NEW Optimal Tank Design - HOI4 No Step Back Tank Designer Guide

NEW Optimal Tank Design - HOI4 No Step Back Tank Designer Guide
Main Channel / davefeedbackgaming
Discord! / discord
Support me on Patreon! / feedbackgaming
Follow me on Twitter: / feedbackgaming
Follow me on Twitch: / feedbackgaming
-----------------------------------
Feedbacker dumping is where feedback procrastinates with his hobbies and other interests. Warning REALLY BORING or REALLY INTERESTING

[@FeedbackIRL]

Are you an average speedy tank fan or a heavy armoured tank enjoyer?

[@owens782]

Do a video where u abuse airplanes dave :D

[@apictureoftomcruise9354]

You found an exploit I think. Look how expensive the last tank is you made but then look at the refit cost. Just build 10,000 crap tanks and refit them all to good tanks and you still come out cheaper

[@JrSPl4ys]

on this dlc i've been using 45w infantry divisions 18/3, and haven't been using tanks a lot since those things just destroy everything, but when i do/use tanks, i like to make them with the most breakthrough and armor posible, while at the same time with a decent speed, so for me its kind of both i guess.

[@nausimur6035]

But i dont think that cheap tanks are that good because i could build motoristed Rocket arty (Katyushas) in the same time , better softattack ,faster and even scales better because of upgrades u get later if you tec rocket arty so you could even keep the production line so i dont the point in building cheap crap tanks just build a big div motorized with rockets arty and add fast TDs with high velocity gun for piercing (i tried it out you could even build an fast heavy TD with an superheavy gun that could keep up with 12 speed and the superheavy gun which has the highest pierching so you can penetrate any armor )

[@nopenever9829]

Im still a fan of "fast" tanks ... you have to "plan" your attacks way better, check for railway lines and supply hubs along your "path" in front ... And the Most important thing ... Supply dropping with your planes ... with Air and Transportplanes ... i think "fast" tanks are even stronger then bevor ... you are able to support your main line way better now ... taking important supplylines and hubs is just amazingly strong ... But it is expensive ... you NEED to have Air to pull that of reliably ...

[@6th_Army]

"Don't want production cost to go above 15 for a heavy" Me and my 36.8 production cost mediums : ×_×

[@1Shai3Hulud8]

He's talking about early tanks, my late game heavies run around 35+ production

[@6th_Army]

@@1Shai3Hulud8 late game lights go for 35. Late game heavies should anyone even bother going for heavies cost 46.

[@ArturoLopez-ly2pn]

Holly shit mine usually don't go over 25 What cast hull does to a mf

[@6th_Army]

@@ArturoLopez-ly2pn Even just welded will be over 35

[@hccdgvvfccdgn993]

I'm just happy that Germany is no longer trading tungsten with Sweden starting 1936 which you forget and lose that one civ.

[@TheRealPog1]

Yep

[@iterationfackshet1990]

But they broke the two armored dlc packs and still haven’t fixed it, tank models like the Panther and Maus are completely missing.

[@jaskapenttila7644]

Also the same with Japan. They no longer trade with the US for Oil at the start.

[@How23497]

@@iterationfackshet1990 bruh i literally bought the packs with the DLC. Are you fucking kidding

[@iterationfackshet1990]

@@How23497 nope, the packs are still bugged. When the dlc originally released all of the models didn’t work.

[@kanchou7698]

Ironically, he designed the Panzer IV as the germans originally intended it to be. Short range howitzer tank with heavier armor to support infantry. Panzer III being the general purpose tank-fighting tank.

[@kanchou7698]

@M J no, the first Panzer III model carried the 3.7cm anti tank gun. It was intended to fight other tanks of the early war era. The IV carried a short 7.5cm howitzer and was intended as a breakthrough tank to target anti tank gun and machine gun emplacements.

[@thecanadiankiwibirb4512]

@M J the Ausf.N with the short 75 came later and was I guess an attempt to make the Panzer III remain useful as it couldn't take the long 75

[@christian9125abd]

@@thecanadiankiwibirb4512 good time in the sovietunion, when germany had only 3,7cm anti tank guns and 7,5cm howitzers. than soviet T-34 and KV-1 came.... without the 8,8cm anti air gun germany would have been done in 1941.... they had no tank that was able to fight the new soviet tanks

[@cnlbenmc]

The short 75 was never classified as a Howitzer as its direct fire ONLY; Howitzers are supposed to be primarily indirect fire artillery pieces (like what's mounted on the Wespe and Priest mobile Howitzers) though some weapons chambered the same shells as those guns like the KV-2 or ISU-152.

[@cnlbenmc]

And the German tank had only decent armor but it had a radio and good mobility; unlike this Infantry Tank Equivalent.

[@cnlbenmc]

2:08 that close support gun is basically the really short 7.5 cm gun the Germans used on Early StuG IIIs and the First Panzer IV models and eventually the Panzer III M; could only penetrate armor reliably later on with rare HEAT shells. It did have a rather insanely fast reload speed and I did some nasty, horribly things with it In War thunder; netting my all-time record of 23 kills on the Poland Map with the StuG IIIA. Low tier was fun...

[@quentintin1]

the APCBC does work well too, you only start to need the HEAT if you meet stuff like T-34, Matilda, or B1bis, for everything else it was good enough as what it lacked in velocity, it compensated in mass

[@ArturoLopez-ly2pn]

I think the main way fast panzer-divisions can still be viable with the suppliy rework is if *you snipe supply hubs*. Don't waste fuel and material encircling an enemy army in the middle of nowhere, go for the cities, railways, ports, etc. so your divisions actually get supplied when doing incursions.

[@Videokirby]

The problem with using tanks for supply-sniping is that Motorized can do that for much less material.

[@sanderleander3367]

Yah, just go the glorious Rocket artillery, requires way less supply and can maintain supply aslong as you control a city and the like.

[@ArturoLopez-ly2pn]

@@sanderleander3367 Hmm, I might try that my self What division width you use? And doctrine?

[@sanderleander3367]

@@ArturoLopez-ly2pn pretty certain that superior firepower is the way to go for rocket artillery. Also building mechanized is a must for lategame, too good to pass up on if you have the economy. Remember that you can turn mechanized 3 from 12 cost to 6 cost through upgrading. I'd say just go same width as you'd use for tanks as you will push best in plains etc. Mobile warfare doctrine can be good too for the organization etc. I don't know which doctrine is best so either sf or mw. Tanks are better though, but motorized rocket artillery has that glorious sound.

[@christophercrane5831]

Totally agree. Fast tanks still serve a purpose, but the AI is not v intelligent unfortunately to do such maneuvers

[@gromsword6984]

SPG/SPAT battalions are definitely not redundant, since you get all the stats for a quarter of tanks.

[@talltroll7092]

@M J You should also keep researching/developing light tanks for use in Med armoured divisions. A Light II/III chassis with carefully chosen upgrades can be nearly as good as your Med I/II equivalents, but cheaper to build and easier on supply without giving much away in stats, so replacing 1 or 2 battalions of Meds with the proper Lights can allow you to build more armoured divisions overall, for the same resources

[@aletoledo1]

Also SPGs can be updated from the previous generation chassis.

[@sawsonex3215]

@@talltroll7092 Although it requires more research so there's definitely a trade-off

[@MundaneThingsBackwards]

Not all the stats. Much worse hardness for the SPG (kind of the whole point of tanks so you're better off using them sparingly as intended) and the tank destroyers are limited to piercing weapons so much less potential soft attack. The REALLY good SPG guns are also prohibitively expensive and should be avoided for your mainline tanks, which is a second reason why being able to delineate the mainline 2w and 3w, focusing mainly on the 2w for your division template, is important. Don't use howitzers for every tank battalion. You save so much of your industry that way which you can turn around and use to build MORE military factories. A practical bonus to production cost that makes up for the 2w using more tanks.

[@talltroll7092]

@@sawsonex3215 Not much though. The components are all going to come from researching things you need anyway, either for Med tanks or just for whatever the actual research is for, so it's only the chassis themselves that you need to invest in, and from what I can see, Light tanks are going to be pretty useful throughout the whole war if you pay attention to them. The Light III is only a 1941 tech IIRC, and you can build some pretty useful units off that chassis, with pretty OK base stats, so you can load them down with options, and have them in production long before your Meds/Heavies get good

[@ViktorVildras]

Speed however can let you cut off their supply, allowing you to accomplish massive maneuvers once you can breakthrough. IE not cutting off their local supply hub, but the ones three deep past their frontlines, making the AI fall back further.

[@MrNicoJac]

Paradrops can too, right?

[@Strait_Raider]

I agree. It seems like, if anything, speed might be more beneficial now. It will be interesting to see how penetration tactics with fast tanks or paratroopers develop. If you can put a large section of the enemy front into supply jeopardy with a few strategic breakthroughs, that could enable wider breakthroughs or encirclements. Encirclements and overruns themselves will still heavily depend on speed, plus the strategic advantage of just being able to advance farther before the enemy can put up a determined resistance. Even if you expect to have to stop at some point to repair railways and resupply, it could be the difference between advancing a few tiles verses securing a critical bridgehead or minor encirclement.

[@XmXStuka2]

Try do that in Russia tho, they might be so far off that you run out of supplies yourself first :D Or.. Africa/Asia

[@ViktorVildras]

@@anonymous-rb2sr I'm usually lurking around lol

[@j.m.f5451]

Great talk. I've been tinkering a bit with the NSB tank designer and seeing what good results I can get, and honestly I find the cheaper high soft attack/breakthrough tanks really are the meta for single player. Armor isn't even a massive concern in most cases it feels like, just maximizing their offensive capability to smash through. I think I have to catch myself from over-emphasizing the quality of my tanks, especially if I'm playing as a nation that doesn't start with any good tank divisions I might want to keep. I treat it too much like the ship designer where I want "the best ship possible" as opposed to "the ship that will do the job I can have -now-". Tanks are much the same way. A Tiger tomorrow is no good to me when I need a Panzer 3 today.

[@Nikolay_Grigoryev]

5:40 Actually, the Soviet Deep battle theory was the modern combined arms offensive with the technology of 1940. It did not call for tanks to operate independently. It called for combined arms, including tanks infantry artillery, and airpower to achieve breakthroughs and exploit them.

[@FeedbackIRL]

That's not what happened in the winter war

[@Nikolay_Grigoryev]

@@FeedbackIRL That's where you are wrong. During the Winter War, the Red Army had no pure tank units. The 1939-1940 mech div were not meant to work separately but to be used to reinforce infantry divisions. The only tank units were at brigade level and were divided down to battalions and used for supporting infantry during breakthroughs. The best example of the Deep Battle theory up to 1940 is the Khalkin Gol battle(on a small scale)

[@kerotomas1]

Germany actually suffered in real life from their fast tanks blitzing tactics when they were breaking through on the eastern front. They ran out of supply (mostly fuel, ammunition was lacking too) and they had to stop so that the supply trucks stuck in mud actually were able to catch up to them. One example is how the Panzer Divisions' tank brigades were ordered to stop for some time during the offensive in 1942 (that was meant to reach Stalingrad) because of supply issues and to stabilize the front lines with troops left behind.

[@dieweissehand]

you're absolutely right, somewhere I have read: they first went with the tanks and even destroyed the few good roads, then the supply truck were not able to drive on the roads, and finally everyone stuck in mud

[@danielhalachev4714]

Yes, they could afford going ahead in France, but they couldn't in the Soviet Union, because the Soviets always had reserves, ready to cut the Germans off (defense in depth/deep battle tactics).

[@aspielm759]

I like using combat width of 21 personally. Goes well with forest fighting.

[@ingratus8160]

21 is actually the most efficient if you compare them to 20 or 22. 21 does better in plains then 22 do in forests comparably and forests are the more difficlut terrain anyways.

[@rancorusia]

@@ingratus8160 im so used to always hearing 10, 20, or 40.. when did things change?

[@stepheningram6415]

I was thinking of making 2 cheap light tanks: 1) Half-track suspension, Diesel engine, Riveted armor, 1 man turret, auto-cannon gun and dozer blade. 2) Half-track suspension, Diesel engine, Riveted armor, 1 man turret, flamethrower gun and a dozer Blade. Use one as armored recon support companies and use the other as flame tank support companies in infantry. This would be cheap on production, give good bonuses (entrenchment, terrain movement/attack, max recon, plus an armor rating) easy on supply and be viable for small nations, What do you think?

[@TheArklyte]

I'm thinking "how exactly does M3 Halftrack count as light tank?". On the other hand, you basically made Putilov armored cars from WWI and they were basically no different from tanks back then.

[@SMGJohn]

Tanks as support company are great, but if you can make a light tank with as much breakthrough as humanly possible, you get super infantry its hilarious to see infantry with 100 breakthrough LOL

[@TheArklyte]

@@SMGJohn so you think that meta would be stacking of light tank support companies onto main divisions? Light recon, flamethrower and tank support?

[@stepheningram6415]

Thanks for your feedback! I guess if you want some brake through you could add a radio or a 2 man turret after a conquest or 2 when you have the IC. Also, I agree don’t attack America or Germany with this. This is more of an early game Mexico against Peru kinda of idea and you could make like “proper tanks” later

[@stepheningram6415]

The recon light tanks are 36 now!??! Lame. They used to be 24. I see your point

[@arabe3139]

I like the new tank designer because it allows players to build tanks especifically for what they want. I think primarily as a defensive design, since we never got the chance to actually build a defensive tank, now people will be able to make one. USSR players, for me, will have the best time with this concept, creating a literal fortress to defend against the germans.

[@SMGJohn]

Yeah but keep in mind that CAS ignores armour still, so even if you have super heavy tank with 300 armour, enemy CAS is gonna chew through it like no tomorrow. I agree with Feedback here that, tanks are essentially just now relegated to butcher infantry as efficient as possible, and unlike mot Rockets, a tank can deal more damage per unit than a mot rock can do, but since you always are gonna get pierced, armour is worthless, you rather up your defence and breakthrough to avoid taking as much damage as possible while dealing as much dmg as possible, so maybe a super cheap heavy tank with a big heavy howitzer on it or a rocket artillery launcher.

[@arabe3139]

But the air war is so important in this expansion that we always need green air for any strategy that we can think of. This proposal of the fortress-like tank is with the conception that we already have green air on the battlefield. And about the defensive tank specifically, I did not thought of shoving infinite armor on it, but using the new add-ons to make the defence as high as possible, maybe with some anti-tank gunnery so it can slow down the panzers advance.

[@aspielm759]

Never underestimate the entrenchment blade , especially when you’re that kind of fucker that keeps the armor and defense high, while speed and firepower suffer.

[@aspielm759]

@@SMGJohn Ahhh, the Glass-cannon principle. A classic

[@MrNicoJac]

@@SMGJohn How can a tank deal more damage per unit than a motorized rocket can? Also, should we really be talking on a per-unit bases, or would a per-production-cost be better? (especially since you have a _big_ front to cover as the USSR)

[@UNSCSpartan043]

That support gun aka 'snub howitzer' on fast light tank 40's is insanely good even till end of mid game. I really don't have much use for the mediums anymore because well managed lights will just smash and race through nearly anything and are cheap to mass produce, and with cheap motorized following behind them to soak up any counters they can just encircle troops or spearhead for supply hubs with ease.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Light 2 is extremely underrated

[@UNSCSpartan043]

@@FeedbackIRL Yep. They have to be taken care of a little more and you can't just throw them at an active wide battle plan or enemy tanks but that's not the point of that support gun light tank. It's Blitzkrieg at it's finest. XD To rapidly smash through infantry and gain rapid encirclements and quickly popping that bubble or rushing 3-6 tiles for a supply hub and crippling an entire section of enemy front lines.

[@Trifler500]

I've found that if you put more than a couple of points into Engine, then you're better off sticking with the gasoline engine, because if you put points into Engine to compensate for the lower speed of the Diesel, then you actually end up with worse stats. The Diesel only makes sense if you don't put points into Engine. I think they should buff the Diesel because of this.

[@2kbk926]

It’s also not cost-effective for fuel consumption. The same speed Diesel engine as a Gas engine will be consuming more fuel

[@Trifler500]

@@2kbk926 Yes, exactly.

[@keithstark1]

@@2kbk926 that sounds like a defect in the game. IRL a diesel pushing at a comparable velocity will be much more fuel efficient than a gas engine. There is a reason virtually every large commercial vehicle burning fuel is diesel.

[@GuilhermePereira-vi6vc]

5:40 the soviet doutrine was actually very good, it was almost equal to the German one, with some differences mainly in the targets of a operation. The problem wasn't the doutrine, the problem was when the German attacked they the army wasn't ready and the tank divions were still incomplete. If we want to see how the soviet doutrine worked when the army was actually ready we have the operation Bagration, destroyed a big part of center German army and encircled a big part of the north army

[@SMGJohn]

Yes, but Soviet doctrine developed into same as German except on a larger scale, tanks were meant for breakthrough to spear into the enemy, then follow with waves of infantry and more tanks and the spearhead tanks would push deep into enemy lines and wreak their supply lines and rear echelon troops.

[@GuilhermePereira-vi6vc]

@@SMGJohn yes, the main difference was the soviet doutrine was more focused on breaking entire sections of the front and reaching the supplies while German doutrine was more focused on breaking in one specific point or some specific points and trying to encircle and destroy the enemy divisions

[@GuilhermePereira-vi6vc]

@M J it is kind already simulated by divions having more defense in those places, but yes, they could have made something like that

[@stevepirie8130]

Chieftain did a series on armoured doctrines of the major nations and I was impressed at how advanced in thinking the Soviets were even just after WW1. The issues were same for all of course. Cost, lack of industrial know-how, technology wasn’t advanced enough, etc, etc, with the Soviets adding in the “Red Terror” to really hamper their intellectual forward thinking. They couldn’t solve the issue of infantry keeping up with the breakthrough tanks. They knew big heavy tanks that AT guns couldn’t stop would punch through but tanks don’t hold terrain, infantry does. Infantry needs support, so you need to bring the whole circus with you and controlling and supplying this was unsolvable early 20th Century until radios, trucks and the actual tanks became available. One resolution was have infantry hang onto the tanks hence for decades welding bars to hang onto turrets were made. Ok until flesh meets machine guns or tanks need to fire. Nobody had actually sat down to work out how to get the entire fighting unit and echelon to breakthrough then breakout. This is why we learnt to have a recce screen, main body, flank and rear guards to battle groups. Softer echelon protected within the harder elements of the Battalion/Brigade/Division/Corps/Army.

[@GuilhermePereira-vi6vc]

@@stevepirie8130 I actually never knew about that channel, thanks for the recommendation. If you don't know, there is also a very good channel about ww2, TIK, a recommendation to you, on case you didn't know about this channel yet

[@nullvoid6472]

Giving a tank a truck suspension and a diesel engine means you get a production cost reduction while losing NO RELIABILITY. This means the meta is basically a type of technical, not a tank. The funny part is, you can make a rocket technical for 7.8 IC instead of the 12 IC for the actual rocket truck from the research tab. The rocket truck is now USELESS.

[@bottle-xz5hp]

but how many rocket truck is required for a battalion and how many tanks are required in your battalion you still need to look at the battalion cost and which kind of designation you should give to that design.

[@felixbarth3103]

Isn't adapting tanks to have more piercing and hard attack the same as making it an SPAT. Same with a high soft attack tank. Thats just an SPG. You just don't have to research those as specific variants anymore like you used to.

[@zackbobby5550]

I feel like making cheap medium or heavy SPGs to support infantry is actually pretty viable now. Now that we can customize the tanks, we can customize their costs too. We also have more room combat width wise now that the standard is roughly 25 vs 20.

[@alatamore]

I think that fast tanks are still great in SP. You just have to play them differently. You don’t go making huge encirclements. You break out and grab the supply depots, starving the enemy of supplies. Protect your supply path and then you can wreck havoc on your enemy. However this won’t work in MP as humans will understand to protect their supply lines in ways the AI doesn’t.

[@28lobster28]

Optimal armor amount - 9 on tanks, 0 on TDs assuming your opponent is also making TDs. Armor is just good for breakthrough on mediums. Medium cannon 2, radio, fill with stabilizers for breakthrough. Replace one stabilizer with wet ammo storage and use torsion bar for MT1 and 2, you can go bogie and an extra stabilizer on MT3. TDs should be high velocity gun, two small cannons, and two additional MGs for soft/hard attack. Template is 40 or 42w, I like 5-8-8 MT-mech-MTD with engi, logi, arty, RA, medium flame tank. TDs give all your hard and soft attack now, tanks are focused on breakthrough. Replace 1 TD with 2 moto AA if you're not planning to win air (should always build some air this patch).

[@CerisVG]

I’ve found the best way to do tank production is produce a crap cheap version and use the conversions to make your optimal one, you end up with 20-30% more tanks easily, kinda how you do the navy

[@ingratus8160]

As far as I've understood it, if you create a tank with 100 % IC (any IC really) and create a tank that has 3 times, so 300 % IC, you can get the new tank for additional 100 % conversion cost. In short: 100 % tank + 100 % conversion = 200 % IC for a 300 % IC tank.

[@ArayaPancho]

like, start building as soon as you have the chassis then just convert in the variants once you unlock the modules and parts ?

[@connorbranscombe6819]

@@ArayaPancho You have to have a gun, turret, and other basic parts, but just make it cheap then convert to a good design, takes less factories.

[@nausimur6035]

I think you need a solid mix of units now , for cheap soft atack fast breaking divisions - a mix of mot ,rocket motorized /mot arty and cheap TDs for quality breaking a good medium division with good medium with high breakthrough for tank to tank combat a Heavy tank divison maybe (yet to see) for defending and holding line , small inf divs (10 width or something close to it) for cheap tank stoping / tank draining , Inf + TDs to counter Inf + TD units some big inf divs (something similar to the old 14 /4 s ) also i think that the flame tank + pioniers will be in every atacking division because of the terrain modifiers

[@zeux5583]

in my portugal-brazil game today ive found that 8 inf + 2 art + engineer + signal + support AT gives me a division with 230 soft attack, 420(nice) defense and 100 Breaktrough at 54 org. id just be rolling through france right now were it not to supply issues because i bombed the german rail network to hell and back

[@kristaps3415]

put a dozer blade in by reasearching engineer 2, you'll see it in special modules, and then watch the magic ENOURMOUS def stats

[@TheArklyte]

Close support howitzer in 1 man turret... That's basically Schneider 75mm. A WWI tank gun french forgot about, the one that was used in Schneider tank and in a version of FT.

[@quentintin1]

it was forgotten for good reasons. compared to any other tank gun (even the 37SA18), it had zilch for penetration, the gun fired only HE at extremely low penetration one of the reason of its existence was that in 1915/1916, they had a crisis where the shell manufacturing quality dropped so low that they were exploding in the barrels of their field guns, so the 75BS was created to use those shells as it's much, MUCH lower initial velocity wouldn't cause such catastrophic issues while delivering some pain to the enemy, in French it was called "mortier de 75 Schneider" (75mm Schneider mortar) and it's ballistics were so bad that as soon as the war ended it was removed from service. even the French realised that at least some anti tank capabilities was good for a tank gun, the 1935 light tanks were made with a more powerful gun than the old SA18 in mind, it was just used in the meantime and as an economy measure, getting some early APCR so at least it could hope to damage enemy light tanks (at least on paper the SA 18 APCR could pierce the Front of all early panzers under 300m) and there was even an APDS under development that would give it the performances of the 25mm AT (40mm at 500m)

[@usf22raptr1]

I love the idea of this basic, cheap vehicle as a seed for throwing 1-2 armor battalions into infantry formations, but I still prefer speed to push weak spots in enemy lines. Though, I prefer speed for the ability to close pockets, rather than to push depth, quickly (because, as Dave mentioned, supply is such an important consideration now). *caveat:* It does somewhat depend on what nation I am playing.

[@Razzlion]

All you need is a heavy tank, lots of armor, flame thrower and as cheap as possible. Then just add them as a support company to all your infantry units. Melts everything unless you go up against big at.

[@stevepirie8130]

“Melts everything” 😈 indeed

[@ByZHellas]

Divisions store supply, so you can still use fast tanks and breakthrough and push around, you just can't snake around and make insanely deep pushes. Speed still works just fine.

[@marekmorrill8954]

lol that medium was litterally my first tank I designed within hours of the game coming out. I now know that it is pretty good.

[@biitimate3697]

Assigning an SPG role to the same tank uses 24 tank in a brigade instead of 40, this is huge especially with more expensive designs. It allows you to make more infantry tank divisions.

[@LDZMarder]

25 width mediums and 15 width heavy's. They all 4 fit then in a plane and urban tile.

[@LDZMarder]

@M J to fit the max amount in a tile. Maximizing divisions in battle over having a few big divisions. They will support each other and can reinforce each other better there and always outnumber a few big divisions. Goal is to have 5 divisions to the enemys max 3 or maybe 4 and have your 5 divisions being able to reinforce each other at whim. Heck make them all 10 width to get maximum inside. The quantity of high quality small divisions.

[@MrNicoJac]

@@LDZMarder Or just go 30 width, save yourself a LOT of support equipment, and just always attack with 3 divisions (with 1 supporting from another tile for urban, and 2 supporting from separate tiles for plains). Fuck the last 6-8 combat width in urban fights, your tanks can still steamroll the AI with ease! xD (or go with 31-32 widths, and eat a small penalty on the plains... you don't have any terrain penalties there, so a small combat width penalty should be bearable... although I haven't had that penalty in _so_ long that I don't remember how big it even is, lolol)

[@vqlcano1698]

I thought of a tank that's really good for a major nation, and easily upgradable. Medium Chassis, Medium Howitzer, 3-Man Turret, Roadwheel Suspension, Diesel Engine, Welded Armor, Radio, Additional Machine Guns, Sloped Armor, and Wet Ammo Storage. This gives you a huge amount of excess reliability, and you can add engine and armor points as you like. It's not absurdly expensive (around 25 production cost), and it has a huge amount of breakthrough, soft attack, and armor points. It works well in a 20 width template (5 tank battalions and 5 motorized battalions), and you can add AA to even it out to 21 width so it fits well into forests and plains, but that's not really necessary.

[@WiggleOcto]

Me looking at dave's 4 - 5 km/h mediums then looking at my 10 km/h heavies

[@metallord999]

Making light tanks into flame tank support companies early on can give some good results as they add Soft attack anywhere from plus 5 to 15% attack on different terrain types and can be build out to give breakthrough and armour.

[@WalrusJones185]

So one thing thats going to crack your theory here a bit is that tank destroyers require half the production numbers of dedicated tanks, but have statistic bonuses. So one thing that is highly likely is tank forces using a spammable high soft attack tank with no substantial cost to it, backed up by an elite tank destroyer with incredible overall statistics to boost the average armor of the division. Tank destroyers use half the tanks, but get 10-60% more penetration at the brigade level (Scaled by anti-tank tech,) hard attack, and fort attack. So it makes sense that they carry whatever high penetration armaments available to you.

[@tbeller80]

Invaded US/Canada as Germany with a light tank army. Captured eastern Canada and New England based entirely on speed until I hit a wall and started losing a lot of tanks. Brought in a much smaller heavy tank army and just started punching right through the front. I haven't verified the numbers yet, but it felt like the heavy tank divs were faster to build. The effect was definitely worth any increased cost.

[@WalrusJones185]

@@tbeller80 The cost is often lower, because heavy tanks use 20 feweer tanks per division, or 1/3d less.

[@rogertracy4005]

Idk if you've tried this yet, but if you attach a transport plane to an army it basically gives the army unlimited supply as they take or build airports.

[@jfarrar19]

So, on the SPG, SPAA, etc. I suspect that it might be useful to use them so you can separate your high soft attack tanks from your piercing tanks from your anti-air tanks and keep them from getting mixed up in the unit.

[@Garathon]

Put wings on a tank and turn it into a supply cas tank

[@generalalexandre6451]

uhhh it doesnt work that way

[@Garathon]

@@generalalexandre6451 *It should.*

[@stevepirie8130]

Soviets did try a flying tank iirc 😁

[@jc5512]

02:23 it's a howitzer. And Bogie is pronounced like bogey

[@ZhaoDrek]

i run my game as italy and use lighs with autocanons, first mix with cavalry then trucks.. was able to realize rome.. even when i fight in china, the supplies i get from the planes allow me to push

[@MrNicoJac]

The planes are bugged and will get nerfed soon

[@Vagabond820]

I really feel they missed a golden opportunity to redo the tech trees from ground, support, tank, sea, air, electronics, and industry to fire arms/canon, engine/propulsion, metallurgy, electrical, and production. Ex: Researching guns/canon develops your ability to create you weapons for every class of unit.

[@ParanoidMaster]

Well they had that back then in HOI 1&2. When HOI4 came out, they streamlined the research tree because you now had the division templates and they wanted to reduce the micro management...i hated that back then. But in fact it was a good desicion. Going back to a humongous tech tree with a quadrillion tiny techs for every single weapon system combined with the focus trees, division templates, tank and ship designer would be a micro management hell and impossible to manage in multiplayer.

[@Vagabond820]

@@ParanoidMaster hmmmm. A valid point. I like the changes to tanks but felt the naval change a tad lackluster. I’d just like all of the currently spread out techs consolidate into common categories so if I research a canon improvement it effects artillery, tanks, and ships (of course in a balanced and logical way). I fully expect the tank customization to reappear for aircraft. And wouldn’t complain about a reshuffling of ships tech into hulls, armor, propulsion, and weapons instead of the hull giving the associated engine upgrade.

[@ArayaPancho]

I think we need better visual indicators of what tech unlocks aditional or better parts. Maybe they could combine the tank and artillery tabs and make it similar to the naval tech tree (vertical instead of horizontal)

[@tychus8219]

It was the germans and more specifically Guderian the one who changed the role of the tanks from infantry supportive unit to just concentrated tank devisions giving birth to the well known blitzkreig. 🙂

[@oscars4608]

So far I like to go with expensive mediums at 8KMH to match the mech, cast armour, torsion bar, sloped armour, advanced radio, 3 man turret, medium artillery armament and wet ammunition storage so I can max my armour stats. I like it because it can easily shred through infantry, and I’ll always add on 2 battalions of high velocity cannon tank destroyers to compensate

[@chrisofelt6427]

should do welded armor, mediums aren't made to take a beating and depending on the role, you might want high velocity cannon to counter heavies

[@oscars4608]

@@chrisofelt6427 yeah I always have a few high velocity cannon battalions for piercing in case of AI tanks, but even those aren’t needed as the AI has the habit of mixing mediums and lights together which I personally think is a horrible idea

[@MrNicoJac]

@@oscars4608 That sounds like a _complete_ waste of production though xD How much does each tank cost to produce? And how many resources per factory?? From what I know (which, right now, just after the DLC dropped, is still basically nothing, lol) it seems best to make something that's slow and cheap, but with a LOT of soft attack, and _just enough_ breakthrough and armor. Those tanks would be inferior to yours, but you'd be able to build twice as many, perhaps :) And they'd still crush the AI... Even tank battalions aren't a big deal if you just blow away their manpower, causing their Org to drop :) Like, here, just per illustration: Sloped _and_ cast armor makes your tanks cost 30% extra!! That means that if you were to field a full army of 24 divisions, I could make 34.28 divisions(!!) that would be almost-identical, for the same cost! They'd still have 70% of your armor, which is probably plenty to blast apart your infantry divisions, after which I can just drive around your tank army to supply hubs or victory points! (as in, I have more divisions, so you can block/fight some, but cannot catch/stop them all simultaneously) Even worse, depending on your division design, I might even be able to pierce your 24 divisions right back, in which case you'd just be overwhelmed/outproduced.... TLDR: cast armor is just **_insane_**! For sloped, you at least gain more percents than you pay, lol Sloped costs 10% more for +20% armor, while cast armor costs 20% more for +10% armor... So if I only changed your designs from cast to welded armor, I could still get 120% of your divisions (24 -> 30) with 90% of their armor, _for the same cost!_

[@MrNicoJac]

@M J D'uhm... Are you sure?? 👀🙃 Just looking at the Wiki, which still has the old values, a medium battalion has 50 tanks and costs 600, whereas a heavy battalion has 40 tanks and costs 1000 production. If this DLC changed how many are in a battalion, please inform me 😅 But, looking at some videos on KZbin, I couldn't help but notice that most people's medium tanks tend to cost 25-30 production each, which is exactly what a heavy tank used to cost 😆 (I haven't seen heavy tank designs yet though, so can't really compare, but it does seem like we'll have far fewer armored divisions from now on!)

[@MrNicoJac]

@M J Oh... was just reading the notes for patch 1.11.4 and saw this: "- AA gun 3 now medium weapon, Tanks are now a bit slower, **heavys/sh are now more expensive** " Too bad man, they're onto ya ;)

[@drinkyourwater1039]

I love how the discussion about tanks are pretty much how history debated about tanks too

[@JackBodnar]

Don’t forget “easy maintance” from Maintaince Company 2 - 10 reliability for free in special module slot

[@FeedbackIRL]

Free? Like no production cost?

[@JackBodnar]

@@FeedbackIRL Well at least it says so on the module. As far as I remember total production and conversion cost didn’t change neither so it’s not a bug or maybe it actualy was one but I doubt

[@jeremyundsoo1872]

hey what is with early rush light tanks that you have op recon supcompany for you inf ? love soft at tanks also, thinking update is coming becaus you can tanks give op soft attack without make them a AT-tank that have 3combw or i wrong? ps: good content keep it up

[@toniodu371200]

When your first tank is a small churchill with mk19 and a coax

[@TheOpalHammer]

I think the large howitzers gets good piercing because the shell is so large armour doesn't really matter.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Howitzer shells aren't solid they're explosive. The shells exploded outside of the armour on impact

[@TheOpalHammer]

@@FeedbackIRL Howitzers were often issued different shells including armour piercing and 'Anti-concrete' shells. The SU-152 was usually only issued with HE (high explosive) rounds, and still earned the nickname 'Beast Killer' as they were known to blow the turrets off tigers. HE rounds are also known to cause 'spalling' on the inside of armoured vehicles, killing the crew. Citations: Wikipedia (very thorough research)

[@FeedbackIRL]

Think you missed the point I was making

[@TheOpalHammer]

@@FeedbackIRL Firstly: This is the weirdest conversation I've ever had, and that's saying a lot. (In a good way) Secondly: I have no clue what point you were making. Thirdly: I like your content, keep doing what your doing.

[@paulfey6760]

I can't say I agree with the close support gun to start. The automatic cannon with (4) additional machine guns costs less production, has only two less soft attack, and has better defense and piercing to boot..

[@PaulKettlebones]

Can only certain countries customize tanks or is this from one of the DLCs? I’m still new and playing small nations and I don’t see this option.

[@walbermr]

i think with all these changes paradox made to the tank, it would be fair to select different tank models on different divisions, rather than light-medium-heavy

[@alessandrozago8387]

you can, just use the different tanks icon on top and you can choose different tanks for different divisions

[@murderouskitten2577]

3:40 congrats , you just designed Stug III :D

[@12gark]

Imho three man turret and gasoline engine are must have. The gasoline let you put less points into engine, which means less fuel consumption and less cost for the same speed. Yes, you lose a little bit of reliability, but just a little bit. The three man turret gives you so much better stats that is worth the cost (which is quiet limited, only 0.8). I think that a tank that cost 15 is worth when it has 30 or 40% better stats than one that cost 12. I prefer having less good tanks and be able to do something with them than just pump out crap that will eat your supply and won't win you any battle. With this supply sistem, any tank you put on the field needs to be a difference maker, otherwise it's better to have infantry and save supply. Also, the high velocity gun is not much worst in soft attack, gives you waaaaay more hard attack, and allows you to have TD, that are still good: you need very few of them to get the armor bonus in your infantry. So, I find it interesting to think about that.

[@XmXStuka2]

Just put light TD and light flamer tank with +2 entrenchment for infrantry division seems to be really good holder division

[@XmXStuka2]

I am aware of that. I seen AI however stack more than 50width worth units and this is pretty OP strategy for singleplayer

[@KubiG1000]

Funny that PDX got the armor types wrong, CAST armor performs worse than welded armor of same thickness, but is cheaper to manufacture. But those pdxdumbs got it the other way around...

[@Fyres11]

Funny thing is with my best game so far since update was without tanks.... nor planes. As the commi federation balkans. I've focused heavily on AA, Artilery and Grand battleplan doctrine. I was dig in so deep I did nearly 2/3 of the casualties the soviets did on the east front When we were both at war against Axis..

[@kc_was_here737]

Anyone figured out a way to tell what tech levels an enemy country has? Really think the realism suffers when you don't know what level tank/ a/t / equipment your enemy is using, and it's difficult to tell if you need to upgrade your equipment.

[@zztophatzztophat]

If you read this comment you are going to have to put out another video in fairly short order. armor is nice cheap mediums are good but stack breakthrough on light tanks and forget armor. All the armor, just leave it at home, gas engines, rivet armor, that... er... whats it called... reliability reducing fancy tracked suspension, auto cannons II (actually start heavy machine gun to save production), three man turret, radios, smoke, auto loader. aim for either 10 or 12 speed depending on what mechanized you pair it with, pair with mechanized. 42 width. As you tech up you can add more, obviously light tank 1s are not going to have reliability overhead for the fancy tracks. try to keep the template at around 15 per. This tank with this template has such absurd breakthrough that it will not take damage when attacking, even when penned, short of certain river crossings and forts there are few situations where this can't simply attack endlessly and and on top of being comically unstoppable they are quick. ...but they really suck at defense. I have seen 1800 breakthrough taking zero damage while attacking a german deathstack of two dozen divisions, including tanks, being penned the entire time until the battle was eventually won with zero damage, not hyperbole. Obviously, doctrines and generals are a big factor to.

[@zztophatzztophat]

Ima add here that you can tech directly from light tanks in to modern, their modern turrets have even more breakthrough, can mount howitzers, still count as tanks (not artillery) and they are only marginally more expensive to make than the light breakthrough design (marginally compared to how much breakthrough you gain).

[@iotcchan]

Early game just use a Close Support Gun Light Tank w/nothing design,it is pretty much the first "good" tank design for minor nations if you want to have tanks division in early 1937 with no tank and artillery technology from start,and it will break pretty much any major's army

[@SMGJohn]

Yeah you get it, this is how Sovietsky manages to troll people with light tank Germany pre-1.11. Cause his light tanks had stupid amount of breakthrough thanks to all the general trait stacking that he did, because of the breakthrough he could push 40 width Soviet heavy tanks with CAS support. Armour is overrated, also against AI, its even more overrated, AI aint human so they cannot build effectively and use effective strategies although its far better in this patch than ever before in fact AI is kind of obnoxious at times.

[@CheefCoach]

In my opinion, 22-23 width is superior to the 25 width. 25 width is good for mountains, but those are rare, and so much in favor of defending infantry, so 22w infantry would stile win in defensive battle. 11/0 10/1 or 8/2 infantry divisions are replacements for 10/0 or 7/2.

[@christophercrane5831]

It occurs to me a lot of what you're discussing is for players that prefer macro play to micro because the AI is not v intelligent in combat and will essentially just attack enemy divisions instead of encircling them or producing breakouts. If you as a player are more of a micro player or want independent divisions, then you still need to make anti tank and spg etc so those divisions have that capability.

[@KillerAceUSAF]

Air supply right now gets rif of any supply penalty you might face with a Speedy Gonzalez tank division.

[@blecao]

what i want to do is small slow tanks for infantry support and go full french doctrine

[@CheefCoach]

That wasn't Soviet tank doctrine; Soviet were heavily into tanks support infantry from get go. Problem rises when they didn't build enough or any trucks to transport that infantry that was suppose to go with the tanks.

[@floridaman4073]

US gave them 300k trucks

[@user-pz4dm9ho5l]

Как насчет тяжелого танка (огнемет) с мощной броней и легким танком (максимально бронированного) как батальонов поддержки ? Я так добавил 40+ брони к обычному пехотному шаблону. How about a heavy tank (flamethrower) with heavy armor and a light reconnaissance tank (maximum armored) as support battalions? This is how I added 40+ armor to the regular infantry template.

[@georgerukhadze9164]

4:28 "the idear is" damn you hang out with tommy too much ahahhah

[@fourthstage9375]

Everyone is discussing tank designs while i just spam CAS from start of the match

[@td23asus]

you can make like 8 production cheapo light TDs that have some really good piercing, its kinda mad tbh, if i can i like to, for rp reasons, use them in a combined arms sense for my elite infrantry

[@FeedbackIRL]

TD's have poo breakthrough :(

[@connortheandroidsentbycybe7740]

You're stressing the wrong vowel in "howitzer". It's "HOW-its-er" not "how-ITS-er"

[@connortheandroidsentbycybe7740]

@M J yes he is. So am I. No, you yanks didn't invent modern English.

[@brandonlee712]

my designer looks different. when i click create variant it just says create variant, i don't have an equipment designer...am i missing something>

[@prodrom]

Can't wait to make infantry support howitzer super heavy tanks that move at 8 kps

[@gonshi9]

I dont know when can you use older tanks in stockpile to upgrade them and when not. Sometimes i have the game tell me that i couldn't, save the same design again and then it could from the previoua design (had some 1,2 k on stockpile)

[@gonshi9]

@M J yeah but that may not be all. I had changed my t34 model to have a biger gun, turret and additionl armor and the first time i saved it i couldnt refit them

[@MrNicoJac]

​@@gonshi9 Of course you couldn't refit them at first. You changed the template itself. The next time, you made a **second** design, and _then_ the game _can_ switch _between_ designs. If you make a new plane variant by upgrading something, the game _also_ dumps a new design with a new name in your list.

[@gonshi9]

@@MrNicoJac bruhh that what i did

[@gonshi9]

I ve played hoi for a while, im not falling for that hahaha

[@MrNicoJac]

@@gonshi9 Yeah, but you didn't understand why it didn't work, at first. Well, like I just explained, because you did it wrong, at first 🙃

[@aspielm759]

2:10 close support gun? What about automatic cannon II?

[@krizy1819]

Few months later every hoi video: 10312nd new combat width and tank design meta video

[@yesman6559]

Yes

[@Glo0ze]

I don't agree about the not needing SPG's or Tank destroyers. especially TD's the way armor and piercing work its usefull to make a heavily armored heavy piercing TD and put 1 in your template. Since medium TD's require only 24 pieces of equipment for 1 battalion (vs 50 for the standard meidum tank template) it doesnt matter if its expensive. So u prop up ur armor and pericing stat with that and just use high soft attack low armor cheap tanks to get your soft attack and breakthrough up. its not the fact that you dont need it since you can design any tank to be a TD the point is that a TD battallion is way cheaper than a medium tank battalion but uses more combat width.

[@yaboidan8668]

paper thin glasscannon japanese armor, lets gooooo

[@pewpewboom4201]

how do you know if your tank is being pierced as you say here 11:49

[@collectibletaco7797]

Has anyone experimented with wheeled chassis as light tanks? Kinda like light tank destroyers and spgs, could go really high speed and be cheap

[@andresmartinezramos7513]

Like the modern Centauro, AMX-10...

[@collectibletaco7797]

@@andresmartinezramos7513 Yeah exactly like that!

[@catgoverning1066]

I will be honest I only make medium tank destroyers and put maybe one or 2 in a motorized division to let them pierce tanks

[@kk7324]

best meta currently possible is going sp doctrine and spamming 10 width infantry with full support companies. As for tank i go 16 width with 3 motorized and 4 tanks. They give you just enough firepower to shred through ai, low supply consumption and actually cost effective. 3 16 width tank divisions are more effective than 1 45 width tank division. Another benefit of 16 width tanks is that your supply consumption is so low to the point that you can advance into the tight front lines where supply are low and make a breakthrough. Also being able to produce a lot of divisions cuz of their low production cost means that you can actually spear head in 3 or 4 point at the same time. Also using 12 width mechanized or motorized to fill the gaps will ensure that your tanks will never get encircled. i think meta is shifted towards small units now because of supply and combat width system. For example, if you use regular 40 width tanks in benelux,you will run into supply problem and will be slower in advance however, 16 width with 12 width mech and mot can shred through benelux and take paris within days without any major problem. Also 16 width and 12 width are ideal for africa corps as germany where supply will be next to nothing.

[@kk7324]

@@anonymous-rb2sr yeah like you

[@namewarner7431]

IRL tanks plz

[@kyle857]

Nice.

[@Routerproblem]

Since Divisions can Store supply, maby give US a motorized supply Truck that increases the stored supply and allows for länger pushes.

[@Routerproblem]

US, not US*

[@crowbarviking3890]

Against the AI so far it is a waste to build anything but light tanks. The AI rarely focuses on AP. Few tanks for Armor and Breakthrough (only push up those two, ignore the rest to keep costs down), Mot. Art. for soft attack., Mot for Org. Gives a cheap division that bashes the AI

[@sesameoil0009]

the tab only showed the title of the video being "NEW O..." and i thought "NEW OPIUM WAR" don't ask why

[@asknicholas4775]

what about the converting meta? You make a shitty low cost tank with the right chasis and then you make a second production line converting those to the one you want

[@SMGJohn]

Does not work anymore, they fixed the conversion prices so that converting tanks is now more expensive, if you add the cheap tank production cost and then add on the conversion cost for the tank you actually want, you end up in a deficit. It can still work if you make a super cheap chassis, and a slightly more expensive main tank but then, when you start upgrading it, it gets more expensive so its pointless.

[@stevepirie8130]

That’s a shame, there should be a cost as you might be swapping out running gear or other parts but you sure save a lot in RL reusing the same Hull.

[@talltroll7092]

@@stevepirie8130 Yes, but you shouldn't be able to build a given design cheaper by converting it from a cheap base model. Conversions IRL were a way of reusing older and/or captured tanks in a battle environment they were no longer suitable for, not a way to make stuff on the cheap

[@aspielm759]

No more than 15 for heavy tanks?! [starts sweating in 24 in cost and over 100 in armor]

[@aspielm759]

@M J So I wasn’t even off to a bad start. Noice. Generally speaking though, my tanks never encountered much AT, I feel like. Either that or I didn’t notice it. So he has a point I guess. Though my creation which I lovely call “Tscherepacha” has around 150 armor and 50 soft attack. Admittedly the production costs went up a bit once I researched the late war chassis but generally speaking I’m good I love the new DLC

[@IxGxNxI]

The new tank meta is no tanks meta. Motorized for pushing and encirclements, basic infantry + CAS for holding the line. Tanks are superfluous.

[@GundamReviver]

I still wanted to give this a try because someone else said it too, why is motorised suddenly good?

[@IxGxNxI]

@@GundamReviver 10 base breakthrough, 20% base hardness (40% with first mechanized tech), high speed. If you go for motorized rocket artillery you can set up production lines and forget about changing them. Passive upgrades will do the rest. Maaaybe switch to better guns. 42 width division costs around 3.5-4k and has about 300 breakthrough. Good tank division costs 10-20k. Use the saved production on spamming fighters and CAS. Air is king in the new patch.

[@GundamReviver]

@@IxGxNxI yeah I figured out air being king, but now you mention the numbers involved I understand, hell thst might even be doable on some minors.

[@talltroll7092]

@@GundamReviver Doesn't that just mean that you should start using AA, like actual WWII divisions did?

[@GundamReviver]

@@talltroll7092 nah since AA isn't strong enough vs air.

[@Tutel0093]

9999 videos a day about ultimate tanks and people said meta was done at day1

[@billbrydon3725]

Pronounced 'bogie' like in "Colonel Bogey."

[@mafiaxjames]

These are space marines, can you show us some Multiplayer legal tank divisions

[@nebojsag.5871]

Why not have a three man turret with radio for your tanks, and a fixed superstructure with a meaty howitzer for your SPGs?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Because it has no breakthrough and is expensive

[@nebojsag.5871]

@@FeedbackIRL If you give your tanks more breakthrough, you can afford to put fewer battalions into a division, and LSPGs are dirt cheap if you convert them from old obsolete light tanks Germany and the USSR start out with.

[@girayrahmi]

Tungsten chromium values make Turkey very easy in a single game

[@andersonklein3587]

You are basically doing a cheap SPG, which is great and all, like a cheap space marine. But, if you face a hard attack heavy armored division your tank divisions would just instantly melt for no damage.

[@Strait_Raider]

Currently the AI builds almost no armored divisions. 1943 Germany? 4 Armored divisions. 1948 USA? 3 Armored divisions. Until the AI fixes itself, SP meta will definitely be either howitzer tanks with decent breakthrough and just enough armor to stop current year support AT, or even straight up SPGs. Support Flame tanks, support light tanks, and a couple of SPG battalions, maybe Space Marines are back on the menu for achievement hunters, they could be very cheap to field and full on armored divisions seem like huge overkill in SP.

[@samarkand1585]

Have fun with the fuel consumption if you put 3 tank batallions on all your infantry divs

[@mcawesome9705]

i could be wrong, but to me, cast armor just seems like a waste you're paying an extra 20% in production cost to get an extra +10% armor.

[@sora64444]

meanwhile me making mediums for 50-70

[@dzikidzwon3802]

Oi, this template + strategy works