Bustr:
If I understand correctly you are comparing taking a zone base and the corresponding country's strats retreating to the rear because of such as tantamount to an unfair advantage to the base takers, or even bullying. I really must

When a zone base is taken, which btw isn't always a front-line base, often the distance to the strats becomes way too much of an investment in time to be worthwhile for most. Especially if some ppl only have a couple of hours to play. Sometimes reaching a survivable altitude and carrying out a strat mission can take up to two hours or more depending on the choice of bomber. So when a group decides to take a zone base, because of either lack of understanding or in some cases lack of
caring how it effects the rest of the war, it hurts the attacking country. Tell me how that makes any sense.
In a real war or any strategic situation for that matter, taking possession of the adversary's assets should not result in a benefit to the adversary.
Additionally:
Those who understand how this works rarely put up any real defense of these zone bases because they know it will only benefit them in the long run.
Nearly every time I log on to AH the first thing I do is a strat run. My reason for this is to take bases afterward, if the strats are too far to reach for my time frame or patience it gets frustrating.
No offense, but I find your analogy flawed in so many ways.
Huge endorsement from me on the OP's suggestion. 30 mins on hangars probably too much but 20mins or so, youbetcha!
Best suggestion I've seen so far along with the J2M

Rot