I prefer making 4 horses, or 4 armored cars even some Super heavy armor with 2 milita and 1MP to police the milita to make sure they got their pitchforks pointing the right way. Never be too sure with milita..
-
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.
- Status
This isn't completely true - if you look at strength.
A German 1939 Infantry division should be
3 infantry brigades (3 regiments @ 3159)
3 artillery brigades (1 regiment @ 2700)
1 anti-tank brigade (1 batalllion @ 599)
1 engineer brigade (1 batallion @ 800)
There should also be a recce brigade (1 batallion @ 575), but there isn't really anything to use for it.
Great discussion! I was working on similar calculations. One thing that doesn't seem to be much mentioned is the effect of weather and/or terrain. For example, attacking in jungle and forest, that arty brigade is going to cause a -0.3 modifier. Heavy armor in particular fairs poorly attacking in almost all non-plains terrain.
I have a question... I know most brigade attributes add to the divisional value (soft attack, defense, etc) and at least one is averaged (softness). Are there other values that don't just add up? What about terrain effects? For example, is a division with 3 heavy armor brigades penalized more at a river crossing than a division with just 2?
I have a question... I know most brigade attributes add to the divisional value (soft attack, defense, etc) and at least one is averaged (softness). Are there other values that don't just add up? What about terrain effects? For example, is a division with 3 heavy armor brigades penalized more at a river crossing than a division with just 2?
Great tables and great calculations!
Hopefully one day we could have an excel table where we select the technology level year and do similar comparisons =).
On a side note, I have used the combination of (1 x L-Arm + 1 Motorized), and sometimes even (2 x L-Arm) for smaller countries like Italy which cannot afford to build large quantities of armor. Obviously these units are not cost effective at fighting (though you can always combine them later), but having a corps of them allows large encirclements, and they can be quite useful.
I think this speaks to the tactical depth of HOI3, since the extra provinces open up a lot of tactics.
Hopefully one day we could have an excel table where we select the technology level year and do similar comparisons =).
On a side note, I have used the combination of (1 x L-Arm + 1 Motorized), and sometimes even (2 x L-Arm) for smaller countries like Italy which cannot afford to build large quantities of armor. Obviously these units are not cost effective at fighting (though you can always combine them later), but having a corps of them allows large encirclements, and they can be quite useful.
I think this speaks to the tactical depth of HOI3, since the extra provinces open up a lot of tactics.
Ok, how does combining of modifiers work? If I have division with two brigades that have a +50 versus the current terrain and two brigades that have a -50 against the current terrain, what's the overall effect? Similarly for speed bonuses or penalties.
Also, where can I look up a table of modifiers for units? And are modifiers stacked, and how do they work across a division. I.E. does an infantry brigade get a negative terrain bonus from an armor brigade if they are fighting in the mountains?
I have a tech-year spreadsheet, but I haven't figured out how to upload it.
Interesting stats, but it leaves out one important aspect of the combat system.
Each "round" of combat, each DIVISION involved has a chance to fire... thus having 4 divisions against your enemies 3, gives you a clear advantage.
I've taken it a step further, and created divisions of TWO Combat Brigades, followed by 2 or 3 support Brigades (depending on what tecks I'm working on). Thus having FIVE shots per round as there are 10 frontline 'slots' per province front, and my unit frontage per division is TWO.
This can add to the amount of Brigades involved in the combat... but even 5 divisions of 5 Brigades is only a 25% decrease in combat power.... vice 4 divisions of 5 brigades which would give you a 20% decrease...
I'll take a 20% increase in firepower over a net 5% penalty anyday.
I also often add 2 Combat Brigades to HQ units... it decreases the firepower of that unit... but makes it a very good Second Line unit used to clean up the "leakers" (enemies who manage to retreat back into your lines).
Each "round" of combat, each DIVISION involved has a chance to fire... thus having 4 divisions against your enemies 3, gives you a clear advantage.
I've taken it a step further, and created divisions of TWO Combat Brigades, followed by 2 or 3 support Brigades (depending on what tecks I'm working on). Thus having FIVE shots per round as there are 10 frontline 'slots' per province front, and my unit frontage per division is TWO.
This can add to the amount of Brigades involved in the combat... but even 5 divisions of 5 Brigades is only a 25% decrease in combat power.... vice 4 divisions of 5 brigades which would give you a 20% decrease...
I'll take a 20% increase in firepower over a net 5% penalty anyday.
I also often add 2 Combat Brigades to HQ units... it decreases the firepower of that unit... but makes it a very good Second Line unit used to clean up the "leakers" (enemies who manage to retreat back into your lines).
Yeah, I have thought it might be a good idea to put some brigades with the HQ.
Maybe 1 AA and 1 something else?
JM
Maybe 1 AA and 1 something else?
JM
I uploaded the spreadsheet in the first page of the thread so you can make your own. Part of the problem with the spreadsheet, and why I did not make some of those proposed comparisons, is that tech levels are not adjusted. So HA and SHA show up later in the tech tree and will therefore have better base unit stats, which would distort things. I would like to add tech effects, but haven't had the time.
One other mistake is that I added org levels when they should be averaged. Relatively minor, but still wrong currently.
I'm interested in learning how the terrain modifiers are applied as well. I suspect that any division containing a brigade of that type will be penalized, which would be unfortunate. It would be pretty complex to only knock off 30% of the artillery brigades attack and defense values as a result of jungle and forest terrain.
If you could upload your tech spreadsheet mediafire does free file hosting. That's where I uploaded my division designer. I would love to combine them to take into account the current tech year.
The terrain modifiers are in the wiki:
http://www.paradoxian.org/hoi3wiki/Terrain
Welcome to the forum! That is true, and is something that could be added to the full stack comparisons. It might make a big difference in the cost effectiveness of the militia units, particularly when they have the 0.5 width tech. I think the technology effect is a higher priority, but I will consider this in the future.
There is still a use for 3 inf divisions. I am guessing I will organize armies much the same way in HoI 3 as I did in HoI 2, which means most of my pure inf divisions would be plain with no art or any other support brigades. I think of those divisions as the "regular plain old rifleman" and kind of the misfits and inexperienced part of my army. I use all those plain divisions to defend territory and hold the outer edges of combat lines. Most of my inf is plain with no support.
I usually have 2-4 groups (a "group" being 3 groups of 3 in HoI 2, or 3 3xinf divisions in HoI 3... so 18-36 brigades) of "elite infantry" that has art. This is the infantry that does it's best to try and keep up with the tanks, and hold the lines where the tanks and the real fighting is. Too me, brigading all of your inf is a huge waste. Only the inf that will support the tank assaults needs to be "elite".
All that art I am not buying is probably one of the ways I always wind up with a bigger navy than most others seem too
I look at it as "all those Officers that I'm not spending on ART brigades"... 100 Officers each!All that art I am not buying is probably one of the ways I always wind up with a bigger navy than most others seem too
All units seem to have a morale value and certain techs seem to improve unit’s morale, but what are the effects morale in the game and its mechanics. I can’t find any reference to it in the manual or anywhere else
OK, see if this link works...http://www.mediafire.com/file/00m2zdjjzdd/HOI3 Unit Comparisons.xls
This has brigade stats by tech year and terrain data.
If I've made any errors, please let me know. (for example, I forgot AT brigades)
This has brigade stats by tech year and terrain data.
If I've made any errors, please let me know. (for example, I forgot AT brigades)
Morale increases the rate at which units regain lost Organization.
As a nuclear physicist I certainly like the idea of quantitative analysis, but in this case I have a feeling that this makes it easy to miss the main point. The best design, either here or in the real world, is not one that provides the best theoretical parameters, but is most suited to its purpose.
In the game there are three main roles for ground units
1. Holding ground
2. Breakthrough / counterattack
3. Exploitation / encirclement
For holding, one benefits most from putting 12 combat brigades per square. On the front line, this is most efficiently done with infantry. Since the holding mission is essentially defensive, in most circumstances it makes no sense to add units like artillery, since one cannot be sure that they will be used efficiently.
For breakthrough and counterattack in critical sectors, on a few selected points of your choice, one wants to maximize hardness, within the limits of the combined arms bonus. The obvious late war choice here is:
3 Arm + 1 Mot, (Armor)
where the speed limited by Mot. Diluting the armor will not help very much, since the number of meaningful breakthrough points is usually limited, and stronger units will suffer less casualties. These units are expensive, but not many are needed.
For exploitation, the most important factor is speed. Here nothing can beat
3 Mec + 1 L. Arm, (Mechanized)
where the main purpose of the L. Arm is to provide combined arms. Such units are also very capable of holding ground, making them perfect for encirclement. In fact, their high speed often makes them very effective also for breakthrough, since they can choose the weakest spot for attack, or as a strategic reserve to reinforce the front line where needed. A relatively large number of these divisions can be built.
The four-brigade divisions allows an efficient use of your leaders, especially for the Armored and Mechanized divisions. For the infantry, it means that a division can easily be split in two, providing optimal tactical flexibility. If one has leadership points to spare for the extra research, a support brigade can be added to the Armored or Mechanized divisions to allow further concentration of firepower in critical sectors. However, only SP R Art can really keep up with the latter. For the Armor, SP Art (or even AC) could work without a hit in speed (albeit with some reduction in hardness).
Before Mec units become available, and Arm can start keeping up with Mot, a good combination is
2 L. Arm + 2 Mot,
which can be split up in two as required. The component brigades can later be used for Armored and Mechanized Divisions.
Clearly, one can find other configurations that will be useful for one role or another. However, if leadership is a limited resource, one will in general benefit most from maxing out the bonuses to the units of which one has the largest inventory. Thus, a balanced inventory of fully developed units (in tech and doctrine), grouped to excel at the most common and important tasks, will usually provide you a greater actual advantage than seeking the "perfect" combo...
Note: Mtn, Mar, and Para are a special case since they share the base techs of Inf, adding only a limited amount of addition research for someone who needs their special abilities.
In the game there are three main roles for ground units
1. Holding ground
2. Breakthrough / counterattack
3. Exploitation / encirclement
For holding, one benefits most from putting 12 combat brigades per square. On the front line, this is most efficiently done with infantry. Since the holding mission is essentially defensive, in most circumstances it makes no sense to add units like artillery, since one cannot be sure that they will be used efficiently.
For breakthrough and counterattack in critical sectors, on a few selected points of your choice, one wants to maximize hardness, within the limits of the combined arms bonus. The obvious late war choice here is:
3 Arm + 1 Mot, (Armor)
where the speed limited by Mot. Diluting the armor will not help very much, since the number of meaningful breakthrough points is usually limited, and stronger units will suffer less casualties. These units are expensive, but not many are needed.
For exploitation, the most important factor is speed. Here nothing can beat
3 Mec + 1 L. Arm, (Mechanized)
where the main purpose of the L. Arm is to provide combined arms. Such units are also very capable of holding ground, making them perfect for encirclement. In fact, their high speed often makes them very effective also for breakthrough, since they can choose the weakest spot for attack, or as a strategic reserve to reinforce the front line where needed. A relatively large number of these divisions can be built.
The four-brigade divisions allows an efficient use of your leaders, especially for the Armored and Mechanized divisions. For the infantry, it means that a division can easily be split in two, providing optimal tactical flexibility. If one has leadership points to spare for the extra research, a support brigade can be added to the Armored or Mechanized divisions to allow further concentration of firepower in critical sectors. However, only SP R Art can really keep up with the latter. For the Armor, SP Art (or even AC) could work without a hit in speed (albeit with some reduction in hardness).
Before Mec units become available, and Arm can start keeping up with Mot, a good combination is
2 L. Arm + 2 Mot,
which can be split up in two as required. The component brigades can later be used for Armored and Mechanized Divisions.
Clearly, one can find other configurations that will be useful for one role or another. However, if leadership is a limited resource, one will in general benefit most from maxing out the bonuses to the units of which one has the largest inventory. Thus, a balanced inventory of fully developed units (in tech and doctrine), grouped to excel at the most common and important tasks, will usually provide you a greater actual advantage than seeking the "perfect" combo...
Note: Mtn, Mar, and Para are a special case since they share the base techs of Inf, adding only a limited amount of addition research for someone who needs their special abilities.
I got it. Thanks. I'll work on integrating it into my spreadsheet. Ideally I would just add a column to be the tech year and it would automatically adjust the unit stats accordingly. We'll see how much time I have to implement it though.
The idea here is not to find the one ring to rule them all, but rather to determine the tradeoffs to help us decide which division design to use for different purposes. I believe that more information is always better. I happen to disagree with the designs you call "obvious".
The 3 Arm + 1 Mot combination requires a lot of frontage for its firepower and is possibly oversized due to the aforementioned each division (not brigade) gets to fire once each round in combat. This means that two 1 Arm + 1 Mot divisions would probably outgun this combination despite being cheaper (but I haven't run the numbers yet to calculate equivalent battle-winning ability to know for sure).
The 3 Mec + Lt Arm combo will suffer the same problems, plus for exploitation purposes smaller divisions are more tactically useful. They allow you to split them off in different directions and potentially cover twice the ground.
I'm not saying these are bad choices, but I don't believe they are obviously the best. Right now the production and research AI is so incompetent that it doesn't require the player to be efficient to stomp on the computer. Plus there are many different styles of play that could affect division design.
I don't think this is true. Larger divisions will have higher attack values and therefore fire for more rounds. In general, the same brigades organized into 3 or 4 divisions will have about the same combat power.
If you have (A) 4 divisions with say SA 12, DEF 12 and STR 9 each versus (B) 3 divisions with SA 16, DEF 16, STR 12 each, they are pretty much a wash. (A) will have 4 shots for the first 12 rounds (48 shots each hour) and (B) will have 3 shots for the first 16 rounds (48 shots each hour).
- Status