ARMOR HAS CHANGED! And no one noticed
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 05. 2023
- Support me on PATREON / feedbackgaming
Sub to my MAIN CZcams: @DaveFeedBackGaming
Sub to my FEEDBACKIRL on CZcams: @FeedbackIRL
Sub to MEMES channel: @feedbackmemes
DISCORD talk with me / discord
Follow on TWITTER: / feedbackgaming
Follow for TWITCH livestreams: / feedbackgaming
Business email: davefeedbackgaming@gmail.com
Produced by Duck Taped Studios:
- Twitter - / markoni1100
- Business Email - themarkoni1199@gmail.com
Edited by Navich:
- Email - navichdeals@gmail.com
Thumbnail by Batsy:
- Discord - Batsy# 5675
#hoi4 #heartsofiron4 #hoi4guide - Hry
Hi Feedback! The reason the armor is 8.6 is because it's using a weighted avg of armor on your battalions! You take 40% of the armor of your most armored batallion (20) and the average armor of all the battalions (1.1) and multiply that by 60% You then add these values together 20*0.4 + 1.1*0.6 = 8 + 0.66 = 8.6
Spreadsheet masters here to the rescue
Where does the 60% come from?
@@chouin023the same place that the 40% comes from. It's a constant
@@chouin023 I guess the devs decided that the contribution an armored united gives is 40%, they should probably scale that from 20% to 40% depending on size of armored units
So only 1 great tank is all you need for your space marines
Jokes on you Feedback! I never knew how tanks worked to begin with. I just mash random templates together paying a bit of attention to cost and roll with it.
It usually works out.
Idk how people have the mental capacity or energy to actually absorb all the stats while designing a tank/division :(
@@preserveourpbfs7128 its a bit of a learning curve, but once you have that "aha!" moment on which stats actually matter and what they do, it takes little to no effort to use that knowledge going forward.
@@christiandelesie6308 I feel like HOI4 really need a help me design tank templets in the ingame editor.
like you tel lthe game I want to make this.
the game goes okey this is what you will be looking at and this are the minimum recommended numbers.
maybe whit a extra where will you be fighting, as The chieftains would say the best tank at one location is maybe not the best tank for another location.
like the Swedish Strv103 from the 1970 (the thing everyone claims is a tank destroyer because it got a fixed cannon).
but its a main battle tank and its design is defensive in Swedish forest and lakes.
and in HOI4 thats sort of simulated if your building a tank for Fighting in Germany it will perform badly in China/Japan (hills and mountains everywhere).
@@Zack_Wester not in the base game, but this exists in the mod millennium dawn. the description of every module in the tank designer includes a sentence or two about what its good for and why you might want to use it.
antiair has more than enough piercing to pierce 100% anything the AI produces in singleplayer so recon for piercing is a definite no because you can just put support antiair in all your divisions which you should be doing anyway.
Edit: Also the update to how piercing works is actually a buff for piercing and not armour and instead a nerf to armour since how it used to work is that if your armour was 1 above their piercing they would still get a 50% damage reduction. Adding a little bit of armour is still as bad as it used to be and perhaps even worse since now that armour has even less circumstances where it works to maximum potential. The divisions Dave used in the video were garbage in terms of piercing because presumably they had 1936 tech. It used to be that the 4 armour would against 3 pierce reduce their damage by 50% but now it only does it by 20%.
Indeed, he got it backwards. But it supports his space marines narrative so I'm not surprised.
Why is adding a little bit of amour to your divison bad? Aren't you getting 50% damage reduction potentially if your enemy doesn't have any piercing ?
@@invalidcrazy7034 it's rather expensive to add a small amount of armour that can (generally) easily be pierced by anything with support anti air. It also means the entire division is reliant on fuel and will start moving at a snails pace if they run out of supply. It may be useful in certain edge cases but "for the most part" it's not worthwhile. I do like armoured recon for mechanised divisions however.
AA support company or battalion?
@@milanstepanek4185 I literally said support AA so the support company, though putting it as an actual battalion in your division is also fine.
Firstly, this change happened months ago with the release of No Step Back, and I was under the impression that essentially everyone knew about it.
Secondly, armour is weaker than it was before. Previously, if the enemy division had less piercing than your armour, they'd deal 50% damage. Now they deal 65% damage if their piercing is at least half your armour, and 80% if it's at least 3/4. So you still need just as much armour to get any benefit, but you need twice as much armour to get the full benefit
but with sloped armor and cast armor..... i kinda feel it's easier to get more armour..... like the number gets higher if you build for armor then you could before.....
Also isn't what is written on 3:43 different then what you are saying? If they pierce 49% of your armor, they still do 50% damage, if they pierce 51% they do 65%, if they pierce 76% of armour they do 80% damage and if 100% they do obviously 100% of damage
Sorry, I had to delete what I replied before cause it was getting all jumbled. Okay, before if you had less armor than their piercing you took 100% damage. Now that damage scales according to how much less your armor is than their piercing.
So if your armor is only 60% of their piercing, then before you would take 100% damage, but now you will take 65% damage.
Isn't the armor rework they thought for NSB was fell through and they moved back the rework with BBA DLC?
This was implemented as a patch after NSB and was sneaked in with the patch notes. So for the most part the community wasn't fully aware of it
No armor is stronger than it was before(at least in mp) because before basically any tank worth their salt would have enough piercing to pierce a enemy division, which would mean that the only reason you would put armor on your tanks is for breakthrough. Now I will admit it does make tanks weaker against AT inf assuming that you would put armor on your tanks before, but you wouldn’t put armor on your tanks before since the main counter to tanks were other tanks, and AT inf still usually gets killed by tanks but with the tanks having a higher loss rate. But since people were meta gaming you wouldn’t put armor on anyways so even now with a armor meta at inf is can be in multiplayer due to the meta gaming that was happening
When you said “let’s dumb this down a bit” I breathed such a sigh of relief haha. Thanks for really breaking this shit into bite size chunks for the average HOI4 player like myself. You’re the best Dave!
the problem is that his bite sized chunks are often wrong. frankly, you should watch this channel for entertainment, not learning. I cant count the number of times he's made a video trying to share his knowledge with others, only the stuff he says to be wrong. sometimes you can even see him figuring things out and making stuff up as he goes in the videos.
Piercing appears in red (bad thing) because you are checking the ability of that division to pierce enemy armor. In this case, if the piercing of this division (presumably YOUR division in the tooltip explanation) has 50 % less piercing than enemy armor, it deals 50% less damage. Great video.😊
Armour is actually worse now than before thanks to this change. Before you only needed more armour than the enemy pierce to get the bonus, now the bonus is reduced if the enemy pierce is greater than half of your armour, meaning you now need TWICE as much armour as the enemy pierce to get the full bonus, meaning even just a single support AA will completely negate 90% of tank divisions. Support AT will negate the other 10%. Thanks PDX for making tanks even more useless than they already were.
Support AA can negate the bonus for armoured recon, and partially negate light tank divisions, but wont help at all against medium or heavy tanks. For a ~20 width infantry division in 1939, the piercing with AA is about 13, so to get the full bonus against it your tank division only needs to have 26 armour
@@explodethebomb thats not the point but youre right
@@explodethebomb True, maybe I was a bit overly dramatic. Still, replace the support AA with a support AT - which is still way cheaper than tanks - and my point stands. This applies IRL as well, the difference is that preventing casualties IRL actually matters, in HOI manpower is merely a number.
@@KingCliveThe17th but then you divert some of your production capacity and resources to AT line while maintaining necessary AA production, which can hurt especially the smaller nations, so cost-benefit trade might still not be that great. Also in MP you already had to produce AT to combat players with tank divisions, so little change there. The real nerf is to "space marines", which relied on the old system of slapping minimum armour on them to create an unstoppable behemoth. Now you have to invest significantly more resources into armour in those divisions so that they would work the same way.
Yeah, I watched the video and came to the opposite conclusion that FeedbackIRL did. Seems more like low armor values are not useful at all with this change, and you need to go way overboard to get good benefits now. In the video he is praising the 20% damage reduction the armored recon gave him, despite the fact that it would have been a full 50% reduction before this change.
I almost never build tanks, but the information is valuable none the less. Thank you Feedback
best single player
why would you play a ww2 game without one of the main ww2 innovations?
@@Perseagatuna because meat grinder players. :p
I actually tested this without knowing in a romanov poland run i did yesterday, i added a 20 armor flame tank in 1940 to all divisions, almost 10 armor for every division, i steam rolled over the soviet union without even putting artillery on the divisions, maybe 20-25 red bubbles in the whole invasion
I thought it was weird that no one was talking about this
I vividly rememebered the change to piercing in a patch note at some point but everyone was still acting as if it hadn't changed
It feels like space marine build would be benefited by it too
Everyone noticed
Very interesting. I enjoyed your France gameplay with light tanks a while ago, it opened some perspective, but that was pre-BBA. Any chance you update that with these findings?
Cheers Dave!
so If I get this correct if my armor/tank had 10 armor.
and if I fought something whit 4 pierceing I would take 50% damage and be unpierced.
and if I fought something whit 6 pierceing I would take 75% damaged and be semipierced or what the calculation says.
and if I fought something whit 10 pierce or more I take 100% damadge and be completly pierced.
At 6 (any amount greater than 50%) piercing you take 65%, at 8 (any amount greater than 75%) 80%.
So basically a support aa is going to let the enemy division deal full damage to your division.
The armor is weighted based on the armor of the highest armored battalion in the division, based on the wiki it's 40% of the highest armor plus 60% of the average armor. The takeaway is that adding any armor will be more effective than if it were calculated as just the average armor of all batalions, to try and represent the armor being intentionally put in the places where the division will take the most fire.
I just did it with a calculator based on the screen at 10:15 and it looks like it is (20 * .4) + (1.1 * .6), which is 8.66. I don't know if the 1.1 includes the 20 from armored car recon, just doing some estimates it seems like maybe it does and the denominator for the average is actually combat width plus some amount per support company, not number of battalions, but that's without having the template on the screen to validate.
İt's 40% of the highest and 60% of the rest
@@danielpincu6030 The other guy is right, I edited my comment. My calculation was also not quite right if I'm reading the wiki correctly.
@@tuluppampam Great for space marines
@@andrewgreeb916 infantry tanks were a thing in ww2, so they are a great idea (but in hoi4 they're not so great)
Light Tank Recon with max Armor and Breakthrough + Medium Flame Tank max Armor and Breakthrough is my personal favourite
You could make a video about every single mechanic in this game and I’d watch it Dave 😂
I noticed right away, like it isn't hidden at all.
What are you talking about? This change came out ages ago, when the last DLC was released. How can you claim this is new and nobody noticed?
It was sneaked in with a free patch in 2022. Wee correction buddy
@@FeedbackIRL No it wasn't. Partial piercing was intended to be added in NSB but wasn't. It was implemented in BBA.
I like the "craptastic tank."
I take a medium tank with riveted armor, a three-man turret, extra ammo storage times two, a radio, easy maintenance (to make it cheaper and more reliable), and a medium cannon. I give it just enough speed to go 4 kph.
The tank costs ~7 IC and has 30 to 40 breakthrough, enough piercing to take out any enemy tank the AI ever fields, good defense, and >25 to 50 armor. The 85% hardness of these battalions also brings the division as a whole to 20% hardness. Since HA is generally way smaller than soft attack this alone effectively drops enemy attack by almost 20%.
I also put on "auto upgrade" so I don't waste any more XP on the tank throughout the game.
I can also add in one non craptastic tank destroyer or AA battalion to beef up the armor stat.
This tank isn't supposed to be excellent. It just adds a lot of hard attack, soft attack, breakthrough, piercing, and even defense to an infantry division for as little cost as possible. It has enough armor so that the enemy as they become weaker will start having problems piercing it.
I use it for South Africa, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or other minors with relatively low manpower. Until I do a formable nation later, I often can get lots of production through conquest but have little manpower to spare.
This is a relatively high or moderate IC but low manpower solution. Having some of these tank stats really help.
Problems are: This does take about 3 to 5 factories to use at scale which is expensive for some nations. They aren't the best tanks. In low supply areas having tanks that require fuel are an issue as those battalions lose most their stats. Finally, it does take lots of oil when moving or fighting with these divisions. It will save on manpower and get XP faster than field hospitals.
BTW armor is WORSE now and not better. Even when piercing is lower than armor it causes more damage now. This makes it not worth it to pursue armor much unless you're doing it for a handful of your elite breakthrough divisions.
I have like 2500 hours.
There's an auto upgrade?
@@cartergeorge1545 Yes, it's right below the engine module in the tank designer. When it is on there is a little green check mark that can save you hundreds of XP over the course of a game.
@@dutchrjen bless you
Sounds like a good cheap medium tank, however I think giving it only a speed of 4 is huge miss unless the plan is use infantry instead of motorized in order to not need rubber and another production line. I'd drop one extra ammo mod and use that extra reliability % to bump the speed to 8 or so.
@@pocketgroyper9301 That's why it's a craptastic medium tank that I use for minor powers.
35 armor, 43 breakthrough, 20 plus soft attack, 15 hard attack, 60 piercing, good defense, 85% hardness, and 100% reliability all for 6.9 IC is a good deal. No rubber and only 1 tungsten and two steel is also a good deal. Sure, I use it with infantry, and they go slow but that's fine. I can't have everything. This also requires only some tech research. Cav is decent to use early on, but it doesn't modernize as well (becoming worse compared to infantry as the game goes on). Cav also uses more infantry equipment. Motorized uses more personnel per battalion, they use rubber, more steel, and cost more. Same with mechanized but mechanized is very expensive but because they have tracks they move fairly fast. Motorized are also slow over many terrains (I've seen them move as slow as infantry in forests and other terrain). Bicycle battalions are good but only a couple powers in game have them.
Later I can build a different faster variant tanks and put them into a handful of high-quality offensive divisions. I can beef those up with mechanized equipment (and use XP I saved to make those cheaper).
If playing a minor nation of say 2 million people, then every single soldier matters. Hardness, breakthrough, and occasionally getting the gold armor bonus are all very helpful. I can also build stronger divisions with less manpower and combat width. This is really helpful when stretching manpower out.
There is no "perfect" tank, or anything design in HOI4.
I can keep the craptastic design going the whole game to beef up infantry divisions. I can make a few tank divisions that use speedier models. I can also put flame tanks in these with lots of fuel drums added for more benefits.
With South Africa I recently made the same number of divisions I normally make with these crappy tanks in them and a few less infantry battalions. The divisions aren't anymore expensive, they have less personnel, and they benefit from lots of stats like breakthrough. Sure, there are trade offs like a somewhat lower hit point value and a need for 16 oil when running all these divisions but there is a lot gained.
Getting into Vicky 3 I hope one day HOI gets beautification like Vicky with the war simulation of HOI.
HOI4 just shows German stereotype strategy does not work and Soviet stereotype strategy works perfectly.
The KV1 did work real well till the Germans upped their anti tank and started piercing
0:29
Me, someone who has hundreds of hours in HOI4 and watches a lot of Feedback: I don't have to forget anything, for i have never known
People are supposed to understand this game?
@@andrewgreeb916 apparently
i noticed
Can you do the video on hardness please?
Aren't Attack and Damage two different things? You suggest it's reducing Attack by a % but the tooltip says it's Damage that's reduced.
you are 100% correct. damage is how much HP is being reduced from the division (and as a result, how many casualties and how much equipment is being lost). attack is 2 of your stats in combat.
what is with assault battalion in the division designer is it a mod or something i didnt knew about Germany having..... sorry for my eagle eyes bro
Japanese tanks are back on the menu boys
when will you discuss the new dev dairies on steam.
the HYPERLINK HERE
Honestly with all these changes I'm struggling to find a good balance for my divisions every time I come back to the game, I've been playing with flame tanks as support in my divisions which honestly I've only got there for the terrain bonus they provide, not sure if it's completely worth it since they can get penned by basically everyone, I'm running a 30 width with 4 arty rest infantry
flame tanks are incredibly strong if you use them right. my recommendation is to make the cheapest possible light flame tank, ignoring all of its stats, because it will only be a support company, so its stats wont really help your division. so like, an interwar light tank chasis, flame thrower, the cheapest platform option, the cheapest wheels. but heres the trick, you also add a dozer blade. the end result should be a tank that costs between 2 and 4 IC, which is about as much as artillery (and thus, so cheap you can stick it into EVERY division you make), gives between 5 and 15% extra attack against all terrain types, AND increases the entrenchment of your divisions.
@@christiandelesie6308 I might try this next, I've been playing as Greece trying to get as much armour as I can, usually with heavy flame tanks but they seem to be able to pierce them regardless how much armour I have and they do cost quite a lot to make so I'm having to put more factories on them taking away from others such as fighters to guarantee air superiority, I will give lights a try next, I'm assuming you reccomend just using light inter war flame tanks regardless of date?
@@-heinz- yes. in fact, unless you are trying to maximize your armour (which is generally never a good idea, and pretty much never worth the cost) upgrading your tank chasis is pretty pointless. for tanks you are going to use in actual batallions, you never need higher than basic. the reason for this, is that the only thing higher level chasis gives you is that it increases reliability, armour, and makes the tank more expensive. not to mention the amount of production efficiency you lose when you convert the line. for a regular tank batallion, i recommend basic chasis (regardless of what type of tank youre making) because its the cheapest option except for interwar, but interwar has TERRIBLE reliability. the trade off of increased reliability for increased cost with the higher levels of chasis is pretty bad overall, so upgrading your chasis is terrible, but interwar is just too low.
HOWEVER, for a support company, there will only be 1 or 2 dozen actual tanks in the unit, so low reliability doesnt matter, since you could lose 50% of the tanks in the unit to attrition, and your production would barely feel it.
also, always use light flame tanks, unless you are building specialized units for the purpose of breaking forts. light, medium, and heavy flame tanks all give pretty much the same terrain bonuses for your unit, with the exception that the larger the tank is, the more attack it gives against forts. but if you arent trying to push through the maginot, or using them as support on marine units to naval invade a coastal fort, the extra fort attack is useless.
@@christiandelesie6308 So basically what you are saying is stick with the 1934 Light tanks as Support flamers in your batallions for the buffs just double checking 😂 I havent tried actually making a tank battalion yet since I've only been playing as minor countries infantry and arty took priority, I would like to give some tank battalions a try for breakthrough as infantry takes a while to actually get through the enemy but unsure how to set up the tanks and designs since I used them before all the modules and stuff got added 😬
So before you had 100 armor and the enemy had 101 piercing, you took 100% damage. If they had 99 piercing, you took 50%. Now if the enemy has 99 piercing, you take 80% damage. The enemy would need to have less than 50 piercing to get the old bonus. This is a HUGE nerf to armor, not a buff to it. Given that tanks were completely gutted by NSB already, this is just an insult to the injury. Even comparing non-upgraded pre-NSB tanks, those are usually better IC / stat wise. But upgrading pre-NSB tanks does not make them more expensive. An NSB tank that has MOST of the stats on par with its fully upgraded pre-NSB counterpart is usually 4-5 times more expensive. AND STILL HAS MUCH WORSE RELIABILITY. Someone at PDX seriosusly needs the bajeezus bítchslapped out of them.
FeedbackIRL has become one my favorite HOI4 channels for no other reason than it helps optimize gameplay and provides better strats and designs. Also more tank, plane, and division template reviewed pls 😊
I’m sadly poor and don’t have “no step back”😂
I just have the generic game
@@1-Melo-1 mediums should still work, just add like 3 more mils to them to account for extra losses.
@PhillyWilly in the Philippines yes but I don’t have money to spend like that When you are barely making ends meat
okay babe
* armour
So does this mean tanks are useless as some are saying? I do not understand half of the changes paradox makes. I ended up giving up on the game several times because their changes to balance multiplayer completely ruin single player. I do not even play multiplayer.
This all is old stuff, and has been in game since NSB (Dave here however has been short on the uptake). So no. it does not change much if you're single player.
all you need to know, is that its harder to make invincible heavy tanks. And for Single player, you probably should add few ticks of extra armor on your tanks than in the past.
@@melfice999 thanks
@@melfice999 Devs thought about adding armour rework in NSB but it fell through, actual rework that Dave talks about here is a BBA addition.
@@africacorpse8010 Huh. And here I thought it was added in NSB or one of the following patches close to NSB. Thanks for correcting me there
@@melfice999 np mate, they were trying to, but failed to implement it correctly in time for NSB.
This video would be a lot better if the recording of you didn't overlap the box with the battle data/stats around minutes 4-6 or so.
Does that mean that a division still benefits from armor in combat if the armor value is at least more than 50% of the piercing of the enemy division? I still don't fully get it.
This is just dumb, no one will micro this much, either flames or light recon.
Considering how support aa already kind of countered tanks, the change honestly only made support aa more effective as an anti tank option as now you don't have to exceed the enemy armor with piercing, you now have thresholds to break to be more effective, just having more than 50% of their armor as piercing increases the damage dealt to the division from 50% to 65%, exceed 75% and you'll do 80%, exceed 100% of their armor and you'll do full damage like before.
我記得很早之前，大概在血戰DLC 的時候就有說要改了
不過沒人注意到實際上的變動在甚麼時候，因為基本標誌沒有改變
基本上"高裝甲"、"超高裝甲" 變成"不需要"，因為損傷有"硬質"可以減免、也不強求 裝甲值>穿甲值
在這新機制下，"只要有1/2的穿甲值、就可以有足夠的傷害"、"裝甲值不高於穿甲值25%以上就無法優勢的減傷"
反而是步兵有裝甲支援，就可以減少許多的受損
輕坦克偵查、重坦克噴火營，就成為了百分百的高CP值部隊
who builds tanks anymore?
Oh geez luise, another useless change