Matrix Games Forums

Ahoy,

After playing the "First Clean Break" scenario, I am missing a command to immediately blow a bridge, without waiting for the enemy to get close... is this possible? If not, why not?

Jesper

[edit] Oops, forgot the obligatory ooh'ing and aah'ing. Awesome game [:)]

To blow up a bridge, you use the Deny Crossing task. However, a unit with the Deny Crossing task near a bridge will not attempt to blow up the bridge UNLESS the enemy is closing by (under 500m if I recall).

That is standard procedure in war. You never blow up a bridge until you are 100% sure it's going to fall into the enemy's hands, since you never know when you will need the bridge later for your own operations. So bridges are only destroyed at the last minute (and even then, it's an attempt at destroying, it's not sure it will work). 

Hmm, that's a bit of a disappointment. I really wanted that bridge out of the way.

ORIGINAL: Dogbert

Hmm, that's a bit of a disappointment. I really wanted that bridge out of the way.

I wonder how many comanders said just that during the second world war?[;)]

ORIGINAL: Tzar007

........You never blow up a bridge until you are 100% sure it's going to fall into the enemy's hands, since you never know when you will need the bridge later for your own operations.

Well .... [:D] ...., the Germans did just that on many occasions. Some of the bridges in my hometown Cologne had been bombed by the USAAF and/or damaged (rail bridge), but the remaining bridges in that region had been blown up by Engineers. The US forces weren't even close. They did that with many bridges. :p Some rare exception on the western front might've been the bridge at Remagen, where the Commander tried to "save" as many troops and civilians, by evacuating them to the right river bank: The bridge was supposed to be blown up in the very last second, but the charges did not explode completely. Investigations revealed that some of the detonators were destroyed/damaged by Allied support fire.
5 Divisions could be withdrawn from the dead-end area Cologne (bridges destroyed, heavy fire from the right bank), and directed to the Remagen bridgehead.

It's true that the Germans did systematically destroy the Rhine bridges. In most cases they waited till their forces had been withdrawn from the far side. In a number of cases they erred on safety side and blew them anyway and in the case of the Remagen bridge they tried to hold it open for as long as possible. In general, though, bridges were not blown unless absolutely necessary. Anyone who like me has been consripted to help rebuild a bridge will appreciate the reason for doing so. [;)] 
 
So on balance we opted to simulate the norm rather than the exceptions. I think this provides a better "game" as well. All too often the player approaches things only from the perspective of winning the game which is neatly defined by the parameters of the objectives and the scope of the map. However, in RL there is often the "bigger picture" to take into account.
 
Eg. the Germans at Nijmegen could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by just blowing the Nijmegen bridge but the German high command had their eyes on a bigger prize the recapture of Antwerp and they needed that bridge for their counter-attack. That is why they never attempted to blow it until the British tanks lined up at the other end and commenced their assault in conjunction with the US para.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

So on balance we opted to simulate the norm rather than the exceptions. I think this provides a better "game" as well. .............

Eg. the Germans at Nijmegen could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by just blowing the Nijmegen bridge.................
............they never attempted to blow it until the British tanks lined up at the other end and commenced their assault in conjunction with the US para.

It's a good decision regarding the game-balance, imho.

But you're mistaken regarding the Nijmegen bridge. The officer in charge decided to ignore orders and ordered the destruction of the bridge instead of useless attempts to regain control of the bridge, but the charges failed to explode, unlike at Remagen, where at least parts of the charges exploded, causing critical damage, but not taking it down instantly. It collapsed a few days later.

Also, I was referring to the fact that blowing up bridges was the german tool of choice for trying to avoid very fast progress of the enemy in the last 2-3 yrs of the war, on both front lines, eastern front and in France later on. Remagen and Nijmegen are rather exceptions (waiting for the very last second), so it's supposed to be the other way round for later stages of the war. IMHO.

Ripley: I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Hudson: Fuckin' A...
Burke: Ho-ho-hold on one second. This installation has a substantial dollar value attached to it.
Ripley: They can *bill* me.


... sums it up nicely [:D]