This HOI4 CAS Design DESTROYS Everyone | Close Air Support Guide for Hearts of Iron IV

[@endzor]

It's not just about encirclements it's about breaking enemy lines, enemy tanks, the gigachad provides enough damage

[@AdamHoi4]

You need all that to make encerclements

[@patropro]

the good thing about having high cas damage planes is that there is a limited amount of cas in one ground battle (depending on the combat width) which means you have to concentrate your fights more since you'll have less planes but also means that where you concentrate you are able to do a lot more damage. but that means that over the whole frontline you probably have less ground attack overall. but that is just a guess since i havent tested that.

[@panpsalt6757]

Before I watch this video, I made a few tests, trying to find the best pure CAS, starting with Excell and confirming ingame. The test was made with 100 CAS vs 100 fighters with 54 Air Attack 45 agility and 585 speed. I allowed all 1940 techs. The 4 most mentionable designs are: Plane 1) 4 rockets, engine 1. The idea was that it would be the cheapest to make and due to it's high agility, it would take the least damage. It was not very effective, partly due to it's low range, partly due to disruption only changing by 30%. Plane 2) AT cannon, 2 rockets. Self sealing, drop tanks, dive breaks. 23 Ground attack. 36 IC Plane 3) 2 h. bomb locks/small bomb bay. 1 bomb lock. Self sealing, dive breaks, 1 light mg turret. 22 ground attack 29 IC Plane 4) 1 h. bomb lock/small bomb bay. 2 bomb locks. Self sealing, dive breaks, drop tanks. 20 ground attack 29 IC All of those before MIOs. The plane 3 is arguably the second worst. it's ground attack/IC is the highest of them all, but it's range is the worst of all. The plane 2 and plane 4 are almost identical. Overall, the plane 4 does 8% more dmg/IC, and it takes 29% more losses/disruption. The plane 2 is in my opinion marginally better, but due to it's high tech requirements, i tend to not build it as much. When I can however, I do. A few more notes: This test was done with having access to rubber as a given, meaning playing Allies.

[@balkan-cowboy]

Thanks for sharing, you mentioned some interesting designs. The lower engine thing would be interesting to test on rocket rail planes, but I do fear it won't have enough thrust to put range-increasing modules because they are heavy. Might be possible with engine 2, tho!

[@comradeivan9326]

self sealing fuel tanks are a noob trap, you should remove them unless you specifically have free rubber to spare (which is only like britain) Air defense as a stat only matters against enemy fighters, so you can entirely ignore it on your CAS bombers, put non-strategic materials and range increases

[@balkan-cowboy]

The air defense thing is not true. Check out my Germany meta video to see how badly non strategic material CAS gets shredded by enemy fighters. Air defense is great even if it doesn't help you against AA. You still need to bomb in contested air spaces

[@Перчик3-ш2ъ]

Honestly, every viewer pressed F to pay respect to the guy in their souls. Only 55 left the comments, bro, just believe, you ARE the gigachad cas

[@punjabiscone848]

For comparing the damage and IC cost you should show damage/IC cost, i think that would make it clearer that the middle one is the best

[@punjabiscone848]

I just did the math, agility CAS does 7.5 DMG/1000 IC, Chad does 7.7, and middle does 12.2

[@lolloblue9646]

​@@punjabiscone848 so rocket plane is not much worse than bomb bay plane, comparatively

[@janmantsch6675]

The only things i have to add is that A: You should also show that you used maxed out Military Industrial Organisations and B: That i belive using At Cannon 2 and 2 rocket rails would give you a better stat line than your second CAS whist staying on 1x Engine 3

[@balkan-cowboy]

Ooh, AT2 and rocket rails is something that I didn't consider. Thanks for that, will experiment with it. As for the MIOs, yeah, it was maxed out but there are quite a few majors who have the same exact CAS MIO so it's a viable build for many players.

[@janmantsch6675]

@@balkan-cowboy no problem I just wanted to compare your designs with mine and was compleatly confused because the numbers were all wrong.

[@andthe4010]

maxed out MIOs are basically impossible to get by normal gameplay unless you play til like 1945 at which point the game is already over anyway

[@obamagaming6410]

Good video, but the testing parameters are a bit unrealistic as virtually no one puts up CAS while the air is still being contested. Usually it's fighters vs fighters until one side practically has no airforce left, and then the winner can unleash his ground damage maxxed CAS to wreak total havoc, the only losses of his very expensive CAS planes stemming from accidents and division AA

[@balkan-cowboy]

Hmm, I can see why people do that but I think putting up CAS while you don't have total control has its merits. It will help with the initial breakthrough, and from my testing, the side without CAS ends up losing more fighters so you might lose more IC overall but you will be able to down more fighters and achieve air superiority more easily. Still, this could be due to other factors so it merits a test

[@josedavidmurgueitio601]

Conclusion: Well, air supremacy is always the way to go. Better and more figthers then/with ChadCAS broke enemy lines and steam roll to Berlín or Moscow Nice Guide Thanks 🎉

[@ac4694]

Great test, I would add signals to the attackers, because reinforcement might be a big random factor

[@drsudy9640]

Glad i found you - your content and testing is fantastic. Also nice to see an air focused channel :). Curious what your opinion on tanks are though

[@balkan-cowboy]

Thanks for watching, I will have to look at tanks at some point :) I will just need to do more research on them. I don't like to speak out of my ass or parrot other KZbinrs if I can add something new and valuable for viewers.

[@0815firstuser0815]

Try to use one additional frontline AA in your divisions: This will shred CAS more.

[@endzor]

Gigachad cas is the best, cuz it gives the most damage and you can't fill all cheap cas you make into a battle, since the amount of cas is limited by combat width

[@gforce95vn]

Excellent video covering the topic we've discussed, if ya still remember me :P thanks for your time and research. PDX definitely has the ability to use Agility stats to mitigate AA, as it had been done in planes vs ship aa calculation, so I don't think it'd be a great leap to implement such for land battle against division AA too. With that said, I'm a bit clueless on why the Agility CAS suffered less loss from division AA even though the battles were longer as afaik the support AA discriminate against all stats. What's not immediately known/noticed is where does the 2.3x times damage reflect in combat, and I suspect that the Gladiator design shreds the enemy's HP in addition to org damage. While arriving 4.5% faster seems small, my 3x rocket rail design wouldn't be able to inflict as much combat & equipment losses as your other design could. Again, thanks for the video.

[@balkan-cowboy]

Of course, my man, you're the reason I made it so thanks to you as well! P.S: I know it sounds crazy but I really like the giga chad variant, I did tests in 2 other regions before settling in Ukraine, there is a NOTABLE difference in how ground troops perform when you bomb with that thing. Not sure if it would be viable in multi, but I highly recommend trying it in single with a larger major just for the fun of it.

[@gocool_2.0]

Balkans mentioned. Instant subscription.

[@Kartiksinghoberoi15]

India se ho bhai 😅😅

[@gocool_2.0]

@@Kartiksinghoberoi15 Yes

[@xModerax]

Always choose the best in everything because 70 years later games like war thunder will make you regret not making best quality which will get matched against 21st century tech

[@Melrieoi]

Yeah the Americans really missed the ball by insisting on Shermans when they should have known they would be fighting is-3s in some autistic asylum they call a video game.

[@lolloblue9646]

I'm gonna need to save this for later

[@ooo_Kim_Chi_ooo]

What about Heavy Fighters? I love Heavy Attack planes.

[@balkan-cowboy]

@@ooo_Kim_Chi_ooo You can check my Italy MiO video for them. They are typically too expensive to be "meta," they can still be very good in single tho

[@ReSSwend]

I didn't see a variant with 3 anti-tank guns. There the ground attack turns out to be more than 30. But you need to install 2 engines.

[@No.00000]

Didnt realise you changed your channel name lost ya there for a bit 😅 Great content 👍

[@mrjaman3752]

imagine hes trolling and saying us the wrong stuff just so he can gatekeep the best cas

[@jagdtigerthunder9161]

Hi,i wanted to ask.Whenever i build 1940 Cas,i have the design : -Anti Cannon 2-Small Bomb Bay-Heavy Machine Guns -i use engine IIIs,self fuel sealing tanks,armor plates and drop tanks This design gives me 553 km air speed,1080kms range,35 agility,12 air attack,29/30 thrust (i would use anti cannon 1 instead of small bomb bay but then i get 32 thrust so i will need to use 2 engines and the cost goes too high,almost 15 LC higher) -The LC cost is 37.80 .Do you find the plane as okay design for 1940 germany? Or should i get rid of the heavy machine guns,use 2 engines and just add anti cannons 1.If i do that,then i get 521 kms/hour/31 ground attack/18 agility and the LC is 55.80.I hope i am not confusing.

[@balkan-cowboy]

Hey, so what are you trying to do exactly? Would this be a multi-role that you run with battlefield support + continuous strike to exploit the mission efficiency or are you trying to create a good CAS model? Because if the latter is the case, I'd suggest sticking to pure CAS and letting the fighters do the fighting for you, don't use machine guns on CAS. Also as I say in the video, Germany would waste too many civ factories to import rubber, so don't use self-sealing tanks unless you're UK, JAP, France. Try maximizing ground attack for your CAS or if you just want the attack bonuses to your army without the ground attack, you can make super cheap cas with 1 bomb module and decent air defence + range.

[@aaronpeters6676]

Great Content, keep up the good work👍

[@Y0k0y0]

I wonder: How does it behave in Logistic Stike? Is the gound Attack of the plane relevant? Does air defence do something? should I spam range? Do you know something?

[@balkan-cowboy]

Yeah, ground attack matters for logistical strike as well. The thing is it was nerfed because it was OP, so static and divisional anti air absolutely shreds planes on logistical strike. Also armored trains are hard to kill and have AA, but trucks are vulnerable. Range matters as much as for other missions, air defense will only save you from fighters. Flying over areas where there aren't many battles doesn't yield great results.

[@radordekeche947]

What about using air attack weapons on CAS? So a few bomb base and some machine guns? Not as much ground attack, but more damage to fighters. Or maybe it's better to just have dedicated fighters.

[@balkan-cowboy]

Best to have dedicated fighters and leave CAS do CAS. That being said, what you are referring to is multi-role planes, but there is a very specific thing you need to do to make them extremely good. I have a few videos about them, check them out.

[@colelehnert5202]

Do a video about light vs medium vs heavy tank for damage to IC cost for multiplayer builds

[@fyheihei]

Does anyone know what ""enemy troops bombed" mean? Total enemy organization loss?

[@fernandolugo3338]

can you tell me the modules of the final cas?

[@-w-6323]

Can you also do something like best tank designs? Love your content❤

[@balkan-cowboy]

Thanks for watching, I will have to look at tanks at some point :) I will just need to do more research on them. I don't like to speak out of my ass or parrot other KZbinrs if I can add something new and valuable for viewers.

[@蔡林翰-v2m]

反坦克炮，應該會更適用於敵方有裝甲部隊吧? 尤其是裝甲混編隊 ，還是說遊戲中其實沒有分別 只有空中攻擊能力? 話說，既然要兩個引擎了，我就不會裝在小型飛機上，直接換 中型飛機、射程與油箱強化、生存與防護能力都比較好 當然也更少損失

[@balkan-cowboy]

No difference whatsoever, only the ground attack value matters. Close air support is actually better for ground attack with the right MIO and is slightly cheaper, so it does make sense to produce it unless you need a lot of range.

[@pasanaator9874]

I usually max out ground attack, and add a heavy mg turret and self-sealing fuel tanks

[@balkan-cowboy]

Don't forget the range, it's important outside of western Europe

[@pasanaator9874]

Yeah, thats why its good practice to almost always add drop tanks to your planes

[@balkan-cowboy]

I'm starting to like extra fuel tanks more. Sure it takes away air defense but the range boost is greater and the module is lighter so you can stack other defensive parts

[@Deroven]

Full mg, full agility, only 1 set of rocket rails on last slot. Stack ground attack efficiency from the tree. Is it meta or best? Nawh, probably not. But would need to be tested because boy does it work vs ai as a single factory line solution for air superiority + cas

[@balkan-cowboy]

Do the rocket rails on the first slot because it classifies as CAS and you get 20% bonus agility 🤌

[@Deroven]

@@balkan-cowboy depends on MIO available to cas and/or fighter. But fair point.

[@yeet8872]

Do you need any dlc for this?

[@endzor]

You are not counting generals lol, they can randomly roll tactics every time you reload save

[@balkan-cowboy]

Yep, you're right. I did several tests and I did notice that sometimes the giga Chad completed encirclements even earlier. I also really like the model, it costs a lot but it does pack a big punch and the difference is visible.

[@ggomega9211]

oh great now my freind that only builds med tanks and fighters and cas and only plays certain nations that grow exponentially will just watch this and be super op

[@balkan-cowboy]

Hahaha, well counter him with mass anti air 🤣

[@cubecrasher7606]

Great video. Did you use a doctrine in the tests?

[@balkan-cowboy]

Yep, mobile warfare vs grand battleplan. For the air it was operational tegrity for Germany vs strategic destruction. You can do even more cas damage with battlefield support but the fighter performance is a bit lacking on that doctrine

[@stevenlandbo6039]

Is this something that is in one of the dlc I have seen people do this before buy I can't seem to find it

[@balkan-cowboy]

You mean the plane designer?

[@stevenlandbo6039]

@@balkan-cowboy yes

[@balkan-cowboy]

@@stevenlandbo6039 it is from by blood alone I think

[@stevenlandbo6039]

@@balkan-cowboy that explains it

[@TheMelnTeam]

Another legit CAS build is just a single bomb lock, nothing else, cheapest crap possible (investment into extra survival vs fighters optional depending on how much you expect to see). You get 2 things from CAS: direct bombing damage (measured in this video) and a positive multiplier from "air support" to your own troops in combat. The former gets reduced by support AA, but it can be further stacked against with camo expert on both general and field marshal, such that divs are taking < 10% of the base CAS damage (less than 20 "troops bombed" on that final chad build vs no AA). However, as long as the planes are on the mission, the divisions are still getting their air support multiplier to their attacks, and thus even complete gutter trash CAS bombers still contribute even if the enemy farms generals + AA to block the direct damage. Note that if it isn't banned, any of the models you show in this video *and* the bomb locks trash CAS can completely ruin enemy supply with logistics strikes too. After the armored train nerf, log strikes have been pretty oppressive.

[@balkan-cowboy]

Yes I agree with this and I touched on the buff provided to divisions by CAS, just didn't show it. So low ground attack CAS with decent air def is ok too. If facing fighters air def shouldn't be ignored tho.

[@SunnyVield]

What's DLC?

[@balkan-cowboy]

I have all of them, I suppose MIOs are from arms against tyranny while the airplane designer is from by blood alone

[@SunnyVield]

@@balkan-cowboy Thanks information sir 👍🏻

[@dezekpl7485]

FFS JUST GET FULL GROUND ATTACK AND THE REST SHOULD GO TO FIGHTER SO YOU DONT HAVE TO HAVE ANY DEFENSIVE MODULES

[@balkan-cowboy]

That's the worst piece of advice I've heard 🤣 but hey you used caps lock so it must be true!

[@counterfactualgaming]

@@balkan-cowboy Considering how dive brakes are just as efficient at providing air defense as armor plates, but do not nerf range, it's really a no brainer to use them in CAS. And if you are going full-on two engine anti-tank cannon Junker CAS, you have enough production cost/weight budget to add them. It really is value added. Oh, and dive brakes are one of the only defensive modules that also boosts naval targeting against ships. So, they are a real bargain. A 56 production cost plane doesn't really need to become a casualty to some Spitfire just because you couldn't be bothered to put dive brakes on it. 😁

[@balkan-cowboy]

@@counterfactualgaming Yep, I actually did a test on my recent Germany video, even if you can't do anything against ground-based AA, if you're fighting against a similar number of fighters and try to ground support they really shred your CAS in a very short amount of time (when CAS has low air def) Even your fighter losses are higher when using CAS without air def, so it's a good insurance imo.

[@andthe4010]

People insist CAS is some amazing thing, but I have never seen it have ANY impact on the game except taking resources and IC to add 0 power of any kind to your military.

[@balkan-cowboy]

I mean just ground support adds 25%+ to damage and breakthrough/defense. That's without counting the org and strength damage you do. Imo it's a big enough bonus to warrant building CAS.

[@andthe4010]

@@balkan-cowboy right, people cite these stats constantly, yet after 3000 hours and knowing basically everything there is to know about the mechanics of the game and how to use everything I have never noticed my army performing better with an airforce. It doesn't matter. Maybe MP is different but I've never had time or a smart enough group of people to be interested in playing that way. All you need are divisions with high hardness and breakthrough, soft attack helps as well. Those are the only stats in the game that matter. Navy and Air are still both completely useless in this game unless you need to do naval invasions or paratroopers. I want it to not be true, but it is. I can't understand how my personal experience can be so drastically different than what everyone on youtube seems to be claiming. close air support does fuckall jack shit.

[@arthurrelke]

​@@andthe4010 play 1 game of mp or try pushing through 60 a.i divisions without tank divisions with 800 soft attack and cas. Cas reduces your loss of eqp and manpower, battles are faster, the time you spend grinding through a front is massive reduced with close air support. Sure, you can invade the sov's without planes, using inf+art and tanks, sinking i.c in the battles because you're exhausting your panzers, taking 1 milion casualties and call it a day after 720 days in game, but it's not the meta, the min max. Same with shore bombardment, you can win a costal battle or invasion without BB/BC/CA, but the bonus reduces the time you expend on the offensive. You claim to know everything, yet, says breakthrough and hardness is the core asset, having more breakthrough than the enemy has attack has no effect, and it is a cheap stat to get, hardness is a side effect of having armor, not the end goal. You should focus on getting massives soft attack, armor and cas with full heavy bombs, that it will obliterate enemy org, so that battles against entrenched are resolved more rapidly, allowing exploits of lines and supply to be done by mot/mech inf. Nothing is useless, in a multiplayer session you would get sent to oblivion. In fact, anti-air is far more valuable than anti tank, i wonder why....

[@arankoka]

@@andthe4010 tanks number is limited by supply. but you have more firepower on the same amount of tanks by having air+cas up. u deal damage, u get attack boni, he gets less defense. your ground troops will do better. decisive at hard objectives, like if you must cross a river, and same quality tanks wait at the other side.