The best tactics for 1.5

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Combination of army :

      1. early stage, militia + fighter bomber

      2. Mid term, militia + fighter + attack bomber + dive bomber + rocket + battleship + destroyer + submarine

      3. Medium tank + motorized infantry + special forces (stealth) + fighter + attack bomber + dive bomber + navy bomber + + rocket + battleship + destroyer + aircraft carrier + submarine

      The key points of the combination are: fighters restrain bombers, bombers restrain others (Tactical bombers restrain infantry and light armor, dive bombers restrain light armor and heavy armor, Navy bombers restrain warships), submarines restrain battleships and aircraft carriers, destroyers restrain submarines, and rockets restrain aircraft (by attacking airports)
    • Upgrade scheme :

      1. attack bombers must be upgraded at each level

      2. The fighter is upgraded according to the level of the opponent

      3. Dive bombers and Navy bombers should be upgraded according to their arms

      4. Tanks do not upgrade

      5. Motorized infantry need to upgrade to level 3 or above then to produce

      6. Destroyers and submarines are not need to upgraded

      7. Aircraft carriers and battleships should be upgraded according to the opposing arms(aircraft and warship)

      8. Special forces do not upgrade

      9. The militia do not upgrade

      Someone can build a self-propelled antiaircraft gun. It can be upgraded to level 2 as well if needed


      There is no need to build any other arms
    • There are actually a few good tips in there, but there is no such thing as "the best tactics". Tactics isn't even the right word, you're referring to strategy. Tactics refers to the maneuvering of troops on the ground to take best advantage of the terrain and other battlefield conditions to win a battle.

      I find your early game advice to be particularly bad. Militia, fighter, bomber? Tactical bombers don't even become available until 11 hours into day 2. I can have level two infantry, upgraded and ready for battle 4 hours before they're even done researching, 8 hours before you even build the first one. Then he'll do 5 damage to my infantry and take 2.3 in return. Tacs are great in the mid to late game, but you need large numbers to be effective early. Interceptors are usually useless in the early game because no one goes air, if you see a neighbor building a bunch of air bases you may want to invest. Militia are quick to build, but slow in the field and they're at a big disadvantage against infantry in urban environments, everyone starts with infantry.
    • You also have to remember SPAA mid to late game as well. They are cheaper in numbers compared to Interceptors and they don't need to refuel as much as well.

      Militia (at least in 1.5) is somewhat useful as cannon fodder and buy enough time for main forces.

      In air-to-ground engagements, I recommend you patrol certain areas such as choke points and naval ports as well (tac, attacker, and naval bombers).

      As for special forces, imo it is very useful for surprise attacks as the defender won't know what direction you are coming from (unless the opposing team has lvl 4 mot. infantry or armored cars) while other forces push behind them.

      As for navy, the battleships can at least be at level 2 or 3 and destroyers and subs at the same level as well. Best for coastal offense and naval defense.
      Ciro702

      Moderator
      EN Community Support | Bytro Labs Gmbh




      "Wonder what this button does"
      -some unlucky soul
    • I'm guessing you are talking about 1.5 here but I'll try to make my comments applicable to both.

      Every player does things differently of course but my experience is that by building a big airforce in the beginning you suffer with your economy later on. This because planes are quite expensive and also you need to build not only the planes itself but also their airstrips in order for them to move around. This means that there are fewer resources invested into growing your economy.

      Also neither of your builds protect very well from tanks, in the early game having a couple of anti-tank guns is not a bad idea. If you play 1.5 and are playing the comitern doctrine I would dare even call them manditory.

      Also, including militia in your standard build really does not take into account what sort of terrain is around you. Factoring in the terrain you are in is crucial though. So I suppose the idea is not bad, but its definitely not a strategy that will always guarantee succes. Like Spite said, There is no such thing as ''the best'' tactics or build que.
    • I find infantry/ordnance to be the most effective in the early game, then adding armor and air forces starting around day 3. I usually invest heavily in industry in the early game, which eats up a lot of metal/oil/rare that you need for armor/air/naval production. You can get a lot of work done with your starting army by concentrating and supporting with artillery. If your rival goes tank, build AT. If your rival goes air, build AA.

      Most of the time the infantry/ordnance army is so successful that building a large armored force is not necessary, but you should always adjust your army composition based on the composition of your opponents. Some people just like building tanks I guess, and they're absolutely effective, but they struggle in rough terrain and urban environments where infantry/AT/artillery have terrain modifiers. Obviously the infantry force is a bit slower, adding armored cars to the mix offsets this weakness at limited resource and research cost. People rarely defend in depth so there are usually vast swaths of territory to gobble up unopposed. Air forces greatly complement this composition.

      There are a lot of ways to win the game, but the most important thing is to stay flexible. You can't get locked into a strategy, in fact it's often beneficial to show your enemy one look while you're building/gathering something else. If you bring a giant air force into battle at the start of a war, you can bet the enemy is going to start cranking out interceptors and AA. I think that sort of trickery has been decisive for me in a few games where the opponent actually knew what they were doing.
    • Spite_Is_Right wrote:

      you should always adjust your army composition based on the composition of your opponents.
      Yup, doing this well enough wins the game.

      As for trickery goes, if at all possible a player should be able to counter every threat at least on the defence. Meaning a defence against unarmored, light armour, heavy armour and planes. Skip one of these three and you give your enemy a chance to exploit that weakness as can be read in quote from Spite above here.