which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

PC : Turn based WW2 goodness in the mold of Panzer General. This promises to be a true classic!

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

ksasaki
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:58 pm

which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ksasaki » Mon Feb 24, 2014 1:19 am

I like the old fashioned infantry, though gebirgsjager is pretty good too. Infantry has a good combination of ammo / defense, and move.

The pioniere is nice, but a little slow. In fact I find often find it difficult because there is a more than 1 move terrain oftentimes between where I am and where I want to go...the 3 move is really ideal.

gebirgsjager seems like they would be a little better, but slightly worse defense and one less ammo...i don't know...

HW Infantry is slow just like pioniere, but +1 initiative is nice. I always make Oleh Dir a grenadier for some serious killing power!

Infantry v gebirgsjager, I like gebirgsjager for Norway or Greece, but the infantry I am always praying I will get a +1 mv hero so I can convert to a non wheeled HW infantry.

Fallschimjager are the kings of rough terrain, but I find the 4 ammo to be very annoying...reminds me of wulfrahmen or Sturmpanzer I...

Kradschutzen....I am seriously tempted to change a few to krad and leave them in the close terrain. Seems too good to be true, but they will be vulnerable to aerial assault!

Anyway, thoughts on your favorite infantry?

ExiledZebra
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 1:10 am

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ExiledZebra » Mon Feb 24, 2014 3:15 am

Well, when Soviet Corps will be released, they will become my favorite infantry ;)

As it stands, I prefer Fallshimjager, pionere, gabirgsjager and HW infantry mainly because they are deadly to infantry and although some of them may lack mobility they can obliterate soft targets with relative ease.

Also, the greatest reason I like them, is rather silly, but I like the sound effects of their weapons when they fire upon the enemy...Seriously that HW infantry machine gun sounds amazing and dreadful :mrgreen: (perhaps MG 42 sounds were used? I'm not too sure...)

BiteNibbleChomp
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3229
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:35 am

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by BiteNibbleChomp » Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:34 am

Pre-1943... I'd say my 1918 Flamethrowers (WWI mod) !

- BNC
Creator of American Civil War mod for Strategic Command WWI!
Discuss here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4504986
Download: http://www.mediafire.com/file/tj4t11z3ttl142w/SCACW.zip/file

Anfield
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee USA

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by Anfield » Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:40 pm

I normally run more infantry than armor units AC or PC. Core for the DLC just before 43 is about what 30-34 maybe, im guessing id have least a dozen infantry units. Somewhat like the original poster, if an infantry unit cant move at a 3 I wont use it. So of that 12, 2-3 would be FJ (para) maybe 1 Gebirgs and all the rest be regualr infantry. I never take or unpgrade to pioneers. And will only upgrade to Grenadiers (HW) if I get the +1 move hero.

I love infantry, and for as much as some players dont like them or claim they get killed to easy I find thats not true. If you use terrain well, dont rush attacks. And most of all, use your armor to force units to retreat into poor terrain where infantry fight best, youll find infantry are get tank killers.

So while regualr infantry may lack fire power (unlike pioneers and HW etc.), that move of 3 allow them to get around better, thus using terrain better to keep them alive.

antoniocapo
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2014 1:16 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by antoniocapo » Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:55 pm

ExiledZebra wrote: Also, the greatest reason I like them, is rather silly, but I like the sound effects of their weapons when they fire upon the enemy...Seriously that HW infantry machine gun sounds amazing and dreadful :mrgreen: (perhaps MG 42 sounds were used? I'm not too sure...)
:D haha and here i thought i was the only one.

Im still trying to figure out a nice infantry balance for my core. I was about to start a thread like this too.

I do love Grenadiers for their defense and killing potential. They have the most kills from of all my infantry so i say they contribute the most despite the slow move. The slow move is really frustrating, but in the long turn allowance of the GC, it isnt so bad. I have them on halftracks as they can sometimes finish a far off weakened enemy unit that way. Also the extra time to get them in position can be an advantage sometimes as it checks my crazy banzai tendencies away from artillery cover. Definitely Oleh Dir as a Grenadier is a rock star! Thats all the infantry you really need sometimes.

The Fallschirmjager are great too as they move 3 and hit for a lot, im happy with the one i use. They can take on entrenched positions rather well and replacements are super cheap, so i dont worry losing a couple of steps. They got low defense, but their high initiative of 4 makes up for it (initiative is a great defense tool too). So far into 1944 my Fallschirmjager has held its ground quite well. The airborne capability many times come in handy too as i can drop him behind artillery or AA positions and flank the enemy for the awesome surrender prestige. But his low ammo is the reason i only use one.

Pioneres are too costly and have less initiave than Grenadiers. Their ignore entrench is not that great as i tend to suppress my targets first before attacking. And the Grenadiers can blow those forts up anyways too. In defense the Grenadiers are much better than pioneres due to higher initiave.

Mountaineers have less defense and that means they can be wiped out in the fierce AI counterattacks, so after trying them and losing the most steps with them im seriously considering upgrading the two i use.

And the regular Wehrmacht has lower attack than mountaineers so its kind of meh.

The other types of infantry dies too fast to even bother. And to boot the Krad run out of fuel!

So far now thats the stage of infantry im at: Grenadiers, Falls and mountaineers. But probably will upgrade the mountain troops to Grenadiers too for later war years more defensive scenarios.

Stmcla
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 7:31 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by Stmcla » Mon Feb 24, 2014 7:39 pm

Does anyone use paratroopers regularly? If so what for and which scenarios?

ksasaki
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:58 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ksasaki » Mon Feb 24, 2014 8:45 pm

paratroopers are fantastic because they are 4 initiative, uncontested kings of rough terrain. They are also fortkillers, so if you want to destroy those big guns or bunkers paratroopers are your men for the job. The only downside is the defense of 5 and the ammo of 4, but if they are in rough terrain the defense doesn't matter much anyway. The ammo is a little annoying, but not too bad, and the paratrooping makes them extremely mobile!

Stmcla
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 7:31 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by Stmcla » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:02 pm

Thanks for the heads up on paratroopers. Do you ever risk them behind the lines to grab objectives?

ksasaki
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:58 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ksasaki » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:33 pm

fallschirmjager have fantastic initiative and also fortkillers !!! so who needs pioniere's anyway (maybe modlin, but I found infantry kill modlin pretty easy too!!). only downsides are 5 GD and 4 ammo, but keep them in the rough and they are beasts.

ksasaki
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:58 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ksasaki » Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:15 pm

fallschirmjager have fantastic initiative and also fortkillers !!! so who needs pioniere's anyway (maybe modlin, but I found infantry kill modlin pretty easy too!!). only downsides are 5 GD and 4 ammo, but keep them in the rough and they are beasts.

Anfield
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee USA

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by Anfield » Tue Feb 25, 2014 2:40 am

I will drop FJ behind the lines up till about the end of 41. After that the tanks they face and the massive amount of Russian troops in the east make it hard to keep them alive, that low ammo and the vast numbers just kill them off. So around then I just switch them to fight as elite infantry.

ExiledZebra
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 1:10 am

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ExiledZebra » Tue Feb 25, 2014 2:47 am

Stmcla wrote:Thanks for the heads up on paratroopers. Do you ever risk them behind the lines to grab objectives?
I usually drop them behind objectives, make them clear out (if possible) artillery/ antiaircraft and then make them wait for the main force to arrive...unless they're strong enough to get good damage upon defending enemies then i might try to attack the objective being protected (i.e. dutch infantry with only 2 soft target damage get chewed up by fallshimjagers at equal strength).

Also I find Fallshimjager to be a pretty bad arse name for paratroopers and for that reason alone are usually included in my cores :3 (I'm quite aware that fallshimjager most probably means paratrooper in German but idc, it's still an awesome name :mrgreen: )

antoniocapo
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2014 1:16 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by antoniocapo » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:11 am

ExiledZebra wrote: Also I find Fallshimjager to be a pretty bad arse name for paratroopers and for that reason alone are usually included in my cores :3 (I'm quite aware that fallshimjager most probably means paratrooper in German but idc, it's still an awesome name :mrgreen: )
I find the name too hard to spell correctly. Would you still love the name if an "r" was added somewhere in the middle?

But yeah, i love them Fall guys too 8)

El_Jairo
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:01 pm

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by El_Jairo » Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:15 am

Nice thread.
As for now I'm trying to have a balance of regular and grenadier infantry.

I want to experiment with bridge pioneers, regular pioneers and bikers.
But it seems they are less useful in general so are a luxuary is you have already a strong core or if you have a special need in a certain scenario.

I was wondering what heroes you keep on which type of infatry. For now I seem to get heroes that strengthen the key feature: 3 defense on grenadier and 2a on Gebirgsjager. I was thinking now: should I change defense hero infantry to regular or fallschirmjager, to counter their innate weakness or does it pay of more to have a high defensive grenadier to receive the counter attack?
With move hero I go grenadier or consider Pioneer (bridge or not)
Init hero might be ideal for Fallschirm or a great boost for any type.

PS: it is time I start the GC at last.

matterhorn

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by matterhorn » Tue Feb 25, 2014 2:56 pm

pre-1943 I prefer normal infantry and Gebirgsjäger.

Pioniere had too much losses when I used them, even worse because they are expensive. And they are slow.

Grenadiere are slow too, to slow for my taste. In the 'Streets of Moscow' scenario for example they are ok, but normally I won't use them. When an Inf-unit has a movement-hero I sometimes upgrade to Grenadiere.

Fallschirmjäger are able to do a really good job against entrenched units, which are unsuppressed. When possible I try to use two of them for an attack to have a second shot. Ammo of 4 is quite low. Especially in Russia there are a few scenarios where you can use them to conquer far cities/airfields.

Brückenpioniere. Well, with concentrated firepower of artillery, airforce and tanks I have forced my troops over the river before the Brückenpioniere are being helpful in almost all scenarios. I can't remember when I had one in my core.

Kradschützen are quite useful in some russian scenarios with big maps. They can advance fast to far cities and screen wide areas with their spotting of 3. Downside is that in mud and snow they are really slow and run out of fuel too fast in that weather.

ExiledZebra
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 1:10 am

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by ExiledZebra » Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:30 pm

[/quote]

I find the name too hard to spell correctly. Would you still love the name if an "r" was added somewhere in the middle?

But yeah, i love them Fall guys too 8)[/quote]

Well to be fair I do not speak nor write German and so it's quite possible I make mistakes, yes I would still adore their name if they had a "r" somewhere in the middle :)

Back to topic: I just noticed I've never once used Kradschützen...I just figured they were soft target scouts and i'd rather have a hard target scout than a soft target one...Hell even hard target scouts get destroyed quite easily, aircraft is usually my main scouting party as others have mentioned.

Not to say hard target scouts are awful, I've actually had quite effective flanking scouts that kill off arty/antiaircraft rather easily. Even infantry out in the open can have a hard time with hard target scouts.

LandMarine47
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2467
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:44 pm
Location: Texas

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by LandMarine47 » Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:51 am

Does anyone employ mass Paratroopers? I tried this in Moscow 41, with some success, but Soviet pilots completely ignore my elite fighters and head straight for the Paras. After 1941, best use them as Elite Infantry in half tracks, as the Allies are the Kings of the Air past that point, and seem to be suicidal when they spot Paratroopers

matterhorn

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by matterhorn » Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:05 am

ExiledZebra wrote:
...

Back to topic: I just noticed I've never once used Kradschützen...I just figured they were soft target scouts and i'd rather have a hard target scout than a soft target one...Hell even hard target scouts get destroyed quite easily, aircraft is usually my main scouting party as others have mentioned.

Not to say hard target scouts are awful, I've actually had quite effective flanking scouts that kill off arty/antiaircraft rather easily. Even infantry out in the open can have a hard time with hard target scouts.
I use them as infantry in the first place. The spotting of 3 is a nice gift. Sometimes I build a team of Kradschützen, an artillery unit in trucks and a fast tank (with movement hero). The stats of Kradschützen are not that great, but I found that they do quite good work as infantry (especially pre-1943). I'm not totally sure, but I think they have an (passive) air attack of 1. In my case aerial attacks on them were no issue. But so far I did go for air supremacy anyway.
When I can be quite sure, that the weather is good, the map is big and there are some far cities, that I can reach per road... I like to use them.

captainjack
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Posts: 1712
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:42 am

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by captainjack » Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:06 am

I like kradschutzen - I usually use a cheat code to have one unit right from the start - they were widely used at the time, though I can see why they might upset game balance if widely available too early. I recently got a spotting hero which made this a very handy unit. They become less useful in mud or snow as the limited fuel disappers so fast they spend all their time resupplying. An upgrade path would be nice, but I usually end up converting them to other infantry in 43.

I also like Gebirgsjager for the all terrain movement (especially with +1 move hero) and for the extra SA and defence. I have learnt that it's best to change them to Grenadiers or regular infantry in 43. Having said that, Oleh Dir usually ends up converted to Grenadier or Pioneer at the first opportunity.

As for paras (and for reference, fallschirmjager is German for parachute troops) I have used them successfully in one of the Norwegian scenarios, in the Metaxas line to capture Keramoti and in the very first Russian scenario to capture airfields, but otherwise they seem to attract enemy troops and disapper very quickly.

I'm starting to favour regular infantry (or gebirgsjager) over truck mounted Grenadiers, as you don't have to pay for the trucks or the extra cost of reinforcements and overstrengthing, and while they do often get beaten up, they are cheap to reinforce.

Aloo
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Re: which infantry do you prefer (pre-1943)

Post by Aloo » Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:32 am

I buy 2 paras as soon as possible. They help in most blitz scenarios such as Norway, Eben Emael, begging of Barbarossa to name a few. I used them in my last play to take Moscow in Vyazma at the start of the scenario. Now in 42 I use them on big maps to land near poorly protected airfields, capture them and move on. On scenarios where there is no such opportunities I use them as normal inf since their great initiative + fortkiller makes them nice all rounders. Lack of transport makes them cheap to reinforce.

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps”