Hearts of Iron IV - Developer Diary 9 - Vacation and Air tech
- Thread starter podcat
- Start date
-
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.
OK spoilsport.
Will airfields/airunits have a command status with leaders or just on their own. I don't mean aces.
Will airfields/airunits have a command status with leaders or just on their own. I don't mean aces.
You mean a type of OOB ? Nothing suggests that. You have a "squadron" (or group or whatever you want to call that particular collection of planes) which you station at an airport in region X. When you make battleplans, you get a list of your air bases (sorted by range), and can assign suitable orders to whatever squadrons you have in the vicinity (that it at least how it was done during the live footage demo they showed).
No I would mean a commander of the entire force at the airbase. Not just squadron or wing commanders and not just aces.
If you can base 200 aircraft at an airbase will they have an overall commander like the 'draging, pointing, clicking' thingie for
ground commanders.
If you can base 200 aircraft at an airbase will they have an overall commander like the 'draging, pointing, clicking' thingie for
ground commanders.
ahh. Nothing that we have been shown suggests such a thing. But ultimately, only Paradox can answer that
Sorry, wasn't trying to cause trouble.
I think it's popped up in discussion before (I think in the air warfare DD) but at the moment I think their only plan is to have aces rather than assigned officers for air bases. I'd like it if you could have air commanders for large groups of aircraft (maybe all the airbases in one air warfare region), as it'd provide more choices re where you put your best air commanders, without needing a leader for every wing. I don't think something like this would be completely out of the question, but it would be another layer of management for the player, and might be deemed a layer too far.
I think it's popped up in discussion before (I think in the air warfare DD) but at the moment I think their only plan is to have aces rather than assigned officers for air bases. I'd like it if you could have air commanders for large groups of aircraft (maybe all the airbases in one air warfare region), as it'd provide more choices re where you put your best air commanders, without needing a leader for every wing. I don't think something like this would be completely out of the question, but it would be another layer of management for the player, and might be deemed a layer too far.
That would be odd to have just 'aces' as that would throw off any combat resolution at this level. Since we are talking about
a strategic level game not having large air force leaders but having aces effect combat is like having top tank commanders but
no higher level commanders. A supertactical part of a world-wide strategic war.
a strategic level game not having large air force leaders but having aces effect combat is like having top tank commanders but
no higher level commanders. A supertactical part of a world-wide strategic war.
That does seem odd. There were several high level air commanders, at least on the allied side that significantly influenced the performance of their air forces. General Lemay and his impact on the Twentieth Air Force in the Pacific Theatre comes to mind as an easy example. Axis leaders who had the most influence may have been more of a cabinet/joint chiefs level though. I can't remember his name but I thought there was a high level German general who championed four engine strategic bombers who died in an air crash. The four engine Ural Bomber camp lost their influence and Goering went with the two engine, tactical bomber doctrine. So I could see keeping the air force leadership at a cabinet level but I hope they go for a similar level as they are doing for ground armies.
The importance of aces wasn't so much in the tallies they accumulated. It was the ideas and skills that they passed on to others. It was the way they inspired others to fight. Think Sailor Milan or Douglas Bader.
still only squadron effects. has little training effect on other squadrons. very limited tactical item in a strategic game like aces
does seem like World of Planes? I hope this is not the way PI intends to slide HOI4.
does seem like World of Planes? I hope this is not the way PI intends to slide HOI4.
If I remember the statistic right, the majority of kills(not claims) was done by aces. Pilot either was really good and gained many kills or mediocre, thus wouldn`t gain any.
Probably the system where less experienced pilots were wing men also did increase the scores of more experienced pilots as they were engaging enemies most of the time, while less experienced would be covering them.
Question is do aces die in HOI4? Do generals? Having a dead ace gives little hope or expierence to other pilots. its the statistical
curve I worry about that a small number of aces would inject into the game. If your not going to have divisional generals how can
you have any workable number of aces?
curve I worry about that a small number of aces would inject into the game. If your not going to have divisional generals how can
you have any workable number of aces?
No idea.
Darkrenown said in DD #7 :
"While individual planes do not gain experience, combat/missions have the possibility of generating Aces. Aces can be assigned to Air wings and improve the efficiency the planes. We'll talk more about them in a later dev diary."
Thats more or less what we have to go on at this point
ewww. I am not at all sure about that being good. Single pilots out of possible hundreds improving efficiency? If they could do that
in their own squadron it was good but beyond that is really stretching it. Again it sounds like panzer aces improving your tank units.
Oh please don't let them read THAT and use that idea...:blink:
Sounding a bit like World of Warplanes meets HOI.
in their own squadron it was good but beyond that is really stretching it. Again it sounds like panzer aces improving your tank units.
Oh please don't let them read THAT and use that idea...:blink:
Sounding a bit like World of Warplanes meets HOI.
Not squadrons, which won't exist in the game, but air "wing" which is a fairly loose implementation of the real life wing. It can have may be 10-100 planes in it. Presumably there is a limit to the number of effective planes you can deploy to an airbase, either a hard cap, or a stacking penalty over a certain number of planes. The effect of an ace could therefore be on alot of individual planes.
But it is assumed that each type of plane at an airbase is a separate air "wing", so a fighter ace can't give a bonus to a "wing" of bombers at the same airbase?
So far as leaders are concerned. I had hoped they would provide a proper air OOB to match the army, not get rid of the lot. Nevertheless, if you create a "blue" army in East Prussia under Rommel, then you should be able to assign air wings as well as Divs to the "blue" army, even if the very concept of colour coded forces is so childish. The air wing should engage in CAS or TAC, or air superiority missions within the West Poland Strategic Region in direct support of Rommel's ground forces. That would then allow integration of air forces within the battle plan system.
Do I have to build a certain level of airbase in a strategic zone before I can start adding planes to the strategic zone?
No, the Strategic Region shown in the screenshot was Southern England, when GER occupied Northern France, Belgium etc. The SR is for targeting purposes. Deciding whether you can target that SR depends on the range of the planes.
We can assume there is a limit on the number of planes you can rebase to the airbases you capture in Northern France. But it would be unusual if an airbase existed, even bombed down to a low level if it had suffered alot of bombing before you captured it, and yet you could not send at least some fighters there.
However, I always felt it was not realistic that you could base medium or worse heavy bombers/transports at level 1 airbases. That level implies to me short grass runways, maybe not even completely flat, on a slight incline in hills and with minimal facilities. A forward air base, where small single engine planes can be located.
Only level 4 and above should hold medium bombers, say, and only level 8 for heavy bombers. They need concrete long and flat runways, and well developed facilities for the fuel and bombs to be stored, probably in underground concrete bunkers.
Some limit would also prevent you capturing a low level airbase and immediately rebasing bomber forces there, and considerably extending their reach into enemy territory. There has to be a delay before the airbase is repaired and brought back into full operation. And rebasing forces even with bases repaired to their maximum capability, should cause a delay before the planes are fully operational. It's not just the planes need to get there, but all of the ground support, equipment and specialist supplies, spare parts and workshops.
