Strategic bombing raids and heavy bombers

@Warsaw44

@Warsaw44 said in G40 - Bombing A Naval Base:

… does it count as a movement to enter the territory the base is on …

Yes.

@Warsaw44 said in G40 - Bombing A Naval Base:

… or is the naval base considered part of that seazone therefore saving a movement?

No. The rulebook leaves no room for such an interpretation.
See Europe 1940.2, page 27:

“Naval bases can be built on controlled territories with a coastline, including islands. Only one facility of each type (industrial complex, air base, and naval base) may exist in each territory.”

and page 28:

“All sea zones that border a territory containing an operative naval base …”

Welcome to the forum :-)

@KGrimB:

I think that because the US has the potential to build a naval base in Morocco and the sz is always 1 turn away from 2 major complexes the proposal to turn off the naval base there indefinitely is impossible to sustain. Even if the base is bombed the US can still land in southern France and pass through to enter the med. if you conquer the territory you cannot hold it against determined American effort.

If the US is completely focused on the pacific than the bombing is still inconsequential. What bombing Gibraltar really does is divert planes from the critical path to Moscow. Their absence will cost additional units on the eastern front that are needed in that fight.

Not to mention that if a single aa gun hits you lose money because the base caps at 6 damage. Attacking the Gibraltar base is an interesting idea but is ultimately a vain effort.

I agree with that, its almost worthless. The only way to turn it off is to do a Sea lion and bomb Gibraltar and not take it and Morocco. The only problem is if the US decides its going to violate the Neutrality of the True Neutrals and Builds a Naval Base in Spain. Doesnt matter what you do, the US will find a way to make it work.

@aequitas:

1 or 2 Strat.bmbrs are allways good on Pac.Theatre.
Their present def. kills the gameflow fpr the Allies.
But it is sure an Investment you have to take on Euro Axis side.

This!

SBR can be used effectively against Italy - not like you need it, but it can.

When you’re ready to invade Rome you can SBR before hand to prevent Italy from using its meager remaining income from adding units to its defense.

If you’ve beaten Axis in the Med, and have the SZs stuffed with subs to blockade away Italy’s income, one good SBR run on each Italian factory can shut them down for good, since it can be very difficult for them to come up with even the few IPCs needed to repair it. This can stop Italy from building the inf or two a turn needed to work in conjunction with Germany to trade territory or can-open.

Thanks for the clarification everyone.  Glad to be here with you all.

YG,

––I agree that you have a really good European strategy there.
Our ‘gang’ usually has somewhat the same priorities, although our ‘gang’ tends to make any enemy Sea Transport target priority #1. Thus we usually have some brutal sea battles, and thus require more Destroyers to be used as “cannon fodder” losses.
1.) Take out the German navy, thus allowing security and an Allied fleet to exist.
2.) Bomb the Germans back to the stone ages.
––Go kill 'em

“Tall Paul”

Thanks for the welcome Variance!

You are guessing correctly ^.^:
If the UK (in our group) sees that Germany is going ‘full bore’ (I guess that means throwing everything at Moscow to defeat it G6 or G7), then it starts channeling its fighters from wherever it must build them (Britain, Canada, South Africa and India) into Russia and finally into Moscow. All this happens Either via the northern route or via Persia/Africa (building a key AB here and/or there).
  UK is OK to sacrifice its ships in the med. to keep every plane alive, annihilate the Italian Navy first and to prevent any new axis ships to appear there.
Subsequently the aircraft help to destroy the Italian presence in Africa (from set-up plus maybe 1 turn of reinforcements) and then the aircraft flies into the Middle east, ready to go into Russia whilst trying not to disrupt Russia’s NO of having Archangelsk-route. But the UK fighters in russia are more important than the Russian NO if the threat is high enough.

This is why our UK is always strong while at the same time being able to be in Russia with their FTRs on time, giving Germany (statistically) no chance on Moscow, not even if it goes full bore. If it doesnt go in full bore than all those UK FTR can go elsewhere as a very flexible force. For example, fly into the areas in Europe that the US captures, stay in the med, fly to India to recapture Calcutta or prevent it from being taken… you name it).

So perhaps we don’t play Germany as optimally as possible ;-).
The best I have ever come up with myself is hitting Moscow with around 230 attack factors G6 (buying 4 STR G5, 4 TAC/STR G4, ARM+MECH G3&G2, ART+INF G1) while Russia alone I believe cannot have more than around 195 defense factors, their AAA still excluded. Combined with the UK FTR however, this can easily be too much over the 230 German attack factors. This combined with sufficiently enough more allied units, a full bore axis attack on Moscow is in our group a statistical fail.

Anyway, a quick calculation shows me that an all STR German build can reach to approx. 200 Attack factors and has way less defense factors so my guess is it will fail to deliver the message to Moscow.

I am looking for Axis strategies to counter the allied dominance (in my eyes) but Perhaps I should then move on to another thread or start one myself  8-).

I will definately look into the tripleA program if I have the time, thanks!

Thank you Krieg. Iam getting some friends together to play our first global game. I have read the rules and alpha updates. The bombing was the last clarification I needed before we play . Thank again for the rules clarification.