Lacky Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 I did a key word search on Fighter-bomber and another search on Jabos to see if this has been addressed in a topic. The are a lot of posts concerning Fighter-Bombers, but I could not locate anything, which dealt with the point cost of Fighter-Bombers. The game's current costs for Fighter-Bombers are: Allied: 225 @ Regular Axis: 300 @ Regular I'm challenging these values based on in-game effectiveness. My experience with fighter-bombers is luke warm, but extensive. Fighter-Bombers are not worth the cost in any situation I have found myself in. As the Allied player, I'd much rather be given (or purchase) a battery of 155mm's, 105mm's, 25 pder's, etc... To exemplify my personal distrust of the prohibitive costs of fighter-bombers, I fashioned a few 'test' scenarios to compare results. The results I ascertain cement my personal dislike of the cost effectiveness of fighter-bombers. A list of Pro's and Con's: Fighter-bombers: Pro's: a) can hit targets out of LOS (random and unreliable) can strafe for a few turns Con's: a) can be shot down unpredictable c) can attack friendly targets d) severely limited by weather e) units in cover are masked from most attacks Artillery: Pro's: a) Smoke (This is a huge blessing) specific area targeting c) good in all weather d) TRP's e) artillery spotters are stealthy f) # rounds Con's: - The only one I can think of is night games without TFP's. But even this doesn't stop artillery from fighting into the darkness along expected attack routes. It is to my understanding that Battlefront.com allocates point values to units based on the units performance capabilities without too much weight with regards to historical availability. On this basis I find the fighter bombers are budgeted too high for their effectiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 They are unpredictable, but when they work, they are incredibly devastating. In a recent game against the AI, I had a friendly fighter-bomber kill 2 Tigers (1 bomb between the two) and several halftracks full of infantry in the space of two turns. The rest of the game was a mop-up. IMO if the cost of fighter-bombers were lowered, you'd see an ahistorical reliance on these units, "just in case." ------------------ Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lacky Posted December 3, 2000 Author Share Posted December 3, 2000 I understand the possibility of a fighter bomber inflicting good loses. Yet the fighter bomber tends to make a pass the turn before (or two) before it strikes. The AI does not dive for cover and split itself into fragments, players do. One bomb taking out two tigers is quite impressive. Just as impressive as my one 155mm barrage taking out 2 panthers, 2 panzer iv's, several halftracks and countless infantry. (immobilization inclusive). My 155's had over 1/2 its rounds left. I do not want to see ahistorical results within the game. But the entire premise of the points are based on combat effectiveness. Fighter-bombers are not warrent their cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 in one scenario in particular the fighters nailed all the nazi reserve armor and half tracks...i was able to mop up easily... of course a fighter nailed one of my own tanks as i advanced, but was a "fair trade" i guess... ------------------ "They had their chance- they have not lead!" - GW Bush "They had mechanical pencils- they have not...lead?" - Jon Stewart on The Daily Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisl Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 One more advantage of the Jabos: They can tell you where the enemy is. I've only used them in a few scenarios (no QBs). In one fictitious scenario that someone sent me they zoomed over, popped a couple of HTs and StuGs that were hiding behind hedgerows (leaving nice smoke columns) and bombed the center of my destination village as well. In general I wouldn't buy them in a QB for most of the reasons above, but they can be a nice addition to a non-QB scenario. ------------------ Slayer of the Original Cesspool Thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tris Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 These assets are expensive out of proportion to their normal contribution, but I'm sure BTS took this into consideration and views it as an issue of play balance. At this point in the war over France Allied air superiority was such that if it were to be modelled historically, say, on a random basis vis-a-vis weather, you'd see 100 Allied fighter bombers for every sortie by the Luftwaffe. Now that's history and so I could easily live with it (in fact I'd be just the person to argue strenuously for it if I bothered at all), but then where would be the game? I think BTS could offer this sort of treatment as an option with no dire effect, but I think it likely soon enough most players would eschew it accordingly (due to above noted play-balance issue). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Being as I play my QBs with weather on Random choosing FBs would be foolish and I have never done so. ------------------ You mean my Java coded Real Time Bar Fight Simulator Madmatt Mission: Beyond BiteMe ISN'T going to be published?!? Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Vanir - IIRC, you can only buy fighter-bombers in QBs weather permitting. If they're available, they're usable. ------------------ Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts