Mechanized vs Motorized vs Tanks vs Infantry Spam

[marat1793]

So lets say your one of the countries with a large amount of manpower, and have a decent industrial base.

First of all: what the ♥♥♥♥ is the point to motorized/mechanized? And what sets the two apart? They don't seem to have any distinct advantage over raw infantry other than being somewhat faster. But for that same purpose you could use light tanks couldn't you? And it would have better survivability right?

Then tanks: Tanks are expensive to make, whereas infantry equipment is like dirt cheap. So remember, in this scenario you have a large amount of manpower(China or India or something like that), so what the ♥♥♥♥ is the point of tanks? Just swarm and surround. Get mass assault and you should pretty much be fine right? You can out-spam any and all plans they try to make. I feel like quantity over quality in this game. Slap in some anti-tank and you should be totally set right?

[Degenerate Trap]

From what I usually field my army with, and fight them with, mass assault doctrine only works when you have enough men to spare in a prolonged war where the enemy would run out of man power before you do. However you'll lose against an outnumbered enemy if he spear headed through your line and counter surround you with his 24 tanks/mechanized units.

Motorized units are like faster infantry while mechanized unit in the late game are there to support your medium/heavy tanks. Early games should have unites of mechanized infantry with light tanks in your 24s. Mid game should focus on medium tanks and mechanized if you have the power to. Late game would be heavy tanks, medium tanks and mechanized 24s.

As for the above 24s, just mass infantry/ mountaineers/motorized. They are there to hold the line while the 24s do the real battles. There are differents between doctrines with the Mass Assault being the weakest in my opinion and should only be use when you have a lot of base manpower but have no industrial capacity at all. But using it if you think . Defensive doctrine people like France, UK, Ita, would use Grand Battle Plan for early defense and mid-late offense. Superior Firepower should be for powerhouse nation such as USA, Late game China, or Russia. Mass Assault is for everyone else who start out weak and want to conquer easy lands before changing their doctrine.

Oh and mobile warfare is also good for weaker nation if they want to to focus on offense but has no industry to build tanks but instead rely on an army of mobile infantry. Other than that, Germany would benefit a lot of their early war with this doctrine, and if they are unstopable in late game, the offensive branch would help them all the way...or if they are forced to defend themselves then the 5% extra manpower and guerrilla tactics helps.

[Benzin]

Mate, with the current state of the games AI right now, it really doestn make much of a difference what you make. AI is so utterly stupid that you could train puppies, and take over the world with that.

[Degenerate Trap]

Sorry..I didn't know that you're talking about pve

[Gebatron]

The usefulness of mechanized is to make divisions harder. They sacrifice some speed for this which makes them good for heavy tanks. These divisions are good for breakthroughs. The advantage to using them instead of light tanks is a higher organization value. The advantage of using faster units is taking advantage of breakthroughs to take strategic points faster. Instead of pushing a whole front you can go straight towards your goals which can significantly shorten conflicts. But at the end of the day you can play howerever you want.