PDA

View Full Version : Why are there no Heavy bombers?



the_captain77
03-14-2005, 01:54 PM
I was just wondering why you have not included any heavy bombers with Pacific Fighters that pertains to the genre (ie, why is there no B-29, B-17 or any other heavy bomber that had any involvement in this campaigne).. Could you not rely on a third party to research, and make the models??

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 02:06 PM
cos its harder to make, and most pilots think bombers are boring http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

even few pilots can start all the engines, or effectivly man the guns, even less can use a bombsite...

and, many look down on bombers, cos ofcourse it was fighters that won the war http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
109,190,p51,spit,p47,corsair,zero THEY where the war winning aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

or, its the "oh they are long range, no one wants to fly for hours", so apprent incapability of long range aircraft, to fly short range ops is very sad. see it everyday in onwhine servers, no p51,47,p38,p40 or anything with decent range http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

btw, tb3 is a heavy, and b25 is a heavy, in japanease terms

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 02:08 PM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/lanc2.jpg

would be better for FP than the oft whined for american bombers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 03:12 PM
Essentially....one heavy bomber = the effort for 5-10 smaller aircraft. Thats the trouble.

But we'd still like to see one. And there was a B-29 that we thought might be finished.

HelSqnProtos
03-14-2005, 03:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by the_captain77:
I was just wondering why you have not included any heavy bombers with Pacific Fighters that pertains to the genre (ie, why is there no B-29, B-17 or any other heavy bomber that had any involvement in this campaigne).. Could you not rely on a third party to research, and make the models?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All developemnt of PF is winding down. We will have to wait for the new sim BOB sometime in 2007 probably to start making requests again. Till then try to enjoy what we have.

DarthBane_
03-14-2005, 04:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Essentially....one heavy bomber = the effort for 5-10 smaller aircraft. Thats the trouble.

But we'd still like to see one. And there was a B-29 that we thought might be finished. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many people already said that not all gunner stations are requred. And if quality standards existed in this game we wouldnt have that Jug cockpit or Zero and Val cockpits, or all Russian cockpits (with i185 exeption). 109 is the most frequently flown AC and still it has funny shadow and LOD model. Not to mention the cockpit and holes in wings when you look around.

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 04:47 PM
forget waist gunners, there mostly useless
top mid and tail gunner and ball turret if plane has it, thats all u need really

Engrs
03-14-2005, 06:13 PM
So where are you going to fly these heavy bombers from and to? If we had a map with East Anglia and Berlin, or Iwoa Jima and southern Japan then I would agree with you. Otherwise as flyables they are pointless with the maps we have at present.

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 06:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Essentially....one heavy bomber = the effort for 5-10 smaller aircraft. Thats the trouble.

But we'd still like to see one. And there was a B-29 that we thought might be finished. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many people already said that not all gunner stations are requred. And if quality standards existed in this game we wouldnt have that Jug cockpit or Zero and Val cockpits, or all Russian cockpits (with i185 exeption). 109 is the most frequently flown AC and still it has funny shadow and LOD model. Not to mention the cockpit and holes in wings when you look around. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A fair point except that people are complaining every other day because the Beaufighter's observation post is not modeled. Its a catch 22...don't model it and everyone is piss mad, model it but exclude something and everyone is piss mad.

It does take alot of work...final end quality being good or not. As for what happened with the Val cockpit I don't know. I never had a problem with the Zero's.

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 08:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Engrs:
So where are you going to fly these heavy bombers from and to? If we had a map with East Anglia and Berlin, or Iwoa Jima and southern Japan then I would agree with you. Otherwise as flyables they are pointless with the maps we have at present. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

indeed, we must simulate the 8 hours of boredom, with well, NOTHING happen for bombers, but not long range fighters....

airstart http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

TC_Stele
03-15-2005, 01:17 AM
Ok, I love the bombers and all and would love to see heavies, heck bombers are all I fly. But this topic is coming up like twice a week now and its driving me insane. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

IKG26Redcoat
03-15-2005, 11:42 AM
Theres a few who like bombers around...

airjunkie
03-15-2005, 12:05 PM
Just watched 617 group bomb a dam. Heavy bombers do have place in this game lets start a flight group and the others how much talent it takes to fly a heavy bomber.


"24 hrs in a day is stil not enough time for a junkie"

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 12:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by airjunkie:
Just watched 617 group bomb a dam. Heavy bombers do have place in this game lets start a flight group and the others how much talent it takes to fly a heavy bomber.


"24 hrs in a day is stil not enough time for a junkie" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

indeed
in some ways its harder for us sim bomber pilots, cos we fly, aim bombs, navigate, man guns all by ourselves http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

also want h2s, for blind bombing http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

TWC_DARKANGEL
03-15-2005, 01:09 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gifI would like to see heavy bomber's in this game. As far as the long range, in the game one can speed up the time, or use warp speed. Now for the guns on the buffs, you have a choice of manning the guns yourself or use AI. Ok starting the enegine's, practice, practice. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif There is alot of bomber squads out there. There is alot in our flight sims. I think this company can bring them in if they had bombers. I for one would like to take off from England & bomb let's say Germany's cities. Of course with a heavy escort. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Hope they come out with some soon. After all Germany Russia and Japan has bomber's, why can't U.S.A. Just a thought. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

StellarRat
03-15-2005, 02:18 PM
The big problem with no heavy bombers is that we can't simulate any "real" online bomber escort missions. So, we end up missing the most important reason for air battles on the Western Front. Hardly anyone flys the Western planes at the correct alt because there are no high alt bombers to escort. This is a really annoying because everything turns into low level dogfighting.

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 02:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TWC_DARKANGEL:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gifI would like to see heavy bomber's in this game. As far as the long range, in the game one can speed up the time, or use warp speed. Now for the guns on the buffs, you have a choice of manning the guns yourself or use AI. Ok starting the enegine's, practice, practice. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif There is alot of bomber squads out there. There is alot in our flight sims. I think this company can bring them in if they had bombers. I for one would like to take off from England & bomb let's say Germany's cities. Of course with a heavy escort. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Hope they come out with some soon. After all Germany Russia and Japan has bomber's, why can't U.S.A. Just a thought. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

b25, a20, corsair. 3 flyable bombers for americans. ai b17's, b24 b29

russians have il2, tb3 and soon pe2.

japanease have val, tony, ki84, zero soon betty

germans have stuka, 190f8, 110, he111, soon ju88 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

english have um spitfire and hurri, bue, and a ai blenhium, soon to get early IV mossie and FB http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

btw close formations of b17 and b24 would crash with lag, and be pretty vunrable to mk108 weilding fighters http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.


just hope for BOB oleg does engine for nighttime ops, and recon http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

StellarRat
03-15-2005, 03:18 PM
"3 flyable bombers for americans. ai b17's, b24 b29"

I don't count these as useable because AI bombers are nearly impossible to use from altitude due to no bombsight. If Oleg wants to give us a bomb aiming method for the AI's that's accurate, I'd certainly count them.

Aaron_GT
03-15-2005, 04:05 PM
I'd love to see some heavies, but I am happy enough with twins but more of them: Mossie, Ju88, Pe2, G4M (I wish we were getting this outside Russia too). Twins such as the Do17, Hampden, Wellington, Hudson, Blenheim, etc would be nice too, and more A20s, and the A26.

VW-IceFire
03-15-2005, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
The big problem with no heavy bombers is that we can't simulate any "real" online bomber escort missions. So, we end up missing the most important reason for air battles on the Western Front. Hardly anyone flys the Western planes at the correct alt because there are no high alt bombers to escort. This is a really annoying because everything turns into low level dogfighting. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I fly them at the correct alt...for the 2nd Tactical Air Force. Spitfires and Tempests flew at 10,000 feet and lower...a totally different ballgame than the high altitude escorts that were common earlier in the war.

Depends on what part of the war you're talking about.

There's a gameplay problem with simulating escort missions however...its boring to fly 8 hours. Time compression has to be extreme.

JG53Frankyboy
03-15-2005, 05:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
The big problem with no heavy bombers is that we can't simulate any "real" online bomber escort missions. So, we end up missing the most important reason for air battles on the Western Front. Hardly anyone flys the Western planes at the correct alt because there are no high alt bombers to escort. This is a really annoying because everything turns into low level dogfighting. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you should fly more COOP missions !
in VOW2 we very often fight at 7000m around the bombers !

StellarRat
03-16-2005, 12:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
The big problem with no heavy bombers is that we can't simulate any "real" online bomber escort missions. So, we end up missing the most important reason for air battles on the Western Front. Hardly anyone flys the Western planes at the correct alt because there are no high alt bombers to escort. This is a really annoying because everything turns into low level dogfighting. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I fly them at the correct alt...for the 2nd Tactical Air Force. Spitfires and Tempests flew at 10,000 feet and lower...a totally different ballgame than the high altitude escorts that were common earlier in the war.

Depends on what part of the war you're talking about.

There's a gameplay problem with simulating escort missions however...its boring to fly 8 hours. Time compression has to be extreme. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, no, no...you just design a map with high air start for all planes (or least the bombers and escorts) and only run the final approach to the target. Obviously, no one wants to fly eight hours.

I don't care much for coops the AI isn't very good compared to experienced humans.

JG53Frankyboy
03-16-2005, 02:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
The big problem with no heavy bombers is that we can't simulate any "real" online bomber escort missions. So, we end up missing the most important reason for air battles on the Western Front. Hardly anyone flys the Western planes at the correct alt because there are no high alt bombers to escort. This is a really annoying because everything turns into low level dogfighting. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I fly them at the correct alt...for the 2nd Tactical Air Force. Spitfires and Tempests flew at 10,000 feet and lower...a totally different ballgame than the high altitude escorts that were common earlier in the war.

Depends on what part of the war you're talking about.

There's a gameplay problem with simulating escort missions however...its boring to fly 8 hours. Time compression has to be extreme. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, no, no...you just design a map with high air start for all planes (or least the bombers and escorts) and only run the final approach to the target. Obviously, no one wants to fly eight hours.

I don't care much for coops the AI isn't very good compared to experienced humans. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you realy have no idea !
well, the fighters of both sides in these COOPS are mostly close to all humans ! the bomberformations are sure AI http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif