A Few Questions

[RVPERTVS]

Originally Posted by runequester

Takes a whole different type of tactics

Like taking care of ATGMs first and don´t rely on smoke?

[Suhiir]

In general use either an expendable or hard to hit or very "tough" unit to draw fire by moving it in small increments across an area in line-of-sight/line-of-fire of the enemy, while your other units are in overwatch positions to see what fired at it...preferably where only a small portion of your opponent can get in a shot.
The supress or kill what exposes itself.
Rinse.
Repete as necessary.
Eventually you win.

[c_of_red]

That and the speed. An elephant with all his war kit on might hit 10KPH tops. Compare that to a MBT moving at 30+. With a fast MBT, deception tactics are possible. You also have to consider that a modern MBT can cross the biggest map in 3 or 4 turns if there is a road going that way and nothing to slow them down. If you don't watch your flanks, in 2 or 3 turns your opponent can be sitting behind you, laughing. Not a good position to find ones self in .

[c_of_red]

Suhiir, the Germans did that a lot in WW2. They normally used an obsolete light tank with only a driver aboard. I presume the driver has upset the Hauptmann somehow. They called it "trailing the Skirt" or something like that. Lifting the Skirt maybe. One of those German phrases that doesn't translate exactly. Anyway, it only worked against FNG's The vets knew better then to fall for it.
Same with SP. Rookies fall for that, vets set up to kill your overwatchers first. Remember, if they are in range, so are you.

[hoplitis]

Originally Posted by c_of_red

...
Remember, if they are in range, so are you.

Infantry axiom not valid anymore I'm afraid. US vs Iraq for example. Except if you imply technological "parity" between the opposing forces.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by hoplitis

Infantry axiom not valid anymore I'm afraid. US vs Iraq for example. Except if you imply technological "parity" between the opposing forces.

Partially true.
We found out early in Gulf I the AK's the Iraqi 3rd rate units had were Iran-Iraq war junk with worn out barrels.
Given the standard arabic "stick weapon over your head-spray 'n pray" infantry tactics many of our guys actually got into standard fixed course rifle range positions, slings and all, at around 400m and practiced the USMC "One Shot - One Kill" doctrine. After a few minutes of this the Iraqi's got th point and surrendered.

And everyone knows what happened when Mr. T-72 met Mr. M1A1.

So yes, while in general the old axiom is true...in some situations it ain't.

[Imp]

Given the standard arabic "stick weapon over your head-spray 'n pray" infantry tactics

You have got to love it, human nature says at some point they are going to stick there head up to see if hit anything so the other guy is just siting there with his weapon trained on the spot, goodnight.

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Given the standard arabic "stick weapon over your head-spray 'n pray" infantry tactics

Where did they get that idea? I see this all the time in Iraqi insurgent video's.

[hoplitis]

C'mon guys (and gals),
we do it all the time, it's called Z-firing.
It's Z-firing with a twist...

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by hoplitis

C'mon guys (and gals),
we do it all the time, it's called Z-firing.
It's Z-firing with a twist...

I don't do that. I think it's a waste of ammo.
I'd rather put the rounds directly on the target, better chance of removing a cyber soldier that way.