PDA

View Full Version : who wants more heavy bombers&float planes(i.e-b29 b17 b24-pbn h8k1 etc)plz repley



slo1234
07-30-2005, 12:48 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gifnow i know im not the only one rite cause i dont know how to contact these people but thats what i would be super happy with a big float plane a b29 or a c47 and heck there already there they just have to make them flyable i'd to here others opinions on this
<span class="ev_code_RED"> slo</span>

GAU-8
07-30-2005, 01:38 AM
looooong argued debate.

probably wont ever be done with the IL-2 engine. maybe 3 to 5 years after BoB is released. im trying to be patient. need another fortress game.

Luftwaffe_109
07-30-2005, 02:36 AM
I would definitely like more heavy bombers, floatplanes and torpedo-bombers in this game.

Hoarmurath
07-30-2005, 03:27 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

ashley2005
07-30-2005, 03:55 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

HoneySeeker
07-30-2005, 04:01 AM
I would certainly like to have them properly flyable in-game, but I'll not cry for lack of them. Zerstorers, strike aircraft, and tactical and light bombers, are much more interesting.

Anyway, I have the A-20 and Bf-110 - so I'm already as happy as a pig in sh*t.

HotelBushranger
07-30-2005, 04:14 AM
I'm with ash on this one. I much prefer light bombers and tactical/strike planes than big lumbering beasts. Still, maybe 1 or 2 heavies max will be great, say a Lancaster or B17 for Europe, Emily or other heavy (dunno much about Japanese planes) for the pacific. But if bombers are implemented, they shouldn't be ETO biased.

Fox_3
07-30-2005, 05:24 AM
As we do not have the maps to do the heavy bombers justice. I think they would be a waste of resourses.

I mean you could takeoff in your B29 from Iwo Jima. But where would you go?

HotelBushranger
07-30-2005, 06:15 AM
You have a good point! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ElAurens
07-30-2005, 10:29 AM
The H8K1 Emily would be a very welcome addition to the Pacific theater. It's ability to carry topredos or bombs and it's heavy defensive armament would be nice to have, both online and off.

It would be fun to re-create the little known night bombing raid of March 4~5 1942 on Honolulu.

The Emily was the best flying boat of WW2, I wish it were flyable.

http://www.ijnafpics.com/JB&W2/H8K-19.jpg

HotelBushranger
07-30-2005, 08:32 PM
Yeah, it is a real beauty. Reminds me a lot of the Sunderland (or is it Sutherland?), thats another real beauty that I'd like to have. The Condor would be cool to fly too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

GAU-8
07-31-2005, 06:22 AM
map size has little to do with it ..REALLY. they are large enuff, at least the mid to large ones.

everybody uses the excuse of map size. it gets old.

most bombers are slower than any prop fighter. if your going so much faster in a fighter..how come nobody ever complains about the map being to small for the fighters speed to distance. all i ever hear about is "maaan.. i gotta fly 5 minutes to look for a fight!"

us hardcore bomber types dont take a "B"line strait to target..thats instant death. we have our tactics to get to 9K alt, and remain relatively intact. (besides, we enjoy the ride)

time for some hours put into construction of making HEAVIES flyable.

WTE_Pharoah
07-31-2005, 08:13 PM
bah, I'd still like a B24 atleast. gimme gimme gimme.