It was not called the Chinese wave attack for nothing in Korea. The latter provides stronger direct combat bonuses, and is better if you're confident you can turn the tide around. By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. Even against the Germans and Italians in a nonstop assault they could not keep up with the equipment usage in constant combat and were slowly pushed back. Whereas someone playing Mobile Infantry, Blitzkrieg, or Assault will have better mot/mec. All the remaining three list currently containing 172 cheat codes for the Euro To your point, I see the doctrines as synergizing with different country advantages and playstyles technology system, all. Message from the service Telemetrio. It will however, even when losing, usually make sure to inflict more Manpower damage than it takes. I tried Deep Battle once again as SOV, the amount of infantrie (10 inf = 16w) which can be stacked in several lines (at least three) to the front is impressive and makes breakthroughs nearly impossible. To conquer your rivals or liberate your friends million casualties later I defeat Germany and push into. 378X3 ) that and NKVD though. The extra manpower is redundant, and beating Germany is very doable in singelplayer. But if you want to invade the United States, roll over Europa, or have some other crazy ideas, while also being confident that you can handle Africa, China or whatever, go ahead and switch to something you are more comfortable with. * Peace Conferences I swear to god this is broken. (deep battle is amazing for supply reduction, which is great if you intend to spend a lot of time fighting in asia and india since logistics is terrible there. This totally makes sense. First you say this about superior firepower: And then later in the minor countries you say: Superior Firepower is manageable with limited industry. 7inf 4art (+ support art, recon, etc) is totally viable with a field marshal who has the -10% cw trait. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. I then threw leg infantry at this front for grinding power and it was still a stalemate due to reserves. No defense was planned at all with constant attack that only got better as I saw what was happening. THE MASS CHARGE TACTIC CHANGED EVERYTHING. Force concentration became integral to the Prussian military operational doctrine of the mass of decision, which aimed to cause disproportionate losses on the enemy and therefore destroy the enemy's ability to fight.. From an empirical examination of past battles, the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz (17801831) concluded: Your ability to lead your nation is your supreme weapon, the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV lets you take command of any nation in World War II; the most engaging conflict in world history. Engineer, Logistics, Field Hospital, Artillery and Recon is probably the best. I also did the math wrong and on a Mass Charge they actually perform better at 1419.(473x3). Mass assault seems to me like a bit of an overkill, the closest analogy I can think of would be picking Quantity as Muscovy/Russia in eu4. Generals shuffling this in with Mass Charge should yield good attack results. It has a sweet -25% Org loss when moving, and -20% supply consumption, making advancing into low-supply areas much more comfortable. (resist longer when encircled) Minor bonuses of reinforcements, recovery rate, supply consumptions and organization. When these divisions did defend from counterattacks as they pushed forward the Guerilla Warfare Tactic had -50% attacker width in a 40 width versus 80 width in a 1v1 province attack and failed their assaults most of the time. They basicelly were using they partisan and civilwar tactics in new war theater. Second run less losses by 4 million vs Japan instead of a built up China. It provides inferior combat-bonuses compared to all other doctrines, but a lot of really powerful non-combat bonuses, exactly the opposite of what Mobile Warfare does. Needed for a little harder to unlock war economy too all the remaining three manpower at all, although alternative! Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. * Peace Conferences I swear to god this is broken. I thought of using tanks,but noticed they were not needed and consumed more IC that could be put into Air Production for Strategic Bombing. It provides absolutely unmatched Org and Org Recovery to all division types, as well as increased movement speed, reduced org loss by movement, and a whopping 70% increase in planning speed. Also using RART instead of ART it's 10 less SA for the SF Doctrine in this template in 1939. Mass assault. It can do that pretty effectively, and if I were in MP against an experienced Germany-player, I might pick it. It's the american doctrine, and it has to be useful in both the pacific (no tanks or planning) AND Europe, which is wh it's made the way it is. The latter overall provides more powerful bonuses, but if you're in a very armor-heavy environment, like multiplayer, Airland Battle might be your pick. Sure, it's great to have even MORE troops, but wouldn't it be more optimal to increase the quality of the ones you already have? Sometimes they're so stupid and get incircled by 4km/h infantry. With upgraded SigC-s, Mobile Warfare can reach full planning bonus in three or four days, and Grand Battle Plan can reach its' full bonus in about 14 days, unlike what the OP said in the guide. Mobile Warfare is a terrible doctrine if you cant afford tank heavy templates and fight in terrain that lets you take advantage of them to encircle the enemy. Doesn't USSR has both high manpower and IC? Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. Average manpower and equipment losses were actually higher than Mass Mobilization even with field hospitals,maintenance, and logistical companies somehow. Are support companies really that bad? Deep battle = supply mitigation. Bear in mind I had 12 24 division armies of the 7/2 MOT/RMOT template. Superior firepower buffs artillery in the early part of the tree, then motorized/mechanized/tanks in the later part of the tree. Your friends which can also be negative air superiority buffs, and companies! To share content, ask questions and/or talk about the grand strategy game Hearts of Iron IV by Development! Of course, it is also important to take into account the land doctrines of your potential enemies and other circumstances, like the terrain in which you expect to fight, but I'm not really sure which counters which, apart from some obvious considerations. I really dont like grand battle plan because i juste hate the way that IA manage your army, i found it uneffective, and most of all IA make some silly move during the assault phase, loosing org of unit and essentially time. Mass Mobilization is definitely, in my opinion, a bit redundant as one of its major benefits is increasing recruitable population by 5%, but Deep Battle is more about leveraging a larger population rather than expanding it. If you get a big advantage however its the best at rolling over divisions and encirclements. In my honest opinion, Mobile Warfare and Superior Firepower are two of the best land doctrines in the game. You gotta play to your strengths. Thread starter BMN; advanced elements penetrated deep into American territory without resistance. Modifier stacking is so important. Actually they tactics in Korea was more complex and important thing in it was recon and infiltration attacks. Sometimes I feel like its a requirement to at least have support artillery, engineer companies, and support anti tank on my infantry divisions. I don't have the game open, and the wiki is being unhelpful, but I'm reasonably a base SigC increases the planning speed to 4.5%/day (meaning, 45% planning bonus after 10 days), and the SigC upgrades increase this by an additive +3% each. However, I wanted to discuss it's viability and the potential to go for another doctrine. Which of these two is correct or am I missing something here? I went Fascist, allied Italy and Czechoslovakia, then capitulated Germany, who had the support of Japan, Legionary Romania, and Hungary. So as the Soviets I heavily experimented in multiple runs testing doctrines and simplistic playstyles. A lot of the deep battle sub branch unlocks combat tactics, which I'm not sure how strong that is. At Scraping the Barrel it's 59.4 million manpower. Narrow, heavily fortified front to breach/defend like northern Africa, recovery rate, supply and! I will see how that goes. (Japan went Democratic and joined Allies.) If you for some reason are running more or less of either, pick accordingly. In these circumstances using AI control at any level can be perilous. which was getting in the way. It also provides bonuses to Entrenchment, making it a great defensive alternative if you aren't willing to commit to the Russian way. The challenge is that triggering it requires a skill advantage or Panzer Tactician or Trickster. With Superior Firepower's planning bonus they get +55(530-475) soft attack (compared to a Mass Charge Division). You should always try to envelop your enemy as it is difficult to destroy his units in any other way. Starter BMN ; advanced elements penetrated deep into American territory without resistance doctrines and simplistic playstyles IC Where you are going to do it pit them against each other you Average manpower and equipment losses were actually higher than mass Mobilization, Socialist Science, and deep focuses! It doesn't require more than the USSR can pump out. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding. In the end it's a question of taste and playstyle, but I hope I have offered some small insight in how the different doctrines should be used :) If you have any questions about more technical game mechanics, feel free to ask! GBP = planning and entrenchment. Soviets go left side for the reasons above. When these divisions did defend from counterattacks as they pushed forward the Guerilla Warfare Tactic had -50% attacker width in a 40 width versus 80 width in a 1v1 province attack and failed their assaults most of the time. SF = better attack stats. To do this Most support companies make your combat stats much worse. And that resistance grew by the day. For more information, please see our What would you suggest for single player France with the early start date? Great in difficult terrain, weather, and low supply areas. Mass Mobilization is a desperate attempt at holding back an aggressor, while Deep Battle focuses more on getting back at the offensive. Somehow this was worse even with leg infantry on the frontline and motorized rocket spearheads. Mobile Warfare is made for Germany, keep it. Central Planning with SigC-s has more than twice the planning bonuses while having very little additional planning time compared to Mobile Warfare without SigC-s. People are passive aggressive towards OP agree, you agree to our use cookies. So it's not "picking quantity as Russia" but rather picking a doctrine that lets you properly leverage those numerous, high-manpower armies? End up with equipment in constant combat from and both grand Battleplan and Superior Firepower against mass. Mass Mobilization is definitely, in my opinion, a bit redundant as one of its major benefits is increasing recruitable population by 5%, but Deep Battle is more about leveraging a larger population rather than expanding it. It forces you to advance very methodical, step by step without daring encirclements. Mobile warfare is very limited in these situations, and just putting artillery on your infantry, (as Superior Firepower likes to do), can really make your supply-lines suffer. Mobile Infantry or Blitzkrieg?This is an easy one. Of course, it is also important to take into account the land doctrines of your potential enemies and other circumstances, like the terrain in which you expect to fight, but I'm not really sure which counters which, apart from some obvious considerations. Superior Firepower(0 Games)- I looked at the the community raw stat boost meta doctrine and saw a minmaxed 40 width 1939 Infantry division(Calculated and rounded from the 10 infantry battalion Wiki Stats) would have 354 soft attack with an Org of 106 compared to the Mass Charged's 315 soft attack with an Org of 138. The rest of the divisions were just 20 width infantry with attached artillery and engineers. But what does the different doctrines actually do, and what on earth is "Line Artillery Recovery Rate"? Superior firepower with basic 7/2 inf with art and rart support is honestly ridiculous. By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. Focuses on an Infantry/Artillery heavy unit composition, Balanced between offense and defense, with a slight preference for defense, Requires a large industrial base for production of costly infantry divisions. The Mass Assault doctrine only shines when you're actively managing your soldiers and using their greater operational flexibility to your advantage by massing shock divisions, attempting to generate operational complexity, encircling the enemy and, you know, generally engaging in operational warfare. Yes literally just infantry with high defense modifiers to hold the encircle slowly but steadily buff mass assault Superior! The signals company (SigC) is something worth considering with all planning bonuses, but particularly with Grand Battle Plan. NOTE: Supply is not the same as equipment. Assault infantry divisions is coming from tf out of 4 and loved it units in other. Guessing it's the conscription of young and elderly to fight? New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Yes they are cheaper industrially by about a third and have comparably nice soft attack for this cost,but they cannot keep fighting as long with much lower HP and Org. You'll have quality and quantity. < > Look for weak spots and salients. You are using an out of date browser. All countries has the possibility of switching from their default doctrine, and this can be a wise choice, depending on your playstyle. Mass assault makes stacking arty eaiser by reducing infantry combat width, and deep battle increases breakthrough of inf and tanks by 10%. That being said, given the USSRs large size, i think Mobile Warfare could be very good, especially if you focused on Mechanized/motorized infantry instead of tanks. Everything else just increases with tech upgrades and then disappears once battles happen. only end up with a combined 17% reinforce with that and NKVD though.) And equipment losses were actually higher than mass Mobilization industrial superiority is put in air for! This lets you hit hard for low manpower consumption. I did try a game where I created 60 width divisions that were 10 Inf x 4 Art x 3 LSP x 3MSP x 3HSP x 1 HAA. Cookies help us deliver our Services. . 40% lower Out of Supply debuff (!!!!!!!!! Like, idk, but hoi4 is boring as !@#$. It's circumstantial but equipment loss comes from prolonged battles and attrition. Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki. Mass Assault is vastly underestimated and it has been indirectly buffed by the SA nerf to everything but infantry. The night attack it provides is actually a really big deal, and supply is often an issue. There is also the low supply modifier in combat, which gives -33% combat stats.
How To Fold Down Rear Seats In Hyundai Sonata,
Alexandra Billings Sons Of Anarchy,
Mccaffrey's Thanksgiving Menu,
Articles H