Bombarding... too many failed artillery attacks and bombing runs?

[Sava]

Well... I think there are way too many failed bombardments in this game. Especially for fighters and jet fighters. I just had 23 jet fighters bombard Moscow, which is 13 and has like 5 units in it, and not a one did anything. WTF?!

[Verto]

I agree, bombardment is nearly useless. For it to do any damage, you need dozens of artillery/air units, and even then the damage is minimal.

[Manya]

Yes artillery sucks in this game, there is no way to do any damage with bombing, better to waste resources in other units that can do more damage

[Sava]

That's unfortunate, because artillery in the real world is very, very effective.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Sava
That's unfortunate, because artillery in the real world is very, very effective.

Well actually arties are very ineffective in the real world.
It has only been in the last decade the even missiles and bombs were very acurate. Plain old cannons or field pieces are very poor and in the game we are using WWII planes for the most part and they really stunk.

Now if you want to just address the issue on the game basic, I would agree that they are too ineffective and are just an after thought.
I use them to fend off naval attacks in cities that do not have any ships or planes. They are only meant to drive them off.
I use them to aid in an assualt, but do not have high expectations that they will be a big help.

[Dida]

bombardment is useless. for the money you invest in fighters and cannons you could have built more tanks, which in turn will do a lot more work for you.

[Master Zen]

On open ground however, they are VERY effective. However, don't expect to be able to pound a large city into submission without at least 15-20 artys.

Air bombardment seems to be slightly more effective for no mayor reason... and Naval bombardment is terrible against cities.

Honestly, I don't really use bombardment untill Artillery comes along. There is a period between Replaceable Parts and Tanks that gives you no edge against Infantry. Thus, in good WW1 style, you'll have to go for it with massive artillery.

There's a recent thread about this in the Strategy forum, take a look

[Jaybe]

If you are in representative (war weariness sensitive) government, using bombardment can save you from needless casualties. 6-12 artillery, plus air support and you can take out a metro (along with many of its population and improvements). To take it out intact, use cruise missiles since they only target units. Don't forget the ARMIES of tanks/MA!

[Jarvin]

It depends on what kind of artillery you are using, catapults and cannons are useless, period. Ships can bombard each other OK, but against cities and other things on land they are crap too.

Artillery and Radar Artillery are good for softening up enemies that you arent certain you can beat alone, and they are also pretty good for reducing your casualties.

Fighters and Jets should never be used for bombing, unless you're trying to lure out enemy interceptors. Fighters and Jets are for recon and intercepting.

Bombers and Stealth Bombers are pretty good at bombing cities (precision strike is badass for screwing over an enemy), but I've found that their main use is for "shooing" away enemies that scare me.
Example: I have a destroyer that only has one or two life blocks left and theres an enemy battleship a couple squares away. You can use bombers to bomb the battleship down to one life and it will usually run away instead of attack, and if it doesnt it gives your destroyer a chance.

[WarpStorm]

The issue is that population and buildings have a 16 defense.

[Sava]

The only real good use for bombardment that I have found is that it is good to bomb tile improvements and cut off supply lines and reinforcements. This allows me to isolate enemy cities, stop resources, and prevent my invasion forces from being overwhelmed by dozens of units.

[bongo]

The only way to compensate the weaknesses of bombardment is to use them in large numbers. Anyway I don't build bombardment-capable units in large numbers until I can build battleships or artillery.

[Sava]

Navals units, IMO, are a little bit more useful because you can blockade cities with harbors, kill enemy sea units, and provide sustained mobile reconaissance (as opposed to fighters).

[Dida]

naval blockade is such a bull****. you have to complete cover up every sea tile in an enemy city to block it. to block their entire country would take probably 100 battleships. and the enemy only need 1 turn of relief to start building massive tanks all over his country again.
to make naval blockade more useful, one hostile naval unit present in the radius of a city should prevent it from conducting trade over the sea for that turn.

[Master Zen]

Dida is right naval blockade should be MUCH easier. You don't need a cordon of ships in RL to block a port.