Korea World at War

I've played as several Pan-Asian countries in WaW, but never Korea. I'll be following this guide

Some tips: Pan-Asian has speed and visibility buffs, take advantage of that. I would use fast units like AC and mot inf. And naval superiority is critical, as all your homeland cities are within range of battleshps.

Good luck

Brando Dilla wrote:

Some tips: Pan-Asian has speed and visibility buffs, take advantage of that. I would use fast units like AC and mot inf. And naval superiority is critical, as all your homeland cities are within range of battleshps.

Thanks for mentioning the armoured cars, I'll remember.

Brando Dilla wrote:

Good luck

Don't bother with mot inf. ACs will do. You probably don't need inf at all tbh.

jubjub bird wrote:

You probably don't need inf at all tbh.

Artillery, armored cars, rrg, whatever

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Brando Dilla wrote:

Some tips: Pan-Asian has speed and visibility buffs, take advantage of that. I would use fast units like AC and mot inf. And naval superiority is critical, as all your homeland cities are within range of battleshps.

Given these buffs, is motorised infantry necessary? On the one hand, it plays the speed buffs even better, but on the other regular infantry is surely fast enough with buffs? Or should I have both?Thanks for mentioning the armoured cars, I'll remember.

Brando Dilla wrote:

Good luck

Thanks

Whatever fits your playing style.

Brando Dilla wrote:

As @jubjub bird said above, you might not need mot inf at all, if you plan on using AC and air support. Or you can also use ranged units which are slow but are good at destroying armor (which ACs suck at)

Whatever fits your playing style.

What's the point of using railway guns in Pan-Asian? It has no terrain bonuses, is slow, and without scouts has a low view range. Given Pan-Asian artillery buffs it's redundant.

i made a korea playthrough very long long ago. In WaW.

Claudio NVKP wrote:

i made a korea playthrough very long long ago. In WaW.

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Claudio NVKP wrote:

i made a korea playthrough very long long ago. In WaW.

Is it still up here?

Claudio NVKP wrote:

yes of course.

All hail the glorious emperor Kim Sing-Song!

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Claudio NVKP wrote:

yes of course.

I think I've found it

All hail the glorious emperor Kim Sing-Song!

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Although I disagree with not using regular infantry. It has a bonus of +30% in forests (on top of 40%, i.e. almost double if done right), and its +10% hitpoints negate the Asian hitpoint nerf.What's the point of using railway guns in Pan-Asian? It has no terrain bonuses, is slow, and without scouts has a low view range. Given Pan-Asian artillery buffs it's redundant.

RRG have the same use case with Pan Asian that they do for any doctrine, strong ranged fire that can't be returned except by other RRG. I prefer PA's buffed artillery myself because it's faster and more fun to use, but RRG are always strong. Obviously you'd use it with scouts and support units.

jubjub bird wrote:

Infantry's strength is unarmored units. Unfortunately the most common unarmored units are infantry itself, which does more damage in defense than offense, so infantry makes a poor attacking melee unit because it takes a ton of damage in return.

RRG have the same use case with Pan Asian that they do for any doctrine, strong ranged fire that can't be returned except by other RRG. I prefer PA's buffed artillery myself because it's faster and more fun to use, but RRG are always strong. Obviously you'd use it with scouts and support units.

To attack I plan to use armoured cars to scout and swiftly capture positions, with artillery, light tanks and planes forming the nucleus of an attack. But infantry still has a place as it is cheap, buffed, and good in many terrains

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Fair enough but infantry are stronger in cities, forest, and mountain, than armoured cars of the same level. Only in hills and plains are armoured cars better.

For your navy, I would drop using subs, and consider a surface fleet with carriers instead.

Don't go infantry, but militia.

Forget about light tanks, just build more AC's. When you encounter enemy armor, take them out with artillery (or tacs, but you didn't mention going for any bomber force).

K.Rokossovski wrote:

For your navy, I would drop using subs, and consider a surface fleet with carriers instead.

Don't go infantry, but militia.

Forget about light tanks, just build more AC's. When you encounter enemy armor, take them out with artillery (or tacs, but you didn't mention going for any bomber force).

Given that (compared to allied) pan-Asian tacs are weaker, should I consider attack bombers as well against armour?

Lord Crayfish wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

For your navy, I would drop using subs, and consider a surface fleet with carriers instead.

Don't go infantry, but militia.

Forget about light tanks, just build more AC's. When you encounter enemy armor, take them out with artillery (or tacs, but you didn't mention going for any bomber force).

Thanks for this.Given that (compared to allied) pan-Asian tacs are weaker, should I consider attack bombers as well against armour?

I’m always conflicted about infantry vs militia. I like to make use of my starting infantry and as you pointed out, they get the best infantry in the game between their good terrain bonuses and doctrines HP modifiers. I’ve found opponents often forget how well they are in forests. But militia are very good too with their terrain modifiers and early access to upgrades. Researching both would be tough as they both require the same resources, probably better to choose one or the other.

With Korea specifically, you are right to make good use of naval bombers. Once you secure Japan and Khabarovsk, there are a handful of naval choke points you can use to restrict access to your coast. Pan Asian naval bombers are the best in the game and great for coastal defense.

Korea is a strong starting position geographically. Your only land boarder with another active player is Manchouko to the north, but you do have to be wearing of Japan as well. Also from my experience the Russian countries in the east rarely attract skilled players, but Asia is often a good starting position for alliances so be careful and check out your neighbors early. Sometimes the competition is pretty tough.

Also consider rocket arty. Lots of players say Pan Asian arty is good enough to use against unarmored units because of their doctrine bonuses and you don’t need rocket arty. I don’t fall into this camp. I always recommend getting rocket arty anyway with Pan Asian. Even with the added damage against unarmored units, compared to regular arty, rocket arty still does double damage to unarmored units and more against light armor too.

Lastly, I agree with the others about motorized infantry. Don’t bother. Pan Asian ACs are incredible and you don’t need to research two different scout units.

Lord Crayfish wrote:

Brando Dilla wrote:

Some tips: Pan-Asian has speed and visibility buffs, take advantage of that. I would use fast units like AC and mot inf. And naval superiority is critical, as all your homeland cities are within range of battleshps.

Given these buffs, is motorised infantry necessary? On the one hand, it plays the speed buffs even better, but on the other regular infantry is surely fast enough with buffs? Or should I have both?Thanks for mentioning the armoured cars, I'll remember.

Brando Dilla wrote:

Good luck

Thanks

6thDragon wrote:

Lord Crayfish wrote:

K.Rokossovski wrote:

For your navy, I would drop using subs, and consider a surface fleet with carriers instead.

Don't go infantry, but militia.

Forget about light tanks, just build more AC's. When you encounter enemy armor, take them out with artillery (or tacs, but you didn't mention going for any bomber force).

Thanks for this.Given that (compared to allied) pan-Asian tacs are weaker, should I consider attack bombers as well against armour?

It’s really situational. When I play Pan Asian, I rarely build attack bombers. Often their arty and speed buff is enough to deal with any heavy armor I encounter. Just shoot and scoot until it’s dead. I also build one or two AT to accompany each ground stack and give it research priority as an added defense against tanks, but rarely have I needed it.

I’m always conflicted about infantry vs militia. I like to make use of my starting infantry and as you pointed out, they get the best infantry in the game between their good terrain bonuses and doctrines HP modifiers. I’ve found opponents often forget how well they are in forests. But militia are very good too with their terrain modifiers and early access to upgrades. Researching both would be tough as they both require the same resources, probably better to choose one or the other.

With Korea specifically, you are right to make good use of naval bombers. Once you secure Japan and Khabarovsk, there are a handful of naval choke points you can use to restrict access to your coast. Pan Asian naval bombers are the best in the game and great for coastal defense.

Korea is a strong starting position geographically. Your only land boarder with another active player is Manchouko to the north, but you do have to be wearing of Japan as well. Also from my experience the Russian countries in the east rarely attract skilled players, but Asia is often a good starting position for alliances so be careful and check out your neighbors early. Sometimes the competition is pretty tough.

Also consider rocket arty. Lots of players say Pan Asian arty is good enough to use against unarmored units because of their doctrine bonuses and you don’t need rocket arty. I don’t fall into this camp. I always recommend getting rocket arty anyway with Pan Asian. Even with the added damage against unarmored units, compared to regular arty, rocket arty still does double damage to unarmored units and more against light armor too.

Lastly, I agree with the others about motorized infantry. Don’t bother. Pan Asian ACs are incredible and you don’t need to research two different scout units.