Infantry and Perfect Defense

The tanks in this game are listed as a "powerful offensive unit". They are considered the most powerful offensive unit in Afterwind. However, I don't believe this is true: infantrymen are actually superior to tanks.
Now, you may see this as ridiculous. Infantry have 5/6 stats, while tanks are 7/5. This puts tanks at an advantage, since they can defend well against the low attack of infantry, while breaking their defense, right?
Yes, but you fail to take into account money. Infantry have a low cost of 60 (note this is even before you purchase upgrades that drop cost even more), while tanks normally cost 140. This is more than 2 infantry to a single tank. This is already a problem as it is- if you have 100 tanks, your opponent would have around 233 infantry for the same cost.

How does Perfect Defense play in? Well, Perfect Defense lowers the cost of infantry even further to 50 (or 40), and raises their defense. This makes them a 5/7 unit. This essentially means infantry are on an even playing field with tanks outside of cities. Inside of cities, things get even worse. Infantry become 5/8, which basically means they can fight off battleships as well as Tank General-boosted tanks, which are 8/5. Perfect Defense players can always beat Tank Generals at the game start, since they can purchase more than 2 infantry to each tank. However, the -10 drop for infantry is much more significant than it is for tanks. If you buy 10 tanks, you have saved only 100 money, and have used up 1300 with TG on.

However, with PD, you still save 100 when buying 10 units, but only pay 500. And since you can buy far more infantry than tanks, the money saved stacks up very quickly. PD should nullify TG's offensive advantage, not completely counter it.

Considering infantry already rout the tank threat before you consider SP Upgrades, they make things even worse. Since tanks have no SP Upgrades, infantry become luckier and faster moving than tanks, as well as cheaper. They drop to 40 with PD on- this is only 10 more than the standard militia cost. Militia are 3/5 units, yet infantry, which are 5/7 with PD, are only 10 dollars more expensive than a 3/5 unit with basically no movement radius.

I simply propose a stat change to fix this issue. Infantry price should be increased to 80 normally, and lowered to 75 with perfect defense on. The -10 expendable infantry upgrade should be lowered to -5, making infantry 70 at lowest. This would alleviate the issue of underpriced infantry. I don't think fast infantry is too serious of a problem by itself, but when combined with the major issues it does not help. Finally, infantry stats should be changed to 5/5 normally. They should get a +2 bonus to their defense on cities. PD infantry would get a +3 defense while on cities. I think infantry should fulfill more of a city defender role, while militia should be more of a cheap defense unit. Note that while standard infantry def on cities increases by 1, to 5/7, PD infantry are still at 5/8.

I am also aware that this holds true more or less in certain areas. For example, Asia has a lot of cities that produce a lot of units. This means easy unit production, where infantry will easily win. Africa is in the same boat, except country income is so low it is difficult to make tank stacks at all there. Of all the regions, Europe is the only one that has a high income value, but low unit count. It is much easier for a TG to win there than anywhere else, unless they are the only one to start in Asia.

I hope my suggestions will be taken seriously and possibly implemented into the game at some point.

You want to tell us that Infantry is overpowered? I don't think so. And it certainly doesn't need any nerfing. Thank you for taking your time to write this, though.

I have played a few games with a player who I think does try and use this strategy. The problem is that its very slow for you to expand and grow doing what you describe.

Written by King Cow, 04.02.2011 at 03:15

I have played a few games with a player who I think does try and use this strategy. The problem is that its very slow for you to expand and grow doing what you describe.

This, while you might get more units they will be slow to capture and move, also, I would like to point out that the scenario you are describing is 1v1 with both parties spending the same amount of money, those sitatuions tend never to happen.

Written by Fgw_wolf, 04.02.2011 at 12:04

Written by King Cow, 04.02.2011 at 03:15

I have played a few games with a player who I think does try and use this strategy. The problem is that its very slow for you to expand and grow doing what you describe.

This, while you might get more units they will be slow to capture and move, also, I would like to point out that the scenario you are describing is 1v1 with both parties spending the same amount of money, those sitatuions tend never to happen.

Slow to move?
I don't think so.
Tanks, at maximum, have a movement range of 7. Infantry can get a movement range of 8, with fast infantry and PD on.
Now, my theory with slow conquering is that although infantry will die more, they can be replaced more easily than tanks can, due to their very low monetary cost. If 28 infantry units take a capital with 7 militia and 7 infantry are lost, this is a loss of about 280 money. If 14 tanks take a capital with 7 miltia and 3 are lost, this is a loss of 390 money.
I believe the only real reason infantry don't completely obliterate tanks is due to reinforcements, but in some areas, like the far East, this is kind of a moot point, since almost every city has 7 reinforcements.

(Note that I am aware infantry/PD will not be nerfed)