Motorized infantry vs Mechanized Infantry... Opinions ?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Motorized infantry vs Mechanized Infantry... Opinions ?

      Hey Guys jut wanted to know your personal opinion on Motorized (lets call them moto) vs Mechanized (mech) infantry..

      Comparing them stats wise and resource wise... what do you prefer ?

      Mech are stronger and have more hitpoints but consume more resources, im in the process of deciding what would be the best mix with vehicles also

      What is the best combination of vehicle + inf in your opinion ?

      Let me know :D
      Alphh
      Community Manager
      Conflict Of Nations | Dorado Games
    • It depends on some things.
      1. Doctrin: European mech infantry is faster and stronger against infantry than other mech infantry. If I have western doctrin I use for ground attacks mostly combinations with Marines(faster and stronger than other Marines).
      2. Terrain: mechanized infatry is very strong in plains, deserts and tundras; moto is good in mountains and jungle
      3. Enemy units: mechs are very good against helicopters(tier 1-3=3,4,5) and tanks; motos good against aircrafts ( level 3=2,3; level 5= 3)
      4. Tactic: If you want attack with the motos and mechs or defense. motos are better in defense and very good in city defense . But the european doctrin is also very good against insurgents.

      I use the motos mostly as defense unit in city after conquer and in the most times I use only the start units and I produce no new motos.

      The combinations I used:
      1. MBT+mechs+CRV and/or AA-tanks
      2. motos+ CRV ( to protect cities) or in mountains (if I have no airmobile inf.)
      3. motos+amphibious vehicle (in jungle)
      „Morgen, ihr Luschen!“ --- „Morgen, Chef!“ (Ausbilder Schmidt alias Holger Müller bei der Arbeit)
    • I don't really use either of them. Actually I have never once researched mechs. I prefer airmobiles (ams). And the only time I ever use motos is at the start of the game. Except when Im taking over Russia because most of it is out of range of ams and motos are quicker in the long run for that. If I need to attack someone across an ocean I use marines to establish a base then ship in ams to finish the job.
    • I call Motorised "Basic infantry". It's actually very rare i research/use them because there are so many better units everywhere and for other roles. Airborn, notably.

      The only time i recall producing Motorised infantry was when i was attacked on several fronts by a anti-me alliance, and i produced them because i feared some airborn would manage to go through.

      I usually prefer to use units with a offensive focus in defense too, because it's easy to transform a defensive fight into an offensive one. You just lose the entrenchement +25% bonus, but it's usually countered by terrain modifiers.

      The best example would be marine infantry : entrenchement + defensive bonus. 25% off + 25% def in cities. But if i transform this into an attack, suddenly, it becomes a +50% in attack, considering the difference between def and attack is 3 to 6.4 (level 1).

      Many of us prefer to kill ennemy units quickly.

      Didn't use mechanized infantry, so, i can't say, sorry. But i think i understand where you are going ---> well, for now it's difficult in terms of economy to mass-produce. We are forced by the stream of resources to make decisions, and usually, we decide to focus on units with capacities to expand, and pray that we won't need the units that would "secure us".

      It is impossible to prove me i should make more motorised infantries, because they are cheap in absolute, not cheap relatively. They die easily, they do not pack heavy firepower, they are not that mobile, they don't have anything interesting in terms of tactical assets, and we are trying our best to avoid unnecessary upkeep.

      In comparison, Mechanized infantry feels the real infantry, that one can use for this role, because it's a good "basic soft unit". And even if i'm able to calculate the differences of cost/upkeep, it just does feel like they cost pretty much the same.

      So, in final, my advice would be :

      Use none of them, use airborn instead, except in large provinces countries like Russia. Better/stronger/specialised, and you won't feel too much the -1/h of fuel upkeep
      But if you are forced to choose between mech and motorised, go for the mech. You basically have the choice between silver for 50 $ and gold for 55 $

      Maybe the problem isn't motorised vs mechanized, but motorised. Maybe this unit should be the one very weak-unit our countries produce when we do not have the other more precious resources, because it doesn't cost anything or nearly, and do provides some basic protection to cities or even provinces.


      Post Scriptum : I need to add, though, that in PvP, i saw players use a bit more infantries now that missiles are not that great for killing them. However, psychologically, it's hard to understand the concept that missiles are not "mega cost effective" against them. People see missiles blow stuff, people think it's good enough.

      Damn, i needed to explain that one SHOULDN'T send a nuke cruiser missile on a alone infantry, because it was like losing a high-value unit against a low-value unit. Didn't hear me.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • It's intended. CM's are efficient to kill armored targets. If you want to deal big amount of damage to soft targets, go chemical ^^.

      You wouldn't want a game where every single tactical situation is answered by "send a CM"
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Well from a US Army background inf is the backbone.

      96 day game I used a lot of them and put them in their own homogeneous units after researching mech. Initially they were with my tanks div and then replaced by mechs. 3 MBT + 2 Mech. Moto was 5 bn. I have not ran recon vehicles because UAVs came about. DIVAD has been relegated to being their own separate units. Both inf were maxed out by game end and IDs were the prime for capturing cities. I had 5 div of AM and 2 div of Marines. Both 5 bn each. I had two AM div that were pulled back to get replacements. I peaked at 305 units.

      46 day game due to more jungle I did not build any mech. I only had 3 tanks which really never left the homeland. Moto and AM. Moto in the same fashion as above. AM I had 5 div in the WH and then moved to take out South Africa and moved 3 of them to Angola and built an Angolan AM div. I had 3 Marine div as well but they were 3 bn each. I had half of what I had previous game.

      I am heavy on air support. I think it is crucial. Helo wings plus Strike wings supporting inf along with bomber wings. We even have a kitchen sink launcher. I do not lose too many inf.

      This old 137 day game I do not think I am going to be able to pull off an upset as the main player seems to be awake now. I just need to take Vietnam and Japan and I could pull this out from under him. I am now ranked 3. This is Indonesia. The AI wrecked the economy but have bought the unit count from over 300 down to 105 so now we are building surpluses in everything. I could had probably used mechs in Australia but I stuck with moto. It was a brutal conflict. I am building Marines at the moment and some have taken islands and have ended two wars for me. My AM has been stranded due to lack of resources for airbases so they shut down but the AI built enough for 3 div. All inf are maxed.

      I do not really pay attention to stats so much as to what resources I am using up. I use the map with the colored terrain because it makes more sense to me and can quick glance where I want to send units to maximize their efficiency. Air Cav is taking the brunt of the casualties as they are going everywhere. We go where the OpFor is and we destroy them.

      Next game I am thinking of two armored/tank div combos. 1 Tank + 3 Mech + 1 CRV and 3 Mech + 1 CRV + 1 AA. It all depends on what country I get. I am thinking maybe South Africa next.
      Ain't Nothing But A Thing!
    • I've never used mechanized infantry.

      My CONOPS is more about the use of airmobile antitank divisions (generally 2x airmobile infantry + 1x airmobile tank destroyer) to dodge major unit formations and take territory while employing frequent air support, airmobile towed artillery, and long-range rocket launchers to engage and destroy enemy units of substance. Where possible, I use motorized infantry to hold cities until morale increases while the airmobile formations take more territory.

      Because of my tendency to employ them in groups, their speed, and their ability to conduct multiple sorties per hour (if my airfields are close enough to the enemy) I look at strike fighters as better damage dealers and more mobile assets than tanks. If I don't use tanks, why do I need to use mechanized infantry?

      Furthermore, the escort unit for strike fighters, air superiority fighters, serve a useful recce purpose because of their speed, large viewing area, and radar range. Ground units like mechanized infantry just can't match this.
      "The enemy cannot push a button, if you disable his hand."
      Sergeant Zim, Terran Federation