Hey guys,
I always wondered if you let your dedicated tank destroyers (Panther, Su-85, Jackson, Puma, Firefly, etc.) shoot at infantry if no hostile vehicles are around?
If so, what are you're reasons?
If not, why?
I tended to enable 'Vehicles only' all the time but I've seen several streams where (pro) players let their TDs shoot on infantry too and I still am curious because of the lack of their AI capabilities.
Tank destroyers - Shoot on infantry or not?
14 Dec 2015, 11:47 AM
#1
Posts: 1740
It is though God by command has withdrawn every other throne.
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
And God is saying 'No. These people will deal with me alone.'
14 Dec 2015, 11:50 AM
#2
Posts: 175
If there's no enemy tanks around, I manually let them target infantry unless I'm trying to hide their position. They occassionally snipe a model here and there, so why not.
14 Dec 2015, 11:55 AM
#3
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
If you KNOW there is no longer armor on opponents side, there isn't much of a reason to keep them on hold fire.
It forces opponent to move his AT as well as there is still little chance for that lucky model snipe.
Plus, panther and puma aren't terrible at AI, the MGs do the work.
It forces opponent to move his AT as well as there is still little chance for that lucky model snipe.
Plus, panther and puma aren't terrible at AI, the MGs do the work.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
14 Dec 2015, 12:03 PM
#4
Posts: 24
Depends, in a theoretical situation where you know for certain there are no tanks around you should let them shoot infantry or you are holding back potential dps, no matter how RNG dependent.
In most situations though i make vehicles with high reload times target vehicles only, particularly if im making an assault etc, then once enemy tanks are cleared away i might change it.
And if my vehicles are sitting defensively ill keep them on target vehicles so shots arent baited out by a leading squad of infantry.
In most situations though i make vehicles with high reload times target vehicles only, particularly if im making an assault etc, then once enemy tanks are cleared away i might change it.
And if my vehicles are sitting defensively ill keep them on target vehicles so shots arent baited out by a leading squad of infantry.
14 Dec 2015, 12:04 PM
#5
Posts: 125
The problem is that if you set the tank to 'vehicles' only, then the pintle-mounted MG holds fire as well.
Best thing you can do is micro the ability according to your needs.
Best thing you can do is micro the ability according to your needs.
 | Playercard of Necrophagist | |||||||||||||||||||
|
14 Dec 2015, 12:13 PM
#6
1 
Posts: 311
I think they would never in real life fire on troops on the ground with the main cannon, only on units in bunkers and buildings with the purpose to destroy the building. It would be a waste of ammunition to shoot on troops on the ground. But their MGs would fire on the troops.
Of course it is possible in this game too shoot on infantry with the main gun, but they should miss the infantry almost every time, because of the accuracy is extremely bad.
But in this game, I try to avoid using tank destroyers against infantry, because that would reveal their position to the opponent.
Of course it is possible in this game too shoot on infantry with the main gun, but they should miss the infantry almost every time, because of the accuracy is extremely bad.
But in this game, I try to avoid using tank destroyers against infantry, because that would reveal their position to the opponent.
14 Dec 2015, 12:20 PM
#7
3 Posts: 587
I sometimes get 5 M-42 AT guns and let them shoot at enemy infantry from max range, they mostly miss but i have witnessed them sniping 2-3 models down with 1 lucky hit, so i keep doing it, and when they reach VET 3 they gain that 30% accuracy that helps them sniping infantry even more, and the penetration bonus helps against enemy tanks asvell #Pray4TheRNG (M-42 is one of the AT guns that still have the old veterancy requirements, so it only needs about 2-3 penetrating hits on enemy tank to gain VET 1)
14 Dec 2015, 13:38 PM
#8
Posts: 378
I think they would never in real life fire on troops on the ground with the main cannon, only on units in bunkers and buildings with the purpose to destroy the building. It would be a waste of ammunition to shoot on troops on the ground. But their MGs would fire on the troops.
Actually they would with HE round. Most of late tank destroyers are equipped with HE round to serve as role of assault gun whenever needed.
14 Dec 2015, 13:59 PM
#9
1 Posts: 311
Actually they would with HE round. Most of late tank destroyers are equipped with HE round to serve as role of assault gun whenever needed.
But if we take what you said in consideration, then the alternatives would be that the tank destroyers would either shoot with High Explosive or Armor-Piercing rounds, and not if the tank destroyer shoots at both infantry and vehicles, or only at vehicles. Then the HE rounds would not make damage to tanks, and AP rounds would not do damage to infantry.
14 Dec 2015, 14:35 PM
#10
1 
Posts: 640
Voted no.
But sometimes I use my Panther with upgraded MG42 on top to fight infantry or if I got an early Puma...
But sometimes I use my Panther with upgraded MG42 on top to fight infantry or if I got an early Puma...
| Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
14 Dec 2015, 16:28 PM
#11
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
No with Jackson, M10s, Su85, JPIV, etc as they have 0 AI in the means of MGs.
Yes with PV n Pumas as the MGs are good on them.
Yes with PV n Pumas as the MGs are good on them.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
14 Dec 2015, 16:39 PM
#12
Posts: 732
Voted no.
But sometimes I use my Panther with upgraded MG42 on top to fight infantry or if I got an early Puma...
But Panther is not tank destroyer but a "Tankhunter" (big brother of puma) in relics book
14 Dec 2015, 16:52 PM
#13
7 
Posts: 1664
But Panther is not tank destroyer but a "Tankhunter" (big brother of puma) in relics book
It's a curious affair that the Puma and Panther have effective mg's in this game while Jackson and Wolverine have none... even though both were historically fitted with .50 mg's... Axis Relic's special flower.
14 Dec 2015, 17:25 PM
#14
Posts: 2742
I used to all the time with SU-85s.
But that was years ago...
But that was years ago...
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
15 Dec 2015, 00:51 AM
#15
Posts: 149
It's a curious affair that the Puma and Panther have effective mg's in this game while Jackson and Wolverine have none... even though both were historically fitted with .50 mg's... Axis Relic's special flower.
As an American, and a big fan of the m2 hmg, I am thoroughly disappointed with relics portrayal of this weapon. This hmg was bolted to anything and everything that moved throughout our involvement in WWII. The m2 was mounted on virtually every class of tracked vehicle. It was on m10 tds, m36 tds, m4 tanks, m7 howitzer, along with scout cars, jeeps, anti air vehicles, and halftracks, and everything else that moved via wheels and/or tracks and virtually every plane the USAAC flew as a defensive mount in bombers or as the main weapon of fighters. The m2 .50 cal should be on everything because it was literally on everything. The m10 and m36 lacking it is silly. If stugs can have pintle mounted mgs why not the usf tds? The elefant should also have a mg. It was one of the main things they did to the Ferdinand that made it become the elefant. Tds usually have some armament to keep infantry from getting close enough to lob a molotov or such. That was the lesson learned from the Ferdinand. Mgs on tds.
PL#freeKatitofPL
15 Dec 2015, 01:55 AM
#16
1 Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
Yes the RNG gods are usually on my side when I let jacksons Fire on infantry.
I once wiped an entire mg42 with an m10 shot as well
But firefly is probably the only thing I would never let target infantry. dat reload
I once wiped an entire mg42 with an m10 shot as well
But firefly is probably the only thing I would never let target infantry. dat reload
15 Dec 2015, 02:15 AM
#17
Posts: 92
As an American, and a big fan of the m2 hmg, I am thoroughly disappointed with relics portrayal of this weapon. This hmg was bolted to anything and everything that moved throughout our involvement in WWII. The m2 was mounted on virtually every class of tracked vehicle. It was on m10 tds, m36 tds, m4 tanks, m7 howitzer, along with scout cars, jeeps, anti air vehicles, and halftracks, and everything else that moved via wheels and/or tracks and virtually every plane the USAAC flew as a defensive mount in bombers or as the main weapon of fighters. The m2 .50 cal should be on everything because it was literally on everything. The m10 and m36 lacking it is silly. If stugs can have pintle mounted mgs why not the usf tds? The elefant should also have a mg. It was one of the main things they did to the Ferdinand that made it become the elefant. Tds usually have some armament to keep infantry from getting close enough to lob a molotov or such. That was the lesson learned from the Ferdinand. Mgs on tds.
Also doesn't make sense that a mounted .50cal on a truck or vehicle has no suppression yet the same weapon for an MG team does.
If anything a vehicle mounted MG would do more damage as it's shooting from a vantage point & has more belt fed ammunition...
15 Dec 2015, 02:23 AM
#18
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
I'll only do that if it has MGs. If it doesn't, I will never have them shoot at infantry unless I'm absolutely, completely, entirely certain that nothing AT-capable can head over to it, which isn't going to be very often.
15 Dec 2015, 04:23 AM
#19
Posts: 270 | Subs: 1
How does the SU-76 perform against infantry?
I assume it's not too bad since it is a multi-role artillery piece/tank destroyer
I assume it's not too bad since it is a multi-role artillery piece/tank destroyer
15 Dec 2015, 05:28 AM
#20
Posts: 446 | Subs: 2
I'd like an option to disable the main gun vs infantry but keep the MGs online where applicable.
Dear Lord, teach me to be generous; to give and not count the cost; to fight and not heed the wounds; to work and ask for no reward, save that of knowing I am doing Your will.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.483190.718-1
- 4.587233.716+3
- 5.1095612.641+19
- 6.894399.691+4
- 7.280162.633+8
- 8.1004649.607+5
- 9.304113.729+4
- 10.379114.769+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1006
Board Info
836 users are online:
1 member and 835 guests
SneakEye
SneakEye
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48781
Welcome our newest member, greenwayautorec
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, greenwayautorec
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM