Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

Scotsman

Standard bunkers for which models exist

Recommended Posts

Scotsman

Picking this up from another thread. This is a display thread. Someone please start another thread for what you like/dislike and what you might want to see. No guarantee on interiors as shown. They are in the models but some may be beyond the engine ability to render and retain performance. As for a PPO placed structure...I'm not sure off the top of my head what the limitations are there...whether they are size restricted etc. It they are simple open flight models then theoretically anything can be placed assuming the terrain will support it and the placement criteria is met. I wouldn't expect a mile long list of possible bunker types...but allowing engineers only to buld these certain brings a great value add to field engineers. 

Many bunkers have 'underground' elements which would be glorious to fight in but which would no be easily do-able as a current PPO due to terrain interaction....so I will restrict this thread somewhat. 

Regelbau 669 - enterable ATG bunker up to 75mm ATG - front Rnd rear doors - probably eliminate the front and make a placeable cover for the cutout? normal rear doors which I would be inclined to leave open - 1943 design - the adjoining infantry support position would probably be dropped to ground level for terrain considerations, but would allow you to stand/crouch and fire from...no hatch...open so grenade and HE vulnerable. It could also simply be deleted. 

This is but one example of many textured models that already exist. Rather than post interior pictures of everything...perhaps I'll just list what I have and you can ask questions or pick and choose from features. Doing a simple google search of the bunker name will show you floor plans and the like. Pictures below show terrain embedding and that can't be done easily so everything has to move to above ground. Likewise wall mounted embedded weapons aren't quickly do-able 

OVERHEAD VIEW

669-1.png

 

FRONT DOOR - 

669-2.png

REAR DOOR

669-3.png

INTERIOR - two side rooms likely stocked with crates etc 

669-8-jpg.png

INTERIOR VIEW

669-9.png

REAR ENTRY - Could be metal could be wood - player choice 

669-10.png

 

Bunker Internal - the wall phones and other internals add a lot of polys and probably have to go 

669-6.jpg

 

Here is a short list of what I have modeled and textured....these models need to be converted to openflight (not hard) and then placement/resources need to be investigated. Keep in mind that you will need multiple LOD etc and that adds to the work load. Also note that anything that goes underground is an up front issue and right now wouldn't work with the standard ppo placement stuff. Likewise anything requiring terrain embedding would have to be moved to the surface. Other than that, its just cutting details down to poly limits. Its all concrete texture unless you want all the pretty interior details. 

-------------------------------

Regelbau 669

VF Machine gun bunker

S3 Casement bunker

Regelbau M145 ammo bunker

Regelbau 667 PAK-38 Bunker

Regelbau H679 Towed Gun bunker

Regelbau 608 Battalion Command Bunker 

Regelbau 107 Twin Machine Gun Bunker

Regelbau 504 Protection Bunker 

Regelbau 120A Mortar And Artillery Observation Bunker

Regelbau 611 AT Gun Variant

Ringstande

Ringstande II

Flak 307 Position 

Regelbau 600 open ATG position 

Regelbau 680 

Regelbau 634 

Regelbau 681

Regelbau 643 

Regelbau 677

Regelbau 639 Field Hospital 

M219 Coast Defense bunker

L416A 88mm AT Bunker

6" Coast Defense gun

Search Light Position

Incomplete Organization Todt Coast Defense Bunker converted to infantry usage

BH179 20mm Flak Position 

Open Casement ATG Position 

Flak towers of various flavors

Brick And Concrete Bathrooms

Large Ammunition/Personnel Bunker

Uboat Bunkers

V Weapon Launch Sites (Mainly V-1) 

Pantherturm

Wurzburg Radar Site

Regelbau 479 Command And Control Bunker 

Regelbau 671 AT Position

VF6A Observation Bunker

Sentry Boxes

S448 Range Finding bunker

Freya Radar Site 

Lindemann Battery 15" Gun Position 

S Boat Bunker 

Norwegian 105mm coast defense position 

Regelbau 663 50mm automatic mortar bunker 

Regelbau M180 Coast Defense Position 

Regelbau M272 Coast Defense Bunker

Regelbau L430 Small Garage And Bunker

Regelbau 32 Field Dressing And Decon Bunker 

FT17 Tank Turret Tobruk

Regelbau M120 Command Post

Regelbau 630 Armored Machine Gun Position

Regelbau S100 Coastal Artillery Ranging Bunker 

Heavy Ammunition Bunker 

Regelbau FL243 Flak Bunker

Regelbau 449 Observation Bunker 

Regelbau L402 20mm flak position 

Regelbau 679 with 155mm french gun 

Regelbau 631b with 47mm ATG

WN 48 Battery Complex

Assorted Other Observation Bunkers

Regelbau 502b 24 man shelter with observation post

Regelbau 693a small observation post

Regelbau L485 Surface Radar Position 

Tobruk 246 with Pz-IVD Turret

The list goes on - more than I have time to type. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman

All of these have great interiors which unfortunately overwhelm the current engine 

 

interior.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

Wow.

I can delete the following question/comment if it is not what you want in the thread, just say so.

If the doors are an issue (as a PPO placed by inf, or maybe even the ATG), could the PPO bunker shown be a spawn point for ATGs---inside the bunker---with a spawn list of 1 ATG, and a super long resupply? Then you make the model with a damage model like FB tents where a charge on the pole does more damage, but in this case the concrete is nearly or actually invulnerable, but the DOOR can take damage much, much easier. So like a FB going to damaged state, this structure would go to damaged state (presumably killing the ATG, if it's like a building going down). The PPO is then in damaged state, and a new ATG can push in, but it has no door any more.

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
5 hours ago, tater said:

Wow.

I can delete the following question/comment if it is not what you want in the thread, just say so.

If the doors are an issue (as a PPO placed by inf, or maybe even the ATG), could the PPO bunker shown be a spawn point for ATGs---inside the bunker---with a spawn list of 1 ATG, and a super long resupply? Then you make the model with a damage model like FB tents where a charge on the pole does more damage, but in this case the concrete is nearly or actually invulnerable, but the DOOR can take damage much, much easier. So like a FB going to damaged state, this structure would go to damaged state (presumably killing the ATG, if it's like a building going down). The PPO is then in damaged state, and a new ATG can push in, but it has no door any more.

Have to think on destructible doors but theoretically possible with a different damage threshold. Playing with some of this right now to find out what we can do. Looking at a couple of standard positions, some open, some completely protected, all with great interiors for a fight. Working on finally giving infantry fighting positions of sorts outsides cities and beyond the current ppo infantry position. This would include engineer placed trench lines of a sort with mixed cover. Also looking at what can be done for field expedients inside the buildings. 
 

I think the first thing that might be delivered quickly would be something like a ringsrande.

 

Some of this requires a stacking of ppo of sorts and I’m sorting through what can and can’t be done quickly. There are also the Tobruks complete with tank turrets but I’m not sure how to handle that yet. I can spawn the entire Tobruk including Armament as a sort of stationary concrete tank with all the appropriate protections. You can’t ‘man’ the weapons though in the current context of spawn. 
 

one solution would be to have Tobruks in the spawn list ONLY if one has been completed by the engineers. Very time consuming to make one for obvious reasons (in game time that is) If present the player could spawn in and man the weapons and fight them just as tanks are done. The question would be how to link the spawn to a dynamically placed engineer position. Ginning that up gives us more dynamic spawns though.

can these be protected spawns? Yes. Also looking at sone bunkers that extend beyond the 30 minute ppo limit with stacked ppo inside (ammo crates) in the case of the VF4A bunker they actually had bullet manufacturing and belting inside the bunker, so I could see putting the ammo crate ppo inside that ppo for resupply.

more to follow...Also seeing if we can finally do something with incendiaries of certain flavors. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrAnit

Awesome stuff, Scotsman!  I think have new fighting position options outdide of town and within buildings would be really great for gameplay.  Constructing and manning a defensive line near a town or bridge would be a lot of fun add a new element to the game, especially for squads. Might significantly help low pop imbalance.

Edited by GrAnit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XOOM

One word of caution is being able to put bunkers within terrain tiles. Terrain tiles are FLTs and require us to build the game client out with bunkers in them. Referencing past experience, this proved to be pretty challenging. The easiest and most sure fire way we can achieve these sort of things is by adding environmental objects (buildings, fortifications, debris, random stuff like the broken cart) on top of terrain, since it doesn't require us to manipulate our existing terrain, which can get finicky and risky.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater
2 hours ago, XOOM said:

One word of caution is being able to put bunkers within terrain tiles. Terrain tiles are FLTs and require us to build the game client out with bunkers in them. Referencing past experience, this proved to be pretty challenging. The easiest and most sure fire way we can achieve these sort of things is by adding environmental objects (buildings, fortifications, debris, random stuff like the broken cart) on top of terrain, since it doesn't require us to manipulate our existing terrain, which can get finicky and risky.

One possibility for defensive PPOs might be that there could be a defensive engie unit. Once there is EWS or an AO, or once tables are hot---something that you guys have hooks for ALREADY---they disappear from the spawn list, or don't work or something. Anyway, these guys could place some bunkers, AND they could place bushes. Maybe they can place some of the objects that are in the ruined farms, maybe even they can place stone walls (that are copies of the ones already in game).

Then at least the defensive people can place these objects on TOP of terrain, then mask them to match.

On offense, maybe engies could get some camo netting or something.

Alternately, netting is fast, and bushes/walls/buildings have HUGE build times (5 minutes?) so only really safe to do on D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
29 minutes ago, tater said:

One possibility for defensive PPOs might be that there could be a defensive engie unit. Once there is EWS or an AO, or once tables are hot---something that you guys have hooks for ALREADY---they disappear from the spawn list, or don't work or something. Anyway, these guys could place some bunkers, AND they could place bushes. Maybe they can place some of the objects that are in the ruined farms, maybe even they can place stone walls (that are copies of the ones already in game).

Then at least the defensive people can place these objects on TOP of terrain, then mask them to match.

On offense, maybe engies could get some camo netting or something.

Alternately, netting is fast, and bushes/walls/buildings have HUGE build times (5 minutes?) so only really safe to do on D.

Everything I’m looking at is above ground and a ppo...so placable by combat engineers. As for placement speed - that’s open to discussion. Field expedients would place quickly compared to anything concrete. I’ll ask for input on times...the first step is to find out what can be done quickly. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower.

Then, implement frontline, where MS can't be placed behind towns.

THEN... implement all these bunkers / PPOs :)
 

Also, need to look at towns and be sure facilities are 100 to 200 m away from other facilities, to allow for combat between them.

Also, would really like a PPO ladder, so I can climb to top of bldgs; and allow me to place foxhole up there :)

And consider PPOs closer, so barbwire can actually block paths, or sand bags can block doors.

 

Edited by delems
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

There's a thread about PPOs blocking "gameplay," and I would argue that every single inf should have some sort of "door" PPO to close doorways. The refresh time can be really long, so it isn;t abused, but as long as they are easy to take out, who cares. Any HE takes them out---maybe a new power could be added to the knife, it gets the same damage as now, but gets treated as "HE" for this purpose, so you can stab a door open (since we can't kick). Breaking doors would make a breaking sound.

The ability to even slightly cover a flank in towns would really change things.

The game feels best to me with loads of people on my team, and not because we are winning, fight can go either way. It feels best to play in large groups because it creates a de facto sense of lines, zones of control. You know there are guys on either side, so you can concentrate on advancing, firing, etc. Some strongpoints really help with this, I think.

Any sort of PPO that could make LMGs the serious problem they should be, but usually aren't would also be cool (normally an LMG parks someplace, shoots at anyone who is not me, but close, I see where the LMG is, and shoot him with rifle. The ability to emplace infantry in a way that is not trivial to overcome at distance would be huge. Maybe bunkers take multiple charges like an FMS?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

BTW, this thread makes me excited that I re-subbed. First hint of something that I really think has potential to improve play that I have seen in a while <S> @Scotsman

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
2 hours ago, delems said:

Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower.

Then, implement frontline, where MS can't be placed behind towns.

THEN... implement all these bunkers / PPOs :)
 

Also, need to look at towns and be sure facilities are 100 to 200 m away from other facilities, to allow for combat between them.

Also, would really like a PPO ladder, so I can climb to top of bldgs; and allow me to place foxhole up there :)

And consider PPOs closer, so barbwire can actually block paths, or sand bags can block doors.

 

Noted - crawl walk run but making good progress as of tonight. I’ll keep everyone informed. I like the idea of a ppo ladder...with larger elements taking real effort to construct... and team work. Placement will be up to the players. All work in progress but looking ok so far. As things get done perhaps the thing to do is post pics with dimensions and placement criteria and let everyone discuss.
 

there are some really good constructs like coastal batteries and heavy batteries available too... but getting them worked in will be much harder. Fantastic to fight over - but essentially ornamental until long range fires are possible. 
 

Doors would really change the game...as would varying door hardness. Too hard to do that in all terrain but will look hard at them for new ppos here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman

Ringestande is likely high on the list as it’s useable by both rifles and lmg. Looks good in test so far...you crouch to enter it and it allows standing covered fire in all directions. No overhead cover while firing so not unbalancing. You can duck under the ring if you do need to duck for cover. Above ground so no issues with placement.
 

3688130813211059.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

My thread (which is similar in some ways). My idea was a PPO with an internal MSP that spawned ONE person/unit.

Build PPO that makes MSP. Despawn. Spawn into that mission as the LMG, say, and you occupy the PPO. Only one LMG in the whole spawn list.

Sample emplacement;

Panzernest-Diagrams_555.jpg

^^^this was a German manufactured, steel emplacement. PLaced on/in ground, the buried a little. In game, above surface, done as a prone position so flatter. Some dirt/grass around it. Limited arc of fire, I would make the slit maybe bigger than it should be (no scope on our LMG), but make it also invulnerable in areas of the slit (meaning the armor model includes part of the slit, even though clear). Flank it, place HEAT, done.

 

My Rural CP thread:

 

Was about maybe making some (A FEW! Not covering the whole map, flavor here and there, maybe Maginot line) CPs using extant bunkers models. Some ideas might relate to this thread, however (and the pics).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

Another idea for an easy PPO, under the assumption placement rules are possible.

New PPO of a sandbag. Placement rules? Someplace an LMG would be allowed to deploy.

Use case? Make it such that you place one in a window, and it narrows the window opening. You then deploy the LMG in the available space next to it. The PPO might in fact be 2 sandbags so it is taller. The goal here is to improve cover. You might block a side window to free fire on one side without being raked by enfilade fire from a flank, for example.

Other PPOs (easy?):

Something similar to the above, but made from stones of rough rectangle shape. Ie: blocks of stone from ruins. Allowing a LMG, etc to make an emplacement in ruins offering at least a little more protection.

Maybe just a piece of log. We have fallen trees, a small log (fireplace sized). Again, build an emplacement out of stuff you have around (looks that way, anyway).

The goal here is not "turtling" it's that certain weapon systems were more powerful in RL than in game, because they are less survivable. I want LMGs to establish bases of fire with maybe some protection, even on attack. Move up LMGs, make an ersatz emplacement, suppress for attackers.

 

On 11/12/2019 at 1:54 PM, Scotsman said:

INTERIOR VIEW

669-9.png

The only issue here is the front slit, IMHO. In my experience playing, the existing ATG emplacements are completely useless. An ET from a couple km away can shoot directly into it, even with MG fire. I have placed ATGs behind them a few meters in the hope that they couldn't shoot flat enough to get me on the other side back a few meters. I die almost instantly every time, and gave up. They are useless. This is true of many places that you'd think should provide SOME cover. You deploy, take a shot, everyone on Earth sees the muzzle flash, 2 cracks later and you're dead.

Not sure what would work, but the above looks awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrAnit
5 hours ago, Scotsman said:

Ringestande is likely high on the list as it’s useable by both rifles and lmg. Looks good in test so far...you crouch to enter it and it allows standing covered fire in all directions. No overhead cover while firing so not unbalancing. You can duck under the ring if you do need to duck for cover. Above ground so no issues with placement.
 

3688130813211059.jpg

This is what I had in mind when I started the other thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OLDZEKE

@Scotsman You could do a 2 state bunker, undamaged has door closed and damaged has it blown open. Issue as stands now with destroyable "buildings" which is what the game would see it as is that any inf inside a structure that changes state dies. That could, I assume, be special cased out. But I can assume easily being I'm not a coder so not sure how much would  have to go into a special case. 

Now if these were used as PPO (any that will sit on top of terrain as we can't change terrain outside of the terrain editor) Then we would need to explore and test 2 state PPOs as to what would be required to transmit that open door/destroyed state 3rd person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman

Lots of testing to be done on things like doors but I see no issue so far. I used to pile furniture in stairwells and doors to block them. Hard to get a grenade through that although one into the pile usually takes it out. Thoughts on furniture piled in a door instead of a proper door? One grenade would remove it but it stops people from just walking in without announcing their presence.

As for AT bunkers, many are casements that have  small firing openings. We are not stuck with what I posted. That’s just an example of one the Regelbau in my stockpile. I’ll try and post other bunker examples later today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pfmosquito

Yes to these PPO ideas!

And yes to ladders.  Anything which allows players creative expression within the parameters of what was available during WW2 seems good to me, as much of the appeal of the game already has to do with the fact that despite needing a regular 'twitch' fix, broader tactical and strategic elements are possible.  Encountering the creativity of other players, even when it is lethal to me, is what keeps the game from becoming repetitively boring.  I remember the days of climbing trees and buildings.  I still look longingly upon certain locations which I would like to ascend to exploit their strengths, and am prevented.  

But no to this:

"Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower."

I just wanted to go on the record being opposed to this, not to belabor it.  I think the better solution to any issues raised by the depots--and a great many of the other things people complain about, frankly--is just to create more options for player expression.   More buildings, more PPOs, more units, more, more more more, lets players solve their own problems.  Hard coding in decisions always comes at a cost.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
1 hour ago, OLDZEKE said:

@Scotsman You could do a 2 state bunker, undamaged has door closed and damaged has it blown open. Issue as stands now with destroyable "buildings" which is what the game would see it as is that any inf inside a structure that changes state dies. That could, I assume, be special cased out. But I can assume easily being I'm not a coder so not sure how much would  have to go into a special case. 

Now if these were used as PPO (any that will sit on top of terrain as we can't change terrain outside of the terrain editor) Then we would need to explore and test 2 state PPOs as to what would be required to transmit that open door/destroyed state 3rd person.

Easier to do a separate door placed by the player to close the structure I think. On ppo stacking I am looking at placing the ammo box ppo inside a bunker ppo. If you want to test that right quick by putting the ammo boxes inside an atg ppo for example  that would help me along. One less thing to do 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
2 minutes ago, pfmosquito said:

Yes to these PPO ideas!

And yes to ladders.  Anything which allows players creative expression within the parameters of what was available during WW2 seems good to me, as much of the appeal of the game already has to do with the fact that despite needing a regular 'twitch' fix, broader tactical and strategic elements are possible.  Encountering the creativity of other players, even when it is lethal to me, is what keeps the game from becoming repetitively boring.  I remember the days of climbing trees and buildings.  I still look longingly upon certain locations which I would like to ascend to exploit their strengths, and am prevented.  

But no to this:

"Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower."

I just wanted to go on the record being opposed to this, not to belabor it.  I think the better solution to any issues raised by the depots--and a great many of the other things people complain about, frankly--is just to create more options for player expression.   More buildings, more PPOs, more units, more, more more more, lets players solve their own problems.  Hard coding in decisions always comes at a cost.

I agree... adding building blocks like ladders etc is the better way to go...let the players make their own designs etc. the trench system I am playing with has straight, 45 and  90 degree angles, fighting positions...all with or without overhead cover. With takes more time to build. I’ll try and post pics. They are currently wide enough to be fought in two directions and take players on both the front and rear walls. Can narrow it to a single player if desired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OLDZEKE
6 minutes ago, Scotsman said:

Easier to do a separate door placed by the player to close the structure I think. On ppo stacking I am looking at placing the ammo box ppo inside a bunker ppo. If you want to test that right quick by putting the ammo boxes inside an atg ppo for example  that would help me along. One less thing to do 

Hit me up internally, I have some test time free off and on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman

And yes..ppo are easier than many other things in terms of insertion into the game. Let me see how fast I can push my affiliated artist to get these into testable form. The models are complete and I can show pics....but my time is better spent on figuring out the how within the current code to be honest. I don’t think any of this is particularly hard...

the concept is easy to apply to many other things in game if it works - and so far it appears to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotsman
1 minute ago, OLDZEKE said:

Hit me up internally, I have some test time free off and on.

 

Roger. First up is to check the ammo box inside the atg bunker or something similar. Have to wait on some new openflight files here to test the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

I'll test if you need it as well, happy to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...