Please do infantry CORRECTLY

[Badass_Ben]

As someone who was apart of WARNO EA and ultimately gave up on that game as the devs repeatedly made incorrect design choices, especially around infantry, I ask that you PROPERLY represent infantry in this game

I do NOT want to see armor able to dominate battlefields with impunity

I do NOT want to see infantry being removed from their positions, without the enemy ever having to "clear" with close combat (Massive HE aside)
(WARNO you could just "snipe" entire platoons to death out of forests and urban areas with tanks)

Infantry should live and die by stealth
They should be VERY stealthy, easily able to bate enemies into close range combat as long as the infantry have some sort of cover/concealment

Infantry not engaging from their positions should be VERY difficult to detect (IE< basically stepping on them)

[Edmon]

We are still at an early stage in the games balance and the games balance is subject to change.

That's all I can really add beyond what I've already said at this time.

[Zeno]

Originally posted by Edmon:

We are still at an early stage in the games balance and the games balance is subject to change.

That's all I can really add beyond what I've already said at this time.

But I mean the game is apparently being released in a few months, perhaps a few months more next year, it can't be that much of an early stage anymore at this point.

Unless your release information on your store page is completely off.

[151]

Originally posted by ZetaMale:

Maybe not bounce off but it does not mean it can't drive anymore and everyone is dead. There are numerous occassions where lightly armoured vehicles such as armoured hummvees are hit by even RPG-7 and keep driving.

Of course there are cases like that. But rocket hit on light vehicle's engine and driver seat will undoubtedly disable the vehicle. It is after all an RTS game. So we can only assume that troops always aim for the vital parts. Hits on non-vital parts shall thus be considered as a miss. That's how infantry and vehicle can be more balanced and makes the game feel more authentic. Unless the game wants to go fully arcady like COH.

[Zeno]

Originally posted by 151:

Originally posted by ZetaMale:

Maybe not bounce off but it does not mean it can't drive anymore and everyone is dead. There are numerous occassions where lightly armoured vehicles such as armoured hummvees are hit by even RPG-7 and keep driving.

Of course there are cases like that. But rocket hit on light vehicle's engine and driver seat will undoubtedly disable the vehicle. It is after all an RTS game. So we can only assume that troops always aim for the vital parts. Hits on non-vital parts shall thus be considered as a miss. That's how infantry and vehicle can be more balanced and makes the game feel more authentic. Unless the game wants to go fully arcady like COH.

Usually yes, as long as it penetrates inside.

[ExiledWarrior]

I do have a question though the FGM-148 Javelin i've noticed from watching videos it doesn't seem to kill unarmored trucks or lightly armored with one missile, i can understand for tanks cause of balancing but those two should be easy kills with one missile especially top down attack?

[Davey Bones Locker]

Originally posted by Enoki:

Originally posted by Edmon:

We are still at an early stage in the games balance and the games balance is subject to change.

That's all I can really add beyond what I've already said at this time.

But I mean the game is apparently being released in a few months, perhaps a few months more next year, it can't be that much of an early stage anymore at this point.

Unless your release information on your store page is completely off.

"Early stage in the games balance"

For a lot of these strategy games, balance is the last thing they tackle because you need to have all the pieces in the sandbox to properly balance it all out. It was similar with WARNO where they were really upfront with balancing not being a focus until all the assets were made and released.

[Earth Spirit]

Originally posted by 151:

Originally posted by Edmon:

Broken Arrow has to simulate the fact that not every hit is a "good hit". It needs to do that in a way that's consistant and fair.

We need a middle ground between 1 shots and shots that were ineffective because they bounced off sloped armour, hit something non-vital, etc. That's why we have damage and hit points.

An infantry squad can typically carry 2 anti-tank weapons, so 2 hits are coming pretty much immediately. 3 hits is not exactly a huge ask for an infantry squad.

On a side note:

An AT-4 costs about US $1,480. A BTR-D costs about US $39,000 and potentially a lot more depending on what you've done to modernize it.

So if you killed one in 3 hits, you've made a cool minimum profit of US $34,560. Not exactly "ineffective" in real life either.

How possibly is an unarmored truck going to bounce a HEAT rocket off? And is it that in BA's universe, soldiers are so kind that they'll always aim at the non-vital part of a hostile vehicle for their first rocket shot? Even if the soldier is aiming at random points of the unarmored vehicle, the explosion of the HEAT round is going to disable it, especially for rockets with tandem warhead like VDV dsh's PG7VR.

The game's health point and HEAT damage calculation designs are currently just problematic. If you want to simulate shooters having bad-aims or making mistakes, just make the shots miss. A reasonable RNG makes an RTS fun. It makes more sense than seeing M113s not dying to air-launched Vikhr missile that busts MBTs in real life.

Besides, Mech. Riflemen squad in game only carry 1 type of AT weapon, the AT-4. And they only carry 4 rounds of AT-4. How is depleting almost all of the squad's anti-tank munitions just for an light APC not a huge ask? And you can't say 20mm AA guns are more "effective" than Stinger missiles just because they both can destroy aircraft and that 1000 rounds of 20mm shells is cheaper than a single Stinger missile. Or the US military won't replace M163 VADS with the Avenger air defense system.

Completely agree with you. On a side note, RNG must be taken care of carefully. For example, in Close Combat Gateway to Caen, the RNG is just stupid. AT squad (PIAT) misses 6 rounds for no reason. Engage range is usually <70m. However, a direct hit destroy enemy tanks from tank's rear or side (Tiger, Pather). In WRD, AT rounds that doesn't destroy tank can disable some functions and lower tank's crew moral. I think Warno should consider them in the game.

[Badass_Ben]

Originally posted by Edmon:

The AT4 is an extremely light "anti-tank" weapon, not really intended to be used against properly armoured targets, from the wikipedia:

"The AT4 is intended to give infantry units a means to destroy or disable armoured fighting vehicles and fortifications, although it is generally ineffective against more modern main battle tanks (MBTs), especially those with reactive armour, unless weaker sections of armour are exploited. The launcher and projectile are manufactured prepacked and issued as one unit of ammunition, with the launcher discarded after one use. "

Much like the RPG-7 (A 1969 classic), it's in heavy use because it's inexpensive and has some usefulness against lightly armoured cars, trucks, artillery, etc.

It's a tool of desperation if your using it against a modern MBT.

I was a grunt (0331) in the Marines from 2013-2017

Then in 11B in the Army from 2021 to current

The AT4 is absolutely a threat vs MBT's
You are not getting "catastrophic kills" (whole tank goes boom and/or crew killed)
Thats more for Javelin and TOW's

But you can get turret and mobility kills quite consistently.
(Detracked, turret disabled)

We are trained to target weak points on tanks, and NOT dump rockets into the frontal plate.

It also comes with Tandem rounds, which defeat reactive armor.

[Edmon]

Originally posted by Badass_Ben:

Originally posted by Edmon:

The AT4 is an extremely light "anti-tank" weapon, not really intended to be used against properly armoured targets, from the wikipedia:

"The AT4 is intended to give infantry units a means to destroy or disable armoured fighting vehicles and fortifications, although it is generally ineffective against more modern main battle tanks (MBTs), especially those with reactive armour, unless weaker sections of armour are exploited. The launcher and projectile are manufactured prepacked and issued as one unit of ammunition, with the launcher discarded after one use. "

Much like the RPG-7 (A 1969 classic), it's in heavy use because it's inexpensive and has some usefulness against lightly armoured cars, trucks, artillery, etc.

It's a tool of desperation if your using it against a modern MBT.

I was a grunt (0331) in the Marines from 2013-2017

Then in 11B in the Army from 2021 to current

The AT4 is absolutely a threat vs MBT's
You are not getting "catastrophic kills" (whole tank goes boom and/or crew killed)
Thats more for Javelin and TOW's

But you can get turret and mobility kills quite consistently.
(Detracked, turret disabled)

We are trained to target weak points on tanks, and NOT dump rockets into the frontal plate.

It also comes with Tandem rounds, which defeat reactive armor.

Broken Arrow does simulate this type of damage - it is possible to detrack or even break the optics on a tank. This type of damage requires supply delivery to fix, as well. So if you demobilize a tank, it'll just sit there.

This is a factor that people aren't mentioning here. You can absolutely one-shot mobility kill just about anything, with the right angle.