BGForums

I dont use them to bomb things very often.Almost never in fact.

So im curious.

If they dont,shouldnt they ?

Doesn't "bomb hex" count as that?

Dont know.

My only real exper with b-52s bombing in some time is watching the AI use them,and to me it doesnt appear that they are getting AoE damage.

I could be completely wrong though.

all strategic bombers are set for indirect attack and do damage everything in the hex, even the facility under the units. The problem is usually that you need air superiority for them to be useful since they are expensive.

I'm in Africa right now, I've been using my B-52s as something like F/Bs. Since the distances in the north are so wide open and large, I can often strike enemy attacks in the open, before they reach my positions, destroy the forces and withdraw before enemy air support can get there. About that time the purposely late Int force shows up and creams the enemy air. They have also been of some use by taking out key bridge here and there to slow or divert enemy units. The reason I'm using them instead of traditional F/Bs is the ranges involved and the scarcity of Air bases in the NW half of Africa. I can base them well back and still reach the targets with fuel to spare.

Balthagor wrote:all strategic bombers are set for indirect attack and do damage everything in the hex, even the facility under the units. The problem is usually that you need air superiority for them to be useful since they are expensive.

Rather than start a new thread, I figured I'd ask my question here as it is somewhat related:

What exactly are the soft/hard attacks for strategic bombers supposed to represent? I can understand the values for the various fighter bombers, as they can be equipped with rocket pods for direct-fire attacks. This isn't the case with the big bombers, as they can only drop ordnance from their bomb bays, which is represented by their missile capacity. With the addition of the "freefall bomb" missile type pretty much all bases are covered, so shouldn't they actually have attack values of 0, and only be useful for delivering large amounts of ordnance?

I know you guys aren't making alterations to SR2010 anymore, but I'm trying to understand the thought process behind some things, as I am currently in the midst of a massive unit revision.

...I'm not so sure about "as they can only drop ordnance from their bomb bays, which is represented by their missile capacity," as functionally some (if not all) of the strategic bombers make awesome standoff missile platforms, as lightbringer suggests. I also use them in a similar fashion - following aerial recon and, if necessary, in concert with interceptors.

Depending on the missiles used, it is often possible to outrange any opposing interception and simply orbit on station waiting for targets - range is the primary criteria for selecting missiles here. Primary targets of this type of operation (for me) are enemy artillery, particularly MLRS units (those damn chinese units with the zillion klick range). I have never bothered to check which category any of these targets fall into. Collateral damage (area effect) seems to vary primarily on the type of missile loadout, not on the platform from which they are launched (at least in my experience).

This seems consistent with reality today, where strat bombers (b-2, b-52, etc) are used for smart bombs, launching as ground forces call in. Perhaps the function of a strategic bomber has been obsolesced?

As for more bombs, that's not very likely. We added the one 'free-fall bomb' mostly for test purposes but let it stay.

I think they also said something further about that the freefall was left in to give players an option to use it.But i dont have a clue where to find the qoute

So I think its really more of a left over,that can be used as an option, than it is the designed in primary attack.

Bombers' attack values represent their normal payload of freefall bombs. Things like Mk 83/ Mk84. We also don't seperatly model missiles such as the Hellfire, Maverick or AS-30.