 |
|
Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes (/showthread.php?tid=52767) |
Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - K K Rossokolski - 09-04-2009 :soap::stir: I don't mind digging up old bones from time to time...and throwing some ideas in. This one's an old chestnut, but interesting and important, and we have plenty of new people, and are in an era of change. This topic has nothing to do with the new JTCS...it came with East Front.....although a small change has been made(when?) in values. Bunkers (abb. Bs) and pillboxes (PBs) ....are they realistically depicted in the game?...and I don't mean the nice icons. How does one deal with them in attack? Now I'm a bit reluctant to quote the Manual in the present climate, but the following facts are germane to the discusssion A. Only non-vehicle units can receive the defensive benefits. Which means, I think, that your horses are safer inside, but your horse and cart ain't. B. Eligible Units get 10 (was 20 before the change) added to their defense factor, and attacking units get their firepower cut by 25%. This applies to both Bs and PBs C. PBs are concrete, so everything inside is deemed a hard target. D. Only one B/PB can go in one hex REALISM: Up to a point,and if used properly, a level of realism exists. But there are some real issues: 1. ALL bunkers and pillboxes have 360 degree all round visibility for at least one hex, even if surrounded by jungle. In real life, to reduce vulnerability, they are built with vision and firing slits of a size consistent with the tactical purpose of the fortification. I have seen, in the Solomons, Jap PBs with maybe 60 deg vision 2. All Bs and PBs are the same. You can fit in a machine gun section, or the biggest bit of artillery we have. (or both). You can tow it in, keep the tractor there, hitch up and tow it out. The thing can still fire indirectly, which means we can shoot through the roof. If we put an AA gun there, it still works...so no roof. Which means my arty should work wonders on the contents, but somehow it never does. And if you want to, and the bunker is on the railway line...at least two armoured trains fit in. My little TEST scn only has two trains, and I couldn't be bothered adding any more... So I opine we have big problems here of realism. ATTACKS ON Bs/PBs Ouch! The questions I'm posing are: A: Are bunkers and Pillboxes realistic in their current form? B: If not, can anything be done? If it can, should it? C: How do you attack them? I won't propose my ideas at this stage, merely setting the stage for the debate. I will put in my two bob's worth at the appropriate juncture, in the fullness of time, when the moment is ripe, as Sir Humphrey Appleby would say. Let's keep it clean and focused, noting that related issues will almost inevitably arise. I will try, if necessary to moderate the flow of argument in the sense of staying on topic. RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - umbro - 09-04-2009 K K Rossokolski Wrote:1. ALL bunkers and pillboxes have 360 degree all round visibility for at least one hex, even if surrounded by jungle. In real life, to reduce vulnerability, they are built with vision and firing slits of a size consistent with the tactical purpose of the fortification. I have seen, in the Solomons, Jap PBs with maybe 60 deg visionThis is true for a single pillbox, but I think that the idea here is that this is a 250m hex with a defensive network of pillboxes giving mutual support. K K Rossokolski Wrote:2. All Bs and PBs are the same. You can fit in a machine gun section, or the biggest bit of artillery we have. (or both). You can tow it in, keep the tractor there, hitch up and tow it out. The thing can still fire indirectly, which means we can shoot through the roof. If we put an AA gun there, it still works...so no roof. Which means my arty should work wonders on the contents, but somehow it never does.A defensive network may have more than a simple concrete pillbox format for different weapon types. K K Rossokolski Wrote:And if you want to, and the bunker is on the railway line...at least two armoured trains fit in. My little TEST scn only has two trains, and I couldn't be bothered adding any more...Did the trains benefit? If so, that sounds like a bug! K K Rossokolski Wrote:?Sort of depends upon whether you are using extreme assault. If not - get your best AT unit up front and blast away from range (so they defenders cannot fire back) until the defenders are disrupted, and then overrun with infantry. If so - same as above - except that you might as well overrun with you infantry every turn as well as though they will not inflict casualties they could get lucky with the assault morale die roll. Smoke the hex that they are assaulting from so as to minimise losses they take from the defenders direct fire and defensive arty. umbro RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - K K Rossokolski - 09-04-2009 umbro Wrote:[This is true for a single pillbox, but I think that the idea here is that this is a 250m hex with a defensive network of pillboxes giving mutual support.Fair enough. umbro Wrote:A defensive network may have more than a simple concrete pillbox format for different weapon types.Again true, but what I was trying to get at here was the unrealism of hiding many weapon types in a B/PB.. The simple concrete PB can in real life hardly hold eg a 170mm gun plus its tractor. In CS it can,, it can shoot through the roof, and gain additional protection against CB fire. And how can an AA gun fire at aircraft through the concrete roof? With great difficulty, I expect. ( I acknowledge a PB could be used to represent a flak tower, but that is a rare case) umbro Wrote:Did the trains benefit? If so, that sounds like a bug!I used the trains as an example of the unrealism of B/PB. Are trains soft targets?...if so they will benefit from a PB. umbro Wrote:[Sort of depends upon whether you are using extreme assault.The staff solution, certainly. Does it work?. IMO. rarely if ever against a foe with good arty, and the wish to defend his B/PB. Attackers just continue being disrupted, and need lots of smoke.. RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Jason Petho - 09-04-2009 K K Rossokolski Wrote:I used the trains as an example of the unrealism of B/PB. Are trains soft targets?...if so they will benefit from a PB. My understanding is that any vehicular unit type does not benefit from pillboxes, nor can they assault them. If the trains are benefiting, then there is a coding bug. Jason Petho RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Mike Abberton - 09-04-2009 One thing I always found unusual/unrealistic is that bunkers are soft targets and PBs are hard targets. In certain cases that makes the PB an easier target than a bunker, when it seems like it should be the opposite. The reason for this is that, particularly in the late war game, you have more units with high hard target attack factors (e.g. anything with a German 88mm or 75mm/70, anything with a 17 pdr or a 90mm for the western allies, Russians a little less so with only the less useful 85mm being common) than units with high soft attack factors (150mm guns and up). And many of the high soft attack factor units are on the fragile side if there is an AT gun in the bunker. Mike RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - K K Rossokolski - 09-04-2009 Jason Petho Wrote:My understanding is that any vehicular unit type does not benefit from pillboxes, nor can they assault them. Indeed so, JP...I even quoted that fact in my preamble....then promptly forgot it!! Trains are presumably vehicles, and therefore gain no benefit, but is it possible the computer does not recognise them as such? B/PB go back to Year One, trains are new. Can we ask the question "According to CS.... what is a vehicle?" Codewise, is it possible a horse is a vehicle? I presumed a horse and cart is a vehicle...I don't KNOW that it is. I can't answer if trains benefit...I was only testing the fit....to illustrate some of the problems as I see them. A vehicular cannot assault a pillbox hex, but can a bunker hex RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Von Earlmann - 09-04-2009 Most of the things KK said are the reasons my scenarios rarely have bunkers or pillboxs...........game engine just doesn't handle them very well. RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - K K Rossokolski - 09-05-2009 Agree fully, Earl. What I'm trying to do is get some ideas for improvement, even if it's only in the form of guidance. RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Dan Caviness - 09-05-2009 KK/et al: I actually enjoy the current system of pillbox/bunker play in the CS series. I think the fact that vehicles can't assault pillboxes, and yet are needed to actually do damage to them due to their hard target status is a nice mix. Then of course with bunkers your looking at an entirely different tactical mix to successfully deal with them. That adds a bit of spice to the game and rewards the player who sets that weapons mix up earlier. I believe some of your points are well taken in that a given bunker, such as one on Omaha Beach, may not really be able to facilitate a mortar or AA gun lets say when it was designed for a heavy AT gun type of weapon that was probably given a narrow firing slit designed for direct fire down on the beach. However, Umbro's point that the game may be depicting a bunker or pillbox complex/nest that can cover up to 250 meters in a hex allows for some freedom in that regard. What I do believe is the bunkers and PBs would play better if they were restricted in their LOS and target hexes. I.E., a bunker designed to cover a beach doesn't work very well after the assaulting forces take it over who are going to use it against the original owners in a 180 degree axis from what it would actually see. You can use terrain to simulate this, and I try to incorporate this to help simulate the directionality of many, if not all, bunkers and PBs. I wholeheartedly agree (and no I'm not rekindling any debates on Extreme Assault here as stated before I play it and enjoy it but I'm also OK with my opponents who choose not to) that with EA....bunkers and PBs are tougher nuts to crack. What I would like to see is if a bunker or PB hex is isolated, and remains so for multiple turns, the resident units inside should suffer losses, disruptions, and make it easier to take them out. If your paying the price to snuggle up on a bunker/PB for more than one turn...your getting hammered by a good opponent and in the context of the game I believe it makes sense to reward that sacrifice. In the context of the game. I'm not as driven as some to achieve ultimate reality in this game. I salute those who are, and certainly have no problems with reality, but I do feel the game makes it's own reality. One I enjoy very much, even if it does occasionally stray from the reality it attempts to depict. I'm very driven to help make it more playable, and complex, and ultimately satisfying to play. For this reason I think your on the right track...keep up the good work! Regards, Dan RE: Soapbox and Pot Stir.....Bunkers and Pill Boxes - Von Earlmann - 09-06-2009 [quote=Dan Caviness I'm not as driven as some to achieve ultimate reality in this game. I salute those who are, and certainly have no problems with reality, but I do feel the game makes it's own reality. One I enjoy very much, even if it does occasionally stray from the reality it attempts to depict. Regards, Dan [/quote] Hell Yeah!......It is a great game...........let's just play! |
){kind=link}