Page 1 of 1
Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:55 pm
by matt.buttsworth
In my advance towards Germany I have found that Russian infantry corps are very strong, and I have been converting them steadily as the mainstay of my advance breaking the defending German units.
By comparison, armored brigades and armored divisions seems very weak and unable to break German lines.
Isn't this unhistorical?
Shouldn't Russian tank armies be their strongest unit?
Matthew
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:16 pm
by vlcz
"armored brigades and armored divisions"????
build CORPS, armored and mechanised CORPS
soviet tank divisions are simply crap, its strange even that you have any as they convert into brigades... maybe you are refering to corps when writing divisions?
brigades are simply too little a unit when you can only stack three units without size considerations
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:38 pm
by matt.buttsworth
Sorry I wrote divisions instead of corps but are Soviet tank and mechanized corps stronger and better at breaking defence lines than infantry corps?
In my experience so far, the Soviet infantry corps are very strong.
Matthew
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:14 pm
by Klydon
That is historical to a point. The tank corps was a exploitation unit that depended on the infantry corps to break the line and then the tank corps went through in a pursuit fashion. Part of it is what time frame of the game you are talking about. In 1942 and even into 1943, the tank corps ToE isn't that hot. It gets better as the war goes along and so its performance improves as well.
Mech corps were designed to advance and then hold a breach. Tank corps do not defend that hot on their own. The mech corps has much more staying power on defense.
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:14 am
by randallw
There is also the consequence of the 25% penalty when tank/motorized/mech brigades are formed into the corps. Forming rifle corps together does not have such penalty.
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:14 am
by gradenko2k
You're correct that Rifle Corps are great on the attack, but it's Tank Corps that have the movement points to exploit any gaps in the line created by your Rifles, and then Mechanized Corps to hold those deeper penetrations open. Even in the absence of encirclements or kessels, being able to drive your tanks through holes in the German defenses should allow you to advance faster than if you were just pushing them back one row of hexes at a time. At that rate, even Sir Douglas Haig might beat you to Berlin.
RE: Infantry versus Armored Units
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:29 am
by matt.buttsworth
Sir Douglas Haig is way ahead of me.
