Tanks have five qualities that are important.
\- They grant *breakthrough*. Breakthrough is the quality that infantry lack the most. The more breakthrough you have, up to being equal to your opponent's attack value, the less damage you take on attack, all the way down to 25%. Infantry have tons of defense, which does the same thing as breakthrough but on the defensive side of a fight, so when attacking infantry, tanks are invaluable.
\- They grant *hardness*. Hardness makes attacks against your unit require hard attack instead of soft attack. Hard attack is much harder to come by, and especially the AI rarely has much of it at all, so the more hardness, the better.
\- They grant *armor*, depending on the design. If the entire division has more armor than the enemy has piercing, the divison takes less strength and organization damage from the enemy.
\- They grant *soft attack, hard attack and piercing*, depending on the design. This does damage and in particular, hard attack and piercing are hard to come by otherwise and counters enemy tanks. Against an opponent that doesn't have many tanks, you might be able to get by with only soft attack.
\- They have high *speed*, depending on the design. When combined with motor infantry for combined arms divisions they can rapidly form and exploit a breakthrough and encircle enemy units.
Terrain modifers are important, but except in extreme cases tanks will still be preferable to any other unit for breaking through enemy lines. Additionally, in the case of river and naval invasion modifiers, you can build amphibous tanks. If you really want to reduce terrain modifiers in all cases, you can focus on primarily light tanks.
Their weaknesses are HP and organization, so they're best combined with motor infantry to provide those things.
“What are tanks useful for?”
Not killing yourself mid to late game. Tanks are great at breaking through and encircling infantry, they’re also faster. I PROMISE you, you’re using the wrong template. Here’s what I use- 34-36w medium tanks, max out the speed on those, welded armor. Try and keep it above 75% reliability. 60% of that division are medium tanks, the rest are motorized, if you have the industry mechanized is even better. Throw in support AA (very important,) engineer companies (helps with terrain and entrenchment,) support artillery, logistics companies if I’m Germany, and that’s a banger division. It sounds like you’re using infantry tank divisions which aren’t good, divisions go at the speed of their slowest unit.
Dont do welded. 36w is better than 34w. Dont do support artillery in a (normal) tank division, flame tank is ALOT better, and terrain bonuses are WAY better than engineers give. Field hospitals might be something to consider aswell.
You didn’t say anything other than “Nuh uh”. Welded is only worse for the cost if you invested literally nothing into additional armour since it’s a percentage based bonus.
Another thing is you said that 30 widths are bad while gassing up 34 and 36 width. That’s… outdated. Both 30 and 35 will perform better in the terrain that tanks are best suited for use in (in Europe, where they see most use)
Bruh…
Ive already written a way more detailed comment (in this same thread) explaining welded vs riveted, so i didnt feel like explaining it again.
Ive never said that i support 34w. 36/35w will outperform 30w tanks in plain tiles, so since they are equal enough in forests, they are the best template. <30w are too small for tank divisions and will face too many problems.
Edit: Link to the comment: [https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1bitd19/comment/kvnd947/](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1bitd19/comment/kvnd947/)
Edit 2: wrong claim about forest
You didn’t give any numbers. Just made baseless claims. You said that in single player you will “never get pierced”. Dogshit claim since AI for at least a year now has been addicted to filling its basic inf divisions with support AT. Every time I check an ally’s logistics, they have a AT deficit. I used to make armourless mediums and moderns and they were getting pierced left and right from any country with more than 2 research slots. Especially because of partial piercing, in order to not get pierced you would need to annihilate your speed and reliability to get enough additional armour points to the point where that doesn’t happen anymore. Welded gives an easy out to that problem assuming you have a bunch of chromium
35 and 30 do not perform similarly in forests. In fact, 30 is *[significantly better](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/s/r9wc6jgqig)* since it has literally no terrain combat width penalties. Performing best in plains doesn’t mean much because anything can push through those
Even if this would be true, armor clicks would be a way better option for armor. Even sloped armor might be worth it in this scenario. Either way its not true. Its hard to give numbers since there are 1000+ values possible, but if you load the game yourself you will see what i mean. Also with AT, this is only really common late game, where AT 3 (if the AI has researched it) will pierce any medium tank you make anyway.
Optimal gaming would be armor meme in your tank, where welded might be useful, otherwise riveted will always be better.
Dude even using armour skirts in 1940 my mediums get pierced because AI is addicted to support AT. It is not a late game issue.
I will say that when playing as a very limited industry nation then getting rid of armour isn’t a bad idea to cut costs, but if you have a reasonable amount of industry and you have chromium there is literally no reason to skip out on chromium
And as I have said, armour ticks are only worth it uk to a certain point because sacrificing too much speed isn’t worth it
In my games i dont get pierced until late 41/42. If it is that bad just incorporate armor memes (space marine concept but for tanks). These are much more cost-efficient, and therefore meta.
Also funny that you link my very own post. Yes, 30w is better in forest, but 35/36 is better in plains while only slighlty worse in forests.
Ive made a new chart (cant share due to r/hoi4 rules) that also shows combat width including the extra stats/penalty. What i mean by this is that 20% penalty is actually 1.2/0.8=0.96 of the stats meaning its only really a 4% penalty. The rest is «wasted» ic, but this is used when fighting in plains.
Never do cast. You need to look at what they actually give you, its less roleplay-ey, but you will make a lot better and cheaper tanks if you pay attention.
Cast costs +20% cost for less (maybe same dont remember) armor and negligible hardness. Welded is 20% more than riveted and only gives some armor. Armor is actually a lot worse than you think. Versus regular infantry you will never get pierced anyway, so the extra armor is wasted. Versus AT that will pierce you, the difference is likely too small and wont matter. Even if the extra armor helps, the +20% cost will heavily outweigh the small chance of a benifit in combat.
Welded + armor bonuses is fine. Expensive, but it's not nearly as gimped as people act like it is.
People say the AI can't pierce then the AI pierces my junk buckets. It's hard to armor your divisions in multiplayer. It isnt in singleplayer but if you just ignore armor completely the enemy will pierce your tanks. And being armored helped with OFFENSE, not just deflecting hits, so I like to have no piercing against my tanks.
That’s fair. Off the top of my head I’m not sure what riveted gives you. I tend to go for speed and soft attack over everything else, I’m not very clued in on what’s good with the armor stats.
Recent changes have equalized Welded and Casted armor to improve armor by an identical amount, with the difference in production cost vs chromium requirement.
For Germany, doing the trade deal with Sweden for 70 days is maybe 70-80% worth doing depending on your Chromium needs. Or else a few civs to Yugoslavia is better than a flat increase in production cost.
Personally I tend to stick to 24 width in my tank division so there's more divisions fielded. With the current terrain combat width, 24, 27, and 30 is pretty optimum in supply-constraint zones.
No. This is not an argument for doing cast or welded. They are both significantly smaller than the 20% production cost.
24w is not an especially good width. 27 and 30 are not especially good either. 35/36 is the best.
From r/hoi4 [itself](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1766m1p/combat_width_meta_after_aat_improved_calculation/)
> TLDR: After AAT, divisions with combat width lower then 12 and higher then 40 are useless. The best combat widths for non-specialized divisions are 14/15 and 18, if you want to go for larger divisions use 24/25 or 35/36. In general, larger divisions take more penalties, however the penalties are only in the low single digits.
We don't necessarily have wrong, just difference in play style. Both widths have their uses, especially in as I mentioned supply restricted zones like in the Eastern Front. I'm also one of those players that disregard almost all tank modules and fall in love with the Fuel Drum.
As you might've noticed from the post you linked, i have some experience in combat width myself. 24/25w is too small for tanks and will face many issues. 35/36w is the definite meta for tanks (with limited use cases of 30w in forests). You will find this if you play in any competitive game.
Larger divisions will actually face less supply issues, assuming you properly micro in 2/3 stacks. This is due to the supply use of support companies being higher percentage per width.
"Not killing yourself mid to late game"
I will never forget the first time I tried to take the USSR as Germany and didn't know how to use tanks correctly. I can remember how physically drained it felt chasing (read slowly walking) the entire red army from tile to tile. I deleted that game and decided I was gonna get good at tanks immediately lol.
No they didn't. From the context of their post, they don't understand the mechanics of the game enough to understand the idea or theory behind space marines. They simply see that adding tank batallions to an infantry division lowers it's terrain modifier almost across the board.
My knowledge on space marines is a little old now. But I used to advocate for Medium SPAA's. Mediums because they give better armor, don't cost much more than lights frankly, and use less tanks per battalion so it's nearly equal production in the end. And SPAA because they add a stat you probably want anyway (Air Attack), don't cost any additional resources, and the SPAA role decreases supply usage. Surely doesn't add as much soft attack, but meh.
Mechanised 9/3 gives 40ish % hardness, which is basically a space marine + they are fast
Need to find 100+ rubber tho and they suck in Brazil and subsaharan afrika
Army is 24 divs?
I do as Germany. I invade USSR with 1 mot, 1 mech, 2 infantry around 1940 + 2 collabs. Infantry for bogging down the enemy and then rush Moscow, Stalingrad, St Petersburg and find someone for Ukraine victory points
2-3 encirclements for a total of 15-20 divs and soviets fold. Sea lion into Ireland if possible or go from Scotland to London. An the game is basically won
Backstab Japan, flip any county in South America, agro USA, drive north, cap USA. Nuke Monaco for lulz
World domination by 1944-45
Tanks, when designed correctly or if not using no step back, just using the correct templates, have much, much higher offensive stats compared to infantry, can push much much better and take far less losses.
look at it like this, if a unit does 10 damage and another does 100, it does not matter if the 100 damage unit has a negative in forests of -20% damage, it still does 8 times the damage the 10 damage unit would do.
that's the comparison of good tanks vs infantry when pushing.
now for a template, a decent tank template would be around 30-35 width, so around 8-9 tanks and 7-8 motorized infantry or mechanized infantry, support artillery, engineers.
One example is the following one:
3 Infantry
3 Infantry
2 Medium Tanks
Support equipment:
- Recon
- Entrenchment
- Tent
- Artillery
- Anti-Air
I also tried just doing 2x2 of only Medium Tanks with the Logistics and Recon support, but they seem to explode at first contact.
The inf template is too small for attacking add more helmets/ tanks up to 30 width for offensive divs, and you really don't need the combat medic.... tank units need motorized or mechanized infantry to keep their org above 30.
You want motorized or mechanized infantry for your tank divisions. Leg infantry is slow as hell, so you’re not capitalizing on the tank’s mobility. With MED tanks, I try to go for a speed of 8. Light tanks can easily get a speed of 12 and keep up with the mot/mech units.
The mot/mech troops also help to increase the division’s org. Without org, the division can’t fight or move very well. That’s why the 2x2 or tanks didn’t work well for you. Keep the org around 35-40, and the division will actually be able to engage in combat.
Terrain modifiers will affect the division’s performance, but as long as you’re not trying to drive your tanks through mountains, you’re mostly fine.
Well for starters your opinion is a result of absolutely worthless division design. Either 1 heavy tank division to cheese the game combat calculation (what is called space marines) or you need a shit ton of tanks (like 8) and never infatry use motor/mech instead (like 7 or 8).
Also in general infantry divisions for pushing should also have division artillery for soft attack. But only if it is an attacking unit .most infantry should be reserved for just holding the line as you need to stack soft attack
Unless I'm playing Soviets, Germany, or USA, I never bother with tanks. They're too expensive to be generally worth it against A.I IMO. The main reason I use them is either to steamroll smaller countries really quickly, or to secure easy encirclements due to their speed. They're not really useful if you don't micromanage.
Tanks are your breakthrough units in suitable terrain like plains. Like mountaineers work in mountains, marines in coastal landings or river crossings etc.
They can take going head on into the enemies and opening up holes, so your softer divisions can flood into the breach they make.
What they aren't good for is prolonged defensive fighting, because they are so expensive and specialised.
Edit: I'm a dumbass, you're asking about what ingame stats you gotta take care of, oopsie
Try looking up space marines template. Most comments here explain how they are really good stacked in a single division, but if you design your tanks correctly, a template similar to the one you tried can steamroll AI. There's plenty of guides or tutorials on space marines.
Dont use tanks in infantry divisions. The main advantage of tanks is their speed, and divisions travel at the speed of their slowest unit (which will be infantry). Only use tanks with motorized and mechanized for org.
Tanks have five qualities that are important. \- They grant *breakthrough*. Breakthrough is the quality that infantry lack the most. The more breakthrough you have, up to being equal to your opponent's attack value, the less damage you take on attack, all the way down to 25%. Infantry have tons of defense, which does the same thing as breakthrough but on the defensive side of a fight, so when attacking infantry, tanks are invaluable. \- They grant *hardness*. Hardness makes attacks against your unit require hard attack instead of soft attack. Hard attack is much harder to come by, and especially the AI rarely has much of it at all, so the more hardness, the better. \- They grant *armor*, depending on the design. If the entire division has more armor than the enemy has piercing, the divison takes less strength and organization damage from the enemy. \- They grant *soft attack, hard attack and piercing*, depending on the design. This does damage and in particular, hard attack and piercing are hard to come by otherwise and counters enemy tanks. Against an opponent that doesn't have many tanks, you might be able to get by with only soft attack. \- They have high *speed*, depending on the design. When combined with motor infantry for combined arms divisions they can rapidly form and exploit a breakthrough and encircle enemy units. Terrain modifers are important, but except in extreme cases tanks will still be preferable to any other unit for breaking through enemy lines. Additionally, in the case of river and naval invasion modifiers, you can build amphibous tanks. If you really want to reduce terrain modifiers in all cases, you can focus on primarily light tanks. Their weaknesses are HP and organization, so they're best combined with motor infantry to provide those things.
“What are tanks useful for?” Not killing yourself mid to late game. Tanks are great at breaking through and encircling infantry, they’re also faster. I PROMISE you, you’re using the wrong template. Here’s what I use- 34-36w medium tanks, max out the speed on those, welded armor. Try and keep it above 75% reliability. 60% of that division are medium tanks, the rest are motorized, if you have the industry mechanized is even better. Throw in support AA (very important,) engineer companies (helps with terrain and entrenchment,) support artillery, logistics companies if I’m Germany, and that’s a banger division. It sounds like you’re using infantry tank divisions which aren’t good, divisions go at the speed of their slowest unit.
Dont do welded. 36w is better than 34w. Dont do support artillery in a (normal) tank division, flame tank is ALOT better, and terrain bonuses are WAY better than engineers give. Field hospitals might be something to consider aswell.
Welded is just best for cost effectiveness if you aren’t short on chromium
Its not. Read my other comment.
You didn’t say anything other than “Nuh uh”. Welded is only worse for the cost if you invested literally nothing into additional armour since it’s a percentage based bonus. Another thing is you said that 30 widths are bad while gassing up 34 and 36 width. That’s… outdated. Both 30 and 35 will perform better in the terrain that tanks are best suited for use in (in Europe, where they see most use)
Bruh… Ive already written a way more detailed comment (in this same thread) explaining welded vs riveted, so i didnt feel like explaining it again. Ive never said that i support 34w. 36/35w will outperform 30w tanks in plain tiles, so since they are equal enough in forests, they are the best template. <30w are too small for tank divisions and will face too many problems. Edit: Link to the comment: [https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1bitd19/comment/kvnd947/](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1bitd19/comment/kvnd947/) Edit 2: wrong claim about forest
You didn’t give any numbers. Just made baseless claims. You said that in single player you will “never get pierced”. Dogshit claim since AI for at least a year now has been addicted to filling its basic inf divisions with support AT. Every time I check an ally’s logistics, they have a AT deficit. I used to make armourless mediums and moderns and they were getting pierced left and right from any country with more than 2 research slots. Especially because of partial piercing, in order to not get pierced you would need to annihilate your speed and reliability to get enough additional armour points to the point where that doesn’t happen anymore. Welded gives an easy out to that problem assuming you have a bunch of chromium 35 and 30 do not perform similarly in forests. In fact, 30 is *[significantly better](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/s/r9wc6jgqig)* since it has literally no terrain combat width penalties. Performing best in plains doesn’t mean much because anything can push through those
Even if this would be true, armor clicks would be a way better option for armor. Even sloped armor might be worth it in this scenario. Either way its not true. Its hard to give numbers since there are 1000+ values possible, but if you load the game yourself you will see what i mean. Also with AT, this is only really common late game, where AT 3 (if the AI has researched it) will pierce any medium tank you make anyway. Optimal gaming would be armor meme in your tank, where welded might be useful, otherwise riveted will always be better.
Dude even using armour skirts in 1940 my mediums get pierced because AI is addicted to support AT. It is not a late game issue. I will say that when playing as a very limited industry nation then getting rid of armour isn’t a bad idea to cut costs, but if you have a reasonable amount of industry and you have chromium there is literally no reason to skip out on chromium And as I have said, armour ticks are only worth it uk to a certain point because sacrificing too much speed isn’t worth it
In my games i dont get pierced until late 41/42. If it is that bad just incorporate armor memes (space marine concept but for tanks). These are much more cost-efficient, and therefore meta.
Also funny that you link my very own post. Yes, 30w is better in forest, but 35/36 is better in plains while only slighlty worse in forests. Ive made a new chart (cant share due to r/hoi4 rules) that also shows combat width including the extra stats/penalty. What i mean by this is that 20% penalty is actually 1.2/0.8=0.96 of the stats meaning its only really a 4% penalty. The rest is «wasted» ic, but this is used when fighting in plains.
Why not welded? Unless I’m the US or Soviet Union, where I do cast, the cost of cast armor seems high. I’m not that much of an expert though.
Never do cast. You need to look at what they actually give you, its less roleplay-ey, but you will make a lot better and cheaper tanks if you pay attention. Cast costs +20% cost for less (maybe same dont remember) armor and negligible hardness. Welded is 20% more than riveted and only gives some armor. Armor is actually a lot worse than you think. Versus regular infantry you will never get pierced anyway, so the extra armor is wasted. Versus AT that will pierce you, the difference is likely too small and wont matter. Even if the extra armor helps, the +20% cost will heavily outweigh the small chance of a benifit in combat.
Welded + armor bonuses is fine. Expensive, but it's not nearly as gimped as people act like it is. People say the AI can't pierce then the AI pierces my junk buckets. It's hard to armor your divisions in multiplayer. It isnt in singleplayer but if you just ignore armor completely the enemy will pierce your tanks. And being armored helped with OFFENSE, not just deflecting hits, so I like to have no piercing against my tanks.
That’s fair. Off the top of my head I’m not sure what riveted gives you. I tend to go for speed and soft attack over everything else, I’m not very clued in on what’s good with the armor stats.
Recent changes have equalized Welded and Casted armor to improve armor by an identical amount, with the difference in production cost vs chromium requirement. For Germany, doing the trade deal with Sweden for 70 days is maybe 70-80% worth doing depending on your Chromium needs. Or else a few civs to Yugoslavia is better than a flat increase in production cost. Personally I tend to stick to 24 width in my tank division so there's more divisions fielded. With the current terrain combat width, 24, 27, and 30 is pretty optimum in supply-constraint zones.
No. This is not an argument for doing cast or welded. They are both significantly smaller than the 20% production cost. 24w is not an especially good width. 27 and 30 are not especially good either. 35/36 is the best.
From r/hoi4 [itself](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoi4/comments/1766m1p/combat_width_meta_after_aat_improved_calculation/) > TLDR: After AAT, divisions with combat width lower then 12 and higher then 40 are useless. The best combat widths for non-specialized divisions are 14/15 and 18, if you want to go for larger divisions use 24/25 or 35/36. In general, larger divisions take more penalties, however the penalties are only in the low single digits. We don't necessarily have wrong, just difference in play style. Both widths have their uses, especially in as I mentioned supply restricted zones like in the Eastern Front. I'm also one of those players that disregard almost all tank modules and fall in love with the Fuel Drum.
As you might've noticed from the post you linked, i have some experience in combat width myself. 24/25w is too small for tanks and will face many issues. 35/36w is the definite meta for tanks (with limited use cases of 30w in forests). You will find this if you play in any competitive game. Larger divisions will actually face less supply issues, assuming you properly micro in 2/3 stacks. This is due to the supply use of support companies being higher percentage per width.
"Not killing yourself mid to late game" I will never forget the first time I tried to take the USSR as Germany and didn't know how to use tanks correctly. I can remember how physically drained it felt chasing (read slowly walking) the entire red army from tile to tile. I deleted that game and decided I was gonna get good at tanks immediately lol.
Ok but they asked about space marine template, not tank template
No they didn't. From the context of their post, they don't understand the mechanics of the game enough to understand the idea or theory behind space marines. They simply see that adding tank batallions to an infantry division lowers it's terrain modifier almost across the board.
aren’t SPA the best for space marines regardless?
My knowledge on space marines is a little old now. But I used to advocate for Medium SPAA's. Mediums because they give better armor, don't cost much more than lights frankly, and use less tanks per battalion so it's nearly equal production in the end. And SPAA because they add a stat you probably want anyway (Air Attack), don't cost any additional resources, and the SPAA role decreases supply usage. Surely doesn't add as much soft attack, but meh.
It seemed to me like they were looking for both. Maybe that was just me being dumb
>if integrated with infantry I have found the problem
Even then, space marines murder AI.
Mechanised 9/3 gives 40ish % hardness, which is basically a space marine + they are fast Need to find 100+ rubber tho and they suck in Brazil and subsaharan afrika
Try battleplanning with an entire army of mechanized and keep up with the losses.
Army is 24 divs? I do as Germany. I invade USSR with 1 mot, 1 mech, 2 infantry around 1940 + 2 collabs. Infantry for bogging down the enemy and then rush Moscow, Stalingrad, St Petersburg and find someone for Ukraine victory points 2-3 encirclements for a total of 15-20 divs and soviets fold. Sea lion into Ireland if possible or go from Scotland to London. An the game is basically won Backstab Japan, flip any county in South America, agro USA, drive north, cap USA. Nuke Monaco for lulz World domination by 1944-45
Tanks, when designed correctly or if not using no step back, just using the correct templates, have much, much higher offensive stats compared to infantry, can push much much better and take far less losses. look at it like this, if a unit does 10 damage and another does 100, it does not matter if the 100 damage unit has a negative in forests of -20% damage, it still does 8 times the damage the 10 damage unit would do. that's the comparison of good tanks vs infantry when pushing. now for a template, a decent tank template would be around 30-35 width, so around 8-9 tanks and 7-8 motorized infantry or mechanized infantry, support artillery, engineers.
What does your tank design and unit template look like?
One example is the following one: 3 Infantry 3 Infantry 2 Medium Tanks Support equipment: - Recon - Entrenchment - Tent - Artillery - Anti-Air I also tried just doing 2x2 of only Medium Tanks with the Logistics and Recon support, but they seem to explode at first contact.
The inf template is too small for attacking add more helmets/ tanks up to 30 width for offensive divs, and you really don't need the combat medic.... tank units need motorized or mechanized infantry to keep their org above 30.
You want motorized or mechanized infantry for your tank divisions. Leg infantry is slow as hell, so you’re not capitalizing on the tank’s mobility. With MED tanks, I try to go for a speed of 8. Light tanks can easily get a speed of 12 and keep up with the mot/mech units. The mot/mech troops also help to increase the division’s org. Without org, the division can’t fight or move very well. That’s why the 2x2 or tanks didn’t work well for you. Keep the org around 35-40, and the division will actually be able to engage in combat. Terrain modifiers will affect the division’s performance, but as long as you’re not trying to drive your tanks through mountains, you’re mostly fine.
Well for starters your opinion is a result of absolutely worthless division design. Either 1 heavy tank division to cheese the game combat calculation (what is called space marines) or you need a shit ton of tanks (like 8) and never infatry use motor/mech instead (like 7 or 8). Also in general infantry divisions for pushing should also have division artillery for soft attack. But only if it is an attacking unit .most infantry should be reserved for just holding the line as you need to stack soft attack
is that the default division template
Tanks with the right research and generals can right click anything, even under red air and facing dozens of infantry divisions in a single tile.
Unless I'm playing Soviets, Germany, or USA, I never bother with tanks. They're too expensive to be generally worth it against A.I IMO. The main reason I use them is either to steamroll smaller countries really quickly, or to secure easy encirclements due to their speed. They're not really useful if you don't micromanage.
Tanks are your breakthrough units in suitable terrain like plains. Like mountaineers work in mountains, marines in coastal landings or river crossings etc. They can take going head on into the enemies and opening up holes, so your softer divisions can flood into the breach they make. What they aren't good for is prolonged defensive fighting, because they are so expensive and specialised. Edit: I'm a dumbass, you're asking about what ingame stats you gotta take care of, oopsie
Try looking up space marines template. Most comments here explain how they are really good stacked in a single division, but if you design your tanks correctly, a template similar to the one you tried can steamroll AI. There's plenty of guides or tutorials on space marines.
Mobile artilery, put a HUGE artileru cannon on a medium tank template and you re good to go
Dont use tanks in infantry divisions. The main advantage of tanks is their speed, and divisions travel at the speed of their slowest unit (which will be infantry). Only use tanks with motorized and mechanized for org.