Why mass assault is just bad.

[TheMeInTeam]

I let some MA-R templates here for someone to try. Just look at the Org, Org recovery rate, defense and the COST... Sure you will need some time to make the best use of a 67 Org tank division!

67 org is questionable per above. If it's in 50's it's on par with normal infantry/arty divisions. Soft attack comparable to what you get from 14/4 divisions at that tech in SF, low hardness, and armor that (at that late of a time period) gets pierced by a single AT gun in support slot. It will perform marginally better than a 14/4 offensively (more breakthrough, slightly more hp), but also ~2-4x the IC.

It will win when defending against 14/4s and lose when attacking 14/4s. 14/4s can break weak spots in a line too if it comes to it.

I did play a mod scenario where you could stack MA combat width reduction wither other combat width reduction, and were relying mostly on equipment capture. This weird scenario was the only time MA seemed to make sense, since I couldn't produce anything decent and infantry kits + support stuff (arty and support equipment) are overwhelmingly what you capture for most of a run. Infantry battalion attacks actually start to matter when you can put 4 25 battalion stacks of them into one 80 width fight.

In base HOI 4 which has nothing like this it really struggles to match what SF provides, and SF provides much of its value earlier on too.

 

[Secret Master]

I hate when units have identical arrival hours (smallest unit of time in the game), and do not arrive at the same time when traveling from the same province.

I'm not talking about the bug, though. I mean in genuine situations where a stack of divisions is moving to a tile, and they will not all arrive at the same time because of different movement speeds and some started their movement a few hours earlier. There are a whole list of reasons multiple divisions won't arrive together in a destination. And even being one hour apart from each other will result in the situation I describe. Division A is stuck trying to hold a position, while divisions B through Z sit around with their head up their exhaust waiting to reinforce to width because they arrived one hour later.

Those who've played MP with me and have been in Discord with me have no doubt heard me swear about "... how nice it would be if the $%^&ing divisions would @#$%ing reinforce to @#$%ing width so we can complete the %^&*ing encirclement and wipe the !@#$ing stack. $@#* them and *@#$ their useless generals." (I'm paraphrasing, of course.)

It's worth noting that division speed is highly variable for a whole list of factors (terrain, actual equipment on hand, fuel reserves, and so on), so divisions arriving late is more common than you might think.

 

[Cavalry]

67 org is questionable per above. If it's in 50's it's on par with normal infantry/arty divisions. Soft attack comparable to what you get from 14/4 divisions at that tech in SF, low hardness, and armor that (at that late of a time period) gets pierced by a single AT gun in support slot.

It have armor bonus vs infantry, just add 1 more tank if you need armor bonus, still much cheaper than the 10-10 tank or use the max armor heavy TD like the spearhead template. Any added tank is good to have, unlike the AT support your enemy was forced on. For infantry to stay it will need double the Org of tank division.

Sure, having more infantry might give you that little bit more attacks by the nature of just having more infantry. But the SF doctrine isn't just getting attacks from their infantry, they are getting more attacks from the support artillery, support rocket artillery, engineers, recon, the tanks, and the cavalry.

Ah, it is firepower again. But these tank don't need to win on firepower all the time. 2 divisions can suppress the whole province. Then rest and use the superb Org recovery to re attack again.

 

[Corpse Fool]

But these tank don't need to win on firepower all the time.

Why are you using them if you don't want to win?

2 divisions can suppress the whole province. Then rest and use the superb Org recovery to re attack again.

So could a bunch of much cheaper 20 wide standard infantry, even if you use them in pairs to get the same amount of total org (without the armor bonus they take twice as much) and recovery, because its the combination of the two divisions. Having more recovery largely just means you need less divisions in reserve to achieve the same amount of up time for whatever intensity of conduct. Too much recovery can also be a bad thing, if it means you're throwing them back into the combat before they have had the time to replenish manpower and equipment.

I'm also going to take this opportunity to address an elephant I don't think anyone has yet. What you are describing is called 'space marines'. Mixing tanks or any of their variants with anything that isn't motorized or mechanized (including amphibious) is called a 'space marine' template, and is popularly banned in multiplayer games. They work against the AI because the AI is terrible.

There are only so many offensive divisions that you actually need. Having 100 or more of these space marines is superfluous. Beyond having enough to make the breakthrough and push the corridor forward to capture territory or surround enemy divisions, there is basically no point in having even more. Pushing in more and more places might stretch the enemies attention and resources thin, but it is getting dangerously close to trying to push the entire front. Pushing the front is asinine unless you're banking on overruns, and since you're infantry speed you're not overrunning anything. Destroying enemy divisions with encirclement means you might not even have to fight half of the enemy divisions. Destroying the enemy through an overrun means you only have to fight them once. Constantly pushing back the entire front line means you have to fight the same divisions again and again and again, which is inefficient.

 

[Cavalry]

Why are you using them if you don't want to win?

Sorry, I won. Not just by firepower. Infantry that don't pierce will need double amount of Org of the tank division to stay. It is hard to do that if the Org of the tank is 50 or more.

So could a bunch of much cheaper 20 wide standard infantry, even if you use them in pairs to get the same amount of total org (without the armor bonus they take twice as much) and recovery, because its the combination of the two divisions

Pinning and anti pinning is where advance players shine. The tank divisions will laugh if you use 20w infantry to pin them!

Mixing tanks or any of their variants with anything that isn't motorized or mechanized (including amphibious) is called a 'space marine' template, and is popularly banned in multiplayer games. They work against the AI because the AI is terrible.

Some banned because the TD space marine are so effective and make the few expensive tank toys become useless vs walls of TD! The cheap tank space marine is a new high, that they can replace the TD in defense too. You can use them with MOT, that's what I used before I discover MOT heavy division is painful slow on snow or forest, and not much better than cavalry in June 1941, unless in MW doctrine..

 

[Cavalry]

Line arty has been out of fashion for like 2 years now?

I can get why people still use it - why fix something that isn't broken right. But if we are purely judging by stats and costs then really no.

They can be good defender in forest or mountain, where you don't need more defense stats, so you want more soft attack to shoot back. The engineer support will give them +25% in forest. Defending is a serious work and I have 2 or more infantry templates for that: rough terrain defender and plain terrain defender, and probably a Guard anti tank defender.

Forest is also a good place to park your tank divisions to bolster the defense line.

 

[Corpse Fool]

Sorry, I won. Not just by firepower.

But having more firepower lets you win faster. Winning faster means you lose less org and suffer less losses. I'll bring this point up again in case some people were unaware. +20% attacks can mean upwards of +80% damage. Divisions of course are a balance of a combination of stats, and attacks aren't everything. But attacks are weighted pretty favourably in that balance.

Infantry that don't pierce will need double amount of Org of the tank division to stay. It is hard to do that if the Org of the tank is 50 or more.

Do you realize how easy it is to pierce these divisions? The first one you posted with the 20 infantry has all of 44 armor. You can pierce that with a 10/0 using engineers, artillery, and support AA3 and IE2 with an infantry AT upgrade. You can pierce that with AT2 and no infantry AT upgrade. The second one is a bit more ambitious with its heavy tank destroyer and ~78 armor. A 9/2 can pierce that. A 9 infantry 1 superheavy TD with +5 gun, or american HTD3 with +5 gun and TD board is going to make an absolute laughing stock of all of these space marines and even medium tank divisions up to 15/5.

These sorts of divisions are largely only good for beating up the AI, any sort of actually intelligent, rival power is going to be able to handle these space marines just fine. If beating up the AI is what you want to be good at, go right ahead, field all the space marines you want, roll around in single player and have your fun. But I honestly hope that you will understand that being good against the AI is like beating a baby in a foot race as an able bodied athlete. They can't even walk, let alone run, they have no concept of what is even happening. They were hardly competition to begin with. The purpose of this thread isn't really to debate space marines, its about doctrines and why the MA doctrine is widely regarded to be pretty bad.

By several different metrics, most of the divisions you've mentioned have been better served for their mentioned goals by either MW or SF doctrine. A lot of them probably benefit a lot from GBP too, but I'm just not as familiar with it to be able to immediately draw the comparisons off-hand. All told, there are basically only 4 advantages that mass mob has, and most of them don't even get fully utilized. The first is it is the shortest doctrine, it takes less time to fully research and get all of whatever power out of it. The second is its recovery rate, which can be pretty high but MW can rival it and while it can be useful, its use can be replaced by other means. Reinforce rate, which signal companies can largely replace, especially Soviets with NKVD focus adding another +5, or using high speed divisions. And lastly, their divisions will tend to have a bit more HP because of having a bit more infantry, which is both a blessing and a curse. Blessing, because more HP means better HP ratios, longer last-stand if you have the CP for it. Curse, because you're being forced to use the infantry, which are slow, unarmoured, and completely soft. It will also drag the averaged stats to their level which is good for org and recovery and most of the terrain mods which are generally good qualities for them, but it is bad for piercing and armor and hardness, as well as costs to field the division in terms of supply, IC, and manpower. This advantage can also be somewhat offset by leveraging more firepower or maneuver with other doctrines to not have to fight as much, and therefore not lose as much HP to worry about having to have more of it.

The cheap tank divisions will laugh if you use 20w infantry to pin them!

They can laugh all they want, they're still going to be pinned. And most likely pierced. Mission accomplished.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It's worth noting that division speed is highly variable for a whole list of factors (terrain, actual equipment on hand, fuel reserves, and so on), so divisions arriving late is more common than you might think.

I agree that different situations can mess with arrival time in practice. However, one of the most common times I observe what you describe (especially in SP where you have time to pause buffer and micro more thoroughly) is two literally identical divisions with same displayed arrival time ultimately not arriving same hour and as a result 1st one gets into combat alone. This is very common, frustrating and notably happens beyond HOI 4 too.

I'm also going to take this opportunity to address an elephant I don't think anyone has yet. What you are describing is called 'space marines'. Mixing tanks or any of their variants with anything that isn't motorized or mechanized (including amphibious) is called a 'space marine' template, and is popularly banned in multiplayer games. They work against the AI because the AI is terrible.

To be fair, the first two sentences in this paragraph don't square with the last one.

If space marines only work against the AI because it's bad, it's not clear why divisions that humans trivially counter would be banned in MP. And sure enough, you could very easily dumpster such divisions with one AT, since we're talking ~40-60 armor with end game tech. Comparable tech support AT has 75 piercing even if you stuff lots of other support companies on to reduce piercing a bit.

I've tested it in the past, no possible arrangement of "space marines" can have enough armor to defeat contemporary support AT. Even if you use only heavies and give them 5 armor upgrades, you'd STILL need enough tanks to make it considered a tank division to have enough armor.

If MP doesn't broadly ban ineffective templates, that rule is and always was arbitrary.

Sorry, I won. Not just by firepower. Infantry that don't pierce will need double amount of Org of the tank division to stay. It is hard to do that if the Org of the tank is 50 or more.

Why do you assume no pierce? You talk about opponent AT as if it's a big investment, but the tanks deployed this way are a MASSIVELY larger investment. Big risk to take when such divisions won't be able to defeat otherwise meta divisions that bother to slap on a single support AT.

These sorts of divisions are largely only good for beating up the AI, any sort of actually intelligent, rival power is going to be able to handle these space marines just fine. If beating up the AI is what you want to be good at, go right ahead, field all the space marines you want, roll around in single player and have your fun.

Is it actually optimal for SP? The most rapid conquests I've seen in SP don't seem to rely on it. Maybe if you pump difficulty high enough you can metagame against exact AI comps to have just enough armor?

The second one is a bit more ambitious with its heavy tank destroyer and ~78 armor.

He's showing 74.4 armor, which is still defeated by advanced AT. If he manages to put 5 armor upgrades on all of those tanks, he will get enough armor that using 2 line AT is required to pierce. 10 XP to adjust isn't a big ask compared to the hundreds all those armor upgrades too.

Tanks aren't really the strong suit for MA-right, but it's hard to picture MA-right succeeding using wave offensives against human players unless they're doing it with green air + significant CAS support.

 

[Cavalry]

Why do you assume no pierce? You talk about opponent AT as if it's a big investment, but the tanks deployed this way are a MASSIVELY larger investment. Big risk to take when such divisions won't be able to defeat otherwise meta divisions that bother to slap on a single support AT.

I didn't assume. It was the real game result. The German AI often start with infantry piercing under 31 in June 1941 so I aim to have a minimum armor of 31 at that time, and quick to increase if needed. I don't care about Minors' troops as Soviet!

In MP things can be different, but so far what I heard from MP players is not bother to build AT, or 10-0 infantry is best choice!

 

[Corpse Fool]

To be fair, the first two sentences in this paragraph don't square with the last one.

Saying they are banned doesn't mean anything about what they are good against. Sub 3 are often banned just because players don't want to deal with them, not that they are particularly broken.

If MP doesn't broadly ban ineffective templates, that rule is and always was arbitrary.

The best argument I've seen for them being banned in MP is what I described. A single heavy tank destroyer can pierce a geeked out 15/5 medium tank division. Tank destroyers with infantry is also massively cheaper than the tank division it pierces, or other infantry/AT mixes for the same piercing. Space marines aren't the sword, they are the counter.

Is it actually optimal for SP? The most rapid conquests I've seen in SP don't seem to rely on it. Maybe if you pump difficulty high enough you can metagame against exact AI comps to have just enough armor?

If you're trying to beat the AI up the absolute fastest with the least casualties or whatever, you can cav spam or bum rush with light tanks, para drop everywhere or whatever else. But if you're trying to follow at least somewhat historical timings and methods, the space marines that ride that line having just enough enough to not get pierced are around 3x as effective in combat with hardly much of an increase in cost. The problem is that they entirely rely on that armor bonus, and losing it means they are basically the same as infantry, but with worse HP ratios and less org. With how easily they are pierced and the sort of bad habits they teach you, I largely consider them to be a "noob trap".

He's showing 74.4 armor

I must have mixed the number up or put in the piercing that I was getting instead, sorry.

 

[Cavalry]

Is it actually optimal for SP? The most rapid conquests I've seen in SP don't seem to rely on it. Maybe if you pump difficulty high enough you can metagame against exact AI comps to have just enough armor?

My test environtment is Expert AI mod, huge production bonus for AI, or recently keep AI but reduce 60% Soviet production output. (This allow for more realistic game, not German tank divisions everywhere) It is to stimulate the extreme hard conditions to test defense tactics. The Axis outnumber me in tanks and planes. They can keep air superiority even after I capture Berlin!

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The best argument I've seen for them being banned in MP is what I described. A single heavy tank destroyer can pierce a geeked out 15/5 medium tank division. Tank destroyers with infantry is also massively cheaper than the tank division it pierces, or other infantry/AT mixes for the same piercing. Space marines aren't the sword, they are the counter.

That's the purpose of counter units, to defeat what they counter cost-effectively.

Single HTD can pierce 15/5, but that division still won't have many hard attacks and if you try putting HTD in every infantry division...the cost adds up fast. If you don't, 15/5s are several times faster than infantry + HTD.

With how easily they are pierced and the sort of bad habits they teach you, I largely consider them to be a "noob trap".

We agree on this, I just think it's odd that something that is a noob trap in practice gets banned in MP. Usually MP bans things because of how strong/decision-centralizing they are, rather than things that experienced players avoid because they're not effective.

 

[Cavalry]

He's showing 74.4 armor, which is still defeated by advanced AT. If he manages to put 5 armor upgrades on all of those tanks, he will get enough armor that using 2 line AT is required to pierce.

It was from a Sept 1943 save game. The whole German already gone so no one to produce AT anymore! I can capture Berlin earlier in some game.

 

[Corpse Fool]

Single HTD can pierce 15/5, but that division still won't have many hard attacks

The more typical AT divisions like 8/4 or whatever will have more attacks to throw back at the tanks than a 9/1, but those will also have less org, recovery, defense, HP, eat more supply. An 8/2 is a lot more directly comparable to a 7/6 (and its 40 wide cousin, the 15/10) in terms of cost and attacks, while having a noticeable advantage in org, recovery, HP, defense, etc.

if you try putting HTD in every infantry division...the cost adds up fast

A 9/1 is still cheaper than an 8/4,m and an 8/2 is still cheaper than a 15/10 per width, or a 7/6. I imagine you'd be putting these TDs in just about as many places as you would otherwise be putting your AT divisions.

If you don't, 15/5s are several times faster than infantry + HTD.

Just as they would be several times faster than infantry+AT?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Just as they would be several times faster than infantry+AT?

Yep, same speed. But more cost and not as spammable/placeable into support. AT is a more portable/less expensive way to pierce armor, but it struggles to pierce and do significant damage to heavy armor. That's the role of HTD. By extension it will be slightly harder to outmaneuver AT than HTD, because there's simply more AT available.

Anyway, I'm not impressed by arguments like "the counter unit for this meta division actually counters it". The same arguments could be made against 15/5 tank divisions itself, that they dominate infantry divisions. If space marines weren't thoroughly dumpstered for-cost by standard infantry divisions + any piercing investment whatsoever, it would be a different story.

 

[Corpse Fool]

But more cost and not as spammable/placeable into support.

Did you miss the part where I mentioned that the HTD has comparable or superior costs than the AT guns? And support AT is pretty bad, at top tier it is about -10% piercing and -40% hard attack, while you're only saving 33% of the cost and 20% of the supply. Support AT does have a narrow window where support AA doesn't offer enough piercing and 2 battalions of line AT are more than enough piercing where the support AT will offer piercing in a more economic package, but that is a fairly narrow window of opportunity and it seems like we're getting pretty serious about AT when we're talking about 100+ piercing.

AT (and medium tank destroyers) also capped at about 150 piercing, which heavy/modern/super heavy tanks can exceed. 120+ is pretty difficult to reach for those things without spiking the cost and dropping a lot of org/defense/etc.

Anyway, I'm not impressed by arguments like "the counter unit for this meta division actually counters it".

I think it revolves more around people wanting the tank divisions to have the armor bonus, such that the fighting on the eastern front for example doesnt just completely devolve into a grind-fest. The HTD mixes can have more attavls/piercing and more org/defensr than the infantry/at mixes, they perform a lot better than their nearest competition. Im not really a fan of banning this or that, I'd rather all of the things be balanced so there is no need to ban. But people want these things banned for whatever reason to bring the mechanics more in line for how they want the game to act. I think part of that is players having some expectation that the tanks are going to roll over infantry, which they cant really do near as well when HTD gets involved. But I'm not one of the people that support the ban, I cant really go into great detail and argue their point that well.

 

[Cavalry]

It was in the search of defending against 15-5 tank that lead me to discover the cheap tank divisions. Here what I found:

- Don't try to stack hard attack, whatever you do you can't stop 15-5 tank 1 vs 1 on open terrain with their huge planning bonus. The plan is delay them long enough to get reinforce or wait for them to run out of Org. Try enough piercing, then use the AT or TD for more AT divisions. Increase the defense stats and enough AA.
- Try to get the Org of AT infantry double the Org of enemy tank, and more defense stat. Luckily it can be done both by adding infantry.
- If you don't have enough AT divisions or cannot pierce, then fine, using pure infantry + enough AA to bolster the line. AA is critical to prevent the air superiorior penalty on defense stats.
- 2 high Org, high defense infantry divisions can stop 1 expensive low Org tank divisions, if they can't, add some more defenders.
- Avoid open terrain as much as possible, even abandon it if you can. When you break through, try to stop the new line at defendable terrain.
- The sercret weapon of anti tank: the submachine gun techs! They increase the defense stats subtantially. So always try to rush them and make sure your AT division use the best gun.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Support AT does have a narrow window where support AA doesn't offer enough piercing and 2 battalions of line AT are more than enough piercing where the support AT will offer piercing in a more economic package, but that is a fairly narrow window of opportunity and it seems like we're getting pretty serious about AT when we're talking about 100+ piercing.

This window fits "space marines" perfectly, however. If you want to counter space marine divisions for a fraction of IC (like they can counter tank divisions), a support AT is all it takes to defeat such divisions for cost...possibly heads up if they're just infantry + HTD.

I also find it suspect that this creates a grind, if someone is getting too fancy with HTD in divisions those divisions won't have much soft attack compared to average (or they will become premium cost). In both cases they're a niche unit, not something that could by itself decide Barbarossa.

 

[Corpse Fool]

getting too fancy with HTD in divisions those divisions won't have much soft attack compared to average

The TD with +5 gun still gain something ridiculous like +50% soft attack, which normally isnt enough to care about but when attacks from either side are so low it matters more. While AT guns are only 4 soft attack per width, Only medium TD1 is going to have less soft attack per width than AT guns, on top of the standard advantage of org and recovery and cost. This means that if you also want to throw in extra support artillery or whatever to boost attacks, the HTD division has a lot more room to include those things than infantry+at.

This window fits "space marines" perfectly, however. If you want to counter space marine divisions for a fraction of IC

If we wanted to counter space marines, yes. A support AT company, if not just support AA, is often enough to pierce them and spess mehreen low hardness means we dont need to worry about stacking hard attack as much. But we arent talking about countering space marines, we are talking about countering the beefy tank divisions.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

If we wanted to counter space marines, yes. A support AT company, if not just support AA, is often enough to pierce them and spess mehreen low hardness means we dont need to worry about stacking hard attack as much. But we arent talking about countering space marines, we are talking about countering the beefy tank divisions.

Yes, but what we were discussing was the merits of banning space marines in MP as a subcontext. The source of this tangent was Cavalry suggested some divisions that are sort of like space marines (the one with 10 tanks has so many it's just a slow tank division IMO), and you pointed out that MP games often ban them. My response was in that context, that I don't see any self-consistent rationale for banning them that couldn't be applied to other divisions as well.

HTD is obviously better than AT for jobs other than "pierce the infantry/tanks setup from a support slot". Though AT can get the job done against anything but full-on heavy tank + armor upgrade setups if it's what you have, we don't disagree in concluding it's not as good. Like other tech choices, it will work better or worse depending on what your opponents build.