Is "Bomber Shielding" a legitimate tactic?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by debeest
The info in the manual is inadequate; it clearly states that you can't attack the stack with ground troops, but it doesn't tell you that if you attack with air units you'll be fighting the ground units. What a surprise it was to run into that until I figured it out. It's nonsensical, but I don't think it's a bug, so I think it's OK to use.

It isn't nonsense, it just that the computer doesn't differentiate between unit domains when calculating who the primary defender is. Bomber def=1, armor def=5, end of calculation. "They" should have added a simple check to allow the air unit to attack the bomber without wiping out the whole stack if it wins.

[ColdWizard]

i still see it as an unintended side effect from fighters being the only units able to attack bombers. use of bomber stacking in MP gives a huge advantage to the first player to discover advanced flight, especially if they have any significant tech lead.

guess I have to vote yes; the AI does it to me, so I've learned to do it to the AI. I still haven't played multi-player, but I don't see any reason why it should be different there

the ai can't defend worth a ****, would you like to see a bomber stack and have your fighters attack it, only to find multiple mech inf inside an insta-fort underneath (and possibly on nice defensive terrain)?

[-Jrabbit]

If the AI can do it to me, then it's just a question of fair play.
If it's Xin Yu planning an assault, then it's clearly unfair.

So to me, it's SP-yes, MP-no.

[Straybow]

Yes, it's a cheat. The AI is so poor at planning assaults it needs to cheat to be a challenge. It is unsporting to use it against the AI.

[Thoddy]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

It isn't nonsense, it just that the computer doesn't differentiate between unit domains when calculating who the primary defender is. Bomber def=1, armor def=5, end of calculation. "They" should have added a simple check to allow the air unit to attack the bomber without wiping out the whole stack if it wins.

Or if the primary defender shoot at the fighter, he shots also the shielding bomber down, because the bullits doesnt differentiate betwen own and enemy airplanes.

[debeest]

would you like to see a bomber stack and have your fighters attack it, only to find multiple mech inf inside an insta-fort underneath

Heh. I've learned not to attack a bomber stack. Even a fortified rifleman on open terrain has even chances against a fighter.

Like I said, though, I haven't played MP yet. I could easily go along with Jackrabbit -- SP yes, MP no.

[Gatekeeper]

About the only time I get irked with AI bombers are when they're blocking an invasion route(s) into an enemy nation. Geez! I have 60 divisions of howitzers, armor and Marines ready to flood in, and a single pesky bomber sitting over a rail line just scrapped that war plan! And it always seems to be "just out of reach" of your own fighters (if you even brought any along for the invasion).

Gatekeeper

[bellisaurius]

I don't think it's a cheat simply because the tactic to fight it is relatively simple. Fighters may be short range, but if you attack with combined arms, a bomber shield is not only ineffective, but dangerous to the troops it's shielding

[EdwardTKing]

Bomber and Ground Unit Stacking are difficult to defend
against; but combine that with a Pre-Worked Engineer!

The pre-worked engineer moves up next to your capital
and builds a fortress; all in one turn. Your opponent
moves two good defensive ground units like Alpines or
Armour in the fort and then the entire enemy bomber
air force turns up and stack bombs your capital!

If you ever play WW2 as Russians, I strongly recomend
that you ban either or both pre-working and
combined bomber & ground unit stacking.

On deity I use Battleship (or Aegis) and Bomber
stacking against AI Coastal Cities a lot myself.