Page 1 of 1

WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:11 pm
by ncc1701e
Few questions on Strategic Bombing.

Doing Strategic Bombing over Metz as Germans. The escort fighters are nicely doing their job even if the bombers are taking some casualties. No problem for me.

Image

RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:12 pm
by ncc1701e
And the pattern can be repeated.

Image

RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:17 pm
by ncc1701e
However when launching my bombers unescorted.

Image

RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:18 pm
by ncc1701e
I am surprised they are not taking more casualties. I am also surprised by the important fighters losses.

Image

RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:19 pm
by ncc1701e
What are the factors involved here? Air combat? Defense? Does aircraft type (fighter vs tactical bomber) count?

Have a look at this last result: Bombers: 0 step lost vs Fighters: 3 steps lost

Image

RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 12:23 pm
by AlvaroSousa
escort attacks interceptor
interceptor attacks bomber
bomber attacks interceptor.

That's the other. They all use the same A2A formula.


RE: WPE 1.00.141 Beta 5.1 - Strategic Bombing

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:42 pm
by ncc1701e
OK I see, the bombers are using all their air combat value to defend themselves.

But, such as an air superiority unit has 1/3rd their air combat value when flying as a bomber, would you consider the following enhancement in the game rule?

Bombers (ground attack air group, tactical air group, strategic air group) are using 3/4rd their air combat value when they are intercepted by enemy fighters without friendly fighters cover.

If they are intercepted but with friendly fighters cover, they can use all their air combat value.

Of course, I propose this for all missions: ground strike, airfield strike, ground support, strategic bombing, ...

Thanks for your consideration

Image