|
|
Post by Ralyks on Dec 6, 2020 14:22:34 GMT
With two clear exceptions, one being the KV-6 (which is a fiction tank) and the Katyusha, infantry is overall the most solid. Tons of options to keep on giving them special forces once it dies out (and these special forces have pretty similar hp numbers to the ones on more expensive tanks or artillery Special Forces), giving them constantly these free stats throughout the entire campaign.
KV-6 is just a beast, being able to trigger the reset chance even if a unit dies from collateral damage is just too good, being able to reset more often than any other Special Force tank while also dealing often the most damage.
Katyusha in hands of my Konev serves as a very mobile with high scouting range unit, that can sometimes hit 3-4 times with its huge aoe dmg, leaving everything easy for a KV-6 easy cleanup.
MacArthur on NKVD or even better cleanup Cossack Cavalry will cause big damage, and how easy and cheap is to heal him up makes infantry (WITH A GENERAL) a better choice than it was on previous ET games, that would normally die quite fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by Józef Poniatowski on Dec 7, 2020 18:45:57 GMT
I remember early days of WC4 when many were fascinated by Mannerheim and Yamashita. In terrorist wars though they didn't have a single chance. Infantry was improved since then, but I really doubt that Infantry will replace armored vehicles as our main force. Again tanks were not especially impressive in WC 4 until all technologies were unlocked. We should keep that in mind... Also I feel like in irl WW2 infantry would still be a powerful force in the pacific and african theater where armored forces were less common I don't mean to be a contrarian, but I disagree. The Matilda was called "Queen of the Desert" for a reason, tanks played a huge role in both of those theaters. Marine Armored Forces became a thing during the war, and while not numerous they were invaluable as a support element for Marines on the islands and an integral asset in every theater. They say the infantry owns the final 100 meters, and this is true, but armor owns the rest of the modern battlefield. |
|
|
|
Post by eeeeef on Dec 7, 2020 18:53:08 GMT
Also I feel like in irl WW2 infantry would still be a powerful force in the pacific and african theater where armored forces were less common I don't mean to be a contrarian, but I disagree. The Matilda was called "Queen of the Desert" for a reason, tanks played a huge role in both of those theaters. Marine Armored Forces became a thing during the war, and while not numerous they were invaluable as a support element for Marines on the islands and an integral asset in every theater. They say the infantry owns the final 100 meters, and this is true, but armor owns the rest of the modern battlefield. No worries I always appreciate good historical trivia  , I didn't knew tanks played such a major role in the Pasific theaters since the mental image in my head says the Pasific theater is basically brutal Island hopping and large scale naval battles, glad to be proven wrong |
|
|
|
Post by Józef Poniatowski on Dec 10, 2020 15:59:52 GMT
I would say infantry is the bedrock of a force; tanks may be more powerful but IRL they are blind, loud, and large. The tanks will always require infantry support, but infantry also love having tanks around. They complete each other IRL.
In game, there is no such nature. Tanks are IMO better in almost every way, and in my experience 1 tank is worth more than 4 infantry stacked or regular
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Dec 10, 2020 18:12:20 GMT
I would say infantry is the bedrock of a force; tanks may be more powerful but IRL they are blind, loud, and large. The tanks will always require infantry support, but infantry also love having tanks around. They complete each other IRL. In game, there is no such nature. Tanks are IMO better in almost every way, and in my experience 1 tank is worth more than 4 infantry stacked or regular Actually this impression is right and wrong at the same time. Of course, few things are better than a heavy tank (or even tanks) at our disposal. But it is not always the case. In some Pacific chapters (especially special chapters) we don't have heavy tanks neither from the start nor as reinforcement. Moreover we don't have factories to repair our vehicles. And last but not least our objectives are on different islands and there are only two ways of reaching them: by see (where our troops are an easy prey) or by air. If that is the pattern for all Pacific scenarios I think that Infantry in general (and Infantry generals in particular) will play an important (if not a leading) role in Pacific campaigns in 1945. |
|
|
|
Post by Ralyks on Dec 10, 2020 18:56:35 GMT
Yes, certainly Pacific Campaign was a way different approach to the two previous campaigns and the following North African campaign. I must confess I was even struggling to get 3 stars on a few ones so I just moved on to the African Campaign and after beating it (which felt easy compared to the campaign I came from) I came back to North Pacific (now with Yamamoto and Mac Arthur and one extra upgrade on my troops) and they were not so problematic.
In that campaign, the role of navy and infantry is clearly strengthened, as they're the only ones that can use paratroops through the often mountainous battleground, the only ones that can build and use coastal defense, and the ones that are healed up with ease, as factories are way more rare but not so for cities.
Infantry was clearly strengthened from previous games, but except for the Pacific Campaign, I must admit tanks did the heavy lifting, with infantry being often more as a meatshield and capturing cities that were cleared by the tanks and artillery. But its a must to upgrade them (I currently only have infantry and tanks on level 5, with artillery only level 2, navy 3 and airforce 3). Why? There's not a single mission in which you don't start with at least one infantry, and the guaranteed 25% discount that is given since the very start of the game makes hiring an extra one more cost efficient. And +5 hp buff on a troop that comes with 3 infantries in a group makes it 15 extra hp, while in a tank, even though its a +6, it only comes with 2 troops (and sometimes just 1) making it just 12, not only better per individual troop, but its also the most common troop type. Artillery, Air force and Navy are the least important, with the Pacific Campaign being an exception for the last two mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by irvin on Dec 11, 2020 18:32:33 GMT
Dealing 500-1000 dmg and destroying 3-5 stacks of infantry at 1 turn by heavy tank, the most effective unit is IMO clear
But the true is that you may not ignore other unit types to pass the game
|
|
|
|
Post by Józef Poniatowski on Dec 12, 2020 17:48:36 GMT
I would say infantry is the bedrock of a force; tanks may be more powerful but IRL they are blind, loud, and large. The tanks will always require infantry support, but infantry also love having tanks around. They complete each other IRL. In game, there is no such nature. Tanks are IMO better in almost every way, and in my experience 1 tank is worth more than 4 infantry stacked or regular Actually this impression is right and wrong at the same time. Of course, few things are better than a heavy tank (or even tanks) at our disposal. But it is not always the case. In some Pacific chapters (especially special chapters) we don't have heavy tanks neither from the start nor as reinforcement. Moreover we don't have factories to repair our vehicles. And last but not least our objectives are on different islands and there are only two ways of reaching them: by see (where our troops are an easy prey) or by air. If that is the pattern for all Pacific scenarios I think that Infantry in general (and Infantry generals in particular) will play an important (if not a leading) role in Pacific campaigns in 1945. I understand what you say, but if I get my *choice* I would pick the tanks. I accept that there are times that they are limited, but even if they give me one with no chance of resupply I might still put manstein on it before using an infantry stack with a gen |
|
|
|
Post by Thortilla on Apr 27, 2021 3:59:16 GMT
Obviously Air Force......
|
|
, I didn't knew tanks played such a major role in the Pasific theaters since the mental image in my head says the Pasific theater is basically brutal Island hopping and large scale naval battles, glad to be proven wrong 
