in general, i won’t engage in a strategic bombing campaign. the economics of the situation are relatively simple:
an aa gun hits a bomber one in every six times. this costs the axis 15ipcs in losses.
the remaining 5 times that the bomber gets through it averages 3.5ipc damage per round. so a bomber does 3.5ipc x 5 rounds = 17.5ipc damage before it gets shot down.
so, by bombing russia, the axis actually does make a 2.5ipc profit every five rounds per bomber (or a 0.5ipc profit each round per bomber, or 1ipc for two bombers, etc.)
there are, however, three major problems with this situation. firstly is the unpredictability of the dice. that bomber is as likely to get shot down on the first bombing run as it is on the sixth (or the twelfth, or twentieth, if it gets that far!). this means that an sbr plan is as likely to fail before it can really get off the ground (because of an early aa hit) as it is to fail later on.
secondly is the opportunity cost of using the bomber for sbr. that bomber could be used in other (conventional) attacks to create a greater probability that a territory is taken. it is often important to “ensure” small battles in order to tip the economic scales in your direction. for example, 2inf, 1ftr vs. 2inf will hold about 30% of the time if you intend to retreat your air unit if you’re outnumbered. add an extra bomber to that battle and the chance to hold goes down to 10%. consistently “ensuring” one extra battle every turn (by throwing in a bomber) could add more than 0.5ipc to your bank (and thus take it away from your enemy). i always try to figure out a better tactical use for my bombers before gambling with an sbr. if you want to work towards economic superiority make sure, above all else, that you take your opponent’s territory!
thirdly is the fact that bombers are possibly the most important unit in the game. at the very least they are the only units that can change the direction of the game completely (which almost always happens when heavy bombers are gained). i always try to keep on pace with my opponent’s number of bombers. if he buys one with usa i buy one with japan. this means that if he gets a lucky tech roll then i am ready to catch up with him quickly. i almost never risk my bombers in attacks where it is possible i will lose one, whereas i will often send 2ftr vs. 1inf or armor if i think it will give me a clear tactical advantage (say for instance the axis drop off a lone armor in egypt and i have no land units anywhere near). i am also willing to sacrifice a bomber to kill an opponent’s bomber, as long as i know i can build another one immediately. in a recent game i sent my american bomber against a lone japanese bomber on italian east africa, knowing that i could only land it unprotected in a territory that germany could strike. he thought that i wouldn’t trade my bomber for his, but i prepared for this by buying a bomber that round - instantly i had a 1 bomber advantage over japan. risking my bombers to aa gun for a marginal 0.5 ipc per round doesn’t seem to be worth the the probable tactical loss of having less bombers than my opponent.
some people think that the axis (especially japan) have more than enough air to ensure all ground attacks. sometimes this may be true, and then i might try an sbr. but, more often than not, with a well placed bid you can create more than enough opportunities to use ALL your airpower to ensure land battles.
ok…despite everything i have just written there are times when i will engage in an indiscriminate bombing war. most often this happens when russia has a brutal start and the axis are almost certain to take karelia anyways. early in the game (when every infantry counts) a 4-6ipc bombing raid can turn a 60% chance of taking karelia into an 80% chance. this is obviously a risk that the axis should take, especially with the japanese bomber. another instance i can think of might be if the allies neglect to build a navy on UK1. that extra turn advantage could isolate russia enough to make them vulnerable to an all-out sbr war. the germans won’t likely need their bomber that badly (the uk sea zone will be impenetrable on uk2, i can guarantee that!) so it might be ok to risk it to aa fire. still, i’d rather send it to africa to punish any british who might have survived GE1. the only other time i might try it is if i am losing badly. if i feel like i need everything to go in my direction in order to even have a chance to win i will increase the number of battles i do (including sbrs). if i don’t get the results i’m looking for then i haven’t really lost anything. if i do get what i’m hoping for then i’m that much closer to clawing my way back into the game.
that’s all i can think of now, but if anything else comes to me i’ll let you know.