There was another guy asking the same thing! I don’t know about the outcome, but I’m curious to figure it out :) so I’ve added it to my backlog! Thanks!
@@hyggegaming Also two things that came into mind: do naval bomber design afect it's efficiency when in a carrier? I heard arguments that they do not (so the cheaper the better). The second thing that came to mind is a minor one: Do screen torpedos work? I heard arguments that ship torpedos are useless even on hit, I think this is not much related since I guess plane torpedos do not follow ship torpedo logic, right?
The air efficiency is different when on a carrier. On a carrier it’s the sortie efficiency stat, while flying from an airbase it’s the air mission efficiency. And If you fly regular missions from a carrier as an airbase, they always have 100% range/efficiency in the zone. Torpedoes on screens are really powerful, but only against capitals, carriers and convoys. You have to first create “holes” in the screen line with light attack or heavy attack to be able to start using your torpedoes effectively
Saw a few comments asking about dive bombers vs torpedo bombers and I have done tests between dive bombers (with AP bombs) and torpedo bombers with both carrier planes in a naval battle and non carrier planes operating from land, with 1939 and earlier tech. Dive bombers tend to do better at sinking cruisers, their extra naval targeting does a lot better against those faster ships. Torpedo bombers tend to do better at sinking battleships and carriers because they survive the ship AA better, don't need as much naval targeting since those are slower ships, and do more naval damage per hit. Against destroyers both seemed to perform about the same because destroyers have such low HP. With carrier planes I figured this by seeing which carrier sank the most of the various ships in a fleet, one carrier had dive bombers and the other had torpedo bombers. However I saw that you tend to lose more dive bombers than naval bombers to ship AA, especially from battleships, even with both planes having the same air defense. It was because dive bombers have less agility. Though since torpedo bombers are generally more expensive a lot of the time even with fewer losses, it was a greater loss of IC than dive bombers. Keep in mind that advancing torpedo tech and naval targeting bonuses from the base strike doctrine can put the naval targeting between dive bombers and torpedo bombers much closer to each other. And to increase the naval attack with dive bombers you have to add more bomb locks which will decrease the planes agility significantly and make it all the more vulnerable to ship AA. Hope this helps for anyone and also gives ideas for your own testing.
In my first HOI4 game, I was Germany of course. I concentrated research on naval bombers with fighter escorts because I knew there was no other way to clear out the English Channel. I built no real warships at all, just subs and transports. I never bombed Britain and placed my naval bombers all along the Atlantic coast to make allied shipping more difficult. It worked.
Could you test carrier CAS vs carrier torpedo bombers: 1940 plane small airframe, 2x AP bomb locks + regular bomb lock, single engine 3, dive brakes = 14 damage and 12 targeting, VS 1940 plane small airframe, 1x tier 2 torpedo armament, single engine 3 = 17 damage and 8 targeting
So carriers OP. I think one of the big things where carriers benefit is that they score kills due to how they selectively go after damaged ships more. To my knowledge all other naval guns/torpedos just randomly select targets.
Well, it’s not random at all actually. Regular ships pick targets based on a weighted system as well. I made an entire patreon exclusive guide about it recently :)
What really confuses me is that ground-based Naval Bombers will never engage combat ships on their own, just convoys. You can only have them engage a fleet if there's a friendly fleet that starts a battle. At least, that's what it seems like to me. Am I wrong?
Well... they will engage constantly and attack the enemy fleet, but there won’t be any naval battles, just a result. So if there’s a fleet on patrol in a zone where you naval strike, that fleet will take damage over time from you, and much so!
@@hyggegaming I don't know what I've done wrong, then. My guess was that radar and air supremacy are only a multiplier for naval supremacy, and without any of your own naval ships, no matter how many aircraft you have, you are still multiplying all that by 0 for a total of 0 Naval Supremacy. With 0 naval supremacy, you can't find their fleets, so there's no engagements. I was playing a Persia game and some British fleet was in the Persian Gulf. I had all sorts of radar and NAV, and had infiltrated their Navy, and their fleet had nowhere to go, but I they took no losses at all even if I had the aircraft on Port Strike. And of course, since they owned the UAE, I couldn't move my fleet in to engage them, even though I owned Iran and even Pakistan. With me unable to move my fleet in, I couldn't naval invade the UAE, either. It was truly ridiculous. And there's so much tech you need to catch up on, plus years of production, to have a navy when starting as a minor power. This wasn't the only time something like this has happened, though. This is just the most ridiculous example.
Another great guide.. I never knew about buffs and targeting order.. I am curious about using dive bombers... although i never use them. I build two types of carriers. A standard maxed out fleet carrier with as much planes and aa it can carry. The second type are cheap fast escort carriers with about 30 fighters and 10 torpedo bombers. No armor or AA. About 9500 to build. I think i need to start adding AA to those.. I lose escort carriers very fast in big engagements when enemy carriers are involved..
Nice vid, saw you mention it might actually be 10x in comments. Is it technically better to use all nav wings in single player ? Rarely see the ai put fighters up unless im fighting coastal and not contesting air elsewhere
Yeah, it seems like the initial information about 10x seems correct about NAV damage and fighter damage seem to be 5x. If you have pure navs, that is much better if you don’t run into any fighters at all :) you could also cover your navs with fighters from land, if needed. I usually prefer a 3/4 navs and 1/4 fighters or something like that.
The "no AA" added weight is so small compared to the HP and bonuses in general, so they would still always target the carriers before screens :) and the AA on the destroyers help the whole fleet as well, so I think it's usually worth it to keep AA if you fight navs
There was a tank build for the Super heavy BB before. You bstack as much AA as possible on it and not much else. Planes would target it but it has OP AA and can tank all the naval bomber power of the enemy. I dont know if it still works now.
It’s definitely better to build dp aa only heavy cruisers especially if you go trade interdiction. It’s basically a fat light cruise that kills dds transports n planes
@@thethugpugz7904 It was to counter enemy CV's. Naval bombers target the heaviest ship in the fleet and CA's cannot overcome the friendly CV's priority for bombing. The idea of the SHBB is to be the magnet for bombs during combat.
@@hyggegamingCOMBAT_DAMAGE_SCALE_CARRIER = 5, You are looking at this, the correct one is this NAVAL_STRIKE_CARRIER_MULTIPLIER = 10.0, the other is for air combat.
Very interesting information, clearly explained, carrier torpedo planes are very good, I make my fleet carriers full to the max with these planes, and I also bring a small escort carrier with fighter planes in my main attack fleet. I can't wait for the carrier torpedo vs carrier dive bomber comparison, maybe you will test against submarines also, because I successfully use a ASW task force which includes 1 small aircraft carrier special for ASW with only 20 carrier dive bombers specially designed with maximum ap bomb locks and it performs very well ... when I hunt submarines I use everything I can, special ASW task force, patrol ships, patrol boat planes, land based navs, radar as much as possible, intel etc.. it's hard to figure out how much the carrier dive bomber with the asw purpose contributes to this whole mix
Thanks mate! happy you liked it! Escort carriers are really effective against submarines in general. Of course the design of the airplanes makes a big difference. Yeah, Let's see when I have time to make some testing :) Cheers!
Does the 5x damage modifier from carriers apply when CV-NAV are being used manually (not in a naval battle)? I often put range improvements on my CV-NAV and micro them.
Turns out it actually was 10x damage for NAVs and 5x for fighters. I’m not 100% sure but if I recall they don’t do extra damage on regular air missions
Another thing. I think NAVs flying missions from a carrier always cover the full zone they fly into, even though their range isn’t enough. Test it a little bit, but I’m quite sure it works like that
@@hyggegaming if that's so it's a shame. I think they should probably have range impact sortie efficiency or something. Range should definitely be an important stat on aircraft operating from carriers.
Hey mate! Thanks a lot! Sortie efficiency is how many of the planes actually fly away on an attack from your carrier. So if you have 50 naval bombers and 50% sortie efficiency, 25 of them will actually fly on missions. That's why you want 100%, if you have more than that, you can start overstacking without penalties.
The torpedo only takes one slot on the naval bomber but the rest are still free. Is there a point in adding fighter weapons to the other slots? Do air attack and/or air defense help the naval bombers or is it better to make carrier fighters seperate from them?
@martinbohm416 no, unfortunately while launching from CARRIERS naval bombers air defense stat only helps protect them but doesn't shoot down ANY fighters. Not one. When they're launched from shore, or from carriers not engaged in naval battles and acting as a mobile airbase, it works correctly. So unless paradox has finally changed this/fixed the bug, don't put anything other than torpedoes and maybe some self healing tanks/etc.
@sebastianokon9223 fighters launched from land will likely never reach the battle on time. If you don't have at least some carrier fighters you don't need to build carriers
So is the 5x buff for naval bombers only comparing carrier capable naval bombers, or is that comparing carrier naval bombers on carriers vs. land-based (non-carrier capable) naval bombers?
That is absolutely a great idea :) even though you don’t have a navy, go down the base strike doctrine as it will give your naval bombers much more targeting :)
So I know you were selling the fact to do carriers, but in a singleplayer game, what's your opinion if I just delete my starting carriers and go a max capital+destroyer+sub build? Destroyers all get light atk, ratio of 5:1 destroyers to capital ships, capitals all get high atk, I ignore medium atk, subs and captains go max torpedo skills, my bombers are not naval bombers since I won't be using carriers. Thoughts?
I usually go a battleship/battlecrusier build with either destroyers or Light cruisers as screens. I don’t usually have 5:1 ratio but less. Then I don’t mix submarines in the same naval group, but I use them instead for starving the enemy once I dominate the waters with my main fleet :) so I kind of like your approach. However, I would never delete ships. Use the carriers for anti-submarine missions
They are 5x better in combat, but how does the cost of the carrier factor into this? Let's assume 12,000 IC for the carrier with a capacity of 80 planes. 12,000 Navy IC is around 10,000 Mil IC (Because they are more eypensive to build). With a nav-bomber cost of 40 IC I could build 250 planes instead of a carrier. So we need to compare 80 planes vs 250+80, which means we build around 4x more planes. So our carrier-based planes are better, but only slightly. With weather penalties, night malus, etc. I guess they are roughly equal. Personally, I prefer HOI3's system, its carrier planes had no combat bonus but had a significantly smaller stacking penalty. Every additional carrier in combat felt really impactfull, without making single carriers too efficient.
Really good reflections! Just to add another one: Navs flying from carriers usually have 100* efficiency (if you go for a carrier build) as compared to navs flying from air bases with very short range, which means that they many times can’t enter the battle and if they do, very few of them does. So that’s another factor in favor of carriers. With that said, I think one have to look at the alternative cost of using your dockyards for something else. As you can’t build navs with dockyards, but you start with quite a bunch yards, if you see my point. But it’s definitely a tradeoff! :)
@@lalad0 That addon doesn't show you the actual number of dislikes, it's not capable of doing that. It's just their guess of what the number of dislikes might be.
How about AP bombs dive-bombers vs torpedo-mounted ones? Dive bombers have much higher targeting stat and can be further boosted with Dive Brakes.
Very good question!
There was another guy asking the same thing! I don’t know about the outcome, but I’m curious to figure it out :) so I’ve added it to my backlog! Thanks!
@@hyggegaming Also two things that came into mind: do naval bomber design afect it's efficiency when in a carrier? I heard arguments that they do not (so the cheaper the better). The second thing that came to mind is a minor one: Do screen torpedos work? I heard arguments that ship torpedos are useless even on hit, I think this is not much related since I guess plane torpedos do not follow ship torpedo logic, right?
The air efficiency is different when on a carrier. On a carrier it’s the sortie efficiency stat, while flying from an airbase it’s the air mission efficiency. And If you fly regular missions from a carrier as an airbase, they always have 100% range/efficiency in the zone.
Torpedoes on screens are really powerful, but only against capitals, carriers and convoys. You have to first create “holes” in the screen line with light attack or heavy attack to be able to start using your torpedoes effectively
Saw a few comments asking about dive bombers vs torpedo bombers and I have done tests between dive bombers (with AP bombs) and torpedo bombers with both carrier planes in a naval battle and non carrier planes operating from land, with 1939 and earlier tech. Dive bombers tend to do better at sinking cruisers, their extra naval targeting does a lot better against those faster ships. Torpedo bombers tend to do better at sinking battleships and carriers because they survive the ship AA better, don't need as much naval targeting since those are slower ships, and do more naval damage per hit. Against destroyers both seemed to perform about the same because destroyers have such low HP. With carrier planes I figured this by seeing which carrier sank the most of the various ships in a fleet, one carrier had dive bombers and the other had torpedo bombers. However I saw that you tend to lose more dive bombers than naval bombers to ship AA, especially from battleships, even with both planes having the same air defense. It was because dive bombers have less agility. Though since torpedo bombers are generally more expensive a lot of the time even with fewer losses, it was a greater loss of IC than dive bombers. Keep in mind that advancing torpedo tech and naval targeting bonuses from the base strike doctrine can put the naval targeting between dive bombers and torpedo bombers much closer to each other. And to increase the naval attack with dive bombers you have to add more bomb locks which will decrease the planes agility significantly and make it all the more vulnerable to ship AA. Hope this helps for anyone and also gives ideas for your own testing.
In my first HOI4 game, I was Germany of course. I concentrated research on naval bombers with fighter escorts because I knew there was no other way to clear out the English Channel.
I built no real warships at all, just subs and transports.
I never bombed Britain and placed my naval bombers all along the Atlantic coast to make allied shipping more difficult.
It worked.
That is also a very viable strategy in multiplayer :) that is usually how Italy defend the Mediterranean if they lose the African campaign
Could you test carrier CAS vs carrier torpedo bombers:
1940 plane small airframe, 2x AP bomb locks + regular bomb lock, single engine 3, dive brakes = 14 damage and 12 targeting, VS
1940 plane small airframe, 1x tier 2 torpedo armament, single engine 3 = 17 damage and 8 targeting
Hey mate! This made me very curious! I’ve noted it down for a test or “vs” guide :)
So carriers OP. I think one of the big things where carriers benefit is that they score kills due to how they selectively go after damaged ships more. To my knowledge all other naval guns/torpedos just randomly select targets.
Well, it’s not random at all actually. Regular ships pick targets based on a weighted system as well. I made an entire patreon exclusive guide about it recently :)
But how carriers pick their targets is ideal for sinking other carriers basically
What really confuses me is that ground-based Naval Bombers will never engage combat ships on their own, just convoys. You can only have them engage a fleet if there's a friendly fleet that starts a battle. At least, that's what it seems like to me. Am I wrong?
Well... they will engage constantly and attack the enemy fleet, but there won’t be any naval battles, just a result. So if there’s a fleet on patrol in a zone where you naval strike, that fleet will take damage over time from you, and much so!
@@hyggegaming I don't know what I've done wrong, then. My guess was that radar and air supremacy are only a multiplier for naval supremacy, and without any of your own naval ships, no matter how many aircraft you have, you are still multiplying all that by 0 for a total of 0 Naval Supremacy. With 0 naval supremacy, you can't find their fleets, so there's no engagements. I was playing a Persia game and some British fleet was in the Persian Gulf. I had all sorts of radar and NAV, and had infiltrated their Navy, and their fleet had nowhere to go, but I they took no losses at all even if I had the aircraft on Port Strike. And of course, since they owned the UAE, I couldn't move my fleet in to engage them, even though I owned Iran and even Pakistan. With me unable to move my fleet in, I couldn't naval invade the UAE, either. It was truly ridiculous. And there's so much tech you need to catch up on, plus years of production, to have a navy when starting as a minor power.
This wasn't the only time something like this has happened, though. This is just the most ridiculous example.
Qn you guys are so underrated
Thanks a lot mate!!
Excellent information!
Thanks a lot mate!!
Another great guide.. I never knew about buffs and targeting order..
I am curious about using dive bombers... although i never use them.
I build two types of carriers. A standard maxed out fleet carrier with as much planes and aa it can carry. The second type are cheap fast escort carriers with about 30 fighters and 10 torpedo bombers. No armor or AA. About 9500 to build. I think i need to start adding AA to those.. I lose escort carriers very fast in big engagements when enemy carriers are involved..
I’m quite curious about dive bombers as well :) I will investigate that! Yeah, AA is usually very underestimated! :)
And thanks!!!
Nice vid, saw you mention it might actually be 10x in comments. Is it technically better to use all nav wings in single player ? Rarely see the ai put fighters up unless im fighting coastal and not contesting air elsewhere
Yeah, it seems like the initial information about 10x seems correct about NAV damage and fighter damage seem to be 5x. If you have pure navs, that is much better if you don’t run into any fighters at all :) you could also cover your navs with fighters from land, if needed. I usually prefer a 3/4 navs and 1/4 fighters or something like that.
It sounds like my destroyers should have no AA, so that bombers have a higher chance to target them instead of carriers. :)
The "no AA" added weight is so small compared to the HP and bonuses in general, so they would still always target the carriers before screens :) and the AA on the destroyers help the whole fleet as well, so I think it's usually worth it to keep AA if you fight navs
There was a tank build for the Super heavy BB before. You bstack as much AA as possible on it and not much else. Planes would target it but it has OP AA and can tank all the naval bomber power of the enemy. I dont know if it still works now.
Oh, no idea. But I can imagine it still could work against navs
It’s definitely better to build dp aa only heavy cruisers especially if you go trade interdiction. It’s basically a fat light cruise that kills dds transports n planes
@@thethugpugz7904 It was to counter enemy CV's. Naval bombers target the heaviest ship in the fleet and CA's cannot overcome the friendly CV's priority for bombing. The idea of the SHBB is to be the magnet for bombs during combat.
@@niki8280oh yea tru
NAVAL_STRIKE_CARRIER_MULTIPLIER = 10.0 the damage Multiplayer is 10.
Where did you find that? According the wiki that was the one, but when I looked in the game files it said 5
@@hyggegamingCOMBAT_DAMAGE_SCALE_CARRIER = 5, You are looking at this, the correct one is this NAVAL_STRIKE_CARRIER_MULTIPLIER = 10.0, the other is for air combat.
Aaaw man, you might be right. So the 10x is actually back on the table 😂😅
@@lucky-nk3nz Wait what, carrier fighters get a bonus now?
@@DthScythe01 yeah, but you should go full carrier naval bombers.
Guess this will be more fun to try then to just stack submarines
But navs and submarines work amazingly together ;)
Very interesting information, clearly explained, carrier torpedo planes are very good, I make my fleet carriers full to the max with these planes, and I also bring a small escort carrier with fighter planes in my main attack fleet.
I can't wait for the carrier torpedo vs carrier dive bomber comparison, maybe you will test against submarines also, because I successfully use a ASW task force which includes 1 small aircraft carrier special for ASW with only 20 carrier dive bombers specially designed with maximum ap bomb locks and it performs very well ... when I hunt submarines I use everything I can, special ASW task force, patrol ships, patrol boat planes, land based navs, radar as much as possible, intel etc.. it's hard to figure out how much the carrier dive bomber with the asw purpose contributes to this whole mix
Thanks mate! happy you liked it! Escort carriers are really effective against submarines in general. Of course the design of the airplanes makes a big difference. Yeah, Let's see when I have time to make some testing :) Cheers!
Does the 5x damage modifier from carriers apply when CV-NAV are being used manually (not in a naval battle)? I often put range improvements on my CV-NAV and micro them.
Turns out it actually was 10x damage for NAVs and 5x for fighters. I’m not 100% sure but if I recall they don’t do extra damage on regular air missions
Another thing. I think NAVs flying missions from a carrier always cover the full zone they fly into, even though their range isn’t enough. Test it a little bit, but I’m quite sure it works like that
@@hyggegaming if that's so it's a shame. I think they should probably have range impact sortie efficiency or something. Range should definitely be an important stat on aircraft operating from carriers.
I agree!
Thank you for the guide ! Do you know what sortie efficiency does ?
Hey mate! Thanks a lot!
Sortie efficiency is how many of the planes actually fly away on an attack from your carrier. So if you have 50 naval bombers and 50% sortie efficiency, 25 of them will actually fly on missions. That's why you want 100%, if you have more than that, you can start overstacking without penalties.
The torpedo only takes one slot on the naval bomber but the rest are still free.
Is there a point in adding fighter weapons to the other slots?
Do air attack and/or air defense help the naval bombers or is it better to make carrier fighters seperate from them?
@martinbohm416 no, unfortunately while launching from CARRIERS naval bombers air defense stat only helps protect them but doesn't shoot down ANY fighters. Not one.
When they're launched from shore, or from carriers not engaged in naval battles and acting as a mobile airbase, it works correctly.
So unless paradox has finally changed this/fixed the bug, don't put anything other than torpedoes and maybe some self healing tanks/etc.
@martinbohm416 tl;Dr - if you have no carrier fighters your planes will get absolutely shredded because the enemy will only lose fighters to ship AA.
@@CultureCrossed64 Thank you!
Any idea how many naval bombers and fighers are optimal?
(Assuming of course both sides have 4 carriers)
@@CultureCrossed64does having carrier fighters matter or can you have them fly from land?
@sebastianokon9223 fighters launched from land will likely never reach the battle on time. If you don't have at least some carrier fighters you don't need to build carriers
how about naval bombers launched from land
You need 5 times as many if you fly from land to get the same effect (more or less) (in reality more, since you need more range)
So is the 5x buff for naval bombers only comparing carrier capable naval bombers, or is that comparing carrier naval bombers on carriers vs. land-based (non-carrier capable) naval bombers?
It’s the category of naval bombers. If they operate from a carrier, they simply get a 5x damage buff :)
Is it competent to use airbase naval bombers 🛫 as a no navy / minor nation to clean a sea region from enemies? 🚢💥⚓
That is absolutely a great idea :) even though you don’t have a navy, go down the base strike doctrine as it will give your naval bombers much more targeting :)
Thank you so much, @@hyggegaming 🎉 😄
I will share you my experience in the following days 🥳
Black ice guide
That’s a positive thing..?
So I know you were selling the fact to do carriers, but in a singleplayer game, what's your opinion if I just delete my starting carriers and go a max capital+destroyer+sub build? Destroyers all get light atk, ratio of 5:1 destroyers to capital ships, capitals all get high atk, I ignore medium atk, subs and captains go max torpedo skills, my bombers are not naval bombers since I won't be using carriers. Thoughts?
I usually go a battleship/battlecrusier build with either destroyers or Light cruisers as screens. I don’t usually have 5:1 ratio but less. Then I don’t mix submarines in the same naval group, but I use them instead for starving the enemy once I dominate the waters with my main fleet :) so I kind of like your approach. However, I would never delete ships. Use the carriers for anti-submarine missions
Do airbases on carriers count for 5x or just carriers in a naval battle?
Just in naval battles. However, navs flying from carriers as airbases has much better efficiency in naval zones
They are 5x better in combat, but how does the cost of the carrier factor into this? Let's assume 12,000 IC for the carrier with a capacity of 80 planes. 12,000 Navy IC is around 10,000 Mil IC (Because they are more eypensive to build). With a nav-bomber cost of 40 IC I could build 250 planes instead of a carrier. So we need to compare 80 planes vs 250+80, which means we build around 4x more planes. So our carrier-based planes are better, but only slightly. With weather penalties, night malus, etc. I guess they are roughly equal.
Personally, I prefer HOI3's system, its carrier planes had no combat bonus but had a significantly smaller stacking penalty. Every additional carrier in combat felt really impactfull, without making single carriers too efficient.
Really good reflections! Just to add another one: Navs flying from carriers usually have 100* efficiency (if you go for a carrier build) as compared to navs flying from air bases with very short range, which means that they many times can’t enter the battle and if they do, very few of them does. So that’s another factor in favor of carriers. With that said, I think one have to look at the alternative cost of using your dockyards for something else. As you can’t build navs with dockyards, but you start with quite a bunch yards, if you see my point. But it’s definitely a tradeoff! :)
How about build some cheap recon plan and set them on naval recon so the amount of naval boombers in battle increasing??
Do carrier capable navs do better on land compared to normal navs? Or doesnt that matter?
That doesn’t matter. It’s the fact that they fly into a naval battle from a carrier that makes the difference
100 dislikes ? Very weird, looks like a bot issue because this video was great as usual
Hey mate, I can't see any dislikes? but there are 106 likes right now :)
@@hyggegaming oh great then. I use an add-on that shows dislikes but i guess it malfunctioned, good news then ^^
@@lalad0 That addon doesn't show you the actual number of dislikes, it's not capable of doing that. It's just their guess of what the number of dislikes might be.