A lot depends on what kind of anti-fighter fire controls the enemy is likely to have. If all their missile fire controls/sensors are res 1 and res 100, then missile LACs, 800-1000 tons, can afford the space for a much larger fire control, and will be able to use longer ranged stand off missiles.
Range is a much bigger concern in C# than in VB6, because it isn't practical to have fighter tankers refueling your strike force in flight. And you could refit an 800 ton LAC into an 850 ton LAC with an extra fuel tank, but there is nothing you could do to boost the range of already built fighters.
In VB6, I had 1000 ton missile boats escorted by 500 ton railgun fighters. Theory was that if the enemy only had limited anti-fighter capability, the fighters would be sufficient to thin the volleys enough to reduce casualties. If they fired anti-ship missiles at the missile boats, they would likely do so at a range beyond that which the anti-ship missiles could engage the railgun fighters. So I could probe with railgun fighters and a small number of missile boats, and either make them waste missiles or, worst case, waste a lot of missiles overkilling the small number of missile boats.
Point defense fighters aren't quite as good in C#, but while you have the option of escorting the bombers if the bombers are >450 tons or so, you really can't build a PD escort to go with 200 ton bombers.
The problem I have with small bombers is how all or nothing they are. If you guess wrong on the range of the enemy sensors/firecontrols, you lose all of them before they get in firing range. A strike force built around 500 ton fighters could have scouts with 200 ton res 1 sensors to let you figure out the range the enemy must have fired on your strike force.
Also, small bombers are attrition units, which means you have to commit a LOT of them to get a good exchange. Unless you have good intelligence on the enemy sensor/fire control tech and know you have a window of effectiveness for 125 ton, 150 ton or whatever fighters.
