Anti-Tank brigade always has higher piercing than Heavy Tanks

[vector1]

Also, I have a feeling that we're thinking too much about the sexy late war weapons rather than maximizing the early systems. You guys realize how long it'll take to ramp up production of 1941 anything if you don't research ahead of time. Even if you do research ahead of time you sacrifice so much other tech. Production efficiency ramps up at 1.7% per week, and there are only 52 weeks in a year. I haven't seen many MP HOI3 games last past 1941, and I have a sneaking feeling that the war in the east will be decided within the year, and with that the winner of the game before too much advanced techs come into play.

 

[Denkt]

It take one year to go from 10% to 100% with 1.7% increase per week. It only cost 10% efficiency to change variant, everything else comes at massive losses of efficiency.

It is also worth mention that late tech equipment are more expensive to produce and also have a research cost so teching up is not a no brainer.

 

[vector1]

Stuff don't get more expensive because of the variant system, but less reliability can make the equipment more expensive to use.

He might just be referring to the overall production cost of 2970 for a heavy tank vs 360 for AT at 1941 levels.

 

[Denkt]

Total cost only applies if you need to import all resources. Production cost with all resources are 1080 vs 180. But Heavy tank vs Anti tank is a bit ridiculous because you are talking about one of the units heavy tanks are supposed to be weak against.

Tanks are expensive for a reason, if you encircle the enemy it is pretty much over no matter what.

 

[oerbaa]

Total cost only applies if you need to import all resources. Production cost with all resources are 1080 vs 180. But Heavy tank vs Anti tank is a bit ridiculous because you are talking about one of the units heavy tanks are supposed to be weak against.

Tanks are expensive for a reason, if you encircle the enemy it is pretty much over no matter what.

Well thats the argument.

I'm saying that Light and Medium tanks should be weak against AT. Not Heavy Armor.

And even if you upgrade it to level 5 armor, at any given year, a much cheaper Light TD with a level 5 gun has a higher piercing than it.

It seems its very difficult to have a higher armor advantage, while also being cost effective.

 

[vector1]

It take one year to go from 10% to 100% with 1.7% increase per week. It only cost 10% efficiency to change variant, everything else comes at massive losses of efficiency.

Yes, but the opportunity cost is real. Lets say you have a 100% efficiency line going, and you restart it to produce a new model of the same line (-70%) so it drops to 30%. You're going to lose out on the max bonus for about 40 weeks, and in that time you lose about 35% of possible production while you ramp back up again. It's not insignificant given the same resource and military factory cost.

I'm unsure what you're calling ridiculous when comparing the cost of HARM and it's general countering unit AT?

 

[vector1]

Well thats the argument.

I'm saying that Light and Medium tanks should be weak against AT. Not Heavy Armor.

And even if you upgrade it to level 5 armor, at any given year, a much cheaper Light TD with a level 5 gun has a higher piercing than it.

It seems its very difficult to have a higher armor advantage, while also being cost effective.

This seems reasonable actually. Heavy tanks were such a huge investment that isn't properly represented in HOI3. If anyone bothered to prepare for HARM it would be cheaply and easily taken down by AT fire.

 

[Ctanr]

Yes, but the opportunity cost is real. Lets say you have a 100% efficiency line going, and you restart it to produce a new model of the same line (-70%) so it drops to 30%. You're going to lose out on the max bonus for about 40 weeks, and in that time you lose about 35% of possible production while you ramp back up again. It's not insignificant given the same resource and military factory cost.

I'm unsure what you're calling ridiculous when comparing the cost of HARM and it's general countering unit AT?

you get -10% for switching to another variant

 

[oerbaa]

Yes, but the opportunity cost is real. Lets say you have a 100% efficiency line going, and you restart it to produce a new model of the same line (-70%) so it drops to 30%. You're going to lose out on the max bonus for about 40 weeks, and in that time you lose about 35% of possible production while you ramp back up again. It's not insignificant given the same resource and military factory cost.

I'm unsure what you're calling ridiculous when comparing the cost of HARM and it's general countering unit AT?

Well, the ridiculous part is that you purchase HA so as to have an armor advantage. But if the opponent, lets say in a multiplayer match, is smart and attaches cheap AT brigades, then he nullified your potential advantage.

This seems reasonable actually. Heavy tanks were such a huge investment that isn't properly represented in HOI3. If anyone bothered to prepare for HARM it would be cheaply and easily taken down by AT fire.

I know it seems reasonable, but then how do you justify the expense? Should you not just skip out on HA and produce faster and more cost effective Medium Armor?

Since this is a game, shouldn't every unit be balanced so as to provide some kind of comparative advantage? If HA's only advantage, its thick armor, is nullified by the cheapest anti-tank brigade, how is this balanced?

 

[vector1]

you get -10% for switching to another variant

I understand that, but moving from 1918 HARM to 1941 HARM is changing the model within the family, and that's what I was referring to when we were previously discussing 1941 technologies since clearly most players will only unlock 1941 HARM sometime in 1939-1941 earliest. I don't even expect many players to be producing 1918 HARM at 100% efficiency in the first place.

Referring to the list here: http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Production#Production_Efficiency

Well, the ridiculous part is that you purchase HA so as to have an armor advantage. But if the opponent, lets say in a multiplayer match, is smart and attaches cheap AT brigades, then he nullified your potential advantage.

I know it seems reasonable, but then how do you justify the expense? Should you not just skip out on HA and produce faster and more cost effective Medium Armor?

If your entire plan revolves around HARM being OP enough to breakthrough, you most likely need a backup plan. HARM being countered with some preparation is pretty reasonable, especially with the gun technology being around a lot earlier than WW2. The question is whether they will have exactly enough piercing to counter your HARM, or whether it'll be in the right place at the right time to stop you from breaking through. Winning in HOI3 was not just a question of technological superiority, but putting yourself in a better position than the enemy. It might very well be the exact same meta in HOI4 as in HOI3 to spam 1 AT brigade in every division to counter any possible tanks, but then you have to find a way around it.

It's pretty much a yes to medium armor being more cost effective, very historical. Skip out of HARM? But... the tigers :x. Sometimes you have to be inefficient to roleplay

 

[Marfach]

The QF 17-Pounder British AT Gun firing APDS could penetrate approximately 200mm (20cm) of armour at 2000m.
The Tiger II (Königstiger) tank had armour up to 185mm.
Both were in service as of 1943.
The notion that there were no AT weapons capable of penetrating Heavy armour is absurd. As another person already pointed out its much easier to fire a bigger shell than to layer even more metal onto a tank.
Certain shell types for the 17-Pounder would not pierce the frontal armour of a Tiger II especially at range, but side and rear armour are significantly weaker, as was the turret armour.

 

[Vidkjaer]

I doubt its averaged, that wouldn't make sense. It isn't like terrain bonuses. Likewise armor isn't averaged.

Piercing and amor values are an average of the divisions battalions. So you cannot just put one AT battalion in your division and have the advantage.
Organisation is also an average.

Soft/hard attack, breakthrough and defense are stacked values.

 

[TomasM15]

zis 2 was low on production because he penetrated to much and of that he did low damage to tank and this gun is from 1941
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_mm_anti-tank_gun_M1943_(ZiS-2)

 

[oerbaa]

Piercing and amor values are an average of the divisions battalions. So you cannot just put one AT battalion in your division and have the advantage.
Organisation is also an average.

Soft/hard attack, breakthrough and defense are stacked values.

where have you read/heard this?

The Null is that it is the single highest value in a division.

And yes, soft and hard attacks alongside breakthrough and defense are additive.

 

[Raptor83]

Divisions "piercing" and "armor" values are averaged

watch from 1:46

 

[Denkt]

Divisions "piercing" and "armor" values are averaged

watch from 1:46

Well it took us just 3 pages to confirm that

 

[fredgiblet]

Building HA forces your opponent to add AT to their divisions, an expensive option that is weak on offense and reduces their soft attack. Meanwhile any units that lack AT or that have outdated AT get rolled over by HA. I'm not seeing the problem here.

In truth the only tanks that were immune to up-to-date AT were the super-heavies, and even they were susceptible to flank shots. All this means is that you can't just build HA and roll over everyone.

 

[Vidkjaer]

where have you read/heard this?
.

From watching WWW.
This has been known since WWW started.

Take a look at the 2nd WWW video at time 02:10

Troy opens his tank division template and there is 4 light tanks and 2 motorized that gives 40 in armor. He then adds 1 heavy tank that gives +20 armor and the 2nd heavy tank he adds, does not give any amor.

 

[oerbaa]

From watching WWW.
This has been known since WWW started.

Take a look at the 2nd WWW video at time 02:10

Troy opens his tank division template and there is 4 light tanks and 2 motorized that gives 40 in armor. He then adds 1 heavy tank that gives +20 armor and the 2nd heavy tank he adds, does not give any amor.

How is that an average?

It's originally 40 with only light tanks, then he adds medium armor and it becomes 60. then he adds another one and it's still 60. This isn't averaging anything.

This video supports what I've said. That's its equal to the highest value in a division. Granted it's an older video and the newer France playthrough shows something interesting.

Divisions "piercing" and "armor" values are averaged

watch from 1:46

Here there is some mysterious averaging mechanism occurring. When there are only 2 light tanks in a division with 4 other motorized and 1 recon, it's armor value is around 7. And when he hovers over one of the two light tanks, it says +1.2 armor. When he hovers over the motorized, no armor is added or removed.

Yet when the division is made up of only 4 light tanks, the armor is 15.

Strange.. I'd like to see how they changed it.

They changed the mechanism from the original WWW to this one.

 

[GsusNSV]

In case anybody here hasn't seen it yet, the Wiki got a huge update (it looks like from the Beta Wiki) including http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units_by_unit
You can now back up your asumptions with some "hard" numbers. (Everything subject to change and I can't say, if they are correct.)

Spoiler

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units_by_unit#Anti-Tank
http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units_by_unit#Support_Anti-Tank
http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units_by_unit#Heavy_Tank
http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units_by_unit#Infantry

From this a AT-gun will always pen a base Heavy tank of the same Year.