About a year ago, a friend and I started developing an American bomber strategy to use against the axis on the premise that America could afford to build large bomber stacks and trade at a disadvantage in cost to eliminate land unit stacks, thus elevating your allied standing armies in strength. Numerous face to face games and a few online games reinforce this alternative thinking.
Example: 18 bombers hit 12 land units: 12 infantry hit 4 bombers or 12 artillery hit 4 bombers, 12 armor hit 6 bombers on average… thus:
48 USA dollars remove either 36 to 48 dollars, or 60 USA dollars remove 60 axis dollars in the case of tanks. Averages do appear as we are talking many bombers and many rolls.
Now remember, you remove all the turns maneuvering those land units. Against Japan, we cleared 10 infantry located in 5 or 6 areas and China (on the brink of oblivion) walked into empty territories since America destroyed any counterattack units. Then America redeployed from India to give USSR 15 extra casualties and prevented an assault on Moscow, then the next turn, they cleared off Novosibirsk while 1 Indian Mech liberated (forcing Germany to spend two turns to retake). Note, Germany also had to walk his 10 infantry backwards or stop so that 10 others could stack on him to keep reinforcements safe. Then they flew to London to be casualties and prevent a late sea lion. Then they sank the German navy on their way back to archangel. Since America can build 5 bombers a turn and have money left over any turn you don’t lose more than 5 bombers, your stack grows.
You get the message, you don’t waste money on ships or land units, instead you maximize the destructive firepower and hit when you have 15 or more bombers on the board.
It gets worse when this is modified for the axis.
We have been play testing German and Japan bomber builds for the first 4-5 rounds: This is the obvious result: Due to so many modifications to bombers and so many additions to starting land units for the axis; Germany and Japan both have enough starting land units on the board to march directly through their opponents for the first 5 turns. Faced with such implied threat from such large bomber stacks, Allies retreat or face death in 2 combat rounds or less.
Under this modification Germany and Japan are not trading bombers, they are trading starting land units and they won’t run out for about 5-7 turns, you beginning bombing capitals on turn 3 to reduce allied builds……then you place factories in captured territories and produce the cheap fodder to protect the bombers. Once Germany has 18 bombers combined with their 5 fighters and 5 tacticals, they can sea lion or take Egypt late in the game, the turn after they take Moscow. If you don’t lose the bombers, you land them in Norway from Moscow (Bryansk based launch to capture Moscow then land in Norway.) You simply keep your navy in tact by building 1 carrier turn 1 and 1 bomber, then all bombers until turn 5. Worse, their is no rush, you can use plundered Russian income to take your time on London or Egypt for city number 8 (and thus the game ending city condition is met)
We have play tested a dozen games with just German bombers, and I took Moscow on turn 5-7 at great bomber loss, so now we stretch it out to turn 9 and we don’t lose any bombers. We now build bombers with Japan as well and it gets worse.
On turn 2, you hit Yunnan with 4 bombers, Szechwan with all your slow moving air units based in Kwantung turn 1. I eliminate China’s fighter and all of his land units except the two northern ones at a cost of 4-5 expendable fighters(which are replaced by bomber builds), by turn 2…then China builds 5 guys, and I back those seven guys up to the border of Russia and eliminate 9 infantry on turn 4 using 2 artillery, mech, 6 infantry plus 7 or more bombers.
Bombers are broken because:
They are +2 to bomb damage, (we send 3 fighters, 4 bombers to shut down Moscow builds beginning on turn 3) (Indian builds beginning on turn 3 as well)
They get to shoot at interceptors, (I will trade German, Japanese and Italian bombers for Moscow fighters any day)
They can move 7 from airbases (I can stack in Southern Italy and hit Moscow, London, Egypt, and West coast of Gibraltar)
They are cheaper than any other naval war units save destroyers and subs. (3 bombers costs the same as a carrier and 2 fighters)
AAguns are limited to shooting 3 times against land unit strikes, meaning you are better off defending your builds with infantry then aaguns as you will hit more bombers that way since infantry fire each round if they get a second round.
AAguns may be destroyed by air unit strafes (making them worthless except for casualties and blocking blitzes).
I typically lost 4-5 Japanese fighters, by the time I have 14 Japanese bombers and the remaining 14 slow moving air units, I add this to my starting navy and America needs enough carriers to avoid 28 air units and 13 ships with 5 two hit soak offs.
When Germany has 18 bombers , 5 tacticals and 5 fighters, Allies need a large navy to approach Europe as well, and you can ignore this navy and simply counterattack the weaker land force after it lands.
Start up Triple A and try a few games, you will quickly see the dilemma: Either retreat and cede ground as Russia to both East and West DOWs or stay and lose units at great disadvantage and still lose your capital.
We DOW Russia turn 2 with Germany, turn 1 with Japan. Keep America neutral 4 turns. Enjoy.
