marking mines takes too much micro managing

[gumby7]

It really seems ridiculous. First you encounter the mine in whatever way. Second, you have to move the engineers close to the mine, because for some reason the mark mines command isn't available at a distance. Third, once they've reach the mine you can order them to mark it. Then for a large mine field, you have to repeat steps 2 and 3 for every individual mine!

The engineers dont have to be near a bocage to blast it. Its just a movement order. Why can't the mark mines command work the same way and order engineers to move through a field, locate mines, and mark them all in one order.

[xian]

Totally agree with you.

[rocketman]

This should be included in the thread with wanted improvements - great idea. As it is now I hate dealing with mines (apart from getting killed by 'em).

[LeeW]

I had my infantry "hunting" forward and they would mark the mine fields that they crossed through, without taking casualties. Worked well and was faster going than slow. Didn't have to wait on the engineers to find them, everybody was able to locate and mark them. The "hunt" command worked very well for advancing without casualties. Will be interesting to see if it works that well again.

[Ryujin]

By marking, I believe the OP is talking about the engineer only command that neutralizes the mine fields. While you will get a red sign when you encounter a minefield, it isn't "marked", just known. When you mark a minefield, the sign will go from red to yellow to green, showing the approximate amount of mines that are marked in that field, green being pretty much safe to cross.

Something that you may find useful when trying to order distant engineers to mark mines, is that you can give a movement order near the mines, then the mark mines order off that waypoint.

[MeatEtr]

To quote myself from a previous minefield thread:

Also, the color of the mine sign indicates the lethality of the minefield. IIRC, bright red is most lethal(usually when mines were actually spotted with no detonations), then dark red, then bright yellow, dark yellow, bright green, and then finally dark green.

[Michael Emrys]

The engineers dont have to be near a bocage to blast it. Its just a movement order. Why can't the mark mines command work the same way and order engineers to move through a field, locate mines, and mark them all in one order.

Marking minefields was a notoriously slow process. BTW, some posters have noted that actually preparing and blasting a gap in a hedgerow took more time than it does in the game.

Michael

[GreenAsJade]

Just because it's slow for pixeltrupen to do doesn't mean it should be extra-intensive for the player to ask to have it happen...

[MikeyD]

I personally don't see how two mouse clicks and selecting one command is labor-intensive

[gumby7]

I personally don't see how two mouse clicks and selecting one command is labor-intensive

Its labor intensive when you have to click twice and select a command 20 times for an entire minefield.

Marking minefields was a notoriously slow process. BTW, some posters have noted that actually preparing and blasting a gap in a hedgerow took more time than it does in the game.

Michael

I have no issue with the time involved. I'm all for increasing the time to blow bocage if that's more accurate, but what I'm concerned with is the required player involvement. The blast command is one click. Mine marking requires you to watch while the engineers slowly advance, then order them to mark a mine they find, then do it over again. In a minefield, this slow process makes it difficult to command the rest of the battle simultaneously.

[Michael Emrys]

Its labor intensive when you have to click twice and select a command 20 times for an entire minefield.

I have no issue with the time involved. I'm all for increasing the time to blow bocage if that's more accurate, but what I'm concerned with is the required player involvement. The blast command is one click. Mine marking requires you to watch while the engineers slowly advance, then order them to mark a mine they find, then do it over again. In a minefield, this slow process makes it difficult to command the rest of the battle simultaneously.

Okay, I take your point. How would you feel if all you had to do was to move the engineer next to the minefield and then place a Mark order (found among the move orders) on the other side of it? I don't know what the argument against that could be provided coding time can be allocated.

Michael

[gumby7]

Okay, I take your point. How would you feel if all you had to do was to move the engineer next to the minefield and then place a Mark order (found among the move orders) on the other side of it? I don't know what the argument against that could be provided coding time can be allocated.

Michael

I imagine the logic of the blast order being move until you encounter a blastable object, blast it and then quick move to the final destination. It seems like there would be a way to have an order to slow move until you encounter a mine, mark it, and then instead of a quick move to the final destination, the pioneers would just continue this hypothetical order to the very end.

I don't know a lot about coding so I might might be completely talking out of my ass. I'm also aware that this would probably take more work for the devs than a regular patch. I think it would be an excellent improvement though. If my thought isn't possible, your proposal would still be a great improvement.

[womble]

Its labor intensive when you have to click twice and select a command 20 times for an entire minefield.

What were you doing? Clearing it lengthways?! Given the rate at which the work proceeds, it's hardly 'intensive' clicking, either, even in RT. The number of clicks required is no worse than sending a scout team to the next bit of cover.

...I'm concerned with...the required player involvement. The blast command is one click. Mine marking requires you to watch while the engineers slowly advance, then order them to mark a mine they find, then do it over again. In a minefield, this slow process makes it difficult to command the rest of the battle simultaneously.

So use pause. You don't have to mark the mines immediately. You don't have to use the same set of engineers to mark the mines as found them. In the end, if the battlefield is so busy you can't afford the time to manage clearing the obstacle, you probably shouldn't be clearing it. Marking mines really only reduces the chance of a detonation for slowly moving troops which isn't that high anyway.

[LeeW]

In the end, if the battlefield is so busy you can't afford the time to manage clearing the obstacle, you probably shouldn't be clearing it. Marking mines really only reduces the chance of a detonation for slowly moving troops which isn't that high anyway.

That was the point I was trying to make. Using "hunt" the troops were able to move through the mines and the location was marked for cautious movement for later troops if needed. It took little time to move through the undefended mine field. One with over watch units is a different can of worms.

[The_Capt]

Not sure why are people are clearing 20 mine squares. Normally you clear mines as part of an overall breaching operation. As the "commander" you need to read the ground and decide exactly where you want to conduct that breach, hence the "mark mines" command.

Like "Blast" these are tactical decisions that reqr player input. If the player was left out of the loop you could wind up with breaches in the wrong place and troops moving thru them.

As to hedgrow blasting. It is quick in game. This was a conscious decision in favour of the overall flow of the game. It is roughly 45 secs per charge, which means the explosives are basically stuffed into the top of the bocage and lit off. This could actually work but you would need very heavy charges and there would be failures, for tank movement at least...or more likely tanks could take a run at it but at higher risk of bellying out or throwing a track.

[xian]

It would also be nice if:

1. It was possible to blast mines

2. Mines functioned in the same way as other 'unit objectives' in the scenario editor

[MikeyD]

I figure if you're clearing 20 mine square in the middle of an engagement your engineers are most probably going to be mortared to oblivion before you get four done anyway. At least they deserve to be. Clearing mines is meant to be grindingly slow work. If you're finding it to be grindingly slow work then mission accomplished.

[womble]

As to hedgrow blasting. It is quick in game. This was a conscious decision in favour of the overall flow of the game. It is roughly 45 secs per charge...

More like 20-25s for the American teams I've been playing with. My hazy recollection is that a veteran breach team did it in 15s...

[gumby7]

That was the point I was trying to make. Using "hunt" the troops were able to move through the mines and the location was marked for cautious movement for later troops if needed. It took little time to move through the undefended mine field. One with over watch units is a different can of worms.

LeeW, your men are not "marking" the mines. All there doing is spotting them. It is a secondary order to mark them so that non-engineers can avoid them. When they're marked they turn yellow.

[The_Capt]

More like 20-25s for the American teams I've been playing with. My hazy recollection is that a veteran breach team did it in 15s...

Just checked and you would be correct. 15-20 seconds is damn fast. Basically a slap and go affair or bangalorepushed thru. Of course for a vehicle lane it takes two hits so that streches things out a bit.

[gumby7]

This is getting off topic. We're all clearly in agreement that blast time and mine marking time should be accurate. I'm just arguing for streamlining the mark mine command.

[womble]

Just checked and you would be correct. 15-20 seconds is damn fast. Basically a slap and go affair or bangalorepushed thru. Of course for a vehicle lane it takes two hits so that streches things out a bit.

Agreed, yes, 30-40s for a double-wide Except when one Blast does the trick, as it sometimes seems to.

[LeeW]

LeeW, your men are not "marking" the mines. All there doing is spotting them. It is a secondary order to mark them so that non-engineers can avoid them. When they're marked they turn yellow.

"Marked" with a yellow marker or "spotted" with a red marker, they are still mines. Are they now more lethal now that they have been spotted or marked? Maybe the game won't allow squads through now that they are spotted??

The next squad "hunted" around and "spotted another mine field, and again, until all the squads are through and you have a bunch of "spotted" mines. Now on with the battle.

I guess being stupid has its advantages. I just went through those mines on "hunt" and avoided all that hassle which seemed to have ruined your gaming experience. Would real soldiers do that?? don't know, but this gamer did it and didn't look back.

[womble]

"Marked" with a yellow marker or "spotted" with a red marker, they are still mines. Are they now more lethal now that they have been spotted or marked?

They're less lethal if they've been 'Marked'. While it may be semantics, there is a difference, and this discussion is about that difference. If you use terminology different to the rest of us, there are bound to be misunderstandings.

[Michael Emrys]

Just checked and you would be correct. 15-20 seconds is damn fast.

Indeed. From Doubler's description of engineers doing it unaided, it must have taken several minutes at least. First the holes had to be dug by hand, the charges placed and then tamped, and finally set off.

Then somebody came up with the bright idea of attaching two parallel pieces of pipe to the front of a tank. The tank would be driven up to the berm until the pipes had penetrated to the desired depth and then backed up leaving —voila!—two nice holes ready to receive charges. This greatly sped up the process, but still took a few minutes, start to finish.

Now whether players have the patience to go through all of that is somewhat of a doubtful proposition. Figure at least 5-10 minutes for the first technique, 2-3 for the second, and the possibility in each case of delays if they come under fire.

Michael