That’s why tanks and infantry support each other. It’s the basic principle behind Combined Arms - each of the unit classes has a strength that they use to fill in for the weaknesses of the others. Tanks move (fairly) fast, and have high firepower, but are not very nimble in close quarters, have difficulty finding cover, and are vulnerable to swarming by infantry (who can cut treads, stick on sticky grenades, throw molotovs, attempt to break in, etc.). Infantry alone are nimble and can seek cover virtually anywhere, but they are slow moving and have limited firepower (e.g. rifles, grenades, light machine guns, etc.).
@Bear , the big ones invading the small ones as I mentioned
Anyway, I thought about making a new topic for this question, but its too similar to this, so I’ll just put it here.
Imagine this, around 100-200 Abrams, Leopard 2 or T-90 tanks and no more than 10.000 soldiers on one side and on the other a country like Albania, Bosnia or most African countries (relatively small, with no atgm’s newer than the Malyutka (at-3 sagger) that are incapable of penetrating any of the mentioned tanks) , would the Abrams/Leopard’s 2/T-90’s manage to conquer the entire country with no problems, since those countries can’t throw any good atgm’s at them or can they be destroyed for example with soviet 122 or 152mm howitzers by using them like guns? (most use HE shell’s, so not by penetration, but by somehow incapacitating the tank) , IED’s don’t count.
How many of you have seen a tank upclose? I have. Its terrifying. It would take lots of training for infantry not to run.