's usually pretty much an error to hide in a place that you can't get out of without exposing yourself to enemy fire. Unless you're confident that there won't be any return fire, whether that's cos the enemy is dead or they never knew to look in your direction...