I think the most important battles are:
Germany: Egypt, clearing the Med of british shipping
everyone else depends on their strategy.
Personally, I found that the SBR in the 2nd edition was way too overpowered. The new heavy bomber, as well as the IPC limit to bombing, forces players to do more inspired plays.
Strategic bombing is something I will do when I don’t have any good moves or surprises to make with my bombers. It’s just such a yawn move
While statistically they should be about a break even proposition I find they are not. For example on paper, an Axis SBR campaign using 3 bombers per turn should do 15 IPCs damage per turn to Russia.
If none of the bombers are shot down, they will destroy an average of 10-11 IPCs per turn, not 15. Where did you get 15? If BOTH Axis powers did this simultaneously, it would be an average of 21 per turn, except statistically you’ll lose one. That drops IPC damage down to 18-19.
I think I see your mistake. The average roll of a six sided die is 3.5, not 3. A bomber doing SBR will statistically destroy 18.5 IPCs before it’s shot down.
It’s true that SBRs are nearly a break-even proposition. However, if they weren’t, they’d dominate the game.
The whole point of SBRs is inflicting damage that the enemy can’t afford. The US is the only country that can really afford an SBR campaign, simply because it can afford the losses, while Germany can’t. The US sacrifices its own income to suppress Germany’s so that the UK and USSR can take advantage of its weakened state. This is not really pointless.
If SBRs were a money-making proposition, there’s no way that the Axis could survive, since they start off economically inferior to the Allies. The Allies could simply build a few bombers to SBR with, then devote the rest of their income to defense. Eventually, the combined toll of the bombings would render the Axis powers bankrupt, then the Allies could move in for the kill. Doesn’t sound like a very fun game, does it?
The strategy you’re describing sounds perfectly viable to me.