Strategic Bombers

I will introduce a new idea here, for specific factions in some scenarios (when they come out): Strategic bombing.

A Strategic bomber will have a range that is about the same as a normal bomber, but its attack will be more and it will be able to deal serious collateral damage. However, its defense will be very bad, and if caught off guard without bomber protection, they would be decimated by the attacker. They will also cost about 250-300. Note that similar units can be implemented in, say, space-themed scenarios, where they would be called "Bombardment Ships" or something of the sort.

Strategic bombing is a very feasible strategy to harm the enemy if you are not in the position to match its ground power. A good example for this is Britain in a WW2. Making USA somewhat less powerful while giving Britain a good air force with strategic bombers can help it survive. It would also force Germany to reallocate their resources to building bombers to fight the RAF, so their provincial reinforcements and income do not decrease.

A vital component of strategic bombing is to secure air superiority over the enemy. If the enemy is on air parity with you, he can retaliate by bombing your cities, which will harm you quite a lot if you are Britain. Not all factions would have access to these bombers, for example, Brazil and China would not, and the RAF bombers would be a bit more enhanced and cost a little less. This would help Britain to bomb French cities, effectively turning them useless, as well as destroying the high income German cities such as Berlin. Once the Germans are forced to transfer their bombers to the West, the Soviet Union would survive the attack.

This would be realistic as well as balanced in terms of making Britain (other nations too, but especially Britain) more self-sufficient. It is not hard to find other applications of this idea. I just gave WW2 as an example, because it seemed to fit the subject well. Strategic bombing helps you to ruin enemy cities before taking them, effectively demolishing any possible enemy resistance. However, it is not without its drawbacks: If you take the cities you bomb, you will not have access to the city reinforcements either; and it will make it easier for the enemy to launch a counterattack to take his lost lands back.

This is just an idea for now. Any suggestions/improvements would be appreciated.

We don't need this in the alpha since we can make custom units.

This is a suggestion for a custom unit type...
It is for all of those who like it and want to use it. I just gave the idea. You are supposed to make the unit itself as you please.

Nope! this idea would be absolutely overpowered:


Just think about a big stack, maybe 50 of your bombers. They have a high attack and kill nearly everything in their path. If the Defender try to get them in defense, there is this maximal range, so you just jump from city to city and you are nearly unbeatable. Just the 50/50 chance to first try give you a chance, but so you need a army in the near (with also a big range). So nearly all NOT SM players will loose.

Not really.

It is quite easy to catch strategic bombers off guard with normal bombers or fighters. A stack of 50 can be easily eliminated and costs quite a lot. To use strategic bombers adequately, you have to bomb and retreat. You can't risk getting your bombers killed. Plus, strategic bombers will maybe have one attack more, so if a normal bomber has 6 a strategic bomber will have 7. Its actual benefit will be the collateral damage it deals. As I said, taking a city you have already bombed with 50 strat. bombers is worthless, because it will preserve around %40 of its total income and reinforcements.

To afford these bombers and to use them efficiently, you have to be on the weaker and isolated side. Playing a normal game where you use strategic bombers instead of bombers will benefit your enemy greatly, because the provinces he takes will be valuable while the ones you take will be worthless.

"It is quite easy to catch strategic bombers off guard with normal bombers or fighters. " i already said: only with SM players possible. and absolutely unbeatable for Africa or tank/naval orientated players.

"A stack of 50 can be easily eliminated and costs quite a lot." If you catch them. Just imagine: Europe attacking China. Chinese Cities are set in a far distance. So only airplanes could jump city by city in 1 turn. So 1. Problem: How reach them? -> only Bombers or fighters 2. Problem: the price -> only Europe, Asia or America can use them. The short range between European cities, would give Europe a high defense bonus against China and America, using the same units.

i don't said to take the city. With S.B. it would be to easy to crash enemy's finances and troop reinforcements. Yeah they are expensive, but for Europe/America Players it would be too easy to take out China or Africa (lol) - you better think for options to power up Africa or middle east.

-> german: Ganz ehrlich: Ich glaube es würde Europa einen zu großen Vorteil bringen.

> 1 attack more by higher a price? i think i would buy bombers, also overpowered enough.

Useless, we already have stealth bombers and no one uses it.

Eshkruar nga Tundy, 30.10.2012 at 15:16

Useless, we already have stealth bombers and no one uses it.

Do they damage the income of the city? I think not.

Eshkruar nga Millennial, 31.10.2012 at 10:04

Eshkruar nga Tundy, 30.10.2012 at 15:16

Useless, we already have stealth bombers and no one uses it.

Do they damage the income of the city? I think not.

You know that you can fix that? I think no.