Using Bombers

[Vease101]

I am trying to understand the rules for Bombers - are they just a one shot deal and once they drop their payload the only option is to remove them off the map before they get attacked? Can you actually fly them back to friendly territory to re use them in future turns if you have enough AP's? If they are a restricted resource like 'Air Strikes' the manual is not clear on this..

[MrRoadrunner]

How many turns would you need to "fly" a bomber back to it's base, rearm, refuel, and return to the map? And, why would you want to do that in a tactical simulation that uses platoon level units?

I hope that is never a feature of this game.

RR

[Warhorse]

Not sure about those, I don't like the use of on-board aircraft at all, the game engine isn't able to properly use them, so I steer clear. I will have to look at the manual also..

[Crossroads]

On board planes remain out-of-ammo after having done their thing. I recall the manual / bootcamp scenario suggest a gentleman's rule to remove them from map once they are done.

[MrRoadrunner]

Gentleman's rules are for games that are not programmed properly?
The on map planes should not have been added in the first place?

I did include on map planes in my ROE list.

RR

[Vease101]

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

How many turns would you need to "fly" a bomber back to it's base, rearm, refuel, and return to the map? And, why would you want to do that in a tactical simulation that uses platoon level units?

I hope that is never a feature of this game.

RR

I keep forgetting that a turn is such a tiny amount of time! I'm thinking on the scale of the Panzer Campaigns games with 2 hour turns. So the answer to my question is that Bombers can only be used once and then really have to be taken off the map as they are defenceless?

[junk2drive]

Sounds about right.

Ed tends to be vocal about how he likes the game to be. Some features have been added for those with different opinions. Every war game gets down to rock paper scissors. I have no problem with on board aircraft as long as there is a counter measure and a chance that the attack will be off course. Maybe better for the player vs AI though, much like artillery in general.

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: junk2drive
Ed tends to be vocal about how he likes the game to be. Some features have been added for those with different opinions.

Yes, I have an opinion and am willing to express it.
The game has a scale and I like to protect it from those willing to fundamentally change the game into something it was never intended to be.

I can be at fault now an then for the passion I bring. I do not see a reason to not try to keep the game within it's original scale. Or, to shout to the rooftops when others try to make sweeping changes based upon "their desires" and not the scale of the game.
I do it with both the game developers (who think the Brooklyn Bridge can be built in six minutes) and scenario designers (who think 800 turn scenarios are great and fit the scale of the game, even if there is no night and day breaks ... or supply issues ... or whatever).

Thanks Junk. I think Gansey had time to look at the game's scale and realized that refueling and rearming bombers was a little out of reach for normal game time frames? [;)]

RR

[Vease101]

Yeah, the old 'whats possible in 6 minutes' arguments used to really fly when I was an avid East Front player in the early nineties, clearing minefields, fording rivers, unlimbering and moving artillery....ah, it's all coming back to me [:)]