Carrier bombers given drones

[Skyguns MKII]

You left off one important difference about the TBM... I dont recall ever seeing an F4U or F6F carrying a torpedo... which was what the TBM was originally designed to do.  

Also... you cant compare the SBD to the F4U-1D...  the 1D was a much later model aircraft.  At the time the SBD was put into service, the primary naval fighter was the F4F... and it was JUST a fighter, and top of the line at that!  Even when the F4U did come out, its early models were intended for air to air roles.

What causes some confusion... is that in the Late War arena, you have aircraft like the SBD that were designed for Early War use, still available and being used in a Late War setting.  In "real life"... these aircraft were obsolete and no longer being used in front line combat... if at all.

To see the SBD and TBM really be effective, you need to see them in use in Early War, or in FSO... where they are flying with and against aircraft from their same time period.

So no... we don't need formations for naval bombers.  They just need to be used in the settings they were intended to be used in.

i understand clearly, im just applying this for LWMA sakes.

[skorpion]

no. i only say that because they only flew in formations to try to get the enemy to not engage due to mass numbers, after they reached their targets, they kind of had to do their own killing.

[SmokinLoon]

...and watch while the number of kills against them go up by at least a factor of 3.  Ok... I will grant you a TBM is a pig.  It cant maneuver anyway.  So why not hand the fighter pilot chasing him 2 extra kills for nothing?  They are the most popular girl at the dance anyway when they show up... everyone goes running after them shouting "MINE MINE MINE".  The only bird more popular than the TBM is a Goon.

But the only defensive asset the B5N has going for it, is that it can out maneuver almost any aircraft in the game.  Put it in a formation, and he will be handing the fighter pilot 2 kills just so he can ditch his drones and maneuver the one.

So, you base your opinion on if the TBM and B5N should or should not have drones on how easy it is for them to be shot down by fighters???  Oh, and you kmust be thinking of the D3A because the B5N is THEE pig of the game.  The B5N is smooth flying, but it can't do anything other than drop 3/250kg bombs.

[Devonai]

As long as the Boston III can up in a formation, I think the TBM should as well.  However, as long as the TBM has wax paper horizontal stabilizers, there's really no point.  The TBM was one of my favorite A/C growing up, and I've been disappointed time and time again, when getting pinged briefly by even .30 cal results in the catastrophic failure of the horizontal stabilizers.

[Lusche]

Oh, and you kmust be thinking of the D3A because the B5N is THEE pig of the game.  The B5N is smooth flying, but it can't do anything other than drop 3/250kg bombs.

... and dance until the enemy fighter runs out of patience and goes somewhere else, help arrives or you can make him auger.
While the B5N has no chance to kill a fighter on it's own, it still is very maneuverable without bombs and with low fuel and can literally turn on a dime compared to LWMA fighters. (In my personal best B5N tour, I ended up at K/D 3-1 vs fighters  )

[BaldEagl]

Here's a reason not to do it:  Land based heavy bombers line up nose to tail on the runway.  Carrier based bombers line up at the end of the deck of a carrier.  Either HT is going to have to write new code to get them lined up in some different way, shorten the deck for the lead plane or have the drones floating in air off the end of the carrier.   None of these are good.

[SmokinLoon]

Here's a reason not to do it:  Land based heavy bombers line up nose to tail on the runway.  Carrier based bombers line up at the end of the deck of a carrier.  Either HT is going to have to write new code to get them lined up in some different way, shorten the deck for the lead plane or have the drones floating in air off the end of the carrier.   None of these are good.

Valid points, there could be coding issues.  But I'd be willing to bet HTC could get it figured out well enough for the TBM and B5n to be able to have drones from a CV. 

[Tank-Ace]

Or if they can't, just disable drones from carriers. If they can't work the bugs out of the formations then I'm sure they can just disable them in certian locations.

[Skyguns MKII]

Or if they can't, just disable drones from carriers. If they can't work the bugs out of the formations then I'm sure they can just disable them in certain locations.

that counters the whole point of having them, The thing is you cant have bombers up with force unless you get many uncooperative players to cooperate, therefor when you are given drones you have some what of a force that is available from a CV...

[Tank-Ace]

Not really. It would be helpfull for some Special Events, and in the MA. But if they can't get the drones to work from a carrier thats no reason not to have drones when taking off from an airfield.

[Castle51]

I think this would be a great just for the fact that it would give a whole group of aircraft that hardly see any use at all a new lease on life.  I'm sure all the coding issues wouldnt be too hard to work through.

[Dragon Tamer]

+1 for drones for the B5N and TBM since both have bombsights. Other than that I don't see how drones for dive bombers would work all that well with the restricted flight abilities of the current drones; and before it gets suggested, no the drones shouldn't be able to maneuver as well as the lead plane. That would just lead to more whines about lancstukas and dog fighting bombers.

I second that +1 good point sir 

[Shifty]

I'd still really like to see this implemented.

[sparky1]

+1

[Zacherof]

Wasn't the carrier the same length when formation enabled B25's were enabled on the CV?

And I can garunnte I can stay
alive for and occasionally kill a fighte in a TBM. But one has to be very light