Project Reality Forums

I think it is great that currently, "foxholes" can withstand all area attacks except JDAM's. After all, isn't the current structure an attempt to partially emulate the ability (and very common practice) for infantry to entrench themselves through digging?

The biggest problem with the current "foxhole" is that the entrance to the foxholes are way too wide. You can drive a HMMWV through it! This basically means that any shell that lands in a 90 degree arc from the entrance and within appropriate distance will still kill a prone player lying inside the foxhole that is supposed to protect him from mortar and arty shells.

A simple solution would be to narrow the entrance, or place a two way ramp at the foot of the entrance so that the player is guarunteed safety from all but a direct hit on his hole.

I like using foxholes as humvee hull downs!

Well, I like to do that too, but at the same time I think they should primarily be for infantry protection.

IMO the only things that should be able to destroy foxholes are C4 and Thermite grenades. AT missiles and tank shells should not be able to destroy them. Again, these are supposed to act like foxholes. They may look in-game like big sand castles with walls that can be kicked over when you trip on them, but their functionality should be similar to that of real foxholes---since it is not possible to create player made holes in the ground.

This would make defending as infantry more survivable on vehicle focused maps and more enjoyable as a whole. Also, the process of attacking infantry entrenched in such a manner will require tactics such as suppressing to keep their heads down and advancing upon their position--close enough to either lob a grenade into their lap or charge into their foxholes with bayonets fixed!

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:I like using foxholes as humvee hull downs!

It's multifunctional, and when you using a (crow)humvee you will get more cover than using the mounted HMG. They shouldn't change it, or at least make a possibility to make a small and large foxhole.

I think the foxholes should be more versatile. I have actuall seen an AA emplacement inside a foxhole. Nice protection. I also use the foxhole to prtect the hummer or sometime my Toyota. All i need now is for the recoiless rifle to be added to replace the .50.

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:I like using foxholes as humvee hull downs!

*Bradley :3


Anyway, I'd love to see a "Covered" foxhole. Like the old "sandbag house" that the FOB used to be :3

If only I could fit a VN3 in the foxhole.

what could be an interesting improvement, would be different shapes and sizes of foxholes. this would add more functionality and protection to the fray. although this would need more models to be created and a change in the current commo rose setup for deploying buildings.

As to that covered foxhole mentioned earlier, why not make a mini bunker. I'm not saying a concrete one, a low lying covered foxhole or something. It would be cool to shoot from cover where its hard for a sniper to hit you.

Maybe make it so that there is no "enterance" way for anything. The way infantry can get in is by jumping over the sides. This prevents the foxhole's being used as Humvee protectors in arty strikes

I like the new fox holes lol ... but yea the openings ARE a bit big ... lolol possibly just adding 2 boxes to close off the space could help lol or like . somthing big and wooden ahja

but you could always set up foxholes in a figure 8 putting two facing oposite directsions ... Arty proffing them except for Direct hits then both failed lol

i think each soldier should be able to make their own 1 man foxholes, just incase of a firefight or something. i sure if in real life you were stuck in the middle of a field during a firefight, you wouldnt just let your shovel go to waste, you would probably build yourself up a little wall or dig a little hole to conceal yourself

Imchicken1 wrote:Maybe make it so that there is no "enterance" way for anything. The way infantry can get in is by jumping over the sides. This prevents the foxhole's being used as Humvee protectors in arty strikes

That's how it was before and people decided that it was nearly impossible to get into. That's why these new foxholes came in .9.

DevilDog812 wrote:i think each soldier should be able to make their own 1 man foxholes, just incase of a firefight or something. i sure if in real life you were stuck in the middle of a field during a firefight, you wouldnt just let your shovel go to waste, you would probably build yourself up a little wall or dig a little hole to conceal yourself

It depends... firefights in PR are minute long ----- I mean:

Suppose you are defending - you ARE gonna have enough time to dig FOB foxholes.
Suppose you get attacked without any foxhole built - would you REALLY drop your weapon to make a trench with bullets wizzing past you? Note that anyone in PR can have a 100% accuracy, rendering quick foxhole building useless - you'll die building it OR while steadying your gun... See what I mean?

Redamare wrote:I like the new fox holes lol ... but yea the openings ARE a bit big ... lolol possibly just adding 2 boxes to close off the space could help lol or like . somthing big and wooden ahja

but you could always set up foxholes in a figure 8 putting two facing oposite directsions ... Arty proffing them except for Direct hits then both failed lol

You sure do like to "lol" a lot now, don't you?

I agree with what Mix has suggested. Foxholes are supposed to represent soldiers digging into terrain for cover. Unfortunately, due to the BF2 engine, this is not possible.

Even so, the current foxholes should still provide the same amount of protection a foxhole dug into the ground would. Unless a munition lands directly inside the foxhole, you should be safe from mortars/artillery/tank shells/etc. if you keep your head down.

And although they do make nice hull-down positions for vehicles, I don't think that is what the foxhole is intended for. Making the entrance a bit smaller would help prevent this minor exploit.

Good suggestion. Would help promote infantry to stay in defensive positions while being assaulted more often.

In all honesty, I'd love to see foxholes designated for vehicle use, something large and rectangular with one side open to allow for a Bradley or tank to drive into and stop. The edges of the fox hole would cover the majority of the side of the vehicles only leaving mostly the turret and main gun exposed. Pretty much like the ones on EJOB Desert. Of course these could be quite a feat to take on so you'd want to limit them to maybe 2-4 deployable ones per map.

Excavus wrote:That's how it was before and people decided that it was nearly impossible to get into. That's why these new foxholes came in .9.

oops. I never used foxholes in .9 ops:

i think the "ramp" in and out of it would help. Having a hole in the back, no matter how small, makes foxholes to easy to flank (e.g. Snipers could shoot into the enterance hole)

Leave the holes...

as usual in PR

gameplay > realism.

The foxholes give goooood cover for infantry, are enterable, you need to THINK in which direction to place them, they give SOMEWHAT of cover for jeeps (against low flying RPGs, but the top is open due to gameplay reasons, try shooting a humvee inside a "bunker"...).

Maybe "new" foxholes would give a bit of diversity to the game but cmon, we would "exploit" them just as well.