Why is the Superior Firepower doctrine so dominant?
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 08. 2022
- In this guide I give a short overview of what the Superior Firepower doctrine in Hearts of Iron IV does and what possible applications it could have. More guides on all the other doctrines will be coming soon!
Just like last time, I tried to give this video a little more spacing in the audio as a lot of you have requested that I make them a bit slower so they're easier to understand for non native speakers. If you guys have any other feedback, feel free to drop it in the comments down below.
Socials
Twitch: twitch.com/bigschmokes
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / bigschmokes
Instagram: / bigschmokes
#heartsofiron4 #hoi4 - Hry
> We have you surrounded! Stop using grand battleplan!
> I HATE THE META, I HATE THE META!
I don’t need a meta, all I need are Special Forces!
thing is....GBP is stupidly good, when used correctly. thats the important part....used correctly. but the High command bonuses are the best out of all doctrines....GBP while being rigid and to the book, is really good.
@@silentdragon1555 I mean, it technically has the highest Atk during battles in the game when used correctly. People often overlook the fact that every point of Entrench or Planning, depending on what you're using the divisions for, actually gives +5% Atk. So +10 Entrench is +50% Atk. Although, the rigidity makes GBP hard to use in a lot of cases, but it is the best choice for Greece.
@@Ryanowning GBP can work for any nation...well for ones that do not receive bonuses for certain doctrines at least...
Main issue is, GBP requires a different way to think, instead of watching the green bubbles go and the front move...you have to micro, and plan for attacks, to get the most out of it. Which a lot of players do not like.
in short, its hard to understand, but powerful once mastered.
Do you go right for night bonus or left for max planning?
Absolute top quality with the stats comparison for easy comprehension.
This video was in my reconmended by the way, so I hope the algorithm favours you!
Chinese ai against this with artillery: I fear no man, but that thing, it scares me.
I have always loved this doctrine for one main reason, and one you mention in the video, its VERY rounded generally speaking, which also helps people like me who like to design a army were everything is just generally jack of trades good. And rely on INDUSTRY and TECHNOLOGY to make up the slack even further. I generally prefer to have a army were I can rely on it to do its job in pretty much any situation.
That said in especially competitive MP my bias shifts to Grand Battle Plan so I can rely on a army that can hold its ground while I focus on Micro somewhere else.
this is very informative. i used to pick the left side when I used only inf just for the air bonuses but now I will pick the right one
Good to hear :D
I only use superior fire power because I like artillery plus makes sense why waste manpower when you got artillery and artillery shells which are cheap and never out of stock.
Yes paradox needs to add ammunition like fuel
its only applicable to very powerful industialized nations
@@sfdwawf that'd actually be amazing especially in kaiserriech
@@sfdwawf”WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH SHELLS?” - Britain 1915, Russia 2023.
@@dannyzero692 And Ukraine 2022-2024
When i started playing i just red "throwing shells not men at the enemy, our men are precious ammunution is cheap" and went it is because that would be my philosophy if i was actual military commander
Today i also use grand battleplan because i like british army esthetics and prefer defensive battles
This and the one on mobile warfare were really useful to me thanks for that I am definitely subscribing now.
I prefer left side.
That 5% coordination is huge.
Very, very good editing.
Thank you very much!
Absolut legend thank you
tbh i alyways choose shock & awe cuz the icon just looks way cooler
yo thank´s
Because soft attack is good.
I just think it's neat.
I always misspelled Shock & Awe and I spelled it more like Shock & Eve. Thanks for correcting me.
I just noticed the +5% coordination in overwhelming firepower. Doesn't this mean that the whole division will do +5% more damage if on a single target? or if there are multiple divisions in the same tile, redirect 5% damage from the secondary targets on to the primary? lol
edit: I just noticed that adding 5% to soft attack will give it literally almost exactly the same amount of soft attack
What would you say is the best doctrine and their right/left side for USA if using space marine templates? :D lol
Top of my head its the latter but afaik coordination is about concentrating attacks on a single target
What I don't get is why mass assault which from a historiographic point of view is the most revolutionary doctrine of WW2 is so crap in the game. I always try to use it but man it's horrible even more with NSB and the combat width and supply changes.
Yeah no idea. It works well enough in multiplayer because you can bog people down hard with org wall units rolling guerilla tactics while others do the pushing but on its own its a bit shit
Yeah, they don't really do the deep battle doctrine justice.
@@bigschmokes Exactly
Realistically, you should only be using MA as the Soviets since it's not worth switching doctrine due to crippling debuffs or if you're LARPing.
@@Kardia_of_Rhodes even then, it should give way more operational bonuses than it does instead of just letting you squeeze more infantry
1 thing i havent tested yet... does the 3rd upgrade '+10% defense' also apply to breaktrought like commanders medals do or not?
(I guess not as these apply to templates while commanders apply on battle...)
As far as I know all doctrinal bonuses except for maximum planning from GBP apply to the divisions directly.
Soft Attack really isn't all it's cracked up to be, but Org is. Hence, when I'm playing a production heavy nation like Germany or America, I pretty much always go Mobile because Org and Recovery Rate is ridiculously good in this game. It's kind of surprising people go SFD in situations where it absolutely sucks compared to Mobile or Mass. GBP also gets way more hate than it should, but that ones more understandable since it's such a niche doctrine. Btw, you technically deal more damage with Grand Battle Plan than Firepower as long as you play the doctrine correctly.
Majors can suck up the losses of Mobile fighting against Firepower pretty easily because of how fast you can cap them with it. The thing about Mobile is that it's really bad in wars of attrition: if you're not green across the board you need to stop attacking.
To break down why, I'll use percentages:
-With Firepower you can get around 20% increase to Soft Atk.
-With Grand Battle you can get around 60% to 120% increase to damage, defending and attacking respectively, but you cannot be fluid and must not get baited.
-With Mobile you can get around 50% increase to Org and around +40% Breakthrough on your attack divisions.
Which means in a straight up fight you win with Mobile... Provided you're ok with losing tons of troops and equipment and you're careful about fighting against GBP. In fact, it's the one doctrine where Field Hospital is not only viable, but actually a great choice.
Oh, I should probably mention, Blitzkrieg in Mobile is actually next to worthless. Unless you plan on making over 15% of your divisions as near pure tank divisions it's a horrible choice and you should basically always go with Mobile Infantry, but as America you can actually afford that and absolutely stomp with Blitzkrieg. Even with tanking Mobile Infantry, however, your tanks still ends up with the highest Breakthrough in the game of all doctrine choices. Also, you almost never want to go Desperate Defense; if you're losing so many troops that you need it then you've already lost the war.
Basically, it all comes down to one question: can you afford to have pure motorized inf and almost 10% of your whole army as tank divisions or not? If you can, Mobile wins the game. If not, Firepower may be the lesser of two evils. People just choose Firepower as the Meta because they don't pay attention to what happens when Firepower fights a good Mobile nation+user. Although, people would be better off in most cases just learning how to use GBP since it's actually better in a lot of scenarios; most of the time the only reason you should pick Firepower over GBP is if you have no idea how to be patient or if you plan on constantly attacking.
Nice TED talk
I disagree. I think mobile only works if the enemy is using 20 widths to defend. But if they’re smart, they’re stacking at least 40 widths with a ton of artillery for extra firepower. The extra breakthrough and org from mobile won’t be enough to prevent mass casualties unless you’re using near pure tank divisions. But the superior firepower guy can bash your infantry while you’re moving your tanks and you won’t be able to complete encirclements fast enough without getting hit too hard.
i like sfp because of how brainless it is. just free stats up with no special playstyle required. sure may be weaker than other doctrines when effort is put in, but im lazy
I have not cheaked but support companies gives some negative to org so on small divisions its not that smart to add support companies (marines or other special forces beyound the absolut nesesery).
that said is the buff from Intergated support enouth to offset that so you can on your 6 slot marine division fill every single support company slot?
why I ask I usually play democratic japan and I had some fun when I realized that converting the 6 battalion sized infantry division to Bicycle division and then smacking on.
AA or Art support company, engineer, maintenance company, cav recon and field hospital (just because whit this I got a div that moves at 6.4 + cav recon, yet tows artillery whit no trucks.
exept for the 20 ambulances that does not carry or use fuel (i just presume they just stops at any civilan gas station and fills up)... now where they find a gas station in Burma is another thing.
3:10 take your adhd pills bro
No.
I think superior firepower should come with increased supply consumption of artillery equipment
No
I seriously disagree on the first split. I mean, I’ve only taken the left branch as Kaiserreich Bulgaria, so maybe even I am only using it on special occasions, but I used 6 inf/16 arty 60 width divisions in the Weltkrieg and with 0.28 recovery rate and 23 total org, you’d think the division would suck.
But with 250 breakthrough and 850 soft attack which regularly gets modified past 1600, enemy divisions melt under the assault before they can even start to deorg me. I’ve had battles with 2,500 enemy casualties and not a single man down on my side and the enemy had supply and were not encircled.
Also, you can do something in battles that I call overkill. When an enemy division is on 1.1 org or so, a normal division will do slight damage and force them to retreat, but a super attack power division will hit their strength for 3% in just a single hour before they get to retreat. This means you can rack up massive kill counts in short time periods.
There’s also another thing called cheesing the AI that works with this strat. The AI decides whether or not to attack not based on strength or division stats, but just based on org comparison. So you can cheese the AI into never attacking by deploying a crap ton of 2 widths, or you can cheese them into biting rocks by making huge, powerful low org divisions.
In two weeks the greeks bashed themselves down to 50% strength on the line when I had only 3 x 19 width 5/3 divisions there. 20/1 k/d ratio without moving an inch.
Try using ExperAI and check your losses. Such a division will not work because of it's abysmally low HP and Defense. You will lose hundreds if not thousands of IC per battle.
@@alexionut.05 Keep in mind I was fighting only nations that had very little attack, especially because this was early game. When I used 5/3 divisions, it was against Serbia, Romania, Greece, and Ottomans, all of which basically had tiny infantry divisions and cavalry divisions only. And a 5/3 division has just over 5/7 the hp of a 7/2 division, so it's not that much worse.
Still in early game, but after the Balkan War, I used 6/16 divisions as volunteers, and they usually suffered 0 casualties per battle because each battle generally only lasted about 5 hours, too quick for U.S. militia divisions to get hits in.
Thanks in part to the artillery attack bonuses Kaiserreich Bulgaria gets from the focus tree and the artillery generals, even in the Commune of France and Russia I won battles so quick that my casualties never went up and I advanced faster than the Germans could follow me.
Though the 6/16 divisions did suffer greatly when I sent them into China in the late game. Partially due to the terrain and supply, but also because late war infantry equipment has 4 times the attack of early war and late war artillery doesn't even have 50% more attack than early war arty.
That's one of the most important details. Early war artillery has almost as much soft attack as late war artillery, but early war infantry equipment basically doesn't have any attack at all, so stacking arty early game is really good.
But also, once the AI starts adding artillery to their infantry divisions, the 6/16s stop being effective attacking forces, though they still do better than regular infantry.
Late game, I tried making tank versions of the 6/16 divisions. 6 heavy tanks and 16 heavy SP arty. The divisions were cool because they had lots of attack and breakthrough but only 5 org. I could only afford one initially (haha), sent it to Tunisia of all places, and did 30 org damage per hour to a single French infantry division for one battle.
Even though I took 0 casualties, I lost of lot of tanks because of desert attrition and reliability, so it was useless in Tunisia.
Also, it ran out of supply immediately and I had to pull it off the line.
Tried again in China later, also bad. Division got less attack in the mountains than my original 6/16s.
Mobile warfare is FAR better than superior firepower.
Another stupidity from paradoxes. Any African bantustan in hoi4 takes this doctrine with only 19th century rifles and gets huge buffs to anti-personnel attack from nothing.
This doctrine would make more sense if it was given increased ammo consumption or buffs only when artillery was present.
For the same reason Russia is decimating the Ukies with this doctrine: because it's so effective in real life 80 years after WW2.
Not really sure what real life has to do with random numbers pdx devs ticked into hoi4.
lmao. "decimating"