Heavy Tanks - What's the Purpose?

freezy wrote:

I am always a bit sad when some unit is under represented so here I just wanted to make a point that they can be useful when used right.

I feel you, man. I'm making it a point to try different builds, and figure out specific situations where an unpopular unit DOES have a place on the battlefield.

Through all the trial and error, I've gotten an appreciation for militia, rocket arty, rocket fighters, paratroopers, attack bombers, motorized infantry, even carriers. These units can all be useful, situationally, even if most players don't use them well.

But there are units that simply don't make sense. The heavy tank is first on that list. It's simply too slow to research, too slow to build, too slow to move around the map. There is no way to make this work, unless you are playing a historical map where the research is done, the tank factories are maxed out, and the tanks are on the front line, ready to roll. In that case, sure, have fun.

There's no way I'm waiting and paying for heavy tanks on a normal map. The game will be over long before they reach the battlefield. It's like waiting for nukes. My maps end way too fast for that. This is also how I know if a build is working. Did it take so long that I can research nukes? That means the build is junk, because it took too long to win.

sometimes instead of a fast army i go for slow artillery focus army, heavy tanks are great for defending those, you can use them for defending air bases or strategic provinces, great defenders if the enemy go for medium tanks.

Yeah they take time but its not that a big deal, its not like research nukes. Not go for them every game but they arent useless.

The one unit wich i actually think are useless its motorized due the existence of the far superior armored car, but even motorized have some uses.

How long does it take you to solo a world map?

like a month.

Cant wake me up every half hour anymore due work, soo i feel save when my tanks protect my air fleet when i go to sleep

Right, my maps finish in two weeks.

It's not the only way to measure the success of a build. So is the KD ratio. Whatever gets you a fast finish with a good KD ratio is a good build. Adjusted for opponent strength, of course.

thats cool

Usually lost a unit here and there just bcuz i fall sleep when i micro my units. My kd ratio is not great anyway due matches against some friends who used to not sleep as well. In any cases my builds evolve around those situations, not optimized for fast conquest.

z00mz00m wrote:

freezy wrote:

I am always a bit sad when some unit is under represented so here I just wanted to make a point that they can be useful when used right.

I feel you, man. I'm making it a point to try different builds, and figure out specific situations where an unpopular unit DOES have a place on the battlefield.

Through all the trial and error, I've gotten an appreciation for militia, rocket arty, rocket fighters, paratroopers, attack bombers, motorized infantry, even carriers. These units can all be useful, situationally, even if most players don't use them well.

But there are units that simply don't make sense. The heavy tank is first on that list. It's simply too slow to research, too slow to build, too slow to move around the map. There is no way to make this work, unless you are playing a historical map where the research is done, the tank factories are maxed out, and the tanks are on the front line, ready to roll. In that case, sure, have fun.

There's no way I'm waiting and paying for heavy tanks on a normal map. The game will be over long before they reach the battlefield. It's like waiting for nukes. My maps end way too fast for that. This is also how I know if a build is working. Did it take so long that I can research nukes? That means the build is junk, because it took too long to win.

Even then heavies are easily destroyed by arty without getting even close to arty. You can argue that heavies should be arty escorts, but they are way too expensive to be even considered anywhere near "efficient"

Well, at least this thread inspired me to try to find a use case for HT... will do so in the near future, I'll let you know how it goes!

Afrikakorps wrote:

Even then heavies are easily destroyed by arty without getting even close to arty. You can argue that heavies should be arty escorts, but they are way too expensive to be even considered anywhere near "efficient"

Well from my experience as a casual player, HT are great! But have to make sure you’re playing with friends. My buddies and I would split specializations (for example I’d have a friend who’d solely focus on naval troops with some planes to support). I personally would make stacks of maxed out HT with Mech. inf maxed and Sp anti-air maxed (1:2:1 ratio). The ratio goes all the way up to about a 24-28 stack army and I just make multiple of those. If I encounter artillery, my allies knock it out with planes which leaves me completely free to just bulldoze through enemy lines. Mech inf make up for the lack of unarmored defense and sp anti air make up for the air defense. Speed is indeed a probably but why need speed when u just send your forces on a one way trip through your opponents cities. Bombers on artilleries and ships that try to tick away my hp. This stack does a really good job of just clearing a path and pretty low skill for casual players like myself. As such, TH are pretty underrated but fantastic for people who only play once or twice a day.