Tactical Bomber vs. Stratetic Bomber

[Democracy Officer Yannick]

Is any of them worth it? If yes, which one is better to bomb the enemy into oblivion?

[Lysenko]

Tacticals can do ground attack, but not as well as Close Air Support, and strategic bombing, but not as well as dedicated strategic bombers. If you want to bomb enemy factories/infrastructure/forts then use strategic, if you want to support your army then build tacticals

Edit: Tactical bombers are the jack of all trades and master of none, but their long range makes them useful in non-European theatres for air support.

[acur1231]

By the way, is it just me or does attaching an air wing to an army not really make the AI send the airwing to the most logical location to support the army?

[Viviana]

Stratetic Bombers.

[Democracy Officer Yannick]

Originally posted by Lysenkoite:

Tacticals can do ground attack, but not as well as Close Air Support, and strategic bombing, but not as well as dedicated strategic bombers. If you want to bomb enemy factories/infrastructure/forts then use strategic, if you want to support your army then build tacticals

Edit: Tactical bombers are the jack of all trades and master of none, but their long range makes them useful in non-European theatres for air support.

So stratetig for factories etc. right?

Just wanna annoy my enemy with ships, fighters and bomber

[Torrens]

Tactical bombers are very good if you want to maximise production efficiency. You can focus on producing a single type of plane and will get a weapon that can answer to any situation. As Germany you can do close air support while invading France, then help Italy and bomb UK navy in meditarenian and later send them to eastern front angainst USSR and strategic bomb Moscow. All this with a single production line. You also don't have to worry about range in large air zones.

Strategic bomber absolutely trumps tactical bomber in strategic bombing. Completely superior for destroying enemy's industry and infrastructure. But very inflexible.

[Scharny]

Tactial bombers are awfull for ground support, awfull for strategic bombing and awfull for naval bombing.
They can do all. But they do all very poorly.

Go Strategic bombers. They have even been buffed abit in 1.5

[KaidenOZ]

Originally posted by Scharny:

Tactial bombers are awfull for ground support, awfull for strategic bombing and awfull for naval bombing.
They can do all. But they do all very poorly.

Go Strategic bombers. They have even been buffed abit in 1.5

stats wise i wouldnt call them aweful by any stretch on a pure numbers situation.

lvl 1 tac ground attack is 6 level 2 is 9 and level 3 is 15
lvl 1 cas ground attack is 10 level 2 is 15 and level 3 is 20

being able to hit well beyond the range of cas, fulfill stratigic roles, naval roles, cas roles all for a single production line is pretty significant. are they as good at the role? no. but they are more then capable.

[Scharny]

Originally posted by KaidenOZ:

Originally posted by Scharny:

Tactial bombers are awfull for ground support, awfull for strategic bombing and awfull for naval bombing.
They can do all. But they do all very poorly.

Go Strategic bombers. They have even been buffed abit in 1.5

stats wise i wouldnt call them aweful by any stretch on a pure numbers situation.

lvl 1 tac ground attack is 6 level 2 is 9 and level 3 is 15
lvl 1 cas ground attack is 10 level 2 is 15 and level 3 is 20

being able to hit well beyond the range of cas, fulfill stratigic roles, naval roles, cas roles all for a single production line is pretty significant. are they as good at the role? no. but they are more then capable.

But also 40% more expensive to build than CAS.
Also Tier 3 tactial bomber doess 16 strategic bombing. While a tier 3 Strategic bomber does 60.
The only thing they have which is some what decent is naval bombing dmg. Was it not because their low naval targeting makes them hit absolutely nothing.
Also their Air defense is also so low that normal fighters are still able to shoot them down.
Strategic bombers on the other hand are very hard to shoot down with normal figthers.
While heavy fighters (which are bad against normal fighters) is the only thing which kills strategic bombers easily.

And since CAS will go equal or better against heavy fighters. Their only true enemy is normal fighters. While Tactial bombers need to fear both Normal and Heavy fighters.

[KaidenOZ]

while they are more expensive than cas, you failed to list the savings in a tac only fleet if you wanted to fill all roles.. strats cost 60 at level 1, and cas 22.another 26 for nav. cas can arguably fulfil the nav role so in building tac to cover all your air roles, you are looking at a net saving of 45 if you use cas for nav role.

the savings in building other air units would give you the freedom to have stronger fighter forces so the tac defence is less of an issue when you have control of the skies.

are they perfect? no. but as an allrounder they are a cabable replacment for cas, nav and strat if you cant or dont want to field all the other air types.

its down to the player to choose what best fits their needs and there are times when being able to cover ALL air roles in a single craft and production line is a strong factor in their favor.

just because you don't like them doesnt mean they are useless.

[Scharny]

Originally posted by KaidenOZ:

while they are more expensive than cas, you failed to list the savings in a tac only fleet if you wanted to fill all roles.. strats cost 60 at level 1, and cas 22.another 26 for nav. cas can arguably fulfil the nav role so in building tac to cover all your air roles, you are looking at a net saving of 45 if you use cas for nav role.

the savings in building other air units would give you the freedom to have stronger fighter forces so the tac defence is less of an issue when you have control of the skies.

are they perfect? no. but as an allrounder they are a cabable replacment for cas, nav and strat if you cant or dont want to field all the other air types.

its down to the player to choose what best fits their needs and there are times when being able to cover ALL air roles in a single craft and production line is a strong factor in their favor.

just because you don't like them doesnt mean they are useless.

True they are a cabable replacement for CAS, but not for naval bombers. And they are very situational strategic bomber. As most minors i find it to be better to go depending on country size either pure figthers or fighters and CAS. Since its easier to get the maximum debuff against the enemy that way.

[jfsial2a]

Strategic bombers are only useful to drop nukes if you have this technology, otherwise it is a waste to send them bombing enemy infrastructure, especially without air superiority.
So keep your fighters for good reasons, mainly when you try to invade UK by the Channel at the early stages of the game, which will give you a fair chance to win the game when UK surrenders.
But remember that the country who gets the higher score at the end of the game is the one with the most important air fighters fleet (air superiority points), that becomes quick to understand..

[Bvisi0n]

If you want to bomb them into oblivion at the border where you fighters can help out, Tactical bombers, they are cheaper to make and can do more then just bomb buildings.

If your objective is to bomb deep inside enemy territory where your fighters can't escort them.
Strat bombers are like fighting fortresses, only heavy fighters can harm them effectively.

[chaosguy]

Right. But the irony is a lot of the back and forth in this thread is arguing the merits for a tactical bomber. No one in this thread is saying they're great. The point is, you got lets say 60 factories at your disposal, for absolutely everything- ground air, art., etc. How many do you want/can you spare for each role? Are you going to put it all in planes and build no tanks or motorized? (Or basic guns?!) And if for some strange reason you do wanna build tanks and motorized, well there goes a decent chunk of the oil that your plane factories need.
& Remember- efficiency on production lines- there's a big advantage to picking one thing and sticking with it. I'd have to think that building mainly tacticals with the bulk of your factories is your best bet. Yes you should also build up CAS or Strat on the side as well, but in much lower numbers (unless you have an glut of spare facotires). Your tacticals then go everywhere while your smaller CAS & strat wings go only where needed.

[Mojo Amok]

Strategic Bombers are obviously vastly superior to Tactical Bombers for strategic bombing, though that's all that they can do.

However, in other roles, you have to weigh the range of the Tactical Bombers when measuring them against CAS or Naval Bombers. Range is a hugely important stat in Air Warfare.

The main reason is that Mission Efficiency is modified by range, so targets that are barely within CAS or Naval Bomber range are not going to benefit from those pretty theoretical Ground Attack and Naval Attack numbers.

Somewhere on the Paradox forums is a great post breaking down the math, but unfortunately I can't find it at the moment, so here's this bit from the Wiki instead.

Originally posted by HOI 4 Wiki:

The lower the Mission Efficiency, the less successful the mission is likely to be, the player's air wings will do less damage to their targets and are more likely to take damage, and may be shot down by enemy aircraft and AA fire. Choosing an alternative mission or sending more planes may be considered, but the most important factor is the range from the region, and therefore the location of the air base that is used. All wings with early models of light frame planes (fighters, CAS and naval bombers) will have poor coverage if they are based outside of the region they are operating in unless their base is very close to the region border.

https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Air_warfare

If your CAS or naval bombers can't cover the whole area that their wing is assigned to, you can see their attack numbers drop down by 50% in situations where the Tactical Bombers would still be operating at 100% efficiency.

Ultimately, it's situational. If you can plop some naval bombers in Sicily, you're golden. If you're on a big front in Europe, your CAS will probably be fine.

However, I find in Asia that CAS and Naval Bombers are basically point defense units that are often doing nothing of any value due to the scarcity of well-positioned air bases and the long distances involved. They also interfere with Fighter berths near the front lines within the more modest sized air bases.

[Democracy Officer Yannick]

Can you come to an solution? Which one is better to bomb factories etc?