|
|
Post by Gone on Mar 18, 2020 23:42:10 GMT
It’s a good unit but only if you get it for free Good in conquest, bad in campaign. Not good in neither. They are really only useful as starting units. If you have access to these guys, you definitely have access to Armored Cars, too, who are far better. |
|
|
|
Post by Risviltsov on Mar 19, 2020 0:16:55 GMT
My opinion...
Tanks are more of a doctrine unit.
In a line doctrine (which I do prefer in open field combat), tanks can serve two roles -- the front line and the sieging role. Best flanked by stuff like machine guns, rifles, and flamethrowers/air guns. A very defensive unit capable of siege, but the issue is that it isn't amazing at combat.
A tank plus a field artillery with naval support makes for a tasty colonial starter pack.
Front line - takes damage
Sieging - destroy city defense, fortifications, and navy
Almost perfect sieging unit, not a good combat unit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lillis "Bing" Crosby Jr on Mar 19, 2020 2:16:35 GMT
Yeah, was really expecting tanks to be viable as theorized in the many post WW1 postulations and research papers. They deal horrible damage to normal units (even infantry? was at least hoping that out of the three the tank would minimally be another infantry counter), and get held up by the enemy rather quickly. Thus your tanks, if you follow the optimum strategy of leading the offense, will get stuck and destroyed as they dont counter any unit well. On the other hand, if you follow the realistically problematic strategy of using them as troop support, only then will non-general tanks be useful in your army, as they are able to start launching their attacks on cities once your other units clear the path and open up the city.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Mar 19, 2020 2:29:45 GMT
Yeah, was really expecting tanks to be viable as theorized in the many post WW1 postulations and research papers. They deal horrible damage to normal units (even infantry? was at least hoping that out of the three the tank would minimally be another infantry counter), and get held up by the enemy rather quickly. Thus your tanks, if you follow the optimum strategy of leading the offense, will get stuck and destroyed as they dont counter any unit well. On the other hand, if you follow the realistically problematic strategy of using them as troop support, only then will non-general tanks be useful in your army, as they are able to start launching their attacks on cities once your other units clear the path and open up the city. Cue me cringing at Joffre dealing 61 damage to Austro-Hungarian Infantry during the 4th tutorial mission. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lillis "Bing" Crosby Jr on Mar 19, 2020 2:41:53 GMT
Yeah, was really expecting tanks to be viable as theorized in the many post WW1 postulations and research papers. They deal horrible damage to normal units (even infantry? was at least hoping that out of the three the tank would minimally be another infantry counter), and get held up by the enemy rather quickly. Thus your tanks, if you follow the optimum strategy of leading the offense, will get stuck and destroyed as they dont counter any unit well. On the other hand, if you follow the realistically problematic strategy of using them as troop support, only then will non-general tanks be useful in your army, as they are able to start launching their attacks on cities once your other units clear the path and open up the city. Cue me cringing at Joffre dealing 61 damage to Austro-Hungarian Infantry during the 4th tutorial mission. Ooh yeah that tutorial mission, they were pretty tough though for complete beginners, especially for me since I was completely new to Ew6 then...  |
|
|
|
Post by Svetozar Boroević von Bojna on Mar 19, 2020 3:12:33 GMT
It's funny but I always have the feeling that those Tanks lack firepower; they have a huge amount of HP for sure but they are very slow and remain vulnerable to heavy artillery and gas attacks. Tanks are very hard to maneuver, they are slow, can't cross Mountains and can deal heavy damage to normal troops. They are useful sometimes when a country has a lot of Armoured Cars but Howitzers are cheaper and more effective. |
|
|
|
Post by Kurt von Schleicher on Mar 19, 2020 4:28:37 GMT
Just cavalry with hand cannon with wrong concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheAmir259 on Mar 19, 2020 4:57:10 GMT
Ultimately, only used when given at the start. Even with an excellent general, they could only do 110+ vs 210+ dmg in an armoured car. Aside from city defense, can help take out the (not plenty of) heavy artilleries (Field & Krupp) but when dueling with another tank or a fort (especially late game), still suffers.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruskii on Aug 21, 2024 12:34:11 GMT
to me I find tanks rather lacking in damage output, might be because my generals haven't been upgraded that much but Armoured Cars are carrying my conquest until the late game stage where Tank's ability to attack twice if using Forced March can really help open cities for capture compared to say artillery which lacks movement or victory rush to capture city after destroying it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on Aug 21, 2024 17:45:54 GMT
to me I find tanks rather lacking in damage output, might be because my generals haven't been upgraded that much but Armoured Cars are carrying my conquest until the late game stage where Tank's ability to attack twice if using Forced March can really help open cities for capture compared to say artillery which lacks movement or victory rush to capture city after destroying it. It could be the weapon type. Armoured cars come with some form of machine gun type which has at least 100% dmg dealt to troops except those with the armour type on tanks and armoured cars). Tank weapons are good against cities, forts, and the aforementioned armour type. They have a penalty against all others, IIRC (meaning less than 100% dmg). |
|
