Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Gneckes
Warrant Officer
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri 10 Feb 2012 16:48
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Gneckes » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:09

EliteSniper wrote:
HEROFOX wrote:To troll of course.


LOL, half the people on this forum including you don't even know what a troll is, so STFU kid and go get a life.


Thanks for the demonstration.
Common sense shall thus be referred to as rare sense.

MENTORImage

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby EliteSniper » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:10

Doeko wrote:
If they were surrounded by the infantry and the infantry was all firing at it at the same time that wouldn't have happened. Most likely either all the infantry was in the same place so all stunned together or they were taken piecemeal. Either way I don't see anything wrong with this (also the BMPT is the vehicle specialized for this role, it's 80 points and it can't do much else so you would expect it to be effective).



How can you tell me what I saw and you didn't? You weren't there, you didn't see what happen. And yes the BMPT did poke through the center of my infantry where it was surrounded, but my infantry was panicked and missed all their rpg hits. pssp, got to tell you something. A BMPT shouldn't be able to kill 16 infantry in a dense forest regardless of the price. It was designed to kill infantry, yes. But it wasn't designed for forest fighting and I don't think it was designed for urban combat either.

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby EliteSniper » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:11

:(
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:32, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Attack the subject, not the person please.

User avatar
SteinerGER
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu 11 Jul 2013 17:18
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby SteinerGER » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:16

I am really surprised atm.
Why are people stating that attacking is hard? Let alone infantry in buildings? I agree that there should be a little bit of ROF decrease and acc decrease while "panicked" but not as much as a vehicle.
When we see a tank it consists of 4 to 5 Persons, we see it as a single unit - thats okay, since they are stuffed together in their tank. If a round hits the tank - all the crew knows and feels it. Infantry in this game is different, its one unit but actually its supposed to be 10 disjunct individuals.
When an infantrysqaud is in a BLOCK of buildings(emphasize on BLOCK! not(!) a single building). Why would you spazz the out when a building like 70m afar is hit?
My suggestion would be:
- Lower the penalties for worried;shaken and pancaked hurr panicked.
- Infantry generally more resilent to fire (maybe the unit can only panic when strength < 50% Basesize ;else max. shaken)
- Improve bonuses from veterancy greatly(!)
- The smaller the unit the harder to supress (good luck finding the right spot to shoot || e.g. Faktorya(2) harder to supress than VDV(10))
-

Concerning attacks with the Pre-patch Meta:
1. Prepare your force
2. Smoke the enemy and the road to the town
3. movefast your BTRs and unload
4. CQB starts
5. ????
6. Profit.


Cheers Steiner

PS: And of course you lose more units in an assault than your enemy - get over it.
If it was the other way round no one would defend right?
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Sat 13 Jul 2013 05:03, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Language

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby EliteSniper » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:20

SteinerGER wrote:I am really surprised atm.

-

Concerning attacks with the Pre-patch Meta:
1. Prepare your force
2. Smoke the enemy and the road to the town
3. movefast your BTRs and unload
4. CQB starts
5. ????
6. Profit.


Cheers Steiner


How it used to be, then too many people complained about attacking being impossible even when people had videos on how to attack. I guess now we won't need infantry when we can just march 15 T-55s into a city and take it within 2 mins. Job done, T-55s just killed over 20 infantry with barely any loses.

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Hidden Gunman » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:34

I guess I'm going to take a beating by saying that my currently favoured afv for directly supporting and being co-located with my infantry is the Su122-54.

Apparently, it shouldn't work in woods or town, is too cheap to be anything more than a burning wreck, and should (alternatively, depending on your viewpoint of being either pro-tank or pro-infantry) die easilly and fast.

*facepalm...

I am such a renegade...

:roll:
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

User avatar
SteinerGER
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu 11 Jul 2013 17:18
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby SteinerGER » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:42

How it used to be, then too many people complained about attacking being impossible even when people had videos on how to attack. I guess now we won't need infantry when we can just march 15 T-55s into a city and take it within 2 mins. Job done, T-55s just killed over 20 infantry with barely any loses.



Yeah it seems like.
I blame it on the kids nowadays thinking tanks roflstomp everything.
I dont know if they watched too many videos about Blitzkrieg or just the discovery channel bull.
The Germans had a pretty incisive slogan in WW2: "Infanterie, (die) Königin aller Waffen" (= Infantry; (the) Queen of all weapons/branches).
And in its core it is still that way.
Infantry has a magnificent amount of flexibility(this flexibility is not that present in WALB tho) while being comparably cheap. They can fight tanks,helos,planes,vehicles and other soldiers effectivly with very little change to their equipment. Thats the reason why modern armies still have mechanized/motorised infantry.
And in town and woods infantry has to be the king, followed by IFV/AFV.
Tanks should get a big penalty when used in(!! - not at the borders.) those two areas.
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Sat 13 Jul 2013 04:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Language

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby EliteSniper » Sat 13 Jul 2013 03:49

Hidden Gunman wrote:I guess I'm going to take a beating by saying that my currently favoured afv for directly supporting and being co-located with my infantry is the Su122-54.

Apparently, it shouldn't work in woods or town, is too cheap to be anything more than a burning wreck, and should (alternatively, depending on your viewpoint of being either pro-tank or pro-infantry) die easilly and fast.

*facepalm...

I am such a renegade...

:roll:


Now seeming how I said, 2 BMPTs just marched through the center of my infantry lines and beat them, you came up with IFV supported by infantry. That's different when you have infantry fighting infantry and dealing with IFVs at the same time.

"*facepalm........

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby Hidden Gunman » Sat 13 Jul 2013 04:02

EliteSniper wrote:
Hidden Gunman wrote:I guess I'm going to take a beating by saying that my currently favoured afv for directly supporting and being co-located with my infantry is the Su122-54.

Apparently, it shouldn't work in woods or town, is too cheap to be anything more than a burning wreck, and should (alternatively, depending on your viewpoint of being either pro-tank or pro-infantry) die easilly and fast.

*facepalm...

I am such a renegade...

:roll:


Now seeming how I said, 2 BMPTs just marched through the center of my infantry lines and beat them, you came up with IFV supported by infantry. That's different when you have infantry fighting infantry and dealing with IFVs at the same time.

"*facepalm........


As I said earlier on this thread, I'm undecided if there is an issue one way or the other.

In critical positions, I like to supplement my infantry with on-hand armour, and the Su122's are very good (in my view/experience) for that. They have the best direct fire HE in the game (with the exception of the CEV's/AVRE's), are cheap and available in numbers, and have passable anti-armour capability up close. All in all, they are just the ticket for the mean streets or the dark woods....but, and this is something that a lot of people are overlooking or don't understand, you don't position infantry on the outer areas of forest or the outer zones of towns if you want them to survive and kill things. You position them inside the cover, or in interior urban zones, which means they aren't visible till they fire, the moving enemy units (regardless of type) essentially get ambushed, no fire can be directed onto your infantry except by units actually adjacent to them, and it forces your opponent to actually have to come and dig you out, and if you are doing things right, your opponent better have his or her act together.

Edit: I'll also mention that postioned like that, helos have to almost hover over them to get a shot off...and helos hovering next to infantry die very quickly.
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

naizarak
Captain
Posts: 1626
Joined: Tue 25 Dec 2012 12:53
Contact:

Re: Infantry vs Tanks - What Happened?

Postby naizarak » Sat 13 Jul 2013 04:09

i never understood why tanks in ALB were so powerful against infantry at close range.

most of the time, it seems that the tank spots the infantry first and gets the initial shot, which is usually decisive. really doesn't make sense that a tank would so easily spot infantry in a forest or urban environment, where the infantry would have the overwhelming advantage.

i think the metagame needs to be reworked a bit, infantry should be buffed as defensive units in CQC situations, and rolling a column of tanks through a forest or town should be suicidal. as in real life, tanks should be used for warfare on open ground across wide distances, and extremely vulnerable in confined environments. right now that's not represented very well at all

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests