Division composition

[sresk]

Since those support companies are division wide it might make sense to try to reach the maximum of 25 battalions per division.

.

I'm pretty sure the reason you don't want to do this is to make sure you have enough divisions to fill a front. If 2 divisions of of 12 brigades are statistically similar to 1 division of 24 or 4 division of 6 brigades (with the only cost difference the need to double up on the support units) then if your fighting on a huge spread out front (barbarossa) you'd need the larger number of diluted divisions, and then just rely on your reinforce speed to make sure that all of your more dilute division make it into your combat width.

Actually that gets me thinking further about combat width. I assume it's prohibitively expensive to build 25 brigades of heavy tanks, so your armor divisions are more than likely only going to be 4-10 divisions and if you want enough combat width to make sure those armor division can join the battle you likely won't want 25 brigades of infantry in one division. You'll want smaller chunks of units to make sure that there is room for reinforcements.

 

[Bocaj78]

hey its not one division that breaks the line it was many diffrent types of divisions in the invasions of the su and poland according to heinz guderian the infintry divisions came first then the tanks snuck trought the gaps and then caused a whole bunch of chaos.

 

[kviiri]

So really with art being only 500 manpower and .5 combat width you almost need to compare the art stats x2 (which likely make the reduced org meaningless) so now it just comes down to "do i have enough production capacity to afford them?"

That assuming you routinely get into battles large enough to make width an actual issue. Artillery loses value on a wider front where there's more width to spare per unit. Also it has abysmal defense.

 

[Denkt]

Artillery is not that expensive as there are many battalions that are more expensive such as motorised at about 200 production cost. It is just that infantry is extreamly cheap to field.

Artillery need 1 combat width while infantry need 2 so in terms of combat power you need to compare them 2 vs 1.

 

[Quendallon]

That assuming you routinely get into battles large enough to make width an actual issue. Artillery loses value on a wider front where there's more width to spare per unit. Also it has abysmal defense.

I don't know for if this is how the mechanics work, but I would state that per value of combat width the defence is equal:
9 def for 1 width with artillery
18 def for 2 width with infantry which equals 9 def for 1 width.
And if this is the case then ART def is on par with infantry Def

Again I don't know if this is the way to calculate this.

 

[Denkt]

Im sure you are correct.

 

[kviiri]

I don't know for if this is how the mechanics work, but I would state that per value of combat width the defence is equal:
9 def for 1 width with artillery
18 def for 2 width with infantry which equals 9 def for 1 width.
And if this is the case then ART def is on par with infantry Def

Again I don't know if this is the way to calculate this.

Hm, that makes sense. However the cost efficiency is probably still better for infantry if the front is wide and the main limiting factor is IC, not MP.

 

[Quendallon]

Hm, that makes sense. However the cost efficiency is probably still better for infantry if the front is wide and the main limiting factor is IC, not MP.

This is true, and i think that is the trade off choice you can make:
Do you go Full Infantry for cost effective decent divisions
Or do you go 6x INF and 3x ART(for example) to get more attack power but lose more industry to building artillery.

And i think base front width is 40 or 60 (believe johan said this in a WWW but could still change before D-Day) so with 9x inf that is 2 or 3 divisions in a single battle at the same time.
so Unless you are using less than 2 or 3 divisions per battle, width might become an issue quite quickly (especially if you want to hammer 1 single province to cause a breakthrough)

 

[nastydisease]

You can widen the front by attacking from multiple provinces, but yeah, 2-3 per province sounds about right.

 

[gladius2metal]

I am really interested how the "best" ingame divisions will look like and how they will compare to the historical organizations and Table of Equipment and Organizations. This will also give us some measure how good the simulation in HOI4 is.

 

[kviiri]

What do you guys reckon will be the best use for tank battalions? As separate divisions or mixed in as support for infantry?

 

[Sun_Killer]

I don't know for if this is how the mechanics work, but I would state that per value of combat width the defence is equal:
9 def for 1 width with artillery
18 def for 2 width with infantry which equals 9 def for 1 width.
And if this is the case then ART def is on par with infantry Def

Again I don't know if this is the way to calculate this.

i think we shouldn´t take all this values too serious, the game still has to go through 2 1/2 months of balancing.

 

[nastydisease]

What do you guys reckon will be the best use for tank battalions? As separate divisions or mixed in as support for infantry?

Probably separately or with MOT mixed in to flesh them out if you cant get enough for your needs as exploitation divisions.

Basically encircling enemies is so powerful you're better off massing your armor to make punctures in the lines and then rushing fast units through the holes made by the armor. The armor can then simply be left behind as a powerful defensive unit to keep the supply line open for the exploitation, or rushed in as well.

Also Armour are wasted in particular provinces such as mountains so having them in every division can be wasteful.

 

[gladius2metal]

i think we shouldn´t take all this values too serious, the game still has to go through 2 1/2 months of balancing.

looking at the Black Ice Mod for HOI3 I would say at least 2 1/2 decades of balancing

 

[Mannstien]

We got no specific bonus atm no, and its something we are still tweaking stats for.

Based on Podcat's comment in the Combined Arms thread it could be that this might impact my initial thoughts on division composition and will change if they do implement the CA bonus but I'll need to see if/when it is implemented what kind of bonus it comes with I think.

 

[Lither]

What do you guys reckon will be the best use for tank battalions? As separate divisions or mixed in as support for infantry?

Best use as probably historical; independent divisions with integrated mobile infantry and artillery battalions

 

[jalapen0]

i think we shouldn´t take all this values too serious, the game still has to go through 2 1/2 months of balancing.

Absolutely agree. Its fun to read the debate though. I'm interested in the thoughts of everyone smarter than me.

 

[staubsauger]

Being a HOI noob I can't tell whether it's been in previous games, but could someone tell me what the parachute symbol in the division designer(top right corner) means? Something about paratroopers or air supply maybe?

 

[tommylotto]

Best use as probably historical; independent divisions with integrated mobile infantry and artillery battalions

By the start of 1945, the US had 61 independent tank battalions and 73 independent tank destroyer battalions. In the ETO alone there were 31 independent tank battalions and 52 independent tank destroyer battalions. They spent most of their time attached to infantry divisions providing armored support.

 

[Denkt]

Being a HOI noob I can't tell whether it's been in previous games, but could someone tell me what the parachute symbol in the division designer(top right corner) means? Something about paratroopers or air supply maybe?

Tell if the battalion can be airdroped or not. A division can only be airdroped if all battalions allow it.