Getting through an obstacle breach

[Tjay]

Encountered in Sunday's DoW mission.

Platoon of tanks encounters 'hedgehog' metal obstacle across road stretching long way left and right. Mine plow tank clears obstacles from road. Tanks proceed through the gap. C.O CSS attempts to route his vehicles through the breach but they refuse to go. Breach opened to 5x road width. Some vehicles can now manually be driven through the gap but it takes 4 attempts before the Medic vehicle finally decides to follow the 'on road' route given it. Any ideas anyone?

[DarkLabor]

Well, I encountered this as well in the past. No matter if the breaching vehicle is manually driven or set on a breach path, the follow on vehicles stop as if the hedgehogs were there.

The only workaround is to manually drive each vehicle through the obstacles...

... quite painful when a scenario designer plans to make you cross obstacles with half of your combined arms task force.

[Pipe]

Gibson thx for the tip, yes I breached the obstacle manually in the Dow mission will try your method next time

[Tjay]

Tnx for the replies. Ran the scenario (relevant bit)in order to record the above behaviour and on the first attempt it was as I described. (Technique was to manually clear the obstacles off the road, then give the Medic vehicle and a HMMT a 'road route' thro the gap.) Unfortunately, I recorded in v3.11 while I was playing in v3.19, so recording failed. Sorted that, and stone me, using the exact same vehicles and technique, next time both the Medic and truck went through the narrow gap just fine. Not possible for the recording software to influence the SB AI obviously, but I'm a somewhat mystified.

[Tjay]

Yes, but my plough DID follow the road exactly - because I drove it manually. I than widened the gap to five times the width of the road. Clearly seen in the 3D view. The vehicles stayed exactly on their 'locked road route' so they didn't get any where near the obstacles. Something clearly 'spooked' them when approaching the gap. On Sunday it was not even possible to manually drive them thro the gap.

Just tried your method of using a breach route. The plough tank just makes a single pass, clearing half the road width - and no indication appears on the map - unlike with a full minefield breach. HOWEVER, the medic and truck both managed to squeeze thro the gap. So perhaps that is the answer.

[RENEGADE-623]

Whenever I d a breach, I make two waypoints and a breach route where I want the breach to be from one waypoint to another, then route the breaching vehicle, lane marker to it, then when they are complete I route the rest of the units through it until they are all through, but yes, I use the persistent breach route, not by clicking on the unit. Never have a problem that way

[Grenny]

Yes, but my plough DID follow the road exactly - because I drove it manually. I than widened the gap to five times the width of the road. Clearly seen in the 3D view. The vehicles stayed exactly on their 'locked road route' so they didn't get any where near the obstacles. Something clearly 'spooked' them when approaching the gap. On Sunday it was not even possible to manually drive them thro the gap.

Just tried your method of using a breach route. The plough tank just makes a single pass, clearing half the road width - and no indication appears on the map - unlike with a full minefield breach. HOWEVER, the medic and truck both managed to squeeze thro the gap. So perhaps that is the answer.

Tjay. IRL you don't use the Mineplow to create routes wider then one lane...with a second pass there is the chance to push a mine into the lane you just cleared.

[DarkLabor]

Yes but are you following the "independent" path (i.e. created the waypoint on the map so its persistent, a bit like in the planning phase) or did you just right click on the unit and give it a breach route?

If its persistent the route remains after the first unit uses it and the follow on vehicles just need to be routed to the start waypoint.

Hence why I said:

Once through the breach (i.e. the route ends) you can then continue on doing whatever you want with the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. unit.

Always.

In a very far past I did experience the loss of few tanks that were following the breach line wich was 1m off compared to the actual breached path just because I breached manually...

In the scenario where I did encounter this problem, I don't have time to man each vehicles.

For each hedgehog line, I send one breaching vehicle with two waypoints for one way, two for the return. The waypoints are at least 10m before the obstacles and 100m after the obstacles (it prevent vehicles to trap the other in worst case scenario). It's actually the same procedure I apply for minefields.

[Froggy]

The plough tank just makes a single pass, clearing half the road width - and no indication appears on the map - unlike with a full minefield breach.

Even with en Eng vehicule following the plough tank, the cleared lane will not be marked on map.

Only minefields breaches are marked on map and flags are deployed on 3D.

Side note, minefield breached with mine roller are not really breached, the eng vehicule will not follow the path and marks the lane.

the attached scenario allow you test different breaching configuration.

Select each lane with associated trigger.

breaching test.rar

[Tjay]

I do not dispute the efficiency of your method. However, there is more than one way to skin a cat. My original question, 'Why would my vehicles not pass through a 200m wide gap in a barrier obstacle that had been produced manually and was clearly visible in the 3D view?' remains unanswered.

But it's no big deal. And further testing last night showed that the anomaly was not consistent. For no discernible reason the medic vehicle and trucks suddenly decided they would behave properly.

[Tjay]

Even with en Eng vehicule following the plough tank, the cleared lane will not be marked on map.

Only minefields breaches are marked on map and flags are deployed on 3D.

Thank you Froggy. I had discovered that myself but thought it best not to contradict MG. He doesn't like it. :clin:

[Tjay]

Tjay. IRL you don't use the Mineplow to create routes wider then one lane...with a second pass there is the chance to push a mine into the lane you just cleared.

But here we are talking about 'Hedgehog' steel beams....

[Gibsonm]

I've deleted the posts that were apparently wrong and didn't answer the question.

Next time I'll just say RTFM.

[Tjay]

Gibson thx for the tip, yes I breached the obstacle manually in the Dow mission will try your method next time

On Sunday, your lead platoon encountered the barrier obstacle so you employed you mineplow tank to shovel the hedgehogs off the road to its full width, and then drove through the gap. Perfectly reasonble action IMHO. And I can see no logical reason why my CS vehicles refused to negotiate that gap on a 'road locked' route. But they wouldn't even go thro when the gap had been widened to 200m. Weird.

Testing offline, I've found that this behaviour cannot be RELIABLY replicated. Some times it happens; sometimes it doesn't. Even weirder. :confused:

[Tjay]

I've deleted the posts that were apparently wrong and didn't answer the question.

Next time I'll just say RTFM.

Had you done so in this case I would have asked you, 'Where in the FM is this behaviour explained?' :wink:

[Gibsonm]

Had you done so in this case I would have asked you, 'Where in the FM is this behaviour explained?' :wink:

There is no point in giving you a reference as it refers to doing it the way I described and displayed in the screenshot and demonstrated in the example scenario that in retrospect I wasted 30mins making for you.

You want to do it manually and that's entirely up to you, but then if it doesn't work you need to work out why it doesn't yourself as the technique described by myself and others here, that does work, didn't fit your requirement.

[Gibsonm]

Gibson thx for the tip, yes I breached the obstacle manually in the Dow mission will try your method next time

You are welcome.

Happy to PM you the information from the later post(s) if you missed them.

[Tjay]

There is no point in giving you a reference as it refers to doing it the way I described and displayed in the screenshot and demonstrated in the example scenario that in retrospect I wasted 30mins making for you.

You want to do it manually and that's entirely up to you, but then if it doesn't work you need to work out why it doesn't yourself as the technique described by myself and others here, that does work, didn't fit your requirement.

Firstly I withdraw my rather naughty dig about you not liking to be contradicted. And I thank you for taking the effort to make that little demo scenario. That said, I was a bit disappointed that you clearly thought I hadn't got a clue about this subject and needed to be instructed in the basic technique as laid down in the manual.

But the point of my original post was simply to enquire if anyone could see why the sequence I described did not work in this case, whereas it worked fine for Pipe and his tank platoon. One could, of course, stick strictly to the official method at all times. But thinking 'outside the box' and doing some experimenting often pays dividends. E.g if a minfield has a major or minor road running through it, a passable route can be cleared by a 'quick and dirty' method isn't mentioned in the manual. It's much faster than using Miclics. The drawback is that it doesn't appear on the map so follow-on units cannot be sent through automatically as there is no 'route'. It therefore needs to be publicised over the RT. Similarly, by experimentation, Rotar discovered that it was actually possible to negotiate a minefield laid across a road with a Humvee by simply looking where you 'put your feet'.

[Rotareneg]

This sounds more like a synchronization issue, perhaps not all clients (and/or the host) are "seeing" the steel beams as cleared, so some vehicles act as if they're still there?

[Lt DeFault]

One could, of course, stick strictly to the official method at all times. But thinking 'outside the box' and doing some experimenting often pays dividends. E.g if a minfield has a major or minor road running through it, a passable route can be cleared by a 'quick and dirty' method isn't mentioned in the manual. It's much faster than using Miclics. The drawback is that it doesn't appear on the map so follow-on units cannot be sent through automatically as there is no 'route'. It therefore needs to be publicised over the RT. Similarly, by experimentation, Rotar discovered that it was actually possible to negotiate a minefield laid across a road with a Humvee by simply looking where you 'put your feet'.

I'm not sure these tactics would be endorsed by the customers for which this sim was designed. Just sayin'.

[Tacom]

Similarly, by experimentation, Rotar discovered that it was actually possible to negotiate a minefield laid across a road with a Humvee by simply looking where you 'put your feet'.

Yea, if the mines are clearly vissible it is possible to drive diagonally through the minefield.

[Tjay]

I'm not sure these tactics would be endorsed by the customers for which this sim was designed. Just sayin'.

I take your comment seriously. Would this be deemed an exploit I wonder? IMHO, it's not, because in RL if mines could be seen placed on the surface of a road, (not buried) it would be reasonable to clear them just using a mineplow tank. But I have no experience of RL tanking. If the powers that be deem this technique to be an exploit - of a similar nature to placing infantry underwater to observe adjacent land - I will stop using it.

[Tjay]

This sounds more like a synchronization issue, perhaps not all clients (and/or the host) are "seeing" the steel beams as cleared, so some vehicles act as if they're still there?

Hi Rotar,

I have now captured this anomalous behaviour offline using OpenBroadcast (?), so can you advise me how to make the videos available to users of this forum? I have RTFM'd but can't get it to work. Thanks.

[Rotareneg]

Just upload it to Youtube and post the link on the forum.

I just finished recording a video too and am rendering it now.

It would appear that the area that defines the location of the obstacles for the AI remains even when the obstacles have been completely cleared. When a vehicle breaches the obstacle area, it appears to leave a "trail" that other vehicles will use to cross the obstacle. Thus, if you clear a steel beam obstacle by driving lengthwise back and forth to clear all three rows of beams, the AI still sees the rectangular area with a pretty much useless trail that goes parallel to the obstacle. If you then breach across the obstacle with the plow again, even though the obstacles where already gone, you'll leave a much more useful trail that other vehicles will follow.

I think maybe the best way to breach an obstacle or minefield may be to manually clear a path using several passes and then finally breach down the middle of the cleared route one last time to leave a "breach trail" and a safety buffer on either side.

[Tjay]

Many thanks Rotar. All that makes perfect sense. I just tried laying a breach route from one side of the manually created gap to the other and then routing my vehicles to WP1, but they wouldn't even have that.

However, I accept MG's point that if you stick strictly to the official method and clear a lane one tank wide through the obstruction with a mineplow tank on a breach route, and then send any follow-up vehicles to the first wp, they will wiggle through the gap. My hope was that with a wide, manually-created gap, vehicles wouldn't have to queue up and go through one by one - with all the usual risks of getting tangled up.