DIVISION SET UP with superior firepower

[harezmi]

As Germany, i`m playing my first game (it has been a month) and i have a few questions regarding the division set up. I have superior firepower doctrine researched.

1. Coastal defense: i first built garrisons for beach defense but then i realized that the only advantage of Garrison is the built time. Why do i waste the manpower for garrisons, i can just build infantry. let`s say I don`t have IC problem.

if i build 2xINF, 1xArt, 1xEng (it is said that it doubles the fort efficiency), would it be a good idea? then, in the long term, i can use them somewhere else. i think i don`t need to add a 2nd ART brigade and 4 brigades would be enough for defending a port with coastal forts. since i didn`t play that much, i have no idea how big the AI can make an invasion.

is it also true that AI just invades the cities with the ports? then, i can just defend the ports ???

2. Spearhead: is 2xARM, 2xSP-ART, 1xENG a good combination? does it give me CA bonus? in the game, we have rivers everywhere. It is very annoying to get crossing river penalty all the time. i usually let INF fight and ARM make the encirclements but i still need the ARM fight itself a lot. that`s why i want to add ENG. i don`t like MOT, SP-RART or AC btw.

3. Regular: 2xINF, 2xART, 1xENG . this way i can put more divisions in the fight. do you think, is it a good set up of division? I don`t like TD, AA, HA or AT . i don`t want to spend neither IC-MP nor research slot for them and i think i can survive without them.

4. Support: ??? Why do i need it? is it a must or just for flavor?

5. Specials: 5xPARA afaik i can`t have other brigades for airborne missions ???

4xMAR, 1xENG marines already have reduced penalty for rivers, how much does an ENG help? if i add ART, do i have any penalty for amphibious assault and speed? is 5xMAR better?
4xMNT, 1xENG do i need ENG? can it be just 5xMTN or can i use ART instead but then speed will be an issue i think, may be SP-ART???

i spend a lot of time in the forum as a reader. i read more than i play for know. i didn`t find satisfying answers for those questions above in the other threads so far. may be i just couldn`t find them. i know everyone has a different strategy but i just want to hear your experience and opinions.

thanks in advance for your answers.

 

[unmerged(146452)]

I use Garrisons as Germany. They are just as effective in combat and doesn't cost as much manpower. Usually I like to build 3x Garrison Brigades + 1 Anti Air Brigade. Invading the netherlands, fighting in belgium and france I am often attacked from the rear with amphibious attacks. While invading countries I like to time my builds so I have Garrisons ready for deployment to protect Ports. The AI actually does do landings other than ports. They are quickly defeated though because of my reserves in the backline.

For river crossings I usually do 2x Inf + 2x Eng. With 1939 Assault Weapons and Briding Equipment researched this almost negates a river crossing penalty. With Engineer Traits on both the division and Corps the penalty is eliminated all together. I usually build between 8-9 Engineer corps each with 3 Divisions of this composition. These formations also excel at attacking Urban areas as well.

 

[blue emu]

I use Garrisons as Germany. They are just as effective in combat and doesn't cost as much manpower.

The important thing is that they dopn't cost as much Leadership. Far less, in fact. I prefer GARx2/ARTx2 for Port defense.

... is 5xMAR better?

Yes.

 

[scroggin]

2. Spearhead: is 2xARM, 2xSP-ART, 1xENG a good combination? does it give me CA bonus? in the game, we have rivers everywhere. It is very annoying to get crossing river penalty all the time. i usually let INF fight and ARM make the encirclements but i still need the ARM fight itself a lot. that`s why i want to add ENG. i don`t like MOT, SP-RART or AC btw.

In the production screen the softness vaues of each brigade is listed. To find out if a division will have combined arms bonus just add all the softness values togeather and divide by the number of brigades if it comes out between 33% and 66% softness you have the bonus
2xArm @ 20% + 2xSPart @ 70% + 1xENG @ 95% = 275 divide by 5 = 55% softness -Yes it has the combined arms bonus

4. Support: ??? Why do i need it? is it a must or just for flavor?
- Support gives you more firepower without taking up any combat width meaning you can put more punch into a smaller area.

 

[Darkrenown]

In the production screen the softness vaues of each brigade is listed. To find out if a division will have combined arms bonus just add all the softness values togeather and divide by the number of brigades if it comes out between 33% and 66% softness you have the bonus
2xArm @ 20% + 2xSPart @ 70% + 1xENG @ 95% = 275 divide by 5 = 55% softness -Yes it has the combined arms bonus

You could calculate it yourself, but why would you? The division's softness is shown on the right of the screen, and the softness icon lights up if it's in the CA range.

Also, for divisions in general, are you not better sticking to 3 or 4 width division so you can fit an extra unit into the availible frontage?

 

[scroggin]

You could calculate it yourself, but why would you? The division's softness is shown on the right of the screen, and the softness icon lights up if it's in the CA range.

Also, for divisions in general, are you not better sticking to 3 or 4 width division so you can fit an extra unit into the availible frontage?

I hadnt noticed that tag......thanks now I wont need the calculator when Im playing LOL

 

[Oof]

If you are contructing divisions, just keep an eye on the speed of each individual regiment. I dont know em all by head, but for example you dont wanna combine ART with ARM, ART has a speed of 4 mph while ARM is 8 mph.

For GAR is use 3 reg GAR for things like ports. I dont find it nessecary to add AA to them. I use 2 reg GAR for non essential areas. The biggest plus of GAR is that use less supplies, are quicker to construct and upgrade and cost less manpower. And in SF you can now convert them as well, so even if you end up with too many GAR, you can always upgrade them to MOT, ARM, INF, etc. Just click on the spanner of the regiment and the options appear.

For land units I hardly ever use attached units like AA, AT etc. Its not because I dont wanna, but so far i havent had the need in combat and it also frees up leadership. But i am still looking for someone who can convince me of their use and advantage and can tell me at what level they are effective? Or if the tech should be kept up to date at all times?

 

[unmerged(3221)]

You do not have to upgrade your divisions to 5 bde. That's a lot of tedious micromanagement to get bde to where you want them. And you have to pay attention to combat width, so if you set up your Corps to fill the province combat width, then only add support bde.

Note that any support bde effects are averaged, so if you add an engineer bde to a 4 bde division, the effects of that bde are only 1/5 effective. Due to the dilution, I wouldn't bother doing that.

The AI will invade non naval base provinces. Place something on every coastal province to either stop or slow down the AI's invasions. And have other units available to boost the defense.

As for using various kinds of bde: they all require researching more tech. I personally limit them due to that fact so that I can do other things with leadership while researching naval + air techs. Up to you how to balance that.

 

[Lauri]

Engineers use fuel, I tend to avoid them (unless it's panzers)
Using fuel on mountains or in amphibious assaults aren't always the best way.

For marines and Mountaineers, I tend to go 3x for them aswell, no support.

 

[1alexey]

Whell i think for spearhead 1*ARM+3SPA(APRA)+1TD(if no 4SPRA).
Allows you to have a huge punch, especially if IC and Leadershib aren`t bottlencks.
A good armygroup/teatre comander+human wave alows you to use 10 divisions atacking one province at the time. And even more if multidirection. My pleasure...

 

[juv95hrn]

As for using various kinds of bde: they all require researching more tech. I personally limit them due to that fact so that I can do other things with leadership while researching naval + air techs. Up to you how to balance that.

Although obviously the one-trick-pony builds are a lot more efficient I tend to notice more and more in MP that you actually need a diversity of bde versions to cope with different situations vs. a human opponent. Against the AI I'm pretty sure any version will work, but of course some are better than others.


Introducing defensiveness and thoughness into the game will just make this diversity more attractive, which is a good thing.

 

[juv95hrn]

Whell i think for spearhead 1*ARM+3SPA(APRA)+1TD(if no 4SPRA).
Allows you to have a huge punch, especially if IC and Leadershib aren`t bottlencks.
A good armygroup/teatre comander+human wave alows you to use 10 divisions atacking one province at the time. And even more if multidirection. My pleasure...

That's great when you attack. But when you need to defend? You just bring out your other panzer army, the defensive one? I'd prefer a more balanced build to be able to both attack and defend.

 

[Kovax]

As mentioned, GAR has the advantages over INF of requiring about 3/4 the Manpower, under half the Officers, and under half the supply usage. The slight disadvantages are that they are pathetically slow if you ever want to move them (but Strategic Redeploy works fine for that), and they're a bit fragile on the offensive (only if you have Defensiveness and Toughness modified to work properly in your game). Most depressingly though, they use the Militia techs, so that means more to research, or else fielding them with obsolete equipment and doctrines.

The only time I use mobile AA is on a HQ unit. By sending the HQ into the province you're attacking from, but not using it in the actual attack, it serves two roles. First, it reduces any casualties taken from air attacks against your attacking group. Second, it provides a little bit of extra backup in case the opponent decides to launch a "spoiling" attack on your attackers from another direction. As for actual damage to attacking aircraft, It's all but useless (as is Provincial AA). I recall having sent a group of 3XTAC to bomb enemy units in a province prior to assaulting them, and forgot about them for a few game days (more like 2 weeks). When I finally checked up on them, the bombers were slightly down in both ORG and STR, to about 96-98%. It was then that I noticed the AA unit in the province they were attacking. I'm not certain that the AA unit was there for the entire 2 weeks of constant bombing, but it doesn't seem to have made a hill of beans worth the difference to my attackers. Undoubtedly, it made the attacks somewhat less effective, but that's about all it did.

Mixing ENG in with ARM reduces the speed of the entire stack to that of the ENG unit, which negates half of the reason to have armored Divisions in the first place.

Pre-SF, the AI almost never launched an amphibious attack on a non-port coastal province. I've seen it happen, but can count the times on one hand, if not on one finger. Guarding the ports, and keeping a mobile reserve to deal with anything else, should be sufficient. If they can't take the port, they can't resupply, and you can demolish them at your leisure after their supplies run out.

 

[DanSez]

about mobile aa, due to an earlier thread by Slan, I tried building a group of 1INF 3AA and move them to cities where the Brits wanted to bomb. A stack of 4 of them, plus fighter support really tears up those bomber formations, much much more effective than the provence AAs. Until they fix that, I have started building a couple of corps of them for anti air suppression and the invasion of France. Even better using the Common Weapons where you can use mobile AA and Lt Inf (moves a bit faster without SR)

 

[1alexey]

That's great when you attack. But when you need to defend? You just bring out your other panzer army, the defensive one? I'd prefer a more balanced build to be able to both attack and defend.

Whell since you are defending at at least 1:1 odds(2:1 or 3:1 depending on enemyth dic structure) in your terms, It is still great, and can make a huge slaughter. By the way the Defencive and offencive combat is not really that different exept for defensivnes/toughtness which are not that differemt in quantity.
But once again key words were "spearhead" and "IC and leadership is not a bottleneck".

 

[ve3609]

As mentioned, GAR has the advantages over INF of requiring about 3/4 the Manpower, under half the Officers, and under half the supply usage. The slight disadvantages are that they are pathetically slow if you ever want to move them (but Strategic Redeploy works fine for that), and they're a bit fragile on the offensive (only if you have Defensiveness and Toughness modified to work properly in your game). Most depressingly though, they use the Militia techs, so that means more to research, or else fielding them with obsolete equipment and doctrines.

.

HPP fixes that last part.

 

[Pugmak]

You do not have to upgrade your divisions to 5 bde. That's a lot of tedious micromanagement to get bde to where you want them. And you have to pay attention to combat width, so if you set up your Corps to fill the province combat width, then only add support bde.

Note that any support bde effects are averaged, so if you add an engineer bde to a 4 bde division, the effects of that bde are only 1/5 effective. Due to the dilution, I wouldn't bother doing that.

The AI will invade non naval base provinces. Place something on every coastal province to either stop or slow down the AI's invasions. And have other units available to boost the defense.

As for using various kinds of bde: they all require researching more tech. I personally limit them due to that fact so that I can do other things with leadership while researching naval + air techs. Up to you how to balance that.

What I started doing, rather than carpet the entire coast, was to build "garrison corps" that had 3 garx2 artx2 divs and 2 standard inf units, of whatever division design I was goofing around with in that game. I'd put a corps per port area, some areas covered more than one port. This way, if the landing was local to a port, I had some counter attack ability. If the landing was distant from a port, I could detatch whatever standard inf divs necessary, reform them into offensive corps, and marshal out to meet the invaders.

The objective of the offensive corps' was more defensive, actually. Set up in favorable terrain in front of a landing and let them come to my forces. The idea was to slow the invasion down, keep it bottled up, and let it starve without access to ports. Works good against the AI (as nearly anything will). No clue if it works against players though.

 

[jju_57]

By the way the Defencive and offencive combat is not really that different exept for defensivnes/toughtness which are not that differemt in quantity.

Defensiveness and toughness is broken so there is no difference.

 

[Oof]

If you dont wanna use too many GAR to guardthe coast of Europe, invade England asap after the French surrender and make sure to take Iceland as well. If you do that, you need less troops to protect the coast. Most of the times guarding the ports will be enough because the enemy needs ports to supply their troops form the US. Or turn the US fascist...

 

[Kurospidey]

3. Regular: 2xINF, 2xART, 1xENG . this way i can put more divisions in the fight. do you think, is it a good set up of division? I don`t like TD, AA, HA or AT . i don`t want to spend neither IC-MP nor research slot for them and i think i can survive without them.

TDs are hugely underrated. Actually are the best support unit in terms of offensive growth due to technology evolution. +1.3 in hard attack per tech level (+1 for Anti Tank). Indeed they're quick (6.25 speed in 1936 and improve with tech also). You could combine them with motorized brigades and have a relatively low supply consumption, fast and versatile division. Your mots would grow your SA while your TD will focus on HA. I think they're better than Light Armor cause they consume less supplies + fuel and are cheaper to build also, but don't have the same popularity don't know why. I think this is in part because they don't give you the combined arms bonus AT THE BEGINNING, in 1936. But if you research the tech, by 1938, a div comprised of 3 Mot + 1 TD will have 66% softness so there you have it. And I don't think there's a lot of countries that are in disposition to enter war before 1938...

I'm gonna try this strategy in my next USSR game: build a lot of 3 mot + 1 td divisions. I think I should bear well against the germans in the western front.