Does troop quality perhaps not matter enough?

[SCAJolly]

I'd have to agree with you here. The skills or the hit percentage among a lot of AT teams often seems to reach ridicolous heights. In particular I dislike the fact that while an entire infantry platoon has been shot to pinned, the AT team in that platoon still advances, and remains as good as undetected! I'd like to see some more AI teamwork!
Still, you are able to do the same to the enemy, and it should perhaps only be realistic that your enemy's a sneaky bastard. God knows how many APCs I've lost to sneaky commies.

[Shadowcougar]

I have had a similar issue into I fixed my tactics. I use my tanks to prep the area I wish to dismount in and always use smoke from the APC to cover my troops.

AT teams are tough to effect. They are small, hard to hit and I havemt checked but may have a higher experence. They are or should be trained. I think in the Sovirt Army the AT teams was one of the groups that got someting other than the follow me training. Them the mortar and commo teams where the important groups. Any one can take a AKM and charge forward

[desh44]

Speaking on troop quality....one thing I have noticed in the games is the number of casualties it takes to break units. I have played games where a squad takes 6 casualties in a single turn retreats and the next turn it is back in the fight. I have been lowering the morale values in preferences on both sides so there is not this tendency to fight to the last man.

[Uncle_Joe]

Hey guys,

Thanks for the input. And yep, I've used varieties of the tactics posted to differing degrees of success. But I still feel that there shouldnt be any additional vulnerability implemented for dismounting (at least not from an APC).

As for the AT weapon, I'm not even talking about the little 2 man roving AT teams. These are the inherent RPGs in the standard Sections or Squads. So EVERY one of the little buggers is blasting APCs (and lesser protected tanks) to oblivion at over 200m!

It takes a certain degree of discipline and training to engage enemy armor in the first place at those ranges and while under fire, it should be a really low chance of a hit. Right now dismounted infantry seem to control too large of an area against armor even with no dedicated AT weapons (there are no ATGMs, RRs, or other such things that I've encountered).

Again, for high-quality troops, yeah, they should be up and firing and hitting at the longer ranges, but for the rabble and lesser trained troops, they shouldnt even be trying to engage armor at those ranges let alone scoring solid kills like they do. For the closer ranges, lethality shouldnt drop off as much for suppression, but it should definately factor in a LOT more at the farther ranges.

[nosrac]

desh44 said:
Speaking on troop quality....one thing I have noticed in the games is the number of casualties it takes to break units. I have played games where a squad takes 6 casualties in a single turn retreats and the next turn it is back in the fight. I have been lowering the morale values in preferences on both sides so there is not this tendency to fight to the last man.

i agree about this robo-troop morale. i was fighting egypt vs israel(me) and the egypt infantry (65 exp. avg) would get blasted by he and small arms and the next turn the remaining 2 or 3 men would be "pinned" or "ready". blasting away. i was expecting a banzi charge!!!

[BigJim]

One thing to remember about all Steel Panthers type games is that they are suppression games, that is why infantry fires on your tanks with no hope to kill it, it does however (in this game) supppress the tank making his next shots not as good if cannot rally. so always use tranport that can fire on any potential threat before unloading troops so as to suppress them and thereby prevent getting them killed. Spotting is another problem in these games the AI tends to remain unspotted no matter how times he fires, unless you have troops with good spotting ability within LOS of his firing troops.

This code was written awhile ago and while the guys here have done a good job with it, it will always have IMHO "quirks" that Grigsby wrote in (the orignal programmer) which I fear can never be totally removed.