Deep battle

[Bean]

Is deep battle any good or should I always go down the peoples army branch for mass assault?

[drewbstar]

What country are you playing?

[Bean]

Originally posted by drewbstar:

What country are you playing?

Soviet union, but I often pick peoples army as China or south american nations with 1k manpower monthly

[drewbstar]

Originally posted by Bean:

Originally posted by drewbstar:

What country are you playing?

Soviet union, but I often pick peoples army as China or south american nations with 1k manpower monthly

As the Soviets I always switch doctrine. MA as a doctrine isn’t that bad, but GBP is better for defending and SF is better for boosting your soft attack. You don’t need more manpower as the USSR (or China), you need to hold the line until you can build up and push back the Germans.

For China I’ll stick with MA for a little bit, as your focus should also be on upgrading your officer corp/clearing your debuffs which takes EXP. Then I’ll switch to GBP or SF, depending on Japan.

[Bean]

Originally posted by drewbstar:

Originally posted by Bean:

Soviet union, but I often pick peoples army as China or south american nations with 1k manpower monthly

As the Soviets I always switch doctrine. MA as a doctrine isn’t that bad, but GBP is better for defending and SF is better for boosting your soft attack. You don’t need more manpower as the USSR (or China), you need to hold the line until you can build up and push back the Germans.

For China I’ll stick with MA for a little bit, as your focus should also be on upgrading your officer corp/clearing your debuffs which takes EXP. Then I’ll switch to GBP or SF, depending on Japan.

What is MA good for then? I can see it has pretty good tactics in it and a bit of supply reduction.

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Anything can be good if properly supported, Deep Battle isn't bad but it's just sort of the wildcard/oddball of the doctrines. USSR is probably one of the best candidates for the doctrine although. The effects it gives are rather relevant to the USSR assuming a historical playthrough. Although, some other doctrines are better so it's good but has better options.

In reality, as USSR you can really do any type of build due to it's unique position as being able to Roach with mountains of infantry, Mobilize Tanks, Entrench, etc.

[Mack]

In singleplayer it doesn't matter as long as you still build some kind of good offensive unit and don't neglect your air support.

I always use deep battle for USSR Larp, Mobile for German Larp, usually go Battleplan if I'm using a smaller country who can't afford armour, and if it's a nation that can really invest into arty and I want to play them as infantry, Firepower.

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Originally posted by Bean:

What is MA good for then? I can see it has pretty good tactics in it and a bit of supply reduction.

Deep Battle in particular is an interesting combination of multiple factors that's hard to describe entirely concretely. It is mostly focused around a combination of strategic factors with some tactical factors splintered in.

Namely, you get:
A decent decrease in supply consumption (strategic value)
A massive amount of reactionary capabilities and later offensive capability in the form of reinforce rate (strategic/tactical)
A mild bonus to planning (strategic/tactical)
An infantry combat width reduction (strategic)
Buffs to tanks (tactical)

Basically, the focus is almost custom tailored to the USSR as it helps manage supply concerns, provides a bend-don't-break defensive style with reinforce rate that bolsters a future offensive, buffs infantry in a unique way via allowing higher stats through high inf count divs, and later on provides the means for a counter offensive via tanks.

The reason it's so very peculiar to the USSR is not many other nations share factors important for the doctrine:

-A large frontline that demands supply needs and demands more then potentially purely tactical buffs.

-The ability to mass recruit infantry to bolster stats via human waves.

-The ability to do the former and still build proper tanks on top of that considering the need for a trifecta of resources, research, and manpower.

- The later parts of the USSR tree in particular really bolster the philosophy of this focus (particularly the military buffs part of the tree).

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Originally posted by Mack:

In singleplayer it doesn't matter as long as you still build some kind of good offensive unit and don't neglect your air support.

I always use deep battle for USSR Larp, Mobile for German Larp, usually go Battleplan if I'm using a smaller country who can't afford armour, and if it's a nation that can really invest into arty and I want to play them as infantry, Firepower.

Tbf you can basically ignore air too in most cases with div AA.

[zeeb]

Originally posted by Bean:

Originally posted by drewbstar:

As the Soviets I always switch doctrine. MA as a doctrine isn’t that bad, but GBP is better for defending and SF is better for boosting your soft attack. You don’t need more manpower as the USSR (or China), you need to hold the line until you can build up and push back the Germans.

For China I’ll stick with MA for a little bit, as your focus should also be on upgrading your officer corp/clearing your debuffs which takes EXP. Then I’ll switch to GBP or SF, depending on Japan.

What is MA good for then?

Nothing. Not when you can use SF.

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Originally posted by zeeb:

Originally posted by Bean:

What is MA good for then?

Nothing. Not when you can use SF.

That's probably the weakest choice as far as the USSR is concerned. Still doesn't mean it's a bad choice however. SF is sorta the best all rounder doctrine but it's buffs are less relevant for USSR then a specialization in Roach or tanks.

[zeeb]

Originally posted by Unpatchable Luigi:

Originally posted by zeeb:

Nothing. Not when you can use SF.

That's probably the weakest choice as far as the USSR is concerned. Still doesn't mean it's a bad choice however. SF is sorta the best all rounder doctrine but it's buffs are less relevant for USSR then a specialization in Roach or tanks.

What is the unit that you will have the most of? Infantry.
What does SF do? It severely boosts infantry.

It might come online later as USSR, but when it does it kicks ass.
You always want to sacrifice early game in favor of late game. Sacrificing late game for early game is just disastrous, it just means you'll get outpaced.

[FreZZy]

Originally posted by zeeb:

Originally posted by Unpatchable Luigi:

That's probably the weakest choice as far as the USSR is concerned. Still doesn't mean it's a bad choice however. SF is sorta the best all rounder doctrine but it's buffs are less relevant for USSR then a specialization in Roach or tanks.

What is the unit that you will have the most of? Infantry.
What does SF do? It severely boosts infantry.

It might come online later as USSR, but when it does it kicks ass.
You always want to sacrifice early game in favor of late game. Sacrificing late game for early game is just disastrous, it just means you'll get outpaced.

Not sure what "sacrificing late game for early" supposed to mean.

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Originally posted by zeeb:

Originally posted by Unpatchable Luigi:

That's probably the weakest choice as far as the USSR is concerned. Still doesn't mean it's a bad choice however. SF is sorta the best all rounder doctrine but it's buffs are less relevant for USSR then a specialization in Roach or tanks.

What is the unit that you will have the most of? Infantry.
What does SF do? It severely boosts infantry.

It might come online later as USSR, but when it does it kicks ass.
You always want to sacrifice early game in favor of late game. Sacrificing late game for early game is just disastrous, it just means you'll get outpaced.

The buffs it provides are far less utilizable for a front like Barb. It does buff infantry org and def but the other relevant infantry buffs are not that desirable such as Arty improvements. Elite infantry will really struggle to encircle and have logistical issues (although vs AI you wont see this as much as you will steam role before a stalemate sets often times). Tanks excel far better for the large front in general.

[velvetcrabman]

It's pretty situational really, everything depends on the style you chose to play, best bet is to just mess about, experiment and see what works for you as an individual.

Don't be afraid to change doctrines as mentioned above as the strategic situation changes.

Just to throw a hat in the ring, Russia on Mobile Warfare with fast tanks and fully tooled up mountaineers in vast numbers is great fun.

[Unpatchable Luigi]

Originally posted by velvetcrabman:

It's pretty situational really, everything depends on the style you chose to play, best bet is to just mess about, experiment and see what works for you as an individual.

Don't be afraid to change doctrines as mentioned above as the strategic situation changes.

Just to throw a hat in the ring, Russia on Mobile Warfare with fast tanks and fully tooled up mountaineers in vast numbers is great fun.

MW tank USSR is very chad indeed