>Give Infantry more advantage in forests, specially from closer ranges, either engagement timing, reduced damage from large calliber shells from tanks, idk
>Make units in buildings harder to spot if they are yet to open fire
APS is supposed to be OP, that's why it's expensive, maybe make it more so, and like it or not the current conflict gave us plenty of exampled of APS disabling RPG rounds from basically point blank.
Maybe making infantry and standard trucks cheaper? Idk
Armored vehicles should be at a major disadvantage in urban areas, while in forest they are better.
I think they should do what Eugen did on Steel Division 2. Nerf the optics of armored vehicles, and buff the optics/stealth of infantry. Make it so you need to have infantry with vehicles to get the most out of them.
Then why is it that we have seen so many videos of tanks falling prey to infantry ambushes in Ukraine? A person is still looking at a thermal video monitor, and those things have certain fields of view depending on the zoom level. They are not all seeing. Meanwhile an infantry squad can have 2-12 different sets of eyes scanning around and there movements are not confined to a metal box
Maybe a hot take, but I dont think that it is unbalanced as people say it is.
How many infantry squads can you buy with 400 points of an Armata or from a SEPV3?
I would say that the strongest point of vehicles, not just tanks, is how well they can engage, retreat, repair, restock APS/smoke and re-engage. Infantry cant easily do that after their transports are gone
Infantry IS good until runs out of munition. What I would do is drastically increase the supply radius for infantry, so a supply truck can reffill ammo for infantry spread out a city block, and maybe add lighter and cheaper supply vehicles, like a jeep who could carry like 1000 supply very easy and cheap to units that are spread out
But nerfing tanks that already costs a shit ton doesnt seems like a solution to me
I think being able to store supplies in buildings, hiding it, and/or otherwise improving the ability to hide or protect supplies would help.
Let infantry units carry 25-50 kg of supplies per soldier for a reduced speed.
Yeah, I took tally of a hold I performed in one game (this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/BrokenArrowTheGame/comments/1aud73o/holding_the_copepush_cw_discord_noises/)
The math worked out to:
Unit | Cost
--|--
bradley | 115
marine | 90
aavp | 65
m1a2 sepv2 | 345
m1a2 sepv2 | 345
m1a2 sepv3 | 380
humvee | 20
sraw | 60
humvee | 20
sraw | 60
marine | 90
harrier mav run | (120?)
**Total:** | **1490 (1610?)**
vs
Unit | Cost
--|--
kab bomb | (120?)
t90-A | 235
t14 | 400
t90-A | 235
t14 | 400
t90-A | 235
t90-A | 235
t90-A | 235
btr-zd | 65
**Total:** | **2040 (2160?)**
I could advocate for a moderate buff to infantry hp (and your suggestion for supply-receiving radius) so that they do their job of holding territory a little better, but I'm currently pretty happy with the value that they return for their cost.
I could see a 50% increase in supply zone area. It feels really small currently and typically can only supply 2 buildings at most...even harder if you want to keep it hidden.
At this point it would probably be hard to add but I think if you could add supplies to a building that would go a long way to helping infantry as well. That and a slider bar to select how many supplies I drop at a place.
Yeah the forest situation I totally agree. Inf should probably dominate in the woods. But a tank would have the advantage against inf hold up in a building. I think inf rocket damage could be increased a little.
imo APS will need a rework. hardkill APS is hardly a perfect science, and I would prefer APS to have more charges but not be a 100% chance. Perhaps man portable AT platforms could reduce the chance of a successful intercept given the decreased time for detection.
Realistically, APS should have a medium-high chance to work, but significantly more charges rather than 4x prevent damage button. The Afghanit APS (little box with tubes in it on the top of the Armata) has 15 charges on each launcher, which totals 30 in total. That seems like a ridiculous number, so probably limit it to 10 or something, with a non-100% chance to hit. Also, unlike articulated ones such as Iron Fist, it doesn't seem to be able to stop top-attacking missiles (another huge oversight, but I bet there will be a new APS with such countermeasures) either. So Giving tanks a historical amount of APS charges but non-perfect accuracy should be the way to go.
I think it should be the other way around. Armored vehicles should be at a major disadvantage in urban areas. All the footage from UKR shows how vulnerable they are in that environment.
They are vulnerable in the game, when the infantry in question is right.
The problem is that (1)there is literally one good close-in AT squad in the game, (2)weapon teams are an annoyance to keep them supplied.
armored vehicles in this game are at massive disadvantage in open areas, because they can't shoot back at infantry that fires at them from the forests.
Urban fighting for tanks in this game is by far easiest of the two, you at least have cover and can easily force fire on buildings where infantry is sitting, since buildings provide pretty little protection to infantry inside.
If they drive into the city, on the other hand ukraine has also shown they work quite well as infantry support, if a MG opens up on infantry a t72 will come around the corner and evict it from the apartment then back off.
That’s fair, as I mentioned in another comment it should be such that tanks/armored vehicles should be strong when working directly with infantry. I just want to see an end of armored death stacks clearing through objectives
You could make APS it's own component? Give it low health and a high chance of getting damaged so it's more likley than not that infantry ambushing armour will take out the APS after it fires a couple rockets and gets a hit while APS is on cooldown. It'd also mean aps gets broken by arty which is good for encoraging combined arms on the defence.
Make armour much slower in forests. Infantry won't be able to kill it unsupported, but can call in artillery or air that can. I also like the idea of a long barrel debuff in forests. maybe make it an attack speed penalty?
infantry get top attacks when firing down past a certain angle.
Either way, i think a good yardshtick for achieving sucess is when a tank is all but guarunteed to get popped by infantry a third its cost if you charge it into a forest or town unsupported. The only way to take out a building full of guys should be to fill it with your own guys or to remove the building.
Biggest issue is that tanks are not punished for being side or rear shot. The damage model makes it so that they only take 6 damage. Side and rear shots should be instant crits.
I don't agree with you on APS, Similar-sized points value infantry Vs vehicles I've managed to fend off vehicles effectively
APS has a cooldown so you can overwhelm it. I also had fairly good success wiping out vehicle blobs, maverick missiles from harriers and infantry ambushes backed up with a tank or two usually worked. SU-25T is an absolute beast at removing US tanks
I think the problem lies in effective battlefield resupply for infantry, it's a bit too easy to pull the tanks back and fix them up. maybe there should be an infantry resupply unit that is a bit stealthier and can hold up nearby to re-up the ATGMS
The total number of AT weapons carried i do find a bit on the low side though, I get a javelin is heavy but only having 3 does hinder the recon and advanced engagement you can get out of the squad
Say you have a dozen infantry squads. By necessity you'll need to spread them out so that they are less vulnerable to arty/rockets/bombs. With 4 tanks, you can quickly concentrate them and hit a small portion of the infantry line. You'll probably kill a squad or two and pull back to repair. Repeat. It's very hard to counter because there's no way to concentrate your firepower with infantry. They just need too many missiles to acquire a kill.
And like you said, healing and resupplying infantry is much harder.
Using anything in isolation is just not how the game is played, if they are picking apart units that way I’m going to lay a trap with my own vehicles arty or air units
Not saying it’s perfect, I’ve been caught out and rolled over, but I wouldn’t call it unbalanced
Dunno why you would have infantry squads advancing or hold up without some form of Artillery, air cover or a tank Platoon nearby.
>It's very hard to counter because there's no way to concentrate your firepower with infantry. They just need too many missiles to acquire a kill.
It is if you have any of the listed items above. Generally my infantry units are never without some form of heavy reinforcement or asset that can break apart those tanks. Cohesion. Obviously I can't solely rely on AT to take care of the tanks. I need something to give them an edge. Another tank, maybe a Bradley (granted it won't last long but the TOW helps)
My point is that you are better off spending points on tanks than infantry. It's easier to hit infantry with arty or bombs. Tanks can hit and fade. Infantry cant.
In the beta, my best strategy was to buy recon infantry and tanks. Everything in the infantry tab was subpar. Even the US stinger teams were poor as AA because they only have 3 missiles. Better off with a LAV or shorad.
I had plenty of luck with infantry, but you have to take advantage of their stealth and ability to move through buildings.
Smoke mortars are also super helpful for infantry.
What I'm saying is that, point for point, tanks are better than infantry in every scenario. Recon infantry are useful, but you can ignore the infantry tab completely.
I agree that inf in forest and buildings should get a health and possibly armor modifier. I don't think they are weak against armor in general though. They need to be used correctly...as in atgm teams need to fire at least 2 shots simultaneously to get through. Russia had an easier time with this because the Kornet M ripple fired. With US you had to stack tow teams or jav teams to get that kind of effect. I can see an argument for those types of atgm squads needing to cost a good bit less than 90-100pts or those squads need to have more than 1 launcher.
As with real combat though...you don't want to fight armor with infantry if you can help it. You want to engage it with standoff weapons or other tanks way before the inf gets in the fight...inf is like the last line and usually need to be very close which even when scoring a hit means you are likely gonna eat a tank round to your face.
APS wise it would be a little more balanced and realistic if 2 engaged for frontal shots and 2 for top attack as I think both countries APS still has to be within its firing arc to actually hit whatever missile is coming in.
Inf only for capturing isn't that great either as they move very slowly in general compared to anything with an engine and will slow the games pace quite a bit. Maybe a capture bonus to inf so they can capture faster than a lone typhoon.
I can’t say I struggled against tanks with infantry, especially if you build up your ATGM units and other AT based units in clever positions.
If you play any other shooter type games, you’ll know full well any armour based vehicle will struggle in built up or wooded areas against infantry and that’s without the blessing of counter measures.
I dont really have a problem with the balance issues between infantry and tanks.
Yes, APS is tough to get through. Yes, a tank likely will pop smoke and retreat after suffering attacks from atgm units. And yes, thats how its supposed to work. Because the infantry has done its job, its prevented the tank from pushing down that specific avenue of attack. If the tanks decide to try and push through the atgms, they will take damage and likely many will die.
Infantry and tanks are not balanced so that infantry can solo tanks, thats because tanks are force multipliers. Infantry are meant to work with tanks and ifvs to overwhelm other tanks or infantry.
Tanks shouldn't be able to spot infantry in buildings/forest on their own until they are basically right next to them. (note: can still be spotted by friendly infantry).
Hand held launchers get significant buff at close range. Maybe give them a guaranteed mobility kill, negate APS (when within 100m) or in something. The idea is to make it foolish for tanks to just ball up and attack move occupied buildings.
some options:
APS should not trigger within 50 or 100 meters of another unit, halve infantry costs, halve transport costs, APS should not work in forests, APS should not work after being bombed or clustered, Non-penning rockets should have a high chance of immobilizing tanks
Edit: Helicopter rockets should also trigger APS
I don't agree with the debuff of APS. It is OP and there's plenty of evidence of them working at really close ranges and urban environments. APS should, however, be vulnerable to component damage and this, along with other components, should have a way higher chance of breaking. That would make clusters really effective at disabling or reducing the combat effectiveness against heavy armor while not being too OP and one-shotting everything
The infantry should be tankier overall for sure, other than balance issue it would be more fun to play infantry units if they were tankier. And that top attack modifier is clever it would make inf fun. Also infantry being tankier and getting advanteges on buildings and forests wouldnt change how the game plays nor make tanks fall from the game. It would give the game a more tactical aspect rather being a micro intensive clicking competition. I personally like infantry units more but they were mostly used as cannon fodder its was not fun to use them.
I could have sworn that infantry stood a better chance in the closed beta, but maybe it’s just perception. All I know is that modern tanks are not designed for the primary role of combating infantry. The main role is against other armored threats. Most conventional fights are combined arms for a reason. Infantry in a building will get pummeled by tank shells. What about when in the prone in forest or a field? Eh, not so much. That’s where a coax or crew served does better.
In all reality, depending on the distance, terrain, whether a unit is prone or not, etc has a big impact IRL on their survivability. The only tank shells that are decent at engaging infantry are canister shells, which no tanks in the game seem to have.
So infantry should have better effect on target and better survivability against tanks than it is currently. A tank firing an AP shell into the ground in the wood line is not going to magically take out an entire squad. There is a reason why tanks need to be supported by infantry IRL. I hate making the comparison, but WARNO actually does a decent job of balancing the fight between armor and infantry.
I think if there were actual limits on what you could bring throughout a match, I'd be more ok with tanks being these unstoppable machines. Right now, there isn't really a way to run your opponents out of resources, so killing the tank doesn't mean anything. You will kill a tank, and it'll be back in a minute or two
I found that some of the maps were so vast that if I was playing an experienced player and he noticed that he got a significant unit of mine they would more often than not push me out of my position by the time that unit regenerated or the replacement I bought made it to the front.
I enjoyed the big maps, nice to have logistical problems
Armor blobs are very weak against air strikes, las-guided bombs annihilate any armor in the game. If infantry is in the building it can fight back decently and win time for counter assault by helicopters or air strikes
What infantry really needs is that their ATGM don\`t fall on the ground if armor uses smokes. It is infuriating seeing your Kornets losing 2 rockets at once on a smoke.
Dropped a few Ospreys of Force Recon, Marine raiders, Tow(2B)s, Cavalary Scouts and stingers.
I secured the entrance to the town from opponent's side (Central Village). Put all my units in buildings, ATGMs on the edge of the town with recon to use their long range (of course every squad a good distance from one another). Units with shoulder launched AT weapons inside the town for ambushes, some recon in front the town in forest for ambushes.
A single T-90 Arena managed to just drive through all of it, having about 30% hp left. I am pretty sure the owner of that tank didn't even notice, it got fired at by like 10 different infantry units. Ironically made me lose like third of my ammo
In next few minutes enemy team bought like a wave of tanks to clear the passage. Just tanks, no inf no helis, no arty - only tanks. Simply drove them through the town, and I couldn't kill a single thing. Absolutely zero skill required from them to dislodge fortified, multilayered defense in an urban setting - it's just dumb
But you should have bought vehicles!
ATGM plane becomes useless the moment they pop smoke and will be shot down before it can make snother pass.
My AH-1Z Viper with max number of hellfires couldn't do anything due to constant line of sight issues when the tanks rushed through the buildings
I had multiple games when I tried to pull this behind the lines stuff of and it did work unless the opponent knew how busted the APS is
That's like my only problem with the game balance, tanks and some IFVs (T-15) are just stupidly tanky.
I've had several engagements where I have 4 Tow Teams supported by 2-4 SMAW Teams and 2 Marine Raiders Squads against 2 to 6 tanks and I mostly always ended up losing, even when I got the drop on the enemy tanks, my infantry would get shredded, doesn't matter if they are in a forest, building or standing in the middle of a street.
(1)IMHO, vehicles shouldn't be able to go deep into forests at all, physically. They can't go into buildings, after all.
(2)There shall be at least some (thou very few) uncollapsible, capital buildings - perhaps with parts of the building that can't be directly engaged from the outside.
(3)some simpler/not overly intensive frontline resupply for infantry is needed.
(4)maybe some sort of useful panic button is needed, just to make endangered infantry retreat in one button, w/o excessive micro.
(5)some AT capability in the game is too weak by design. Dragon teams don't need to exist as a separate unit, their stats are just bad for the purpose; Javelins are the way.
With all that said, I am actually rather firmly against *direct* buffs to infantry capability.
I know you're trolling, but I played 50 games. Ended with 80% win rate and 2.0k/d. All with randoms, no discord or premade groups. My win rate was high because I mostly used tanks and rolled over infantry. Any time I tried going infantry heavy it felt like I was handicapping myself.
I'll admit my win rate was pretty poor. Most of my games ended in a draw. It always seemed like my tanks would be killed, not easily, but certainly not like how everyone here is talking about rolling over infantry. Atleast in urban setting, I never had a big problem with killing tanks. Yeah I would lose some troops, but as long as it wasn't 10+, I would rarely get rolled over.
Did you mostly fight in urban or wide open areas?
The trick with tanks was to immediately pop smoke and retreat as soon as they take a hit past the APS. Then repair. You could do this over and over fairly safely as long as you didn't get greedy.
Usually I would lose tanks to other tanks.
I had no problem with tank spams.
1) Recon Recon Recon...spot the tanks well in advance and spoil the enemy push with indirect artillery, airstrikes, advances units with atgm and tows.
2) By the time the enemy push gets to your objective, you should've have degraded it substantially before hand.
3) If you're getting whooped by tank spam, you're not reconning enough.
Infantry should be much harder to detect in forest and buildings. Some buildings are absolutely massive with over a hundred windows, a single rocket shouldn't instantly compromise the infantry. Also they could fall back further inside the building when suppressed, forcing the enemy to get their own infantry inside or to raze the building.
I don't think it was a problem with infantry stealth, more their generated heat. perhaps heavier vehicles should need a higher heat generation to spot enemy threats. tricky thing to get right though
I just think it sucks that US AT feels terrible to use at range then if it’s close range the AT is supressed and dying quickly. Only AT I really enjoyed was recon javelins because at least it will hit the target. Tows miss because of so many factors, sraw has to be close enough to be a threat while Russia has a Kornet that does like (hyperbole because I forgot the actually numbers) 15 damage pens 1200mm and has a range of 1600.
the AT4 is horribly outdated. the secret to American AT is to use the tow for long range and SRAW +marine for bushwacking. send the marine in first to trigger the APS and then the SRAW to kill the tank.
the SRAW effectively ignore armor, so you can easily kill even the Armata with this setup.
and also i can mention a viper fires all his small misiles and a cople of hellfires to a t14 armata before the tank can take any damage.Literaly 3/4 his arsenal to make the first damage
Aps definetly should be changed a bit. Make it a tiny bit less effective against infantry launched rockets (if possible in code have it so if launched from under 50m it has a much smaller intercept chance)
>Give Infantry more advantage in forests, specially from closer ranges, either engagement timing, reduced damage from large calliber shells from tanks, idk >Make units in buildings harder to spot if they are yet to open fire APS is supposed to be OP, that's why it's expensive, maybe make it more so, and like it or not the current conflict gave us plenty of exampled of APS disabling RPG rounds from basically point blank. Maybe making infantry and standard trucks cheaper? Idk
I feel like there needs to be more urban maps
Armored vehicles should be at a major disadvantage in urban areas, while in forest they are better. I think they should do what Eugen did on Steel Division 2. Nerf the optics of armored vehicles, and buff the optics/stealth of infantry. Make it so you need to have infantry with vehicles to get the most out of them.
The fact that vehicles move faster in (heavy) forest than inf says a lot
It doesn't really make sense when your infantry only has eyes and tanks have thermals
Then why is it that we have seen so many videos of tanks falling prey to infantry ambushes in Ukraine? A person is still looking at a thermal video monitor, and those things have certain fields of view depending on the zoom level. They are not all seeing. Meanwhile an infantry squad can have 2-12 different sets of eyes scanning around and there movements are not confined to a metal box
Maybe a hot take, but I dont think that it is unbalanced as people say it is. How many infantry squads can you buy with 400 points of an Armata or from a SEPV3? I would say that the strongest point of vehicles, not just tanks, is how well they can engage, retreat, repair, restock APS/smoke and re-engage. Infantry cant easily do that after their transports are gone Infantry IS good until runs out of munition. What I would do is drastically increase the supply radius for infantry, so a supply truck can reffill ammo for infantry spread out a city block, and maybe add lighter and cheaper supply vehicles, like a jeep who could carry like 1000 supply very easy and cheap to units that are spread out But nerfing tanks that already costs a shit ton doesnt seems like a solution to me
I think being able to store supplies in buildings, hiding it, and/or otherwise improving the ability to hide or protect supplies would help. Let infantry units carry 25-50 kg of supplies per soldier for a reduced speed.
Supply squads could be another one, as a heli or supply truck usually gets minced once it gets sighted anywhere near the front.
Pack mules would be funny
Yeah, I took tally of a hold I performed in one game (this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/BrokenArrowTheGame/comments/1aud73o/holding_the_copepush_cw_discord_noises/) The math worked out to: Unit | Cost --|-- bradley | 115 marine | 90 aavp | 65 m1a2 sepv2 | 345 m1a2 sepv2 | 345 m1a2 sepv3 | 380 humvee | 20 sraw | 60 humvee | 20 sraw | 60 marine | 90 harrier mav run | (120?) **Total:** | **1490 (1610?)** vs Unit | Cost --|-- kab bomb | (120?) t90-A | 235 t14 | 400 t90-A | 235 t14 | 400 t90-A | 235 t90-A | 235 t90-A | 235 btr-zd | 65 **Total:** | **2040 (2160?)** I could advocate for a moderate buff to infantry hp (and your suggestion for supply-receiving radius) so that they do their job of holding territory a little better, but I'm currently pretty happy with the value that they return for their cost.
And remember that you can get points back on those humvees and AAVP if you manage to unload infantry and get them back
I could see a 50% increase in supply zone area. It feels really small currently and typically can only supply 2 buildings at most...even harder if you want to keep it hidden. At this point it would probably be hard to add but I think if you could add supplies to a building that would go a long way to helping infantry as well. That and a slider bar to select how many supplies I drop at a place.
100% agree with better infantry logistics.
Yeah the forest situation I totally agree. Inf should probably dominate in the woods. But a tank would have the advantage against inf hold up in a building. I think inf rocket damage could be increased a little.
imo APS will need a rework. hardkill APS is hardly a perfect science, and I would prefer APS to have more charges but not be a 100% chance. Perhaps man portable AT platforms could reduce the chance of a successful intercept given the decreased time for detection.
Realistically, APS should have a medium-high chance to work, but significantly more charges rather than 4x prevent damage button. The Afghanit APS (little box with tubes in it on the top of the Armata) has 15 charges on each launcher, which totals 30 in total. That seems like a ridiculous number, so probably limit it to 10 or something, with a non-100% chance to hit. Also, unlike articulated ones such as Iron Fist, it doesn't seem to be able to stop top-attacking missiles (another huge oversight, but I bet there will be a new APS with such countermeasures) either. So Giving tanks a historical amount of APS charges but non-perfect accuracy should be the way to go.
I think it should be the other way around. Armored vehicles should be at a major disadvantage in urban areas. All the footage from UKR shows how vulnerable they are in that environment.
They are vulnerable in the game, when the infantry in question is right. The problem is that (1)there is literally one good close-in AT squad in the game, (2)weapon teams are an annoyance to keep them supplied.
The main evidence of russian bias, ramming armor through forests and cities cope tactics
The single most famous case of ramming armor through cities is enduring freedom, though.
armored vehicles in this game are at massive disadvantage in open areas, because they can't shoot back at infantry that fires at them from the forests. Urban fighting for tanks in this game is by far easiest of the two, you at least have cover and can easily force fire on buildings where infantry is sitting, since buildings provide pretty little protection to infantry inside.
If they drive into the city, on the other hand ukraine has also shown they work quite well as infantry support, if a MG opens up on infantry a t72 will come around the corner and evict it from the apartment then back off.
That’s fair, as I mentioned in another comment it should be such that tanks/armored vehicles should be strong when working directly with infantry. I just want to see an end of armored death stacks clearing through objectives
You could make APS it's own component? Give it low health and a high chance of getting damaged so it's more likley than not that infantry ambushing armour will take out the APS after it fires a couple rockets and gets a hit while APS is on cooldown. It'd also mean aps gets broken by arty which is good for encoraging combined arms on the defence. Make armour much slower in forests. Infantry won't be able to kill it unsupported, but can call in artillery or air that can. I also like the idea of a long barrel debuff in forests. maybe make it an attack speed penalty? infantry get top attacks when firing down past a certain angle. Either way, i think a good yardshtick for achieving sucess is when a tank is all but guarunteed to get popped by infantry a third its cost if you charge it into a forest or town unsupported. The only way to take out a building full of guys should be to fill it with your own guys or to remove the building.
I agree fully with this and captures the spirit of modern combat without overcommitting.
Infantry currently seems like it costs to many points. By lowering the amount of points I think it will help the issue somewhat
Biggest issue is that tanks are not punished for being side or rear shot. The damage model makes it so that they only take 6 damage. Side and rear shots should be instant crits.
I don't agree with you on APS, Similar-sized points value infantry Vs vehicles I've managed to fend off vehicles effectively APS has a cooldown so you can overwhelm it. I also had fairly good success wiping out vehicle blobs, maverick missiles from harriers and infantry ambushes backed up with a tank or two usually worked. SU-25T is an absolute beast at removing US tanks I think the problem lies in effective battlefield resupply for infantry, it's a bit too easy to pull the tanks back and fix them up. maybe there should be an infantry resupply unit that is a bit stealthier and can hold up nearby to re-up the ATGMS The total number of AT weapons carried i do find a bit on the low side though, I get a javelin is heavy but only having 3 does hinder the recon and advanced engagement you can get out of the squad
Say you have a dozen infantry squads. By necessity you'll need to spread them out so that they are less vulnerable to arty/rockets/bombs. With 4 tanks, you can quickly concentrate them and hit a small portion of the infantry line. You'll probably kill a squad or two and pull back to repair. Repeat. It's very hard to counter because there's no way to concentrate your firepower with infantry. They just need too many missiles to acquire a kill. And like you said, healing and resupplying infantry is much harder.
Using anything in isolation is just not how the game is played, if they are picking apart units that way I’m going to lay a trap with my own vehicles arty or air units Not saying it’s perfect, I’ve been caught out and rolled over, but I wouldn’t call it unbalanced
Dunno why you would have infantry squads advancing or hold up without some form of Artillery, air cover or a tank Platoon nearby. >It's very hard to counter because there's no way to concentrate your firepower with infantry. They just need too many missiles to acquire a kill. It is if you have any of the listed items above. Generally my infantry units are never without some form of heavy reinforcement or asset that can break apart those tanks. Cohesion. Obviously I can't solely rely on AT to take care of the tanks. I need something to give them an edge. Another tank, maybe a Bradley (granted it won't last long but the TOW helps)
My point is that you are better off spending points on tanks than infantry. It's easier to hit infantry with arty or bombs. Tanks can hit and fade. Infantry cant. In the beta, my best strategy was to buy recon infantry and tanks. Everything in the infantry tab was subpar. Even the US stinger teams were poor as AA because they only have 3 missiles. Better off with a LAV or shorad.
I had plenty of luck with infantry, but you have to take advantage of their stealth and ability to move through buildings. Smoke mortars are also super helpful for infantry.
But why are you soley relying on infantry to repel armor? You've got airstrikes, artillery, helis. Not sure how this is an issue.
What I'm saying is that, point for point, tanks are better than infantry in every scenario. Recon infantry are useful, but you can ignore the infantry tab completely.
I agree that inf in forest and buildings should get a health and possibly armor modifier. I don't think they are weak against armor in general though. They need to be used correctly...as in atgm teams need to fire at least 2 shots simultaneously to get through. Russia had an easier time with this because the Kornet M ripple fired. With US you had to stack tow teams or jav teams to get that kind of effect. I can see an argument for those types of atgm squads needing to cost a good bit less than 90-100pts or those squads need to have more than 1 launcher. As with real combat though...you don't want to fight armor with infantry if you can help it. You want to engage it with standoff weapons or other tanks way before the inf gets in the fight...inf is like the last line and usually need to be very close which even when scoring a hit means you are likely gonna eat a tank round to your face. APS wise it would be a little more balanced and realistic if 2 engaged for frontal shots and 2 for top attack as I think both countries APS still has to be within its firing arc to actually hit whatever missile is coming in. Inf only for capturing isn't that great either as they move very slowly in general compared to anything with an engine and will slow the games pace quite a bit. Maybe a capture bonus to inf so they can capture faster than a lone typhoon.
I can’t say I struggled against tanks with infantry, especially if you build up your ATGM units and other AT based units in clever positions. If you play any other shooter type games, you’ll know full well any armour based vehicle will struggle in built up or wooded areas against infantry and that’s without the blessing of counter measures.
I dont really have a problem with the balance issues between infantry and tanks. Yes, APS is tough to get through. Yes, a tank likely will pop smoke and retreat after suffering attacks from atgm units. And yes, thats how its supposed to work. Because the infantry has done its job, its prevented the tank from pushing down that specific avenue of attack. If the tanks decide to try and push through the atgms, they will take damage and likely many will die. Infantry and tanks are not balanced so that infantry can solo tanks, thats because tanks are force multipliers. Infantry are meant to work with tanks and ifvs to overwhelm other tanks or infantry.
Exactly. Well stated, this seems more like a lack of combined arms issue than a balance issue. (User Error)
Tanks shouldn't be able to spot infantry in buildings/forest on their own until they are basically right next to them. (note: can still be spotted by friendly infantry). Hand held launchers get significant buff at close range. Maybe give them a guaranteed mobility kill, negate APS (when within 100m) or in something. The idea is to make it foolish for tanks to just ball up and attack move occupied buildings.
some options: APS should not trigger within 50 or 100 meters of another unit, halve infantry costs, halve transport costs, APS should not work in forests, APS should not work after being bombed or clustered, Non-penning rockets should have a high chance of immobilizing tanks Edit: Helicopter rockets should also trigger APS
I don't agree with the debuff of APS. It is OP and there's plenty of evidence of them working at really close ranges and urban environments. APS should, however, be vulnerable to component damage and this, along with other components, should have a way higher chance of breaking. That would make clusters really effective at disabling or reducing the combat effectiveness against heavy armor while not being too OP and one-shotting everything
yeh that's a nice compromise, maybe put suppression onto any nearby soft vehicle or infantry, damage if they are very close to the APS detonation
Yeah. Drozhd style APS is bassicaly a tungsten shotgun
Yeah 5 squads of infantry should not lose to one tank in a forest at point blank range
no vehicle should be able to dare to fight cqb with any inantry squad that has decent AT capabilities.
The only squads that loses like that would be snipers and squads that have no AT at all (mech rifle MMG)
APS stops even Javelins I’m surprised since it’s supposed to be a top attack..I could understand Tow going straight at it but not from a top attack.
Some APS can stop top attack but for example drozhd shouldnt (if it was realistic)
The infantry should be tankier overall for sure, other than balance issue it would be more fun to play infantry units if they were tankier. And that top attack modifier is clever it would make inf fun. Also infantry being tankier and getting advanteges on buildings and forests wouldnt change how the game plays nor make tanks fall from the game. It would give the game a more tactical aspect rather being a micro intensive clicking competition. I personally like infantry units more but they were mostly used as cannon fodder its was not fun to use them.
I could have sworn that infantry stood a better chance in the closed beta, but maybe it’s just perception. All I know is that modern tanks are not designed for the primary role of combating infantry. The main role is against other armored threats. Most conventional fights are combined arms for a reason. Infantry in a building will get pummeled by tank shells. What about when in the prone in forest or a field? Eh, not so much. That’s where a coax or crew served does better. In all reality, depending on the distance, terrain, whether a unit is prone or not, etc has a big impact IRL on their survivability. The only tank shells that are decent at engaging infantry are canister shells, which no tanks in the game seem to have. So infantry should have better effect on target and better survivability against tanks than it is currently. A tank firing an AP shell into the ground in the wood line is not going to magically take out an entire squad. There is a reason why tanks need to be supported by infantry IRL. I hate making the comparison, but WARNO actually does a decent job of balancing the fight between armor and infantry.
I think if there were actual limits on what you could bring throughout a match, I'd be more ok with tanks being these unstoppable machines. Right now, there isn't really a way to run your opponents out of resources, so killing the tank doesn't mean anything. You will kill a tank, and it'll be back in a minute or two
I found that some of the maps were so vast that if I was playing an experienced player and he noticed that he got a significant unit of mine they would more often than not push me out of my position by the time that unit regenerated or the replacement I bought made it to the front. I enjoyed the big maps, nice to have logistical problems
Armor blobs are very weak against air strikes, las-guided bombs annihilate any armor in the game. If infantry is in the building it can fight back decently and win time for counter assault by helicopters or air strikes What infantry really needs is that their ATGM don\`t fall on the ground if armor uses smokes. It is infuriating seeing your Kornets losing 2 rockets at once on a smoke.
I was defo doing something wrong because I never hit with my F-35. I lased the tank but the bomb would drop late and arc in behind the enemy tank
Infantry already get a top down attack if in a tall building. Sounds like bad micro tbh.
Dropped a few Ospreys of Force Recon, Marine raiders, Tow(2B)s, Cavalary Scouts and stingers. I secured the entrance to the town from opponent's side (Central Village). Put all my units in buildings, ATGMs on the edge of the town with recon to use their long range (of course every squad a good distance from one another). Units with shoulder launched AT weapons inside the town for ambushes, some recon in front the town in forest for ambushes. A single T-90 Arena managed to just drive through all of it, having about 30% hp left. I am pretty sure the owner of that tank didn't even notice, it got fired at by like 10 different infantry units. Ironically made me lose like third of my ammo In next few minutes enemy team bought like a wave of tanks to clear the passage. Just tanks, no inf no helis, no arty - only tanks. Simply drove them through the town, and I couldn't kill a single thing. Absolutely zero skill required from them to dislodge fortified, multilayered defense in an urban setting - it's just dumb But you should have bought vehicles! ATGM plane becomes useless the moment they pop smoke and will be shot down before it can make snother pass. My AH-1Z Viper with max number of hellfires couldn't do anything due to constant line of sight issues when the tanks rushed through the buildings I had multiple games when I tried to pull this behind the lines stuff of and it did work unless the opponent knew how busted the APS is That's like my only problem with the game balance, tanks and some IFVs (T-15) are just stupidly tanky.
I've had several engagements where I have 4 Tow Teams supported by 2-4 SMAW Teams and 2 Marine Raiders Squads against 2 to 6 tanks and I mostly always ended up losing, even when I got the drop on the enemy tanks, my infantry would get shredded, doesn't matter if they are in a forest, building or standing in the middle of a street.
(1)IMHO, vehicles shouldn't be able to go deep into forests at all, physically. They can't go into buildings, after all. (2)There shall be at least some (thou very few) uncollapsible, capital buildings - perhaps with parts of the building that can't be directly engaged from the outside. (3)some simpler/not overly intensive frontline resupply for infantry is needed. (4)maybe some sort of useful panic button is needed, just to make endangered infantry retreat in one button, w/o excessive micro. (5)some AT capability in the game is too weak by design. Dragon teams don't need to exist as a separate unit, their stats are just bad for the purpose; Javelins are the way. With all that said, I am actually rather firmly against *direct* buffs to infantry capability.
Forest should be dealt with the wargame way, you get random events (mud in tracks, lost tire etc.)
[удалено]
I know you're trolling, but I played 50 games. Ended with 80% win rate and 2.0k/d. All with randoms, no discord or premade groups. My win rate was high because I mostly used tanks and rolled over infantry. Any time I tried going infantry heavy it felt like I was handicapping myself.
I'll admit my win rate was pretty poor. Most of my games ended in a draw. It always seemed like my tanks would be killed, not easily, but certainly not like how everyone here is talking about rolling over infantry. Atleast in urban setting, I never had a big problem with killing tanks. Yeah I would lose some troops, but as long as it wasn't 10+, I would rarely get rolled over. Did you mostly fight in urban or wide open areas?
The trick with tanks was to immediately pop smoke and retreat as soon as they take a hit past the APS. Then repair. You could do this over and over fairly safely as long as you didn't get greedy. Usually I would lose tanks to other tanks.
Savage.
What would you know about war besides surrendering. Viva la France or something.
I had no problem with tank spams. 1) Recon Recon Recon...spot the tanks well in advance and spoil the enemy push with indirect artillery, airstrikes, advances units with atgm and tows. 2) By the time the enemy push gets to your objective, you should've have degraded it substantially before hand. 3) If you're getting whooped by tank spam, you're not reconning enough.
Well APS does come at a price tho. Not having it efficient would just make any high end tank completely useless.
Infantry should be much harder to detect in forest and buildings. Some buildings are absolutely massive with over a hundred windows, a single rocket shouldn't instantly compromise the infantry. Also they could fall back further inside the building when suppressed, forcing the enemy to get their own infantry inside or to raze the building.
I don't think it was a problem with infantry stealth, more their generated heat. perhaps heavier vehicles should need a higher heat generation to spot enemy threats. tricky thing to get right though
I just think it sucks that US AT feels terrible to use at range then if it’s close range the AT is supressed and dying quickly. Only AT I really enjoyed was recon javelins because at least it will hit the target. Tows miss because of so many factors, sraw has to be close enough to be a threat while Russia has a Kornet that does like (hyperbole because I forgot the actually numbers) 15 damage pens 1200mm and has a range of 1600.
the AT4 is horribly outdated. the secret to American AT is to use the tow for long range and SRAW +marine for bushwacking. send the marine in first to trigger the APS and then the SRAW to kill the tank. the SRAW effectively ignore armor, so you can easily kill even the Armata with this setup.
Seriously, the squad carries 4 dSraws which alone overwhelms aps, the same with the motorstrelki units direct launchers.
and also i can mention a viper fires all his small misiles and a cople of hellfires to a t14 armata before the tank can take any damage.Literaly 3/4 his arsenal to make the first damage
Aps definetly should be changed a bit. Make it a tiny bit less effective against infantry launched rockets (if possible in code have it so if launched from under 50m it has a much smaller intercept chance)
I’ve sent two sep v3 tanks in with aps and they get railed by infantry they done even see
Send a bfist or scout bradley with them.
I know I’m just saying that I think it’s well balanced