As the title asks, what would you consider the best unit in the game for ground invasions? I consider a "ground unit" Armored and Infantry (not including officers).
I just guessed
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.
Jemandanderes wrote:
If you can only choose one you would have to choose an infantry because you need to be able to capture ground. Since you cannot choose any artillery, you should probably choose lvl6+ mot inf and you can still protect yourself against air wit ASF(kinda). But this is not a good strat, which underlines that you need multiple unit types to be successful.
New
Opulon wrote:
Yes, ultimately, if we are playing such a game where your own tech tree gets 100% blocked once you searched an unit, infantry seems pretty obvious.Jemandanderes wrote:
If you can only choose one you would have to choose an infantry because you need to be able to capture ground. Since you cannot choose any artillery, you should probably choose lvl6+ mot inf and you can still protect yourself against air wit ASF(kinda). But this is not a good strat, which underlines that you need multiple unit types to be successful.
This said, i'm pretty sure some madmen would still chose mobile artillery, because "i have 10 starting infantries, i can win with that".
New
StopThereCowboy wrote:
Haven't played with mobile artillery because it just never caught my eye as something useful. Why is it considered bad? Is it just because there are better alternatives (for example, towed artillery)?Opulon wrote:
Yes, ultimately, if we are playing such a game where your own tech tree gets 100% blocked once you searched an unit, infantry seems pretty obvious.This said, i'm pretty sure some madmen would still chose mobile artillery, because "i have 10 starting infantries, i can win with that".Jemandanderes wrote:
If you can only choose one you would have to choose an infantry because you need to be able to capture ground. Since you cannot choose any artillery, you should probably choose lvl6+ mot inf and you can still protect yourself against air wit ASF(kinda). But this is not a good strat, which underlines that you need multiple unit types to be successful.
New
Teburu wrote:
its not bad it just doesnt not as stronk as MRL is but in return is a bit less expensive and costs "only" supply/components instead of supply/elecStopThereCowboy wrote:
Haven't played with mobile artillery because it just never caught my eye as something useful. Why is it considered bad? Is it just because there are better alternatives (for example, towed artillery)?Opulon wrote:
Yes, ultimately, if we are playing such a game where your own tech tree gets 100% blocked once you searched an unit, infantry seems pretty obvious.This said, i'm pretty sure some madmen would still chose mobile artillery, because "i have 10 starting infantries, i can win with that".Jemandanderes wrote:
If you can only choose one you would have to choose an infantry because you need to be able to capture ground. Since you cannot choose any artillery, you should probably choose lvl6+ mot inf and you can still protect yourself against air wit ASF(kinda). But this is not a good strat, which underlines that you need multiple unit types to be successful.
New
New
New
StopThereCowboy wrote:
I've wondered how useful something is for its cost. For example, weaker artillery that's cheaper vs more expensive artillery that's stronger. So in that case, would it be smart to possibly research cheaper artillery at the start of the game (per se mobile artillery) and in the later game (day 10-15) research more expensive tech? Or is it better to just go all out on day 7 if you can, even if you don't get a larger army size in the end?
New
New
New
crazystoner wrote:
Special Forces.
Nothing and i mean nothing will stand up to a 200 atk SF stack.
New
Sgniappo wrote:
I've struggled with the same puzzle. The issue i got stuck with is that in theory the principle works, practically if you shift in later game (and research more expensive tech) you a) lose functionality of the 'cheaper unit', b) you waste lots of research time / resources.StopThereCowboy wrote:
I've wondered how useful something is for its cost. For example, weaker artillery that's cheaper vs more expensive artillery that's stronger. So in that case, would it be smart to possibly research cheaper artillery at the start of the game (per se mobile artillery) and in the later game (day 10-15) research more expensive tech? Or is it better to just go all out on day 7 if you can, even if you don't get a larger army size in the end?
I'll take a simple example: start cheap(er) TA in early game, evolve to MRL later.
Well, TA really comes useful when it can air assault, which is day 15 and after 5 research steps. So, i think it'll be unwise to stop research before that.
But then, is it wise at that point to switch to MRL, which you should have started researching from earlier on, and have them fly on day 17?
dunno. i haven't really found an answer to the 'start cheap, evolve later' within the same unit category (artillery, artillery) so far. I think my answer is 'no'. You evolve with different unit groups (like, TA early, then RGs, or ships, or... later)
New
MicahWill wrote:
Also, what spec ops has a 200 attack rating? Do you have 15 maxed out spec ops stacked together? lol
The post was edited 8 times, last by crazystoner ().
New
2 Guests