Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Midnight on October 21, 2004, 09:47:56 AM
-
I thought I read somewhere that HTC said he would disable level bombers (like B-17) from being able to drop bombs in a dive *IF* it was prooved that this was not possible from a real bomber.
Not having access to a real B17 with 500lb bombs to try this out, why shouldn't we be able to use physics to determine what was possible?
I would venture a guess that the bombs in the low part of the bay might be able to drop out in a dive, but the ones in the upper part of the bay would either get jammed up in the rails, or actually crash into the sidewalls of the bay, as most "Dive bombing" bombers are dropping at zero Gs.
Futher, I think we are missing a bomb collision model for in-air collisions between aircraft and bombs. Perhaps if we had a collison model for this, we would see dive boming of level bombers decrease, as the possibilty of bomb collisions in the bomb bay would make it more difficult.
-
Modify the model so that bomber's wings can fly right off if going over a certain speed. Buff's didnt automatically pull up if they were into a steep dive...
-
We have this whole calibration routine, so why not disallow the dropping of ordinance if the calibration is off by XX%. Just alert the pilot that callibration is off with the orange text and require a new calibration before arming the ordinance.
The above plus the requirement to drop from the F6 view should see the end of the dive bombing heavies, I would think, but not restrict them with reguards to high vs. low alt attacks.
I still think that bombers below 5k should not get any drones, but a new bomber drone will form up with you for each 5k you climb, though.
-
Furious, that doesn't make sense at all...lol
You receieve a B17 that just appears on your screen once you pass 5k? no. All you gotta do is perk the extra formation bombers and you wont see many formations anymore...
-
Originally posted by Mak333
...You receieve a B17 that just appears on your screen once you pass 5k?...
...and them just exploding when they fall out of formation is what?
A drone popping into existance 3k out and forming up with you would not be anymore cheezey than some other things we already have.
Like a million PT's popping out of nowhere after a fleet is sunk, or GV's popping into existance 15 miles away from their base.
-
better idea. how about not leting bombs drop is the nose is +/-15 degrees?
-
But Furious, what if you didn't want another drone past 5k? The fact that the pilot has no control over his own aircraft just seems odd. I do see your point about drone's blowing up but them just appearing once you pass a certain alt cannot be compared to that...
-
I thought I read somewhere that HTC said he would disable level bombers (like B-17) from being able to drop bombs in a dive *IF* it was prooved that this was not possible from a real bomber.
It probably was possible to dive bomb in almost any type of aircraft, whether you had the ability to pull out of the dive was another matter all together. If B17 pilots had fly by wire or a MS sidewinder control system then you would have seen them trying to dog fight ME262's. I've never flown a heavy bomber myself but I'm assuming that it would take a donkey to pull one out of of a dive like you see in AH.
I have never seen any footage of a formation of heavy bomber using dive bomb tactics, if anyone knows where any is it would be interesting to watch.
I would rather HT use his time to code new planes/maps/effects etc.., rather than run around trying to plug "loopholes" in the game play that some player - who can't play the game in the spirit of things- will exploit, if it isn't dive bombing B17's it'll be wrangling free tea and biccies in the o' club.
I'ts a case of looking at why you play here, is it for the challenge, or just to play the easy option and try and find loopholes, because deep down we all know that heavy bombers weren't really used in this fashion... well maybe not that much but I need to see to believe.
-
There is still fighters in the game that are capable of shooting down bombers aren`t there?
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
There is still fighters in the game that are capable of shooting down bombers aren`t there?
That, my friend, requires *effort*. Its vastly easier to rant here and demand such things not be allowed.
At this point, bombers should be thankful the engines start :p
-
I don't know about anyone else but I don't usually carry a spare fighter around in the boot of my panzer.
As to "effort" well ask yourself this, what takes more?, being accurate with one 1000lb bomb in an attack plane or just dropping 14 of them.
-
The immediate solution would be to to make the bombs drop only from the Bombardier's position.
Problem fixed!
ps) The bombers need a target. Small scale tactical targets such as airfields, is definately not a suitable target. Same thing with towns. In the MA where things revolve around territorial capture that depends on field suppression, the bombers have no place in the game.
But what about the strat objects? Such as refineries and etc? Its pretty much worthless, as the procedures required to actually effect the game in a wide scale are much too compliated, and unrealistic a goal.
If we want to see buffs in the game, the high flying, massive formations of buffs as they should be, we need a new strat system. An attritional, wide-scale system, that effects the game wholely. An attritional system powerful enough to effect the game for days.
-
Originally posted by Scaevola
I don't know about anyone else but I don't usually carry a spare fighter around in the boot of my panzer.
You will find the fighters located in the hangar section on your clipboard.
-
Oy vey, there was a reason that aircraft designers mounted the ordinance of dive bombers on the exterior of the aircraft. And it wasn't because they'd sat down and said "How can we add the most drag to this aircraft, as its still 20 MPH too darn fast? I dunno chief, howzabout we take out the bomb bay and put them heavy things on the outside of the airframe!"
Several dive bombers, such as the JU 87 and SBD actually had devices to extend the bomb beyond the radius of the prop, because bombs dropped in a near vertical drive would have fallen through the prop rather than executing the nifty magical right angle bombs dropped from our level bombers do!
Just try the following at home. Take a styrofoam coffee cup, make a little "bomb bay" by cutting a square opening in the side. Pretend the closed end is the nose of the bomber. Hold a penny inside the cup over the bomb bay opening. Now point the "nose" straight down and let go of the penny. Whoops! The penny hit the inside of the nose didn't it? So would your bombs. You'll find the "bomb" hits part of the "aircraft" at most angles over 45 degrees.
- SEAGOON
-
Nice analogy lol. I tried it out myself. :aok
I agree with Seagoon. Some bombers were called "dive bombers". B17's and Lancs were not one of these yet we still see them dive with steep angles. For those planes, lets disable the release of bombs from any other position than the bombardier's. I still think perking the formation for b17's, b26's lancs, and others is a good idea.
-
Originally posted by Mak333
For those planes, lets disable the release of bombs from any other position than the bombardier's.
Let`s not. :D
Instead maybe disable the next flight of any fighters within a certain radius that could have easily confronted the low, incoming bomber instead of heading into an allready capped base and letting their CV get sunk, etc. Makes just as much sense.
Case in point: Yesterday morning I went to attempt sinking an NME CV. The base had aprx. 10 fighters with a tight cap on the pummeled field. I was alone, unescorted.Upon reaching the area the CV was located at an altitiude of around 4.5 to 5K there were 10 NME planes over the CV still grabbing alt , although ALL of them had an allt advantage over my bombers. Why they were still grabbing I haven`t a clue. Any one of them could have made my run a living hell. Instead they ignored the incoming threat and headed to the allready capped field. Made my pass over the CV, dropped 2 salvos of 4 500lbers, returned to base uncontested by the fighters and scored the sinking of the CV.
It boils down to you asking for the removal of someone elses ability to accomplish their task when YOU are not willing to put out any effort to defend against the threat.
-
Jackal, The idea is the realism factor, not someone's ability to bomb without escort....
We already know lancs can dive bomb and take out all FH's with no escort even if base is heavily populated. The point being tried to make here is how can we limit the suicidal bombers. Not if we can shut them down before they reach the field....
-
When the B24 gets released its number cause of death will be...
(http://www.b24.mach3ww.com/new/454bg.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Mak333
Jackal, The idea is the realism factor, not someone's ability to bomb without escort...
LOL The realism factor is that with 10 fighters with alt over an unescorted bomber group would be a turkey shoot for the fighters if instead of going off on search for the easy points or kills.
-
Originally posted by Mak333
Jackal, The idea is the realism factor, not someone's ability to bomb without escort....
We already know lancs can dive bomb and take out all FH's with no escort even if base is heavily populated. The point being tried to make here is how can we limit the suicidal bombers. Not if we can shut them down before they reach the field....
If the base is heavily populated as you put it then Lancs should be your bread and butter. Lancs are the easiest target of them all. What, supposedly is all this heavy population doing if not taking out threats before they reach the base, pylon racing?
As you put it," shut them down before they reach the field" should be priority #1. It should also be a cake walk .
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
You will find the fighters located in the hangar section on your clipboard.
Once again I am amazed by the cohesive and constructive arguments for and against a subject you get on this bulletin board.
I will try and put it in terms that will be a lot easier on the grey matter:-
Me in Panzer on ground
panzer no got wings
me know where hanger is
but me in panzer
geezer comes in B17 and dive bombs
methinks oooh lemme go all the way back to hanger to grab plane to shoot bad old B17 down.
and yeh lo and behold bloke in B17 not be there when get back.
anyone can be a smart ... and try and bring the level of discussion down to a certain level but as stated in my previous posts it's a case of self examination and if you want to dive bomb B17's etc that is your choice but in my humble onion thats going outside the aspect of what the gameplay is about.
If anyone has a legitimate reason or they can point to certain examples to justify dive bombing in heavy bombers then I'll look at them and say either yeh you got me beat or try and formulate an argument against.
If you're gonna quote then quote verbatim.
If you're gonna be a smart ... then at least be smart.
If you're gonna argue then at least have an argument.
A is for Apple
-
Originally posted by Scaevola
Me in Panzer on ground
panzer no got wings
me know where hanger is
but me in panzer
Don`t be in panzer.
Plane has wings.
Also has guns.
Shoot bomber down before reachs base.
Panzer in this case useless anyway.
Now Tonto, maybe in your language you can get a grip on reality.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
That, my friend, requires *effort*. Its vastly easier to rant here and demand such things not be allowed.
At this point, bombers should be thankful the engines start :p
What a load of crap. I had a a 5 bomber kill sorti last night and a 3 bomber kill sorti last night. The night befor I had a lanc formation sorti where I bombed a defended large base from 14k and destroyed all 7 fighter hangers my self killed an intercepting p38 and landed all three bombers. All those sortis were flown with my country out numbered by just one of the other countries by over 2 to 1
There. do I get to comment on how stupid the current bomber usage is?
Make the bombers work like they are technically limited to.
Its not like anyone is asking for anything less then then what is reasonable limitations on what bombers could do. Let them bomb dive the Ju88 if they want. It was made for it.
-
It boils down to you asking for the removal of someone elses ability to accomplish their task when YOU are not willing to put out any effort to defend against the threat.
The effort to defend has no relevance in this matter at all. We're talking about a systematic exploit in the game.
Since it turns out that most people are too lazy to ever plan and execute a proper bomb run, and exploit the F3 externals and limited depiction of G-effects in bomb drop angles, it is only natural that something must be done with it.
If the fighters in your case were too lazy to stop you, that's all fine and dandy. But that's really got nothing to do with the bombers dancing and jerking to avoid fire, diving to gain 350mph speed(which is a speed higher than 80% of fighters in the plane set can achieve at that alts with level acceleration), and going in with a nice dive angle to time the drop by using F3 externals with the whole formation that can spew at least 10,000lbs amount of ordnance at the target area.
In other words, if you wanna still do the low-alt bombing thing, then fine. You don't want to calibrate it? Then fine.
You'll just have to do it in the bombardier's position. During a level flight. Through the bombsight. That's what it boils down to.
-
http://www.dba-oracle.com/louis_f_burleson.htm
As copied from the link above
Major Bernard Schriever, a newly-minted Major fresh from Graduate school at Stanford University, joined the 19th bomb group in Australia and directed Burleson’s effort to perfect the flare racks. In less than 90-days Schriever recommended Louis Burleson for an officer’s commission. Schriever was the pilot of Louis Burleson’s crew on a famous bombing raid there Schriever used the B-17 as a dive bomber, destroying Japanese battleship in an act of extreme heroism. This recollection is from an article about General Schriever in “Air Force” magazine:
General Bernard Schriever
“They flew in a formation of about a dozen B-17s in a night raid on Rabaul. Their airplane carried the flares and half the regular bomb load. The flare system worked well, but Schriever wanted to check on the bombing results, so they made another circuit over the target area. Flak was heavy but ineffective at the 10,000-foot altitude from which they were bombing.
As they turned, the No. 3 engine burst into a ball of flames. Dougherty, in the left seat, feathered the prop and shut the engine down. They still had bombs on board but did not want to set up another bombing approach. A quick conference on the intercom led to a decision: They would dive-bomb the ships in the harbor.”
Since it apparently CAN be done I see no reason to change history just to satisfy a few that dont like it. Im sure that all the twin engine (and apparently even the B-17) bombers have official reports of dive bombing in them. BTW I also believe its over used in AH but then again there are so many things that dont fit into the "real" catagory. maybe disable any dive bombing in formations would help it seems like a streach that a whole formation would dive bomb .
-
Even an F-15E is limited to approx +/- 60 degrees in the tech order due to "bad things" happening at more extreme angles, and we are using external carriage with explosive ejectors that shove the weapons away from the plane at a precise angle during release. Dropping gravity-release bombs from a bomb bay with a total relative "G force" vector more than 20ish degrees away from straight down out the bomb bay doors is just begging for either a weapon hangup in the racks, weapon to weapon contact and detonation, or a weapon to aircraft impact that could leave a live weapon bouncing around loose inside the bomb bay.
I heard a report of a B-1 release over Iraq where the pilot began to turn before the bomb bay was empty, and several bombs struck the bomb bay doors after only a 10-20 degree roll, causing minor damage. That's only a small roll while still in level flight, so imagine the damage in more extreme flight conditions?
As for the historical report of a B-17 "dive bombing", even a 10 degree dive is considered a dive bombing attack so without more details as to the actual dive angle and situation, there's no way that account, however true it may be, can possibly be used to justify the extreme dives possible, effective, and survivable in AH heavy bombers as currently modeled.
Maybe Pyro and HT could scrape together a bomb bay mockup in the computer and drop virtual bombs out of it from various roll and pitch angles. It ought to be visually apparent at what angle it's unlikely the bombs will cleanly exit the bomb bay, and those results could be used as force-limiting factors when bombs are released. The amount of G forces could also be varied since a bomb released at less than 1 G would drop more slowly as well and may not cleanly exit the bomb bay. If the relative force vector on the bay exceeds the limiting angle or the force component out of the bay is less than, say, .5 G's (for example), the bomb release would not be successful and would either hang up in the bay or the bombs could explode right there.
A simple virtual box with doors and racks of bombs sized according to a B-17 bomb bay might not take too long to model, and then it could just be rotated and accelerated in space as the weapons are released. Bomb to model and bomb to bomb contact would need to be modelled to really see the effects of the various angles on release, and bomb drag also would help show how various airflow angles affect a clean release as well.
The "problem" has been identified and there are a few ways to go about doing something about it. Right now, it's just a facet of the heavy bomber concept that simply isn't modelled so people are taking advantage of that hole in the aircraft model to do things that probably wouldn't be possible in real life. Without determining what the proper behaviour *should* be through some experimentation and design work however, any fixes are just gameplay adjustments instead of an actual addition or modification to the aircraft simulation. It is my understanding that this is why HT and Pyro have let it go on so long... They haven't had the time to properly simulate it to figure out the right way to add this to the bomber model to make it realistic instead of just a way to artifically limit gameplay.
IMHO :)
It doesn't matter to me personally because dive bombing goofs in the game simply don't affect me one way or another. It's a game and they're taking advantage of a game feature. The way I play the game only very rarely takes me into contact with people using this particular quirk of the simulation so it's an academic exercise to me. If the HTC crew has time to fix it right, good for them and good for us. If not, it doesn't affect me anyhow and I'll enjoy the nice new water and other enhancements they keep adding because those DO affect my gameplay and I appreciate their work.
-
Not interested in buying into this "you gotta play my way" stuff in the MA at all.
You may however be interested in something that apparently happened in WW2 that astonishes me with its skill and bravery.
I was watching a History Channel story on 617 Squadron and they made reference to a pilot dive-bombing in a Lancaster so as to hit a target with great accuracy. They reported that one of the pilots was able to successfully demonstrate the technique. Apparently Cheshire VC was inspired by the idea and after getting a personal exhibition, realised it's benefits and promoted its use for target marking. He thought that using a Lancaster probably wasn't the optimum so he proposed and then introduced Mosquitoes into the Squadron for the task. He often flew one of them himself. The technique was then adapted for Pathfinder use.
After the dam raids 617 became a special weapons squadron skilled in the ultra-accurate placement of bombs like the 12,000lb Tallboy and 22,000lb Grand Slam.
I spent 60 seconds and googled up these 3 references to the Lanc and diving and divebombing. They are not related directly to each other so be careful of their context.
"Barbara then introduced Bob Knights for a talk on Wartime Memories of 617 Squadron. Bob explained that 617 (the famous Dambusters), was formed on March 20th 1943 for the sole purpose of destroying the Möhne, Eder and Sorpe dams using Barnes-Wallis’s new bouncing bomb. The raid took place on May 16th, 1943, and the Möhne and Eder were both breached. Bob joined the squadron after the dams raid. Leonard Cheshire was now in command, having taken a reduction in rank from Group Captain to Wing Commander.
Bob’s story covered the first raid over France using a new bomb sight, SABS, and a new marking method promoted by Cheshire: dive a Lancaster straight down on the target and drop the flare from low level. "
"Several missions followed against pin point targets, but they were not a great success. Oboe marking was too inaccurate against small targets. Cheshire and Martin worked out between them that only low- level marking in a dive would be good enough, and on 3/4 January 1944, they tried it against a flying bomb site at Freval. By the illumination of flares, they marked from 400 ft (120 m), and 12,000 lbs (5440 kg) bombs from the remainder of the formation as they obliterated the target."
"Morale went up fantastically as the Lancaster proved herself to be easy to use. This was a big aircraft, and she flew as easily and as dexterously as a Tiger Moth. The lanc had no bad habits ... you could dive the Lancaster at phenomenal speeds..."
-
And how often did such things happen when compared with the regular 8th AF/RAF bombing sorties?
Let's face it. We don't play the game how we want. We play it how HTC wants and how they see fit. Their mission statement starts;
"Aces High takes the art and science of vintage WWII air combat
and sets it in an online high intensity environment where
hundreds of players can battle it out with and against
each other..."
Art and science? Where's the 'art and science' in the deck bomb runs? The only thing I see there is laziness and crudity. I wouldn't say this if 99% of the bombers I see in the MA are flying under 5k.
It is a result of 'misplaced' bombers that have no place in the MA. MA revolves around fast-paced field captures which conditions that change by the minute. A bomber that takes a long time to get up to alt, to try to hit such small tactical-scale targets, is wildly inefficient.
No doubt, it is because AH started out as a small-scale A2A combat simulation, with bombers or GVs being nothing more than 'side-show attractions'. However, the numbers grew, people changed, and the game evolved into more than what it was.
The only point of compromise that holds people with wildly different ideas of 'fun' together, is that we fly to simulate certain aspects of typical WW2 combat, and that is what holds its novelty over many other games from other competitors. AH is a realistic experience, recreated in a multiplayer environment, which is not limited to a "MP Room", but happens in a large-scale battlefield on real time.
If the people who object to such limitations are truly "in defense of" bomber usage, then they should ask for a better strat system, not try to protect a gameplay exploit that kills whatever immersion left in the MA.
If the people who object to such limitations are in defense of "the player's freedom to do whatever he wants", then that's bullshi*.
-
Low-level bomb runs were made in real life some good some not so good, in all forms of aircraft. The hard angle of attack was not used in all forms of aircraft, it was fatally realized by some crews and test pilots.
An angle restriction is the only way to conform to a realism factor.
People behind this game has got to say Geeeesssss! Ok now with all the open suggestions I will set down and right the parameters for such changes.
Hats off to ya AH for putin up with all of us
Spiker
-
In real life a bomb aimer released the bombs.
Disable bomb release from any position aside from the bomb aimer F6 view. Require a calibration before release (akin to "fusing the bombs").
Voila no more dive bombing.
-
Make the drop possible only from the bombadier position... that has potential.
Could the pilot of a -17 release the bombs from the cockpit? What about a lanc's pilot? Or a -24's pilot (this will replace divebombing -17s)? If the pilot couldn't release the bombs, then limit release to the bombadier (or any other position that could release while in flight). That'll stop some of the F3 view abuse going on here.
-
I's not low lvl bomb runs that are bad just the dive bombing of lvl bombers and the use of the F3 position to bomb, Come on how many bombers had the ability to jump outside of the plane to see where their target was??? :)
I think making bombing from the F6 position only is a good choice.
About 3 nights ago I sunk 3 cv's lvl bombin in the f6 position of my B26's at 1000ft up and sunk a cruiser with the torps on a flight of JU88's,I landed 2 out of 3 flights of 26's and the JU88's minus a drone or 2. Is this really so hard???
I always use bomb sight to bomb and usually if not always hit target. The only problem I've found with this is if I have a lack of fighter cover right befor I make my drop and I end up with 4 or 5 cons on my 6. But usually my squadmates can keep em off of me long enuf to bomb my target.
I also talked to a B26 bombadier and asked if they ever used dive bombing tactics and he said "no only lvl bombing tactics." So if they only used lvl bombing in b26's then I see no reason Y B17/Lancs should be able to realistically dive bomb. JU87's/88's yes as they were biult to dive bomb.
Seems to me that people just don't put in enuf time learning how to use the F6 position.
So Jackle if you still can't figure out how to use it after all this time I'll be happy to take you to the TA and teach you how to calibrate the bomb sight.:D
-
If you catch my bombers under 20K you caught me climbing.... and I never dive-bomb unless my planes are completely shot up and calbrating has become impossible.
That being said, bombers are too easy to kill, especially at low alt... I dont dive bomb or like to see others do it... BUT it was done, I think it is a tactic that can reap a lot of success IF the defenders are not doing their job.
Personally I like long high altitude bomb runs... gives me plenty of time to drink beer, watch the map, drink beer, do laundry, drink beer, play with the gf a lil, drink beer...
I wish these guys would learn to level bomb and set up runs like i do, but i am not one of the realism or conformist nazis here that thinks everything must be done just a certain way for it to be ok. Let em have their fun... low altitude bombers are perk points waiting to be landed! Up a FW190A8 or a ME110G2 and put them in the drink! Besides if there are plenty of them down low to shoot at... you won't be climbing up after my arse! :D
-
You know, I`ve never heard the "F3" complaint until the last week and a half or so.
Hmmmmmmmm............. I don`t think I could hit the broadside of a very large barn in F3 view.
-
Dive bombing was possible in real life but not without restrictions and complications - such as structural limitations on the diving plane, bombs not clearing the bomb-bay, and bombs spinning out of control and landing way off the target if not dropped properly (that still happens quite a lot, even for modern fighters with GP bombs).
AH is not 100% realizm, but the dive bombing lanc/B17 formations is both non-realistic and an ugly, against-the-general-good-of-the-game tactic.
To the suggestions designed to limit the dive bombing (such as F6 bomb release only) I would add a 1 perk cost for each drone.
This is an extremely low cost that almost any newbie can afford and will encourage players to save their drones - by flying high to make it hard for fighters to reach them and by not flying into the ground.
1 perk per drone still enables you to fly a single bomber for free if you don't have 1 meger point and collecting points in a bomber is extremely easy if you bomb.... STRAT TARGETS!. Bomb cities, towns, factories, HQ - targets with lots of small structures and harvest the perks.
Leave the F3 working. It's purpose is to represent the multi-crew helping with spotting planes.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by bozon
1 perk per drone still enables you to fly a single bomber for free if you don't have 1 meger point and collecting points in a bomber is extremely easy if you bomb.... STRAT TARGETS!. Bomb cities, towns, factories, HQ - targets with lots of small structures and harvest the perks.
Leave the F3 working. It's purpose is to represent the multi-crew helping with spotting planes.
Bozon
Negative =) Why should newbies be able to fly formations?? I have already stated this a numerous amount of times in other threads. Perk each extra bomber by 10-20. This way it forces newbies to actually become somewhat experienced in level bombing. Flying the formation should be a privelege - whether one has enough perks. Not a simple right. No one will care about a single perk. Even if you are no good at dive bombing in buffs and take out maybe a couple targets, theres your 2 perks right there. It would never have any effect on the amount of dive bombing or formations.
-
Originally posted by Mak333
Negative =) Why should newbies be able to fly formations??
LOL Why shouldn`t they? You think this is a union job or something?
-
For most people coming into this community, it is a learning experience. Let them learn first with basics, then progress. What good is a game if you see the limits in the first hour of playing? Maybe 20 perks may be high, but it will keep the formations down. It's a possible solution to fix the excessive dive bombing as well.
-
And why is the tempest perked? Shouldnt newbies be able to fly that? Same with the 262, just because it's a jet, does that mean newbies shouldnt be able to fly it right away? Im just adding on to those who say perk la7's and such. Think of flying a formation as flying a jet...
When this game first came out, they never had formations did they? I think thats how it should be. You get your free plane just like any other bomber or fighter, then a formation is perked at a small rate. Just because the purpose is to level bomb doesn't mean it should automatically have extra planes added to the plane selection.
-
Originally posted by Mak333
Think of flying a formation as flying a jet...
ROFL Check them meds. I think maybe you have missed a few doses.
-
;)
-
No one will care about a single perk.
my gut feeling is that you'd suprised.
see what 8 perks did to the F4U-C.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
LOL Why shouldn`t they? You think this is a union job or something?
LMFAO great comparison!!! :rofl