Are 10 Width Divisions META?? - Hearts of Iron 4 No Step Back Combat Width Meta

Are 10 Width Divisions META?? - Hearts of Iron 4 No Step Back Combat Width Meta
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

[@ertrick3693]

There's also still the fact that if you want to use support equipment for the 10-widths versus the 42-widths the ratio of production is so much incredibly higher for the 10's than the 42's. And with the rate at which you lose equipment... it's a recipe for disaster. 10-widths are the kinds of divisions you make if you need to hastily scramble out a defense and don't have the equipment to make beefier divisions or the numbers to churn out enough beefy divisions to cover an entire frontline.

[@giapeto5467]

This is basically why Pariani's reform and the binary division was so disastrous for Italy, because although the better ratio of artillery and equipment is clearly advantagious on paper, in practicality at the time Italy was still a poor country and its industry couldn't substain the demand. And in fact one of the few scenarios in which the Italian army performed somewhat well was the CSIR in the USSR, under Messe's command, who bought the necessary (or at least part of) equipment from the Romanian black market.

[@FeedbackIRL]

I, for one, think that 1 width divisions will ultimately become the new meta.

[@aleksandarmanojlovic4988]

1 width are the best imo

[@WaifuSeeker]

@@aleksandarmanojlovic4988 Its possible make a one width division?

[@chunyinlau9577]

@@WaifuSeeker yes AA or AT only division forgot abt armor car

[@MrZauberelefant]

@@WaifuSeeker In case the joke's lost on you: anything below 10/12w suffers from overstacking penalty. Not a clever choice then

[@renemuller7383]

so one general will lead one soldier? genious! .. i think the "general-system" is also something those 10 width speculations forgot.

[@lohengrin4009]

The 10W division loses all of its experience when attacking, often being reduced to green experience. In my opinion, they are not good for offensive operations. They just lack size.

[@user-vm1vf1zj6h]

Plus, it is only 5% difference, which should be covered by using actually good generals

[@stepheningram6415]

10 widths have uses. Garrisoning ports, guarding forts on a low priority boarder or strategic reserves. But, they just aren’t good offensive units.

[@mothemperor]

Experience in the long run doesn't matter tbh

[@lordmaur180]

A 20, 26 or a 40 with division have so much more breaktrought, soft attack and defense that they inflict damage, while taking less casualtyes, 10 withs are for when you need to hold and you got a lot of spare infantey equipment and manpower, because theybwill take damage and you will take casualtyes and lose equip

[@commiesquid4620]

Don't attack with inf, not all units need to be spec ops. Use these light troops to hold the line and use your heavy and mech units to break through with local superiority in air support etc.

[@Glumbus1]

i remember when i first starting playing hoi4 i didnt understand how to create divs and one of my first divs was just a 2 width infantry

[@SadisNic]

Same but mine was 70 width 20-5s Arty-Leg cause I didn't understand Org.

[@Luredreier]

Oh god. That didn't go all that well I'm assuming...

[@Glumbus1]

@@Luredreier i think i had made like 300 and was confused why they kept disappearing and couldnt push

[@firefly2806]

my first division was 50 width with light tanks only without support companies

[@hertogvandamme]

I remember using the Vanilla temolates without changing anything and somehow navally invaded the UK

[@jackthemapper]

10 width can be alot of fun using rhs superior firepower. 50% soft attack boost to support companies paired with slow, cheap light tanks with close support guns, support artillery and support rocket artillery can get you insane soft attack per combat width.

[@kelbyreid7254]

It’s been workable for years but everyone sleeps on it. only now that older metas are getting nerfed does it have it’s time to shine.

[@iwantcrawfish6110]

I definitely use this approach for small brake through armies, especially when there's low supply areas.

[@kennedytheretard975]

My man literally making scientific research to determine efficiency of HOI4 division widths

[@nikbond188]

To be fair, if you study Math/Statistics/Economics, it can be a fun and easy way of practicing your Mathematical analysis. Once you have set up the correct analysis, you can apply it to something more useful

[@weareeverywhere8851]

10 width sucks because with the new system, you won't have unlimited generals anymore, which means you'll run out of generals faster and be outfought by an opponent with bigger divisions.

[@gvdl7893]

14 width full support companies is the meta

[@vincentschrama749]

For coastal defense you can go 10 width but i personally like to add shovels so prefer something around 20 width so you dont have to spend so much on support equipment.

[@LudietHistoria]

This is the best hoi4 video out there. This enlightened me on the combat width.

[@sneed457]

Ludi why did you cheat in your Manchu guide?

[@MaskofPoesy]

@@sneed457 lmao. That's funny. Still don't punish my favorite Romanian for leaving comments on other people's videos. Man puts out too many videos to keep up with the algorithm, I would've sworn he cheated on a few even if there wasn't any evidence for it.

[@sneed457]

@@MaskofPoesy Here is the only place I can leave a comment seeing as he deletes comments and bans anyone who mentions it

[@Razzlion]

@@sneed457 why do you care? Do your own manchu video then?

[@sneed457]

@@Razzlion why are you getting defensive? Parasocial relationships with youtubers are not healthy.

[@12gark]

For what I tried, 10W are very good in NSB in 3 specific scenarios: Case 1: 10W inf with artillery and medium flame tanks supports. The flame tanks add hardness, so they reduce the losses you get by a wide margin. If you have the IC (flame tanks are cheaper to make than regular ones), as Germany you can battleplan Barbarossa with zero effort and less than 1M losses (even less than 500K if you have enough air). The issue is that you burn those flame tanks pretty quickly (I ended up needing 35 mils on flame tanks to keep up with the losses), and you need a billion generals to manage that, so I don't know if I'd consider it to be meta. Case 2: low supply areas. 10W with artillery and logistic are very effective in places like China, where you won't be able to effectively supply any large division. The enemy will have so low org because of supply, that you losses will be limited, and basically the less severe supply penalty will compensate for the low stats. Same thing in Africa, South America, and post-Moscow Russia. Case 3: 10W motorised behind you tanks. The tanks make a breakthrough, and the 10W rush into the gaps snaking for supply hubs and stuff. Trucks are cheap and fast, use way less supply than tanks, and can close pockets and reinforce encirclements with ease. They suck at fighting 1v1, but they can hold for a bit while your tanks do the heavy lifting and can finish off encircled divisions if needs be. Using 27+W motorised for the same job could be better, but only if you have fuel and supply for both, which may never happen, so, I generally like have 24 of those divisions to follow my tanks. Maybe even cavalry can do the job, I should try... Other than that, 9-3 and 42W are better in most cases. The graphic shows interesting numbers for 15W, so maybe 6-1 can be tested a bit, will see.

[@nikbond188]

Case 3 sounds like a good idea, might try it out actually

[@12gark]

@@nikbond188 I had a ton of fun playing USA, with 8 42W tanks and 48 10W motorized I literally steamroller the axis. Just encircle, clear, repeat until you reach Berlin. Only issue was to land, but I used 6 42W marines to get a port and I was good to go. I used mobile warfare tho, not superior firepower in that case, don't know if that's the key or not.

[@FeedbackIRL]

1: support is not cost effective on small divisions 2:sure 3: just use 2w motorized for snaking. Doesn't work as well Vs ai there micro is OP

[@12gark]

@@FeedbackIRL 2W are just for snaking, not worth imho. Any unit, even heavily damaged, can chew them and break free from encirclements, and they're useless when your front line have a weak spot to quickly reinforce, or when you need any kind of fighting capability. 10W can buy enough time to do actually do something. They're not cost effective as a main fighting force, but they may come clutch in a lot of different situation if you want to micro. And they're still cheap enough to field few units without committing too much of your build's IC to it, with no extra production lines and research needed.

[@Vincrand]

​@@FeedbackIRL Support on small divisions can be effective, it just depends on the type of support. Battle support units (AA, arty, AT) less IC and manpower compared to when you put them in line. So they basically add a flat bonus that is not dependant on the combat width and as a result their added bonus in a large combat width division is rather small. Supp AT gives 50% the attack & defence and 85% the piercing of line AT at 67% of the IC and 60% manpower. Supp arty gives 60% the attack, defence, breakthrough and 100% the piercing of a line arty at 33% of the IC and 60% manpower. Supp AA gives 60% the attack, defence, breakthrough, 100% the piercing and 80% the AA of a line AA at 60% of the IC and 60% of the manpower. Supp rocket arty gives 50% the attack, defence, breakthrough, 100% the piercing at 33% of the IC and 60% of the manpower. I don't have the latest DLC, but I'm pretty sure that tank like support units act the same way. The supp AT performs poorly compared to the line variant and it's cost, but in the end it still saves that 1 combat width. The supp AA slightly performs better than line AA if you take in the cost, while saving 1 combat width. The supp arty overperforms since it has stats of a 2 width arty and the cost of a 1 width arty. The supp rocket arty performs great, just not as great as normal support arty if you compare them to their line counterparts. Non-combat Support companies (engineer, logistics, recon and such) give a percentage bonus to units, so they have far more effect in larger combat widths. Because the non-combat support companies are too expensive for 10 width, you'll end up with 5 slots that can be used for batlle support units. Depending on your production capacity I'd slam on as much as possible. Looking at the number above and their general purpose, I'd prioritice them as arty, rocket arty, AA and AT only if you need more piercing and/or hard attack. That support arty adds 50% soft attack to your division. Having multiple support units in a small division also means that it will benefit a lot more from integrated support, which means you can't get all the reinforcement speed from mass assault. That'd mean you can realistically only use them as defensive if you choose integrated support. Aside from that I also just noticed that cav and mobile recon cost 10 support units, but (light) armored recon cost 0 support units and 0 infantry equipment, making light armored recon cheaper than mobile, while providing more recon and costing less fuel.

[@conservativegamer1180]

hey dave, thanks for the content. glad you are back!

[@haukionkannel]

I have used 42 wide division with Japan, Sverige, Germans, Finland and it has worked very well, but I still don´t know if it is meta :) But it is wide enough to be effective and it is optimal in hills and forest. Places where the defense is hardest. Not so good at mountains though... So Still investigating ;)

[@Fractured_Unity]

But aren’t hills 80?

[@Vincrand]

I just go for 25 width mountaineer divisions and train my general to allow them to make bridges as well. So they can attack over rivers as well.

[@buddermonger2000]

I think it will be more effective than you think thanks to the coordination stat limiting the ability for big divisions to just dump on units

[@SadisNic]

Trying to argue with people about the low HP of 10s is difficult, I'm bookmarking this specifically to link when the plebs get frisky.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Lad

[@bartysp2599]

who cares about hp lol, its a 10 width division, no one cares. i'd rather put the the rest of the ic into planes than having a slightly better division, which wouldnt even be better because more sup companies.

[@ninjabus7454]

Shouldn't HP scale with division size, losing the same amount of equipment per HP lost? The real problem is small divisions have low defense, and attacks against a unit higher than its defense effectively deal 4x damage.

[@Jansay34]

Thaanks for the explanation! Where can we find the revised work about the combat width?

[@FeedbackIRL]

My discord

[@VarenvelDarakus]

Thanks , lots folk who I see in comments of various hoi4 vids don't know that raw data needs to be applied , 10 widths are best yes but not practical , if you factor support companies and costs more , thats why 42/bigger is good , another factor lots forget is generals the more you spread your army the weaker your generals are and you need more of them ,general with 42 and support companies will squish same equivalent force with 10withs(who mind you would need 4 generals) ( i rewrote this a bit , i posted it on the phone and typing there is bad)

[@swamperino8450]

Depends on doctrine, support artillery gives more attack per IC than line artillery while requiring no width. Fielding smaller width divisions gives you a bigger proportion of support companies, which in turn will give you more attack per width as well as more defence against air attacks.

[@VarenvelDarakus]

@@swamperino8450 not really , you will get more loses and you will use 4 times more support eq , trucks and stuff , bonuses of support c are utilities , less fuel supplies , signals , repair , recon engis diffrance is needing 8000support eq then just 2000 to same amount of force , also how defence , generals and air works it stacks better for bigger divisions , this is even worse when you factor atricion who mind you you often lose more stuff due atricion not combat war with Russia for example even if you will be wining you will lose lots stuff due atricion so again you will lose 4 times more support equipment etc I dare you to load save , go to logistic and check equipment lost due atricion this year in war , you'd be surprised

[@elmerikamari801]

Hoi 4 community makes peer-reviewed essays on meta but the wiki is still unupdated lmao

[@some_gh0st]

Picked up HoI4 just before NSB and you’ve been a great help in learning the game. CW and division templates are still a bit over my head, so I don’t think I’ve had a game where I have had a template get up to 42 width yet. Does that not suck supply dry rapidly because so many men get concentrated in one spot? Or is it realistically late enough into the game when you can get 42s online that supply is irrelevant?

[@Jointorino]

Well since NSB supply never gets irrelevant anymore :P but It doesn´t realy make a difference if you have like 4x10 width divs per tile or just 1x42 width. For conquering most countries it´s absolutely sufficient to have few armies with strong divisions to break through enemy defences and push forward, but if you fight against the Soviet Union for example, you just need huge amounts of divisions simply because of the 1600Km long frontline, which is why I personally put smaller divisions in the mix to not overstretch my supply demand.

[@bIuebuIIet]

Staxking 6-10 10-15w on the Pacific islands works great. Any more than that and the attrition gets too high

[@Xunek.]

Guys, the important combat change in nsb was NOT the change to terrain combat width. *It's that divisions now face as many enemy divisions as fit in front of them.* That means your 42 width division will have to fight (and spread their stats across) 4.2 enemy 10 width divisions, while 4.2 enemy 10 width divisions will dump on your single 42 width division. Right side superior firepower gives +50% soft attack and +20 Org to support companies, putting them basically in overdrive. So the 10w with support will bring 4.2 of these super support companies versus your 1. That's why 10w inf with max support and superior firepower break any other divs, even tanks if they have support AT. To stack as much "right side superior firepower support" in combat as possible. Are they expansive? Yes (for infantry). Do they need more Generals? Yes. But they tend to win a lot of combat. Also, other doctrines then SF R do favor bigger divs.

[@NateMcBrady]

A 40w HT division will crush an infinite number of 10w infantry 1500 breakthrough gg

[@felixluca6511]

Okay so as the soviet union you should produce more support equipment and build smaller divisions... Got that But should you do the same as germany? I mean instead of training the old 7/2s should you go 6/1 for 15cw maybe? Lately i even used 8/3s with 25cw and it worked out but im certain that this isnt the meta either. What would you suggest for a germany play through?

[@Xunek.]

@@felixluca6511 For tank play i go mobile warfare and 42w tanks, and i more or less keep the default 18w inf as frontline/garrison. For infantry play i'd still go 7/2 or maybe 9/3. Or maybe even something crazy like 12/6 with left side superior firepower. I don't like playing with smaller divisions myself because you have so many of them and need so many generals. If you want up to 120 combat width per tile you need 12 10w divisions per tile, so 1 general = 2 tiles, or 1 general = 3 tiles for 80 width per tile. Even if 10w are technically better, i don't feel like it's worth the trouble.

[@felixluca6511]

@@Xunek. thats exactly what i was asking for! Thank you very much🙏🏼

[@vincentschrama749]

Early on 10 width work okay but as you progress and the large width division gets more coordination 10 width lose alot of their advantage.

[@NevilleFarkinBartos]

every time I try to play this game I walk away feeling dumber

[@biscuit4705]

I used 10 width with Portugal and it works really well for defending and if the situation permits it alright on the attack as well

[@jaxusr235]

Huh… I did an achievement run for France within the last few weeks, spammed nothing but 10w and not only survived with the Little Entente, but capitulated Germany and Italy. Not entirely sure how I did it, aside from Mechanized spam, but it worked for me, aside from Britain stealing some war score from bombing, I did almost all the other work aside from dying in the east. Then I went to war with the Soviets and pressed the attack and wondered why all my divisions went from Veteran to Green… So, I guess it only works if you let the enemy die on your lines? I dunno.

[@ViktorVildras]

what is your opinion on paratroopers being used to snipe supply depots? the AI tends to panic everytime I do it.

[@martinflaisig1183]

Not taking into account coordination, no mention of Superior Firepower which is used, no mention on research saved and CAS... this isn't how it's meant be used.

[@VayleGW]

I recall playing a game (single player) where I had a load of 20 width infantry divisions with just engineers, a handful of 40 width tank divisions and then loads upon loads of 10 width motor divisions. create a gap with the beefy tank divisions and then move the 10 widths everywhere. This was somewhere before man the guns was released though, but definitely a funny way of invading Germany and then invading the USSR.

[@RyanTheHero3]

So according to the graph 20 widths would still be a solid option for your inf, right? also 42 and 45 would make sense as being good sizes if we look at the CW for deserts, forests, plains, and jungles

[@somewhereelse1235]

10w is good as China because it gives you the ability to create a lot of divisions to hold off the Japanese while you make your better units. Most other countries don't have any reason to go for 10w because they have a much longer time to build up

[@adamconner9302]

It may well be inefficient, but I have had considerable success with using 3 infantry, 1 artillery, and 1 anti-air for defensive purposes. They don't burn support equipment because they don't get any. If you garrison with them such that you have say 3 or 4 in each sea port they will take some time getting pushed out of said port, or if a large scale invasion occurs extra units from nearby ports will automatically start shifting to retake the port which you can micro to form a temporary line. It gives you time to get proper fighting divisions in place before enemy bridgeheads get enough supply to accomplish much of anything.

[@12gark]

Why using 3-1-1 instead of having 5 infantry with support companies? I don't think they will end up fighting enough to worry about support equipment, and you get more hp and more org, so more time to reinforce.

[@adamconner9302]

@@12gark It really boils down to manpower and resource efficiency(in contrast to unit efficiency) more than anything. I tend to prefer playing minors where manpower and minimum effective investment is a primary consideration. Using 5 infantry and support companies is going to likely require 50%+ more manpower to accomplish the same thing as a 3-1-1 as well as a higher resource investment. The 3-1-1 is just a much cheaper alternative and we're talking about a defensive role that I want to allot the absolute minimum effective investment into. Undoubtedly the 5 infantry with support will be a stronger division, but neither will be an effective offensive force against strong divisions. That's not what they are there for though. They buy time and really nothing more than that. I may well be wrong in terms of pure mathematical efficiency, but i've put thousands of hours into the game and over time came to the decision that the 3-1-1 suits my needs better than a more substantial garrison template.

[@reviveempires]

Honestly I've been sticking to 15 and 45 since your video and it looks like the chart still supports those. 15 has just felt right as a standard size (Replacing the old 20s) and 45 for divisions that needed oomph. Alot of nations i've been playing start with a 12 width infantry so just slapping an arty on only cost 5 xp, making it easy to set yourself up before the war with optimal widths. I find while 45 widths are worth it as breakthrough divisions the XP and equipment costs make them prohibitive until well into the 40's unless you farm xp hard. If anything the new 15 width meta is a godsend since its far easier to get set up with than the old 20 width 7-2s.

[@juvandy]

Isn't a 15 width with 6 infantry and 1 artillery pretty expensive for its capability though? Depending on how you balance manpower/production, an 18-width with 9 infantry and support artillery may be more efficient, especially if you are just using it to hold the front line while you attack with a small number of 42s.

[@reviveempires]

@@juvandy 1. 9 widths cost more manpower->casualties, guns burnout quicker than artillery, 18 widths do not fit well into plains 45 width meaning penalties on a common terrain where defenders have little advantage (ie where you need any advantage you can get) 2. 1936 production cost is only a difference of 50 out of around 600 (8.3%) and that's not counting the recon company missing from the template I made for the 18 that was on my usual 15 3. 15 is according to the chart in the video nearly as effective as the 10 width(but with extra bulk) and everything beyond it falls off in the middle range. 4. I don't know how early you get your 40+ widths out, but I usually sink most of that XP into prepping at minimum a tank, infantry and in some cases marine division at 15 width then make 45 width variants. I'd rather have a small tank unit early or a motorized for encirclements. Only problem I've run into is I tend to rely on them a bit too late. As long as your not grinding them into the enemy I find them effective, but you do you since I mainly play 2 nation Coop or singleplayer so I have no Idea about the multiplayer meta.

[@buddapimp21]

What about setting up my CAS in 10 plane groups? Isn't that good?

[@boomknight1015]

to defend coast lines 3-4 inf with no support does the best work for me. How ever I load them up with 1-2 level coastal forts. Unless there is a lot sent to attack or rines trying to bust in, often times it works just fine. I tired 2 inf but they always get ran over unless there was more then one on the same port. Over all I think 5 inf or 10 with to garrison is over kill because at that point I'd just make a 6-8 inf with support arty, aa and engi. 3-4 depending on man power you can afford is best in 99% of the cases I have seen. Does it some times get over ran and lose a port? Yeah, how ever it gives you time to react as well as some divs that try to clean up and over all, slow down their spread. It's not about repealing D day. It's about giving your real forces time to get to the new front.

[@lukebeich]

About garrisons, for what I understand that graph is kinda irrelevant for garrisons. The graph shows the max overstack debuff possible, doesn't it? therefore if you don't overstack your front line, that graph is not really relevant and I doubt you do that for garrisons, which are usually one or two divisions for province.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Combat width of garrison doesn't matter. Video coming soon

[@thepatrickcrab]

Correct

[@WalrusJones185]

A really major factor that influences my combat width choice comes down to maintenance companies. MEGA wide divisions actually have a very high strength relative to their organization. This means they lose maybe a sixteenth of the equipment before they flee. Low combat width divisions flee when they have lost a quarter of their gear. So while fully micro'd 10 divisions are strong, they aren't especially sustainable. The ratio of strength loss to equipment loss is like, 25% from what I remember back when i modded the game. But close to equal strength and organization is still a huge hit, and when your divisions get forced to flee even once you are going to quickly reach 33% equipment in the field. Meanwhile, a 42 width division is quite a different story, being able to fully sustain its equipment off of looted enemy gear with a maintenance company lvl2 on the defense. 10w: Hyper micromanaged assaults and winning battles (Using very concentrated support artillery and firepower.) As there is no reinforce timer if you order all units to attack on the same day. (Essentially good for say, special forces.) Essentially only good for an army that you never let the AI use. 40+w: Sustainably managing an entire war.

[@weareeverywhere8851]

Another one if that you will simply run out of generals, because you need much more divisions on the field. So you won't get any general bonuses for your divisions.

[@janetd5121]

I use 15 and 18 widths for defensive garrison and infantry and 42 for tanks and motorized/mech and that worked really well. 15 and 18 are high points on that graph as is 27 and it works as well.

[@artruisjoew5473]

Playing the US I use 15 for pacific garrison, 21 for motorized line and 42 for tanks. 27 panders too much to mountain tiles.

[@zeul1337]

hello. can someone please explain how to pull off the 10 width France defense. Feedback said that it's complicated and didn't elaborate further. How complicated? What do you need to do? And can anyone please explain how is the "proper" way to reinforce? I'm supposed to keep back-up divisions 1 tile back or?

[@nikbond188]

I haven't done the 10 width strat, but did something similar with other budget units. You basically retreat units that are low on org so they can regain it and push in with new units that have org. That way you can stall a battle for long enough to de-org the enemy

[@herbertsmagon5777]

what about when battleplanning across rivers? it halves the width!

[@odycz]

Does anyone know how does the attack spiting on bigger divisions works? The changes mentioned in HoI4 Dev Diary - Combat Changes & Soviet Exiles. It seems to me that if that works how I think it works then the majority thinks of you have said is wrong.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Unless they updated the wiki. Then no

[@scl9671]

In Tommykays great game pretty much all the players went with 15w anti air or at guns with flame tank support.

[@zola3559]

Yeah but 10w were banned - all the players said that 10w are op.

[@rharding8698]

@@zola3559 yup. Dankus killed grisha Russia with a German 10w wave battleplanning with CAS

[@GregAtlas]

Newer player here: Playing as Italy with their horrible industrial base, is it worth upping the combat width when you're lacking equipment? Like what if I only have half the guns that the divisions end up being set up for? Would it be better to upgrade slowly as you get enough guns and/or tanks?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Always better to be at 100% strength

[@chunyinlau9577]

Forgot abt these I just spam 21 width division

[@wp12mv]

I'll stick to 27 infantry line + 42 attack force

[@TheBusbyBabes]

what about 18 width? that seems to be good too, or is also not good?

[@handlesarecringe957]

So, 20, 27, 33, and 42-44 are the best widths?

[@glamscum]

Tell me if I'm wrong with this then: Infantry should be 18, 27 or 33 cw Tanks should be 42 or 45 cw Marines should be 32 cw(since they usually naval invade urban terrains which is 96)

[@12gark]

I honestly use 42W also for marines. I tried both, but you get more firepower for each unit, so you need less units (and so less time to set up), and you can fight better after the invasion if you need to do it.

[@ericc9321]

Cowards not running 48w marines.

[@tijmenwillard2337]

Really depends on the theatre you are attacking. In the pacific it is mostly plains on all those Islands, so you're better of with 45 or something slightly smaller which fits in other stuff. Now I don't know which urban tiles you think are relevant enough to build 32 width for specifically, but IT would be interesting to hear

[@glamscum]

@@tijmenwillard2337 Port cities like Shanghai for example.

[@enesb4797]

cw?

[@jamesdunn9609]

I can verify that the 27 width is not as effective as he first thought. I was in the middle of a game when I saw his video so I tried it. It did not go anywhere near as well as expected so I began to wonder if he had made an error in his calculations. It's good to get verification! Keep up the good work!

[@jamesdunn9609]

@Hamood Alkhateeb Moved the 27's back to 20, and started a new line of 42's.

[@turtl3playz303]

Meanwhile my 23 and 47 divisions help me make world domination 😈

[@TheMrZ100]

What about the supply use? Large divisions seems to have a hard time being supplied now

[@willwalsh7591]

It's not the same as having 10+ 10w on every tile.

[@daveriddell3704]

Would a 15W division be a viable option? The graph appears to like them. Or would the HP pool be too low as well?

[@felixluca6511]

I saw someone using it in tommykays great game and it appeared to work quite well... I havent tried it myself yet but i guess they would work out well for me too

[@FeedbackIRL]

Yes

[@dzikidzwon3802]

It's viable, certainly does't leak as much manpower and equipment. I don't know if it's the most optimal though, I guess we'll see about that.

[@devinmccane8343]

I’ve been playing HOI since it came out and I think I still don’t understand the whole meta-gaming division combat widths. How on earth can you even build enough 40 width divisions to even fight a war against say Russia or France? Is it literally just building straight infantry and all military factories are building infantry equipment? I tried doing it once with Germany and it didn’t work. I couldn’t build enough divisions, and the ones I did have were great on defense but couldn’t breakthrough shit. So please, someone explain this whole process to me.

[@vincentschrama749]

People used 20 width inf for Germany but complement it with 40 width tank divisions. The inf is just to hold the line and with the 40 width tanks you push through. I still do basically the same when playing Germany/Soviet union/USA/Uk. Now for alot of minors with limited resources you cant really go into large tank divisions especially if you need to wage war early on. In that case you can make a large Inf/Art division so you still get pushing power but alot cheaper. You could for instance make a bunch of 20 width inf and complement it with a small army of 40 width art/inf. There are other options like staying on basic inf and spamming CAS but in the end find something that you like to play. Especially in SP just mess around and have fun!

[@devinmccane8343]

Thanks for the response!

[@DoomDutch]

So would the meta for smaller divisions be 15 width then?

[@grimreaper492]

Lower HP divisions don't lose more equipment though, their IC cost is proportional to their division size and HP.

[@googane7755]

Feedback you're forgetting that you can add more support companies in smaller widths which makes them much hit much harder and with more org than 2 big divisions with support companies. I wasn't a fan of small widths before the update but with how they changed damage distribution in battles in my eyes it still makes them op.

[@jozopako]

Yes but power of support companies is not in their soft attack etc but combat modifiers which are better in larger templates. Just find on youtube some "support company only" videos.

[@googane7755]

@@jozopako Using nothing but support companies doesn't make small widths bad just as going over 60 width in a division doesn't make bigger templates bad. There has to be a balance, obviously. I also never just said soft attack, they hit harder because they can also reinforce faster, make more use of entrenchment because of their higher org and give more recon bonus to pick better tactics.

[@JordanHh]

aw man I have been using 27 widths since your video lol

[@fehyth3400]

i suck so much in HOI4 to understand any of this shit

[@sabierc555]

Good thing i use 18 width 6/2s

[@imperify7671]

I think 21 width and 42 width are the best. Ive tried to use 15/10 width but they feel so weak in actual combat

[@Aqueox]

Try 27w.

[@bobbyknuckles3436]

Found 18 to be great

[@suokkos]

You need support artillery, support rocket artillery, support AA (or AT) combined with superior firepower giving +50% soft attack bonus for support companies.

[@TheOpalHammer]

I don't understand this at all. I thought the no step back update made it so there wouldn't be a difference between one 40 width and four 10 width with the damage being split relative to combat width?

[@sld1776]

As you move through the tech tree the old system partially comes back.

[@0witw047]

@@sld1776 not really. Even at max coordination you’re still only dealing a fraction of damage to one division at a time that you would have been doing previously

[@classicfrog80]

But if you add support to the 10 width divisions than you can squeeze in a lot more of firepower into the same combat width, and with signal companies you'd reinforce quickly enough to be flexible with your land doctrines. .... Right?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Support company costs don't scale with division size. So it's not cost effective to add support to small divisions

[@classicfrog80]

@@FeedbackIRL Yes, but nowhere in that chart was any mention about the cost, just the combat capability. Surely if you adjusted the said graph by the manpower or IC cost it would look a lot different!

[@FeedbackIRL]

If we talked about combat capability then 10w would be dead last. Less stats less damage

[@classicfrog80]

@@FeedbackIRL Well, yes, of course! But the whole purpose is to fill the combat width with as many as possible while having the least penalty for exceeding it. So there would be several divisions in play, all with support companies each. In an even fight they'd lose to larger divisions, as they'd start withdrawing from the fight due to low organization, but thanks to the extra firepower they bring, it would not be an even fight to begin with. And for long battles they'd even allow rotating frontline troops, regenerating organization and strength, while large divisions would be stuck in fight until they win or withdraw. Sure, it's expensive, general-heavy, micromanage heavy approach, and not something to trust the AI with, but that is a whole different discussion.

[@JoeBurner1720]

I think 6 inf 1 art is a nice middle ground between it all

[@reviveempires]

It's my new 7-2, plus most nations start with a 6inf so it's cheap on XP to make

[@matthewramos7605]

15w are my go too now tbh

[@bakuisimpartialtoemu]

I used 10 widths as the soviets it worked alright but theirs probably a better strat

[@evill01]

10 width AT is surprisingly good against tanks

[@nikbond188]

Isn't it a bit niche though? The unit is rather slow, so you have to use them as a reaction force

[@evill01]

@@nikbond188 good for defending i correct myself

[@FeedbackIRL]

Massive AT cost

[@badysparta]

You will lose so much manpower when using low width divisions. When using 40+ you will lose literally 0 manpower in most battles.

[@thevoxdeus]

18W and 42W look like your best bets now

[@karsaorlong3761]

nah, they get melted way too quickly

[@GreenyNZ]

I like 27 width

[@jackthemapper]

You made a mistake: low hp does not mean you take more equipment losses. Its the hp to equipment ratio. If you lose 50%hp, you lose 50% of total equipment, but total equipment is lower for 10 widths. This means a 10 width infantry losing 100% hp will lose about the same equipment as a 20 width infanrry losing 50% hp. Hp is important with mixed divisions and one of the reasons you cannot run tanks only. tanks add laot of ic worth of equipment but almost no hp. example a tank division with only 20 hp will lose all tanks when they take 20 hp damge while a mixed tank/infantry division with 80hp from infantry and 20 hp from tanks will only lose 20% of their tanks when taking 20 hp damage. The main reason 10 width lose alot of equipment is that their defense value is overpowered by the attackers attack value and every point above the defense value does 5x damage to equip. With no step back divisions get less focus fire though so the attack from an attacking 20 width is distributed almost equally between 10 widths unless you have hogh coordination. This means if the attacker doesnt stack coordination almost all downsides of 10 widths are mitigated and theiir higher org per combat width prevails. 10 widths have far higher org per combat width meaning they stay in fights longer, taking more hp damage before retreating while higher width devisions retreat earlier. When the combat lasts longer attackers also take more damage though so your loss vs enemy liss ratio is not affected by this.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Regardless of number crunching. From experience 10w bleed equipment and manpower

[@jackthemapper]

​@@FeedbackIRL I know. but what im questioning is wether this is "no step back" expierience as fundamental combat mechanics were changed^^ I just want to challange your assumptions :) Im not sure about the meta yet either, but i feel the new coordination mechanic will have an impact and small templates will have a place. Doesnt have to be 10 width, but i feel there is a spot for a low width division in there somewhere.

[@kindasimpson9704]

I think in no step back you can modify templates much more easily with tons of xp, meta combat width is not a serious topic anymore. The only philosophy you need to follow is a single division doesn't exceed the typical terrain's width you are fighting, or double the width and still doesn't exceed.

[@fraulens]

You did not read carefully, Mass Assault increase recovery rate and not reinforce rate ;)

[@FeedbackIRL]

Mass mobilization increases reinforced rate

[@fraulens]

@@FeedbackIRL My apologies Dave, I need to get a new pair of glasses then! :)

[@Altoonawiseman]

So,.....the Least amount of Men (1000, 5000, 10,000) can stop Thousands and Thousands of men (20,000, 40,000, 80,000,) ~ for me THATS ALWAYS been the deal breaker of this game how the man power acts. You would think 40,000 guys armed with sticks and rocks could just RUN OVER a couple thousand guys with a few guns,......NOPE!! Not here!!

[@0witw047]

Well usually the groups of 10,000 people would be grouped together in fours so you still have 40,000 vs 40,000, the 10,000 groups are just better organized. And it’s not at all ridiculous for a much smaller force to absolutely annihilate a larger one with modern weaponry

[@Calbeck]

>TIL that "peer review" for HoI4 Theory is literally just reddit -XD

[@FeedbackIRL]

Do you want us to submit to a scientist?

[@tiedeman39]

@@FeedbackIRL Yes

[@sld1776]

So... it's 42 like every experienced player who looked at a map of Eastern Europe thought? The attacker wins in plains no matter what, you don't attack on mountains, so to win in forest it's perfect, and the penalty in hills is acceptable.

[@0witw047]

No. 42 width have relatively no org and it’s definitely not true that “the attacker wins in plains no matter what”. Treating that like a guaranteed outcome only makes it such

[@CheefCoach]

That calculation is just wrong. For example, you can have 10 10 width division on 90 width county in one direction attack, with 16.7 % of penalty, 16 on two direction attack for 27.8% of penalty, and also 10 of them in single direction attack on 84 width for 28.6 % of penalty. Nether of that is 5 % penalty. It is hard to optimize with out of correctly knowing percentage of different terrains.

[@adamreith183]

But what isss the meta :D. I need to know!

[@hommedesbois9080]

Dont go with any DLC and life will be easier

[@Timmi429]

so 42 is the best?

[@FeedbackIRL]

42 - 45 are on par

[@Timmi429]

@@FeedbackIRL Thanks ur video ist helpful :)

[@sid_the_ant]

Second, because feedback has the first pinned comment

[@loh1945]

Are meta divisions meta?

[@FeedbackIRL]

No, meta

[@sebastiancabrera7281]

Bruh you are like a low budget john mayer

[@FeedbackIRL]

I'll take that

[@garyg3468]

the more of this guy I watch the more I'm convinced he doesn't understand the difference between a strategy/tactic and the term Meta. It's probably a clickbait ploy that's clearly worked out for him. I've just heard META describe more things in the past week than in the entirety of the rest of my life. 10 width, 20 width whatever are strategies that become the Meta as players use one size over another through trial and error. If your trying to determine what strategy is optimal so that it can become the Meta things like the graph are far more useful then incessant rambling. I know I have be reverting back to another one of your vids for days now to check if my own divisions are within optimal widths. Though I'm not fully sold on their validity, mostly on the effectiveness of +40 widths but to my limited understanding on the subject my max size is now above 80 in some zones so that would still allow for stacking in those areas, boosting the +40w effectiveness. What you seems to be overlooking in most of these builds is that 20w is still seemingly hyper efficient

[@girayrahmi]

best meta template: Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank Medium Tank

[@ronswearingen552]

They broke the whole thing, too much micromanaging needed. They should just have each country have set division templates and the only thing that can be changed is the support companies.