Prototype Days (or arena)

[Pongo]

A bomber like that will be about 5 fighters work. All the gun postions, etc. It is allot of work. that will only matter to guys who like to fight bombers and will be hated by everyone that wishes all bombers where just easy targets like the Lanc is.
But it is certainly more work.
This one also has remote controlled gun turrets that might need some specific main engine code changes apart from any new model issue. Fast plane with 20 mm tail gun and bristling with 50s. It will be a nightmare to intercept. But so what. It is actually the type of bomber that belongs in the MA.

[Hap]

If HTC installed 29's folks would have fun with them. 

[JHerne]

I don't believe the development of the B-29 would be much different than other heavies already in game. Weapon's data is already there, flight model a is probably a standard fill-in-the-data template. Developing the 3D model, interiors, etc., would be the biggest hurdle.

Perking them makes sense, rear bases launches make sense...so to limit the Uber-ability of the plane, don't make it a formation bomber, make it a stand-alone single.

Does it perform, yes. Will Brewsters and Spit 16s catch them? Not if they're up in the statosphere. However, historically, B-29 accuracy was horrible at high altitude because of the environmental effects on the bombs as they fell. The higher you go, the less accurate the payload delivery. Lower altitude, you increase the chances of interception.

The Ta-152 was designed to be a high-altitude interceptor, its purpose was to kill bombers. 262s and 163s would have something worth climbing to alt to intercept. The uber-defensive abilities of the 29 are effectively countered by the speed of the 262 and 163, and the size of the 163 as a target, especially if its a single aircraft. A single B-29 would carry less than formation of Lancs, although it would be higher and faster.

I like the idea of a prototype '45 arena, even if on a limited basis. P-51H, XP-47H, XP-72, A7M Reppu, F2G Corsair, F7F Tigercat, F8F Bearcat, Meteor, P-80, P-40Q, MB.5, Supermarine Spiteful, etc. I do however, agree that more additions should be made to the existing plane and GV set before we start looking at what-if scenarios.

What it boils down to really - any aircraft can be added to the game. HTC has the ability to impose whatever limitations it wants to make the aircraft viable. Thinking that the '29 would alter the game so dramatically to influence gameplay is wrong - HTC has the ability to control all aspects of balance, from the micro to macro levels. Us relying on a 2 year old post from a staffer is also not much - requirements and demands and priorities change almost daily - not only from the stuff we don't see or hear about from within the company, but from who they're competing with in the market, player requests and demands, the implementation of new technologies, maintenance of the existing platform and future, heavy-duty changes that might be coming down the pike. While I would like to see strategic bombing improved in this game, the overwhelming majority of the players in this game operate under 10K.

[1carbine]

I don't believe the development of the B-29 would be much different than other heavies already in game. Weapon's data is already there, flight model a is probably a standard fill-in-the-data template. Developing the 3D model, interiors, etc., would be the biggest hurdle.

Perking them makes sense, rear bases launches make sense...so to limit the Uber-ability of the plane, don't make it a formation bomber, make it a stand-alone single.

Does it perform, yes. Will Brewsters and Spit 16s catch them? Not if they're up in the statosphere. However, historically, B-29 accuracy was horrible at high altitude because of the environmental effects on the bombs as they fell. The higher you go, the less accurate the payload delivery. Lower altitude, you increase the chances of interception.

The Ta-152 was designed to be a high-altitude interceptor, its purpose was to kill bombers. 262s and 163s would have something worth climbing to alt to intercept. The uber-defensive abilities of the 29 are effectively countered by the speed of the 262 and 163, and the size of the 163 as a target, especially if its a single aircraft. A single B-29 would carry less than formation of Lancs, although it would be higher and faster.

I like the idea of a prototype '45 arena, even if on a limited basis. P-51H, XP-47H, XP-72, A7M Reppu, F2G Corsair, F7F Tigercat, F8F Bearcat, Meteor, P-80, P-40Q, MB.5, Supermarine Spiteful, etc. I do however, agree that more additions should be made to the existing plane and GV set before we start looking at what-if scenarios.

What it boils down to really - any aircraft can be added to the game. HTC has the ability to impose whatever limitations it wants to make the aircraft viable. Thinking that the '29 would alter the game so dramatically to influence gameplay is wrong - HTC has the ability to control all aspects of balance, from the micro to macro levels. Us relying on a 2 year old post from a staffer is also not much - requirements and demands and priorities change almost daily - not only from the stuff we don't see or hear about from within the company, but from who they're competing with in the market, player requests and demands, the implementation of new technologies, maintenance of the existing platform and future, heavy-duty changes that might be coming down the pike. While I would like to see strategic bombing improved in this game, the overwhelming majority of the players in this game operate under 10K.

Very well written. But I disagree on it being treated different why shouldn't it have a formation, would put a bigger dent in the HQ or the city. and we are having a what if scenario it's already started.

[JHerne]

The biggest complaint I've heard about implementing the B-29 is the fact that its the pinnacle of WW2 aircraft development in terms of bombers. When you consider the lineage of the B-29...the follow-ons were the B-36, B-47, then B-52. I could include the B-58 in there but that's a bird of a different color.

So the argument is - it carries too much, too fast, too high, and has too much defensive firepower. So you reduce that firepower and payload by 66%. At that point, within the existing structure of the game and planeset, you have your 'balance' that people are so concerned about.

I agree with the skeptics, that a 3-plane formation of B-29s, at 30,000ft AGL and 300mph IAS, is a tough nut to crack with anything but a 163 or 262. The biggest gripe is lack of early warning. A smart bomber pilot will fly outside the dar circles, so unless you have a point interceptor, by the time you reach 30,000ft. in your Ta-152, they're long gone.

I can easily see both sides of the argument here, and believe me, I'd love to be part of a 30-plane ThundrEgg B-29 mission to the enemy capital. But I can also understand the difficulty in intercepting that same formation. The overwhelming majority of players are going to simply shrug it off because its too daunting a task.