Is there any reason to not choose Superior Firepower over GBP/Mass Assault doctrines?

[PuttBlug]

I was playing as France building up my industry to supply my space marines so I could hold off Germany and Italy and wanted to try GBP instead of SF for once, just so I could see if I'm missing something.

The result was pretty dissapointing, both my casualties were higher and I didn't inflict nearly as much as I did by choosing SF in other games. So what do you guys think of GBP, does it seem useless to you too or is it good for specific nations?

[LazyPandas]

Grand Battleplan is better for static fronts with slow pushes and a lot of defending in trench style warfare. You get much higher entrenchment bonuses which leads to higher defensive values and if you wait until your planning bonus reaches max then you have much higher attack values than even Superior Firepower. I'm actually suprised you did worse, since GBP is actually the better tree for that situation imo.

Mass assault is kind of inferior except for maybe china or if you're doing some wierd 10 width infantry rotation where you move divisions in and out of combat. The other 3 trees are suprisingly balanced.

[RalphRoberts]

GBP is pretty mediocre, in my experience. The planning bonus and increased entrenchment essentially means you have very stable and immobile borders, but the lack of soft attack boosts means you semm to deal less kills to the enemy when you do attack.

Mass Assault is easily the weakest doctrine, having no signficant bonuses that put it ahead of the other three doctrines. Even the manpower boost it gives is available under Mobile Warfare Doctrine.

[Zsrai]

GBP is decent if you have a solid manpower pool but a weak industrial base; you can field a lot of divisions but can't fill them all with Artillery (no 7/2, just 10 Inf and Support Arty). You still get solid bonuses and can field a full army. This is especially true as France or even the USSR, when you can just fortify and hold a line as you bleed out the enemy.

MA is basically good for the PRC, since you have loads of troops and basically zero industry. You just rotate troops in and out with no support brigades at all. It's not even good for the USSR, since GBP does the job of holding the line better and you have enough industry to actually make some support equipment, arty, and tanks.

SF is great in pretty much every other case, with MW being better if you know you have a ton of industry and want to focus on tanks and motorized/mechanized.

[football5680]

I don't really see a situation where Grand Battleplan would be a better option than another doctrine. Superior Firepower is probably the best overall, Mobile Warfare is great if you are making a lot of tanks or mechanized infantry, and Mass assault is viable if all you can produce is infantry.

At maximum planning, Grand Battleplan does have better soft and hard attack, as well as breakthrough but you begin to lose your planning when you begin the attack and after a few days, it will fall below what you would have had if you went with Superior Firepower.

[Zsrai]

Originally posted by Deus Vult:

I don't really see a situation where Grand Battleplan would be a better option than another doctrine. Superior Firepower is probably the best overall, Mobile Warfare is great if you are making a lot of tanks or mechanized infantry, and Mass assault is viable if all you can produce is infantry.

At maximum planning, Grand Battleplan does have better soft and hard attack, as well as breakthrough but you begin to lose your planning when you begin the attack and after a few days, it will fall below what you would have had if you went with Superior Firepower.

GBP is better if you're going to keep that front line solid because you're on defense. You don't lose the planning that way, IIRC. It's basically good for the USSR and (maybe) France if your plan is to turtle up and let the Germans kill themselves on a fortified front line while you just hang tight and wait for them to run out of manpower and equipment. Otherwise, yeah Superior Firepower is the way to go.