Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Fighter vs. Int F org values

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
ShadoWarrior

ShadoWarrior

Colonel
12 Badges
Jun 25, 2004
848
222
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Why do multi-role fighters have such poor Org values compared to interceptors? My German 1939 Int F have a whopping 30 more Org value than my 1938 Ftr. On the production screen they both have the same Org, but because of doctrines, Interceptors get a LOT more bonuses. Interceptors are for anti-bomber use, where you typically don't get a lot of return fire to knock down your Org, while multi-role fighters are intended to go against enemy fighters, which will rapidly knock down your Org in combat. So the fighter type that most needs Org (multi-role) is the one that, doctrinally, has far fewer bonuses. It just doesn't seem right that Interceptors should be nearly twice as durable in air-to-air combat as Fighters. It's ass-backwards from the RW where the larger fighters could take more abuse than their lighter, faster interceptor brethren.
 
Last edited:
The problem is the the doctrine path Pre-planned Coordination -> Short Notice Response -> Radio-integrated Chain-of-Command yields +10% each to Int F (total of +30%) and none at all to Ftr. Surely this is an oversight? It's especially painful as it costs well over twice as much to build a Ftr-1 than it does an IntF-4.
 
These units are meant for quite different roles, even though you may view the aircraft as similar. The Doctrine path you mention is all about getting Interceptors to their targets quickly and efficiently - it has nothing to do with sending Fighters out on offensive operations, basically.

However, I do see your point to some extent - if you happen to use Fighters for Air Defence, then logically they would gain some benefits from these doctrines. It is really baylox's area of knowledge, so I shall leave it to him to comment further.

Tim
 
HistoryMan said:
The Doctrine path you mention is all about getting Interceptors to their targets quickly and efficiently - it has nothing to do with sending Fighters out on offensive operations, basically.
Click to expand...
If that was true then these doctrines wouldn't give bonuses to CAS. Also, these doctrines each give a bonus to Air Superiority. Air Superiority is generally considered to be blowing enemy fighters out of the sky (not just enemy bombers). Between the bonuses to CAS, and the bonuses to Air Superiority, this doctrine path is about coordinating fighter missions (which should be any fighter doing the mission, not just a particular type of plane) and on-call air strikes in support of ground forces (which also should be about the mission type, and not just the plane type, and thus should logically also include Tac bombers, since in HoI2 you can assign Tac the same missions as you do CAS).

If you don't use Fighters for "air defense" in CORE, then what the heck purpose do they serve? They cost almost triple what Interceptors do. They have no soft or naval attack values, so they're useless in ground and naval attack roles.

It seems Fighters only gain bonuses in the Independent Air doctrine path. So basically a country like Germany, stuck with Army-directed Air and which historically built and used Fighters (such as the FW190) for air superiority, gets screwed. Since CORE is about being historically accurate, then Fighters need to be given bonuses in the Army-directed Air path because Germany did in fact use Fighters for Air Superiority, not just Me109 Interceptors.
 
Preliminary Strategic Bombing Operations opens up Independent Air Arm techs, so Germany isn't actually limited in the long run. Fighters also, on a per model comparison, have higher attack and defense values, longer range and a hard attack value. Whether it's worth nearly twice the IC per unit is another question...
 
Well, Fighters do get the bonus to the Air Superiority Mission as much as Interceptors do and Org isn't everything: Fighters have significantly higher Air Defense values than Interceptors, which makes them less vulnerable to damage.

But yes, 30% difference is too much. I'll look into this (though it might be that Interceptors need to be toned down).

Historically, Germany used INT almost exclusively (in a typical FTR role) until after the Battle of Britain, where they historically (seen through our mod) switched to Defensive Focus via Independent Air Arm Formation, though they didn't make much progress down that branch. So that needs to be taken into consideration as well.
 
Thanks for the reply, Baylox. BTW, I modded the tech file to add 5% Ftr Max Org bonus to those 3 air doctrines and then reloaded my saved game. Existing Fighters do not have their max org values increased. I don't know if any newly-built ones will be affected. So, while edited events will affect reloaded saved games (though not retroactively), the same may not true for techs. At least not retroactively.

Oh, and a 1-point difference in air defense between the Ftr-1 and the IntF-4 isn't enough to compensate for a 30-point difference in MaxOrg. ;)
 
Last edited:
I have had more sweeping unit stat changes in the works, but I actually can't remember of the top of my head if that made it into 0.3 or not. If not, then it won't be for 0.3.1 either, but I'll take a look nonetheless to see if its where I want them to be.
 
Can't ask for more than that. Thanks again, Baylox.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back