Page 1 of 1
Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2026 8:54 pm
by Wiedrock
Are Strategic Recon planes, scheduled to take Photos from damage dealt to a factory, more accurate with their reported % damage than the bombers that do the bombing themselves?
Re: Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2026 11:00 pm
by Wiedrock
And if so (I assume it is):
- are cameras relevant?
- is number of planes relevant?
→ 5planesx3cameras vs 3planesx5cameras, what's better?
- does the "Air Recon Value" reported matter? It is shown in the combat reports for the recon.
→ There is no "Air Recon Value" added anywhere to any hex it seems, where is it?
Re: Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2026 11:39 pm
by Denniss
If I remember right from WitW then camera-equipped recon had a much more accurate damage assessment than what was reported from bombers
Re: Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2026 4:11 pm
by Wiedrock
So I did a quick test series.
Setup:
- GC 41 but rolled to 1942 and from another test before some Hexes are made Axis (but in another area, so not related).
- Targets are Railyards in 3 cities, Vilnius (Railyard 2) + Voronovo (Railyard 1) + Minsk (Railyard 6).
- The Altitude is set for both ADs to 20k, just one run the bomber AD was set to 7k (grey marked run).
- Bombers perform 2 Missions per week (day 1 + day 3) per Hex (I just thought it would be nice to not only have one, those 2 Missions are added up, so we actually have 3x9x2=54 Bomber missions, but I count them as "one", so 27 total) and at the end of the Week (day 7) the Recons fly.
- It's all vanilla otherwise and the game does with the ADs whatever it does.
→ So the size of the bomber missions are RY2=~48planes, RY1=~24planes, RY6=~144planes (with slight deviations)
→ So the size of the Recon mission is always automatically 12planes per each of the 3 hexes.
- A total of 9 runs were performed. So 3 Cities x 9 Runs = 27results.
- Planes choose their loadouts automatically.
Results:
- Averages EDITED
The average deviations amongst all missions is in favor of the Recons with +/- ~30% compared top the bombers with average +/- ~65%.
Interestingly, for Minsk, which is the one with the most Bombers per Mission (~144planes), the average accuracy is the best for the bombers with only +/- ~43%. So the number of Bombers may play a role and the large deviations for the small missions may be ruled out by forcing large bomber missions also on smaller Railyards.
- 'min<->max'
The 'min' and 'max' deviaton of the assessment from actual damage is closer to 100% for the Recons 36%<->200% versus the bombers with 32%<->395%, the big issue of the 'max' for the bombers seems to be massive overreporting of damage at times (which is a nice historical hint).
Despite this smaller 'min-max-bandwith' and the average deviation being smaller for the recons, in 9/27 Missions, Bomber damage assessment was more accurate from that of the Recons. So 33% of cases, which means the Recons actually worsened damage assessments in those cases and you'd been better off without recons.

- results_strat-recon.jpg (388.46 KiB) Viewed 78 times
Note:
We'd now need to test the Recons at higher/lower Altitudes to see if things differ.
Re: Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2026 10:38 pm
by Wiedrock
I am aware that the Averages for the percentages and how I created them does not make complete sense due to the nature of "below/above 100%". I added it as info due to anyways averaging the damage and so on. The main argument are the mins/max and the "wins" of individual cities. But an average deviation would obv. be nice.
I am right now working on another series or tests with proper deviation averages and will add it to/amend the first example with that.
EDIT: Edited the post above, needed to add a column for deviation ....wanted to keep it compact but so the columns grow...
Re: Strat Recon vs Bomber Photos
Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2026 1:19 am
by Wiedrock
Wiedrock wrote: Wed Oct 21, 2026 10:38 pm
will add it to/amend the first example with that.
done.
There are now 2 new columns showing the deviations, that way I can create percentage averages with proper info.
So reporting 80% damage (underreporting) or 120% damage (overreporting) will now both be shown as 20% each and so on.
Wiedrock wrote: Wed Oct 21, 2026 4:11 pm
the game does with the ADs whatever it does.
→ So the size of the bomber missions are RY2=~48planes, RY1=~24planes, RY6=~144planes (with slight deviations)
→ So the size of the Recon mission is always automatically 12planes per each of the 3 hexes.
Accounting for this, new series mostly the same as before but with two changes...
- the Bomb AD has a plane requirement of 150planes now (automatically ~24/48/144 before)
- Recon AD has a plane requirement of 24planes now (automatically 12 before)

- result_example_150vs24.jpg (116.67 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Things I wanted to know:
- is the increase in bombers for the small Railyards increasing their damage assessment accuracy?
- is the doubling of recon planes increasing their damage assessment accuracy?
Observations:
- likely yes, all average deviations for the three cities were reduced (now having even better accuracy than the Recons in the case of Minsk)
- slightly (may just be RNG), the total deviation was reduced from ~30% in the 12 planes series to ~25% here with 24 planes.
There are 3/27 draws, 10/27=37% bomber wins, 14/27=52% Recon wins. Among the individual 27 results.
So again ~33%'ish results that get made worse by Strategic Recons.
- Averages
The Average deviations now also amended in the first example. Here in the second one especially the bomber averages went down by quite a bit in total. Hard to say still if it isn't all just RNG since Minsk also improved quite a bit while not having "mor" planes....so...
- 'min<->max'
The overall 'min' the LBs have won since 24 Strategic recons managed to once report only 4/73 and once 1/79 damage percentages (like, seriously????).
The 'max' showing 200%+ deviations was possibly ruled out by increasing the number of LBs (or again....it's juts RNG).

- results_strat-recon_150vs24.jpg (393.16 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Not quite sure if I am missing something, but this seems to be little weird to have...
- the amount of recon planes to possibly not matter for it's prediction accuracy (and if so then only slightly).
- the recons actually "worsening" assessments in ~33% of cases.
This means that the men taking & evaluating the taken photos are failing their job 1/3 times. Even worse, they "overwrite" good/better assessments done by others.
- 24 Recons recognize 1 damage while there actually is 79damage done (1/79 example I mentioned already).
So a factory complex/railyard being damaged to 79% is reported as 1% damaged. And with 24 planes there were 2 examples of this magnitude while with 12 planes there was none.