Tell me about Difficulty

[Epperaliant]

That was very detailed, thank you.

[StuccoFresco]

About force composition, what do you guys suggest?
I know this probably varies between different campaigns, but generally speaking what's a good infantry/armor/support ratio?

About recon, in panzer corps 1 it was essentially a wasted slot, as you could easily scout with tanks/planes and then reload the game.
I read that in Panzer Corps 2 recon gives real combat bonuses. How does it work here?

Campaigns will alter any composition massively. You will want substantially less armor fighting in Burma in a bunch of rugged jungle than in Eastern Europe with a bunch of woods and flat lands and marsh. Island landings can make use of a little armor, but you won't want as much as you'll want marines.

I personally think armor is extremely weak and bring the minimum necessary. For me in the Soviet campaigns that meant 1x heavy tank (later ISU) for each infantry group and 2x medium tanks for the mechanized group for four tanks total, two of which were mostly fighting as artillery. This allowed me to strike a good balance between the need for a fast moving mechanized formation to maneuver at the operational level and the need for the workhorse units -- infantry, artillery and support weapons.

Land recon is IMO essential. Many units -- snipers, bunkers, most infantry, ATG, mines -- cannot be detected by air recon and they make up the bulk of the forces you will be fighting in many campaigns. Land recon also has the quick retreat ability that allows it to absorb hits from the heaviest of tanks while taking only 1 or 2 dmg which is fantastic. In addition the recon ability to double move and ignore supply allows it to work its way around an enemy defensive position giving you the very nice mass attack bonus from the rear as well as the ability to hit artillery or chase down weakened units. Finally land recon is a mechanical unit, meaning it will easily defeat any early game infantry in the open and even late game will handle itself competently. The downside of land recon is that it is very much road bound and on maps with lots of difficult terrain it can struggle. I always bring one for my mechanized group and if I can fit in 1 for each of my infantry groups I will as well. They also happen to be supremely CP efficient although unfortunately the req cost of reinforcement is higher than I'd like.

In campaigns with lots of enemy tanks -- the Soviet ones in particular -- you will absolutely want an anti-tank gun for every single one of your groups. I would always and everywhere recommend using the more mobile 2 movement ATGs over the sluggish 1 movement ones. I also always take my infantry ATGs dismounted as they can keep up just fine along a road and if there isn't a road you won't be desperate for them anyway because you'll probably have plenty of difficult terrain or forest to ensure your infantry are fighting well against tanks. I do recommend bringing a self propelled ATG for your mechanized groups as tanks and mounted infantry are too fast and mobile for even a towed ATG to keep up, but otherwise I think these units are overkill in most cases due to the high CP cost.

Another situational but very valuable unit is the AA gun. In some campaigns -- the Soviet and Finnish campaigns in particular -- you will not have the option of seizing control of the skies without paying an unaffordable price and giving up all your strike capability. In these situations, AA makes all the difference. I strongly prefer the 40mm caliber AA with 2 foot movement for infantry formations and the same caliber AA self propelled on a truck or mechanized platform for mechanized formations. These calibers typically perform the best against light enemy aircraft, the bulk of targets. You can go through the entire first Soviet campaign with only two fighters while still dominating the sky even on the hardest difficulty through proper use of positioning and AA. In other campaigns -- UK in Burma, US to an extent -- you'll thoroughly dominate the the skies with superior planes or will be fighting over open water where AA isn't accessible.

Infantry is of course the most important unit in the fight and the least understood IMO. It is exceedingly terrain dependent and a good eye for terrain will make the difference between infantry that loses 0-7 to enemy armor and the same infantry winning 2-1 against the same armor. The key element here is the difference in mech attack -- 50% or more! -- for infantry in close terrain (woods, cities, jungles, difficult terrain) and the reduction in the enemy attack modifier alongside the immense benefits of entrenchment (a scaling 0-10 modifier that will make all the difference). Generally your best bet in most non-jungle terrain is the standard infantry, and even in jungle campaigns (where a marine complement is helpful) you will want standard infantry for a good chunk of the fighting as they perform better against enemy armor and are much cheaper to reinforce. You will want a mechanized heavy infantry for your armored group as the light mortar it brings is very helpful and it has by far the best open ground performance against enemy armor, but the high CP cost (that of a medium tank) and low foot mobility means it is generally a poor mesh with foot mobile formations. Engineers are also key as they do 7 damage to entrenchment and have very low reinforce cost, allowing them to do the work of three rounds of artillery bombardment by a siege gun in a single turn. They can also clear mines, lay pontoon bridges, speed the entrenchment of nearby units, lay mines, inflict efficiency damage and -- a niche use -- repair the supply output of cities/airfields that have been hit by strategic bombers. Engineers are your utility knife.

Artillery is another vital unit, and here a close reading of the unit statistics is in order. A novice doing unit comparison through hover will only see 0% cover values compared. These values differ little between artillery pieces and are exceedingly uninstructive. However a more experienced player will note that small caliber artillery typically has poor soft attack values in 100% cover terrain, as much as 60-70% lower than their 0% cover values! Therefore small caliber artillery is usually of minimal use in attacking infantry dug into cover and should not be used against those targets (engineers will help here). Instead it performs exceedingly well in the job of suppressing enemy units in the open, where its values are usually almost exactly those of heavier artillery. Therefore artillery should be selected to cover the needs of the formation! For a mechanized formation that needs to move quickly and will generally fight in the open, siege artillery is of little use, while self propelled lighter guns will do just fine at suppressing enemy artillery or AA and you can simply use engineers to crack the fortified enemy defender and attack! By contrast for slower moving infantry formations siege guns are much more valuable as most of their fighting will occur in close terrain against dug in enemies while the need for speed is not at nearly so much of a premium.

Attacking enemy efficiency is a key part of the franchise and will make an enormous difference in the ability of your own and enemy units to fight. A max strength unit that is at 2 efficiency is far weaker than a half strength unit at max efficiency and will lose terribly to it! Therefore units like artillery, engineers, flame tanks and strategic bombers that attack efficiency are all critical. Tanks that can fight both direct and indirect (like the Calliope and ISU series) are FANTASTIC support for infantry formations.

In general I structure as follows, adding support units based on the needs of the scenario. Note that this is the OOB I hit mid campaign usually, not the one I start with as CP is limited early and gradually expands over the course of a campaign.

2x Footmobile Formation
Mission: capture heavily entrenched areas, when necessary fight enemy armor formations
Avoids: open terrain
* 2-3x foot infantry
* 1x short range siege artillery (at least 4 range, at least 2 damage to entrenchment, best performance vs entrenched units)
* (scen dependent) 1x AA (prefer 2 movement, prefer footmobile)
* (scen dependent) 1x AT (prefer 2 movement, prefer footmobile, prefer AT+ART)
* (if CP permits) 1x Tank (prefer TANK+ART)
* (if CP permits) 1x ENG

1x Mechanized Formation
Mission: move quickly to capture distant objectives
Avoids: densely forested terrain, lots of hills/mountains, dense urban areas
* 2x Tank (prefer medium, 5-6 CP, best in class)
* 1x Recon (prefer best combat stats)
* 1x Heavy Infantry (motorized or mechanized)
* 1x Engineer (motorized or mechanized)
* 1x ART (prefer self propelled or if unavailable longest range)
* (scen dependent) 1x SP AT (prefer medium, prefer AT + ART)
* (scen dependent) 1x SP AA (prefer mechanized)
In jungle heavy scenarios or scenarios with frequent landings I will often have 2-3x Marines that I will sub in to other combat formations.

Absolutely excellent post.

[Epperaliant]

Started the Tutorial, got some misc. questions:

1) I completed the 1st tutorial mission in 28 turns, yet primary objective was to capture in 25 and I still had "objective accomplished": See pic. Did I miss some rewards?


2) Ships: how can I tell the class they belong to? All I read is their name.

3) Is it ok to suffer some casualties on your core in Very Hard? Nothing dramatic, but is field reinforcing a "doable" thing or am I going to get bankrupted? How much "wiggle room" must I have in tolerating casualties?

4) Specialization...Should I get the Ambulance thing? Description is not really clear. Perhaps it would be better to get the Infantry Training?

5) Any suggestion for core buildings? Stuff than is mandatory and stuff that should be avoided? For example, are Engineers as good as in Panzer Corps?

6)Transports for drawn artillery...mandatory I suppose, because it's 1 hex per turn. Also, does range influence damage and enemy efficiency reduction?

[Erik2]

2) The default ship names 'give away' their class, like 'DD name' or 'CL name'
3) You will suffer casualties and it costs resources to repair. hit R for normal repair. E is for Elite repair, costs more and is usually not worth it (depends on unit type).
4) The Medic spec is really weak, go for Infantry (or tank or fighter) training as this adds 1 experience start to the unit purchased.
5) There have been plenty discussions on cores here. Depends on the theater you're fighting (terrain). Basically I think it is sound to have a varied force; mainly infantry, but add engineer, artillery, AT/tank and AA (preferably AT-switchable) and a recon unit.
6) Transports are also nice for engineers and heavy infantry. I don't think range influence efficiency damage.

[Epperaliant]

Thanks,

Any idea on how I didn't failed the objective despite finishing after the turn limit?

[GabeKnight]

Any idea on how I didn't failed the objective despite finishing after the turn limit?

Because it makes no sense IMO.
Maybe as secondary objective, but not as primary.

I don't know that the devs were actually thinking here, but this objective's not linked to any specific turn anyway.

[Epperaliant]

Cool, as long as I didn't miss any reward I'm fine with that.

Anyway, game is really tough and I noticed that the RNG is very limited, most predictions end up true.
I guess efficiency reduction is really the best way to go, enemy troops really became inoffensive when pounded enough.
I even tried to cut off enemies from supply, but guess that the villages were enough to support those small pockets of enemies.

[Epperaliant]

Ok, I am half away through the second Tutorial mission.

So far it's manageable, I still got plenty of turns and suffered very low casualties, especially on my core. Already conquered the first half of the big island.
The key is that I got many ships to bombard enemy troops and lower their efficiency, otherwise it would have been a bloodbath.

I seriously need to get some artillery. I got awarded one at the start but forgot to equip it with transports, so its incredibly slow. Can I add it in-mission? How? Is that more expensive than doing that in the beginning?
I also noticed that I got awarded more commands points, so I could buy the Artillery during the mission...is this going to be more expensive than outside-mission buying?

Finally, a couple of technical questions:
-is there some way to set a default zoom? I hate having to re-adjust with every reload.

-is there any way to disable the mission recap that appears at the beginning of every turn?

[Erik2]

You can add transport to a unit if it has not moved/attacked this turn. Hit short-cut U.
Note that you need some resources (30 for truck I think) and at least 1 available command point.
The unit cost is the same wether you purchase during a turn or in the deployment phase.

There's a variable.txt file in the main installation Content/Data folder.
You can set the following zoom values:

// Camera zoom limits
defaultZoomLevel = 30
defaultMinZoom = 15
defaultMaxZoom = 67
defaultMaxZoomEditor = 100

[Epperaliant]

Very clear, thanks

[Epperaliant]

Completed the second scenario, it has been a good fight and I am glad I started with hardest mode, otherwise it would have really been too easy.


I have a question:
I know I can export my tutorial core in the US campaign. I suppose that I won't get to keep all the earned requisition, so it would make sense go crazy with upgrades and spend everything, right?

Edit: I am also having some trouble with the naval combat.
I know the mechanics but I see that ships do not get suppressed by cannon fire, so every engagement ends up with considerable losses. How do you usually approach naval battles?

[Epperaliant]

I have a question:

Is it ok on early scenarios to spend almost the entire in-mission income to replenish casualties on Hardest mode?
So far I see that the income trickles very slowly and I can barely afford to keep my early core in combat conditions.

[prestidigitation]

With ships you generally want to keep them moving at max speed and at the greatest distance possible from the enemy. This minimizes incoming damage and in ship fighting minimizing incoming damage is more important than maximizing outgoing damage.

You should also have lots of destroyers to screen heavier ships, otherwise you’re begging for a torpedo.

IF you go in for a torpedo attack with destroyers, only do it if the enemy is already low on strength as a finishing move or you have overwhelming strength and can alpha strike them.

I largely prefer to keep ships out of range of the enemy where possible and to rely on aviation to smash them up before moving the shooters into range to finish the job. Weakened ships move slower — so take more damage — and can’t maneuver into optimal firing positions.

With carriers, you generally want 1x fighter, 1x dive bomber, 1x torpedo. Dive bombers do best on destroyers and carriers, torpedoes do best on battleships and carriers. Both kinda suck against cruisers.

I have a question:

Is it ok on early scenarios to spend almost the entire in-mission income to replenish casualties on Hardest mode?
So far I see that the income trickles very slowly and I can barely afford to keep my early core in combat conditions.

This is generally a bad sign, it’s ok in some campaigns — Allies Defiant and the first Soviet campaign are pretty stingy — but the US Pacific campaign gives you oodles of cash for those ships.

[stormbringer3]

Great naval warfare tips! Which is the better tactic, putting a lot of damage on one ship or putting 1-2 damage on mutiple ships?
Thanks.

[prestidigitation]

Great naval warfare tips! Which is the better tactic, putting a lot of damage on one ship or putting 1-2 damage on mutiple ships?
Thanks.

They can still do damage when weak so finishing them off is usually best

[Epperaliant]

So, I am close to complete Morning Sun and I have to say on difficulty IV it has been a cakewalk, almost too easy. I am tempted to switch to V.

Is that normal for that campaign? I hope future ones will be harder.

[prestidigitation]

So, I am close to complete Morning Sun and I have to say on difficulty IV it has been a cakewalk, almost too easy. I am tempted to switch to V.

Is that normal for that campaign? I hope future ones will be harder.

Yeah Morning Sun is very easy, it’s a prequel campaign against a fairly weak foe. Lots of fun early war units but not a huge amount of challenge.

The first Soviet campaign will put you through your paces though!

[Epperaliant]

I felt guilty and I decided to play the USA campaign again on the hardest mode.

So far, Warplan Orange went perfectly smooth with close to zero losses to core, I really got much better with experience.
Now, I'll tackle my old nemesis, Bataan!

[Epperaliant]

...and Bataan is done on Hardest difficulty.

It was still by far the toughest scenario in the whole US campaign, but on this replay I did it with limited losses.

[Epperaliant]

Finished the US campaign and I am at Melbourne in the Japanese one...difficulty V, sitting on 4000+ prestige!!!
I guess I got the hang of the game by now, and I am glad I picked the hardest.

Can't wait to try the newer dlc campaigns, I read that they are much harder!