B-29

[ACE]

Should have won?  That's a weird question.  It got the most votes so I guess, sure, it should have won.

You missed my point entirely. 

[Jayhawk]

You missed my point entirely.  

Entirely on purpose... sorta of entirely.

What do you mean?

Was it right for the game?
Did another deserve it more?
Is it worth the perk?

Or did you leave it open for interpretation?

[ACE]

Entirely on purpose... sorta of entirely.

What do you mean?

Was it right for the game?
Did another deserve it more?
Is it worth the perk?

Or did you leave it open for interpretation?

I kinda wanted you to give your opinion  on it.   How do you like it ?

[Karnak]

Entirely on purpose... sorta of entirely.

What do you mean?

Was it right for the game?
Did another deserve it more?
Is it worth the perk?

Or did you leave it open for interpretation?

Sure.  It had to be added at some point.  The bomber guys now have their big toy like the fighter guys had the Me262 for a long time.

I voted for the Me410, but I accept that the B-29 won.

[Jayhawk]

I kinda wanted you to give your opinion  on it.   How do you like it ?

As a bomber guy (full disclosure, not currently playing the game), I voted the B-29 all the way through.  However, I loved the B-29 when I was using it.  It was expensive, added a little more danger to your missions, definitely forced you to fly them high.  My problem was never with the bomber, or with the perk price, but with targets to hit.

I had hoped that with the B-29 would soon come a redesign of the strat system.  Unfortunately, nothing ever came, and it was just not worth the time to take a B-29 up to 30k to hit city strat.  I still hope strat will be changed in a way that might make the B-29 a little more relevant, but I haven't heard anything that points to that.  I don't regret my vote for the B-29, but I hope there are changes relatively soon.

[tmetal]

Lame?  Maybe he doesn't mind losing his interceptor to your B-29.  Why shouldn't he risk it all for a B-29 kill?  It is the biggest, baddest and most perked bomber in the game.  Killing a rare, high-value target like that is far better than a kill on any other bomber.  It is quite a challenge to defeat such a fast and heavily defended bomber - one that the enemy pilot will do anything in his power to stop you.

I'm not saying they shouldn't "risk it all" for the kill, especially on a something like the B29. What I don't like is the ones who have no intention of ever RTBing the sortie. Personally, when I up a plane I do it with the intention to bring it back.  The players who follow a set of B29s so deep into enemy territory that they won't have the fuel to even get back to friendly territory, just so they can possibly get at least 1 kill before they scurry away are just as lame as the players who bomb a target then bail before an enemy gets within the proxy range, or the players who auger their plane into a hangar just to make sure their jabo attack actually hits. But hey, everybody pays to play their own way right? and everybody is entitled to their opinions of that play. So yeah the situation I described above, lame IMO. (<<<does the IMO disclaimer help?)

[Babalonian]

Sure.  It had to be added at some point.  The bomber guys now have their big toy like the fighter guys had the Me262 for a long time.

I voted for the Me410, but I accept that the B-29 won.

I think many of us accepted it... now where's our 410!?

[Karnak]

I think many of us accepted it... now where's our 410!?

Well, the B-29 winning didn't annoy me.  If the A-26 had won I would have been annoyed.

The people voting for the B-29 knew they were asking for a heavy bomber.  I am willing to bet most people voting for the A-26 thought they were voting for a big fighter and intended to use it as a fighter, not an attack aircraft.



The thing is, if another vote is held and the A-26 is on the list they may as well not hold the vote and just have done with it and add the A-26.  The P-61 is in that category too, though at least it really is a heavy fighter.  I'd not be surprised if the SB2C Helldiver or PBY-5 Catalina would triumph over any non-US aircraft as well, though it would be closer.

[lyric1]

Certainly did not become the game changer that people predicted & decided to leave the game over Supposedly left.

[Karnak]

Certainly did not become the game changer that people predicted & decided to leave the game over Supposedly left.

I could never understand how people thought it would be a massive game changer.  There is nothing in AH that bombers are really good for.  You're better off using heavy Bf110G-2s or heavy P-38Ls than bombers.  They get the only required ground attack job done much faster and can fight afterward.

I prefer the Mosquito Mk XVI as a bomber, to be honest.  I know I am biased in favor of Mossie's, but I honestly think it is a better tool in AH.

[Krupinski]

[ACE]

Krup have you heard about that ambedextrious pitcher that the yankees got from High School?  He throws high 90s with both arms!

[LCADolby]

Democracy sucks, the peasants are revolting 

[Rich52]

Certainly did not become the game changer that people predicted & decided to leave the game over Supposedly left.

It basicallt became what most of us, at least those with sense, were predicting it would be. A heavily perked bomber that wouldnt change any game. I wasnt around when it was introduced, in fact I still havnt flown the thing. But I still remember the cries of "NO NUKES" that always accompanied any B-29 thread as if the plane and A-bomb were linked by a tether and you couldnt have one without the other.

The whole thing was silly. If perk prices control other airplane numbers then why wouldnt it control B-29s too? If anything it was introduced a couple of years to late. Maybe we'd have more bomers squads left if it came earlier.

[oakranger]

I remember some people whine that the B-29 will ruin the game and people will milk-run the bases consistently. That does not appear to be true now.