Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevin_hx

But, how can you choose the type of the bombs of LBs in the game? 

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevin_hx

But, how can you choose the type of the bombs of LBs in the game? 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevin_hx

But, how can you choose the type of the bombs of LBs in the game? 

YOu cannot choose bomb type. Some planes use 50 kg bombs, some use 250 kg bombs etc.

Maybe 4 x 50 kg is better than one 250 kg if you're bombing airfield, but other than that 50 kg bombs are definitely useless.

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


Producing bombers using 50kg bombs or even 100kg bombs is waste of time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevin_hx

But, how can you choose the type of the bombs of LBs in the game? 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


Producing bombers using 50kg bombs or even 100kg bombs is waste of time.

Light bombers are cheap trainers. You don't need 2E bomber to train bomber pilots. Although usually there is enough light bombers to fill all training squadrons, there's no need to produce any.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I did a bunch of tests with attack bombers and fighters bombers vs Japanese armor and can say for sure that the bomb is the important factor over say cannons and MGs. Bigger "is" better as the 250 lb bombs on the beaufighter was all but useless vs armor, but 500 lb and 1,000 lb bombs killed tanks very nicely. 50KG bombs are virtually useless.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

The OP is trying to apply real world considerations to a set of game abstractions. There is therefore no good answer to what he is trying to achieve as it fundamentally involves a trade off.

Have a read of this thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2583518&mpage=1&key=bomb%2Csize�

in particular post #19 and the linked thread contained in that post.

The basic error being committed here is that the OP wants to go CAS, a concept which is not particularly well implemeneted in the game as it involves too much abstraction compared to a naval strike against a ship. To compound the error, CAS is only a sub set of ground attack in the game which, in the case of airfields and ports, is even more abstracted.

Yes, in very simplified terms, the bigger the bomb, the more damage it will inflict IF delivered onto the target area. However it isn't of much value if it misses. Having more, albeit smaller bombs, increases the odds that something will be delivered onto the target area.

Then you have to factor in the actual game abstractions. When you go CAS after a unit, you don't get to pick

(a) which unit is targetted in the hex (if there are several present) or

(b) within a unit itself what devices exactly will be targetted. Against soft shelled devices in the unit, a smaller bomb will often suffice whereas a hard shelled device would need a bigger bomb. In any case even with a big bomb the result is likely to be only a disablement, which is not outright destruction.

Then consider the greater set of ground attack on which level bombers are mainly used (and not on CAS). In hitting airfields/ports the destruction of supply is dependent on bomb size. But what about cratering runways. What exactly do you think that 70% runway damage actually represents? A single large bomb crater right in the middle of the runway or 70 small craters caused by 70 small bombs, the WWII equivalent of cluster bombing.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well in a nutshell what Alfred said, use the biggest bombs you can regardless of the target. The game does not really allow much freedom or take into account the type of target or mission. Basically, whatever the target, bigger bombs do more damage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

One may adapt the type and size of bombs to missions, by using the Alt_Device and Alt_Use fields in the editor.

One may have a standard load, defined by the Aircraft specs, but various alternative loads for specific missions. The bomb Devices need not be the same size as those in the standard load. Calculations will be done to load the plane out to the value in the plane’s Max Load field (depending on mission, range, etc..).

One must be thoughtful and careful, particularly with value and value/2, and keep primary and secondary missions in mind, but the tools are there to allow many aircraft to have many different loadouts for various different missions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

You are on the right track. It is a trade off between more damage and getting any damage inflicted.

A land device is not killed off outright. First it must become disabled. Then, if a disabled device is struck again, it is destroyed. Left alone disabled devices will become ready devices dependent on

(a) the number of support squads present
(b) adequate supplies on hand

Fatigue and morale does not factor directly into the destruction of devices, but they do impact upon the combat effectiveness of the ready devices. To the best of my knowledge, the size of a bomb has no direct impact on the degree of fatigue and morale of the unit. This is the sort of abstraction I alluded to earlier and why the debate over small or large bombs for use against land targets is, IMHO, largely sterile. It is always a case of horses for courses.

As to the claim that much has been left out of the manual, that is a claim often made, but in my view usually unfairly. For time after time I see posters displaying a lack of understanding of the game mechanics when a careful reading of the manual provides the answer to their posted questions. And what is not found in the manual, and frankly no manual can ever hope to be encyclopedic, can be asked and be promptly answered on the forum.

Alfred