why build fighter?

[sobrano]

with radar techs interceptors are much better than fighter and bombers are much better for bombing...
the fighter seem to be only more expansive about supply and oil...

what i wrong?

 

[Gort11]

Fighters have way better range as they tech up.

 

[Cossack_PL]

Also it's usually not that difficult to mantain air superiority in DH and when you get it your fighters can also do the "Ground Attack" and "Ground Support" missions, as they also have some soft and hard attack values.

 

[Jamesk2]

As fighters > interceptors in duel, you'll need fighters if you want to clear the way for bombers.

 

[Creslin]

In western Europe where zones are small and airfields plenty, shorter range on the INT isn't such a big issue. When you fight in Pacific or areas that are far apart with sparse airports, the extra range on the fighters are very important factor.

 

[sobrano]

As fighters > interceptors in duel, you'll need fighters if you want to clear the way for bombers.

it is not really true:the air attack value is pretty the same, but interceptors have about 30 as air detection value (for radar techs) vs only 13 of fighters
against bombers the interceptor was always better than fighter cause bonus +25% against bombers

 

[sobrano]

In western Europe where zones are small and airfields plenty, shorter range on the INT isn't such a big issue. When you fight in Pacific or areas that are far apart with sparse airports, the extra range on the fighters are very important factor.

yeah ty, i pay more attention about range, and you are right

fighter have something about 400-450 vs only 150-200 of interceptors!
btw it is not enough for me to build fighters, it is much more cheaper build airbases

 

[nessin]

yeah ty, i pay more attention about range, and you are right

fighter have something about 400-450 vs only 150-200 of interceptors!
btw it is not enough for me to build fighters, it is much more cheaper build airbases

You must only play Germany/Italy/Soviet Union. Fighters are great for all the other nations. The main powers benefit from the extra range (already mentioned) in undeveloped areas with sparse airfields or the pacific (both of which you'll encounter areas where you just can't build airbases). For the non-major powers, Fighters can fill the Air Superiority/Recon role as well as as CAS role, thus negating the need to diversify on limited resources.

 

[Creslin]

yeah ty, i pay more attention about range, and you are right

fighter have something about 400-450 vs only 150-200 of interceptors!
btw it is not enough for me to build fighters, it is much more cheaper build airbases

In area with extremely low infrastructure or Pacific, you don't always have the choice of building airfield, so the range can make a lot of difference. Shifting base will cause your units lose a lot of organization, fighter lose less on move due to their higher range and need to shift base less often as well, so they are much more useful in offensive actions.

HOI games are dominated by offense, so you can see which I prefer if only build one of them.

 

[unmerged(238359)]

Not to mention that in many cases, interceptors, even high model ones, can't patrol over ocean provinces, aside from confined waters like the Baltic, as they simply lack the range needed.