I don't really think this is a bug, so much as it is a simple criticism/suggestion
Incorrect Bomber
The lvl 3 Strat bomber in this game is the YB40, which is really stupid. The lvl 1 strat is the B-17 while the YB40 was a variant of it used to protect other bombers, not to bomb. It was bristling with guns and had little or no bomb load.
The YB40 should be removed, all the bombers pushed up one level and the B-18 Bolo should be the lvl 1 strat bomber.
To replace the now missing B-18 from the tac bomber line should be the B-23 Dragon.
Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
6 Replies
It is none, it is an issue.
Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
After seeing the PBY rated as the shortest ranged naval bomber and then seeing the SBD, OS2 and SB2C. I try not to look at what actual vehicles are connected with any unit levels. Obviously a horde of degrees in computer game design , does nothing for trying to know any military history , or hiring one temp consultant to check such things.
You don't even need to hire a consultant, you just need to read a little bit about the B-17. It is ridiculous that a gunship is a better bomber than a heavy bomber that could fly home on one engine.
As for the naval bombers, I think they ordered them by what got the most kills.
Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
Nah kills is not it. The SBD sunk more ships than any other plane and also had the most air-to air kills of any naval bomber in WWII.Butter Ball Bill wrote:
You don't even need to hire a consultant, you just need to read a little bit about the B-17. It is ridiculous that a gunship is a better bomber than a heavy bomber that could fly home on one engine.As for the naval bombers, I think they ordered them by what got the most kills.
It is not range either as best range would be the Catalina, which had an enormous range being a long range patrol aircraft, in excess of only a very few aircraft of a similar type.
They might be working off year of introduction, and disregarding everything else or maybe just picking random wiki pages . As I said I simply don't look anymore, as I cannot look at, or for, such travesties, for any length of time. It would run me off of the game.
I would say it is the year of introduction then.
Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.