The use of strategic bombers has been brought up now and then. For some time they were directly unusable in 1.5, but AFAIR they were tweaked to make more useful.
However, I still have been unable to find any use for them. I have build some in the last 3-4 games, but never had any real use for them. It is more like an in-your-face thing I do to my enemies in the end-game.
Here's why I think they fail to fill a significant role:
- I find that tac-bombers can do most of the long range bombing (airfield strikes etc.) quite well.
- When you need to directly take out an airfield, missiles are better. One use for sure, but unkilable and much faster. Makes up for the cost.
- When prioritizing research, you cannot go for every branch. And in terms of necessity, strat bombers are low in priority. So I generally don't have the option to research strat bombers until the end-game, and the game is usually decided by then anyway.
-Start bomber tech comes too late. I could imagine the use of a strat bomber in the early-to-mid game, but as it is now, fighters are usually all over the map before the first strat bomber comes off the assembly line.
- I imagine strat bombers would be useful to damaging the enemys economy. Damage to the economy in the early to mid-game has some serious consequences that are often overlooked by players. However, I find that raiding is much more effective for that. Fast or stealth units can cause a lot of damage to rear areas and you need such units anyway.
- If the war is static and you cannot break a deadlock, maybe strat bombers would be good for reducing defenses or bombing nearby bases. But this situation close to never happens. I remember one game a few years ago on the world map, but since then it has been an all too familiar meta-game: war of the stacks bulldozing in one direction, then getting bulldozed back. Strat bombers have no role in mobile warfare of stacks.
To sum up, I think strat bombers need some better competitiveness. And instead of fiddling with their unit stats, my suggestion would be to reduce the availability of rockets. Sort of to make strat bombing the rule and rockets the exception (today it is opposite).
Rockets should have much increased cost or longer construction time- And perhaps strat bomber tech should be moved forward.
Please log in to post a reply.
Personally, I have found that strat bombers are best used by...
1. Finding a target to DESTROY
2. Launching those strat bombers
3. Watching destruction rain and just keep pummeling.
Alternatively, I have found them good at picking off lone arties and infantry units that are deep in enemy territory.
Using strat bombers for unit attacks is inefficient use of ressources. Their attack values are negliable.
for my the mayor problem with strat bomber its: they are too much vulnerable against interceptors since interceptor cant scort them, if bombers have more anti air defence, more hp and a little more range (since its to short for worth it instead of fast land units) i would use them
Strategic bombers are mainly useful for:
- To take out enemy abs: In the 1.5 version a level 1 ABS of 99% health doesn't function anymore. The planes will be sent back to that airbase and turn into convoys. Imagine the possibilities.
- To take out enemy fortifications: You have got an enemy that is bunkered down with his artillery in it making your artillery to attack is fairly useless. Unless you are willing to attack with huge losses the strategic bomber is the key.
Strategic bombers are anti building and fairly useless against units.whowh wrote:
Alternatively, I have found them good at picking off lone arties and infantry units that are deep in enemy territory.
In 1.5 strategic bombers can be escorted by interceptors. Nuclear bombers are the only bombers that cannot be escorted.Danieliyoverde123 wrote:
they are too much vulnerable against interceptors since interceptor cant scort them
On paper, yes, but in practice is actually works quite well.BMfox wrote:
Strategic bombers are anti building and fairly useless against units.
Try out tacticals against the infantry branch and the attack bomber against the armoured branch and come back to me 
interceptors doesn't have the same range than estratégic bombers, so there two alternatives, estratégic bombers having the same range than interceptor Made them useless to destroy building except frontier ones, or leave them withouth scort, made them too vulnerable against enemy interceptorBMfox wrote:
Strategic bombers are mainly useful for:- To take out enemy abs: In the 1.5 version a level 1 ABS of 99% health doesn't function anymore. The planes will be sent back to that airbase and turn into convoys. Imagine the possibilities.
- To take out enemy fortifications: You have got an enemy that is bunkered down with his artillery in it making your artillery to attack is fairly useless. Unless you are willing to attack with huge losses the strategic bomber is the key.
Strategic bombers are anti building and fairly useless against units.whowh wrote:
Alternatively, I have found them good at picking off lone arties and infantry units that are deep in enemy territory.In 1.5 strategic bombers can be escorted by interceptors. Nuclear bombers are the only bombers that cannot be escorted.Danieliyoverde123 wrote:
they are too much vulnerable against interceptors since interceptor cant scort them
I've found that strat bombers aren't worth the materials it takes to produce them. All it takes is a stack of fighters and they're gone.
Yes but if you can produce a large amount and have an enemy without many fighters you could disable them
We have no dispute over the fact that those units are much preferred for aerial assault.BMfox wrote:
Try out tacticals against the infantry branch and the attack bomber against the armoured branch and come back to me
As I wrote: missiles are better and faster at taking out airbases as they cannot be intercepted. Any capable enemy will have fighters near an airbase that matters. Strat bombers have a problem.BMfox wrote:
Strategic bombers are mainly useful for:- To take out enemy abs: In the 1.5 version a level 1 ABS of 99% health doesn't function anymore. The planes will be sent back to that airbase and turn into convoys. Imagine the possibilities.
- To take out enemy fortifications: You have got an enemy that is bunkered down with his artillery in it making your artillery to attack is fairly useless. Unless you are willing to attack with huge losses the strategic bomber is the key.
As for fortifications, that is a rare problem. The meta-game is a war of stacks. Heavy bunkering is seldom and can usuallu just be bypassed.
Don't waste your time with strat bombers. The game is too fast to waste resources researching and upgrading. You have to focus on attack bombers and fighters to even stand a chance in this game.
strat bombers are a huge investesment, if you go for strats you are not investing on more useful units, AND on a competitive level maxing your efficiency it's keyGrandEmpire wrote:
Yes but if you can produce a large amount and have an enemy without many fighters you could disable them
Yea if you want to play role play with the strat bombers that's fun and all but no way will someone waste time and resources researching and creating them. YOu have to maximize your resources for just a couple of units in this game not spread them out to several.
You would spread them out or prioritize the strat bombers if they were worth the while.Tribunate wrote:
Yea if you want to play role play with the strat bombers that's fun and all but no way will someone waste time and resources researching and creating them. YOu have to maximize your resources for just a couple of units in this game not spread them out to several.
AgreedNoobNoobTrain wrote:
You would spread them out or prioritize the strat bombers if they were worth the while.Tribunate wrote:
Yea if you want to play role play with the strat bombers that's fun and all but no way will someone waste time and resources researching and creating them. YOu have to maximize your resources for just a couple of units in this game not spread them out to several.
The one advantages they have over rockets is that they are much more mobile. When your production centers are in the rear, it takes ages for rockets to reach the front in their slow trucks, and they're vulnerable all that time. And when they finally get there, you have to launch them almost immediatly, otherwise they're just a sitting duck to an enemy who usually has YOUR air base in range as well with HIS (regular) planes. Strats fly there in no time, can be protected by patrolling to the rear before being used, and can be switched to different fronts easily as well.
Having said that, I never use strats, though there have been a few instances where an enemy used them against me with at least SOME success.
Through sheer expirience i have seen them used well and have used them well, for example on one of my first games, i wanted to role play, i was Germany, took france and went for UK.
Although my strat bombardment was just for fun, intel told me that i successfully grounded the entire British air force, destroyed their naval bases too, and that meant they were stunned. It is true that the other pplayer had no fighters or at last few, he was a noob.
Point is, there are instances where they can be used well, but i agree that you shouldnt focus on them.
Well, against a sleepy enemy anything works.
Strat bombers do too little damage to installations like bunkers to be worth the high risk of losing them against someone half capable.
Yea Roleplay is fine with strat bombers but in a high speed competitive game they aren't worth the time.
The last couple of rounds I have lost the enemy usually spams the heck out of attack bombers and fighters. Rarely have I seen people waste resources on strat bombers.
Please log in to post a reply.
