In all this discussion, one thing really stands out --
Lots of guys who've played the game for a long time are talking about bombers from their veteran's perspective alone. I think many of us have lost sight of what it feels like to be a newb....and for newbs, or the hatchlings that grow from newbs, bombers are completely different things.
Unlike many of you, I've only been in the game for about 3 years, and I am not a natural gamer. I just love WW2 aviation, and that's what kept me in the game during the long months it took for me to attain survivable mediocrity in fighters. In those months, after being continually reminded of my incompetence in A2A combat, I could still feel like part of the big picture by upping buffs to hit strats or to be part of an attack. Without that ability to feel successful, I would likely have given AH up as being just too hard.
I submit that we ought to think of the bombing model more in terms of player retention. Looking only at their simulation accuracy is shortsighted, because the buff pilot of today may become the combat opponent of tomorrow...if we can keep him hooked long enough to get there.
I see what Zanth, Hub and others are saying about the context in which the bomb modes were made easier. But, I would argue that the FACT of their remaining easier has less to do with realistic bombing for the vets, and more to do with keeping players in the game while they negotiate the incredibly steep leaining curve.
