we have TB for ground units, SB for cities, and NB for naval units, while we only have the interceptor for air superiority.
I was thinking why not we add more planes into the game? As follows:
Torpedo bomber - Naval bomber
Fighter-bomber - stratigic bomber
Dive bomber - tactical bomber
Basically there scale down versions of current bombers specialize to different fields, they would cost quite similar with the interceptor with a little difference in steel, oil, and goods. They not as strong as bombers for having a lighter load but can still deal damage to a specific unit, they are much cheaper to their bomber counter-parts, and because they are not bombers and are planes fitted with bombs, they have better survivability but not much damage to true bombers.
On the side note im not sure with the dive bomber and fighter-bomber, I'm much more familiar with the torpedo bomber but not the other two.
"Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none" -imperium thought of the day
7 Replies
27 May 2015, 15:07
Well, dive bombers were used as attackers(JU-87), naval bombers(SB2C) and, well, dive bombers(JU-87). The attackers were mainly for strafing infantry and light vehicle columns, with the naval bombers engaging all types of ships with the dive bombers just kind of bombing stuff from civies to ships to armies.
The fighter-bomber was kind of like an attacker that could quickly change to aerial combat, I think, since normal attackers would most likely turn slower because they are are heavier thanks to their bigger guns.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
28 May 2015, 16:34
I think that there's no purpose for a Torpedo Bomber since there are already Naval Bombers. Fighter Bombers would be an hybrid of Int. and SB? If they were supposed to defend bombers they must have low stats because they are fat flying bricks, also using a small bomb load, making them useless for me. I don't usually produce SB, just researching them to have Nuclear Bombers, but for gameplay aspects, make bombers hard to defend is imperative, since research allows you to improve their air defences. For Dive Bombers, even Hearts of Iron III don't have them, and they are useless against tanks as Ju pilots discovered when facing some Gs trying to hit a tank (they were easy targets too).
So, for me the Air System is ok in this game and it needn't changes.
O beijo, amigo, é a véspera do escarro, A mão que afaga é a mesma que apedreja.
29 May 2015, 22:36
I think its fine like it is at te moment. Most other strategy games have just fighters and bombers, so be happy we have 3 types of bombers and 2 types of fighters
Maybe later, when they add Cariers, some special carrierplanes will be added too.
Taktik? Wozu? Es gibt RAKETEN! Für alles andere gibt es Flieger.
30 May 2015, 07:43
4 Types of bomber, 2 fighters and 2 types of rocket, don't forget the nuclear bombers, although since they're single use, you might consider them a type of rocket as well
Kalantigos
Master Chief Petty Officer.
Game Moderator
EN Community Support
Bytro Labs | Call of War
30 May 2015, 09:50
No, you can't shoot down the rockets as well as rockets being much faster, I think.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
30 May 2015, 10:57
The V rocket Hitler used againts England can be shot down by anti-air and interceptors
"Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none" -imperium thought of the day
30 May 2015, 15:11
V1nd1cat0r wrote:
The V rocket Hitler used againts England can be shot down by anti-air and interceptors
The one that can be shot down is a V1 flying bomb, it isn't a rocket.
O beijo, amigo, é a véspera do escarro, A mão que afaga é a mesma que apedreja.
