B-29 Super Fortress

[DaddyAck]

I do not know if it has already been thought of, but what if there was no option for drones and a purely conventional payload, and restricted launchable bases like the 163?  Just thinking people then can not menace a base with just 1 formation, and at the same time they will be interceptable because it will just be a single ship and not have 3 sets of guns trained on the attacker. Not to mention since they would up from rear bases they would not be a constant hastle. 

[Arlo]

since i have become a member of aces high i have been visiting the website,frequently, and i have noticed that the designers have been putting out only fighter and tanks,so far.

Not frequently enough, it seems. I'll even keep it to just formation ones:

A-20G
B-17G
B-24J
B-25C
B-25H
B-26B
Boston Mk III
Lancaster III
Ju 88A-4
Ki-67

[Rich46yo]

No to b29. I'll say it 81 times. End of story.  It would make the rest of the BUFFS hangar queens.  One B29 would carry as much as an entire set of B24's.  The current set of bombers is quite enough... notice how all the veteran players are against it.  One plane should not change the entire game.

I get the feeling those that want the B29 are the same ones that fly at 38K on HQ missions at 330 in the morning... All words and afraid of the fight.  You already have laser bombsights and gunnery positions... now you want 3x the bombs too?   In WW2 it took 300 bombers to put three 500lb bombs  within blast radius of a target.... you can hit a single building with a single bomb consistently without any real practice at all, in AH2.

The B29 has not been modelled for good reason.  

                     "Yes" to the B-29. And I'll say it 82 times the reason being is I pay the same $ per month as you do and have as much right to say what I want as you do. Nor do I speak for "all the veteran players" who pay the same $ as the noobs do to play this game, and most of whom I'll bet could care less if the 29 was in the game.

                     The ones who "fly 38k on HQ missions at 0330 in the morning" are the highly ranked score guys who need a minimum of times in a bomber to get a high bomber rank for their overall ranks. And they can do all this already in Lancs and B-17s or 24s. So why would they risk perked B-29s? Go ahead and ask them cause the real bomber sticks are attacking front line targets with 4 cons on their tails already. Perked B-29s would have no more adverse affect on the game then perked 262s do.

                    You should learn to be more accepting of others and their opinions Moray. Cause as it stands now you just come across as a fool. Just because you dont fly bombers doesnt mean everyone who does should be content with what you deem is "enough".

[Strip]

The B-29 would be a great plane to fly even with a hefty perk price. I think 200 per bird is a fair price putting it on par with the 262. For all of the arguements of "changing the game" I have something to say. Why do we have the 262, F4U-1C, F4U-4, Spit 14, AR-234 or the Tempest? All can change the face of the game rather easily yet they are being flown everyday. Oh wait....they are perked! Now what does this do? Thats right....keeps them in check.

I ask you this....if a perked B-29 would change the game why on earth are the planes above in?

The B-29 dropped many thousands of standard bombs and would have dropped much more had we invaded Japan. Would you still shun the B-29 if it had been a B-24 dropping the nukes? Most want to fly the B-29 for one reason.....it was the BEST prop bomber used in WW2. Personally I would love to see the B-29 and nuke for many reasons. The whines when a nuke hit would be priceless. For gameplay issues I agree with not having the Atom bomb however. As far as the B-29.....go for it!

Moray.....sounds like you have a case of the whineritis. HQ missions at ANY time of day are suicidal when there are more than 75 people on. The Lancaster carries 14,000 lbs and the B-29 carries 20,000lbs or so? Hardly the 3X you talk about. I think you (like most others) dont want it are too lazy to climb and kill it ther for dont want it all together

Strip

[5PointOh]

Ok so weekly we all see the B-29 post, I want a the B-29, I don't want the B-29, ect ect.  So I thought, why not see what a selection of the players think in a mutliple choice questionaire.  Sorry, would have just done a poll, but I guess that went away with the new forum.  So Please just be an adult so to speak and answer the poll questions.

1)Would you like to see the B-29 added to the LW Arenas?
  a:No, I would not like to see it.
  b:Yes, I'd like to have the B-29 added to the LW Arenas
  c:I really don't care, either way

2)If the B-29 was added to the MA, should it be in a single bomber form? (Like the Ar234)
  a:Yes, bomber form (Formations disabled)
  b:No, a set of B-29s...wahoo or something.
  c:Yes but each plane will cost ya

3)If ENY equals 0 what should the average perk value be per bomber?
  a:100-200
  b:200-300
  c:300-400

4)If the B-29 were to be added, should it be limited to one base for launch (Like the 163s)
  a:Launch only from an uncapturable field.
  b:Launch it anywhere, I'd enjoy the whines on 200 for vulching a B-29 on take off
 
Just answer, and well see a little bit of what people think. 

[5PointOh]

1.C
2.A
3.C
4.A

See simple

[Denholm]

1. A

That's all that must be told.

[Denholm]

Now where in the heck can we get the idea to add another heavy bomber to the already superior American Bomber Plane Set? Let's fill up the Italian, German, Japanese, and Russian Bomber Plane Sets before we go galloping off to give the Americans all the tools and armor.

[VansCrew1]

1. A

That's all that must be told.

 

[Hitman20]

If you had a room that only had 29's and jet's I just might vote for it....ehh maybe not... HTC has better things to do..

[5PointOh]

mark you down as an A since you failed to follow instructions.

[waystin2]

A
A
C
B

[Karnak]

Let me add my voice to the pro-B-29A group.

Mind you, we need other bombers first, Pe-2, Tu-2, G4M2, S.M.-79-II, He111, Wellington B.Mk III and Ju188 all stand out as higher priority to me.

But the idea that the B-29A should never be added is absurd.  It was a very important aircraft that saw heavy service and was produced in the thousands.  Of course it will need to be perked, and at arelatively high cost.  Of course it will not have a nuke as a load anymore, less in fact, than the Lancaster Mk III has the 22,000lb 'Grand Slam' as an option.  To constantly rebuff the B-29A request due to the nuke is ridiculous as they are 100% separate issues.


Some people claim the B-29A would need to be perked outrageously high, say 3,000 per plane or some such, because they say it would be nigh indestructible.  This is false.  It would be very survivable, for a bomber, but far from indestructable.  If used at medium or low altitude it could be easily destroyed by a Bf110 or Mosquito VI.  The Typhoon, La-7, Fw190D-9 and Bf109K-4 would all be effective against it at low and medium altitudes.  If the B-29A player spends the time to climb to high alt then the Ta152H and P-47N would both be effective.  Adding perk planes in, the Tempest and F4U-1C at low alt and the Spitfire Mk XIV at high alt, and the Me262 and Me163 at any alt would also be effective B-29A killers.  Remember, the B-29A has a wingloading of 80lbs/sq.ft. and is not at all a B-17 in agility at altitude.

[Rich46yo]

Now where in the heck can we get the idea to add another heavy bomber to the already superior American Bomber Plane Set? Let's fill up the Italian, German, Japanese, and Russian Bomber Plane Sets before we go galloping off to give the Americans all the tools and armor.

                         I agree. I'd rather see some Russian medium bombers. But...my love is for medium bombers be they Yank, Russian, Japanese, German...whatever. However I would never say the 29 should "not" be in the game.

                        Lose 750 perks on a 3-pack of 29s and see how anxious you are to take up another set. When I left the game due to wife ack I lost 5,000 bomber perks and have only rebuilt a small amount back. I'd fly 29s but rarely. 95% of the guys in this game just dont have the patience to climb to 30,000' anyways.

                      Having B-29s would turn the game more into an actual war sim instead of just a A1-A19 furball on one end of the uterus. Hopefully it will eventually be in the game. However I would like to see Russian bombers first.

[Rich46yo]

1, B
2, B but perked heavily
3, B
4, B