Attacking Infrastructure

[a511]

Re: the new patch:

12. Rules Clarification - Attacking Infrastructure - Air units often select infrastructure that is already at level 2 damage for additional bombing. This is intended in order to make it more difficult to destroy all of the infrastructure in an area through bombing alone.

i know this rule is not a new one and dont know whether it has been discussed previously. while i fully understand the reason behind the above rule, i dont think that's realistic. in fact, it just discourage the use of strategic bombing, esp if there is certain infrastructure with lv 2 damage, cos its just a waste of resources.

IIRC, the Allies did use strategic bombing to destory Axis factories during WWII. as such, instead of what states in the rule, i think the attacker should have the choice of bombing target (factory/resources/railway).

remember, u are not bombarding by artilleries, ur bombers are actually flying above ur assigned target (say a factory) and start the bombing ... its hard to imagine that u keep hitting the damaged railway 10 miles away in the course of 3 months [X(]

the defender should place AA or Fighters to defend the resources, and should get punished if otherwise. thats one of the incentives of gaining air-superiority.

AN

[MarcelJV]

I am not entirely sure why the rule is there, as I think it would work fine if it just picked a resource,factor or rail for each attacking unit, at random. This way it is more than possible to hit the same one over and over again. Once more thing to consider is that these areas are large. Consider West Germany as it covers a major portion of section of Europe and would take a great many attacks to even come close to damaging the rail enough to warrant a level reduction.

Historically speaking the bombing of factories was not very effective as the bombing would destroy the building but not the machines. It became common practive to not rebuild the building but continue to use the machines in place. This must have been real fun in winter.[:(] The real damage was done during the fire bombing of cities as whole or near whole cities would be desroyed including rail, resource and factories, not to mention many civilians.

I would still hit a location over and over again until I had every thing taken out, so it is not that bad a rule.

[aletoledo]

I am not entirely sure why the rule is there, as I think it would work fine if it just picked a resource,factor or rail for each attacking unit, at random.

I think thats how it currently works and I think the system is fine currently.

I do a lot of strat bombing in all my games. I can tell you that if given the option of choosing the target there would be an outcry as to how wrong that idea is. For example, china has four factories and japan has 10 airplanes to start the game. despite the fact that china has 3 AA and one fighter guns at the start I could take out all of chinas factories by turn two. they would never ever be able to produce a thing in the game. if they use supplies to rebuild a factory, I'd just keep a plane or two around every third turn to pick off the repaired factory.

thats not the only example of "smart bombing" easily taking out a country. the only winner in selective bombing would of course be the USA since it can't really be bombed effectively. I don't think the WA need any boost in their abilities at the moment.

[5cats]

The "success" of Allied carpet bombing in WW2 was vastly over-rated. German and Japanese vital production didn't decrease all that much due to bombing. Also the small raids by fighter-bombers & low-flying medium (Tac) bombers did as much damage, if not more.
The carpet bombing was only 'useful' against cities, to kill lots of civilians. That was in fact the primary focus of Allied bombing strategy in both Europe & Asia. To the shame of Allied Bomber Command, IMO.