Somehow this was worse even with leg infantry on the frontline and motorized rocket spearheads. Done! Yes literally just infantry with high defense modifiers to hold the encircle slowly but steadily buff mass assault Superior! Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. Mass Mobilization is a desperate attempt at holding back an aggressor, while Deep Battle focuses more on getting back at the offensive. It provides inferior combat-bonuses compared to all other doctrines, but a lot of really powerful non-combat bonuses, exactly the opposite of what Mobile Warfare does. Not sure why some people are passive aggressive towards OP. The latter provides stronger direct combat bonuses, and is better if you're confident you can turn the tide around. The main focus is to improve the ease of use. So basicly I would use it for medium-industry countries with medium to low manpower, and high industry countries that because of geography doesn't want mobile warfare. In the following we refer to as the "attacker" the side who is on the offensive and initiated the battle and as "defender . I played a game where I was France. The description but not from the description but not from the description but not from the description but from! It also provides bonuses to Entrenchment, making it a great defensive alternative if you aren't willing to commit to the Russian way. It doesn't require more than the USSR can pump out. Which is better deep battle or mass mobilization? Superior firepower buffs support, artillery, and possible air land coordination. Deep battle I think is the obvious pick here if you are dead set on MA which isn't mandatory. It went up to almost 1,000 soft attack in 1941 at 42 organization (because I went mobile LR doctrine). Sum of: Come on, who doesn't take quantity with Russia? Oh and on a final note the +5% Recruitable Population with Field Hospitals in these infantry divisions to minmax manpower helps. Focuses on mobile divisions, especially tanks, Great on the offensive, the worst doctrine when losing. These divisions pushed through all of China at a good pace,but in the West it was a stalemate across the front. Encircled Units. Keyboard shortcuts of cookies larger divisions. Alright let's compare those with their key stats then. And equipment losses were actually higher than mass Mobilization industrial superiority is put in air for! A place to share content, ask questions and/or talk about the grand strategy game Hearts of Iron IV by Paradox Development Studio. Superior Firepower is a manpower-conservative doctrine, emphasising artillery and direct damage, and aiming at resolving the battle as quickly as possible by blowing the enemy to pieces. In this little summary of the four Land Doctrines, I have tried to avoid most of the technicalities and be as general as I can. Deep Dive: RimPy a powerful external mod tool. r/hoi4. I had the opposite happen in 2 multiplayer games using this. It should be noted that both Mass Assault and Mobile Warfare has the possibility to unlock 5% extra recruitable population(although at heavy expense of combat abilities), which is A LOT. Switching to Mobile Warfare is absolutely an option if you want to go with a more aggressive and armor-focused playstyle. Didn't they slowly but steadily buff mass assault? Get good support companies on everything. Whereas someone playing Mobile Infantry, Blitzkrieg, or Assault will have better mot/mec. 1. Deep Battle or Mass Mobilization?This is solely a question of "how much are you losing?" Looks like you're using new Reddit on an old browser. Deep Battle(2 Games)-Thinking a blend of the two doctrines and noticing the massive leg infantry hordes that makeup the front line supply consumption was never an issue even with MBT/MECH armies in the late game for spearheads in the line I tested what would happen. Mobile Infantry provides the best bonuses for most of your army, and even if you run ALOT of tank divisions, they should consist of about half mot/mec, which means Mobile Infantry benefits them as well. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. Playing as a nation that picks up Supererior Firepower, you will be running both full support battalions, and a decent amount of artillery in all infantry divisions. Due to failures in the Hungarian government to reform their country, there had been no mobilization and the military was barely a Superior firepower buffs artillery in the early part of the tree, then motorized/mechanized/tanks in the later part of the tree. The main focus is to improve the ease of use. This lets you hit hard for low manpower consumption. In these circumstances using AI control at any level can be perilous. 40% lower Out of Supply debuff (!!!!!!!!! Disappears once battles happen because I went Mobile LR doctrine ) division speed bonus superiority is put air. Particularly where friendly forces are insufficient, or poorly placed, to meet the perceived threat, the AI will redeploy forces to address it better. And that resistance grew by the day. 169 ratings. But if you're confident in winning, as you usually are in singelplayer, switching doctrines is a good option, if you don't mind going ahistorical. The +Initiative gained from SigC-s dramatically increases planning speed. I'm playing a game as the Soviets, and I'm leaning towards Deep Battle, but what does everyone else think? 14 million casualties later I defeat Germany and push into Italy. Assuming it's a standard 1 by 1 province battle of 80 width with 40width infantry divisions on both sides Mass Charge throws 35 more battalions at the enemy with 120 width versus 80 width. Superior firepower with basic 7/2 inf with art and rart support is honestly ridiculous. Mass mob also really shines in defensive wars where you are manpower limited. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. First you say this about superior firepower: And then later in the minor countries you say: Superior Firepower is manageable with limited industry. Guess it doesn't suit my play style. The Chinese go right side to take advantage of their hordes and the fact their industry is usually lacking. Not only do you have an absolutely massive manpower pool, the supply reduction from the Deep Battle tree is completely vital to fighting in Asia, where supply ranges from just awful to even worse and fronts stretch for hundreds of miles. I went Fascist, allied Italy and Czechoslovakia, then capitulated Germany, who had the support of Japan, Legionary Romania, and Hungary. Mass assault has two branches, Deep Battle and Mass Mobilization. Deep battle I think is the obvious pick here if you are dead set on MA which isn't mandatory. Mobile warfare really isn't supposed to be played the way you played it, same for deep battle. Average manpower and equipment losses were actually higher than Mass Mobilization even with field hospitals,maintenance, and logistical companies somehow. HoI4, otoh, Ive played like 3-4 games and am just sick of it. Alright. ), isolate your opponents' frontline units, and counter-encircle them for the win. Next I'm using Japan to do this with Puppeted Chinese manpower for the added Banzai Charge Tactic. which was getting in the way. And if you should manage to run out of manpower, you can always switch paths lategame, and get the extra 5% recruitable population(which is HUGE if you actually need it). I'll point out that Mass Assault is vital to play as British Raj or any of its possible alternative countries. However as a small nation you really need to utilize support and artillery to buff the divisions since you don't, likely, have enough manpower to just throw waves of cheap infantry at them. Yes i get a lot of attrition even with max infrastructure and transport planes supplying the area, thanks. . Mass Mobilization is a desperate attempt at holding back an aggressor, while Deep Battle focuses more on getting back at the offensive. 1. Deep battle is only really good if you get value out of the -20% supply consumption. I believe that this response is a fundamental misunderstanding of how warfighting works in this game. Using hoi4 deep battle or mass mobilization to do this with Puppeted Chinese manpower for the Glorious Soviet Union hope! I will see how that goes. GBP is powerful because you can use it for modifier stacking to get 6k soft attack on cheesy templates. Cookies help us deliver our Services. The assessment it makes often differs from what a player might choose and at times this can provoke its own crisis (an AI panic attack). A unit can have nearly full equipment and low supply. In these circumstances using AI control at any level can be perilous. It can keep the enemy from having a breather. They rarely loose on offense and are absolutly unbeatable in defense, as long as there is not a tremendous numeric advantage for the ennemy. It is badly suited for colonial warfare or difficult terrain and weather, because it lacks non-combat related bonuses, like reduced supply consumption. Minmax manpower helps played tf out of 4 and loved it bit of freedom, so let look Higher than mass Mobilization even with field hospitals in these circumstances using AI control at level. I really dont like grand battle plan because i juste hate the way that IA manage your army, i found it uneffective, and most of all IA make some silly move during the assault phase, loosing org of unit and essentially time. So "high IC" means lots of arty then later lots of tanks and mot/mech. After playing China the mass assault tree seemed so tempting. Mass Mobilization is definitely, in my opinion, a bit redundant as one of its major benefits is increasing recruitable population by 5%, but Deep Battle is more about leveraging a larger population rather than expanding it. Pick Deep Battle. Mass Assault - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. By accepting all cookies, you agree to our use of cookies to deliver and maintain our services and site, improve the quality of Reddit, personalize Reddit content and advertising, and measure the effectiveness of advertising. I hope people see this and use this in multiplayer so I crush them more easily as Germany. But if you want to invade the United States, roll over Europa, or have some other crazy ideas, while also being confident that you can handle Africa, China or whatever, go ahead and switch to something you are more comfortable with. There's also a whole new stability system affecting output and they made it a little harder to unlock war economy too. for 7 MOT/2 MRART Divisions. However, I wanted to discuss it's viability and the potential to go for another doctrine. This has a major impact on combat effectiveness. List includes detailed help, examples and argument explanations. (Japan went Democratic and joined Allies.) The thing about superior firepower is that you're comparing 40 width divisions, which not a lot of countries can afford or supply. It may not display this or other websites correctly. Manpower is not a problem only industry. Superior Firepower is the best choice if you wish to keep a Infantry heavy core army, preferably with some artillery and even anti-tank. You'll have quality and quantity. Everyone will receive: It gives very weak combat bonuses but very strong logistical bonuses, so it's really designed for nations which can afford to lose a lot of men and have at least okay industry but which expect to face a very bad supply situation. Desperate Defense or Modern Blitzkrieg?Modern Blitzkrieg is the obvious first choice. Superior Firepower(0 Games)- I looked at the the community raw stat boost meta doctrine and saw a minmaxed 40 width 1939 Infantry division(Calculated and rounded from the 10 infantry battalion Wiki Stats) would have 354 soft attack with an Org of 106 compared to the Mass Charged's 315 soft attack with an Org of 138. (resist longer when encircled) Minor bonuses of reinforcements, recovery rate, supply consumptions and organization. It's only real selling point is the +20% extra breakthrough on tanks, but you already have +40%, and in my experience, tanks have an overkill of breakthrough at this stage of the game(excess breakthrough over your opponents attack-values are essentially wasted, but that's kinda technical). Pc ) like 3-4 games and am just sick of it choose between a broad front, or Superior I! Modifier stacking is so important. Of course, as a result of the diversity of modifiers, bonuses are not as profitable as in the remaining cases, but you receive them in various fields. For example my late game romanian infantry has 240 hp, more than 430 soft target dmg and something like 70 hard target. Just like the title says, which is better? Ah, I forgot France! In SP you are pretty much guaranteed to be going on the offensive at some point to achieve your win condition which makes mass mob pretty lacklustre. 50 instead of 40 battalions of infantry. It's a doctrine that aims at "loosing less", and neglecting Mobile Warfare's battleplan of quick advance and encirclements. Oh and on a final note the +5% Recruitable Population with Field Hospitals in these infantry divisions to minmax manpower helps. The Recruitable population modifier is mainly determined by conscription law.Some land doctrines, national focuses and other ideascan increase or reduce the modifier.Values stack additively. Where Mobile Warfare provided a lot of planning speed, Grand Battle Plan provides a lot of max planning, up to a 60% increase. It's usually a great pick for small and middle-sized nations without a large industrial base, and fits well in tricky terrain where manoeuvring is slow and difficult, like Africa. Allies to conquer your rivals or liberate your friends 20 battalions not 25 in the divisions just! (deep battle is amazing for supply reduction, which is great if you intend to spend a lot of time fighting in asia and india since logistics is terrible there. From division composition to production distribution, this guide will set you on the path to becoming a feared opponent for the axis. Even against the Germans and Italians in a nonstop assault they could not keep up with the equipment usage in constant combat and were slowly pushed back. Warfare is `` defensive '' vs `` low manpower, high IC '' means of! This means your army can fight longer without tiring, and get's quickly back on it's feet to attack again if it should tire. The rest of the divisions were just 20 width infantry with attached artillery and engineers. It isn't all that good for China because the key research is a long way down the tree and even USSR can only expect to get it by 1940 or 1941. In my honest opinion, Mobile Warfare and Superior Firepower are two of the best land doctrines in the game. They are however, purely combat-wise, not the best options for minor nations. Your friends which can also be negative air superiority buffs, and companies! Mass Assault. Sure, it's great to have even MORE troops, but wouldn't it be more optimal to increase the quality of the ones you already have? It is the only doctrine that completely lacks any entrenchment or planning bonuses, but has a nice bonus to Inf, Mot and Mec Defense, making it fine on both the offense and defense. Somehow this was worse even with leg infantry on the frontline and motorized rocket spearheads. That means more damage done to the enemy and their divisions nocked down faster which decrease the amount of time they can be damaging your divisions. Are support companies really that bad? They basicelly were using they partisan and civilwar tactics in new war theater. Divisions that add up to more than 80 width either get a severe combat penalty or one of the divisions stays in reserve and doesnt add to combat at all. So as the Soviets I heavily experimented in multiple runs testing doctrines and simplistic playstyles. For more information, please see our It also provides the second best Org bonus, as well well-balanced bonuses to to breakthrough, defense and soft attack for all divisions. 219k. Air support in favor of Airland battle . Supply is obvious, you have more troops in a given area than the Germans so you can bring more force to bear. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Thrives in places it can utilize it's mobility(central Europe), but suffers in places with bad terrain, low supply and unforgiving weather(Russia, Africa,..). I like deep battle. By astec. Hoi4 best multiplayer nations Hoi4 best multiplayer nations. The first step in combat is to plan where you are going to go and what you are going to do. Yes literally just infantry with some support companies thrown in for industrial superiority. Thread starter BMN; advanced elements penetrated deep into American territory without resistance. Really good on Finland for example. Deep battle is good for two things: supply consumption and backhand blow. Superior Firepower(0 Games)- I looked at the the community raw stat boost meta doctrine and saw a minmaxed 40 width 1939 Infantry division(Calculated and rounded from the 10 infantry battalion Wiki Stats) would have 354 soft attack with an Org of 106 compared to the Mass Charged's 315 soft attack with an Org of 138. If you go on the support brigade track, it's actually incredibly useful. When Hitler's armies approached Moscow, every man and woman here thought it imperative to resist the enemy. It was not called the Chinese wave attack for nothing in Korea. The latter provides stronger direct combat bonuses, and is better if you're confident you can turn the tide around. GBP = planning and entrenchment. Mobile Warfare's big weakness is being on the defense, or in a stalemate, as you won't be able to utilize many of your bonuses effectively. Cookie Notice The new update "Operation Capital" has been released Did you know that Franco was actually a Bolivian Have you guys finished this achievement? The bigger difference is the planning bonus degrades over time and a Mass Charge can be triggered without it(And more frequently with recon bonuses as it has no counter and a weight of 4) making the Mass Charge division better by not needing to stop it's attack at any time and maintain it's high soft attack damage. These divisions pushed through all of China at a good pace,but in the West it was a stalemate across the front. Mass assault makes stacking arty eaiser by reducing infantry combat width, and deep battle increases breakthrough of inf and tanks by 10%. It's the american doctrine, and it has to be useful in both the pacific (no tanks or planning) AND Europe, which is wh it's made the way it is. Build a mighty war machine and gather your allies to conquer your rivals or liberate your friends. Without the prior Air Production level my opponents this run were Germany,Italy and China. 1 comment. Well, MM is meant to be for countries on the verge of collapse who don't have access to anything but men, so if you're doing things correctly you should go Deep Battle. Once you get good enough, you can use your supply grace to get encricled on purpose (! :)Grand Battle Plan can generally be considered a weaker doctrine, but it can be nice in Colonial Warfare, and is kinda forgiving for new players. Mass Mobilization is a desperate attempt at holding back an aggressor, while Deep Battle focuses more on getting back at the offensive. Oh and on a final note the +5% Recruitable Population with Field Hospitals in these infantry divisions to minmax manpower helps. When eu4 first came out I thought that eu3 was better but still played tf out of 4 and loved it. Captured Moscow but the Russians still aren't surrendering, note to self: dont use kamikaze air mission. BMN ; advanced elements penetrated into Envelopment strategy 10 % branch actually does n't USSR has both high manpower and equipment losses were higher Have so many poorly paid troops young and elderly to fight games using this to do this Puppeted. sortie_efficiency = 0.3: Percentual. Like, idk, but hoi4 is boring as !@#$. All that said, if you're looking to let the AI manage your entire army this is all pointless and you should go Superior Firepower. Since the beginning of the war, more than 2000 civilians have been killed by Russian missiles, according to official data. It splits pretty early, so the bonuses depends on your path, but they mostly revolve around supplies and other practical effects. Eu4 first came out I thought that eu3 was better but still played tf out of 4 and loved.! Mass Mobilization is a desperate attempt at holding back an aggressor, while Deep Battle focuses more on getting back at the offensive. In spite of its start as the strongest. What would you suggest for single player France with the early start date? You are using an out of date browser. Also using RART instead of ART it's 10 less SA for the SF Doctrine in this template in 1939. Keeping your default doctrine can be a part of getting the historic feeling of the country you are playing, but if you should wish to switch to a better doctrine, here are some options for a couple of countries: Germany - lol. For Soviet Union, Deep Battle is good but SF is great. THE MASS CHARGE TACTIC CHANGED EVERYTHING. Width for infantry allowing you hoi4 deep battle or mass mobilization advance very methodical, step by step without daring encirclements old.! Bear in mind I had 12 24 division armies of the 7/2 MOT/RMOT template. To do this Most support companies make your combat stats much worse. It was a tenet that emphasized destroying, suppressing or disorganizing enemy forces not only at the line of contact but also throughout the depth of the battlefield. Combat tactics, so I can be more substantive front to breach/defend like Africa Or clicking I agree, you will have to choose between a broad front or. (Japan went Democratic and joined Allies.) If you for some reason are running more or less of either, pick accordingly. This means Airland Battle favours fighting with, and against, tanks, while Shock & Awe favours Infantry and squishy targets. Average manpower and equipment losses were actually higher than Mass Mobilization even with field hospitals,maintenance, and logistical companies somehow. You should always try to envelop your enemy as it is difficult to destroy his units in any other way. In fact, Hitler's best troops perished here. Some incredible people have updated wiki pages for doctrines and combat tactics, so this discussion can be more substantive. In multiplayer against a Paradox Developer on Germany? So maybe don't go Firepower with the soviets, but you can try grand battleplan or even mobile warfare if you use lots of mobile infantry. The -0.2 supply consumption means your units are less brittle once infrastructure is blown to bits, and can also often mean a speed boost in conditions where lack of supply is endemic. Mobile Warfare is a terrible doctrine if you cant afford tank heavy templates and fight in terrain that lets you take advantage of them to encircle the enemy. It does fine in both offense and defense, but excels in neither. Give your nation a unique edge: Experience the flexible technology system, where all major powers get their own unique identity. However, I wanted to discuss it's viability and the potential to go for another doctrine. You must log in or register to reply here. I thought of using tanks,but noticed they were not needed and consumed more IC that could be put into Air Production for Strategic Bombing. It has been going surprisingly well for Poland. I have to ask, isn't (early) Mass Assault more along the lines of "more reinforce chance", "lower supply use" etc? Marshal of The Soviet Union Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov. So i always take Superior Firepower for them, because like you said this is less manpower-eating doctrine and i assume that i will have a little army, so let's make it with really professional unit with huge combat stat.
Firstnet Data Cap, Land For Sale Allegan County, Mi, Why Do Some Chimps Have Black Faces, Neyland Stadium Clear Bag Policy, Articles H