What do you guys consider to be fantastic tank divisions templates regardless of being 20 or 40 width or anything in between? I am not talking about tank divisions you use to kill AI, I mean fighting in multiplayer games?
great tank divisions?
- Thread starter Stug_Life
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
ill go ahead and start. I just played a game the other night as Germany in a 17 player game. For my 39 war with the Allies I had light tank divisions consisting of the following: 4 light tanks, 3 motorized, and 2 light SPG. Then for my 41 war against the Soviets I had a division template: 4 medium tanks, 3 mechanized, 2 rocket motorized.
Fantastic tank divisions are always going to be debatable and depends on your playstyle. Every division template has a use and cost effectiveness, so you would employ heavy tanks very differently from a medium tank division.
If you do the math and compare the cost effectiveness of light tanks, it's not worth building them except in small numbers to help with the Spanish civil war as GER. You have access to Pz 3 by mid 1936, PZ 4 by 1937 and panthers by 1939 if you rush them, so there's really not much point in spending a ton of production for light tanks unless you have a specific use for them (cheesy light tank speed strats, fighting in Africa as 2nd tier units etc).
Generally, use as many tanks as it takes to give yourself armor advantage over the enemy, so a pure tank + MOT division works fine, or if you feel like flanking and spanking infantry then throw in SPG in the ratio of 3 ARM 2 SPG and 4 MOT (replacing MOT with armor depending on situation). It's pretty easy to get between 8 to 12 40 width armor divisions running by 1939 for France, and around 24-36 by the time of 1941 in my experience with the previously mentioned 6 ARM 4 SPG and 8 MOT division. I like this ratio because I've done the math before regarding stats and cost, and this delivers one of the most balanced tank divisions while fitting into most MP game rules.
It's important to note that regardless of the additional breakthrough, once incoming attacks are < defense/breakthrough, they always deliver the same amount of damage on average. 100 incoming damage does the same even with 101 breakthrough or 1000 breakthrough. Hardness increase from more ARM does directly reduce incoming damage (assuming incoming soft attack is higher than hard attack, but the decrease tends to be marginal. You also lose out on a lot of defense, HP, organisation, and increase supply usage when replacing MOT with ARM. It's not really worth the cost increase replacing MOT with more tanks when the cost increase is more than damage reduced or when the stats are not really being used.
That being said, the most fantastic tank division will be very hard pressed to deliver victory without sufficient air cover, and even a mediocre division will easily win with sufficient numbers of fighters and CAS supporting.
If you do the math and compare the cost effectiveness of light tanks, it's not worth building them except in small numbers to help with the Spanish civil war as GER. You have access to Pz 3 by mid 1936, PZ 4 by 1937 and panthers by 1939 if you rush them, so there's really not much point in spending a ton of production for light tanks unless you have a specific use for them (cheesy light tank speed strats, fighting in Africa as 2nd tier units etc).
Generally, use as many tanks as it takes to give yourself armor advantage over the enemy, so a pure tank + MOT division works fine, or if you feel like flanking and spanking infantry then throw in SPG in the ratio of 3 ARM 2 SPG and 4 MOT (replacing MOT with armor depending on situation). It's pretty easy to get between 8 to 12 40 width armor divisions running by 1939 for France, and around 24-36 by the time of 1941 in my experience with the previously mentioned 6 ARM 4 SPG and 8 MOT division. I like this ratio because I've done the math before regarding stats and cost, and this delivers one of the most balanced tank divisions while fitting into most MP game rules.
It's important to note that regardless of the additional breakthrough, once incoming attacks are < defense/breakthrough, they always deliver the same amount of damage on average. 100 incoming damage does the same even with 101 breakthrough or 1000 breakthrough. Hardness increase from more ARM does directly reduce incoming damage (assuming incoming soft attack is higher than hard attack, but the decrease tends to be marginal. You also lose out on a lot of defense, HP, organisation, and increase supply usage when replacing MOT with ARM. It's not really worth the cost increase replacing MOT with more tanks when the cost increase is more than damage reduced or when the stats are not really being used.
That being said, the most fantastic tank division will be very hard pressed to deliver victory without sufficient air cover, and even a mediocre division will easily win with sufficient numbers of fighters and CAS supporting.
Well, I won't rehash various tank divisions I use here. But here are a few things to keep in mind when designing any panzer formation.
1) If you run the mobile warfare doctrine, you get more ORG for the tank battalions. You should consider leveraging this extra ORG by dropping a MOT or MECH and replacing it with a tank battalion.
2) Tier 1 MECH has two important effects: it opens MECH I, but it also boosts the hardness of basic MOT. While I generally find it suboptimal to try and produce significant MECH before 1942 (it's really expensive), grabbing the tech can boost existing MOT for no cost.
3) I consider armor concentration important in MP. Against the AI, spreading your armored units (whether H-TDs or something else) around your foot infantry formations works wonders, but against a human player who has any sense, it fails miserably. You really want tanks concentrated in panzer divisions where their hardness, firepower, and armor can do the most good.
The exception to this rule is motorized divisions. If I build plain motorized divisions, I will sometimes put some cheap L-SPART in them, since line ART slows them to 4 kph. 1936 L-SPART is so easy to make, it's no big deal. Note that I just want them there to provide soft attack; their armor or hardness values are irrelevant.
4) Always keep in mind that armor and piercing values are highly variable in the field. After a few days of fighting, panzer divisions will often not be at 100% equipment strength. This means that even if you think your divisions are completely immune to enemy piercing on paper, in real life, variable equipment levels will result in lower armor values.
5) I prefer putting SPART in all panzer divisions, regardless of doctrine. I prefer the firepower advantage it provides.
6) Support companies will reduce key attributes like hardness and armor and piercing. I still use them (LOG, MAINT, RECON, and ENG are a must as far as I'm concerned), but I do so with the understanding that I am losing some stats in these categories. Note: Superior firepower has techs that give more ORG for support companies; this changes the math for some divisions.
1) If you run the mobile warfare doctrine, you get more ORG for the tank battalions. You should consider leveraging this extra ORG by dropping a MOT or MECH and replacing it with a tank battalion.
2) Tier 1 MECH has two important effects: it opens MECH I, but it also boosts the hardness of basic MOT. While I generally find it suboptimal to try and produce significant MECH before 1942 (it's really expensive), grabbing the tech can boost existing MOT for no cost.
3) I consider armor concentration important in MP. Against the AI, spreading your armored units (whether H-TDs or something else) around your foot infantry formations works wonders, but against a human player who has any sense, it fails miserably. You really want tanks concentrated in panzer divisions where their hardness, firepower, and armor can do the most good.
The exception to this rule is motorized divisions. If I build plain motorized divisions, I will sometimes put some cheap L-SPART in them, since line ART slows them to 4 kph. 1936 L-SPART is so easy to make, it's no big deal. Note that I just want them there to provide soft attack; their armor or hardness values are irrelevant.
4) Always keep in mind that armor and piercing values are highly variable in the field. After a few days of fighting, panzer divisions will often not be at 100% equipment strength. This means that even if you think your divisions are completely immune to enemy piercing on paper, in real life, variable equipment levels will result in lower armor values.
5) I prefer putting SPART in all panzer divisions, regardless of doctrine. I prefer the firepower advantage it provides.
6) Support companies will reduce key attributes like hardness and armor and piercing. I still use them (LOG, MAINT, RECON, and ENG are a must as far as I'm concerned), but I do so with the understanding that I am losing some stats in these categories. Note: Superior firepower has techs that give more ORG for support companies; this changes the math for some divisions.
Last edited:
Usually I stay with 20w tanks for taking France(2 mot, 8 armor),because I spend experience on 40/44w infantry, Mp..then I have 40w for Taking Africa if Italy needs help (5 mot, 15 arm). I don't use spgs, since I don't want to waste my production and research time, and I prefer breakthrough Over soft attack, and I prefer having max armor values.
P.S. It's also a good idea to add 2 spaas, if you know that Soviet and us players are good
P.S. It's also a good idea to add 2 spaas, if you know that Soviet and us players are good
I usually use light tank IIs to take Belgium, Netherlands, France, Poland, Denmark, and Norway. I use light tanks instead of rushing mediums because delaying the NF also delays the ability for the USSR player to rush his tanks. This prevents USSR from having large numbers of produced 45 tech medium tanks in 41.
I almost purely play mp. I only play sp when I want to test out ideas for mp.
Honey, support companies do not affect hardness in any way or form. Hardness is based upon combat batallions only.
Then how light tanks work for France in 1939? Do you upgrade them before war smhw or what?
Well I'm guessing your asking if German light tank divisions are good against French players in 1939? Then the answer is yes, although I did modify my template by making it 4x light tanks, 3x mot, 1 light spart, and 1 mot rocket=20 width. I usually have 11 divisions total for my War in 39. I use 3 of them for Denmark and Norway and the rest for Benelux and France. They are extremely fast when getting behind enemy lines and they have the aid of 1000 CAS working in their air space so it's rather simple work if you know where to attack and how too.
I should have written ORG instead. It would have made more sense that way.
Well, allies are going to have cas in France as well, and France ,with 40w divisions can have 1 line at (or even only support ) to pierce that division , and having lvl 4-7 forts in Belgium will definitely stop those tanks , I don't know if maxed land and air doctrine are going to help, but it takes a lot of micro to get France even with 20w mediums quickly to deny allied cas wrecking your tanks. Also don't you lose a ton of tanks in Norway, I usually send plain motorised or mot+lspg. I have around 8-11 20w medium tank divisions which are getting support from approx 15 standard mot and 24 40w infantry for France and Benelux .Well I'm guessing your asking if German light tank divisions are good against French players in 1939? Then the answer is yes, although I did modify my template by making it 4x light tanks, 3x mot, 1 light spart, and 1 mot rocket=20 width. I usually have 11 divisions total for my War in 39. I use 3 of them for Denmark and Norway and the rest for Benelux and France. They are extremely fast when getting behind enemy lines and they have the aid of 1000 CAS working in their air space so it's rather simple work if you know where to attack and how too.
The reason why I use mediums is because the whole France campaign is to get 1 tile into northern maginot and start crazy micro to surround all the exp corps and secure all the ports , then cap France and kill everyone , so there is not a lot of use for light armour, motorised is as fast, and can deal with plain infantry , mot is also cheaper . I think light armour can be used in Soviet Union though as it is harder to fight there and you may need mediums for creating a breakthrough and then fill it with lite armour to deny breaking out of the pocket(providing that soviet is fighting and not trying to hold the river, and is having sp doctrine )
P.S. modern tanks are usually banned to research for soviet in 41
As well they should be.
One day, we're going to have some national focus research boosts balanced a bit better.
Interesting, Although I have to ask who is making CAS for the Allies prior to 1939? I have always capitulated the French within a month of attacking the their territory. I find medium to be so much more useful on the east than light armor.
So, first of all once the war starts US can send thousands of CAS within a month and uk can put them up within several days .
As Germany you need 2 weeks to get to the French border , 1 more to clear the mess after fall of Belgium,Netherlands (assuming spd 2-3 and no pausing ) and to deal with possible delays that can be created by uk invasion somewhere in Benelux straight after it has fallen( that's risky ,because uk has no spare troops , and probably will use garrisons for that, but it can we you precious time) , which results in 1-2 weeks in which UK can only use its own cas ( yea you have to focus on fighters as uk and so on , but having 3-5 factories on cas from beginning of the game can result in approx 1k CAS) . And if you have Canada as a player , you have 1,5k more fighters in early 1940 , so uk can produce some more cas .
Another possibility is soviet lend leasing its cas , but again you have some spare time but definitely not enough to get through lvl 4-7 forts of 40 width mountaineers with piercing , air superiority ( or contested air at least) and France having good advisors (it's really hard and you have to sacrifice all the research stuff ,but you can get almost every needed advisor before war starts - I guess it's around 350 pp + 150 on pp horse , and France gets 0,20 daily , plus 120 from focus ~0,20*70+0,35* 365*3 + 0,35*30*9 + 120 = about 495 pp .)
Also soviet can give some cas,but allies will need to return that
Talking about east, the lands there are so vast,that you need like 10k+ mediums to cover every important part of the frontline. And you really need to be fast to secure oilfields : deny soviet tank production (I myself do it through Crimea air invasion and naval invasion of Caucasusian ports , though I don't see it to be very popular)
France can make 2-3k cas easily and uk can normally add another 1 or 2k as well