Brigade research bizarrities?

[unmerged(43142)]

First time I've fired up CORE this generation.

I admit that I'm in way over my head on the new research tree, but it seems like some of the brigade research is punitive. Not the actual brigade units, but just the research alone hurts your unbrigaded divisions according to the tech screen.

Tank destroyers, Self Propelled artillery and Antitank gun research all make regular divisions more expensive without any benefit, other than an insignificant desert bonus for TD.

Infantry tanks and Heavy tanks have all sorts of negative effects on tracked divisions, with the only benefit is later Infantry tanks making armor less expensive.

Why does knowing how to build a Tiger (but not actually building it) make a division of Panzer IVs more expensive and crappier in difficult terrain? Unless you are assuming that all armor divisions get some Tigers, but then they should get some benefit too. It would seem the only logical thing to do is avoid researching these brigades, which I did in Vanilla anyway. Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Hagar]

Dec's really the one to answer this, but he's off flying again (might be back any day now though). But TDs, SPA and AT certainly have their uses. Personally I consider heavy tanks and infrantry tanks to be dead ends - they certainly were in real life as well.

 

[unmerged(101225)]

I think it is assumed Tigers make up an invisible part of any armored division in small numbers. Part of the abstracted "infantry" and "armored" divisions. I would think the same goes for AT and such, as a guess.


I have a lot of trouble seeing which brigades I should use, so I usually choose to just roleplay it.

Some have good stats but negative ORG bonus, that sort of thing.

 

[Denniss]

I have a lot of trouble seeing which brigades I should use, so I usually choose to just roleplay it.
Some have good stats but negative ORG bonus, that sort of thing.

Use ART for RES or Rocket ART if you have.
Use SP-ART for INF, MOT, MEC or ARM (or Rocket-ART)
Use Pioneer for Mountain, or use ART if you dan't care about the possible movement loss.
Paratroops should use Pioneer as well.
HQ should use AA, GAR only Police.

If you have no ability to use ART (CHI for example) then use Pioneer.
As Germany I like to use Assault guns for almost evrything except those who can't use them.

 

[HistoryMan]

One of the issues with Infantry Tanks and Heavy Tanks is the dilution of effort - instead on concentrating on 2 or 3 models of tank, you try to work on 5 or 6 or even more, and this leads to a loss of focus and that is partly what causes the penalties to other tank types when you decide to research the heavies, say.

Tim

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

What is at work here is a pair of things being modeled. When you develop these sort of units there is a substitution effect and these new weapons end up as part of the basic divisional TO&E as was mentioned before. There is also a crossflow effect in that research into extreme designs tends to pull the average design toward the new extreme. Thus Germany ended up with heavier medium tanks than the USSR (which continued light tank development) or the USA (which continued light tank development and really didn't pursue heavy tanks until very late in the war.

WRT the actual effects, most of these techs do have some beneficial effects. It's just that the game engine makes it difficult to see them. For example, Heavy Tanks increase Organization for Armor and Light Armor formations while Infantry Tanks do this for both Armor types and Mechanized as well.

IMO I wouldn't research the specialized armor brigade types unless you actually want to build the Brigades themselves. Tank Destroyer and SPA both provide more benefits and are probablly a good bargain overall. This represents the increased mobility these platforms generate compared to standard AT and Artillery. Rocket Artillery is also a pretty good bargain if you can afford the research slots.

mm