[Rules] Can non-personnel units dig in?

[treadasaurusrex]

I feel bad going down the rabbit whole again, once it looks like you extricated yourself from it, but the rules for digging in aren't all that great.
     Beginning dug in makes sense for many scenario's.  But I do have two major objections.

     1) Time -  According to rules it takes only 30 minutes to dig in provide one is not interupted. 
         a) No one digs in that fast - certainly not a foxhole.  As an infantrymen I can tell you that you, that soil and root system dependent, one can spend most of a night digging a foxhole.  Granted that is you and your battle buddy rotating in 15-30 minute intervals (one digging and one providing security).  It is exhausting.  God help you if you hit the water table before you can get at least 4 feet down.  
         b) The best you can do is Hasty Fighting Position (aka Hasty Grave) -https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=hasty+fighting+position&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8.  Does provide some protection from both direct and indirect fire, and better than nothing, but it is not what most of you probably envision when you think about digging in.
         c) Mortars, Guns and Tanks would take a hell-of-alot of effort to dig in.  Even with a larger crew it would take time to do it and do it right. Best thing to do if use the terrain (some natural low ground or berm) and quickly reinforce it with some extra digging.

    2) Once fox holes or hasty fighting positions are dug - they don't go away unless you fill them in.  Why do they disappear when you leave the area.

Mike

I think what you are considering digging in to be more of entrenching. The rules seem to follow that as well. It made even more sense WAAAAY back in the day when there were 3 levels rather than 2: dug in, entrenchment, bunker.

      I have been playing. PG since 1999 (1st Edition).  I don't remember there being three levels to digging in.
      Also, in U.S. Military we consider entrenching something akin to digging actual trenches and defensive works.  Entrenchments are manmade fortifications.  Digging in is more temporary in nature.  The longer you are in the defense the more robust it becomes.  Hasty fighting positions become fighting Positions (fox holes), Fighting positions become built down fighting positions with overhead cover.  Eventually you will  dig in alternate and supplementary positions, and start tying in positions with communications trenches.  Eventually you can and will construct trenches with pill-boxes, or walls with towers.  Given time, your hasty's can become a virtual fortress which can be surrounded by obstacle belts including land mines and wire.  
      Even from a WW II perspective, fox holes aren't really entrenchments.  For game purposes you may be right.... it takes about 15 minutes to carve out a hasty fighting position for an infantryman, 30 for him and his battle buddy (one securing while the other digs).  Not sure how long it would take to build a berm around a tank or a gun.  I would imagine it would take quite a bit of time if building it on a flat surface, and a little less if using natural folds in the terrain, or man made walls/fences to obscure at least part of your vehicle/gun.

    Mike

Similar experience.
Having been an armored company and battalion XO, my tank had a blade in front and my crew could create initial (hasty) enfilade positions for a whole platoon (17 tanks) in about 75 minutes with my tank's dozer blade. That was in peacetime maneuvers, and not under hostile fire. No overhead, or rear protection, and typically minimal buildup on the flanks of each tank. These "dozer push enfilade positions" were created in appropriate -- usually desert --  terrain. Creating secondary firing positions for each track would have taken an additional 75 minutes, or so.

Felipe

[Greyfox]

I feel bad going down the rabbit whole again, once it looks like you extricated yourself from it, but the rules for digging in aren't all that great.
     Beginning dug in makes sense for many scenario's.  But I do have two major objections.

     1) Time -  According to rules it takes only 30 minutes to dig in provide one is not interupted. 
         a) No one digs in that fast - certainly not a foxhole.  As an infantrymen I can tell you that you, that soil and root system dependent, one can spend most of a night digging a foxhole.  Granted that is you and your battle buddy rotating in 15-30 minute intervals (one digging and one providing security).  It is exhausting.  God help you if you hit the water table before you can get at least 4 feet down.  
         b) The best you can do is Hasty Fighting Position (aka Hasty Grave) -https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=hasty+fighting+position&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8.  Does provide some protection from both direct and indirect fire, and better than nothing, but it is not what most of you probably envision when you think about digging in.
         c) Mortars, Guns and Tanks would take a hell-of-alot of effort to dig in.  Even with a larger crew it would take time to do it and do it right. Best thing to do if use the terrain (some natural low ground or berm) and quickly reinforce it with some extra digging.

    2) Once fox holes or hasty fighting positions are dug - they don't go away unless you fill them in.  Why do they disappear when you leave the area.

Mike

I think what you are considering digging in to be more of entrenching. The rules seem to follow that as well. It made even more sense WAAAAY back in the day when there were 3 levels rather than 2: dug in, entrenchment, bunker.

      I have been playing. PG since 1999 (1st Edition).  I don't remember there being three levels to digging in.
      Also, in U.S. Military we consider entrenching something akin to digging actual trenches and defensive works.  Entrenchments are manmade fortifications.  Digging in is more temporary in nature.  The longer you are in the defense the more robust it becomes.  Hasty fighting positions become fighting Positions (fox holes), Fighting positions become built down fighting positions with overhead cover.  Eventually you will  dig in alternate and supplementary positions, and start tying in positions with communications trenches.  Eventually you can and will construct trenches with pill-boxes, or walls with towers.  Given time, your hasty's can become a virtual fortress which can be surrounded by obstacle belts including land mines and wire.  
      Even from a WW II perspective, fox holes aren't really entrenchments.  For game purposes you may be right.... it takes about 15 minutes to carve out a hasty fighting position for an infantryman, 30 for him and his battle buddy (one securing while the other digs).  Not sure how long it would take to build a berm around a tank or a gun.  I would imagine it would take quite a bit of time if building it on a flat surface, and a little less if using natural folds in the terrain, or man made walls/fences to obscure at least part of your vehicle/gun.

    Mike

Bunkers werent used much, but existed in 2nd edition when called for. The rules were dropped entirely for 3rd edition along with HQ units. 

http://www.pg-hq.com/library.php?series=...it&id=1198

Dug in takes 30 minutes, has generally -1 modifiers, and arent permanent. 

Entrenchments cant be built in a scenario timeframe, generally has a -2 modifier, cant be used by AFVs, and is permanent. 

Bunkers cant be built in a scenario timeframe, generally had a -3 modifier, their own fire values, and were permanent (units),

The more real life detail you fill in, the more I am left questioning where you think the delineation between the rules and your view are. The only leap of faith I see is assuming that digging in an AFV includes using the terrain for rudimentary hull down positions. Other than perhaps allowing units to reach entrenchment level in very very long scenarios, and disallowing weapon units from digging in on the field, what would you propose?

Triangular,
 
       Love this game system and think that it is one of the most accurate systems to replicate tactical action during WW II, while minimizing a lot of extraneous rules.   I am a historian, and I like asking these types of questions for two reasons.  First I like to make sure that folks understand or can visualize what digging in looks like.  And second to address any potential elephants in the room.  It might lead to tighter rules if a Fifth edition is ever produced. 
       One of those potential elephants is what is meant by digging in.  The second elephant in the room is the amount of time it takes to get to that level of protection.  Digging in infantrymen is easier than digging in machine gun teams and mortars, which is easier than digging in an anti-tank weapon, which is easier than digging in an artillery piece,.... an armored car..... an assault gun/light tank.... or a medium/heavy tank. 

        Real life experience allows me to agree that hasty fighting positions for infantrymen would take about 30 minutes or two turns to complete.  50% of the platoon pulling security while the other 50% dig (15 minutes for each half of the platoon to digging - two turns).  Where I believe disparities arise, and I don't necessarily have solutions for it include the following. I believe to resolve disparities we have to approach the situation with a common series of assumptions (see bold words below).
 
        1)  Digging in disappears -   Unless you fill in the holes (which is quicker than digging them out), and which was rarely done, they still exist.   The fact that you can't leave, and allow someone to reoccupy would mean that we are operating on the assumption that the fighting positions are improperly located, or that the direction of fighting has changed.  As a leader, if I walked up on unoccupied fighting positions (especially former U.S. fighting positions) and they were in positions that made sense, I would occupy them and at a later date, would work to enhance them.  I would be more wary of enemy entrenchments, it is likely the enemy would have those positions plotted by their artillery (a significant consideration) and I would have to check for some bobby traps.  But if I didn't have time, and the situation warranted, I might use enemy positions temporarily.  BTW, most WW II entrenchments weren't filled in when soldiers left (meaning they went onto the offensive, or withdrew).

         2)  Times for digging in tanks, armored cars and guns.  Takes a lot more time.   If they begin the scenario dug in, it makes sense.  Trying to dig in a tank or gun in 30 minutes or less, without assuming that folds in the terrain allow for some sort of defilade beggars belief.  I understand that this will likely rarely be employed by mobile forces mid scenario, so this likely has a minimal impact on game play.  I also am not sure that additional special rules are needed to add to the realism.  A gun team will put the gun behind a brick wall, a tank crew will find a fold in the terrain to put their tank, and then spend some time adding additional barrier materiel.

      Tracking all for the rules on entrenchments and bunkers.  I have copies of both 1st and 2nd edition rules, which I haven't reviewed in a while.  You have me wanting to dive in because I always remembered bunkers as being addressed as game based special rules.  There really hasn't been much if any change regarding digging in and entrenchments.

      I think that the best you can do when interpreting the rules - 

      1)  Digging in (-1 column modifier) -  Hasty fighting positions. Units digging in prior to or under fife.
      2)  Entrenchments (-2 column modifier) -  Either Battle Positions made up of fighting positions (fox holes) with interlocking fields of fire as well as command post positions, and mortar positions; or actual dug in trenches with dirt or log walls and bunkers.
      3)  Fortifications -  Special rules (usually Armor Value).  Bunkers and more (Special markers)

[Greyfox]

I feel bad going down the rabbit whole again, once it looks like you extricated yourself from it, but the rules for digging in aren't all that great.
     Beginning dug in makes sense for many scenario's.  But I do have two major objections.

     1) Time -  According to rules it takes only 30 minutes to dig in provide one is not interupted. 
         a) No one digs in that fast - certainly not a foxhole.  As an infantrymen I can tell you that you, that soil and root system dependent, one can spend most of a night digging a foxhole.  Granted that is you and your battle buddy rotating in 15-30 minute intervals (one digging and one providing security).  It is exhausting.  God help you if you hit the water table before you can get at least 4 feet down.  
         b) The best you can do is Hasty Fighting Position (aka Hasty Grave) -https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=hasty+fighting+position&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8.  Does provide some protection from both direct and indirect fire, and better than nothing, but it is not what most of you probably envision when you think about digging in.
         c) Mortars, Guns and Tanks would take a hell-of-alot of effort to dig in.  Even with a larger crew it would take time to do it and do it right. Best thing to do if use the terrain (some natural low ground or berm) and quickly reinforce it with some extra digging.

    2) Once fox holes or hasty fighting positions are dug - they don't go away unless you fill them in.  Why do they disappear when you leave the area.

Mike

I think what you are considering digging in to be more of entrenching. The rules seem to follow that as well. It made even more sense WAAAAY back in the day when there were 3 levels rather than 2: dug in, entrenchment, bunker.

      I have been playing. PG since 1999 (1st Edition).  I don't remember there being three levels to digging in.
      Also, in U.S. Military we consider entrenching something akin to digging actual trenches and defensive works.  Entrenchments are manmade fortifications.  Digging in is more temporary in nature.  The longer you are in the defense the more robust it becomes.  Hasty fighting positions become fighting Positions (fox holes), Fighting positions become built down fighting positions with overhead cover.  Eventually you will  dig in alternate and supplementary positions, and start tying in positions with communications trenches.  Eventually you can and will construct trenches with pill-boxes, or walls with towers.  Given time, your hasty's can become a virtual fortress which can be surrounded by obstacle belts including land mines and wire.  
      Even from a WW II perspective, fox holes aren't really entrenchments.  For game purposes you may be right.... it takes about 15 minutes to carve out a hasty fighting position for an infantryman, 30 for him and his battle buddy (one securing while the other digs).  Not sure how long it would take to build a berm around a tank or a gun.  I would imagine it would take quite a bit of time if building it on a flat surface, and a little less if using natural folds in the terrain, or man made walls/fences to obscure at least part of your vehicle/gun.

    Mike

Similar experience.
Having been an armored company and battalion XO, my tank had a blade in front and my crew could create initial (hasty) enfilade positions for a whole platoon (17 tanks) in about 75 minutes with my tank's dozer blade. That was in peacetime maneuvers, and not under hostile fire. No overhead, or rear protection, and typically minimal buildup on the flanks of each tank. These "dozer push enfilade positions" were created in appropriate -- usually desert --  terrain. Creating secondary firing positions for each track would have taken an additional 75 minutes, or so.

Felipe

Felipe,

         Thanks for serving.  Looks like we might have had some similar experiences.  I do have some clarifying questions... I think you had an error in your response - specifically number of vehicles in your platoon.  I think you mean to refer to either a company or perhaps meant to equate numbers in modern company to a WW II tank company for comparative purposes.  I know late at night or in haste I have made similar errors.
         Were you a Armored Company Commander or a Cav Company Commander?  I think you have an error in your write-up.  Armored platoons are 4 tanks, Armored Companies are 14 tanks (including CO or XO).  Armored Companies in WW II were about 17 vehicles (3 platoons of 5 tanks plus CDR and XO vehicle).   In Cav, a Mechanized Scout platoon equipped with M3 Cavalry Fighting Vehicles include 6 M3s, and a Cav troop has two of those with two armored platoons and CDR and XO vehicle (22 tracks).  Numbers are all minus any attachments like Bradley Linebacker, BFSV, etc.
        Did you use your tank plows to do hasty digging?  Usually  it is for mobility operations, to cut a path through a minefield.  I have only seen tanks go into prepared fighting positions usually requiring D7 dozer support or ACEs.  I don't think M4's had dozer attachments designed for digging in WW II (though I am not an expert on U.S. Tanks in WW II.  That would make the job for tankers to dig in during our grandfather's day.  

Mike

[treadasaurusrex]

I feel bad going down the rabbit whole again, once it looks like you extricated yourself from it, but the rules for digging in aren't all that great.
     Beginning dug in makes sense for many scenario's.  But I do have two major objections.

     1) Time -  According to rules it takes only 30 minutes to dig in provide one is not interupted. 
         a) No one digs in that fast - certainly not a foxhole.  As an infantrymen I can tell you that you, that soil and root system dependent, one can spend most of a night digging a foxhole.  Granted that is you and your battle buddy rotating in 15-30 minute intervals (one digging and one providing security).  It is exhausting.  God help you if you hit the water table before you can get at least 4 feet down.  
         b) The best you can do is Hasty Fighting Position (aka Hasty Grave) -https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=hasty+fighting+position&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8.  Does provide some protection from both direct and indirect fire, and better than nothing, but it is not what most of you probably envision when you think about digging in.
         c) Mortars, Guns and Tanks would take a hell-of-alot of effort to dig in.  Even with a larger crew it would take time to do it and do it right. Best thing to do if use the terrain (some natural low ground or berm) and quickly reinforce it with some extra digging.

    2) Once fox holes or hasty fighting positions are dug - they don't go away unless you fill them in.  Why do they disappear when you leave the area.

Mike

I think what you are considering digging in to be more of entrenching. The rules seem to follow that as well. It made even more sense WAAAAY back in the day when there were 3 levels rather than 2: dug in, entrenchment, bunker.

      I have been playing. PG since 1999 (1st Edition).  I don't remember there being three levels to digging in.
      Also, in U.S. Military we consider entrenching something akin to digging actual trenches and defensive works.  Entrenchments are manmade fortifications.  Digging in is more temporary in nature.  The longer you are in the defense the more robust it becomes.  Hasty fighting positions become fighting Positions (fox holes), Fighting positions become built down fighting positions with overhead cover.  Eventually you will  dig in alternate and supplementary positions, and start tying in positions with communications trenches.  Eventually you can and will construct trenches with pill-boxes, or walls with towers.  Given time, your hasty's can become a virtual fortress which can be surrounded by obstacle belts including land mines and wire.  
      Even from a WW II perspective, fox holes aren't really entrenchments.  For game purposes you may be right.... it takes about 15 minutes to carve out a hasty fighting position for an infantryman, 30 for him and his battle buddy (one securing while the other digs).  Not sure how long it would take to build a berm around a tank or a gun.  I would imagine it would take quite a bit of time if building it on a flat surface, and a little less if using natural folds in the terrain, or man made walls/fences to obscure at least part of your vehicle/gun.

    Mike

Similar experience.
Having been an armored company and battalion XO, my tank had a blade in front and my crew could create initial (hasty) enfilade positions for a whole platoon (17 tanks) in about 75 minutes with my tank's dozer blade. That was in peacetime maneuvers, and not under hostile fire. No overhead, or rear protection, and typically minimal buildup on the flanks of each tank. These "dozer push enfilade positions" were created in appropriate -- usually desert --  terrain. Creating secondary firing positions for each track would have taken an additional 75 minutes, or so.

Felipe

Felipe,

         Thanks for serving.  Looks like we might have had some similar experiences.  I do have some clarifying questions... I think you had an error in your response - specifically number of vehicles in your platoon.  I think you mean to refer to either a company or perhaps meant to equate numbers in modern company to a WW II tank company for comparative purposes.  I know late at night or in haste I have made similar errors.
         Were you a Armored Company Commander or a Cav Company Commander?  I think you have an error in your write-up.  Armored platoons are 4 tanks, Armored Companies are 14 tanks (including CO or XO).  Armored Companies in WW II were about 17 vehicles (3 platoons of 5 tanks plus CDR and XO vehicle).   In Cav, a Mechanized Scout platoon equipped with M3 Cavalry Fighting Vehicles include 6 M3s, and a Cav troop has two of those with two armored platoons and CDR and XO vehicle (22 tracks).  Numbers are all minus any attachments like Bradley Linebacker, BFSV, etc.
        Did you use your tank plows to do hasty digging?  Usually  it is for mobility operations, to cut a path through a minefield.  I have only seen tanks go into prepared fighting positions usually requiring D7 dozer support or ACEs.  I don't think M4's had dozer attachments designed for digging in WW II (though I am not an expert on U.S. Tanks in WW II.  That would make the job for tankers to dig in during our grandfather's day.  

Mike

Yes, several mistatements, thanks for your clarifications. I meant tank company, and not platoon.

In my day, 1975-1986, the TO&E for Army Reserve Tank Companies was 17 tanks, in three 5-tank platoons, plus the XO and the CO tanks. WWII and Korean War tank companies were similarly organized, as you mention, but no blades on the XO's M-4s or M-26s as far as I can tell. Those guys would have picked the best terrain-fold features that they could find for enfilade positions. I doubt if much more than some camouflage foliage was tossed around to obscure the vehicle profile and maybe a few sand bags, or convenient logs were placed -- given the momentum of operations in late-WWII operations. No time for building fancy revetments.

Yes, served as an Armored Company XO, and CO as an Army Reservist.

Now it is indeed, 4-tanks to the platoon and 14 tanks in an armored company. I was pleasantly surprised as an IRR replacement during Desert Storm, to see how much things had changed in Active Duty Armor outfits with M-1A1s and ADEs . . . and mountains of sand in Saudi. 

Thanks again,

Felipe