As it stands, since the No Step Back DLC there is actually zero reasons to use them, since tanks are just straight upgrades in most regards. Will we be seeing any changes to them?
- 15
- 2
- 1
Are there any plans to rework Armored Cars?
- Thread starter Planchon12
- Start date
-
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.
A very easy to implement fix would be to simply reduce or even eliminate tanks' suppression.
- 7
- 6
- 1
- 1
A quick and dirty fix is to just make them massively cheaper. That gives them a marginal role for a country that can't afford tanks.
- 22
- 1
- 1
@MacroWarrior, perhaps you would like to explain your disagree? It's a very simple fix. What don't you understand?
- 6
- 1
- 1
I don't believe that this is a valid response, who uses tanks for suppression? If you produce enough support equipment, putting military police to garrison division and using agents to crash resistance is always sufficient.
What we need is a proper combat usage for armored cars. They are now totally worthless. The way of making it is actually increasing soft attack about 33% so that they would be at least superior against infantry, slightly increasing hard attack (1 for first two versions, 2 for the following versions) while keeping the breakthroughs same so the while main pusher still keeps being the tanks, armored cars would have a niche.
- 6
- 2
Okay, thanks for the explanation. Armored cars had a use before the tank designer: military police units to garrison occupied territories. That matches their real life use as well. They were rarely utilized in frontline units, except for protecting high ranking officers. That is, they shouldn't be capable frontline units because that's not what they were used for.
The current system--where you can produce a barebones LT for less than the cost of a AC--is silly because tanks were rarely used for MP duty. Taking their suppression would restore the previous state where AC did have a use. In other words, it would restore the previous state, which should be the objective.
Given the game mechanics, I don't see how AC could be useful in a combat role. Either AC or LT will dominate, in which case one or the other won't be used. It's much more realistic to have LT be the choice for light armored divisions than AC.
The current system--where you can produce a barebones LT for less than the cost of a AC--is silly because tanks were rarely used for MP duty. Taking their suppression would restore the previous state where AC did have a use. In other words, it would restore the previous state, which should be the objective.
Given the game mechanics, I don't see how AC could be useful in a combat role. Either AC or LT will dominate, in which case one or the other won't be used. It's much more realistic to have LT be the choice for light armored divisions than AC.
- 7
- 3
- 1
- 1
Armored cars were very much used by frontline units, as they were an important part of recon. It's only later in the war, that much of this role was taken very by light tanks.
And yes, tanks were used for MP duty. The Germans liked to add outdated tanks or tankettes to security units, for while they may have been useless against a proper enemy, they were very much a deterrent against partisans, who didn't have the weaponry to fight them.
- 11
- 8
- 2
Not sure if you are talking about real history or the game...but cheap light tanks (oldest design, only MG) are a good deal for garrisons because of their hardness reduing losses. Cavalry and MP surely works as well (I use it as 2nd template when I'm short of "police tanks"), but I don't think its superior. Both approaches have their (dis)advantage(s).
- 5
- 3
I remember in A Bridge Too Far Michael Caine is leading the armoured column in a Humber Scout Car.
The AC provides the best recon. So surely it has a use right now in armoured divisions? I believe historically they were also used as dedicated radio vehicles and definitely were used for suppression (partisans have no answer to even lightly armoured vehicles).
So maybe if their suppression is raised, or various tanks are lowered. I'm not sure how the coordination stat from radio tech is used, but maybe ACs could also increase that if present in a division?
The AC provides the best recon. So surely it has a use right now in armoured divisions? I believe historically they were also used as dedicated radio vehicles and definitely were used for suppression (partisans have no answer to even lightly armoured vehicles).
So maybe if their suppression is raised, or various tanks are lowered. I'm not sure how the coordination stat from radio tech is used, but maybe ACs could also increase that if present in a division?
Attachments
.jpeg)
Last edited:
- 9
- 3
Armored Cars had (and still have, look at the HMMWV) many benefits that are very hard to model properly in HOI4.
- They provided a lot of suppression not only because of their armor and machine gun but also because of their mobility. They were destined to escort supply columns and patrol towns.
- They provided offensive power to motorised troops, as they could be used to suppress enemy positions and be highly mobile at that
- They were great for recon, as the enemy could only return fire if they had anti armor equipment
- They provided mobility to commanders while also keeping them safe from small arms fire. This enabled commanders in the field to move around and keep better overview and provide more accurate orders
- Suppression should be way higher than that of a tank. Not because an armored car has more firepower or armor, but because they were able to cover way more ground due to the mobility (on roads) they provide. It was not the primary target to drive into some forests and swamps to root out resistance, armored cars were there to drive from town to town go keep check on vital points.
- Mobile Infantry should lose some breakthrough, while armored cars should gain a lot (not as high as tanks) but ACs should be a viable support unit to increase offensive power of divisions
- Their recon value should outclass every other unit just because of their combination of mobility, armor and armament. Light tanks (while having more firepower) have way less mobility (on road speed compared to armored cars, fuel efficiency, tanks need more supply to cover large areas), and can therefore not scout as efficient
- Armored cars should increase coordination to resemble their mobility on the battlefield and improved command and control.
- 20
- 10
- 1
I personally think that it would make sense for tanks/armoured cars/mechanised and derived weapon platforms to be done via a combined vehicle designer rather then the current system. This would be closer to reality as there were armoured cars that were half track and many light tanks were called by various nations as armoured car. Also this would allow for things like the Kangaroo vehicles derived from the stuart light tanks, ram/sherman/priest/sexton cruiser/medium tanks/spgs and cromwell infantry tanks, it could also theoretically work for tank riders as well. Say you have a infantry compartment component that allows you to classify a vehicle as mechanised. Would also allow things like the various armoured trucks that were produced by various nations as well.
- 6
It doesn't help that they right now acts as a direct nerf of AI nations as for some reason so are AC high priority for both research and spending xp on upgrades, even if they don't even use them at all.
- 5
This would make me at least consider using armoured cars unlike the current state where they could be useful in some circumstances they just aren't worth the additional investment even when you have a large industrial base.
It would be nice to see ai's not longer waste army xp on armored car models
- 2
Yeah, I guess what I'd do is drop the cost of armoured cars to slightly below the cheapest possible tank and eliminate the ability to spend land XP on them.
- 1
Light tanks on wheels and armored cars seem a bit redundant.
We only need one of those two, problem is that some people own LaR and NSB, others none of these two and then again some people own one those two.
So I'd apply the following:
For people who one both DLCs:
- Remove armored car tech
- selecting wheeled in light tank designer should allow the user to select as unit type armored car, with maintaining the battalion/support brigade type already existing since LaR (with some balance improvements to suppression [speed and reliability also positively should effect suppression of armored car designs)
- Armored cars should also have an org advantage compared to the default wheeled tanks.
For people who only own LaR:
- Keep the current armored car tech tree, but adapt the stats to what could be a good standard design of an armored car in the above case.
For people who only own NSB:
- It is only possible to built wheeled tanks, but not using armored cars brigades.
- However, wheeled should have some speed and reliability buff in simple terrain compared to tracks, to somewhat have a niche use. Maybe lower supplier consumption, Idk
For people who own neither DLC
- I think here we don't need any change.
We only need one of those two, problem is that some people own LaR and NSB, others none of these two and then again some people own one those two.
So I'd apply the following:
For people who one both DLCs:
- Remove armored car tech
- selecting wheeled in light tank designer should allow the user to select as unit type armored car, with maintaining the battalion/support brigade type already existing since LaR (with some balance improvements to suppression [speed and reliability also positively should effect suppression of armored car designs)
- Armored cars should also have an org advantage compared to the default wheeled tanks.
For people who only own LaR:
- Keep the current armored car tech tree, but adapt the stats to what could be a good standard design of an armored car in the above case.
For people who only own NSB:
- It is only possible to built wheeled tanks, but not using armored cars brigades.
- However, wheeled should have some speed and reliability buff in simple terrain compared to tracks, to somewhat have a niche use. Maybe lower supplier consumption, Idk
For people who own neither DLC
- I think here we don't need any change.
- 8
- 2
- 1
With NSB, light tanks are really good for suppression. MPs are also a bit of a noob trap.
- 3
I totally agree on the suppression front and I absolutely love the idea AC modifying the divisions coordination factor the most. Right now there is no way to alter coordination except by doctrine or tech. I don't even know if signal companies even do anything for coordination. But for each battalion of AC improving coordination sounds really cool as you wouldn't want too many of them due to being weaker then a LT but enough to impact the divisions at large.
Combine this with a buff to combat tactics back to 24 hours instead of 12 for a new tactic and that should make AC desirable for the early game and maybe mid game
- 1
The tank designer actually allows wheeled and half track vehicles for light tanks
Try fix the source of problem. Quick fix is give light tank a minimum cost. And medium, heavy tank too to prevent exploit Then everything returns as before.
- 1