Tanks and AFV's in heavy woods....

[viper827]

I play SD 2 and one of the things I like is that armour or other vehicles cannot enter heavily wooded areas. This means you have to use infantry to clear and secure such areas giving the game a bit more depth I feel.
In WARNO it seems tanks and AFV's can roll through a heavily wooded area no problem and still be a major problem to infantry in that area even if they are armed with AT kit. I think where your tanks and AFV's can be deployed should be more realistic and inline with SD2. I think restricting this movement of armour and support vehicles would bring more tactical depth to the game overall. Hope Eugen sort it out.

[Jackelrush]

Originally posted by Sammy_The_Snowplow:

Best Boy, you need to learn when you've lost an argument and cut your losses. At this point, you are just embarrassing yourself. I've personally served with people that have been at both Green Top Hill and Indigo Pass. Trying to degrade a fellow veteran's service just so you can win an internet argument is honestly just sad and pathetic. Piss baby cowards like you need to show some respect!

What the ♥♥♥♥ did you just ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ say about me, you little ♥♥♥♥♥? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the ♥♥♥♥ out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ words. You think you can get away with saying that ♥♥♥♥ to me over the Internet? Think again, ♥♥♥♥♥♥. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little ♥♥♥♥. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ idiot. I will ♥♥♥♥ fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dead, kiddo.

[int main() {_salt = 1;};]

While we are comparing mil-peens, swedish military here. As has been stated before; the best solution is probably to differentiate sparse forest from dense forest. From both a gameplay perspective and a realism one, tanks should not be climbing mountains in terrain that is a pain just to walk through. European forests aren't all flat hard ground with light undergrowth and restricting some areas to certain unit types is just good map design.

[Evil donut]

Well i have to agree with the thread opener on the term that tanks and IFVs are to strong in woods. Normally the infantery should be the king of the woods. But right now, it is easier to take a scout and some tanks and BMPs or Marder for example and just murder every infantery unit inside the forrest.

RIght now infantery is getting stunned immediately by the tanks and IFVs and APCs. I have have often the situation were 4 infantery squads in the woods get absoluteley murdered by two tanks.

Right now you do not play infantery decks because of the infantery. You play it because of the BMP 3 for example on the soviet side. When i play Nato germany i play infantery heavy not because of the infantery too, but because of the Marder.

I know vehicles get slowed down very hard in the woods right now. But the fire power is still calculated in a way as if tanks IFVs and APCs are still 100% accuarate in the woods.

I often encountered situation were enemies had to flee with with 4 or 5 infantery units in a forrest, because i was just driving behind them with my tanks, in the forrest !!! and was killing them left and right! This is wrong!

[Mother's Best Boy]

Originally posted by Friendo:

Here's a compilation of the relevant videos from the thread so far for everybody that isn't a hpyer-elite tier 1 warrior (seems to be everybody in this thread):
https://youtu.be/D4roHOw6hkc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fReXK_ntOYg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_AAOdAeY3Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_axqDGIvD8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc06o7ayx-g

no one is claiming to be a tier one operator. your cherry picked instances are not reality

[Actionjackson]

Joining the murder force, the lowest of the lot, acting like this so called "valor" is worth a damn, and getting off on it. Classic

EDIT: maybe back on topic about forests.

[Actionjackson]

Was drunk yesterday, maybe i was a lil bit too direct there.

[Actionjackson]

Discipline is for robots, no thanks

[Mother's Best Boy]

so many level 0 trolls

[Malakie]

Originally posted by viper827:

I play SD 2 and one of the things I like is that armour or other vehicles cannot enter heavily wooded areas. This means you have to use infantry to clear and secure such areas giving the game a bit more depth I feel.
In WARNO it seems tanks and AFV's can roll through a heavily wooded area no problem and still be a major problem to infantry in that area even if they are armed with AT kit. I think where your tanks and AFV's can be deployed should be more realistic and inline with SD2. I think restricting this movement of armour and support vehicles would bring more tactical depth to the game overall. Hope Eugen sort it out.

I am former US Military and mark my words, tanks and IFV's can enter woods. It's not the fact they are woods. It's the TYPE of forest and thickness of the heavy tree line that does.

For example, most forests past the tree line are actually easily traversed by tanks and IFV's as they can literally drive THROUGH anything smaller than 8 thick" if they have to. Forests edges are the thing that slows you down more because those trees usually get bigger due to access to more sunlight. Forests are usually thinned out much more and are more brush and smaller trees than the larger thick old growth trees. And as I said, it also depends on the 'type' of tree as well.

Additionally, if there are heavy forests that DO have OLD growth that can't just be plowed over by a tank, i.e. thicker than 8" or so, then in planning, the military will setup engineers to blast paths if necessary or if the situation calls for stealth, will detcord certain trees to make a path in a much more stealthy manner. Tanks will also have blades attached for clearly the debris in those situations as they move.

If the game wants to be somewhat realistic, then factor in the TYPE of forest (tree type), thickness and whether an engineering unit will need to be used to clear a path. Otherwise to not bog down game play, they can attach a bladed tank unit to another unit and just make overall movement much slower through forests to account for the density, terrain and forest itself with the bladed units being presumed to be clearing ahead of the other units.

[FREEZED]

Originally posted by Malakie:

Originally posted by viper827:

I play SD 2 and one of the things I like is that armour or other vehicles cannot enter heavily wooded areas. This means you have to use infantry to clear and secure such areas giving the game a bit more depth I feel.
In WARNO it seems tanks and AFV's can roll through a heavily wooded area no problem and still be a major problem to infantry in that area even if they are armed with AT kit. I think where your tanks and AFV's can be deployed should be more realistic and inline with SD2. I think restricting this movement of armour and support vehicles would bring more tactical depth to the game overall. Hope Eugen sort it out.

I am former US Military and mark my words, tanks and IFV's can enter woods. It's not the fact they are woods. It's the TYPE of forest and thickness of the heavy tree line that does.

For example, most forests past the tree line are actually easily traversed by tanks and IFV's as they can literally drive THROUGH anything smaller than 8 thick" if they have to. Forests edges are the thing that slows you down more because those trees usually get bigger due to access to more sunlight. Forests are usually thinned out much more and are more brush and smaller trees than the larger thick old growth trees. And as I said, it also depends on the 'type' of tree as well.

Additionally, if there are heavy forests that DO have OLD growth that can't just be plowed over by a tank, i.e. thicker than 8" or so, then in planning, the military will setup engineers to blast paths if necessary or if the situation calls for stealth, will detcord certain trees to make a path in a much more stealthy manner. Tanks will also have blades attached for clearly the debris in those situations as they move.

If the game wants to be somewhat realistic, then factor in the TYPE of forest (tree type), thickness and whether an engineering unit will need to be used to clear a path. Otherwise to not bog down game play, they can attach a bladed tank unit to another unit and just make overall movement much slower through forests to account for the density, terrain and forest itself with the bladed units being presumed to be clearing ahead of the other units.

is do not know, it could make game too complex for no reason, this game allows tanks to move trough woods, infantry benefits from shorter view range on woods so they can pretty easily engage tanks in woods.

this game should be played with several units together so fight should be pretty easy for infantry to win in woods where they can hit from every direction and get easy kills

[Malakie]

Originally posted by FREEZED:

Originally posted by Malakie:

I am former US Military and mark my words, tanks and IFV's can enter woods. It's not the fact they are woods. It's the TYPE of forest and thickness of the heavy tree line that does.

For example, most forests past the tree line are actually easily traversed by tanks and IFV's as they can literally drive THROUGH anything smaller than 8 thick" if they have to. Forests edges are the thing that slows you down more because those trees usually get bigger due to access to more sunlight. Forests are usually thinned out much more and are more brush and smaller trees than the larger thick old growth trees. And as I said, it also depends on the 'type' of tree as well.

Additionally, if there are heavy forests that DO have OLD growth that can't just be plowed over by a tank, i.e. thicker than 8" or so, then in planning, the military will setup engineers to blast paths if necessary or if the situation calls for stealth, will detcord certain trees to make a path in a much more stealthy manner. Tanks will also have blades attached for clearly the debris in those situations as they move.

If the game wants to be somewhat realistic, then factor in the TYPE of forest (tree type), thickness and whether an engineering unit will need to be used to clear a path. Otherwise to not bog down game play, they can attach a bladed tank unit to another unit and just make overall movement much slower through forests to account for the density, terrain and forest itself with the bladed units being presumed to be clearing ahead of the other units.

is do not know, it could make game too complex for no reason, this game allows tanks to move trough woods, infantry benefits from shorter view range on woods so they can pretty easily engage tanks in woods.

this game should be played with several units together so fight should be pretty easy for infantry to win in woods where they can hit from every direction and get easy kills

Infantry in woods should have an advantage no doubt. But once they are seen, that can change because in the woods, ATGM's cannot be used at range thus tank anti personnel weaponry still can however.

[heronlord]

lol im amazed some troll spent so much time defending ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ all cause he wants tanks to drive through forests in his war game. But the icing on the cake is his proof of service is a marine publication on fallujah that doesnt even have the word forest or even the word tree. lolsigh.

Anywho, current balance of tanks vs infantry in forests is garbage, it promotes apc spam, and isnt fun or realistic.

I agree that too restrictive lane issues is bad, and I do honestly like the flexibility of moving armour through forest, but honestly its absurd at this point.

My fav suggestion so far was an increasing penalty the deeper one goes into forest, but that isnt realistic really to how line of sight effects forest as its always the densest cover at the edge of the forest, and really tanks should have the best maneuverability and line of sight in "old growth super dense forest" cause of how the larger trees prevent dense tree clusters, except with weird stuff like cedar, which unless like 1000 years old is a not gonna stop a mbt.

I guess i would like to see inf being faster than tanks in general in "heavy forest" and the line of sight being reduced in forests in general for tanks, especially against infantry.

>_> I would also be ok with crit rolls on weapons and tracks + random hp loss to force a player to bring logistical units to represent attached engineers for their armour units they are throwing into rubbled city terrain or heavy forest. That would be dealable and realistic.

[Noblesse Oblige [KG] ⳩]

Originally posted by Malakie:

Originally posted by FREEZED:

is do not know, it could make game too complex for no reason, this game allows tanks to move trough woods, infantry benefits from shorter view range on woods so they can pretty easily engage tanks in woods.

this game should be played with several units together so fight should be pretty easy for infantry to win in woods where they can hit from every direction and get easy kills

Infantry in woods should have an advantage no doubt. But once they are seen, that can change because in the woods, ATGM's cannot be used at range thus tank anti personnel weaponry still can however.

But can the turret be turned in close forest?

[Malakie]

Originally posted by heronlord:

lol im amazed some troll spent so much time defending ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ all cause he wants tanks to drive through forests in his war game. But the icing on the cake is his proof of service is a marine publication on fallujah that doesnt even have the word forest or even the word tree. lolsigh.

Anywho, current balance of tanks vs infantry in forests is garbage, it promotes apc spam, and isnt fun or realistic.

I agree that too restrictive lane issues is bad, and I do honestly like the flexibility of moving armour through forest, but honestly its absurd at this point.

My fav suggestion so far was an increasing penalty the deeper one goes into forest, but that isnt realistic really to how line of sight effects forest as its always the densest cover at the edge of the forest, and really tanks should have the best maneuverability and line of sight in "old growth super dense forest" cause of how the larger trees prevent dense tree clusters, except with weird stuff like cedar, which unless like 1000 years old is a not gonna stop a mbt.

I guess i would like to see inf being faster than tanks in general in "heavy forest" and the line of sight being reduced in forests in general for tanks, especially against infantry.

>_> I would also be ok with crit rolls on weapons and tracks + random hp loss to force a player to bring logistical units to represent attached engineers for their armour units they are throwing into rubbled city terrain or heavy forest. That would be dealable and realistic.

Troll and Marine book? I AM A United States Navy Service Connected, now medically retired disabled Veteran. So you want to throw insults, FIND OUT who you are referring to first.

I don't get my info from computer games. I get it from having been there face to face and being combat injured for real. (btw, my avatar should have been a clue but apparently you are too dense to figure that out as well) So take YOUR TROLLING and shove it back in your piehole TROLL.

Why don't YOU step up and put on the uniform, go and see first hand what combat really is before opening said piehole again... but no, people like you walk on the backs of us that do and then make snide comments and troll posts because you don't like what was said.

[Malakie]

Originally posted by Vexillatio ⳩:

Originally posted by Malakie:

Infantry in woods should have an advantage no doubt. But once they are seen, that can change because in the woods, ATGM's cannot be used at range thus tank anti personnel weaponry still can however.

But can the turret be turned in close forest?

Like I said, it depends on the forest, type of forest, denseness of the forest AND whether engineering units or bladed tanks are part of the unit trying to move through. In MOST combat situations, stuff like that is planned out, especially if the need is to move unit without the enemy finding out right away. It is also extremely rare a tank unit will find itself in armored combat within a forest range. Think of a forest like a city. Tanks still need boots on the ground in support or they are in deed huge targets otherwise, both forested area and in cities or towns.

Today's armor, however, is being massively beefed up with anti-personnel capabilities. Everything from localized packs that work much like a claymore to other new weapons systems that are still classified. This tech is also related to drone defenses and anti missile defenses.

In a forested area, armor depends more on the crew served weapons and the boots on the ground accompanying it to move through dense areas. You don't fight in the forest with a tank. It is more about movement to contact, trying to flank or maneuver past a unit you want to block.. that kinda thing.

While I was not a tanker or armor crew member, my unit I was team lead accompanied them in many situations where we would have to traverse areas not commonly thought of as something armor would be found.

It kinda is like where most people are surprised to learn units like mine would often use horses in extreme mountain terrain to move or flank positions and I mean mountain terrain, not little hills.

Real life military is MUCH different than any game can come close to showing. And the things we do, the training we work, and the different things we try would surprise a lot of people if they knew about that kinda stuff. Everything from landing C-130's on aircraft carriers to dropping an M1 Abrams by parachute (which did not go so well when that was tried), nothing is off the table when it comes to learning, training and doing.

Forested use of armor because a HUGE deal during WWII in the Pacific (it was more jungle type situation than forests like here in the USA or Europe) and then again in Vietnam. And a LOT of lessons were learned about armored warfare in areas that most people would not even consider being something armor would be found in.