Do you raid?

@Young:

@Cmdr:

starting to change my mind.  If I am SBRing, then I can probably afford to lose some fighters and should relish the thought of his scrambling, since I should be getting a fighter or two AND damage on his complex.

I hate losing aircraft.

Tht’s exactly why she would do this ;)

i only raid if i don´t need any of my bombers. sometime, even if i do not need them i won´t raid, because i don´t want to loose him to fulfill a very special and important task. after this, no problem with SBR.

but as a stratey it never worked really, did it? is it possible to take down UK, for example, by SBRing it?

rock`n roll

@special:

@Young:

@Cmdr:

starting to change my mind.  If I am SBRing, then I can probably afford to lose some fighters and should relish the thought of his scrambling, since I should be getting a fighter or two AND damage on his complex.

I hate losing aircraft.

Tht’s exactly why she would do this ;)

I don’t LIKE losing aircraft, but if I am going to do so, I feel it is in my best interests to force the enemy to not only lose their aircraft, but also take damage on their complexes!

You dont have strategic bombers for their defensive capabilities, so make the most of what they have offensively. Scorched Earth Policy.

@TheDefinitiveS:

You dont have strategic bombers for their defensive capabilities, so make the most of what they have offensively. Scorched Earth Policy.

Yes, but there is no need to send them needlessly to their death’s either.

Killing enemy units > bombing them (less risk to bombers, generally, more return on investment as well since you can get more than one infantry with your bomber but can only roll one die (+2) against a factory)
Bombing them > not doing anything with them

I’ll trade a German or Japanese fighter for an Australian, British or Russian fighter any day of the week, so if I am SBRing, I’ll gladely fly equal to greater number of fighters as escorts in hopes of an intercept mission against those nations.

Yeah, if you can go with escorts, or even hit some interceptors with the bombers defensive hits, then that is gravy.
A couple of guys and myself came up with another idea for SBRs on another thread about SBRs.  Once you are past the interceptors, it’s down to bombers vs. AA guns of the facility.  The way the rules are now, if the AA gun gets any hits, you lose that bomber immediately with no damage to the factory.  Any surviving strategic bombers roll a die and get that roll +2 in damage.

Here is our idea:  if a strategic bomber is hit by the AA gun, you can STILL roll a die for damage but do NOT add the +2 damage.  The hit bombers just get the die roll worth of damage.  After all, you figure the bombers are dropping their loads WHILE the AA gun is firing at them.  These things happen simultaneously, like the regular combat (which is why defender hits still get to roll).
As for the HIT bombers not getting the +2 damage, you could say they didn’t drop all of their load or accuracy suffered from being hit.
This way you don’t just lose a 12 IPC bomber with no return, you still get some damage to the factory.  Plus the defender gets a little break in the damage by not having to add the +2 for the bomber he/she hit.  This could make SBRs a little more attractive.

@knp7765:

Here is our idea:  if a strategic bomber is hit by the AA gun, you can STILL roll a die for damage but do NOT add the +2 damage.  The hit bombers just get the die roll worth of damage.  After all, you figure the bombers are dropping their loads WHILE the AA gun is firing at them.  These things happen simultaneously, like the regular combat (which is why defender hits still get to roll).
As for the HIT bombers not getting the +2 damage, you could say they didn’t drop all of their load or accuracy suffered from being hit.
This way you don’t just lose a 12 IPC bomber with no return, you still get some damage to the factory.  Plus the defender gets a little break in the damage by not having to add the +2 for the bomber he/she hit.  This could make SBRs a little more attractive.

From a mathematical return on investment point of view, it makes SBR’s less attractive:
You are reducing the average damage done by (5/6)*2 = 1,7.
You are also increasing the average damage done by (1/6) * 3,5 = 0,583

BUT it makes them less dicey, which is good. The inherent problem with SBR’s is the extreme luck dependence. It’s essentailly a high risk - medium reward operation, which is why is it not being used much.

One could always go LL for SBRs and ADS for everything else.  Strategic Bombers do: 3 dmg + 1 if you roll a 1, 2, 3 or 4 and the attacker loses 2 IPC (1/6th the cost of a bomber.)  Tactical Bombers do 3 dmg and take 1 dmg + 1 if you roll a 1, 2, 3, or 4.

Strategic bombing Russia’s ICs seems to be effective.  I’ll have to play it out for an entire game - got frustrated with LL with my Japanese fleet this last game and called it.

G1 I SBR Britain with everything that can reach to open her up for a G2 Sealion. After that, I rarely SBR.

@Dijitz:

G1 I SBR Britain with everything that can reach to open her up for a G2 Sealion. After that, I rarely SBR.

On G1 I prefer to sink SZ 106, SZ 110 and SZ 111 instead of hitting complexes.  When you hit complexes, you might lose aircraft, when you hit the sea zones, you probably won’t lose aircraft.  This is very beneficial, I feel, when attempting Sea Lion, as you need every plane you can get, in my opinion.

However, if I am NOT going Sea Lion, then starting on G2, I like to pummel England and build up some strat bombers. (I like to have 3, that means I should be doing 12 dmg if I dont lose any bombers, 8 with losing one.  Give or take.)

If I go Sea Lion, I still like to have 3 strategic bombers, but I pummel Russia with them instead.  Those pesky Russian’s can easily out number you, if you are not careful!