Is mechanized infantry + tank destroyer a good stack?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • TheZhukov wrote:

      What do you do?
      As an FP? There are beta games, just regular CoN maps that only FPs can access, filled with more bugs than usual. We have to report those bugs and stuff. Sometimes, new content is added early for us (I think FPs got the Strategic Advisor thing long before the rest of the people)
      Have an amazing rest of your day ^^

      "Everything is impermanent. The only thing that is permanent it impermanence itself."

      Need support? ---> Send a ticket here!

      dxter's CoW Battle Calculator ---> Use it here!

      :tumbleweed:

      o7
    • Klusey wrote:

      Lord Crayfish wrote:

      In allied, tank destroyers and mechanised infantry (and some medium tanks maybe) are my go-to land units. Heavily supported by tactical bombers and self-propelled artillery.
      What makes you want to sometimes use medium tanks? You're free to have fun and play the game how you want, but personally I believe you'd be much better off without using the medium tanks!
      Commandoes in main stacks kind of defeats their stealth advantage. While allied medium tanks are not buffed, nor are they bad and I need something that can do damage primarily to light armour as well.
      It does not matter that they lose to comintern ones, since tank destroyers deal with those.

      Neither tactical bombers nor SP artillery are most effective against light armour. Therefore the strategy of grinding them to a pulp with ranged attacks and then moving in doesn't work so well.

      Do you have a better suggestion? Not trying to sound rude
      Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.
      — Marshal Foch

      A pretty mechanical toy [...] the war will never be won by such machines.
      — Lord Kitchener, on tanks

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Lord Crayfish ().

    • Lord Crayfish wrote:

      Klusey wrote:

      Lord Crayfish wrote:

      In allied, tank destroyers and mechanised infantry (and some medium tanks maybe) are my go-to land units. Heavily supported by tactical bombers and self-propelled artillery.
      What makes you want to sometimes use medium tanks? You're free to have fun and play the game how you want, but personally I believe you'd be much better off without using the medium tanks!
      Commandoes in main stacks kind of defeats their stealth advantage. While allied medium tanks are not buffed, nor are they bad and I need something that can do damage primarily to light armour as well.It does not matter that they lose to comintern ones, since tank destroyers deal with those.

      Neither tactical bombers nor SP artillery are most effective against light armour. Therefore the strategy of grinding them to a pulp with ranged attacks and then moving in doesn't work so well.

      Do you have a better suggestion? Not trying to sound rude
      Usually I have LTs as well with ACs. They're good enough as they are to hold their own until arty/air support is nearby. Cheap and fast, could even pair with mech inf, if you have no choice but to melee.
      Have an amazing rest of your day ^^

      "Everything is impermanent. The only thing that is permanent it impermanence itself."

      Need support? ---> Send a ticket here!

      dxter's CoW Battle Calculator ---> Use it here!

      :tumbleweed:

      o7
    • Lord Crayfish wrote:

      Commandoes in main stacks kind of defeats their stealth advantage. While allied medium tanks are not buffed, nor are they bad and I need something that can do damage primarily to light armour as well.It does not matter that they lose to comintern ones, since tank destroyers deal with those.

      Neither tactical bombers nor SP artillery are most effective against light armour. Therefore the strategy of grinding them to a pulp with ranged attacks and then moving in doesn't work so well.

      Do you have a better suggestion? Not trying to sound rude
      My suggestion is simply that light armour does not matter enough to need a specialist unit to counter them, especially not one as expensive as medium tanks.

      What light armour is such a threat to your tank destroyers and mechanized infantry to make you think you need medium tanks? Light tanks are easily handled by tank destroyers and armoured cars can even be defeated by mechanized infantry.

      SP artillery, SP anti-air, and SP rocket artillery all get slaughtered in melees by tank destroyers and mechanized infantry. Not to mention all of these units can also be weakened or knocked out by ranged units and air power; I don't know why you're convinced they can't do the job on their own or at least support TDs in the task.
    • Klusey wrote:

      I don't know why you're convinced they can't do the job on their own or at least support TDs in the task.
      I think I am convinced now

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      You’re giving tank destroyers too much merit there though. They are very slow and you could definitely shoot and scoot them in that place. But to be honest normal artillery is better anyway.
      And that is the problem with allied. It's vital to field a mechanised army but TD's slow it down.
      But in allied, SP artillery is surely better than normal artillery? Other doctrines not.
      Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.
      — Marshal Foch

      A pretty mechanical toy [...] the war will never be won by such machines.
      — Lord Kitchener, on tanks
    • Nah, normal allied is way cheaper and doesn’t suffer from the armored damage bonus from enemy arty, overall an improvement for me, along with being cheaper and not competing for as many important resources.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate
    • Carking the 6th wrote:

      You’re giving tank destroyers too much merit there though. They are very slow and you could definitely shoot and scoot them in that place. But to be honest normal artillery is better anyway.

      The debate is strictly medium tanks vs tank destroyers, as an Allies nation. Tank destroyers are considerably faster than medium tanks in this doctrine.

      You're right in saying that any melee unit can be kited (shoot 'n scooted), but that is not my argument at this time.
    • Lord Crayfish wrote:

      And that is the problem with allied. It's vital to field a mechanised army but TD's slow it down.But in allied, SP artillery is surely better than normal artillery? Other doctrines not.


      My debate is strictly medium tanks vs tank destroyers, as an Allies nation. Tank destroyers are considerably faster than medium tanks in this doctrine.

      You're right in saying that any melee unit can be kited (shoot 'n scooted), but that is not my argument at this time.
    • Klusey wrote:

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      You’re giving tank destroyers too much merit there though. They are very slow and you could definitely shoot and scoot them in that place. But to be honest normal artillery is better anyway.
      The debate is strictly medium tanks vs tank destroyers, as an Allies nation. Tank destroyers are considerably faster than medium tanks in this doctrine.

      You're right in saying that any melee unit can be kited (shoot 'n scooted), but that is not my argument at this time.
      Damn they are, but tank destroyers still suck overall. I’ve seen AA kill them, not worth it when you are up against mixed armies. Mediums can damage a bit of everything and take a good few hits themselves.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate
    • Carking the 6th wrote:

      Damn they are, but tank destroyers still suck overall. I’ve seen AA kill them, not worth it when you are up against mixed armies. Mediums can damage a bit of everything and take a good few hits themselves.
      Why settle for "damage a bit of everything" when you could just as easily invest in specialized killers?

      Like I said, you should have the scouts anyways, so they will handle anything unarmoured. At that point, the role of your heavy armour should be countering enemy armour.
    • Scouts as in one or two armored cars per stack? Then a full force of motorized and enemy armored cars would basically be unstoppable. Even if you mean lots of them, enemy defensive damage would be higher, so good luck advancing…

      Armored cars + TD would just die to anti tank/infantry and armored cars.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate
    • Lord Crayfish wrote:

      Klusey wrote:

      I don't know why you're convinced they can't do the job on their own or at least support TDs in the task.
      I think I am convinced now

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      You’re giving tank destroyers too much merit there though. They are very slow and you could definitely shoot and scoot them in that place. But to be honest normal artillery is better anyway.
      And that is the problem with allied. It's vital to field a mechanised army but TD's slow it down.But in allied, SP artillery is surely better than normal artillery? Other doctrines not.
      I always used SP arty (but that was in 1.0)

      What's the case in 2.0?

      Stay Sweet!
    • Depends on a lot of factors. Doctrine. Resources. Size of your empire. Position of your core relative to the front line. Enemy unit composition. Likely terrain where battles will be fought.

      As an example, imagine you're Kansas trying to take over the Homefront map. There are plains all around you and you're Allied. Your neighbors are building lots of armor. Time for SP arty.
    • Taffyta Muttonfudge wrote:

      That stack would have no AA defense.
      Well yeah, not by itself. But as the focus and backbone of the field army.
      Mech inf has decent AA anyway.

      _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Me grinning knowing there's still no counter to RRG doom stacks, no matter how much yall argue about MTs and TDs :rolleyes:
      No effective counter maybe. If it's a matter of wearing down opposition regardless of losses, massed stealth flesh charges might do the trick possibly at a lower economic cost.

      If you can afford RRG doom stacks, I assume I can afford nukes. No amount of AA won't help either, not if I play my cards right. I'm kind of buggered if you get enough before day 16 though.

      If it has stats we can kill it.
      Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.
      — Marshal Foch

      A pretty mechanical toy [...] the war will never be won by such machines.
      — Lord Kitchener, on tanks

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Lord Crayfish ().

    • Lord Crayfish wrote:

      Taffyta Muttonfudge wrote:

      That stack would have no AA defense.
      Well yeah, not by itself. But as the focus and backbone of the field army.Mech inf has decent AA anyway.

      _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Me grinning knowing there's still no counter to RRG doom stacks, no matter how much yall argue about MTs and TDs :rolleyes:
      No effective counter maybe. If it's a matter of wearing down opposition regardless of losses, massed stealth flesh charges might do the trick possibly at a lower economic cost.
      If you can afford RRG doom stacks, I assume I can afford nukes. No amount of AA won't help either, not if I play my cards right. I'm kind of buggered if you get enough before day 16 though.

      If it has stats we can kill it.
      Ye I'm talking b4 nukes. With right play, you should be dead by the time you even start researching nukes (they're hella expensive RM wise)
      Have an amazing rest of your day ^^

      "Everything is impermanent. The only thing that is permanent it impermanence itself."

      Need support? ---> Send a ticket here!

      dxter's CoW Battle Calculator ---> Use it here!

      :tumbleweed:

      o7