November 10, 1943 - Cairo

[Chalenge]

President Roosevelt issues his approval to the China-India B-29 basing plan later to be called 'Matterhorn.' Matterhorn calls for the early sustained bombing of Japan and was the blueprint for the strategic air offensive bombing campaign. Not only would the B-29s have to be flown over the Himalayas (The Hump) but so would the air bases since there were none in China at the time.

Bring on the B-29! 

[Jayhawk]

[Chalenge]

I dont think cute pictures of stop signs and kittens is going to make any difference. This is a popular wish and now with recent changes in the game (and those about to come about) the B-29 will be needed.

[phatzo]

[Jayhawk]

Hey I like the B-29 and think it should be in the game, but I'm guessing the guys at HTC have gotten the message already.

[thndregg]

B29 itself? Okay. B29 as another version of a "Lancstuka" for the no-patience "I want my candy NOW" gamers? No.

[waystin2]

+1 No Nuke.

[gyrene81]

The B-29 is "needed" how exactly? There isn't a map the existing bombers cannot traverse easily with 100% fuel. Few if any fly the existing bombers over 25k. Even if it was for some odd reason added into the plane set (considering there are a very large number of more valuable planes missing)...it would probably be perked to the point where few could use it.

[USCH]

it would probably be perked to the point where few could use it.

ya because the 262 perk is too high and its in no way killable eather.
people have plenty of bomber perks sitting around and a B29 is not indestructible.

perk it and play with it i say, and i think most sane people agree no nuke.

[Nemisis]

I'm with USHC on this. And if it gets to the point to where it gets less use than the 262 cause no one can afford to fly it, then lower the perks to make use about equivelant to the 262.

B-29 is the 262 of bombers, no getting around that. If we have the 262 which is uber, then we should get the B-29 which is uber.

[Yossarian]

The thing about the B-29 is it would allow us to use up some bomber perks.  However, it would be perked so heavily that after a while (probably until we ran out of bomber perks, or the novelty wore off), you'd rarely see it in the arenas any more - which would sort of negate the point of adding it...

I'm afraid I still think the A-26 should be added next, just to fulfil the role of a perked bomber.

[Nemisis]

read two  posts up. I believe I answered your problem.

[Ack-Ack]

Other planes are needed far more than the B-29 or the A-26.  There are gaping holes in the EW and MW plane set that need to be addressed first.


ack-ack

[Nemisis]

Then do something about it. Don't just sit back and say "we need others first". Start a thread, email hitech.

[Chalenge]

The strategic changes to AH are going to make strats much more important to winning the maps and even taking fields. The strats are going to be much larger as well and it will take much more than a few of the currently available bombers to take strats down to the levels of porkage required especially if you are one of the carpet bombing noobs we have now. Really the B-29 has already been needed (for survival if nothing else) but most people have never realized it because they do not attack bombers properly. Most people attack bombers from dead six which is really the dumbest way to do it but if they can manage just one kill most of them are happy because in a one versus one fighter fight they will lose. Bombers are really easy to take down if you do it right because their guns can be defeated so easily and because there are so many fighters that greatly out match their speed. The only real defense the current bombers have is speed and altitude and the smart bomber pilots will hit their targets as quickly as possible from 'service ceiling' and then climb to maximum ceiling as quickly as they can on egress.

The B-29 will make even 163s think twice.