Most UNDERRATED Land Doctrine In HOI4! - HOI4 Land Doctrine Tier List
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 03. 2022
- Most UNDERRATED Land Doctrine In HOI4! - HOI4 Land Doctrine Tier List
Main Channel / davefeedbackgaming
Discord! / discord
Support me on Patreon! / feedbackgaming
Follow me on Twitter: / feedbackgaming
Follow me on Twitch: / feedbackgaming
-----------------------------------
FeedbackIRL is where feedback procrastinates with his hobbies and other interests. Warning REALLY BORING or REALLY INTERESTING
#heartsofiron4 #hoi4 #hoi4guide - Hry
Germany is gonna be nerfed so hard when Paradox adds Ukrainian tractor battalions into the game...
Tractor battalion gets 50% equipment capture rate for tanks.
im guessing this is april fools because mass mob is the best
Gurillia warfare doctrine? :P
Who uses artillery in 2022 man.... Anti air is superior, since cas is king with heavy fighter II, artillery isn't needed to push , anti air = air superiority = cas = GG, ARTILLERY IS POINTLESS! ALSO, anti air is cheaper overall and less division width, and can pierce case people use tanks, so your anti-everything, add flametank and tank recon for armour, ant it's GG BOIS. get trucks for supply, and rush mechanised 1-2 and use those as your Mobile forces and it's GG.
@@danielanderson12321 this is the shittiest comment i have seen in a while. Yes CAS spam is good but antiair shuts down enemy CAS. So if your enemy has Fighters your CAS will shredded (and also if they also have antiair), so how you are planning to push without soft attack (since aa does not give any significant soft attack) ? Also AA can pierce very cheap and crappy tanks only.
106 entrenchment Ussr with Grandbattleplan definitely not broken XD
Trolling the Germans with lvl 10 forts on the Stalin line with GBP
Is this with the Infanry entrenchment trait?
The Great Trial cannot be won by mere entrenchment, Comrade Yazov.
With 10 forts.
I mean tanks are gonna push that easily anyways
"Whenever you plan to defend, you don't plan to defend, you plan to attack" - Dave 7:43
"Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more" - George S Patton
Had to google the exact quote, seen it in HOI4 loading screen as well, Dave is getting good at military strategy.
In fact, sometimes it's better to simply sit in perfect defence, while your enemy drains resources and manpower. Of course, only in the case when *you* have good defence.
And, as enemy tries to grind through your lines of defense, you bomb him to hell. At some point, the enemy will be left without people, resources and with bombed infrastructure, and you will only have to head slowly to his capital at the speed of infantry walking, without any resistance.
"invicibility lies in the defense, possibility of victory in the attack" -Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Desperate defense is such a strange addition to the Blitzkrieg tree. It's really only there for historical reasons but really doesn't have anything to do with fast mobile warfare that the tree is suppose to represent
It honestly demonstrates to me how the whole doctrine thing needs to be revamped. All the paths are built around specific nations and all of them have that feel of 'well and now the player would probably want to go with something like this'.
It also keeps different paths locked behind so much and you lose all your gains if you move to another, so if you're suddenly doing horribly, having gone towards 'shock and awe' you're not going to quickly switch to desperate defense and stem the tide. It means you have to plan to fail to be able to ever use it.
@@EkEMaN91 but you can change doctrines now WAY quicker..
Idk,why alt doctrine trees ever exist
They prolly added for germany roleplay but it doesn't make sense anyway.
It's kinda of like if the blitzkrieg fails and You need to defend or something
Worth noting that some parts of the world have longer nights than others. I remember cheesing this as multiplayer New Zeeland by tech rushing both night fighting doctrine and equipment and wrecking 30 Romanian Divisions in Norway with 4.
That's surprisingly realistic, but I guess that *is* something Paradox would be aware of...
How did you rush the night tech and doctrine? I can hardly grind enough manpower to fight as new zealand (im not going the new core polynesia route).
wait does it take in to account what time of the year it is though? cause there is no night in summer while winter there is only few hours of sun light
@@juhoalander3461 Yes if you turn on the day night cycle this should become more obvious too. (The only flaw is that the graphical day night cycle is always set to 1st January but the combat calculator for day night does change based on month)
French planing bonus goes up to 95% if you go Assault in Grand Battle Plan, it can even go to 130% with a general and field marshal with level 10 strategy, the field marshall trait below organizer, and a military advisor (you can also take the spirits of the army that increase planning speed if you want some min-max)
Which mean +130% soft attack, hard attack and breakthrough for every single division of your army, staff office plan goes brrrr
A definitively balanced doctrine of course
compare that however to the very same france with the very same generals that went SFP. +130% attack from planning vs +100% attack from planning and +20% base attack. which one deals more damage, even at max planning? hint: it's SFP.
and most of the time you will be nowhere near max planning as that requires you to pause your offensives, allowing your opponent time to recover and recoup. the game basically forces you to blitzkrieg if you want to avoid ww1 (as it should tbh). GBP is the ww1 doctrine, it's not relevant for ww2.
@@kvlt1349 But: GBP has it's rather good defensive modifiers up front. When you play France democratic & without invading Spain; you will struggle to get more then 3 doctrines pre war. And to hold on for dear life against the Germans, the first 3 doctrines of GBP are the best. It's also really nice for (semi) historical Czechs and poles, as it allows you to dig in really good and spam desperate defense with very cheap units, braking the tip of the early, German spear.
@@kvlt1349 You seem to not realize that 130% planning take a whole month to fall to 100% if you battle plan properly, and that planning bonus also apply to breakthrough (on top of the +20% you already get from the doctrine)
And the existence of staff office plan essentially allows you to regenerate planning at an insane speed (and remember GBP allows you to gain twice as much command power)
And eventually, 130 days after you launch an offensive (and the planning bonus go to 0%), the enemy line is generally totally broken, and you are just finishing to close the pockets of undersupplied division, where your stats doesn't matter anyway
However, I agree that, while this doctrine is excellent for France or any country who want to turn the war in a WW1 style stalemate to build up (like Greece, Poland or China) and eventually strike when they are finally ready, it's not really good for UK, Germany or USA where I will prefer SFP or MW, depending on my army composition.
@@nanoboso3656 i can assure you i know how planning works. you decay 1% per day if you're battleplanning. 3% per day if you're microing. if you're not microing, what are you doing? battleplanning is asking for men and materiel to be thrown away worthlessly. the battleplan ai is straight garbage. and staff office plan is not free. you will quickly run out of command power for it if you use it liberally, but if you use it sparingly then you're left back in the prior situation of not having planning. it's a bad patch to a self-imposed problem. relying on planning for stats and on staff office plan to get planning is all well and good for a short time, and then you're left with no planning and no command power either.
the problem with relying on planning is that it's circumstantial, you have to plan your strategy around your bonuses, and good luck if your opponent doesn't comply, instead of applying your bonuses to your strategy. comparatively, the bonus you get from SFP always applies, no questions asked. how about instead relying on a fickle mechanic for a lesser bonus, you just get the better bonus that doesn't punish you for trying to use it?
@@kvlt1349 all you need to do to make this work is to hit the little red square when you are below the planning you want, trust, its goated
Most people choose their doctrine based on meta and what they need for their strategy
I choose my doctrine based on what the country i play as used in real life
Most of the time it's just Grand Battle Plan-Infiltration Assault because the only countries i play frequently are Italy and Japan
Based and historically accurate pilled
Italy didn't have a doctrine in real life...
Infiltration is based.
every chinese country is mass mobilisation
I often go for desperate defence as Germany even when Im winning. The reason is that I dont want to increase my conscription laws beyond extensive conscription and suffer the production decrease. So essentially it gives you a production boost. And at that point I dont need every attacking bonus because I win the combats anyway because I have more tanks...
Its never necessary to go past extensive conscription in my Germanycampaigns anyway. (Singleplayer)
Lots of people say this, makes me wonder how truly good they are at building templates or microing or anything.
Theres not one major country in the game with manpower issues where youd get absolutely fucked and you must go for Service by requirement, except maybe Italy, maaayyybbe. By extension, you dont get any real bonuses by going MW X-L because you never needed that extra manpower unless youre seriously having a bad game, even on MP, which is why going MW X-R is always superior.
@@bonkbonk420 actually true. I once did a germany world conquest without doing any focuses and even without austria and sudetenland as cores i never went beyond extensive conscription.
@@antonioseg5436 at some point, if you know what you're doing and aren't just aggressively battle-planning infantry into tanks, your non-core manpower on extensive conscription is gonna carry you.
@@bonkbonk420 the only thing I can think of is Germany going Kaiser/Democratic and going to total mobilisation straight away (get it in the civil war), then they may need a bit more manpower to compensate the total mobilisation
Its all logistics, guys:
Small nation, with low manpower/equipment -> GBP (Dont forget maintenance companies)
Meta nation, lots of manpower/equipment -> SF, MB (Press attack and turn your brain off)
There's no meta nation, there's metas and prefered nations (by the player). SF is also great for minors which have free war goals from their focuses
what about large minor nation with lots of manpower but almost no civs/mils, and thus barely any equipment?
@@dandarr5035 You don't play this nation
@@yoanawramow8809 no
I will play the nation anyway. Guess I will have to continue to figure this one out myself.
@@dandarr5035 Maintenance companies with scavenger trait is always a good investment. Opportunistic attacking against weakspots (minimizing equipment/manpower loss). The game has a surprising amount of options IF you like restarting/testing (I do)
I love GBP Infiltration path, especially with Japan or countries in comparable situations.
Armored cars shouldn't be in frontline battalions, but they're the best recon support you can get, but they're a bit more expensive. Especially with the new spirit of the academy mechanic, choosing aggressive reconnaissance is a huge bonus, combined with the recon bonuses Infiltration provides. If you max out your recon with Infiltration GBP, you will only lose battle if you're out of supply or the enemy is really really stronger in terms of numbers. I rarely lose battles as Japan because the generals always pick tactics second, plus Infiltration provides not one but two tactics that connot be countered.
Also, you get a massive +25% land night attack. All your stats are multiplied by 0.5 at night, increasing this by 0.25 to 0.75 is an effective +50% on attack during night, not just 25% like we may expect. And it also provides extra supply bonus. This is THE doctrine for going infantry only or island hopping. Any enemy infantry divisons will lose all the time, even if you'r eslightly out of supply you will absolutely dominate. GBP in general is the most underrated doctrine imo.
Entwined doctrines:
My guess is they will rework the Division Designer so you can mix and match tactics/training (think how you choose modules in the Ship and Tank Designers). The Officer Corps would then unlock choices for you. So you might get what you want.
Why do I guess that? Tank Designer and Officer Corps in NSB. Neither was needed for reworking the USSR and Barbarossa. But both probably make that Division Designer rework easier under the hood.
Having -20% supply consumption doesn't mean 20% more units, but instead 1.25x more units because you're now only using 4/5 of the supply which means that to get to 1, you have to multiply by 5/4 which results is 1/4 more units which is a really big deal if supply is holding you back
I'd like to make a point here, for mass mob. It gives a lot of supply penalty reductions, and specifically has the out-of-supply bit; This counters the new supply depo problems, and buffs paras/marines.
first, all supply problems seem to count as 'non-combat' out of supply penalties, even when units are in combat and losing equipment. With that said, being in a red zone applies attrition, effects org, and can reduce attack by 50% when defending. This stacks with Attrition problems. That -40% reduction stacks additively with other sources of supply penalty reduction, meaning it translates nearly half as much of a problem when you're in a red zone, say in the China land battles? This also multiplicatively stacks with the attrition reduction it gives as well.
second, paras and marines get a 48 hour supply grace period, which can be bumped up to 6 days with the right spirits, advisors, and focuses, not to mention general abilities. *this means they ignore state supply issues.* It leads to a very curious idea of para dropping units onto your own front line, letting them get some org to defend or attack, then pulling back to repeat as the next wave comes in. It's very micro intensive, but it also means anyone who goes down that path gets much, much better special forces.
Lastly, the infantry combat width reduction really effects how the new combat mechanics work with coordination, such to the point that someone using MM can beat out most other nations with identical units and a fleshed out doctrine, simply because most of them do not focus on infantry or only give defensive bonuses for them. Remember, the smaller your divisions are now, the less damage they will take overall.
Grand battleplan-assault is designed to be used with signal companies. If you haven't used these together you can't judge the doctrine accurately.
They speed up planning to make use of the max, multiply the extra 10% coordination (I've watched battles and you can see the units getting destroyed one by one, it is significant), and multiplies reinforce rate which is always good.
Maybe there are better options without this doctrine, but here you are playing wrong if you don't use them. They make this doctrine very viable imho.
Feedback has mentioned in a couple of videos now that coordination is not very good, citing someone's testing. Fair enough if there's evidence then that's a reasonable conclusion. However there are some details about it that make it more useful in some situations than others, so whether this testing took that into account and gives a fair picture I don't know.
Coordination focuses a higher percentage (higher by the coordination stat) of a units damage onto whatever the game decides is the primary target.
When you have large battles with lots of divisions this adds all the attack from your different units all focusing this primary target and can quickly overwhelm that units defence stat, but you NEED enough combat width for the combined attack or enough attack per division to break past that defence and make a significant difference.
As a side bonus, this allows smaller combat width divisions to be more effective in combat, or alternatively, give your big aggressive tank units more org (by reducing their combat width) and still retain effectiveness.
Signal companies are more complex than other supports, they don't give flat bonuses that apply equally anywhere, unlike most others (I.e. probably never on mountaineers). Therefore it can be easy to overlook them and their bonuses if they are tested without consideration of this. They're not worth it in some cases for sure but they can be very effective if used right.
I never thought of that, nice.
Plus multiplayer players know very well that you can get planning for naval invasions by invading from a port next to another country's territory
Singals also help avoid getting memes. I find lvl 2 signals combine well with GBP infantry.
That is true vut grand battle plan is sadly one of the worst doctrines because both offense and defense (entrenchment and planning bonus) can easily be screwed over if the enemy just places agents in your territory. Had many hoi4 rounds where the enemy just made spy networks and even with the bonuses of GBP my max planning was -10% (think it was a planning debuff in total of -120% or something similar) and an entrenchment that was reduced by 30. Wasnt able to get the enemy agents out there with evereything in regards of spy defense on max because the risk to be found is small when they just build a spy network and dont make operations.
@@l.h.9747 That's why spies are usually modded out in competitive mods (either you have no agency or you have decryption only)
You said in the video that Superior Firepower is more geared towards offense, as it has no entrenchment bonuses like Grand Battleplan. I think it should be noted that you don't need entrenchment bonuses if you blow the enemy to smithereens first while you are defending, and engineer support companies still can provide entrenchment anyway. Superior Firepower (w/ integrated support & shock and awe) truly shines on the Eastern Front. Big, fat infantry divisions with copious amounts of line and support arty can grind the Red Army down faster than they can reinforce, coupled with the AI's stupid tendency to use the Last Stand order, this means that by the time one gets to Moscow, there are barely any Soviet divisions left. It proteccs, it ataccs, it pulverizes enemy manpower by the millions, and it's still cheaper than a tank army for Blitzkrieg, no question in my mind that it is the single best doctrine path in the game.
Supply consumption and org loss while moving is massive. Deep Battle is the best doctrine in the game. Stuff like entrenchment and soft attack can just be covered by having more units. Nothing else can take the place of org loss while moving. Get a bunch of speedy boys and once you break the enemy, they stay broke.
Its massive. With such low supply you can just stack many whole armies in nearly any combat zone and just overrun the enemy. The bonuses you lose in stats are less than what you gain by having many more entire divisions attacking which normally wouldn't be there because of the lack of supply. Its very fun to use with nations that have enough industry to deploy millions in the field and keep them equipped like the soviets with their insane production efficiency cap bonuses
Specialist is low PP(50) high CP(30), expert is medium PP(100) and CP(20) and then expert is high PP(200) with low CP(10).
Indeed. The thought process is probably that lower level generals require more supervision (thus higher command power requirement) where the mid- and high level generals have such reliable results that they can operate more freely, thus requiring less.
@@Madmuli
I wonder why the reliable generals require more PP to hire in the first place.
@@artificialintelligence8328 For balance
To be fair I think mass mobilization was designed with China in mind, since they don’t have the tech or production to produce much more than infantry anyways. Other side obviously designed around USSR and withstanding that original German push in Barbarossa.
One thing you didn't notice is that Air/Land Battle gives pretty substantial tank buffs, so it's actually perfectly viable on nations that end up building a lot of Armor like Germany. It ends up giving better pure stats on tanks (Hard Attack, Soft Attack, Defense), but with less mobility, recovery rate, organization, and breakthrough.
From my own testing, deep battleplan's ability to endlessly push the assault is real and can absolutely flatten entire armies, once you are on the offensive and they are pushed out of their initial entrancement you can push and push and push... but in order to reliably do that you need air superiority and cas is doing the work of breaking the line in the first place.
Planning is best... and basically unstoppable when *stacked*. Officer corps: planning. doctrines: planning, Generals: the ones with the best planning. Stack it miles high and attack. It's uncomplicated and importantly does not rely on many outside factors to perform, they help, a lot but it's great if you say don't have air superiority or can't field tanks or can't afford artillery divisions. Planning is very good with a all infantry china, allowing you to scoot the front line forward despite japan having better everything. GBP assault's one big weakness is that you need to plan, granted you can do that quickly with good generals but you need those generals first. Another important thing to note is that GBP assault reduces supply use and the officer corp choice that boosts planning... also boosts supply.
Stacking breakthrough is good and mob warfare can stack a lot, on top of what you can stack with certain tank builds but I found that the planning from GBP works better. Because you are using tanks, which use more supply GBP is great, makes tanks suck less on defense (which is great when you need to hold that risky encirclement) and in general I find tank losses are far lower using GBP over mobile warfare.
Great video as always!
I would like to make a point for mass mobilization, although I’m nowhere near being a great player and I’m a single player user so I don’t know where my suggestions apply. That extra 5% recruitable population is a game changer when playing minors, especially ones lacking manpower. I like to play Greece a lot, and getting mass mobilization allows me to generally ignore most supply problems whilst also getting a crap ton more divisions out much earlier on in the game. I was able to get out almost a million manpower on extensive conscription, mass mobilizations 5%, 0.2% from an army focus and 135% manpower bonus from a multitude of focuses. Combined with the fact that in general when the war starts my industry is only strong enough to really support infantry with engineers, recon and artillery support I’ve never seen the reason to go down one of the much longer more industry-heavy paths.
At the end of the war against Germany I had around 8-13% war score, don’t know which one came into play because there were 2 different world war tabs for some reason. This allowed me to end up annexing half of Italy, including some mostly historical Greek holdings and Venice. Considering the fact that the axis never got past Thessaloniki in Greece I’d consider it a good game.
I would also add that the tactics MM gets are incredibly underrated, especially as nations like Greece where you will be able to select a preferred tactic for most of your generals asap.
Mass Mob with Australia is quite fun. Let the allies defend, and push where there is no supply.
You should have also talked about the tactics those Doctrines provide. I was Romania vs USSR and on thea ttack i was 20 red. The moment i gained Breakthrough, my attacks instantly turned to green 80. Tactics are very good in this game. A weaker army with tactics can destroy a superior army with no tactics.
i think we need a deep dive into tactics
For real bro. Reading the doctrine is easy, but understand how to use (tactic) isn’t the thing anyone can get. Breakthrough and defense are counterbalance, same with attack (soft and hard) and hp. In battle’s result calculations, breakthrough and defense is firstly calculated, attacker will use breakthrough and defender will use defense, if breakthrough is higher then attacker will do damage base on their attack (which the system will check hardness of defender), if defense is higher then the formula will see which one has higher organization.
Been playing some Commie China recently, and I have to say for Mass Mob, you need the attrition reduction. There are just literally millions of men on the line in China, the railroads are either shit or they don't exist, you aren't going to have trucks early, and the infrastructure is shit.
I've been playing a lot of China myself recently. The new supply system has changed that campaign a whole lot. There are so many supply dead zones it makes it very difficult for both sides to take certain areas. Its great for defense but makes pushing back SUCK
I agree with this tier list Dave.
Right-side Superior Firepower is very good, you can actually do alot of soft attack with infantry/arty and is my personnel favourite for fielding large armies.
Grand Battleplan/infiltration is my 2nd favourite for minor countries that can't afford tanks, large armies or low MP and is well balanced in both attack and defence.
Mobile warfare right-side if I'm only focusing on tanks as a major or minor nation.
If i play china than i do Human wave tactics.
If i play soviets then I do deep battle or mobile warfare and focus on tanks.
I tried mobile warfare as the soviets after NSB, and I didn't have as good of a time as when I used deep battle. Mobile warfare really struggles on the defensive, it's great on the attack, but if you don't declare on the germans before they declare on you, you will start on the defensive and it was tough when your doctrine is an offensive one.
@@nevets2371 Fair point, attrition and supply is a game breaker now.
Deep battle is probably the best choice for soviets unless you wanted to do grand battle plan instead and dig in.
@@leiaorgana5098 i tried that too, and had way more fun than I thought I would.
@@nevets2371 lmao nice.
Superior Firepower depends how you use your artillery vs support . If you use lots of support then the Intergraded support. If you use line artillery IN directed Support (artillery in the main Template then all bonuses go there ) and use very little support company's. (Don't fill the support slots)
71Cloak tested coordination. You could have mentioned him IMO.
Whole vid is copied off of 71Cloak and Feedback forgot his name lmao
@@Mememaster12345 He could have Just Googled it. Would have been one jump Cut more. But rather Not give Credits to smaller Channels, aye?
a video on naval and air doctrine would be nice, i have a hard time understanding and grasping which path to go down for certain situations i feel like i’m missing out on a lot of potential there. hopefully you do it sometime!
Airland battle has more buffs to tanks (which ironically is meh if you're focusing on CAS), Shock and awe has more buffs to infantry. How you build your army usually determines which of the two you pick.
I'd like to see a video on coordination. On paper it sounds amazing, basically focus fire to force a division out of the battle so you can make a breakthrough quicker but I guess it could be countered by lots of small divisions with high org recovery constantly cycling back into the battle.
I think the video should've gone more into the special army spirits each doctrine grants (I think its one for each category in the officer corps screen that each doctrine grants). However there is a possibly unintended feature where you can take the doctrine specific army spirit and then switch doctrines and keep it. So its nice to start as GBP to get the logistics army spirit then switch to something else if you want.
I think Mobile Infantry + Modern Blitzkrieg is a rush (cheese) tactic, especially with a country with a smaller starting industry: you churn out a lot of quick and strong infantry and then rush victory points and infantry encirclements. It's my go to for Italy WC (where I basically own everything but the USSR and Germany by 1943)
The -0.4 Combat width for Infanrty on Mass Mob is pretty great if you have the equipment and manpower for it (which, either way you should) your infantry divisions just outlast the enemy on those extra battalions you can fit in alone
Mobile Warfare+desperate defense is actually my favorite doctrine to go with Italy/Britain and sometimes democratic France/Germany. Particularly with UK/Italy i find myself needing the extra manpower to produce enough units to cover the extremely large amount of territory you have to hold in the multiple continents you have to fight for. The sacrifice of the 3rd chunk of bonuses for the tanks isn't really felt from my experience. You get more than enough breakthrough and org bonuses from the first 2 to have insanely powerful tank divisions that outclass the competition. Maybe its just a preference of mine, but I absolutely never like having to go past extensive conscription to service by requirement or higher for manpower because then you start taking massive negative effects on everything.
Deep battle Mass Assault with Soviets is also very fun. When you unleash the counter attack on the Axis its just silly when you have every division with logistics company, Field Marshall with Logistics Wizard, and the supply bonus from the doctrines. You can literally have 3 Army groups stacked on eachother on the same Frontline and not be out of supply and then just steamroller everything in your path with the combined 250+ divisions or so of tanks/24-27(but really 30+ thanks to doctrine bonus of cheaper infantry) combat width infantry and tanks loaded with motorized rocket artillery and line artillery.
Blitzkrieg Left/Right is all about high organization and high speed in your mobile divisions. You get more mobile divisions that are also faster and the highest possible organization in the game. That's the overrun path.
Hey Dave, you can get a planning bonus with naval invasions but it is kind of niche. If you set up your invading divisions on their port and said port is adjacent to enemy territory, you can set a feild marshal order with 0 divisions assigned with the naval invading divisions underneath. This causes them to gain their planning bonus which shouldn’t degrade to much before the landing begins
The only disagreement I have is with blitzkrieg vs mobile. Going modern blitzkrieg with the org from motorized it much better in my experience due to the extra org from the averaging of motorized infantry and tanks, while still helping to hold the line and avoid being countered encircled when you’re doing big maneuvers.
LL Mobile Warfare is usually shit, but can do exceptionally well in a few fringe scenarios. For smaller and relatively industrialized nations, it can provide the manpower needed to field a decent army of buffed mechanized inf. I find it works well in the Baltic and Bulgaria
You forgot about the officer corps of GBP. Imo the best option. Supply/fuel + tip of the spear
The command power allocation cost of military staff decreases by 10 for every level.
It starts out as 30 for a Specialist, improves to 20 for Expert and further improves to 10 for a Genius.
So, as your military staff is leveling up, you're getting some of that command power back.
That's why for most countries, where your military staff isn't one of your actual generals, it's just better give your generals the officer corp trait you're looking for.
Do you know how cost for promoting Generals into Field marshalls is calculated? I had some that were around 120 cost?
@@xModerax The cost is always 40CP base (the wiki says 30 but it is wrong). This is then modified by traits like war hero (-50%), politically connected (-50%) or career officer (-25%). Not sure what would cause such a high price of 120.
@@mainman879 New generals if you already have a lot could cost 120.
@@Vincrand That's the cost of hiring generals (which scales with each existing general), not promoting generals to field marshals. Completely unrelated to the question at hand.
@@mainman879 If you have to recruit a new general, so all your armies still have a general it wouldn't be unrelated. As far as I know it's the only thing that can cost that much cp. I don't know all modifiers from the top of my head, but there are some that make promoting generals more expensive, but I doubt that it can go as high as 120.
I'd adjust MM up one. The strength of MM isn't the reinforce rate, it's the infantry recov rate, and the -org loss when moving. If you have advisors that give recov, or national spirits (looking at you, Finland), then if the enemy defeats a unit, and it retreats, and then returns to the front line, it will essentially be back at full org. If the enemy attack fails, then your units will have re-orged before the attacker has. It also has the snowballing effect that Deep Battle has, once you win, you continue steamrolling, as you reorg way faster than your enemy, and suffer less from low supply. This is the doctrine for luring your opponent into a low supply area, letting them burn themselves out, and then counterattacking. It is VERY situational, but in the situations where it applies, it is better than your A tiers (bonuses to tanks don't matter if your industrial capacity, or worse, your supply infrastructure, can't support tanks).
The grand battle plan mehanized path is my favourite when playing Italy specifically. You can get +10% coordination from Ducati Electrical company, +10% coordination from the doctrine, and some extra from signal companies. Means you can focusfire individual divisions out of battles that are otherwise difficult (with hard mechanized divisions, i might add). Add planning bonus to that and you are literally able to break "mountains over rivers".
Now air and naval Doctrine tier lists?
As a former superior firepower addict, i recently tried grand battle plan and i was actually pleasantly surprised. It's pretty cool
i think maybe the Blitzkrieg-MobileWarfare path can work for country like Italy or Romania if you make some divisions with few tanks for the stats and a lot of mobile infantry (for keeping the cost low but stack some nice stats and speed)
The -.4 infantry combat width in mass assault feels like it should be really good
Hey Feedback,
I think you kinda skimmed through tactics. Mass Assault Right has Mass Charge which gives +50% combat Width and is really great pull towards it. Similary GBP has Well Planned Attack and Infiltratrion Assault while not great are not counterable. Breakthrough+Backhand Blow are also important and not every doctrine has them. Having counter to banzai charge as China is also nice.
Great tierlist nonetheless.
Mass assault left has backhand blow which is probably the best tactic.
I use deep battle as Russia against buff ai china, it helps because most of the border don't have supply depot and I can field more division and more army with combat with reduction
I have a few favourites that I like to play depending on the nation I'm playing.
"If you know yourself and know the enemy, you must not fear the result of a hundred battles." - Sun Tzu.
For that reason, I have a small rule of thumb: Mass Assault if I have infinite manpower, superior firepower if I have infinite industry, grand battle plan otherwise.
- Deep Battle Mass Assault (Left): you need a lot of manpower, so it's very niche. You prioritize having a massive army over a good army. Good with China and the Soviets. It's a draw field marshal order and go sleep. Not very efficient but very easy when you don't want to think. You can use it with a bad industry or with a good one, if your industry is bad just spam guns, but if you can have good industry you can add support companies, even if they're not as effective as in Superior Firepower, you high inf divisions will not take a very big org loss and will improve greatly with them.
- Infiltration Grand Battle Plan(Right): this one I like when I have a hard defensive war on the horizon. You get many good defensive bonuses early on and can develop into good offensive bonuses later on. I like it a lot when playing small nations or France. Similar to Deep Battle, with low industry just focus on guns, but you can make good divisions later on, but you are more limited in manpower. Plus it makes me think a lot of the new Sabaton album, the Stormtrooper song. It requires a bit more from you, the strategy is usually let the enemy bash itself against your gun wall, then push little by little when he's exhausted.
- Shock and Awe with Integrated Support Superior Firepower (Right&Right): this is easily the best choice, but it requires a heavy industry to support it. Very strong divisions that, same as Deep Battle, you can just turn your brain off. Like an offensive version of Infiltritation, your manpower is in good capable hands.
I don't like mobile warfare because I don't like micromanaging, and tanks require micro. But it's very good if you like it.
Planning bonus for Grand Battleplan Assault Path can be almost entirely negated by enemy spy networks when using La Resistance. Learned this the hard way when I was France against the world in very late game and everyone was decrypting my ciphers one after another.
I've had success with the mobile infantry/mobile artillery/mobile rockets combo for nations that have more moderate industry, but who are planning on taking on larger powers. Especially if you stack those late game rocket modifiers. Sometimes it's just not feasible to mass produce tanks, and I'd rather have a bunch of fast units with deadly soft attack instead of a few hard-hitting armor units.
I use mobile warfare modern blitzkrieg all the time, +45 infantry mot/mech let’s you build 8 tank 2 mech divisions which have ridiculous soft attack while still having 30 org (and a few support companies). On top of that, infantry can hold off the enemy very well, as without support companies they have 105 org, throw on a few support companies and they still have like 90. Try it sometime, it’s really fun!
I haven’t played mp, but in may expierience mobile infantry kicks butt, especially as France where you get reductions in vehicle production so you can spam cars at the enemy
The reason why Mass Mobilization is so good on high pop countries is because of the Mass Charge tactic, which gives +50% combat width (!).
In general, the invidual tactics can make a lot of difference.
As a mega noob I actually went the mass mob as provisional (tsarist) russia, and held the stalin line for a long while until D-Day then I just battle planned with ~30w infantry that had AA/Arty/Engineers supp and 1AA 1Arty.
this video has convinced me there needs to be a war exhaustion mechanic - based on length of war, casualties, bombing, and territory loss/gain
Oops, Feedback didn't include economy in the analysis...
And I do agree with a massive doctrine tree instead of the 4 fixed doctrines, no nations historically stick to only one doctrine.
Keep in mind, with support companies, it's not a full unit. It varies from unit to unit, biggest dip being flame-tank company, but it's in the range of 50% to 20% of a normal battalion. The math works out on Integrated Support that Art/RA and LT recon function at 100% of a normal battalion-- effectively a cheaper battalion that doesn't increase combat width. But, they don't get other bonuses that their battalion counterparts would, such as Frontline or Tank bonuses, so they just stay at 100% rather than 110% or 120%.
In multiplayer alot of Italy players go mass mobilization so they can defend Italy and D-day. It's quite good for that but I wouldn't use it on the eastern front or Pacific.
the left battle plan is better than dave evaluate but its like a quiet complex to use, and have to be used to take regions with some supplys, and the tip of spear, not bor only land attack, usefull to take europe and usa or scandinavia, you need to use slow advance and normal swapping and getting a slow advance, reciving and contesting attacks. Its not bad, but you need art and some mobile, i only use frontline orders and even then its good, but needs care and pattient. The best way its use 2 fronts line one over the other, and attack with only one and let the other be entrech and generate atrittion. also paussing attacks, but its good sometimes.
I haven't played this game in years so I just started it up and noticed that doctrines weren't in the research tabs.
(I'm excited to learn the new mechanics, it's almost like a different game)
Question feedback, as someone who plays typical 10width spam with mass CAS in SP; is that a situation you'd go mass mob as your entire army is just infantry anyway? Or are the bonuses of the other doctrines more worth it overall?
SFP rr.
MM is for defending, not attacking. SFP gives you all the juicy attack buffs. 10w max supports gets a huge buff from the first right in SFP, and if you are limiting yourself to inf, no tanks, then there's no real point in taking the second left, might as well keep going for the arty bonuses in the second right.
you can get planning bonus for amphibious assault, someone like you should know that. also building a full bar of planning bonus takes a few days only.
Grand battleplan i only use in exceptional cases. Like when i went for the NL achievement and had to hold off Germany.
Hey Dave, I recently played as the USSR and found an interesting thing I thought you maybe would like to cover(it's nothing about doctrines). So, I went for the Gobi Gambit focus and soon after that Sinkiang offered me a deal. I will recognise them as the Communist China in the power struggle, and in turn they become my puppet(at first not really, you have to get it through decisions). That is an easy way to get a powerful chinese puppet as the Soviet Union without going to war with the warlords, because they have focuses to join Communist China, so if you are lucky, you can get a powerful puppet really early into the game.
What i used to do was go down mobile infantry all the way to fire brigades, and make a infantry artielly division with pretty good org and lot of artielly.
Grand battleplan, is there some weird feature that spies can debuff your planning bonus strength therefore lowering it eve before you have reached full planning before the attack? Iplayed in a modded game and it happened that my div could not reach full planning because espionage
I think the manpower path can be useful when you're tight on manpower but have a good industry, like Canada as an example perhaps? Of course the best way of doing that would be to get the manpower and immediately flip back over to Modern Blitzkrieg
Its honestly very versatile. If you need the manpower you've got time to think about it untill you get that far in the tree and you don't have to commit right away. Most likely you will only use it in the mid-late game, and when you're done needing it you can just easily switch to the other side and by then you will likely be floating max army experience from late game war anyway to instantly do it.
I feel that Mass Assault, especially the right path(which is also shorter btw so requires less xp to complete) was actually designed for minor powers that have a very limited manpower pool and a rather small industrial and resource base that simply doesn't allow your economy to support tanks or even motorized/mechanized units on a large enough scale. In these instances going all in on infantry and line artillery makes perfect sense, the extra manpower is godsend and the combat width reduction gives your infantry divisions a lot of extra stats since you can fit more infantry/artillery in each division on the same combat width. It's a shame that the 2 nations with bonuses towards Mass Assault are the 2 that need it the least: Soviet Union and China. I mean yes that's the historical path those nations took so it makes sense, but it simply doesn't translate into game play.
A note on defending vs attacking, while the objective is at the end of the day to attack, I feel you're grossly discounting defensive bonuses. If you're playing any of the major powers and are a semi-competent player you don't really need them. However if you're playing any of the minors or are doing various challenge runs than defending suddenly becomes very important. The most important aspect is minimizing your losses, both in terms of equipment and especially manpower. Even Germany can run into manpower issues if you go for a proper 1 tag world conquest for example and are waiting to attack the USA until they've powered up significantly. And that's Germany, what about a nation like Bulgaria or Greece who must do quite a lot of defending early on and have very limited manpower pools and industrial capacities? Defensive bonuses suddenly become a godsend and ultimately allow you to make those powerful offensive maneuvers you otherwise wouldn't be in a position to do in the first place.
I think night attack was so op back in the day paradox had to nerf it to the ground
and I still think it's quite op now
My favorite: grand battleplan, engineers and entrenchment bonus on generals
Personaly, i don't do line artillery, so thats why i'd chose dispersed over integrated support :)
Ofc, i'm a singleplayer person so it doesn't realy matter /that/ much wich branch i choose :p
Exactly. I routinely play different doctrines with different nations and build my templates to them just for variety and seeing what works for my play style.
Feedback Everything ok?
Excellent analysis!
In this case, "Integrated Support" increases the firepower of support artillery, while 'Dispersed Support' increases the firepower of Line Artillery, so it will depend on the templet you build. Depending on whether it will be a large or small division and if it will use other supports and place the artillery directly as battalions.
Another aspect
is Mann Power. He is sorely needed by neutral nations. For example if you create the Austro-Hungarian Empire before the start of the world war you will suffer severely from a lack of MannPower because it will be stuck at 3% and most provinces won't even be core for some time so you will have to make up for it.
I really like mech because of their great defense. They’re cheaper than tanks, but stronger than infantry, and late mech is fast enough to overrun most divisions. They’re really good at exploiting breakthroughs; the only hard part is getting those breakthroughs in the first place. But, paired with a couple of decent tank divisions to spearhead the beginning of the breakthrough, mech can be a fantastic choice.
Try infiltration path with airborne troops. I am having so much fun!
My take on your "how does CP scale?" question: (that also includes PP's reasoning)
You're a leader trying to put in power some good commanders. For Rommel as an example, he costs 200 PP and 10 CP, as he is a genius. A specialist costs only 50 PP, but 30 CP.
Because the genius has "more demand" (I guess?), it takes more political influence to get him in your high command. Because the specialist is "less wanted", he doesn't take as much political influence to sway him to your cabinet.
For command power, it's opposite. Command power here is being used to tell your generals and field marshals that this guy is dependable and should be trusted. Because Rommel is a genius, most generals already know how useful he will be on the field, so it takes less CP than the specialist, as you have to sway more of your command to his side.
This is just my take on things but I think it makes enough sense to post publicly
or think about staff requirements. A genius doesn't need 200 people to tell him his plan will work. A specialist will need 200 people to tell him plan WON'T work.
I feel like the bonuses are only so good, fielding more divisions will always be better in my opinion, and so that's why I think the manpower bonuses trump all else, unless that is, you already have an absolutely absurd amount of manpower.
I would like the doctrines to change battle plans personally.
Mob warfare: concentrate units for attack at weakpoints, aim to rush victory points and supply hubs, encircle units opportunistically after that (aka should be about disrupting the front line and capitulating nations)
prioritise breakthrough, then speed , then firepower in choosing which divisions to attack with, fill in the gaps with regular divisions.
Superior firepower: aim for broad front advances, keeping a reasonably coherent front line, making short pushes with broader attacks, concentrating a bit on weakpoints but not overly, encircling small no's of divisions as they go.
Prioritise firepower, then breakthrough, then org for attack divisions.
Grand battle plan: prioritise defeating enemy armies, so aiming for the largest encirclements possible for their army size and strength. Concentrate on pincers, prioritising cutting enemy supply routes and airfields on the way.
Attack priorities should maybe be breakthrough, then org, then firepower, then speed?
Mass mobilisation: advances similar to superior firepower, but much more willing to extend the front line, stretch out the enemy to greate weakpoints, then throw troops at those weakpoints.
Attack priorities should probably be org and HP, then firepower.
I've got some ideas for defensive beholaviours and it combines with a comment i made on another vid about being able to deploy troops under equipped or under-manned, with mass mob, for example, lowering the equipment threshold for example (first man has a rifle, the second, ammunition) and giving bonuses to maintenance companies (equipment is harder to replace than soldiers), but I've not fleshed them out yet.
desprete defence mean you wont need servise bt requierment saving you 10%(or 20% if you are on by requirment and it saves you from all adult serve) org, output, and constraction speed. so if you are out of manpower its better then increasing conscreaption
I'd rank mobile warfare mobile infantry as S tier because you'll have higher org per mot/mech resulting in being able to put more tanks into division while maintaining same organisation resulting in higher stat that your tank is focused - soft attack or breakthrough
Theres no bad upper tier MW doctrine branch, both work, just require different template set ups. Its basically up to what youre able to build as a player.
If you can go full meta on the economy then you absolutely can just quickly shit out tons of tanks, and going MW Right in the first branch is worth it.
If you cant, then add more Mech in your tank divisions and go for MW Left. What tipped the scale a bit more towards Right lately is having access to Blitz, but iirc both get it in the latest patch.
71Cloak did a testing video (regarding coordination)
That would have been one jump Cut too much :D
I think they should have added Navel Invasion bonuses for Grand Battle Plan. And Hard Attack's Boones to help break down forts . And Boones to Commandos (Maines and Mountaineers (AKA Rangers). Besides all the defensive.
Funny how you went in to research first for searching for the doctrines.
Can’t believe we used to have to research those NSS really revamped the game
Make tierlist for navy doctrines and air doctrines
Theory: Isn't the left path of SF actually useful for countries like Canada because they have a strong industry compared to their tiny manpower? So that you don't have the manpower to train many divisons, but enough industry to equip each division with like 5 or 6 artillery? That would make improved line artillery actually more effective than improved support artillery. Of course, for most nations this would be ineffective as you could just create more division with support artillery, but Canada can't do this because of their limited manpower.
Same might be true for New Zealand. Just support the Allies by microing very few but highly-trained and highly-equipped divisions.
had hilarious time playing "Powerful Land Doctrines" mod. Noticed as soviet when looking at the mod's land doctrines that grand battle plan had heavy tanks armor +100% bonus. so lets just say germans did not very far across the border with the soviets early tank research bonuses xD
Mobile Warfare xL literally gives you a free 5% MP.
"Why would you ever go down this path" - for some nations, like Germany, it's a free lossless _doubling_ of your Manpower. Why _wouldn't_ you?
Also the mass charge tactic works for tanks too! And Gorilla warfare is not bad for Germany if the eastern front goes bad if you go right, and if you go left you get backhand blow and the 20% supply use reduction.
Mass mobilization is actually really good, but only in certain situations. The best part of it is the manpower. You go mass mobilization when playing a country like Greece. If you don't go for Byzantium, you will never have enough manpower, and your industry will never be big enough to field many tanks. Same with a lot of small countries. Canada for example. The manpower buff is huge, and the fact that all the other buffs are for inf is fine bc it's all you have the industry for
Italy with mass mobilization is actually pretty powerful. Slap some AT and AA on the infantry early then just 4art and 4aa when you can safely supply your troops with the high piercing aa guns
And interesting for China as well if you can field more than 5 million troops (manpower pool can be at 30 million) in the field, no country can beat you at that point. (And your PC will die as well)
@@liasonlee1248 I actually kinda disagree on this one. China has no need for extra manpower you already have so much. The buffs you get from superior firepower are better
@@davidbascom5781 yeah but I keep pumping out soldiers with that nonstop to overwhelm the entire frontline, though inefficient as it is I find it quite fun. (can be a counter for blitzkrieg as well, imagine spearing through the frontline and you see the endless horde behind the frontlines.)
@@liasonlee1248 I mean sure but you can also just up your conscription law by one level and do exactly that
I’m pretty dedicated to superior firepower, rushing rocket artillery to double up on support artillery. I just eh, I’m not too happy with my builds. I find myself leaning to mech infantry and heavy tanks but even then I’m finding that superior firepower helps me more. I don’t know my ground game sucks. I’ve got naval warfare and air superiority down but my ground game really sucks. I can defend really well with my builds, use rivers and forts in extreme circumstances, but my attack is absolutely terrible for some reason.
Night time bonuses are always good because roughly half of the time your attacking, you're suffering a -. Because both sides got it, it's not a big deal but any bonus during night is really darn good because it's often a large bonus compared to other buffs.
the infiltration path was good with Japan, a combat zone with a lot of jungle and poor supply, plus China doesn't really use tanks and fighting the allies on islands with tanks isn't really a good idea
don't know if this still works now with the supply rework
Do you think grand battle plan would be better if instead of 30% max planing, it was 20% faster planing and 10% max planning?
Planning maybe more useful when you attacking into low supply area's and you need to spend time repairing/building infrastructure/Supply depots and railways anyways.
I use armored cars to just steamroll Africa from Egypt to Portuguese Guinea. They make traveling the desert so much easier.
Attrition never affects your manpower, just your equipment. Attrition might make you more susceptible to lose manpower because you aren't fully equipped, but you can't lose manpower from attrition. Guess you don't have to worry about malaria and dysentery in hoi4
you guys ready for the Scandinavian dlc soon
The research all command user : what is this mean
next up: air doctrines?
Nights tend to be longer in the northern hemisphere, take that into account when considering Infiltration.
I think doctrines depend alot on your country's industrial and resource base. Superior firepower is excellent as America but not Communist China because you cannot afford as much artillery.
7:45
all i do is defend until the enemy runs out of Manpower