SCWAW Strategic Bombers

[HarrySmith]

Hi guys,
Yes i have updated the latest patch for the game and noticed nothing done in relation to strategic bombers. I have brought this up before and I have had a game where at Dec 1942 the USA had strategic bombers level 5. When at the same time upgrading asap and with level 3 spying the German fighters are only level 3 this creates an imbalance in the game. This is able to occur because you can multiple chit Strategic bombers but no other air units. Strategic bombers should only be able to advance 1 chit at a time, like all other air units. Surely I am not the only one who thinks this? Strategic bombers then can wipe out any city/towns supply value with one hit. If bombers are placed in Persia with range level 5 they can bomb nearly as far into Russia as Moscow. Wiping out all the supply behind the German front lines by doing this with the German fighters useless against them creates a total imbalance in the game. Please rectify asap in the next patch release.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

noted....yeah the multiple chitting probably needs to go in regards to USA Strategic Bombers. Early game max research strategy combining S&I + Strategic Bombers may seem on the surface as a viable long term strategy with pitfalls because of the inevitable shortfalls in other tech..but by mid game these weapons would be unstoppable by the Germans (Axis).

Harry..that situation you illustrated above..was that in a MP match btw?

[HarrySmith]

Yes OCB it certainly was against another player. In retrospect a tactic the other player utilized to his advantage it worked very well. It is also available to the British and any other country with strategic bombers to multi chit the research.

[Elessar2]

For now unless he releases a hotfix (I've found 3 other errors which I've already documented) you'll likely have to House Rule that against other humans at least.

[Hubert Cater]

Hi Harry,

Thanks for the report and as Bill is on holiday, I'll try and quickly fix the issues that have arisen since the patch release.

For this one, everyone happy if just the US is reduced to 1 chit for Strategic Bombers, or should this be across the board?

Hubert

[redrum68]

I think it should be a 1 chit limit across the board.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

The 2-chit was brought long ago, not for Yankee Bombers, but for Spying & Intelligence. Nobody wanted a change. For that one, I did. Germans putting 2-chits into S&I is a strategy many use, it's absolutely boring strategy but very effective against the Reds. Germans also have Subs 2-chit, that many don't use, only so many MMPs to go around. All countries have Command&Control for 2, as AmphibTransports.

Really wanna change the whole game based on Harry & Murder? Nothing personal, Potter. And Murder has dialed M, weak.

I suggest setting up a "Poll" for us big league, big name players.

-Legend

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Hi Harry,

Thanks for the report and as Bill is on holiday, I'll try and quickly fix the issues that have arisen since the patch release.

For this one, everyone happy if just the US is reduced to 1 chit for Strategic Bombers, or should this be across the board?

Hubert

Hi Hubert,
Thought I would add my two cents against changing research chits.

WaW is a fun game because each player is faced with a multitude of options. For example, as the USA, I might go heavy into researching bombers or tanks. Or, instead, invest in infantry tech and amphib tech and build lots of infantry for an early second front. Or slam navy tech and try to crush Japan. Or try to do everything (you can't). So many decisions and each decision has a huge impact on strategy for winning the game. Fun!

Harry's opponent who built tech 5 bombers must have invested a significant amount of his MPPs into bomber tech, long-range air tech, advanced fighter tech. In addition he built expensive bombers and support fighters. A huge investment. I doubt he had much MPPs left to build infantry, tanks, and amphib transports. So as a result he might have a big bomber fleet but a delayed second front. Could Russia survive while his bombers hammered Germany into submission? Germany might respond by double-chitting anti-air. Or just ignore the bombing and crush Russia.

So cool to see players attempt to out guess the other.

Lots of options is the most fun part of WaW. But we are talking about taking away some of those options. Why? Will it make the game better?

Take away enough options and we could be left with a vanilla game where only one viable strategy is available.

[redrum68]

ORIGINAL: ElvisJJonesRambo
Really wanna change the whole game based on Harry & Murder? Nothing personal, Potter. And Murder has dialed M, weak.

I suggest setting up a "Poll" for us big league, big name players.

Please leave the personal attack out of the discussion and stop putting words in other people's mouths. I didn't even say I agreed or disagreed with limiting 2 chits for Strategic Bombers just that if the limit was gonna be added then it should apply to all nations across the board not just the USA. Can't we just have a reasonable discussion without the insults?

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Two players, that don't know the dynamics, should not be trying to change the entire game for the rest of us. There's dozen categories that use 2-chits. Just because you're unhappy about one game going sour, that's life. Don't ruin the game for the rest of us. This is a significant move. If that's a personal attack, then I'm the one who sold Rommel his wife shoes the week of D-Day.

Bombers
Subs
Naval
Long Range Aircraft
Anti-Sub
Anti-Air
Command & Control
Amphibious Warfare
Spying & Intelligence
Logistics
Production
Industrial Technology

It's a good thing I saw this thread, just saved the game from a BAD Decision.

-Legend

[Elessar2]

The issue is that only AA tech can keep up, Advanced Fighters can't. [Which makes sense; an artillery gun is a much easier thing to design and perfect than an airplane]

The precedent already exists for key techs to only get 1 chit max, and Buffs would appear to be key enough (i.e. capable of unbalancing things) to qualify. Nobody is going to be able to get the equivalent of a B-29 (debugged and in sufficient numbers) in 3 years (starting from L0). Took even the US a little over 4 years, and that was arguably from L2.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Once the Bombers get a little bit of experience (1-star Elite), the AA is worthless. There's all kinds of targets: Resource hexes, Cites, Ports, Ships, Ground units (not in cities) are so toast. Would could possible be improved, is allowing Luftwaffe intercepts AND the AA gets to defend. Currently, the AA is used first, by itself. Conjunction defense would be more deadly. Many players send the Maritime Bombers to draw fire from AA anyhow. Cheap to replace, then just send in the full 9-yards on the target. I like to move the AA every turn, it's a miracle to do any damage. If you send Panzers to Paris or somewhere significant, better surround it with 3 AA units.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Yeah..I'm starting to think that my initial support of nerfing the Strategic Bombers was wrong. In a current MP match I am doing...I sold the USA chit so as to get Industrial pumped. I figured I didn't need these bombers till 43-44..so I waited..then double chitted them in 42. If the this option was taken away..well, on hindsight..I wouldn't have the realistic option to change "Research National Policy"..as it were.

So..I think IMHO..and thinking deeper into the meta...don't make the change. Sorry Harry. [:)]

[Marcinos1985]

Please don't make hasty changes, especially basing on exp from one game. As someone mentioned earlier, if USA went HB route, it probably lacks in other departments, at least in 1942-early 1943.

[BillRunacre]

It'll be useful to know if the US bomber strategy becomes more common, and how Axis players might counter it if it does.

Which is my way of saying, please keep the feedback coming!

[LoneRunner]

Thanks Bill and Hubert for listening.

WaW is a game of What Ifs. What if Germany invaded Spain. What if Turkey joined the Axis. What ifs keep the game exciting and make it fun. Taking away what ifs would destroy a wonderful game.

Let's consider strategic bombers. What if in 1941 the USA focused it's considerable resources into developing a jet bomber? Could they have developed the bomber by the end of 42? Heck, yes! Germany developed a jet engine in 1939. Why couldn't the USA. Or the UK.

What if Germany had developed a fleet of strategic bombers and bombed UK into dust in 41? Well...in WaW they can't because someone decided Germany can only build one strategic bomber. Why? Because historically they didn't pursue strategic bombers? Ouch. A what if removed from the game.

What if Russia had developed a fleet of strategic bombers and hit German supply lines as the Axis advanced into the Russian interior? In WaW they can't build strategic bombers. Why? Because historically they didn't? Ouch. Another what if removed from the game.

What ifs are important to keeping WaW alive and vibrant. The more What ifs are available, the more we want to replay the game again and again.

[James Taylor]

Can't argue with LoneRunner's comment, additional "what ifs", either optional or not, is what keeps these games alive and thriving.

Just keep it within the historical context and this one certainly is!

[BillRunacre]

Just bumping this thread as Harry Smith has mentioned it elsewhere.

Maybe it would be useful if some players modded the official campaign, played with a 1 chit setting in Heavy Bombers, and report back on the impact that has when the US follows a heavy bomber strategy.

If it's still viable and doesn't reduce choice too much then maybe we can go for it with the official campaigns.

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Just bumping this thread as Harry Smith has mentioned it elsewhere.

Maybe it would be useful if some players modded the official campaign, played with a 1 chit setting in Heavy Bombers, and report back on the impact that has when the US follows a heavy bomber strategy.

If it's still viable and doesn't reduce choice too much then maybe we can go for it with the official campaigns.

Hi Bill. Please don't remove double-chit of heavy bombers without the support of a large group of WaW gamers. I think it would be a mistake.

Double-chit of heavy bombers allows USA and UK to implement a crushing bombing campaign over Germany by late 43. Which is historically accurate. The bombing campaign has to happen fast because the Allied player is attempting counter Germany's attack on Russia. Linked with a series of invasions, maybe knocking Italy out of the war, a bombing campaign provides another option for the Allied player.

Developing an effective bombing campaign requires an enormous investment of MPPs. Researching bomber tech. Purchasing strategic bombers. Upgrading bombers. Are all expensive. But if the Allied player wants to go that route, they should have that option.

Using single-chit research, level 5 bombers would not be developed until early 45 at best. Too late to have much of an impact on the war.

A bombing campaign is countered with anti-air not fighters. Fighters typically don't have much effect on escorted strategic bombers. Germany can double-chit anti-air research and keep up with Allied bomber development if they decide it's worth the investment. I've played MP games where the German player installed level 4 anti-air in most of their mines and important cities in response to my level 5 bombers.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

The problem is not the 2-chits.
The problem is Spying & Intelligence.

I've been preaching for two years, that S&I is outta control, needs redone or eliminated.