Don't get how Germany can handle UK and Russia with the bombing…

Re. the OP…

1. If Allies are receiving more money from NOs early on, then Axis isn’t playing right.  As Axis, make sure you are aggressively denying the Allies NOs, and are getting as many Axis ones as possible.  Ultimately, even in a KGF it should take a while for the Allies to deny the NOs.

2. If the Allies are spending all their cash on bombers (and teching for heavies) then Germany should counter appropriately.  Either buy mainly infantry and wait for Japan or go aggressive and take out Russia while the Allies are buying techs and planes.

Zhukov44 is right on point 2, if Allies neglect building transports and invasion troops you should build 5-6 tanks per turn as Germany and send them East together with some infantry. Together with Italian invasions of two full transports per turn into the south of Russia this should take Russia out of the game before too long. Once you reach around 15 tanks put together you’ll be surprised how quickly Russian infantry stacks vanish.

An IC in France is there to protect against a heavy invasion strategy by Allies, because then you need tons, tons of infantry. If they do heavy SBR, better capture Russian ICs!

hey at least the allies are not doing max damage on italy and half on germany

@Deathtwinkie:

I mean, every single turn, his US has 57 IPC’s to build with……his regular amount, and he’s getting 15IPC’s every turn from the bonus income.

Where on earth is the US getting that income from?  3 NOs would require Japan to completely ignore the pacific, and/or for them to be taking France.  Sorry mate but you need to get a better axis game plan.

And yes, SBRs are good and strong, but only as an element in the KGF strat, not as the entire plan.

my suggestion to you is to either play a pbf game, or check some of them out.  this will give you ideas,  what to do if allies are SBRing you to pieces, and what to do offensively & defensively.  i have played as the allies, bombing the crap out of germany, and still lost.  i have played as the axis, being on the recieving end of the bombings, and still won.  check out the other games bud, it will help.  if you like, we can start a game just to have a little walk through.  imo, japan is the key to an axis victory,  germany and italy just help out, sometimes alot.  good luck.  and go for radar or improved factories.  SBRs wont bother you any more if you can get both of those.  just $5 each turn till you hit something.

Just out of curiosity, how early did the Med fleet die? It is vital to claiming Allied IPC’s and posing a threat to the southern part of Russia. You should try to keep it alive as long as possible.

Hey, Deathtwinkie (apologies to gamerman01), welcome to the A&A forums, where veteran players will gleefully tear your strategies apart but hopefully offer good advice in exchange.  Lots of good advice out there about Allied bombing strats.  Personally I disagree with the consensus that SBRs aren’t so bad, as the cost of bombers is lowered in AA50 and the HB tech is inevitable by end game since tech is so cheap now.  Britain and the US also start with a hefty supply of ready bombers and extra IPCs to build them, where the Axis does not.  Allies have it especially good as Britain is an excellent bomber base and can hit any German or Italian fleet SZ as well as Germany and Italy.

You did have a bit of advantage at the start of the game though, many players DREAM of getting HBs round one in a tech game, so you’re at fault there for not exploiting it.  1 bomber a round if you can afford it as germany gives you a lot of flexibility.  Main thing you need to learn is how to cope with other strategies and revising your play, it sounds like you got stuck in tunnel-vision mode in Russia and just couldn’t find a way around the Allied bombing campaign.  Captain Crunch gave some great advice there.  If nothing else, learn to exploit the enemy’s strategy and not just grimly fight against the damage; that’s what the enemy wants.

A and A is one of those games that sucks you in and doesn’t let go, and the dice aspect of it is really harmful in that you can have the best strategies in the world and still LOSE, so don’t feel bad about it happening.  The trick is to playing the game so that losing any particular battle doesn’t lose you the entire game, so you must keep your strategies OPEN.  Don’t continue on the same path that’s losing if you can help it; try getting to the objectives some other way.  Axis must really push hard early in AA50 41 games to get a favorable Axis/Allied IPC balance, but it’s still a lot easier than the 42 scenario, or hell, even Revised.

If you enjoy quick games I suggest giving TripleA a try, its pretty good freeware, and you can find plenty of players to cut your teeth on.

common G1s don’t involve much air support on the Eastern front.  Sometimes the ftr from pol gets involved but consider that most of it.

The bmb is better served in Egy or sz 2.

Egy is effectively worth 7 IPC to UK in rd1.  sz 2 is a relatively easy chance to clear a bb off the board before it gets paired with other units.

As Germany, including the 2 units you can transport from ger -> bst via sz 5, you have SEVENTEEN land units to deal with the 7 Russian units currently on your front.

The Russians have a total of 1 artillery and 1 armor to counter attack you with.  This leaves them severely lacking in punch, and if the battles go your way a counter attack might not even be possible.

So you say a heavy bomber was needed in Russia?  I say you needed:
trn sz 13 load inf arm fra -> sz 15 unload egy
inf art arm lib, bmb ger -> egy

now the dice are:
1@1 2@2 2@3 2@4
v
3@2 1@3 1@4

6 units, 19 punch for Ger
5 units, 13 punch for Gbr

That’s going to mean close to 80% of the time that Egy is yours, and about 90% of the time it’s decimated and you’ve still got a HB.

You’re stuck inside your own gaming group.  You may think you and your friends are as good as anyone out there but the truth is you just don’t know until you’ve tried it.  Spend some time here, play some games, watch some more.

Just from your G1 discussion, and don’t take this the wrong way, but it does seem like you’ve got a lot to learn about AA50.  Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make their response immature.

@Deathtwinkie:

Currently playing 1v1 with a friend.  And we’re both competent veteran players of the older AA games.  I’m Axis.  Now, first in the other theater of the world, Japan is doing ok.  A lot of my navy left over there and fighting with US navy while at same time I setup a factory in Manchuria and India to steadily pump infantry/tanks west trying to help either reenforce Africa or help take out Russia.  I tell you this because if I wasn’t pressuring Russia like this, then Germany would be even harder to play.

So now to my question.  Any half competent player, playing as the UK/US is going to have bombers parked on UK and every turn will be Industry bombing Germany.  This is really a necessity to do if you play Allies.  So of course he’s doing that to me.  Per turn he brings 3 British bombers, and he’s got 2 American bombers there.   So per turn I lose 17-20 IPC’s from this as I’ve also been a little unlucky on the AA rolls.  I’ve only shot down 1 bomber after 4-5 turns.  So he hammers my factory so bad that, as Germany, I only have about 7-10 IPC left each turn.  This is even INCLUDING the bonus money that I get per turn.  Because of this aspect of the game that Germany has no defense for, I don’t have the money to take Russia, where as Russica continues to have 25-30 IPC per turn to push me back.

So of course, I’ve lost ground and been reduced to making lots of Infantry and just defending.  I simply cannot afford anything and it’s only a matter of time when Germany will fall.

My question is I simply don’t understand how Germany is playable with this going on.  It’s too much power.  Germany only has 1 factory so each turn I’m REQUIRED to repair the damage or I can’t bring in any new units.  Russia isn’t hindered by this, so even if I tried to bomb Russia with my own bombers to try and do to them what UK is doing to me……I can’t.

My bombers, I think, can only reach the north Russian factory and that’s only an IPC value of 2…meaning I can only do a max of 4 damage to that territory.   That’s nothing compared to what UK/US are doing to me.

Trying to take Africa takes time and Britian has already killed off my navy in the med.  Italy is actually doing ok and is helping defend Germany with infantry while at same time managed to take Egypt at the moment.  I couldn’t take my Italians further down south and take Africa because the British/US fleet controls the Med and western Africa seazones not to mention they have a big presense now on Algeria.   So I’m forced to keep my Italians (they even have a factory) in Eygpt to help defend that from the forces soon to come from Algeria.

==== HERE’S MY POINT ====

This bombing from UK, any half competent player should be doing this to Germany, but with AA only being a 1/6 chance to shoot down, I complained and complained that he was destroying 90% of my income and he wasn’t having to pay for that power.  He isn’t losing enough bombers.   I’m not complaining about the damage…(as this happened in real life)…as much as I’m complaining that I don’t think 1/6 is enough of a chance.   I told him that in the war, we lost a ton of bombers prior to mustang escorts.  He hasn’t lost hardly any and that doesn’t seem balanced.   I figured if he’s going to keep doing this to me, he should have to put more IPC’s towards that power.

So I convinced him that, JUST for the purposes of industrial bombing, we need to give the AA a 20% chance instead of 16.5%.  So we use 10 sided dice for this purpose and a 1 or 2 kills the bomber.   So since doing that, it’s been a little more balanced and thusly I take a little less damage, he is paying for another bomber or two.  I think that’s balanced.

I just simply don’t understand how Germany can even function with this heavy bombing on a 1/6 AA dice roll.  Imagine if UK/US had heavy bombers?   What am I doing wrong as Germany to be in this situation?

We’re using bonus income (which I’ve noticed gives the Allies the advantage as he’s getting lots of IPC’s from this), and we started with 1941 scenario, which again is Allies advantage.  I even took off right away with Germany and raced ahead into Russia as best I could.  I took 3-4 territories at first and Russia looked as if it would fall, but then the heavy bombing was so bad that I’ve since been fought back and lost ground cuz I simply can’t replace what I’ve lost.  Russia still can be because they don’t have a factory as vulnerable as Germany’s.

okay, i agree on you, sbr can be tough. but than again, use japan to win the game :-D
i do disagree on this: i think '41 with NO’s axis have big advantage, rather than the allies
have you tried some tech perhaps against sbr?

@Frontovik:

okay, i agree on you, sbr can be tough. but than again, use japan to win the game :-D
i do disagree on this: i think '41 with NO’s axis have big advantage, rather than the allies
have you tried some tech perhaps against sbr?

What tech works against heavy bombers?  :(

I wouldn’t say the Axis have a HUGE advantage with NOs and with Tech, but in the hands of someone with AA50 experience the Axis should win more often than they don’t.  Japan’s got almost no resistance most of the time and they spread like a bad disease.  Even if Germany’s just doing enough to survive then Japan will eventually collapse Russia from behind and/or eat up every American IPC forcing them to defend their homeland.

Always sux to be beaten by a better player. However you only make things worse for yourself by blaming game mechanics!

Base cost of bomber = 12 IPC
Average cost of bombing per turn= 12/6 = 2 IPC
Average damage per turn = 3.5 IPC

So yes initially strategic bombing is worth it (The people who claimed on this thread that it isn’t fail at basic maths.)

Especially when you take into account that in this version of AA strategic bombing can do twice as much damage! e.g you can do 20IPC damage to Germany instead of the maximum of 10 in previous editions.

You mentioned earlier that you roled for heavy bomber tech? Correct? In that case how did that alter your game plan mr great AA player?
Did you start bombing England for 7 IPC ave per bomber? Or did you stick to your inflexible pre game plan?

Once you saw the Allies build more and more bombers how did you plan for countering them? Extra tech dice?

Bah

Good points, Bel.  But as I said in my first post here, Strat bombing is not as effective in this incarnation of A&A.  You forget that in Revised, the damage limit PER BOMBER was the IPC value of the TT.  In this one, double the IPC value is the total damage limit.  If a factory is maxed out in damage and isn’t repaired, it can’t be damaged at all for a turn.  Also, your math is correct, but you leave out the other opportunities that bomber may have.  Many times bomber support on a battle is more effective than a SBR, especially because usually in the battle the Bomber has a 0% chance of being lost.  Those are some of the reasons I don’t see that much SBR in this game.

I see lots of SBR because for every SBR a bmb goes on, it’s +1.5 IPC for your faction.  It’s especially effective for the allies if they’re looking for a way to slow Germany down without committing to a large atlantic navy (e.g. UK’s India factory v. AA50 and KJF).  I feel like I have a pretty good system for knowing how and where to send a bmb.  What is your punch like with or without said bmb?  Will the battle be over in less turns with a bmb in the fight?  What unit does the bmb finish?  If it’s an arm, then 50% chance of it getting a hit, for example.  Also, what’ll it kill if it hits?  Inf = +1.5 swing (50%3 IPC unit).  Arm = 2.5.  Does it kill an inf?  Will the inf hit another inf?  If so, it’s more cost effective to SBR (1/3 chance of hitting a 3 IPC unit.  1/33 = 1 IPC.  An SBR is worth 1.5 IPC).  We’re playing a math based game, use it :).

If a factory’s not being dmged because it’s not repaired, then no units are coming out of it until that faction pays the territory’s IPC value +1 to build.  More than mildly effective v. factions like Italy and Great Britain because they lack the money and a good territory to place another IPC.  Therefore, all SBR damage is likely to need to be fixed.  It works well for Germany despite the fact they have France and Poland, and can grab Karelia.  Stopping production is stopping production.

Old SBR was ineffective because 15 cost bmb shot down every 6 turns averaging 3.5 dmg was less cost effective than it is now.  As it stands, the bomber is a really strong and versatile unit.  I think it’s on par with the armor in terms of base effectiveness.  Strong attacker, long range, and even on a turn with no land or sea battles as long as it can reach an enemy factory it’s producing a positive effect for your side.  When you’re playing a tech game, the bomber rules the day.  All of the most out of control upgrades involve bombers in some way or exclusively the bomber.

@souL:

When you’re playing a tech game, the bomber rules the day.  All of the most out of control upgrades involve bombers in some way or exclusively the bomber.

An excellent point.  It is smart to build bombers before even getting the breakthroughs because there are THREE techs that boost bomber capabilities, and all of the are very significant!!  If you have all 3, look out world!!!

@gamerman01:

In this one, double the IPC value is the total damage limit.  If a factory is maxed out in damage and isn’t repaired, it can’t be damaged at all for a turn.

As Britain or USA you wouldnt call preventing Germany building a single unit for that a victory?

Here is a plausable and common scenario.

-Enough bombers go in to do 12 IPC damage to Italy.
-Italy only has 9IPC to repair with. (2 mainland ones)
-No units for Italy that turn and still 3 IPC left to repair
-Next turn allies need to risk even less bombers to keep Italy out of the game!

@gamerman01:

Also, your math is correct, but you leave out the other opportunities that bomber may have.  Many times bomber support on a battle is more effective than a SBR, especially because usually in the battle the Bomber has a 0% chance of being lost.  Those are some of the reasons I don’t see that much SBR in this game.

Everything has an opportunity cost not jsut strategic bombing. Very hard to calculate.
But in order to use the bomber as you suggest then some other unit is costing you.

ie. while the bomber isnt being lost whatever you sent in with it si!

@Bel:

Here is a plausable and common scenario.

-Enough bombers go in to do 12 IPC damage to Italy.
-Italy only has 9IPC to repair with. (2 mainland ones)
-No units for Italy that turn and still 3 IPC left to repair
-Next turn allies need to risk even less bombers to keep Italy out of the game!

I was going to write this long explanatory response, but I would sound argumentative.  I’ll just say it this way, I would enjoy being your opponent if you use logic like this. 
How many bombers is “enough bombers to do 12 IPC damage to Italy”? Two?  Three?  Five?
Who would spend 9 with Italy to repair if there was 12 damage?  A player would spend nothing and save another 9 so they have 18 the next turn.

@Bel:

Everything has an opportunity cost not jsut strategic bombing. Very hard to calculate.
But in order to use the bomber as you suggest then some other unit is costing you.

ie. while the bomber isnt being lost whatever you sent in with it si!

And if I don’t take the bomber in to support, I lose more!
Bel, I would love to play you by forum.  No one has ever mounted a strategic bombing campaign against me, and since you think it’s such a great strategy maybe I would get my first opportunity.

I just laugh that you say people are failing at basic math, but you don’t understand the basic rules.  As in your example, in previous games damage was limited to IPC value of territory.  Um, PER BOMBER!!  Really the only point I was trying to make was that in earlier games you could bomb an enemy’s money to smithereens - even if he had 50 IPC’s.  THAT’s “taking someone out of the game” as you say.  By comparison, now the most damage you could do to Germany is 20 and anything above that is wasted.  Germany can pay 15 and build 5 units, for example.  Point is, Germany has choices, whereas before Germany didn’t have choices, they had 0 IPC’s.  Now they have 50 IPC’s (in this example) and plenty of options.

We all know SBR per bomber is worth 3.5 less the average loss of 2 per bomber = 1.5.  But this does not take into account the lost damage when you inflict greater than maximum damage.  For example, you bomb Germany with 4 bombers, and roll 24 damage.  You only inflict 20, so 4 had no effect.  So your average calculation is not always as simple as 1+6 divided by 2, if you’re taking in enough bombers to potentially do more than max damage.

I’d like to see you build that many bombers up without me taking all your territory.  I’d have to see an effective strat bombing campaign to believe it is really that effective, because a 1.5 (at best) average margin per bomber is not that attractive, frankly.

@gamerman01:

As in your example, in previous games damage was limited to IPC value of territory.  Um, PER BOMBER!!  Really the only point I was trying to make was that in earlier games you could bomb an enemy’s money to smithereens - even if he had 50 IPC’s.  THAT’s “taking someone out of the game” as you say.  By comparison, now the most damage you could do to Germany is 20 and anything above that is wasted.

To be fair, most players utilized the Larry Harris Tournament Rules for Revised that altered the out of the box SBR rules you mention.  LHTR DID limit bombing to max of the IPC value of the territory per country.  So IF USA was conducting the allied bombing campaign on her own, she could only take $10 from Germany.  UK would be forced to do her share to get to the $20 limit that now exists in AA50.

In AA50, USA alone can do the bombing while UK builds her navy.  To me, that is a huge difference.  Also, bombers are $3 cheaper, AAA guns cost $1 and are less effective (only defend the territory they are in, no longer shooting at planes en route to target).

All of these factors indicate to me that SBR’s are a bigger factor in AA50 than in Revised.

In classic, well with weapons, that game turned into a bomber fest.  Best leave THAT version of the game out of the SBR discussions.

Hmmmm - OK axis, thanks for the clarification.  I never did read up on the LHTR for Revised, so yes, I’m comparing to unlimited damage with OOB rules as you said.

@gamerman01:

I was going to write this long explanatory response, but I would sound argumentative.  I’ll just say it this way, I would enjoy being your opponent if you use logic like this. 
How many bombers is “enough bombers to do 12 IPC damage to Italy”? Two?  Three?  Five?
Who would spend 9 with Italy to repair if there was 12 damage?  A player would spend nothing and save another 9 so they have 18 the next turn.

-doing 12 IPC takes on average 3.4 bombers.

Look mate I’m not sure why your so worked up but your plainly putting little thought into your replies. If Italy waits to turn 2 after the SBR to bomb again they have 18IPC - 12IPC to fix allowing them to build 2 infantry. Allies come in the next turn and it begins all over again.

Regardless italy has gone from building 3 inf per turn to 2 every 2 turns and even better for the allies they have to use their bombers in SBR only every second turn as well so while the axis have gained some respite to build again they are killing less heavy bombers and freed up the heavy bombers to do some combats.

The maths don’t support your logic.