raventhefuhrer wrote: And if nothing else, a surrounded town should be much easier to pressure into surrendering.
orcbuster wrote:Mike wrote:I'm sitting here, not paying too much attention to my online class, but I have a thought. With infantry losing their long range (ATGMs & RRs, not that RR where that great) reach, isn't much more possible now to just bypass towns?
Not really because zones are no longer a thing and you have to push all over the map. Towns thus become cheaply defensible points on the map (usually also road focus points) that you can use to channel forces alongside of. Hopefully, setting up AT guns in them can be a thing as well.
I should think that towns will be able to provide cover for AT guns, which makes them similar to ATGM teams in terms of role. If not then I think concealing ATGs behind houses so that they cannot be fired at from the 'front' of the town but can threaten the side armour of tanks trying to slip around the town should be sufficient to stop small encirclements. If the enemy provides large numbers of units and smoke cover and tries to slip past then what you have is an attack in open terrain. That's lovely, defending is easier. This particular attack is happening in a more predictable location than if you'd ignored the town and with the preparation time in waiting for the smoke curtains to build you can be rushing reserves up and readying your forward observers. To avoid this fate your enemy will be forced to assault the town.
The bit I'm more worried about is an attacker's advantage against towns. Infantry on their own were not particularly good at taking out FSVs and especially tanks in the era and I wouldn't be surprised if we see a Churchill/Sherman/Unironic Char B1 meta in the early days of the game as effective FSVs that are unthreatened by light long-range AT and outrange short-range AT. The obvious counter is having your own tanks in the area to react but at the relatively short ranges considered here that's dicey.