Now what am I supposed to do with all these HQ units?

[Marcus]

Last question, then back to work, I am noticing that some of my divisions have HQ units attached to them, should I be attacking with these? If not, why attach infantry to them? For defence only?

In short, what am I supposed to do with the 2 Inf 1 HQ units, the bigger HQ only units and the 5 HQ units?

It seems a bit of a waste to attach INF to HQ units when the HQ units shouldn't be fighting frontline in the first place and the INF can be much better used to liberate provinces for the Reich in the East.

 

[TheLand]

Last question, then back to work, I am noticing that some of my divisions have HQ units attached to them, should I be attacking with these? If not, why attach infantry to them? For defence only?

In short, what am I supposed to do with the 2 Inf 1 HQ units, the bigger HQ only units and the 5 HQ units?

It seems a bit of a waste to attach INF to HQ units when the HQ units shouldn't be fighting frontline in the first place and the INF can be much better used to liberate provinces for the Reich in the East.

You're thinking about it like it's HOI2.

The infantry isn't attached to the HQ, it's under the control of the HQ.

 

[Spricar]

You're thinking about it like it's HOI2.

The infantry isn't attached to the HQ, it's under the control of the HQ.

So if you attack with HQ unit, the actual HQ won't enter combat, but all divisions it is commanding will?

 

[Marcus]

So if you attack with HQ unit, the actual HQ won't enter combat, but all divisions it is commanding will?

That's what I want to know.... that would make a lot more sense then my quartermasters back at HQ throwing pens at the Red Horde at the front line.

 

[Wyrm]

That's what I want to know.... that would make a lot more sense then my quartermasters back at HQ throwing pens at the Red Horde at the front line.

Remember that the pen is mightier than the sword...

 

[TheLand]

So if you attack with HQ unit, the actual HQ won't enter combat, but all divisions it is commanding will?

If you attack with the HQ unit, it will march off into battle on its own.

If you set the HQ unit to AI control and give it an objective, the divisions under it will try to take the objective.

You need to think about giving corps and armies objectives, rather than making a stack of units and ordering them to attack somewhere. It's a massive change

 

[Lauri]

You don't do much with the HQ besides sending them after the frontline units, but a province or two behind, so they stay in range with their HQ, and gets their bonuses...
Other than that, you order the units below them to attack and defend, and everything else
Else you could just give them AI control..

 

[Featauril]

Remember that the pen is mightier than the sword...

But maybe not more then the sub-machine gun.

 

[unmerged(51140)]

You don't do much with the HQ besides sending them after the frontline units, but a province or two behind, so they stay in range with their HQ, and gets their bonuses...
Other than that, you order the units below them to attack and defend, and everything else
Else you could just give them AI control..

Now let me ask you this... is it really necesary to show dozens of units with no combat value whatsoever on the map and force the player to move them behind his troops and take care not to forget them and let them be overrun just to show some sort of command structure? Wouldn't it have been easiert to have a nice command level tree in some interface screen under an additional tab which lets you organize that, maybe a button in a unit that opens a view of its siblings and superior HQs and keep the map reserved for the actual fighting units? It was already ridiculous in HoI2 to have several HQ units on the battlefield and even have the AI attack you with them sometimes but now you have dozens of them and none of them are there to fight, they're just there to hold a general's chair...

 

[Lauri]

Is it really neccesary to manually control all units yourself? No
Is it really neccesary to have all the HQ's on the map? Not really, no

But they are

 

[Marcus]

But maybe not more then the sub-machine gun.

That would actually make a pretty cool signature.......

Got it now, I think, keep HQ units 1-2 provinces behind for bonuses and keep them out of the front line, that makes some sense.

 

[Subcomandante]

Now let me ask you this... is it really necesary to show dozens of units with no combat value whatsoever on the map and force the player to move them behind his troops and take care not to forget them and let them be overrun just to show some sort of command structure? Wouldn't it have been easiert to have a nice command level tree in some interface screen under an additional tab which lets you organize that, maybe a button in a unit that opens a view of its siblings and superior HQs and keep the map reserved for the actual fighting units? It was already ridiculous in HoI2 to have several HQ units on the battlefield and even have the AI attack you with them sometimes but now you have dozens of them and none of them are there to fight, they're just there to hold a general's chair...

The general's chair gives different types of bonuses now, and each level of HQ has its communication range/range of influence. So the generals and their staff is really there on the field and they have to be close to their units to make things happen. They have a great combat value that can be attacked, and you have to take care of them.

HOI3 has a command tree on the right of the screen, where you can find any unit and its siblings. You may click on the plus button in the top right corner.

As Germany in the demo, the OOB is confusing because we're not used to it. It's not neatly organized as there are a number of single divisions and even single brigades attached to armies and army groups. Just like it was in real life.

 

[HelmuthM]

Is it necessary to keep HQs in adjacent provinces to grant the bonuses?

Would stacking all HQs to your capital city work?

 

[TheJoker]

I attach a unit to an HQ and that HQ to anther HQ.. fine.. but why the heck do I have to see all those HQs on the map and move them around, just so they're .. well.. around. My division HQs move around invisible behind my division so the other HQs can do just that as well. I don't need to show a HQ on the map for it to exist. if you disagree then I say let's put hitler on the map and place him in the Wolfsschance or the Führerbunker. What's the diff?

because thats how WW2 was fought ? HQs of Armies allways moved with the frontline. The OKW is in Fact present on the Map if you havent noticed ...

oh, and as a lot of people have allready mentioned, this isnt HOI2, you have to learn to let the AI do things for you ...

 

[Lockerius]

The only complaint I have about the HQ system is that it seems the only way for the senior leaders (corps cmdr, army, etc) to gain experience is for their HQs to hit the front lines and attack themselves, despite really crappy combat values.

I think that needs to be fixed, because it has NEVER been the point of HQs in any army I have read about.

When a corp's divisions are in combat, the corps HQ in fact IS in combat, despite being behind the lines. The corps staff officers and their leader are assisting the divisions below them to conduct the attack, so the leaders (not just the boss) should be gaining experience.

It isnt direct combat experience (i.e. fighting door-to-door), but as they are staff officers, they are getting staff officer experience.

 

[DeveronMagi]

every lvl of HQ has a distance range in which the bonuses work...theatres are like really big...and armees a little smaller and corp hq only a couple of miles...

on the other hand...i dont use the higher HQs in combat...but the lowest...corps(?) 'xxx' i use to attack too...but that is because i attack with corps together if at all possible...the rest of the HQ are behind the front line

 

[HelmuthM]

I don't mind dragging the HQs to frontline combat if they are tough enough so that they don't sustain large casualties. (HQs are expensive to reinforce)

 

[wright1331]

Remember that the pen is mightier than the sword...

But i'd rather have a sword in a dark ally
SNL

 

[Johan]

The only complaint I have about the HQ system is that it seems the only way for the senior leaders (corps cmdr, army, etc) to gain experience is for their HQs to hit the front lines and attack themselves, despite really crappy combat values.

I think that needs to be fixed, because it has NEVER been the point of HQs in any army I have read about.
.

hmm.. thats not how it should be.

 

[unmerged(148321)]

The only complaint I have about the HQ system is that it seems the only way for the senior leaders (corps cmdr, army, etc) to gain experience is for their HQs to hit the front lines and attack themselves, despite really crappy combat values.

I think that needs to be fixed, because it has NEVER been the point of HQs in any army I have read about.

When a corp's divisions are in combat, the corps HQ in fact IS in combat, despite being behind the lines. The corps staff officers and their leader are assisting the divisions below them to conduct the attack, so the leaders (not just the boss) should be gaining experience.

It isnt direct combat experience (i.e. fighting door-to-door), but as they are staff officers, they are getting staff officer experience.

According to the manual pg.64, Any time any portion of a Leader’s command structure (underneath his level, not above) is in combat, he gains experience.