Infantry or Armored, what do you prefer?

[[GER]mob232]

Hey guys =)
Do you prefere inf or armored,with which kind of division are you more succesfull and why?
I thought about if there is more sense in mastering one or being able to switch between both types.
So just for my curiosity, what's your opinion?
Please excuse my english, it's not my native language.

Greetings

 

[mitchverr]

Really I think it comes down to 2 things.

1. How much of a hardcore gamer you are
2. How competitive you are.

If you are on the high end of both of these, you will likely wish to master all, if not, I would say you would likely play all a bit but then find that single or 2 divisions that falls into your playstyle, which everyone has and always reverts to in games.

For example, I personally love light infantry/vehicles, and so I will fall into that gamestyle, so 6th Airborne suits me perfectly with the tetrarchs and recon vehicles, meanwhile I have tried guards armoured a bit because it has 1 of my favoured "light vehicles" the AEC(and is the only division with it), but sadly the division doesnt seem to suit me as of yet, as though on paper the cromwells are simular, that asthetic appeal isnt there to me.

But given that I tend to keep to 10v10 right now due to a lack of time to "git gud", my views of the game are rather, skewed towards that and how i play there, for example with 6AB i could pretty handedly end a game on the enemy side of the map still with about 5-6k kill 1800 death in points, guards I can "hold my own" in the middle with either even losses or suffer losses heavily, something like 5k losses for 1800 kills, but I hold my ground well enough, which in conquest is what you aim to do. Just need practice i guess.

So yeah, in the end, i preff the light infantry 6 AB myself as of right now.

 

[Yung Rommel]

Infantry is generally more viable in small games. Your unit roster is cheap, cost effective, and good at getting map control.

Armored units typically have much greater stats and potential to rapidly take map (envelope or move fast to quickly take territory) but are also much more expensive and require more micro to use.

 

[local-festival]

I'm playing mostly infantry because I find it more appealing from the aesthetics standpoint, which is always more important for me than actual power of the deck. Infantry combat is more dangerous, you have to micro troops, use smoke and move a lot across the fields. Although to be fair tank combat is more adrenaliney in SD because of no hit points mechanics.

 

[IS-2]

armored because mobility ^-^

 

[Rojan]

Infantry. Mainly because I am an Airborne fanboy. I love the 101st, the 6AB, and the 3. FJ to death.

 

[Max_Damage]

Infantry. Mainly because I am an Airborne fanboy. I love the 101st, the 6AB, and the 3. FJ to death.

But not Luftlande?

 

[Mister Maf]

I like the armored and mechanized infantry decks with armored support. I can't deal with the lack of medium and heavy vehicles the paratroopers have. Even if a given airborne deck is "good", it's no fun for me. 15th Scots, 12. SS, and 17. SS are all great.

 

[Rojan]

But not Luftlande?

That isn't an Airborne Division. It is an air transported infantry division. A bit of a nuance but there is a difference. It was under the command of the Wehrmacht.

 

[Tankhunter__]

But not Luftlande?

91. Luftlande was (supposed to be) an air-transported infantry division. The Fallschirmjaegers are not part of the division, but rather attached troops from 6th FJR who fought alongside the 91st at Carentan.

 

[Nebelwerfer 42]

I prefer infantry, I use the defensive/static divisions all the time (15th Scots, 2nd Infantry, 316 & 752 Infantry). Cheap, cost effective, defensive, lots of great arty and AA.

 

[Nalydix]

Depends on the map really.

I will definitely play an infantry deck over an armored in an hedgerow hell map for example.
However, if I happen to play on an open map like Cheux, then Armored will be my jam.

 

[CyberianK]

I prefer Infantry for Allies (such as Canadians/2nd/15th) but Armored for Axis.

Sure has to do with the light vehicles and big Cats but also with the weak Axis Inf (except Fallschirmjaeger). I really would want to play 716th more as I really like them but they are not quite on par.

 

[Tankhunter__]

I don't really like any of the Axis infantry divisions. I roll 12th SS as generic multirole, Windhund for open areas, 17th SS and/or 3rd FJ for urban/forests

Allies: 2e DB for open areas(Just like Windhund), 101st Airborne for urban/heavy forest, 3rd Armored or 3rd Canadians for hedegrow heavy.

 

[Deuzerre]

Infantry heavy with fire support and some fast stuff to break through occasionally.

Basically, the scots.

 

[Choatic Neutral]

Mechanized.

Canadian Tanks and Air and Infantry all at once!

 

[LKHERO]

Armored for me. Love the guards in theory but enjoying 12.ss a lot more.

 

[Panzerfaust556]

Definitely armored. Open terrain makes playing infantry decks difficult unless you've got good organic armor support.

 

[Vyllis]

I am more and more leaning toward armored:

. Winning some city fights with half track and rockets is not so difficult.
. No need to smoke everytime you want to cross a field.
. Fear of the mighty half track, no more.
. Armored self propelled artillery does not care too much about counter battery fire (Four 2 stars 25 pdr can't destroy quickly enough a lone sdkfz mortar before it run away...).

Unlike cities and open fields, only heavy bocage is annoying.