Combat engineers versus infantry OLD_TOPIC
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:26 pm
The existing infantry is really a combination of combat engineers and fortification engineers.
Infantry was used to kill machine guns in not open terrain.
Combat engineers clear tactical obstacles and lay mines. Blow minefields, firethrowers...
Fortification engineers provide built protection and strategical resources. Airfields, harbours...
I think it's worth considering expanding the infantry tech tree here.
Another tactical and strategical issue is that infantry with artillery was the main combat forces during both world wars. Differently utilised of course. Our existing general issue is that most terrain is favoring motorised forces. In real life moving a tank is the biggest problem. Enemies is the third priority. The second is fuel but I think it's good to avoid logistic troops in this game. I think we need some half hindering terrain to get the infantry versus tanks balance correct. This might help tanks versus air easier too. Oohps
Infantry was used to kill machine guns in not open terrain.
Combat engineers clear tactical obstacles and lay mines. Blow minefields, firethrowers...
Fortification engineers provide built protection and strategical resources. Airfields, harbours...
I think it's worth considering expanding the infantry tech tree here.
Another tactical and strategical issue is that infantry with artillery was the main combat forces during both world wars. Differently utilised of course. Our existing general issue is that most terrain is favoring motorised forces. In real life moving a tank is the biggest problem. Enemies is the third priority. The second is fuel but I think it's good to avoid logistic troops in this game. I think we need some half hindering terrain to get the infantry versus tanks balance correct. This might help tanks versus air easier too. Oohps