ASM - equipped CAS

[Mammoth]

Hiya,
downloaded HSR(2.02) recently and was very impressed. I liked the extra flavour that events added and the related incentives to keep supply levels high. I have never used Stony road with Hoi as I was happy with CORE, but I thought I would give it a shot while waiting for core.I am pleased i did. But I have one question - I was looking at the difference between turbojet cas and asm equipped cas. Currently turbojet cas has a surface defence of 12, while asm has only 6. Is this correct? Given that the progression is 6/8/10/12/6 is the next upgrade really supposed to lower CAS surface defence to 6? The unmodified progression is 3/4/5/6/6 so I assume it is a typo. Sorry if this has been raised before, but I like my CAS
Cheers,
mammoth

 

[Aregorn]

Hiya,
downloaded HSR(2.02) recently and was very impressed. I liked the extra flavour that events added and the related incentives to keep supply levels high. I have never used Stony road with Hoi as I was happy with CORE, but I thought I would give it a shot while waiting for core.I am pleased i did. But I have one question - I was looking at the difference between turbojet cas and asm equipped cas. Currently turbojet cas has a surface defence of 12, while asm has only 6. Is this correct? Given that the progression is 6/8/10/12/6 is the next upgrade really supposed to lower CAS surface defence to 6? The unmodified progression is 3/4/5/6/6 so I assume it is a typo. Sorry if this has been raised before, but I like my CAS
Cheers,
mammoth

Thanks Mammoth we will correct it.

 

[unmerged(39735)]

What value is it supposed to have? I changed it from 6 to 16 for my current game.

 

[Aregorn]

What value is it supposed to have? I changed it from 6 to 16 for my current game.

If you check the logical projection it should be 14

 

[unmerged(39735)]

Okay. I never have made it that far anyway. I generally start over after conquering Russia and the UK.

 

[Aregorn]

I checked it out last night, and I would say that the progression is on purpose. You shoul realise that is a naval CAS jet version the last model not an improved version of the jet for land combat.

 

[unmerged(39735)]

I checked it out last night, and I would say that the progression is on purpose. You shoul realise that is a naval CAS jet version the last model not an improved version of the jet for land combat.

Wouldn't that make it a CAG though rather than a CAS? It seems like with that big of a drop in defense, this "upgraded" plane would be inferior to the prior one so there's no reason to even research it.

 

[Aregorn]

Wouldn't that make it a CAG though rather than a CAS? It seems like with that big of a drop in defense, this "upgraded" plane would be inferior to the prior one so there's no reason to even research it.

When I saw it a couple of days ago, I thought we will eliminate the plane model, as if you research it you are obliged to upgrade all your land CAS squadrons to naval CAS which is not good. We will have to think about it.

 

[Mammoth]

When I saw it a couple of days ago, I thought we will eliminate the plane model, as if you research it you are obliged to upgrade all your land CAS squadrons to naval CAS which is not good. We will have to think about it.

When i was playing vanilla, I wondered what the design decision to have asm euipped cas was. You could argue that Tac or Nav should benefit as much from asm equipment.
I noticed that you have given a lot of bonuses to units when a tech is researched. Why not do it with the asm-cas and rather than a specific unit, give a generic bonus to air units naval attack (and maybe logistical strike effectiveness etc) when the tech is researched?
I have been reading the 'naval bombers are overpowered in the game' thread(s), and I come down on the side that holds, that as a unit they should represent long range aircraft with limited anti-naval ability.Tac and cas should be ship killers with the land based aircraft's anti-naval capability affected by doctrine. If you want to use your cas or tacs in an antinaval role then you should have to invest in the training,logistics and equipment for it as represented ingame by doctrine research.
But thats my 2cents. I won't cry whatever you decide After all you are the one doing the hard work.
Cheers,
Mammoth

 

[unmerged(39735)]

I don't have the stats in front of me since I'm at work but wouldn't removing the final CAS plane make TAC superior to CAS in almost every way? There may have been a gap somewhere in the WWII timeframe but CAS has continued to be very effective right up to current times even. I don't know how accurate this is but I heard somewhere that in the first Gulf War, the A-10 had more kills for the US than our tanks did. That's some serious punch for a CAS.

 

[Aregorn]

I don't have the stats in front of me since I'm at work but wouldn't removing the final CAS plane make TAC superior to CAS in almost every way? There may have been a gap somewhere in the WWII timeframe but CAS has continued to be very effective right up to current times even. I don't know how accurate this is but I heard somewhere that in the first Gulf War, the A-10 had more kills for the US than our tanks did. That's some serious punch for a CAS.

This is correct but please do not fall into the mistake of comparing WWII weapon efficiency with the modern warfare one .

 

[Aregorn]

When i was playing vanilla, I wondered what the design decision to have asm euipped cas was. You could argue that Tac or Nav should benefit as much from asm equipment.
I noticed that you have given a lot of bonuses to units when a tech is researched. Why not do it with the asm-cas and rather than a specific unit, give a generic bonus to air units naval attack (and maybe logistical strike effectiveness etc) when the tech is researched?
I have been reading the 'naval bombers are overpowered in the game' thread(s), and I come down on the side that holds, that as a unit they should represent long range aircraft with limited anti-naval ability.Tac and cas should be ship killers with the land based aircraft's anti-naval capability affected by doctrine. If you want to use your cas or tacs in an antinaval role then you should have to invest in the training,logistics and equipment for it as represented ingame by doctrine research.
But thats my 2cents. I won't cry whatever you decide After all you are the one doing the hard work.
Cheers,
Mammoth

This was easier to be done in HOI 1 but for sure I am with your point of view. When the time comes I think we will follow this doctrine.