Why the Allies have the upper hand

[bbrett3]

@Stoob:

RE: SBR “intercept” optional rule.  So much of this game is just threats, not actual attacks.  If you have a bomber, and your enemy doesn’t have any fighters in his home territory, then do an SBR.  If he has fighters on defense, don’t do an SBR.    This will “put him on notice” and he’ll either be forced to bring back a fighter or two permanently from the front (where he needs them) for SBR defense or put up with you bombing him every turn.   If he moves the fighters away, then do an SBR again and annoy him.   People over-react to these types of optional rules.  Chill the %$#& out people, it’s an optional rule.

truer words have never been spoken :-D

[axis_roll]

As far as I have seen, a good move is for Germany to buy some sort of plane every round.  With this in mind, it is quite easy for Germany to leave a ftr or two in Berlin.

These are not really out of range of anything.

Germany needs to either push as hard and fast as possible or to slowly build and let Japan do all the work.

If Germany is pushing hard, then a few SBR’s will be too little too late
and a slow build allows the ftrs to keep the allied bombers off them.  It’s not easy for the allies to mount a bombing campaign.

I still maintain my position as the escort rule makes SBRs too expensive to happen (expensive can be measured by opportunity cost, or as people are pointing out… that ftrs have to be places they would rather not want to be).

And of course it’s an optional rule.  We happen to be playing it, so to us, its part of the game and hence, part of the discussion.

[TimTheEnchanter]

While the option of making SBRs when an IC has no interceptors is still there, I think the likelihood that there will be interceptors will lead to a decrease in the production of bombers since SBRs vs. interceptors is a very poor proposition.  If you don’t think “spare” bombers can be used in SBRs, they are not quite as valuable so you’ll buy more figs instead.  Therefore you’re less likely to have that opportunity because there won’t be a lot of bombers laying around.  Again, this rule pretty much kills SBRs.

[Funcioneta]

Yep, Tim is right. Play tech and some Radar, War Bounds or Improved Industry will counter SBRs

[bbrett3]

I agree with the last 2 posters, risking a bomber at 2:1 odds of losing it  to do only 1-6 damage is too much of a risk for me
hell, I barley SBR now

[Lynxes]

These are not really out of range of anything.

Fighters in Germany are out of reach of such unimportant areas as Russia and Caucasus…  :-o

[axis_roll]

@Lynxes:

These are not really out of range of anything.

Fighters in Germany are out of reach of such unimportant areas as Russia and Caucasus…  :-o

If you are playing an agressive Germany, then yes, they are out of range.
You can play a safe Germany and let Japan do the dirty work and then those ftrs are not out of range.

you also do not need to station all your ftrs in Berlin.

Just a couple is plenty to discourage SBRs

Remember Germany should be buying inf and a plane a turn if you are not pushing hard.

[Lynxes]

/axis_roll

You’re assuming a KGF strategy by the Allies. Yet a lot of the players are now saying that’s too much of a gamble and advocating a balanced strategy where UK and US put some forces out to contain Japan. Then you will probably be buying tanks with Germany in order to take Caucasus and gain a foothold to threaten Moscow on your own / with Italy, and then most certainly you will need every aircraft that can fly on the Eastern front!

My point is that all this is too early to tell what it leads to. I just think that the interceptor rule is such a major improvement to the logic and structure of the game that it really should be welcomed. If we end up thinking SBR becomes way too weak, we will hear voices saying that fighter interceptors should be defending on a ‘1’, for example, but we haven’t got the games played to prove that conclusion.

[axis_roll]

@Lynxes:

If we end up thinking SBR becomes way too weak, we will hear voices saying that fighter interceptors should be defending on a ‘1’, for example, but we haven’t got the games played to prove that conclusion.

I stand by my opinion at this time.

IMHO, the interceptor optional rule removes SBR from the game.

That penduleum has swung hard from SBR’s being way too powerful (with $12 bombers) all the way to never being conducted, as it’s too expensive.

The AA fire at all planes before air-to-air is really nasty.

Perhaps we should start a thread and keep a tally on the results of using the optional SBR escort rules.  My guess is that SBRs will be dramatically reduced in games using this rule.

[tin_snips]

this new interceptor rule may reduce SBR’s somewhat, but not dramatically.

you have to remember that if a player is doing so many SBR’s so as to bomb a nation *cough Germany cough back to the stone-age, then they probably aren’t spending much money on forces to actually land and take territory

[Funcioneta]

This rule gives western axis even more advantage. They can defend too easily and USSR cannot risk precious fighters just to stop SBRs