Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

I've noticed that close assaults, during the players turn, do not trigger when attacking amphibious vehicles. So far I've seen it with unit classes 33 (Light Amphibian), 34 (Heavy Amphibian), and 35 (Amphibian Tank). Close assaults will trigger like normal during the enemy's turn if they move next to an infantry unit. I've attached two save files, the first one is a bunch of LVTs about to approach infantry. If the LVTs get next to the infantry you'll see the infantry can close assault them during Player 2's turn, but when it is Player 1's the infantry will not attempt close assaults on any surviving LVTs that you have them attack. The second save file takes place a few turns after the first save file. You'll see two LVT's have been destroyed by close assaults, and there is one LVT next to unit D0, and one next to D2. Neither one will close assault the LVTs on Player 1's turn even though they both have 6 moves left, no damage, and only 1 suppression. D2 even successfully performed a close assault on Player 2's previous turn. Is this happening to anyone else? I'm playing on the most recent version (17.0) on the extended edition. I've also tested it on SP:MBT (17.0, extended) and the same thing is occurring.

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

I am running tests AND SO FAR I agree with you but if you have been following my posts you'll know I'm not 100% yet....... i ****THINK**** I am following the correct steps but I am not triggering a close assault

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

Just tried some Japanese vs LVT as a test..

LVTs are unarmoured.

Close assault only happens with armoured targets, if soft-skin vehicles then the infantry shoot at them instead.

If you had armoured LVT then you should be seeing close assaults, but not on the early models with no armour.

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

Andy

" yeah but.........."

The LVT's in that save are LVT4's and they only have two unarmoured area..... top and rear.........the rest is armoured

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1745588470

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

No armour on at least 1 hull side == "soft skin" IIRC

(Not sure about turret side 0 if all the hull has tin plating)

No top armour == Severe disadvantage if actually assaulted.
- Don't get open topped vehicles close to enemy infantry, they are "grenade buckets"!

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

I just set up a Brit / German Normandy "battle" with a Tiger 1 and Brit infantry

When the time was right, I was able to close assault the beast

I used a Tiger 1 because there is no disputing a Tiger 1 is armoured

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

Welp, looks like it was the unit class that is being treated as a soft skin for assaults after all

I changed to a later model LVT with hull armour all round, and they still fired at them rather than assaulted, even the inf-AT wit HEAT weapons in slot 1

Something to look into further, then.

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

Yeah!............ it wasn't my memory "this time" <G>

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

Thank you both for the quick replies! It’s nice to see I’m not crazy…

Re: Close Assault vs Amphibious Vehicles
 

We've been doing this for 27 years.......... "crazy" is at the heart of what we do :D