Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: MajIssue on September 24, 2007, 10:08:35 AM
-
What about the bomber that brought Japan to her knees... The B-29! This airplane could be the second perk bomber in AH2. It seems strange that the Luftwaffe's AR 234 is represented and not the Superfortress. This could make high altitude bombing VERY interesting.
Also...
One of my squad mates was talking yesterday about "Luftwaffe '46" aircraft I don't know how practical it would be from a modeling perspective but it could be fun... Also the Japanese had several interesting aircraft late in the war like the manned "Buzz Bomb" Kamakazie CV killer and the Japanese version of the ME-262 for example (this aircraft had slightly better performance that its German "parent").
-
nOOk
:noid :noid
-
:O hereeeeeee we goooooooo
-
I fear for the future.
-
New wishlist forum requirement. B-29 have a minimum of 1 new thread per week.
-
[size=10]NO![/size]
Get the German, Japanese, Italian, and British bomber plane set up before we go hailing the Americans again.
-
if it comes with a nuclear bomb if it does come) make it cost 1 million+ perk points for the bomb
-
here:
load it up with 4000 lb bombs, like lanc, or 2000 lbs if they didnt take 4000's, make it some 5000 perks
-
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/nookie.gif)
:noid :noid :noid
1st
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/nookie.gif)
:noid :noid :noid
1st
Bronk
DArn you Bronk! You beat me 2 it :lol
-
My aunts father flew B29s in WW2, i am sure he can offer great info on the bomber.
-
Originally posted by PanzerIV
My aunts father flew B29s in WW2, i am sure he can offer great info on the bomber.
not going to happen, so why worry.
-
I agree with Denholm (but not with the agressive no part :lol ) Get other country bombers in first, then get the B-29....262 perk value maybe??
-
the plane was the oka (pink flower) do not coment me on the spelling for oka i know i spelled it wrong it was powered by a roket not a buzbomb engen it was launched by bombers bad idea the planes were easy kills for american planes it is credited i thing with the sinking of a single destroyer and severly damageing another
STOP POSTING THREADS ON THE B 29 I THINK HTC KNOWS WE WANT ITD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
We all know that HTC knows we want it, yet new forum members do not know that HTC knows.:cool:
-
Originally posted by splitatom
the plane was the oka (pink flower) do not coment me on the spelling for oka i know i spelled it wrong it was powered by a roket not a buzbomb engen it was launched by bombers bad idea the planes were easy kills for american planes it is credited i thing with the sinking of a single destroyer and severly damageing another
STOP POSTING THREADS ON THE B 29 I THINK HTC KNOWS WE WANT ITD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Baka bomb wasn't an easy kill, it's Betty launch platform was. The one
in the Smithsonian is actually jet powered compressor>, although most were rockets.
I also beleive it was Ohka for Cherry Blossom :D
-
Sorry Guys! I've been playing this game off and on for a few years but am new to posting on this board... I didn't know that B-29s were such an overdiscussed subject
As to the idea that non American bombers should be added first... Name ONE type that had 10% of the effectiveness of the B-17/24 in the ETO other than some of the Brit types that were horrible daylight bombers and had to fly at night. The HE 111 would be a possibility but it was cursed with slow speed, low service celing and a small bomb load (but did LOOK cool).
Russian Bombers? maybe the IL-2... oops that was an exact (down to the battle damage patches) copy of the Superfort.
Italian bombers? kill bait all.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Sorry Guys! I've been playing this game off and on for a few years but am new to posting on this board... I didn't know that B-29s were such an overdiscussed subject
As to the idea that non American bombers should be added first... Name ONE type that had 10% of the effectiveness of the B-17/24 in the ETO other than some of the Brit types that were horrible daylight bombers and had to fly at night. The HE 111 would be a possibility but it was cursed with slow speed, low service celing and a small bomb load (but did LOOK cool).
Russian Bombers? maybe the IL-2... oops that was an exact (down to the battle damage patches) copy of the Superfort.
Italian bombers? kill bait all.
You do know there was fighting before Dec 7 1941?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Search.
And you spelled prophets wrong too.
-
MajIssue, you're quite an issue aren't you? Perhaps you never realised that some of us are history junkies and enjoy a good historical aircraft in the list. Some of us are jealous that the Americans have the largest plane set in this game. The rest of us would prefer some variety other then having to look into the American plane set all the time.
-
B-29 ought to be here - eventually - - - but i am posting another thread about unrelated bomber wishes.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
maybe the IL-2... oops that was an exact (down to the battle damage patches) copy of the Superfort.
Wrong![/b]
1st, we have the Il-2 in AH, it is a single engined attack aicraft. The Tu-4 is the post-war copy of the B-29.
Look at some of these: Ju188A-1, Do217, He177A-5, Pe-2, Tu-2, Mosquito B.Mk IV, Mosquito B.Mk XVI, P.108, H8K2 'Emily'. All of those would be viable bombers in the LW MAs. The B-29 and other American bombers are not the only options. In addition, read up on WWII before making outlandish claims.
-
MajIssue, you're quite an issue aren't you? Perhaps you never realised that some of us are history junkies and enjoy a good historical aircraft in the list. Some of us are jealous that the Americans have the largest plane set in this game. The rest of us would prefer some variety other then having to look into the American plane set all the time.
There may be more American planes in the game but it's not like thats what you see most. Seems to me you see alot more La7's, Niki and Spit16's than you ever see 51s, 47s or 38s. That being said the B-29 is a very bad idea, I think the toolshedders are doing just fine with what they have now. IMO the P-39 is one of the more needed and better ideas for an addition to the plane set.
-
Capz, the US planes seem to be doing ok. The top spot belongs to the P-51D:
P-51D has 30975 Kills of All models. All models have 27809 Kills of P-51D
La-7 has 29803 Kills of All models. All models have 24412 Kills of La-7
Spitfire Mk XVI has 25634 Kills of All models. All models have 24130 Kills of Spitfire Mk XVI
N1K2 has 23382 Kills of All models. All models have 19730 Kills of N1K2
Typhoon IB has 16221 Kills of All models. All models have 10315 Kills of Typhoon IB
F6F-5 has 14579 Kills of All models. All models have 15226 Kills of F6F-5
Hurricane Mk IIC has 14497 Kills of All models. All models have 9760 Kills of Hurricane Mk IIC
Spitfire Mk VIII has 11981 Kills of All models. All models have 12461 Kills of Spitfire Mk VIII
A6M5b has 11637 Kills of All models. All models have 12782 Kills of A6M5b
Fw 190D-9 has 11162 Kills of All models. All models have 8202 Kills of Fw 190D-9
Bf 110G-2 has 10486 Kills of All models. All models have 14090 Kills of Bf 110G-2
Fw 190A-8 has 10205 Kills of All models. All models have 8479 Kills of Fw 190A-8
P-38L has 9620 Kills of All models. All models have 12009 Kills of P-38L
F4U-1D has 8316 Kills of All models. All models have 11600 Kills of F4U-1D
Bf 109K-4 has 7679 Kills of All models. All models have 5383 Kills of Bf 109K-4
Ki-84-Ia has 7653 Kills of All models. All models have 6206 Kills of Ki-84-Ia
C.205 has 5597 Kills of All models. All models have 4973 Kills of C.205
P-47-D40 has 5532 Kills of All models. All models have 5878 Kills of P-47-D40
Yak-9U has 5718 Kills of All models. All models have 5326 Kills of Yak-9U
Mosquito Mk VI has 5448 Kills of All models. All models have 5129 Kills of Mosquito Mk VI
-
Why even perk it? Just dont allow drones in it .
I think the bottom line is that Americans made the best all around bombers in WW-ll. Just watch, let these closet bombers start getting shot down in 29s, at 3,000' that they just lifted off from next door airfields, to jump into the furball? And when they get slaughtered in it? It will end up being a Hangar queen for many. Most of all if theres no drones with it.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Why even perk it? Just dont allow drones in it .
I think the bottom line is that Americans made the best all around bombers in WW-ll. Just watch, let these closet bombers start getting shot down in 29s, at 3,000' that they just lifted off from next door airfields, to jump into the furball? And when they get slaughtered in it? It will end up being a Hangar queen for many. Most of all if theres no drones with it.
Are you insane? The ords capability of one B29 is huge. Not to mention the high alt speed of the damn thing. Anyone who would use this for low alt stuff in the MA , should lose perks.
If this thing is ever introduced it should be perked heavily.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Rino
The Baka bomb wasn't an easy kill, it's Betty launch platform was. The one
in the Smithsonian is actually jet powered compressor>, although most were rockets.
I also beleive it was Ohka for Cherry Blossom :D
Yep and Baku means Idiot in Japanese if I remember correctly, something U.S. pilots nicknamed it, which was very common.
Also if you want a real bomber get the Japanese G10N(Mount Fuji). It carryed 20,000Kg's (roughly 44,200 Ibs.) in bombs and had 6 2,500 HP engines.
To bad it never got constructed before the war's end. :p
-
I personally don't think it will ever happen due to the difficulty of modeling the convergence computer on the remote turrets. Without it, the remote turrets would be almost useless.
I would be more than happy to be wrong, though.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Are you insane? The ords capability of one B29 is huge. Not to mention the high alt speed of the damn thing. Anyone who would use this for low alt stuff in the MA , should lose perks.
If this thing is ever introduced it should be perked heavily.
Bronk
In order, 1, No I'm not insane, "tho there are some who would disagree". 2, The bomb load of a single B-29 was what? max 20,000 lbs? A B-24 x 3 = 24,000 lbs in bombs. A B-17 x 3 = 18,000 lbs of bombs. This is stuff I learned in 1'st grade.
A 17 or 24 coming in low to an airfield looks like a crippled old Goose in need of Jenny Craig. A 29 will look like a 99 yo California condor flying with a load in his pants. How long do you think it would last against all those fighters? The biggest danger would be everyone trying to shoot it down.
3 B-24s = 24,000 lbs. 3 B-17s = 18,000lbs, 1 B-29 = 20,000 lbs. Or is my math wrong?
Boy, God forbid the Bomber sticks get something.
-
Do you have any idea how many cries for nukes there will be when there is even a slight hint of the B29 coming to AH?
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Do you have any idea how many cries for nukes there will be when there is even a slight hint of the B29 coming to AH?
Who cares, we wouldn't get the nuke carrier version anyways.
And 60,000 (it would have formations) is just ord. It'd be heavily perked.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
You do know there was fighting before Dec 7 1941?
Bronk
DUH... The Japanese were bombing China in the early 30's and BF109s were in action over Spain during the Spanish civil war, but I was thinking that most of the pre 1940 types would quickly be shot down in the main arena. You didn'e see the US using Brewster Buffalos against A6Ms for very log did you? I was thinking more along these lines:(http://www.luft46.com/vaart/mz079-3.jpg)
-
Gee look, another "expert" on the air-war, that really doesnt know much posting about how he wants a 1946 plane, cuz, they are ThE BESteZTs!!! evar!!! hyuk hyOK!!!
Did that one come with missiles billie?
They did?
KEWL.
:lol
...oh and a history lesson for your precious B-29. Sitting down? good.
It couldnt hit jack-s*** over Japan in 1945, so they went to LOW ALT AREA BOMBING with INCINDIERIES, at NIGHT, by order of Gen. Curtis Lemay in March 1945 against Tokyo. Not to mention the two most famous raids were carried out with a NUKE. So much for daylight "precision", as we nuked or firebombed "precisely" the right city? I guess.
...Your homework for this week is to actually read a book on the air war, then maybe you wont be spending your time getting the IL-2 mixed up with the T-4 (which didnt see service in WW2), and ranting on about "them copying Russkies", and you will know >< much about other nations histories other than just your own.
Your dismissed. Make sure you tell all your IL-2 jet fanboys about us here too.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
You didn'e see the US using Brewster Buffalos against A6Ms for very log did you?
< wants earlier planes that make a challenge to kill zekes, not F-15 "Eagles" kinda planes that would blow everything outta the skies. We have enough Late war planes for now.
-
What about?
(http://www.maam.org/wwii/images/L16_.jpg)
Total ownage!:D
-
Yeah, but were talking about the B-29 in AH right? Its very true Le may changed tactics during the war against Japan and took them in low to annihilate entire cities, and in retrospect, it was quite brilliant and broke the back of Japanese home industry as well as slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.
But in AH they would be sitting ducks that low. Most of all if perks were on them. And how many players would climb to 30,000' in them which is as close as they would come to being untouchable?
Go ahead and perk them. Its doesn't matter to me one way or another. Either way they would end up a mission aircraft flown by very few. Very few fly bombers to 20,000' + anyways and very few fly against strats.
While were at it why not change the strat rules at the same time we bring in the B-29?
-
Originally posted by Squire
Gee look, another "expert" on the air-war, that really doesnt know much posting about how he wants a 1946 plane, cuz, they are ThE BESteZTs!!! evar!!! hyuk hyOK!!!
Did that one come with missiles billie?
They did?
KEWL.
:lol
...oh and a history lesson for your precious B-29. Sitting down? good.
It couldnt hit jack-s*** over Japan in 1945, so they went to LOW ALT AREA BOMBING with INCINDIERIES, at NIGHT, by order of Gen. Curtis Lemay in March 1945 against Tokyo. Not to mention the two most famous raids were carried out with a NUKE. So much for daylight "precision", as we nuked or firebombed "precisely" the right city? I guess.
...Your homework for this week is to actually read a book on the air war, then maybe you wont be spending your time getting the IL-2 mixed up with the T-4 (which didnt see service in WW2), and ranting on about "them copying Russkies", and you will know >< much about other nations histories other than just your own.
Your dismissed. Make sure you tell all your IL-2 jet fanboys about us here too.
Maybe you should know whom you are 'fragging' before you start eh?
Must be the BC Bud eh? A little jealosy toward us yanks maybe? For your homework assignment...
Suggested Reading for a misguided Vancouverite:
The United States Stratigic Bombing Survey
You can find it at the Bellingham public library
The area bombing campaign against Japanese cities was ordered by LeMay(wrongly in my humble opinion) as a phych war tactic to demoralize the public much more than a tactic to cripple industry... The allied naval campaign had accomplished this by eliminating most of the Japanese merchant fleet by the summer of 1944.
Some of the advanced German and Japanese aircraft types did see combat prior to May 8 or August 12, 1945.
IL2? Never flown one in aces high! I don't like to fly any of the Soviet aircraft. I think the Germans, British and Americans had the best overall types in World war 2 with some notable exceptions, and I stick with them. Tanks are a different story...
YOU are dismissed! and who the heck is billie?
-
hmm i think the halifax or sterlin should be added before the B29 because
a) they were use far more extensively during the war
b) had a decent bomb load
c) not american
or diffrent veriants of the JU-88 and he-111; possably the DO-17
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
DUH... The Japanese were bombing China in the early 30's and BF109s were in action over Spain during the Spanish civil war, but I was thinking that most of the pre 1940 types would quickly be shot down in the main arena. You didn'e see the US using Brewster Buffalos against A6Ms for very log did you?
idiot . bet a spit 1 or early 109 could wipe the floor with your P51D in the right hands (wich i have seen ) . heck i've even beaten an LA7 in a hurri 1.
-
Originally posted by B3YT
idiot . bet a spit 1 or early 109 could wipe the floor with your P51D in the right hands (wich i have seen ) . heck i've even beaten an LA7 in a hurri 1.
<--- has La-7's for breakfast in my spit 1 :p
-
A-20G has 4002 Kills of All models
All models have 2917 Kills of A-20G
What we need is an A-26:)
-
Originally posted by B3YT
hmm i think the halifax or sterlin should be added before the B29 because
a) they were use far more extensively during the war
b) had a decent bomb load
c) not american
or diffrent veriants of the JU-88 and he-111; possably the DO-17
I agree with A and B... good points. But C? Does it matter WHO made the airplane really???
Ask yourself this about any airplane disregarding who built it:
1. Was it an effective aircraft ?
2. How did it compare to what it was flying against?
3. How many were produced (i.e. was it a common site in the sky during WW2)?
I could care less if an airplane was German, Japanese, Itallian, French (opps there aren't any Franch aircraft in Aces high nor in WW2 for that matter ), Russian, or American
I care if its a good ride in Aces High.
For giggles... I'm from Seattle and several members of my family work for or have worked for boeing. I like the B-17 because it is death to emeny fighters but will happily up Lancasters if I want a big bomb load. I don't care that the B-17 is the single boeing airplane in Aces High! Even though My grandfather built them. I just want the best plane for the job.
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
Search.
And you spelled prophets wrong too.
Search what?
-
Originally posted by Latrobe
< wants earlier planes that make a challenge to kill zekes, not F-15 "Eagles" kinda planes that would blow everything outta the skies. We have enough Late war planes for now.
A Zeke is pleanty of a challenge just as any other plane(excluding the B5N), it just takes a capable hand, just like any other plane does.
-
Originally posted by humble
A-20G has 4002 Kills of All models
All models have 2917 Kills of A-20G
What we need is an A-26:)
agreed
i'd like to see the 'vader before the b29
'cause i can dogfight in it:t
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
In order, 1, No I'm not insane, "tho there are some who would disagree". 2, The bomb load of a single B-29 was what? max 20,000 lbs? A B-24 x 3 = 24,000 lbs in bombs. A B-17 x 3 = 18,000 lbs of bombs. This is stuff I learned in 1'st grade.
A 17 or 24 coming in low to an airfield looks like a crippled old Goose in need of Jenny Craig. A 29 will look like a 99 yo California condor flying with a load in his pants. How long do you think it would last against all those fighters? The biggest danger would be everyone trying to shoot it down.
3 B-24s = 24,000 lbs. 3 B-17s = 18,000lbs, 1 B-29 = 20,000 lbs. Or is my math wrong?
Boy, God forbid the Bomber sticks get something.
1. Any single AC that can carry almost or more ords than a box needs a perk.
2. Then they dissevered to be shot down just for being stupid.
3. Umm you just got the B-25.
You buffers need risk. What would happen if the B-29 was introduced risk free.
I'll tell you, you'd never ever see another buff in the skies. That's the reason it would be perked.
Bronk
-
I beleive most people would rather have other, more useful planes.
I fall into that category.
Although i could get ahold of great info on the B29.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
1. Any single AC that can carry almost or more ords than a box needs a perk.
2. Then they dissevered to be shot down just for being stupid.
3. Umm you just got the B-25.
You buffers need risk. What would happen if the B-29 was introduced risk free.
I'll tell you, you'd never ever see another buff in the skies. That's the reason it would be perked.
Bronk
Not necessarily. You get shot down in B-24s, which carry more bombs and shoot more guns, and you can jump into a drone, and then jump into another one. Imagine climbing to 25,000' in a B-29 and getting diced? Thats about an hour wasted.
Why would you think the 29 would be flown any different then any other heavie 90% of the time? As in at 3,000' from the next airfield over? Flown like that it would get slaughtered like sheep.
And to the few of us whom have the patience to gain altitude and take them after targets?? Isn't that fun for fighter sticks? Shooting down bombers? It sure looks like they are having fun when they shoot me down.
Im not saying the B-29 would end up a queen but I'd bet it would be flown far less then you think after the first few weeks.
-
i think we should have another vote about the next plane
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Not necessarily. You get shot down in B-24s, which carry more bombs and shoot more guns, and you can jump into a drone, and then jump into another one. Imagine climbing to 25,000' in a B-29 and getting diced? Thats about an hour wasted. Yup thats called risk. As it stands now you lose nothing. Unless your in an arado. Zomg up again and go watch tv until I get to alt.:rolleyes:
Why would you think the 29 would be flown any different then any other heavie 90% of the time? As in at 3,000' from the next airfield over? Flown like that it would get slaughtered like sheep.
That's the whole point. If we attach risk to it what do you think might happen. How about they might fly at historic alts. Wow what a concept.
And to the few of us whom have the patience to gain altitude and take them after targets?? Isn't that fun for fighter sticks? Shooting down bombers? It sure looks like they are having fun when they shoot me down.
Yup even more fun when I know I just relieved someone of perk points. Dont tell me you don't get a grin on your face when you shoot down a perk plane.
Im not saying the B-29 would end up a queen but I'd bet it would be flown far less then you think after the first few weeks.
Rich think rationally an not I want, I want, I want. If a b29 was introduced perk free what would you fly be honest. lets see b17, b24 or b29 decisions decisions.
:rolleyes:
Bronk
-
If and when the B-29A is added it is absolutely, blindingly obvious that it will be perked, and perked heavily. Arguing anything else is pointless.
Second, it will not have the nuke as an option, ever.
Third, it will almost certainly have formations as an option, just like the Ar234 does.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Rich think rationally an not I want, I want, I want. If a b29 was introduced perk free what would you fly be honest. lets see b17, b24 or b29 decisions decisions.
:rolleyes:
Bronk
Without question I would still spend most of my time in B-26s. With a smattering of 17s, 24s, KIs, and 234s. One B-29, or 3 perked heavily? All the way up to 30,000'? I would fly them but not that often. And I would never take them under 20,000'. I dont bomb strats, "because they are meaningless", all that often anymore, and I love taking the B-26s into tactical targets.
And I'll find a way to survive even if we dont get them. Its not that important.
-
What a novel idea!
-
ZOMG! actually taking a bomber above 20,000 feet! preposterous! we would not want anything to be historic! I'd still fly 17, 24, 25, 26 if there was a B-29. It would depend on the the arena and mission. Leaving the B-29 out is like leaving out the mustang for fighter guys. It makes no sense. I'd still like auto gunners on the bombers too.
Von
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Without question I would still spend most of my time in B-26s. With a smattering of 17s, 24s, KIs, and 234s. One B-29, or 3 perked heavily? All the way up to 30,000'? I would fly them but not that often. And I would never take them under 20,000'. I dont bomb strats, "because they are meaningless", all that often anymore, and I love taking the B-26s into tactical targets.
And I'll find a way to survive even if we dont get them. Its not that important.
Negatory Rich, Bombing Strats are not meaningless, Bombing a HQ is kinda the respective country HQ you bomb will send 10-15 goons and it'll be resupplied before you even RTB. Bombing Strats are effective.... Very effective that's why i do mission to bomb strats.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
other than some of the Brit types that were horrible daylight bombers and had to fly at night.
that would be a somewhat inaccurate statement. Although some of the early RAF bombers were not very efficent bombers others were quite excellent in the bombing role, whether day or night bombing. The RAF believed the cost was too high in bombers and crews to bomb during the day and preferred to bomb at night to reduce losses
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
I could care less if an airplane was German, Japanese, Itallian, French (opps there aren't any Franch aircraft in Aces high nor in WW2 for that matter ), Russian, or American
No French aircraft in WW2? mmmm
Dewoitine D.520, scored a few kills when France was invaded (108 kills, 39 probables and 54 lost) , later flown by the Vinchy French and also used as a trainer by Germany. Under the Vinchy goverment D.520s had about 30 kills against British and American aircraft vs 11 losses. Free French also had a few, used mostly as trainers until last few months of the war and then used for ground attacks.
theres a few more, look it up...
Bloch MB.174
Bloch MB.210
Amiot 354
Breguet 693
Caudron C.714
Lioré et Olivier LeO 451
Potez 633
get a library card or something...
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Negatory Rich, Bombing Strats are not meaningless, Bombing a HQ is kinda the respective country HQ you bomb will send 10-15 goons and it'll be resupplied before you even RTB. Bombing Strats are effective.... Very effective that's why i do mission to bomb strats.
I agree major. Bombing strats with missions "Is" effective. My comments were directed at myself, as an individual, flying against them. Getting 5 to 10 Buff sticks aimed at a vital strat will have impact as well as being great fun. Thanks for pointing it out sir.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
No French aircraft in WW2? mmmm
Dewoitine D.520, scored a few kills when France was invaded (108 kills, 39 probables and 54 lost) , later flown by the Vinchy French and also used as a trainer by Germany. Under the Vinchy goverment D.520s had about 30 kills against British and American aircraft vs 11 losses. Free French also had a few, used mostly as trainers until last few months of the war and then used for ground attacks.
theres a few more, look it up...
Bloch MB.174
Bloch MB.210
Amiot 354
Breguet 693
Caudron C.714
Lioré et Olivier LeO 451
Potez 633
get a library card or something...
I have one thank you... Significant? NO! up to UK/US/German standards for fighter aircraft? NO again. D 520 had a top speed of around 320 mph... mincemeat for a 190 a5 or 109 G or a 51B or 38G! 'Nuff said about the French "airforce in WW2!
-
another lame B29 thread.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
I have one thank you... Significant? NO! up to UK/US/German standards for fighter aircraft? NO again. D 520 had a top speed of around 320 mph... mincemeat for a 190 a5 or 109 G or a 51B or 38G! 'Nuff said about the French "airforce in WW2!
Except it's an early war plane. 320 is average compared to a 109E, Hurricane 1, A6M, P40, etc...
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
I have one thank you... Significant? NO! up to UK/US/German standards for fighter aircraft? NO again. D 520 had a top speed of around 320 mph... mincemeat for a 190 a5 or 109 G or a 51B or 38G! 'Nuff said about the French "airforce in WW2!
Good, you got a library card... use it.. Motherland is close, They were significant aircraft, the same or better than other countries in 1940. The failing in the French airforce wasnt its equipment or men but in its goverment and its leadership.
so use your library card and read some books (dont just look at the pretty pictures)...
-
I agree, as any knows, that the B-29 should be added. What's more, with the exclusion of the Germans in the early war, it is the American bombers which flooded the airspace along with the Lancasters, which is already in the game. So it is accurate to have the US bomber fleet greatly outnumber that of the British. Additional bombers, such as the HE111, would be a joke for game play and score potato fodder. I would like to see such things as fire and skip bombs added to the British arsenal though, and night fighters would be nice.
-
I seem to remember someone, somewhere saying that odd bombs (Parafrags, things of that nature) would be the last kind of things added to the game, if at all. I could be horibly wrong though.
And as for Night Fighters, I just don't see it happening. Night time is gone. Heck, it was gone when I got here in the summer of 06' as Balefire. I doubt it'll come back. Ever. As most of the older Aces High players are a tad older, and don't have perfect eyesight.
Besides, I was here last Christmas. Night Time solved by simply turning up Gamma. Night Fighters would be even meat in the day, or night time.
Personally I think the B-29 should be the last, or near the last thing Aces High ever gets. For a few quick reasons. All my personal ones, atleast.
A) Just so we can get these endless threads about people wanting them, so much joy.
B) Maybe HTC will go crazy and give me a P-26 first (I'm not even sure if they're a possiblity, I know they saw combat. But I am unsure of the Squadron level, anybody got info on this? D: )
And C) There are other forces that need bombers more than the US. The Pe-3, the Tu-2, Pe-8, and a few other VVS Bombers to name. Heck, we could use a G4M Betty just for Historic reasons, alongside the He-111. They're planes that played a important part in history. Mind you, so did the B-29, I'm not saying it didn't. But the US Planeset is huge. Lets get something else. :D
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Except it's an early war plane. 320 is average compared to a 109E, Hurricane 1, A6M, P40, etc...
Point taken... Being occupied had a serious effect of late war French designs!:aok
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Good, you got a library card... use it.. Motherland is close, They were significant aircraft, the same or better than other countries in 1940. The failing in the French airforce wasnt its equipment or men but in its goverment and its leadership.
so use your library card and read some books (dont just look at the pretty pictures)...
Before you call someone stupid for having an opinion you should at least ask them how they came to that conclusion...
Here's a homework assingment for you Airscrew: The Fall of the Third Republic by William L. Shirer...
A accurate depiction of the failures of the French Government and Military leadership that led to the debacle of1940.
I agree that the rank and file pilots of the French airforce in early 1940 were on par with the other allied powers and the equipment of their most modern squadrons was up to snuff, but the policies of the high command (who were always ready to fight the last war) hampered any serious effort to modernize the French air force before the onslaut of the NAZIs. There was in fact serious resistance from some in the government (to procurement of more modern types of aircraft) who thought that an invasion from the East (Germany) was impossible because of the Maginot Line. The Spanish civil war should have been a wakeup call but the govermant failed to obtain additional modern types for the Air Force. The D520s in the invenatory prior to the invasion were too few too late. By 1940 the Luftwaffe had LOTS of 109s HE111s JU88s and other modern types that were able to destroy Frances vaunted D520s on the ground rendering the Air Force useless...
I expect a full report by this time next week... class dismissed
-
The B-29 was the most powerful, complex and important bomber built during the war. It's actions and abilities set the stage for the next 50 years of history. (SAC etc..) It was very much a marvel of it's time and had a very significant contribution to the war and it's subsequent history.
No non-American or British multi-engine strategic bombers really contributed to changing the course of the war. The Battle of Britian era German bombers did not change the course of the war, (the spits and hurricanes sure did) the Russian multi-engine birds did not really hit thier stride until the arms race after the war. (When they interned the B-29)
The B-29 was important and revolutionary and that is why it should be included as opposed to any of the French craft and any of the other bombers. It's blaringly obvious when you have late model planes that the B-29 is missing.
The only other things that could possibly be considered near as important would be the V2 strategic rockets and the Jets. We already have the Jets, bring on the Superforts!
Von
(edited for spelling)
-
I see school didnt make all the squeakers go away. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Hien
I seem to remember someone, somewhere saying that odd bombs (Parafrags, things of that nature) would be the last kind of things added to the game, if at all. I could be horibly wrong though.
And as for Night Fighters, I just don't see it happening. Night time is gone. Heck, it was gone when I got here in the summer of 06' as Balefire. I doubt it'll come back. Ever. As most of the older Aces High players are a tad older, and don't have perfect eyesight.
Besides, I was here last Christmas. Night Time solved by simply turning up Gamma. Night Fighters would be even meat in the day, or night time.
Personally I think the B-29 should be the last, or near the last thing Aces High ever gets. For a few quick reasons. All my personal ones, atleast.
A) Just so we can get these endless threads about people wanting them, so much joy.
B) Maybe HTC will go crazy and give me a P-26 first (I'm not even sure if they're a possiblity, I know they saw combat. But I am unsure of the Squadron level, anybody got info on this? D: )
And C) There are other forces that need bombers more than the US. The Pe-3, the Tu-2, Pe-8, and a few other VVS Bombers to name. Heck, we could use a G4M Betty just for Historic reasons, alongside the He-111. They're planes that played a important part in history. Mind you, so did the B-29, I'm not saying it didn't. But the US Planeset is huge. Lets get something else. :D
How many Pe3/Tu2 (Wasnt that an EXACT B29 copy?) pe 8/HE111/G4ms were produced?
Who cares what country's aircraft were represented... What WORKS is all I care about.
P 26... Please let me see one in my 190A8. I'd rather see them add a P 39... More made and more saw combat.
This game isn't about historic reinactmant (except in the scenarios) its about air/ground and sea combat in WW2 equipment
The B29 played a critical role in the Pacific Theatre (without dropping Nukes which I agree should never be introduced in AH except maybe for 1,000,000 perckies :lol) The planeset of US bombers is big because there were more of em in WW2 and they were the most effective in the war. The same isn't true in fighter/attack planesets where there are far more non American aircraft "represented". Show me one type that can rival the B29s capabilities...
-
Originally posted by Larry
I see school didnt make all the squeakers go away. :rolleyes:
nope
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Before you call someone stupid for having an opinion you should at least ask them how they came to that conclusion... ,snip.....
By 1940 the Luftwaffe had LOTS of 109s HE111s JU88s and other modern types that were able to destroy Frances vaunted D520s on the ground rendering the Air Force useless...
I expect a full report by this time next week... class dismissed
Ok, before I reply and tell you where to put your homework assignment :rolleyes: is this your OPINION or do you believe this to be a FACT.
-
Originally posted by VonKost
The B-29 was the most powerful, complex and important bomber built during the war. It's actions and abilities set the stage for the next 50 years of history. (SAC etc..) It was very much a marvel of it's time and had a very significant contribution to the war and it's subsequent history.
No non-American or British multi-engine strategic bombers really contributed to changing the course of the war. The Battle of Britian era German bombers did not change the course of the war, (the spits and hurricanes sure did) the Russian multi-engine birds did not really hit thier stride until the arms race after the war. (When they interned the B-29)
The B-29 was important and revolutionary and that is why it should be included as opposed to any of the French craft and any of the other bombers. It's blaringly obvious when you have late model planes that the B-29 is missing.
The only other things that could possibly be considered near as important would be the V2 strategic rockets and the Jets. We already have the Jets, bring on the Superforts!
Von
(edited for spelling)
Disagree strongly..both the US and UK bombers hitting fuel and
transportation targets very definitely influenced the course of the war.
-
Originally posted by Rino
Disagree strongly..both the US and UK bombers hitting fuel and
transportation targets very definitely influenced the course of the war.
I agree, that's why I excluded them in the second paragraph. :aok
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
How many Pe3/Tu2 (Wasnt that an EXACT B29 copy?) pe 8/HE111/G4ms were produced?
Who cares what country's aircraft were represented... What WORKS is all I care about.
P 26... Please let me see one in my 190A8. I'd rather see them add a P 39... More made and more saw combat.
This game isn't about historic reinactmant (except in the scenarios) its about air/ground and sea combat in WW2 equipment
The B29 played a critical role in the Pacific Theatre (without dropping Nukes which I agree should never be introduced in AH except maybe for 1,000,000 perckies :lol) The planeset of US bombers is big because there were more of em in WW2 and they were the most effective in the war. The same isn't true in fighter/attack planesets where there are far more non American aircraft "represented". Show me one type that can rival the B29s capabilities...
I'll agree it isn't about reinactment, if anything it's about having fun, to me atleast. I tend to fly aircraft I find fun (or just like), D3As, Spit I, I don't mind if I get shot down. As long as I put up a good fight.
But for numbers... Lemme see if I can find a few of the VVS Bombers...(for those of you who can, please add to this list :D)
Pe-2, Pe-3, Pe-8, Tu-2, SB-2, Ar-2 (Sb-2 Dive bomber, Archangel), Db-3, Il-4, Il-6, Yak-2, and the Yak-4.
Looking over the Wikipedia data, I'd love to see the Yak-4, 358mph in level flight is pretty good for a bomber. Though I do not know what alt. that is achived at. But if you want to get technical that's a MPH faster than a B-29, yet again I doubt it was at that high of an altitude though.
Personally I love the earlier war VVS bombers, the Sb-2, Ar-2, and DB-3. Some of my favorite bombers of all time. Yes, they got slaughtered by Me-109s and thier ilk, and they don't have great bomb loads (alot of LW fighters can do better) but on the subject of 'work' they do work. But then, everything works when used properly. :aok
For Fighters I agree Russia needs a voice early war. The LaGGs, MiG-1/3s, Yak-1, 1B, 7, and a few others come to mind. The Yaks seem to have alot of little variants, and I don't feel like listing them all here. Especially as some might be field Modifications (and are thusly moot. :o)
I feel like noting it was the Tu-4 that was the Soviet B-29.
Edit:Whoop, found another one. :D
-
Originally posted by Hien
I'll agree it isn't about reinactment, if anything it's about having fun, to me atleast. I tend to fly aircraft I find fun (or just like), D3As, Spit I, I don't mind if I get shot down. As long as I put up a good fight.
But for numbers... Lemme see if I can find a few of the VVS Bombers...(for those of you who can, please add to this list :D)
Pe-2, Pe-3, Pe-8, Tu-2, SB-2, Ar-2 (Sb-2 Dive bomber, Archangel), Db-3, Il-4, Il-6, Yak-2, and the Yak-4.
Looking over the Wikipedia data, I'd love to see the Yak-4, 358mph in level flight is pretty good for a bomber. Though I do not know what alt. that is achived at. But if you want to get technical that's a MPH faster than a B-29, yet again I doubt it was at that high of an altitude though.
Personally I love the earlier war VVS bombers, the Sb-2, Ar-2, and DB-3. Some of my favorite bombers of all time. Yes, they got slaughtered by Me-109s and thier ilk, and they don't have great bomb loads (alot of LW fighters can do better) but on the subject of 'work' they do work. But then, everything works when used properly. :aok
For Fighters I agree Russia needs a voice early war. The LaGGs, MiG-1/3s, Yak-1, 1B, 7, and a few others come to mind. The Yaks seem to have alot of little variants, and I don't feel like listing them all here. Especially as some might be field Modifications (and are thusly moot. :o)
I feel like noting it was the Tu-4 that was the Soviet B-29.
Edit:Whoop, found another one. :D
I looked it up and YES you're right and I'm wrong The TU-4 was an exact copy (including patched battle damage) of a B-29 forced to land in Russa after a raid on Japan.
I see your point, but most of the EW types would get mualed badly in LW arenas. Since the EW arena earely has more that 10-20 players, what would be the benifit of including light bombers that would rarely be flown and instantly get killed whan thay made contact? Here is an illistration of my point: I was flying a 190 A8 as wing with a good stick Monday to improve my fighter skills in the MA, We stumbled across a raid of 10 Stukas on rhe deck. Result: 10 stukas downed.:aok
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
We stumbled across a raid of 10 Stukas on rhe deck. Result: 10 stukas downed.:aok
You can kill 10 stukas with the tail gun of a SBD if you wanted to. You could probably take out 3 or 4 with the pilots .45 while riding the silk elevator.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Ok, before I reply and tell you where to put your homework assignment :rolleyes: is this your OPINION or do you believe this to be a FACT.
Airscrew:lol
I certainly hope you were not thinking that I am a squeaker... honest disagreemant is good! It stimulates debate. It is telling that when one has a disagreement that another will lower themselveves to personal attacks and sarcasim... must have hit a nerve eh:rolleyes:
FYI: History Minor, Business Major USC Class of '81, MBA Stanford class of '83 so please spare me the revisionist history lectures, I got enough of THAT in college!
How far are you in Shirers book? only five days left until your report is due!
All kidding aside "The Fall of the Third Republic" is a GREAT book that even a casual student of history will enjoy. I liked it better that Shirers more widely known "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" I highly recommend it as the best narrative of what led up to the collapse of France in 1940! An eye opening account!
By the way... This is completely "tongue in cheek"... :rofl
-
Originally posted by VonKost
The B-29 was the most powerful, complex and important bomber built during the war. It's actions and abilities set the stage for the next 50 years of history. (SAC etc..) It was very much a marvel of it's time and had a very significant contribution to the war and it's subsequent history.
No non-American or British multi-engine strategic bombers really contributed to changing the course of the war. The Battle of Britian era German bombers did not change the course of the war, (the spits and hurricanes sure did) the Russian multi-engine birds did not really hit thier stride until the arms race after the war. (When they interned the B-29)
The B-29 was important and revolutionary and that is why it should be included as opposed to any of the French craft and any of the other bombers. It's blaringly obvious when you have late model planes that the B-29 is missing.
The only other things that could possibly be considered near as important would be the V2 strategic rockets and the Jets. We already have the Jets, bring on the Superforts!
Von
(edited for spelling)
Good post VonKost! I agree completely
-
Originally posted by Tiger
You can kill 10 stukas with the tail gun of a SBD if you wanted to. You could probably take out 3 or 4 with the pilots .45 while riding the silk elevator.
My point exactly! the early war types are cannon fodder in the LW arenas. If you saw 10 JU87s heading for your base would you NOT kill them? Would you let them through to pork your base out of a misguided sense of mercy?
What would your Kammeraden in GVs think when 10 stukas appeared the their spawn (that you let through) because you felt sorry for the misguided souls that upped an inferior airplane? BTW, those that shoot pilots in parachutes have NO honor (in my humble opinion)!:D
[edited for spelling]
-
Originally posted by Bronk
:noid :noid :noid
1st
Bronk
You're Welcome :)
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
My point exactly! the early war types are cannon fodder in the LW arenas. If you saw 10 JU87s heading for your base would you NOT kill them? Would you let them through to pork your base out of a misguided sense of mercy?
What would your Kammeraden in GVs think when 10 stukas appeared the their spawn (that you let through) because you felt sorry for the misguided souls that upped an inferior airplane? BTW, those that shoot pilots in parachutes have NO honor (in my humble opinion)!:D
[edited for spelling]
<===has no honor! :D
Next time ride it in like an aviator :aok
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
I looked it up and YES you're right and I'm wrong The TU-4 was an exact copy (including patched battle damage) of a B-29 forced to land in Russa after a raid on Japan.
I see your point, but most of the EW types would get mualed badly in LW arenas. Since the EW arena earely has more that 10-20 players, what would be the benifit of including light bombers that would rarely be flown and instantly get killed whan thay made contact? Here is an illistration of my point: I was flying a 190 A8 as wing with a good stick Monday to improve my fighter skills in the MA, We stumbled across a raid of 10 Stukas on rhe deck. Result: 10 stukas downed.:aok
I hate to say it, but I believe the purpose of Early War Bombers in the Late War Arenas would actually be for slipping through defenses. Tell me, you see a High Sb-2 Group ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_SB ) that is say, 7,000 feet above you. And you also see a B-17 group, that is 1,000 feet below you.
Now, I am sorry if I make an assumption. But going off my logic. the B-17 is the bigger threat to my base as well as being lower than me. And depending on my plane (not likely as I fly things coated with .303s, and B-17s can take more .303 rounds than I care to mention, all the while shooting back at me) you probably will get into posistion and hit the B-17.
From what I see, this would probably also be the case of your allies. For multiple reasons, ranging from easy kill, to bigger threat. That is not to say that some people will see the SB-2 as the easier kill, and go after it instead, climbing to a bomber never seemed like a smart idea to me, less you did it at an angle, as to set up for an attack. But that takes time, time you may not have.
But for the sake of reasoning, you let the SB-2 get through, simply because he has a smaller bomb load, and is slower. Mind you he still may not make it to the base, he may still die horribly to your allies before he can get to his target. He probably will die after he drops his bombs, but by then his mission has been accomplished. Hopefully. But most people would go for the B-17. And underestimate the little SB-2s that're going through to pork your fighter hangars.
I am horrificaly bias on this though, I absolutly love the Early War Russian Bombers, I blame IL-2 (call me a dweeb, the game is awesome, and I can't wait for a patch so I can fly one of my beloved bombers. Which by 1946' DVD, will come out... sooner or later, I suspect two weeks.)
I also tend to view Early War Aircraft in the Late War arenas askew, as compared to late war equipment. Be it true or not, I like to think people in them know what they're doing to some extent. I don't remember who it was that has it, but they have a Quote about P-40s in their Sig. They're like a hobo with a crazy eye. You don't know what they might do. Not to mention alot of people in the LW arenas have little experience agaisnt Early War Aircraft. I have had countless people try to outturn my D3A low and slow, when they could simply walk away.
Knowing is, litterally if very cheesy, half the battle.
(on a side note, I really should make smaller posts. :huh )
Edit: I seem to be wrong, after re-watching the DVD, to get a look at the cockpit of the SB series, it wasn't there. I am now sad, but one day! One day I will fly it in a game, on full realism, and I will be happy!
-
Thats a pretty good point you made about AH MA and the Scenarios, I would have to agree that the intent is not historical accuracy. I do also agree that the foreign plane arsenal is under represented, in thinking, for an early war plane a Swordish would be kindof cool. It would get owned on a fairly regular basis, but fun to fly I just think it would be cool to slip a torp in at say 10' above the water level. It'll probably never happen. Hell, you could up them in a raid like a Stuka. Just thinking...
-
I love Stukas. Fly em all the time. Not really able to stand up against fighters, but they are great jabo birds. If only we had a D5, it would be even more useful (force overshoot, easy to do in the slow stuka, and then blast the enemy with 20mms) or a G2 (AP cannons under the wings).
-
Originally posted by Squire
...oh and a history lesson for your precious B-29. Sitting down? good.
It couldnt hit jack-s*** over Japan in 1945, so they went to LOW ALT AREA BOMBING with INCINDIERIES, at NIGHT, by order of Gen. Curtis Lemay in March 1945 against Tokyo.
Talk about not knowing history. The B-29's had a tough time hitting stuff over Japan because of the JET STREAM, and it's 100++ knots wind speed. Perhaps some quick reading up on the subject will help you.
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/The-Discovery-of-the-Jet-Stream.htm
http://www.crystalinks.com/jetstream.html
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
I think the bottom line is that Americans made the best all around bombers in WW-ll.
Helps when you never have to worry about your R&D department getting bombed on a daily basis...
B-29 has a place in this game simply because it was an aircraft in WWII. But, there are quite a few others that, while not ultimately as historically significant (and I'm speaking of two days in August here), are much more tactically significant to many other theaters of the war.
-
Originally posted by Hien
I hate to say it, but I believe the purpose of Early War Bombers in the Late War Arenas would actually be for slipping through defenses. Tell me, you see a High Sb-2 Group ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_SB ) that is say, 7,000 feet above you. And you also see a B-17 group, that is 1,000 feet below you.
Now, I am sorry if I make an assumption. But going off my logic. the B-17 is the bigger threat to my base as well as being lower than me. And depending on my plane (not likely as I fly things coated with .303s, and B-17s can take more .303 rounds than I care to mention, all the while shooting back at me) you probably will get into posistion and hit the B-17.
From what I see, this would probably also be the case of your allies. For multiple reasons, ranging from easy kill, to bigger threat. That is not to say that some people will see the SB-2 as the easier kill, and go after it instead, climbing to a bomber never seemed like a smart idea to me, less you did it at an angle, as to set up for an attack. But that takes time, time you may not have.
But for the sake of reasoning, you let the SB-2 get through, simply because he has a smaller bomb load, and is slower. Mind you he still may not make it to the base, he may still die horribly to your allies before he can get to his target. He probably will die after he drops his bombs, but by then his mission has been accomplished. Hopefully. But most people would go for the B-17. And underestimate the little SB-2s that're going through to pork your fighter hangars.
I am horrificaly bias on this though, I absolutly love the Early War Russian Bombers, I blame IL-2 (call me a dweeb, the game is awesome, and I can't wait for a patch so I can fly one of my beloved bombers. Which by 1946' DVD, will come out... sooner or later, I suspect two weeks.)
I also tend to view Early War Aircraft in the Late War arenas askew, as compared to late war equipment. Be it true or not, I like to think people in them know what they're doing to some extent. I don't remember who it was that has it, but they have a Quote about P-40s in their Sig. They're like a hobo with a crazy eye. You don't know what they might do. Not to mention alot of people in the LW arenas have little experience agaisnt Early War Aircraft. I have had countless people try to outturn my D3A low and slow, when they could simply walk away.
Knowing is, litterally if very cheesy, half the battle.
(on a side note, I really should make smaller posts. :huh )
Edit: I seem to be wrong, after re-watching the DVD, to get a look at the cockpit of the SB series, it wasn't there. I am now sad, but one day! One day I will fly it in a game, on full realism, and I will be happy!
When you're right... YOU'RE RIGHT! but givin the level of participation in the LW vs early/mid war arenas, what rides would gey more usage? I would think that a 29 (perked) would. The heavy price would discourage it's use as a low level tank killer (like lancs are all too often).
Maybe having some of the pre 1943 bombers available ONLY in EW and MW arenas would be a win-win... increase interest in the under used arenas by having rides not available in the LW! And give the fans of some of the more obscure types a chance to fly them in combat!
-
Originally posted by Rino
<===has no honor! :D
Next time ride it in like an aviator :aok
lol
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
When you're right... YOU'RE RIGHT! but givin the level of participation in the LW vs early/mid war arenas, what rides would gey more usage? I would think that a 29 (perked) would. The heavy price would discourage it's use as a low level tank killer (like lancs are all too often).
Maybe having some of the pre 1943 bombers available ONLY in EW and MW arenas would be a win-win... increase interest in the under used arenas by having rides not available in the LW! And give the fans of some of the more obscure types a chance to fly them in combat!
Hehe, low level Lancs. That reminds me of the summer of 06', when I first started playing Warbirds (And then Fighter Fail, and then this!). I was far from a good pilot (and still am), and thusly I drove alot of tanks around... Low level Ju-52... I was at his like... 9. And I fired a T-34 shell right into its tail as it flew by. I wonder if he ever knew what happened... That was alot of fun.
But in all seriousness, I do think it would be a given that it's perked. I mean, really, that big of a bomb load, and the option to triple it is just insane. Not to mention that if you're up high enough, and good enough, you probably won't use all your bombs on the first pass. You could (Although, I find it to be... unsafe) turn back around and do another pass. I think it would just be easier in something that fast/high to make two bases your target. Line up from a distance, and just knock the crap out of two bases. It's not like you don't have the payload. :aok
Heh, if I remember correctly the SB-2 was outdated by the time the war started. Even in Early War it would probably be a huuuuge target. So why not put it in late too, I mean, really.
Guy A:"Low Sb-2!"
Guy B:"... Are you kidding? I upped to fight, not watch some plane catch fire and break into pieces when I point my sights at it, nevermind pull the trigger."
Guy A:"It could be worse...*chuckles* I mean, atleast we aren't quite... twice as fast as it is..."
Guy C:"Dangit, guys. It just porked Ord."
Guy A & B:"Fail."
I can see it now.
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
Helps when you never have to worry about your R&D department getting bombed on a daily basis...
B-29 has a place in this game simply because it was an aircraft in WWII. But, there are quite a few others that, while not ultimately as historically significant (and I'm speaking of two days in August here), are much more tactically significant to many other theaters of the war.
Respectfully I dont think bombing German R&D did much of anything, if in fact we even did bomb it. The Luftwaffe simple went in other directions with their bomber development and never seriously developed strategic bombers. They geared up to fight a European war in the air, not a strategic one. Even their one strategic bomber, had it made it off the drawing boards, would have had very little impact on the war.
America, on the other hand, had almost unlimited resources and an industrial base out of the reach of the enemy.
What the Germans did build, bomber-wise, they built pretty good. They designed some very good 2 engined bombers. I'd love to see the HE-111, both the bomber and the transport, in AH.
The B-29 operated against the Japanese for more then a year and flew many, many missions. Some of which were more destructive then either the A-bomb attacks. I believe the B-29 changed the face of air warfare more then any other aircraft in WW-ll.
Most players in this game are sitting on lots of unused bomber perks. The B-29 would be a terrific perk for everyone.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
What the Germans did build, bomber-wise, they built pretty good. They designed some very good 2 engined bombers. I'd love to see the HE-111, both the bomber and the transport, in AH...The B-29 operated against the Japanese for more then a year and flew many, many missions. Some of which were more destructive then either the A-bomb attacks. I believe the B-29 changed the face of air warfare more then any other aircraft in WW-ll...Most players in this game are sitting on lots of unused bomber perks. The B-29 would be a terrific perk for everyone.
He-111 was obsolescing before the war even began. The Ju-88, on the other hand, was an excellent multi-role aircraft that proved to be useful the entire war, so yes you have a point there. I was referring to the fact, that you intimated, that the U.S. industrial might was able to act unhindered by any outside influence.
I agree that the B-29 flew some missions that were more destructive than the 2 atomic bombs--however, the B-24 dropped more tonnage and was built in greater numbers than the B-17, and yet, the B-17 is the iconic U.S. bomber of the ETO. Hence, had the B-29 not dropped the atomic bombs, it would have merely been a footnote in WWII USAAF history.
Most players are sitting on a nice reserve of bomber perks, but that's not justification for the B-29 over all of the other aircraft missing from the planeset. I'd rather spend bomber perks on A-26's or Fast Mosquitos than the B-29. Ultimately, I think HTC may be worried about its unstabilizing capability in the MA that makes them hesitant (if they are indeed) about introducing it. There have been half a million other B-29 threads that basically spell out the same.
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
He-111 was obsolescing before the war even began. The Ju-88, on the other hand, was an excellent multi-role aircraft that proved to be useful the entire war, so yes you have a point there. I was referring to the fact, that you intimated, that the U.S. industrial might was able to act unhindered by any outside influence.
I agree that the B-29 flew some missions that were more destructive than the 2 atomic bombs--however, the B-24 dropped more tonnage and was built in greater numbers than the B-17, and yet, the B-17 is the iconic U.S. bomber of the ETO. Hence, had the B-29 not dropped the atomic bombs, it would have merely been a footnote in WWII USAAF history.
Most players are sitting on a nice reserve of bomber perks, but that's not justification for the B-29 over all of the other aircraft missing from the planeset. I'd rather spend bomber perks on A-26's or Fast Mosquitos than the B-29. Ultimately, I think HTC may be worried about its unstabilizing capability in the MA that makes them hesitant (if they are indeed) about introducing it. There have been half a million other B-29 threads that basically spell out the same.
Why not all the above? No problem here!
B-29 wouldn't have been a footnote without the Atomic bombs. It was the most advanced bomber developed during the war by any side.
If all pilots have access to an airplane how could that be destabilizing?
If you want to spend your perks on an A-26 or another low level type... fine it's all good, but I would like to see another perk hi alt bomber and there was none better than the B-29.
Why read the thread if you're sick of B-29 threads?
The very fact that this wasn't the first and will not be the last should indicate that there is some interest and demand within the community!:rofl
-
Originally posted by Denholm
[size=10]NO![/size]
Get the German, Japanese, Italian, and British bomber plane set up before we go hailing the Americans again.
yep.
B29 why,need more AXis and british plane's to many american fighters and bombers.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Why read the thread if you're sick of B-29 threads?
The very fact that this wasn't the first and will not be the last should indicate that there is some interest and demand within the community!:rofl
Didn't say I was tired of B-29 threads--merely mentioning that this issue has been discussed more than any other wish-list thread.
Obviously, there is a demand, and as I stated in my previous post, I believe the B-29 has a place in AHII merely because it was an aircraft that participated in WWII.
My point, was that there are many other aircraft that I believe should be added before the B-29. Perhaps I didn't state that plainly enough. During the time it takes for the B-29 to move to the top of HTC's priority list, perhaps they can figure out a way to keep it from becoming a destabilizing influence in the MA (which it certainly has the potential to become due to the fact that it carries 3 times the ordnance of the Lanc at almost twice the speed at altitude--262 type perks would certainly be a minimum perk level).
Just my opinion, and not worth more than any other :aok
-
See if you guys would read the help files, you would know that the B-29 has been on HTCs radar. Therefore saving posting space for the next "original idea" that we've been seeing for years :)
A portion of this quote from the bbs is directly copied into the perk points portion of the help files.
Originally posted by Pyro on 11-30-2000
The perk system is also in place. We don't have any perk planes going into 1.05, but we'll still have the system up and ready. It's been awhile since we've discussed the perk system so I'll describe the basics of it again. On the outside the perk system is a way for us to introduce some interesting but otherwise unbalancing planes on a limited basis but the benefits go deeper than that. Perk planes (and vehicles) would be things like Me 262s, Ta 152s, Tempests, B-29s, Ar 234s, Tiger IIs, etc. These are interesting rides but would be very unbalancing if they were available on an unlimited basis. So there won't be unlimited availability but they'll be available as bonuses or perks every so often.
I think if they had decided to never model the B-29, they would have removed the reference from the help files. So it is a matter of priority. No community feedback is going to move the B-29 up the list of priorities. Whatever arguments one would like to present as to why this should be a priority has already been stated a hundred times.
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
Didn't say I was tired of B-29 threads--merely mentioning that this issue has been discussed more than any other wish-list thread.
Obviously, there is a demand, and as I stated in my previous post, I believe the B-29 has a place in AHII merely because it was an aircraft that participated in WWII.
My point, was that there are many other aircraft that I believe should be added before the B-29. Perhaps I didn't state that plainly enough. During the time it takes for the B-29 to move to the top of HTC's priority list, perhaps they can figure out a way to keep it from becoming a destabilizing influence in the MA (which it certainly has the potential to become due to the fact that it carries 3 times the ordnance of the Lanc at almost twice the speed at altitude--262 type perks would certainly be a minimum perk level).
Just my opinion, and not worth more than any other :aok
Thank you for the clarification and I agree... There are alot of aircraft that were sigbificant in WW2 that we don't see in AH2. (Other that the Superfort) I would like to see the P-39 anh HE-111 among others. I alologise if I've been "beating a dead horse" , but this thread won't go away... I started it over two weeks ago and it's still on the first page of the list...
On to the other part of my original post: I've been thinking that (after reading some opinions on this board that maybe my luftwaffe '46 idea might have merit... What about a "what if" arena where the aircraft in development at the end of the war could see action. Some guys have suggested a special "elite" arena this idea could be it. Maybe a perk fee of say 100 perkies to get in... just a thought:aok
-
Originally posted by Denholm
We all know that HTC knows we want it, yet new forum members do not know that HTC knows.:cool:
Yeah, but how do you know that they know, but we don't know?
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
yep.
B29 why,need more AXis and british plane's to many american fighters and bombers.
This should put an end to the argument that there are "too many American" aircraft in AH2:
By my count (source http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/index.html)
considering every ride available Air/Land/Sea
US - 34
NON US - 53
Thats about a 3-2 advantage (give or take)
It is notable that the US supplied Mustangs, Liberators, Fortresses, Dakotas and Shermans to the British (among other types), Aircobras and Dakotas to the Soviets (among other types). Why did the US dominate aircraft production you ask? Simple... nobody was bombing US production facilities.
You could point out that the German production of 109s and 190s was huge during 1943-44 but that level of production (aircraft AND pilots) couldn't be sustained in the face of the US/British stratigic bombing offensive. In the end the reason there were so many US made aircraft of so many types is that the US mainland was never attacked and every other combatants home country was.:aok
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
This should put an end to the argument that there are "too many American" aircraft in AH2:
By my count (source http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/index.html)
considering every ride available Air/Land/Sea
US - 34
NON US - 53
Thats about a 3-2 advantage (give or take)
It is notable that the US supplied Mustangs, Liberators, Fortresses, Dakotas and Shermans to the British (among other types), Aircobras and Dakotas to the Soviets (among other types). Why did the US dominate aircraft production you ask? Simple... nobody was bombing US production facilities.
You could point out that the German production of 109s and 190s was huge during 1943-44 but that level of production (aircraft AND pilots) couldn't be sustained in the face of the US/British stratigic bombing offensive. In the end the reason there were so many US made aircraft of so many types is that the US mainland was never attacked and every other combatants home country was.:aok
On the numbers, frankly. I would hope that 5 other countries would outnumber the US.
VVS, IJN/A, LW, and RAF. Italy (?) VS. USA
I would hope on my boxers that the US is outnumbered. ._.
But the fact that it's as close as it it just proves that we need other countries aircraft. I would love to see each side be even, to some extent.
MiG-3s, LaGG-3s, Yak-XX*s, British bombers, and fighters. IJN/A fighters, and bombers. LW bombers (if not so much fighters, since from what I've seen... the 190/109 were... really all they had. I'm probably wrong though, I would hope so. :D)
*insert random letters and numbers! It probably exists!
All of them should be on the list to. I say equal the planesets out. Make all the countries equal in numbers. Even if that means adding a few useless aircraft into the planeset. I mean, really, even if it was a hangar queen that doesn't mean it never gets used. Almost all aircraft - fighter or bomber - have fans.
Some are rabid, like myself. I would choke my best friend for a SB-2. (And he would probably understand my want of it. :p ) Some are not so rabid, and just simply want it. I fly fighters, pretty much only fighters. I would learn to buff if we got an SB-2. And I would fly it constantly. But my Yak/D3A would still get used from time to time, cause I love them both too.
But I go off subject...
Yeah, I think we should equalize planesets. And in doing that, we should hold off on the US aircraft for a while. Simply because they're so far ahead.
You say the US Planeset has 34 aircraft?
VVS - 5 (La-7, La-5, Yak-9U, Yak-9T, and IL-2, this is not counting lend-lease stuff)
LW - 16 (109F, 109E, 109G (3 versions?) 109K, 190 (4 versions), Ju-87, Ju-88, Me-262, 163, Ar-234)
Raf - 11 (Spit 1, 5, 9, 14, 16 (I think that's all of them...) Hurr 1, D, and C. Boston? (Eh, not sure, all of these are off the top of my head), Lanc, Mossie)
IJN/A - 7 (A6M2, A6M5, N1K, Ki-84, that two engine bomber I can't remember the name of, D3A, B5N)
Italy (I think the C.205 is Italian... Um... Ravioli?) - 2 (C.205/2)
(Remember, I'm going off the top of my head here... I don't remember most of the aircraft we have, just the things I see alot... Or remember from IL-2)
Things I think we need before a B-29?
VVS - Yak-1B/1/7/something early warish, Yak-3, LaGG-3 and 3T, MiG-3, and 3U (bis, whatever), I-16 Mosca, I-153, Pe-2, Tu-2, Sb-2/Ar-2/Db-3, and even though it was pretty much just a transport - the Pe-8.
LW - He-111, Other Ju-87 variants (Including the big Cannon one, that would be fun), and that's really all I can think of for the LW...
RAF - (I don't know many of thier names, but I know they had bombers that weren't US made... I think.)... Gladiator? Swordfish maybe? Defiant maybe...? Give Gunners a purpose... :rolleyes:
IJA/N - A6M5, J6M2/5, G4M Betty, (I might look up more, I know they exist, just not thier designations...)
Italy...? - ... Um... G.50? Was that from Italy...? I really... don't know most of thier aircraft... at all... I'm gonna... go... find that out now... That's of course me guessing the C.20Xs are... Italian. I am not sure. :(
Ignoring my inability to find the names of aircraft. The US Planeset is huge, and it was big during WW2 as well. But. I believe we should even all of them out as much as possible. The B-29 was a great bomber. But this isn't a great war, where we need a HUGE bombload and great survivablity. This is a game, where Fun and Balance are both much more important than Ords on target, and survivablity. And to me, the US Planeset is not balanced next to the others, atleast in raw numbers.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
:O hereeeeeee we goooooooo
Yup...This button could make EVERYONES life easier!! (http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c312/alohajoe_/top_search.gif)
-
Originally posted by Hien
On the numbers, frankly. I would hope that 5 other countries would outnumber the US.
VVS, IJN/A, LW, and RAF. Italy (?) VS. USA
I would hope on my boxers that the US is outnumbered. ._.
But the fact that it's as close as it it just proves that we need other countries aircraft. I would love to see each side be even, to some extent.
...
The B-29 was a great bomber. But this isn't a great war, where we need a HUGE bombload and great survivablity. This is a game, where Fun and Balance are both much more important than Ords on target, and survivablity. And to me, the US Planeset is not balanced next to the others, atleast in raw numbers.
Close... I think not. History is what it is and the US produced more aircraft than all others (combined I believe), hense the "imbalance". Why have hanger queens in the game at all? Someones love of the Brewster Buffalo (for example) doesn't justify it being in the AH2 plane set. Maybe it could be a way for the veteran pilots to pad their scores when newbies up HE-111s. or MiG-3s
If you had more stick time in buffs you would know what imbalance REALLY is! Try bombing (even at 25K+) a target within ME-262 or 163 range in ANY of the current heavies. In lancs it is a joke. you would do as well throwing marbles at a 262 as shooting at them with the .303s. There is also the issue of the limited ammount of bullits in the defensive guns of lancs . It seems like about 30 each! Even B-17s/24s with all of their M-2s are no match for a swarm of jet/rocket propelled aircraft! Even in large formations The advanced German aircraft will cut through bombers like a hot knife through butter.
Also why would you hope that the US was outnumbered? As a US Army vet it was my firm belief that if you went into a war and it was a fair fight you shouldn't be there! But, I digress
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
If you had more stick time in buffs you would know what imbalance REALLY is! Try bombing (even at 25K+) a target within ME-262 or 163 range in ANY of the current heavies.
Fact is, the overwhelming majority of bombing missions do never get near any 163 base. Also the amount of 262 you encounter is usually quite low.
Bombing at 25k is easy with our current bombsight and opposition is usually negligible, unless you are part of a very big bombing raid.
Yesterday I was bombing rook strats 4 sectors deep in enemy territory at 25k. During US prime time. Completely unmolested. On my way back one single fighter took of, but apparently figured it's not worth the time to climb that high.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Fact is, the overwhelming majority of bombing missions do never get near any 163 base. Also the amount of 262 you encounter is usually quite low.
Bombing at 25k is easy with our current bombsight and opposition is usually negligible, unless you are part of a very big bombing raid.
Yesterday I was bombing rook strats 4 sectors deep in enemy territory at 25k. During US prime time. Completely unmolested. On my way back one single fighter took of, but apparently figured it's not worth the time to climb that high.
I disagree that bombing is easy at 25K.It is much more difficult to calibrate at that alt. I AM surprised that the rooks didn't up to stop you an strat. tgts... They seem more willing to come up to intercept Hi alt. buffs than the knights! Just for laughs make their HQs blink and watch ho long it takes to see 163s and 262s! one day in September a squaddie and I flew ponys noe to get the rook HQ to blink as a diversion to take pressure off their main effort attack. We landed just out of ack range and within 5 minutes there were 5+ 262s overhead looking for our phantom buffs... lmao:rofl
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
I disagree that bombing is easy at 25K.It is much more difficult to calibrate at that alt.
Calibration routine is not affected by altitude in any way. Stable speed & alt, hit U then hold down Y for 10 seconds. Perfect calibration, regardless if your are at 10k or 30k.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Fact is, the overwhelming majority of bombing missions do never get near any 163 base. Also the amount of 262 you encounter is usually quite low.
Bombing at 25k is easy with our current bombsight and opposition is usually negligible, unless you are part of a very big bombing raid.
Yesterday I was bombing rook strats 4 sectors deep in enemy territory at 25k. During US prime time. Completely unmolested. On my way back one single fighter took of, but apparently figured it's not worth the time to climb that high.
That was you? I saw you way up in the stratosphere but unless you were going to turn east I didn't think we had any strats in that corner. B-17s right? I called it out but apparently nobody intercepted. I was N/B in 26s looking for a CV.
The night before I pounded the Knight city twice and nobody bothered to come. Kinda disappointing.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
The night before I pounded the Knight city twice and nobody bothered to come. Kinda disappointing.
Announce it on Channel 200. We used to do that for those HARM missions we ran back earlier this year just to stir up the bees.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
That was you? I saw you way up in the stratosphere but unless you were going to turn east I didn't think we had any strats in that corner. B-17s right? I called it out but apparently nobody intercepted. I was N/B in 26s looking for a CV.
I think that must have been someone else. The only buff I encountered enroute was a B-25 formation flown by bigk29.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Close... I think not. History is what it is and the US produced more aircraft than all others (combined I believe), hense the "imbalance". Why have hanger queens in the game at all? Someones love of the Brewster Buffalo (for example) doesn't justify it being in the AH2 plane set. Maybe it could be a way for the veteran pilots to pad their scores when newbies up HE-111s. or MiG-3s
If you had more stick time in buffs you would know what imbalance REALLY is! Try bombing (even at 25K+) a target within ME-262 or 163 range in ANY of the current heavies. In lancs it is a joke. you would do as well throwing marbles at a 262 as shooting at them with the .303s. There is also the issue of the limited ammount of bullits in the defensive guns of lancs . It seems like about 30 each! Even B-17s/24s with all of their M-2s are no match for a swarm of jet/rocket propelled aircraft! Even in large formations The advanced German aircraft will cut through bombers like a hot knife through butter.
Also why would you hope that the US was outnumbered? As a US Army vet it was my firm belief that if you went into a war and it was a fair fight you shouldn't be there! But, I digress
I would hope the US is outnumbered in Aces High, because this isn't a war, and the countries have the ability to use all the aircraft. This is a game. And games need balance. Less they become one sided free for alls (And I for one would find an Arena full of nothing but high alt P-51s, and B-29s boring as heck.) I said nothing about real life, where I would also like to believe that 5 countries, allies included, could outnumber the number of specific aircraft that the US built.
Not in numbers of aircraft built persay, but in numbers of different models of aircraft. In the end, even if the US does have more specific aircraft I still think we need to catch some of the other planesets up some. Because they had quite a few aircraft as well. Quite a few aircraft that we could use to fill out thier planesets in this game.
And Hangar Queens have a good purpose, to me atleast. They are there, to be used. If people so choose not to use them that is thier own fault. Every single aircraft in this game can be a menace to just about anything. B5Ns can, and will, torp your CV if given the chance. D3As will turn and burn dogfight with anything, if given the chance. When given half the chance, and a pilot who knows the aircraft, any aircraft in this game will destroy something. But is that really the point? Not to me. To me fun is the point. You question the Brewster Buffalo, and its fans. I know it was just an example, but bear with me for a moment.
You question the Buffalo, well, I question the B-29. We don't need another Bomber. Not at this point in time, right now I believe we need a new fighter. Something that could compete with all the Spit16s, P-51Ds, La-7s, whatever. The Buffalo may not be able to do that, but other aircraft that are available to be chosen, and were important in their times, are. The Yak-3 (With perhaps the 3P version as well) for example. They played a major role in thier own theater. (Though, after reading Wiki they seem slightly... worse than the 9U, but I'm sure that there are other aircraft that we could add, such as the J2M5)
But at the same time, I don't fly Buffs, so I don't feel the pain that my bomb load isn't high enough to drop the town, or down Fighter Hangars. Or the menace of a Yak-9T plinking at me from lord knows how far away.
I guess that it's always been like this though. People who fly Fighters against People who fly Bombers. Both want thier own way, I want a P-26, and alot of people want a B-29. I do think I'm going to lose. It's almost no question at all to me. That doesn't mean I'm going to give up. Because the aircraft I so chose to fight for, just like yours, has its purposes, and uses.
I agree though, any fight you go into that is fair is a mistake. You messed up if it's fair, or heck, they did to. :aok
On the note of the 262s, and 163s. I would also hope that they tear through bomber formations like a hot knife through butter. I believe that's what they were designed to do. And it would appear that they were designed fairly well. :t
(Though, 30 262s might be... overdoing it a tad bit. How many 30mm guns is that...? I can hear it now... "262 raid inbound A1!" *shudders*)
-
Originally posted by Lusche
I think that must have been someone else. The only buff I encountered enroute was a B-25 formation flown by bigk29.
Well this B-17 formation had about 14,000' on me, and I was at 12,000', and it was in the OMA with the map we've been staring at for a week. It was on the A1 side, S/W, over land. Come to think of it you can get at strats that way.
Maybe you didn't even see me. Anyway I remember thinking, "who the heck is that that climbed that high in B-17s"?
Back to the thread. We need another perk bomber. Its really that simple. We have only one thats used very little cause its more of a "novelty airplane" then a useful one. Fighter sticks have what? 4 or 5 perk airplanes??
C'mon guys. Fair is fair.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Well this B-17 formation had about 14,000' on me, and I was at 12,000', and it was in the OMA with the map we've been staring at for a week. It was on the A1 side, S/W, over land. Come to think of it you can get at strats that way.
Maybe you didn't even see me. Anyway I remember thinking, "who the heck is that that climbed that high in B-17s"?
Back to the thread. We need another perk bomber. Its really that simple. We have only one thats used very little cause its more of a "novelty airplane" then a useful one. Fighter sticks have what? 4 or 5 perk airplanes??
C'mon guys. Fair is fair.
Yup at 300 points a piece is about right.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Well this B-17 formation had about 14,000' on me, and I was at 12,000', and it was in the OMA with the map we've been staring at for a week. It was on the A1 side, S/W, over land. Come to think of it you can get at strats that way.
Nope, wasn't me. I checked the whole film, you never showed up. And my approach didn't take me close to A1:
(http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/3544/ahss453copyog0.jpg)
-
No, then it couldnt have been you. I took off from 9 and was IB to run on 19 so I was probably close to 62 or 8. Strange that I saw 17s that high, or, perhaps they were lower then I think. Oh well,
anyways.
Nobody would fly 29s if they were perked that high. 300 for a formation?? Maybe. Probably. Why would anyone fly a single 300 point bomber when you can take 3 24s or 17s and have as much, or more, destructive power with a un-perked formation?
Most of all since there are a fair amount of fighters that would pose a serious threat to B-29s. Threats that the airplane never really saw in the war.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Most of all since there are a fair amount of fighters that would pose a serious threat to B-29s. Threats that the airplane never really saw in the war.
Not at designed alt , 3 maybe 4 ac models would be a serious threat.
-
If I recall right, max speed of a B-29 is about 360 at 30K.
Only a few planes can hope to catch them at that alt. And almost all of them will really have big troubles attacking a 20mm equipped bomber at that alt & speed.
If you ever took a 262 to 30k you'll know what I'm talking about.
A few tours ago, the was a big buff mission attacking knight HQ on Ndisles map. The bombers went all across the map with a huge darbar, thus many knight pilots trying to intercept. The buffs finally died, but only AFTER bombing their target, most of them by 163's.
30mins before that, the fended off attack after attack. Why? Because it's very difficult to engage even slow B17 & B24s at that alt. Several 262s had a lot of problems setting up their attacks, some were even shot down. Now imagine that buffs going 340 and shooting back with 20mm guns...
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Not at designed alt , 3 maybe 4 ac models would be a serious threat.
Which was what? 30,000'? How many times during the war did they actually fly 30,000'? How often in the game do you think they would? They would have a hard time hitting anything from that high I assume as well.
So what fighters would pose a threat? First off would be "The Butcher Birds" right? The 190 has no perk value and a lot of good sticks fly it already. Of course the 262 and 163's. The 109s, P-51s,P-38s, maybe the F4U? I suspect B-29s would get a whole lot of attention from these airplanes.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Which was what? 30,000'? How many times during the war did they actually fly 30,000'? How often in the game do you think they would? They would have a hard time hitting anything from that high I assume as well.
This is not war, it's a game. The reason they stopped operations at alt was because of the jet stream. Since there is no wind in AH's MAs and the bomb sight is set on EZ mode. I'd expect it to be easy as pie.
So what fighters would pose a threat? First off would be "The Butcher Birds" right? The 190 has no perk value and a lot of good sticks fly it already. Of course the 262 and 163's. The 109s, P-51s,P-38s, maybe the F4U? I suspect B-29s would get a whole lot of attention from these airplanes.
At desigend alt
1 P-47n
2.Ta 152
3.f4u-4 *perked*
4. p51 b
5. 262 *perked*
6. 163 *perked and only at one base*
7. 109k4
8. Spitfire Mk XIV *perked*
So I'll amend my comment. 8 aircraft have an decent chance at attacking the B-29. Four of them are perked AC, with one of them being base limited.
You would stand little chance of launching and catching an an at alt and speed 29.
Think you'd better have a look at the speed and climb charts Rich.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
At desigend alt
1 P-47n
2.Ta 152
3.f4u-4 *perked*
4. p51 b
5. 262 *perked*
6. 163 *perked and only at one base*
7. 109k4
8. Spitfire Mk XIV *perked*
So I'll amend my comment. 8 aircraft have an decent chance at attacking the B-29. Four of them are perked AC, with one of them being base limited.
You would stand little chance of launching and catching an an at alt and speed 29.
Think you'd better have a look at the speed and climb charts Rich.
Dont need to. I can guess from off the top of my head. That, and from what Ive seen in the game. First off I bet we'd never see anyone climbing a 29 to 30,000'. I know I never would. 20,000'?? Sure! Maybe even 25,000' on occasion. But most of the time 15,000 to 20,000'. Besides we have comms in the game. Anyone that saw 29s would radio ahead and give guys time to get up to alt.
Fact is there are very few things you can do to amuse yourself while flying big bombers to that alt. Especially for a guy my age.:( Its about as exciting as giving your dog a flea bath. Conversely I just flew KI-67s thru a furball, had about 3 minutes of sheer cyber-terror while a bunch of demented Bish teenagers tried to run me down, and landed 3 kills with my hide still intact. Which is more fun? And where would be the fun of flying the B-29 at an alt where its invulnerable? This is a big reason I changed from strats to frontline bases anyways.
Of course it really wouldnt be invulnerable. Even if only 262s and 163s rode against them, which they wouldnt. There would be others and a couple/three formations of B-29s together would garner a whole lot of attention, while opening up more of the map to play with a renewed interest in strats.
-
That's your prerogative to fly at whatever alt. Although we were discussing designed alt.
You must have taken a tap class as a child.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
That's your prerogative to fly at whatever alt. Although we were discussing designed alt.
You must have taken a tap class as a child.
No, I never took any dance classes pal. I just look out the window often, of B-26s at 12,000', and never see anyone above me. Or, hardly ever. Whats the designed alt of all these fighters we see chasing their tails in furballs?
But even if they did climb 29s to alt? Hey how about that? A bomber in AH that finally has an advantage.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
No, I never took any dance classes pal.
Just an obsevation the way you dance around the subject at hand.
I just look out the window often, of B-26s at 12,000', and never see anyone above me. Or, hardly ever.
Well it's a game so people do gamey things. Things like fly well below designed alts, dive bomb with heavies, stick stir, ect, ect, ect. I applaud you for trying to fly in a some what historical fasion. But the not see fighters above 12 k is bs. The fight in LWO yesterday between 19 and 1 there was a plenty. If however you attacked an undefended base, you had less chane of seeing any.
Whats the designed alt of all these fighters we see chasing their tails in furballs?
Well now Einstein look at the AC people most whine about. The La7 and the spit XVI, gee what were they designed to do? Ohh thats right low to mid alt combat.
But even if they did climb 29s to alt? Hey how about that? A bomber in AH that finally has an advantage.
Well now that the tap dance is over and you are back on the subject at hand. That's right they do have an advantage at alt lets explore that.
1. 3 mulligans= self explanatory
2. slaved laser guns= self explanatory
3. 360 mph at alt= almost impossible to climb and catch you have to be up already to hope to engage them
4. f3= impossible to sneak up on
5. EZ mode bomb sight=might as well use laser guided it's the same.
5. 20,000 lb bomb load= If thats not self explanatory. :rolleyes:
So yes if introduced perk it and perk it heavily. I'd say right along the 262 perk line. With an eny of about 3.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Well now that the verbal tap dance is over and you are back on the subject at hand. That's right they do have an advantage at alt lets explore that.
1. 3 mulligans= self explanatory
2. slaved laser guns= self explanatory
3. 360 mph at alt= almost impossible to climb and catch you have to be up already to hope to engage them
4. f3= impossible to sneak up on
5. EZ mode bomb sight=might as well use laser guided it's the same.
5. 20,000 lb bomb load= If thats not self explanatory. :rolleyes:
So yes if introduced perk it and perk it heavily. I'd say right along the 262 perk line. With an eny of about 3.
Do you ever fly bombers? A "Laser range finder" from 30,000'?:lol You try hitting a single target from that high. "3 Mulligans"? Yeah sure if you want to risk losing all those points. And whoever said drones would be available, or, would always be flown? As for "slaved laser guns" the only "slave" in the AH B-29 would be the poor schmuck bomber stick running around to all the guns, while flying the thing, trying to save his perk points from deranged teenagers jumping in 163s. An airplane that the 29 never ever saw in real life combat.
"360 mph"? Yeah probably top speed without bombs at angels 30. I'll bet at 15,000', the alt you'll see them most, it aint much faster then the KI-67. "F3 to sneak on"? How easy do you think it was to sneak up on actual bombers with all those eyes looking out? "20,000" lb bombload"? Very self explanatory. So learn to protect those strats. Yaknow? The ones that have 6.7k high airbases near them.:D
So yeah, at alt, the B-29 would have an advantage over "most" fighters. But thats what perk airplanes are for. Fighter sticks have perk airplanes that have big advantages at any altitude. Some of which would be a serious threat to B-29s.
With its perk price and eny the 29s would be flown far less then anyone thinks. I would probably fly them about as much as I fly the AR-234, which is a handful of times a week. The fact is perks and eny control the numbers of "ubers" like the 262 so why wouldnt they control B-29 numbers? Especially since the pool of those who have the patience to climb to those alts in bombers is much smaller then the pool of those who would jump into a 262.
Nobody's dancing around anything. Ive just made these points so many times Im getting tired of it. If uber-fighters like the 262 are in the game then so should a bomber like the B-29.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Do you ever fly bombers? Or are you just talking out your arse?
tappa tappa tap
A "Laser range finder" from 30,000'?:lol You try hitting a single target from that high.
Historicly they didn't they didn't. They took out the target and everything around it. Have you ever seen some WWII bomb run films?
"3 Mulligans"? Yeah sure if you want to risk losing all those points. And whoever said drones would be available, or, would always be flown?
Only multi buff without drones available is the 25H, it's the exception to the rule. So I'd expect the 29 would have drone.
As for "slaved laser guns" the only "slave" in the AH B-29 would be the poor schmuck bomber stick running around to all the guns, while flying the thing, trying to save his perk points from deranged teenagers jumping in 163s. An airplane that the 29 never ever saw in real life combat.
Yea those 163s are everywhere... look there's one now.:noid You toss out more hyperbole than Krusty , thats no easy feat BTW.
"360 mph"? Yeah probably top speed without bombs at angels 30. I'll bet at 15,000', the alt you'll see them most, it aint much faster then the KI-67.
Ahh more hyperbole. here let me help you.
Powered by four 2200 hp Wright R-3350-23 radial engines driving 16-foot, 7-inch four-bladed propellers, the B-29 could cruise at 342 MPH at 30,000 feet. From http://www.acepilots.com/planes/b29.html. And that's in cruise not mil power.
"F3 to sneak on"? How easy do you think it was to sneak up on actual bombers with all those eyes looking out?
I'd bet a lot harder than hitting F3, zooming out and panning around with an arrow key.
"20,000" lb bombload"? Very self explanatory. So learn to protect those strats. Yaknow? The ones that have 6.7k high airbases near them.:D
Since you are so fond of tappa tappa tap. Think I'll try some. I know you don't fly fighters so you have NO idea how hard it is to catch buffs at alt now. Perk plane or no perk plane. Wow, that is fun now I know why you do it.
So yeah, at alt, the B-29 would have an advantage over "most" fighters. But thats what perk airplanes are for. Fighter sticks have perk airplanes that have big advantages at any altitude. Some of which would be a serious threat to B-29s.
Exactly, thats what perk AC are for. They add a bit of risk not present in most sorties. BTW how often do you see perk AC attacking buffs now. That's right, not many there are a handful that do it. Just like there will be a handful of 29 pilots that would fly it low. They care not for perks just the fun.
With its perk price and eny the 29s would be flown far less then anyone thinks. I would probably fly them about as much as I fly the AR-234, which is a handful of times a week. The fact is perks and eny control the numbers of "ubers" like the 262 so why wouldn't they control B-29 numbers? Especially since the pool of those who have the patience to climb to those alts is much smaller then the pool of those who would jump into a 262.
BZZZZT wrong the ubers will fly whatever they want when they want. Most of them have thousands of perk points. Just like the *cough* uber buffers. Perks are there to keep the balance. If the 262 were perked like a Chog, you'd see a ton more. If you perked a 29 like a Chog , it'd be the same.
Nobody's dancing around anything. Ive just made these points so many times Im getting tired of it.
You dance like a flea on a hot brick.
If uber-fighters like the 262 are in the game then so should a bomber like the B-29.
I agree however an uber buff needs an uber perk. Now If the A-26 is introduced I'd say that is a lightly perked buff.
See the diff?
-
The B-29s hit record from 30,000' was so horrendously bad that Le May changed tactics and started sending them into cities at 5,000', sorta like AH, with incendiaries instead of HE. He said he wanted to hit Jap home industry, Of course we all know he just wanted to kill Japs.I forget what the track record was for the B-29s bombing from high alt but it was terrible, like 5% of bombs hit the target. So historically they hit everything but the target.
I'd expect the 29 would have drones as well. All with high perks on them.
The reason the 163s aren't everywhere is because there aren't bombers everywhere's, and certainly not ones that would give you monster perks if you shoot them down. But, Ive flown in formations where we've seen all kinds of 163s.
Let me help, and I'll make this both succinct and simple, "how fast is it with bombs and without bombs".? Gee, yathink 20,000lbs of bombs would slow it down some?:huh Try and do more then quote others that any of us could look up.
Tell me how hard it is sunshine? To run down bombers? How much cartoon gas do you have to burn in your cartoon airplane? I have fighters chase me down all the time so I guess Ive learned somthing about it. But hey, I guess I just aint a uber fighter stick , ,.
""You dance like a flea on a hot brick. """
That was a swell dance around the F3 question kid. I got news for you, actually flying the bloody thing was a lot harder then sitting in front of a computer with your Red Baron outfit on.:p Let alone the F3 views. Seeya some time at 15,000'
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
I got news for you, actually flying the bloody thing was a lot harder then sitting in front of a computer with your Red Baron outfit on.:p
Wait you were joking I thought everyone flew AH wearing:
(http://www.antiqueradio.com/images/Oct00-Military-RedBaron.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
The B-29s hit record from 30,000' was so horrendously bad that Le May changed tactics and started sending them into cities at 5,000', sorta like AH, with incendiaries instead of HE. He said he wanted to hit Jap home industry, Of course we all know he just wanted to kill Japs.I forget what the track record was for the B-29s bombing from high alt but it was terrible, like 5% of bombs hit the target. So historically they hit everything but the target.
The only reason their hit percentage at that altitude was so bad was because of the Jet Stream, which was a phenomenon that hadn't been discovered yet. The goal was to use their potent high-altitude performance to avoid Japanese fighters during un-escorted daylight raids. LeMay wasn't so much about killing Japanese as he was ruthlessly efficient.
The point Bronk is trying to make is that with MA calibration, you can hit a target at any altitude, at any speed, as long as your calibration is good. The only error in dropping bombs in the MA is introduced by either bad aim or bad calibration only.
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
The only reason their hit percentage at that altitude was so bad was because of the Jet Stream, which was a phenomenon that hadn't been discovered yet. The goal was to use their potent high-altitude performance to avoid Japanese fighters during un-escorted daylight raids. LeMay wasn't so much about killing Japanese as he was ruthlessly efficient.
The point Bronk is trying to make is that with MA calibration, you can hit a target at any altitude, at any speed, as long as your calibration is good. The only error in dropping bombs in the MA is introduced by either bad aim or bad calibration only.
What he said. To bad rich thinks its much harder to fly buffs than fighters.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
The B-29s hit record from 30,000' was so horrendously bad that Le May changed tactics and started sending them into cities at 5,000', sorta like AH, with incendiaries instead of HE. He said he wanted to hit Jap home industry, Of course we all know he just wanted to kill Japs.I forget what the track record was for the B-29s bombing from high alt but it was terrible, like 5% of bombs hit the target. So historically they hit everything but the target.
Been covered above.
I'd expect the 29 would have drones as well. All with high perks on them.
Ohh so now you agree they need a hi perk congradulations, you're now a step up from numpty.
The reason the 163s aren't everywhere is because there aren't bombers everywhere's, and certainly not ones that would give you monster perks if you shoot them down. But, Ive flown in formations where we've seen all kinds of 163s.
BZZZT wrong again. 163 enabled everywhere would be unbalancing. You starting to see a pattern yet?
Let me help, and I'll make this both succinct and simple, "how fast is it with bombs and without bombs".? Gee, yathink 20,000lbs of bombs would slow it down some?:huh Try and do more then quote others that any of us could look up.
awww whats a matter using links to back up my argument a bit much for you. Try it sometime instead of spewing hyperbole.
Tell me how hard it is sunshine? To run down bombers? How much cartoon gas do you have to burn in your cartoon airplane? I have fighters chase me down all the time so I guess Ive learned somthing about it. But hey, I guess I just aint a uber fighter stick , ,.
No kidding ya mook. Guess what you can get above a B-26 max speed alt . A 29's is so high it'd be almost impossible to get an alt advantage on it . Boy you are about as slow as they come.
""You dance like a flea on a hot brick. """
That was a swell dance around the F3 question kid. I got news for you, actually flying the bloody thing was a lot harder then sitting in front of a computer with your Red Baron outfit on.:p Let alone the F3 views. Seeya some time at 15,000'
Awww I guess your the only one that can go tappa tappa tap.
With all dumbing down for buffs the fluffers should be made to jump gun to gun looking for targets.
Yea fluffing is so hard . Just got done in LWB sinking a rook cv with a 90 degree deflection drop. ZOMG it was so hard to hit the "u" and "y" key.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Awww I guess your the only one that can go tappa tappa tap.
With all dumbing down for buffs the fluffers should be made to jump gun to gun looking for targets.
Yea fluffing is so hard . Just got done in LWB sinking a rook cv with a 90 degree deflection drop. ZOMG it was so hard to hit the "u" and "y" key.
:rolleyes:
Can someone translate that? Must be a generation thingy.:D Dude I have no idea what your talking about.
Yaknow kid you can be the greatest fighter jock in AH and your still flying a cartoon airplane in a cartoon game on a computer. Kinda puts it all in perpspective dont it? Have fun, play the game, and whatever you do dont get in the 6 of B-26s.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Can someone translate that? Must be a generation thingy.:D Dude I have no idea what your talking about.
Yaknow kid you can be the greatest fighter jock in AH and your still flying a cartoon airplane in a cartoon game on a computer. Kinda puts it all in perpspective dont it? Have fun, play the game, and whatever you do dont get in the 6 of B-26s.
Basically Einstein I'm making fun of you far saying I dance around the subject.
What you basically did was a the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I.".
So your all hyperbole and straw man arguments. That's why you can't stay on topic we've been on . Performance of the B-29 at alt and the relevance that would have on perk cost.
So you just keep on thinking I'm a kid numpty, if that's what it take to make you feel better.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Calibration routine is not affected by altitude in any way. Stable speed & alt, hit U then hold down Y for 10 seconds. Perfect calibration, regardless if your are at 10k or 30k.
Yes the routine is the same but the visibility IS NOT. [BTW check my damage rating if you doubt that I know how to hit a target with buffs!] It's easier to see the groung at 15K than at 25K... agreed? It is a fact that bombing accuracy suffers in relation to altitude in AH. As for the Superfort... in order to get up to 30K to ensure that you don't squander your 200 perks per airplane you'd have to up from a rear area field, spending alot of time climbing out. If HTC were to introduce the '29, I think it would be uncommon to see more than 1 or two boxes at a time, due to the high perkies required to up them (I think that there is a consensus that there would be a high perk cost for a B-29 ride).
-
Here again, you are uninformed on the subject. Current arena settings have "Auto calibrate bombsight" enabled. The only thing a bomber pilot has to do is press a button and then maintain the same speed and altitude which the calibration was set for.
Having never had to go through the full calibration process, and having never had to drop through various wind layers, you have no perspective on how easy it currently is.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Basically Einstein I'm making fun of you far saying I dance around the subject.
What you basically did was a the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I.".
So your all hyperbole and straw man arguments. That's why you can't stay on topic we've been on . Performance of the B-29 at alt and the relevance that would have on perk cost.
So you just keep on thinking I'm a kid numpty, if that's what it take to make you feel better.
Actually my friend you have me a bit befuddled. You tell me Im dancing but you dont tell me what Im dancing around. And to make it worse your starting to blubber.
Answer the question: Is the B-29 performance stats with or without a full bombload? Your the one doing the dance.
Obviously a full bombload is going to slow it down. Right? I would also assume the specs on the airplane are without a bombload.
So your saying its just as easy hitting a single target from 30,000' as 15,000':rofl Sure it is Jethro. Whatever you say.
And I still dont know what in heck you were talking about with that post. What is a "fluffer"? What does "ZOMG" mean?
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Here again, you are uninformed on the subject. Current arena settings have "Auto calibrate bombsight" enabled. The only thing a bomber pilot has to do is press a button and then maintain the same speed and altitude which the calibration was set for.
Having never had to go through the full calibration process, and having never had to drop through various wind layers, you have no perspective on how easy it currently is.
WRONG WRONG WRONG... I played the original AH with the old bombsite settings. The old settings took forever to get right at hi alt, and were guaranteed to miss anything that went through a wind layer. The Norden bombsite had compensation for windage incorperated... When you assume...
-
Then why do you choose to ignore that bombing from alt is currently highly simplified?
[edit]Actually, if you know everything, why did you bother to start yet another b-29 thead?
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Actually my friend you have me a bit befuddled. You tell me Im dancing but you dont tell me what Im dancing around. And to make it worse your starting to blubber.
Answer the question: Is the B-29 performance stats with or without a full bombload? Your the one doing the dance.
Obviously a full bombload is going to slow it down. Right? I would also assume the specs on the airplane are without a bombload.
So your saying its just as easy hitting a single target from 30,000' as 15,000':rofl Sure it is Jethro. Whatever you say.
And I still dont know what in heck you were talking about with that post. What is a "fluffer"? What does "ZOMG" mean?
Have you ever tried to catch a bomber at high altitudes? Its not easy, even against Lacasters and such. Either way, the B29 is yet FASTER.
At 15000 or 30000 feet, hitting a strat is childs play. Dont kid yourself.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Have you ever tried to catch a bomber at high altitudes? Its not easy, even against Lacasters and such. Either way, the B29 is yet FASTER.
At 15000 or 30000 feet, hitting a strat is childs play. Dont kid yourself.
And the real problem is the combination of speed & firepower. You don't even need to climb to 30K -20 will do.
If you ever hunted buffs at that alt, you know how difficult it is to properly setup several attacks even against slow bombers. Even with speed & E advantage, because at that altitude it's easily gone.
Surely I usually get them, but it happens rarely that I don't get pinged a few times while doing that. Now imagine that pings being 20mm rounds...
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Actually my friend you have me a bit befuddled. You tell me Im dancing but you dont tell me what Im dancing around. And to make it worse your starting to blubber.
Answer the question: Is the B-29 performance stats with or without a full bombload? Your the one doing the dance.
Obviously a full bombload is going to slow it down. Right? I would also assume the specs on the airplane are without a bombload.
So your saying its just as easy hitting a single target from 30,000' as 15,000':rofl Sure it is Jethro. Whatever you say.
And I still dont know what in heck you were talking about with that post. What is a "fluffer"? What does "ZOMG" mean?
Pound sand, look it up for yourself if you think it's wrong.
Fluffer is a pet term coined by laz for 1337 (that's read leet, short for elite for the older than dirt crowd) buff jocks.
Instead of a buffer he calls them fluffer.
Here is a link for ya to figure out why he uses term, enjoy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluffer
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Then why do you choose to ignore that bombing from alt is currently highly simplified?
[edit]Actually, if you know everything, why did you bother to start yet another b-29 thead?
Because for these numpties it's not ez enough.
It takes more practice estimating range in a tank than dropping ords from a buff.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Pound sand, look it up for yourself if you think it's wrong.
Fluffer is a pet term coined by laz for 1337 (that's read leet, short for elite for the older than dirt crowd) buff jocks.
Instead of a buffer he calls them fluffer.
Here is a link for ya to figure out why he uses term, enjoy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluffer
Ahhh, I see. So its a derogatory term aimed at your elders right? Yaknow I graduated High School back in 1975 when we didn't need porn movies. We had the real life thing crawling all over us.
And just remember one thing, and it was a lesson I took to heart as a kid, A man who doesn't respect his elders will never be a "Man".
We've spun around this long enough and I am getting bored with it. No doubt your not a bad guy so I'll just buzz off the thread. Ive made all the points about the B-29 that I possibly could. !
-
No it's a derogatory term aimed at buff pilots who think bombing is hard in AH.
And you have made no points about the 29, although your hyperbole is superb.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
And the real problem is the combination of speed & firepower. You don't even need to climb to 30K -20 will do.
If you ever hunted buffs at that alt, you know how difficult it is to properly setup several attacks even against slow bombers. Even with speed & E advantage, because at that altitude it's easily gone.
Surely I usually get them, but it happens rarely that I don't get pinged a few times while doing that. Now imagine that pings being 20mm rounds...
AWWW... did those big bad bombers shoot at your itty bitty fighter? poor baby!
A successful fighter pilot will slash through a bomber formation and cause enough damage to put the buffs at a disadvantage (like the fighters don't have an advantage already).
Let me get this straight... It's difficult to find and intercept the biggest aircraft in the game when they are flying at around 200 mph in a STRAIGHT LINE and at a constant altitude. Then, once you've accomplished the impossible intercept, it is hard to line up a shot that will ensure that you can pump enough 20mm rounds into the buffs so you can escape undamaged and land your 3 kills. If the bomber pilot is a good gunner and kills YOU he (or she) gets ONE. OK I get it. Please don't cry anymore... [wiping away the tears]
So all you really want is an honest advantage...
BTW try fighting off 262s and 163s in ANY heavy, then come back and tell me what's fair!
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
AWWW... did those big bad bombers shoot at your itty bitty fighter? poor baby!
You should actually read my posting before reacting. That really helps :aok
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Then why do you choose to ignore that bombing from alt is currently highly simplified?
[edit]Actually, if you know everything, why did you bother to start yet another b-29 thead?
1. I did not and am not ignoring that bombing is easier that it once was from high alt. Do you think there is a reason it is now simplified? Maybe the lack of bombing results was making air battles go on the deck taking away the "high" out of the low/mid/high air combat that makes this game realistic, fun and interesting. "Why go bomb from high alt if you can't hit squat?" or..." This sucks I'll join the furballin hoard and mob the [insert country name here]". is what I'm sure many were thinking. There IS a built in difficulty to bombing from 30+ and that is the cloud decks that make it more difficult to calibrate accurately... I didn't say impossible I said more difficult. It is not as easy as it it is when bombing from 10K AGL.
2. I started this thread because I wanted to see what others had to say and get information about the possibility of adding the Superfort (a significant aircraft in WW2). Many of the readers have done just that, informed. I was unaware that there had been MANY B-29 threads. I'm not new to the game, but I am new to the forum. As I said above if you don't like the subject, you don't have to read and respond the thread. It IS a simple concept!
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Apparently you have not no clue what you are talking about :)
You should actually read my posting before reacting. That really helps :aok
Fair enough... I did resort to sarcasim first. But I thought that your complaining that you sometimes get pinged when killing bombers merited sarcasim. I not only read but QUOTED your post my friend! By the length of your response can I assume that you didn't read my posting in response to yours?
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Fair enough... I did resort to sarcasim first. But I thought that your complaining that you sometimes get pinged when killing bombers merited sarcasim. I not only read but QUOTED your post my friend! By the length of your response can I assume that you didn't read my posting in response to yours?
I did read it.
And please note that there wasn't any complaining about being pinged my posting. I don't even complain when being shot down by them - which naturally happens more often at high alt than down low ;)
It merely stated that it's not that easy to kill buffs at 20k when compared to lower alts. And that's a fact, not a complain. And this statement was made in respect to the increased difficulty when facing a faster, better armed B-29 instead of our slower "less" armed B-17 & B-24s
Also it's not really aproblem to find buffs, not even at alt.
The only difficulty is to intercept them before they reach their target, which has a bit increased becaude the small maps we currently are playing on.
BTW, yesterday I happened to intercept a B-17 flight at 32-34k. Even in my P-47N, which rules up there, I had a really hard time to catch up and set up one attack
-
Originally posted by Lusche
I did read it.
And please note that there wasn't any complaining about being pinged my posting. I don't even complain when being shot down by them - which naturally happens more often at high alt than down low ;)
It merely stated that it's not that easy to kill buffs at 20k when compared to lower alts. And that's a fact, not a complain. And this statement was made in respect to the increased difficulty when facing a faster, better armed B-29 instead of our slower "less" armed B-17 & B-24s
Also it's not really aproblem to find buffs, not even at alt.
The only difficulty is to intercept them before they reach their target, which has a bit increased becaude the small maps we currently are playing on.
BTW, yesterday I happened to intercept a B-17 flight at 32-34k. Even in my P-47N, which rules up there, I had a really hard time to catch up and set up one attack
Agreed... My point [that I have been dancing around] is that with the current planeset getting mobbed by 262s and 163s in B-17s/24s/lancs at high altitude isn't a fair fight.
On the other hand when I'm in buffs at alt. I like nothing better than to see some hapless soul trying to claw for altitude at near stall speed on my 6.
I understand both sides of the argument my friend [he wrote sincerely] but wouldn't you agree that having a counter to the jets/rockets would be a good thing? Obviously upping B-29s would cost massive perks, on the same level (times 3 for a formation) of the 262/163, and have a reward (bomb load, speed and ceiling) for risking so many perkies. The only currently perked buff ride [AR 234] offers only speed and ceiling without a bombload to do more than harass. I think this is a good argument for the introduction of the Superfortress.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Agreed... My point [that I have been dancing around] is that with the current planeset getting mobbed by 262s and 163s in B-17s/24s/lancs at high altitude isn't a fair fight.
Yea because those 262s and 163s are just everywhere. :rolleyes:
Spewing hyperbole doesn't help make your points. What it does do is ruin your credibility.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
As I said above if you don't like the subject, you don't have to read and respond the thread. It IS a simple concept!
:confused: Wow. I didn't notice that during my 3000 previous posts.
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
The Norden bombsite had compensation for windage incorperated...
Click here (http://www.twinbeech.com/norden_bombsight.htm) for an in-depth look at the Norden and its operation. As you can see, it was an extremely complicated piece of kit, and one that is steeped in as much folklore as the P-51D, for example, with respect to its actual contribution to the air war over Europe. The Norden didn't compensate for wind automatically. Rather, it was the human input into the device that allowed the assembled mass of slide rules and manual computational devices to give the bombardier a chance to hit a point target on the ground. Human input that had to be made in a huge formation, over a heavily defended target, in swarms of fighters, and sometimes poor weather. Furthermore, the autopilot that was slaved to the sight was a pure one axis autopilot. The Norden required groundspeed to be put in (by the bombardier through the sight) and the pilot was required to maintain this speed and altitude throughout the run, again in a massive, turbulent formation, over a heavily defended target, (you get the idea). While in training in the states, B-17 crews were capable of hitting within a very tight tolerance against a point target at altitudes in the range of 12,000 feet (source is "Tail End Charlies"). In combat, having 30% of the bombs dropped within a fairly broad tolerance of the aimpoint was considered a successful mission, even though the target may have only sustained meager damage requiring follow-on missions. Obviously the USAAF was much more realistic about the limitations of the Norden in combat. There is much thought among historians that the massive amounts of propaganda distributed about the "top secret" Norden bombsite was an attempt to prove that "precision" bombing was being conducted by the USAAF and not the "terrorism" used by the Germans at Guernica or during the Battle of Britain, or the bombing raids of Nanking by the Japanese that were so loudly trumpeted by the U.S. Press when drawing favorable comparisons between Allied and Axis bomber tactics.
I don't mean to have this sound combative or condescending, but don't even think that the calibration that we have even brushes the surface of what it took in real life to operate the Norden effectively. Its merely a representation used by HTC to give us enough of a taste to replicate the WWII experience, much like the "dumbed down" cockpit tasks of all the aircraft, fighters and bombers, in the game.
I flew a lot of high-altitude bomber missions in this game when I first started, because learning how to fly fighters well was an exercise in frustration. And, I can tell you that hitting a strat well from 28,000 feet is pretty simple if you have the patience to do so. On most maps, there are plenty of strats to hit that don't present easy access to 163's or 262's--choose wisely. Its one thing to go after a HQ and something entirely different to go after a fuel refinery.
Furthermore, the bomber guys have been stockpiling bomber perks for as long as they've been playing, so at least for a few weeks or so, B-29's would be relatively cheap.
Regardless, the B-29 should be added, albeit after at least another dozen more applicable aircraft are added.
-
I couldnt agree with your post more stoney. I dont believe the perk should be all that high because the speed/armament isnt spectacular enough to earn it a 262 type perk. The lancaster carries a 14K load (Yes, I know 20K is a LOT more) but it has amazing speed at very high alt, in fact you can simply outclimb most fighters outright.
I look at the B-29 as a HUGE target... It might even make high altitude fights between fighters happen more often because if you have lets say 150 to 200 perks riding on your formation, you are gonna want to fly upstairs, way upstairs... At 15K or below, this thing would be canonfodder... Its big and it will have that "PLEASE KILL MY PERKPLANE" icon above it.
I would love to have bombing outside of the F6 view disabled for heavy bombers that did not have a divebomber role (The Ju-88s, for example, dove)
I also feel that the gunners should have to deal with muzzle jump and that the convergence or aim of all guns on one target should be a bit looser. By that I mean that you should not be faced with a laserlike 18 x .50 caliber buzzsaw at 1.5K out from the buffs.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Yea because those 262s and 163s are just everywhere. :rolleyes:
Spewing hyperbole doesn't help make your points. What it does do is ruin your credibility.
Hyperbole? True you don't see 262/163s "everywhere", but get into strat/hq land and they can be thick. Getting jumped by jets isn't common but it isn't unusual either. [Last night I actually saw a guy using a 163 as a ground attack aircraft at A12 on the Uterus map:lol ] Please don't take it personal... I use my experiences in the gane to make my points, not hype!I believe that the B-29 should be included, and you do not. We disagree, we debate. Enough said.:aok
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Hyperbole? True you don't see 262/163s "everywhere", but get into strat/hq land and they can be thick. Getting jumped by jets isn't common but it isn't unusual either. [Last night I actually saw a guy using a 163 as a ground attack aircraft at A12 on the Uterus map:lol ] Please don't take it personal... I use my experiences in the gane to make my points, not hype!I believe that the B-29 should be included, and you do not. We disagree, we debate. Enough said.:aok
Ahh so now we go from "everywhere" to "strat/hq land".:aok
I've never said the b-29 shouldn't be in game.
What I have said is if introduced it should be perked heavily.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Ahh so now we go from "everywhere" to "strat/hq land".:aok
I've never said the b-29 shouldn't be in game.
What I have said is if introduced it should be perked heavily.
OK we are in agreemant... Also [as you well know] 163's can ONLY up from bases near HQ's/strat tgts... so when I was refering to them it was in that context. I hope HTC get the message that new aircraft and gv's should be added (including the B-29).
I'm not griping though... I love this game although my wife has a different opinion.:lol
-
I believe there were more B-29s in service than 262's or 163's. I know there were more than the LA-7 or Niki. So why no B-29?
-
I don't get it madman, why bring back 2 B-29 threads? Now there are 4 of them. Atleast 3 will be closed, if not all......
There should be a rule with B-29 threads, once they are off the front page, you have to make a new one....
Or sticky them, that'll work too.
Regards,
Subway
-
Originally posted by SuBWaYCH
I don't get it madman, why bring back 2 B-29 threads? Now there are 4 of them. Atleast 3 will be closed, if not all......
There should be a rule with B-29 threads, once they are off the front page, you have to make a new one....
Or sticky them, that'll work too.
Regards,
Subway
Sorry I started it Subway... :lol
Never meant to offend you, but if ignorance is bliss then I'm a happy guy! I didn't know that there were 4 b-29 threads or I would have posted on them rather than start this one.
-
Freakin' thread stealers...
-
Originally posted by MajIssue
Never meant to offend you, but if ignorance is bliss then I'm a happy guy! I didn't know that there were 4 b-29 threads or I would have posted on them rather than start this one.
:huh :noid
Black helos! We need black helos! :cool: :D