Bridge attack

[JonS1]

Thanh Hoa bridge, finally knocked down with first gen laser guided bombs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanh_Hoa_Bridge

To offset the Kiev example I would point out the futile efforts of the western Allies in 1940 to destroy the German bridges at Sedan.

The question wasn't about the success of those efforts. Success should depend on local AA defences, who has air superiority, etc. All factors that can be handled in game at a commanders discretion. For example, charging panzers with cavalry might not be a very smart thing to do and it might never be successful, but PzC allows me to try, should that be my wont.

My example for a/c vs. bridges in WWII is the bridge busting campaign carried before and after 6 June 1944 along the Seine and Loire in NWE. The USAAF managed to get to the point where they could reliably knock down a bridge with as few as 8 x P-47 sorties.

You could say that was part of the overall interdiction plan - which it was - and therefore covered by the interdiction thingy in PzC. However, the interdiction thingy in PzC functions quite differently, as even a superficial investigation will discover. It is based on causing cas to units moving along routes, not preventing them moving along that route to begin with.

The wider point is that in N'44 - for example - the player can be anyone upto and including Eisenhower or Rundstedt. Now, Eisenhower himself wouldn't say, "Ya know what fellas? I think we should knock down the bridge at GR 123 456." However, somewhere between him and Private Snooks hiding in his foxhole under a hedgrerow on the way to St Lo there are commanders - and more importantly their staff officers - who can, would, and did call for strikes on bridges.

Heck, the Anglo-American armies managed to get Bomber Command and 8th Air Force to come play on at least fourteen (14) occasions during the Normandy campaign. Given that, asking their associated TAFs to go knock out a bridge is well within the army's remit.

However, looking at N'44 as it stands, my spurious comment was specifically in response to the idea that "asking air units to attack bridges would be outside the scope of what an operational ground commander could do." Even if we accept that statement as accurate (which it isn't, but let's pretend it is) then there are a whole swag of other things that should be stripped out of N'44 for exactly the same reason. Naval Gunfire Support being the most obvious, and others depending on the particular scenario and nations involved.

Incidentally; once implemented bridge busting in PzC should IMO be somewhat counter-intuitive, in that larger and longer bridges (ie, the heavy type, or thse than span water hexes) should be easier to KO than the little light jobbies (LLJs) that span streams. In fact, the LLJs should be almost impossible to knock down (although you can still try if you want...). This is because the LLJs are typically heavily masked by terrain and vegitation, while the larger bridges tend to be easier to find and approach from the air.

Edit to add: bridges of any size should also be essentially immune to heavy bomber attack.