Long Range Tech & Bombers

[Edwin P.]

In WWII the attack range of Long Ranger Bomber Groups was much larger than that of fighter aircraft.

In SC2 I would like to see Long-Range Tech give a 3:1 advantage in attack range to bombers vs air fleets. Thus at Tech Level 3 LR the Attack Range (not the spotting range !) of bombers would increase by 9 hexes, whereas the range of Air Fleets would increase by only 3 hexes.

This would allow players to recreate the long range daylight bombing attacks of the US Air Force.

[ May 06, 2004, 10:34 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Edwin P.]

Sometimes, the bombing raids of the Axis and Allied forces were compromised by intelligence leaks. In which case the enemy forces were alerted and awaiting the attackers.

This effect could be recreated by building on the intelligence tech that will be included in the game. For example: For each level of intelligence tech there is a 20% that air fleets intercepting Bombers will receive a 25% boost to their readiness. A higher intelligence tech gives intercepting aircraft a greater chance of being able to suprise the attacking bombers. Of course, it only benefits city and resource hexes that are protected by an air fleet.

Of course, I also think that there should be a counter intelligence tech that would negate any enemy advantage in intelligence.

[ May 06, 2004, 10:35 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Liam]

as i recall reading, B-17 or Lancaster raids could be up to 1,000 strong. 12 500 LBS Bombs equals what times 1,000???

Later Bombers were better equiped too..

Along with these Daylight precision B-17s you'd face Night Lancaster firebombers and the damage wasn't massive to production. It hurt Morale a lot.

You know that the Germans had a big morale campaign when they put their 14 year old boys under 88 AntiAircraft Guns and designed Night Fighters equiped with radar.

[Marky]

i dont think the restriction for potential fighter range should b so harsh

cuz wat about the p51 mustang?

there ranges were 2000 miles

to berlin and back

[Marky]

and y shouldnt the spotting range increase?

if the range for the aircraft increases the patrol range should increase too dont ya think ?

[Edwin P.]

In my opinion the Spotting range for Bombers should not increase at the 3:1 ratio as bombing missions were assigned specific targets and did not wander back and forth across the country side looking gathering intelligence.

Thus at 3:1 the attack range of bombers at tech level 3 would increase by 9 hexes while the spotting range would increase by only 3 hexes. I believe that this more accurately reflects the effect of engineering advancements in WWII and further differentiates Bombers from normal Air Fleets.

As for the Mustang, in the early part of the war the bombers range far exceeded that of the Fighters and they often hit their final target without fighter escort. In SC2 as LR increases the fighters can provide escort coverage at longer distances; however, the bomber will always have the advantage of a larger fuel tank and larger wingspan.

[ May 08, 2004, 09:13 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ev]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

In my opinion the Spotting range for Bombers should not increase at the 3:1 ratio as bombing missions were assigned specific targets and did not wander back and forth across the country side looking gathering intelligence.

Thus at 3:1 the attack range of bombers at tech level 3 would increase by 9 hexes while the spotting range would increase by only 3 hexes. I believe that this more accurately reflects the effect of engineering advancements in WWII and further differentiates Bombers from normal Air Fleets.

Very good point... though perhaps 3:1 is a bit too much. I guess playtesting would tell.

[Shaka of Carthage]

I'm confused. Why all the speculation? Simply look up the ranges of the various bombers and aircraft that you're discussing.

Organize them based on a tech advance giving you a better model or a different aircraft.

Then understand how they were used, so you can properly translate the ranges into meaningful numbers.

For instance, the combat radius of a fighter aircraft is roughly one-third of its effective range. You used 1/3rd of the fuel to get to a certain point, used another 1/3rd to get home and the last 1/3rd was available for dogfighting. Don't remember what the combat radius for bombers was, but I would suspect its closer to 50% of the range.

Put the numbers together, problem solved.

[Edwin P.]

In 1942 US B-17F Bombers had an effective combat range of about 20 (1000 miles) tiles at the 50 miles per tile scale of Strategic Command2.

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The famed B-17F was produced from May of 1942 through September of 1943 with a total of 3,405 aircraft built. It was powered by four Curtiss-Wright R-1820 radial engines that produced in excess of 1,200 horsepower each. The aircraft was capable of a maximum speed of 288 miles per hour and it could deliver a 4,000 pound payload over a range of 2,000 miles.

B17G - Range 5,200 km, 3231 miles

The B17 was born out the obssession of the United States with "pinpoint" Strategic Daylight Bombing. While almost all of the other great powers concentrated on tactical and medium bombers, the United States stood virtually alone in the conviction that a large four engine bomber with heavy defensive armament could penetrate enemy defenses to lay waste to their defense production and infrastructure - and do it in daylight. It might also be added that the United States was about the only country that could display the industrial might to be able to dedicated the huge resources necessary to produce such planes in large numbers.

The result was the most famous heavy bomber in history. The Fort was very durable, and handled very well. However the American "theory" that unescorted heavy bombers could perform strategic bombing during daylight was to be sorely tested. The British, under "Bomber Harris" virtually abandomed daylight bombing as simply too costly and resorted to night bombing. The Americans however persisted in their daylight efforts. Unescorted raids deep into well defended German territory proved very costly. The Forts took a horrible pounding at the hands of the Luftwaffe until adequate fighter escort could be found. During the famous Schweinfurt raid, the 8th Airforce lost 60 bombers - 600 men - in one raid. A very costly endeavor.

The Boeing B-17 "Flying Fortress" is a World War II bomber used primarily in Europe. B-17s from the Eighth Air Force participated in countless missions from bases in England. These missions often lasted for more than eight hours and struck at targets deep within enemy territory. Because of their long-range capability, formations of B-17s often flew into battle with no fighter escort, relying on their own defensive capabilities to insure a successful mission.

</font>

[Lars]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

In WWII the attack range of Long Ranger Bomber Groups was much larger than that of fighter aircraft.

In SC2 I would like to see Long-Range Tech give a 3:1 advantage in attack range to bombers vs air fleets. Thus at Tech Level 3 LR the Attack Range (not the spotting range !) of bombers would increase by 9 hexes, whereas the range of Air Fleets would increase by only 3 hexes.

This would allow players to recreate the long range daylight bombing attacks of the US Air Force.

Hmm, I think you need to have the bombers start the war with long range and make Long Range research strictly to give the fighters a chance to catch up.

Almost all early-war bombers were "long range" anyway. Even the Ju-88 had a combat radius of 1,300 miles.

This would force the player make a choice between flying those early bombing raid unescorted and taking the losses for it or waiting till later when he can add the escort.

[Edwin P.]

Hmm, I think you need to have the bombers start the war with long range

Excellent idea - In the editor double the starting attack range of bombers but keep the spotting range the same or reduce it.

Thus Bombers can be used against long distance targets, other than cities and mines, only if they have been spotted by other units. It also restricts the bombers to the role they historically played during WWII - not intelligence gathers - but bombers against previously identified targets.

[ May 11, 2004, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Lars]

Yep, it would be nice if you could have bombers spot on the way to a target instead of the way they do it now.

For instance, if you did a strike against Berlin, you'd have a chance to see everything within, say, 2 tiles of the bombers path.

You'd still have to keep some spotting ability as it was in SC to reflect reconnaissance patrols, but not to the same range. Although a recon toggle to give you that longer range might be a nice add-on for bomber units and would be almost mandatory for the Atlantic U-boat battle.

[Exel]

I completely agree with Edwin P. on all his points.

Fighter ranges developed drastically during the war, but so did bomber ranges. By the time the Allied escorts could fly all the way to Berlin, their bombers could fly all the way to Romanian oil fields. So even with Mustang the fighters couldn't compete with heavy bombers in range.

[Lars]

Excel, the bombers always had the range.

Heck, the range of WW1 bombers was great enough to carry out those attacks. A Vickers Vimy was the first to fly across the Atlantic shortly after the war.

The only major advance made in bomber range in WWII would be the B-29.

[jon_j_rambo]

US Air Force bombers, nice! Let drop those Easter Eggs on the Hun like that got in the real thing

[Red Fleet]

Bomber Range and Spotting

LR Bombers could fly these distances at the end of the war, no discussion there, but were (as a unit) not used for recon. I´m therefore against a big spotting range for all bomber units.

As for the Naval wings: The Allied forces had their float-planes and re-equipped bombers for Anti-Submarine-Patrol, the Germans the Focke-Wulf 200 Condor against merchant shipping in the Arctic. These units were on long patrols and therefore should have larger spottig ranges.

The problem is that in SC1 you only have one type of strat. bomber units and making two different types would not be necessary if bomber units could have two types of operation modes.

So what about a "Naval warfare" option for strat. bombers? Players could choose wheter to use bombers against land targets (low recon range, maximum bomb load) or naval warfare (high recon, lower bomb load).

Any suggestions?

Fighter defense

If bombers can penetrate as far as the Romanian oilfields they could encounter multiple fighter squads on the way. Later in the war the German radar could pick up heading of allied bomber fleets and therefore 'guess' their target destination.

Why not assign Luftwaffe squads to stategic targets they defend automatically? The Axis player could choose which targets are to be defended at all costs and which only to defend lightly.

[SeaMonkey]

I like this idea of fighter defense RF. Why not allow an automatic increase in anti air for the occupying tile and all adjacent, surrounding tiles of Fighter Air units. This could be in addition to performing the optional escort and intercept missions to range. If the Fighter unit falls below strength 5/50% readiness it no longer can provide air defense enhancement. As far as spotting is concerned, I believe we are going to find that fast, light bombers and fighter bomber models performed most of the low level recon missions necessary to spot ground units. These would be the longer range missions as the short range missions are performed by slow flying single engine forward observers for the ground forces.