fighters vs interceptors

[sbr]

Why does everyone keep saying that in a straight up fight fighters > ints? Early interceptors have slightly BETTER stats than early fighters and are much cheaper. Unless there's a hidden modifier (which I doubt) there's no way that fighters can dominate ints as much as people here are claiming. I still build fighters mainly unless I'm Germany or the USSR because the extra range is worth the 2-3 IC difference unless you choose to exploit the system by keeping airbases in queue, in which case range doesn't matter.

In HOI2 Fighters were better than equal year INTs, that was changed in DD, INTs Air attack values were increased. Maybe people are still thinking along those lines.

Air units statistics HOI2

Air unit statistics Doomsday 1.2 -- PDF warning --

 

[ltccone]

Then the result of a 3 CAS + 1 FTR flight group being intercepted should be even worse.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8743784&postcount=2


Well, if you have air superiority, which is be the priority before starting CAS missions, why do you mix FTR with CAS? Flavour? Honest question, I´m not critizising.

I really don't worry about my FTR + 3 CAS group being intercepted because I have air superiority. The main reason I mix them is that FTRs spot ships for the CAS. I usually overrun Britain before I even go to war with Scandinavia, so who would I use INTs against? No one bombs me after that.

 

[GREG 42]

i usually only use fighters due to their higher range, but i often see in AARs that most people prefer interceptors.

i am wondering why. what am i missing? the fighters cost a bit more but do have a higher range, which is sometimes very useful and if IRR also the stats are the same for the same generation of planes.

so why would i choose Interceptors ?

Fighters ever time even in mp were range is more inportant