Are Tac bombers useless?

[G19]

I've been told that you should use either CAS or Strats. Is this true?

[mk11]

no

[Rasluka]

In my experience in single player:
They're useful for nations that can't afford to produce different types of bombers. Also useful in large regions without much airbases like China where CAS range will be a limitation.

I don't think they're that bad for naval bombing or CAS, it's just naval bombers and CAS can get insanely strong (like turns the game into super easy mode). Not sure about how they compare against strat bombers since i never use them though.

[Imhotep]

Their first unique selling point is their range, which is much higher than CAS aircraft. This means they can perform CAS missions against targets CAS aircraft can't reach, which is particularly useful in areas without lots of airbases, like Africa or Asia. In aircraft-dense areas where the frontline airbases might be congested, they, like Heavy Fighters, can act as "second row" aircraft adding even more air power to the frontline regions from airbases behind. The range also means they can easily be assigned to air missions in different regions without having to move to another airbase.

Their other USP is their versatility in that they can also perform strategic bombing missions.

Here's a list of WWII strategic bombers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bomber#Interwar/World_War_II

Here's a breakdown of the number of different strategic bomber aircraft models by country:

United States: 6
United Kingdom: 3
France: 1
Germany: 1
Soviet Union: 1
Italy: 1

It's a bit of a niche area. In my opinion, tactical bombers should be preferred to strategic bombers by all powers, and strategic bombers should only be built by a few major powers, notably USA and UK, and that's in addition to building tactical bombers, rather than instead of building them.

[drewbstar]

TACs are great for their versatility. You don't build them because they're the best at what they do, you build them because they're cheaper and easier than building CAS+NAV+STRAT bombers.

They're also great for their range. Places like Africa, China, and fighting with several allies who crowd their air fields. Airfields are cheap to build, but they are limited by state control, allies, and your ability to supply them. TACs are cheaper to build and supply than strats, even if they're less effective.

I personally love them for their uses in the Pacific, where NAV bombers can't even reach the next island over. With TAC bombers you can port strike, naval patrol, lay mines, and strat bomb the enemy islands with ease. If you're bombing the industrial centers of Germany or the UK, you're going to need strat bombers or you'll never to enough damage. However, bombing the 1/10 port or airfield in the middle of the Pacific is easily done with a handful of TACs.

If you're playing someone like the USA or UK, it's obviously better to specialize into your different fields with your good research bonuses/slots and wide access to resources. However, even then TACs have their usage. I'd put naval bombers over the English channel with TACs over the Atlantic to help patrol for subs.

[ᛣ Munin ᛉ]

Originally posted by analyzerlx:

I've been told that you should use either CAS or Strats. Is this true?

YEs very effective, esp in mp. You use them to bomb airfields and gain air supremacy.

[Megawasp]

Tacs are useful if you don't have the industry for specialised aircraft and need some sort of air support.
Mediocre CAS/Bombing is better than no CAS/Bombing. And even if they don't end up not doing much damage, they can be used to distract the enemies air-force.

[|H|H| Fr3ddi3]

VS the AI, TAC is very niche, sometimes useful in vast airspace but entirely pointless in the west because the question of range is never asked.

VS a Human opposition though? different game entirely.

Long story short, in MP frontline airfield capacity is often at a premium vs decent opposition, you often cannot afford to field anything other than fighters on the front because your opposition will be also be putting nothing but fighters on the front, in MP the air war is just a numbers game as both sides will power game that ♥♥♥♥ from the outset of the game, the loser of the air war (and typically the ware entirely) is the side who cannot flood air spaces with enough planes to compete, this is where TAC comes in cause they can use the air fields the fighters cannot due to their extended range.

[mark.r.hendrickson]

At strattie bombing they are not so good, but they do what CAS does when CAS doesn’t have the legs. If your target is beyond CAS range, then you can have 10K CAS and they’re useless.

Which means it depends on how far away your target is from your airport.

[left4bass]

I love tac bombers. Usually, by the time I get a real air force going, I don't have enough nearby airbases for fighters and CAS. Tac bombers can fly in from super far away.

[AdmiralPiett]

Yet another pureblood gamer rejecting the existence of a game feature and classifying it as "useless" on pure gameplay grounds.

Tactical (or "medium") bombers existed in real life and were EXTENSIVELY used by air forces, especially the luftwaffe, during this time period.

And if you still reject history in a HISTORICAL grand strategy game, their versatility is their in-game strength. An He-111 can bomb a column of enemy tanks, but a strat bomber can't. It can also bomb downtown london, but CAS can't do that.

[lang]

no

[lakupupu]

Originally posted by AdmiralPiett:

Yet another pureblood gamer rejecting the existence of a game feature and classifying it as "useless" on pure gameplay grounds.

Tactical (or "medium") bombers existed in real life and were EXTENSIVELY used by air forces, especially the luftwaffe, during this time period.

And if you still reject history in a HISTORICAL grand strategy game, their versatility is their in-game strength. An He-111 can bomb a column of enemy tanks, but a strat bomber can't. It can also bomb downtown london, but CAS can't do that.

hoi4 isn't an easy game, people opt to play it the easiest way, such as the meta

[AdmiralPiett]

Originally posted by battle royale pro lol:

Originally posted by AdmiralPiett:

Yet another pureblood gamer rejecting the existence of a game feature and classifying it as "useless" on pure gameplay grounds.

Tactical (or "medium") bombers existed in real life and were EXTENSIVELY used by air forces, especially the luftwaffe, during this time period.

And if you still reject history in a HISTORICAL grand strategy game, their versatility is their in-game strength. An He-111 can bomb a column of enemy tanks, but a strat bomber can't. It can also bomb downtown london, but CAS can't do that.

hoi4 isn't an easy game, people opt to play it the easiest way, such as the meta

meta is toxic and dumb change my mind. If you want meta play a FPS game

Furthermore, the very fact that it isn't an easy game proves my point. Making a hard game easy by cheesing it with meta isn't the game's fault, it's lazy "mainstream" gamers polluting historical grand strategy

[Homuya]

Its a simple game, CAS is better but TAC has more range which you hardly ever need thus CAS it is then usually.

[Homuya]

Originally posted by AdmiralPiett:

Yet another pureblood gamer rejecting the existence of a game feature and classifying it as "useless" on pure gameplay grounds.

Tactical (or "medium") bombers existed in real life and were EXTENSIVELY used by air forces, especially the luftwaffe, during this time period.

And if you still reject history in a HISTORICAL grand strategy game, their versatility is their in-game strength. An He-111 can bomb a column of enemy tanks, but a strat bomber can't. It can also bomb downtown london, but CAS can't do that.

Why do you call an unfinished mess full of flaws and historical inaccuracies that dont make any sense whatsoever historical and talk about real life stuff in a game where noone of that matters because its so simplified and couldn't be more ahistorical in what you can do?

Sure they got versatility as well as range but you won't need any of that because its just not the meta. Why would you for example ever strat bomb the AI?

Unless you play with mods you can just spamm infantry with arty, light tanks with SPG and CAS = easy win towards everyone and everything. Oh and for navy just spamm subs, late subs cant be detected.

"Furthermore, the very fact that it isn't an easy game proves my point."

Check the HOI4 AI that is basically afk unless their focus tree says otherwise and call it easy again. Its so freaking simplified the only difficulty you'll get is by how barebones the mechanics are.

Do you know why we got such metas? Because it lacks substance, mechanics and effort. There's a reason this game is unplayable without mods.