Can Tac Bombers Escort a Bombing Raid, but choose not to bomb?

@zooooma:

1st edition had an optional rule that German subs take 3 IPCs in a convoy raid instead of 2.

Ah ok, indeed.

I was thinking about another (temporarily discussed) rule during Alpha-development towards second edition rules,
that increased all subs convoy raiding IPC-reduction to 3 when the “Super Subs” technology had been achieved.

@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!

Tried countering this move as axis with a J1 DOW and J1&J2 Strat bomber buy (+2TT J1). Turned out the Philippines assault failed and the fighter survived to be the 4th interceptor, but I still did the strat bombing raid J3 with 3 bombers, figuring the damage I would do would hurt the Allies more than losing a bomber. Turned out all got through and shot one interceptor down, but more importantly, instead of repairing the damage, the Allies built an extra IC on West India which I could only reach from Shan State, which I hadn’t claimed yet.

4th interceptor would normally come ANZAC2 via Malaya IMO, but I think the alternate IC is a pretty radical strategy. Not sure of the advantage of it to be honest.

Certainly had trouble containing China while focusing so much on India.

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

@AndreasI:

Just some thoughts from someone who hasn’t really done the math nor played enough rounds to actually see this tactic through.

Can US really be at war, at their own initiative, with Germany on turn 3 (Combat/Movement phase?) so they can actually move to Gibraltar at all? Or are there any second edition additional rules that I have missed?

And then on down to the tactics on getting a strong fleet supporting units into Normandy or other mainland european regions:

Am I correct in assuming that Germany loosing it’s entire bomber force against, let’s say, a strong naval presence from US/UK equals a lost game for Germany? I am aware that Japan can still grow to be a monster and win the game for the axis anyhow but let’s keep focus on europe for now. Creating a fleet according to Nippon-kokus suggestion (or similar) would create a situation that requires Germany to respond with their bombers. Once there is a strong static fleet that Germany can’t attack without risking it’s entire air force it’s quite easy for the allies to maintain that ratio of units so that it stays safe. And what happens then? The US can land units basically every turn once the shuttle is running. 8 or 10 units are not frightening, I admit. Easily countered by Germany but the way I see it is that Germany from then on are forced to use their bombers plus land units each turn against a landing force. Using german bombers on that front every turn makes them unusable against the russians. I can certainly see where there could be a bit of trouble breaking through russian lines.

The way I see it, if the US can do this, why would Dark Skies really matter? Would buying 20 Infantry and 10 Tanks be any different? Germany still couldn’t kill the Allied fleet, would still have to divert forces from Russia, would still face the Allies landing every turn…

…and on top of it, It’d be harder for Germany to counter attack.

Seems like Dark Skies is still an optimal strategy against a US invasion.

Yes.

Thanks for the quick response.

Just figured I had to ask based on how (and this is if I remember correctly, of course) marines could be boosted to 3 in amphibious in the original Pacific game when supported by artillery.

this is my point, get hvy bmrs and you win within a few turns, or lose if the other guy got it. this now means navies wont dissappear in moments.