Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: BotaBing on July 17, 2000, 12:17:00 PM
-
After realizing that my b17 can only take 6k of bombs, and that my P47 can take 3k of bombs and rockets, a couple thoughts have occurred (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
#1 - Doesn't it seem that a b17 could take more than 2x a fighter's payload?
#2 - Doesn't it seem that you could refuse to take most of your guns, and ammo, on the b17 and instead pile in more bombs?
Could someone give me the real numbers on what a b17 could take?
I know that it would not take 3 1k bombs to destroy a hangar, and that its more of a game balance issue. BUT, it sure seems that a bomber could do more than 2x the damage of a fighter in BOMBS ALONE. Not to mention that the fighters carry up to 3400 rounds of ammo, and can kill acks MUCH better than a bomber can.
With the messed up bomber stats, the low payloads, and the inability to strafe acks like a fighter, I'm getting to the point where I would never take a bomber for anything.
-
You seem pretty new around here...
So far B-17 has the payload that it carried in real life too.
You don't have guns in the bomb bay or bombs in the gun sections, so no more bombs can be carried than bomb bay can fit in.
B-17 bomb bay is quite small...
Heres a layout of the B-17:
(http://www.mbnet.fi/~fishu/b-17/pics/B-17_Layout.jpg)
Heres a bit history and stuff about B-17: B-17 Flying Fortress (http://koti.mbnet.fi/fishu/b-17/)
-
I don't know about the messed up bomber stats...don't really care about score. One thought about the 'low payloads' though, is that in AH, you can hit whatever it is you're aiming at, every time unless YOU screw up. So IF (and i have no idea if it is) the payload is too small in AH, you're being more than compensated by being able to have 100% of your ordinance fall on the target, quite unlike bombers in WWII.
As for strafing acks, go ahead. I'm sure the guns in the B17 are plenty powerful enough to take out an ack...of course, flying that huge beast low enough over the field to hit acks will get you torn to bits before you're close enough to be effective. Fighters can take out acks with ease because they can dive in at odd angles, and maneuver while they're diving in for the kill.
Reasons to fly a bomber? It's fun sometimes. To help your countrymates take an airbase. Just my thoughts (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
SOB
-
The maximum bombload of the B17 was around 17000lb for most versions. It was almost never used. Even on short range missions the bombload rarely exceeded 6000lbs, and was often as low as 4000lb.
-
What you want, Botabing, is a Lancaster. Fewer guns and a bigger payload. Mind you, you may be wanting those guns back pretty quickly.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
I remember reading that although the B-17 could carry quite a hefty load, doing so severely cut down its range. FYI..certain production blocks of "F" models were fitted with a pair of external bomb racks, one on each wing root, which allowed carrying 2 additional 1,000lb. bombs. These racks weren't used much, and were deleted from later B-17F's.
AH currently has the B-17G, so the bomb racks aren't an option anyway. I WILL say that if they do bring in the "F" model down the road, it would be AWESOME to have those with it. It would certainly fit in with HTC's desire to bring in more unique aircraft. To keep things in check, the increased bomb load would come with the decrease in performance, and also a serious elimination of forward firepower (no chin turret or forward firing cheek guns, and perhaps only a 30cal MG in the nose.)
<S>
IC