Project Reality Forums

It's not though, that's the point, you can't get half a squad in a foxhole concentrating fire in 1 direction...

Trenches arent realistic nowadays anyway

A 'Sandbag wall' might be more acceptable and realistic than an actual trench, though this is kinda what the old sandbags were.

I think the OP wants something as long as the wire and tank traps but made specifically for use by infantry to hold a line in defense. A line of sandbags in that manner could work and would look correct.

Yeah I don't really get why they were removed anyway, they were at a bit of a useless height and there's probably not much room for another requestable in the comm rose though.

I liked the old sandbags. In a way they provided more cover than foxholes, for instance, you could use them to cover MG emplacements from behind. (so they wouldn't get shot directly by a tank or anti-tank weapon. It might seem silly but it worked sometimes)

Foxholes are useful, but it would be much nicer if we could have both sandbags and foxholes. Not sure if it's possible though.

Well long foxholes for trenches could work.. although it wouldn't look that great... Maybe on a slope it would!

rampo93(FIN) wrote:wtf??? u cant build anything under ground!? r u nuts!?!?!?. and if thats not what u did mean the foxhole is just as good...

read the whole post next time before u make ignorant comments please

"Trenches arent realistic nowadays anyway" to whoever said this fair enough but foxholes that waste half of your stamina are not realistic by any means either and you cannot just put an opening in one because your exposed, and whoever suggested it would look weird on a building so does every asset.

Basically it would look like this looking down it from the side -^-^- if you make it between 5-10 yrds long you could fit at least 4 in comfortably and it would be a better alternative to cover rather than the foxhole.

Dev's get back to me on this but is the only reason this hasnt happened already is because you guys dont want glitched "super tall" walls being built that would create like a super defensive possition?

Blakeman wrote:A 'Sandbag wall' might be more acceptable and realistic than an actual trench, though this is kinda what the old sandbags were.

I think the OP wants something as long as the wire and tank traps but made specifically for use by infantry to hold a line in defense. A line of sandbags in that manner could work and would look correct.

this is probably even a better idea than a trench except if your out in the open you could get flanked very easily but either this idea or an above ground trench i think would be better than the foxhole in the new version

They can keep the current foxhole model, just put an opening on one side so it may be accessed without having to jump in it necessarily. It is quite annoying to jump into a foxhole and then being unable to quickly leave the position in an emergency because you have to jump out again.

xXRich07Xx wrote:They can keep the current foxhole model, just put an opening on one side so it may be accessed without having to jump in it necessarily. It is quite annoying to jump into a foxhole and then being unable to quickly leave the position in an emergency because you have to jump out again.

mentioned this a bunch of times in the post already but this isnt a good solution because you would be exposed in the foxhole which renders the foxhole pointless

small crate looking thing that would act as a stair case out of the foxhole might work.

supahpingi wrote:Trenches arent realistic nowadays anyway

not quite, trenches are still used all the time, although not commonly used out in the field since most combat ares these days are attack and leave, but when tasked to defend a location short trench lines are built. they are great for covering from shrapnell and gun fire, and is much better than a foxhole.

in a conventional force on conventional force style war like we have in PR, trenches would be very common in use.

**EDIT. fixed visual examples by doing them in paint**

The biggest problems I have with the foxhole is summed up in 2 points:

1. It uses up half your stamina to get in or out of it. If you have been sitting on your *** in real life firing you're not very fatigued, but if your position is about to get overrun and you hop out to run away you are in way more trouble than you ought to be... no sprint when you've been stationary for the last 10 minutes?

2. Foxholes in this release do not allow you to practice sensible infantry doctrine. Infantrymen are taught to fire around cover rather than over it as much as possible. If you can't dig into the ground and fire from ground level then you fire around a piece of cover. This was possible with the old sandbags but not with the new foxhole.

All a foxhole lets you do is get excellent cover while curled up in a ball wanting the bullets to go away. If you actually want to fire back you are at a disadvantage to anyone out there who is prone or crouched. You need to stand to fire and we all know thats not very accurate. The point is that a foxhole puts a defender in a weaker position when firing back. This is completely the reverse of what it ought to be.

How do you fix this? Well the trench offers a nice option. If its two sided and like a low sandbag wall that allows a crouching infantryman to fire over. Also with the whole -^- thing you could make the ^ into a raised area that gives great cover to a machine gun or sniper to fire through a narrow aperture in the sandbags so that he can in fact fire as deployed from a fortified defensive position.

All you have to do to fix a foxhole for proper firing is to make slots on either 2 sides or 4 sides so that you can fire from the foxhole crouched into certain firing arcs. The way they are laid therefore implies that you should lay them in a patter to allows for overlapping firing arcs and to make your defenses inter reliant.

Trenches offer the bonus of being able to create a built up 'on-line' defensive position for a squad that needs to hole a choke point. It would also offer a sandbagged position for an MG or sniper which is severely lacking at this point.

Ideas for making a trench viable for firing at crouched, prone, and for moving at crouch without being exposed:

To achieve the ability to let soldiers fire over the sandbags while crouched or prone but also to be able to traverse the interior without showing their heads you could create 3 levels of height within the trench. I'll try to demonstrate in crude characters.



The above examples show that you have either a one direction or two direction defensive trench. The lowest part is where soldiers can move while crouched below the lip of the sandbags while the second level up can be where soldiers can crouch to fire over the trench. To facilitate a safe ability to defend from the second level you could create crenelations (those notches on medieval turrets) along the length of the sandbags so that each soldier can fire into a certain arc without risking being shot from where he isn't looking. The following example shows what I mean.




Obviously the spacing and number of them would be determined by the overall design and size of the trench.

Lastly for sniper and MGs occupying the ^ outcropping you coudl create a further slight elevation which can be crawled up from prone from the second crouch-firing level. This area would have a relatively narrow firing arc to protect what would obviously be the most popular target. Further you could raise the height of the sandbags around this spot a bit more to protect the occupant a bit. I guess that is another thing that would be an 'in progress' decision.




Its an ambitious idea but I think it could work. Plus it'd look badass and anything badass looking is gonna get built. Now the images appear as if they imply digging underground but they only represent the internal configuration. All the dead space between the edge of the static and the trench avenues would be filled by dirt. Obviously last of all they'd be open on either end or perhaps with some kind of barred opening like _ --- _ much like the bases have for vehicle entrances.

Bringerof_D wrote:small crate looking thing that would act as a stair case out of the foxhole might work.

Yeah I'm not sure why some sort of steps or something along those lines didn't get added, perhaps the foxhole got added later on in the development of .85 and the issue wasn't really noticed, or wasn't noticed in time for the model to be modified.

Still think foxholes are useful though, very good for a couple of guys that have a few arcs to take care of.

I am not sure if it would be possible But in other games it is possible to fall though the ground ... Infinate falls.... but i think with BF2 if u go under ground you automaticaly die. like when you fall of the edge of the maps.. same thing.... If it was possible ..... 1 Delete Ground around the Model 2. insert object 3. enjoy?? Except it might cause glitching when the trenches get destroyed

Actually after looking at the foxhole again there are notches for firing so its actually a good emplacement though it still doesn't solve the issues of losing your stamina to man or de-man the position.

I still think that trenches can work. I wish I was any good at modeling and using the BF2 engine cause then I'd happily explore it myself.

It is not possible people, it has been stated before.

PFunk wrote:You need to stand to fire and we all know thats not very accurate.

Nope look/try again, they were made to be fired from the crouch position. The holes are dipped in the middle. If your firing from there yes you will have to stand. Sounds like you need to get your player up to the rim.


Also you drawings are missing something.



OH and to make these look right you need to draw lines from each ends to the bottom. Like this

Line at the bottom is the ground.

The stamina problem could be reduced by giving the foxhole a ramp, then covering it with the same texture it displaces, except it has no collision mesh (Basically you walk through the wall :/ )

M.