Vehicle-Infantry Combat Dynamics
Posts: 60
The imbalance in micro that is required is absurd, infantry need to be issued 1 command (atnade/faust), tanks need to be constantly maneuvered.
The whole dynamic is screwed up.
Tanks are formidable weapons against infantry, in the absence of anti-tank weapons, a tank should easily displace soldiers. Infantry should be scurrying around tanks and hiding in cover, not chasing them!
Far be it for me to say how the game should be run, but I have a few ideas that would address this issue.
1) Faust/At nade - should primarily inflict damage, not disable. Guarantee damage on hit, chance to disable tracks/engine only on rear armour attacks.
2) improved affects of cover for infantry -green should keep guys relatively safe, infantry with no cover should be more vulnerable
3) increased affect of range - give infantry decent staying power at long range, and die quicker up close.
With these changes conscripts/grenediers can still deal with all manner of vehicles in a reliable yet cost-innefficient way. With guaranteed damage you can make a calculated decision on how much munitions it will cost to kill a vehicle with tier 0/1. The chance to disable on rear attacks would punish tanks that are over extended and unsupported.
The changes to cover/range would punish infantry that attempts rushing tanks head on and would let players conserve their infantry until AT weapons can be brought in by soft retreating and hiding in cover.
Tanks would be able to kill covered infantry quickly up close, but would risk over extending and getting disabled from behind.
Posts: 1734
Permanently BannedPosts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Your changes would mess too much with the overall balance of the game, for very little overall gain in playability.
Posts: 107
I miss the impending sense of doom you feel in vCoH when you hear the sound of a greyhound/stuart/puma because you KNOW your infantry are gonna take a pounding if you don't have any anti-armor capability.
Even Men of War, an indie game, knows that armor > infantry. Heck, almost every RTS game knows that you don't rush armor with infantry except maybe in swarms.
A possible solution would be:
Increase the resources needed to produce armor
and/or
Decrease/remove resources gained from non fuel/ammo points.
Buff the armor a bit and decrease the engine crit chance on the faust/AT nade coz it's also a bit silly that you can get an engine crit when the faust hits your frontal armor. MVGAME
These may make it hard for balancing but I feel it would be a change towards the right direction.
Posts: 531
soviet AT nade should damage engine in a small throw radius, and the animation should stop and munitions be refunded if the tank leaves that radius.
just like COH1.
Posts: 409
panzerfaust should inflict a medium amount of damage, about the same as a panzershreck
soviet AT nade should damage engine in a small throw radius, and the animation should stop and munitions be refunded if the tank leaves that radius.
just like COH1.
If only pigs could fly...
Posts: 813 | Subs: 1
Posts: 308
Posts: 133
I miss the impending sense of doom you feel in vCoH when you hear the sound of a greyhound/stuart/puma because you KNOW your infantry are gonna take a pounding if you don't have any anti-armor capability.
have you ever heard the sound of an early t70/ostwind arriving on the battlefield ?
Posts: 107
"wooopdedoooo! more targets for our potatoes!"
Yuri complains, "But Sir! It's a tank!"
And the officer simply replies with, "It's JUST a tank, no match for that potatoe in your pocket! For Stalina!!"
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Oh, ok.. So the MG's mounted on the medium tanks are there for display after all.. I mean really, you see a P4 and your officer goes,
"wooopdedoooo! more targets for our potatoes!"
Yuri complains, "But Sir! It's a tank!"
And the officer simply replies with, "It's JUST a tank, no match for that potatoe in your pocket! For Stalina!!"
A well thrown potato could do some serious harm to the exposed turret top gunner.
Posts: 107
But seriously guys, infantry should be running AWAY from the tanks or at least seeking cover and not the other way around. I mean it's true that T70's and ostwinds are anti-infantry but shouldn't it be the same for their big brothers who HAVE more MG's AND more powerful guns? I mean you're afraid of the the dinky T70 but laugh at a T34? Just doesn't make sense.
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Yes, and it seems that all their potatoes are "Well thrown" and always hit the engine even if the well thrown potatoe hits the turret. They must have had a "destroy engine" button placed on the turret.
But seriously guys, infantry should be running AWAY from the tanks or at least seeking cover and not the other way around. I mean it's true that T70's and ostwinds are anti-infantry but shouldn't it be the same for their big brothers who HAVE more MG's AND more powerful guns? I mean you're afraid of the the dinky T70 but laugh at a T34? Just doesn't make sense.
It has a bit to do with gameplay>realism. If infantry have to cower in fear for PIVs and T34s, who would ever bother getting an ostwind or KV-8 ever again? Also, at the moment it is very easy to acquire tanks, and even now there are complaints about how this game is a tank-spam fest (especially in team games). With even more effective tanks, what role would there be for infantry other than capping?
Posts: 409
Also, at the moment it is very easy to acquire tanks, and even now there are complaints about how this game is a tank-spam fest (especially in team games). With even more effective tanks, what role would there be for infantry other than capping?
To be honest, I don't see why this can't be fixed by raising fuel and population costs for tanks to reduce spam (while increasing their effectiveness).
Relic.
Posts: 3548 | Subs: 2
Livestreams
6 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, toxsltechnologiesSA
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM