Are engineers worth the effoert of building them. They appear to have good bonuses in that they get + movement and attack bonuses. Do these bonuses apply just to the engineers or are they applied to the division the engineer is in? I assumed that the engineer bonuses applyed to the division it was in, but I would like to be sure. We know what assumations do.
The engineer's bonus is applied to the division. It is averaged based on the number of brigades. So a division that was 3inf + 1 eng would get 75% of it's modifier from infantry and 25% from engineers.
Engineers have virtually no firepower of their own, but provide a bonus to the rest of the division. In cases where you're fighting in normal terrain, those bonuses won't offset the loss of another combat brigade. For river crossings, urban assaults, or against fortifications, their bonuses will offest much or all of the penalties associated with the terrain. Against places such as the Maginot Line, it's the difference between your division having virtually no effect on the defenders versus fighting on even terms. I use them sparingly, but certainly use them.
I always use them with Marines (though I'm too lazy to bring up the coastal fort math in here) and sometimes with Armor to save myself some doctrine research and soften it to the CA levels using just special forces (imagine Italy, Japan, Soviets). There's some use for them in infantry divisions if you choose to ignore artillery for some reason and are going to fight through a lot of rivers, jungles and fortifications (think Japan, UK). Finally they can be always mixed into motorized divisions for the same terrain-oriented purpose as they don't lack speed for it.
Just don't expect miracles, expect a slight bonus.
"Our officers of cavalry have acquired a trick of galloping at everything. They never consider the situation, never think of manoeuvring before an enemy, and never keep back or provide a reserve."
Suggestion - go to advanced search and type in Engineer. Not to be an arse, but this question has been asked and answered by wise and experienced minds in the past.
"Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter" Sir Winston Churchill
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” Lady Margaret Thatcher
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" Napoleon Bonaparte
Roll Tide! BCS Champions 2009, 2011, 2012, and counting!
Well.
One question.
Why should my infantry be 3inf+1art and not 3inf+1eng?
Because ART has way more soft attack than ENG.
Here's the thing about ENG. Terrain bonuses and penalties are averaged for the division. So, while 1 brigade of ENG is really good in all kinds of terrain, putting it with 3 INF dilutes that bonus quite a bit. ART has horrible terrain penalties, but they are averaged out, too. And because ART contributes a ton of soft attack to the division compared to ENG, and ART doesn't use fuel like ENG, it is often a better choice.
Now, let me just say that if you are operating in areas where terrain is really bad all the time, you might consider skipping INF anyway and going with either MTN or MAR. INF/ART is better in more situations than INF/ENG. Not all the time. Just most of the time. But in places where INF/ENG is better, it might be better to consider full special forces anyway.
All Hail Him,
The Secret Master
Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.
I didn't catch it earlier, but this kind of comment is not helpful. This community is helpful to all new players and I want it to stay that way. And considering the difference of opinion on certain topics (like this one), asking the question in a thread is sensible.Originally Posted by Meglok
The same questions get asked over and over again, and that's fine because we prefer new threads to thread necromancy anyway.
All Hail Him,
The Secret Master
Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.
As a new(er) than most user, I'm glad Secret Master took the time to say that.
As for being on-topic, for my first couple of campaigns I used Engineers with 3 brigades of Marines for my Marine Corps. I haven't tested it myself yet (playing Germany now, not much need for Marines yet) but I've read that adding Engineer's to Marine Brigades is actually useless. Is this true?
Also, based off what Kovax said, was it a mistake to add 1x ART to my 3xINF divisions on the Maginot line instead of Engineers? I was planning on adding an Engineer Brigade to each division in my LArm breakthrough Corps behind the line.
Adding ENG to MAR comes with advantages and disadvantages.
I don't have the math handy at the moment, but there is a certain level of coastal fort being present in a province where the loss of firepower from an ENG brigade is offset by ENG's ability to neutralize the defensive bonuses of the coastal fort. If you are sending MAR to attack something with no coastal fort, ENG isn't helping. If it has a ton of coastal forts, ENG is helping, but then you need to ask yourself whether it's worth attacking something by sea that has higher level coastal forts. It's also worth asking whether the target needs invasion at all. This is the perennial question of the Pacific campaign for all sides.
As for the Maginot Line, let me ask you a different question: If I told you to not bother attacking across the Maginot Line at all, would you even think about including ENG anymore?
EDIT: MAR attacking across rivers (which they are also good at) can face land forts, which again raises the question of using ENG. Again, ask yourself whether it is worth the time and effort to attack across a river into land forts.
All Hail Him,
The Secret Master
Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.
Ever tried attacking a coastal fort from a boat with engineers and then without them?I've read that adding Engineer's to Marine Brigades is actually useless. Is this true?
"Our officers of cavalry have acquired a trick of galloping at everything. They never consider the situation, never think of manoeuvring before an enemy, and never keep back or provide a reserve."
That makes sense about the coastal forts. The bonus engineers give for attacking these had slipped my mind as of my last message. I've only ever played the 4 majors with large navies and I could sent a corps of marines on 6 transports and easily take any port city with my 3x MAR 1x ENG. I know that this formation WORKS, but I was a bit more confused (after reading another topic a week ago) of whether I'd get the same effects without the ENG brigade. The way Secret Master explains it really sets it well in my mind that ENG are for more than just getting rid of amphibious/river penalties.
I don't plan to send my main assault over the Maginot line but I also didn't plan to sit still down there. Ideally, in my mind, I'd punch two holes in the lines and try to flow some forces in to link up with the invasion force coming down through Belgium and pocket a whole bunch of French troops. I have already built 3 divisions of 3xMAR 1xENG (habit) and they are sitting in Konisberg(?) above poland to attack over the large river there when the time comes. I suppose at the Fall of Poland I can quickly reassign them to whereever ENG may be needed during the invasion of France. Perhaps I'll use them to punch a hold in the center of the line to allow my 2Larm + 1Mot + 1Eng corps through. I may have sunk hundreds of hours into this game already, but I have precious little experience in Europe. I usually play pretty ahistorically, and unlike most new players, started with Brazil instead of Germany and waited until I was a master naval player before even starting up my first and current game as Germany.
I build an army of 3x[3MAR+1ENG] & 4MAR. This allows you to put 16 brigades on to a single province beach-head. I also research assault weapons as much as possible. It really helps when you need to take a small island like Midway quickly, before the enemy CTFs & SAGs show up.
People will tell you that ENG “dilute” the attack values of the marines but, simply, the lower averaged values are multiplied by the larger number of brigades so… the bottom line is total number of soft attacks is higher, your damage suffered is spread over more brigades so each has less ORG loss to recover.
Even without a fort to assault, the additional zero-frontage manpower helps.
“You should not have any special fondness for a particular weapon, or anything else, for that matter. Too much is the same as not enough. Without imitating anyone else, you should have as much weaponry as suits you.”
"It is a sin to carry a weapon in to battle & not use it."
Miyamoto Musashi
@ pratttroy - Secret Master was entirely correct. My flippant and rude response to your question was completely undeserved and you have my sincere apologies.
"Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter" Sir Winston Churchill
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” Lady Margaret Thatcher
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" Napoleon Bonaparte
Roll Tide! BCS Champions 2009, 2011, 2012, and counting!
In essence, I've found that attacking across a river with 3INF+ENG is more effective than attacking across it with 4XINF or 3XINF+ART. On the other hand the division with the ENG will be significantly less effective than either of the others in non-penalizing terrain. You want it when it's needed, but it's a drawback at other times.
As GER, I generally group a full 5 division Corps of 2XINF+2XENG, mainly at the Maginot Line to open a second front into France (allowing for encirclement of about 1/4 of the French Army and virtually all of the remaining Belgian troops), with one division to cross rivers in Belgium. After I've made and expanded the breakthroughs, I redeploy those clearly labelled ENG divisions to seperate Armies (1 ENG-equipped division per Army) in various theaters, to be used as needed for contested river crossings and against the rare fortification.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
