OBB mixing Infantry with armor

[Clux]

I have barely used them since the enemy AI doesnt make tanks, but I'm curios if when you create an OBB with APC + infantry or Light Tanks + Infantry if the Infantry "gets cover" and gets hit less or if they benefit from the movement type of the tanks/APC. Because otherwise I have not find why you should make them instead of separate units.

[Coffeecool]

APC are superior to Trucks in every way, they are tracked that means faster on roads and offroad and they come with a mounted machinegun + armor.
But aussault formations(inf/tanks) are not really usefull imo, the benefit is that your tanks get the bonus from comanders unlike a independent tank formation, but are a lot less mobile if they are attached to the infantry. It could be that the tanks come seperate i never tried it to find out, in that case its the better option.

[ramnblam]

*Me getting fucked by enemy AI tanks*

[WeaverofBrokenThreads]

I have not confirmed this, but I will, however I think infantry acts as a preventer for tanks, stopping infantry from attacking tanks which have massive negative modifiers from being attacked by inf.

[Coffeecool]

The question is not if you should send tanks alone or in combination with infantry. But if its worth to build the combined forces over the independant ones.

[Malevolence]

It depends on your models. There are important details in the Model sections under 5.12.3, "Designing New Models".

(I'm irritated every time I see 5mm Armor.)

[WeaverofBrokenThreads]

I believe I answered the question. Yes, there are massive huge benefits.

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: Coffeecool

The question is not if you should send tanks alone or in combination with infantry. But if its worth to build the combined forces over the independant ones.

Well certainly early on and possibly into the late game you may want infantry tanks. Infantry tanks should be used in combined units alongside infantry because an infantry tank should never be without its infantry.

If you are using cavalry tanks, then generally they should be independent or obviously accompanied by motorised or mech inf that can keep up.

Why would you want to use tanks in an infantry support role? Well that depends on the situation you are fighting in, the models you have designed and the logistical situation of your empire. If you cannot produce oil or metals in great quantities, then you may not be able to avoid large mechanised forces. Here using upgunned, uparmoured tanks with underpowered engines in an infantry support/AT role could be quite beneficial and the best way to use tanks. If the terrain is not favourable to tank combat or rapid mechanised advance, then again this might be the best option etc.

Note you do not have to research all available OOBs or models (an error I have made in earlier games). Do not waste BPs getting assault armies (the game's term for mixed foot infantry tank formations) if you do not think they will be useful. However, always consider that they could be useful in a range of situations such as those briefly outlined above.

[WeaverofBrokenThreads]

You absolutely do not want to use underpowered engines if you do not have oil. The fuel cost sky rockets. In my latest game, I put a beam gun from an archive onto a heavy tank, and the fat bastard ate 40 fuel PER HEX. And that's just the minor offender. I don't even want to talk about my rocket artillery...

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: WeaverofBrokenThreads

You absolutely do not want to use underpowered engines if you do not have oil. The fuel cost sky rockets. In my latest game, I put a beam gun from an archive onto a heavy tank, and the fat bastard ate 40 fuel PER HEX. And that's just the minor offender. I don't even want to talk about my rocket artillery...

Interesting... I presume powerful engines eat more oil too.

Then the best thing to do is to ensure your engines are adequate no less and certainly no more if fighting with foot infantry. Not quite sure why an underpowered engine would drive up fuel costs so much. Don't underpowered engines give a negative AP modifier representing the fact that you move less far on the same fuel? Seems like double penalisation if you are hit with neg AP, representing you move less far on the same fuel, and increased fuel costs, presumably representing the fact your engine has to chug more fuel to get as far as a more powerful one would.

It's obviously less efficient to use an engine underpowered for the job but that penalty should come either from AP or from fuel cost not both.

This is all miles off-topic. Sorry OP!

[KingHalford]

ORIGINAL: WeaverofBrokenThreads

You absolutely do not want to use underpowered engines if you do not have oil. The fuel cost sky rockets. In my latest game, I put a beam gun from an archive onto a heavy tank, and the fat bastard ate 40 fuel PER HEX. And that's just the minor offender. I don't even want to talk about my rocket artillery...

I didn't know this! I thought you'd save fuel by underpowering it... but that makes perfect sense. Good info!

[KingHalford]

ORIGINAL: Coffeecool

APC are superior to Trucks in every way, they are tracked that means faster on roads and offroad and they come with a mounted machinegun + armor.
But aussault formations(inf/tanks) are not really usefull imo, the benefit is that your tanks get the bonus from comanders unlike a independent tank formation, but are a lot less mobile if they are attached to the infantry. It could be that the tanks come seperate i never tried it to find out, in that case its the better option.

You get more tanks with the Assault infantry... AND you can then add another two independent units on top of them, for EVER MOAAAAR TANKS.

As for the OP, don't worry, the tanks function as tanks and the infantry function as infantry. Same as all the other model combinations. There are big advantages, for example, to having artillery mixed with infantry (they fire to pin and damage enemy units whilst the infantry advance for the first three rounds, and if independent arty are attacked they're a lot more vulnerable than ones mixed with infantry)

There's another thread somewhere that I broke down the relative costs of Siege Infantry Corps vs light Infantry Corps with added Indy Arty... you're getting more arty for less money and the added bonus of the OHQ bonuses + the option to add 2 other indy units.

However they are situationally useful so best to use your judgement there. In the example above, Siege Infantry formations are monsterously effective in attacking superior-tech infantry in difficult terrain like High mountains or dense forest.

[WeaverofBrokenThreads]

All right, so I can confirm that infantry does not protect tanks from infantry attacks. But it is still useful to have them. At the very least, they will sponge some hits that could've gone onto the tank instead. They are also cheap to replace.

On the topic of tanks, I haven't run the numbers, but I believe an engine that is overpowered burns LESS fuel per hex, but has a heftier initial investment. I think the idea is that the efficiency is based on 'fuel per hex' rather than 'gallons per hour'. This goes back to the initial topic. Overpowered engine light tanks and mechanized infantry absolutely wreck. Huge range and incredible tendency to get surrounded by angry enemies deep inside enemy territory. This is why you want the infantry and potentially mechanized artillery support. The mechanized storm infantry is a good one as it can perform a wide range of tasks whilst delivering killing blows to Major regimes.

[Cornuthaum]

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

ORIGINAL: Coffeecool

APC are superior to Trucks in every way, they are tracked that means faster on roads and offroad and they come with a mounted machinegun + armor.
But aussault formations(inf/tanks) are not really usefull imo, the benefit is that your tanks get the bonus from comanders unlike a independent tank formation, but are a lot less mobile if they are attached to the infantry. It could be that the tanks come seperate i never tried it to find out, in that case its the better option.

You get more tanks with the Assault infantry... AND you can then add another two independent units on top of them, for EVER MOAAAAR TANKS.

As for the OP, don't worry, the tanks function as tanks and the infantry function as infantry. Same as all the other model combinations. There are big advantages, for example, to having artillery mixed with infantry (they fire to pin and damage enemy units whilst the infantry advance for the first three rounds, and if independent arty are attacked they're a lot more vulnerable than ones mixed with infantry)

There's another thread somewhere that I broke down the relative costs of Siege Infantry Corps vs light Infantry Corps with added Indy Arty... you're getting more arty for less money and the added bonus of the OHQ bonuses + the option to add 2 other indy units.

However they are situationally useful so best to use your judgement there. In the example above, Siege Infantry formations are monsterously effective in attacking superior-tech infantry in difficult terrain like High mountains or dense forest.

Siege Infantry is probably the best offensive foot infantry OOB out there. I haven't found a Heavy MG + RPG infantry oob yet, which would be the ideal defensive OOB.

Meanwhile, for offensive, mechanized infantry is stupendous once you get to polymer armour. The bolter buses are basically bulletproof against infantry weapons and you output a tremendous amount of soft attack while still having excellent defensive stats.

[WeaverofBrokenThreads]

bolter buses

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[KingHalford]

Yes I'm getting more into using Mechanized Infantry now: initially I avoided them as I didn't know how good those APCs were, but man they really do kick ass when used right! They basically make your infantry quite tough on the attack and that's not to be sniffed at!

The way OOBs and Model design works in this game is so interesting, there's so much room for experimentation too.

[t1it]

I always rush for mechanized infantry and I wish the AI did too...

[Clux]

Thank you so much for your answers and advises guys! Now I know how I will kick this major than its deep inside a cloud forest [:@] [:D]

[Cornuthaum]

ORIGINAL: WeaverofBrokenThreads

bolter buses

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

Bolter Bus is one of the default names for the armored transport model :V

[diamondspider]

ORIGINAL: WeaverofBrokenThreads
Overpowered engine light tanks and mechanized infantry absolutely wreck.

This is how I'm now winning the game over an AI that started with 31% against my 14% victory at the start of the war. So, yes! The brigade mech infantry OHQ is also fairly cheap early on. Due to how important having AP left over is in battle, mobility is everything on attack. For defense, can just use cheap machine guns in cover, but the best defense is a good offense.