Artillery or amphibious tanks? Or engineers?
Which brigade helps the most with amphibious landings?
Which brigade helps the most with amphibious landings?
Brigade_modifiers.csv rather disagrees with that Besides, multiple brigades make division slower.Artillery, when fully upgraded, is always better, actually, and it gives no mallus, that is incorrect; attached brigades give no maluses to units as they are essentially supplements to stats, they dont count as units.
[...} gives no mallus, that is incorrect; attached brigades give no maluses to units as they are essentially supplements to stats, they dont count as units.
Speaking of that: how should I read these numbers? Are they multiplier? Like artillery is 5% stronger than usual when it attacks forts and it uses only 85% of his power when doing shore attack?Are you serious and sure about this?
So all the shown stats for brigades concerning landscape, river, fort and shore attacks are wrong?
Speaking of that: how should I read these numbers? Are they multiplier? Like artillery is 5% stronger than usual when it attacks forts and it uses only 85% of his power when doing shore attack?
Well, I am no modder or expert in DH and thus one can always surprise me with things running completly different than I thought, as far as I understand and see it...
In the above image we have an infantry with an artillery brigade. If you hover your mouse within DH over the area I marked with circles, small windows pop up with the following data:
1) unit data for the infantry alone
2) unit data for the brigade alone
3) hovering over the small circled cross you get the combined values
Comparing those 3 data with each other it seems that the values of the infantry and artillery do NOT get multiplied but added (somehow) with the main unit (infantry) being the base.
Example for shore attack:
infantry: 40%
artillery: 0.85
So the base is 0.4 and for the artillery the difference between 1 and 0.85 gets subtracted:
0.4 - 0.15 = 0.25
So the value infantry/artillery for shore attacks is 0.25 which again is the multiplier for soft/hard attacks.
Some examples for the intial question: Best brigade for marines in shore attack?
(Values taken from a running game, playing III. Reich year 1940, so they will differ from your game but the direction should be nevertheless consistent, considering only maximising soft attack and leaving out everything else.)
Mar-3 (shore: 0.8, soft-attack: 10)
Amph-1 (shore: 1.1, soft-attack: 3)
together: shore: 0.9, soft-attack: 13 => 0.9 x 13 = 11.7 soft attack
Mar-3 (shore: 0.8, soft-attack: 10)
Art-10 (shore: 0.85, soft-attack: 4)
together: shore: 0.65, soft-attack: 14 => 0.65 x 14 = 9.1 soft attack
Marine with even the very first researched amphibious brigade is highly superiour.
In case no amphibious brigades were researched, what's better: Artillery or Engineer?
Mar-3 (shore: 0.8, soft-attack: 10)
Eng-5 (shore: 1.1, soft-attack: 0)
together: shore: 0.9, soft-attack: 10 => 9 soft attack
Artillery is only slightly better than an engineer brigade. But since artillery comes with a whole lot additional goodies and the higher price is irrelevant (when it comes to special attacks like shore invasion), I'd definetly choose Marines/Art.
If you have no marines researched (rather the usual than the unusual case when eg playing Germany), next best base unit would be airborne or mountain units which both have a shore attack value of 0.6 (in comparison to infantry with a lowly 0.4). Nevertheless those special units are allowed to have only 1 brigade with a limited choice (eg Mtn can't equip Amph-brigade) while infantry may be equipped with 2, can choose from all researched brigades and is usually your best researched unit. Let's see what's better...
First figuring out what the best Mountain + brigade combination is (as mentioned above brigades for Mtn are rather limited, so no amph):
Mtn-11 (shore: 0.6, soft-attack: 12)
Art-10 (shore: 0.85, soft-attack: 4)
together: shore: 0.45, soft-attack: 16 => 0.45 x 16 = 7.2 soft attack
Mtn-11 (shore: 0.6, soft-attack: 12)
Eng-5 (shore: 1.1, soft-attack: 0)
together: shore: 0.7, soft-attack: 12 => 0.7 x 12 = 8.4 soft attack
Mmmh, that's probably a bit surprising. Due to the better shore attack value the engineer brigade is superiour to artillery even without any own soft attack value. Now to infantry: my choice of what to compare will be a amph/eng combo (best shore attack values) vs LArm/MArm (best soft attack values).
Inf-11 (shore: 0.4, soft-attack: 11)
Amph-1 (shore: 1.1, soft-attack: 3)
Eng-5 (shore: 1.1, soft-attack: 0)
together: shore: 0.6, soft-attack: 14 => 8.4 soft attack
Inf-11 (shore: 0.4, soft-attack: 11)
L-A-8 (shore: 0.88, soft-attack: 4)
M.Arm-4 (shore: 0.87, soft-attack: 5)
together: shore: 0.15, soft-attack: 20 => 3 soft-attack
Now, that's a quite decisive result that inf/amph/eng is superiour to inf/LA/MA.
Note: Infantry alone (4.4 shore soft attack) would fare better than equipped with the heavy hitter brigades LA/MArm (replacing one of those with artillery would make the result even worse due to the lower artillery shore attack value).
And the result of the comparison what's the best unit/brigade combo for shore attacking when considering soft-attack:
1) Mar-3/Amph-1 => 11.7 soft attack
2) Mar-3/Art-10 => 9.1 soft attack or Mar-3/Eng-5 => 9 soft attack
3) Mtn-11/Eng-5 => 8.4 soft attack or Inf-11/Amph-1/Eng-5 => 8.4 soft attack
Just for curiousity reasons and to bring in only mainstream research units (= without marines, Mtn, airborne nor amph)
Inf-11/Art-10/Eng-5 => 5.25 soft-attack
Wether it is really smart to invest all the needed research to get Marines with amphibious brigades is, of course, a completly different matter. Note, though, that in the above examples I was comparing upto-date infantry (1939), Mtn 1939 with lowly Marines-3 from year 1931. Uptodate Marines from 1937 or 1940 would be even stronger.
Personally I shy away from the high research costs and usually use Mountain units with engineer brigades for shore attacks. Additionally: when you have a limitation on how many units you can use (eg amphibious attacks), the higher org of special units vs infantry has quite its merits. And engineer brigades not only raise the shore attack value, they also speed up the landing process and thus minimizing the very dangerous time your transporters are sitting ducks for sea or air attacks... while artillery lengthen this time considerably.
Researching marines, especially when lacking good research teams for it, seems quite costly... but as usual it depends on what country one is playing and what you intend to do: playing the USA and planning to isle-hop to Japan changes the picture (and the available research teams).
I guess amphibious tanks aren't as useful if you're invading a mountain. Am I right?
Why do you think so? You are still talking about shore attacks, aren't you?
I thought the terrain penalties for mountain apply during the landing as well.
What is this special forces attachment everyone keeps referencing? Is this from some mod? I have not played vanilla DH Full in some time but I do not remember any such unit.
It's in the Cold War Tech Tree. Mods that use it are All In One, The Grand Campaign, and I think EOD and Fatherland among others. Personally, I don't build them because they're overpowered.