Triple Buffs Should GO

[4deck]

Ya know. have you guys even taking into account

15 mins [/font] is how long somehting stays down.
How about we have 1 hour for the hangers to be down, then you can nerf the bomber.

How about it. Makes it a little more realistic, how about carpet bombing runways. then you have to resuplly the base to get it back up. This thread is ridiclus

[mars01]

I was flying bombers before your mommies paid for your first account

LOLHROTFF


I love the meltdowns some people have on these BBs.  Priceless.  

[hubsonfire]

Can't argue about the strat system, but I think a complete revamp of that is even less likely than removing formations or the EZ mode bombing.

[Dead Man Flying]

The Disposable Heroes are to the BKs what Frasier is to Cheers.

Or what Joanie Loves Chachi is to Happy Days.  We're still trying to figure this one out.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
The Disposable Heroes are to the BKs what Frasier is to Cheers.

Or what Joanie Loves Chachi is to Happy Days.  We're still trying to figure this one out.

-- Todd/Leviathn

More like Laverne and Shirley is to Happy days.


Bronk

[Tango]

Originally posted by SkyRock
You kind of answered this for the opposition in your case.  You are saying that bombers need 3 lives to be functional and I am saying that is a load of crap!  GV's are an example we can use.  It is soo incredibly easy for GV's to be stopped at a base by one guy with an Il2, but GVer's don't get a formation!  They get one ride per player, just all the other fighters and attackers..........except bombers!  I would like to mention that I have nothing at all against peeps who like to Buff it.  I just don't like the gaminess of drones!  

Mark

Difference is the GV players can simply respawn since they don't have to drive all the way from thier base to the enemy base.

Bombers are just fine as they are. I wouldn't mind seeing something done to stop the glide bombing 24s and 17s though.

[Patches1]

Folks...I've read through this entire thread with interest; I've no dislike of the current bomber set up. Personally, I think that the current model gives the best of all worlds for new folks, and veteran players.

I regularly shoot bombers down with my F4U-1, F4U-1A, F4U-1D without too much difficulty. Most of the time I can take out all 3 of the bombers in the box. Occassionally, I become impatient and take out only one, or two before having my engine shot out, or just flat get killed by a good gunner. And, then there are the occassions where I simply mess up my pass and get shot down right away.

Sure...my Squaddies, and perhaps others, have heard my diatribes about lazer-accurate buff guns and hyper-sonic speeds of bombers...but that's really me covering-up the mistake I made in my attack. It's easier to blame others for my own failures and lack of skill, or patience.

I enjoy the challenge of killing bombers and surviving to land; and I've dead-sticked many a Corsair to a sucessfull landing. I'll engage bombers on the deck, or at 30,000 feet. The higher the bombers fly, the more challenging they are to shoot down. And, I do take the time to climb. I also study the clipboard map before I take off and plan my mission. And, I've learned to recognise a skilled bomber pilot by the way they fly their bombers as I make my approach.

Many folks herein have expressed an opinion that the bomb sight should be more complicated than it currently is. In my opinion, the current bomb sight is a reasonable compromise between the more complex bomb sight we previously had and the even simpler bomber sight than current bomb sight we now have. I enjoyed the more complex bomb sight, but many others did not, and thus, it was changed. I think the compromise is fair.

What annoys me is the cry I hear for further hardening of Ground, or Sea, targets; make it harder for bombers to destroy FHs, BHs, VHs and CVs? Add more AAA...add more Barracks....put more AAA in the town? What I really hear is...make it easier for Fighters.

[hubsonfire]

The removal of formations is the only thing that would make glidebombing less effective.

[Karash]

I am not a bomber pilot, but I actually like buffs!  I say give them 4 drones...definately meat on the table.  They can reduce a base to a pancake, but the base should have had high alt interceptors anyhow.

[Patches1]

That option is available in the Hangar.

[hubsonfire]

Read through the thread again, and try to comprehend what we're really saying, not what you thought we were going to say before you even opened this thread.

[Tango]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Read through the thread again, and try to comprehend what we're really saying,

Nerf the bombers.

[moot]

The point of a debate is to find out what's true, not who's right or wrong.
This thread is getting too complex to discuss in full because people aren't replying to each others refutals.

So I'll be brief:
It's not hard to kill formations of 3 bombers.  If you come up against a gunner that breaks you in half everytime... then you've met your match.  It's not happening in any more than a minority of cases, so using it as reason for handicapped bombers is akin to wanting the old spit5 nerfed because Lev flies it.

It's not hard to bomb pickles in a barrel from high alt with the current calibration and bomb dispersion model. The calibration should be easier to fudge, and the bomb should disperse a bit more... and to compensate for these two, bombers should get (2?) more drones for a perk cost.

Bombers flying in their target too high for interceptors to just pull back on their joystick and shoot them down is not excuse enough to nerf them.

Bombers certainly did fly a lot slower, but that's a can of worms because fighters didn't fly WFO either, nor have infinitely renewing WEP.  In any case it's not necessary for bombers to be slowed down, as they're already easy to kill.

A system to stop divebombing in the heavier buffs should be used.. bombs hitting the top of the bomb bay, or whatever.  Suicide dweebs are a more important concern than bomber formations that no one can even make a case to handicap.

[Patches1]

I'm just an old man who flies for fun.

I've read through the thread, Hubsonfire....and the only "we" I see is "you". And, Sir....I didn't open this thread. I think the "thought" of this thread is well understood. I think you simply resist it's thought.

[hubsonfire]

I'm aware that Zanth started the thread, and not you. By open, I was referring to you clicking the link. As happens in any thread where bombers are discussed, those who much prefer the current system of formations, no dispersion, and no calibration, and those who do not, are opposed to the ideas of the others. That's fine, all discussions would be incredibly dull were this not the case.

However, simply saying, "you just want to take away my fun" is currently the canned (arguably the only) response, so we don't really wind up with a discussion. I keep seeing the terms furballers and fighters used to describe anyone who wants the bombers changed, which ignores the fact that many of us, despite the labels we're given, aren't the single-minded furballers that some would claim we are.

I don't have a problem with bomber speeds, or fuel burn, or durability, or payload, or the defensive guns, or any of the other reasons people are trying to insert as the reasons we're asking for change. My issues with buffs are exactly what I have stated several times already. You don't know me, you have zero interaction with me in the game, and yet you ignore what I say, substitute some contrived reasoning in place of my own, and claim that my only goal is to ruin your fun. That's simply not true.