Adjusting infantry combat

delor
Lieutenant
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon 21 Apr 2014 23:39
Contact:

Adjusting infantry combat

Postby delor » Fri 5 Dec 2014 20:13

Recent discussions of infantry in RD have been making me think about how it fits into the game as a whole. Without getting into the weeds of more specific enhancements (MG rebalancing, transport pricing, reservist effectiveness, building teleportation, etc), I'd like to share two proposals as blanket modifiers to infantry to make their role in Wargame more interesting.

In short, the first is an increase to infantry damage resistance outside of urban areas, to make positioning and maneuvering infantry slightly less suicidal than it presently. The second is a reduction to RPG fire rate, to allow for supporting vehicles to contribute to urban assault when concentrated in sufficient number.

1) Infantry damage resistance
Infantry is currently the uncontested king of urban areas, strong in forests, and worthless in the open. IMHO, this is about as things should be. However, the extent to which they're vulnerable in the open is excessive and contributes to defensive gameplay by making it extremely difficult to approach a position or reposition your infantry. So, I'd like to see infantry survivability in the open enhanced slightly.

To the best of my knowledge, infantry take full damage in the open, 40% less small arms damage in forests, and 70% less damage from all sources in urban zones. Adjust this to 30% less damage in the open, 60% less small arms damage and 30% less other damage in forests, and keep it at 70% less damage in urban zones.

An even better option would be to take this a step further and use this mechanic to emphasize infantry rolls. Expressed as normal/small arms damage taken:

Reservists: 100%/100% in the open, 100%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(extremely vulnerable outside of towns)

Regulars: 70%/70% in the open, 70%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(the baseline)

Shock: 70%/50% in the open, 70%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(better at closing the distance under infantry fire over open areas, like when assaulting an urban area or dashing across the street between two urban areas)

Elite: 70%/70% in the open, 70%/30% in forests, 30%/30% in urban areas
(nasty infantry murder in the forest)

2) RPG fire rate
Currently, anything that isn't a vehicle is next to worthless in or near an urban area. Even when the vehicles arrive in force against a small number of infantry defenders, the high ROF that RPGs receive allows for an infantry unit to decimate very large numbers of incoming attackers.

I think it's a good thing that infantry are extremely good in towns- that's their optimal role. However, the exchange rates they can achieve strongly reduces the ability of the offense to counter the advantages inherent in defense through concentration of force. Instead, if the attacker arrives with a significant numerical advantage in assault vehicles, they should take their licks and then the survivors should have a chance to suppress the defenders with machine gun fire.

To accomplish this, reduce RPG rate-of-fire via a reload time increase. Infantry will still get off the first shot and be fighting in a position that is maximally advantageous in town- at short range with 70% damage reduction. However, when outnumbered they will be exposed to MG fire while reloading.

Infantry with 10 r/m RPGs should fire at 4 r/m instead. Infantry with 20 r/m, at 8 r/m. FISTs with 15 r/m RPGs should also fire at 8 r/m, and also have their HE minimum range reduced to the shorter minimum range suffered by napalm RPGs.

I think this will prove a great boon to urban combat in ALB:

-Offensive play will be enhanced by the ability to power through a thinly defended urban chokepoint using vehicles to support the attacking infantry.

-Line infantry, which is currently a bit undervalued except when paired with a powerful IFV to compensate, would receive an effective buff. Firstly, because the number of RPGs returning fire will be more important their lower cost per unit (and, consequently, per-RPG) fielded will be emphasized. Secondly, the machine gun-equipped APCs they come in- which comprises a greater portion of their cost than it does for more expensive infantry- will be of greater value in supporting them.

-The various RPG FIST teams will become worthwhile again, both because of their increased ability to defend themselves and because of the increased importance of short-range anti-vehicle defense in urban combat.

This second suggestion is by far the more important of the two, and could also be taken in isolation of the first.

User avatar
horsman
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri 26 Apr 2013 20:52
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby horsman » Fri 5 Dec 2014 20:39

I cant believe I'm seeing a nerf line infantry thread, clearly you don't play Infantry decks much cos if you did you'd be screaming for buffs.

Infantry are too vulnerable in all situations the best defensive buff they get is 70% damage in urban environments to bullet damage, with normal HE from all explosives, the reduction is so miniscule it might as not be there.

delor wrote:Infantry with 10 r/m RPGs should fire at 4 r/m instead. Infantry with 20 r/m, at 8 r/m. FISTs with 15 r/m RPGs should also fire at 8 r/m, and also have their HE minimum range reduced to the shorter minimum range suffered by napalm RPGs.


This is where i gave up on this thread, 4RPM are you kidding me.
What needs to happen is a increase in the prevalence of line infantry, and for that to happen more infantry slots need to be made available (2+), decrease in special forces by reducing the number per card, 6,4 max.

Next they need a defensive buff in towns and forests with bullets and HE Explosive damage so bombers and arti spam are no longer the most effective and easy ways to remove infantry.

Then maybe after a infantry rebalanced we might see actual tactics in a urban combat again
Don't mind my spelling I'm just dyslexic
Image

Adolith
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat 17 Mar 2012 22:20
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby Adolith » Fri 5 Dec 2014 21:27

Lower ROF on infantry RPGs would make them lose in forests even harder.

keebs63
Brigadier
Posts: 3091
Joined: Mon 3 Mar 2014 08:33
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby keebs63 » Fri 5 Dec 2014 21:38

Yes, because it takes 15 seconds to shove a rocket up the front end of an RPG...

(Das ist sarkasmus)
Image
"arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarted" -Someone, somewhere in Wargame Chat 2015

User avatar
Desty
Warrant Officer
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed 23 Jul 2014 16:22
Location: Austria
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby Desty » Fri 5 Dec 2014 22:02

http://youtu.be/2jZij3gH3xA?t=3m18s

Watch these guys reload, they are even faster than ingame..
Image

User avatar
PzAz04Maus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2014 01:42
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby PzAz04Maus » Fri 5 Dec 2014 22:16

I've probably said a few times that I would be up for reviewing and pushing up weapon resistance in general, but to one exception.

It doesn't make all that much sense to increase small arms resistance in forests and the like, while leaving the HE damage resistance low. My concept of infantry combat is that in built up areas, infantry should mop other infantry up. This would be preferable, at minimum, in the city if only to encourage using infantry to clear a town instead of artillery. I would apply it to forests, despite the risks of treebursts, splinters, et cetera, because it would accentuate the role of needing riflemen to clear close quarters terrain - not a tank, not artillery, nor a plane.

I would additionally comment that perhaps it would be wiser to instead increase infantry stealth, allowing them to cross fields in the open without being spotted or move into position much more quietly than any vehicle is capable of. The stealth and size category of infantry should also apply to extremely light vehicles like the UAZ, jeep, potential infantry buggies, and humvees, in order to give them a better amount of room and tactical mobility to support infantry operations and sneak through lines.

User avatar
CandyMan
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2017
Joined: Sat 11 May 2013 01:24
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby CandyMan » Fri 5 Dec 2014 22:39

delor wrote:Recent discussions of infantry in RD have been making me think about how it fits into the game as a whole. Without getting into the weeds of more specific enhancements (MG rebalancing, transport pricing, reservist effectiveness, building teleportation, etc), I'd like to share two proposals as blanket modifiers to infantry to make their role in Wargame more interesting.

In short, the first is an increase to infantry damage resistance outside of urban areas, to make positioning and maneuvering infantry slightly less suicidal than it presently. The second is a reduction to RPG fire rate, to allow for supporting vehicles to contribute to urban assault when concentrated in sufficient number.

1) Infantry damage resistance
Infantry is currently the uncontested king of urban areas, strong in forests, and worthless in the open. IMHO, this is about as things should be. However, the extent to which they're vulnerable in the open is excessive and contributes to defensive gameplay by making it extremely difficult to approach a position or reposition your infantry. So, I'd like to see infantry survivability in the open enhanced slightly.

To the best of my knowledge, infantry take full damage in the open, 40% less small arms damage in forests, and 70% less damage from all sources in urban zones. Adjust this to 30% less damage in the open, 60% less small arms damage and 30% less other damage in forests, and keep it at 70% less damage in urban zones.

An even better option would be to take this a step further and use this mechanic to emphasize infantry rolls. Expressed as normal/small arms damage taken:

Reservists: 100%/100% in the open, 100%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(extremely vulnerable outside of towns)

Regulars: 70%/70% in the open, 70%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(the baseline)

Shock: 70%/50% in the open, 70%/50% in forests, 30%/30% in urban
(better at closing the distance under infantry fire over open areas, like when assaulting an urban area or dashing across the street between two urban areas)

Elite: 70%/70% in the open, 70%/30% in forests, 30%/30% in urban areas
(nasty infantry murder in the forest)

2) RPG fire rate
Currently, anything that isn't a vehicle is next to worthless in or near an urban area. Even when the vehicles arrive in force against a small number of infantry defenders, the high ROF that RPGs receive allows for an infantry unit to decimate very large numbers of incoming attackers.

I think it's a good thing that infantry are extremely good in towns- that's their optimal role. However, the exchange rates they can achieve strongly reduces the ability of the offense to counter the advantages inherent in defense through concentration of force. Instead, if the attacker arrives with a significant numerical advantage in assault vehicles, they should take their licks and then the survivors should have a chance to suppress the defenders with machine gun fire.

To accomplish this, reduce RPG rate-of-fire via a reload time increase. Infantry will still get off the first shot and be fighting in a position that is maximally advantageous in town- at short range with 70% damage reduction. However, when outnumbered they will be exposed to MG fire while reloading.

Infantry with 10 r/m RPGs should fire at 4 r/m instead. Infantry with 20 r/m, at 8 r/m. FISTs with 15 r/m RPGs should also fire at 8 r/m, and also have their HE minimum range reduced to the shorter minimum range suffered by napalm RPGs.

I think this will prove a great boon to urban combat in ALB:

-Offensive play will be enhanced by the ability to power through a thinly defended urban chokepoint using vehicles to support the attacking infantry.

-Line infantry, which is currently a bit undervalued except when paired with a powerful IFV to compensate, would receive an effective buff. Firstly, because the number of RPGs returning fire will be more important their lower cost per unit (and, consequently, per-RPG) fielded will be emphasized. Secondly, the machine gun-equipped APCs they come in- which comprises a greater portion of their cost than it does for more expensive infantry- will be of greater value in supporting them.

-The various RPG FIST teams will become worthwhile again, both because of their increased ability to defend themselves and because of the increased importance of short-range anti-vehicle defense in urban combat.

This second suggestion is by far the more important of the two, and could also be taken in isolation of the first.



I think nstead of Eugen making a laundry list of changes to the game, you should just get gud.

Infantry are all very cost effective and good at what they are designed for. City and forest fighting. Running your infantry over open fields like a banzai charge ends like it should. With a field of corpses. Try smoke infront of an infantry charge. Or better yet combined arms.
Image
Your standard pinko Commie swine...
Rabidnid wrote:NK has a veritable cornucopia of mediocrity to choose from when it comes to inexpensive vehicular recon!

User avatar
Randomletters
First Sergeant
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri 10 May 2013 06:48
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby Randomletters » Fri 5 Dec 2014 22:41

Desty wrote:http://youtu.be/2jZij3gH3xA?t=3m18s

Watch these guys reload, they are even faster than ingame..

They shoot at 3:21 and then again at 3:31 again at 3:41. 6 r/m is not faster than ingame.

The problem with assaulting towns is not due to the effectiveness of AT weaponry, it's that it is far too difficult to spot and destroy infantry in the exterior row of buildings. The combination of stealth bonuses and teleporting make it nearly impossible to dislodge infantry from buildings with vehicles, without the infantry shooting at something.

A more adequate solution would be to lower the stealth bonus applied by buildings, which IIRC is higher than the difference between no stealth and exceptional stealth. Basically infantry in buildings are harder to spot than a Nighthawk.

keebs63
Brigadier
Posts: 3091
Joined: Mon 3 Mar 2014 08:33
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby keebs63 » Fri 5 Dec 2014 22:43

Reload time =/= firing time....
Image
"arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarted" -Someone, somewhere in Wargame Chat 2015

User avatar
Randomletters
First Sergeant
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri 10 May 2013 06:48
Contact:

Re: Adjusting infantry combat

Postby Randomletters » Fri 5 Dec 2014 23:08

keebs63 wrote:Reload time =/= firing time....

7-8 second reload =/= 10 r/m

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests