an observation...

Z

Zarr

Mongoose
1)-looking at the Brits and U.S.Marines...it appears their inf. plts. do not really have any anti-tank punch...so I would guess a must in fielding such an army would be a Challanger/Abrams...

2)-on the other hand the PLA inf. plt. has those two rocket launchers...so I guess a army of PLA inf. plts. has a chance in a game without the type 99...
 
1. You are correct. Though the infantry squad shown isn't the oly set of ground pounder that will be released.

2. From the 1 test game I've played, the PLA just made the Challenger II mad more than anything. They scored two hits, but no kills. Both times they were killed by reaction fire even in cover. If the enemy has a tank and you don't, I'd recommend at least 3-4 RPG type troops to counter. Multiple units to avoid reactionary fire on all of them may change that a bit more.
 
let's say we are playing a 1000 pt. game...inf plts. are around 200 pts. and tanks 400pts....

the USMC will have to take on Abrams...and say 3 Inf. plts....which = 1000...

the PLA takes 5 inf. plts....giving them 10 rocket launchers to deal with the Abrams...

looks like advantage PLA...

then factor in the fact that the PLA has 50 units on the board and the USMC only 28...with the shattered rule...big advantage PLA...

I am going with a Brit and PLA army...but looking at the PLA...I just might not need a type 99...maybe 2 inf. plts. instead...with the Brits. I will need a Challanger just in case my opponent has some armor...
 
I'm doing my best to not buy a tank... I just don't like having a tank in a man-to-man scale game...

Playing EFTF I may need to though. It all depends on what my opponents bring.
 
agree...down the line I would much rather have Brit. Infantry supported by Warriors...and maybe a Lynx...

no sure if that 40mm on the Warrior has any chance against a MBT in the game...I see no anti-tank missle launcher on the Warrior...so I am wondering if the upgrade to 40mm is to do the job...I got a feeling that if I go with the Brits...I will need a Challanger...even in the future...
 
Zarr said:
the PLA takes 5 inf. plts....giving them 10 rocket launchers to deal with the Abrams...

looks like advantage PLA...
Click to expand...
PLA rocket laucnhers have a range of 20 = 1-3 rounds of fire before they can bring them to bear. PLA = no armor. Any hit kills. UCMC can survive 33% of all hits. So you can essentially add 9 troops in terms of survivability = 37 troops. If the abrams is similar to the Cheiftan it's as good as 2 RPGs and 6 troops in terms of damage potential = c 45 troops. But with the round or two to shoot without return fire it's fairly balanced.
 
I had been thinking that I would avoid any tanks as well, but it just sounds like too much fun not to field at least one. :twisted:

As for the 40mm, I suspect that it will have a chance to at least damage a tank, so given time you would be able to take one out.
 
Zarr said:
agree...down the line I would much rather have Brit. Infantry supported by Warriors...and maybe a Lynx...

no sure if that 40mm on the Warrior has any chance against a MBT in the game...I see no anti-tank missle launcher on the Warrior...so I am wondering if the upgrade to 40mm is to do the job...I got a feeling that if I go with the Brits...I will need a Challanger...even in the future...
Click to expand...

If you get on a tank's 6 0'clock and pump a dozen rounds of 40mm HEAP into the engine compartment you'll wind up with one dead tank.
 
I hope those Warriors with infantry plts. and the SAS...will do the job for me well into next year...but I will have to purchase at least one Challanger...

my initial purchase will be...

3 Brit Inf Plts.
1 Challanger
3 PLA Inf. Plts.
1 PLA Type99
 
Hummer replacement for the Marines.

Oh, and a 1000pt game will give you plenty of room for Marines and Shadows. You don't have to buy a tank if you don't want. And with some of the other toys coming out...*evil grin*
 
What is the reason for the organic anti tank weapons within UK and USMC units being ignored? Brit troops carried LAW-80 at section level (6-8 weapons) and I'm sure NLAW is deployed at the same level; I'm also fairly confident that similar weapons are available at the same level to US forces. Is is play balance, or am I missing something, or am I just plain wrong in my assumptions?
 
anton970 said:
come on chaps you need armour!! I'm thinking an armoured section of 3 myself!!
Click to expand...

Yeah! Infantry is the core of the game, but how can you not want to field tanks?! I hope to use everything they put out less it really just sux or is a waste of money...but the point of the game is to have fun, and tanks, in my opinion, are fun...as are APCs, and IFVs, as are choppers and AA units and the whole shabang!
 
I really do suspect that we'll see a USMC/British army specials box in the future. Something that'll add a good deal to the cost of a squad and attaches just like any team.
 
Probably, although the AT capability should replace rather than add to existing team members.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
An alternative to the DSMS
Replies
13
Views
538
Condottiere
C
ottarrus
The Imperial Army... Life and Times of an Imperial Grunt
Replies
11
Views
788
actionman
actionman
S
High Guard Smaller Weapons
5 6 7
Replies
132
Views
4K
Condottiere
C
Sigtrygg
The Imperium that could have been.
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
WHULorigan
WHULorigan
ottarrus
Starfield Release Date announced
Replies
0
Views
642
ottarrus
ottarrus
Back
Top