Armoured Brigades in 4.02

[Kovax]

I'd upgrade the CAV to MOT (if you can build your own MOT), otherwise LARM or ARM. You only need one armor brigade in a division for its Armor and Piercing stats, which will be applied to the entire division. More than one is generally a waste. MOT (or INF, but it's way slower) will practically match LARM for sheer firepower, at a fraction of the cost and supply needs. A brigade of AC provides a little bit of extra firepower and hardness at a low cost for a mobile brigade, and also gives the entire division a small speed bonus in some types of terrain, as well as the small Combined Arms bonus. SPART is a very good optional addition if you can afford to feed it; I used them SPARINGLY because of the high supply needs.

TD is as slow as ARM, so don't mix them with LARM/MOT/AC for an exploitation division, and they've got excellent punch against armored divisions, but are really not that good against Soft targets (the vast majority of what you'll be facing). The really good aspect to TDs is that they can upgrade their Piercing value with a single tech (AT Ammo and Sights), whereas a license-built ARM will usually fade into obsolescence in a couple of years unless you research the set of ARM techs yourself. It only takes one TD brigade to provide its Piercing value to the entire division, so more than one is less than desirable.

I'm fond of LARM+MOT+AC, with either a second MOT or a SPART, depending on needs and availability, and either upgrade the LARM to ARM at some point, or build new ARM divisions and relegate the existing LARM divisions to an exploitation and support role for the ARM main spearhead. In some cases, I'll license or build a small number of TD brigades (2-3 total) and build dedicated anti-tank divisions of 3xMOT+TD, where the MOT provide the bulk of the raw HA firepower and the TD just gives it the ability to Pierce just about anything. Essentially, it's just a faster 3xINF+AT division, which is likewise optimized for punching holes in armor and sheer staying power. Why waste your own tanks against their tanks when cheaper units can do the same job just as well?

 

[incognitus]

Thank you! Very detailed, exactly what I was looking for. Let me summarise and follow up with questions

Medium Armoured Battle Division: "Arm, Mot, AC" plus S-P Art if affordable. What if S-P Art is not affordable? You wouldn't leave the division at three brigades, would you? Would you include another brigade (Eng?) or just use two Mot?
Light Armoured Battle Division: "L Arm, Mot, Mot, AC" or "L Arm, Mot, AC, S-P Art" These are only used as long as Arm are unavailable, right?*
Anti-Tank Division: "Inf, Inf, Inf, AT"
Mobile Anti-Tank Division: "Mot, Mot, Mot, TD"

*How would you compose the exploitation divisions? I use a speedy "L Arm, L Arm, AC, AC" at the moment, but they are rather weak. I have also created a variation with "L Arm, L Arm, Mot, AC" and called them "Heavy Scout Division"

 

[Kovax]

A second MOT provides a lot of sheer firepower at a very affordable cost for a mobile brigade, and is my preferred option. I might consider various alternatives for specialized work, but ENG+AC in the same division only gives you a Combined Arms bonus for one of them, and the ENG provides very limited firepower of its own, even less than the AC. Granted, the ENG may be worth its weight in gold if you need the terrain modifiers to do a contested river crossing or take on a fortified city, but it's got pathetic SA of roughly the same order as AT (only MPs are weaker), you definitely don't need them in every division.

Mixing TD with LARM is alright (not great) for tank busting, but the TD is going to slow it down drastically. If I'm creating a tank-busting unit, I'd rather have ARM than LARM for the higher HA, and the ARM will probably have better Armor than the TD, while LARM won't give you anything that you don't already have. For exploitation, LARM, MOT, and AC are all very viable fast options, and a second MOT will give more punch while a second AC will provide a higher speed bonus in the open.

Last game, my armored corps ended up with:
2 Divs. - ARM+MOT+SPART+AC (the SPART replaced an earlier second MOT)
2 Divs. - LARM+2xMOT+AC
1 Div. - 2xMOT+SPART+ENG
and a HQ division of HQ+2xINF+AA (a highly debatable addition)

That's not to say that it will work for your situation or playing style, but it's something to consider as one possibility. Consider these things: What's the slowest unit in the division, and can one faster unit bring the overall speed up by a lot? What SA and HA does the unit add, and at what price in IC and supply? What other benefits does the unit provide in terms of Combined Arms, Armor value, Piercing, Terrain benefits or penalties, or other special capabilities that the division doesn't ALREADY have (or will it stack)? Can I afford to supply it? The answer is generally a series of contradictions, so you have to pick the one that best fits your playing style. Enjoy the dilemma.

 

[ZeroMoon17]

Your Armored Car bonuses stack, so LARM AC AC AC will be one of the fastest units in the game FYI

 

[Pugmak]

yea, do that. its exploit actually. building CAV and then upgrading them to LARM is cheaper than building LARM.

I don't think it's an exploit, really. I mean, think of all the time saved in training tankers now that they'll not be required to learn how to ride a horse and use a lance or saber, since as cavalry, they already know how to do that! Without those traditional, and oh so valuable skills, your tankers would have no elan! And, tankers without elan! are just DAT.

 

[yamato2cz]

I don't think it's an exploit, really. I mean, think of all the time saved in training tankers now that they'll not be required to learn how to ride a horse and use a lance or saber, since as cavalry, they already know how to do that! Without those traditional, and oh so valuable skills, your tankers would have no elan! And, tankers without elan! are just DAT.

or maybe they are from warhammer 40k. those guys poking from the top of leman russ tanks with sword yelling "drive me closer, i want to stab them with my sword!"

 

[Kovax]

or maybe they are from warhammer 40k. those guys poking from the top of leman russ tanks with sword yelling "drive me closer, i want to stab them with my sword!"

Now don't go bashing on a game like that for realism. Everyone knows that a sword has better armor penetration than a big cannon that can only fire 55 gallon drums out to 100 meters or so.

 

[incognitus]

a second AC will provide a higher speed bonus in the open.

Your Armored Car bonuses stack, so LARM AC AC AC will be one of the fastest units in the game FYI

Are you talking about actual strategic movement speed or just some in-battle speed bonus?

 

[Kovax]

Are you talking about actual strategic movement speed or just some in-battle speed bonus?

Strategic. The AC can be slower than MOT, depending on which techs you research, but its speed bonus in some types of terrain brings it up above that of units with a lower base speed....but not in all terrain.

 

[yamato2cz]

Now don't go bashing on a game like that for realism. Everyone knows that a sword has better armor penetration than a big cannon that can only fire 55 gallon drums out to 100 meters or so.

nice description of whole universe of W40K. i still like it tho. considered making mod based on it for HOI3. its not even that much work.

 

[browd]

Just to flesh that out a bit more, ACs (base speed 9 kph) get +40% movement bonuses in urban and plains, +20% on hills, +15% in woods, +10% in forests and on mountains, +5% in jungle, and only suffer a -10% movement penalty in marsh.

In comparison, LARM (base speed of 8 kph) has no movement modifiers (bonuses or penalties) in urban or plains, has a -70% penalty in marsh, -30% in jungle, forest and mountains, -10% in woods and -5% in hills, while MOT (also base 8 kph) has no movement modifiers for urban, plains or hills, a -80% penalty for marsh, -40% for jungle and mountains, -30% for forest and -20% for woods.

In general, LARM will be faster than MOT (leaving aside tech-specific movement bonuses) on all terrain types other than forest, urban, plains and hills (with MOT beating LARM by 5% on hills), but ACs will beat both (in some cases by 40% or more) on all terrain types.

Since division modifiers (attack, defense and movement) are the average of the modifiers for all brigades in the division, having one or more ACs in your division should significantly reduce time to cross any province, regardless of terrain type (although the benefit is lower in some terrain types than others). For example, in plains, a 2xMOT/2xAC division will have total 20% bonus vs. base speed (0% + 0% + 40% + 40% / 4 = 20% bonus), while in forest that same division will have only a -10% penalty (-30% - 30% + 10% +10% / 4 = -10% penalty). If you swap out one AC for another MOT, combat width and overall strength go up, but speed drops a great deal.

 

[incognitus]

So, considering that Exploitation divisions are meant to be "as fast as possible, as strong as necessary", the best all-rounder is probably a L Arm / Mot / AC / AC division? Swapping one AC for a Mot is going to make it slower and stronger, while swapping the L Arm or Mot for a third AC is going to make it a lot weaker and only a bit faster, right?

 

[browd]

Well, you could go for one super-fast LARM + 3xAC division per corps. When its corps attacks a province, keep this division out of the fight (to avoid attack delay), and when the battle is won and the enemy is retreating, turn it loose to overrun the retreating forces. Who needs envelopment when you can simply overrun and eliminate enemy units?

 

[incognitus]

Well, you could go for one super-fast LARM + 3xAC division per corps. When its corps attacks a province, keep this division out of the fight (to avoid attack delay), and when the battle is won and the enemy is retreating, turn it loose to overrun the retreating forces. Who needs envelopment when you can simply overrun and eliminate enemy units?

So you actually move a corps as one unit? I always spread the divisions across a number of provinces... mhmm. Have I been doing that wrong all along?

Can you explain that overrunning to me? Do you mean being in the province the enemy is retreating to before they gets there? Doesn't that just make them retreat to another province?

 

[Kovax]

Can you explain that overrunning to me? Do you mean being in the province the enemy is retreating to before they gets there? Doesn't that just make them retreat to another province?

Eliminates them, if you occupy both the province they are in and are retreating to. HQs seem a little wonky, and don't always vanish.

 

[Pugmak]

So you actually move a corps as one unit? I always spread the divisions across a number of provinces... mhmm. Have I been doing that wrong all along?

Can you explain that overrunning to me? Do you mean being in the province the enemy is retreating to before they gets there? Doesn't that just make them retreat to another province?

You want to read up on "frontage", stacking and multiple axis of attack (tactical level). It's been too long since I played to explain the details. But there's those here to have it down pat and can provide you the true scoop.

There's also what I call a "two tier attack" which in effect means stacking a province with enough units to fill the frontage and be within stacking limits for the initial attack, then a division or two that weren't in the attack to immediately follow through and advance through the conquered province and thereby avoid the attack delay of the actual attacking units.

So, yeah, I stack by corps (5 divisions) most of the time. It also makes management of the overall force easier.

 

[incognitus]

There's also what I call a "two tier attack" which in effect means stacking a province with enough units to fill the frontage and be within stacking limits for the initial attack, then a division or two that weren't in the attack to immediately follow through and advance through the conquered province and thereby avoid the attack delay of the actual attacking units.

Don't all units involved in the attack get that annoying delay X? I think only troops that are sent into the target province AFTER the battle was one, get to move in without being unable to attack for ages. Of course in most cases some bastard brigade of the enemy will march into that province before they get their and "bless" them with a delay of their own. This game is broken in so many ways, it's almost funny...

So, yeah, I stack by corps (5 divisions) most of the time. It also makes management of the overall force easier.

It does, but it... triples (or more) the number of divisions needed to form a more or less solid front-line, doesn't it? I guess when conquering Italy from the north it would work with 5 corps or so, but in a country like Spain?
Certainly makes you far less vulnerable though...

 

[Pugmak]

Don't all units involved in the attack get that annoying delay X? I think only troops that are sent into the target province AFTER the battle was one, get to move in without being unable to attack for ages. Of course in most cases some bastard brigade of the enemy will march into that province before they get their and "bless" them with a delay of their own. This game is broken in so many ways, it's almost funny...
It does, but it... triples (or more) the number of divisions needed to form a more or less solid front-line, doesn't it? I guess when conquering Italy from the north it would work with 5 corps or so, but in a country like Spain?
Certainly makes you far less vulnerable though...

I'm not smart enough to do that interspersed stuff in comments so I'll go all at once

The attack delay only gets stuck to those divisions that participated in the actual attack, or were in a province that got attacked.

Lets say I have a corps of 5 divs and each div has 3 line brigades. If I stack that corps in a single province, I can commit 4 divs to the attack which fills the frontage while keeping one div in that province on hold to exploit the gap made by the other for divs since that 5th div won't have an attack delay because it didn't participate in the attack. Or, I can use that 5th div to expand a bordering corps' attack by adding the 5th div to that neighboring corps' attack because a second axis of attack adds more frontage to fit attacking brigs into and doesn't break the stacking limit.

Other part:

Yes. Stacking by corps is country and force size dependent. I don't mess with minors so not up on the needs there.

 

[Kovax]

The convenience of being able to click on the HQ's green bar and move the entire Corps in nice, but I rarely (if ever) throw a whole division into a single attack from one province.

On the other hand, if you pre-placed a division in each of the adjacent provinces that are also in contact with your target province, you can individually commit one from each province, which sticks the opponent with an additional 5% "Encirclement" penalty (for facing 3 axis of attack), as well as giving you 5 more frontage for each of those two flanking attacks. At that point, you can easily throw an entire infantry division into the fray to punch a hole, and have a fast armor division chomping at the bit for a chance to race through the gap as soon as opposing units break and run, or else hold one infantry division out of the fight to push ahead with no attack delay.

Depending on the length of the combat and your Attack Movement doctrines, your divisions involved in the fight may actually get there first, and if it's a REALLY long battle (which means you did something wrong), they may even be at the end of their attack delay around the time they arrive in the contested province. I've made overruns, breakthroughs, and encirclements with an entirely infantry-based force on many occasions, it's just harder.

 

[Pugmak]

The convenience of being able to click on the HQ's green bar and move the entire Corps in nice, but I rarely (if ever) throw a whole division into a single attack from one province.

On the other hand, if you pre-placed a division in each of the adjacent provinces that are also in contact with your target province, you can individually commit one from each province, which sticks the opponent with an additional 5% "Encirclement" penalty (for facing 3 axis of attack), as well as giving you 5 more frontage for each of those two flanking attacks. At that point, you can easily throw an entire infantry division into the fray to punch a hole, and have a fast armor division chomping at the bit for a chance to race through the gap as soon as opposing units break and run, or else hold one infantry division out of the fight to push ahead with no attack delay.

Depending on the length of the combat and your Attack Movement doctrines, your divisions involved in the fight may actually get there first, and if it's a REALLY long battle (which means you did something wrong), they may even be at the end of their attack delay around the time they arrive in the contested province. I've made overruns, breakthroughs, and encirclements with an entirely infantry-based force on many occasions, it's just harder.

I think you used division in place of corps in there in places. If so, it might cause some confusion.