• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

piratefish

Captain
9 Badges
Aug 8, 2009
480
1
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Iron Cross
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
From your experiences, what do you think is the best way to utilize HQ units?

Typically, I do not stack them with other divisions and tend to keep them out of the front and immediately to the rear in a province where they will bestow benefits to the maximum number of armies/corps on the frontlines.

I have also played a few games where I included HQs in my army stacks, but I am not sure how advisable this is; I never really noticed a difference.

From simple observation, the HQ is practically useless as an attacker, but is tough as nails when defending (especially with an engineer brigade attached, which is my prefered MO).

I would sincerely appreciate your thoughts and observations related to HQs and the most optimum way to deploy them on the battlefield.

Thanks!
 
I basically use them the same way as you, behind the front, but I attach an AA brigade because I have had them bombed a lot. Also, if the HQ unit will not directly participate in a battle, you can use an Old Guard or low skill level general use higher skill level generals to control the battle.
 
Last edited:
I use them too with AA but I have them in Front line duties, commanded by a good General who is going to lead the battle.

Because that way I can attack with more divisions.

Good for Majors.
 
Can someone explain HQ's for me a bit, im sure i dont know everything about them. What benefits do they provide. And when you say you put them behind the front line, wouldnt that only support the province in front of them?
 
HQs provide benefits (bonuses) to all armies/corps/divisions in any province immediately adjacent to the one they occupy. Hence, the wisdom of keeping them in the rear with the gear. They can still bestow the benefits without going into harm's way (they have no real offensive capabilities, but are extremely tough defensive units - I have held off 4 to 5 divisions attacking for a week straight with just a single HQ-engineer brigade, and with hardly any losses to speak of).

That is why I do not include them in the stack I am attacking with - they only use up a slot that is better used by a division with superior offensive capabilities.

For example, if I am attacking with a general I can command 9 divisions without incurring the command penalty (although I will still get a stacking penalty). However, if I position a HQ in the same or an adjacent province, I can then have up to 18 divisions participate in the attack without exceding the general's command limit and getting penalized. In other words, you can effectively double your general's command limits (which, again, is completely separate and unrelated to the stacking penalty). That's why I do not actually include the HQ in the attacking stack; it will count as one of the divisions yet it's offensive capabilities are pathetic when compared to just about any other available land unit. I just don't see the point of puting the coach on the field with the players - he's much more useful on the sidelines instead of taking the position of one of his "scorers".

Anyhow, there are other benefits to using HQs related to ESE, combat effectiveness, etc. But suffice it to say it is well worth while having a HQ in or immediately adjacent to the province from which you are attacking or defending. They are worth the IC, time, and manpower to build.
 
In all my games, I try to create 12 division big armycorps. 1 HQ, 11 infantry divisions. They have brigades in 3-3-3-3 heavy art, light art, eng, at, or aa instead of eng(lack of oil), but also 4-4-4 at, eng/art, aa is effective.
They are the workinghorses of my army. They breakthrough, they handle with the larger enemy units, they attack the forts. During it, my panzers and motorized/mechanized divisions encircle, captures the VP provinces and the airfields. The last can be very effective, no air force during the Barbarossa with only 9 panzer divisions.
 
I have a similar tactic as Turul's, except I have more armies and corps. I utilize Lt. Generals in stacks of 3 (brigaded with L or M armor, L artillery, and engineers 1-1-1), I also have stacks of 5 for generals using similar structure where I double up on the art. and armor, and finally stacks of 7 or more for my field marshalls where I tripple up on the same basic theme with perhaps a specialized division or two like mountain or marines, depending on the type of terrain in which I will be deploying that particular army.

I also use a few armies to create a defensive army corp (using 2 generals with stacks of 9, and 3 or 4 Lt. generals with stacks of 3, all with almost exclusively heavy art. and AA) to secure the flanks and hold key positions while the rest of my army attacks and encircles. Then I strategically place a few garrisons with MPs to help reduce partisan activity and decrease revolt risk/increase ESE.

Lastly, I use around 5 or 6 panzer armies to encircle, capture key provinces and airfields, and to exploit opportunities where speed and overwhelming power are needed. These armies usually consist of 2 generals or field marshalls with up to 9 armored/mechanized/motorized and all brigaded divisions, and 3 or 4 Lt. generals or generals with up to 4 or 5 armored/mechanized with all brigaded divisions. My panzer divisions only have brigades which do not decrease their speed, so any brigade that confers bonuses to attack or defense, but that does not slow my panzer armies down at all is fair game.

My HQs (usually 4 or 5 at most) stay just behind, next to, or in the same provinces as my main forces that I am attacking with, but I rarely ever directly include them in my offensives (for reasons I stated in my post above). I always like to have them very close by to my main forces as they do confer several useful and important benefits, plus, in a pinch, they can hold off several brigaded divisions for days at a time when defending while losing very little org or strength.

As for the airforce, by Barbrossa I usually have 24 interceptors organized into six airforces. At least 3 of these constantly patroll the English Channel to keep allied bombers at bay, while the remainder remind the Soviets who is in control of the skies over the eastern front. I also use 2 airforces of tac bombers (w/ escort fighters attached) of 4 tacs each, and 2 airforces of cas bombers with 4 cas each to punish the soviets and soften them up where necessary. Usually I will also build at least one airforce (again, with 4 wings) of naval bombers to support my navy/bomb convoys. And I am not above using half or more of my minor allies (Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria) airforces to cover western Europe in case any Allied planes do manage to break through my net of interceptors over the English Channel. (I also use parts of their armies to garrison the coast of France, Belgium, and the Netherlands).

So far, this overall approach has proven to be highly effiicient and very effective. I have experimented with more than a dozen different approaches over the last 6 years, and this one seems to me to be the best yet. But I am always open to new ideas and strategies. That is why I love these types of threads the best. I get to learn so much and benefit from the minds and experience of other great players and lovers of strategy. It just doesn't get any better than that!
 
Seems like you gotta build more HQ's than you would have to in HOI2 and AOD because of the larger IC map right? Unless they provide benefits to 2 province away range in IC?
 
Seems like you gotta build more HQ's than you would have to in HOI2 and AOD because of the larger IC map right? Unless they provide benefits to 2 province away range in IC?

the number of HQs correlate more with the number of initial main thrusts as opposed the number of provinces, so I did not revise my building strategy in regards to HQs in IC.
What also makes HQ units unique is that they do not lose strength in land combat (only by air attack or encirclements/surrender) and thus retain any experience in a great way.

Usually I do include them in my "breakthrough forces" (QH+5Inf) with a good general and attach a mobile rocket luncher brigade to the HQ for some offensive capabilities.
Occasionally I also create a Mech-HQ-Corps, in Arm+IC 2Mech+1HQ do get the combined arms bonus and are slightly faster than if combined with regular inf.
E]