PDA

View Full Version : Big bombers



Jambock__01
01-17-2005, 04:48 AM

p1ngu666
01-17-2005, 05:03 AM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666/lanc2.jpg

need one of these mate

pilot, bomberdier, mid upper, tail gunner, front turret.

vs pilot, bomberdier, upper, radio(optional) 2x waist, front guns (semi optional) tail, belly gun. on b17

carried near twice the bombload, handled better, and could take loadsa bombs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

i surpose u could argue that b17 would be used more, having to return to target twice to have same effect as lanc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
01-17-2005, 05:07 AM
oh and if only cockpit/bombsight, ud need to learn howto corkscrew, cos ai gunners are useless http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

b17 is heavy, lanc is like a sports car in comparison, b24 was overweight.

lanc was hardwork to corkscrew with 7tons of bombs onboard, but pilots did it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Jambock__01
01-17-2005, 05:31 AM
Rgr that p1ngu666, but the B-17/ B-24 externals are done, just need a cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

harryklein66
01-17-2005, 05:44 AM
"No doubt these planes are the most needed and wanted by the community"
I'm not sure.

p1ngu666
01-17-2005, 06:27 AM
ya true, externals already there

harry, love the sig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Bomber-Burn
01-17-2005, 07:43 AM
I agree with you to a point. We defintenly need flyable heavy bombers, but I'd like to see complete with gunner stations. As soon as its out or soon after but the bomber should be complete.
These games have been weak on providing flyable level bombers. PF when it was released was suppose to have the Betty bomber as flyable but it wasn't. And I'm not sure when it will be available. (Patch???)
The fighter guys have gotton many more requests acheived for different fighters, but we only have a few level bombers and no flyable heavies.
A Bomber only, paid expansion should be released to address the bomber fans requests, and to compensate for all the work involved. It should only include flyable and AI bombers, maps, missions, ect. no fighters.
I be willing to pay for flyable versions of our favorite bombers, B-17, B-24, B-26, B-29 Lancaster, Ju-88, D0-217, He-177, Fw200, Pe-2, IL-10 and others. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

p1ngu666
01-17-2005, 07:53 AM
yes, we have a game which is 90% about secondary aircraft.
bombers and recon being primary aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

MadMAX_wwky
01-17-2005, 08:47 AM
i agree, we really need some of the biggies. i still enjoy flying the TB3 though its very weak against the later fighters. does anybody know what happened to KAMIs B-29 pit? i'd love to have another 4-engined plane flyable!

Engrs
01-17-2005, 09:08 AM
So where are we going to fly these heavies from, and to where? The maps are just not big enough to do these planes justice.

harryklein66
01-17-2005, 10:27 AM
I think the problem is that most of player are interst in dogfight only http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif, and not in
"just flight" whe get with heavies pit only.

ty p1ngu http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

stef51
01-17-2005, 01:52 PM
In any case, it's obvious we won't have them very soon if at all. Might I suggest that try to find planes that look like the ones we want and skin them appropriately?

I saw on Il2skins the Martin Maryland and I think the hampden and Lancaster using DB3s and Pe-8 with British paint.Same with the Blackburn Skua that looks like the SU2. A B24 or B17 with a good British scheme could work as a Halifax etc...

Thats the best we can have and it's better than nothing... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stephen

Skycat_2
01-18-2005, 04:47 PM
How about releasing a flyable Heavy with some but not all crew positions mannable? Maybe even forego the bombadier position -- let it be auto and simulate the pilot turning over control to bombadier? I could settle for a limited version with, say, only the pilot, top turret and ball turret gunner positions modeled; every bomber doesn't have to be a complete virtual museum.

p1ngu666
01-18-2005, 05:57 PM
if u dont model the waist guns, the most useless guns, then thatll save alot of work http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ive been on a b17, and its pretty complex back there, to model

Jambock__01
01-18-2005, 07:41 PM
So, thats my point. Release a Big bomber with a cockpit and bombsight. Then, if have time and references, model the others positions and add to the game.....

LEXX_Luthor
01-18-2005, 07:51 PM
You need gunner stations, at least the more important gunner positions.

Top gunner is most important, and we should have top gunners.

Great skins Jambock!

p1ngu666
01-18-2005, 08:02 PM
with ai gunners as they are, u probably do need top/ rear gunners, personally i hardly ever use side gunners

LEXX_Luthor
01-19-2005, 07:22 AM
pingu:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>i hardly ever use side gunners <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Probably, nobody plays side gunner.

I'd rather have B~25 and IL-4 with no Playable side gunners than only B~25 with Playable side
gunners (of course, IL4 no side gunner anyway).

All the modding put into crew positions that are not attractive to flight simmers could be used
for newer planes of major importance to the war.

Leave side gunners as AI only.

Daiichidoku
01-20-2005, 02:52 AM
That is one sexy pic, Pingu.....no, really it is a REALLY nice shot

May use that one as wallpaper....

That OM has certain standards is known...
But it rankles that the Glad MkI and II sit idle as we have the J8, and 3 types of Mitchell collect dust....

I can squint while in those cockpits and pretend the Finnish is actually English...or that there is an armor plate next to my pilot...

IMO there would be not many complaints about having common pits for (closley) related types...or "generic" gunner positions for bombers....too many ppl would be far too busy ENJOYING what could be given (not ALL, sadly) to b i t c h

Give us pits and gunner positions, if its THAT much of an issue for 1C, release them with a disclaimer; "these pits/positions are not intended to represent historical specs exactly, and are intended to allow purchasing comsumers a chance to further enjoy what FB/PF has to offer, bearing in mind that these are temporary, and may be replaced with accurate models in future, or possibly not" or such to that effect...works fer me....

Seeing as how even though 1C/OM still supports FB/PF (and tyvm<S&gthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif we have to face that sooner than later, this will not be the case, with BoB rearing its head. Let the third party guys submit DL'able pits/positions, like skins....that one not good enuff for ya? here's another guy's, maybe you like it better...no? then dont use it

Maybe we will see little new types flyable, but cant we get flyable those AIs with FM/DMs already done?

nakamura_kenji
01-20-2005, 04:48 AM
i sure i have seen internal picture of b-29 that someone make it looked very perfessional and almost finish