Do you use artillery?

[krieger11b]

You should have kept the LT's, you could use them as your initial PZ GRP West, while your MT's are used for Barbarossa. Split out the 6 LT brig and create a div: 1LT 2MOT and 1TD...you'll wind up with a 6div (3 crps) reserve for the Western Theatre. Good hunting in the East.

It didn't seem worth the cost of supplies, and upgrades to keep them along for that long and for a unit that is less effective than a medium, I bet if someone did the numbers they would have ended up costing more than replacing them with medium tanks at that point.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

Art is good if you have a narrow frontline to cover or few MP and want to add some punch to your divisions.

My usual infantry division setup is INF-INF-ART or INF-INF-ART-ART for fort busters & def line breakers.

ART is an okay division, esp against the maginotline as it has a decent fort attack bonus, plus: only 1-2 techs needed, so you can research it rather quickly.

 

[panzeroo]

i always try to build infantry divisions with an art brigade attached
the other brigades all seem abit useless for infantry as compared to artillery

 

[greendevil]

I usually build a 4 INF brigades divisions and for arty i create divisions with 1xINF and 2xART (or 1x in case im not using a great power) with a ration of 4 inf divs : 1 art div

 

[kigrwik]

That's why I've edited the teach files and give Infantry, Motorized, and Mechanized about 1/6 of the benefit of the Artillery techs.

Now *this*is an interesting approach.

So if we consider that INF only carries light artillery (mortars and such), then it gets improved with the proper techs. But if you consider that each inf brigade also has a couple of heavy guns, then it gets some improved punch.

 

[kigrwik]

If I had to guess, I would say that an artie brigade has no more tha 100 heavy and medium guns, since is uses 1000 MP, it reasonable to guess that 10 men (5 manning, 5 coordinating fire and bringing up more ammo) per gun is a fine number

Those seem like good numbers, but Kursk (which I mentioned earlier) had something like 20k heavy guns. This would mean 200 ART brigades. It was about 1/3 of the whole Red Army's artillery, so that would mean a total of 600 ART brigades. Does that sound reasonable ?

Well, actually, yes... I guess. Come to think of it, it's even a bit short. Anyway, we're in the same ballpark.

 

[unmerged(3221)]

To correct some misinformation scattered above:

Both arty and infantry bde use 100 officers
Inf use 3.33 manpower while arty uses 1.33
Arty uses 1 supply while inf uses 0.67
Arty and inf have the same speed [unlike HOI2]

If you have enough leaders/officers, then adding arty to infantry is generally cost effective. For your typical combat width of 10, 3 inf + arty with 4 divisions per corps is probably the most effective combination [16 attacking bde]. You can also use 2 inf + 2 arty to create a breakthru corps of 5 divisions [20 attacking bde]. Drawback to fewer inf bde is that they are not so good if they are on the defensive.

If you do not have a lot of leaders/officers, then stick to plain inf. Arty bde use as many officers as inf bde. Best corps set up when you do not have lots of leaders/officers would be a corps of 5 plain [size 4] inf div, rearrange inf bde into the HQ to make them fighting formations, with 6 fighting divisions spread out over 2 provinces.

And to stretch that even further if you do not have enough leaders/officers, substitute militia for infantry on a half and half basis: 12 militia, 11 inf, and an HQ for 6 fighting divisions in a corps spread over 2 provinces.

http://www.paradoxian.org/hoi3wiki/Strategy has 2 articles about division building which might be useful with links to some forum discussions. Lots of discussion about this in August.

 

[unmerged(85507)]

I use inf+3arty. Some player may call it gamey but it works wonder. Less MP, more firepower, less research, smaller combat width.

I would not call this gamey. It is the rich man´s war if you have enough industry.

 

[unmerged(85298)]

if you dont have supply problems make 1 inf +3 art
why make this ?

if you have 1 inf and 3 art
you have max firepower
it costs minimal manpower
and ih has a small combat wight thats mean you can add more divisions to combat so if there is a province that has 10 combat with you can attack with (1inf+3art=1 cw) 10 divisions and if you attack with (4inf=4 cw) 2.5 division so i thnk best choice 1inf+3art

 

[womble]

if you dont have supply problems make 1 inf +3 art
why make this ?

if you have 1 inf and 3 art
you have max firepower
it costs minimal manpower
and ih has a small combat wight thats mean you can add more divisions to combat so if there is a province that has 10 combat with you can attack with (1inf+3art=1 cw) 10 divisions and if you attack with (4inf=4 cw) 2.5 division so i thnk best choice 1inf+3art

Those 10 divisions, though, contain 40 Brigades, which is, according to my limited understanding, a 40% stacking penalty, so your 10 Divs fight like 6 while drawing the logistics of 10, and you still need divisions to hold the line and fill in behind, so the manpower you need to cover a given frontage isn't much reduced... While the spearhead is important, it's not the whole story.

If you have the logisitcal superiority to 'waste' 40% of a 10 division strike force, the outcome probably isn't in doubt unless you do something dumb, whatever your force composition.

 

[Onedreamer]

Now *this*is an interesting approach.

So if we consider that INF only carries light artillery (mortars and such), then it gets improved with the proper techs. But if you consider that each inf brigade also has a couple of heavy guns, then it gets some improved punch.

Infantry already has a tech for mortars/light artillery, it's called Inf. Support Weapons. It makes no sense to give Inf light art. a bonus from researching Heavy Art., and not vice versa.

Artillery is ok, but you have to weigh thier extra damage, against the leadership for researching them. Combined its like 10 techs just to get to 1936, if you don't start out with them.

8 techs, and only 4 if you focus on soft attack, which will be higher than an infantry brigade '36 IIRC, so yeah they are worth it IMO.

 

[unmerged(57661)]

what about 3 inf + 2 art?

 

[unmerged(149317)]

I've been experimenting with a 2x Inf, 1x Arty, 1x Anti-Air in Diday's Unique units as Germany. The additional 88s technology makes the Anti-air brigades pretty good anti-tank brigades.

 

[egross]

It depends on who I am playing. When I play the US, and often Germany, I give every division an extra brigade of something, making sure each 5-division corps has attached artillery, anti-tank, anti-aircraft and engineers. When the corps operates together, the synergy is great.

When I'm the Soviet Union I make lots of triangular infantry divisions, and then give each army an attached "Guards" corps with artillery and rocket brigades attached to their divisions.

 

[wokelly]

what about 3 inf + 2 art?

About to say no one seems to bother with superior firepower doctrine. I always research it and usually get it on the eve of war.

My Infantry units area always 3 inf brigades, 1 Arty and 1 AT, usually makes for a pretty powerful and self containing Div, though air support is required on my part. Been tempted to try 2 inf, 1 Arty, 1 AT and 1 AAA.

I use inf+3arty. Some player may call it gamey but it works wonder. Less MP, more firepower, less research, smaller combat width.

I do wish there was some bonus for having more infantry, since casualties would be spread out across several brigades and thus there would be less attrition on the valuable veterans who usually become the core of the division and teach replacements their trade. One brigade taking all the casualties would badly wear it out quickly.

 

[Charles Louis]

About to say no one seems to bother with superior firepower doctrine. I always research it and usually get it on the eve of war.

I far more frequently go the other direction and build 2+1 divisions or 3+0, maintaining supply for five brigades is too hard to many places. I've made a few 4+1 for use in Russia as lead divisions, but only a few.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

Playing ITA right now, I noticed the massive effect of British bombers in my africa campaign. Right now I am thinking about using INF-INF-ART-AA divisions. AA has good stats during the early game and provides a lot of cover against air attacks - and later, I can still use them for my MIL beach garrisons...

 

[unmerged(90249)]

I do use in early war (1939/1940) the following pattern :

INF * 3 + ENG *1

or

INF * 3 + armored car * 1

I do push 3 ART in the HQ corp

I am not sure it's the most efficient, but that was the pattern used in real life (untill the end of years 1980') , divison having 'light ' artillery, the heavy being kept at the corp level (eventually with more heavier such as rocket artillery at the army level) to create a 'schwer punkt', instead of spread it at the tactical level.

I must confess I have some kind of fun, as it make the HQ usable as a front line unit (assuming there is at least another unit with). I do add an armored car when I am able to have 5 bge per div.

 

[Illusori]

I do push 3 ART in the HQ corp

Oh, I do like that idea from a themic perspective. And it gives you some added low-frontage punch as a reserve force.

Not sure it's neccessarily hugely effective, but it is appealing still.

 

[unmerged(52507)]

I usually use a 3inf + 1 Arty div along with 2 straight 3inf Divs in a Commonwealth corps. I do it for a little extra punch and for historical flavour - calling the arty bde IICorps Arty or whatever.