PDA

View Full Version : Combination of vehicles and various vehicles' purposes


Dagobahn Eagle
05-16-2004, 03:53 PM
For example, on Hoth there are AT-ATs (heavy assault/spearhead), AT-STs (anti-infantry, support), and snowtroopers (light assault units, support for walkers) on one side and speeders (close air support), turrets (perimeter defense and surpression), and entrenched soldiers (perimeter defenses, anti-infantry) on the other side. The Imperials had units that could hit both airborne units and both light and heavy ground targets with ease, making for an army of combined arms. I doubt that probots were actually part of the fighting force on Hoth.

What are your ideas for different vehicle combinations in different battles?

I'd like to see speeders in a different role and environment, for example swampspeeders with green camouflage in a swampy environment (sort of like Dagobah), and a lot of infantry on both sides. Add limited armour support (AT-PTs and AT-STs, for example) and you have an interesting game of stealth and small-arms combat that I think would make for a nice Invasion map. Since speeders are exceptionally poor fighters, the Empire couldn't use TIE Fighters as this'd make the speeders totally useless. The slowest fighter the Imperial Navy uses commonly is the M-1 Assault Gunboat, which is much faster than the speeder. So I suppose AT-STs and AT-PTs would be what the Imperials had for air defense. Alternatively, the Rebels could have Z-95 Headhunters and the Imperials a smaller number of TIE Fighters. The Headhunters are (relatively) slow, armed with two cannons and missiles, and lacks hyperspace engines. As such, it's a fighter seeing less and less use in the Rebel military and stationed mainly at remote outposts and other bases which see less combat and/or faces challenges less serious than Imperial starfighters.

This leaves the rebels with troops (fighting other infantry and walkers) and air units (scouts, strafing), and the Empire with troops (light assault) and armoured units (support, anti-air). Both sides benefit from the foliage and dense trees of the swamp. If the Rebels have Z-95s and the Empire TIEs, it makes for more fighting in the air and leaves the ground units a bit safer since both side's air units will be busy fighting each others for air superiority.

--Eagle

tFighterPilot
05-16-2004, 03:58 PM
errr.... no? :confused:

Eagle Warrior
05-16-2004, 09:31 PM
thjey will all serve their purpose. thats all i got to say for thsi:)

tFighterPilot
05-17-2004, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Eagle Warrior
thjey will all serve their purpose. thats all i got to say for thsi:) Quotded forr emmhpsasis

Eagle Warrior
05-17-2004, 09:59 PM
aaaaaaaaaaa:)

lukeiamyourdad
05-18-2004, 10:46 PM
I think that no matter what happens, infantry should always be close to vehicles to protect them from being overwhelmed by enemy anti-armor units.

That's the thing in 1942. They did well to include weak spots on the tanks so that it needs to be covered by some infantry or some anti-tank soldier will sneak around it and blow it up.

It's pretty hard to play as armor support though. I once did it in 1942, actually I once coordinated it. I was standing behind and ordering units around with the help of my binoculars.
It turned out to be very difficult for the engineers and medics covering the tanks. They always get hit by enemy lost tank shells. Lost lots of good men...in the end, the combination proved succesful since we avoided ambushes by lone enemy anti-tank soldiers trying to score a quick kill. They came up and were surrounded by medics and engineers pointing their guns at them.

All of that just too say that infantry should help vehicles...

Eagle Warrior
05-19-2004, 07:30 AM
i think you should just ride the veichles or if you dont want to use them at all hide or if can destroy them so the other teams can use them. (who would not want to use a vechial

Mountainforest
05-19-2004, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Eagle Warrior
i think you should just ride the veichles or if you dont want to use them at all hide or if can destroy them so the other teams can use them. (who would not want to use a vechial

after decrypting your post I came to the conclusion you JUST want to use vehicles if you like to, and that you will destroy them otherwise.

*hoping I will never play in the same team as eaglewarrior*

That's insane, ever tought your teammates would use the vehicle for a well organized atack?

tFighterPilot
05-19-2004, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by jasperw
after decrypting your post I came to the conclusion you JUST want to use vehicles if you like to, and that you will destroy them otherwise.

*hoping I will never play in the same team as eaglewarrior*

That's insane, ever tought your teammates would use the vehicle for a well organized atack? He was talking about destroying the OTHER team's vehicles

Eagle Warrior
05-19-2004, 03:15 PM
ty:D some people *rolling eyes* jk:D anyway ye destryo the other teams vehcile wait:( cant oyu use them. i mean there are team veichles. andyway i was sayin that if oyu did NOT want to USE A VECHILE and knowbody on your team does then YOU DESTROY IT SO THE OTHER TEAM CANT USE IT!!:rolleyes: