TLDR : do a few small changes to strategic bombers, and you might make them much more interesting, useful, and relevant, with the added benefit of historical accuracy.
Introduction
I have asked a fair number of experienced players who told me almost unanimously that strategic bombers are scarcely ever used nowadays in gameplay, the main reasons for which I try to summarise below :
Objective
Historically, strategic bombers served a very important role in the European Theatre. With the right changes and balancing, I believe you can successfully implement them so that they become relevant to gameplay and emulate the roles they served during WWII.
To start, I try to identify the key characteristics of a WWII-era strategic bomber :
Suggestions
So based on these characteristics and my own experience, here are some changes I suggest for your in-game Heinkel 117’s, Handley-Page Halifaxes, and Boeing Superfortresses, which I match to the corresponding number in the previous list. Please refer back-and-forth to between these.
Other ideas :
Conclusion : how these changes may impact game-play
Happy to hear feedback and other suggestions. Cheers.
Introduction
I have asked a fair number of experienced players who told me almost unanimously that strategic bombers are scarcely ever used nowadays in gameplay, the main reasons for which I try to summarise below :
- Unable to defeat units and vulnerable to any ground AA defence
- Expensive and lengthy to construct, especially due to the need for ( one-time ) investment in a level 3 airbase
- Damages buildings which the attacker may later wish to possess
Objective
Historically, strategic bombers served a very important role in the European Theatre. With the right changes and balancing, I believe you can successfully implement them so that they become relevant to gameplay and emulate the roles they served during WWII.
To start, I try to identify the key characteristics of a WWII-era strategic bomber :
- Long range, able to reach deep into enemy airspace, often their home cities
- Typically fly at high altitude
- Typically target civilian and military production centres, causing disruption in logistics. Do not typically look for enemy units or soft targets in general.
- Vulnerable to enemy fighter aircraft, but not completely defenceless
- Imprecise ( due to lack of guided bomb technology at the time )
- Return immediately after completion of mission
- Able to significantly weaken enemy morale
- Suitable for a lengthy war in which neither side has a clear strategic advantage, and must therefore resort to war of attrition
Suggestions
So based on these characteristics and my own experience, here are some changes I suggest for your in-game Heinkel 117’s, Handley-Page Halifaxes, and Boeing Superfortresses, which I match to the corresponding number in the previous list. Please refer back-and-forth to between these.
- No change or small calibration ( already long range )
- Remove or significantly reduce damage from ground units, including AA guns, which were less effective at such altitudes. Heavy bombers may need to become a wholly separate type of attack.
- Strategic bombing primary damages buildings and fortifications, potentially disabling production of certain units ( already good ), but may also delay existing production ( open to calibration ).
- No change or small calibration ( already good ). High-altitude interceptors become primary form of defence against strategic bombers
- No change or small calibration ( strategic bombing already ineffective against enemy units )
- Disable the patrol function on strategic bombers. The patrol, although unrealistic in terms of fuel / pilot fatigue, tactically make sense for interceptors and other light attack aircraft, which historically did so to defend an area or look for targets of opportunity. These tactics are not relevant for strategic bombers.
- Add morale loss in the province recently bombed ( this neatly takes care of economic impact )
- As previously touched on, strategic bombers take longer to make and are more useful in a strategic sense than in tactical engagements. Additionally, they would only come into play when two powerful factions are fighting each other, and neither side are able to achieve a breakthrough in the front lines. These changes will heighten the distinct role of strategic bombing and allow players to correspondingly adjust their tactics. For instance, a player may choose to invest in more strategic bombers than tactical bombers to destroy factories and infrastructure in the enemy core territories, to delay production or cause reinforcements to arrive more slowly to the front lines ( bombed-out roads, bridges, etc. ).
Other ideas :
- Because strategic bombers are not used as often in combat and in the early stages of a war, you can very well make them unavailable in the first 3 days, for instance. Additionally, perhaps not so many stages of upgrade that require players to devote rare materials to a unit that serves a highly specialised function.
- Availability and construction speed of course will favour the Allied ( and / or Axis ) doctrine.
Conclusion : how these changes may impact game-play
- No impact for short-term engagements and one-sided wars in which they offer little advantage
- Increased defensive use of interceptors in non-border areas ; increased importance of air-superiority
- Increased relevance of intelligence in predicting enemy strategic bombing runs
- Increased importance of maintaining infrastructure and industrial facilities, which may prompt players to devote more resources to upgrading and repairing them, if an enemy uses strategic bombing
- Less “spamming” of tactical bombers and increased unit variety.
Happy to hear feedback and other suggestions. Cheers.
We're always looking for top players to play together and learn from. Apply to Tokugawa Bakufu ( alliance code : KIOTO ) if you are a like-minded individual and wish to improve your game.
Whenever feasible, one should always try to eat the rude.
Whenever feasible, one should always try to eat the rude.
The post was edited 6 times, last by Marechal Saoul: Wording clarity ; added poll ().