• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
That's a long walk for a Garrison. They only move at speed-1.


Took the units longer to travel to the borders of the countries than the wars themselves. Took over a year to get the units to the canal and by that time the Germans were only controlling a few provinces and the Japanese were down to their Home Islands.
 
That's a long walk for a Garrison. They only move at speed-1.


Took the units longer to travel to the borders of the countries than the wars themselves. Took over a year to get the units to the canal and by that time the Germans were only controlling a few provinces and the Japanese were down to their Home Islands.

you didn't use strat redeploy? that was slightly silly
 
it still would've taken ages for them to get to the countries' borders.
 
Check Numbers Aren’t Everything AAR (in my signature) the third page. There are some unusual division like 2MNT+2MAR (for river crossing in mountains), 4ARM+ENG (fast medium armour with 35% softness), HARM+2SHARM (division with 6.7% softness), HARM+SHARM+ENG (mobile fort) and etc. Basically a whole invading army prepared for Barnarossa without a single regular infantry brigade.
 
(for river crossing in mountains)

This was the answer to Final Jeopardy, HOI3 edition, in 1941. The prompt was "This is the second worst terrain to attack into."

I do like your HARM/SHARM division. It cares less about SA than even my 4xHARM divisions do. "What's that? I can't hear you over the sound of us ignoring all the artillery those INF divisions brought with them."
 
Embarrassing admission: before I realized that SHARM acted as a support role, I built 4xSHARM as GER and then wondered why they kept retreating instantly...
Of course, if they let me build the Maus I should be able to spectacularly waste my resources on a Landkreuzer...
Though I freely admit I haven't made too many "weird brigades" anymore, I likely will as I acclimate more to the game. Dunno if anyone does this, but if I'm assembling an "Afrikakorps" I tend to make a few divisions of 1xLARM + 3xAC. Seems to perform admirably against the opposition you are likely to face in far off places, as long as a couple divisions of grunts of some flavor (INF, MAR, MTN, MOT) tag along for fun as well.
 
Embarrassing admission: before I realized that SHARM acted as a support role, I built 4xSHARM as GER and then wondered why they kept retreating instantly...
Of course, if they let me build the Maus I should be able to spectacularly waste my resources on a Landkreuzer...
Though I freely admit I haven't made too many "weird brigades" anymore, I likely will as I acclimate more to the game. Dunno if anyone does this, but if I'm assembling an "Afrikakorps" I tend to make a few divisions of 1xLARM + 3xAC. Seems to perform admirably against the opposition you are likely to face in far off places, as long as a couple divisions of grunts of some flavor (INF, MAR, MTN, MOT) tag along for fun as well.

One combat brigade? And AC is supposed to give Combined Arms to Hard units without losing speed, so, sounds a bit poor.
 
it still would've taken ages for them to get to the countries' borders.
Nope

Strategic redeployment moves at speed 20kph regardless of division speed. It's only slowed down by infrastructure (which normal movement is too). In my experience SR is pretty much always fastest.

In most normal cases garrisions will arrive 20 times as fast using strategic redeployment ;)




On the topic of strange divisions, Does 4x INF counts as "strange" now a day that everyone uses artillery? :p
 
What's the worst? Trying to attack directly into the Atlantic?

My bet is Amphibious Assault onto a Mountain terrain. I think that gives greater penalties than River Crossing.
 
One combat brigade? And AC is supposed to give Combined Arms to Hard units without losing speed, so, sounds a bit poor.
I know, its weird but oddly effective when facing relatively smaller armies (ie. NOT the Soviets' main armies). I made them as a diversion with some spare IC so I could go gallivanting about the low-infra sections of Asia relatively easily. Its mostly lower-end infantry there so I wanted excess soft attack, and with the german ability to research scads of tech, they are very resilient in the org/morale department.
 
What is the most efficent configuration? Please do not use abbreviations, as I don't understand them :)
Depends on what kind of efficiency ;)


Efficient per Industry cost? Probably using Infantry only.
Efficient per manpower invested? As much Artillery added to your infantry brigade as you can afford (or Tactical bombers if we are not limited to land units).
Efficient in speed? Probably Light Armor
Efficient in combat power per front? I would guess Armor + Self Propelled artillery.
 
My bet is Amphibious Assault onto a Mountain terrain. I think that gives greater penalties than River Crossing.

That was what I had in mind, too. I tried it the other day. :wacko:

EDIT:

Alex covers various efficiencies well, but let me just add a few.

Efficient use of officers? Militia with some kind of artillery support

Efficient in terms of softness? We're talking pure heavy armor divisions or heavy armor brigades with super-heavy armor attached.

Efficient in terms of suppression? A single garrison brigade with 1-2 MP brigades attached.

Efficient in terms of width, regardless of stacking penalties? Militia with the width reducing doctrine researched

Are you France and not planning to build an airforce to contest the Luftwaffe? Attach an anti-aircraft artillery brigade to every single infantry division. Trust me. It works. :)

Are you fighting in really low infrastructure areas with bad terrain? Maybe it's time to build some Marine or mountain divisions, but cut the brigades down to 2 instead of 4. Then spread them out a bit to ease the supply draw.
 
Last edited:
Depends on what kind of efficiency ;)


Efficient per Industry cost? Probably using Infantry only.
Efficient per manpower invested? As much Artillery added to your infantry brigade as you can afford (or Tactical bombers if we are not limited to land units).
Efficient in speed? Probably Light Armor
Efficient in combat power per front? I would guess Armor + Self Propelled artillery.

Forgive my ignorance, friend. Is artillery really that effective? As I rarely use it, instead focusing on infantry and light and medium armour units.
 
Forgive my ignorance, friend. Is artillery really that effective? As I rarely use it, instead focusing on infantry and light and medium armour units.

If you aren't using Artillery, you haven't been living. :D

Artillery gives substantial benefits to infantry and militia divisions. In fact, they are so powerful that some people have modified game mechanics to reduce their power.

What are those benefits?

1) Lots of firepower: Using 1940 techs, artillery has a SA rating of 6 versus an SA of 4.4 for infantry. That doesn't sound like much, but since battle results and damage are calculated hourly, that's a 22% increase in firepower against soft units.

2) Reduced width: All that extra firepower that artillery concentrates into a single brigade also has zero width. A division with 2xINF/2xARTY (that's 2 infantry brigades and 2 artillery brigades) has more firepower than a 4xINF division, but also has half the width. I can put more divisions of the first kind into a single battle than I can of the second kind. That means that it further amplifies the firepower advantage it has by allowing greater concentration of force. Concentration of force = good. :)

3) Artillery brigades cost less manpower than infantry brigades. Anyone can benefit from the reduced manpower costs. Even the Soviets.

4) Artillery costs the same amount of officers per brigade that infantry does, but since it has more firepower, you get more firepower per officer spent with artillery than you do with infantry. That's a big deal for everyone. Yes, even Germany and its high leadership.

5) Artillery costs more IC-days than infantry, but it has more firepower per IC-day, so it's more cost effective in terms of SA than infantry is.
 
If you aren't using Artillery, you haven't been living. :D

Artillery gives substantial benefits to infantry and militia divisions. In fact, they are so powerful that some people have modified game mechanics to reduce their power.

What are those benefits?

1) Lots of firepower: Using 1940 techs, artillery has a SA rating of 6 versus an SA of 4.4 for infantry. That doesn't sound like much, but since battle results and damage are calculated hourly, that's a 22% increase in firepower against soft units.

2) Reduced width: All that extra firepower that artillery concentrates into a single brigade also has zero width. A division with 2xINF/2xARTY (that's 2 infantry brigades and 2 artillery brigades) has more firepower than a 4xINF division, but also has half the width. I can put more divisions of the first kind into a single battle than I can of the second kind. That means that it further amplifies the firepower advantage it has by allowing greater concentration of force. Concentration of force = good. :)

3) Artillery brigades cost less manpower than infantry brigades. Anyone can benefit from the reduced manpower costs. Even the Soviets.

4) Artillery costs the same amount of officers per brigade that infantry does, but since it has more firepower, you get more firepower per officer spent with artillery than you do with infantry. That's a big deal for everyone. Yes, even Germany and its high leadership.

5) Artillery costs more IC-days than infantry, but it has more firepower per IC-day, so it's more cost effective in terms of SA than infantry is.

Thank you for the well explained answer. Conquering Europe may not be quite as difficult now :D
 
You're welcome.

Artillery does have some disadvantages, but they are pretty simple. They draw more supply than INF. You also have to research more techs to keep them up to date. But since self-propelled artillery uses the same gun techs and doctrines that regular artillery does, this isn't a big deal.

They also attack into certain kinds of terrain poorly, but since they have more firepower, it's usually a wash. Just do not ever attach artillery to Marine divisions when they are doing amphibious attacks because the Marines dilute their special bonuses by dragging along the artillery with them.