Strategic Bombing Raids as of 10/10/11

[mantlefan]

I like it. Sign it off and move onto the next issue. It follows the KISS rules and gives the bombers more incentive to bomb.

People who say that 1d6+2 may be a little bit powerful , you have to remember that your bombers have to survive to hit it.

People who say that the bomber needs to survive to hit in a way that suggests that it is at all difficult for the bomber to survive are not being fair to the facts.

If an interceptor miraculously hits at it's severely decreased odds, the hit can just be taken on an escort.

AA fires at one as well.

It's incredibly easy to have the bomber survive because interceptors keep getting worse relative to A2.

Maybe you are one of those players who hits 50% of his AA shots. But please get real, you make it sound like it's so hard for bombers to live. For USA, it's incredibly easy to be overwhelming with these new rules if they are implmented.

I'm sorry but suggesting that bombers will have a hard time surviving with these rules is a joke.

Add that onto the +2 to the roll and the new damage rules.... Why are you so angry? Just talk it through. "is a joke" "not being fair" "maybe YOU are one of those players who hits 50% of his AA shots" - sarcastic. Calm down man. We're not screaming at each other... we're just talking here.

Honestly, the only time I got close to angry in this thread, was, ironically, when you accused me of being angry and not calm.

It's incredibly unfair for you to accuse me of screaming at people. I honestly do think that a player who hits way more AA than average would have a very distorted view of the reality of the situation.

I am trying to be clear that I am not at all on the fence about this being overpowered; I am 100% convinced that this will absolutely break the game in the hands of the USA. I am sorry if you have mistaken absolute clarity for anger. I am just talking as well, I am not accusing anyone of having some sort of attitude based, for some reason, on a total lack of usually appropriate evidence for a post being seen as angry (lots of exclamation points, lots of all CAPS sentences everywhere). I could say "Please conduct your thoughts about the game in a manner that is more appropriate for addressing the reality of the game," but get real means the same thing. It is not at all sarcasm. It means "be more realistic." It all stems from the very unrealistic suggestion that a significant number of bombers would die with these rules.

Anyways, my point overall is that this is FAR too powerful. It's not just a little overpowered. In the hands of the USA, bombers under these rules BREAK the game. (and that's an emphasis caps, not an angry one.) Bombers are harder to ever get to, interceptors kill a plane half as often, bombers do more damage, and the damage they do is FAR more potent.

[mantlefan]

There is more to this than Germany Bombing a Russia defended by 300 IPC worth of fighters.

The real issue is what the USA could do with these rules to the main German factories. This is where these rules get broken.

Germany now on average needs 6 interceptors to do 1 hit. With everyhting that Germany needs to do in Russia, exposing your fighters as Germany to an attacking force that probably has more shots at 1 than you do starts to screw you over pretty fast.

If you actually have enough interceptors to get 1 or 2 hits, you will only hit escorts. Odds are in most situations where Germany is being raided, the Germans will lose more fighters than the Amis would lose ftrs.

Sure Germany can't bomb a 30 ftr moscow. But , let's get real. Is Germany going to have huge ftr stacks on Berlin and W Germany?

Whoever made the point about Minors in many cases being better than Majors now hit the nail on the head. I would rather pay 15 IPC to build 3 infantry than pay 23 to get 1, especially when after all that repairing I have so little money left due to my necessary Russia purchases. Once the USA starts bringing over it's bombers that it can easily stock up many of, I would be wishing as Germany that I could downgrade my Majors.

Since I would not actually build 10 at a Major most of the time, I have to throw away loads of dough to no benefit. Any rule that makes a player want a supposedly inferior unit in many, many cases is one that needs at least a little reexamination.

With these rules its far too easy to max out a factory, and maxing out a factory is far more devastating than it was before. There are plenty of cases where the Allies taking W Germany and me taking it back and giving me the minor are a gift.

If we use the rules as they are written in the 1st post, we won't be very far off from the days where US bomber swarms would be all that was needed to win. Now, you don't even need to research Hvy Bmb's to make them too powerful, they just start that way.

Ok got your message... You bring up a question that must be answered. Is the 1d6 +2 too much? Maybe it is...

[stew8888]

Larry I like it Makes bombing worth while as I have never found it to be a useful strategy.

A couple of things to consider and possible ways to adjust it.

USA in this senario may become a bomber factory as it may be more economical to buy bombers and bomb Germany than to buy boats and land US troops in Europe. Needs to be tested by one of those people who understand only the numbers in this game.

Italy may be bombed into oblivion under these new rules.

I would limit the damage on heavy complexes to 12 as a heavy complex shows not 1 single injustry or capital industry but a major industry across multiple cities and thus harder to damage and completly bomb into submission. May also throw in that at a minimum major IC can build 2 units regardless of the damage or something creative alond those lines.

Still have Minor and Air Bases and Navel Bases at 6 damage.

Also have bombers do 6di+1 damage
and Have Heavy Bombers roll 2 dice choose the highest die and have a 6di+2 damage.
If there is a tech that helps defend there should be a tech that helps the offense.

Also I still beleive France should go 3rd in this game

I'm intrigued with the idea of limiting Majors to 12 damage. As for +1 ... turns down the dial a bit... Slowly moving away from the +2 idea.Thanks

I really enjoy these games
stew8888

[Gargantua]

Thanks MANTLEFAN.

But NO THANKS.

Your math at shooting the bombers down isn't even correct.

These new rules are EXCELLENT, and VERY playable. A step up from anything else we've seen.

Good work Larry.

[mantlefan]

Thanks MANTLEFAN.

But NO THANKS.

Your math at shooting the bombers down isn't even correct.

These new rules are EXCELLENT, and VERY playable. A step up from anything else we've seen.

Good work Larry.

Hm? 6 interceptors firing at 1. Avg one hit, Y/N?

[Infrastructure]

Mantle,

With unlimited aa for instalations back. It becomes a little weaker. I am on the fence about the +2 as well... Average of 2 dice rounded up?

Second thoughts; keep the +2, but do make it, remove 2 damage for 1 IPC.

this is playable though...

[Gargantua]

Hm? 6 interceptors firing at 1. Avg one hit, Y/N?

Every bomber ALSO faces AA fire. Improving said average, depending on the amount of attacking bombers.

[oztea]

Larry, this is a little over the top, and we might need to see some setup changes to adjust for this. On paper I like it...I like that now the tokens only symblolize what needs repaired to work. Not a little damage here and there as we have now.

From what I understand, the token system was implemented in AA50 to ensure they werent bombed into extinction via the Revised SBR "piggybank attack" rules. This system will make minor damage fixable, but major damage out of the question to repair. Im not sure if thats what the game needs

A thought emerges. Should damage be dealt evenly to both sources?
Some damage is done in damage chips (damage to structures and equipment)
Some damage is done straight to IPCs (blowing up irreplaceable war matieral and workers)

Maybe bombers shouldnt get +2....maybe they just always roll 2 dice. 1 for chips, 1 for IPCs.....nevermind...that wont happen

Considering the new levels of damage.....

Should India have 2 minors now instead of one major?

Should UK have 2 Minors (scotland/UK)? Instead of one major

Should East Germany have a minor, and a 2nd minor moved to Greater Southern Germany?


--------------------------
Has the thought of a night bombing/day bombing rule ever come into the equation for you Larry? It was an important tactic used by both sides during the war.

Day Bombing - Rules as normal
Nightbombing - Escorts and Interceptors rule ignored, +2 damage rule ignored

Some flair to add to SBR ... Nice house rule.