Definitely! I would also love to see more tactical bombers like the A-5 vigilante
Also could be the US’s nuke carrier rather than an aircraft they never used lmao
8 Likes
I mean, sure, if they do it like it works in sim.
But if the Airfield destruction works like it does in low tier, so without modules, there definitely would have to be a limit on how many strategic bombers there can be per team.
1 Like
Holy Jesus!
One day (hopefully a few months) I will be able to afford Al-Khalid and ZTZ 96 (P) and I will embark myself on the journey of grinding China too, hahahah.
I agree with you! I have no trouble spending money on War Thunder whenever I can afford it (it’s been a while lmao), because War Thunder is the only game I have consistently played daily since 2014.
Other people prefer to buy several AAA games a year instead? That’s fine! But, in my case, every AAA game I’ve had, I’ve only played it for an average of 50-60 hours before getting bored of it xD. War Thunder on the other hand… 4,000+ hours and counting! So when I can spend money on a game, the choice is clear to me- it’s going to War Thunder!
2 Likes
Before the Tornado
Brazil has SK-105A2S and is stabilized
2 Likes
For sho, yeah.
Tbh, a limit might not be bad to protect the team playing the bombers. No defence…at those tiers…
There’d have to be a victory condition linked to the airfield destruction or something if there is no limit.
1 Like
In low tier the destruction of the airfield leads to constant ticket drain, they could enable that if there is no limit
1 Like
I also like to add a new nation can create hype for more than a couple of updates if not a year.
October -air premiums releases = First major hype.
December - CBT air tech tree is released + with ground premiums = 2 months of hype from the last update.
March - Air tree releases fully and CBT ground tech tree is released = 3 months of hype from the last update.
June - The whole nation can now be played by everyone = 2 months of hype from the last update.
So you see it’s about 7 months worth of hyping right there.
1 Like
Consider instead that 2 B-36s can carry 172k lbs of bombs. And two B-52s can carry up to 140k lbs of bombs.
Instead of risking teams being full of bombers (like the good old days am i right?), instead make airfields easier to destroy for non-US strategic bombers.
Dmg/bombload instead of dmg/bomblbs
I think they do it for MP and other reward already. They could do the same for airfield dmg
Eh, soviet strategic bombers have similarly ridiculous bombloads, they could just limit those loads per bomber, if necessary
1 Like
If you meant the rockets, thats mostly a RB thing. For sim it was just lower damage, while both rewards and scorings would be the same. I suppose the way to adjust it was to split the module damage from actual bomb lb load and make it only affecting the scorings, meaning that each bomb between 1000 and 3000 pounds deals roughly the same damage but bigger bombs gives a higher score.
They could make targets which would warrant such insane payloads
1 Like
Well yeah, those targets would be the airfields after having destroyed all bases
1 Like
Hmm, yeah. Although it just base bombing with an extra step
What else would you propose? In the end it always is just the same as base bombing
1 Like
As an option special targets visible and damageable by strat bombers. This would prevent base bomb race (which doesn’t happen now, but regardless) and reduce chance of interception on approach. But yeah, in the essence it the same base bombing with an extra step
A-5 is so sexy. It’s an addition I have been waiting for as well. Also this thing please it even has a turret.
3 Likes
