Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: jolly22 on March 11, 2009, 06:26:01 PM
-
ok heres my idea...........we add a b-29 with NO COST!!!!!! BUT the nuke or more than 20 1000ibs bombs should be perked
-
Ok, you're not new to this board so I guess you know what comes next (i.e. nook being dropped on tanks picture, flaming, insults, etc).
Here are the problems with adding the B-29 to Aces High:
- as you propose it, there would be no perk price on the plane itself or any 'normal' ordinance load. This would probably mean that it would replace all the other bombers in the medium/high altitude bombing roles - the B-29 is fast, heavily armoured, and has a pair of 20mms in the tail. Plus it would (or at least could) fly so high that it would be difficult to intercept. Perhaps the only practical way to intercept it would be the Me-163, and that's only enabled in 1 or 2 bases per country. For these reasons I doubt the B-29 will ever be added as a non-perked plane.
- IF IT WERE perked, then it would have to have quite a high perk price, probably something similar to that of the Me-262.
- HOWEVER if it were given such a high price (which it would probably have to be, for the reasons given above), then it would be rarely flown. This raises the question: why should HiTech Creations spend the time, money and effort to make this plane, if nobody flies it?
- Again, if they were to add the B-29, it would NOT have the nuclear bomb - HiTech has already said this. So it would just be a very fast, very high altitude and very expensive (and thus very rare) bomber. There are many planes which would be far more valuable additions to the game than this.
-
It's time HTC starts reprimanding people for this spamming for the B-29.
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/nookie.gif)
-
That never gets old :rofl
-
Ok, you're not new to this board so I guess you know what comes next (i.e. nook being dropped on tanks picture, flaming, insults, etc).
Here are the problems with adding the B-29 to Aces High:
- as you propose it, there would be no perk price on the plane itself or any 'normal' ordinance load. This would probably mean that it would replace all the other bombers in the medium/high altitude bombing roles - the B-29 is fast, heavily armoured, and has a pair of 20mms in the tail. Plus it would (or at least could) fly so high that it would be difficult to intercept. Perhaps the only practical way to intercept it would be the Me-163, and that's only enabled in 1 or 2 bases per country. For these reasons I doubt the B-29 will ever be added as a non-perked plane.
- IF IT WERE perked, then it would have to have quite a high perk price, probably something similar to that of the Me-262.
- HOWEVER if it were given such a high price (which it would probably have to be, for the reasons given above), then it would be rarely flown. This raises the question: why should HiTech Creations spend the time, money and effort to make this plane, if nobody flies it?
- Again, if they were to add the B-29, it would NOT have the nuclear bomb - HiTech has already said this. So it would just be a very fast, very high altitude and very expensive (and thus very rare) bomber. There are many planes which would be far more valuable additions to the game than this.
I think the B-29 would be a nice addon for the HTC staff to work on in their free time (Not like they have much anyways but you get the point). The B-29 would be something like the Ar234 if added, minus speed and plus bomb load. I'd say about 100-150 perks (per plane?). It'd give the buff dweebs (myself included) something to spend their perks on other than taking the Ar234s up (Which most people know, I love taking it up). It would have to be perked obviously, but it'd have to be perked high enough for it not to be used every sortie by someone. The thing could get high, so there IS a chance of making it home. Again, it'd be a nice addon someday, but I think HTC has higher priorities.
-
likes spike says...i think we need somekind of better jet bomber i think the 234
SUCKS!!!
-
likes spike says...i think we need somekind of better jet bomber i think the 234
SUCKS!!!
Well, I beg to differ on that one. I could probably kill you 1v1 with my 20mm arse guns. :)
In terms of bomb load compared to the lanc, yes, but not all around.
-
i have about 900 bomber points but im not going to use them on the Ar234
-
likes spike says...i think we need somekind of better jet bomber i think the 234
SUCKS!!!
Umm "some kind of better jet bomber" and you're asking for the B29? Please tell me you're joking.
-
well im just saying...... we need a new bomber period
-
bump for nukes? Or at least sharks with freaking lasers on their heads?
-
bump for nukes? Or at least sharks with freaking lasers on their heads?
Another wish granted:
(http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4579/image17e.jpg)
New argument against Nooks:
B-29s had to be specially modified for the bomb to fit in it. Same for Lancs that carried Tallboys.
wrongway
-
love that shark
-
at least you wouldn't see them diving face first into CVs while pouring bombs out.. heck that is reason enough for me, add the sucker.
-
I think it might be the only perk bomber that could be added
hard for me to understand why everyone hates the idea of it, I mean we got some planes in this game that saw much less use and made little impact on the war
one example being the TA-152 and the Jet bomber
although the nuke is stupid of course, but I bet HTC could add a option that if you payed by credit card say 10 dollars you get 1 nuke to use, just kidding of course
-
I think it might be the only perk bomber that could be added
hard for me to understand why everyone hates the idea of it, I mean we got some planes in this game that saw much less use and made little impact on the war
one example being the TA-152 and the Jet bomber
although the nuke is stupid of course, but I bet HTC could add a option that if you payed by credit card say 10 dollars you get 1 nuke to use, just kidding of course
haha
-
I could probably with little effort rattle off at least 100 planes that deserve to be in the game before the 29....
-
I think it might be the only perk bomber that could be added
hard for me to understand why everyone hates the idea of it, I mean we got some planes in this game that saw much less use and made little impact on the war
one example being the TA-152 and the Jet bomber
although the nuke is stupid of course, but I bet HTC could add a option that if you payed by credit card say 10 dollars you get 1 nuke to use, just kidding of course
Wrong - the A-26 Invader would be far better suited to a perked bomber role in Aces High IMHO.
If you search for the A-26, you'll find one of my threads where I asked for it :D
-
back to the the a-26 of course ADD IT !!!!
-
at least you wouldn't see them diving face first into CVs while pouring bombs out..
Why would you assume that? If you can dive-bomb in a Lanc you can dive-bomb in a 29.
-
Why would you assume that? If you can dive-bomb in a Lanc you can dive-bomb in a 29.
well I guess a person COULD do it.. but not too many times before they were "broke"
how many people are going to bomb strat for hours on end just to get enough perkies for 1 suicide B29 run?
-
well I guess a person COULD do it.. but not too many times before they were "broke"
how many people are going to bomb strat for hours on end just to get enough perkies for 1 suicide B29 run?
You have to remember that some people have been playing this game for years with only the ar234 to burn bomber perks. Before I changed my name I had over 10,000 bomber perks and I know of some people that have many, many more then that.
-
You have to remember that some people have been playing this game for years with only the ar234 to burn bomber perks. Before I changed my name I had over 10,000 bomber perks and I know of some people that have many, many more then that.
So? A brief rash of possibly misused B-29s is not a reason not to add it.
There are reasons not to add it right now, but that isn't one of them.
-
You have to remember that some people have been playing this game for years with only the ar234 to burn bomber perks. Before I changed my name I had over 10,000 bomber perks and I know of some people that have many, many more then that.
Im sure they skys would be absolutely POLLUTED with them for a short period of time... but even with many thousands of perkies.. at around a grand per formation even the "rich" would still probably be frugal..
-
Game would be great with a B29. Reduce the 20K bomb load to whatever HTC wants. Should be in the plane-set.
-
ok heres my idea...........we add a b-29 with NO COST!!!!!! BUT the nuke or more than 20 1000ibs bombs should be perked
Um ....one small problem with your request. The Runways in Aces High are NOT long enuff to get a B29 in the air. So HTC would have to redo every airfield ...on every map. I doubt that is going to happen for one plane.
Helm ...out
-
Um ....one small problem with your request. The Runways in Aces High are NOT long enuff to get a B29 in the air. So HTC would have to redo every airfield ...on every map. I doubt that is going to happen for one plane.
Helm ...out
Ah the irony. Enable a plane that can't take off.
:rofl
wrongway
-
It makes perfect sense now! HTC is redoing the terrain so they can add in bases with longer runways! Just for the B29.
-
It makes perfect sense now! HTC is redoing the terrain so they can add in bases with longer runways! Just for the B29.
Shhhhhhhhhh :noid
-
I'd love to see it in the game. No nuke, and a high perk cost.
-
Well, lets be true to life with it. IF it ever gets in the game, make it a requirement to have someone join you (since the all throttle and flaps were operated by the flight engineer) before you could even start engines, and both parties would have to pay the perk fee!
B-29
20,000lbs
357Max/220Cruise
Ceiling 33,600 Ft
B-17
8,000lbs
287Max/182Cruise
Ceiling 35,600 Ft
B-24
8,000lbs
290Max/215Cruise
Ceiling 28,000 Ft
Lancaster
14,000lbs
272Max/200Cruise
23,500 Ft
Quick info I got from the devil (Wiki) but should be accurate enough to show how much devastation would follow the B-29 (60,000lbs per formation!)
-
So? A brief rash of possibly misused B-29s is not a reason not to add it.
There are reasons not to add it right now, but that isn't one of them.
I don't remember making that post as a 'reason' not to add it. I was quoting wingnutt saying that if they were added that some people would have enough perks to almost fly them indefinitely.
Im sure they skys would be absolutely POLLUTED with them for a short period of time... but even with many thousands of perkies.. at around a grand per formation even the "rich" would still probably be frugal..
Most people think/want them to be around a Me262 value and that's 200 with a perk multiplier at 1.0. Even at 600-900 per formation their speed and armament will make then very hard to kill, so I don't think alot of people will be losing them unless they are dive bombing a fleet. Seeing that each B29 can carry 20k of bombs you wont need a formation to kill it. I would be like the M4 now, so many people have so many perks that they wont care if they lose one. The only way I think they could limit them is only enabling them from 'zone bases' or resetting everyones bomber perks a month or so before its released.
-
I don't remember making that post as a 'reason' not to add it. I was quoting wingnutt saying that if they were added that some people would have enough perks to almost fly them indefinitely.
Only if they flew them correctly. If they used them as dive bombers, like Lancasters are misused, then even the largest perk bank would run dry reasonably fast. B-29 would probably be 200-300 perks, so that is 600-900 perks lost for a formation. Even 20,000 or 30,000 perks would go pretty fast at 900 a pop and I doubt there is a large number of people with that many bomber perks.
HTC could also do a bomber perk reset when introducing it to prevent it from being unbalanced. Even just a 75-90% reduction in bomber perks.
-
Under 10K, the bomb bay doors will not open.
-
Only if they flew them correctly. If they used them as dive bombers, like Lancasters are misused, then even the largest perk bank would run dry reasonably fast. B-29 would probably be 200-300 perks, so that is 600-900 perks lost for a formation. Even 20,000 or 30,000 perks would go pretty fast at 900 a pop and I doubt there is a large number of people with that many bomber perks.
HTC could also do a bomber perk reset when introducing it to prevent it from being unbalanced. Even just a 75-90% reduction in bomber perks.
But if you're going to go dive bombing knowing theres a good chance your not going to make it back why take a formation? 20k will easily take out all the hangers at a small field or the cruiser and carrier in a fleet. So theres no need to risk more perks when you don't need the extra two bomber to distroy what you're attacking.
-
But if you're going to go dive bombing knowing theres a good chance your not going to make it back why take a formation? 20k will easily take out all the hangers at a small field or the cruiser and carrier in a fleet. So theres no need to risk more perks when you don't need the extra two bomber to distroy what you're attacking.
Well, they could always make them super expensive at first and lower the price later. Say, 1000 for a single plane, 3000 for a formation and later bring it down to the 200-300 range once their use drops off. HTC has changed perk prices in the past.
There is also the reset on bomber perks as an option.
-
Has no one thought of the repercussions of nuclear radiation? Think of all the helpless sheep a nuke would kill, and future generations turning out like SHawk.
-
Got nothing against the B-29. It was a late war bomber with an impressive performance and payload, but it is not un-interceptable. There actually, the fastest climbing aircraft (like 109 and Spits) would turn out bad because of the fuel burn rate.
There would be perks and no nook, no big deal. We already have perked aircraft as well as aircraft that saw much much less use than the B-29, so I'd rather think it is a goal for HTC, just not the first one in the queue.
Just my 5 cents....
-
Has no one thought of the repercussions of nuclear radiation? Think of all the helpless sheep a nuke would kill, and future generations turning out like SHawk.
you saying the mullet is the result of radition?