Standard Response

[Rich46yo]

I think you just answered your own question there...We DO have so many bomber perks that if something like the B29 were introduced we'd see nothing but B29's for a very, very long time before all those perks were exhausted.

One of the things that has kept cropping up since I joined is people saying that if the 29 was added we would see non-stop waves of them.

Certainly there would be the initial rush to them, just like any other airplane, but if they were perked high enough it wouldnt last. The real dedicated bomber sticks are a small part of the membership and anyone else is only going to lose so many 700 perk formations, while flying their conga line runs at 3,000', before they say "the heck with it" and go back to their Lancs, which hold almost as much ords and can be bomb and bailed out of without a loss.
 The 29's would only be "very effective" when dedicated sticks and squads take them high, and even then most of the time they will be no higher then the other heavies.

I fly mostly Jabos now but do keep an eye on the Strat war, which really is "no war" unless dedicated bomber squads are conducting Ops and even that only happens mostly on squad nights. Most of all for the Rooks. We used to have outstanding bomber sticks and nowadays I see almost no-one flying them, including myself.

And one of the things including the 29 into the game, would do for the game, is it would plain get more sticks into bombers more often. Adding more perk bombers , period, would get more sticks into bombers so they can get more perks in order to fly the perked heavies more often. More people in more and better heavies would invigorate the strat war and open the map up.

My preference is for the Soviet TU-2 but I'd also love to see the A-26 and I also think the B-29, perked heavy, would be a fantastic addition to the game. Ever notice that most who are against the 29 being included never fly bombers anyways?

I love the fact AH modeled the AR-234. I flew them the other night and they are an exciting bomber. But they are also a bomber that takes a lot of skill to fly right and they will never fly that often cause they are just not an airplane that makes a big impact in the game.

I think the game needs a perked bomber more then anything else.

[Yarbles]

And what is neede is the mossie bomber formation because;

1) Like the 234 it is fast

2) Unlike the 234 it can land and take off easily and climb which means Shorter Sorties. I think long sorties are what put people off bombing but without height its suicide and height takes time in everything except the Boston which is too slow to survive and does not have th load. I think the mossie could cary maybe 6 x500 which would give serious damge pottential and fast turn around.

[SmokinLoon]

If bomb loadouts are perked, that will be all we need.  I think the six 2k in the Lanc and the four 2k in the B24 should be perked slightly, as well as the 14/1k load from the Lanc.  The B17 excels at the lighter bomb load (24/100 and 16/250lb), and few ever really use that loadout. 

Two things to think about: 

First:
I dont think people really understand or appreciate the dustructive power of three-four flights of Lancasters loaded with 14/1k bombs each.  If the teams and players ever got into the groove of using nine Lancs to fly over any base of any size in any kind of decent formation and have their salvo at 14 and their delay at .5 or so so the bombs stretch from one end to the other the game would change... I am very suprised we dont see more of that.  That tactic would shorten a lot of base captures. 

Second:
I also dont think people understand the usefulness of the lighter bombs.  I challenge players to take a B17 loaded with the 24/ 100lb loadout and hit targets of choice.  Obviously, busting hangers with that loadout is not what it is best at, but rather raking an enemy base's ack, ord, fuel, dar, etc.  Set the salvo at 12 (for two passes) and delay at .5 or so and just watch.  Pick your drop alt and have fun.  I've done as many as 44 destroyed OBJ against a strat target in just two quick passes via the 100lb bombs.     

This is where HTC could step in and give not only each bomber an ENY and OBJ modifier, but give each bomb loadout its own ENY and OBJ modifier score as well.  Destroying something with a 100lb bomb shoudl count for more vs destroying the same object with a 1000lb bomb.  It isnt any different that destroying a Spit16 with a La7 or P40B.  THe La7 gets a few token perks and the P40B would get 8+ if the modifiers are right.  Food for thought, I guess.

Oh... and one more thing:  YES!  Bring on the Mossi B Mk 16!!!   

[Steve]

Well, it depends, as has been discussed ad nausea in many B29 wishlist threads, on how they are modelled and implemented. If modelled ultra-realistically and/or insufficiently perked they would be all but invulnerable to prop fighters,

Why?

[whiteman]

Possible perk bombers not yet added to AH:

A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
Mosquito B.Mk XVI

Maybe:

Il-10
Tu-2

I like those choices, would definitely fly the A-26 if we had it.

[Obie303]

We have loads of Bomber perks but nothing worthwhile to spend them on.

Go to the early war arena.  Lancs are perked.

[BaldEagl]

I think long sorties are what put people off bombing but without height its suicide and height takes time in everything except the Boston which is too slow to survive and does not have th load. I think the mossie could cary maybe 6 x500 which would give serious damge pottential and fast turn around.

The Boston will climb from 0-16,000 feet in one sector, then run along at 315 mph with a full load (4x500 lbs).  A formation can take out 25-30% of a city in a single pass, then exit at 325 mph.  I've scored almost 250,000 points on a single, multiple target Boston run.

It's also a good dogfighter if need be (it's a modified A-20).  It's only real downfall is it's relatively short range and the fact that the interrupters keep the tail guns from firing on a dead six con.

[Zazen13]

Why?

A combination of the popularly published top-speed of ~360 mph (compared to 290 mph for a B24 which already seems very fast in-game if you try to chase one down) and the lead computing sighting equipment which compensated for all factors including relative airspeed. Which if modelled in the game might equate to a training arena style lead-computing site for all its sync'd defensive armament (Yikes!)...Also, the original version had a 20mm cannon and two 50 cals in the tail, which would be a very likely approach angle for a bomber faster than all but the speedier LW rides...

[Steve]

A combination of the popularly published top-speed of ~360 mph (compared to 290 mph for a B24 which already seems very fast in-game if you try to chase one down) and the lead computing sighting equipment which compensated for all factors including relative airspeed. Which if modelled in the game might equate to a training arena style lead-computing site for all its sync'd defensive armament (Yikes!)...Also, the original version had a 20mm cannon and two 50 cals in the tail, which would be a very likely approach angle for a bomber faster than all but the speedier LW rides...

Well I'd imagine the wouldn't model the LCS... just a guess.  Didn't the 51 have a good one as well that isn't modeled?

[Zazen13]

Well I'd imagine the wouldn't model the LCS... just a guess.  Didn't the 51 have a good one as well that isn't modeled?

Well, the sight the P51 had wasn't that great as it had to be micromanaged in the heat of battle. The pilot had to continually adjust the "ring" on the reflector sight to match the diameter of the target's apparent wingspan while trying to take the rate of closure into account in order to crudely calculate for distance (if memory serves it was called the K-14). So, it isn't the 'hands-off' kind of thing the game has in the TA. But, for the time any help was welcome as most fighter pilots tended to under-lead substantially. It wasn't until the Korean-War era that fixed gun platforms got the kind of lead-compensating sight we think of today. Flexible mounts (ie: turrets) got them much sooner.

[Yarbles]

Go to the early war arena.  Lancs are perked.

Serious suggestions only please

[Yarbles]

The Boston will climb from 0-16,000 feet in one sector, then run along at 315 mph with a full load (4x500 lbs).  A formation can take out 25-30% of a city in a single pass, then exit at 325 mph.  I've scored almost 250,000 points on a single, multiple target Boston run.

It's also a good dogfighter if need be (it's a modified A-20).  It's only real downfall is it's relatively short range and the fact that the interrupters keep the tail guns from firing on a dead six con.

Range is the problem and speed as its fast but still catchable the majority of the time. I would rather be exiting that city at 380 mph plus having dropped 6 x 500 lb

[RRAM]

I know you're gonna hate and kill me for this idea, and I know it's not going to happen, but...

The solution to the immense ammount of perk points everyone has is to perk all the heavies. And to keep the light/mediums free. Anything with four engines (heavies), goes down the perk system with reasonably low perk costs according to it's loadout (say 1 or 2 perks for the B-17, 2-3 for the B-24, 3-4 for the lanc)... twins (B-25s, B-26s, Ki-67s, Boston IIIs, A-20, Ju88...) and singles (Il-2, Stuka, SBD, Kate, Avenger, Val...) stay free.

And the 234 of course, stays perked.

You get to see more early war and lighter bombing aircraft you rarely get to see today (any buff you will find is 90% a B-17, Lanc or B-24), and there will still be a lot of four engined bombers flying here and there because of their reasonably low cost and because most people has a lot of buff points anyway.


I love the idea of seaplanes, too. But don't really know how they could be implemented in the gameplay as it is...maybe making enemy fleets appear on the map of everyone on his country if it's shadowed by a seaplane can be an idea, but of course then there is the question on how hard would that be to implement (without forgetting that big seaplanes are hard to model and probably are very low on the priority list)

[stroker71]

You have to pay for bombs on fighters using bomber perks.  Or atleast pay for the 1000# bomb.  Any one know how rare the 1000# bomb was for a fighter...or at all. 

[Helm]

I doubt we will ever see a B29 for the simple reason that our runways are not long enuff to get one in the air.  HTC would have to re-do the runways at bases for this to happen.  .....and thats alot of work when you consider how many maps there are.



Helm ...out