Any use in Militas?

[unmerged(56271)]

0.2 for MIL_36 and 0.5 for MIL_43
1 for INF_36 -41, later 1.1 or 1.2.

I didn't realize that, I thought their TC weight would be about the same as for an INF.

Looks to me like TC weight is roughly the same as supply consumption then, which makes sense I guess...

 

[theokrat]

Looks to me like TC weight is roughly the same as supply consumption then

As far as i understand its the same, for every units that does not consume oil.

 

[unmerged(46967)]

*shrug* Sometimes I like using Militia for the fact that they can do good work as Fire teams in occupation duties, as Garrisons just sit on their rear ends in whatever province they are in.

 

[ulmont]

The problem with this analysis is that targetting is not done by individual shots... it's done by units. The defending Inf-41 will always fire ALL of its shots at a single randomly chosen enemy target each hour.

I couldn't remember what the current theory (unit vs shot) was. Unit does make a lot more sense, though.

Your numbers should be adjusted sharply downward... each Militia receives an average of 1.8 shots (not 0.93)... for a total of 20-to-1, not 38.71-to-1

I'll rework eventually.

Another point to bear in mind is that the Militia-vs-Inf attack scores 40% fewer hits per hour than the Inf-vs-Inf attack... thus increasing the chance that the combat will last past sundown

This really suggests that the main country to use this strategy should be NatChi on the Infiltration path.

 

[unmerged(77300)]

probably the best use in militias i can think of is replacing garrisons. Since the need 0.1 supplies while garrisons need .5 supplies, you can have 5 in each province. Also, unlike garrisons, they can retreat if losing a battle and dont just disappear. It would cost more manpower for 5 militia rather than 1 garrison, so its best in china or CCCP.

 

[ulmont]

probably the best use in militias i can think of is replacing garrisons. Since the need 0.1 supplies while garrisons need .5 supplies, you can have 5 in each province.

I only use garrisons when I need to suppress partisans. 1 Garrison '39 + 1 Police Brigade uses .7 supplies and has 11 suppression. It would take 11 Militia '36 to compare, using 2.2 supplies, since you cannot attach police to Militia.

Edit: even worse than I was originally thinking.

 

[unmerged(56271)]

probably the best use in militias i can think of is replacing garrisons. Since they need 0.1 supplies while garrisons need .5 supplies, you can have 5 in each province. Also, unlike garrisons, they can retreat if losing a battle and dont just disappear. It would cost more manpower for 5 militia rather than 1 garrison, so its best in china or CCCP.

Militias use 0.2 supplies, not 0.1.

 

[unmerged(77300)]

Militias use 0.2 supplies, not 0.1.

and garrison uses .6 so it comes out to 3 militia

and it depends for what country, as Ukraine my militia upkeep was .1 supplies

 

[ulmont]

Note that a mix of 1 Inf-41 + 10 Militia-36 (the same TC load as 15 Militia) has a ratio only 7% lower (18.75-to-1 instead of 20-to-1) and inflicts damage 22% faster (44 sph instead of 36 sph), thus making it less likely that the battle will last past sundown.

1 Inf + 10 Mil is 11 units...so you could throw in the obligatory HQ for an even 12 and slap the whole thing under an FM. That's probably the way to go.

 

[blue emu]

... and it depends for what country, as Ukraine my militia upkeep was .1 supplies

It doesn't depend on Country... virtually nothing does.

It depends on Minister traits (eg: the -15% Supply Consumption guy) and Leader Traits (eg: Logistics Wizard).

... but note that these discounts affect all units, Infantry, Garrisons and Militia... so they do not change the ratios at all.

 

[ulmont]

I'm sure that can be overcome with a small number of INF (or MTN, which also beat INF on the TC front...)

Not too much, unless you're in the hills:

To evenly compare the Mtn '41, you have to get to 9 Inf (9 TC) before you pick up an extra integer Mtn (since each Mtn '41 is 0.9 supplies). So the ratios for Mtn are 10 Mtn '41 vs 3 Inf '41.

10 Mtn '41 v. 3 Inf '41 generates 120 shots. The per unit targeting is irrelevant (each defending Inf receives more than 24 shots before the odd ones are taken into account), so 48 shots will be doubled, for an effective 168 shots or 56 per target.
10 Mtn '41 v. 3 Inf '41 receives 42 shots. Assuming 3 different Mtn units are targeted, toughness is not exceeded, for a total of 42 effective shots or 4.2 per target.

The ratio of 10 Mtn '41 attacking 3 Inf '41 is 56 shots sent to 4.2 taken per target, or 13.33:1.

This is only slightly better than the 12.85 ratio that 9 Inf '41 get over 3 Inf '41.

 

[Moltke]

One could probably build an assload of militia as the Soviet Union to keep Germany from attacking. I realize the SU can just as easily build real infantry, but there could be advantages to inflating one's apparent power with cheap militia. If for example one wanted to build another run or two of factories or to further research along the doctrine path before going to war.

*shrug*

I tried building a handful of militia with artillery just to try them out and the game wouldn't let me assign brigades; maybe I'm missing something?

 

[ulmont]

'43 Mil is worse TC-for-TC

Interestingly, if you're attacking with Mil '36 for TC-constraints, you don't want to upgrade them:

15 Inf '43 v. 5 Inf '43:
Generates 240 shots, 90 exceed defensiveness, effective 330 shots or 66 per target.
Receives 80 shots; assuming 5 targeted Inf, 0 exceed toughness for an effective 80 shots or 5.33 per target.
Ratio of 66:5.33 or 12.38:1.

15 Inf '43 use 16.5 TC, which matches up to 33 Mil '43.

33 Mil '43 v. 5 Inf '43:
Generates 198 shots, 48 exceed defensiveness, effective 246 or 49.2 per target.
Receives 80 shots; assuming 5 targeted Mil, 50 exceed toughness for an effective 130 shots or 3.94 per target.
Ratio of 49.2:3.94 or 12.49:1.

15 Inf '43 use 16.5 TC, which matches up to 82.5 Mil '36 (using 82).

82 Mil '36 v. 5 Inf '43:
Generates 164 shots, 14 exceed defensiveness, effective 178 or 35.6 per target.
Receives 80 shots; assuming 5 targeted Mil, 75 exceed toughness for an effective 155 shots or 1.89 per target.
Ratio of 35.6:1.89 or 18.84:1.

It's going to be a real pain to set up your attacks to let 82 Mil attack without penalties, though.

 

[ulmont]

I tried building a handful of militia with artillery just to try them out and the game wouldn't let me assign brigades; maybe I'm missing something?

For whatever reason, building a militia with a preassigned brigade is broken in DD:Arma.

But if you build 1 Mil + Art, you pretty much have an incredibly slow moving infantry unit that sucks on the attack.

1 Mil '36 + 1 Art '40 costs 7 MP and 560 IC-days, and needs 0.68 TC. It has 8 soft attack, 2 hard attack, 1 toughness, and moves at speed 3!
1 Inf '41 costs 10 MP, 665 IC-days, and needs 1 TC. It has 14 soft attack, 4 hard attack, 19 toughness, and moves at speed 5.

 

[blue emu]

It's going to be a real pain to set up your attacks to let 82 Mil attack without penalties, though.

You would have to be attacking from at least four provinces... which happens quite rarely (the opening USSR attack on Suwalki is the only example I can think of off-hand).

Another point to consider is that Militia-36 is much more vulnerable to negative modifiers than any other unit... even a -1% modifier costs them half of their offensive Firepower, while the same -1% modifier costs Infantry-41 only 7% of their Firepower... and Militia also gains much less from positive modifiers... it takes a +50% bonus to raise their Firepower by one shot, while Infantry-41 gains a shot with each +7% bonus.

... something to consider, since in any realistic case it does devalue the Militia to some extent.

 

[Dakk]

Baseline: for IC low nations: use 3 Milita + 1 INF for Defence

I'm contemplating implementing your findings (formations) in my next Italy game, but there's one thing holding me back - the 4 division setup. I'd rather not use a General for these formations (or should I perhaps use 2 Inf + 6 Mil + HQ?), but how would you suggest deploying this defensive juggernaut?

Also, I read the entire thread earlier but I now I've forgot.. how did this formation (or any other combination with MIL) fare on the offense?

 

[theokrat]

I'm contemplating implementing your findings (formations) in my next Italy game, but there's one thing holding me back - the 4 division setup. I'd rather not use a General for these formations (or should I perhaps use 2 Inf + 6 Mil + HQ?), but how would you suggest deploying this defensive juggernaut?

Easy enough: The Militias have only 2 Softattack. That means they need a +50% total modifier to do any better. On the other hand even a -1% modifier would reduce their ability to deal out by 50%. That makes it rahter easy. If you assume that bad Infra (-20%) and add some terrain and dug in modufuers you see that militias will not need any leader at all. So i would suggest taking a half decent leader for the INf division and leave the 3 Militas with the faceless guy, or any other leader you simply dislike (1 skill OG).

Also, I read the entire thread earlier but I now I've forgot.. how did this formation (or any other combination with MIL) fare on the offense?

As it turns out even exceeded Defence can not be neglected, much less exceeded Toughness. This means that attackign militas will loose ORG much faster, reducing their BWA. However they will never loose at twice the rate of an INF and since they only have half the cost in reinforcing them they make the most manpower-effective shockabsorbers in attack.

 

[Dakk]

Easy enough: The Militias have only 2 Softattack. That means they need a +50% total modifier to do any better. On the other hand even a -1% modifier would reduce their ability to deal out by 50%. That makes it rahter easy. If you assume that bad Infra (-20%) and add some terrain and dug in modufuers you see that militias will not need any leader at all. So i would suggest taking a half decent leader for the INf division and leave the 3 Militas with the faceless guy, or any other leader you simply dislike (1 skill OG)..

Pretty straightforward then. But they should still be lead individually and not grouped into a three and lead by a single Mj.Gen? Oh, and regarding the fact that -1% modifier will reduce their effectiveness with 50% - is that because a SA of 1.98 will be rounded to 1?

As it turns out even exceeded Defence can not be neglected, much less exceeded Toughness. This means that attackign militas will loose ORG much faster, reducing their BWA. However they will never loose at twice the rate of an INF and since they only have half the cost in reinforcing them they make the most manpower-effective shockabsorbers in attack.

So are both 2 INF + 1 MIL or 1 INF + 2 MIL manpower-efficient builds? IC/TC? With the only real downside being more stacks need more, perhaps worse, leaders..?

 

[theokrat]

Pretty straightforward then. But they should still be lead individually and not grouped into a three and lead by a single Mj.Gen? Oh, and regarding the fact that -1% modifier will reduce their effectiveness with 50% - is that because a SA of 1.98 will be rounded to 1?

Exactly. If you group them to three they will need a Lt. Gen. if you have a bad one you dont like, you can use him here...

So are both 2 INF + 1 MIL or 1 INF + 2 MIL manpower-efficient builds? IC/TC? With the only real downside being more stacks need more, perhaps worse, leaders..?

Depends on what you wnat to do with them. For Defence i would take the 1INF+2Mil stack, its really cheap (1k IC*d, 20 Manpower, 1.2 TC) and do better than any other thing you cna build with that. But as i said, you could just as well leve the MIL on their own if you are low on leaders, stacksize does not really count on Defence. In fact a bunch of Militas will give you more high ranking leaders because of auto-promote system.

 

[ulmont]

So are both 2 INF + 1 MIL or 1 INF + 2 MIL manpower-efficient builds? IC/TC?

Not really, no.

Just think about the pure options to get a feel. On defense, 3 Inf '41 are roughly equivalent to 8 Mil '36 when defending against 3 attacking Inf '41(calculations earlier in the thread).

3 Inf '41: 30 MP, 1995 IC-days, 3 TC
8 Mil '36: 40 MP, 1600 IC-days, 1.6 TC

So the Mil option with equivalent force on defense is 33% worse on MP while 25% better on IC and 47% better on TC.

On offense, 3 Inf '41 are roughly equivalent to 13 Mil '36 when attacking 1 Inf '41 (ratios of 12.85:1 for the Inf and 13.46:1 for the Mil; this is the smallest number of Mil that outperforms the Inf).

 3 Inf '41: 30 MP, 1995 IC-days, 3 TC
13 Mil '36: 65 MP, 2600 IC-days, 2.6 TC

So the Mil option with equivalent force on attack is 117% worse on MP while 30% worse on IC and 13% better on TC.

Mil is better on IC and TC when it replaces Inf on the defense. Mil is better only on TC when it replaces Inf on the attack. Mil is never better on manpower when it replaces Inf.