Yes.
Theoretically yes you could design a division that's really big and support it with a bunch of smaller units to keep the big guy from being targeted. In practice you have no idea what size template the other guy is going to use, and its really hard to micro that type of play. What happens when 2 or 3 of the big divs end up on one tile and the little support divs on another? The little guys fold on the flank and the big guys get encircled and die. Good luck with in battle reinforcing too, the little guys are going to get chewed up and need to be replaced often.
This technique is obviously about microing.
The whole idea is about your big DIV breaking the enemy front very quickly so in practice it's uber-SA uber-breakthrough armoured DIV. It'll inevitably have low org yet it won't need much since it won't be fighting for long.
Yes You have to be at war to take it.
Right-click any nation on the map the bring up that country's diplomacy screen. then press the button on the bottom left for "Show List of Countries."
The divisions are moving to a province while atacking, probably this.
It's probably when you have red rather than yellow line when moving. I've never had a chance to use this bonus but it should be VERY handy.
i find that stats very odd, never see it on a doctrine etc.
Don't really get what you mean by "on a doctrine"
IMHO IT IS quite RL doctrines just applied to HoI4 unrealistic / unhealthy combat model. In a very generic and high level form chess strategy is no different from RL military combat. But don't wanna write a wall of text.Since you mentioned doctrines...
IMHO it's misunderstanding of the deep operations concept. You wrote higher org which in HoI4 terms means units being able to absorb more punishment while still being combat effective and / or being abe to be in combat for longer without crumbling (which is the same thing But RL good "deep operations" are not about being stronger at any given tile or any given time -- hasty defence is always weak. It's about creating such a threat to enemy at higher level that it elects to retreat rather than challenge you at the time time and / or place of your choosing. Deep operations work at any level and the objective is the danger you create should be at higher planning level than yours. I.e. if you're in command at tactical level then by tactical application of force you create an imminent danger at operational-tactical level. Or if you command an operational-tactical level then you do the same but create an imminent danger at operational level. The key is the imminent danger should be created at higher level. Always be at least one level higher. It should pose more risk to meet you heads on than to retreat. And then if you're good you can always keep the enemy off balance turn after turn for as long as your logistics allows. Same as chess, each turn of yours should create more ambiguity / risk of how can potentially hit the enemy next turn. It's how to win big with little direct expenditure of force.
They can't establish much air superiority if that's what you mean. They are only really useful in carrier-versus-carrier combat, where their effectiveness is boosted a lot.
Thanks! It was exactly because of this as I previously merged ships from the Baltic Sea with the ones in Black Sea and Japanese Sea so the Baltic tfs ended up being stuck, immobilising the entire group which now even couldn’t operate in the Black Sea despite already partly being stationed there.
FYI I know another offender -- Persian / Arabian Gulf. Dunno now yet some time ago the Gulf was not a separate sea region though it had the Strait of Hormuz at the entrance. I saw a particular "special situation" -- I controlled both coasts and was the enemy of UK (Kuwait) and Iraq. UK had no land route to supply troops in Kuwait yet the supply convoys were still sneaking through the Stratir of Hormuz by pure magic
Dunno how it might have affected naval invasions and troop transports yet definitely the Strait of Hormuz was one of its kind though.
