Matrix Games Forums

In my previous games of ATG, when the choise stood between airforce and armoured vehicles I always primarily opted for the strong airforce against the AI. I figured that because everything is limited by fuel, I should put the weight of my resources on infantry, mortars and artillery for attacking and dedicate my airforce to pick of high value targets such as artillery and HQs, tanks was mainly used for frontline antitank duty. Because of this, I always got one airplane factory, one tank factory and 2 artillery factories on 5-6 cities.

Then I started fighting AI+ (No magic from me, just being careful in choosing starting position)

Something you'll notice when fighting the AI+ is the HUGE stacks of airplanes it gets. It was impossible for me to fight for airsupremacy, so I deviced a new plan. I stopped building divebombers entirely, focusing only on fighters. Not flying the airplaens saves up a lot of fuel. This fuel can be used, among other things, to motorize artillery to regain some of the same capabilities as the divebomber have.

The enemy aircraft cant be dealt with in the air, I let my two artillery factories produce flaks. If you have factories building 16 flaks per turn, after a while, the enemy will be reluctant to use even a 100+ airstack.

Now I'm left with the topic of this discussion: what tanks should I be building and how should I use them? The enemy is fielding mostly infantry, armoured cars and some light tanks. Optimally I should then use light tanks because of the efficency against that mix and later on introduce highly moble tankdestroyer units to deal with anything heavier. I am, however trapped with the idea that the tank is primarely a antitank weapon and is not designed to displace infantry. I therefore prefer the medium tank, mostly because of the increased survivability.

I have started to seperate my HQs according to type, I fill a HQ with 80 staff and I then let it be. Infantry HQs can become quite extensive (800 inf if I'm not incorrect). The dwarfing only really begins as artillery is added. I therefore add artillery until the HQ drops to 100% staff and then create another HQ to add artillery to. The benefit of this becomes apparent in the staff bonus. In my current game, I have staff II with 100exp, these grants a 153% combat bonus.

Early in the game I deploy singleton units with armoured elements in my infantry armies, just to get offencive antitank units out. Later in the game I try to do a more focused effort. I create a new HQ channels a lot of tanks and some infantry in there, The 80 staff is about enough for 4 beastly armoured units, flak and a motorized artillery unit. Such a army is capable of doing serious damage despite its size.

Finally I'd like to say that I once again fallen in love with the halftrack, I was doubtful it was worth the extra resorces and then I discovered it's main advantage over the truck: it can be produced in a factory! If you're building trucks you will always have to elect to not build infantry, pps or supplies
, all of which are very desireable. It is often far easier no not build tanks for a turn for mobilization rather than to not build infantry. It is also tracked, that way you avoid the disadvantages of having mixed movment types in a unit

I didn't really speak much of tanks here did I? More about resorse management and organisational structure. Very well, maybe I should change the title of the tread.

I put 100 staff in a headquarters. My Corps are 3 Inf Units, 2 armor units and an artillery OR 3 armor units and 2 Mech units and one Artillery.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

I put 100 staff in a headquarters. My Corps are 3 Inf Units, 2 armor units and an artillery OR 3 armor units and 2 Mech units and one Artillery.

Twotribes - what do you mean by units? Could you post a screenshot depicting the contents of a Corps as you describe? I'm picturing one counter containing 3 inf, 2 armor and 1 artillery and I just can't see the benefit; you lose the mobility of the armor, etc. I'm certain that isn't what you are describing but I can't imagine how you would utilize separate counters and still get any bonus for combined arms.

I mean divisions. 3 Infantry means 3 divisions. 2 Armor means 2 armor divisions.

I posted elsewhere what my usual division size is though I am experimenting with 50 stack divisions now.

@ Ande
 
"...I have started to seperate my HQs according to type, I fill a HQ with 80 staff and I then let it be. Infantry HQs can become quite extensive (800 inf if I'm not incorrect). The dwarfing only really begins as artillery is added. I therefore add artillery until the HQ drops to 100% staff and then create another HQ to add artillery to. The benefit of this becomes apparent in the staff bonus. In my current game, I have staff II with 100exp, these grants a 153% combat bonus..."
 
Now that's a useful tip if there ever was one! Thanks. I feel rather silly not to have thought of that myself. Because up till now I created HQ's specifically for a part of the front, with a special purpose; say take that part of the island/continent/whatever. If the task was bigger than I anticipated I send more and more Staff to that HQ... thereby lowering all the time the Staff Exp. [:(] 
With your idea however one can prevent that from happening. Create a HQ, say with 50/100/150 Staff and stick with that number Never send more Staff to it, and see that Exp rising. If that part of the frontline needs more troops you have to create another HQ. Yes there will be the risk of units from both HQ's attacking the same hex, thereby lowering the bonus from a multi-hex attack, but I think the advantages of your system outweigh the disadvantages.
I will try this out the next couple of games, many thanks. [&o]
 

On the topic of staff levels, I've noticed a major difference between having 50 staff and 100 staff.  The latter takes a very long time to get XP, whereas the former gains XP very quickly.  In my games, I am experimenting with combinations of large HQs and small, elite assault HQs; or simply trying to stick to several small HQs and avoiding the larger corps entirely.