WHY This Division Is The NEW META - HOI4 Infantry Division Guide

WHY This Division Is The NEW META - HOI4 Infantry Division Guide
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
#hoi4 #hoi4template #hoi4guide

[@FeedbackIRL]

What's your favorite combat width?? Mine is 69...

[@dr1o761]

Nice

[@silosneeded]

Nice

[@BeemanFunnyman]

You are such a humourus person, i must say quite the humour

[@AjarTadpole7202]

probably 1.2 or 12 or 10

[@Kholdstare1987]

nice

[@Elongated_Muskrat]

"What's the opposite of a division that does everything?" "An Italian Division" -German Soldier probably

[@capitanjulietti3436]

As an Italian, I can say it's true

[@Boretheory]

Why Italian? Why not Danish or American? And yes the Americans sucked they just won by sheer number of weapons and soldiers.

[@YourMom-un7jp]

@@Boretheory Bastogne.

[@ziyueguan3430]

No, an Italian division would do 2 things. 1. Eat pasta, 2. Surrender

[@giftedturtle3598]

@@Boretheory somebody doesn’t know history

[@some_gh0st]

My favorite part about playing minor nations is seeing how much I can improve their starting base templates. It feels so rewarding to slowly be able to support new equipment or even just more numbers in general

[@Notmyname1593]

Another reward is surviving in the area between Germany and Soviets.

[@Aqueox]

I think your comment about combat width is right on. So many people are so used to focusing on combat width because that's what we've done for 6 years. PDX essentially made combat width a "non-factor" of sorts due to the terrain width changes as well as the over-width penalties being lower. Use what you can afford and that is that. I guess this is our "machine guns, planes, and tanks are now a thing" moment in the HOI4 community. We're so used to fighting wars a certain way, like the militaries pre-WWI and somewhat during, that when something new comes around nobody adapts and we do the same thing over and over and over expecting something to change.

[@alexandercaires5921]

I absolutely agree, for generalist units. For your assault/shock/breakthrough, equipment heavily divisions; I can see optimizing divisions so you don't lose that much equipment - but mainly for minor nations.

[@jeremiahkivi4256]

Yeah width is now just a minor factor. It really comes down to who can make more/better equipment, and keep supplied.

[@frankunderbush]

At this point the only time I'd really worry about combat width is for dedicated fighting in supply strained areas like Africa, SEA, and island hopping. For places like the USSR you kinda just have to roll with your bigger divisions and suffer through it.

[@DanielSinks]

As someone that's been playing since launch but doesn't like MP I never understood why people even care about width so much. Yes it makes a difference but if you're fighting a battle where you lose because one more division couldn't fit then you probably have a bigger issue than width. One more division won't help much in an attack unless you're opening up a new angle of attack or it's just a really good division. Sending one more into a defense getting shredded by cas will just shred that division too. Maybe MP is more nuanced but whatever

[@PIRATE99A]

@@DanielSinks Couple reasons, one more division can make a complete difference, if you are attacking with four divisions and one cannot enter the battle that is a quarter of your stats erased. In MP it honestly doesn't matter as much for infantry because they just need to be able to hold tiles but for tanks that's incredibly important. Even if you can win with three you want to win with four faster so your opponent has much less time to react, no pausing, remember. Finally, unlike SP, MP is a tense PvP environment where minor stat differences can absolutely make the difference when multiple players are trying their hardest to one up each other.

[@costakeith9048]

@@DanielSinks I usually find it's pretty late game before I even have enough units on the front for it to matter, you need four twenty-ish combat width units attacking from a single province or six from two provinces before it even matters (three or four, respectively, in the case of mountains and marshes, but that's pretty niche). And then you need the logistics in place to supply this large of an army on the front. I guess it can matter a bit more with tanks since you tend to concentrate them, but you also tend to micromanage tanks, meaning you can choose to attack weak provinces or provinces you can attack from multiple angles.

[@darthbigred22]

@@DanielSinks It mattered more when divisions could fit nicely together across most the map but now not so much The death of 7-2 and Space marines has really shown who was a blowhard with editing skills (Feedback) and who actually knows how to play the game

[@HungarianPatriotGaming]

My fav is 10 inf, 2 arty, 1 AA for 27 width, light tank or motorized recon, engineer, logistics, support anti-tank, and hospital or maintenance depending on whether I value my manpower or equipment more. Support AT can be swapped out for a flame tank and one infantry for a heavy or modern TD for an actual space marine division. Superior firepower right-right is a must.

[@tis_ace]

I'm kinda new to the game, can you explain why not choose air land battle?

[@HungarianPatriotGaming]

@@tis_ace Both are fine, the one you should choose depends on the nation you are playing. Air-land is good if you plan to use lots of tanks and CAS (with a nation that has the industrial capacity to churn out the required equipment). The other path is great to buff mixed infantry-artillery divisions. That path is very good for atritional warfare for countries that have enough industry to build a large number of cannons, but not enough to build a large number of tanks and aircraft at the same time. Air-land is also generally speaking, better for localized offensives (eg: pincer maneuvers), while the right-side path is better for protracted defense and grinding down an enemy with a general offensive on the entire length of the front.

[@wetwillyis_1881]

I've been making 14-4s with all of the support light tanks, so this is very helpful, thanks Dave. I plan on sharing this with my MP friends, so that they know how to make better divisions.

[@mainman879]

At 7:30ish you bring up Hardness for the recon tank. Hardness is a literally useless stat for a support company of any kind as support companies will never change the divisions hardness. You want the wheeled suspension for light tank recon to reduce the production cost by a lot.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Agreed! Learnt something new

[@bombidil3]

A space marine is any large unit with a single heavy/medium tank slapped into it to exploit the armour value calculation. They were called "Space Marines" because they were 99% infantry, but couldn't be pierced without dedicated AT or tanks, letting them do crushing amounts of org damage, like 40k space marines. People did frequently use marines with them back when they were unlimited. Marines had less defense and breakthrough than Leg Infantry, but that was easily offset with a big tank, and the attack bonuses combined with the non-penetration buff more than made up the loss of defense and breakthrough.

[@VarenvelDarakus]

reason why lots "use division for everything" its cheaper , XP costs can be incredible , 1 division can be cost of 1 level of doctrine who is insane you can experiment when you take spirit of the army that certain part is free , but you'd be still paying for support companies and other stuff

[@chengarqordath]

There's also the fact that a single template is easier on micro than a bunch of specialized ones. The more templates you have, the harder it is to keep them all straight and make sure you're using the rights ones in the right places.

[@bombidil3]

You can duplicate divs for free. It is very inexpensive if you built out a common core (typically infantry core), then attach what you need to it.

[@darthbigred22]

@@bombidil3 War advice from a liberal? No thanks we're not here to dox and protest nazis and ignore commies

[@quirinoguy8665]

I haven't played Hoi4 for like nearly two years, play Italy in by blood alone, and get absolutely smacked in the face for using a 20 width template, damn this game is pretty different now.

[@Babagush68]

Thank you for the tips!!

[@scottx1415]

Fantastic recap - getting back into HOI4 a bit again

[@TheRewasder97]

I don't like to think too much, that's why I like the big do all infantry template. Funny thing is, I never thought about including maintenance, and you make very solid point for it.

[@FeedbackIRL]

Maintenance pairs well with battle planning

[@TheRewasder97]

@@FeedbackIRL indeed, thanks for the tip, you've saved my logistics moving forward xD

[@tiberiuswolf8259]

while I was going for a few UK achievements and doing a lot of UK runs I made specific divisions for African combat, and specific templates for defending Gibraltar, Malta, and Cyprus. But I think that's about as detailed as I ever got with my units.

[@jerryrgzz1571]

I noticed that if you add light rec and flame thanks to the paratroopers they become decent against garrisons, and can be used to snipe the Mediterranean islands like Malta or Crete, and if used in tandem with marines even Gibraltar

[@pocketgroyper9301]

I'm gonna have to try that with Italy. I can see how it would be easier to get air superiority and paradrop than to get naval supremecy and naval invade when the war starts.

[@Crembaw]

Makes sense, 71cloak did testing that indicated 9-2 was around or about the sweet spot.

[@Cerabelus]

I've been messing around with 2 templates. 21w, 9 Infantry + 1 Medium SPG with Maintenance, Logistics, Artillery, LT Recon, Flame Tank. 30w, 9 Infantry, 3 Artillery, 3 AA with Maintenance, Logistics, Artillery, AA, Flame Tank. Always Superior Firepower, Right side than left side for tank bonuses and air superiority bonus.

[@daviddavidson505]

With enough air support, your template can just be a blob of infantry and they'll do fine.

[@arya.n.8252]

When you got more manpower in the planes than in the tanks

[@Boretheory]

@@arya.n.8252 what are tonks?

[@zztophatzztophat]

The best raw "defense" division has tanks with dozer blades and mech inf, mostly mech inf. Simple. ...but... you don't actually need good tanks of even "tank" tanks, you can use self propelled AA, AT and artillery tanks. Divisions like this with the proper generals, doctrines and officer corps can easily reach levels of entrenchment and defense that are frankly absurd and completely unbeatable with a fort, especially with a few SPAA in the mix slaughtering CAS. Is it a good idea to build these? Maybe? I often start early war with these as my primary "tank" divsion because they are objectively cheaper than a meta tank division even if not as good offensively, really, they start out with basically a mix of mech, motorized a smattering of light tanks and SPAA. As the war progresses and I get more factories and techs I phase out the motorized, add more light tanks, increase the combat width, add flame support, ect until it's a full-fledged 42 width 1200 breakthrough monster. EDIT: I should also mention that I initially produce tanks with the fixed mount instead of a turret because of the defense bonus and the fact that's it's cheap and I like making thousands of 3 cost light tanks to initially fill out my divisions but I quickly transition to proper turrets. The fixed mount should never be discounted however, as it's great for the support tank types they get zero breakthrough anyway.

[@TheArklyte]

What's the point of wasting motorized on division that can't move faster then infantry due to your use of low cost early light tanks if motorized add neither hardness, nor armor? Flexing? On whom? With what?

[@zztophatzztophat]

@@TheArklyte The point is maximum defense stat, like the first. line. of my post says. These divisions are not slow, I keep them at around 8kph, it's not hard to do with light tanks, except the pre-war variants. Moreover, the point of motorized is also addressed in the post, they simply fill out the template until I have enough mechanized to replace them and, again, the point of mechanized is the defense stat.

[@AWest-ns3dl]

Early: Sup AA, 6 Inf Mid: A.Recon, Sup AA, 7 Inf 2, Art Late: dependent on doctrine and situation, but max support companies and larger width.

[@janisb7071]

For me Space Marines comes from Europa Universalis where you would get something totally OP that just wrecks everybody and the name "Space Marines" is a joke that your units are so powerful compared to others that you can't even compare them to others. A classical example would be EU4 Prussia with extra idea groups taken for maximum meme material and stack wiping.

[@IceMaverick13]

I always thought it was a Warhammer 40k thing because your men are super-armored and supported by legions of vehicular support and flamethrowing death machines.

[@janisb7071]

@@IceMaverick13 True, Just imagine dropping them into a medieval setting against simple gunpowder units... Thus the meme that Prussia are spacemarines.

[@darthbigred22]

@@janisb7071 Do you even play EU4? You just stack wipe it's not exactly complicated. You general matters more over there than composition plus there's literally a limiter to cavalry in any one specific army. EU4's complication comes in development and playing politics with your neighbors so you can build the bigger stack quicker. The only game like EU4/CK3 that made composition matter but was still mostly a stack wipe game was Imperator Rome.

[@darthbigred22]

@@IceMaverick13 Agree I thought it was 40K or Starcraft

[@Notmyname1593]

@@darthbigred22 Clearly you havent played it, because then you`d know that Prussian space marines have absolutely nothing to do with cav. Like 0 cav in them because their inf is just so much better and would wreck anything the AI throws at you.

[@Crimethoughtfull]

See, here's the thing...I love all the stuff that HoI4 does, and the addition of the new logistics mechanic is very cool...but it is all on rails. If all this existed in a WWII era version EU4, that would be awesome.

[@giantfrigginnerd]

Gotta think about cost effectiveness? *gestures broadly at the T-34*

[@darkchopper8983]

Waiting for PDX to make armored cars great again 🚗

[@mattrehu8154]

I still remember the first day I played the very first hearts of iron that was 15 odd years ago and I've played all of them when they come out. They have made this game pretty good now and every time I come back they have added something new. I've always kept my combat width at 20 or 40 for stacking reasons, does this no longer apply?

[@kidthebilly7766]

recent updates have made combat width less of a worry

[@DontKnow-hr5my]

If i in theory have lots of production capabilities, would it be smart to change the light tanks to heavy ones or does that impact the division in a negative way?

[@Vaelosh466]

There's basically two competing interests, your overall production for your whole army, and your research. The research you put into light tanks can be used for both recon and flame tanks if you are trying to put armor support on your infantry. On the other hand light tanks aren't great as their own division, you'd probably want to make medium or heavy tanks to actually break through with (or just spam CAS, but maybe PDX will nerf that). Of course, then you have to research two different types of tanks at the same time, so one or the other will suffer. If you are OK giving up armor recon, just researching medium or heavy tanks for your main battle tank divisions and making a flame variant for your infantry might be a good tradeoff, if you have the production to support it. From what I understand the stats on flame tanks are penalized so heavily they only impact the overall division very little, it's the attack bonuses that make flame tanks so good.

[@aneural]

That'll be just quantity vs quality. It just means that your light tanks will be less independent in attacking and defending but since you'll have more of them it should be fine. Imo heavy tanks are better in every way if you make them fast enough by upgrading speed

[@MrNicoJac]

If you have lots of production, you'll still not have enough to equip an entire army. Unless you're the US and can push on tiny tiny fronts at a time. So it might be 'better' stats-wise, but probably never practically. (having more divisions would beat having slightly better ones - unless it's in low supply areas, I suppose) Nevertheless, there's _one_ element that might be a significant negative impact: terrain modifiers. (but I don't know the differences between light and heavy tanks, off the top of my head)

[@cm01]

Light armored recon and light flame tanks can stack enough armor in the designer that there's no point in worrying about heavier tanks for space marines. If you don't have the dlc you are much more limited in how much armor lights can give you and it may be worthwhile.

[@kyfernandez3057]

Pretty great video, though my question is does this also work when you're fighting in the jungles? I'm playing as Brazil and I'm trying to find a division template that will survive through the massive debuffs the terrain has, it's especially hard when fighting Columbia even with my main strat to take the Panamas first then pump out CAS in the region's airport

[@FeedbackIRL]

Yes, but less effective. Air supply is useful for those niche situations. The best situation is to avoid areas completely do a naval invasion

[@jacobwhite9006]

For defense I like to use Army’s consisting of 12x 6:0 (optional Engineer support) and 12 x 6:0 with Anti Air support. High Org, super cheap to build.

[@nodamiaen]

are large combat width infantry division desirable for defending single-tile islands? i don't do multiplayer so i don't know the meta for island hopping but i'm presuming one or two fat divisions on a strategic island that fill the combat width would be superior to multiple small ones as a concerted invasion with support will kill the low-HP divisions

[@MrNicoJac]

I believe invasion-landings have 90 combat width, which means that stacking 4 infantry divisions of 30 width each is ideal. (leaves you one in reserve, or against multiple directions - the AI has _never_ captured a port I defended with this)

[@sungerbok]

Wow was not expecting molchat doma

[@ronswearingen552]

The problem with this is continually adding to your divisions as you move along means they go back to being green untrained troops. You will also have to have those divisions off the front line when you make a change because it will take some time to get them staffed and equipped.

[@boosterh1113]

The solution to that is to make incremental changes. Adding or changing one battalion and a support company doesn't have a huge impact, and should be fairly manageable. It only starts to be a problem if you are completely revamping a division, in which case, yes you do need to make a duplicate template, make a training army, and gradually pull units off the front and into your training army, and then change them to the new template and let them train for a month or so before you send them back to the front.

[@fastboy5557]

Lovin the Kletka outro

[@rordongamsay6368]

The 7/2 is back... And it aint f'ing around

[@grantforester1864]

I remember one meme RT56RP game I played recently, I didn’t really care about my land military, I made a fat Argentine navy and a decent airforce with my allies, so I just made a 9-3 with some support and it did it’s job on whatever front I needed. I put it in Europe and I held off some guys “attack specialized divisions”. I had probably 10 mil factories on arty support and infantry and I didn’t have any doctrines cause I never got much combat xp the whole game, just naval and airforce xp. Just as a comparison, I had about 70 dockyards by 42 and 30 capitals kek. The 9:3 is pretty good as a lazy division, especially as a defensive unit, and I love it. I think it’s 27/28 combat width.

[@boudicajones6524]

How are your combat widths not full integers? Are doctrines unlocked on this save?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Ignore the stats I was using research all on this video

[@dominicsmith6287]

This video has made my life easier thank you.

[@marthvader14]

I don't have the xp to spare to get the doctrines and design a garrison division, coast defense division and then multiple infantry divisions and multiple tank divisions so they can exactly fit every terrain perfectly And I sure as hell won't micro all these specialized units so every tile has its special unit on it

[@12gark]

5xp for the Garrison division, but if you start with a country that has any width of pure cavalry, just use that. 1 infantry division to hold, again, most country have a 12 or a 18W division, you just add support art, engineer and AA to the 12W or 1 line Art and support to the 18W and you're good to go. And 1 pushing division to actually micro in the 30 to 44W range. If you don't have XP (usually democratic countries or small minors), just hold with defensive units until you have it. If you have IC but not XP, build CAS. CAS is always the answer 😂 Specialized division are worth only if you make them instead of something else, usually in multiplayer. For example, Bulgaria or Hungary don't need line infantry usually, Germany will take care of that, so just make 1 or 2 specialist units for specific tasks, like fort attack, river crossing, hold the ports against invasions or whatever, depending on how the axis handle things.

[@SouthParkCows88]

I always make a ton of motorized and artillery whenever I start, even when I have like 8,000. I know I'm going to burn right through that once the war starts. And I'm usually right.

[@lolmeh4838]

So which with what you mentioned 2 template division is battle plan division and the usual division is straight do everything division

[@trillo4519]

I think that 30with for tanks and 24with for inf works best. But I only play sing player. Also my inf has only aa and Engineers that’s it. What’s you opinion about that?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Not a big fan of engineers. Width doesn't matter

[@Albania4life535]

What i did is 9 inf , 3 artillery , 2 heavy tanks , maintanance comp , support artillery and support anti air for my entire army. Ill try out the division you made tho

[@ananyaguptabhaya5515]

Why is the combact width so less despite having so many units?

[@hmcredfed1836]

7:54 as a newby to Hoi4 this was realy helpfull!!!!!!!!!!!

[@burchiebaby]

How do you get the tank designer? I don’t have that? Just 4 options for +1 on a armour etc. I also noticed on my mates he’s has rows of ships mods. I don’t have any?! I have road to 55.

[@Nova-jd5hc]

You need the no step back dlc and Man th eguns for the ship and tank editors.

[@Aiphiae]

Hmm... when I play UK and try to hold France from Germany with that "classic defensive template" he mentions at 1:20 I just get rolled. I'm not sure why. They're mostly pushing with infantry themselves and while I can delay the inevitable, they eventually just overwhelm me. Air superiority is yellow or green, I can't see any other bonuses that they have - is it just down to sheer numbers whittling away my org. fight after fight? This game is complex!

[@MatthewZzzz0]

thoughts on field hospitals and signal companies for the +20 breakthrough?

[@Anonie324]

Hospitals are the worst support company by a large margin. Not worth 99/100 times. I know he considers signal companies overrated

[@MatthewZzzz0]

@@Anonie324 fair enough but 20 breakthrough for just support equipment isnt a bad deal considering you can just request tons of support equipment

[@Anonie324]

@@MatthewZzzz0 reduced org is a concern, as well as support equipment being genuinely a huge IC sink.

[@metaparalysis3441]

@@Anonie324 no, it is very good for minors with low manpower

[@normannobrot]

i thought the suppresion one was just full of horse infantry ?

[@6th_Army]

I've been shown lots of relatively weak all purpose infantry templates. I need to join this server to show one that doesn't get pushed aside.

[@mxcokoko]

What I've noticed (at least for garrison divisions) is that the one horse trick is cost effective but not efficient; a filled-out division template with cavalry (or the CHEAPEST light tanks you can create) plus MPs typically work better in all cases.

[@N3M093]

yes, but you start with the one horse only. Making the divisions you are talking about is good, but it's going to cost a lot of army xp (both the design of the division and to design the equipment) and genrally isn't woth it unless u have very low manpower or are annexing alot of territory. The xp is better spent getting doctrines, so you actually can fight and gain territory to garrison in the first place. the tanks work really well once u can afford them, but make sure they have a bit of armor so they can't get pierced by the partisans (if anyone knows the pierce value of the partisans, i would love to know). armored cars is also a decent option an so is mech modified with lower production cost. If you are playing a minor, with low production and manpower, i recommend full horse with mp, as this will take the lowest toll on your production and costs the least amount of army xp (10xp only for mp, if you have Proper Heritage as your spirit of the army).

[@mainman879]

2 width cavalry and 50width cavalry garrison EXACTLY the same. The only time there is a difference is if you add MP, and all that changes is using expensive support equipment instead of cheap guns.

[@MrNicoJac]

Not worth the XP cost. And to make MPs _really_ good, you need to put a LOT of research days into them. You're honestly better off adding a few more horses, some cars, and one light tank (to recycle your old junk while keeping the equipment balanced, lol)

[@leMiG31]

My favorite is 13 infantry and 7 artillery,and maybe 2 at and 1 aa Super soft attack With tank recon cause im not updating my hoi4 yet

[@marekwellman3502]

why i have 29 combat width and 46 organization?

[@fancynaeser9154]

Hey what does the "Production Cost" on the bottom right tell me exacly ? Would be nice if someone could explain it to me

[@MrNicoJac]

Timecode?

[@fancynaeser9154]

@@MrNicoJac The Production Cost on Tank Designer or Division Designer

[@MrNicoJac]

@@fancynaeser9154 On the tank designer, it's per individual tank. On the division designer, it's for all the equipment needed to fully stock one of those divisions.

[@Nostr00]

Is it important if I use AA support company or regular battalion?

[@ahmedrazick4946]

AA support company is enough. My understanding is that the base air attack you get makes up for the air superiority penalties. Anything pass that (so like 90 AA heavy spaa) just makes u more likely to shoot down cas or tacs.

[@FeedbackIRL]

All comes down to enough air attack

[@ronswearingen552]

If you're changing your division templates as the game goes on, won't your frontline divisions suffer penalties as they try to fill those positions? It seems optimal to have your divisions set by the time the war starts unless you have divisions behind the line that can move forward.

[@lamename2010]

You can make a copy off your current template, upgrade the copy, then slowly apply it to those divisions, who are building up plan bonus (ie are not in combat). At least that is what i do.

[@ronswearingen552]

@@lamename2010 when you change those divisions they also lose any training done.

[@MrNicoJac]

They do suffer penalties. But if you only change 1 battalion at a time, you can wait until they're reinforced and even train them back to Experienced, before changing more. This way, the penalties will not really make a difference :)

[@Gorbz]

Great. Now try it as Tannu Tuva. See how far that 1 recruitable growth, and 1 military factory get you.

[@cyberpunkfalangist2899]

I found its way easier to build dedicated defensive line infantry and garrison infantry and then specialize mechanized, armor, and infantry as dedicated assault units. There's a high upfront cost but you end up saving manpower and equipment in the long run when those assault units roll over enemy lines with key breaches/encirclements than if you just try and battleplan a massive frontline with jack of all trades divisions.

[@matewhat1582]

What do you use? Looking to do the same

[@cyberpunkfalangist2899]

@@matewhat1582 for line infantry 10-20 width with engineers, arty, and AA attached. Garrison/coastal defense 5-10 width with engineers maybe some support weapons if you have extra. Attack units 20-40 width depending on supply availability. Armor/mech should have a minimum of 35 org 40 is easier to get with mobile warfare. Defense units only job is to fill the line and delay any attacks

[@matewhat1582]

@@cyberpunkfalangist2899 cheers mate didn't expect a reply, will help me out a lot

[@koreanjesus738]

@@cyberpunkfalangist2899u really dnt need 35 org tho u can put more tanks into ur template for more hardness and just have that swet spot of 29-31 org

[@Tapsomebong234]

That "Sinkiang-Afghan border" comment just made me chuckle.

[@Babagush68]

Why is there a decimal on combat widths now? I just noticed it yesterday.

[@MrNicoJac]

Mass Assault doctrine decreases the combat width of infantry battalions

[@Babagush68]

@@MrNicoJac Got it thanks!

[@Cloud9vegas1]

Are there garrison mechanics? I feel like 1 horse unit couldnt effectively support an entire region. What ive been doing is 4 horses and a military police support company.

[@boosterh1113]

The thing is, the occupation mechanics will assign multiples of your garrison divisions whenever a given region would require more suppression. And since there is no penalty for having 15 or 20 single battalion "divisions" assigned to pacify a single particularly troublesome region, it makes sense to have your garrison units be as small as possible so the AI can assign exactly as much as needed without any extra.

[@H3rraM4juri]

this is why in my friends games we do not make meta division we always create new like our "meta" things but it is always sometimes expensive or is isn't good enough

[@bombvoyage5686]

Here’s the weird thing, I have found that making a big chunky horse garrison is cheaper for some reason

[@slashingbison2503]

This guys voice: I’ve been playing this game for soooooo lonnnggg

[@RedeyeGaming]

Didn’t they buff AT? It seems like its never mentioned in any videos like this, not that it matters much in Single player but in multiplayer shouldn’t it matter at least a little?

[@nazbolthatcherite6769]

In multiplayer only good tanks divs should be used, so support at or 1 at in inf wouldn't be enough to get piercing.

[@JohnSmith-bs9ym]

Pure inf + air superiority is still the meta for small countries to start off.

[@cuig5222]

optimal combat widths are 18, 20, 24, 32, 40

[@miguelhs6045]

I can use infantary method in MP? I just use my base division in everysingle game 12 infantaries 4 artilharies 2 anti-tank and air, armor-recon, enginners, equipament steal company, hospitals In every single campaign I do, I use that division and works perfect, but without so many encirclements This is my basic design for 4 years This strategy is good? Because I give up from use tank divisions 2 years ago

[@nazbolthatcherite6769]

Unless you're going no air I wouldn't use both support AA and line AA. Either the Line AA could be replaced by line AT, removed for a smaller div, or the support AA could be removed totally, replaced with engineers, or replaced with support artillery.

[@oligone9epic33]

really helpfull

[@patricksimpson1157]

Why ignore reliability on your support tanks? Does attrition not apply to support companies?

[@12gark]

Reliability is a division value. If you have 10k guns at 80% reliability, and 15 light tanks at 37% reliability, the average is like 78%. If the light tanks have 97% reliability, the average is 81% for example: the difference is not worth it. It's better to have extra armor, extra breakthrough or extra piercing for example

[@patricksimpson1157]

@@12garkThanks

[@patricksimpson1157]

@@12gark I knew about how it affected mp's in garrison unit but never connected it to recon companies

[@jowey_2077]

what DLC do you need for the tank designer?

[@HydroHemp]

No Step Back

[@jowey_2077]

@@HydroHemp thx

[@jessicalindo7977]

I always do my templates without light tanks, even with the logistics companies they EAT UP ALL MY SUPPLY. I make 17w or 23w with 1 to 3 artillery, no tanks, just building tons and tons of airplanes. If I went into an MP game though I know I would get absolutely destroyed, so I don't do that

[@Cal97g]

youtube not showing me the date of the video, presumably its 2 weeks ago (channels comment) but this could be years out of date without this info, thanks utube

[@SkraLord]

I never made a division I just use the base ones always worked fine for me

[@VictorianTimeTraveler]

I like equipping My Space Marines with jetpacks, so they can just drop in and wreck shit in the emperor's name

[@FlinzPrime]

How armor works with infantry is just weird. It makes combined arms useful as you want to take less damage and have some other stats. I don't think armor should affect whole division but just tanks how often you pierce them. That would same time buff AT and nerf tanks just for stat uses. Even if we talk single player game it is weird and ai is not really geared to handle what player builds at all.

[@raxsavvage]

use MP cavalry with 9/8/7 cavalry depending on when in the game im at with mp upgrades good supression really feels important

[@NEINNEINNEINNEIN1]

make 24 40 width heavy tank only divisions

[@lafaucheuse2001]

you need radio in your divisions, it's the most important thing to have... every single top HOI4 player says that and yet you don't even have one in your god like template...

[@kaseyrobbins753]

how can you tell if a division design is affordable or not?

[@leiferickson1494]

Do you have the factory output to equip them all? If so, you can afford it.

[@kidthebilly7766]

hover over the production cost estimate at the bottom right of the window

[@maximiliansteeg2602]

I always use a 9/3

[@raah5583]

When do I get my answer? 3:25

[@MrNicoJac]

About that Sinkiang-Afghani border... _They_ **also** have massive supply issues. So a 'normal' good division (but not insanely expensive) **will** _still_ beat them, _if_ you just upgrade your railroads (and air bases for 1k deathstacks of CAS, lol) EDIT: just don't attack in either mud or snow, and go with max planning bonus

[@MrNicoJac]

If you wanna waste production, build a railroad gun for them sweet bonuses xD

[@AtlasX123]

Is this video still up to date?

[@grudgebearer1404]

That "space marines" division was awful, damn, people saying that the width changes ended the "meta" divisions but hardly you find someone that actually knew how to make an actually meta 40 width Heavy Tank "space marines" division

[@dillongreaves9452]

Cheers

[@jamesshelley5912]

Why does reliability not matter?

[@Phillibetrus]

focusing on combat width is just force of habit at this point. It was critical until Barbarossa and I prefer the new system but still those habits die hard.

[@stonebridge157]

Can you make template for small countries with little manpower/resources?

[@FeedbackIRL]

Na you keep it simple

[@stonebridge157]

@@FeedbackIRL and what's simple? ☺️

[@fireiron369]

@@stonebridge157 probably 7/2s. It’s more cost efficient in terms of men and equipment. And if you can afford it get Light Tank Recon/Flame Tanks

[@stonebridge157]

@@fireiron369 So 7 inf and 2 art? Is Light Tank cheaper than antitank?

[@fireiron369]

@@stonebridge157 yes 7 Inf 2 Art. No but it gives armour

[@01296501923654]

Is it ever worth it to research and build a railway gun?

[@cyberpunkfalangist2899]

railway guns can be useful for defense not as much for attack since it gives an attack debuff for the opponent and it naturally needs rails to deploy on to the front line and those get damaged as you you move forward. I managed to stop a late game soviet push as Germany by spamming out railway guns since they have a sort AOE in the same way that planes do so if you have green air, CAS, and rail guns even little 10 width divisions can hold off modern tanks. they're stupidly expensive but if you have a lot of chromium and tungsten stockpiled you can build them with no problem and you honestly shouldn't need more than like 10 for the eastern front. I wouldn't prioritize them but if you need to hold the line at all cost and you have the resources they really do help other units punch above their weight.

[@MrNicoJac]

Realistically, no. You're better off putting those resources into other things. Just a bigger bang for your buck.

[@Bzerka333]

Is there ever a reason to use anti tank guns in single player?

[@fireiron369]

Support AT will pierce all tanks that the AI will build and that stops them having the armour bonus

[@Nova-jd5hc]

I mainly use them for areas where I wont have tanks avalible, ie, areas I want to deffend

[@thecolafan9057]

is this just for Germany?

[@jt9565]

But wouldn't it be a division vulnerable to medium and heavy tanks?

[@wilkic2]

Build a tank destroyer tank division. This infantry division is good vs infantry and light tanks, which are most enemy divisions. If they have dedicated medium/ heavies just send your tank destroyers to where they’re pushing. Making an infantry division to counter mediums is a waste of IC/combat width on 90% of combats

[@adamvale945]

Feedback try not to make a meta-video any% challenge impossible (gone sexual?)!!!

[@ZiePe]

6:56 reliability doesn't matter??? I thought tanks should have as close to 100% as possible? Or is it that for Rechner tanks it doesn't matter? Why? More reliability=less factories have to be put on tanks, right?

[@12gark]

Reliability importance depend on the number of tanks you have in the division, because what the games uses is an average value for the whole division equipment, including trucks, mec, guns and so on. If you're making a tank division, with hundreds of tanks, go for 100%. If you're making light recon, or flame tanks, with only 15 tanks in a division full with other stuff that has 80% reliability, having 100% or 1% reliability basically changes nothing, having 79% or 81% average reliability is basically the same thing. Same for real space marines, so 1 tank battalion into a big, fat infantry divisions: you just have 40 tanks or something like that, 50% reliability is more than enough.

[@FederationUnabhaengigerSysteme]

My Tanks must always be 10kmh

[@baseditalian03]

isnt reseriching everything just stupid? when showing a template in particular

[@lochnessmonster5149]

Every division should be combined arms unless it's purely for defensive purposes.

[@jhbBouwmeester]

I do not understand why you want an all round division. So I do not have a CW for everything but based on the keypoints I want to be good at. 27 suggests that you will have to fight in mountains and marshes too.

[@pocketgroyper9301]

Its because people are lazy and don't want to have to think about trying to supply and tailor their eco to support multiple different templates.

[@metaparalysis3441]

@@pocketgroyper9301 and army xp is a severe bottleneck to getting a division for every situation

[@Boretheory]

Only I think that using motorised artillery is just better than tanks? They’re more cost effective, faster and most of the time the stats are also better Ps: like seriously with the light version of this strat i can get 1.2k attack it’s quite op