APC Infantry

[Elxaime]

I understand it is advantageous in Modern Campaigns to leave certain APC-equipped infantry in T mode to represent their staying mounted.

1. Is this true?
2. How do I know which ones these are? The ones that are tracked? For example, in NGP which sort of APC-equipped NATO infantry might benefit?

Thanks in advance.

[Ricky B]

I can't think of any units that would always or generally benefit from being in travel mode. Based on the situation, where mobility is critical and opposition light, then it would be of benefit, but otherwise any units outside of helos that are in travel mode would be extremely vulnerable and suffer high losses if fired on by nearly any enemy unit.

All ground units in travel mode are halved in defense strength, from the unit rating, and APC mounted infantry already have lower defense than tanks so they would be more like a third of tanks or even less.

So I say false to the supposition.

Rick

[CptCav]

Where enemy resistance is light and the need to gain ground is paramount, I would have my mechanized infantry move in travel mode. For example, in the opening moves of a MC campaign scenario where the NATO units are scattered around in garrisons and the idea is to gain as much ground as possible before they release. Then, by all means, have the WarPac infantry stay in travel mode and accept the possible losses. The NATO player is probably going to be very busy trying to get his free units organized and withdrawn to form a defensive line. Under those circumstances you will find it more practical to stay in travel mode while bypassing and surrounding the few NATO units opposing you. :boom2:

Regards,
CptCav

[Bigwig]

Once I moved a BN of mounted BMP infanrty next to a bunch of Leos at night. My boys didn't stay a BN for long.

Really all that mounted mech infantry being hard targets means is that they can be engaged at longer ranges. There may be reasons to leave them mounted at the end of a turn, but protection isn't one of them.

[Volcano Man]

That depends though, as Cpt Cav said, if the resistence is light and you are only encountering enemy infantry then (usually) the IFV / APC will provide adequate protection. If you have tanks in the area then they will be nothing more than tracked coffins.

[Elxaime]

Thanks for the answers. With all the ATGM armed Warsaw Pact infantry able to fire 2 hexes, seems like its almost in reverse for the NATO APC troops - they need to stay on foot. The problem then becomes their being obliterated by Pact artillery unless entrenched/heavy cover 70 percent.

Another question: when calculating the defense value of a deployed infantry unit equipped with APC, does it help or are they treated the same as a deployed infantry unit that is equipped with soft-skin vehicles or truck bound?

[CptCav]

Infantry deployed, regardless of type (mechanized, motorized, foot), generally have a defense value of 16 per the PDT files and are treated as a soft target.

Regards,
CptCav

[Bigwig]

Thanks for the answers. With all the ATGM armed Warsaw Pact infantry able to fire 2 hexes...

Which bugs the heck out of me, by the way. Dismounted BMP infantry can attack a Leo 2 at a two-hex range with presumably vehicle-mounted ATGMS, and the Leo can't fire back, because the infantry is an allegedly soft target. This makes no sense.

[greg]

you just have to give a 2 hex range fire for soft target.than your leo could fire too against infantry.

[Elxaime]

Thanks for the answers. With all the ATGM armed Warsaw Pact infantry able to fire 2 hexes...

Which bugs the heck out of me, by the way. Dismounted BMP infantry can attack a Leo 2 at a two-hex range with presumably vehicle-mounted ATGMS, and the Leo can't fire back, because the infantry is an allegedly soft target. This makes no sense.

I believe the NGP designer rationale for this was that by doctrine NATO armor was to oppose Pact armor and did not carry sufficient non-AP ammo to use against enemy dismounted troops.