Is there a Plane design meta?

[aedarn]

Hello everyone.
Since the plane design modification with one DLC, I'm completely lost with planes. No matter who I play, or how I design my plane, I seem to be inferior to my ennemies, often losing with like 1/5 ratio.
Is there a optimal way to build fighters? LMG, cannons, 1x or 2x engines...
Thanks

[83athom]

The meta is to just stack defense on everything. For air superiority, stack HMGs. To kill bombers, use like 2 things of cannons on a cheap fighter. Most people I see just use the light airframe for everything but strat bombing, nobody seems to use the medium airframe when playing meta. For engines, use the cheapest you can get away with to meet thrust requirements for the weight.

IMHO that's not fun though, so I make funky stuff based on IRL designs. Though it's funny because doing that really shows you how limited the designer actually is, a lot of aircraft IRL are outright impossible to make in the designer properly.

[AGI experiment gone wrong]

More complicated than this, what are your fighters doing, air superiority of interception, range/ basing coverage? up against medium or light fighters? Basically light fighters are 1 engine (look up speed tables in research) not 2 as fastest, then you want agility as they already have pace with the thrust, then you want things which don't damage it, no armour, self sealing tanks, air to air radar, machine guns because what you are shooting (fighters) have low air defence. Conversely you could be intercepting bombers, which would be maximising speed not agility and making sure like penetration with armour you always have higher air attack than they have air defence as your agility is already pretty good, you might for example use air cannons. If you are projecting into enemy territory you'll need range so medium fighters and probably won't need to penetrate defence so any air attack without any penalties you can get to shoot down fighters and try to make up for lower agility, you might go 4 engines because there is no low drag single engine medium fighter, then up the armour because of your thrust with the extra modules because you can overcome the penalties and have 4x 4x machine guns or something.

[AGI experiment gone wrong]

The game is basically way more complicated, you can make jack of all trades but it conflicts with your early game wings who can't do say naval strike if you add that to medium bombers, you have to understand what the mission is and who the enemy is. Single engine jacked up machine gun fighters with self sealing, air to air radar, maxed engine quality you also are probably overlooking radar for detection efficiency which is as important as mission efficiency. Your planes won't kill any planes without seeing them, radar is maximum 50% so if your planes have the whole region (100% efficiency) and 50% detection, 50% of the enemies air will face whatever it is you have flying and begin a combat. If you are Germany and have 1% detection, you can't actually engage back so once the allies start winning the war even if you have enough power to intercept the bombers you can't. UK on other hand has bases and radar around the world and can hold sea lanes even without the game's most powerful navy. Japan is screwed for example as Hong Kong and Malaysia you can base naval aircraft and medium aircraft with torpedoes and medium fighters and take on their submarines and aircraft carriers with literally no navy then when you send the UK's 4 aircraft carriers to one sea area Japan can't do it and they can't project navy behind 2 regions anyway without basing which they don't have, all they have is submarines and the UK has them too. Japan needs to kick the allies out of the naval areas it holds to have a chance. In Germany you can already pin their navy and overcome Italy's then do naval invasions to outflank them but you want to concentrate on taking them on in the air and start succeeding in strategic bombing first which you should be able to do because they have fewer resources and their production has been on the army and they can't trade as you own the seas

[captain403]

Good lord, paragraphs, man.

[All talk and no fight]

someone remind me: is max air attack and air defense the best fighter for cost-ratio destroying enemy planes (so 2 cannon x1's, 1 4hmg along with armor plates and self sealing tanks) or just 1 2xcannon, then the air defenses?

[Zerian VySil]

Design your planes the way you design Army Divisions : for the Terrain

If you are deploying planes to small zones where they will easily be able to cover every part, then the advice of those above is decent.

If you are only able to achieve 50% coverage, then you'll need to build 2 times as many equally designed planes just to stay even, because they will be shooting down twice as many of yours.

It's an easily overlooked mechanic.
Click Assign to Army and forget about them, is my habit, for sure.

But if you really want to win, then choose designers that increase range, and add drop tanks to your planes.

You didn't really think they added that research option just for kicks, did you ? ;)

[Citizen X]

There are some things we can look at objectively here. Heavy (and Light) MGs are the only weapon with a 4:1 ratio, for Air Attack / Production Cost. Cannons are worse, plus they diminish your agility as well.

Self-Sealing Tanks are the best Defense / Production Cost, however in a serious game relying on Rubber to that degree is quite dangerous. Armor Plates are a great second for a slight reduction in range.

One thing is for certain that planes are retarded expensive right now; 26 PC for Fighter 2 before the DLC was already a lot, but now Improved Fighters are costing well over 30 PC. They cost more than double that of good Improved Medium Tank designs.

[AGI experiment gone wrong]

It depends with cannons because they have higher air attack and can get through defence and say a fighter verses strategic bombing agility gap is mute as the fighter dominates. It would be cheaper and more effective for 1 cannon slot single engine fighter on interception to take out strategic bombers and go for air supremacy on your medium fighters, it depends what you face and what the fighters are doing, fighting fighters or bombers?

[Square Box]

Originally posted by All talk and no fight:

someone remind me: is max air attack and air defense the best fighter for cost-ratio destroying enemy planes (so 2 cannon x1's, 1 4hmg along with armor plates and self sealing tanks) or just 1 2xcannon, then the air defenses?

That is a good question. Looking forward to an answer.

[Ás Fífldjarfi]

It depends on the theatre and how you are using them.

If you want your naval bombers to keep your coasts clear, small airframes are fine.

If you want to hurt the enemy shipping, a medium bomber floatplane might suit better. (this is usually playing Japan/Italy/Germany and don't intend on invading the UK, then these kind of bombers can be useful for hitting ships outside of the enemy air coverage, like the pacific and middle of the atlantic ocean)

As for ground support, I usually use medium bombers in Asia and light bombers in Europe, because airfields are a lot more spaced out in asia and range is a factor.

I suppose you can use light airframes now with drop-tanks and extra fuel, but I would imagine they would be pretty vulnerable to AA.


As for fighters, I usually just make cheap dedicated fighters to do both interception and air superority, and give them 4 hmg's and 2 cannons and air-air radar and armour(unless I have a ton of rubber, then I substitute armour for self sealing tanks)

[V.A.L. Commorby]

Originally posted by AGI experiment gone wrong:

The game is basically way more complicated, you can make jack of all trades but it conflicts with your early game wings who can't do say naval strike if you add that to medium bombers, you have to understand what the mission is and who the enemy is. Single engine jacked up machine gun fighters with self sealing, air to air radar, maxed engine quality you also are probably overlooking radar for detection efficiency which is as important as mission efficiency. Your planes won't kill any planes without seeing them, radar is maximum 50% so if your planes have the whole region (100% efficiency) and 50% detection, 50% of the enemies air will face whatever it is you have flying and begin a combat. If you are Germany and have 1% detection, you can't actually engage back so once the allies start winning the war even if you have enough power to intercept the bombers you can't. UK on other hand has bases and radar around the world and can hold sea lanes even without the game's most powerful navy. Japan is screwed for example as Hong Kong and Malaysia you can base naval aircraft and medium aircraft with torpedoes and medium fighters and take on their submarines and aircraft carriers with literally no navy then when you send the UK's 4 aircraft carriers to one sea area Japan can't do it and they can't project navy behind 2 regions anyway without basing which they don't have, all they have is submarines and the UK has them too. Japan needs to kick the allies out of the naval areas it holds to have a chance. In Germany you can already pin their navy and overcome Italy's then do naval invasions to outflank them but you want to concentrate on taking them on in the air and start succeeding in strategic bombing first which you should be able to do because they have fewer resources and their production has been on the army and they can't trade as you own the seas

I'm sorry, I ain't reading allat without separated paragraphs.

[Square Box]

Originally posted by V.A.L. Commorby:

Originally posted by AGI experiment gone wrong:

The game is basically way more complicated, you can make jack of all trades but it conflicts with your early game wings who can't do say naval strike if you add that to medium bombers, you have to understand what the mission is and who the enemy is. Single engine jacked up machine gun fighters with self sealing, air to air radar, maxed engine quality you also are probably overlooking radar for detection efficiency which is as important as mission efficiency. Your planes won't kill any planes without seeing them, radar is maximum 50% so if your planes have the whole region (100% efficiency) and 50% detection, 50% of the enemies air will face whatever it is you have flying and begin a combat. If you are Germany and have 1% detection, you can't actually engage back so once the allies start winning the war even if you have enough power to intercept the bombers you can't. UK on other hand has bases and radar around the world and can hold sea lanes even without the game's most powerful navy. Japan is screwed for example as Hong Kong and Malaysia you can base naval aircraft and medium aircraft with torpedoes and medium fighters and take on their submarines and aircraft carriers with literally no navy then when you send the UK's 4 aircraft carriers to one sea area Japan can't do it and they can't project navy behind 2 regions anyway without basing which they don't have, all they have is submarines and the UK has them too. Japan needs to kick the allies out of the naval areas it holds to have a chance. In Germany you can already pin their navy and overcome Italy's then do naval invasions to outflank them but you want to concentrate on taking them on in the air and start succeeding in strategic bombing first which you should be able to do because they have fewer resources and their production has been on the army and they can't trade as you own the seas

I'm sorry, I ain't reading allat without separated paragraphs.

lol. At least he included a little punctuation!

I take it that "allat" represents the term 'all of that'. I enjoyed the irony. Thank you.