German bomber strategy - How to play and How to counter

I’m thinking now that if I had moved that fleet to 109 instead of back to the US then the UK could have put an airbase in Ireland… and that would have given me three more fighters to scramble. I still don’t think it would have survived a 30 bomber attack but it may have reduced the bomber stack so it wasn’t such a threat for a couple more rounds.

Whatever the answer is going to be, to me it is saying a LOT that nowadays most threads end up in balance-discussions. A&AG40.2 is balanced for most strategies, but there are a few -axis- strategies that are hopelessly unbalanced and need fixing. Whether the ‘dark skies’ is one of them remains to be seen but reading that it has been defeated before makes my day. The fewer strategies with unbalance the better (easier to fix).

And I also would like a fix for KJF being the only true way to go for the allies. Back in the days when the allies always went KGF is fixed as well (split up axis VC) and now it’s the reverse situation. Only now it’s not even a choice anymore, it’s a necessity.

I’m not a huge fan of buying bombers before they are needed. The 2 bomber buy on the first turn isn’t a horrible, but not ideal. The bombers should really be purchased when your 2 move units can’t reach Moscow for the final attack, and then after taking Moscow continue to buy a couple bombers every round. You still need the ground forces for defensive purposes. By the time US has crippled Japan and decides to swing over to help the allies on the Europe side Germany has 10+ bombers and he has to have a massive fleet to defend these.

Two things, I think, need to be done to reduce the effectiveness of bombers.

1. Allow factories to be built on Islands. This will mean that US can build factories in the DEI’s and stage his fleet off of East Africa/Middle East after he has dealt with Japan.

2. Make bombers attack value 2 base and 3 if paired with fighter. This is really the important one. Bombers attack being at 4 just doesn’t make much sense from a realism standpoint, and it blows the balance out of the water.

Holy Moly Batman, that’s a lot of planes. I’ve seen heavy bmr buys by both sides, but honestly not to the extreme discussed here (so I could be way off base).

Ok, the thought is that the Luftwaffe with 30+ air units (5 ftrs, 5 tacs, and 20+ bmrs), can be positioned to threaten several different allied strong points. They can be used to do SBR runs and push the Russians back (w/starting German land force), threaten major combined allied navy in the Atlantic/Med, or drive a landing force back into the sea.

The thing is they can’t hit them all at the same time though (not in full force). They can’t hit your Western Combo Navy, the landing force, and keep the Russians at bay. Maybe 2/3, but not all 3, so you need to make sure that the Luftwaffe takes a hit when they do commit.

I think the main thing is that the allies need to put themselves in the best defensive positions and force the Germans to commit to reduce the axis air force (by chunks if necessary). This means many carriers w/ftrs, a huge destroyer screen along with multiple airbase support (when possible). One would think that at some point the Germans would be lacking in ground units on all fronts w/heavy air purchases. Do they want to commit to attacking the US/UK navies knowing that they are starving for land units in Russia?

Yeah, it will hurt but once the Luftwaffe takes a major hit (reduced to say a normal 8-12 planes), the Russians should be able to overwhelm the German land force even if the west is pushed off the beaches and the navy takes a big hit.

Wouldn’t this be similar to how an early successful Sea lion can doom the Germans? They spend the wad on transports to invade England just to face an overpowering Russia in the end. If the Germans are buying that many air units (bmrs), then they can’t have the ground units to hold off the Russians, much less attack Moscow (allies must open up a second front even if it fails). Is it too much indecision by the allies that is causing the problem, heard several people say that things could have been different if I had……Then there was the post that said on AAA the axis side just quit when things weren’t going as planned (don’t like to rely on hearsay, but sounds like that guy was a major supporter of this tactic until it failed).

So is this the end all beat all strat, or is the allied learning curve a bit slow? Sounds like in some cases the allies backed out which gave the axis the break they needed to stay on the offensive to capture/hold the last VC.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m going to try it next time I’m axis lol

What about rather than trying to defend, the allies go on the offensive? Send their own air units to attack Germany, taking advantage of all those Bombers having to roll 1?

@amanntai:

What about rather than trying to defend, the allies go on the offensive? Send their own air units to attack Germany, taking advantage of all those Bombers having to roll 1?

Wherever the Germans land their bombers, they will surely also station some infantry, aa guns, and/or fighters as needed. Only a really careless opponent will leave them undefended in a vulnerable position.

I think trying to bait them into attack could be effective, but will be challenging.

Depending on the situation, a naval base on British Guiana or Suriname could let you reach Normandy (if you’re willing/able to sacrifice enough transports to make a landing stick).

@wheatbeer:

@amanntai:

What about rather than trying to defend, the allies go on the offensive? Send their own air units to attack Germany, taking advantage of all those Bombers having to roll 1?

Wherever the Germans land their bombers, they will surely also station some infantry, aa guns, and/or fighters as needed. Only a really careless opponent will leave them undefended in a vulnerable position.

I think trying to bait them into attack could be effective, but will be challenging.

Depending on the situation, a naval base on British Guiana or Suriname could let you reach Normandy (if you’re willing/able to sacrifice enough transports to make a landing stick).

But if they’re really going all bombers on turn 2-3, how many infantry, AAAs, and fighters would they really have? If the Allies attack with several bombers, some TacBs, and any fighters they have in the UK, surely the Germans would eventually be left with no choice but to start losing bombers? It’d be suicide for the Allied aircraft, but at least they’d eliminate the threat.

@amanntai:

@wheatbeer:

@amanntai:

What about rather than trying to defend, the allies go on the offensive? Send their own air units to attack Germany, taking advantage of all those Bombers having to roll 1?

Wherever the Germans land their bombers, they will surely also station some infantry, aa guns, and/or fighters as needed. Only a really careless opponent will leave them undefended in a vulnerable position.

I think trying to bait them into attack could be effective, but will be challenging.

Depending on the situation, a naval base on British Guiana or Suriname could let you reach Normandy (if you’re willing/able to sacrifice enough transports to make a landing stick).

But if they’re really going all bombers on turn 2-3, how many infantry, AAAs, and fighters would they really have? If the Allies attack with several bombers, some TacBs, and any fighters they have in the UK, surely the Germans would eventually be left with no choice but to start losing bombers? It’d be suicide for the Allied aircraft, but at least they’d eliminate the threat.

Who ever said all bombers?  I know that I myself EXPLICITLY stated otherwise…. 3-4 bombers plus land units.  You can still have a nice stack around G8 or so.  I mean, Germany is going to get several NO’s and have a solid income base.

wheatbeer, I like your idea, and I even made that purchase against bmnielsen.  However, I didn’t have a plan for it from the beginning, but instead just happened to figure out that was the only way to get there.  I think having the plan from the beginning would have had more “teeth” so to speak, and might just be the best counter.  For the rest reading this, the idea is to land so many units that the bombers plus land cannot annihilate the landing forces.

And, to correct some potential misperceptions above, the defensive ability of an infantry is not half that of a bomber when the bombers are stacked.  It is generally 1/3.  The reason?  If I hit your infantry stack, I’m going to make sure you get exactly one defensive hit.  So, you will hit 1/3 on the bombers (using faulty math) and thereby gain IPC’s… but only 1 ipc gained per infantry lost (12-3*3)/3.  Depending on board positioning, that may well be worth it to the Axis.  The bombers can maintain central position for a long time…

@DizzKneeLand33:

@amanntai:

@wheatbeer:

@amanntai:

What about rather than trying to defend, the allies go on the offensive? Send their own air units to attack Germany, taking advantage of all those Bombers having to roll 1?

Wherever the Germans land their bombers, they will surely also station some infantry, aa guns, and/or fighters as needed. Only a really careless opponent will leave them undefended in a vulnerable position.

I think trying to bait them into attack could be effective, but will be challenging.

Depending on the situation, a naval base on British Guiana or Suriname could let you reach Normandy (if you’re willing/able to sacrifice enough transports to make a landing stick).

But if they’re really going all bombers on turn 2-3, how many infantry, AAAs, and fighters would they really have? If the Allies attack with several bombers, some TacBs, and any fighters they have in the UK, surely the Germans would eventually be left with no choice but to start losing bombers? It’d be suicide for the Allied aircraft, but at least they’d eliminate the threat.

Who ever said all bombers?  I know that I myself EXPLICITLY stated otherwise…. 3-4 bombers plus land units.  You can still have a nice stack around G8 or so.  I mean, Germany is going to get several NO’s and have a solid income base.

I usually buy 3 to 4 bombers per turn after the first few turns.  My 2nd round purchase has been 8 bombers, and the 3rd round is usually all bombers too, but of course this can be adjusted.

My Comment matched your description of the strategy.

Sorry, maybe I’m misunderstanding.  G4 you can buy what you need.  US can’t even land in UK until turn 4 (it’s a J4 DOW kind of game usually).  The UK doesn’t have the resources to hit anything in Europe that early.  In addition, You will never have enough planes to take on the German bombers.  All Germany has to do is purchase 2 less to have 8 infantry of cover.  Only the US can come close, but the US needs to send bombers by way of taking out Japan on the way to Egypt, if that strikes your fancy.

I’m not trying to blindly argue.  But a couple of points:  it is a non-issue to take Russia – Russia will fall, just look at the league games with this strategy.  Germany starts the game with enough land units to take out Russia, the others purchases or mechs are just to save planes.  The only true question is whether or not Germany can get to the UK or Egypt for the 8th VC, or if the Allies can stop it (or capture a VC in return).  Any other discussion here is almost secondary to that question.

So, the two main ideas seem to be for the Allies to go KJF and then roll across Asia as fast as they can to take back one of the Russia VC’s, or to stack off of South America and land with enough force in Europe to disrupt the VC win.

[Or, the third one may be to go with all bombers with the U.S.  However, I think that’s just a bit slow (not by much by the way, just a bit).]

@DizzKneeLand33:

…(it’s a J4 DOW kind of game usually)…

J4DOW games are usually very hard for the allies in Europe ;-). Axis that do this usually are very experienced and coordinate the Euro- and Pacific axis carefully together.
…Hard for the USA in general (late in the war, and with fewer income at that as well).

Well, I’m currently playing my rematch against bmnielsen, and man it’s just not fun going against his strategy…but here it is for all of you to see the issues one faces when dealing with it:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35062.new;topicseen#new

I don’t think Russia will hold for much longer, but my hope is to keep the other Euro VCs long enough for me to overwhelm Japan and then rush to help a falling Europe. As you can see, Italy gets so big with this strategy, as nothing can get near the med and even the middle east. I’ve already blown out two of his Italian fleets (at a high cost in US planes), but they just keep coming as Italy’s income is great and it has a monster backing it up!

I could use a little cheering on  :lol:

GO Axis D! GO!

I recently completed a game using German bombers.  I forced Russia to retreat back to Moscow and then headed south into Persia.  Russia was only netting 3 infantry a turn after repairing bomb damage to the factory.  UK was hurting economically for bomb raids over London.  I was about to pull my German air force back home for a turn 7 Sealion when the opponent called it over.

My main German stack had to stay away from the big Russian stack, but likewise his army could never step out from Moscow.  His money just kept dwindling, especially after Japan picked off a few territories in the east.  America tried KJF, but never could get too close to the combined fleet + planes stacked up at FIC.  Japan played an economic game.  The money islands were taken and held, China reduced to three territories, and India made irrelevant by bombings every turn.  Japan couldn’t win in the Pacific, but America could not turn significant money towards a massive enough Atlantic fleet to withstand the German bombers.

To top things off, I had spotted the Allies 16: two subs in the Med and an artillery in Africa.  I never once stepped foot back onto Africa after the first two rounds of obliteration, but it still was one of my easiest Axis victories.  I had some bad dice rolling as Axis, but the amount of economic superiority far then made up for the lack of luck.

I think that the Allies do have a chance against the German bombers if they can quarantine Japan with 3 solid rounds of American building in the Pacific and then an abrupt change of focus into the Atlantic.  Still, it is tough to prevent Germany and their bombers from reaching the oil fields and winning by economic superiority.  Moscow does not have to fall for the Germans to have overwhelming amounts of money.

@axis-dominion:

Well, I’m currently playing my rematch against bmnielsen, and man it’s just not fun going against his strategy…but here it is for all of you to see the issues one faces when dealing with it:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35062.new;topicseen#new

I don’t think Russia will hold for much longer, but my hope is to keep the other Euro VCs long enough for me to overwhelm Japan and then rush to help a falling Europe. As you can see, Italy gets so big with this strategy, as nothing can get near the med and even the middle east. I’ve already blown out two of his Italian fleets (at a high cost in US planes), but they just keep coming as Italy’s income is great and it has a monster backing it up!

I could use a little cheering on  :lol:

Thanks for the upload, a-dominion!
Looking at your file I think the allies have more than 1 option to beat this strategy. But they have to pick an option and go for it with all their heart. The options that I do see (in general, not specifically to your game):

• KJF. Like your allies started out (Russians in China, UK giving japan a harder than usual time). Good hunting in the Pacific :-)!

• Early focus on Germany. Look at what Germany has in Bryansk and calculate some Russian options through. With Russia not going into China, producing all INF + ART and loosing no units as speed bumps, the ONLY way for Germany to enter Bryansk GE5 is to base ALL of the Luftwaffe there as well. Any other way they would be annihilated in there. Germany would have to make a choice and I feel both options they have are bad. IF the Wallies would have a large invasion fleet waiting at this very time.
  At Guyana / Suriname / Iceland with a NB there, OR at Gibraltar with enough escorts against those STR (3/4 fully loaded CV + a few DD and that starting US CA would do. British AB for extra scramblers would be welcome as well). Germany would then be either unable to contain Russia or unable to defend against invasions with the Luftwaffe deep into Russia. Ofc., if they stay west, preventing allied landings, they can still SBR Moscow with some of their STR. Untill the allies land a lot of FTR there as well, that is.

Anyway, good luck with this game, man!

I discovered this historical video that suggests this plan could work:

meemsy.com/v/29398

Let’s say Ger. Player builds R1-3 Bombers.
Would it not be the logical way to build AA Guns with Russia.
With logical way I mean to engage the natural problem with a natural solution/answer.

The good thing is:
You build with Russia R1 your regular stuff.
R2, just in case (because you are not sure of Ger strategy) you build two AA guns.
R3 you also build additional AAguns(you are sure).

What is this good for?

Germany can’t blitz through territorys with aa guns in it.
For each shot down Bmbr/plane Germany lost precious ipcs.
His Ground Forces are weak.

The chances are slim to get many bmbrs shot down but we have to consider that even the aa gun has multipal functions and is worth the cost if purchased.

If U.K. player realized that Ger builds bmbr en mass.
Build ftrs, bmbrs and aa guns as well
And if possible unis for S.Africa.
SBR Germany and intercept any time.
Uk will still have time to build ships but must land in Norway or Normandy first to force Ger to build. Ground units.
US should adjust gameplay but also buys bmbrs to SBR Germany when at war with them.

Just a thought.

I’m with Marsh on this one.  I know everyone is probably sick of hearing me say it  :-D but I don’t buy that the game has broken strategies for the Axis, including the bomber strategy (which, admittedly, I have never played against).

After reading the thread the three main arguments seem to be:

1. This forces a KGF strategy, which always ends in Axis victory

2. Russia won’t be able to build at all because of bombing raids

3. The Allies cannot put together a fleet presence in the Atlantic

I’ve spent enough time on the forums arguing against the first point, so moving onto to the second and third

Even if Germany is buying bombers every round, they still have to wait a few turns (turn four I think) before they can reach Moscow.  Russia can buy at least a fighter a turn (plus 7-9 ground units), UK (and even Anzac) can send fighters over.  If Germany launched a bombing raid round four with, say, ten bombers, Russia could probably scramble 8 or so fighters.

So Russia scrambles and rolls a total of 18 for one.  Let’s say Germany hits two of their 10 and Russia hits three of their 18; Russia can wait a turn before repairing that factory, then next turn repair and buy.  Is this a big win for Germany?  Are they holding their position easily without the normal tank buys?  Also, how are they committing that many bombers on this end AND holding off the UK and US in the Atlantic?  America and the UK can put a strong fleet together pretty easily (three or four loaded CV’s by turn 4 is pretty easy to attain).  Is Germany raiding Moscow and taking out this fleet with these bombers?  That’s fine, but they’re going to lose all of them sooner rather than later and once that happens they are s*** out of luck.

But here’s the big issue I have with this plan:

every game has a 3-5 battles where the rolling is way off; sometimes it works for you and sometimes against you.  That being said, one bad dice roll doesn’t usually determine a game.  But in this case?  One bad roll and Germany is royally screwed.  It’s one thing to roll four under, while your opponent rolls four over, when you’re talking infantry.  But what happens when it’s bombers?  ONE bad roll and it’s game over.

It’s possible I’m completely underestimating the Germans here and I plan on trying it out soon.  But it’s hard to believe that Germany ignoring the ground game is an unbeatable strategy.

I agree that it’s not unbeatable, but it is a tough strategy to counter. Done properly, Germany can reduce Russia’s troop production up to 50% after round 4. If you do a not entirely uncommon strategy with Russia of buying 1 fighter per turn the first 3-4 rounds, you can have 6-7 fighters available, as they start with 2. The odds are not good for scrambling 6-7 fighters against 10 bombers. I would probably just let them through and hope for some AAA hits.

Thus, I probably wouldn’t bother buying more than 3 fighters with Russia. Just enough to force Germany to send in all his bombers on the raid and expose them to AAA.

Once Russia is at war, I would focus on having Russia buy infantry/artillery (probably just every other round to build the max number of troops). Then just do the standard send as many fighters as possible to Moscow to defend it. Send the 2 India fighters. Send the 3 Anzac fighters. Send 5-6 British fighters. All of those can be in position to get to Moscow on round 4. Then, with the Russian fighters you suddenly have 16+ fighters defending Moscow. With a UK factory in Persia, you can churn out another 2-3 per round, assuming that you went aggressive after Italy and are in solid control of the middle east & Egypt.

If you assume that India is going to fall eventually anyway, you can have them produce a couple more fighters for Moscow as well.

This of course assumes that the USA is going heavy KJF.

With the all-bomber strategy, the Axis has the option of an economic victory.  Conquering Moscow in <10 turns is not critical to winning.  If Russia turtles down too much in Moscow, the German land units head south to the oil fields.  The bombers can fly back home in a single turn and be ready for either a late-game Sea Lion or Atlantic fleet attack mission.  The following round the bombers return back to the Russian front if the Moscow stack comes out to hassle your Iraq-vicinity pile.  They will quickly retreat back to their capitol because they simply can’t afford to split their forces into two piles.  Quick note: if the Allies are forced to build a fighter stack to defend factories, the economic cost is so massive that the Allies will surely lose.

I’ve only played the strategy once so I’m not claiming to be an expert.  Just remember that the bombers strategy gives them amazing amount of flexibility to attack in Africa, Russia, and Egypt.:roll:  For example, the Allies used a group of bombers to attack my Italian aircraft carrier.  The bombers landed on Cyprus and were reinforced by a stack of British fighters.  The German bombers sent 12 (out of 17) bombers and crushed the stack of Allied planes.  A total of 110 IPCs were destroyed for a cost of four bombers.  He thought that he had sufficient defenses to withstand my strike, but miscalculated my ranges.