B-29 Super Fortress

[uptown]

Why do we need a B29? I can blow up everything that needs blown up with what we have. We don't need B29s, B52s,V2 rockets, A10s, nukes,F4s thur 18s. What we need is people to learn to play the game with what we have. Not some dork flying at 50K dropping one bomb and ruining the fun 50 people are having.
If you want a B29, have your dad buy you a pretty little playstation and you can blow the world up before your bed time...........SQUEEK! 

[Enker]

Why do we need a B29? I can blow up everything that needs blown up with what we have. We don't need B29s, B52s,V2 rockets, A10s, nukes,F4s thur 18s. What we need is people to learn to play the game with what we have. Not some dork flying at 50K dropping one bomb and ruining the fun 50 people are having.
If you want a B29, have your dad buy you a pretty little playstation and you can blow the world up before your bed time...........SQUEEK! 

SQUEEK! what game would that be? Super Smash Polly Pocket Bros.?

[trigger2]

Ummm....
Well, first of all, the B29 carries 20,000 lbs of ordinance. The Lancaster carries 14,000 lbs. That's a B17's bomb load difference between the two.

Well, if I do recall though, HT has said something similar to The Lancaster will be about the maximum ordinance load that will be put in the game?

Second of all, the only guns that the Lancaster has outside of the tail guns are .30 cals, which are almost useless- which is why Lancasters are meat unless you get behind them.

Well, that's just cause you epic fail at knowing how to use the guns properly... I remember a sortie where I got 2 262's and a 163, both came shooting up from underneath, you have to angle yourself so that you can get either nose or tail gun on them... aim for an engine or the cockpit, and you're all good, I mean, seriously, with the laser bomber gunsights, it's not all that hard.

[Motherland]

I'm speaking from the attacker's perspective. I haven't flown the Lancaster in at least a year. The Lancaster is meat unless you get behind them (which isn't very hard because they're insanely fast at altitude once the bombs are gone).
I laugh at times about the .30 cal's hitting me hovering above them, though if they were .50 cals they'd probably down me.

[Chalenge]

Why not? I mean think about it. Really. I dont agree with the way a lot of people use parts of the game now. Like CVs for instance. You capture one you dont use it... you hide it right? So why not give us the B29. Okay heres my thinking:

You get the B29 with regular ord for everyone. Everyone defends country assets in all zones for 24 hours (game hours so its a dawn to dawn thing) and that country gets 1 nuke. First come first serve but a 2500 perk cost. You can drop it on a factory or a field or a furball but you only get one (no saving them up). If the factories/cities/HQ gets hit AT ALL in the dawn-to-dawn period then NO NUKE. One last proviso... you MUST have at least 2500 bomber perks (plus perk modifier) to qualify and formations ARE NOT available to a buff with a nuke.

If a field/factory/HQ gets hit by a nuke its GONE for a period of dawn-to-dawn.

Nothing says fight like maybe having a NUKE or trying to stop the other guys from getting one! 

Results: more people engaging buffs at altitude and more people trying to hit strats. People will cheer on buffs hitting strats and maybe even escort them. I mean who wants (enter name of country of your choice here) to have a nuke? Win/win the way I see it.

If you die on a NUKE run you lose 2500 perks.

Flame on!

[A.F. Crash, Fire, Rescue]

I could care less about having a nuke. I mean, in the lifetime of countries having nuclear weapons only one country has used them for hostile purposes and that was the United States dropping the Little Boy and Fat Man bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to end the war without a mass invasion of mainland Japan thus causing more casulties. The B-29 would be a nice bomber to have WITHOUT the nuclear weapons. Just leave it with conventional weapons, and no incendiary bombs either.

[Bronk]

Sorry once again....has to be done.

[VansCrew1]

[Lye-El]

Results: more people engaging buffs at altitude and more people trying to hit strats. People will cheer on buffs hitting strats and maybe even escort them. I mean who wants (enter name of country of your choice here) to have a nuke? Win/win the way I see it.



Flame on!

I don't fly up to the flying pillboxes now let alone try to catch a B-29 that is probably flying faster than I am already.

[Chalenge]

Hey now. I didnt say we NEEDED the Nuke. I was just mentioning a way it could be introduced that would work and get more fighting generated. Of course right away the standard 'Im tired of seeing this stuff' mindset kicked in. You could have tried just a little to contribute something to the conversation instead of invoking a 'anti-glock' filibuster. 

[Anaxogoras]

You know someone would spend those 2500 perks just to drop the nuke on a gv fight between the two other countries.

[1pLUs44]

I'd sure as hell do that!

[A.F. Crash, Fire, Rescue]

I'd sure as hell do that!

And knowing you 1plus, as soon as you got airborne you would prolly auger in.

[Becinhu]

It would only be worthwhile to drop it on TT. And make it so that for the next dawn-to-dawn cycle that no one could use TT due to radiation and fallout.
 

[Noir]

I laugh at times about the .30 cal's hitting me hovering above them, though if they were .50 cals they'd probably down me.

erm...the tail guns of the AH2 lancaster III are 50 cals actually.