Infantry underwhelming? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series



Message

StuccoFresco -> Infantry underwhelming? (2/9/2019 12:03:53 AM)

I'm finding hard to use infantry: even in urban environement it seems incapable of closing in on enemy and gets slaughtered without ever getting in RPG range. 2 full companies of Soviet Mechanized Infantry at 100% readiness never even scratched the paint of a single Leopard 1A1, and got progressively obliterated by other 6 Leopards in a dense urban area.

Even the rare times it gets into assault range (0m engagements) it fails to inflict losses even when it drastically outnumbers enemy light units (like HQs). Meanwhile, enemy APCs and tanks seems to have no real problem killing infantry at 1000m or so in dense urban areas.

To dislodge enemy units from a city I had to bring in tanks, burying them deep in downtown which is... counterintuitive at best.

Am i doing something wrong? I'm currently testing Pied Piper scenario, with a mechanized btn added to the Soviet side to test infantry. The area where i noticed the poor performance of infantry is Hameln city.



Zakalwe101 -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/9/2019 6:39:03 PM)

I think actually it's the other way round, in so far that Tank units are too effective in Town and city hexes, when all the evidence is that Tank units are very vulnerable to infantry when operating in Towns/cities. Budapest 1956 and Grozny 1991 show how vulnerable tanks are, also the ineptness of Soviet (Russian federation) tactics.

I assume the game engine provides for infantry targets getting a defensive bonus for being in concealment (urban area) but does an attacking solely tank unit suffer both a offensive penalty ( gun depression /elevation issues, serious visibility loss , limited arcs of fire , serious loss of manoeuvrability,( old German towns are not built for tanks,) and an increased vulnerability to short range AT weapons.(hits on top rather than front, side or rear) The other side of this coin would be that if the tanks were accompanied by infantry these penalties would be mitigated . I’d suggest that the defending infantry still get the offensive bonus to simulate their choice of engagement area’s ,creation of tactical ambush zones , tactical use of mines etc (a 500m hex is a lot of real estate)
Hopefully this would
• Make infantry in towns more formidable
• Make rushing tanks into or through held urban area’s expensive.
• Encourage combined arms assaults.
• Turn MR companies into essential elements rather than cannon fodder.

I think also this would also encourage adherence to soviet doctrine that MRD make the break through , the OMG Tank divisions are the exploitation force.
A question will be what impact this would have on the AI , at present the AI is very good at selecting various axis of attack , can it discriminate enough to send MR companies to Urban VP’s and pure tank units to other VP ?
Having read through the forum I know this a subject that has been discussed before but I think this is worth revisiting for Southern Storm ?.




StuccoFresco -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/10/2019 7:48:05 AM)

That may be the issue: not infantry being poor, but rather vehicles being too strong in urban hexes.

Is there a game file where modifiers of this kind are stored?



CapnDarwin -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/10/2019 2:01:29 PM)

Infantry needs to be equipped with good AT capability to take down tanks in a city. Unsupported armour in an urban area does suffer some major penalties against troops. All the modifiers for combat are in code.



Deathtreader -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/11/2019 12:08:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CapnDarwin

Infantry needs to be equipped with good AT capability to take down tanks in a city. Unsupported armour in an urban area does suffer some major penalties against troops. All the modifiers for combat are in code.


Might be a silly question but, in order for armour to be considered "supported" in an urban area does the infantry have to be a subunit of the armour unit in question? Or can it simply be in the same hex as the as the armour unit?

Thanks,

Rob.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/11/2019 12:45:03 AM)

Having an infantry unit in the hex with armor will reduce the chance of armor taking those penalized shots.



KungPao -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/12/2019 4:03:31 PM)

I have seen a Soviet Inf company who lost all their BMPs took out an assaulting M1 plt in one min, with RPG-18. I have also seen a M1 plt, using move-deliberate order, move into urban hex cautiously, kept distance with defending Soviet Mech inf units, then wiped out the whole company in 30 min.

I have also seen a 40% strength , low readiness, low moral British mech inf co. took out 7 tanks, 17 IFVs. (see my post here)
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4436980&mpage=1&key=�

In an ongoing game , a remaining PzG inf squad beat back one of my full strength BMP Co., took out at least 6 IFV and 7 Inf units.

I don't think it's the problem of tank too strong or inf too strong.
My thought is
1) LOS in urban hex is too high. A tank with TI will have 60-65 LOS for anything in the same hex, 40-55 LOS for adjecent hex. That’s too high, yes, the TI sight can spot a sniper on the roof 1000m away, but how do you spot a BRDM hiding behind the building 100m away? Inf units should have a slightly better LOS compare to tank units as they can put boots into high level buildings, So maybe we should decrease the LOS of tank units in Urban hex.
2) Correct me if I am wrong. The short range AT weapon like RPG-18 and LAW-72 won’t shoot adjecent hex. This will cause a serious problem if the enemy tank just sit into adjecent hex. Like mentioned above, the tanke will have high LOS on your inf units, and you won’t be able to shoot back. I don’t know too much about coding, maybe the best solution is to give dug in infantry hand hold AT weapon the ability to shoot adjecent Urban hex? It is to simulate the dug in infantry send out the tank hunting team. The long range RPG-7/ Pzf 44 should have a chance compare to short range RPG-18/LAW-72.

My two cents



IronMikeGolf -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/13/2019 3:14:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KungPao

2) Correct me if I am wrong. The short range AT weapon like RPG-18 and LAW-72 won’t shoot adjecent hex. This will cause a serious problem if the enemy tank just sit into adjecent hex. Like mentioned above, the tanke will have high LOS on your inf units, and you won’t be able to shoot back. I don’t know too much about coding, maybe the best solution is to give dug in infantry hand hold AT weapon the ability to shoot adjecent Urban hex? It is to simulate the dug in infantry send out the tank hunting team. The long range RPG-7/ Pzf 44 should have a chance compare to short range RPG-18/LAW-72.



There is a bit of game design approach to unpack there. First, let me preface my remarks that noting
a. I have a good bit of experience shooting ATGMs, recoilles rifles, and shoulder fired rocket launchers of this era (RPG-7, M72A2, M134, M67, Dragon). These get quite difficult to shoot past 100 meters or so (excepting Dragon) (RPG-7 and M67 have better sights, so double that). And that is exacerbated by the fact that these weapons need a good to great shot placement to be effective.
b. I have trained and led dismounted and light infantry anti-armor hunter-killer teams. No, we don't model this tactic. Yes, I'd like to.

So, what to do? Well, to allow infantry in Hold the ability to engage with armor in an adjacent hex with short range AT weapons really is more of a time/space/movement of the AT team. Essentially, it is teleporting the team at the time it pulls the trigger. What is missing is the need to spot the target several minutes beforehand and the movement to the firing position, away from the parent platoon. The hard part of this when you really do it is getting to a good firing position without being detected and shot. The proposed model does not account for that and we don't build in "cheats" for either side. In this case, we would have a capability without the attending vulnerability.

At the core of this is the fact that the size of a hex being a good bit bigger than the range of non-trivial weapons really complicates things. We are not doing any overhauls of Red Storm, but we are looking at giving some love to dismounted infantry in Southern Storm. No details as yet, as we are working it, but they will be more capable than in Red Storm.



StuccoFresco -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (2/13/2019 3:34:32 PM)

Good to hear and thanks for the lengthy explanation [:)]



Anthropoid -> RE: Infantry underwhelming? (3/9/2019 12:46:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KungPao

I have seen a Soviet Inf company who lost all their BMPs took out an assaulting M1 plt in one min, with RPG-18. I have also seen a M1 plt, using move-deliberate order, move into urban hex cautiously, kept distance with defending Soviet Mech inf units, then wiped out the whole company in 30 min.

I have also seen a 40% strength , low readiness, low moral British mech inf co. took out 7 tanks, 17 IFVs. (see my post here)
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4436980&mpage=1&key=�

In an ongoing game , a remaining PzG inf squad beat back one of my full strength BMP Co., took out at least 6 IFV and 7 Inf units.

I don't think it's the problem of tank too strong or inf too strong.
My thought is
1) LOS in urban hex is too high. A tank with TI will have 60-65 LOS for anything in the same hex, 40-55 LOS for adjecent hex. That’s too high, yes, the TI sight can spot a sniper on the roof 1000m away, but how do you spot a BRDM hiding behind the building 100m away? Inf units should have a slightly better LOS compare to tank units as they can put boots into high level buildings, So maybe we should decrease the LOS of tank units in Urban hex.
2) Correct me if I am wrong. The short range AT weapon like RPG-18 and LAW-72 won’t shoot adjecent hex. This will cause a serious problem if the enemy tank just sit into adjecent hex. Like mentioned above, the tanke will have high LOS on your inf units, and you won’t be able to shoot back. I don’t know too much about coding, maybe the best solution is to give dug in infantry hand hold AT weapon the ability to shoot adjecent Urban hex? It is to simulate the dug in infantry send out the tank hunting team. The long range RPG-7/ Pzf 44 should have a chance compare to short range RPG-18/LAW-72.

My two cents



There IS a lot of rando isn't there.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.140625