WWW: The German player does not use artillery

[alkomon]

I´m just watching the 6th WWW video and saw this again: the best HOI4 player in the world, mr Daniel Sjöberg does not use any artillery in his German infantry divisions (and he is still successful) :O

Well that’s hurts my eyes and brain. I know that in the game some arty units are hidden in inf. battalions, but not to have arty battalion(s) in Division is just crazy and unrealistic.

It´s just like this: “We don’t need to suppress and destroy the enemy with arty fire, we have doctrines!”.

 

[Zaku]

I´m just watching the 6th WWW video and saw this again: the best HOI4 player in the world, mr Daniel Sjöberg does not use any artillery in his German infantry divisions (and he is still successful) :O

Well that’s hurts my eyes and brain. I know that in the game some arty units are hidden in inf. battalions, but not to have arty battalion(s) in Division is just crazy and unrealistic.

It´s just like this: “We don’t need to suppress and destroy the enemy with arty fire, we have doctrines!”.

Johan once said that we will not have "no brainer" choices in the game. Arty is strong, but it's not the only way to win the game.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

Johan once said that we will not have "no brainer" choices in the game. Arty is strong, but it's not the only way to win the game.

I take infantry won't be necessary either and you can be highly successful with just tanks and artillery. Can't have infantry as no-brainer.

 

[Zaku]

I take infantry won't be necessary either and you can be highly successful with just tanks and artillery. Can't have infantry as no-brainer.

You can win using only fully mobile army if you have the resources.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

You can win using only fully mobile army if you have the resources.

I wasn't talking about mobile army. I meant army composed of exactly two line brigade types: Tanks and Artillery. No cavalry, no motorized, no infantry of any sort whatsoever. Here I come Stalingrad!

 

[Zaku]

I wasn't talking about mobile army. I meant army composed of exactly two line brigade types: Tanks and Artillery. No cavalry, no motorized, no infantry of any sort whatsoever. Here I come Stalingrad!

I don't understand your point.
Why would you only build armored and arty? What's the thought behind it?

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

I don't understand your point.
Why would you only build armored and arty? What's the thought behind it?

The point is that "we don't want artillery* to be no-brainer" is equal argument to "we don't want infantry* to be no-brainer".

*In any of it's 2-7 variations ingame.

 

[Invader_Canuck]

Johan once said that we will not have "no brainer" choices in the game. Arty is strong, but it's not the only way to win the game.

The problem with this is that artillery was war winning. It was the use of artillery more than any other land based asset (even tanks) that separated the first rate military powers from the rest.

Having a WW2 game where artillery is optional, is imho more than a wee bit silly.

I honestly think the issue is with supplies though. The Jerman player was basing his strategy around high operational tempo, basically being able to fight longer and more efficiently than anyone else. We saw it in Syria with Johan. His motorized divisions were out of supply the entire time and got rolled back.

Still, artillery should ALWAYS be present if it can be present. The upgrade in stats at the cost of logistical cost should always favor at least 1 arty brigade.

 

[Zaku]

The point is that "we don't want artillery* to be no-brainer" is equal to "we don't want infantry* to be no-brainer".

*In any of it's 2-6 variations ingame.

You have the option to not use arty, just as you have the option to have a fully mobile army.
You can also have an army with large amounts of arty.
If you feel like arty is a thing that you definitely need, then build them they are a viable choice. If you don't, then you can build lighter divisions.

 

[Zaku]

Having a WW2 game where artillery is optional, is imho more than a wee bit silly.

If you feel that way, then build an army based on arty. Nobody says you shouldn't, it will be a strong choice according to Johan and Daniel.

Diversity is always a good thing in a video game.

 

[RabbidHamster]

The game is in Beta, balance is off. I wouldn't fret too much about these unadorned infantry divs being OP for the rest of forever....

 

[paranoidsteve]

This is a known balance issue. One of the devs said (I cannot be bothered to look up who said it when) that it will be 'sorted' out before the game is released.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

You have the option to not use arty, just as you have the option to have a fully mobile army.

Again, I'm not talking about mobile army. I'm talking about tanks and artillery. It doesn't even need to be mobile. You are sidestepping my reductio ad absurdium. Why should infantry in any of it's 7 variations be a no brainer? It clearly violates the base precept.

If it's because it has 7 fairly diverse variations, then give artillery 7 diverse variations, maybe having one coukld be no-brainer.

 

[Zaku]

Again, I'm not talking about mobile army. I'm talking about tanks and artillery. It doesn't even need to be mobile. You are sidestepping my reductio ad absurdium. Why should infantry in any of it's 7 variations be a no brainer? It clearly violates the base precept.

If it's because it has 7 fairly diverse variations, then give artillery 7 diverse variations, maybe having one coukld be no-brainer.

Your point makes no sense. You have the choice of using several types of combat battalions, just as you have the choice to use several types of support battalions. You can build your army the way you want. Just as I said in my previous post which you mostly ignored, if you have a boner for arty then by all means use them. They are strong, but there are also several other choices as well.

 

[vota dc]

In a Hoi 2 mod I made a country that build only armor and never infantry.

The reasons of no need of artillery are
-Soviet Union has a crappy but determined leader: no surrender until annexation but also -40% IC so fewer troops.
-Gibraltar is lost so the supply line for UK troops is very long.

With a little more artillery I guess the french pockets wouldn't last so long.

 

[joeenochs]

I wasn't talking about mobile army. I meant army composed of exactly two line brigade types: Tanks and Artillery. No cavalry, no motorized, no infantry of any sort whatsoever. Here I come Stalingrad!

Well, this kind of army in a well balanced game should be too expensive to produce and too expensive to supply in sufficient number.

An army with only infantry should lack the punch to break into good defensive lines although it is a less clear. I assume that some kind of small artillery is also abtracted into an infantry only army and close air support might also play the role of it.

 

[Vidkjaer]

Artillery cost Tungsten as resource. Germany does not have this in abundance and can therefore not make it the bulk of the army.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

Your point makes no sense. You have the choice of using several types of combat battalions, just as you have the choice to use several types of support battalions. You can build your army the way you want. Just as I said in my previous post which you mostly ignored, if you have a boner for arty then by all means use them. They are strong, but there are also several other choices as well.

There are three basic arms for this period, infantry, artillery and armour. Don't try to muddle that to "several types of combat battalions". I already brought up the variation question, but variation of infantry is over represented compared to artillery. Which might actually be significant cause for the current situation. For example, had there been "cheap" or "pack" or "light" variation of artillery Daniel could have chosen that and I would not be taking issue. And obviously I'm primary concerned from the historical and thematic perspective, I have no "boner" for artillery.

 

[Amur_Tiger]

Johan once said that we will not have "no brainer" choices in the game. Arty is strong, but it's not the only way to win the game.

Just because he wants to avoid no brainer decisions doesn't mean we should expect that no fire support is needed at all. If not arty then it should be rocket arty or a lot of CAS. Otherwise you've just invalidated combined arms for the sake if 'balance'. At the very least the lack of fire support should be bleeding Germany white in terms of losses.

 

[Zaku]

For example, had there been "cheap" or "pack" or "light" variation of artillery Daniel could have chosen that and I would not be taking issue.

Small calibre arty and mortars are abstracted in infantry equipment.

But that aside, I still don't get your point. This is a game, and as such it should be balanced. You can't have an OP support brigade, because then nobody would use the rest. The game design revolves around the idea that you should make sacrifices, because you can't have everything.
Do you build divisions with less infantry battalions, but lots of heavy firepower?
Do you build them focusing on mobility? Then you add a recon company or maybe an engineer company.
Do you build lots of CAS and skip arty?
Game should include several diverse builds, and I don't think heavy arty should be the only obvious choice.