Carrier based aircraft tree

[GhengisKhan]

Ha! @Sideburnout actually added art for jap and us carrier planes yesterday:

(G3M is there because it was incorrectly set as a carrier plane and thus needed art for its land based version)

Fantastic. Now you need to get him to work on all the tank submodels.

 

[Frosted Vert]

Fantastic. Now you need to get him to work on all the tank submodels.

When I close my eyes I have visions of Stugs and M10s.

 

[Gort11]

When I close my eyes I have visions of Stugs and M10s.

You should probably get that looked at.

 

[FieldMedic]

Ha! @Sideburnout actually added art for jap and us carrier planes yesterday:

(G3M is there because it was incorrectly set as a carrier plane and thus needed art for its land based version)

These look really good .

I know Stellaris gets all the love these days but know that HoI4 is still my favourite <3

 

[GundamMerc]

looks good. I rescind my arguments.

 

[Daelyn75]

sure, but anything else would:
1) Take too long to make
2) Take too long to balance
3) be harder to learn
4) possibly not be any more fun/immersive anyway.

podcat, have you taken my and other suggestions about the land based naval bombers being twin engine or four as standard instead of single engine land based naval bombers which basically didn't really exist? The entire Japanese naval (non carrier) bombers, and their tactical bombers are way off.

As several of us went over the entire Japanese aircraft tree - minus the fighters and heavy fighters in this thread - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/japans-air-force-tree.920107/

I and many others spent hours examining each and every aircraft for the Japanese CAS, Tactical, Naval, and Strategic bombers. We've done this to make it more accurate, and a better playing experience. We all would love it if you modeled the aircraft upon the general consensus reached by the end of the thread.