Heavy bomber strategy?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • To me most Heavies .. the Juice is not worth the squeeze. once take in to account research; advanced bases needed; etc... thean too easy to shoot down.

      Was playing against a guy who rolled in a few into my territory (it was occupied so didnt really give a crap about building damage) think he might have got 1 strike off before took out two of them with air superiority fighters. then he sent in AWACS and met same fate.

      To me stacking Four Strike Fighters with 1 Air Supp is a good mix giving flexibility and effectiveness. get past lvl 4 and can launch cruise missiles.
      "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him "

      aka ...The killer formerly known as BuckeyeChamp
    • Heavy bombers are by far one of the best unit in the game, In one of my matchs a player was out of control he had a point lead of 2k but was in a coalition so he would not win. I sent in 20 bombers 2 bombers for each of his 5 main airports which bombing these locations killed off all back up leaving my units free to claim over his stolen land. The last 2 bombers stacked of 5 I used on his main cities to kill off days worth of building . After this I regrouped and blew up each one of his homeland cities tell he rage quit, little did I know he was pure airforce and airborne so he had 70+ planes stuck on the ground with over 30+ airborne stuck to. Using bombers in stacks of 5 is very painful on cities since when they have all upgrades the range is insane and they deal nearly 10 damage to buildings and they also reke a cities pop.
      I will not do that but my sister will !!!!!!
    • Opulon's heavy bomber strategy works!
      I used a bunch of conventional warheads to slow down enemy SAS forces and naval production.
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • Here's the one problem I see with heavy bombers - the lvl 4 airport requirement. Any time I see another country with > lvl 3 airports, I immediately max out SAMs. They are either building bombers or stealth, or both. And max lvl SAM detects stealth.

      Second, if you are in a match where you know your opponents are fielding nukes and you don't have TDS stationed in each of your home cities, you deserve everything you get.

      So, in Opulan's most excellent outline of a successful use of the heavy bomber, how would that scenario have played out if the other player had a SAM and a TDS sitting in that city?
    • The thing is, Opulon knows how to use missiles.
      Do you really think the enemy has the time to built 14 TDS to protect each of their 7 cities?
      And Opulon talked about this too- if the enemy wastes time protecting their homeland, their front lines are exposed :D
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • And don't even get me started about the dangers to unprotected troops on the front lines...
      Chances are, the enemy has SAMs on their front lines, not sitting wasting time in cities.
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • ewac123 wrote:

      The thing is, Opulon knows how to use missiles.
      Do you really think the enemy has the time to built 14 TDS to protect each of their 7 cities?
      And Opulon talked about this too- if the enemy wastes time protecting their homeland, their front lines are exposed :D
      I always have trouble balancing both protecting my frontlines and my homeland. If I am protecting my frontline, I am not protecting my homeland, and vice versa. I try striking a balance by keeping my low-tech troops protecting my cities, and my high-tech fighting on the frontline. But that has not always worked for me.
    • ewac123 wrote:

      The thing is, Opulon knows how to use missiles.
      Do you really think the enemy has the time to built 14 TDS to protect each of their 7 cities?
      And Opulon talked about this too- if the enemy wastes time protecting their homeland, their front lines are exposed :D
      14 TDS?!? No, just 1, starting with most important city. I admit, in a country like Australia, where there's no overlap, ya gotta spend a lot more to get good coverage. Nevertheless, yes, you absolutely leave air defenses in your home cities when facing an enemy that is employing bombers. And yes, that means resources not being available at the front. Just as the research and expense of building those bombers means less resources available for that player's front.

      I only play public maps, so my experience is colored accordingly. Look at my stats, I almost never encounter heavy aircraft. But as I said, once I see high level airports, SAM research and production go up to the front of the line.

      And yeah, my bad re lvl 3/4 mess up, thanks for that correction.
    • DOA70 wrote:

      Here's the one problem I see with heavy bombers - the lvl 4 airport requirement. Any time I see another country with > lvl 3 airports, I immediately max out SAMs. They are either building bombers or stealth, or both. And max lvl SAM detects stealth.

      Second, if you are in a match where you know your opponents are fielding nukes and you don't have TDS stationed in each of your home cities, you deserve everything you get.

      So, in Opulan's most excellent outline of a successful use of the heavy bomber, how would that scenario have played out if the other player had a SAM and a TDS sitting in that city?
      Be weary, it detects stealth "in visual range". You don't get the early warning whatever comes. the only way to actively hunt a stealth is... well, stealth ASF.


      About your remark :
      Mostly, it doesn't work, and it's actually the point. In a late game, with roughly equal means, the cost of defending all assets, both your core cities, and annexed cities (because at that point it will be a part of your war machine), is immensely superior to the cost of offense, to the point it may create strategical discreancies in order of battle that can be exploited elsewhere.

      For example, i'm 100% certain you already faked a nuclear program or lvl 4 and 5 airports to encourage your enemy to overspend in some units.

      Here, it's , roughly, the same idea. Either your opponent didn't protected as much he should his home base, far from the front, or he did, in which case the defense spending to ensure you had no "default in the armor" is a guarantee there will be less other annoying things on the battlefield.

      One could argue that stealth bombers are pretty decent against armored and that as a result, they can take on 3-4 units in a city, but i disagree : Sure it would work for one city, but at the moment you actually used the attack patrol... they're toast. The enemy knows their path, knows their flight time, he may even have the time to put frigate under them :D
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • ewac123 wrote:

      The thing is, Opulon knows how to use missiles.
      Do you really think the enemy has the time to built 14 TDS to protect each of their 7 cities?
      And Opulon talked about this too- if the enemy wastes time protecting their homeland, their front lines are exposed :D

      You should.

      Putting TDS in your home cities becomes a "survival need" beyond a certain day. On that point, i'm 100% in agreement with DOA70. TDS AND SAMs, btw.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • StopThereCowboy wrote:

      ewac123 wrote:

      The thing is, Opulon knows how to use missiles.
      Do you really think the enemy has the time to built 14 TDS to protect each of their 7 cities?
      And Opulon talked about this too- if the enemy wastes time protecting their homeland, their front lines are exposed :D
      I always have trouble balancing both protecting my frontlines and my homeland. If I am protecting my frontline, I am not protecting my homeland, and vice versa. I try striking a balance by keeping my low-tech troops protecting my cities, and my high-tech fighting on the frontline. But that has not always worked for me.
      Yeah, its' always a high-wire act trying to balance them. For me, its dependent upon the map, my troop concentrations/compositions and how far they might have to go to get back home in an emergency. It also depends on how active I'm expecting myself to be. My worst beatdown was when I moved my troops out to attack, thinking I'd be back online in a few hours to watch for counter-attacks. Life happened and the next day when I got online, my home cities were entertaining someone else's troops. ;(
    • The topic is old (more than one year). I should maybe remind that my initial point wasn't to say "do Heavy bombers they are great", but more "Heavy bombers can shine in a very specific context" :D
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Opulon wrote:

      Blah blah blah... Stealth blah blah blah...

      Important stuff is here: For example, i'm 100% certain you already faked a nuclear program or lvl 4 and 5 airports to encourage your enemy to overspend in some units.

      Here, it's , roughly, the same idea. Either your opponent didn't protected as much he should his home base, far from the front, or he did, in which case the defense spending to ensure you had no "default in the armor" is a guarantee there will be less other annoying things on the battlefield.

      One could argue that stealth bombers are pretty decent against armored and that as a result, they can take on 3-4 units in a city, but i disagree : Sure it would work for one city, but at the moment you actually used the attack patrol... they're toast. The enemy knows their path, knows their flight time, he may even have the time to put frigate under them :
      Opulon, you are definitely 100% certain, because I just messaged you that I faked a nuclear program. Maybe even 200% certain by now :D
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • ewac123 wrote:

      Opulon wrote:

      Blah blah blah... Stealth blah blah blah...
      Important stuff is here: For example, i'm 100% certain you already faked a nuclear program or lvl 4 and 5 airports to encourage your enemy to overspend in some units.

      ...
      Opulon, you are definitely 100% certain, because I just messaged you that I faked a nuclear program. Maybe even 200% certain by now :D
      Hey, I only recently graduated to that level of subterfuge. (again, public map only player). On the other hand, I have known about the limits of stealth detection for awhile now, after someone cleaned my clock by having stealth UAVs.
    • playbabe wrote:

      What it good at, What it bad at. the only time I ever use it is the one it give to thailand at the begining of round. I can one shot infanty but that is like when the game first open.
      and I never use it since

      so here im asking for some discussion aboit it from someone who might be using it or saw other using it.

      Im personaly think it cost too much. you need to have level 4 airbase which at that point is not early game any more.
      so it would expect to get shoot down a lot if I try to use it. any idea? :thumbsup:
      I know that I was a little late to this thread, but that's ok! I will give you some in-game experience as to why I think the heavy bombers are useful: I am currently playing a game as Chad, and am focusing mostly on air force. It is day 23 so I easily have the infrastructure to build the heavy bombers. I have claimed most of Africa up to Morroco, and down to Mozambique. Egypt on the other hand, is giving me problems. He has some of East Africa. Since his resources are what propels his "war machine" I used the heavy bombers and their large attack radius, to bombard his homeland cities thus destroying all of his buildings and lowering morale. I use heavy bombers to break the opponent's war machine. For example, I was destroying their buildings and preventing them from mobilizing more troops. To be clear though, I do not use heavy bombers to destroy infantry or armored targets. For that, I use strikers because they are more accessible and come at a cheaper cost.
      This We'll Defend” - U.S. Army :thumbsup:
    • FarmerJG wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      What it good at, What it bad at. the only time I ever use it is the one it give to thailand at the begining of round. I can one shot infanty but that is like when the game first open.
      and I never use it since

      so here im asking for some discussion aboit it from someone who might be using it or saw other using it.

      Im personaly think it cost too much. you need to have level 4 airbase which at that point is not early game any more.
      so it would expect to get shoot down a lot if I try to use it. any idea? :thumbsup:
      I know that I was a little late to this thread, but that's ok! I will give you some in-game experience as to why I think the heavy bombers are useful: I am currently playing a game as Chad, and am focusing mostly on air force. It is day 23 so I easily have the infrastructure to build the heavy bombers. I have claimed most of Africa up to Morroco, and down to Mozambique. Egypt on the other hand, is giving me problems. He has some of East Africa. Since his resources are what propels his "war machine" I used the heavy bombers and their large attack radius, to bombard his homeland cities thus destroying all of his buildings and lowering morale. I use heavy bombers to break the opponent's war machine. For example, I was destroying their buildings and preventing them from mobilizing more troops. To be clear though, I do not use heavy bombers to destroy infantry or armored targets. For that, I use strikers because they are more accessible and come at a cheaper cost.
      Well, honestly, anyone not using bombers to wreck infrastructure and wasting them on unit attacks is an idiot.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD