antitank misnomer

[Treefrog]

IMHO "antitank" is a bit of a misnomer, they seems to me to be super non-tank troops. Compare them to infantry.

Infantry have certain attack/defense values which are increased an unspecified amount by research; research is limited to two levels.

Antitank likewise have specified values increased by +1 per level of research; research has five levels.[X(]

I'm not a "math guy" but it seems to me the potential fighting capability of the antitank units is greater, perhaps justifying their greater initial cost (200 mpps vs. 150 mpps for an infantry corps).

What do you think?

Do you buy antitank units?

[lwarmonger]

The thing that always gets me about anti-tank units is the cost of the research line that benefits 3 or 4 units only. You are putting in 500 mpps (in addition to the opportunity cost of 100 MPPs of your research capacity for quite some time) to improve a unit you will only have a few of. The Soviet Union doesnt usually have the MPPs until it as already won (after which, why not?), the Germans also have many other things to spend research on and units to buy. The Americans and the British must also research many things... so spending a lot of time down 100 MPPs in research capacity to improve a niche unit seems like too steep a cost until late in the game.

[taffjones]

I agree with Treefrog

AT units at the moment are overpowered especially at even at level 1. They can move and rip armoured units apart but when attacked by infantry, even army's suffer very low losses, Even if the infantry unit hasn't moved and should have the attack bonus.

Under the v1.05 patch I have seen At units move forward and take up to 5 points off a tank unit, on my turn attacking with an entrenched army I am lucky to get a 1-3 kill on the AT unit.

I used to play Axis, but to get a better understanding of the balance issues ,I have started to play the Allies and have found this to favour the allies AT playing both sides. Note I don't tend to do upgrade Axis AT units , but am considering it seeing how effective lvl 1 Allies AT units are even against lvl 3 Axis panzer units.

[EarlyDoors]

AT units are ace. I use them in a defensive coordination with corps. Slightly withdrawn and if a panzer sticks it nose out I punch them with an AT.

It's normally a 3-3 trade but it's the only way to slow the panzers

[HamburgerMeat]

I only consider getting antitank as either Germany or the USSR. However, the USSR can't really afford both anti tank and tank units, so I usually end up going tank in order to be able to counter punch.

I might keep up antitank tech in the next patch though, depending on how they buff the USSR. Youre right that they are powerful units

[BillRunacre]

This is very interesting, and in the past the wisdom seemed to be that they weren't worth the MPPs to buy and develop, and that they were easy for tanks to destroy. Have we swung things too far or is the cost now more or less right?

[taffjones]

Hi Bill

I think they are slightly overpowered against tanks, unless it's a surprise encounter.

I don't think they should get even results when they have moved next to a entrenched tank unit.

They even hold their own against Army's. They should defiantly be more vulnerable against infantry units

[Mercutio]

Interesting, I may have to try this if I have some time. I do agree they should have limited attack/defense against infantry though. Maybe 1/2 vs mech and full vs armor. Interesting discussion though!

[EarlyDoors]

Don’t touch those ATs

[Tanaka]

I think for the few you get and the cost to research and upgrade for the few they are probably balanced. They used to be too weak before patches and no one would build them.

[James Taylor]

I like'em, I use'em, and I'm with Early Doors, they're perfect against tanks although the defensive value should be emphasized.

IRL it was the defensive located AT unit that had the advantage against attacking/moving tanks, when they(AT) were on the move is when they were most vulnerable.

[taffjones]

I don't have a problem with the AT units ripping Tanks or Mech inf apart if they haven't moved or the enemy units have run into them (Ambush).

But when a AT unit can move into a hex against a tank or mech inf and still get better results then there is a problem.

Also against inf armies /corps there is no way they should get equal or better results.

Keep the Hard Defence the same + a bonus if they ambush a hard unit, reduce the soft defence is my opinion.

[taffjones]

Sorry line 2 should have been

When they can move into a hex against an entrenched Tank or Mech inf

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: taffjones

I don't have a problem with the AT units ripping Tanks or Mech inf apart if they haven't moved or the enemy units have run into them (Ambush).

But when a AT unit can move into a hex against a tank or mech inf and still get better results then there is a problem.

Also against inf armies /corps there is no way they should get equal or better results.

Keep the Hard Defence the same + a bonus if they ambush a hard unit, reduce the soft defence is my opinion.

I would agree with that. Defensive only.

[Helsingor]

I agree. They should be strongest defending against Tanks or Mech, less strong attacking same. I don’t have a problem with their values vs Inf, especially at Level 3 when they are presumably some form of Tank Destroyer or Assault Gun.