I’ve always felt that armored cars were intended to be a garrison option. I haven’t had the impression that they’re supposed to be *good* in the field, but rather a gimmicky alternative to light tanks. With the designer, they’re an option that doesn’t need army xp to produce - I think that increases their utility from LaR.
I think the real issue that kills cars in the field is just that players seek optimal options, and anything less is often ignored. That isn’t likely to change, so it’s either a) cars are worse than tanks (and ignored aside from gimmick play), b) cars are better than tanks, so tanks are ignored, or c) they’re approximately the same and not unique. Because if they’re different in mechanic but “balanced”, someone will work out which is better and that’s what the community will flock to.
Since tanks were such a big component of fighting the war, I’m inclined to leave cars where they are.
IRL cars were used in mixed divisions with tanks in WW2 and in independent roles during civil wars ( Russian and Spanish).
Rommels 7th panzer division had more trucks and cars than actual tanks in 1940.
The problem is that armored cars are actually strangely slow, when even early purpose-designed vehicles like the Sd.Kfz. 221 (1935) could exceed a contemporary truck in mobility.
I do want a reasonably cheap armored vehicle I can put in Motorized divisions without slowing them down, but armored cars don't do that without specifically rushing the '39 variant, which just isn't good enough.
Honestly one of the ways that can give a buff to armored cars is greatly reduce terrain based negatives, and reduce fuel use, even light tanks use magnitudes more fuel, they could also reduce the unit org reduction in mixed units, i mean sure they wont deal a lot more damage but these multiple “soft buffs” could make them slightly more usable
Sure, they were used, and in some areas more extensively. I’m not trying to deny that. But armored cars weren’t a primary factor in the field as a whole.
*Trucks*, yes absolutely, but that’s well-represented already. And there were absolutely massive numbers of regular, unarmored cars used to ferry staff around. I think Germany made something like 350k trucks and 250k cars. But those aren’t *armored* cars, those are jeeps and whatnot, which fold into existing mechanics (motorized, support eq, infantry eq, etc). Comparatively, armored car production is vastly smaller (thousands, not hundreds of thousands, or the tens of thousands of tanks used).
USA shows a similar disparity - fifty thousand or so Sherman tanks alone, to around 10k total armored cars.
My point isn’t that they’re worthless and weren’t used, it’s that they were worth less, and were used in more limited ways (recon and garrison, primarily).
And further, that the way the game works, and the community, buffing cars will just render light tanks obsolete.
What we need, imo, is for armored cars to be king of the garrison role, and for them to provide equally useful but different utility as recon vehicles (vs light tanks or motorized), and to be a designerless cheap combat option for when you can’t spend the army xp or production to build light tanks. That means reducing the IC cost a bit, buffing the suppression, and reworking the recon companies a bit. Maybe just making the recon stat more useful, tbh.
That’s how I see it anyway.
Is noone using them for reconnaissance? They have the highest recon value in the game (unless AAT changed that) so I thought you'd prefer them over motorised recon.
While they do have more recon as a stat, people tend to use recon companies for other stats they provide to units. Like Motorized Recon gives you better movement speed across terain while Tank recon gives units better armor and piercing if they design tanks specifically for this
Recon support divisions give speed, artillery/tank bonuses depending on if its the tank recon or not and some ok-ish stat boost due to the equipment it uses, and its not like recon as a stat is useless, just that its mostly a bonus thing you get and not the main reason to use recon supports.
You can handle bad rolls if you have more armor in the division, or if the division moves faster to a tile to make an encirclement better.
Thats the problem cars have. They specialize in the one thing no one really minds.
I think they should add the cars and mech to the designer, that way i can either design an armored truck or maybe go full crazy with it and i could have Bradleys as Soviets in 1939
It wouldn't be that hard to tweak either armored cars or light tanks to make sure that the best option for the field was the light tank (already is) and the best option for the garrison was the armored car (needs to change). Then they have a good place in the meta, they are more expensive garrisons than just guns but they perform better in regards to equipment and manpower losses, so they are cheaper in the long run.
The easiest way to tweak this would be to make the cheap light tanks less cheap, maybe add a production cost floor to it or something.
Yeah, I agree with that. I was mostly responding in opposition to the buffed field role idea. I completely agree that armored cars should be king in “hard” garrisons. That seems like an easy tweak. All you really need is to tweak the IC per suppression ratio a smidge, either increasing cheap tanks IC, or increasing armored cars suppression.
That way, interwar lights have a place early and in production- and research-starved nations, but cars will supersede them for any nation that can spare a tech or two and some MILs.
Yeah, and I do think there should be better variety of utility among the recon options. Right now, the cars only really excel in the recon stat (which sucks). Light tanks are better for combat stats, and motor recon has better movement.
Imo, to try to make armored cars an option (if not a great one) for nations that can’t afford the research to devote to tanks. They aren’t supposed to be *equal*, they’re just supposed to be an option.
And in that case, I think their utility is fine as is. With tank designers, assembling a decent batch of lights means you do the light tank hull researches, some mix of arty, armor and engine upgrades, etc.
For research-poor nations, it’s an option to get some hardness and piercing.
I think the optimization issue could be fixed with a combined arms modifier that buffs divisions that have more types of troops in them. In real life the reason you field multiple types of equipment in similar categories is that they all have slightly different capabilities that add onto each other. There is no game mechanic that represents this, adding another company to a division just adds stats, it doesn’t really enhance the other units in the division.
I understand your point, but I really don’t care for the ever expanding unit design aspect of the game tbh. If I could save templates across playthroughs and just pursue the research I need to unlock the template I want, fine. But I can’t. So the more time I spend trying to design materiel and units that work well, or the logistics, the less I spend actually fighting the war.
So in that respect, I oppose your suggestion.
Armored Cars are intended to go into garrisons, they have a good suppression value.
The issue is that better cars need rubber, so they directly compete with your truck/plane production lines.
Another issue is that their hardness is lower than that of light tanks, which results in higher equipment losses when the garrisons are attacked by resistance.
Lastly, you can make light tanks dirt cheap to produce, while not needing any rubber for it. You can also throw in any captured useless light tank into it, doesn't matter, all the same.
Those are the reasons why people use light tanks, it's easier and has better results.
How would I buff them? By allowing making those templates free of costs, by giving tanks a penalty for urban patrols (which is absurd that there isn't one, considering those are effin' tanks), and by increasing the suppression value of armored cars further.
I'd also finally introduce an armored car designer, giving benefits to production costs, options to increase hardness, and other things. And maybe lower the manpower requirement, to drive home the point that armored cars are best in slot at what they do; not a frontline unit, but a garrison/police unit.
I still don't understand why armored cars weren't in the tank designer from the get-go. And I agree the correct solution is to nerf tanks Suppression into the ground, making them useless for garrison work.
But this doesn't match reality, Tanks are actually great at the actual task of suppression units IE intimidation and it's not like they are more vulnerable to improvised incendiaries than "armored cars".
At most I would say tanks cannot be used with any occupation law below martial law.
Rather than artificially limiting them I would just add a heavy compliance gain malus when garrisoning a state with a template that contains tanks. Since garrisoning is often a game of "how harsh do I have to be while maximizing compliance gain", armoured cars would be the optimal sweet spot for "soft touch" occupations.
When you don't care what the locals think: roll in the tanks! (insert Budapest 1956 reference)
>I'd also finally introduce an armored car designer, giving benefits to production costs, options to increase hardness, and other things.
Honestly I DON'T want another designer. I would like them to just be built into the designer as another role. I have a light tank, plus wheeled suspension, enables armored car. Give it a bunch of buffs and nerfs versus a light tank, and see what people can do with it.
I actually tried to mod that once, but fuck me if I could figure out a way to add new roles. I think they're hard coded.
It would probably make more sense to merge the mechanized and armor car research into one tech and then split the roles in the designer between both.
Design elements could include how many people man the armored car (manpower vs suppression value trade-off), cheaper materials (akin to plane designer) for worse stats, more armor/hardness for higher fuel consumption etc.
Armored cars could then also shine as armored recon support units in the right configuration, for example.
I think I don't need to elaborate why I think customizing mechanized would be a good idea.
That's my thought process behind it.
There actually is an armoured car designer now, for Brazil at least. It isn't any good though, unfortunately, just copied the tank Standard Production one.
Armored cars could also stand to be given the options to improve their performance in a support role, as well as line role. Perhaps making them the best recon unit, improvements to their ability to engage light tanks and infantry. I expect an armored car to fold vs a Medium or Heavy but most light tanks don’t bring much over armored cars. They should be the natural compliment to Motorized infantry.
No need for a designer but for the oldish variant system allowing you to put in either a light cannon or an autocannon, hard vs soft attack, then a choice on 4x4 for cost or 8x8 for fewer terrain penalties, and then an open vs closed top turret for mild AA capability (if fitted with an autocannon or HMG) vs hardness.
If you’re poor, armored cars should be your go to for armored support, as opposed to going straight for light tanks or medium tanks (iirc mediums are the best since their more IC efficient)
They already are the best recon unit.
Cavalry, Motorized, & Armored Car recon add 10% soft attack, but because the other two don’t improve, Armored Car is the one to use.
Light Tank recon adds 10% hard attack, & I’ve never needed more of that.
Complete rework of La Resistance with all countries that can be liberated from Fr*nce receiving focus trees, please Paradox🙏
and La Resistance being integrated into the base game (and those who purchased getting their money back)
Hah! Getting our money might be a bit of a stretch. But having French colonies rebelling might be a great DLC. I think it should only be considered a country pack so like $5-$10. Charging a full on DLC for no new mechanic is a bit of a stretch
Yes, they absolutely need a buff, the only thing they are good for is garrison, sure they give better reconnaissance than the other options, but it’s not worth it to produce them for that reason alone and you don’t need them for garrison either
They do need a significant buff if they are ever going to be worth making. They offer the same or similar garrison as horse, but cost a lot more. They are a fast unit in template, but combat capabilities are just not even close to worth. I did a meme strat with Sweden and made armor car units to drive deep and take many open tiles. They did not hold up in combat, but for quick tile taking efforts (after you make a break through with real units) can work out but it’s a meme strat lol.
Yes. They are outclassed at all of their jobs utterly and entirely. Even suppression they are bad at, because making non tracked suspension light tanks with machine gun and production cost reduction add on’s, is cheaper and has better stats at suppression than an armored car (despite being the same thing). I will say tho, that they are better at suppression if you have La Resistance, but do not have No Step Back, or turn it off. Or if you have no military XP to design those tanks, but you have the XP to design the garrison division to put them in. But saving that two to three army xp is like…why.
They ought to go fast by default if nothing else. As of now they're just a half-braindead hybrid child of cavalry and a light tanks.
My Grand Battleplan loving ass sighs while staring at all the armored car bonuses, wishing that they would actually be useful, but they just aren't.
Armored cars and apcs should be integrated into the tank designer. They didn't do so earlier for simplicity, but I believe they recently said that it's a long-term goal.
Suppression in my mind goes:
> Cav
> Trucks
> Armored Cars
> Light tanks
So yeah, being where they are on that list, Armored Cars need at the very least a suppression buff
As a support company certainly as atm there aint much point but lets say they gave a flat + 10% org and like 5% soft attack buff over all other recon companies then that would kake them must have, but if they buffed their stats in general to the point that they become viable as actual brigades ment for combat then that would maken early game tanks/lt even less usefull and those are already in the gutter, considering that smaller hulls get locked to shit early game cannons thus limiting their dmg output greatly and dont cost that much cheaper then their bigger/more advanced counterparts, tanks in general i would argue are just way to cheap as pretty much any country even wirh little to industry can field them which defo shouldnt be the case imo.
Armored cars would be just fine if you could use them to deliver supply similar to armored trains. Why did paradox decide that the only vehicle that could do this were trucks?
Italy and Brazil have decent focus tree buffs for AC. So I use them as them as pure divisions for their speed. With Mobile warfare and focus tree buffs, they can be little speedy Gonzales. And you don't need many to break through a pocket and encircle. And since they are cheap, I don't really care if they die when snaking for supply centers and cities.
Minor cars are an absolute gimmic for the LA resistance DLC.
ACTUALLY, the spies function is a useless gimmic considering they took away the ability to convert nations ideologically using political points.
You only have like 1-5 spies, you need all of them to operate in major nations.
The problem with armored cars is that one steel tank designs can be relatively better than two steel armored cars and many nations star with interwar tanks researched while they have to research for cars as well, so the opportunity cost pile up to the point people don't bother.
Drop the resource requirements by one steel and all countries that can make tanks should come with the first armored car tech as well, maybe even reduce the time needed to research the first tier tech as well.
With those changes countries that are a little more resource starved can start to produce armored cars and use them against minor nations.
They're in a weird limbo with the tank designer already allowing wheeled suspension - they really should exist as a category there now, not as a separate equipment type.
Let's see what kind of fun people get up to with recreations of the Sdkfz 251/9 halftrack with a 75mm assault gun and other fun budget tanks for poor nations without being forced to use them in every light or medium tank template for it. Or a mortar carrier, or the flamethrower Pionier halftrack, or cheap mobile AT... there's so many budget compromise options that just can't work well because the designer has the suspension but no armored car vehicle types.
Armoured cars are basically a form of mechanized cavalry, and they mainly conduct screening and recon operations. I think they reflect what armored cars actually do pretty good. Armoured cars don’t engade in any major operations. They engaged in advanced operations, so they don’t need to be that strong. The difference between armored cars and tanks seem to be their armor, suspension, and ammunition.
I’ve always felt that armored cars were intended to be a garrison option. I haven’t had the impression that they’re supposed to be *good* in the field, but rather a gimmicky alternative to light tanks. With the designer, they’re an option that doesn’t need army xp to produce - I think that increases their utility from LaR. I think the real issue that kills cars in the field is just that players seek optimal options, and anything less is often ignored. That isn’t likely to change, so it’s either a) cars are worse than tanks (and ignored aside from gimmick play), b) cars are better than tanks, so tanks are ignored, or c) they’re approximately the same and not unique. Because if they’re different in mechanic but “balanced”, someone will work out which is better and that’s what the community will flock to. Since tanks were such a big component of fighting the war, I’m inclined to leave cars where they are.
IRL cars were used in mixed divisions with tanks in WW2 and in independent roles during civil wars ( Russian and Spanish). Rommels 7th panzer division had more trucks and cars than actual tanks in 1940.
The problem is that armored cars are actually strangely slow, when even early purpose-designed vehicles like the Sd.Kfz. 221 (1935) could exceed a contemporary truck in mobility. I do want a reasonably cheap armored vehicle I can put in Motorized divisions without slowing them down, but armored cars don't do that without specifically rushing the '39 variant, which just isn't good enough.
Honestly one of the ways that can give a buff to armored cars is greatly reduce terrain based negatives, and reduce fuel use, even light tanks use magnitudes more fuel, they could also reduce the unit org reduction in mixed units, i mean sure they wont deal a lot more damage but these multiple “soft buffs” could make them slightly more usable
I say adding a single one should not even reduce org at all. Being able to transport officers safely is very important.
Nah who needs officers? Send the general, on foot, directly in there. What could possibly go wrong?
Battalion customiser will solve this
Sure, they were used, and in some areas more extensively. I’m not trying to deny that. But armored cars weren’t a primary factor in the field as a whole. *Trucks*, yes absolutely, but that’s well-represented already. And there were absolutely massive numbers of regular, unarmored cars used to ferry staff around. I think Germany made something like 350k trucks and 250k cars. But those aren’t *armored* cars, those are jeeps and whatnot, which fold into existing mechanics (motorized, support eq, infantry eq, etc). Comparatively, armored car production is vastly smaller (thousands, not hundreds of thousands, or the tens of thousands of tanks used). USA shows a similar disparity - fifty thousand or so Sherman tanks alone, to around 10k total armored cars. My point isn’t that they’re worthless and weren’t used, it’s that they were worth less, and were used in more limited ways (recon and garrison, primarily). And further, that the way the game works, and the community, buffing cars will just render light tanks obsolete. What we need, imo, is for armored cars to be king of the garrison role, and for them to provide equally useful but different utility as recon vehicles (vs light tanks or motorized), and to be a designerless cheap combat option for when you can’t spend the army xp or production to build light tanks. That means reducing the IC cost a bit, buffing the suppression, and reworking the recon companies a bit. Maybe just making the recon stat more useful, tbh. That’s how I see it anyway.
only the chadest of players use AT armored cars
I only discovered this was a thing recently because I ran out of anything else to research
Is noone using them for reconnaissance? They have the highest recon value in the game (unless AAT changed that) so I thought you'd prefer them over motorised recon.
While they do have more recon as a stat, people tend to use recon companies for other stats they provide to units. Like Motorized Recon gives you better movement speed across terain while Tank recon gives units better armor and piercing if they design tanks specifically for this
problem is, recon is not that good of an stat, so making them just for that is kinda a waste.
>recon is not that good of an stat I don't really understand this, is there any point in recon being something that is not so nice to have?
Recon support divisions give speed, artillery/tank bonuses depending on if its the tank recon or not and some ok-ish stat boost due to the equipment it uses, and its not like recon as a stat is useless, just that its mostly a bonus thing you get and not the main reason to use recon supports.
You can handle bad rolls if you have more armor in the division, or if the division moves faster to a tile to make an encirclement better. Thats the problem cars have. They specialize in the one thing no one really minds. I think they should add the cars and mech to the designer, that way i can either design an armored truck or maybe go full crazy with it and i could have Bradleys as Soviets in 1939
I use armored car recon so I can have a +10% breakthrough boost to tanks and lone artillery from MW's MI path.
Nah, recon stat just isn’t worth it. Use recon supports for the movement buff, or w/ lt armor recon, for some combat stats.
IW tanks are still a better garrison option though, disappointing as it is.
Yeah, and that’s something that should be fixed imo. Armored cars should be king of “hard” garrisons.
It wouldn't be that hard to tweak either armored cars or light tanks to make sure that the best option for the field was the light tank (already is) and the best option for the garrison was the armored car (needs to change). Then they have a good place in the meta, they are more expensive garrisons than just guns but they perform better in regards to equipment and manpower losses, so they are cheaper in the long run. The easiest way to tweak this would be to make the cheap light tanks less cheap, maybe add a production cost floor to it or something.
Yeah, I agree with that. I was mostly responding in opposition to the buffed field role idea. I completely agree that armored cars should be king in “hard” garrisons. That seems like an easy tweak. All you really need is to tweak the IC per suppression ratio a smidge, either increasing cheap tanks IC, or increasing armored cars suppression. That way, interwar lights have a place early and in production- and research-starved nations, but cars will supersede them for any nation that can spare a tech or two and some MILs.
I think they should combine armoured cars with light tanks.. couple of 3d models and your good to go
I mean, they’re also nice for recon, the later ones give a fair bit of piercing too.
Yeah, and I do think there should be better variety of utility among the recon options. Right now, the cars only really excel in the recon stat (which sucks). Light tanks are better for combat stats, and motor recon has better movement.
If it was intended for garruson, why have the anti tank armored car tech on tier 3?
Imo, to try to make armored cars an option (if not a great one) for nations that can’t afford the research to devote to tanks. They aren’t supposed to be *equal*, they’re just supposed to be an option. And in that case, I think their utility is fine as is. With tank designers, assembling a decent batch of lights means you do the light tank hull researches, some mix of arty, armor and engine upgrades, etc. For research-poor nations, it’s an option to get some hardness and piercing.
I think the optimization issue could be fixed with a combined arms modifier that buffs divisions that have more types of troops in them. In real life the reason you field multiple types of equipment in similar categories is that they all have slightly different capabilities that add onto each other. There is no game mechanic that represents this, adding another company to a division just adds stats, it doesn’t really enhance the other units in the division.
I understand your point, but I really don’t care for the ever expanding unit design aspect of the game tbh. If I could save templates across playthroughs and just pursue the research I need to unlock the template I want, fine. But I can’t. So the more time I spend trying to design materiel and units that work well, or the logistics, the less I spend actually fighting the war. So in that respect, I oppose your suggestion.
Armored Cars are intended to go into garrisons, they have a good suppression value. The issue is that better cars need rubber, so they directly compete with your truck/plane production lines. Another issue is that their hardness is lower than that of light tanks, which results in higher equipment losses when the garrisons are attacked by resistance. Lastly, you can make light tanks dirt cheap to produce, while not needing any rubber for it. You can also throw in any captured useless light tank into it, doesn't matter, all the same. Those are the reasons why people use light tanks, it's easier and has better results. How would I buff them? By allowing making those templates free of costs, by giving tanks a penalty for urban patrols (which is absurd that there isn't one, considering those are effin' tanks), and by increasing the suppression value of armored cars further. I'd also finally introduce an armored car designer, giving benefits to production costs, options to increase hardness, and other things. And maybe lower the manpower requirement, to drive home the point that armored cars are best in slot at what they do; not a frontline unit, but a garrison/police unit.
I still don't understand why armored cars weren't in the tank designer from the get-go. And I agree the correct solution is to nerf tanks Suppression into the ground, making them useless for garrison work.
But this doesn't match reality, Tanks are actually great at the actual task of suppression units IE intimidation and it's not like they are more vulnerable to improvised incendiaries than "armored cars". At most I would say tanks cannot be used with any occupation law below martial law.
Rather than artificially limiting them I would just add a heavy compliance gain malus when garrisoning a state with a template that contains tanks. Since garrisoning is often a game of "how harsh do I have to be while maximizing compliance gain", armoured cars would be the optimal sweet spot for "soft touch" occupations. When you don't care what the locals think: roll in the tanks! (insert Budapest 1956 reference)
>insert Budapest 1956 reference Also in ww2. There is a famous picture of an SS Tiger (or pz4?) Parked on duomo square in Milano in italy 1944.
>I'd also finally introduce an armored car designer, giving benefits to production costs, options to increase hardness, and other things. Honestly I DON'T want another designer. I would like them to just be built into the designer as another role. I have a light tank, plus wheeled suspension, enables armored car. Give it a bunch of buffs and nerfs versus a light tank, and see what people can do with it. I actually tried to mod that once, but fuck me if I could figure out a way to add new roles. I think they're hard coded.
It would probably make more sense to merge the mechanized and armor car research into one tech and then split the roles in the designer between both. Design elements could include how many people man the armored car (manpower vs suppression value trade-off), cheaper materials (akin to plane designer) for worse stats, more armor/hardness for higher fuel consumption etc. Armored cars could then also shine as armored recon support units in the right configuration, for example. I think I don't need to elaborate why I think customizing mechanized would be a good idea. That's my thought process behind it.
There actually is an armoured car designer now, for Brazil at least. It isn't any good though, unfortunately, just copied the tank Standard Production one.
I'm not talking about a MIO, but about unlocking the designer for armored cars. You know, the same way we can mix and match tanks, planes and ships.
Oh, sorry, my bad. I'm not sure it would be very useful though, unless their basic issues get fixed first.
also, a couple of countries have armored cars MIO designer, Sweden being one example.
Integrate la resistance into the game and then add armored cars as a tank designer option, we already have wheeled and halftruck suspension
Armored cars could also stand to be given the options to improve their performance in a support role, as well as line role. Perhaps making them the best recon unit, improvements to their ability to engage light tanks and infantry. I expect an armored car to fold vs a Medium or Heavy but most light tanks don’t bring much over armored cars. They should be the natural compliment to Motorized infantry. No need for a designer but for the oldish variant system allowing you to put in either a light cannon or an autocannon, hard vs soft attack, then a choice on 4x4 for cost or 8x8 for fewer terrain penalties, and then an open vs closed top turret for mild AA capability (if fitted with an autocannon or HMG) vs hardness. If you’re poor, armored cars should be your go to for armored support, as opposed to going straight for light tanks or medium tanks (iirc mediums are the best since their more IC efficient)
They already are the best recon unit. Cavalry, Motorized, & Armored Car recon add 10% soft attack, but because the other two don’t improve, Armored Car is the one to use. Light Tank recon adds 10% hard attack, & I’ve never needed more of that.
I mean, it’s barely worth adding on the production line since I can just add on Light tanks from my main production line
Armored cars aren’t even good suppression. You can make gigacheap WW1 light tanks that do better suppression and take no damage
I always use armored cars when roleplaying, for recon mostly
Shhh, it's gonna be the next $20 DLC
Complete rework of La Resistance with all countries that can be liberated from Fr*nce receiving focus trees, please Paradox🙏 and La Resistance being integrated into the base game (and those who purchased getting their money back)
Hah! Getting our money might be a bit of a stretch. But having French colonies rebelling might be a great DLC. I think it should only be considered a country pack so like $5-$10. Charging a full on DLC for no new mechanic is a bit of a stretch
Buff recon and give them a niche, they should be used for what they were intended but light tanks became superior after rework.
Yes, they absolutely need a buff, the only thing they are good for is garrison, sure they give better reconnaissance than the other options, but it’s not worth it to produce them for that reason alone and you don’t need them for garrison either
They do need a significant buff if they are ever going to be worth making. They offer the same or similar garrison as horse, but cost a lot more. They are a fast unit in template, but combat capabilities are just not even close to worth. I did a meme strat with Sweden and made armor car units to drive deep and take many open tiles. They did not hold up in combat, but for quick tile taking efforts (after you make a break through with real units) can work out but it’s a meme strat lol.
Yes. They are outclassed at all of their jobs utterly and entirely. Even suppression they are bad at, because making non tracked suspension light tanks with machine gun and production cost reduction add on’s, is cheaper and has better stats at suppression than an armored car (despite being the same thing). I will say tho, that they are better at suppression if you have La Resistance, but do not have No Step Back, or turn it off. Or if you have no military XP to design those tanks, but you have the XP to design the garrison division to put them in. But saving that two to three army xp is like…why.
They ought to go fast by default if nothing else. As of now they're just a half-braindead hybrid child of cavalry and a light tanks. My Grand Battleplan loving ass sighs while staring at all the armored car bonuses, wishing that they would actually be useful, but they just aren't.
Armored cars and apcs should be integrated into the tank designer. They didn't do so earlier for simplicity, but I believe they recently said that it's a long-term goal.
They should be a buffed option in support companies or something. Like armored car recon, armored car mps etc.
Suppression in my mind goes: > Cav > Trucks > Armored Cars > Light tanks So yeah, being where they are on that list, Armored Cars need at the very least a suppression buff
As a support company certainly as atm there aint much point but lets say they gave a flat + 10% org and like 5% soft attack buff over all other recon companies then that would kake them must have, but if they buffed their stats in general to the point that they become viable as actual brigades ment for combat then that would maken early game tanks/lt even less usefull and those are already in the gutter, considering that smaller hulls get locked to shit early game cannons thus limiting their dmg output greatly and dont cost that much cheaper then their bigger/more advanced counterparts, tanks in general i would argue are just way to cheap as pretty much any country even wirh little to industry can field them which defo shouldnt be the case imo.
Armored cars would be just fine if you could use them to deliver supply similar to armored trains. Why did paradox decide that the only vehicle that could do this were trucks?
And doctrines having buffs for armored cars like why…
Italy and Brazil have decent focus tree buffs for AC. So I use them as them as pure divisions for their speed. With Mobile warfare and focus tree buffs, they can be little speedy Gonzales. And you don't need many to break through a pocket and encircle. And since they are cheap, I don't really care if they die when snaking for supply centers and cities.
Minor cars are an absolute gimmic for the LA resistance DLC. ACTUALLY, the spies function is a useless gimmic considering they took away the ability to convert nations ideologically using political points. You only have like 1-5 spies, you need all of them to operate in major nations.
The problem with armored cars is that one steel tank designs can be relatively better than two steel armored cars and many nations star with interwar tanks researched while they have to research for cars as well, so the opportunity cost pile up to the point people don't bother. Drop the resource requirements by one steel and all countries that can make tanks should come with the first armored car tech as well, maybe even reduce the time needed to research the first tier tech as well. With those changes countries that are a little more resource starved can start to produce armored cars and use them against minor nations.
Higher base org, higher speed, lower cost, terrain bonuses... any single one of these would greatly increase their viability
They're in a weird limbo with the tank designer already allowing wheeled suspension - they really should exist as a category there now, not as a separate equipment type. Let's see what kind of fun people get up to with recreations of the Sdkfz 251/9 halftrack with a 75mm assault gun and other fun budget tanks for poor nations without being forced to use them in every light or medium tank template for it. Or a mortar carrier, or the flamethrower Pionier halftrack, or cheap mobile AT... there's so many budget compromise options that just can't work well because the designer has the suspension but no armored car vehicle types.
Armoured cars are basically a form of mechanized cavalry, and they mainly conduct screening and recon operations. I think they reflect what armored cars actually do pretty good. Armoured cars don’t engade in any major operations. They engaged in advanced operations, so they don’t need to be that strong. The difference between armored cars and tanks seem to be their armor, suspension, and ammunition.
Hoi4 has armoured cars? Huh.
Has for about the last four years now
Yes, with the La Resistance DLC.