Aces High

[War Emblem]

One of my favorite design directions that HOI4 took was a departure from the Air Wing system in HOI3. For me, the Air Wing system was a logistical and micro management nightmare. I really like the idea of Air Superiority zones in which you can assign air resources, especially how it has a % chance of effecting ground operations based on your level of Air Superiority. That said, while I really like the design philosophy, the implementation could be refined. Here are some observations I have on the air war.

1. 1936 model might decide it. From my experience, the air war is decided by 1936 models. While there is a large jump in stats from 36 to 40 fighters, most nations are going to be starting WW2 with the majority of their fighters as 36 models (especially since you will have replaced your pre-War starting fighters with these.) I'm not sure on the exact graph but it seems like it would be well into 41 before the 40 models make up the majority of your air force. By that time, the issue of air superiority is going to have been decided.

2. A plane is a plane is a plane. All aircraft are identical. For example, every 40 fighter has an attack of 27 defense of 16 and agility of 65 and so on. Now, generally I don't mind this - at this scale the operational abilities of individual units is largely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the Spitfire is slightly more agile than the FockeWulf, they both were able to perform their respective roles. However, I do understand the immersion argument in that people want to 'feel' like they are using Spitfires (or whatever). Further - the aircraft models of the major nations are going to be a lot better than anything the minor nations can come up with. Sweden might be able to build 40 fighters, but they shouldn't be as good as those being produced by the majors and it should be a big deal if say the Brits start a lend lease with them sending them some Spitfires.

3. Declining rate of return. Since the air war is likely decided by your 36 models right now, everything else seems somewhat superfluous. Yes, we will want to get 40 fighters, but what about 44s? After 4 years of war you really don't get much more in the 44 over the 40. Air Attack is identical, Air Defense 25% more, max speed 70 km/hr better, Range and everything else identical and costs one more aluminum to produce. Jets are really odd their stats are much improved over the 44 models but in terms of performance it seems they don't significantly outperform propeller aircraft. Yes, we know the Me-262 didn't effect the war, but they were only deployed in small numbers. 100 Jets would be overwhelmed by 2000 44 models, but would 500? Seems like weight of numbers is more important than actual stats.

4. Hey look at me we count too! That must be the motto of the heavy fighters an tactical bombers. I find myself (almost) never building either of them. Even with a resource heavy nation like the USA I don't get around to building them because you already are producing 5 air lines (CV Fighter, CV Bomber, Fighter, Strategic Bomber). Yes, heavy fighters in theory have greater coverage area but they are so far behind in agility and speed that fighters seem to dominate them. Maybe heavy fighters would have a place if you got a large number of 40 heavy fighters versus 36 fighters. Or maybe if they had a boost as night fighters. Maybe I just don't know how to use them. Right now I don't see a reason to ever build them. Tactical bombers seem to fall into that zone as well. From my experience CAS are much better at ground attack - like I can easily see the yellow numbers go green when I throw CAS into an attack, I must confess I don't see much effect from tactical bombers. They really aren't all that cheap either being only slightly less expensive than Strategic bombers and requiring almost the same amount of resources. Is there any reason to build tactical bombers over CAS and Strategic bombers?

I don't now enough about the nuances of the air war to make suggestions on these points, these are just my observations on the planes we build and fight with. Some of the most famous planes in history took part in this era. Are we seeing enough of them?

 

[Opanashc]

Different Air chief, different design studio, XP...

 

[Stolen Rutters]

4. Hey look at me we count too! That must be the motto of the heavy fighters an tactical bombers. I find myself (almost) never building either of them. Even with a resource heavy nation like the USA I don't get around to building them because you already are producing 5 air lines (CV Fighter, CV Bomber, Fighter, Strategic Bomber). Yes, heavy fighters in theory have greater coverage area but they are so far behind in agility and speed that fighters seem to dominate them. Maybe heavy fighters would have a place if you got a large number of 40 heavy fighters versus 36 fighters. Or maybe if they had a boost as night fighters. Maybe I just don't know how to use them. Right now I don't see a reason to ever build them. Tactical bombers seem to fall into that zone as well. From my experience CAS are much better at ground attack - like I can easily see the yellow numbers go green when I throw CAS into an attack, I must confess I don't see much effect from tactical bombers. They really aren't all that cheap either being only slightly less expensive than Strategic bombers and requiring almost the same amount of resources. Is there any reason to build tactical bombers over CAS and Strategic bombers?

I don't now enough about the nuances of the air war to make suggestions on these points, these are just my observations on the planes we build and fight with. Some of the most famous planes in history took part in this era. Are we seeing enough of them?

Yeah, what's up with that? The long range heavy fighters are supposed to be the only thing that can protect strategic bombers throughout their long bombing runs. If you are building tons of strategic bombers, the game should make strategic bombers harder to kill if you have heavies, and virtually unprotected if you only have light fighters (i.e. intercept missions should be terribly overpowered and extra deadly if the strategic bombers come in without heavy fighter support, where light fighters are unable to reach).

 

[sterrius]

1-> You are half right. 1936 fighters will kind of decide the air war but its the 1944 that models that will finish it.

With 1944 models being researched in 1941-42 they can totally kill 5 to 10 1936 fighters before going down. No matter your advantage you will eventually run out of planes.

Also 90% of the players lose the air war in 1938 because everyone bets "all or nothing". There is some techniques you can use to heavily reduce the amount of dead planes making sure even if you're losing you will keep enough planes until you get a edge either on XP or new models.

One example is to set your fighter to 1 big stack plus Night missions only. Deaths get reduced by half or even more when you do that for example. Also don´t forget to use limited operations where they will only fly with 75% or more planes on the wing.


2-> This is a problem of the actual XP system. Right now no one sees much reason to expend a lot of XP on old plane models. Also the upgrades planes have available are very limited with speed and weapons being the only 2 that actually matter in combat.

This create a very limited way of improving them and making sure every plane will be the same.

My recommendation here would be range going to speed. And trading range for armor. (that would increase defense). That would enable paradox to create a "rock > Paper > Scissor" system making things a lot more interesting as you will need to kind of bet what option the enemy will be using and counter it.

Also the new XP system need to avoid a new researched equipment to receive a super amount of XP. And at same time give 1 or 2 points so you can suit the equipment to your taste.

In resume: We need a new XP system and variant system. Ships and tanks too.


3-> Range is not identical. Your right click can show you "1k" but in the production screen if you hover the mouse you will see there is a difference in planes. Only jets right now are really too much out of reach. (only itally can rush them) and something is wrong with jets right now as they don´t perform that good.


4-> Before 1.3.3 Heavy fighters where worth it, but since they buffed 1940 and 1944 L. Fighters the later H. Fighter models lost even more edge. So i agree they totally need some buffs right now. 1936 H. Fighters are still very good vs 1936 L. Fighters. They just need some speed upgrades.

Tactical bombers are very very useful. Im using them with Germany for port strikes, Japan + italy they totally replace cag´s, and USA and UK to use in the pacific (few factorys).

Thats because they peform all missions. From S. Bombing, to Ground bombing to bombing ships and docks (put on ground support on sea provinces). This allow me to save resources putting everything in one single plane. This way no need for NAV´s as italy for example and i can S. Bomb if needed.

Sure i lose some ground attack, but its not that bad as S. bombing and Naval bombing increase my options and strategys. So "punching a wall with troops" is now not my only solution.

 

[cunningstunts]

1-> You are half right. 1936 fighters will kind of decide the air war but its the 1944 that models that will finish it.

1-> One example is to set your fighter to 1 big stack plus Night missions only. Deaths get reduced by half or even more when you do that for example. Also don´t forget to use limited operations where they will only fly with 75% or more planes on the wing.


2-> This is a problem of the actual XP system. Right now no one sees much reason to expend a lot of XP on old plane models. Also the upgrades planes have available are very limited with speed and weapons being the only 2 that actually matter in combat.

My recommendation here would be range going to speed. And trading range for armor. (that would increase defense). That would enable paradox to create a "rock > Paper > Scissor" system making things a lot more interesting as you will need to kind of bet what option the enemy will be using and counter it.


4-> Before 1.3.3 Heavy fighters where worth it, but since they buffed 1940 and 1944 L. Fighters the later H. Fighter models lost even more edge. So i agree they totally need some buffs right now. 1936 H. Fighters are still very good vs 1936 L. Fighters. They just need some speed upgrades.

Tactical bombers are very very useful. Im using them with Germany for port strikes, Japan + italy they totally replace cag´s, and USA and UK to use in the pacific (few factorys).

Thats because they peform all missions. From S. Bombing, to Ground bombing to bombing ships and docks (put on ground support on sea provinces). This allow me to save resources putting everything in one single plane. This way no need for NAV´s as italy for example and i can S. Bomb if needed.

Sure i lose some ground attack, but its not that bad as S. bombing and Naval bombing increase my options and strategys. So "punching a wall with troops" is now not my only solution.

Few questions on your air strategy as Germany:

1) I may be remembering something incorrectly, but isn't there a bug where you have to set your planes onto day and night missions, not just one, otherwise they don't fly missions properly?

2.1) With your BF109s, how much do you try to upgrade them before switching to the 1940 fighter?
2.2) When do you try to research the 1940 model?
2.3) And then regarding your variants, how do you balance them? +5 on engine and +1 on speed, something like that?

Very much looking forward to the new air changes and what you can tell us in your amazing guide!

 

[sterrius]

Few questions on your air strategy as Germany:

1) I may be remembering something incorrectly, but isn't there a bug where you have to set your planes onto day and night missions, not just one, otherwise they don't fly missions properly?

2.1) With your BF109s, how much do you try to upgrade them before switching to the 1940 fighter?
2.2) When do you try to research the 1940 model?
2.3) And then regarding your variants, how do you balance them? +5 on engine and +1 on speed, something like that?

Very much looking forward to the new air changes and what you can tell us in your amazing guide!

1- For fighters the air superiority bonus is not linked to the amount of missions/day. GOin day or night will reduce the amount of missions the planes will do each day reducing the amount of enemys killed but mainly the amount of fighters you lose will also be reduced.

On air superiority players have to stop doing a focus on wiping out the enemy and more focus on just staying alive and keeping its air superiority. Specially as axis where you need to save planes for Barbarrosa.

I also only use CAS on day missions. never night. On night they face penaltys putting themselves for interception for almost no benefit on the ground.

In fact air superiority is so broken right now that if you place more planes the airfield can support no planes will fly but they still going to add air superiority to the region. (Ex: Placing 2000 planes on a airfield that can field only 600).

My hope they will fix and balance this more on 1.4

The main problem is the system right now don´t give those hints. You have to find this by trial and error. Taking hours and hours of testing for a info that should be readily available.



2-> Right now on 1.3.3 im not using H. Fighters because its a dead end already in 1936. I hope on 1.4 the 1940 H. Fighter and 1944 get better so that way i can focus more on them with USA and Japan.

3-> 1940 is researched around 1939-40, depends on the country. Any country with a fighter discount i save that discount for the 1944 allowing you to get them on 1941-42. Depends on the country.

 

[War Emblem]

I'm curious why you save your bonus for 44 fighters over 40. There is a big jump from 36 fighter to 40. The difference between a 40 and a 44 is rather small 25% air defense and 70 km/hr. Your observations on air superiority are enlightening, I didn't know that is how it worked currently.

 

[REDDQ]

One of my favorite design directions that HOI4 took was a departure from the Air Wing system in HOI3. For me, the Air Wing system was a logistical and micro management nightmare. I really like the idea of Air Superiority zones in which you can assign air resources, especially how it has a % chance of effecting ground operations based on your level of Air Superiority. That said, while I really like the design philosophy, the implementation could be refined. Here are some observations I have on the air war.

True that. I wish they cut the micro even further. Now we have to put aircraft on every single airstrip we own and then deploy forces where we wish. We should have instead a hybrid system where we create air wing (as we would create an army) from available planes and then mark zones with missions we wish to perform (as we do with navies). Planes should land on airfields giving them the best air efficiency automatically

4. Hey look at me we count too! That must be the motto of the heavy fighters an tactical bombers. I find myself (almost) never building either of them. Even with a resource heavy nation like the USA I don't get around to building them because you already are producing 5 air lines (CV Fighter, CV Bomber, Fighter, Strategic Bomber). Yes, heavy fighters in theory have greater coverage area but they are so far behind in agility and speed that fighters seem to dominate them. Maybe heavy fighters would have a place if you got a large number of 40 heavy fighters versus 36 fighters. Or maybe if they had a boost as night fighters. Maybe I just don't know how to use them. Right now I don't see a reason to ever build them. Tactical bombers seem to fall into that zone as well. From my experience CAS are much better at ground attack - like I can easily see the yellow numbers go green when I throw CAS into an attack, I must confess I don't see much effect from tactical bombers. They really aren't all that cheap either being only slightly less expensive than Strategic bombers and requiring almost the same amount of resources. Is there any reason to build tactical bombers over CAS and Strategic bombers?

I don't now enough about the nuances of the air war to make suggestions on these points, these are just my observations on the planes we build and fight with. Some of the most famous planes in history took part in this era. Are we seeing enough of them?

Tacticals are very nice, so versatile. If I have resource shortages I can focus on them while cutting CAS and strategic. I agree about heavy fighters though.

I am by no means an expert but they seem as kind of failed class, by no means able to hold their own against lighter single engine fighters. Wiki certainly agrees (I know, weak source) but it mentions the same thing you do, that they managed to find a niche in night combat so that might be nice option. With bonus for every researched radar technology.

The other thing is precisely what makes tactical bomber nice, ie versatility.

More successful was the Bristol Beaufighter, which reused major portions of the earlier Beaufort torpedo bomber. Armed with six .303 inch machine guns, four 20 mm cannon and an assortment of bombs and rockets, the Beaufighter was potent in the anti-ship and ground attack role in the Pacific and Europe. With the addition of radar, it was one of the Royal Air Force's main night fighters. Similarly, the de Havilland Mosquito fast bomber was later adapted for both day and night fighter use.

Which brings me to "Realistic Air Missions" mod. I deeply believe that planes are just way too limited in their roles in HoI4. Heavy fighters would make a nice light bomber/maritime patrol with an option to hold air superiority for some time.

 

[cunningstunts]

I'm curious why you save your bonus for 44 fighters over 40. There is a big jump from 36 fighter to 40. The difference between a 40 and a 44 is rather small 25% air defense and 70 km/hr. Your observations on air superiority are enlightening, I didn't know that is how it worked currently.

Hmm. And one could start building production efficiency on the 1936 model from the beginning of the game, to give you an early advantage over your enemy's 1936 fighters. I'm thinking the UK's fighter model bonus could help against German fighters for example.

 

[cunningstunts]

True that. I wish they cut the micro even further. Now we have to put aircraft on every single airstrip we own and then deploy forces where we wish. We should have instead a hybrid system where we create air wing (as we would create an army) from available planes and then mark zones with missions we wish to perform (as we do with navies). Planes should land on airfields giving them the best air efficiency automatically

Tacticals are very nice, so versatile. If I have resource shortages I can focus on them while cutting CAS and strategic. I agree about heavy fighters though.

I am by no means an expert but they seem as kind of failed class, by no means able to hold their own against lighter single engine fighters. Wiki certainly agrees (I know, weak source) but it mentions the same thing you do, that they managed to find a niche in night combat so that might be nice option. With bonus for every researched radar technology.

The other thing is precisely what makes tactical bomber nice, ie versatility.

More successful was the Bristol Beaufighter, which reused major portions of the earlier Beaufort torpedo bomber. Armed with six .303 inch machine guns, four 20 mm cannon and an assortment of bombs and rockets, the Beaufighter was potent in the anti-ship and ground attack role in the Pacific and Europe. With the addition of radar, it was one of the Royal Air Force's main night fighters. Similarly, the de Havilland Mosquito fast bomber was later adapted for both day and night fighter use.

Which brings me to "Realistic Air Missions" mod. I deeply believe that planes are just way too limited in their roles in HoI4. Heavy fighters would make a nice light bomber/maritime patrol with an option to hold air superiority for some time.

What about heavy fighters to counter strategic bombers?

And regarding tactical bombers: we know @podcat et al. are working on the air aspect of the game. So maybe we'll see Germany getting a 50% research bonus on the 1940 tactical bomber model instead of the strategic bomber model - small change in the national_focus text folder is all that's needed

@REDDQ - I could definitely see tactical bombers being decent for long-range naval operations from coastal airfields. This could also mean coastal airfields increase in strategic value. I'm thinking good things for MP games where one might want to counter all of @Dalwin's U-boats all that commerce raiding/anti-submarine/carrier=OP banter I read on the forum has produced some great suggestions.

 

[Dalwin]

You should see the uboat plan for the next game.

After having been the USSR and Japan in the last two, starting next week I get to be Germany. The uboat plan will be a key facet and it will be something entirely different from any that I have revealed in earlier threads on the topic. The last time this particular UK player faced my Reich, uboat mechanics were still broken and he was allowed to bomb me with relative impunity. His economy will not be so untouchable now.

 

[REDDQ]

What about heavy fighters to counter strategic bombers?

And regarding tactical bombers: we know @podcat et al. are working on the air aspect of the game. So maybe we'll see Germany getting a 50% research bonus on the 1940 tactical bomber model instead of the strategic bomber model - small change in the national_focus text folder is all that's needed

@REDDQ - I could definitely see tactical bombers being decent for long-range naval operations from coastal airfields. This could also mean coastal airfields increase in strategic value. I'm thinking good things for MP games where one might want to counter all of @Dalwin's U-boats all that commerce raiding/anti-submarine/carrier=OP banter I read on the forum has produced some great suggestions.

Folks playing multiplayer probably have way more experience with strategic bombers than I do Heavy fighter seem natural as they have the best air damage. But then again... strategic bombers might be escorted by light fighters and heavies will be slaughtered. At least that is my take on this, might be wrong.

 

[sterrius]

I'm curious why you save your bonus for 44 fighters over 40. There is a big jump from 36 fighter to 40. The difference between a 40 and a 44 is rather small 25% air defense and 70 km/hr. Your observations on air superiority are enlightening, I didn't know that is how it worked currently.

Don´t forget that you will also put a speed 5 on the 1944 plane. Increasing the speed and agility even more. Giving yourself bigger bonus vs the 1940 and 1936 models.

Each agility point above the other fighter increase your stats by 1%. Speed not only determine if you strike first but also give a bonus.

I don´t remember right now what stats, i have no internet right now in my house and even deleted hoi4 to make a update on my total war game. So until i get internet back i have limited acess to the gamefiles i.i.

but you can test yourself. Make 1000 1944 fighters vs 1940 fighters. Put speed 5 on both and you will see the 1944 will murder the old planes. In good enough numbers to be worth it saving your 50% discount for them.

In fact im a heavily defensor of nerfing those bonus to around 20-30%. This way stopping those kind of strategys. I don´t like getting 2 years + ahead of time, but its very hard not to use it when the opponent goes that route.

 

[ringhloth]

What if some NFs provided a smaller research bonus, but gave a free variant? IMO, the problem with variants providing the difference between two countries' weapons is twofold: first, it's really difficult to get decent variants out when the war starts; second, I generally have the same strategy for variants no matter who I play. I'm not super-gosu-pro at the game, but variants fall short when it comes to personalizing my army towards my country, and I think providing a "path of least resistance" when it comes to upgrading my tanks and planes would be great.

 

[sterrius]

What if some NFs provided a smaller research bonus, but gave a free variant?

Giving a much smaller bonus and some air XP that can only be spended on specific models can help. Otherwise this XP will be used on later models.

We need ways of fixing the XP to specific models stopping people from "farming" XP on the early years to spend everything on the last models.

 

[ringhloth]

Giving a much smaller bonus and some air XP that can only be spended on specific models can help. Otherwise this XP will be used on later models.

We need ways of fixing the XP to specific models stopping people from "farming" XP on the early years to spend everything on the last models.

(I edited the post in the time it took you to make yours)

What I mean is that certain national focuses will give a free variant, either immediately or when a specific plane is unlocked. So if I get "beginner airplanes" as Britain, I get a small research bonus, but when I research the Spitfire, I get a free Spitfire variant that gives it a bit more agility or something. If I had taken that focus after I researched the Spitfire, I would immediately gotten that Spitfire variant, and then gotten a research bonus applicable to my next tech.