Matrix Games Forums

what would be the best bombing heights to get the best results?
im aware that the lower the bombers the more damage they will receive but im sick of seeing pretty splashes and i want to see more fires, explosion and japs swimming

if 4E & Allied, 6000 feet, otherwise, 1000 feet

Now, be aware you didn't ask what is the most survival height [:D]

Well...depends if one wants to exploit "Flak gap" or not. I personally use 20 000 ft for strategic city attacks against mainland Japan. 15 000 ft for other city, airfield and port attacks. 10 000 for naval attacks by 4E bombers. 6000-10 000 for 2E bombers (if not skip bombing).

Not probably best altitudes, but I have been happy with cost/effectiveness so far.

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

if 4E & Allied, 6000 feet, otherwise, 1000 feet

Now, be aware you didn't ask what is the most survival height [:D]

Shame on you Raymond... you know perfectly well that at 6000 ft almost nothing can touch those 4E Allied bombers and that they are 99% safe from AA... [8D]


Leo "Apollo11"

Gee, I lose bombers at 6000 feet all the time.

I tend to level bomb from 8,000 feet. Anything higher doesn't seem to deliver results.

Couple of questions:

1. What was common for 'real life' bombing during the war?

2. What's this 'flak gap'? I've seen in mentioned a couple of times now.

I would tend to agree with Ron, as the Japanese I lose bombers at 6000ft also and get plenty damaged as well to.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Gee, I lose bombers at 6000 feet all the time.

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Gee, I lose bombers at 6000 feet all the time.

What missions? Against what targets? How are the target(s) defended?


Leo "Apollo11"

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Gee, I lose bombers at 6000 feet all the time.

What missions? Against what targets? How are the target(s) defended?


Leo "Apollo11"

All sorts and in CHS. Targets can be defended by AA units or not, the intrinsic AA seems effective according to the loss to flak numbers I have. Many ops losses are caused by flak damage as well so what one sees in the over the target loss tally and the actual end of day tally are two different things, with actual losses to AA being higher. I really think that people expect too much from AA and that if anything is to be done, broaden the maximum and minimum ceilings of the various weapons so that they overlap better. Japan sufferred from a lack of a decent medium range AA weapon to begin with so I really don't see that much of an issue with AA.

I'm level bombing at 6000' on Naval attack, doing some serious damage to Jap AP's and AK's

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

What missions? Against what targets? How are the target(s) defended?

All sorts and in CHS. Targets can be defended by AA units or not, the intrinsic AA seems effective according to the loss to flak numbers I have. I really think that people expect too much from AA and that if anything is to be done, broaden the maximum and minimum ceilings of the various weapons so that they overlap better. Japan sufferred from a lack of a decent medium range AA weapon to begin with so I really don't see that much of an issue with AA.

Ahhh... CHS... that might explain things... OOB / database is very different than "stock" game I play...


Leo "Apollo11"

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

What missions? Against what targets? How are the target(s) defended?

All sorts and in CHS. Targets can be defended by AA units or not, the intrinsic AA seems effective according to the loss to flak numbers I have. I really think that people expect too much from AA and that if anything is to be done, broaden the maximum and minimum ceilings of the various weapons so that they overlap better. Japan sufferred from a lack of a decent medium range AA weapon to begin with so I really don't see that much of an issue with AA.

Ahhh... CHS... that might explain things... OOB / database is very different than "stock" game I play...


Leo "Apollo11"

I don't believe AA was touched in CHS, outside of filling out units perhaps. No adjustments were made to the devices I'm quite sure.

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I don't believe AA was touched in CHS, outside of filling out units perhaps. No adjustments were made to the devices I'm quite sure.

I think (but I am not 100% sure) that OOB in AA unist was changed a lot and that 13mm AA gun (as it is in stock game) is no longer sole automatic weapon for many AA units...


Leo "Apollo11"

ORIGINAL: cantona

what would be the best bombing heights to get the best results?
im aware that the lower the bombers the more damage they will receive but im sick of seeing pretty splashes and i want to see more fires, explosion and japs swimming

Sychronized? Or just for leisure?

ORIGINAL: Mark VII

I would tend to agree with Ron, as the Japanese I lose bombers at 6000ft also and get plenty damaged as well to.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Gee, I lose bombers at 6000 feet all the time.

of course you do! Because you don´t have 4E bombers and Allied have enough AA guns that are effective below 8000 feet.

if 4E & Allied, 6000 feet, otherwise, 1000 feet

Now, be aware you didn't ask what is the most survival height

except for strafing runs and skip bombing - 100 feet - the latter only after a certain hard code date (I don't know what it is either)

And in RHS the AA is going to kill you at low altitude. .30 MGs will shoot you at 2000 feet, .50s at 3000 or 4000 feet, and 20 mm and other "light AA" can be nasty at 6000 feet. Medium AA is effective at about 8000-12000 feet - depending on the type - and heavy never less than about 18000 - old French 75s reach 22000 - and really modern stuff quite a bit higher. I doubt DP guns or AA guns worked often in CHS or stock - lots of technical reasons - including I just found all Allied AA lacked the ability to detect planes! [IF something else detected the planes - or IF they saw them - fine - but no warning roll - because no detection system assigned.] Also, I reduced durability to make AA more effective (among other reasons) - and players say it is too effective - which may be right (but we are experimenting with different values). Still- go in low - expect to get hurt - particularly if the guns actually are shooting. Note also that US AA units had far too few guns.

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

if 4E & Allied, 6000 feet, otherwise, 1000 feet

Now, be aware you didn't ask what is the most survival height [:D]

No, the best bombing height would be zero[:-]. The ultimate dive-bomber. You bring both plane and bombload to the target with great accuracy. This also fails to consider survivability[:)].

Early version of the smart bomb.....though I might be inclined to call it a dumb one.

Doesn't soundlike anything will get done...if there is a "gap"or not/ Does it?