Nonsense.....

[76mm]

It was assumed when people were demanding to see barbed wire back in CMSF that they wanted it in as an actual obstacle and not just eye candy. What's the point of making the effort to code it up if infantry can then flow through like water through a strainer?

huh? How does being able to breach wire somehow, someway, without specialized troops equate to flowing through "like water through a strainer"?

Are you suggesting that obstacles should either be non-existent or impassable?

[DavidFields]

I am still a bit disturbed by JonS's first response to the original poster. It is one thing to be frustrated by the game, it is another to name-call. (Initially, I thought maybe he knew the poster of the OP, and the OPs first name was perhaps Richard)

Infantry being able to get through wire, slowly, and with hazard if there is someone firing on them, seems immensely appropriate. This is not a CM1/CM2 issue, it seems like basic reality. Otherwise, the results are scenarios with highly, highly channeled routes--like those in C and F (ok for one Campaign, but would be tiring after awhile). Better, I think, somewhat channeled routes. The absolutes--both with wire and unbroken bocage, oddly make the scenarios like a Dungeons and Dragons dungeon crawl.

The "absolutely unable to be flanked" maps just seem odd. No worry? IRL a defense was made where one was sure of impassable terrain? Can anyone say Sedan and the Ardennes? I usually want my opponent to think that he knows where the attack is going to come from--my job would usually be to disabuse him of that certainty. If it were up to me, any infantry unit would have some probability of crossing a deep water area--they scrounged a boat, floated on a log, something. AFVs would have some probablility of crossing "impassable terrain".

It happened.

Infantry getting through wire without explosives or artillery: Impossible?

[Paper Tiger]

Personally, I'd prefer to have infantry cross through barbed wire but very, very slowly and not have wire as an uncrossable barrier without blowing holes in it.

BTW, 'The Road to Montebourg' will not be remembered as a campaign that restricted the player or closed down avenues of approach to the enemy positions. (You actually have a LOT of freedom to take each mission on because that is how they were designed to be played.) What it will be remembered for, if it is remembered at all , is the ubiquitous wooden bunkers. There is a small line of wire in the 'Hell in the Hedgerows' mission that is there to prevent the player from sneaking up one of the board edges. In that battle, the German's right flank was well covered by forces on the high ground on the other side of the flooded river and their left flank was covered by forces positioned in the large hangar near La Lande. So, yes, I felt justified in closing down the first ten action spots on one of the flanks with wire. No minefields either. I tried to be hard but fair.

[sburke]

Personally, I'd prefer to have infantry cross through barbed wire but very, very slowly and I tried to be hard but fair.

Sounds like Dinsdale Piranha

It is said that Dinsdale was a gentleman; he bought his mother flowers and that he knew how to treat a female impersonator. Despite a jaw-dropping violent streak (including nailing people's heads to the floor and to coffee tables, and screwing people's pelvises to cake stands), he was beloved by everyone who knew him, most considering him "a cruel man, but fair". The local chief constable was in his employ, and would help him threaten others with a thermonuclear device. Dinsdale also possessed a tank.

[WriterJWA]

I just got back from Normandy a few hours ago (I visited two of the three sectors of Omaha, Point de Hoc, and Pegasus Bridge with the time I had there)....

Yeah ... the bocage in the game is spot on as far as traversing on foot. It's THICK. The waist-high hedges, though ... a man could walk over them easily. A ball has been dropped on that regard.

[JonS]

The waist-high hedges, though ... a man could walk over them easily. A ball has been dropped on that regard.

The hedges in CMBN can already be traversed by infantry.

Different complaint from you, same problem. Why is that?

[WriterJWA]

The hedges in CMBN can already be traversed by infantry.

Different complaint from you, same problem. Why is that?

You're right. They can be. But only through the gaps in them.

Do you know me from somewhere ... JonS?

[womble]

Yeah ... the bocage in the game is spot on as far as traversing on foot. It's THICK. The waist-high hedges, though ... a man could walk over them easily. A ball has been dropped on that regard.

Low Bocage isn't waist high, is it? A Tank can see over it, but not a trooper. If you saw something in C21st Normandy that you could get over easily, it should not be represented on the CMBN map with a Low Bocage 'tile'. A hedge, or some bushes, or a combination of, with some relevant ground type under 'em.

[JonS]

You're right. They can be. But only through the gaps in them.

No. Hedges can be hurdled anywhere.

Bocage - any bocage - can be gotten through, or not, at any location at the designers discretion.

[MikeyD]

Low bocage is slightly abstracted. There were game engine limits that mandated what height the model could be and still work as advertised. You shouldn't think of low bocage as the model then extrapolate what its attributes should be, you should think of low bocage as the attributes with a compromise model representing it. Low bocage 'is' impassible with vehicle LOS over the top, whether the 3-D model looks up to the task or not.

[WriterJWA]

Low bocage is slightly abstracted. There were game engine limits that mandated what height the model could be and still work as advertised. You shouldn't think of low bocage as the model then extrapolate what its attributes should be, you should think of low bocage as the attributes with a compromise model representing it. Low bocage 'is' impassible with vehicle LOS over the top, whether the 3-D model looks up to the task or not.

Yeah ... that's actually a pretty common occurrence with 3d tac games. Scourge of War does a similar thing with fences, walls, etc. However, why the seemingly black-and-white restriction to movement? The full bocage I understand ... that stuff is thick , but why replicate the same attributes for what is supposed to represent a smaller terrain feature?

[womble]

However, why the seemingly black-and-white restriction to movement? The full bocage I understand ... that stuff is thick , but why replicate the same attributes for what is supposed to represent a smaller terrain feature?

Because it is smaller only in height. It's just as thick and spiny and overgrown as the taller stuff. In fact, since laying a hedge (which makes it very resilient) takes height out of a hedge and uses some of it to create extra 'body' lower down, you could consider that a 'low' bocage has been more recently maintained than a 'high' bocage, so might actually be more likely to be truly impassable (fewer gaps) than a 'high' bocage.

[WriterJWA]

Because it is smaller only in height. It's just as thick and spiny and overgrown as the taller stuff. In fact, since laying a hedge (which makes it very resilient) takes height out of a hedge and uses some of it to create extra 'body' lower down, you could consider that a 'low' bocage has been more recently maintained than a 'high' bocage, so might actually be more likely to be truly impassable (fewer gaps) than a 'high' bocage.

So .... let me make sure I'm understanding this correctly. A decision has been made to treat everything basically as if it is the full-on, ten feet high, four feet thick (-ish) bocage, regardless if it's a chest-high hedge (which can be cross without demolitions IRL and quite as common in Normandy as the full bocage). Do I have that right?

[JonS]

Do I have that right?

Well, since it's you, and your batting average is appallingly bad, the safe and smart money is betting "no".

[WriterJWA]

Well, since it's you, and your batting average is appallingly bad, the safe and smart money is betting "no".

I'm not really sure what your issue is, but you've offered little to no correct information since this topic began. Rather, you've done nothing but display snide comments and related nonsense of little to no worth.

The reason I started this topic, was to learn why aspects of the game were developed contrary to what can and does/did occur in real life, prompted by something I saw in a scenario. When I see elements of a tactical simulation (of any kind) not fit to the reality of the situation it's trying to represent, I tend to ask questions as to why. This is compounded by the fact that I 1) am a former infantryman w/combat experience, 2) have been to Normandy (in this case), and 3) know the history of the overall campaign. Having looked at your reading list under your profile, I find it dubious that you're not at least curious to find out the same, being the armchair general you seem to be.

I've been playing Combat Mission since CMBO, I love the series and jumped at the purchase of CMBN ... I wouldn't be here asking questions if I felt otherwise. It's the best game to represent the difficulties of modern infantry combat to date, in my opinion. I'm simply here to understand why certain elements of the game were done the way they are. If I've come off as snide in doing that, then I apologize.

So please ... either class up, or move along.

[JonS]

Stop being so precious. You started this topic with a self-acknowledged retarded rant, and have continued in the same vein. You don't want a discussion, you want to vent. So, fine ... vent away. Just don't expect anything meaningful to come of it.

[womble]

So .... let me make sure I'm understanding this correctly. A decision has been made to treat everything basically as if it is the full-on, ten feet high, four feet thick (-ish) bocage, regardless if it's a chest-high hedge (which can be cross without demolitions IRL and quite as common in Normandy as the full bocage). Do I have that right?

Well you'd best roll those eyes back, because you do not have that right. There are three types of green linear obstacle: two kinds of bocage which are impassable and, wait for it.... the... hedge. Which is crossable without assistance.

It's also entirely possible for scenario designers to use the 'hedge' linear obstacle and various shrubs and bushes to make a passable hedge that's 3m high and scruffy-looking.

You're drawing conclusions from incomplete understanding, not comprehending what people are telling you and then getting snippy about the game 'not representing reality' rather than just asking for clarification. That 'rolleyes' was unnecessary unless you'd already drawn your conclusion.

When people say 'hedges can be hurdled' they mean hedges, not bocage. There. is. a. difference. Clear enough?

[RockinHarry]

From my experiences with the editor, you can create almost any style map with the means and terrain types available. It´s just up to the scenario maker, to make best use of them and sell potential players in the briefing why a map has been crafted in a particular way.

I also figured low bocage to be good for modded fallen pine trees, if additionally some logs from flavor objects is added. So for basically non bocage maps, bocage could be very useful to (fake) create different terrain types.:cool:

[BletchleyGeek]

I've been playing Combat Mission since CMBO, I love the series and jumped at the purchase of CMBN ... I wouldn't be here asking questions if I felt otherwise. It's the best game to represent the difficulties of modern infantry combat to date, in my opinion. I'm simply here to understand why certain elements of the game were done the way they are. If I've come off as snide in doing that, then I apologize.

You're drawing conclusions from incomplete understanding, not comprehending what people are telling you and then getting snippy about the game 'not representing reality' rather than just asking for clarification. That 'rolleyes' was unnecessary unless you'd already drawn your conclusion.

Womble, your second explanation was very clear, and WriterJWA was a bit too crass. But he apologized. Are these forums hosted in North Korea, or what?

[Erwin]

Now, now... We must embrace alien cultures and North Korea has much to teach us...

(...on how we can get used to being ruled by China.)

[sburke]

Womble, your second explanation was very clear, and WriterJWA was a bit too crass. But he apologized. Are these forums hosted in North Korea, or what?

That you were able to take that picture, proves you obviously were not bowing. Our agents will be visiting you.

[BletchleyGeek]

This Is An Automated Reply. Bletchley_geek Has Gone On Vacations For An Unspecified Period Of Time. Nothing To See Here, Move Along.

[LongLeftFlank]

His fault for living near a beach convenient to midget submarines.

Oh, and whose grass mod are they eating?

[BletchleyGeek]

Ughh, I've had a really weird dream...

[John1966]

Ughh, I've had a really weird dream...

Angela Lansbury should have got the Best Supporting Actress Oscar she was nominated for for The Manchurian Candidate (1962).

I realise that's a little off topic but it was a subtle yet powerhouse performance, after all.

(Also got me a pointless answer in the final of "Pointless" I was watching on the BBC the other afternoon but now I'm really digressing)