PACT Tactics

[sp111kg]

Just a lil disscussion I wanted to do.
Im starting to play with Pact a lil more, and I find that my Nato Tactics are not to good any more.
My current Pact tactic is using 4 convoys, with atleast 4 of the following
Light AA (Praga)
T55s (German)
BMP ot BTR with infantry
Addtional squad of tanks or a Strela/BMP squad.

Air Support is
4 Mi24 A (Russian), and 2 Mi2

Supply
4 FOBS and 2 Mi26 Halo once I can deploy them.

With this force, i can normally take several points, in conquest mode (capture the circle zone) until I need to call in addtional tanks or the German Looking Halftrak AT gun,

Normally ill win, but because the timer runs out with my forces about to collapse or I save enough points to send out BMP convoys to secure the last few points.

Any Ideas for a better Pact force?

[SivCro]

Originally posted by sp111kg:

Just a lil disscussion I wanted to do.
Im starting to play with Pact a lil more, and I find that my Nato Tactics are not to good any more.
My current Pact tactic is using 4 convoys, with atleast 4 of the following
Light AA (Praga)
T55s (German)
BMP ot BTR with infantry
Addtional squad of tanks or a Strela/BMP squad.

Air Support is
4 Mi24 A (Russian), and 2 Mi2

Supply
4 FOBS and 2 Mi26 Halo once I can deploy them.

With this force, i can normally take several points, in conquest mode (capture the circle zone) until I need to call in addtional tanks or the German Looking Halftrak AT gun,

Normally ill win, but because the timer runs out with my forces about to collapse or I save enough points to send out BMP convoys to secure the last few points.

Any Ideas for a better Pact force?

I generally find that the only good Light AA are the Shilkas, even though they are more expensive, they have the rate of fire to make a dent in most Helicopters, and can still take on light vehicles.

For tanks I think I prefer the T-72s, again they are more expensive, but they are very effective for their cost in my opinion.

For infantry I will always try to get them in BMPs, BTRs aren't much good for anything other than being Taxis. IGLAs are much more effective in the AA role than STRELAs are, but if you don't want to field Russian Infantry to get them, then STRELAs are still enough of a threat that they can't be disregarded.

For Air Support, I agree with the choice of Mi-24s, Mi-2s are too expensive in my opinion. I generally prefer some of the later variants though, with Gsh30k 30mm cannon, and the more accurate Kokon Missiles.

I always use 4 FOBs and Mi-26s as supply carriers.

[Nangleator]

I was obliterated in the Wargame Cup by an opponent that used SKOT APCs. Some were even unarmed. But his attacks would come with a lightning-fast drive by a platoon of them, which parked just past my guys in the woods, and he would unload infantry and no tanks on my side would survive more than a few seconds. The APCs were too fast to accurately hit, especially with tanks backing them up, and they're cheap as dirt.

[Vanchel92]

Ideal tactic does not exist, so you need to understand that what took place today, will not work tomorrow))) But this retreat. If the game comes with starting 1500 points, the alignment is usually a 2 t80u 2 t80bv t64bm few (in my opinion T64 T72 in the game better, because higher accuracy). 3 squad of three pieces on bmp1 infantry, 2 special forces (see far and can give a light Delta Force), 1 air defense detachment IGLAs, 2 anti-tank squad competition (important - the maximum level, then no one tank will not go away). From mobile air defense I take one BUKm2 (very high damage range, radar homing and may take several helicopters at a time). For exploration, I use 2-3 of UAZ without weapons (their task is not to spy posing). If glasses are - take 3.2 SPG Acacia, which is the second, I learned of a very good work. Everything else take Urals supplies. And in the process of ordering MI 26. And fighting))

[Vanchel92]

Incidentally, the question of what defense you would recommend to use for NATO? I tried to use Chapparal, but what it is not accurate, tried to use the Roland - which is also not impressed ..... Maybe I'm doing something wrong? Just for ATS very large selection and the best defense - it BUKm2. What can I do for NATO?

[sp111kg]

Well, first thanks to every one who replied.
At Arc.
As for the first post about the tanks mainly, I have 72 and T80s, which I deploy as needed.
My Next step in Helicopter is to get German Hinds and a armed recon helicopter. I never been a big fan of ground recon because of the limit of uses. I use Recon helicopters with my Ah64 when I go hunting. Allows for the Ah64 to use its ATGM effectivly. So I do the same with the Hinds.
At Nan.
The Skot Rush. I used Skots at one point, but switched to BTRs since they had a gun. My current tactic is to establish some form of line with fast moving units. It helps because some times you can catch some one of guard. Drawback (In my case) is that they have to be backed by some heavy hitters if they are bogged down.
At Ivan
As for the Nato AA, I use Gepards and SAS or Rangers. Rolands are usefull enmass (2-3 platoons) They work best against Hips and Mi2s. Mi28s (Havent fought them yet) I think can out range them with the AT missile like the Ah64 can do to the Osa.
Nato AT, I use M2 with some infantry attached to them. Plus some Marder AT guns. I also like using ATGM Dragon II (Barely upgraded to them) and the French counter part. Taank wise, the M8AGS is effective when backed up. M60s are good to. M1s are excellent, but require constant resupply in fuel.

[Vanchel92]

Playing for the ATS of infantry I use BMP for one simple reason - in fact it is a cheap tank that's great support infantry. A volley of three guns BMP often brings Delta Squad to the hereafter, which can not make the machine gun or small-caliber gun. And the cost of BMP 1 starts from 25, that's pretty cheap. Moreover, BMP 1 D has an automatic grenade launcher that just a nice way to trim forests and buildings. Skot I do not use, but I once caught Skot Rasch.

That is the question, again about NATO. What marines do you use? M113 and VAB is certainly not bad, but the guns can not have that fire support, which sometimes need infantrymen. I am interested in price / performance ratio. By Dragon totally agree with you, a good thing.

And one more question, but off topic. I wonder how much is available, he explained to me in English? Manages to convey the idea that all right? I just Russian and English ability is not very good, and that's worried. Thank you in advance for your answers

[sp111kg]

Originally posted by ivan-solovev-92:

Playing for the ATS of infantry I use BMP for one simple reason - in fact it is a cheap tank that's great support infantry. A volley of three guns BMP often brings Delta Squad to the hereafter, which can not make the machine gun or small-caliber gun. And the cost of BMP 1 starts from 25, that's pretty cheap. Moreover, BMP 1 D has an automatic grenade launcher that just a nice way to trim forests and buildings. Skot I do not use, but I once caught Skot Rasch.

That is the question, again about NATO. What marines do you use? M113 and VAB is certainly not bad, but the guns can not have that fire support, which sometimes need infantrymen. I am interested in price / performance ratio. By Dragon totally agree with you, a good thing.

And one more question, but off topic. I wonder how much is available, he explained to me in English? Manages to convey the idea that all right? I just Russian and English ability is not very good, and that's worried. Thank you in advance for your answers

My Infantry are mostly Rangers, SAS, and AT units. BMP are really good, with the infantry being ok, as rpgs are unguided. I like using mechinized russian infantry for the cheapness and the amount you can put out. My other Pact AT is the German looking Halftrack from Czech.
As for availablity, I assume you mean unit numbers.
For example, the Dragoon 2 in Airborn form, is for eample 12. You can deploy up to 12 platoons of two squads with any of the helicopters from the UH1 to the Uh60.
Same with tanks.
24 Leo 1 then 20 Leo 1 A and so on. Tanks can be deployed by variants. I can deploy 24 Leo 1 and then 20 Leo 1 A since they are diffrent models.
As for your english, Its very good. Its better than some people who speak english 1st.

[Vanchel92]

With unit all clear, and what tactics do you prefer? I have already said that there is no perfect tactics, but every player has his own game handwriting. It is clear also that in Game 2 on 2, 3 on 3, etc, is very much dependent on the adequacy and experience of other players.

I like to lay emphasis on exploration, you can see the maximum action opponent. The tanks, I prefer to take the "cool" designs (T 80 for ATS and Leo 2 - Abrams for Nato), even get them a little bit (up to 6), but when they lit to smash all to pieces. I take out the artillery 3 pieces (for NATO 3 - 4 mortars based on M113), and keep it close to the front line, so more accurate and mortars not beat) Well, of course half-close defense for ATS as already written - in BUKm1 knock any tip from the first time, most often fall under attack reconnaissance helicopter (it was for this reason that I do not often use the reconnaissance helicopters, as Roland and Chaparral are not asleep). If possible, cut off the supply (especially on a road map to Hell and Full Throttle), and slowly, until the opponent tries to punch me on the main line, gather the troops at his base (there sent special forces to drive the artillery), if you are lucky to find his CV no attack just covering artillery.

 Clearly, not always like that, before I even win-loss ratio was 1/6, which disappoints me, as my favorite RTS genre (here it is necessary to think, not to click on the speed), but in recent years begins obtained, and trying to coordinate with allies. Even noobs with competent tip a dangerous weapon))

[sp111kg]

My strategy for Nato is Forming a line of tanks and AT units with SAMs. Ah64s abd AH7 Lynx are used as fast responeders. My supply kine is in the form of Westland Chinooks and Puma for all 3 Nato Decks. My Airborn Deck (Lots of Airborn infantry and Sheridins and M8 with mechinized infantry) makes use of mass air attacks and landing infantry along reinforcemenrt routes to kill incoming units,

My Pact Decks, are all the same with minor details.
I usually rush with mechinized infantry in 4 convoys with 3 of the convoys using T55s or T72s.
The fourth un-armored assisted unit is my rapid response force. Mi24 A and Mi2 make up my air support.

Both Pack and Nato are very unique, as with Pact I can field lots of units while Nato has expensive but powerful and multirole units/ The MBT70 is a great example, as I have seen them kill Mi24s when they get to close.

Other tactics I use is Motars in the M113 chassie. They make great anti helicopter units (If they can hit a stationary hovering or landed helicopter it is one shot kill).
For Pact Arty, I use the Dana (It looks like a large truck with a multi role gun) but its not to accurate in my opnion.

[Vanchel92]

There was an interesting question - what is better - to adapt to the opponent, or vice versa, forcing it to adapt to you? Make mistakes? Press in an open field, a powerful striking force or operate covertly, infantry groups, special forces, cutting the supply? Or is it better to combine both? And yet, because surely come across opponents who appeared smarter and more cunning than you, as in this case to do? And what to do if the opponent is obviously weaker than you (for example, I just ran over one of his Rush airborne in helicopters, it was ridiculous of course)?

[untilted]

@OP: 4 FOBs and two MI-26? that's 50000l of supply! (and atleast 400pts at the start of the match - and another 250 during the match) you will never ever need that amount of supplies. (assuming that you're not playing a silly 2000+pts match per player with lots of arty spamming going on)

----------------------------

1. well, the most important thing is to have a plan depending on map & gamemode.
e.g. you can win destruction by war of attrition killing more pts than the enemy in the timelimit. you can force a quick decision by rushing the enemy CVs right from the start. you can force a decision by infiltrating/flanking enemy lines and kill the CVs. on some maps infiltration works good, on others a rush. a war of attrition also depends on the map - some areas are easier to defend than others - depending on the units you chose. but all these plans also demand a specific selection of units. "having a plan" doesn't mean that you're not reacting to things your enemy does, it means a specific course of action that gives you guidance when you have to make decisions (and you will have to make a lot of them!) ... in a war of attrition you'll likely want to stop at the first sign of enemy contact, in a rush you will want to bypass an enemy force as quickly as possible, in an infiltration you will want to bypass an enemy force as stealthy as possible.

2. a combined arms approach doesn't mean that you're moving with a diversified force down a road. it means that you use different units to their fullest potential. infantry might be slow and weak - but they are stealthy and the kings of the forests. moving them with a column of tanks might not be the best idea. (expensive) vehicles on the other hand should stay out of forests - even with friendly infantry nearby it happens often enough that some infiltrating infantry is killing your expensive tanks before you know what's happening. ATGM is great against heavily armored targets, against bigger groups of vehicle tho they are worse than a few cheap tank guns and autocannons. helicopters can be decisive - or a waste of points .. depending on the quality of your recon and the amount and type of AA your opponent fields. AA can be decisive - or a waste of points (either because the enemy doesn't field helicopters or they bypass your AA) ... instead of bunching AA together, spread them out in single units near/behind your frontline - also use the synergies between AA systems ... e.g. chapparal fires fast and at long range but has low ammo and low accuracy, roland fires volleys of two with long reload, but has a decent amount of missiles.

my tip if you want to see which units work and which don't - take a look on escalation.eu. there you can find replays of matches - i recommend here esp. matches of the Clash of the Clans tourney - as here the major clans and some of the best W:EE players participate. sure, sometimes teams fu**-up royally ... but overall the quality of the shown matches is very high. while you likely won't be playing under similar circumstances (3 players closely working together), you see lots of different tactics and ideas regarding deployment and usage of units.

[Vanchel92]

Originally posted by untilted:

@OP: 4 FOBs and two MI-26? that's 50000l of supply! (and atleast 400pts at the start of the match - and another 250 during the match) you will never ever need that amount of supplies. (assuming that you're not playing a silly 2000+pts match per player with lots of arty spamming going on)

----------------------------

1. well, the most important thing is to have a plan depending on map & gamemode.
e.g. you can win destruction by war of attrition killing more pts than the enemy in the timelimit. you can force a quick decision by rushing the enemy CVs right from the start. you can force a decision by infiltrating/flanking enemy lines and kill the CVs. on some maps infiltration works good, on others a rush. a war of attrition also depends on the map - some areas are easier to defend than others - depending on the units you chose. but all these plans also demand a specific selection of units. "having a plan" doesn't mean that you're not reacting to things your enemy does, it means a specific course of action that gives you guidance when you have to make decisions (and you will have to make a lot of them!) ... in a war of attrition you'll likely want to stop at the first sign of enemy contact, in a rush you will want to bypass an enemy force as quickly as possible, in an infiltration you will want to bypass an enemy force as stealthy as possible.

2. a combined arms approach doesn't mean that you're moving with a diversified force down a road. it means that you use different units to their fullest potential. infantry might be slow and weak - but they are stealthy and the kings of the forests. moving them with a column of tanks might not be the best idea. (expensive) vehicles on the other hand should stay out of forests - even with friendly infantry nearby it happens often enough that some infiltrating infantry is killing your expensive tanks before you know what's happening. ATGM is great against heavily armored targets, against bigger groups of vehicle tho they are worse than a few cheap tank guns and autocannons. helicopters can be decisive - or a waste of points .. depending on the quality of your recon and the amount and type of AA your opponent fields. AA can be decisive - or a waste of points (either because the enemy doesn't field helicopters or they bypass your AA) ... instead of bunching AA together, spread them out in single units near/behind your frontline - also use the synergies between AA systems ... e.g. chapparal fires fast and at long range but has low ammo and low accuracy, roland fires volleys of two with long reload, but has a decent amount of missiles.

my tip if you want to see which units work and which don't - take a look on escalation.eu. there you can find replays of matches - i recommend here esp. matches of the Clash of the Clans tourney - as here the major clans and some of the best W:EE players participate. sure, sometimes teams fu**-up royally ... but overall the quality of the shown matches is very high. while you likely won't be playing under similar circumstances (3 players closely working together), you see lots of different tactics and ideas regarding deployment and usage of units.

Very interesting comment. I wonder how you are an experienced player? I am now very interested in that, for example when playing a team (3 of 3) (provided that it is really a team), is whether the division into classes (such as in the World in Conflict)? Well for example, I am responsible for artillery and supplies, John is responsible for the ground forces, and Mac - the air? And not it be easier to create about

[untilted]

while you *can* try to split your team this way it doesn't work as well as in WiC. in WiC you usually have smaller maps and bigger teams (8 per team, 4 different roles) which means that you have usually atleast several players in the same role splitting the map between them. in W:EE covering the whole map (esp. the larger ones) in a meaningful way is somewhere between painful and outright impossible.

in W:EE you will usually take a sector (or several) on the map (hopefully one that is important enough ;) ) and reinforce it/push from there onwards. this will depend on plan, gamemode and map.

actually the best example in this case would be rivers of blood: if you're fighting in the golf/hotel/india area you will have to rely a lot on infantry (forests, short engagement ranges) with a quite small amount of tanks and ATGM. if you're fighting in the charlie/delta/echo area you likely want more tanks and ATGM as there isn't that much cover for infantry and the engagement ranges are longer.

another example would be dual field. it has a prominent town in the middle. going to the middle without a healthy amount of infantry usually means that you won't be able to clear the town (unless your opponent doesn't bring infantry himself). as this town is so important (high value zones in the center of the map with lots of roads connecting it to other zones) you don't want to ignore it - either you take it in force or atleast deny it to the enemy as good as possible. if you're on the flanks on the other hand you'll likely will need less infantry and more long ranged units.

[Vanchel92]

No, I understand the difference between the WIC and WEE, was just wondering your opinion. Rivers of blood and the two fields are also in the course, much has been tried. It was interesting, how often do the tactics used by the attack as a team (in the beginning of the match), because it is often much decided in the first 15 minutes, everything else - this is the results of these minutes (not always of course), and observed that those people who play together (I'm talking about the usual battle, no rating) always beat an opponent (in this case only if such artillery was only one). By the way, the situation: you opponent is besieged on all sides, and consistently knock you out of all sectors. And now the moment - there is only one sector, and now clearly be a loss. Have you ever seen such that activates and ultimately did not lose, and win?

[sp111kg]

I hace found that I need the supplies, because I need them to keep my convoys moving. Nato the same, but this is with Ah64s and Ah7s constantly hitting tanks. Plus, when I get into combat, I need to keep my M1s fueled.
It really depends on how you play I guess. I play conquest alot and I like to establishdefensive lines.
As for flanking, Helicopters are what I use. I let the enemy attack the ground, and the Helicopters attack from the side.
Steath, I only use when gping after CVs, in which I use SAS and Rangers to kill them.
PACT wise, I use any infantry and Hinds, since they can support each other to a degree.

With my convoys, they are made up as such to make use, like you said, of each units cabalties. Infantry will move into a town first, while the tanks and AA wait behind, maby in a neart by forest or a hedge row. Once the route I want to use in the town is safe, i send the tanks and AA on.
I like hiding below a ridge so that when the enemy comes across it and has to start moving down hill, I can use my ATGMs on them.
I normally like the 2000 pt max because it makes for faster fights in my opnion. There is normally 1 major fight that determines the out come of a fight if no one brings Airborn infantry or risks a gunship to look for the cv.
Ill go higher point wise once I start using Leo 2 and Challangers to replace the Amx32 and Leo1.