• 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.

Developer Diary | Plane Designer

image.png

Hello, and welcome back to another Dev Diary for the upcoming By Blood Alone DLC and accompanying Patch 1.12! The team has returned from the summer vacation, and we are now back fixing bugs and tweaking the balancing of the new features and focus trees.

Today, we are taking a look at the Plane Designer. As always, any number value that you are going to see in this DD is subject to change.

The Plane Designer became a subject of discussion, both inside the team and in the community, almost as soon as we announced that No Step Back would feature a Tank Designer. We felt that it would mesh well with the rework of the Italian focus tree, not least because the Italian aviation industry was very well developed and produced some of the best combat airplanes of the war - hampered mostly, as Italy so often was, by lacking production capacity.

We also felt that a Plane Designer would help plug some gaps in the lineup of available aircraft. Over the years, many players have commented on the fact that many nations modified their fighters to also be able to carry bombs, or their tactical bombers to also carry torpedoes. One of the big goals of the Plane Designer was to allow for these types of multi-role aircraft.

At the same time, we didn’t want to make these multi-role planes too powerful. Instead, a plane design optimized for a single mission should still be more effective than a multi-role plane. Where multi-role planes offer flexibility, optimized designs offer top performance, if you can afford them.

The basics of the Plane Designer are probably not a surprise for anyone who is familiar with the Ship or Tank Designers. The base is called an airframe, which roughly corresponds to the hulls and the chassis of the ship and tank designers. The Airframes have a number of module slots, where you can put the modules that give the final design its actual stats. There are three different size classes of airframes: Small, Medium, and Large. Small planes also come in a carrier-capable variant of the airframe.

The types of module slots in the Plane Designer are slightly different from the Tank Designer. There are effectively only three types of slots: Engines, Weapons, and Special modules.

Engine modules are perhaps the most straightforward of them. Unlike tanks, where this slot dictates what type of engine the tank uses and a separate stat determines what its speed is, engine modules in the plane designer determine the number and power of the engines mounted on the aircraft. These engine modules produce a new stat called Thrust, while all other modules have another new stat called Weight. These two stats are effectively the limiting factor of what and how many modules you can put on the plane. A design is only legal if Weight does not exceed Thrust (some people might point out that the only planes with a Thrust/Weight ratio of 1 or better in reality are modern, high-performance fighter jets, but these people will be summarily ignored).

Any excess Thrust is converted into extra speed, which is intended to provide a reason not to fill every module slot.

One thing to note here is that jet engines (and rocket engines, for that matter) are part of these engine slots, which means that they are available for all types of planes. This, by necessity, means that Jet Fighters and other jet-powered airplanes are no longer their own unit type - they are now simply fighters with jet engines. Jet fighters will therefore reinforce regular fighter wings, and also that you can now effectively make jet carrier planes, jet CAS, jet heavy fighters etc.with the plane designer.
Or Rocket Naval Bombers, one supposes, if you really hate your pilots on a personal level.
image5.jpg

Weapon modules are also fairly self-explanatory. But beyond providing offensive stats like Air Attack, weapon modules fulfill two other major functions. The first is that the weapons define what type of plane a design ends up being. For this the designer has a Primary Weapon Slot. The module in this slot defines the role of the final design, i.e. Fighter, CAS, Naval Bomber etc.

This is relevant because the weapon modules also unlock what missions a design has available. That means that the strict separation of mission by type of aircraft will be gone. You can now create fighters that can provide ground support, or Strategic Bombers that can do naval strikes, depending on the modules you put on the plane. There are, of course, some restrictions - strat bombers can never mount the modules necessary to unlock air superiority missions, for example.

We still wanted to give you an easy way to classify your designs on a high level and it also makes it a lot easier to tell the AI what a design actually is and how it should be used. Without accounting for doctrines, there are no stat differences between, say, a fighter that has a set of 4 Heavy MGs in the Primary Weapon Slot and bombs in a secondary weapon slot, and a CAS that has the bombs in the primary weapon slot and the MGs in the secondary slot - but one goes into Fighter Airwings and the other goes into CAS Airwings.
CAS planes have a large variety of weapons available to them to attack ground targets.
image6.jpg

There is a full list of weapons, the missions they unlock, and what they classify a plane as if mounted in the primary weapon slot, below (stats omitted because balancing is still ongoing):

ModuleMissions UnlockedType
2x Light MGAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
4x Light MGAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
2x Heavy MGAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
4x Heavy MGAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
Cannon IAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
2x Cannon IAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
Cannon IIAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
2x Cannon IIAir Superiority, InterceptFighter, Heavy Fighter
Rocket RailsClose Air Support, Logistics StrikeCAS
Bomb LocksClose Air Support, Naval Strike, Port StrikeCAS
Small Bomb BayClose Air Support, Logistics Strike, Port StrikeCAS
Tank Buster IClose Air Support, Logistics StrikeCAS
Tank Buster IIClose Air Support, Logistics StrikeCAS
Torpedo MountingNaval Strike, Port StrikeNaval Bomber/Maritime Patrol Plane
Guided Anti-Ship MissileNaval Strike, Port StrikeNaval Bomber/Maritime Patrol Plane
Fixed Explosive ChargeKamikaze StrikesSuicide Craft
Medium Bomb BayClose Air Support, Logistics Strike, Strategic BombingTactical Bomber
Large Bomb BayStrategic Bombing, Port StrikeStrategic Bomber

While some of these weapons are unlocked in the (reworked) Air Tech Tree, some of them are also found outside of it, in a similar manner as the tank weapons are found in various trees. I will note that the total number of techs in the Air tech tree has actually decreased.
A view of the Air Tech tree. It has a total of 28 techs, compared to the old tree’s 38 techs.
image9.jpg

One notable aspect is that a lot of these modules provide different stats only for specific missions. For true multi-role planes to make sense, we wanted to make sure that building a design with a mixed set of missions didn’t make the plane useless in some of them. Hanging bombs off a plane should make it less agile and slower, but a fighter that was able to do CAS missions shouldn’t be useless in air superiority missions. Thus, the weight and agility penalties only apply to the fighter if it is actually on a CAS mission, not if it is on an air superiority mission.

Modifiers only apply to certain missions. Here, the bombs the Stuka carries make it less agile, but the dive brakes give it better air defense
image4.jpg

Finally, we have the so-called “Special” module slots. These are effectively a catch-all term of various different items, a list of which you can find below:​

Armor Plate: Increased Air Defense, reduced range
Self-Sealing Fuel Tanks: increased Air Defense, costs Rubber
Drop Tanks: increased range (small airframes only)
Extra Fuel Tanks: increased range, reduced air defense
Dive Brakes: increased air defense, increased naval strike hit chance
Radio Navigation I: reduced night penalty, increased strat attack
Radio Navigation II: reduced night penalty, increased strat attack
Air/Ground Radar: reduced night penalty, increased strat attack, increased naval detection
Air/Ground Radar II: reduced night penalty, increased strat attack, increased naval detection
Air/Air Radar: reduced night penalty when on intercept mission
Air/Air Radar II: reduced night penalty when on intercept mission
Floatplane: increased naval spotting (small airframes only)
Flying Boat: increased naval spotting (medium+large airframes)
LMG Defensive Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
2x LMG Defensive Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
HMG Defense Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
2x HMG Defense Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
Cannon Defense Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
2x Cannon Defense Turret: increased Air attack, reduced agility
Recon Camera: unlocks recon mission (LaR only)
Demining Coil: unlocks demining mission (MtG only)
Bomb sights I: increased strat attack
Bomb Sights II: increased strat attack
Non-Strategic Materials: reduced Aluminum cost, reduced air defense

Special Modules are primarily intended to help optimize planes for various missions or give them different niches.

The eagle-eyed amongst you have already spotted that planes now have a surface and sub detection stat. Up until now, planes that were active in a sea zone always provided a flat bonus to the spotting speed of any navies active in the seazone. This will now change, with planes having dedicated spotting stats that determine how well they do with helping the navies spot. There are modules, like the Air-Ground Radar and the Flying Boat hull, which give bonuses to naval spotting.

Vanilla planes have those stats already baked in, with some being better than others - carrier planes are better than their land-based counterparts, naval bombers are better than fighters etc.

To further support this, we are adding two more things: Maritime Patrol Planes as a dedicated unit type and a special Naval Patrol mission for planes with the right modules.

Maritime Patrol Planes are built on the Large Airframe, giving them exceptional range. They are able to mount the whole array of naval bomber weapons, but naval strike is really not intended to be their primary role. Maritime Patrol Planes are meant to help with spotting raiders in the deep ocean, where smaller planes with shorter ranges struggle to provide much mission efficiency.
You can run naval patrol missions with many different types of planes.
image2.png

Finally, let’s talk a bit about art! While we already have a large amount of historical art for various plane types, we also wanted to give you more options to visually distinguish your designs, even if it is just to find the plane design more easily in the production menu. For the tank designer, we split up the existing art and recombined it into various combinations to quickly generate a large number of assets. We realized early on that this wouldn’t work for the plane designer. So instead, we decided to fill in some gaps in the existing art as well as add some art for a number of prototypes that flew but were historically passed over for mass-production.
Here is a partial list of new plane icons coming in BBA. Which one’s your favorite?
image1.jpg

We also decided that we wanted to add more 3d art. Much like the tank designer, you can select these assets when you design the plane. We are adding about 80 new 3d models for planes to the DLC, but more on that in the future!
Here is just a teaser of some of the new assets coming in the DLC:
image7.jpg

That is about it for this week. We hope that you will enjoy playing with the Plane Designer as much as we enjoyed making it. To end this DevDiary on a personal note: The Plane Designer will be my final contribution to Hearts of Iron 4. After close to 6 years on the project, all the way from the early days on Together for Victory, the time has come for me to leave the company and move on to greener pastures. It has certainly been an eventful and productive couple of years, and there are many things that I am very proud of (and a few that I regret - like adding Austria-Hungary as a joke and then finding out that people love monarchism). Working on the Hearts of Iron series has always been a dream for me, since the day I launched Hearts of Iron 1, almost 20 years ago now. Few people can say that they had an impact on a piece of entertainment that has had a similar impact on themselves. But the thing I am most proud of is the team we have built. Hearts of Iron is in very good hands, and there are years of content still to be released. I’m looking forward to it - but, once again, as a player.​

Weird designs that QA came up with:
This single plane outguns an entire tank platoon, unfortunately it can’t ever turn:
image11.jpg


And then we restricted the number of bomb bays you can have on a plane:
image3.jpg

6 engines, 8 cannons, 4 cannons in turrets, and a production cost 50% higher than a strategic bomber. Needless to say, this combo is no longer possible:
image10.jpg


When you look at the Spitfire Mark I’s armament and wonder: but what if…more guns?
image8.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 117Like
  • 77Love
  • 6
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
No, Engines are more or less a linear upgrade path. I didn't feel that the radial vs. inline choice offered enough tradeoffs to really be interesting at the level the player operates. Most countries - as far as I can tell - cared more about the engine performance and availability than its type. The Germans even went from a radial to an inline engine on the later models of the Fw 190.
The engine types could affect reliability like with tank engines?
Is there any modules that affect reliability?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I feel that Thrust should have been a upgradeable stat akin to Speed/Armor on the tank designer with more incremental levels and that advanced engines should make achieving a higher Thrust cheaper with perhaps a tradeoff in material costs, was such a thing considered?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
How will BB/CAs and float planes work?

I see that the catapult slot will not require production of an aircraft but if there is one being produced, and it has bomb lock so allowing naval strike mission, will this affect the BB/CAs reaction to subs?
Also, will it be possible to convert old CAs into float plan tenders for early ASW work, if a float plane with bomb locks can be deployed on a ship? If a float plan with bomb lock cannot be deployed to ships why design and produce them?
 
Last edited:
I want to ask. So in the last dev diary (also in steam store page) i see there's also Hs 293 guided bomb on the designer module, yet i don't see that in the special module list. Is that some kind of mistake or just WIP?
The Hs 293 is listed under weapons as a Guided Anti Ship missile since it was mainly used as an anti-ship weapon
 
Hello, first time commenting on a Paradox forum, just wondering if the rocket interceptors now actually use fuel like every other aircraft, or if they are still an odd exception (as well as the 100% interception rate against anything that flies if optimized)? Also was curious about some more loading screen art in the next development diary, anything ahistorical such as an Operation Sealion in a ruined London battle taking place alongside Italian troops?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Three questions:

1) Will altitude ever play a role? Altitude matters a lot when it comes to air combat, and treating every plane as if it's at the same altitude 24/7 is going to make air combat less interesting.

2) Will altitude play a role in games where the DLC is not enabled? For instance, heavy fighters were IRL a high-altitude fighter, designed for escorting strategic bombers (another high-altitude mission). By contrast, torpedo bombers are low-altitude, so fighters trying to intercept both types of planes won't be able to strike as a single force.

3) Will the game make the torpedo bomber/naval dive bomber difference more obvious? "Naval Bomber" is very vague, and "Naval CAS" implies this is a low-altitude torpedo bomber, not the mid-altitude dive bomber its stats say it actually is. It'd be like calling strategic bombers "precision bombers" and land CAS "bombers."
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Looks great! This will finally complete the trifecta of designers!
But please, PLEASE cleanup the selection tab for designing ships, tanks and now planes. I hate that the basic frames are in one line with the designs you have made.

Just give us a plus button or something else that pops up and asks us what we want to build, maybe?
I second, third, quadruple this.

It would be a huge quality of life improvement and drives me nuts! too when using those features.

Also, can we get WASD scrolling? Jfc it's 2022
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
That is the icon for the guided anti-ship missile weapon module

Depends on what aspect of the airwar you want to model and what you expect the outcome to be.
I see also, another question. for the floatplane and the flying boat special modules, will it affect aircraft ability to land on the naval base? Because if i remember there's a guy who wants that the floatplane/flyingboat can land on the naval base since in the pacific only a small airbases can be found if aircraft designer become the next feature in the next dlc
 
Planes with jet engines should sap a unit's training level much harder, considering prop vs. jet planes are two completely different beasts.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Kind of unrelated, but are you planning on adding 'linear factory efficiency gain' instead of the current model which is basically rendering concentrated industry 'highly ineffective' compared to dispersed and making tools one of the highest priority researches in the game
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
So P'dox has choosen a 2-dimensional approach to air warfare rather than going 3d:

No Max. Ceiling / Service Ceiling?

All planes gonna operate on the same altitude?
2d Bombing War?
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Looks great! But shouldn't there be an armor stat?

The trade off between things like armor and range+agility was very important during the war (think of the Zero forgoing armor for range) and should be represented.
There are a lot of modules that affect agility, so making a real max-agility plane does require some thinking and deliberate decision making.
I'm not a huge fan of losing the "armor/agility/reliability/range" stat choices, honestly. I know they'll probably be covered to some degree in the modules but that's always a lot more finnicky.

Also bothers me that we'll never be able to build a plane that has better agility than the airframe default, as I'm understanding it? Will that be an absolute cap?
This was a deliberate choice to avoid making modules that would be considered "must-haves", given how highly the current meta values agility (even if we changed the impact of agility behind the scenes). If you look at the historical developments, agility lost value while speed gained value as the war progressed. We wanted to represent that.
Looks very interesting! Some questions:

1. I find it unfortunate that you excluded transport planes from the designer, mainly because transport planes have quite bad range and it would be nice to upgrade it. Maybe you could atleast add upgrade options for the transport planes, in the same way as we can upgrade mechanized infantry with army experience?

2. Is there any penalty to the mission efficiency for multi-role planes assigned to multiple missions at the same time? For example, would a fighter-bomber assigned to air superiority and close air support run both missions at the same time on full efficiency?

3. I find it very weird and unlogical that naval patrols can't spot independently as that is pretty much the whole purpose of doing that mission. Is there any chance that this could be changed? For example, the naval patrol would do the spotting without ships, and then the strike force would attack the target?

4. Could you please allow nations to use the plane and tank pictures of other nations? For example, when playing as Sweden, I research my own planes and tanks but I'm forced to use that boring generic picture, while it would be awesome if I could for example use the picture of German planes and tanks?
1. This was discussed and voted down for the same reason that we decided not to add them to the plane designer in the first place.

2. An airwing only ever runs one mission, even if several are selected. It only runs CAS missions if there are battles going on etc. So having the Air Superiority mission active actually means that an air wing would never do any other missions (since they can always run air superiority). We discussed this back and forth and decided that this was the best approach (since that is how the game already works and there are a lot of assumptions built around it in other parts of the game).

3. It was one of the things where we designed it to work like that, then took a look at the code and realized that it was not a very trivial thing to change.

4. We are considering that but have not implemented it yet.
Hello,

Does this mean that there is two airframes available for each small plane tech ? Not a module like a tailhook when you get aricraft carriers ? So you can't create a naval version from a land base aircraft by adding specific hardware but you have to redesign the whole plane ?
We considered both options and decided that separate airframes were less messy to implement. This does mean that conversions of land-based planes are not possible. One of the reasons was that a tailhook module would effectively just turn into a module tax for carrier planes, a module that you always have to take.
gun designer when?
I had a design where we integrate a 3d-design software to be able to sculpt the bolt with the locking lugs, but then found out that our programming department is staffed with cowards
@Archangel85 Given recon planes only increase the spotting of normal ships, does that mean land based bombers can't attack ships without a fleet to support them?
Yes.
Hello, first time commenting on a Paradox forum, just wondering if the rocket interceptors now actually use fuel like every other aircraft, or if they are still an odd exception (as well as the 100% interception rate against anything that flies if optimized)? Also was curious about some more loading screen art in the next development diary, anything ahistorical such as an Operation Sealion in a ruined London battle taking place alongside Italian troops?
Welcome! Rocket Engines will still not use any fuel. This is a deliberate design choice, like it was in vanilla. There will be a new loading screen (and it looks awesome!), but I din't think it will be in the next DD.
I see also, another question. for the floatplane and the flying boat special modules, will it affect aircraft ability to land on the naval base? Because if i remember there's a guy who wants that the floatplane/flyingboat can land on the naval base since in the pacific only a small airbases can be found if aircraft designer become the next feature in the next dlc
We discussed this early and decided against it, because it would make those modules extremely powerful and likely lead to a flying boat meta. While I don't have a problem with that, others do.
 
  • 15
  • 2Like
  • 2Love
  • 2
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
1. This was discussed and voted down for the same reason that we decided not to add them to the plane designer in the first place.
So by design they will get increasingly obsolete while everything else gets more range? Fine. I guess, designable Recon planes are more important (even if it's also a player-exclusive feature). Fixing all the range weirdness associated with paradrops is also off the table, I take it?

(IMO, if you insist on transports being non-designable, they should be abstracted the way naval convoys are: stuff from stockpile you use to connect airfields for airlifting or supply)
we are adding two more things: Maritime Patrol Planes as a dedicated unit type and a special Naval Patrol mission for planes with the right modules.

Maritime Patrol Planes are built on the Large Airframe, giving them exceptional range. They are able to mount the whole array of naval bomber weapons, but naval strike is really not intended to be their primary role. Maritime Patrol Planes are meant to help with spotting raiders in the deep ocean, where smaller planes with shorter ranges struggle to provide much mission efficiency.
I still fail to see a purpose of adding extra button that does... what? same thing as Naval Strike, but only for specific airframe?

That said, I also doubt that there's actually a need to differentiate between CAS and Naval Strike - with exception of tiny Pacific islands and their like, it's perfectly case-sensitive: CAS over land, Naval Strike over water. And it's even more rare to have the opportunity to participate in both at the same time in such airzones (and that can easily be prioritized by stats/role/current left-to-right order).

Air attack is the damage output, air defense is (effectively) the HP of the plane.
Speaking of: why is there a bunch of different names for the same thing?
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions: