• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

priam11

Second Lieutenant
78 Badges
Apr 14, 2007
109
297
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 -  Back to Hell
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III
Just started playing this after moving over from EU3. Still trying to figure out the HOI3 world.

Starting as Germany in Dies Irae: Gotterdamerung.

Just polling for peoples thoughts on the issue. Should I focus on only one or try a bit of both? I am staying away from strategic bombers as they are just too costly and I feel that Germany just does not need them at this time.

Other than the obvious benefits with regards to range with tactical vs. CAS, is CAS better at taking out troops and such which would make their limited range a trade-off? I know that they seem to be quite deadly against surface ships (found that one by accident as I clicked on the wrong air wing).

Also CAS has a shorter Tech tree as opposed to tactical. Which techs are a must for either approach?
 
CAS has more hard attack, making it better at bombing armor units. But since you'll face mostly infantry divisions, this isn't that useful.

And has, as you said, better naval attack.
 
In theory CAS has the advantage of being significantly cheaper in IC terms per unit than TAC, especially given that CAS use the light airplane practical which Germany should have oodles of due to building INTs for air dominance. You can almost build 2 CAS for every 1 TAC given that combination.

That IC savings is offset by the fact that you now need to research a whole new field of air doctrines. Given that IC for Germany is usually not a limiting factor while leadership is precious this often isn't a good trade. Then there's the operational employment. Very few of your opponents are going to field enough armor to make CAS high hard attack worthwhile. France and the UK have some tank units but those are generally inconsequential for Fall Gelb. CAS might be useful against UK armor in N. Africa but TACs are usually the better choice especially for their ability to knockdown infrastructure and logistic bomb which has more of an impact in N. Africa when both sides are fighting with tenuous supply situations. There are two countries which actually build enough tanks for CAS to be useful, one is the SU the other is the USA. Great you say...those are the defining battles of the war. The only problem is that the SU has kindly neglected to build you any airfields with which to base them. For the USA, if an American doom stack invades you are not going to accomplish anything on a strategic level with CAS planes. Stopping a large invasion is dependent on denying the invasion supplies, containing it, and ultimately crushing the beachhead. CAS aren't any good at port strikes or log bombing, TACs are more valuable.

Back to the SU, I mentioned earlier that you can build maybe almost 2ish to 1 in terms of IC cost. Well that doesn't help you when the only airbase for 200 miles is a piddly level 4. Going with a strategy of building numerous small CAS planes runs into the problem that there's no place to base them without incurring severe over stacking penalties and limited range to support the front.

The last annoyance is that a good deal of the bomber commanders which have traits suitable for ground support also have the "Tank Buster" trait. Great you say, that's exactly what you want your CAS planes to do. Well the only problem is that the TB trait lowers a target units hardness meaning that your CAS planes have to use their weaker soft attack rating.

In total the result is that while CAS look good in theory...in practical terms they have range problems, their role is better filled with TACs, and what little advantage they have in production costs are offset by the fact that airbase space limitations makes CAS zerging much less viable.
 
I concur with Ifernat completely, but I'll add a few more to recommending TAC exclusively over building any (or a doublish flood) of CAS as Germany or most countries for that matter, but you are correct in thinking to choose between a TAC or CAS complete concentration builds only IMHO.

While CAS are cheaper and buddy up in small plane practicals with your plethora of INTs that Germany needs to build for control of the air, in building large numbers of TACs even if only about half as many as you could of CAS they still provide a fairly reasonable return of medium practicals which are good enough to reduce their IC costs & production times but also if you were to build a few NAVs and some M-R Fighters (for their range advantage in Russia/NA) that stream will help them as well.

The other thing is that individually TAC are more durable than CAS and will be able to fly missions longer before you need to rest them to recover, so you would get more out of them that way and they are less likely to be eliminated in game, hopefully.

Also you can only have so many planes involved in each battle/bombing flight at a time given the stacking penalty and for much of the war, especially the early to mid-war period during which most of the fight will be, TAC have greater Soft Attack (and HA with Tank Buster traited wing commanders) so that they will inflict more casualties on the enemy & importantly disorganise them faster and assist your ground forces much more effectively, particularly if you use them to help out in desperate situations or at the tip of the spear.
 
The small range of CAS does not only give you trouble with the amounts of airfields. More important for my taste is that you need to rebase them more often. And this in addition to the rebase penalty really kills CAS for campaigns against SU and USA.
 
When you build CAS you only need two extra doctrines to research: pilot and ground crew training. The ground attack doctrine needs to be researched for other aircraft (like TACs) anyway. With FTM pilot/ground crew training finally applies to CAGs, but you need to research FTR, CAS, and NAV to get the full benefits of ORG and Morale (20%, 40%, and 40% respectively). Without these CAGs are lame puppies.

Given the above, if you are going to be a nation with sea power you are going to need to research all three types. If your going to do the research you might as well build the darned things. Besides the great practical gains for FTR, CAS has pretty decent sea attack values. Since even Germany is going to use TAC and NAV in any decent setup, add CAS to the mix and build some CAGs for light naval airwings (they do a great job). Unless you are going to use gamey tactics even Germany will build some sort of navy, which means CVs.

If it hadn't been for the much needed change with FTM I woud never build CAS. Now I do and am able to field a much better number of INTs than before.
 
It may be good to have a small amount of CAS. I use them as cheap substitution for naval strikes, yes. And for static defense, for offense they are not adequate. They could work better if rebasing penalty would base on range of rebasing, not flat 50% penalty. 6 is usual amount.

TACs are great multipurpose bombers. They have trouble only with very hard targets, only drawback is you need lot of doctrines to truly uncover their potential.

And MRs for Soviet land is very good investment. There are often no serious airfields in range.
 
Most of the techs relating to CAS and TAC (other than the type-specific Pilot and Ground Crew training) will need to be researched anyway, regardless of which you build. My preference as a major power is to build mostly TAC, with one (or possibly two) groups of 3xCAS for their higher hard attack, or for deployment along the coast as anti-ship bombers if there are no armored units to attack. They need to be closely supported by INT if you use them in that role, or they will take horrendous losses if any opposing aircraft show up. Any more than 1-2 groups of 3 is better served by building more TAC instead.
 
In the European theatre CAS are to my opinion a valuable supplement. I do not use them in quantities though; as Ger I'm happy with four groups of 3CAS+1FTR. As mentioned in this thread before, the leadership to research CAS, if you want to research FTR, TAC and CAG anyway, is minimal. And they are cheap.

If I have to make a choice, I would give TAC preference over CAS though.
 
Does anyone know if drop tanks technology affects CAS? If it does they can be useful if not then they are not really worth building. The main air groups I have are a bunch of 3 int and 2 tac 1 multi. You can have 3 tac groups if you have easy air superioirty.
 
Does anyone know if drop tanks technology affects CAS? If it does they can be useful if not then they are not really worth building. The main air groups I have are a bunch of 3 int and 2 tac 1 multi. You can have 3 tac groups if you have easy air superioirty.
CAS and CAGs get a significant boost (CAS slightly more so) to range from Drop Tanks, but they'll still be miles behind INT/FTRs.

I've yet to test them extensively, but I anticipate that my Soviet CAS wings will be a useful counter to Germany's panzer divs when they inevitably come rolling over the border. Naturally, I'm not ignoring my Tacs, either ;)
 
I said to uncover potential. Ground attack + TAC org-morale, then Logistical strike and other doctrines from that tree, and TAC armament technologies too.
Well my point was that considering CAS now also excel at naval attack you need to research the 4 naval doctrines to fully unlock their potential aswell ( instead of the four TAC doctrines for different land attacks).

So in my book they have the same doctrine requirements.
 
I have found CAS to be deadly on the eastern front; especially effective on offense when i find my plain infantry up against red army tanks. A small group of 2xCAS, if protected from soviet interceptors, can completely change the outcome of such a battle. The CAS wings will truly decimate the soviet armored regiments after a few days.
 
Well my point was that considering CAS now also excel at naval attack you need to research the 4 naval doctrines to fully unlock their potential aswell ( instead of the four TAC doctrines for different land attacks).

So in my book they have the same doctrine requirements.

Their usefulness of naval attack is severely limited by range. They are good at hunting convoys and if lucky, catching some ships.
Naval bombers have serious range and are used for further away operations.
And CAS can manage okay without most of doctrines, as in stand-up fight they are weakest of all planes.
 
The small range of CAS does not only give you trouble with the amounts of airfields. More important for my taste is that you need to rebase them more often. And this in addition to the rebase penalty really kills CAS for campaigns against SU and USA.

I've quit building CAS as Germany. The only place they are really useful is against the USSR, and not only are there range and airbase problems for CAS in the USSR, they suck up fuel that can better be used for tanks and TAC/INT/M-Rs.
 
I have found CAS to be deadly on the eastern front; especially effective on offense when i find my plain infantry up against red army tanks. A small group of 2xCAS, if protected from soviet interceptors, can completely change the outcome of such a battle. The CAS wings will truly decimate the soviet armored regiments after a few days.

TACs with tank buster leaders could have done the same thing. And to me, nothing blunts a determined attack better than logistical bombing.