Could it have a sling for transporting cargo maybe?
Might just be gettin the m18 treatment lol
Well Gaijin also thinks that the Mi-8, Mi-4, light utility, and scout helicopters are all attack helicopters. An AH-6 and an Mi-8 are NOT the same as an Apache just because they have weapons. Totally different roles even though the other roles aren’t utilized in the gameplay.
And how the Shar 1s are classed as strike aircraft even though it was designed as a fighter Harrier
I think it was only used as a fighter because it was the only fixed wing aircraft the British task force had when they were deployed to the Falkland Islands against the Argentinians.
It was still pretty much an attack aircraft, but they just stuck some AA missiles on them and used them for fleet defense and combat air patrol. It would be like the US calling the A-4 a fighter because its only armament is AIM-9Bs.
(That would be a really cool co-op mission btw)
True but it has Strike in the name for that reason but as primarily as a fighter
I like this idea better than the way gaijin is currently trying to implement it. From what I have seen, Gaijin’s current infantry tests just look like Enlisted with modern combined arms. Ethantokes’ idea to me makes more sense as far as keeping the game largely familiar to its original concept, though I do feel the rts gameplay would be a bit much. I did enjoy the way gaijin implemented infantry for the first time in the WW1 event and that concept could be improved upon with ethan’s idea of apcs and ifvs being able to drop infantry on the battlefield, but instead simplify the rts with simple mechanics such as- 1)infantry are always making their way to defend the nearest friendly held point 2) if there is no friendly held point, they move within 100 meters or so of a point and hold until it is captured 3) enemy tanks within 200-300 meter sightlines of the infantry are scouted as long as a member of the infantry team is alive 4) if a tank gets within 100 meters of the infantry they engage with direct fire anti-tank weapons (panzerfaust, bazooka, rpg, m72 law, at4) 5) if the infantry are moving and an enemy tank is spotted by them in the area they will seek cover and concealment or hold position until the enemy tank moves on, is destroyed, or the team is wiped out 6) we now have scout drones, so maybe under modifications you can have either the dismount team or the drone selected, not both
Having infantry implemented in this way I think will keep the mechanic simple enough to code and only slightly change gameplay, keeping the game familiar. it will also give more usefulness to auto cannon he shells as well as small caliber mounted weapons on vehicles and aircraft.
Overall, this to me would be a fun way to implement infantry while keeping gameplay relatively unchanged or feel like i am playing an entirely different game altogether with gaijin’s current idea of infantry gameplay
1 Like
You know, with how scout drones play in GRB, I could honestly see something like this being totally fine.
Personally though, I think this would be best suited for a new combined arms mode with far larger maps and more complex objectives. I feel like pretty much all aspects of War Thunder stand to gain a ton from Gaijin moving in that direction. Naval is a great example. It’s a real shame that we can’t use destroyers, cruisers, PT boats and battleships in combined battles like they were in real life, but I absolutely believe that balance can be found in the game, and the same goes for IFVs and Helis (both of which are feeling a little lacking in purpose to me rn).
Hell, I think it could even be cool if we could make multiple trips from the airfield in a heli to drop off multiple squads to control, and then head back to change load-outs, or for tanks, if you could configure a Merkava to carry infantry, drop them off to capture a point, and then wait a minute on the point converting the vehicle back so that you can carry more rounds again, that could be really interesting. But these are some of the more extreme examples I can think of so don’t take my ramblings on that part seriously lol
At the end of the day, I 100% agree with your sentiment about people on here just being afraid of change. I think this is probably the best direction for the game in the coming years, and I don’t see it replacing what we already have, but it would add sooo much more nuance to the game, and so much more value to the many unique vehicles we already have in the game. I’m sure many of them would love it if it was implemented well, and I don’t see the point in throwing up your arms to whine about how “oh it’s Gaijin, why even bother? You already know they’ll screw it up”. Pretty pathetic mindset if you ask me.
1 Like
I actually think this is a great idea overall, and I completely agree that infantry should eventually become part of War Thunder. IFVs, APCs, and transport helicopters have never really fulfilled their intended role in the game, and adding infantry would finally give them a unique purpose.
But, I don’t think RTS-style control is good for War Thunder.
Selecting individual soldiers, splitting squads into fire teams, managing medics, engineers, radio operators, laying mines, reviving soldiers, and occupying buildings would make the game far more complex than it needs to be. War Thunder has always been a vehicle combat game, and I think it should remain focused on vehicles rather than squad micromanagement.
I think infantry should support vehicle gameplay instead of becoming a second game inside War Thunder.
There are two approaches that I believe would fit the game much better.
The first is a simple implementation. IFVs and APCs could transport infantry and deploy them onto a friendly captured objective. Instead of simulating every soldier, the infantry would simply reinforce the capture point by increasing the time required for the enemy to capture it. This would immediately give IFVs and APCs a meaningful support role while remaining relatively simple to implement.
The second is a more advanced implementation. Gaijin has already demonstrated AI infantry during the World War I April Fools’ event. A similar system could be used here. After deployment, infantry would automatically defend the capture point, engaging nearby enemies with rifles, machine guns, grenades, or RPGs depending on the nation and Battle Rating. Higher-tier infantry equipped with anti-tank weapons would also increase the importance of APS and ERA. Players who eliminate defending infantry could receive a small amount of Silver Lions, Research Points, and score, making it worthwhile to clear fortified objectives. A capture point could only be captured once all defending infantry had been eliminated.
Such a mechanic would also finally justify moving many IFVs into their proper vehicle class instead of leaving them in the tank destroyer or SPAA branches simply because of their armament. Vehicles like the AMX-10P, Pbv 501, Pbv 302 BILL, M113, ZSL92, and many others would finally have a gameplay role that reflects their real-life purpose. It would also improve the gameplay of vehicles such as the M3A3 Bradley, Luchs A2, and Pbv 501, which currently rely almost entirely on scouting and ATGMs.
The same mechanic could naturally be expanded to transport helicopters. Since helicopters can already capture objectives in War Thunder, helicopters such as the Mi-4, UH-1, Black Hawk, Little Bird, Mi-8, and Mi-24 could deploy infantry directly onto a captured point or nearby, allowing them to reinforce or defend the objective instead of capturing it themselves. This would create a meaningful transport role for helicopters that has always been missing.
Overall, I believe infantry should exist to enhance vehicle gameplay rather than replace it. Keeping infantry AI-controlled would preserve War Thunder’s identity while finally allowing IFVs, APCs, and transport helicopters to perform the roles they were actually designed for in real life. It would add a new tactical layer to Ground Battles without turning War Thunder into an RTS or infantry simulator.
(I accidentally deleted this message so sended it again :D)
While I dislike the idea of players controlling the squads, I do like the idea of the WWI event ai returning to make maps feel more alive. If matching with the era of weaponry for the match, I feel that having ai infantry work in tandem with APCs would be a fresh thing, especially if it’s also compatible with the suggestion thread and missions I’m working on here:
Combined Arms Enduring Confrontation
2 Likes
The last few replies are spot on. I think the missing link in war thunder is the fact that there is no infantry to support despite the vast majority of the vehicles, aircraft, and weapons being designed to support infantry whether directly or indirectly.
1 Like