As far as IC goes, replacing a tank battalion or two with max-armour HTD of your own - will make your standard 15/5 both impiercable and cheaper (provided you did put in couple points to armour your medium tanks as well).
Minesweepers in Combat Taskforces, how do they exactly work?
- Thread starter Voigt
- 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.
I am so glad that el_nora, a god amongst men on reddit, has become quite more active on this forum as well. I am looking forward to a lot of insightful discussions from you here!
- 1
In 1941, when Barbarossa begins, Germany has either MT3 or HT3, not both. And when, in 1943, they get access to both MT3 and HTD3, Russia can play the same game. They can make 8-2. Or they can license or lease US HTD3 with their completely not broken +10% piercing and +25% hard attack designer. Or they can use SHTD. Regardless of how they choose to do it, they will still be able to cost-effectively counter the German tanks.
I've played alongside a roach Russia holding the Stalin Line against Germany all the way until DDay in competitive games. That is to say, without spacemarines. And they continued to hold out, all the way to the Volga, tying down most of Germany's army until Berlin, Vienna, etc were taken from the west. I fail to see how allowing them to use spacemarines to hold the line would make them any worse at that.
That seems excessive, but thank you.
They do pin, though, and I kept hearing from groups that banned space marines that it was impossible to pin space marines because infantry couldn't pierce. AT guns render that argument suspect.
Which is why I'm surprised anyone complains about space marines, since SPAA are cheaper than TDs in most cases anyway.
Not that I would put HSPAA in every infantry division, but if I were looking for cheap armor values and a way to defeat the Luftwaffe, it makes more sense to spam HSPAA than the HTDs.
Which is also why I think putting HTDs in every infantry division is kind of a waste. Even a no-air Soviet Union has other things it could do with that IC.
I still want hard attack and piercing for German armored thrusts, but for the cost of putting 500 HTD battalions in 500 infantry divisions to make them space marines, you could instead just have 50 infantry divisions with HTDs held in reserve until you see where the German tanks are, then commit them to that battle. The rest of the infantry divisions can do without and just cycle using reinforce chance. Then you take the rest of the IC you didn't spend on a massive number of HTDs and build something else. Like maybe your own tanks for counter-offensives to punish any German attack that overextends.
I mean, I can't be the only one that sees space marines as more useful against the AI than a human opponent.
- 2
If you're as ahead of time on AT guns as the soviets are on tanks, sure. Most Germany players don't research and produce large quantities of 1943 AT in 1941. If you are making them, then that means you gave up on some other area of research. And if you only have a pair of 1942 or earlier line AT, they don't pierce. If you bring more AT, that costs more ic than the TD do. Regardless, simply forcing Germany to supply all their infantry with line AT is already a win. Those AT cost about 70% as much as the TD, forcing them to curtail their own tank production. Instead of beginning Barbarossa with 20-24 and quickly ramping up to 60-72 tanks, Germany will be using less than half that number. And in an infantry-on-infantry battle, the defender wins.
Cheaper per battalion, not necessarily cheaper per width. A pair of MSPAA costs the same as a MTD. And while a pair of HSPAA costs less than a single HTD, it's not by much. Regardless, since their armor is lower, they provide much less to the total divisional average, to a state at which even 1942 support AT pierces. And why would you need to bring SPAA anyway? Support AA provide nearly all the (anti-air) benefit that a pair of MSPAA3 do for a quarter the cost. HSPAA are just straight up worse in every way than MSPAA3 except for their armor, piercing, and hardness values, all of which are not really relevant to AA battalions unless using them explicitly for the purposes of creating spacemarines, in which case, I would still prefer the higher values to be gotten from TD.
However, when speaking about line AA, I agree. Line AA is less cost effective than SPAA, to a frightening degree. Even unboosted 1943 MSPAA3 cost less and provide more air attack than 1943 line AA. And when boosted with +5 guns, the MSPAA have nearly double the aa/ic value of line AA. Pathetic.
Let us look back on this discussion:
SM: spacemarines shouldn't be banned, they are easy to counter.
EN: spacemarines are a counter to tanks. This is an example of the annoying ways spacemarines can bog down games and ruin everyone's fun.
SM: I'd rather use 50 spacemarines to counter tanks than 500. That way I can also use other things.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Yes. That doesn't mean they can't be used to ruin games against players though. Things that ruin games get banned.
- 1
This is possible because seamines are for free. the fix would be producing them as equipment (consuming MIC) and deploy only as many mines as stockpiled.
Naval Mine warfare in general is poorly implemented.
Historcially, most MS and MM were too small and too slow to be represented in the game.
I don't disagree, but I will say that before our current MP game, I did some reading about the Royal Navy's implementation of mine warfare. I was hoping to take inspiration from the historical record as I developed my strategy (it did actually give me ideas for my plan in the game; history FTW in MP for once!), but I also ended up learning about just a bunch of stuff in general.
One important thing I learned was that a major limitation of minelaying wasn't just available mines. It was also the availability of ships. Not the availability of mining ships, but instead escorting ships. When the enemy (whether Germany, Italy, or Japan) had a decent naval presence or air presnece in an area, mining with ships was much more difficult. Sure, you could send 5 minelayers into the area by themselves, but they were very vulnerable to attack while doing their job. So, there were plenty times when mining was limited the availability of escorts to cover the minelayers, whether the minelaying ships were the tiny ones that aren't in HOI4 or the bigger ones that are.
This is one reason why submarine mining was popular among various powers. The subs had an easier time mining enemy waters without the need for escorts. Of course, in HOI4, submarine mining is a bit too fast.
- 1
tiny weenie beeny but to fast. Like speed was divided by 5 for subs in our mod and still decently fast.
But well let's see how that historical strat works out for you in the end.
But well let's see how that historical strat works out for you in the end.