Hoi4 combat width no step back Reddit

Join reddit

Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations.

Create an account

r/hoi4

Posted by8 months ago

Archived

Hoi4 combat width no step back Reddit

This thread is archived

New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast

Hoi4 combat width no step back Reddit

level 1

He basically concludes that 10w spam inf to fill up armies (thus getting generals bonuses) is optimum before specialising for Armour etc..

I'm not sure he considers manpower though. I believe smaller armies take a greater % of casualties.

level 2

10 width is not good feedbackIRL explains it. 10w will get shredded by armor and takes a ton of casualties when attacking, so even though you get more supports/soft attack per width it's an extremely inefficient use of IC and manpower.

level 2

Yah they get wiped fast if the ai is hitting hard.

level 1

Rule 5: Taureor investigates every width in depth.

level 1

I love Taureor but this video is not his best, even with all the effort. It should be taken with a pinch of salt.

level 2

yeh I think he ran out of energy at the end.

TL/DR: I did some math to determine the best combat width in the new system. 10, 15, 18, 27 and 41-45 seem to be the best.

EDIT: I made a mistake, the maximum penalty is 33% not 30%. It is now corrected in the pdf and the graphs

So I made some calculations to determine the combat width and made a PDF about this and some graphs. You can find all this in this dropbox link.

One thing I found: Most people think that divisions do not reinforce over combat width. However they reinforce unless battle would go over 20% over combat width, getting a 1.5% penalty for each percent over combat width on both attack and breakthrough. With this knowledge, we can calculate the penalty for each combat width-terrain-attack directions combo and compare them to one another

The maths is explained in depth in the PDF, but the result looks like this:

Hoi4 combat width no step back Reddit

If you find errors in the math or have found something I didn't think of I'm happy to hear your thoughts.

Special thanks to Feedbackgaming who has helped me with the presentation and will release a video discussing my results on his second channel FeedbackIRL today.

Edit: Feedbacks video is live

So there's still some talk on what is and isn't the meta, and that's all well and good. But I have a simple question: How does size difference take effect now?

If you remember back, one of the dev posts talked about combat width, and had a 40 width dog attacking to 20 width dogs, because you know, paradox. It expressly said...

targeting is now changed so that divisions will select targets up to its own width (so a 40w can fire on two 20w), but doing so spreads the damage over them relative to their width

This got brought up in a player lobby, with some saying such and such, and some saying the opposite. Okay....So what does this mean? I tried testing it with a mate and we couldn't get any info out of the system; It does indicate that one 40 width will attack two 20 widths in the same day of combat, but it doesn't show any modifiers for this supposed split. And keeping track of any of that in the soup that is the console is just...No.

So I reach out to you all here: Does anyone know conclusively or even vaguely how this supposed split effects units? Does attacking multiple smaller units evenly split attack stats? Does it effect defense stats as well? Is it a non-adjustable 'debuff', or is it adjustable like how Forts are countered by buffs?

Happy new year!

The way I see it, you have 2 strategies:

  • Adapt your width to the terrain you're expecting to fight in

  • Use the new 'generalist' combat widths (10, 15, 27, 33, 41, 42)

I prefer the first aproach. I'm considering swapping templates after big offensives to better suit new terrain, if you get to an area that's not suited for your widths, but that can be risky as units would lose strenght when swapping to a bigger template, until they get resupplied.

The new generalist widths I mentioned are based on a recent post. It's pretty decent, but is an estimation and isn't perfect (river crossings and combat tactics aren't accounted for).