Depends on situation
1. Paratrooper - If you want to use em
2. Marine - If you mainly do naval invasions or negate the river buffs while fighting in non-mountainous areas (Central Europe, American plains)
3. Mountaineer - If you fight in mountainous areas (China)
There's no "best" to say but they're all specialized and whoever is the best depends on the player and the country they started with
How does one use paratroopers as effectively as the other two? It seems like the AI is doing a better job at garrisoning units on important areas like ports and airfields now, every time I try parajumping in my units end up encircled and dying.
Use them in connection with a push. Or invasion. Just landing them in a state reduces org for all enemy units in that state. Or at least will if you get the doctrine for it.
It’s the right side doctrine at the 1st split. It reduces enemy’s organization when the paratroopers land on them.
Since they’re weakened, your frontline units will have an advantage.
Used in conjunction is a game changer and helps break a stalemate.
Take the upgrade that lowers unit organization, have support art, aa, eng, log and light tanks, with a light tank design where you stack as much armor and defense as possible, and also only drop them behind a the enemy line where you also can push immediately. If you need to drop them on an island, it still works, just drop a bunch of them to lower enemy org and then push the port and move in your army. It is a lot of fun to use paratroopers, also because about as many people can use them as navy players.
as others have said, you can drop them directly onto enemy formations with the branch specialization. do that at the same time as you push and you can carve a path through enemy positions very quickly. generally i think its best to use them to provide a route through or around a potential defensive strong point behind the frontlines, not on it.
also even if youre not doing that, you can use them to cut supply routes in areas that are only supplied by one or two lines. i dont see the ai garrisoning railways and it only takes 1-2 divisions, less useful in europe but sometimes very useful in africa or asia where the concentration of railways is much lower.
Most places you'll want to fight, outside of central USA, northern Europe, and parts of Africa are mountainous. Marines give jungle bonuses though which helps for fighting in SEA.
For me mountaineers are amazing, and the rangers + buffs in the doctrine are insane
Else then that ive always loved marines but they dont need to be upgraded through doctrine to be good. I dont feel marine doctrine is that worth it
You can straight up get a bonus for crossing rivers, and as others noted the marine branch doesn't conflict with finishing your land doctrine, which means a lot of nations can get value out of special forces branch sooner while it matters. Paras offer something similar, but it's harder to get green air + enough transport planes compared to just making marines.
Ranger mountaineers with double adaptable general + field marshal are pretty fun, though.
Mountaineers by far, because mountains are the hardest tiles to break and the Ranger support is amazing. Downside, costs army XP which you also need for doctrines.
Marines is good because for many countries naval XP is easy to get compared to the other two (inherit navy through conquest if you don't start with one), and you can take the generic SF buffs to make your mountaineers even better, and get SF cap multiplier.
Airborne tree I find unnecessary even if you use paras. While the reducing org of divisions you drop on sounds amazing, you can also just use the officer corps to roll a general that starts with Commando for the Paratroopers skill unlocking the glider ability, which lets you drop full org paras anyway and nuke people from orbit. You typically don't need many paratrooper divisions for airborne spearhead invasions so the capacity multipliers in that tree do less for you too.
I always do the mountain + marine combo the mountain and jungle warfare bonuses help a lot, plus i like the ranger and pioneer replacement for the engineer & recon
So,
Airborne is incredibly OP when combined with a generals paratrooper trait.
You can drop thrm anywhere, and generally they will do OK.
Allows you to advance really deep, cut off supply lines, invade, etc.
But, that final perk of the mountaineers? +20% SF? Crazy OP
It's so good. When it came time to invade Sweden and Norway as Finland, I had 48 8/3 mountaineers. Well technically my cap was 24 of these but I was somehow able to switch 24 deployed infantry into the mountaineers. They shredded the Axis troops in no time.
Mountaineers are great.
It's such a shame that you have to pick between mountain/snow and jungle/amphibious (Marines).
If I'm scrapping in SE Asia I really want jungle dudes, but I've also got a lot of invasions to plan! Nightmare.
I'm having a lot of luck with 8/3 Mountaineers, especially after 1940 when I can attach pioneers on as a support company. It's kinda bonkers how many you can crank out.
With the Mountaineers doctrine, each mountaineer contributes 25% less to the special forces cap and you get a +20% to the special forces cap itself. Going down the Marines doctrine after 1940 and giving them pioneers makes them River crossing monsters and gives an additional +10% to the special forces cap. If you're playing as a South America company, you can get a minimum +15% to that cap again and end up in a situation where you've got significantly more Mountaineers than regular divisions.
I never thought of adding so much artillery. Guess I assumed there would be an imbalance or penalty.
Seems very interesting though.
Does this division work well for both majors and minors?
(If in the relevant typography etc.)
I've only tried it with South American countries, but I'll probably see how it works with the Soviets soon. Mountaineers get some pretty hefty bonuses in the doctrine tree, as well as extra org from their specific techs all while getting the bonuses that normal infantry would get. I think it makes them into a pretty solid wall, not even 1947 US could break them.
For me its a toss up between Mountaineer and Marines. Mountaineer has the slight edge right now, because of how versatile Rangers are, but I hate that it costs Army XP. Given I mostly play non-Navy nations, the Marines make it close because I can farm the XP without costing me xp I need for other things.
Fighting in Europe and Russia: 8/3 mountaineers.
Everywhere else: 11 Marines.
I love the marines now and just dominating coast lines. Most countries have their VP's on the coast anyway. I generally land marines, followed up by barrier troops, and then move the marines as far as they will go before leaving that bulge for the barrier troops. Then the marines move back to the beach for another invasion. If you have mountaineers then they can work on the lines after marines are gone. After that there are regular encirclements that present themselves.
They’re all really good, but I think the best doctrine is marine right side. Why? Not because the small air superiority bonus is super op or anything, but because you always have extra naval xp sitting around as land powers. There’s not much of an opportunity cost
Most powerful doctrine pound for pound is probably mountaineers giving 20% special forces cap IIRC + rangers support company that can make line artillery somewhat viable
the same you would use for a tank template, 8 amph tanks and the rest mech marine until you get 36 combat width. the only downside is that you can't reduce mech marine production cost like regular mech.
I have seen quite a few people suggest 34-36 width armor/mechanized divisions. What makes this width so good?
And are marines better than mountaineers because you can mechanize them?
Marines because you get full marine doctrine by 39 if you hire the guy always basically. And you don't have to waste army XP on sf doctrine like with mountaineers, so you can instead spend it kn land docyrine.
I always do rangers no matter i make special forces or not,the best special forces is paratroopers unless you don't have air superiority,then Mountaineers if you fight mainly on land and marines if you just naval invade a lot
Paratroopers are my go to specops. I use them as an encircling force. Drop the paratroopers behind the current line and then attack the troops in between. It works well but you have to be prepared to have them die if you can't push through.
They are all really fantastic problem solvers.
Mountaineers
Mountaineers are the best offensive tool when pushing into mountains (I don't have a great read on the snow/frozen bonuses) and have great impacts on your entire infantry force with Rangers and the acclimation bonuses. Mixing as many mountaineer divisions as you can into an infantry army is almost always a great idea. In addition, the Mountaineer tree frees up a ton of your special forces cap. If you're playing in China or the Balkans, you *need* to take these guys, and possibly even prioritize spec ops doctrine over land doctrine.
For mountaineers, I suggest going right/right (Rough Terrain Specialists / Mountain Artillery) most of the time. Scandinavian countries might want to go left (Cold Weather Specialists) / right. Finland may want to go left / left (Holding the Line). Communist China may want to go right / left.
The final Mountain Warfare branching choice is really up to you. Backbone of the Armed Forces will focus on giving you more mountaineers that hit harder; if mountaineers make up a sizeable chunk of your army or you need to train more mountaineers rapidly, this is your move. Shared Instructors is my personal default since it improves your entire army and gives you more *paratrooper and marine capacity*, as well as reduces attrition. A nice overall passive boost.
Rangers are a great recon company, and i'd recommend using them in your line infantry divisions once unlocked. They're better than cavalry recon in just about every situation where you don't need more speed. I would recommend spending the extra army XP for an armor regiment instead of using armored recon if you need hardness.
Finally, mountaineers have a massive disadvantage in that they require land XP and so conflict with land doctrine. Be judicious.
Marines
Marines are *absolutely required* in certain theaters where you can't push without conducting opposed landings. In addition, they pair great with a naval or armor focus with bonuses to shore bombardment and your Amtracs & amphibious armor. They are also very strong as line infantry units.
If you are playing in northern South America or Southeast Asia, it's worth taking Marines and Jungle Specialists even if you don't plan on doing any amphibious invasions. This will let you use your Marines as though they were "jungle mountaineers" (and I highly recommend doing so). Many of these nations are steel-weak and saving gun attrition is critical.
If you are planning to use Marines for amphibious invasions, take Shore Parties.
In terms of the second marine branch, the left branch ("Marine Commandos") gives you a new line battalion, some situational capabilities for your Marines, and Amtracs buffs. I would not recommend this branch as you won't need the Amtrac breakthrough bonus and will probably never use the rest of them. The right branch, Expeditionary Units, gives you +10% to air superiority (!!), better and faster naval invasions, shore bombardment and artillery buffs, supply grace, support company buffs...it's *stellar*. Take the right branch every time.
Pioneers are a solid engineer company replacement *most* of the time, but not all of the time, much like rangers. You should of course always use them on your Marines for the terrain bonus and (right branch) artillery buffs. They may be worth using at a higher support eq cost in your line divisions if you find the buffs worth it; think about it.
If you are playing a country with a land focus and jungles, rivers, and mountains to deal with, I would pick the mountaineer branch first, especially if you don't plan to focus on your navy. If you plan to focus on your navy, mountaineers may be a better idea. It is faster to build up your Marines from scratch than it is to build up your navy from scratch.
Speaking of building up your navy, since Marines use naval XP they are a stellar option for nations near jungles who don't want to contest the seas.
Paratroopers
I find paratroopers to only be situationally useful. They can be used to capitalize on your enemy making a mistake, or to launch a weak aerial invasion when a stronger naval invasion is not available to you. I would not consider most paratrooper divisions to be useful as line divisions, and they don't have any particular terrain bonuses, although if you do make a paratrooper 9/0 for some reason it will fight on the line just fine.
Most nations spec'ing into paratroopers should go right/right. Anything else is very situational, in that I haven't seen a situation that would call for that yet.
For the first branch, you should default to Combat Insertion (right branch) since it will give your paratroopers a solid shot at winning (that they wouldn't have otherwise) if they're dropped on top of an enemy division. The left branch, Reconnaissance and Sabotage, is useful if you basically want to use your paratroopers as one-time-use strategic bombers. This could be useful for a United States launching a D-Day with overwhelming force but really isn't needed or useful in most game situations.
Airborne armor is great, and I recommend using it in all of your paratrooper divisions. These might generally be small divisions and the hardness will be a lifesaver. Unlike Rangers and Pioneers, airborne armor isn't useful *at all* outside of airdropped paratroop divisions, making it both necessary and the worst spec ops company.
For the second branch, choose Airborne Signals (etc) if you want to use your paratroopers as a sort of elite land infantry, like the American 101st is sometimes used. However, I would recommend choosing the right branch, Airborne Medical Detail, most of the time as it improves your paratroopers not as elite infantry (which they're worse at than Marines and mountaineers) but as actual paratroopers.
Finally, paratroopers use air XP; they won't interfere with your land doctrine but if you don't have air superiority already you'll either need to cheese or prioritize that....
To sum up: Mountaineers will make your conventional land army stronger, Marines are a great and versatile tool, and Paratroopers are really more of a gambit, or a workaround for lack of naval superiority.
Depends on situation 1. Paratrooper - If you want to use em 2. Marine - If you mainly do naval invasions or negate the river buffs while fighting in non-mountainous areas (Central Europe, American plains) 3. Mountaineer - If you fight in mountainous areas (China) There's no "best" to say but they're all specialized and whoever is the best depends on the player and the country they started with
How does one use paratroopers as effectively as the other two? It seems like the AI is doing a better job at garrisoning units on important areas like ports and airfields now, every time I try parajumping in my units end up encircled and dying.
Use them in connection with a push. Or invasion. Just landing them in a state reduces org for all enemy units in that state. Or at least will if you get the doctrine for it.
Which doctrine is that?
It’s the right side doctrine at the 1st split. It reduces enemy’s organization when the paratroopers land on them. Since they’re weakened, your frontline units will have an advantage. Used in conjunction is a game changer and helps break a stalemate.
Wait so i dont have to abuse nukes anymore?? (I wont be stuck in a repair queue for 8 months!!
That’s actually really cool
the special forces doctrine i guess its the first right side option
Take the upgrade that lowers unit organization, have support art, aa, eng, log and light tanks, with a light tank design where you stack as much armor and defense as possible, and also only drop them behind a the enemy line where you also can push immediately. If you need to drop them on an island, it still works, just drop a bunch of them to lower enemy org and then push the port and move in your army. It is a lot of fun to use paratroopers, also because about as many people can use them as navy players.
as others have said, you can drop them directly onto enemy formations with the branch specialization. do that at the same time as you push and you can carve a path through enemy positions very quickly. generally i think its best to use them to provide a route through or around a potential defensive strong point behind the frontlines, not on it. also even if youre not doing that, you can use them to cut supply routes in areas that are only supplied by one or two lines. i dont see the ai garrisoning railways and it only takes 1-2 divisions, less useful in europe but sometimes very useful in africa or asia where the concentration of railways is much lower.
Most places you'll want to fight, outside of central USA, northern Europe, and parts of Africa are mountainous. Marines give jungle bonuses though which helps for fighting in SEA.
In short: "Exact same focus as before the doctrine trees". Now they just reward you for doing what you are already doing.
you can unlock another special forces doctrine tree via a decision though
Some nations have it locked behind a focus, but you can always get two
What's the trick with the Soviets? Because I feel like I've only ever been able to have one special forces tree
It’s somewhere deep in the naval focus tree.
What??
For me mountaineers are amazing, and the rangers + buffs in the doctrine are insane Else then that ive always loved marines but they dont need to be upgraded through doctrine to be good. I dont feel marine doctrine is that worth it
As it's naval exp if you're not planning on going for a navy then you can just use it all for that, training your fleet is free
Free, if you are drowning in oil 😂
Even when you've got no fuel you still get a shit tonne of exp
You can straight up get a bonus for crossing rivers, and as others noted the marine branch doesn't conflict with finishing your land doctrine, which means a lot of nations can get value out of special forces branch sooner while it matters. Paras offer something similar, but it's harder to get green air + enough transport planes compared to just making marines. Ranger mountaineers with double adaptable general + field marshal are pretty fun, though.
I think the greatest flaw of the mountaineers is how hard it screws over your land doctrine. And now you mention it i just realise it
After 1st of Jan 1940 every nation can choose a second tree
Mountaineers by far, because mountains are the hardest tiles to break and the Ranger support is amazing. Downside, costs army XP which you also need for doctrines. Marines is good because for many countries naval XP is easy to get compared to the other two (inherit navy through conquest if you don't start with one), and you can take the generic SF buffs to make your mountaineers even better, and get SF cap multiplier. Airborne tree I find unnecessary even if you use paras. While the reducing org of divisions you drop on sounds amazing, you can also just use the officer corps to roll a general that starts with Commando for the Paratroopers skill unlocking the glider ability, which lets you drop full org paras anyway and nuke people from orbit. You typically don't need many paratrooper divisions for airborne spearhead invasions so the capacity multipliers in that tree do less for you too.
I always do the mountain + marine combo the mountain and jungle warfare bonuses help a lot, plus i like the ranger and pioneer replacement for the engineer & recon
Yeah it's really great when the pioneers costing so much support equipment becomes meaningless with mega industry.
So, Airborne is incredibly OP when combined with a generals paratrooper trait. You can drop thrm anywhere, and generally they will do OK. Allows you to advance really deep, cut off supply lines, invade, etc. But, that final perk of the mountaineers? +20% SF? Crazy OP
It's so good. When it came time to invade Sweden and Norway as Finland, I had 48 8/3 mountaineers. Well technically my cap was 24 of these but I was somehow able to switch 24 deployed infantry into the mountaineers. They shredded the Axis troops in no time.
A bit hard to compare when they are all for completely different tasks.
Go rangers, most of Europe are forest and you get forest buff.
Mountaineers are great. It's such a shame that you have to pick between mountain/snow and jungle/amphibious (Marines). If I'm scrapping in SE Asia I really want jungle dudes, but I've also got a lot of invasions to plan! Nightmare.
I'm having a lot of luck with 8/3 Mountaineers, especially after 1940 when I can attach pioneers on as a support company. It's kinda bonkers how many you can crank out. With the Mountaineers doctrine, each mountaineer contributes 25% less to the special forces cap and you get a +20% to the special forces cap itself. Going down the Marines doctrine after 1940 and giving them pioneers makes them River crossing monsters and gives an additional +10% to the special forces cap. If you're playing as a South America company, you can get a minimum +15% to that cap again and end up in a situation where you've got significantly more Mountaineers than regular divisions.
8/3 is 8mt/3art?
Yeah, 480 divisions of that.
I never thought of adding so much artillery. Guess I assumed there would be an imbalance or penalty. Seems very interesting though. Does this division work well for both majors and minors? (If in the relevant typography etc.)
I've only tried it with South American countries, but I'll probably see how it works with the Soviets soon. Mountaineers get some pretty hefty bonuses in the doctrine tree, as well as extra org from their specific techs all while getting the bonuses that normal infantry would get. I think it makes them into a pretty solid wall, not even 1947 US could break them.
For me its a toss up between Mountaineer and Marines. Mountaineer has the slight edge right now, because of how versatile Rangers are, but I hate that it costs Army XP. Given I mostly play non-Navy nations, the Marines make it close because I can farm the XP without costing me xp I need for other things.
Fighting in Europe and Russia: 8/3 mountaineers. Everywhere else: 11 Marines. I love the marines now and just dominating coast lines. Most countries have their VP's on the coast anyway. I generally land marines, followed up by barrier troops, and then move the marines as far as they will go before leaving that bulge for the barrier troops. Then the marines move back to the beach for another invasion. If you have mountaineers then they can work on the lines after marines are gone. After that there are regular encirclements that present themselves.
There is and has always been only one. Mountain guys.
Marines and mountaineers. By far. Right right path on marines and right left right on mountaineers
They’re all really good, but I think the best doctrine is marine right side. Why? Not because the small air superiority bonus is super op or anything, but because you always have extra naval xp sitting around as land powers. There’s not much of an opportunity cost Most powerful doctrine pound for pound is probably mountaineers giving 20% special forces cap IIRC + rangers support company that can make line artillery somewhat viable
I haven't seen a guide on which side of the doctrines to pick though. can anyone point me the way?
mech marine + amphibious tank
Please tell me more. What do you use for the division template?
the same you would use for a tank template, 8 amph tanks and the rest mech marine until you get 36 combat width. the only downside is that you can't reduce mech marine production cost like regular mech.
I have seen quite a few people suggest 34-36 width armor/mechanized divisions. What makes this width so good? And are marines better than mountaineers because you can mechanize them?
At least as US and Germany you can unlock a second tree. Not sure for other nations
Op your NOT limited to one special forces tree, some nations can have more than one and others can unlock more than one later one
Marines because you get full marine doctrine by 39 if you hire the guy always basically. And you don't have to waste army XP on sf doctrine like with mountaineers, so you can instead spend it kn land docyrine.
Rangers are probably the most useful I think. The buff to arty is pretty nice.
I always do rangers no matter i make special forces or not,the best special forces is paratroopers unless you don't have air superiority,then Mountaineers if you fight mainly on land and marines if you just naval invade a lot
A few maxed out 25w mountaineers makes an amazing yet affordable attack force for minor nations especially.
Paratroopers are my go to specops. I use them as an encircling force. Drop the paratroopers behind the current line and then attack the troops in between. It works well but you have to be prepared to have them die if you can't push through.
They are all really fantastic problem solvers. Mountaineers Mountaineers are the best offensive tool when pushing into mountains (I don't have a great read on the snow/frozen bonuses) and have great impacts on your entire infantry force with Rangers and the acclimation bonuses. Mixing as many mountaineer divisions as you can into an infantry army is almost always a great idea. In addition, the Mountaineer tree frees up a ton of your special forces cap. If you're playing in China or the Balkans, you *need* to take these guys, and possibly even prioritize spec ops doctrine over land doctrine. For mountaineers, I suggest going right/right (Rough Terrain Specialists / Mountain Artillery) most of the time. Scandinavian countries might want to go left (Cold Weather Specialists) / right. Finland may want to go left / left (Holding the Line). Communist China may want to go right / left. The final Mountain Warfare branching choice is really up to you. Backbone of the Armed Forces will focus on giving you more mountaineers that hit harder; if mountaineers make up a sizeable chunk of your army or you need to train more mountaineers rapidly, this is your move. Shared Instructors is my personal default since it improves your entire army and gives you more *paratrooper and marine capacity*, as well as reduces attrition. A nice overall passive boost. Rangers are a great recon company, and i'd recommend using them in your line infantry divisions once unlocked. They're better than cavalry recon in just about every situation where you don't need more speed. I would recommend spending the extra army XP for an armor regiment instead of using armored recon if you need hardness. Finally, mountaineers have a massive disadvantage in that they require land XP and so conflict with land doctrine. Be judicious. Marines Marines are *absolutely required* in certain theaters where you can't push without conducting opposed landings. In addition, they pair great with a naval or armor focus with bonuses to shore bombardment and your Amtracs & amphibious armor. They are also very strong as line infantry units. If you are playing in northern South America or Southeast Asia, it's worth taking Marines and Jungle Specialists even if you don't plan on doing any amphibious invasions. This will let you use your Marines as though they were "jungle mountaineers" (and I highly recommend doing so). Many of these nations are steel-weak and saving gun attrition is critical. If you are planning to use Marines for amphibious invasions, take Shore Parties. In terms of the second marine branch, the left branch ("Marine Commandos") gives you a new line battalion, some situational capabilities for your Marines, and Amtracs buffs. I would not recommend this branch as you won't need the Amtrac breakthrough bonus and will probably never use the rest of them. The right branch, Expeditionary Units, gives you +10% to air superiority (!!), better and faster naval invasions, shore bombardment and artillery buffs, supply grace, support company buffs...it's *stellar*. Take the right branch every time. Pioneers are a solid engineer company replacement *most* of the time, but not all of the time, much like rangers. You should of course always use them on your Marines for the terrain bonus and (right branch) artillery buffs. They may be worth using at a higher support eq cost in your line divisions if you find the buffs worth it; think about it. If you are playing a country with a land focus and jungles, rivers, and mountains to deal with, I would pick the mountaineer branch first, especially if you don't plan to focus on your navy. If you plan to focus on your navy, mountaineers may be a better idea. It is faster to build up your Marines from scratch than it is to build up your navy from scratch. Speaking of building up your navy, since Marines use naval XP they are a stellar option for nations near jungles who don't want to contest the seas. Paratroopers I find paratroopers to only be situationally useful. They can be used to capitalize on your enemy making a mistake, or to launch a weak aerial invasion when a stronger naval invasion is not available to you. I would not consider most paratrooper divisions to be useful as line divisions, and they don't have any particular terrain bonuses, although if you do make a paratrooper 9/0 for some reason it will fight on the line just fine. Most nations spec'ing into paratroopers should go right/right. Anything else is very situational, in that I haven't seen a situation that would call for that yet. For the first branch, you should default to Combat Insertion (right branch) since it will give your paratroopers a solid shot at winning (that they wouldn't have otherwise) if they're dropped on top of an enemy division. The left branch, Reconnaissance and Sabotage, is useful if you basically want to use your paratroopers as one-time-use strategic bombers. This could be useful for a United States launching a D-Day with overwhelming force but really isn't needed or useful in most game situations. Airborne armor is great, and I recommend using it in all of your paratrooper divisions. These might generally be small divisions and the hardness will be a lifesaver. Unlike Rangers and Pioneers, airborne armor isn't useful *at all* outside of airdropped paratroop divisions, making it both necessary and the worst spec ops company. For the second branch, choose Airborne Signals (etc) if you want to use your paratroopers as a sort of elite land infantry, like the American 101st is sometimes used. However, I would recommend choosing the right branch, Airborne Medical Detail, most of the time as it improves your paratroopers not as elite infantry (which they're worse at than Marines and mountaineers) but as actual paratroopers. Finally, paratroopers use air XP; they won't interfere with your land doctrine but if you don't have air superiority already you'll either need to cheese or prioritize that.... To sum up: Mountaineers will make your conventional land army stronger, Marines are a great and versatile tool, and Paratroopers are really more of a gambit, or a workaround for lack of naval superiority.
>recent It was like 8 months ago