I’m afraid of AA guns when they’re in places where I’m only going to spend one round of combat. It’s not a very good trade economically. A $10 IPC fighter means if you go into a territory with an AA that you’re losing 1.66 IPCs on average and likely you are doing 1.5 IPCs (killing infantry). That’s no good. If I see something like 1 inf 1 aa in a territory I will either go 2 inf 1 art or simply try to overpower it with a big force then retreat the next turn with a new shiny AA gun.
But you’re right, you shouldn’t be afraid of the AA gun if it is a battle in which your fighters will be used for a few rounds.
Nah, cause taking them gives me a free AA Gun to use against them. If they are too afraid of the gun, I net the territory for multiple rounds and can pull the gun back if I want too or press forward and land my planes. Or maybe he attacks with armor so I can kill a few of them off.
Anyway, I’ll attack anything I want. I’ve sent 5 fighters and 2 infantry against an infantry and AA Gun with out regard to the potential loss.
Anyway, I’ll attack anything I want. I’ve sent 5 fighters and 2 infantry against an infantry and AA Gun with out regard to the potential loss.
Well that’s your prerogative to make decisions as the CO.
But isn’t there some limit…I mean theoretically if you had 100 fighters with nothing else to do, would you send 100 fighters + 2 inf to attack 1 inf 1 aa? It seems silly to me to lose 16 fighters to take the aa gun, unless the enemy has more fighters and no land units to take it back.
Stop stop stop.
There are situations in which you want to save your bomber (of any power) and not risk them. Switch did a good job in summing up most of the cases - anyways he covered most of the stuff I would have mentioned offhand.
There are situations in which you want to strategic bomb. NOT just when US has “Superfortresses” either. Usually this is when Russia was overaggressive first turn, and you’re going Turbo Tank Dash to Moscow, but NOT always. There are other situations too.
The situations in which you want to save your bomber are already accepted and standard.
What people do not think about is the situation to SBR.
p.s. where can I baiz some turbotankz!? lawlz.
@Bean:
The situations in which you want to save your bomber are already accepted and standard.
What people do not think about is the situation to SBR.
p.s. where can I baiz some turbotankz!? lawlz.
Ya well, u kno that ppl get their “ideaz”, and there “klever planz”, and they dun wanna listen to anyone else. So it no use arguin!
u can baiz teh turbotankz if u join teh “jenforces” lawlz. field promotion to lieutenant kernel!
OK, to balance my prior posts…
A good time to SBR as Germany…
When you have your forces ready to attack Moscow the following turn, have no use for the BOM in combat this turn, the BOM is not critical to the Moscow attack, but reducing the Russian build before the attack could significantly reduce enemy resistance.
A good time to SBR as Germany is when you own Caucasus and don’t yet have enough armor to take Moscow. If you and Japan are both SBRing and one or both of you lose your bombers, you’re not going to lose the game.
Times when NOT to SBR as Germany is if you cannot even hold all your original territories! (Possible exception of Norway.)
u can baiz teh turbotankz if u join teh “jenforces” lawlz. field promotion to lieutenant kernel!
W00t field promo to kurnal! The next phase in teh strategeries is code name “jenigma decoded.”
That’s a little bit conservative Switch, but at least you do make some provision to SBR at some point.
I see no reason to use the bomber for SBR’s except when you are losing badly and you need to gamble. It is much more useful as a long range 4 based out of Southern Europe so it can threaten just about anything worth killing.
I see no reason to use the bomber for SBR’s except when you are losing badly and you need to gamble.
That’s exactly what I’m doing in my game against Gamer. :evil:
It is much more useful as a long range 4 based out of Southern Europe so it can threaten just about anything worth killing.
After a certain point what’s it really doing? After a certain point the Allied transport system is too strong to be threatend by 1 bomber, after a certain point solely your fighters will suffice in trading territories. Then what’s the use of doing nothing with your bomber?
Yea, after Russia 1, the Allied Fleet is too powerful to be threatened by 1 Bomber. :P
Oh, you meant 1 bomber + other stuff? Why didn’t you say so!
@Bean:
After a certain point what’s it really doing? After a certain point the Allied transport system is too strong to be threatend by 1 bomber, after a certain point solely your fighters will suffice in trading territories.
Yeah, the bomber isn’t always there as overkill. I rarely have a situation where the bomber is truly unnecessary for offensive operations.
@Bean:
Then what’s the use of doing nothing with your bomber?
In reality, it isn’t just doing nothing. It’s presence alone is enough for the Allies to adjust their moves because it’s threat range is so large. SBR’s may be a wash on average value of the bomber vs. damage done, but losing it to AA gives the Allies more freedom of movement everywhere and that is a value that you can’t easily measure in IPC’s, but it is significant enough for me to want to preserve the bomber until the very end.
Remember, in my KJF test game against the Commander, I purchased a second bomber with Japan. On paper, it may look like a risky purchase based on it’s high cost, but I guarantee that every move she made in Asia and the Pacific took the range of my bombers into account. That’s the true measure of a bombers value, and it’s worth every penny.
Wha? You had two bombers? Never noticed.
Guess what trumps two bombers? 2 defending fighters on a carrier. :P
Well, now that I look at it, you may be right. After you moved your unprotected US naval reinforcements(1 DD, 4 SS) to sz45 in out game and I subsequently used my 2 bmb, 4 fig to smash them, it appears that you may have not even noticed, until after that battle, that I still had the first Japanese bomber, let alone the second. :lol: :-P
**MOD NOTE: random political comment that had no purpose deleted.
AJ, I have better things to do than edit posts put out just to be annoying.**
@AJ:
**MOD NOTE: random political comment that had no purpose deleted.
AJ, I have better things to do than edit posts put out just to be annoying.**
Lol, I guess Allah didn’t make you funny enough, AJ.
@AJ:
**MOD NOTE: random political comment that had no purpose deleted.
AJ, I have better things to do than edit posts put out just to be annoying.**
My bad …
damn liberals :roll:
I see no reason to use the bomber for SBR’s except when you are losing badly and you need to gamble. It is much more useful as a long range 4 based out of Southern Europe so it can threaten just about anything worth killing.
YES! the BOM is extremely versatile. I use it mainly in North Africa to support operations there and to give naval operations a boost. It never hurts to use it as ground support for a while and then when Germany starts to get a little fatter or thinner in the IPC realm then think about using it as an SBR. I’ve also found that using it in conjunction with submarines, depending on the game, is a great deterent to the US player wanting to use TRNs to invade N. Africa.
