Strategic Bombing

[Russ Bensing]

I'm sorry, but for the life of me I can't see the sense of strategic bombing. I've played the demo gazillions of times, almost always as the Germans, at intermediate with no bonus. I leave a corps in Brest and one in Antwerp, and that's it. The allies bomb those two ports back to the Stone Age, and you know what? I don't care. The bombers can usually inflict damage without taking any in return, but if one run in ten results in damage to the bomber, I'm ahead of the game: he's going to cost me maybe 3, at most 4 MPP's, and it will take him 25 to repair the damage. If he uses the airfleets, I'm way ahead: there, we're usually trading one or two of my MPP's for the 20 it will take to repair each damage point of his. And if he builds another strategic bomber unit, God bless him: that's 500 points which could have been used for 2 armies or a good part of a sea unit, which would really give me fits down the line. But the bombers? Hey, bombs away. The reason I don't even keep an air fleet up there is because it costs me more to repair it than the MPP's I lose from the bombing. I'd rather use the air unit to blow up Russian troops than to keep the Brits from knocking out a minimal fraction of my gross production per turn.

One of the major enjoyments of a game like this is managing the economic aspect. As others have pointed out, the war was basically decided through that aspect: the allies simply grossly outproduced the Germans. To paraphrase Patton, you're not going to win this game by spending MPP's, you're going to win it by getting the other poor bastard to spend his. I just don't see how the math supports any use of strategic bombing. Better to disband the bomber, use it to create a couple of armies, and plop them down on the French coast somewhere. With decent air cover, you're going to soak up a lot more German MPP's than bombing could ever hope to do.

Am I missing something?

RB

[DevilDog]

Yeah. Try playing at higher difficulty levels and invade Russia. You'll end up losing beaucoup MPPs due to British strategic bombing. And if you pay attention, you actually lose double the MPP value when bombed.

1. You lose the production value from the city or port to the amount of the bomb damage. This damage only comes back at one MPP per turn, so the effects last for a while, and once lowered to zero, it's easy to permanently deny the enemy MPP production from that source simply by bombing it every third turn or so.

2. You also lose the MPP value from your MPP stockpile to the amount of the bomb damage, thus doubling the MPP loss.

3. Advances in bombing tech will substantially increase the amount of damage bombers do, and lower the damage they take.

[husky65]

Originally posted by Russ Bensing:

Am I missing something?

RB

Yes, you are playing the demo, early war strat bombing IRL was ineffectual, wait till the tech ratchets up later.

The other thing to remember is that if enough damage is done to your ports, you can't embark units for operation sea lion (the proposed invasion of England).

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Russ Bensing:

The allies bomb those two ports back to the Stone Age, and you know what? I don't care. The bombers can usually inflict damage without taking any in return, but if one run in ten results in damage to the bomber, I'm ahead of the game:

That's the way I've been playing it as well.

And I was also taking disproportionate losses trying to defend northern France with an Air-Fleet or two. It seemed as though my fighter losses were always greater than the Brits, since I would often take hits when he would not, but this may be due to a biased viewpoint.

And don't forget that you can also research Anti-Aircraft Radar, which will, according to the SC Play Guide: "Improves the air defence values for all Strategic Resources."

I usually pretend I am playing a full-game (so as not to get into lazy habits) and buy one of this tech early -- figuring that later I will be too hard pressed to want to bother with it. Thus far, I have never gotten Anti-Air Radar, no matter when I buy it (though, I always seem to eventually get the Anti-Tank advance... I wonder if some techs are programmed to arrive earlier than others?)

There may be some minor adjustment to strat bombing in the upcoming Final-SC. If the cost was a little less for the bombers, say around 425-450 MPP (of course, this could be solved with Heavy Bombers research, which the Allies are more likely to buy than the Axis), it might prompt me to buy one or two -- perhaps more so for the Italians than for the Germans, who really need attack forces concentrated on the Eastern Front.

[Russ Bensing]

Originally posted by DevilDog:

Yeah. Try playing at higher difficulty levels and invade Russia. You'll end up losing beaucoup MPPs due to British strategic bombing. And if you pay attention, you actually lose double the MPP value when bombed.

I'm playing at intermediate. I do lose beaucoup MPP's -- about 16 (Brest and Antwerp). But if I put a fighter there, I spend more than that each turn repairing my fighter.

I understand what you mean about "double loss": that turn and the next one.

Advances in bombing tech will substantially increase the amount of damage bombers do, and lower the damage they take.

I think that's a good point, and I agree with it; I doubt if I can be as indifferent in 1944 as I am in 1940 or '41. But to make that happen, the allies will have to invest in bomber tech and also build more bomber fleets. Say they build three more, which would give them the ability to flatten just about everything within range. That would cost 1500 MPP's, or just about 5 turns worth of combined production of the US and Britain. For pretty close to the same amount, you could build five armored divisions, send them off to France, and wreak havoc: the German player would have to devote far more resources to defending against that than against bombing.

At least, that's how I think it would play out. When the game goes gold, we can test it and see. Which is why these things are so much fun.

[Russ Bensing]

Originally posted by Immer Etwas:

I usually pretend I am playing a full-game (so as not to get into lazy habits) and buy one of this tech early -- figuring that later I will be too hard pressed to want to bother with it. Thus far, I have never gotten Anti-Air Radar, no matter when I buy it (though, I always seem to eventually get the Anti-Tank advance... I wonder if some techs are programmed to arrive earlier than others?)

Although I was initially critical of the research thing -- a point of view largely derived from the fact that I didn't understand it -- it's turned out to be pretty neat. And also somewhat maddening. For a while there, I was having great luck; in one game, I managed to get to both Tech 3 and Heavy Tank 2. (Nice to be able to crank out an air fleet for just a bit more than the Brits and Americans would spend for an army.) Now, I'm investing in four techs, and the last several games I've played I haven't wound up with anything for my troubles except 1000 MPP's that I could have sorely used on the Russian Front.

[DevilDog]

I understand what you mean about "double loss": that turn and the next one.

Actually, what I mean by "double loss" is that you lose an equal amount of MPPs from your stockpile when a resource center is bombed. For example; say one of your French towns is bombed and takes 3 MPPs damage. In addition to the 3 MPPs production you lose, you also lose 3 MPPs from your MPP stockpile for a grand total of 6 MPPs lost for that turn. In addition, you gain back 1 MPP production per turn, so if no further bombing takes place: the next turn you lose 2 MPPs in production and the next turn 1 MPP. For a grand total of 9 MPPs lost.

That's just an example. Even in the demo I've been hammered a lot worse than that by the AI. I don't know whether the Brits got tech advances or not, but I've had level 8 ports reduced to zero in one turn from several attacks. It adds up.

However, while I tend to defend strategic bombing in the game, in most games I've played I prefer to conquer and take resources for myself than to simply destroy them and deny them the other player. So that is a valid point. I just like the fact that the game is designed to allow for different styles of play, even if I myself don't end up following a certain strategy.

[Ancient One]

Originally posted by DevilDog:

Actually, what I mean by "double loss" is that you lose an equal amount of MPPs from your stockpile when a resource center is bombed. For example; say one of your French towns is bombed and takes 3 MPPs damage. In addition to the 3 MPPs production you lose, you also lose 3 MPPs from your MPP stockpile for a grand total of 6 MPPs lost for that turn. In addition, you gain back 1 MPP production per turn, so if no further bombing takes place: the next turn you lose 2 MPPs in production and the next turn 1 MPP. For a grand total of 9 MPPs lost.

Wrong, the 3 lost in production IS the 2 you lose next turn and the 1 after that, you're counting it twice. The final total you lose from that attack is 6.

You may then say "well, it all adds up", but consider this - Doing 1 point of damage to a corps is also worth 6, it adds up a helluva lot faster, and you don't need units that cost 500 MPP each to inflict this kind of damage.

[ July 04, 2002, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Ancient One ]

[Russ Bensing]

Originally posted by DevilDog:

I think you're double counting. (If you're looking for a job, that's Arthur Anderson on line 2). I have my turn, and get 275 MPP's, giving me a total of 400 for next turn. Now it's the Brits turn. They bomb Antwerp, and I lose 3 MPP's. That reduces my total to 397. The next turn I get one of the MPP's back, so my production for next turn will be 273. The turn after that, I get 274, and the turn after that, assuming there's no further bombing, I'm back to 275. The total loss is 6. Am I right, or am I the one doing something wrong?

And that was pretty much my point. About the only way to ward off the strategic bombing attacks is to stick a couple of air fleets and an HQ in France. That keeps me from losing, say, 16 MPP's a turn. If I stick that HQ and 2 airfleets in Russia, that will probably result in the infliction of about 6 extra damage points on Russian units, and may often mean the difference between destroying a unit and letting it live. The short version is that the math boils down to a choice of saving myself maybe 16 MPP's, or costing the Russian maybe a 100.

Absolutely. As I said, once we get the game, it'll be interesting to see if my analysis holds. Tell you what: we'll do PBEM. I'll take the Germans, and promise to put no airfleets in France, if you promise to build no less than three more bomber fleets.

:cool:

[Old&Slow]

Very interesting discussion here, gets to the core of the games mechanics which is the relationships between MPP`s allocated/spent and the damage they cause and take.

Anyone with a long term 3rd. Rich Board game background will love this game, which I suspect is _far_ deeper and more complex ( hence harder to master )then it appears on first viewing.

Haven`t looked forward to a Computer Game release so much since Harpoon.

This is a must buy Game IMHO

[ July 04, 2002, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: Old&Slow ]

[Russ Bensing]

Originally posted by Old&Slow:

Anyone with a long term 3rd. Rich Board game background will love this game, which I suspect is _far_ deeper and more complex ( hence harder to master )then it appears on first viewing.

Haven`t looked forward to a Computer Game release so much since Harpoon.

This is a must buy Game IMHO

I've been wargaming for going on 40 years. (Anybody else remember Avalon Hill's "Blitzkrieg"? This has the makings of what we used to call a great pretzels and beer game. I can enjoy a game like Eastern Front, which requires me to micromanage just about every division, but it's nice to knock off a game of something like this. With the research techs and the normal randomness of the results -- that one in ten times that the Belgian guy holds out in Antwerp can change the course of the war -- every game is different.

The only reservation I have is about the AI. WWII is really two wars: up to 1942, when the Germans had the strategic offensive, and afterwards, when the Allies did. The AI handles defense fairly well; it's surprised me sometimes with counterattacks on the Russian Front, even in the early stages of the invasion. It doesn't handle the offensive well at all, from what I've seen; as the Allied player, even at expert and giving the Germans the max bonus, I can hold onto France until late August.

But there's always PBEM and, for that matter, doing both using the hotseat feature.

Yeah, this could be a really good one.

[Wolfe]

This subject's been discussed a couple of times before, and I'm still kinda sitting on the fence. On its face, Strategic Bombing looks like an big waste of points. But Hubert and some of the Beta testers have said that it does really work over time, so I'm certainly willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm still not completely convinced it's worth it (and I probably need the whole game in my hands to figure out ), but I am warming up a bit to the idea.

I've tried evacuating many units from France (including French armies), moved them back to merry olde England, and then disbanded them for 250 pts each (plus one fighter) to put towards research and bombers. If you buy 2 research points and 3 bombers, that's 2000 (though the research pts will eventually go to other things). You are then reasonably free to bomb the hell out of the ports of: Antwerp, Bergen (Norway), Brest, and even Arachon if you move the bombers to the southern part of England. This effectively removes the possibility of a Sealion. There are also two mines in range: one in France and one in Germany that are possible targets. Other ports in range if you research Long Range Aircraft include: Oslo, Norway; Kiel, Germany; and Toulon, France. I also tried putting a bomber in Malta to go after the Italian ports, but the limited supply (only 5) negates any real attack from there.

The Bombers themselves (upgraded to atleast level 1 bombers) don't seem to take too terrible of a pounding from the Axis airforce (so long as they stick to bombing ports, not enemy units or occupied cities), and will usually only lose 1 or 2 strength points per bombing run, even though the Axis HQs in command of the German fighters impart some nice bonuses to their planes. By repeatedly successfully bombing the ports, you also build up your own HQ's experience. If you have friendly escorts within range, they will often take a pounding from the Luftwaffe, however.

The one thing I would like to see changed is the ability to damage a city even though there is an enemy unit in it. This one has been requested before, hopefully it'll make it in.

I still don't know if all the math works out, but eliminating the possibility of a Sealion and removing a number of MPPs from the German player's pool turn after turn is a Good Thing in my book.

Though the strategy of emptying France to use their armies for MPP points does allow the German player to do an earlier Barbarossa, which could be a bad thing.

I guess we'll hear if Hubert has done any real tweaking to this, and then see how it works in the full game.

- Chris

[ July 04, 2002, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: Wolfe ]

[DevilDog]

Russ and AO, next time you play a game watch your MPP stockpile totals when you get bombed and you will see what I'm talking about.

[Old&Slow]

Been playing around with fighters defending the Ports from the Brits Strategic Bombing and ya know what...it`s not worth it ( as some folks upthread have posted )

This is typical: A level 1 jet group at 10 strength intercepts a bombing mission. It loses anywhere from 3 to 4 points. The port/industrial center loses 1-3 points, the bomber, on average loses 1-3 points.

On average you ( defender ) lose far more by having a fighter there then not.

The Bomber gains far more by being intercepted then not....Hmmmmmm.

Now while this tactic ( no fighter defender ) is sound in the Demo I think it will be disastrous in the full Game if the AI ( or a human player )just concentrates on Bomber Tech and buying bombers. He will shut down your MPP output fast.

I think I understand what is trying to be represented here in terms of Game balance & history, but IMHO, if this follows through in the full Game the Axis player is screwed if he defends and screwed if he doesn`t by a CRT that seems a bit too skewed toward the Bomber attacker. ( especially in the early Game )

Comments please ?

[gorski]

Might want to run that test again in hotseat and check the experience levels of the involved units and HQ's. I just played a game vs the ai with +1 experience. The unescorted English bomber was chewing up my fighters badly. I think this might be partly due to the difference in experience between my units and the AI's.

Gorski

[Lars]

Old&Slow, I think it's the choice you have to make. Leave one fighter group behind and put up a token defense or put four in France with long range fighter and go after those bombers. That can make it costly for the English.

[ July 07, 2002, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Lars ]

[Russ Bensing]

Originally posted by Old&Slow:

Now while this tactic ( no fighter defender ) is sound in the Demo I think it will be disastrous in the full Game if the AI ( or a human player )just concentrates on Bomber Tech and buying bombers. He will shut down your MPP output fast.

[Ancient One]

Originally posted by DevilDog:

Russ and AO, next time you play a game watch your MPP stockpile totals when you get bombed and you will see what I'm talking about.

I know that the MPP stockpile totals go down, but you're counting it twice. Just do the math, it's not that complicated.

[SuperTed]

Originally posted by DevilDog:

...watch your MPP stockpile totals when you get bombed...

DD,

I tried your suggestion, but I found it very hard to play when I got bombed.

Once I get rid of the hangover, I'll try again...