whats the point of regular infantry

[Nuggs]

i kind of just replaced the two infantry units you start off with, with pioneers instead. the pioneers just seem so much better. feels like they do more damage over all and are great for taking on entrenched units in cities.

Now i get having the special mountain units for terrain with mountains of course and those specialized types of infantry. i just dont see why id ever bother to take regular infantry in my army over pioneers.

[SPAMBO]

Whats the point of regular infantry?

Pioneers are generally more expensive to run (both prestige & slots) than standard infantry in the beginning of the game. Early game I'll tend to use Wehr infantry without any organic transport. When I need to take a city I'll bring in multiple artillery units. Again, generally speaking I like to take damage with the Wehr as they'll level up (experience wise) quickly and therefore take less damage once I upgrade them to a pioneer about the time SdKfz transports become available. If I'm swimming in prestige early game I'll run cavalry.

Edit: Pioneers are slow & I find the Opel Blitz form of organic transport less than adequate relative to cost as it has issues with close terrain such as hills, forests, etc...

[Sovieticozasz]

if you dont need the forced march, none. Pioneers are better for the only thing you want infantry, close combat, they are more expensive but marginally so for the increase in performance. They make almost any other infantry useless except paratroopers for niche situations. That is the reason the 2 biggest mods on the workshop buff massively grenadiers and wher infantry or nerf the engineers.

In MP things are a little different but not by much, there regular infantry is more useful due to the lower cp costs.

edit: dont sleep on cav tho, cav is awesome.

[easylife]

- Regular Infantry can move 3 Hexes without riding a vehicle
- With the forced march ability, they can move +1 Hex
- Infantry is cheaper
- They have a higher Initiative, so they fire first, or at the same time and receive less damage.
I would recommend to have 1 pioneer Unit, which you can split up to give the ignore 50% entrenchment bonus to neighboring units.

[Sovieticozasz]

Escrito originalmente por easylife:

- Regular Infantry can move 3 Hexes without riding a vehicle
- With the forced march ability, they can move +1 Hex
- Infantry is cheaper
- They have a higher Initiative, so they fire first, or at the same time and receive less damage.
I would recommend to have 1 pioneer Unit, which you can split up to give the ignore 50% entrenchment bonus to neighboring units.

In campaign i will recommend either full pioneer or pioneer/cav. But i will never recomend to use wher inf, in any situation. they are just worse cav if you want movement, or worse pioneers if you want to fight in close terrain.

[Grondel the 10/10]

Escrito originalmente por Sovieticozasz:

...full pioneer or pioneer/cav.

i agree that without any special general traits those are the 2 inv u need. Sadly in the vanilla version there is no 1943 upgrade for the cavallerie.

Escrito originalmente por Sovieticozasz:

But i will never recomend to use wher inf, in any situation. they are just worse cav if you want movement, or worse pioneers if you want to fight in close terrain.

if u have either meticolous planning or agressive deployment this is no longer true and Wehr Inf becomes extremely mobile.

sers,
Thomas

[Boredflak]

I never run the wehr infantry either Pioneers and then add Para and mountain troops when they are available. In the SCW I run cav. But once I get the pioneers it is replaced with them.

[Grondel the 10/10]

Escrito originalmente por Boredflak:

In the SCW I run cav.

no infantrie in vanilla scw

sers,
Thomas

[Sovieticozasz]

Escrito originalmente por Grondel the 10/10:

Escrito originalmente por Sovieticozasz:

...full pioneer or pioneer/cav.

i agree that without any special general traits those are the 2 inv u need. Sadly in the vanilla version there is no 1943 upgrade for the cavallerie.

Escrito originalmente por Sovieticozasz:

But i will never recomend to use wher inf, in any situation. they are just worse cav if you want movement, or worse pioneers if you want to fight in close terrain.

if u have either meticolous planning or agressive deployment this is no longer true and Wehr Inf becomes extremely mobile.

sers,
Thomas

The problem is that by 1943 , the infantry is useless completely for anything that is not either a) Holding a close combat hex fortifying, b) attacking a city, since every tank and most recon vehicles are "immune" to infantry attacks on open terrain.

in my experience that makes infantry a very specific tool (assuming you have not rolled the needed heroes to put in your tanks and bea ble to ignore infantry completely or, for some reason, dont want to use flamer tanks with artillery support) at that point, and for a specific tool i would argue that a "better tool but slower" will be better 95% of the time, than a more "versatile" one, and that makes the generic non-specific wher inf. very very uncompetitive. So pioneers all the way.

I have played one full vanilla campaign with agresive deployment, and its the only campaign where i used grenadiers and was happy with them too, i did not use wher inf. since i assumed they were still subpar, i should have tried them then. So ¿maybe agresive deployment makes infantry more usefull in general? i dont know, but it will be fun to give the trait to every infantry and play a campaign that way to see if they feel better.

[Grondel the 10/10]

Escrito originalmente por Sovieticozasz:

The problem is that by 1943 , the infantry is useless completely for anything that is not either a) Holding a close combat hex fortifying, b) attacking a city, since every tank and most recon vehicles are "immune" to infantry attacks on open terrain.
in my experience that makes infantry a very specific tool (assuming you have not rolled the needed heroes to put in your tanks and bea ble to ignore infantry completely or, for some reason, dont want to use flamer tanks with artillery support) at that point, and for a specific tool i would argue that a "better tool but slower" will be better 95% of the time, than a more "versatile" one, and that makes the generic non-specific wher inf. very very uncompetitive. So pioneers all the way.
I have played one full vanilla campaign with agresive deployment, and its the only campaign where i used grenadiers and was happy with them too, i did not use wher inf. since i assumed they were still subpar, i should have tried them then. So ¿maybe agresive deployment makes infantry more usefull in general? i dont know, but it will be fun to give the trait to every infantry and play a campaign that way to see if they feel better.

play a campaign with this active and let me know what u think.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2410075863
sers,
Thomas

[Boredflak]

Escrito originalmente por Grondel the 10/10:

Escrito originalmente por Boredflak:

In the SCW I run cav.

no infantrie in vanilla scw

sers,
Thomas

Really?? NOT true if you run AUX troops. Or run the No AI Inf MOD in either case you CAN field infantry or Calvary.

[Valks]

I use wehr due to aforemntioned cheap-ness, mobility and cost-effectiveness when OS and with some otherwise mid-tier heroes. For the most part I pair them with an engineer as a 2-man team supported by arty to take CQ tiles. Mountain inf is superior ofc in a given few scenarios.

They have their use running down units in rough/CQ terrain, finishing off retreated units, encircling, trading, wasting enemy support ammo etc.

Heavy inf I only use when I need defense in place - some of the AO maps where you need to hold a bottleneck. Park them in an entrenched position and they can hold it.

That being said the Azul's in AO with the most basic of heroes or AO assigned named ones are just a CQ tile streamroller that can do without arty support superior to anything Eng/Wher can pull off.

[Invisible]

It's all about prestige cost. I had a campaing where I spent to much on elite infantry and had 1943 not enough presige to fill all core slots. It's quality vs. quantity. The longer barbaossa goes the less prestige you get due to the supply line issues.

[Maverick]

I use Pioneers and Azul Infantery. Is vigliant hero a good choice for Azul? their close defence stats are not bad and not good.

[Grondel the 10/10]

Escrito originalmente por Maverick:

I use Pioneers and Azul Infantery. Is vigliant hero a good choice for Azul? their close defence stats are not bad and not good.

yes and no. it will give them an advantage gut vigilance can do more on other units.
i myself do not use vigilant on tanks to keep the game interesting. vigilant tanks completely ruin game balance imo.
i tend to use them on StuGIIIb/Brumbär/Sturmtiger to enable them to stay with the infantry.

sers,
Thomas

[Sovieticozasz]

Escrito originalmente por Maverick:

I use Pioneers and Azul Infantery. Is vigliant hero a good choice for Azul? their close defence stats are not bad and not good.

Vigilant is the "i dont need infantry anymore" hero. it makes tanks able to perform in every situation. It is not bad in infantry per se. but it is insane on a tank.