Could use some infantry defensive tips

[Stoppelhopser]

Not sure if I use infantry on the defensive correctly. Would love to hear some ideas.

Case in point: Single Mission Mortain (US)

I place my men into the built up areas and set them to "hold". In a later wave german infantry attacks and throws grenades at my men. My men do exactly nothing apart from the occasional shot. By the time I have chosen grenades on single men they get showered from the emey and die. Remember, meanwhile the tank battle rages on with me unable to attend as I vainly baby sit...

Another example:

My infantry prone in line gets charged by a enemy squad. This surely should end up lopsided as the advancing enemy shortly kneel down, shoot, and then go on. A lying squad which sees them coming should make mince meat of them with few if any losses. Nevertheless my squad (any nation) of prone men often looses about 4-5 from about 10 when 10-15 enemy are attacking.

I don't know if I am a victim of delusions but should not a lying down squad (small target, stable shooting position) with even a lmg with free vision mow down their enemy, especially coming over a ridge with minimal or zero own losses?

[SlapHappy]

I think the problem occurs because the advantage of stationary infantry accuracy vs. moving troops accuracy of fire is not delineated enough - perhaps this is purposeful for game balance.

I think the limited number of troops available in-game and the absence of smoke make the attacker's job pretty hard given realistic circumstances. Accuracy of fire seems more linked to troop quality and weapon types than movement. That is my observation, looking at the numbers used.

[SlapHappy]

One of my gripes plays into a little of what you are saying here: The survivability of HMG teams, which is ridiculously low in this game.

I think this was one of the strengths of the Close Combat system. In an infantry on infantry struggle the well-sited MG-42 HMG was king of the map....and rightfully so.....

[Stoppelhopser]

Accuracy of fire seems more linked to troop quality and weapon types than movement. That is my observation, looking at the numbers used.

That makes sense as to the results. I have however just made a little experiment and found that "defend" makes my troops a little more eager to fight back on defensive (I shamefully never thought about that button before and only placed them and told to hold).

I think this was one of the strengths of the Close Combat system. In an infantry on infantry struggle the well-sited MG-42 HMG was king of the map....and rightfully so.....

Yes, while graphically old and with its own quirks I remember that a well placed MG in CC decided an outcome and could hold off a platoon. Came out more to what one reads in the books.

[R33GZ]

I never played Close Combat... but I can certainly remember the enormous advantage a well placed MG gave you in CM... MG's positioned with a height advantage were/are deadly... a far cry to having MG teams wiped out in ToW cause they are sitting out in an open meadow with no cover.

[Sneaksie]

They die more quickly than in CC because of lack of cover. With grass providing concealment and special HMG nests which are planned, problem should be gone.

[SlapHappy]

Bump.

Sneaksie, are the HMG nests something we will see in the add-on or are there new statics in the Uber-Patch I haven't found yet?

Also: Is this a bug? Anytime HMG crews receive fire that is anywhere in their proximity, they ABANDON the gun and go scrambling around like decapitated chickens. Very annoying! One of these days I would love to be able to play with these units and not feel like it is a complete waste of time.

[R33GZ]

Ive found that the russian MG crews seem to last a bit longer... probably because they have a frontal shield?

Obviously these shields are only useful against small arms fire, but it does seeem to help.