Should bombers be able to attack convoy routes?

[Edwin P.]

I would think that unintercepted Bombers should be able to attack an enemy convoy route tile within attack range if they are within spotting range of the bomber.

Example: UK bomber in Edinburgh should be able to attack Norway to Germany convoy route if it is within the spotting range of the Bomber. Of course, an Axis air fleet stationed in Norway can prevent the bomber's attack.

Simarily, a Lisbon based Axis bomber should be able to attack the Egypt to Manchester convoy route. Of course, an allied carrier can intercept the bomber force and force it to turn back.

Likewise, an Axis bomber stationed in Ireland can attack convoy routes terminating in Manchester.

Of course, Bombers that attack a convoy route can't perform any other action that turn.

With this change two types of units - Bombers and Subs - can attack convoy routes.

Any comments? Good idea? Bad Idea? Not Needed?

[ July 28, 2006, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[SeaMonkey]

So this would be like a strategic attack and it would be somewhere on the convoy route?

I say OK, but the closer to entry ports the greater the chance for more lost MPPs.

[Canuck_para]

Maybe have an option for the bomber to raid conveys in properties and then have a random chance to intercept any convoys that are within range. Of course this would not really be a strategic bomber role but light and tactical bombers but there is not such a unit.

[Edwin P.]

In my view, the Bomber unit would be ordered to attack a specific convoy tile, similar to an attack on a resource or city tile.

The attack would be aborted if it was intercepted. You could even have a random chance for it to be effective; as Canack_para suggested, i.e. attacks against convoy routes have a 50% to damage a convoy route.

[Sombra]

I like the idea Edwin. One reason more to take Norway. Artic convoy

[Iron Ranger]

No, I personally dont see a use for it. Historically Heavy Bombers couldnt hit crap at sea (yea its not a historcal sim). If you want to make use of bombers they need to reduce the ports that the convoys depart or start at.... its a fixed target and well done I think in SC2. If we do allow this then we should think on serface raiders as well..... and then I think we are getting out of the scope of SC2 and more of a tactical game.

[SeaMonkey]

Alright what's it going to be, do Bombers (not Heavy Bombers, that is a tech) include naval bombers or not? (CA, UA, NA=4)??

I believe these numbers speak for themselves.

Hubert.....Blashy???? Someone.

[Hyazinth von Strachwitz]

I would love that feature.. german bombers and "Jagdbomber" scored a lot of hits on the allied convoys to Archelansk.. Luftflotte V`s only use in Norway was sinking those ships.

[hellraiser]

I would rather solve the current 'bomber from brest hits liverpool thus starving uk' stuff first.

If Eddie's feature was to be implemented, I would rather see it as a 'raiding' effect type (the one the subs provide) Maybe AA tech could help to diminish the effect in the way ASW helps in reducing convoy losses due to subs' raiding.

But what if Axis place a bomber in Brest and gets super LR tech? Will it interdict med AND atlantic convoys?

[Scook]

I think we are evolving far enough to have another type of unit, naval bombers. SC1 didn't need it as much as SC2 does, now that naval action can be a huge part of the game.

[Honch]

Awhile ago someone created supply scripts that would hit reduce Liverpool if the Axis had bombers/air fleets/cruisers or battleships in Brest/St.Nazaire/Bilbao or Bordeaux. It was a good work around.

Another script hit Archangel if the same units were in Trondheim.

[Liam]

Whatever has been and will be mentioned, I know LR German Bombers were used in conjunction with subs, to what level I'm not sure. How many ships were actually sunk in the Atlantic by German bombers isn't likely to be very high a total. Fact is Goering was on bad terms with the Kriegsmarine. Therefor the full power of Air-Subs-Surface Raiders were never committed to the operation as they could've been. Hell who knows, the Bismark may have been saved and it's whole purpose was what to be a commerce raider? I think... So shouldn't Battleships and Bombers, both strategic weapons have impacts on Convoys. More so Battleships and Cruisers, German ones operated with such success they became folk heroes in both wars. From India, to the Pacific to South America... in WW2 a more limited area of operations due to the constraints of no Colonies however, German Surface Raiders reigned hell... as far as I know.. Post the figures

As far as Bombing is concerned, already in Malta, Malta effect is a sort of raiding aspect, and raised by a Bomber in percentage? Yes! So naturally there should be something else given to the Allies, not Norwegian raiding... Though what is odd the Germans have no Convoys from N.Africa when there is not actual direct route to MainLand Europe though still collect! Should be Set CONVOY ROUTES for all powers.. Fact in, in WW2 Germany had no convoys outside of what was from Sweden and Switzerland. Probably USSR a little and Spain... They couldn't get it, because they were bottled of the by the British Navy. Any ship in a Convoy Route should have some percentage chance of disrupting Supply... To reflect the Real War... Historically

I'm no Battle of the Atlantic Historian but I certianly am glad I could add my 2 cents

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

I would think that unintercepted Bombers should be able to attack an enemy convoy route tile within attack range if they are within spotting range of the bomber.

Example: UK bomber in Edinburgh should be able to attack Norway to Germany convoy route if it is within the spotting range of the Bomber. Of course, an Axis air fleet stationed in Norway can prevent the bomber's attack.

Simarily, a Lisbon based Axis bomber should be able to attack the Egypt to Manchester convoy route. Of course, an allied carrier can intercept the bomber force and force it to turn back.

Likewise, an Axis bomber stationed in Ireland can attack convoy routes terminating in Manchester.

Of course, Bombers that attack a convoy route can't perform any other action that turn.

With this change two types of units - Bombers and Subs - can attack convoy routes.

Any comments? Good idea? Bad Idea? Not Needed?

[Lars]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

In my view, the Bomber unit would be ordered to attack a specific convoy tile, similar to an attack on a resource or city tile.

How you going to do that? You can't even tell where the buggers are with subs.

[SeaMonkey]

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but as I play, especially Axis, I note which tiles produce raiding effects.

I have a pretty large set of coordinates by now.