What is the most offensive division?

[Vampiresoap]

This thread is created to explore the possibility of making a division with the highest possible damage (which is different from just having high soft attack)

A few rules must be laid down:

-- Upwards to 40 widths (Seems like you can't do 44 widths anymore)

-- Organization must not be ridiculous low ( greater than 30 at least) like adding all arty into one division.

-- Armor should be factored into the final result, as your attack is higher when the enemy can't pierce you.
So...I would say all else being equal, the higher the armor, the better the division. However, this thread focuses mainly on soft attack.

-- Same goes for hard attack. You do more damage when you can pierce the enemy.

-- Lastly, when all rules have been taken into consideration, the division that has the highest soft attack should be the best one and wins the mysterious prize in this thread

PS: As Hans pointed out, tech makes a huge difference on the composition of the division, so I would like people to specify what year their division belongs to:

Like 1936, 1938, 1940 and beyond...Personally, I think early game division advice is invaluable

 

[Bergest]

Definitely the SS

 

[Tisifoni12]

Ah, not the one with the most politically incorrect line in humour . . .

 

[Hans Lemurson]

So, a 40 width division with a minimum of 30 Organization?
Any limits on technology, like best unit at the 1936 level, or 1940?
Or should we assume the entire research tree is maxed out?

It makes a difference if we are using Light Tank I or Modern Armor.

 

[Vampiresoap]

So, a 40 width division with a minimum of 30 Organization?
Any limits on technology, like best unit at the 1936 level, or 1940?
Or should we assume the entire research tree is maxed out?

It makes a difference if we are using Light Tank I or Modern Armor.

Hmm...you bring up a very good point!! That gives me an idea. I'll modify the original thread a little bit.

 

[PanzerMan7]

What happened to 44 width divs?

 

[dave1233]

What happened to 44 width divs?

offensive doctrine now gives -10% org loss when moving into a province rather than -10% combat width.

With regards to the original post, it depends so much on the situation. Terrain will play a significant part as will what you are attacking into. What you want for attacking into a mech mediums is completely different to what you want for attacking into 7/2 infantry which again is different to attacking into 10 width infantry spam. The air situation will influence it as will the location of the province (shore bombardment) and forts and several other factors.

 

[Sir Garnet]

Divisions skewed heavily to offense often have vulnerability to continual counter-attacks, notably into the teeth of a formulaic armored offensive.

 

[Meglok]

offensive doctrine now gives -10% org loss when moving into a province rather than -10% combat width.

With regards to the original post, it depends so much on the situation. Terrain will play a significant part as will what you are attacking into. What you want for attacking into a mech mediums is completely different to what you want for attacking into 7/2 infantry which again is different to attacking into 10 width infantry spam. The air situation will influence it as will the location of the province (shore bombardment) and forts and several other factors.

Yep, that change means Mass Assault got more interesting, esp since the old NKVD reinforce bonus got moved into the doctrine lines. Now anyone can get godawful reinforce rates by going MA and use the width nerf for INF to make walls of flesh.

 

[Vampiresoap]

Divisions skewed heavily to offense often have vulnerability to continual counter-attacks, notably into the teeth of a formulaic armored offensive.

That's why you need motorized divisions to follow up your armored assaults.

 

[Sir Garnet]

That's why you need motorized divisions to follow up your armored assaults.

For follow on exploitation, yes, but for the actual breakthrough the issue is how much infantry class bns to have in the armored divisions (ideally mechanized, of course, for the wealthy).

 

[Alex_brunius]

My answer would be: As many and as heavy SP Artillery as you can get away with ( given minimum org and armor you want + what you have time to research and get xp to make templates for ).

 

[Minion__]

My answer would be: As many and as heavy SP Artillery as you can get away with ( given minimum org and armor you want + what you have time to research and get xp to make templates for ).

Apologies in advance if I'm flogging a dead horse, but how do motorised rocket battalions or rocket support companies compare?

 

[Alex_brunius]

Apologies in advance if I'm flogging a dead horse, but how do motorised rocket battalions or rocket support companies compare?

Motorized rocket battalions is a cheaper softer version of SP artillery. Can be quite good bang for the buck but generally doesn't have quite as high attacks as SP Artillery, and isn't the best choice if you want divisions with armor/hardness.

Rocket support is a given if you can spare the research and want to maximize attack values since it's better then all the alternatives.

 

[Zwirbaum]

Motorized rocket battalions is a cheaper softer version of SP artillery. Can be quite good bang for the buck but generally doesn't have quite as high attacks as SP Artillery, and isn't the best choice if you want divisions with armor/hardness.

Rocket support is a given if you can spare the research and want to maximize attack values since it's better then all the alternatives.

With all the techs (including 3 rocketry techs from engineering) Support Rocket Art costs 120 IC and provides 36.1 Soft Attack. Support Artillery 34 Soft Attack for 54 IC. It's quite bad comparing one to another when you think about it. Support Art provides more total Def and BRK, have slightly better hard attack (1.2 vs 0.5 iirc)

 

[Alex_brunius]

With all the techs (including 3 rocketry techs from engineering) Support Rocket Art costs 120 IC and provides 36.1 Soft Attack. Support Artillery 34 Soft Attack for 54 IC. It's quite bad comparing one to another when you think about it. Support Art provides more total Def and BRK, have slightly better hard attack (1.2 vs 0.5 iirc)

When I wrote better then all alternatives I did not mean regular support artillery since you naturally will be getting both ( so it's not an alternative )

I meant that it provides more attack then engineers, MP, logistics or the other support companies that might be actual alternatives.

 

[Fulmen]

Definitely the SS

Dammit, I was going to post that!

 

[Zwirbaum]

When I wrote better then all alternatives I did not mean regular support artillery since you naturally will be getting both ( so it's not an alternative )

I meant that it provides more attack then engineers, MP, logistics or the other support companies that might be actual alternatives.

Roger that and agree!

I've spent too much time on forum today and yesterday probably and as such I'm reading all the things in the most literal way probably.

 

[Louella]

Mix Super heavy sp artillery with motor rocket artillery, with support units of artillery, rocket artillery, military police, recon company and field hospital.

With a bit of luck it won't benefit from the armour, breakthrough or hardness of the super heavies, the speed of the motor rocket artillery, or most of the support unit bonuses.

It will greatly offend the sensibilities of any hoi4 player, lol.

 

[Vampiresoap]

Why choose motorized rocket artillery over SPA?

I'm also thinking like using just infantry in the heavy tank divisions up till 1940 when the mechanized troops come out. I see no reason to spend like a shit ton of IC on motorized for just that extra 1 KMP speed. What do you guys think?

Haha I realized that I might've made a misleading thread title lol