I would welcome any opponent who focused solely on strat. bombing.
I agree in AA50. In earlier versions, an economically superior power would usually benefit from bombing, since it was essentially a 1-for-1 IPC swap mechanism. But now that it’s a more-realistic factory suppression mechanism, a bit more thought is needed (since the bombed nation might have other factories, or might just save up IPCs and only repair factories every other turn, rendering your bombers worthless half the time). It’s a good improvement with more options all around.
I almost never strat. bomb in my strategy, it’s too expensive and too risky.
There might be a case for you’re argument, If Britian Flies into Germany with 2 Bombers and avoids snake eyes than there is a potential of taking a maximum $12 from the enemy (best case senario) however, if Germany shots down just one British bomber than they have already achieved the max damage $12 that britian was hoping for in the first place. My question is…. Besides SBR’s what else can Britian and America do to slow down Germany before an invasion?
you can reject it all you want, but if the UK is only building bombers, then the US has to focuse completely on Japan so that’s less defences to the shoreline yet again. and if the US splits its attention between Europe and Asia, then Japan can help with Russia. it all works out
AND don’t forget Italy. what will they be doing while un-checked?
There’s no possible way short of the German’s using 4 sided dice instead of 6 for all their attacks that Germany can take Moscow in 3 rounds even if England and America did nothing but buy tech dice for the entire game!
Well, unless Russia decided not to build anything there and even then, i think it’s pushing it severely, since you’d have to at least assume the Russian player is smart enough to build units which means there’d be at least one rounds worth of defensive units in Moscow!
Even if we assume that Germany attacked nothing but East Poland and stacked it all there to conserve units, and subsequently moved to Belarus or East Ukraine on Germany 2, that’s still not going to leave them with enough units to take Moscow!
Sorry, uh-uh. You may have been exaggerating things to demonstrate a point, in which case just say so and I’ll back off, but there’s absolutely no way the Germans are taking Moscow on Round 3 with normal dice results. No way possible.
Hell, if Russia does nothing but run everyone they can to Moscow, they have enough to stop 100% of all the German forces that can legally get in range of Moscow on Germany 3.
sorry, perhaps i meant turn 4. keep in mind that i’m just running it all over in my head and not looking at a map or checking the board setup :roll:
so exaggeration aside, it still is a a very bad idea to focuse solely on SBR’s :-D
Okay, tin. I can buy turn four given the plan goes without hitch and the dice land in Germany’s favor in most of the battles.
Just glad you agree that turn 3 was a little exaggerated. :)
Anyway, turn 4 is pushing the envelope, it could theoretically happen, but realistically speaking, even with building as many tanks as possible with Germany (I say as possible since it’s safe to assume Germany is losing 10-20 IPC a round to SBRs thus reducing Germany’s available income to 30ish IPC) you might be able to break Russia’s back.
I am not saying Germany will lose. I am saying it would be more realistic for Germany and Japan to plan a tank dash to Moscow with the goal of taking Moscow on Round 6. This would account for some bad dice and the loss of income to Germany.
