1. #1
    1) Not enough of them.
    The TBM-3 is great after about 4 beers, and I've stoped paying attention to the game. Seriously...the TBM-3 is good for nothing more than comic relief. It was a Joke in the great patriotic war, and its a joke in the game. The HE-111 is the only viable bomber currently available in IL2FB.

    2) The flight sim community is made up of informed, and expierianced real world pilots,
    WE ARE TIRED OF BEGGING FOR BOMBERS !
    1C Madox Games, and Ubi Soft has pulled the rug from under Microsoft and captured the Combat Flight Simulator market. It is very arguable that this simulation needs balance between fighter craft and Bombers. Right now we have to manualy edit mission files and fly the B-17 from 3rd person view....that should say somthing about the players desire to fly bombers

    3)Payloads and Accuracy
    AI gunners are way to sharp. From 1942 to early 43 U.S. bomber crews had a %30 chance of surviving thier tour of duty(Actual Stats). Bomber relied on formation disipline, and the ruggedness of their planes to survive. U.S. bomber crews averaged 0.7 kills per 25 missions flown.
    http://www.ww2guide.com/britishb.shtml

    4) Formations and cooriagraphy

    I'll leave this subject open. I can't imagine what my computer would do with 300 Bbombers in box formation.

    "The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
    -Rush Limbaugh
    http://trackpad.home.comcast.net
    Share this post

  2. #2
    1) Not enough of them.
    The TBM-3 is great after about 4 beers, and I've stoped paying attention to the game. Seriously...the TBM-3 is good for nothing more than comic relief. It was a Joke in the great patriotic war, and its a joke in the game. The HE-111 is the only viable bomber currently available in IL2FB.

    2) The flight sim community is made up of informed, and expierianced real world pilots,
    WE ARE TIRED OF BEGGING FOR BOMBERS !
    1C Madox Games, and Ubi Soft has pulled the rug from under Microsoft and captured the Combat Flight Simulator market. It is very arguable that this simulation needs balance between fighter craft and Bombers. Right now we have to manualy edit mission files and fly the B-17 from 3rd person view....that should say somthing about the players desire to fly bombers

    3)Payloads and Accuracy
    AI gunners are way to sharp. From 1942 to early 43 U.S. bomber crews had a %30 chance of surviving thier tour of duty(Actual Stats). Bomber relied on formation disipline, and the ruggedness of their planes to survive. U.S. bomber crews averaged 0.7 kills per 25 missions flown.
    http://www.ww2guide.com/britishb.shtml

    4) Formations and cooriagraphy

    I'll leave this subject open. I can't imagine what my computer would do with 300 Bbombers in box formation.

    "The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
    -Rush Limbaugh
    http://trackpad.home.comcast.net
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Future-'s Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    611
    As many stated already, the increased efficiency of the ai gunners can be justified by the fact that large protective formations like they existed in WW2 can not be recreated in FB. Partly maybe in the mission builder, but if you go online and fly a B-17, even if you get some people to fly with you, you would only be able to pack together a force of about 1% - 2% in numbers compared to an average real task force back then.
    Plus if the ai gunners would further get tuned down, they would be useless, especially for big birds like the B-17.

    Apart from that, I agree with you, it's more than time that some more flyable bombers are added. However, it's not sure if Ubi/1C will react on this... as rumors are now that even the long-expected B-25 won't make it (at least not with cockpit) to the expansion. The fate of the Bf-110 is also still unsure.
    The Fw-200 Condor, although only a recon plane, was first planned fully flyable too, but will definitely be just ai only.
    The Ju-88 is still a work in progress, won't be flyble in the add-on either.

    So overall, if they also scrap the B-25 now, the expansion can be regarded as a huge let-down, at least when it comes to new bombers/ground attack craft.

    - Future

    Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
    380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF



    Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG
    Share this post

  4. #4
    The bomber formations can be created.
    Got 108 in the air they bomb & land .
    Just the computers are not fast enough to play it.
    Making a B-17 flyable would at least give some better control on the formation itself.
    Alittle command & control would be nice.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    Aaron_GT's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,134
    There seems to be at least one set of bombers
    coming in the paid add on - the B25. More
    would be welcome, of course - e.g. Ju88, Pe-2,
    etc., to name ones that already have a presence
    in the game.

    What would be a nice addition to the game
    for bombers would be the ability of the AI
    to call out positions of incoming fighters.
    This is present in games like Warbirds, but
    sadly missing in FB. About the only way
    to recreate it is online, and have a real
    human(s) man position(s).
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Future-'s Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    611
    I just hope the B-25 will really be there, latest rumor has it the interiors won't be completed in time for the add-on.

    - Future

    Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
    380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF



    Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Yes, I really hope the B25 makes the expansion pack as a flyable bird and want to see more bombers too - especially the strategic four engine bombers such as the Fortess, Liberator et al.

    Man, I'd give my right arm for a Lanc, Stirling or Halifax. Well, someone's right arm anyway
    Share this post

  8. #8
    As far as I know, the big computer companys are all useing Pentium 4s, and AMD athlon 64s in their products. Dell, IBM, Gatewqay ect...ect...

    Those are powerfull prossessors! I'm useing a Duron 1.6 and do very well keeping up with most online gamers, and offline single play is very smooth, Frames around 35-40 on perfect settings are common for me.

    My point is, For years PC development has been driven by the need to run more complicated software. The latest line of PCs are so powerfull and affordable, it should'nt be an issue to challenge users PC power with complicated Aircraft.
    Folks like me who run older CPU's only do so because we don't need the extra power to run our games.
    But If a B-17 was availbe today, I'd buy a new prossessor today.

    Check this out. CFS did a pretty good job with their multi crew bombers, and I was running CFS3 on a Duron 1.2. I can't say if the Bombers have in that game have issues, because that whole game has issues. (i still want my $60 back) But those were very pretty planes.

    By the Time BOB is releases I sure most gamers will be running 2.0 ghz or faster. The only major thing that needs to be worked out is a good interface with A.I. support, much like what we have now.

    Offer a Bomber and I'll buy it.

    "The only reason we liberated France was to get to Germany"
    -Rush Limbaugh
    http://trackpad.home.comcast.net
    Share this post

  9. #9
    No (b)25????.......No (U.S.)$29

    Its time we had an official word/clarifiation on this.
    Many squadrons watching and waiting for the only thing this fine sim is missing.
    S!
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Zen--'s Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,060
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Future-:

    As many stated already, the increased efficiency of the ai gunners can be justified by the fact that large protective formations like they existed in WW2 can not be recreated in FB.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    You can't justify the accuracy by saying that it simulates the protection that a bomber WOULD have in a stream. FB has never been about game balance, it's been about accuracy all the way.

    A single bomber in real life was effectively a goner against fighters. No escort, no bomber box = low probability of survival.


    Why should FB be different than that? What makes a bomber justified in having unrealistically high accuracy from it's AI gunners?


    Plane FM's get picked apart with a microscope and everything that is not realistic is heatedly debated to the Nth degree....I don't see where a flyable or AI bomber of any sort is justified to have something that it did not in real life, that contradicts what FB is about in the first place. Bombers should be held to the same standard as everything else...if that means they can't survive by themselves, well, they can't survive by themselves then. Same as real life, right?

    I like bombers a lot. I like AI planes included in the missions, they add to the game play and lots of people enjoy them and the change in dynamics they create.

    I just don't think it's right that AI gunners are have their current accuracy because it simulates cover they would have had in real life, but don't in the game.

    -Zen-
    Formerly TX-Zen
    Share this post