Resurgence of medium/Strike bombers.

[Ack-Ack]

And that's all I have to say about that.

You're lucky you ran into a bomber pilot that was a crappy gunner.  Against a better gunner, your FW 190 would have been toast with that terrible attack profile of coming up on the dead six position,

ack-ack

[BaldEagl]

You're lucky you ran into a bomber pilot that was a crappy gunner.  Against a better gunner, your FW 190 would have been toast with that terrible attack profile of coming up on the dead six position,

ack-ack

I didn't say it was textbook.

[Zoney]

You're lucky you ran into a bomber pilot that was a crappy gunner.  Against a better gunner, your FW 190 would have been toast with that terrible attack profile of coming up on the dead six position,

ack-ack

UHOH 

[bangsbox]

When I come in dead 6 with a 190 or gondie 109: I do my damage at 1k out and aim carefully, I don't move in closer until gunner stops shooting

[icepac]

B17s can remove the wing from a 110g at near d1500 from most any angle.

[Fulcrum]

And that's all I have to say about that.

I agree.  I think medium bombers are yummy.  


I tend to slash across or come up underneath tho'...  

[Blinder]

Yesterday we stopped a Bisg attack where a lot of B25s were present, "I havnt seen that many B-25s together in a long time". With the coming TU-2S, the redo B-26, the eventual A-26, and of course the A-20, JU88, Mossie, KI-67, Boston, 410, AR234, I sense a come resurgence in the two engined strike bomber role.

I'll probably become a Tu-2 junkie when it finally becomes available. 

[Nathan60]

And that's all I have to say about that.

LOL 

[save]

B17s can remove the wing from a 110g at near d1500 from most any angle.

And that is absolutely crap, why should a .50cal reach out 1.5k in a bomber and not in a fighter armed with the same gun ???

This really needs to be addressed, read the "fixing bombers" thread in wish list

[Lusche]

And that is absolutely crap, why should a .50cal reach out 1.5k in a bomber and not in a fighter armed with the same gun ???

They are modeled the same.

At same speed altitude and firing direction the bullets from the same guns have the same maximum travel distance.

For example, use the .target command offline for a quick test. A B-17 at 1k flying 239 mph shooting straight forward will have it's guns register hits at 1080 yards, but not at 1100 yards anymore. If you do the same at about the same speed in a P-51, you will find the same result.

Of course, the higher you go, the further the bullets will travel, and a bomber shooting backwards to fighter flying towards him will have a greater effective range than the same fighter shooting at the bomber heading away from him.

[Scca]

The B-26 is probably the best medium bomber in the game due to its speed, bomb load, and amazing defensive armament.  The waist guns cover such a wide field of fire downward that they are just 1 notch shy of being a ball turret.  Now it does take a bit practice to get used to switching to the proper waist gun or jumping back into the tail turret, but so does everything else in Aces High. 

Just going from memory, at 50% fuel and a full bomb load, the B-26 cruises at 275mph at 14k.  Once you kick the bombs out, speed obviously increases, and nearly all enemy fighters will be slowly creeping towards your six.  Easy plinking for the the twin 50s in the tail turret.  Head on attacks are also a lot of fun. I usually disengage autopilot and have the whole formation open up with the fixed forward firing guns.  Just looking for a shot to splash oil all over the canopy of the enemy fighter.  That's enough to spoil his aim and sometimes discourages him from trying to reengage.

I remember one time I dropped all my ords then went fighter trolling in a B-26.  Just my luck someone was trying to rope a fighter just as I was approaching them.  I went into the pilot position and started climbing the formation and picked the red guy off with the forward firing guns.  You should have heard the "woop woops" when they saw a bomber pick a con off a friendly. 

It only happened that one time, but I still giggle like a little girl when I think about it 

[Karnak]

I remember one time I dropped all my ords then went fighter trolling in a B-26.  Just my luck someone was trying to rope a fighter just as I was approaching them.  I went into the pilot position and started climbing the formation and picked the red guy off with the forward firing guns.  You should have heard the "woop woops" when they saw a bomber pick a con off a friendly. 

It only happened that one time, but I still giggle like a little girl when I think about it 

I remember when having the fighter hangars down meant upping B-26s to use as fighters as the last ditch field defense.  I scored a few fighter kills that way.

[bozon]

They are modeled the same.

At same speed altitude and firing direction the bullets from the same guns have the same maximum travel distance.

For example, use the .target command offline for a quick test. A B-17 at 1k flying 239 mph shooting straight forward will have it's guns register hits at 1080 yards, but not at 1100 yards anymore. If you do the same at about the same speed in a P-51, you will find the same result.

Did you test it also shooting backwards?
If the travel distance is absolute, i.e. measured relative to the ground, then a bomber firing backwards will reach farther back than the plane after it that is shooting forwards.

[skorpx1]

And that's all I have to say about that.

This.


Once the "new" wears off of the planes it'll be back to B17's B24's and B29's.

[Karnak]

This.


Once the "new" wears off of the planes it'll be back to B17's B24's and B29's.

The Lancaster has been the #1 bomber in AH for many years.  Odd that you left it out.