RadicalEdward2

Fortifications, Barricades, and Obstacles

Recommended Posts

RadicalEdward2    1,889

Kind of new to the Reference Regiment so, sorry (in-advance), if I'm not following the format.

 

Anti-Tank Trenches

wazM3Iu.png

They were used in WW1 and 2. They were essentially wide and deep trenches that were used to trap and disable tanks.

They were used in the Battle for Stalingrad and the Battle of Berlin.

They were commonly used by the Germans. They could be masked with bushes and other frail objects to conceal them. They were dug into elevated areas of land to keep them within the blindspot of tanks (since they couldn't look down). Once trapped inside, they would be left at the mercy of the ones that set the trap if the tank's escorts don't assist it fast enough.

 

In-game it shouldn't be that difficult to implement.

Just make a long ditch and make sure they're placed on slightly elevated terrain so tanks can't see them.

 

Additional Images

Spoiler

 

An anti-tank trench during the Battle of Stalingrad (1942)

69khGbJ.jpg

 

An anti-tank trench in Assen

XawM0HQ.jpg

 

An anti-tank trench in-action during WW1

R1F33mW.jpg

 

An anti-tank trench in-action during the Battle of Kursk

BnbiMWC.jpg

 

 

 

 

Cheval de Frise

zJxy5QD.jpg

 

I know these WERE in the game but included them anyway.

 

There were a few variations of them that were used:

1. Ones with sharpened sticks

2. Ones with barbed wire.

3. Ones with shards of glass (this ones really vague and I couldn't find pictures of it)

Prior to WW2, they were used mostly used as anti-cavalry obstacles (I'm going to guess that they were removed when ride-able horses were shelved).

They were used in both WW1 and 2 until they were phased-out and replaced wire barbed wire.

They're so uncommon that I could barely fine any images of them.

Technically, the barbed wire fortifications used in-game could count as Cheval de Frise(s) (?)

 

 

I'll try to post more at a later date.

Feel free to include some if you know them off the top of your heads, I guess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889

Found some time to include more obstacles.

 

Bocage

(aka Hedgerows)

BcM7uqf.jpg

 

Here's a small diagram:

660NugG.gif

 

They currently exist in-game but, only in implication alone. None of the bocages in the game actually follow the pre-requisites that one would associate with a bocage.

*they're bushes on a flat plane

SXASR44.png

 

Bocages/hedgerows can come in a variety of different sizes.

From really tall ones...

Ewg7wTT.jpg

 

...to really short ones.

XTtUVGh.jpg

 

 

Using the Empire at War Terrain Editor,  I put together a simple visual to show how the bocage should look and feel:

Spoiler

 

I used in-game assets as placeholders but, just disregard that they're all Star Wars assets since I'm using the game's engine for educational purposes.

Here, you can see the height difference between infantry and the bocage:

ASXuoVW.jpg

 

Here's the same image but, with passabilities visible to better illustrate the difference in height:

txm5wXv.jpg

 

Here's the same location but, further away to show how the bocage should be utilized in-game:

qu883a2.jpg

 

 

 

Some other examples that can be used for reference...

 

An oil painting of US infantry using the bocage as solid cover:

Xn6PHMV.jpg

 

Note how the wheat fields are visibly shorter in comparison to ones found on Town's C Line and D/E Line and Forward Airfield:

nx0RGI6.jpg

 

An example of a narrow trail used by infantry and farmers:

QfqjHId.jpg

 

A bocage today:

bocage.jpg

 

Note the presence of foliage WITHIN the fields:

S7324Cw.jpg

 

Fallschirmjagers and a field commander in a low bocage (not sure if there's actually a term for ones with lower elevation):

AhQNl0c.jpg

 

Note the lack of square/rectangular arrangements and the presence of foliage within the fields:

Z3lDuEG.jpg

 

The end section of a bocage.

Note the presence of a house at the end of the hedgerow:

hQ7uWdS.jpg

 

A Tank Destroyer driving through a bocage:

mgnqV0F.jpg

 

A Sherman rolling over a bocage:

Z0mL3Za.jpg

 

A model of a "gated" bocage:

7rDyP4s.jpg

 

An example of a real gated bocage:

LSD0SqK.jpg

 

A replica to illustrate just how the gated bocage worked:

EB2KOkz.jpg

 

An oil painting of a tank crew driving through a gated bocage by artist, Barry Spicer:

9ilFFMN.jpg

 

A pillbox wedged into a hedgerow:

6Rp09Vh.jpg

 

 

Edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrandonSolo10    3,562

The concept of bocage represents what the ideal French map should look like, because it not only provides cover, but the fields in-between also provide ideal opportunities for battles as enemy squads would clash with eachother when moving from row to row.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
2 minutes ago, BrandonSolo10 said:

The concept of bocage represents what the ideal French map should look like, because it not only provides cover, but the fields in-between also provide ideal opportunities for battles as enemy squads would clash with eachother when moving from row to row.

 

That's true but, it prominent enough to be considered a type of obstacle/cover on the battlefield throughout the war :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
On 3/21/2018 at 12:40 AM, BrandonSolo10 said:

Tank dug-ins, anybody?

 

 16149_rd.jpg

 

I swore I made a post about adding those! Guess I was wrong lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgwyn    467
On 23.3.2018 at 4:51 AM, RadicalEdward2 said:

I swore I made a post about adding those! Guess I was wrong lol

 

why have we forgotten dragons teeth and steel hedgehogs also i read in a manula early war simply tree stumps were common, i f atree was old enough and had a large diameter a certain height could also be a serious obstacle, pluss wooden pillboxes would be common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jacky95    2,354

electronic fence....we used it in the Carpathians

Edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
On 4/3/2018 at 5:28 AM, Belgwyn said:

why have we forgotten dragons teeth and steel hedgehogs also i read in a manula early war simply tree stumps were common, i f atree was old enough and had a large diameter a certain height could also be a serious obstacle, pluss wooden pillboxes would be common.

 

Because they were in the game so they know what they looked like. Although I could look up some images to illustrate how they could be better utilized in the future.

2Cwx9Iq.jpg

 

Maybe they could even make a comeback on one of the tank maps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgwyn    467
16 hours ago, RadicalEdward2 said:

Because they were in the game so they know what they looked like. Although I could look up some images to illustrate how they could be better utilized in the future.

2Cwx9Iq.jpg

To be completley honest i really miss Dragon teeth they provided good cover for infantry and prevented tank and vehicle movement, really a good map asset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
7 hours ago, Belgwyn said:

To be completley honest i really miss Dragon teeth they provided good cover for infantry and prevented tank and vehicle movement, really a good map asset.

 

Agreed. It follows my sentiment on how there shouldn't be more assets in the game in Beta than in launch but, I won't go on a tangent about this because this isn't the place for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgwyn    467
20 hours ago, RadicalEdward2 said:

Agreed. It follows my sentiment on how there shouldn't be more assets in the game in Beta than in launch but, I won't go on a tangent about this because this isn't the place for that.

 Agreed maybe we should make a list of easy to add defensible items like dragon teeth, i mean they are only concrette pyramids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GermanSoldier    3,795
3 hours ago, Belgwyn said:

a list of easy to add defensible items

 

- Dragon-teeth = literally a concrete pyramid

Spoiler

0577090221113018.jpgSimmerath_Westwall_Panzerbefestigung_Dra

 

- Rommelspargel = Literally wooden poles

Spoiler

Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-719-0240-35,_Pas_Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-582-2122-31,_Fran

 

and other "asparagus" type obstacles = literally metal beams driven into earth ( can have wire or barbed wire between them)

Spoiler

171461e819045c479403d07cd79b1cce.jpg07-maginot-line.jpg

 

also available for roads

Spoiler

large.jpg

 

- czech hedgehogs (arent they even in game?) = literally three metal beams welded together

Spoiler

db1bcf949e1caaf689db01de3c80dc2e.jpg

 

- Tetrahedron (not sure what their militairy designation is) =  Tetrahedron made from Concrete or Metal

Spoiler

tetraeder_6387.jpg87a932afd5d0a78a0f14ebf5b31f0c4e.jpg

 

- Wire defenses, from rolled wired, to the obstacles already ingame, to simple metal poles with wire inbetween them. there is a wide range and they all should be relatively easy to make and add

Spoiler

k16.jpg1200px-T-S_73_Polom.jpg59086691-czech-defense-fortification-bun

 

-R emoveable roadblocks using two concrete pillars and wooden beams

Spoiler

1280px-Railway_block_on_Taunton_Stop_LinRoadblock.jpg640px-Anti-tank_removable_road_block_dia

 

- Simple concrete blocks

Spoiler

large-concrete-blocks-used-as-anti-tank-rows-of-cube-anti-tank-concrete-blocks-r15902303487_f3a2fedfdf_b.jpg

 

And then there is ofc a shirt ton of makeshift frontline fortifications made from simple logs etc etc. that should be really easy to add even with the current available assets 

 

On top of that, the game is making little to no use of the terrain for decent defenses and covers, there is a lot from simple roadside ditches over train dams to the mentioned dug out anti tank trenches and so on and so forth.

Edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889

Those are all gorgeous and would make for great areas for cover in locations that would otherwise be open stretches of grass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgwyn    467

I know from the insider forum that some of these may seem very simple to us but the big issue with them is getting the collison system done (i think you guys all remember those earth ramparts with the wooden beams where you couldn't shoot past them really)

 

So yeah this is a good thread we should get it stickied for devs maybe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
11 hours ago, Belgwyn said:

I know from the insider forum that some of these may seem very simple to us but the big issue with them is getting the collison system done (i think you guys all remember those earth ramparts with the wooden beams where you couldn't shoot past them really)

 

So yeah this is a good thread we should get it stickied for devs maybe.

 

 

Collision or not, that shouldn't mean they should be left on the backburner in hopes that we forget about them and stop asking.

I'm sure that's probably not their intention but, there's a sizeable deadpool of cut assets what would help with livening up maps in the game if more time is allocated to rectifying them.

I do understand that these types of things take time to fix but, hopefully there's someone working on these issues instead of all the assets being concentrated solely on Armor 2.0.

I know this is somewhat deviating from the intended topic of discussion but, the fact of the matter is that there are assets available from the list of fortifications we're creating; they're just inaccessible until someone fixes them.

 

But to bring my tangent back on-track, I would say that restoring the fortifications from the "Isle of Misfit Assets"  is something that should really be carried out alongside Armor 2.0 since a lot of these lost assets (Dragon's Teeth for example) are things that the vehicle handling should be tested on.

 

For example:

  • Will the vehicles retooled for Armor 2.0 clip through the Dragon's Teeth?
  • Will the Dragon's Teeth gradually chip away at vehicle hardpoints (treads, armor plating, etc)?
  • How will the proposed new vehicle projectile system work in conjunction with the Dragon's Teeth?
  • How much overall vehicle HP will be lost when colliding with the Dragon's Teeth?
  • How will the hit detection work for the Dragon's Teeth in the event a vehicle (like a tank or jeep) crashes into it head-on at top speed?

You see where I'm going with this?

If models that were designed specifically to hinder armor are left on the cutting room floor during Armor 2.0's development, how will anyone know how they will function when (if ever) they are reintroduced to the game post-Armor 2.0 launch?

I hope I'm not the only one thinking about this potential conundrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgwyn    467
11 hours ago, RadicalEdward2 said:

You see where I'm going with this?

If models that were designed specifically to hinder armor are left on the cutting room floor during Armor 2.0's development, how will anyone know how they will function when (if ever) they are reintroduced to the game post-Armor 2.0 launch?

I hope I'm not the only one thinking about this potential conundrum.

I think it is better to actually reintroduce them after armour 2.0, alongside with maybe an engineer class that could potentially redeploy or repair them as well, there are a few ways this could work.

 

I'm thinking a pre designed location where an engineer can go to "fix" the obstacle, and enemy engineers need to destroy with satchels where they would break with a window/fence style destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
9 hours ago, Belgwyn said:

I think it is better to actually reintroduce them after armour 2.0, alongside with maybe an engineer class that could potentially redeploy or repair them as well, there are a few ways this could work.

 

I'm thinking a pre designed location where an engineer can go to "fix" the obstacle, and enemy engineers need to destroy with satchels where they would break with a window/fence style destruction.

 

While that would be nice, I'm referring more to having the Dragon's Teeth worked on alongside a project that they would influence (Armor 2.0). Otherwise, it'll probably just say on the cutting room floor because it won't be a thought anymore. Destructible environments are not a priority at this time since its Armor 2.0 or bust. You and I both know that destructibles are not on the agenda right now and probably won't be until Armor 2.0 is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrSimh    57
On 30/04/2018 at 1:12 AM, RadicalEdward2 said:

 - How much overall vehicle HP will be lost when colliding with the Dragon's Teeth?

Like a rock ?

The goal of  Dragon's Teeth is not to let the tanks pass, so we can say that it's almost like the rocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RadicalEdward2    1,889
On 5/13/2018 at 5:59 AM, MrSimh said:

Like a rock ?

The goal of  Dragon's Teeth is not to let the tanks pass, so we can say that it's almost like the rocks.

 

While that is true, even rocks are underutilized in the game as evidence of all the open areas in the current build.

Here's an example of varying obstacles back in 2013.

KnW0ATE.jpg

It's either Town or Forward Airfield. I can't tell because they use the exact same bridge asset.

But look at how diverse the terrain looked.

There's bushes, swamp grass, and rocks by the riverside and even rocks inside the forested area.

 

Nowadays, the only areas with this amount of obstacle variety is Forward Airfield's D line.

ihxg2II.png

 

I'm pushing for the re-implementation of the Dragon's Teeth because even if it could serve the same purpose as rocks, that shouldn't be a valid reason as to why measures should not be taken to ensure that the Dragon's Teeth remains up-to-par with Armor 2.0's development as it is a vehicular-based obstacle where as rocks are more of natural obstacles that can be "randomly generated".

 

By simply saying, "Oh, we could save the Dragon's Teeth for later." would leave us then wondering, "When will later truly come?" and "Will later come at all?" to which we would be found in a similar situation as to why there isn't any explicitly known efforts to port the old Mountain Town to the new build. It's not being ported because so much of the inner workings were left unattended for so long that, the workload could (allegedly) be too daunting to even be bothered with since no one probably kept taps on keeping the codes compatible with each new update.

Like a plant that needs to be watered daily, the asset will eventually wither away into obscurity until the new excuse becomes that "the plant's already wilting, so we're just not going to water it."

 

But getting back on-topic, if we're to continue sharing reference material, we must also draw our attention to the current state of how obstacles are distributed in the game presently.

MzZOFYO.png

 

One glaring issue that I've noticed over the past three years that I've played H&G is that obstacles tend to be placed too close to Objectives and Capture Points to have any real value or impact on gameplay.

 

There's plenty of open space beyond the radio antennae to strategically place the hedgehogs and yet, they are all almost flush with the Quonset huts; the same goes for the Cheval de Frise (chicken wire) and the sandbags. Seeing as how there's no destructible environment in the game yet, there's no reason for these resources to be wasted so frivolously.

 

Now, I would normally share a 3D mockup of how these obstacles could have been better utilized but, I'm currently soft-locked out of the modelling software I use because I need to either update my graphics cards or scrounge up money to buy a newer version of the software (which I currently can't afford to do so). So I'm just going to have to use Paint or Photoshop to illustrate my point.

 

QF6v8Qj.jpg

 

Its the little things (like moving around existing fortifications) that can make all the difference with a lot of the maps in the game.

 

And then there's areas like Forward Airfield's C-2.

7qJTXnQ.jpg

 

Why is there so much sandbag and chicken wire inside of the Capture Point?

Is it trying to keep enemies out or keep the Capture Point in?

There's so much open space around the CP and yet there's THREE stacks of sandbag lining on top of each other.

 

If the Objective/CP needs to be defended, the obstacles should be spread out in such a way that they're actually going to slow down progress.

You know...like obstacles are supposed to :|

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites