The real reason why Halftracks are a MUST (not +Att)

[Duedman]

Like many others I used to say "I wont spend 1 core slot for that!!"
But then it just recently dawned on me: With halftracks you can embark edit: disembark of course infantry in forests or hills. With Trucks you can not.

This far outweighs the extra Attack stats. It has so many tactical benefits its crazy.

On Generalissimus mode its a real hassle to get your Pioniere in striking distance without exposing them.
Every pesky scoutcar or cavalry really hits hard if it catches them in the open or still embarked in a forest tile (not to mention tanks!). And setting up defensive artillery will only soften the blow from very bad to still bad.
You cant afford constant replacement on this difficulty.
To me, that translated in setting up my advance with screening units for the Pioniere.
This of course just slows the advance.

But if u can disembark your Pioniere in forest and hill tiles, it completely changes. Due to the close defense mechanics and the insanely high close defense of Pios, they just become irremovable objects.
No one attacks them.
This not only relieved me of the burden to screen them - I can now use them to screen others. You can even let them be the outer part of an encirclement, that faces a likely counter attack. It kinda changed the whole game for me lol


P.S.: I know there is a thread already about halftracks. I'm guilty

[Nalikill]

The movement benefits are something that really need to be better laid out and explained. It wasn't at all obvious from me comparing the stats that this was going to be the case... I found it out very late in the campaign on a whim when I decided to make one or two units of maxed-out infantry to help hammer through some of the cities.

[gunnergoz]

Try beefing up a pioneer with over strength and a hero or two, put him in a fast halftrack and you have a one-man army who can tackle almost any soft target, even in close terrain. It's worth the core slots with the pioneers, even more so than most other game units. With the right hero you can take the unit to 25 and if you are really lucky and find the hero that halves core value, you're golden! Of course he becomes a juicy target for enemy air, so you have to cover him all the time. I use cheap recon aircraft to provide overhead cover. And as OP noted, such a unit quickly becomes the anchor of any defensive line.

[nexusno2000]

Plus, German halftrack give a good boost to attack, 4 SA, 1 HA.

Try playing as Allies.

Soviets have a halftrack that's just a transport, so no attack bonus.

British Bren carrier and Kangaroo and American M3 halftrack get 1/1. Why? No one knows. The Kangaroo in particular had more guns than the German version had.

[SineMora]

That's because half-tracks have much better off-road performance than wheeled transports; this is the same reason the all-terrain recons are significantly better than the standard wheeled ones, as the latter do not come close to matching the maneuverability of the former despite having just as many movement points.

Plus, German halftrack give a good boost to attack, 4 SA, 1 HA.

Try playing as Allies.

Soviets have a halftrack that's just a transport, so no attack bonus.

British Bren carrier and Kangaroo and American M3 halftrack get 1/1. Why? No one knows. The Kangaroo in particular had more guns than the German version had.

I find this puzzling too. It was one of the first things I noticed playing the Gothic Line, and I'm not convinced it's actually intentional -- unit stats are very much homogeneous across the board as far as infantry and support are concerned, and their transports aren't any cheaper.

[gunnergoz]

That's because half-tracks have much better off-road performance than wheeled transports; this is the same reason the all-terrain recons are significantly better than the standard wheeled ones, as the latter do not come close to matching the maneuverability of the former despite having just as many movement points.

Plus, German halftrack give a good boost to attack, 4 SA, 1 HA.

Try playing as Allies.

Soviets have a halftrack that's just a transport, so no attack bonus.

British Bren carrier and Kangaroo and American M3 halftrack get 1/1. Why? No one knows. The Kangaroo in particular had more guns than the German version had.

I find this puzzling too. It was one of the first things I noticed playing the Gothic Line, and I'm not convinced it's actually intentional -- unit stats are very much homogeneous across the board as far as infantry and support are concerned, and their transports aren't any cheaper.

It could represent different national doctrine: Germany trained panzergrenadiers to fight from their halftracks and had specially designed support halftracks. They were basically mobile foxholes you fought from. Americans, Soviets & UK forces focused on using their halftracks and Kangaroos more as battle taxis. Though the American halftracks were often heavily armed with one or more machineguns, doctrine & training was that the infantry dismounted the carriers to fight. Same with the Kangaroos. Soviets carried infantry on their tanks too, besides using halftracks when available, but the troops dismounted to fight. Only the Germans had a doctrine to fight mounted, and used it in the field.

[Duedman]

Plus, German halftrack give a good boost to attack, 4 SA, 1 HA.

Try playing as Allies.

Soviets have a halftrack that's just a transport, so no attack bonus.

British Bren carrier and Kangaroo and American M3 halftrack get 1/1. Why? No one knows. The Kangaroo in particular had more guns than the German version had.

Compared to the time I was playing with Trucks only I did not really notice a great benefit from those added attack values.
The possibility to embark infantry into close terrain over some distance on the other hand is a huge bonus over trucks.

[SineMora]

It could represent different national doctrine: Germany trained panzergrenadiers to fight from their halftracks and had specially designed support halftracks. They were basically mobile foxholes you fought from. Americans, Soviets & UK forces focused on using their halftracks and Kangaroos more as battle taxis. Though the American halftracks were often heavily armed with one or more machineguns, doctrine & training was that the infantry dismounted the carriers to fight. Same with the Kangaroos. Soviets carried infantry on their tanks too, besides using halftracks when available, but the troops dismounted to fight. Only the Germans had a doctrine to fight mounted, and used it in the field.

The same argument could be made for virtually every discipline of the armed forces, though -- doctrines differed a lot between their respective militaries. Stats and costs are still standardized across the board, with German half-tracks being the odd outlier.

[SJS87]

What extra attack? I know halftracks have better stats than trucks but I don't see any effect they have on the disembarked infantry.

[SineMora]

What extra attack? I know halftracks have better stats than trucks but I don't see any effect they have on the disembarked infantry.

It isn't shown anywhere for some reason, so a lot of players miss it. It's in the combat log, but you'll have to actually give half-tracks to a unit and have them fight to see that. The most significant bonus is the 4 extra SA that (German) half-tracks provide disembarked infantry, e.g., Pioniere will have a SA of 12 instead of 8.



Edit: Reloaded a game to take a screenshot. Note the "Bonus from attached half-track transport."

[gunnergoz]

It could represent different national doctrine: Germany trained panzergrenadiers to fight from their halftracks and had specially designed support halftracks. They were basically mobile foxholes you fought from. Americans, Soviets & UK forces focused on using their halftracks and Kangaroos more as battle taxis. Though the American halftracks were often heavily armed with one or more machineguns, doctrine & training was that the infantry dismounted the carriers to fight. Same with the Kangaroos. Soviets carried infantry on their tanks too, besides using halftracks when available, but the troops dismounted to fight. Only the Germans had a doctrine to fight mounted, and used it in the field.

The same argument could be made for virtually every discipline of the armed forces, though -- doctrines differed a lot between their respective militaries. Stats and costs are still standardized across the board, with German half-tracks being the odd outlier.

LOL Halftracks are the "odd outlier" for a specific reason, and that reason is doctrine and practice as it applies to German halftracks and their historic employment.

[SineMora]

LOL Halftracks are the "odd outlier" for a specific reason, and that reason is doctrine and practice as it applies to German halftracks and their historic employment.

Again, the same thing applies to every branch of the respective armed forces. It's still the only outlier, no matter how much you keep telling yourself that it makes sense.

[gunnergoz]

LOL Halftracks are the "odd outlier" for a specific reason, and that reason is doctrine and practice as it applies to German halftracks and their historic employment.

Again, the same thing applies to every branch of the respective armed forces. It's still the only outlier, no matter how much you keep telling yourself that it makes sense.

By all means, please enlighten us then with some examples of other distinct doctrinal differences between the wartime participants, that were reflected strongly in reality, but glossed over in the game.

[panzeh]

LOL Halftracks are the "odd outlier" for a specific reason, and that reason is doctrine and practice as it applies to German halftracks and their historic employment.

Again, the same thing applies to every branch of the respective armed forces. It's still the only outlier, no matter how much you keep telling yourself that it makes sense.

By all means, please enlighten us then with some examples of other distinct doctrinal differences between the wartime participants, that were reflected strongly in reality, but glossed over in the game.

I think it's odd that allied halftracks still cost the slot despite providing far less soft attack.

I don't think German armored infantry was all that advantaged over their allied counterparts. US armored rifles were trained to take the guns off of the tracks if needed but aren't any better than other HW infantry. I'm 90% sure that rather than a historical point, it's to make Allied HT-mounted infantry less dangerous in the context of single-player.

One could absolutely make a units.csv that emphasized national differences, but the vanilla one ain't it.

[gunnergoz]

Again, the same thing applies to every branch of the respective armed forces. It's still the only outlier, no matter how much you keep telling yourself that it makes sense.

By all means, please enlighten us then with some examples of other distinct doctrinal differences between the wartime participants, that were reflected strongly in reality, but glossed over in the game.

I think it's odd that allied halftracks still cost the slot despite providing far less soft attack.

I don't think German armored infantry was all that advantaged over their allied counterparts. US armored rifles were trained to take the guns off of the tracks if needed but aren't any better than other HW infantry. I'm 90% sure that rather than a historical point, it's to make Allied HT-mounted infantry less dangerous in the context of single-player.

One could absolutely make a units.csv that emphasized national differences, but the vanilla one ain't it.

The point is not that "US armored rifles were trained to take the guns off of the tracks." The point is exactly the opposite: the Germans alone trained and used armored infantry to fight MOUNTED, using all the weapons on the tracks. They also had support tracks armed with 75mm cannons, both HE and AT lobbing versions. The panzergrenadier regiment fought mounted when possible, with the infantry shooting over the sides of the vehicles. No other army taught and implemented this during the war. The other armies dismounted and fought the infantry separately from their tracks, which were simply "battle taxis" carrying the infantry near the action then dropping them off to fight. Germans used armored infantry as a blitz force on its own right, preferably following closely to the tanks that were to lead the fight. Of course they could fight dismounted, like any infantry, and often did. But in offensive operations, the preferred doctrine was mounted combat. This is why the Germans get the bonus attack points for halftracks and other armies don't get it. But fine, believe what you want that the game somehow has this weird "outlier" that is a glitch by programmers. Sorry, it is WAD based on the historical record.

[panzeh]

By all means, please enlighten us then with some examples of other distinct doctrinal differences between the wartime participants, that were reflected strongly in reality, but glossed over in the game.

I think it's odd that allied halftracks still cost the slot despite providing far less soft attack.

I don't think German armored infantry was all that advantaged over their allied counterparts. US armored rifles were trained to take the guns off of the tracks if needed but aren't any better than other HW infantry. I'm 90% sure that rather than a historical point, it's to make Allied HT-mounted infantry less dangerous in the context of single-player.

One could absolutely make a units.csv that emphasized national differences, but the vanilla one ain't it.

The point is not that "US armored rifles were trained to take the guns off of the tracks." The point is exactly the opposite: the Germans alone trained and used armored infantry to fight MOUNTED, using all the weapons on the tracks. They also had support tracks armed with 75mm cannons, both HE and AT lobbing versions. The panzergrenadier regiment fought mounted when possible, with the infantry shooting over the sides of the vehicles. No other army taught and implemented this during the war. The other armies dismounted and fought the infantry separately from their tracks, which were simply "battle taxis" carrying the infantry near the action then dropping them off to fight. Germans used armored infantry as a blitz force on its own right, preferably following closely to the tanks that were to lead the fight. Of course they could fight dismounted, like any infantry, and often did. But in offensive operations, the preferred doctrine was mounted combat. This is why the Germans get the bonus attack points for halftracks and other armies don't get it. But fine, believe what you want that the game somehow has this weird "outlier" that is a glitch by programmers. Sorry, it is WAD based on the historical record.

Then why isn't the bonus only done when they're mounted? US armored rifle platoons had a 60mm mortar track integrated at the platoon level and 81mm mortar tracks at the regimental level- they had plenty of support fires, too. If you gave them a bonus when they're sitting out in the wind as a halftrack, cool, but it's a bonus that's massively improved when the infantry is dismounted. It's bizarre.

[gunnergoz]

Germans too had 81mm mortar tracks to go with the other support vehicles of the halftrack-borne panzer grenadier forces. Mortar tracks cannot fire on the move, of course, be they German or American. The differences come with all the other vehicles that can fire on the move, or at least from a quick halt. Germans were aggressive in their use of them, incorporating them in assaults. OTOH American armored infantry had support SPG's in the armored infantry battalion, but they were used for indirect fire, not assault fire. I think the designers knew what they were doing: abstracting mobile warfare doctrine, which can only be done to a certain extent in a game like this, which is not a simulation. They wanted the Germans to benefit from the overall effects of their doctrine, and not the other factions which had no such doctrine. Again, that's my opinion about why this is the case. Maybe at some point they'll come out and explain why they did it this way and not some other way and I'll be proven wrong.