Static Units: Discuss!

[MARDER]

But bunkers that you deploy yourself: Nope. Do not want: WEE (and wab) are about forces engaging, not one digging in for the other to smash on.

WEE is about fighting in WW3 and in a fight the is a defender and a attacker, you react or some or one has react to your moves. Nobody is forcing you to dig in you can still rush around but only because you don’t want it why shod some one else shodent? Only because you don’t like it?Its WW3 and digging in was part of the plann.

Think positive, more options to chose how to conduct battle. The attacker and defender missions get more fun and more tactics to chose with more toys to bring total destruction to the other side.
Now its a rush fest.

Barbed wire, mines, tank traps... All of these require time out of the scope of the game.

ROFL out of scope? Barbwire needs only few minuts or even shorter to be set up every infantry unit has them. mines a few seconds if you use arty or airdrop or mine laying vehicles a few minuets. tank traps the same prefabricate concrete blocks and ironheaghocs out of steel just thrown out of the back of a truck only a few minutes. this is in time scope of the game. Bunkers the same prefab and placed with a crane only a few minutes. I don’t know about what kind of bunkers you think(cheyenne mountain complex). Pillboxes out of concrete are a huge help against direct fire and air burst ammo. The same goes for sandbag bunkers works like a charm and every infantry platoon can build them in minutes.

[DeuZerre]

Ok, let me just rephrase that:

I'm against bunkers that we would DEPLOY. I'm all for them to be buildings that already are on the map where infantry becomes more resistant to artillery than just urban combat, but against the ability to decide "Hey, wouldn't it be great if this time, that bunker was by the edge of the forest?"

To have a significant barbed wire position, it's about 5 minutes per section, with a group of at least 5 people. You require truckloads of those sections to deploy a significant no-man's land that will be trampled by any artillery shell or tank or APC that drives around.

Mine layers don't go on a battlefield, period. They set before the battle, where theywere told to go and dig, but won't ever do it 5minutes from the enemy if they weren't totally desperate (and by that time, it's more of a delay tactic to cover a retreat, not a combat tactic)

Crane carried bunkers? Would you bring those to a battlefield too, seriously? To be honest, I haven't seen any, but then they aren't used in recent wars, and don't believe they'd be planted there like that, on the spot, right before the enemy strikes.

- Little note: In a war, there is an aggressor and a defender, true, but at the tactical level, it's a whole different story. It's not like it's written in stone "The invader must attack, always, and never defend, while the defender must always defend, never attack."

[Hob_Gadling]

"Hey, wouldn't it be great if this time, that bunker was by the edge of the forest?"

Why not? Ever since W:EE launch trailer I've wanted to see a scenario where the war starts with massive artillery barrage on whatever positions the defender has. This of course requires a scenario where one side clearly has to attack, in the current skirmish gametype it doesn't work.

[MARDER]

Ok, let me just rephrase that:

I'm against bunkers that we would DEPLOY. I'm all for them to be buildings that already are on the map where infantry becomes more resistant to artillery than just urban combat, but against the ability to decide "Hey, wouldn't it be great if this time, that bunker was by the edge of the forest?"

I am for it so know?Whats so wrong with this concept?Sounds like you are against player progress in multiplayer, he got outmaneuver´d or got overrun because his bunker was in the wrong place. He learned maybe this time victory. like saying make all tanks static because the player can move them to the edge of a forest.
Sounds more like you are afraid of change and you have to adjust to a new situation.

To have a significant barbed wire position, it's about 5 minutes per section, with a group of at least 5 people. You require truckloads of those sections to deploy a significant no-man's land that will be trampled by any artillery shell or tank or APC that drives around.

If that’s how you use your barbwire its your thing. I would take a small section of 10meters and pull it over the street or from building wall to building wall and put a few mines/grandees under it plus a mmg or a few guilders to guard it. I go with real life approach. If you want to make some WW1 no mans land barbwire is the wrong thing, take mines its faster and if some one try s to get rid of them he has to take loses.

Mine layers don't go on a battlefield, period. They set before the battle, where theywere told to go and dig, but won't ever do it 5minutes from the enemy if they weren't totally desperate (and by that time, it's more of a delay tactic to cover a retreat, not a combat tactic)

To dig?Mines get thrown out of the vehicles and at best visible for the enemy. Yes five minutes before a attack you can place mines or earlier . first the enemy scouts pass and say the way is clear after that you put your mines and if the enemy is coming he has a problem. evade or wait for clearing equipment or clear the way your self. So you buy your self time when he waits or you direct him in a direction you want him to have or you take him under fire with arty, air. Mine laying vehiclesMinelayer.Its a combat tactic to defend your flank. With increasing speed of deployment redeployment changing positions so mine layers have to respond fast. Dinging in mines is something for far behind the front or guard a border. In modern combat you throw mines visible for the enemy most of the time with arty or vehicle if it has to be fast done. sometimes you do use only dummy or mix dummy mines with real one. OK you would use your mines to destroy the enemy or you would try to do this I would just use them to get him in a different position that favors me and not him or just delay him or deny a position important for him.

Its up to every player how he uses his assets.

Crane carried bunkers? Would you bring those to a battlefield too, seriously? To be honest, I haven't seen any, but then they aren't used in recent wars, and don't believe they'd be planted there like that, on the spot, right before the enemy strikes.

Every repair battalion has them tracked or on wheeled cranes, where´s the problem?No they don’t get planted on the spot before the enemy arrives but if you stay long in a place or you have to defend a strategic asset like a airfield a town or a crossroad you use them. bather than bare sky over your head that’s just invite for air burst ammo or getting overrun fast by the enemy. defensive structures bind more enemy assets to overcome this obstacle. Ts not like NATO or USSR did not expect to get attacked. We did know that they know that we know that there will be maybe war.

- Little note: In a war, there is an aggressor and a defender, true, but at the tactical level, it's a whole different story. It's not like it's written in stone "The invader must attack, always, and never defend, while the defender must always defend, never attack."

and so the invader digs in when he is defending places, putting his sandbag bunkers at forest edges and puts barbwire and mines to canalize the attacking defender or prepares traps for the attacking defender if he manages to get the upper hand. more options to choose more fun.

[loosebruce]

Ok, let me just rephrase that:

I'm against bunkers that we would DEPLOY. I'm all for them to be buildings that already are on the map where infantry becomes more resistant to artillery than just urban combat, but against the ability to decide "Hey, wouldn't it be great if this time, that bunker was by the edge of the forest?"

To have a significant barbed wire position, it's about 5 minutes per section, with a group of at least 5 people. You require truckloads of those sections to deploy a significant no-man's land that will be trampled by any artillery shell or tank or APC that drives around.

Mine layers don't go on a battlefield, period. They set before the battle, where theywere told to go and dig, but won't ever do it 5minutes from the enemy if they weren't totally desperate (and by that time, it's more of a delay tactic to cover a retreat, not a combat tactic)

Crane carried bunkers? Would you bring those to a battlefield too, seriously? To be honest, I haven't seen any, but then they aren't used in recent wars, and don't believe they'd be planted there like that, on the spot, right before the enemy strikes.

- Little note: In a war, there is an aggressor and a defender, true, but at the tactical level, it's a whole different story. It's not like it's written in stone "The invader must attack, always, and never defend, while the defender must always defend, never attack."

The reason I put forward static bunkers , mines etc would be for the Game modes like "Last Stand" , "Siege" . These game modes are very unpopular from my experience as there is no clear defensive part. Most times I play Last Stand the defenders all rush a zone so we can spawn.
There is no Last Stand for the defenders its more a case of we all just spawn in the middle and tank roll over a sector.

However with some static defenses like mine fields , tank traps (someones suggestion) it would make these game modes more true to what they are instead of what it is at the moment which is just Conquest but with funny spawns.

[DeuZerre]

^ In that optic, yes, but limited to that game mode.

I like bunkers, I have quite a few in my region (north coast of France) but seriously implementing them in the standard battle setting, apart as in map features, Nope.

[solvens]

Like Deuzerre, I would prefer towed weapons, coming with their transport/ammunition carrier like infantry.

The advantages would be :
-lots of ammo in the truck
-small size, better concealment
-little price drop
-airborne arty, youhou !! (and it would make chinooks useful )
The disadvantages :
-long deployment time, and completely uneffective on the move
-can move with the speed of a snail when not towed
-fragile as crystal (truck and 5 men infantry unit)


About the radars, I think it doesn't fit into the game, since only autonomous units are modelled (except for the kub, but that's another story), and radar systems aren't interchangables.
Besides, I don't think I have enough place in any of my decks for a brand new type of unit.


Why not the Rapier, by the way ?

[Stagler]

Why not the Rapier, by the way ?

Tracked Rapier is already ingame I believe.

True story.

[guynumber7]

The Hawk missile needs to be in

[LJFHutch]

To have a significant barbed wire position, it's about 5 minutes per section, with a group of at least 5 people.

There are a few things which wouldn't happen in the time-frame of a wargame battle, such as repairing a vehicle. In such a case static defenses are far more plausible than repairing a MBT on the field while a battle is going on.

- Little note: In a war, there is an aggressor and a defender, true, but at the tactical level, it's a whole different story. It's not like it's written in stone "The invader must attack, always, and never defend, while the defender must always defend, never attack."

If the enemy is attacking you then presumably you would already be in a good defensible position, why would you leave it and put yourself on equal ground with the enemy?

From my understanding at least, meeting engagements like those in Wargame are quite uncommon in real warfare, the vast majority of the time it is an attack and defense. Wiki "Such encounters normally occur by chance in small unit operations, typically when two moving forces collide. Engagements involving larger units may occur when intelligence, surveillance, or reconnaissance operations have been ineffective."