I am an idiot and don't know what these air doctrine modifiers do. Please, help.

[Secret Master]

So, I finally give up. Despite my best efforts, I can't figure out (or even test) what some of the modifiers in the air doctrine tree actually do.

Since I'm too dumb to figure it out, could some of you smarter folks give me a hand?

The following concepts I do not fully understand:

Escort Efficiency (Is it a mission efficiency buff? Which mission is it improving and when? I have no idea.)

Interception Detection (Since detection in an air region is increased by planes on air superiority, what the Hell does this do? Planes on intercept don't even fly if no bombers are detected.)

Naval Mission Efficiency: Does it only improve land NAVs on naval strike? Does it ever affect CV NAVs? What about CV NAVs on land?

Air Support Mission efficiency: Does this just mean "improved mission efficiency for planes on ground attack"? Or does include other things?

Strategic Bombing Visibility: I know what it does, technically, but when the enemy has 98% detection from 2000 fighters and level 5 RADAR, does does it matter at all? I'm asking, because as far as I can tell, detection is universal in an air zone. I don't see a real difference when I test it, but I thought I would ask since I don't know how it works.

In all seriousness, some of these modifiers come from parts of the doctrine tree that can be skipped due to how branching paths work. For example, Home Defense (strategic destruction doctrine) has interception detection. You can skip that entire tech if you want, getting you further down the tree faster. But I'm not sure what I'm giving up. I don't think I need it, but I'd hate to be missing something.

The irony is that when I test stuff in the air, I can't really see a difference in air combat when I either have or do not have some of these factors in play.

I'd also like to point out that you can put fighters on both air superiority and interception at the same time. Could you nerf yourself accidentally by selecting both missions (or the wrong mission) when you have certain doctrines in play?

 

[Louella]

Interception Detection (Since detection in an air region is increased by planes on air superiority, what the Hell does this do? Planes on intercept don't even fly if no bombers are detected.)

Checked from ingame, aircraft that are on interception missions do increase detection. (tested by switching the active air region of a wing of interceptor aircraft).
But they don't fly unless things are detected.

Naval Mission Efficiency: Does it only improve land NAVs on naval strike? Does it ever affect CV NAVs? What about CV NAVs on land?

Dunno, however, land-based aircraft capable of performing naval strikes, their targeting ability is improved not by air doctrines, but by the naval doctrines relating to air-attacks. (oddly making the "Base Strike" naval doctrine, rightmost path, useful for a land-based power seeking to use land-based aircraft to attack the ships of a superior naval-based power. +40% better targeting for naval strike missions.)

Escort Efficiency (Is it a mission efficiency buff? Which mission is it improving and when? I have no idea.)

Dunno. There used to be a define that specified chances for interceptors to bypass escorts and attack bombers directly, but it's no longer active, so... ???
Maybe "bomber escort" was planned to be a mission type, but removed, and this tech directly affected things there.
What does it do now? lol, I dunno. Maybe something to do with efficiency of wings on air superiority vs enemy wings on interception missions ? i.e. if there are enemy fighters on interception mission, then more friendly fighters on air superiority mission, will engage those enemy fighters.

 

[grandad1982]

I'm glad that the air war was overhauled. Its so much clearer now.

 

[Secret Master]

Checked from ingame, aircraft that are on interception missions do increase detection. (tested by switching the active air region of a wing of interceptor aircraft).
But they don't fly unless things are detected.

What are we going to do tonight, Secret Master?

Enlist in the interception air corps. That way, we don't have to die doing our job. We'll sit in the lounge, sipping our favorite beverages, and periodically fill out detection reports from all those air missions we didn't fly. Then we take over the world!

(I considered going with "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?", but I couldn't think of something that was both funny and not an innuendo.)

I'm glad that the air war was overhauled. Its so much clearer now.

You, sir, are a scholar among men for such a simple, concise joke.

 

[Louella]

I'd also like to point out that you can put fighters on both air superiority and interception at the same time. Could you nerf yourself accidentally by selecting both missions (or the wrong mission) when you have certain doctrines in play?

Tested ingame. With air doctrines for the test scenario giving a higher "Interception Detection" statistic than the "Fighter Detection" statistic, then... when an air wing is on Interception mission, the detection is slightly higher, than when the air wing is on Air superiority mission. If both selected, detection is lower (air superiority mission overrides interception mission).
test scenario, when "Fighter Detection" statistic is higher than "Interception Detection" statistic, then, detection is highest when air wings are on air superiority missions. Selecting both missions has no effect.

So... in a handful of situations, you'll get better detection when the aircraft are on "interception" mission only. But, in the layout of the air doctrines, this will only occur if you only have the first 3 Operational Integrity doctrines researched. The other two doctrines, fighter detection techs occur first.

So... you can nerf yourself, but only in the early war, if you're using Operational Integrity.

I think.

 

[Sourlol]

I'm glad that the air war was overhauled. Its so much clearer now.

lol

When they announced they were working on the air war. I expected issues like this thread would be the subject of their work. Nope, just a new UI.

WtT comes with the first mechanic changes to the air war--attaching them to divisions.

Im edging on 900 hours and I've really got no idea how the air war works--mechanics wise (the formula for combat and all the modifier and how they impact it).

 

[BaddoSpirito]

In the previous patch, air support mission efficiency significantly increased the trade ratio of CAS against fighters. In fact, bf support CAS traded almost 1 to 1 against fighters. This doctrine might still have the same effect but not be noticeable because CAS trades extremely badly against fighters now. I suspect naval mission efficiency might be similar.

I have not seen any effects of interception detection and escort efficiency on any patch ever. Even if they do anything, they don't do anything that makes a significant enough difference to be noticed.

No clue about strat bombing visibility.

 

[Secret Master]

I think.

So, it's basically like this:

In all seriousness, you have been a bit helpful.

 

[smellymummy]

yeah air doctrines, air combat mechanics, all of it really could seriously benefit from some clarity. But it's an interesting post so I'll give it a shot and share what I expect to be on how this stuff works

Escort Efficiency

Direct boost to the combat for fighters on air superiority where there are air wings on the same side of the war doing bombing.

Maybe bombing means ground support + strategic bombing. I assume it is, but who knows for sure.

Interception Detection

Increases how many enemy aircraft are spotted and can be potentially shot down

Naval Mission Efficiency

Everything that's bombing sea targets

Air Support Mission efficiency

Pretty much better results from CAS and TAC

Strategic Bombing Visibility

Yup, reduced detection, but in that example posted, that doctrine isn't going to do much to help vs lvl 5 radar and 2000 fighters right?

For example, Home Defense (strategic destruction doctrine) has interception detection. You can skip that entire tech if you want, getting you further down the tree faster. But I'm not sure what I'm giving up.

What you are giving up in this case is a 10% increase of potential targets to shoot down from the increased detection, vs 10% better ground support.

Detection boost is probably one of the best stats I think. Air XP from shooting down the enemy is very useful to make better airplanes. There are a lot of detection factors in an air zone from radar, states controlled, airplanes in the sky.

IMO I'd take detection over everything else first. This will be nerfed one day, but not yet

The irony is that when I test stuff in the air, I can't really see a difference in air combat when I either have or do not have some of these factors in play.

The bonuses are so small... It's going to need huge samples to properly test and compare results to see what exactly is going on. And honestly not a lot of people on this forum have that kind of time..... right?

I'd also like to point out that you can put fighters on both air superiority and interception at the same time. Could you nerf yourself accidentally by selecting both missions (or the wrong mission) when you have certain doctrines in play?

Great question! I have no idea. I think it does nerf you big time. The fighters are on air superiority and thus busy to launch interception. But whatever. I always set my fighters on both and I dump so much IC in fighters it makes no difference in the long run if I set them to both or if I set 50% of fighters to one mission and the other 50% to the other. I just go with the less clicks

The big problem I think is the contradicting info about interceptors detecting aircraft and interceptors only flying if there are enemy aircraft. Obviously that's not how it works because that wouldn't make any sense. I can't say how it works, but in the end the best rule of thumb is just to fill up the airzones with as much shit as you can

 

[Fulmen]

Escort Efficiency

Makes fighters flying in an air zone with friendly bombers more effective at shooting down enemy fighters (and bombers?). Very powerful combined with masses of strat bombers. I've seen UK players use this effectively to hold France in MP.

Interception Detection

AFAIK improves the Interception mission. Basically useless.

Naval Mission Efficiency

Improves hitting ships. Applies to CAGs in naval battles. Probably applies to port strike as well. Important if you're looking to sink ships.

Air Support Mission efficiency

Improves ground attack efficiency. Important if you're using CAS/TAC.

Strategic Bombing Visibility: I know what it does, technically, but when the enemy has 98% detection from 2000 fighters and level 5 RADAR, does does it matter at all?

In practice probably not.

 

[Meglok]

Upon reading this thread I come to the conclusion we are all in the same boat, making educated guesses (aka SWAG) based upon common sense and limited data.

 

[Secret Master]

Makes fighters flying in an air zone with friendly bombers more effective at shooting down enemy fighters (and bombers?).

If that is true, how do we measure it's effectiveness? Is it one bomber required to get it to work? More than one? A certain ratio with fighters?

And is it just when escorting STR? What about TAC, CAS, or NAV? And does the mission of the bombers matter? Does it activate when TACs are strategically bombing?

Put another way, almost all air regions I am bothering to contest have some kind of active bomber or support aircraft. If I am going Strategic Destruction, am I basically activating this effect all the time? Or should I be putting 25 STR in all air regions where fighters operate so they are technically "escorting" some bombers.

And since Strategic Destruction is the only doctrine with this effect, does it help mitigate the advantage of more agility in Operational Integrity?

Very powerful combined with masses of strat bombers. I've seen UK players use this effectively to hold France in MP.

I have to be honest, I rarely have a problem winning control of the skies when running a strategic bombing campaign. But I think a test is in order to see how much impact this actually has. STR shoot down plenty of planes on their own (especially when your opponents think they can get away with just +5 to engines and never upgrading guns on light fighters). I wonder if the STRs killing fighters is making this effect look good.

Improves hitting ships. Applies to CAGs in naval battles. Probably applies to port strike as well. Important if you're looking to sink ships.

It does affect CAGs? Considering how early in Strategic Destruction the naval mission efficiency modifier is located, it might be wise for those concentrating on naval air to grab that tree instead of others. You don't have to go far to get your modifier.

But that begs the question: mission efficiency matters in air regions when you don't have 100% mission efficiency due to lack of range/coverage. Does this matter when you are in a naval battle? I'm pretty sure reliability doesn't matter, so how much impact would naval mission efficiency have on carrier NAVs (if one were inclined to even use them).

 

[Louella]

I'm not sure if "Naval mission efficiency" does anything.

Remember when huge numbers of land-based aircraft could intervene in naval combats ? and then there was a change so that the number of aircraft that could perform naval/port strikes was based on the "width" of the naval forces they were attacking ?

I think maybe it doesn't really do much anymore, since the number of aircraft that would be available according to the efficiency is often greater than the width available.

Like, you have 100 aircraft assigned, you have 86% efficiency from range, and +10% efficiency from techs. So you'd expect 96 aircraft to be available for naval strike, but width limitations mean only 20 will perform a strike anyway. So the other 76 are doing... what ?

 

[Louella]

It does affect CAGs?

Also, I was under the impression that carrier air mission efficiency was its own thing, for the naval battle air missions anyway. If you assign a carrier air wing to do missions in a region, then I'm not sure what happens.

 

[Secret Master]

Also, I was under the impression that carrier air mission efficiency was its own thing, for the naval battle air missions anyway. If you assign a carrier air wing to do missions in a region, then I'm not sure what happens.

That's why I started this thread. I don't have a clue if it really matters.

 

[Louella]

I don't have a clue

Right now, I'm looking at a naval battle, and it says things like:
25 of Fighter from HMS Eagle, and then it has stats for "Air Efficiency" and "Sortie Efficiency"

But these stats bear no relation to anything I can see for my "naval mission efficiency" from the air force overview screen.

They don't seem to match any of the figures on the naval overview screen either. Unless the admiral, who has the "air controller" trait, is affecting things, in which case one of the stats plus his 10% bonus, matches the quoted air efficiency on the battle screen.

 

[Forster]

Upon reading this thread I come to the conclusion we are all in the same boat, making educated guesses (aka SWAG) based upon common sense and limited data.

Common sense is not always useful in games.

 

[Fulmen]

If that is true, how do we measure it's effectiveness? Is it one bomber required to get it to work? More than one? A certain ratio with fighters?

In theory one bomber should give some escort efficiency to the fighters. How much, that I don't know.

And is it just when escorting STR? What about TAC, CAS, or NAV? And does the mission of the bombers matter? Does it activate when TACs are strategically bombing?

The game tends to make distinctions based on mission rather than aircraft type. Hence it doesn't matter if it's a TAC or an STR performing strat bombing. I think it applies to ground attack as well, not as sure about naval and port strike.

Put another way, almost all air regions I am bothering to contest have some kind of active bomber or support aircraft. If I am going Strategic Destruction, am I basically activating this effect all the time?

I believe so.

And since Strategic Destruction is the only doctrine with this effect, does it help mitigate the advantage of more agility in Operational Integrity?

Yes. But I've seen very good UK players massacre the Axis AF over France while greatly outnumbered in the FTR department, while fielding 1-2k STR in the zone at the same time. So I feel like it's a bit OP atm. Though the root cause is probably in the air defense stats of STRs themselves, and not so much the escort efficiency bonus. The escort efficiency just magnifies the effect.

It does affect CAGs? Considering how early in Strategic Destruction the naval mission efficiency modifier is located, it might be wise for those concentrating on naval air to grab that tree instead of others. You don't have to go far to get your modifier.

Well in MP the general meta, at least when USA isn't fielding an AF of its own, is for the US to research just 3 techs into the Strategic Destruction doctrine, to grab that +15% efficiency.

CAGs in naval battles in terms of mission type are basically treated the same as any other plane in a naval battle, right? Sure, land-based planes don't always join a naval battle where as CAGs always do (and are consequently shot down in droves), land-based aircraft will have much lower efficiency etc. But AFAIK beyond some modifiers like local air superiority etc., they're treated as performing the same mission type as land-based aircraft. So if naval mission efficiency doesn't affect CAGs, then it shouldn't really affect anything, right? Unless naval mission efficiency only means something like spotting efficiency for planes on naval strike, but I seriously doubt that.

 

[kettyo]

I guess Escort Efficiency will give bonus to fighter's air superiority efficiency when they dogfight enemy fighters on interception. So that practically you get some extra range for bomber defense in case you have air supremacy. In case you don't have supremacy (yet) the enemy will fly air superiority so it makes no difference.

Did not test this out so my assumption can be wrong but it seems logical.

 

[kettyo]

how much impact would naval mission efficiency have on carrier NAVs

Should make no difference if they are just attached to the fleet. Should make a difference if you send them on mission to another naval air zone. Their range is short so it's a helpful bonus.