Search Results

Sometimes, sure. Usually you're advancing in relatively balanced fashion so your flanks should be too vulnerable. ABs can help, and I don't hate TDs, but I don't think building a strategy around flank protection is best. With ranged units you can always fire while retreating if you're outmatched on a flank.

I don't recommend it. Commandos and HTs have similar strengths (attack vs light armor) so they don't pair particularly well. Looking at just damage output, Commandos give you more attack per manpower, but their HP is less than half of HTs and their armor class (unarmored) is generally weaker than HTs (heavy armor). When paired with HTs, Commandos don't really shore up any weaknesses. You'd be better off spamming HTs. If you want the little bonus attack vs unarmored that commandos supply, go for …

Usually you want to be the one expanding and you'll be attacking more often than defending, so your own tanks are decent for attacking enemy tanks. Anti-tank are fine but require defending, which isn't always an option. Better options are ranged units like artillery and RRG, or maybe attack bombers.

Only on mobile, are you on PC? I see it in my app and don't have any active games.

It'd be nice if list view had a core/non-core toggle

Agree with KR, I don't think your groupings work unless you're strictly looking at damage output. Militia are cleanup crew, revolt prevention, coast guards, and occasionally meat shields / damage absorbers. Infantry can do this but militia do it better. Armored cars are scouts and break-off/rush stacks. Mot inf can do this but AC do it better. LTs can complement the AC rush role with their speed, but mediums and heavies can't because they're too slow. Arty and RA are alternatives to RRG, but RRG…

I was thinking more of an average but yea for sure doctrine would bump some of them up or down relative to other doctrines.

I guess I'll attempt an actual list too A: AA, AC, Int, NB, RRG B: Militia, arty, LT, tac, sub, cruiser, RA C: mot inf, mech inf, SP arty, SPRA, TD, destroyer, battleship, AB D: Inf, AT, SPAA, MT, HT, Carrier, strat, nuke bombers, RFs F: commandos, paras, flying bombs, rockets, nuke rockets Agree with situationality making a big difference

I think they've actually managed to build at least one of every unit type. Impressive.

Seems reasonable. I'd bump militia, AA, AC, HT, nav bomber, and RA up a level. I'd drop infantry, Mot Inf, tac bomber, all ships, and nuke bomber a level or two. RFs are situational, probably only for comintern, but are useful when needed.

Woof. I love the one single heavy tank thrown in there, classic. Despite your smaller army I think you'll be able to beat them, the only question is when to attack. Good luck

Quote from DxC: “Banned for what? Can someone summarize what jub posted? ” Haha woops, I see your confusion. I was the first response to OP's complaining about mods, but decided I didn't want to get involved. My comment was about their user name, not their post. They must have gotten banned later and now it looks like I was OP.

Oof, terrible stack. Good sign for you.

I've seen reports in the discord of always-visible subs and naval units unable to spot non-stealth ground units, but I don't have an active game to test that for specifics Edit: I see you've already mentioned the subs issue in this thread too

[deleted, I don't feel like getting into it]

I disagree that beating a coalition requires gold, but agree that it's often easier to beat a coalition if you can attack them one at a time rather than being surrounded. I haven't played a 22 in a long time but I recall them being mostly noobs and inactives, so I don't think there's much to fear from coalitions or from being sandwiched. Probably different if you're playing AvAs.

You just have to be the one doing the attacking There's always a tradeoff. Starting from a corner might seem like it's easier to defend, but it's harder to expand and makes morale management harder later in the game. I think new players overemphasize Day 1 safety and don't think about mid/late game considerations. For WaW some countries are clearly better than others, based on layout, resources, province quantity, etc. Hard to make a blanket statement about which one is best, may depend on prefe…

Quote from Fox-Company: “Try winning a WaW with only Cruisers, Subs, and Destroyers as your navy, tell me how that goes, play a Coastal/Navy oriented country, if you insist that Cruisers are better then surely this is no problem, i would honestly and non-sarcastically would like you to show me how you would do it. ” It's a topic for another thread, but navies are absolutely not required to win a WAW and can often be a waste of resources. Using battleships almost always requires keeping destroyer…

Would it be possible to get the actual numbers for some of these changes? The detailed release notes don't say how much infantry costs have been decreased, etc

Welp this analysis might already be useless after today's balancing changes haha