Best Armoured Div build?

[Cybvep]

I always build Arm/Arm/Mec/SPArt/Eng. That's the best I think

No, it isn't. Compared to 2xARM+1xMEC+1xSPART+1xTD, it's less powerful, more soft (~55% softness doesn't give it a bonus against soft units!), has lower BWA, lower HA, lower DEF and THG and lower MOR. Even though it has lower nominal supply and fuel consumption (although not by very much), it is less cost effective both in terms of BWA per MP and BWA per supply and fuel consumption. Its only important advantage is higher speed, but it's not an exploitation division, anyway.

 

[unmerged(246246)]

No, it isn't. Compared to 2xARM+1xMEC+1xSPART+1xTD, it's less powerful, more soft (~55% softness doesn't give it a bonus against soft units!), has lower BWA, lower HA, lower DEF and THG and lower MOR. Even though it has lower nominal supply and fuel consumption (although not by very much), it is less cost effective both in terms of BWA per MP and BWA per supply and fuel consumption. Its only important advantage is higher speed, but it's not an exploitation division, anyway.

What is your offer??

 

[Oobro]

I'm pretty much interested in your viewpoints of Armor divisions as Germany for Barbarossa. I play the ICE Mod.
I usually go for 3Arm+1AC. France usually falls pretty easy, but I do suffer massive supply issues when using this formations for Barbarossa.

So what formations do you guys prefer for Barbarossa and how many divisions to you tend to use?

 

[merserm]

I'm pretty much interested in your viewpoints of Armor divisions as Germany for Barbarossa. I play the ICE Mod.
I usually go for 3Arm+1AC. France usually falls pretty easy, but I do suffer massive supply issues when using this formations for Barbarossa.

So what formations do you guys prefer for Barbarossa and how many divisions to you tend to use?

If supply is a significant concern, you could look at the previously mention 2 Mot, 2 TD. It's far cheaper for fuel, supplies and IC cost, while maintaining CA, and adequate speed.

Resist the urge to upgrade your MOT to MEC, which would negate the advantages you seek.

 

[Oobro]

If supply is a significant concern, you could look at the previously mention 2 Mot, 2 TD. It's far cheaper for fuel, supplies and IC cost, while maintaining CA, and adequate speed.

Resist the urge to upgrade your MOT to MEC, which would negate the advantages you seek.

Cheers, but how about Soft attack and softness. 3ARM/1AC brings some solid bonus for attacking soft targets. 2MOT/2TD seems to focus more on hardattack and seems more vunrable against soft units.

 

[Cybvep]

Try 2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART.

 

[Secret Master]

Cheers, but how about Soft attack and softness. 3ARM/1AC brings some solid bonus for attacking soft targets. 2MOT/2TD seems to focus more on hardattack and seems more vunrable against soft units.

You can't have it all.

When using TDs in this way, you are giving up some extra soft attack upfront for a 30% increase (or more, depending on leaders) in overall combat efficiency. It's trade off, but one that I think is worth it in 90% of circumstances. Furthermore, it means that every one of these divisions doesn't give a damn about enemy armor. Even though I hate MOT for most situations (not enough like MECH to be awesome, motorized enough to get terrain penalties that INF doesn't get), it's less of a strain on logistics and costs less IC. Works just fine in open terrain.

If you are really looking for lots of soft attack, you would want to go with MECH/TD, but that's more expensive and strains logistics more. You could also do something like HARM/SPART, but that's even more expensive, uses more fuel and is slower.

But if I am just worried about SA and not speed or hardness, I just go with 2xINF, 2xARTY anyway. Plenty of SA for the cost and uses no fuel. But it's slow, has low toughness, and is 100% soft. Oh, and it hates certain terrain thanks to having a lot of ARTY.

 

[Cybvep]

But if I am just worried about SA and not speed or hardness, I just go with 2xINF, 2xARTY anyway. Plenty of SA for the cost and uses no fuel. But it's slow, has low toughness, and is 100% soft. Oh, and it hates certain terrain thanks to having a lot of ARTY.

It's very MP-efficient, has high BWA and has 2 width instead of 3 width. 5-10% efficiency difference in harsh terrain compared to 3xINF+1xART is not enough to offset these advantages.

Furthermore, it means that every one of these divisions doesn't give a damn about enemy armor.

Not true. It is less efficient than 2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART against hard targets even if it is facing 3xARM+1xENG, i.e. a division with softness well below 50%. The way it is balanced now, its relative lack of SA will make it not very efficient against most targets (even the "hard" ones) and its HA, while high, is not high enough to compensate. Moreover, it is soft, so armoured divs gain a bonus against it.

Its main advantage is relatively low logistical strain and high BWA per supply and fuel usage. It will also increase Mobile practical, so you can field MEC more easily later, but it's not that IC is a big constraint in HOI3, anyway. In 1941/42 I always end up with more IC than I can effectively use.

 

[Secret Master]

It's very MP-efficient, has high BWA and has 2 width instead of 3 width. 5-10% efficiency difference in harsh terrain compared to 3xINF+1xART is not enough to offset these advantages.

Well, it is my preferred build for those very reasons.

However, for mountains or amphibious assaults/rivers, I prefer MTN/MAR. Of course, I wouldn't use armored units in those environments, either.

 

[merserm]

If supply is a significant concern, you could look at the previously mention 2 Mot, 2 TD. It's far cheaper for fuel, supplies and IC cost, while maintaining CA, and adequate speed.

Resist the urge to upgrade your MOT to MEC, which would negate the advantages you seek.

Perhaps strike a balance. I'm playing FTM, but for Poland + France I built 1 Army of 4 Corps 3Arm+1Eng. Once I hit Doctrine I increased to 3Arm+2Eng.

Infra in France and Poland makes this work w/o problems.
Naturally, the majority of my army is INF. I like mostly 3Inf+1Art, with a few 3Inf+Eng, and enough 3Gar for Ports.

After France I'm splitting my 4 Corps of Arm in half. And I create 2 Panzer Armies of 3 corp 2Mot+2TD, and (previously built) 2 Corp of 3Arm+2Eng.

It gives me plenty of punch, while helping with the supply issues that are going to occur in USSR. I like Eng over AC, but it might be a coin toss.

 

[Cybvep]

Of course, I wouldn't use armored units in those environments, either.

While it makes little sense, armoured units get no (you got it right: zero) defensive penalties in HOI3. This means that in Europe, where infra is high practically everywhere, you can effectively halt the enemy advance in the mountains by fielding some MTNs and "hard" armoured divisions. It will be very, very hard to dislodge those units. CAS would be my best bet.

Perhaps strike a balance. I'm playing FTM, but for Poland + France I built 1 Army of 4 Corps 3Arm+1Eng.

Why not 2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART? 3xARM+1xENG is more efficient in mountains, jungles, marshes and urban environments - places where you will normally avoid using armoured divs on attack and as Germany, you are mostly concerned with attacking.

It gives me plenty of punch, while helping with the supply issues that are going to occur in USSR.

3xARM+1xENG is TERRIBLE when it comes to logistical strain.

 

[blue emu]

... MOTx2/TDx2...

Cheers, but how about Soft attack and softness. 3ARM/1AC brings some solid bonus for attacking soft targets. 2MOT/2TD seems to focus more on hardattack and seems more vunrable against soft units.

Be aware that with a combat width of two (instead of three for your 3ARM/1AC build) you can pack six of them into a single-province breakthrough attack instead of four. That means that they will generate 50% more Soft Attack on-target and can withstand 50% more ORG damage than their base stats would indicate.

You can also build nearly 2-for-1... they cost less than 55% as much as the Armor, and the practicals will gear up faster.

 

[merserm]

With 38 Techs

3Arm+Eng = 5.65 Supplies, 10.58 Fuel.
2Arm+Mot+SPArt = 5.32 Supplies, 8.95 Fuel

I will definitely consider it, however, I like the reduced practicals of arm+eng early in the game.
The 2nd Eng I'll attach later is less supply/fuel than any other fast unit, which helps catch up the difference listed above.

Just my opinion, but the Eng terrain bonuses are worth it. Perhaps overlooked is the enormous bonus to Defense, so you can hold onto that breakthrough or attempted encirclement.

 

[merserm]

With 38 Techs

2Mot+2TD = 4 supplies, 4.3 Fuel.

Hmm...

 

[Secret Master]

While it makes little sense, armoured units get no (you got it right: zero) defensive penalties in HOI3. This means that in Europe, where infra is high practically everywhere, you can effectively halt the enemy advance in the mountains by fielding some MTNs and "hard" armoured divisions. It will be very, very hard to dislodge those units. CAS would be my best bet.

That's why I said "assault." On defense, hard units perform quite well as long as they are supplied. Whether it should be that way is another question.

I should have been more clear.

 

[blue emu]

With 38 Techs

2Mot+2TD = 4 supplies, 4.3 Fuel.

Hmm...

So even TWO of them use less fuel than either of the Armor builds...

I tend to build both... a few Armored Corps for the initial breakthrough against tough resistance, and lots of MOT/TD to bulk-out my mobile forces for the more fluid, mobile actions that take place once the front-line becomes unstable.

After all... you don't need high hardness everywhere, but high speed will be very useful wherever the fixed front line gets un-hinged.

 

[Cybvep]

With 38 Techs

3Arm+Eng = 5.65 Supplies, 10.58 Fuel.
2Arm+Mot+SPArt = 5.32 Supplies, 8.95 Fuel

I will definitely consider it, however, I like the reduced practicals of arm+eng early in the game.
The 2nd Eng I'll attach later is less supply/fuel than any other fast unit, which helps catch up the difference listed above.

3xARM+1xEng are inferior to 2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART both in terms of nominal logistical strain and BWA per supplies and fuel in every terrain type.

2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART (without any additional brigades!) is more cost-effective than 3xARM+2xENG in good terrain and on plans and it even has higher nominal BWA.

2xARM+1xMOT+1xSPART is a really powerful composition.

 

[delra]

is more cost-effective

Yes, good luck doing 6 doctrines just for your spearheads which aren't even 1/10 of your total forces and riding your blitzkrieg at -2/3 penalty through rivers...

 

[Kraxis]

So even TWO of them use less fuel than either of the Armor builds...

I tend to build both... a few Armored Corps for the initial breakthrough against tough resistance, and lots of MOT/TD to bulk-out my mobile forces for the more fluid, mobile actions that take place once the front-line becomes unstable.

After all... you don't need high hardness everywhere, but high speed will be very useful wherever the fixed front line gets un-hinged.

Haha... Pretty much my way of doing it too. True armoured divisions for the exploitation and the punishment of specific targets (getting rid of newly formed units standing in the way, which would cause some hiccups with the followup units due to Org regeneration). The Mot. CA divisions for closing the bag behind the spearheads. Then finally normal Inf for the actual reduction, or breakout from the 'corridor'.

 

[blue emu]

Haha... Pretty much my way of doing it too. True armoured divisions for the exploitation and the punishment of specific targets (getting rid of newly formed units standing in the way, which would cause some hiccups with the followup units due to Org regeneration). The Mot. CA divisions for closing the bag behind the spearheads. Then finally normal Inf for the actual reduction, or breakout from the 'corridor'.

My typical Armored Corps at the start of the war (1939) is five Divisions:

one LARMx3/AC
two ARMx2/MOT/SPA
two MOTx2/TDx2

... the Medium Armor Divisions are used for break-through (unless my INFx2/ARTx2 Divisions can accomplish it unassisted) and for dealing with tough resistance, the Light Armor is for exploitation and pinning attacks on nearby defenders that I want immobilized, and the Motorized are for raising Hell in the enemy's rear areas.

I try to pair them each with a Motorized Corps:

five MOTx2/TDx2