PACT Tactics/ Strategy?

[LonePie]

I can't for the life of me play good with PACT decks.
Their Infantry squads in general have lesss manpower, tanks are less accurate as well.
I try to make up for this with more use of support, planes, heli- but still can't get the hang of PACT battlefield tempo.

Especially Infantry-Infantry battles where it seems like Soviet squads are just squishier and less robust in manpower and materiel.

[Switchinzski]

Originally posted by LonePie:

Especially Infantry-Infantry battles where it seems like Soviet squads are just squishier and less robust in manpower and materiel.

They are, Use units that have good accuracy and or suppression to pair with your moto's and or desant's

[Hexagon]

Originally posted by LonePie:

I can't for the life of me play good with PACT decks.
Their Infantry squads in general have lesss manpower, tanks are less accurate as well.
I try to make up for this with more use of support, planes, heli- but still can't get the hang of PACT battlefield tempo.

Especially Infantry-Infantry battles where it seems like Soviet squads are just squishier and less robust in manpower and materiel.

Best strategy is to switch to NATO side, cuz its much stronger now.
If u MUST play reds, try 39 and new-one-GDR, they are not nato-lvl-overpowered but not as bad as other reds

[Cryptic]

if you havent already figured it out: quality beats quantity. get units with a bit of experience. it goes a long way

[Sokol]

Give all units at the very minimum 2nd level veterancy
Give bomber planes lowest veterancy so you can have more of them
For PACT, the availability of bombers and cheap/numerous infantry is what wins

[Kampfkekskrieger EXP Folk Master]

boy with toy looses toy. This must happen to see the universe beyond toy.

[asaphx]

Mi-8 is a very strong weapon and you get loads of it. Rocket pods are OP, use them. Helis are not very hard to keep alive, but you must have the most possible recon sight, both from ground and from air. This will allow you to eliminate AA units before they can shoot at you. It's also good to use several helis together, just not too close to each other due to blast. Just remember to have a hidden supply station nearby for frequent refills of rockets.

For tanks: Soviet heavy tanks generally have better rate of fire and aim time stats than NATO, but I've found that many times they shoot slower for some reason. Try to maneuver things so that you can get the first shot in a tank duel. Otherwise, if using lesser tanks, especially the awful DDR tanks, try to engage at close range with numbers.

Close range cancels the NATO advantage both in accuracy and kinetic power. This can allow you to overcome even the NATO super heavies with minor tanks. Smoke can help you achieve close range, but takes a lot of practice to master.

[Solon]

I will play more as Pact to study this issue.
I lost good infantry to Pact today.
German pioneers got the best of mine today.
Panzerjagers swipe a few of my tanks.

[[ING] Ingvarplay]

This is a NATO army simulator game. don't play for the red side, it's useless. Play for the blues.

[Ava]

If you absolutely want to play redfor, then play against redfor. bluefor decks are overpowered atm

[Keinutnai]

In general you have to be a better player than your enemy to win with PACT.

I Prefer play PACT simply because I like playing more challenging games and I like the appearance of units.

NATO has:
1) superior anti-tank missiles (25 HE tow-2),
2) larger squads (often 10 men compared to 7 of the pact
3) higher accuracy on tanks
4) more potent helicopters for most decks (25 HE and many missiles compared to PACT)
5) Better recon in the form of Bradley recon with 25 HE tow-2 and many infantry teams with more men &rpg than most pact decks.
6) Same availability of better units compared to inferior pact units: for example 6x tow-2 25 he teams for nato and 6x konkurs 20 he teams for pact.

PACT has:
1) superior infantry fighting vehicles in most decks. This means you have an advantage if you unload infa, send them foreard with bmp-2 and bmp-3 giving supressing fire.
2) missiles on most tanks, which gives minimal advantage, because they have low HE (usually merely 20, thus dealing only 1-2 damage before engaging more accurate nato heavy tanks. => To win tank engagements I recommend you attack only if pointwise you have a superior value in tanks. Dont send 2 T-80 U against 2 M1A1(HC). You will lose. Send 3 T-80U against them. To have more tanks than the enemy, you have to save on AA by buying merely 1 tunguska or something comparable at the start and not spending much on planes on game start. Planes are risky, but having tank superiority and positioning tanks properly is not.

[LonePie]

I actually didn't want to think that PACT was just under-powered at the moment and that I was just not 'getting their strategy"
But they really do seem to be lacking at the moment- maybe due to them having the same number of infantry and vehicles per card as NATO but with worse weapons or manpower.

I'll still try playing as them because I like the units but it just seems harder to effectively fight with them.

[Havran00]

Originally posted by Hexagon:

Originally posted by LonePie:

I can't for the life of me play good with PACT decks.
Their Infantry squads in general have lesss manpower, tanks are less accurate as well.
I try to make up for this with more use of support, planes, heli- but still can't get the hang of PACT battlefield tempo.

Especially Infantry-Infantry battles where it seems like Soviet squads are just squishier and less robust in manpower and materiel.

Best strategy is to switch to NATO side, cuz its much stronger now.
If u MUST play reds, try 39 and new-one-GDR, they are not nato-lvl-overpowered but not as bad as other reds

Is new DDR division any good? I only tried it against AI so far and it seems abysmally bad. I can't think of a single good thing about it expect for BUK and those Mi-8 helis with rockets, MGs and granade launchers, but this won't win you the game.

[AGENTTOSZERO]

Originally posted by Cryptic:

if you havent already figured it out: quality beats quantity. get units with a bit of experience. it goes a long way

That is the case in this game. But IRL elite soviet units would break you defencive positions and that a lot of mediocre units would get behind your lines and with no proper defencives a lot of thouse worse units will absolutly devastete your better units

[UG || Pilot007]

Originally posted by AGENTTOSZERO:

Originally posted by Cryptic:

if you havent already figured it out: quality beats quantity. get units with a bit of experience. it goes a long way

That is the case in this game. But IRL elite soviet units would break you defencive positions and that a lot of mediocre units would get behind your lines and with no proper defencives a lot of thouse worse units will absolutly devastete your better units

IRL, the soviets wouldn't of even had the SU-25 supporting. That ♥♥♥♥ was in Afghan with only one squadron.

[LonePie]

Originally posted by UG || Pilot007:

Originally posted by AGENTTOSZERO:

That is the case in this game. But IRL elite soviet units would break you defencive positions and that a lot of mediocre units would get behind your lines and with no proper defencives a lot of thouse worse units will absolutly devastete your better units

IRL, the soviets wouldn't of even had the SU-25 supporting. That ♥♥♥♥ was in Afghan with only one squadron.

That's actually a myth. Cold War levels of men and materiel was VASTLY bigger during Cold War days even with Soviet corruption. We know this because we could SEE at the time all the ships, fighters, and tanks the soviets would position on and around the Iron Curtain and
whole world.

The Soviet Union was poor because it spent all it's money on the military (on-top of graft and corruption).
They actually trained their soldiers and couldn't lie about selling off as much materiel because a hard-line commie believer from the NKVD will actually shoot them instead if found out.

In 1991, the 16th Air Army (Covering East Germany) alone had 3 fighter divisions each with 3 regiments flying 32 Mig-29UB + 5 Mig-23UB with the exception of one regiment flying Mig-23MLDs. That's 320+ Aircraft in their AAW role.
This doesn't include the 16th AA's Fighter/Bombers, Ground Attack, Recce, and EW Divisions. Those add 300+ more aircraft.

The amount of Cold War weapons ready for WW3 is actualy mind-boggling compared to the amount of forces we have today.

I think because Russia is a paper tiger- people sometimes extend that to the Soviets, which isn't the case.