Houses ... when it all boils down to it...

[mjkerner]

I have a catapult. If you don't give me all the money, I will throw a huge stone at your head???

Man, that Rufus was a regular Henny Youngman!

[Kat Johnston]

I recently watched "Theirs is the Glory" about Arnhem - granted, it's a film/documentary, not genuine footage, but the people acting it were people who fought there, it was filmed in the right place and only a short time after the battle. They were certainly inside (big, solid-looking, town) houses a lot. It looked to me like they were mostly standing well back from windows and at an angle to them, which seemed sensible, but they weren't acting as if bullets were going to come though the walls.

[JonS]

+1 to the idea of a fortified house model

There's some considerations here:

* should fortified houses be subject to FOW? That is, as an attacker you don't know a bldg is fortified until after you're inside.

* should fortified bldgs be decided by the scen designer or the player?

* should fortified bldgs be visually distinguishable from a normal or unfortified one?

* If it's the player, how do you compare fortifying a sigle tile, single story bldg to a multi-tile, multi-story bldg?

Perhaps the easist solution would be to have a 'hardened' toggle that can be set in the editor, which doesn't change the appearance of the building. however, that would also be the most unsatisfactory from a gameplay perspective - and the most prone to sniping by people looking for things to complain about. But adding UI and usability elements would dramatically increase the time and effort to add as a feature, and also make the whole thing more complex and more prone to unexpected results (eg, what should happen if you have a fortified modular bldg adjacent to an unfortifed modular bldg? An indep bldg?).

Regards

Jon

[JonS]

Rufus turns to the Gaul, cocks his eye, and quips: "Catapultam habeo. Isi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane."

That Uderzo. What a guy.

[c3k]

Catapultam is quite obviously plural. "I have catapults. Give me all your money, or I'll use your big head as a throwing stone."

[Wodin]

not at all. bad misconception there.

Yeah, thought about it more and your right...not sure why I've discounted everything I've read. Though it depended on tactical necessity.

Cellars where used as base of operations at times...as long as they had two exit points...

Houses are an Arty target...

So your right, silly me.

I know the Para at Arnhem took over buildings aswell as backgardens..

However we do need big thick walled farm houses and outbuildings as they where used. Offered great protection from small arms and small calibre.

Are all houses the same in CMBN except churches? If so that needs looking at.

I like the idea of random fortified buildings that the defender can find out which ones at start of scenario through possible tool tip. Each time you play the scenario it will be a differenve house...load sof coding but helps replayability and the attacker will neevr know which houses and the defender may have useless houses fortified..which I'm sure many times the wrong ones where.

[Sgt Schultz]

You want fortified buildings?

Fine ...

As long as the sides of the structure align properly, then that structure can be fortified.

[Fredrock1957]

Like to see that one story on a map.... come up behind it and blam... no windows no los/lof no work...

[Sgt Schultz]

Better?

Then put another wall around the house at the usual distance.

[LongLeftFlank]

I have a catapult. If you don't give me all the money, I will throw a huge stone at your head???

Man, that Rufus was a regular Henny Youngman!

[Fredrock1957]

Better?

Then put another wall around the house at the usual distance.

Perfect... great job S. Schultz

[Pak40]

Yeah, thought about it more and your right...not sure why I've discounted everything I've read. Though it depended on tactical necessity.

Cellars where used as base of operations at times...as long as they had two exit points...

Houses are an Arty target...

So your right, silly me.

I know the Para at Arnhem took over buildings aswell as backgardens..

However we do need big thick walled farm houses and outbuildings as they where used. Offered great protection from small arms and small calibre.

Are all houses the same in CMBN except churches? If so that needs looking at.

I like the idea of random fortified buildings that the defender can find out which ones at start of scenario through possible tool tip. Each time you play the scenario it will be a differenve house...load sof coding but helps replayability and the attacker will neevr know which houses and the defender may have useless houses fortified..which I'm sure many times the wrong ones where.

Yea, I should discount everything I've read also. Silly me.

Of course, your example of Arnhem and any other urban combat trumps what I said - there was very little option but to occupy buildings.

All I'm saying is that your statement that soldiers always defended from houses is not true. It depends on, as you say, tactical necessity but also the building itself. It depends on what the building is made of, if it even has good firing positions etc.

Rural Normandy is especially the kind of area where lone manoirs or farmsteads become obvious targets and windows become bullet magnets. Defending from slit trenches and hedgerows were often a better alternative.

[GerryCMBB]

Hello:

I thought the problem was defenders getting killed because they fired out from the windows? So a stronger wall wouldn't help?

Or can bullets penetrate stone masonry? I am not an expert here but I have read comments about the sturdy walls of the Normandy buildings. Surely a bullet couldn't go through those?

Thanks,

Gerry

[Paper Tiger]

60mm mortars can slaughter troops in buildings, even when they're on the lower levels.

[GreenAsJade]

Do you mean in-game ones, or real ones? Or both? (genuine question in all cases: I don't know!)

[Thomm]

Catapultam is quite obviously plural.

No, it is not!!

Best regards,

Thomm

[TrailApe]

Whilst it might not be relevant to CMBN, many moons ago, to give us a break from artillery stuff, they let us have a weekend doing something called (at the time) FIBUA - fighting in built up areas - its called something different now.

However there was a mock village (just a couple of streets) on a site in Catterick and it was supposed to resemble a Western German style environment. Now our lot, being WeekendWarriors and artillery to boot, thought that (as in Hollywood), once you were in a house, that was it, you were in a safe environment. However as we went through the two day course it became obvious that even rifle bullets (we were using 7.62 at the time) would mess up a brick wall, lots of rifle bullets (eg GPMG) would blast holes in a wall and anything bigger would go through with ease.

We had some engineers to take us through how to fortify a house and it took a hell a lot of sandbags (floors and walls), bracing (because of the weight of the sandbags) and barbed wire to make a building reasonably resistant to small arms and infantry. In other words, a lot of time, stores and expertise to make one building reasonably resistant to anything up to 7.62. And this only applied to the walls, most houses would not be able to take the weight of the sandbags in the loft area, so really only the ground floor and the basement would have good overhead protection.

So to 'fortify' a building takes a lot more than just barracading the doors, smashing the windows and putting piano's on the stairs, no reason to believe it was any different back in the 1940's.

Perhaps, BF have it right? - although I can see the sense in having one or two buildings that are proof to small arms - as long as their cost is quite high.

[womble]

Perhaps, BF have it right? - although I can see the sense in having one or two buildings that are proof to small arms - as long as their cost is quite high.

I think they've sortof got it right, and map designers are still feeling their way to the best representation of Norman buildings in the game. There are house-type buildings that are resistant to rifle-calibre incoming, which is good, because some of the methods of construction used in Normandy were probably proof against most bullet impacts. There were a lot of stone-built buildings even in towns, and many old farmhouses had thick walls that'd give good protection. But many of the building types available in-game are more concealment than cover, to the rounds that were used in '44, so the understandable desire of map makers for some visual variety leads, perhaps, to the modal building characteristics being a bit vulnerable.

What might bear improvement is the information available to the player about the type of house they're looking at, and perhaps also the positioning of the pTruppen when they're using windows, though that could well be abstracted in some way.

[GreenAsJade]

I think they've sortof got it right, and map designers are still feeling their way to the best representation of Norman buildings in the game

I'm playing one humorous QB map right now where the town looks for all the world like a wild west Cowboy town :)

GaJ

[RockinHarry]

Don´t miss the info from this not quite so old thread:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99777

[akd]

So to 'fortify' a building takes a lot more than just barracading the doors, smashing the windows and putting piano's on the stairs, no reason to believe it was any different back in the 1940's.

Typical buildings in Normandy from before the War are likely very different from the above scenario. Windows, doors, etc. would still need fortification to provide a good fighting position, but many walls at least were probably proof against small arms as they were.

[Pak40]

Hello:

I thought the problem was defenders getting killed because they fired out from the windows? So a stronger wall wouldn't help?

Or can bullets penetrate stone masonry? I am not an expert here but I have read comments about the sturdy walls of the Normandy buildings. Surely a bullet couldn't go through those?

There have been some posts on this topic with good information in the past: Link to thread with small arms penetration

[Georgie]

The problem that I have is that there are buildings in the game that provide protection against small arms fire but there is no way to tell which building it is.:confused:

[Childress]

The problem that I have is that there are buildings in the game that provide protection against small arms fire but there is no way to tell which building it is.:confused:

The modular type buildings provide good cover.

I ran a test a couple of months ago with three mod-type structures. German squad in the building, American squad in the open. 200m. Duration: 3-4 wego turns. You can find the link at the front of this thread.

Results: typically 5-1, 10-1 in favor of the Germs. Note this is with relatively equal numbers. If the Amis get fire superiority, say a platoon vs a squad, or add an MG team, all bets are off. I found that bldg defense works better on the ground floor than the top and that the bldg should directly face the attackers. Also, three windows are better than one.

One tidbit of information I don't believe is included in the Manual: Barns are completely porous, that is you get the blue targeting line out of every side despite the solid wall graphics. They give concealment but lousy cover.

[Wodin]

Yea, I should discount everything I've read also. Silly me.

Of course, your example of Arnhem and any other urban combat trumps what I said - there was very little option but to occupy buildings.

All I'm saying is that your statement that soldiers always defended from houses is not true. It depends on, as you say, tactical necessity but also the building itself. It depends on what the building is made of, if it even has good firing positions etc.

Rural Normandy is especially the kind of area where lone manoirs or farmsteads become obvious targets and windows become bullet magnets. Defending from slit trenches and hedgerows were often a better alternative.

Erm...I think you though I was being sarcastic and I wasn't....