Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Drang » Tue 16 Jul 2013 01:49

Zloba wrote:
Gopblin wrote:The problem is that cheap infantry loses to cheap tanks in their specific role, and is nowhere near as useful at other things.

Like, say, if most AA was unable to kill planes circling overhead and not shooting unless you spent almost the same points on AA as the cost of planes - you would call AA broken, yes? Well currently infantry is in that position, barely effective under ideal circumstances and not effective in other situations.

I far and away prefer using Harpoons as cheap forest guards these days - they aim and fire very fast, stunning most infantry and tanks very quickly, they're actually cheaper than infantry with a transport, and they're much more useful outside of sitting in a forest.

As for realism, trained infantry in dense terrain is almost impossible to dislodge with just tanks IRL.
Heck, even Moldovan police company managed to repulse an unsupported tank attack and burn like 5 T64BV in Transnistria, and it's hard to find a worse trained army than Moldovan "police" circa 1992 (to give you an idea, the tanks were reinforcing the local volunteer militia battalion - which was holding its own against an attack by Moldovan mechanized brigade despite having no armor and very little ammo).

Best wishes,
Daniel.


This. All recent historical evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that only a combined attack can clear infantry from built-up areas effectively. Even when dealing with militia-like forces.

If current mechanics were true the final battle in SPR would be over in two minutes. Two Tiger tanks and assorted self-propelled guns roll into town. Shots fired. PANIC. Roll end credits.


Lol, so true.

M3SS3NG3R
Sergeant
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun 30 Jun 2013 19:25
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby M3SS3NG3R » Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:23

Maybe we can do this:

Infantries in buildings/forest when panicked should go into some sort of hiding mode. When infantries are hiding they become very hard to detect and very hard to kill (so your opponent can't be sure if they are dead yet) with significantly decreased ROF (or maybe can't fire at all). During hiding their morales also recover quite a bit faster. However the stealth and defensive bonus does not apply to CQC or small arms attacks so other infantries will be able to hunt them down easily.

If infantries are out in the open then they cannot hide at all when panicked.
Last edited by M3SS3NG3R on Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:24, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Hartmann
Lieutenant
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 18:31
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Hartmann » Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:24

So what exactly do you people want then, because like it or not the only counter to infantry in a building atm is tanks. Simple as that, there´s nothing else that can counter infantry. Infantry gets absolutely massacred when attacking, and air is not a viable counter against 20 points worth of infantry.

So what, you just want to make it harder and harder to attack in the game?

Also, I´d still like to see a replay of someone cost efficiently using light armour to fight equal cost infantry in woods. People keep saying that this works yet I´ve not seen a shred of evidence posted. Get me a replay. Apparently it happens to you all the time so post them.

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3619
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Gopblin » Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:28

Arty, duh. Arty the buildings, move in with GL's, autocannons, and infantry of your own. IMO tank cannons need to be less efficient against inf, and autocannons maybe even more efficient. Then we get a realistic rock-paper-scissors setup where infantry beats tank, tank beats IFV/arty, IFV/arty beats infantry.

There was a reason Soviets/Russians used Shilkas, helos, and AGS-equipped vehicles instead of tanks to deal with infantry, you know. And this with having a HE-Frag rounds for tanks.

Best wishes,
Daniel.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

User avatar
Hartmann
Lieutenant
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 18:31
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Hartmann » Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:55

Artillery? You mean how I use artillery now to panick and ruin their accuracy? Isn´t that exactly the thing you are complaining about?

Tanks should annihilate infantry in buildings, I don´t see how you can think it would be realistic if 125mm shells don´t effectively deal with infantry hiding in a scandinavian barn. Again, we are not talking about fighting in Grozny or Homs. These are tiny tiny towns with small little cute vulnerable houses. Stop drawing the realism card when it clearly doesn´t apply to what we have in this game.

The only moment tanks should not do well against infantry is when they get within range of their RPGs, and tanks do terrible when that happens ingame. My infantry is doing perfectly fine against tanks that drive into range of their RPGs. They damage, stun and kill them.

Infantry is dirt cheap in this game right now, and it performs according to that price while still being able to scale up with the correct usage.

User avatar
katt
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 20:42
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby katt » Tue 16 Jul 2013 02:57

Gopblin wrote:Arty, duh. Arty the buildings, move in with GL's, autocannons, and infantry of your own. IMO tank cannons need to be less efficient against inf, and autocannons maybe even more efficient. Then we get a realistic rock-paper-scissors setup where infantry beats tank, tank beats IFV/arty, IFV/arty beats infantry.

There was a reason Soviets/Russians used Shilkas, helos, and AGS-equipped vehicles instead of tanks to deal with infantry, you know. And this with having a HE-Frag rounds for tanks.

Best wishes,
Daniel.


ROCK PAPER SCISSORS!?!?!!?!?!?!??!?!??!

BUT BUT BUT BUTBU TBUT AYSSYTMEMTRICAL BALNACESES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!1!!!!!!!!./!?>?!.1/.1/1./1../kj
Image
人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人◕ ‿‿ ◕人

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3619
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Gopblin » Tue 16 Jul 2013 04:22

katt wrote:
Gopblin wrote:Arty, duh. Arty the buildings, move in with GL's, autocannons, and infantry of your own. IMO tank cannons need to be less efficient against inf, and autocannons maybe even more efficient. Then we get a realistic rock-paper-scissors setup where infantry beats tank, tank beats IFV/arty, IFV/arty beats infantry.

There was a reason Soviets/Russians used Shilkas, helos, and AGS-equipped vehicles instead of tanks to deal with infantry, you know. And this with having a HE-Frag rounds for tanks.


ROCK PAPER SCISSORS!?!?!!?!?!?!??!?!??!

BUT BUT BUT BUTBU TBUT AYSSYTMEMTRICAL BALNACESES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!1!!!!!!!!./!?>?!.1/.1/1./1../kj


Well, that's true, "tanks pwn everything" is technically "asymmetrical" balance, although I'd prefer the term "totally screwed up" :lol:

Best wishes,
Daniel.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3619
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Gopblin » Tue 16 Jul 2013 04:40

Hartmann wrote:Artillery? You mean how I use artillery now to panick and ruin their accuracy? Isn´t that exactly the thing you are complaining about?


I'm complaining that tanks can do that on their own, when IRL tank rounds are way less effective against infantry than e.g. mortars (well, unless we're talking about hiding in a basement).

Tanks should annihilate infantry in buildings


I think Sergeant Pavlov would be much amused if he was alive to hear this. His understrength platoon held an apartment building in Stalingrad against daily tank&infantry attacks and heavy shelling/bombing for months. Chuikov's claim that Germans lost more men trying to take Pavlov's house that taking Paris is probably incorrect, but then they never did take Pavlov's house.

I don´t see how you can think it would be realistic if 125mm shells don´t effectively deal with infantry hiding in a scandinavian barn. Again, we are not talking about fighting in Grozny or Homs. These are tiny tiny towns with small little cute vulnerable houses. Stop drawing the realism card when it clearly doesn´t apply to what we have in this game.


For starters, a tank shouldn't even be able to elevate/depress a gun enough to hit someone firing from the basement/roof, or traverse the turret fast enough to catch someone who steps from around an opposite corner, fires and bolts (hence armor moving in "christmas tree" formations in cities).

Even if a covering tank is far enough away, what can a flat-shooting cannon do to an infantryman who pops up and fires an RPG from a roof? Try to bring the building down? Couple minutes after the dude has run away?

Finally, even if you get 2 tanks for every infantryman into a city block, how can you be sure that you cleared it and the enemy didn't simply stop firing for a minute? Gonna have the tank crews do house clearing?

All these things aren't shown in ALB because it ain't detailed enough, but I think they should be properly represented performance-wise.

The only moment tanks should not do well against infantry is when they get within range of their RPGs, and tanks do terrible when that happens ingame. My infantry is doing perfectly fine against tanks that drive into range of their RPGs. They damage, stun and kill them.

Infantry is dirt cheap in this game right now, and it performs according to that price while still being able to scale up with the correct usage.


You mean base infantry+transport costing as much as a cheap tank, that it can sometimes maybe beat in a forest or city, and which can do a ton of things infantry can't? What's the point of using inf exactly, when cheap tanks are generally a lot more useful?

Best wishes,
Daniel.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

Bastables
Warrant Officer
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri 30 Mar 2012 05:49
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Bastables » Tue 16 Jul 2013 05:55

QT3.14159 wrote:
dimabernat wrote:Ok so I been able to play the game yesterday and checked out the new "nerf" how you call it and I don't see any problem with infentry use on the counteriery. Now that unite get acc penelity it's more realistic and my tactics work even better. Currently number 5 and 8 point from 4.
Played vs a high ranked turtale yestrday diismental him with my usual. Ow if you turtale and think I will atk so you get easy points and win. Then I just atk and get double the points then you and win ;) work like a charm vs all top and low grade turtale in game.

So this hule cry baby topic is not needed game is fine about inf maybe small change to inf moral higher.


You nauseate me.

1. Infantry morale is too low.

2. Their accuracy drop off is unrelatistcally huge. If they were civilians straight off the street maybe but even a standard trooper would know how to hit a tank 9 times out of 10 at maximum distance with a LAW or RPG whilst under fire.

3. You argument is biased. You benefit from this break in gameplay. You benefit from the loss of power that infantry now have.

4. You would suck at making video games. It doesn't matter if you enjoy crushing people, what is important is that they must enjoy trying not to be crushed. Winning is always fun, but losing should be fun also, fun in the sense that it is enjoyable trying to take advantage back. At the minute infantry's loss of strength has caused that not to be the case for many people. Desperately scrabbling to try and stop a steamroller isn't fun, changing your tactics and adapting, reforming your line, taking a different position, that's fun. Right now, that rarely happens because if infantry aren't in a town they get crushed, not only is this unrealistic but it means a whole section of your army is out of action until you can defend a town again.


So what you're saying is that every western military that has used suppressive fire since WW1 as a concept and something to achieve in infantry tactics (winning the fire fight) is a waste of time as infantry can just be trained to ignore bullets cracking past their heads?

User avatar
MrSnappy
Sergeant
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 03:12
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby MrSnappy » Tue 16 Jul 2013 06:28

Infantry now do OK in cities in forests they have always lacked.For me the problem is how they spot units a heavy tank vs infantry which one can "sneak". I think infantry should have an edge on spotting and reaction in forests. I mean seriously how is a 60 ton loud ass tank going to sneak up on an infantry squad ? Atm good anti infantry armor ala bmpt or cev/flamer will annihilate infantry in forest's.

Tanks seem to get the jump on infantry more than they should in forest.No real life commander in their right mind would send armor alone in city or forests.The amount of cover and defilade in forest is almost unlimited for infantry. Like I said I think the toughness of infantry should be in the ability to hide and spot others farther in cover.

IMO it too easy for armor to enter forest and just hunt down infantry.Think about it you would hear a tank a mile away and be plenty prepared for it.This would make spotting infantry in forests and cities key. If you can find and see them then you can kill them.That should be the harder part finding them in the first place.

At least they let tanks get in range in cities and can still kill i am grateful for that.In forests they could use work they are not as good at ambushes in forest as they should be so many ways to kill a mbt.Key is to get close and cities and forests are the best place for that.

They are the two places history shows infantry can hold their own..against about anything.Tanks and planes should own the open but woods and cities should be the domain of the infantry.I would love to use my infantry to defend forests...until then assault tanks/vehicles just do it better.

Some people like a more mechanized faster type armored game.Others enjoy the slower infantry combined arms combat.So there will always be two sides to this argument.I'm more on the infantry side and they need a slight moral boost....and hopefully one day a forest buff!
"Its easier to find men to die than suffer the patience of war" ~Julius Caesar
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests