The Importance of Infantry.

[Alex6714]

Originally Posted by Tophatter94

And niether is 'this war.'

In modern infantry doctrine, there are tactics to take out or at least bypass most types of enemy vehicles. Air Superiority isn't a must unless the enemy has the airspace above our troops. Air superiority is very VERY good thing to have though.

Well you can bypass them all you want, but who is really winning the war when your constantly surrounded by tanks and aircraft, and can´t do much.


But each part is equally important in its own role.

[CAS_117]

Originally Posted by Sir.Grossi

Infantry for the Win!

Infantry is the lowest common denominator!
Everything else is designed to either Support or Destroy Infantry.

Without infantry you have no need for anything else, you would just sit in
your bunker and fire intercontinental missiles at each other.

A rather basic tree

Infantry < APC/Light Armour < Tank < Aircraft < AA/Artillery < Big Bombs!

Infantry < APC/Light Armour < Tank < AA/Artillery < Aircraft < Big Bombs

*Fixed

[Wags]

Originally Posted by jbgeezer

Well, infantry is my favorite, but is it really used that much in modern combat?

Well no war has been won by using vehicles only. At least no dedicated infantry (Conventional Forces). Infantry is very deadly, even in areas that are not urban. With advances in technology, the modern infantry soldier can only get better, not be phased out by growing vehicle technologies. This is evident in weapons systems such as the Javalin Anti-tank system. Now the infantry can take out reinforced armor at the flick of a switch, and run off to shoot more armor.

Infantry also provides targets for modern aircraft to fire upon. In real-life, it can be very difficult to find targets from the air. But with the infantry, they can call in an exact area for an attack. Refer back to my first post, everything has been made to support infantry in one way or another. Everything that was made to support infantry can be destroyed by infantry as well.

[Wags]

Originally Posted by Alex6714

Well you can bypass them all you want, but who is really winning the war when your constantly surrounded by tanks and aircraft, and can´t do much.


But each part is equally important in its own role.

Did you not see the part that says infantry can take them out too
They don't have much to shoot if can keep bypassing them

I'm saying that infantry is why all these aircraft have been invented.

Your aircraft have nothing to do if there is no infantry to shoot at, right? You could shoot at tanks, but tanks were made to support infantry. You could shoot other aircraft, but those were made to destroy infantry.

Infantry is the basis of all warfare.

Aircraft alone cannot win a war.

[Kirra]

I would disagree. A good armor/APC squad is just as important if not more IMO.

[Acemantura]

In the Project Reality vision of Modern Warfare, I believe that both Infantry and Assets are equally important. However, I believe that more people should be pining to be in an Infantry squad. I dont enjoy it when there aren't enough infantry on the ground and I dont enjoy it when we have no APC or Armor support.

It seems when I am Infantry, which is all the time, I can never get any Asset support and when I am lucky enough to be supporting I never see any Infantry callin for support or Lazing. Ehh, maybe I'll get better luck next time.

Inf it Up people.

P.S. Can someone show me how to properly utilize the auto rifleman. I really want to learn how to supress with that gun and I never get to use it because I always squad lead.

[Alex6714]

Originally Posted by Tophatter94

Infantry is the basis of all warfare.

Aircraft alone cannot win a war.

Well thats not what I said, each plays a different role. Infantry can secure ground, set up camps, be an eye on the ground but really they aren´t doing the full on fighting, only after the vehicles have.

[Scot]

You can't win a war with infantry alone, you can't win a war with vehicles alone, each plays off of each other.

[amazing_retard]

Originally Posted by [SP-DEV]Scot

You can't win a war with infantry alone, you can't win a war with vehicles alone, each plays off of each other.

I'm assuming your talking about a CONVENTIONAL war, if so your right. Anyway you need a lot of INF support on PR. The problem is not that there are too many asset squads, its more the problem of people making useless squads. You don't need 2 choppers squads (or one full one for that matter), you don't need 3 tank squads, 2 of them locked at less than 6, and you don't need a million stupid sniper squads...
Also I'm sick of clans pubbing, and making a 4 or 5 man squad and locking.... The PR pubs aren't that bad....

[Scot]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Jaymz

hey, I get kicked out of the US in one week. I'm allowed to be as pessimistic as I want!

An irishman being pessimistic... well I never

Originally Posted by amazing_retard

I'm assuming your talking about a CONVENTIONAL war, if so your right. Anyway you need a lot of INF support on PR. The problem is not that there are too many asset squads, its more the problem of people making useless squads. You don't need 2 choppers squads (or one full one for that matter), you don't need 3 tank squads, 2 of them locked at less than 6, and you don't need a million stupid sniper squads...
Also I'm sick of clans pubbing, and making a 4 or 5 man squad and locking.... The PR pubs aren't that bad....

Insurgency aswell, I'm going out on a limb here(don't flame please) but I would say that the ISAF forces are more than likely winning at the mo in A'stan, and why? Partly because of superior technology, but a big part is the vehicles, even simple things like a GMG on a moving platform like a humvee or Landy is so effective and demoralising, let alone a 2000lb bomb.