Author Topic: B-29 Super Fortress  (Read 115939 times)

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1245 on: May 21, 2009, 02:21:42 PM »
For those who don not want to B-29 on AH.  Give me (and other who would like it on AH) reasons why it doesn’t need to be on AH.
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline Pannono

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1246 on: May 21, 2009, 02:29:25 PM »
It needs to be in AH, but there are 1,242,372 things that need to be added before it
Pannono
Proud Member of Pigs On The Wing
8 Player H2H: 2006-07
MA Tours: 87, 97-113, 143-144, 160-Present
FSO: JG54

Offline Pannono

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1247 on: May 21, 2009, 02:31:49 PM »
This is deserving of a seperate post
Pannono
Proud Member of Pigs On The Wing
8 Player H2H: 2006-07
MA Tours: 87, 97-113, 143-144, 160-Present
FSO: JG54

Offline texastc316

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1774
      • Mighty 316th
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1248 on: May 21, 2009, 02:40:06 PM »
sigh
TexsTC-CO/Court Jester-Mighty 316th FS "CREEPING DEATH"  in MA/FSO

The eager pilots are not experienced. And the experienced not eager.

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1249 on: May 21, 2009, 02:40:54 PM »
LOL.  Yea it dose.  But i really lost on why some ppl don't want it.  Besides the atom bomb which i think should be left out.
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline wulf31

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1250 on: May 21, 2009, 02:53:50 PM »
 OMG the POOR KITTENS!!!!
Bexar  Pigs On The Wing

You see me now a veteran of a thousand psychic wars

Offline LLogann

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4947
      • Candidz.com
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1251 on: May 21, 2009, 03:09:23 PM »
I'm actually for the B29..........

But whoever said yesterday that we should have a sticky for the B29 might be right.  It'll at least keep the database down some.    :D

See Rule #4
Now I only pay because of my friends.

Offline SEraider

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1755
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1252 on: May 21, 2009, 03:11:09 PM »
LOL.  Yea it dose.  But i really lost on why some ppl don't want it.  Besides the atom bomb which i think should be left out.
 

Screw it! I want the NOOOOOK man!  :rock
* I am the embodiment of Rule #14
* History is only recent.
* Stick and Stones won't break my bones, but names could "hurt" me.

CO Screaming Eagles

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1253 on: May 21, 2009, 03:50:09 PM »
boring  :huh
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Kazaa

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8371
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1254 on: May 21, 2009, 03:52:01 PM »
Because AH2 needs more hanger queens. :rofl



"If you learn from defeat, you haven't really lost."

Offline Latrobe

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5975
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1255 on: May 21, 2009, 04:51:45 PM »
OMG the POOR KITTENS!!!!

There are no more kittens, now its PUPPIES!!!!  :O

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1256 on: May 21, 2009, 04:54:04 PM »
One major issue that stands against the B-29 (and other large aircraft like the H8K2) is the sheer amount of work they entail for the artists due to their large and complex interiors.  I'd guess the B-29 or H8K2 would take as much developement time as 8 to 12 single engined fighters.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline texastc316

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1774
      • Mighty 316th
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1257 on: May 21, 2009, 04:57:03 PM »
I'd fly it if it was introduced, but won't lose any sleep if it never is. I just don't see the need for more threads about it when 'I think' HT has said it will never be in game. it has its pros and cons.
TexsTC-CO/Court Jester-Mighty 316th FS "CREEPING DEATH"  in MA/FSO

The eager pilots are not experienced. And the experienced not eager.

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline MotleyCH

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 633
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1258 on: May 21, 2009, 05:02:57 PM »
.... for those who haven't seen this.


Offline Nemisis

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
      • Fightin 49'ers
Re: B-29 Super Fortress
« Reply #1259 on: May 21, 2009, 05:07:11 PM »
There are no more kittens, now its PUPPIES!!!!  :O
                 ?                

You must understand the I am all for the B29. But anyway we are likely not to get it because it will have even better defense than the B17's or B24's AND on top of that it has even more bombs than the lanc, heck it probably has enough bombs to level a small country like that Luxembourg place. But the fact remains that it would be an uber-bomber and as such would have be perked higher than the 262, I would even say that it should perked up in the 400 or maby in the 500 range. If one got past the forward bases during a large attack then it would level several of the best bases to counterattack from once the forward bases are captured. It would probably throw off the entire bomber v.s. fighter aspect of the game. And if YOU want to design the plane AND the interior of the plane be my guest
All man needs to be happy is a home, his wife, and a place in the world

Col. 49Nem, Armor commander of the 49th