Ever since I looked into the air doctrines (which was even before Man The Guns), I always thought that Operational Integrity was the best. Every guide raved about the perks of Strategic Destruction or Battlefield Support. But I always figured that _once_ you got air superiority, your CAS or Strats could do endless damage anyways. The one thing that _truly_ matters is getting that air superiority. And it's _really_ cool to see that the seemingly small difference for fighter boosts specifically between SD and IO actually makes a _massive_ difference!
From my xp CAS is a bait and a trap. Tactical bombers are the way to go (with Operational ofc). They can strike everywhere, you can hit moskow from Berlin, they dont die as easily, their ground attack is nice enough, they can do logistical strikes and they can do strategic bombing. I think CAS is only usefull against France and then its just thrash, in Russia they cannot cover a single zone because of their limited range which always result in low mission efficiency. Also Air bases become fewer and fewer the longer the war goes on and the more you push into russia or china or africa. CAS can basically not operate there, while tac bombers can. For the same reason Heavy fighters are undervalued, Heavy fighters over every sea zones = insane Heavy fighters over russia/africa/china = easy air superiority, combined with tac bombers you rule the sky everyhwere in the regions. While CAS and fighters sit at their bases crying in either 10% mission efficiency or no range at all.
@@Triumph633 Haha, yeah, whenever I take on Russia as Germany, I attack in summer and winter while spending the mud months on building air bases and railways 😆 You basically need 1-2 collaboration missions, or else it's just an endless and boring slog to reach beyond the Urals 😝
@@Triumph633 don't forget TACs provide good long range air cover as Germany against the UK or as anyone in the Pacific. Naval bombers are good for the med, Indonesia, and the English channel but don't have that amazing range TACs do.
@@Triumph633 Just upgrade range on the cas, Reliablity doesn't matter and the Battlefield support doctrine gives you a spirit to make cheap upgrades to cas.
I always found OI's flavor text a bit weird. While SD is clearly focused on strat bombing, and BS greatly improves CAS and exploiting air superiority, OI says that it focuses on TAC but it only has one TAC-specific bonus that's even shared with BS. Instead, its only selling point is having the best fighter buffs lol
I used to pick OI always, until it got nerfed. Then BSL for cas, which I rarely even used, but now that you proved that OI is still the best for air superiority, I have to rethink my life's choices :D
I love your videos dude. The thing that has annoyed me so much about HOI4 is how there are all these stats and I can't tell what half of them do or if they matter. These videos have done sooooo much in clearing that sort of thing up!!
I use BS because it has the dive bombing spirit. It makes creating very good CAS dirt cheap. Then I can easily use the excess air xp to up the fighters. Informative video, notwithstanding, and thank you for showing the marginal analysis, always nice to see that.
So at the end of the day, the doctrine you should pick depends on how much you need good trades. Trying to air controller Hungary for the Axis for example, taking on the RAF and USAF pretty much mandates OpInt. If you can afford worse trades though, the perks for bombing and CAS on the other two doctrines might worth it. Oddly enough, when I did the same test with Fighter 3s over the Benelux (2000 for both BEL and HOL against each other), the K/D ratios were much more divergent, almost 2:1 for OpInt against both other doctrines.
Air controllers should go operational integrity because they don't need the bonuses for air superiority or ground support. Those bonuses apply in combat and they don't have any units to benefit from them. Everyone else should be going battlefield support to get the extra bonuses to air superiority and ground support.
I'd say as Germany you want to go Battlefield Support. Being you can get Udet and Sperrle for an additional 17% CAS Damage,, that would be 67% CAS DMG which isn't something to well ignore. Being Battlefield Support also provides a buff to air superiority when CAS is present, you can also stack air superiority up to make up for it with Germany with the right commanders, like Goering as an example for an additional 10 or 15% (forgot exactly) Flat Bonus, so as long as you have fighter support protecting your CAS even if you're losing fighters at a greater rate you're CAS is still going to successfully achieve missions/strikes and do damage. If you combine that with the fact Germany also gets CAS Manufacturing Bonuses as well. You can basically make the most destructive CAS in the entire game. Basically meaning you don't even need the best ground divisions to do extensive damage to enemy ground forces. Basically Battlefield Support can turn a Red ground battle outcome into a Green one, the effect it can have is that dramatic. Imagine combining it with Superior Firepower Doctrine? The Purpose of it isn't Air Superiority but to kill the enemy on the ground, while providing enough bonuses to to air superiority keep those ground support aircraft doing their job. That being said though, few countries I would use Battlefield Support on, but Germany is just about the only one I use it on for all those factors I mentioned. She can make enough fighters to make up the loses, so losing more planes doesn't matter, but the massive damage to ground forces is worth it's weight in gold.
This is my second favorite channel in youtube, after Kurzgesagt. You are straight to the point, explain your reasoning and don't waste people's time. I would gladly support you : ) I would rather lose 5-10% more fighters than losing ~60% ground support bonus. Plus, with Battlefield support you are getting CAS agility which surprisingly does well in air to air combat. I think tactical bombers are waste of manpower and economy. In my opinion Strategic Destruction should be more "Offensive" oriented doctrine where it buffs fighters "escort" capability where as OI should buff interception and defensive doctrine. Neither are working that way. With the latest patch, I even notice air wings assigned to armies are just cancelling their missions after relocation randomly so I think air warfare in this game just not good.
This was great to watch. I still go for the middle to get the CAS bonuses, because they're a bit busted, but also that it's really easy to max them out to be absolute killers. The other doctrines affect Strats and Bombers, which are both great too, but there's no fighter one that takes less exp to tweak it to 100%. I will say however if I were to go Fighters and bombers, OI would definitely be my choice. Thanks for doing the testing mate.
I recently messed around with modding to buff the stats on Tactical bombers for OI I suppose I underestimated IO even more than I thought as it’s actually fairly balanced. I considered making additions to SD by letting the strategic bombers have a bigger impact on war support (maybe through the spirit they get). I’m gonna have finally make some decisions now. This video is a great addition to my work. Thank you for the investigation
If you ask the wiki it says you get 25% agility, air attack, air defense. Idk how accurate that is though. For all I know those mission specific efficiency bonuses don't do anything.
SD gives the bonuses in 5 doctrines, in OI you need to basically finish the doctrine to get all the bonuses. this was a big deal back when you needed to research, as only germany or japan could really get a full air doctrine before the war. Now its changed a bit but still remains the same, you need 500 air xp to finish SD compared to 1000 for OI, even with reduced doctrine cost from focuses or general staff thing, its still double the cost for OI than SD. Other than Germany and Japan you might need to go SD to be competitive as the early war defines everything, if you lose France or Malaya early then the axis could snowball. on the otherhand as the Axis you can go SD and put your xp in making other variants choosing different focuses. In the end i think SD retains the strategic advantage as the utility of saving xp on doctrine research might just be better than going down a full efficiency build. This is with a focus on MP but still perhaps even more relevant in SP when you don't have as much back and forth.
It also depends on the country you are playing. For example, playing as Soviets, I think it's best to go OI and just produce Tactical bombers and fighters, because by the time the Germans attack you, you should have enough air xp to finish your doctrine. But, playing as for example France, SD is far better, since you unlock all the fighter bonuses earlier, probably by the time the Germans attack you. Also one thing that I find really interesting is how effective Strat bombers can be with SD. Sending them even without escorts can give you a trade of 3:1 when engaging fighters, and they can also deal massive amounts of damage. That's why I like making them as the UK and USA. Tactical bombers, on the other hand, do not trade nearly as good when doing strategic bombing,with the trade sometimes being like 1:6 ,and although they can do some serious damage, if you play Germany and put them over UK, they will get shredded the moment they get in the skies, and up to 90% of them will get disrupted. In conclusion, your doctrine and production choices should be much different, depending on the country you are playing and what you want to do.
Did you run this test a couple of times, and/or switched around which country went what doctrine? :) I assume you disabled the weather again, right? I mean, the results are saying what I'd like to hear, hehe. But I've been _so_ trained to look at how a test was conducted rather than the results, that it's hard to turn off 😆 Cool video though 👍🏼
I ended up doing it 3 times, each time gets the same result. Each month has the same result. I did disable weather, its also important when you disable weather. If you do it at night then it will be a permanent night time modifier. Hoi4 is so random it actually become quite predictable. There are so many dice rolls that things average out quite quickly.
@@71Cloak Could you do a series of shorts on each of the support companies? For example make a simple division, and add only a 1939 recon company. Test it in combat for a month. Next use only a 1939 signal company. Which company gives more bang for the buck. For hospital companies, I recommend changing the division template a few times to reset experience back to 0. How long does in now take to train the division from green to veteran. How many troops does it cost as compared to having no hospital company. Mechanic companies also save equipment when training from green to veteran. Is the IC savings a good return on investment (ROI)? The other use of mechanic companies is capturing equipment. How much equipment is gained per month of combat? Again, what is the ROI in IC? I wonder if China equipped its divisions with mechanic companies, could they capture enough Japanese rifles and tanks to make it worth it. How does having a supply company affect combat results when you are sitting in a red versus blue province? Finally for the attack value companies like AA and AT, a different comparison would be a division with an AT support company versus a division with an AT battalion added, versus a division with an AT battalion replacing a normal battalion. You already covered the MP company which correctly pointed out not only a smaller garrison requirement, but yearly casualties were also a factor. Thanks, and Keep up the great work.
Is it in single player even worth going for and keeping up with fighters when you play a minor? Lately I haven't done that and just spend my factories on ground troop equipment + cas and do pretty well. The first fighter I produce is often the fighter 3. Fighters are kinda useless against enemies with no or a small airforce. With mass cas I usually have air superiority in 1944 over majors while starting out as a minor. Countries with 4 research slots can ofcourse more easily take the time to research fighters compared to countries with only 2 slots. Those with more research slots also tend to have a bigger industry to make both. I guess this could be tested by looking at production loss in the air and the ground combined in various scenarios.
If you have a minor in SP that has a 4 research slots I'd definitely go for it, as early fighter 2 (even better if max agility or range) can shred AI planes even when outnumbered. Yugo gets fighter 3 relatively early and is a great minor for airforce.
i can usually get air superiority over Germany as Poland in the new DLC so it honestly depends on who you are playing, as Poland you're fighting a war mid 39 or even 38 depending on the path you go and fighter build up is really useful. the second thing is that i never really find myself needing more than 5-10 factories on CAS if i have fighters up, and fighters will trade better.
@@jam8539 "the second thing is that i never really find myself needing more than 5-10 factories on CAS if i have fighters up, and fighters will trade better." That is why I think it should be tested with ground and air production losses combined. Cas will do a lot of damage on the ground, where fighters can only give green air for your troops. That also makes me think of something else. Cas is more useful for armies that don't have much breakthrough (usually some sort of infantry), because tank division can melt the enemy before cas can do it's job. So in another way is cas worth it if you have lot of production and can afford pure offensive tank divisions?
@@Vincrand realistically combined arms doctrine of using everything in combination with each other is the best and hoi roughly translates to this. Not even the best production countries can field so many tanks as to make up the entire front. So yes, tanks can break enemy unit before CAS can be really useful but you dont just have tanks, you have infantry holding the lines, and defending the coast, Planes can move quicker than ground troops, a naval invasion in Africa when you are in Russia is hard to move your tanks to, but CAS and planes will move almost instantly. I think at some point adding more factories to tanks just isn't as worth it compared to makin some planes or other equipment. air superiority make it so much easier to attack, increasing stats like attack and speed. if you have the factories build a bit of everything really and it wont fail you. just make sure you can actually fight the air war, no point in putting a thousand fighters if the AI have 3000
@@jam8539 I didn't meant an antire frontline of tanks, but a frontline of infantry that holds the line with at least 1 army with only tank divisions. Infantry holds (and can do that perfectly without cas in most cases), while tanks go for the strategic/ victory points. About no country being able to field tank only. Starting as Dutch I had roughly 2M fielded manpower all in mechanised infantry or modern tank divisions before 1450. Tank only is somewhat risky anyway.
So if you go OI you can win the air war with less factories on planes than with the other doctrines but you should also take into account that the bonuses to ground combat can mean that you need fewer factories on ground equipment and can put more factories on planes.
I feel like Battlefield Support should be more effective at ground support in a contested air zone, doing more damage to ground units, while Operational Integrity less so and require greater air superiority to be as effective. Maybe it actually is, IDK. It just seems like BS isn't worth it, when you can just go OI and getter better fighters and ground support bonuses. I do know one of the perks of BS is that CAS are cheaper. I suppose it would most effective for a small nation fighting other small nations. But even then, you're probably not investing factories into fighters anyway.
Thank you for making these informative videos, I actually learnt a lot from these past weeks. While on the subject of air, Could you make a video on bombing? Does the airwing size matter like how with ur Nav video, smaller wings did more dispersed damage but the 1k ones sank more ships. and what to prioritize upgrading first on the bombers? Or any general tips to maximize bombing damage?
how big as a difference does it make that SD gets fighter agility after 5doctrines and OI only gets it after 6 doctrines. air xp is usually the hardest to get pre-war. how much does the ace chance actually effect the number of aces that you have. at which rates do aces actually get generated compared to them getting shot down.
depends on the amount of air wings if you have air wings of 1 each air wing will be rolling your chance to generate aces, so you're basically pumping aces out. the difference is mostly in the pre-war and first few months, 1 doctrine doesn't take long to get after the combat started
Air xp is easy to get if you can send volunteers and pretty impossible if not. If you can send volunteers then you should be able to generate enough air xp to cone close to finishing your doctrine. Otherwise you are barely going to have enough air xp to get the fighter upgrades
OI is best for winning the air war (in mp all air controllers should be using it). BS provides the best land combat bonuses once you have won the air war (in mp everyone but the air controller should be using this). SD is for when you really want to bomb stuff and isn't that much worse than OI at winning the air war.
Gotta max out my cas with that one spirit, then switch doctrines as Germany and apparently I might have a snowballs chance in hell of being able to win the air war in MP
I never in my life used operational integrity as other than fighters it's terrible in anything else and you can simply just build more planes to counter the losing while decimating the armies with battlefield support or killing ships/strat bomb with strategic destruction.
Seems to me like BFS is good for minors because you want to spam cas and make early gains with them, you won't have a huge amount of cas and you dont have much time before the majors come knocking so you need to progress very quickly. OI is better for majors or for minors to switch to when they get big, when you have a lot of cas or you have made the switch to jet tac bombers the bonuses of OI are better I think
Hey i really like your testing. Mind if I ask, what do you think about bicycle battalions? I see a lot of players not bothering with them but they don't use much support equipment and the speed seems worthwhile to me.
Artillery can't keep up with bicycle battalions without be motorized which costs fuel and increases the cost even more. On top of that, only 2 countries get them I think, Japan and Netherlands.
So if I understand it correctly, SD and OI should be roughly equal, but it all comes down to aces generation that gives an edge to OI? I wonder if you compensated the aces generation factor with external buffs (national spirits, advisors...) how SD would fair against OI or how much more OI would win with the same external factors.
Ground support doesn't affect planes. Ita the bonus your troops get in combat for having planes in combat. It should apply the same regardless of tacs or cas.
Can you explain what the escort efficiency does for strat destruction? if you read its tool tip says it helps for air superiority agility? But does it really do that?
According to the people on the forums who have tested it. Nothing. Half the bonuses related to air probably don't do anything. The question is which half.
Ever since I looked into the air doctrines (which was even before Man The Guns), I always thought that Operational Integrity was the best.
Every guide raved about the perks of Strategic Destruction or Battlefield Support.
But I always figured that _once_ you got air superiority, your CAS or Strats could do endless damage anyways. The one thing that _truly_ matters is getting that air superiority.
And it's _really_ cool to see that the seemingly small difference for fighter boosts specifically between SD and IO actually makes a _massive_ difference!
SD is good because it gives fighter planes the bonus early instead of 2nd last.
From my xp CAS is a bait and a trap.
Tactical bombers are the way to go (with Operational ofc).
They can strike everywhere, you can hit moskow from Berlin, they dont die as easily, their ground attack is nice enough,
they can do logistical strikes and they can do strategic bombing.
I think CAS is only usefull against France and then its just thrash, in Russia they cannot cover a single zone because of their limited range which always result in low mission efficiency.
Also Air bases become fewer and fewer the longer the war goes on and the more you push into russia or china or africa.
CAS can basically not operate there, while tac bombers can.
For the same reason Heavy fighters are undervalued,
Heavy fighters over every sea zones = insane
Heavy fighters over russia/africa/china = easy air superiority, combined with tac bombers you rule the sky everyhwere in the regions.
While CAS and fighters sit at their bases crying in either 10% mission efficiency or no range at all.
@@Triumph633
Haha, yeah, whenever I take on Russia as Germany, I attack in summer and winter while spending the mud months on building air bases and railways 😆
You basically need 1-2 collaboration missions, or else it's just an endless and boring slog to reach beyond the Urals 😝
@@Triumph633 don't forget TACs provide good long range air cover as Germany against the UK or as anyone in the Pacific. Naval bombers are good for the med, Indonesia, and the English channel but don't have that amazing range TACs do.
@@Triumph633 Just upgrade range on the cas, Reliablity doesn't matter and the Battlefield support doctrine gives you a spirit to make cheap upgrades to cas.
Every time I see you make a new video I'm amazed at how good these questions are.
I always found OI's flavor text a bit weird. While SD is clearly focused on strat bombing, and BS greatly improves CAS and exploiting air superiority, OI says that it focuses on TAC but it only has one TAC-specific bonus that's even shared with BS. Instead, its only selling point is having the best fighter buffs lol
I really like how you examine all these questions scientifically.
I used to pick OI always, until it got nerfed. Then BSL for cas, which I rarely even used, but now that you proved that OI is still the best for air superiority, I have to rethink my life's choices :D
I love your videos dude. The thing that has annoyed me so much about HOI4 is how there are all these stats and I can't tell what half of them do or if they matter. These videos have done sooooo much in clearing that sort of thing up!!
I use BS because it has the dive bombing spirit. It makes creating very good CAS dirt cheap. Then I can easily use the excess air xp to up the fighters. Informative video, notwithstanding, and thank you for showing the marginal analysis, always nice to see that.
So at the end of the day, the doctrine you should pick depends on how much you need good trades. Trying to air controller Hungary for the Axis for example, taking on the RAF and USAF pretty much mandates OpInt. If you can afford worse trades though, the perks for bombing and CAS on the other two doctrines might worth it. Oddly enough, when I did the same test with Fighter 3s over the Benelux (2000 for both BEL and HOL against each other), the K/D ratios were much more divergent, almost 2:1 for OpInt against both other doctrines.
Air controllers should go operational integrity because they don't need the bonuses for air superiority or ground support. Those bonuses apply in combat and they don't have any units to benefit from them. Everyone else should be going battlefield support to get the extra bonuses to air superiority and ground support.
I just subscribed today and now i find this video 5 mins in, cant be coincidence.
I'd say as Germany you want to go Battlefield Support. Being you can get Udet and Sperrle for an additional 17% CAS Damage,, that would be 67% CAS DMG which isn't something to well ignore. Being Battlefield Support also provides a buff to air superiority when CAS is present, you can also stack air superiority up to make up for it with Germany with the right commanders, like Goering as an example for an additional 10 or 15% (forgot exactly) Flat Bonus, so as long as you have fighter support protecting your CAS even if you're losing fighters at a greater rate you're CAS is still going to successfully achieve missions/strikes and do damage. If you combine that with the fact Germany also gets CAS Manufacturing Bonuses as well. You can basically make the most destructive CAS in the entire game.
Basically meaning you don't even need the best ground divisions to do extensive damage to enemy ground forces. Basically Battlefield Support can turn a Red ground battle outcome into a Green one, the effect it can have is that dramatic. Imagine combining it with Superior Firepower Doctrine? The Purpose of it isn't Air Superiority but to kill the enemy on the ground, while providing enough bonuses to to air superiority keep those ground support aircraft doing their job.
That being said though, few countries I would use Battlefield Support on, but Germany is just about the only one I use it on for all those factors I mentioned. She can make enough fighters to make up the loses, so losing more planes doesn't matter, but the massive damage to ground forces is worth it's weight in gold.
germany is a he
This is my second favorite channel in youtube, after Kurzgesagt. You are straight to the point, explain your reasoning and don't waste people's time. I would gladly support you : )
I would rather lose 5-10% more fighters than losing ~60% ground support bonus. Plus, with Battlefield support you are getting CAS agility which surprisingly does well in air to air combat.
I think tactical bombers are waste of manpower and economy.
In my opinion Strategic Destruction should be more "Offensive" oriented doctrine where it buffs fighters "escort" capability where as OI should buff interception and defensive doctrine.
Neither are working that way.
With the latest patch, I even notice air wings assigned to armies are just cancelling their missions after relocation randomly so I think air warfare in this game just not good.
Love your short testing videos
looking at these borders is pain
Testing is more important than nice borders.
@@71Cloak sigma Hoi4 gamer
This was great to watch. I still go for the middle to get the CAS bonuses, because they're a bit busted, but also that it's really easy to max them out to be absolute killers. The other doctrines affect Strats and Bombers, which are both great too, but there's no fighter one that takes less exp to tweak it to 100%. I will say however if I were to go Fighters and bombers, OI would definitely be my choice. Thanks for doing the testing mate.
I recently messed around with modding to buff the stats on Tactical bombers for OI
I suppose I underestimated IO even more than I thought as it’s actually fairly balanced.
I considered making additions to SD by letting the strategic bombers have a bigger impact on war support (maybe through the spirit they get).
I’m gonna have finally make some decisions now.
This video is a great addition to my work. Thank you for the investigation
While we're on the topic of doctrines, does the 25% bonus from Continuous Strike mean a 25% increase in CAS damage? Or something else entirely?
If you ask the wiki it says you get 25% agility, air attack, air defense. Idk how accurate that is though. For all I know those mission specific efficiency bonuses don't do anything.
SD gives the bonuses in 5 doctrines, in OI you need to basically finish the doctrine to get all the bonuses. this was a big deal back when you needed to research, as only germany or japan could really get a full air doctrine before the war. Now its changed a bit but still remains the same, you need 500 air xp to finish SD compared to 1000 for OI, even with reduced doctrine cost from focuses or general staff thing, its still double the cost for OI than SD. Other than Germany and Japan you might need to go SD to be competitive as the early war defines everything, if you lose France or Malaya early then the axis could snowball. on the otherhand as the Axis you can go SD and put your xp in making other variants choosing different focuses. In the end i think SD retains the strategic advantage as the utility of saving xp on doctrine research might just be better than going down a full efficiency build. This is with a focus on MP but still perhaps even more relevant in SP when you don't have as much back and forth.
It also depends on the country you are playing. For example, playing as Soviets, I think it's best to go OI and just produce Tactical bombers and fighters, because by the time the Germans attack you, you should have enough air xp to finish your doctrine. But, playing as for example France, SD is far better, since you unlock all the fighter bonuses earlier, probably by the time the Germans attack you.
Also one thing that I find really interesting is how effective Strat bombers can be with SD. Sending them even without escorts can give you a trade of 3:1 when engaging fighters, and they can also deal massive amounts of damage. That's why I like making them as the UK and USA. Tactical bombers, on the other hand, do not trade nearly as good when doing strategic bombing,with the trade sometimes being like 1:6 ,and although they can do some serious damage, if you play Germany and put them over UK, they will get shredded the moment they get in the skies, and up to 90% of them will get disrupted. In conclusion, your doctrine and production choices should be much different, depending on the country you are playing and what you want to do.
I’ve always preferred op integrity if I’m not doing strats
Can you make a video about some useless high command advisors that don't actually work properly? Because i think u mentioned some of them earlier.
You do quality content, thank you for all of the test !
Did you run this test a couple of times, and/or switched around which country went what doctrine? :)
I assume you disabled the weather again, right?
I mean, the results are saying what I'd like to hear, hehe.
But I've been _so_ trained to look at how a test was conducted rather than the results, that it's hard to turn off 😆
Cool video though 👍🏼
I ended up doing it 3 times, each time gets the same result. Each month has the same result. I did disable weather, its also important when you disable weather. If you do it at night then it will be a permanent night time modifier.
Hoi4 is so random it actually become quite predictable. There are so many dice rolls that things average out quite quickly.
@@71Cloak
Nice!
Good to know, thanks ^^
@@71Cloak Could you do a series of shorts on each of the support companies?
For example make a simple division, and add only a 1939 recon company.
Test it in combat for a month.
Next use only a 1939 signal company. Which company gives more bang
for the buck.
For hospital companies, I recommend changing the division template a
few times to reset experience back to 0. How long does in now take to
train the division from green to veteran. How many troops does it cost
as compared to having no hospital company.
Mechanic companies also save equipment when training from green to veteran. Is the IC savings a good return on investment (ROI)?
The other use of mechanic companies is capturing equipment. How much equipment is gained per month of combat? Again, what is the ROI in IC? I wonder if China equipped its divisions with mechanic companies, could they capture enough Japanese rifles and tanks to make it worth it.
How does having a supply company affect combat results when you are sitting in a red versus blue province?
Finally for the attack value companies like AA and AT, a different comparison would be a division with an AT support company versus a division with an AT battalion added, versus a division with an AT battalion replacing a normal battalion.
You already covered the MP company which correctly pointed out not only a smaller garrison requirement, but yearly casualties were also a factor.
Thanks, and Keep up the great work.
When I first started playing I went BS but never got green air, went OI and started getting success.
Is it in single player even worth going for and keeping up with fighters when you play a minor? Lately I haven't done that and just spend my factories on ground troop equipment + cas and do pretty well. The first fighter I produce is often the fighter 3. Fighters are kinda useless against enemies with no or a small airforce. With mass cas I usually have air superiority in 1944 over majors while starting out as a minor.
Countries with 4 research slots can ofcourse more easily take the time to research fighters compared to countries with only 2 slots. Those with more research slots also tend to have a bigger industry to make both.
I guess this could be tested by looking at production loss in the air and the ground combined in various scenarios.
If you have a minor in SP that has a 4 research slots I'd definitely go for it, as early fighter 2 (even better if max agility or range) can shred AI planes even when outnumbered. Yugo gets fighter 3 relatively early and is a great minor for airforce.
i can usually get air superiority over Germany as Poland in the new DLC so it honestly depends on who you are playing, as Poland you're fighting a war mid 39 or even 38 depending on the path you go and fighter build up is really useful. the second thing is that i never really find myself needing more than 5-10 factories on CAS if i have fighters up, and fighters will trade better.
@@jam8539 "the second thing is that i never really find myself needing more than 5-10 factories on CAS if i have fighters up, and fighters will trade better."
That is why I think it should be tested with ground and air production losses combined. Cas will do a lot of damage on the ground, where fighters can only give green air for your troops. That also makes me think of something else. Cas is more useful for armies that don't have much breakthrough (usually some sort of infantry), because tank division can melt the enemy before cas can do it's job. So in another way is cas worth it if you have lot of production and can afford pure offensive tank divisions?
@@Vincrand realistically combined arms doctrine of using everything in combination with each other is the best and hoi roughly translates to this. Not even the best production countries can field so many tanks as to make up the entire front. So yes, tanks can break enemy unit before CAS can be really useful but you dont just have tanks, you have infantry holding the lines, and defending the coast, Planes can move quicker than ground troops, a naval invasion in Africa when you are in Russia is hard to move your tanks to, but CAS and planes will move almost instantly. I think at some point adding more factories to tanks just isn't as worth it compared to makin some planes or other equipment. air superiority make it so much easier to attack, increasing stats like attack and speed. if you have the factories build a bit of everything really and it wont fail you. just make sure you can actually fight the air war, no point in putting a thousand fighters if the AI have 3000
@@jam8539 I didn't meant an antire frontline of tanks, but a frontline of infantry that holds the line with at least 1 army with only tank divisions. Infantry holds (and can do that perfectly without cas in most cases), while tanks go for the strategic/ victory points.
About no country being able to field tank only. Starting as Dutch I had roughly 2M fielded manpower all in mechanised infantry or modern tank divisions before 1450. Tank only is somewhat risky anyway.
it'd be great if you tested their CAS, strat bombing, and naval bombing performance, too
So if you go OI you can win the air war with less factories on planes than with the other doctrines but you should also take into account that the bonuses to ground combat can mean that you need fewer factories on ground equipment and can put more factories on planes.
I feel like Battlefield Support should be more effective at ground support in a contested air zone, doing more damage to ground units, while Operational Integrity less so and require greater air superiority to be as effective. Maybe it actually is, IDK. It just seems like BS isn't worth it, when you can just go OI and getter better fighters and ground support bonuses. I do know one of the perks of BS is that CAS are cheaper. I suppose it would most effective for a small nation fighting other small nations. But even then, you're probably not investing factories into fighters anyway.
i always took OI because of the agility + the aces.
Glad to know I picked right. And bittersteel has been consistently wrong in this lmfao.
Thank you for making these informative videos, I actually learnt a lot from these past weeks.
While on the subject of air, Could you make a video on bombing? Does the airwing size matter like how with ur Nav video, smaller wings did more dispersed damage but the 1k ones sank more ships. and what to prioritize upgrading first on the bombers? Or any general tips to maximize bombing damage?
My stuka divers ain't gonna like this on our next meeting!
how big as a difference does it make that SD gets fighter agility after 5doctrines and OI only gets it after 6 doctrines. air xp is usually the hardest to get pre-war.
how much does the ace chance actually effect the number of aces that you have.
at which rates do aces actually get generated compared to them getting shot down.
depends on the amount of air wings
if you have air wings of 1 each air wing will be rolling your chance to generate aces, so you're basically pumping aces out.
the difference is mostly in the pre-war and first few months, 1 doctrine doesn't take long to get after the combat started
Air xp is easy to get if you can send volunteers and pretty impossible if not. If you can send volunteers then you should be able to generate enough air xp to cone close to finishing your doctrine. Otherwise you are barely going to have enough air xp to get the fighter upgrades
I dunno know man, there’s something really based about reenacting the Dresden bombings
i usually do the middle air tree, havent even look at the others lmao
gunna be doing operational integrity for when i play smaller or poorer nations
Is OI still the best air sup doctrine for BBA? Have you tested it yet?
OI is best for winning the air war (in mp all air controllers should be using it). BS provides the best land combat bonuses once you have won the air war (in mp everyone but the air controller should be using this). SD is for when you really want to bomb stuff and isn't that much worse than OI at winning the air war.
Gotta max out my cas with that one spirit, then switch doctrines as Germany and apparently I might have a snowballs chance in hell of being able to win the air war in MP
I never in my life used operational integrity as other than fighters it's terrible in anything else and you can simply just build more planes to counter the losing while decimating the armies with battlefield support or killing ships/strat bomb with strategic destruction.
Seems to me like BFS is good for minors because you want to spam cas and make early gains with them, you won't have a huge amount of cas and you dont have much time before the majors come knocking so you need to progress very quickly. OI is better for majors or for minors to switch to when they get big, when you have a lot of cas or you have made the switch to jet tac bombers the bonuses of OI are better I think
Looking forward to an update after BBA DLC
Hey i really like your testing. Mind if I ask, what do you think about bicycle battalions? I see a lot of players not bothering with them but they don't use much support equipment and the speed seems worthwhile to me.
Artillery can't keep up with bicycle battalions without be motorized which costs fuel and increases the cost even more. On top of that, only 2 countries get them I think, Japan and Netherlands.
I watched all your videos and i don't even play HoI 4
Guys i know this is out of the topic but, can no air Russia is still viable? Or cas destroys spaa and aa alltogether?
Also is spaa worth the cost?
Without air you would just get logistics striked into the ground. AA doesn't affect cas on logistic strike missions (might not affect tacs either).
i always did bsl
So if I understand it correctly, SD and OI should be roughly equal, but it all comes down to aces generation that gives an edge to OI? I wonder if you compensated the aces generation factor with external buffs (national spirits, advisors...) how SD would fair against OI or how much more OI would win with the same external factors.
Can you make a video for railway guns? Because I can't find many videos breaking them down.
They provide a 10% debuff to enemy attack and defense/breakthrough. It also reduces fort effectiveness by 33% and entrenchment effectiveness by 20%.
is this an ong or a fr moment
What?
Does ground support affect the tactical bombers?
Ground support doesn't affect planes. Ita the bonus your troops get in combat for having planes in combat. It should apply the same regardless of tacs or cas.
Lol who needs AS when you can just level their ground forces into the soil with 2000 CAS.
Can you explain what the escort efficiency does for strat destruction? if you read its tool tip says it helps for air superiority agility? But does it really do that?
According to the people on the forums who have tested it. Nothing. Half the bonuses related to air probably don't do anything. The question is which half.
@@71Cloak interesting, I tried testing with and without and noticed hardly any difference so my guess is probably nothing gained.
can you talk a little slower? its pretty fast when reading with subtitels
Use all 3 doctrines. problem solved.
Cheers mate. But pleeaase speak a bit slowlier when reading the conclusion. I really couldn't follow.
you think I script these?
You want a 1v1 cloak Russia Germany?