We need strategic jet bombers...NOW!

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

when i grind ussr tech tree, i dont want my last strategic bomber to be an il-28 or tu 14 or even yak 28. or if usa, b 57. or if british, a canberra mk 2. you know what i mean. we need strategic jet bombers!!! at least a few for each nation.

Soviets get Tupolev Tu-16, and Myasishchev M-4.

americans get B 52, a 3 skyawarrior, and b 58.

china gets xian h-6 aka just tu 16.

britain gets all 3 v bombers like avro vulcan, valiant, and victor.

france gets dassault mirage IV.

Turboprop bombers will be Tu-95, for the USSR, B-50, B-45, B 36, P-2 Neptune, AJ Savage and B-47.

Eventually, the bombers tech trees will end with like the Russians having the Tu-160 at the end, Americans with B-2, french keep their dassault mirage IV, brits get avro vulcan. china keeps the xian h-6

BR and costs will be determined by Gaijan i guess idc

eventually, there will be a a whole line of bombers for each nation, and a lot of bombers will mix with attack aircraft like su 25 after il 28, and mig 27 after yak 28 and its going to get confusing. so i say we make a whole new tech tree for bombers like with helicopters, to separate them from the attackers.
I also say we make a new gamemode exclusive to jet bomber aircraft where the whole point would be to bomb airfields, bases, fob’s, cities with enemies in them, anti air targets/positions, etc. Jet bombers will go mach mach 0.9-2+ so they will need to be in the bombers game mode. Turboprop Bombers are not as fast and are a bit slow so they can stay in Ground Realistic or Air Battles.

image

18 Likes
2

Gaijin has taken great care to eliminate bombers as a way to win games. And they certainly managed in RB. So why would this mode need “useless” planes?

If you had requested this for AB, OK. But as long as RB stays as stale as it is now, there is just no need.

9 Likes
3

adding these is difficult to balance, but it’s quite suitable as an NPC

1 Like
4

They would be nice additions, if Gaijin put more effort into EC style game modes.

Unfortunately they have no place in the current game modes.

8 Likes
5

No we don’t.

6 Likes
6

The most I could see Stratobombers being used for is AI targets.

2 Likes
7

Maybe if bomber gameplay gets into a state where it is both fun to play and against, and is actually useful for your team I could see them being added. But until then, no.

1 Like
8

First of all Il-28 is not a strategic bomber.

Second: Use forum search in the old forum; this topic was extensively discussed in dozens of threads.

Main message:

  1. Not possible in current game set up, bombing has not impact on game result at jet tiers due to respawning bases since May 2020
  2. Just ask Tu-4 players how they feel when the get missiled - missiles get better at higher BRs
  3. Strategic jet bombing is outdated - almost all of them were designed to deliver nuclear payloads at high alt - or adapted later for low runs like B-1B
  4. Example B-52: Attack profile changed from Hi-Hi-Hi to Hi-Lo-Hi and then to attack with stand-off weapons outside enemy air defense due to SAMs
  5. Currently all of them are either used as carrier for cruise missiles or to carpet bomb poor guys in sandals carrying AK-47s
  6. Realistic combat scenarios impossible in current game layout - u need way bigger maps
  7. Go to yt and search for vids “Red Star Rising” - gives you an impression how strategic bombers could have been used in the Cold War

Have a good one!

PS: Forget countermeasures for bombers - u might flare/chaff a few missiles, but you will just get overwhelmed by countless fighter guys looking for free kills

5 Likes
9

Strategic bombers would be useless, cannonfodder, only possible role where they could be used is for NPCs, thats it

1 Like
10

And The A5 Vigilante?

11

no.
The game isn’t ready to have gameplay including strategic bombers, carrying nukes and long range cruise missiles etc.
It would be cool, but they either would be op at 7.0 or something, or useless at 11.0
As the gamemodes currently are, they are unbalanceable and would be unplayable.
They mostly lack defensive armament, and could destroy all targets without getting into the big airmaps we have, or are defenceless nuke-carriers, that outside of a killstreak can’t work atm in game.
Seeing that Gaijin balances everything by giving or not giving munitions, which make a bomber in the first place, we would have a conventional B52 at 7.0 and giving them the nukes or even the nuke cruise missle, would bring it to 12.0 at beyond, being bait for Phoenixes or any medium range radar missile.
Especially since Gaijin hasn’t implemented any jamming or electronic warfare systems.

12

yes. They would either be op with like the AGM 28, so nuklear cruise missile as standoff attaaks, or useless with only the later variants carrying 84 or so conventional 500 lb bombs at 7.7 or something.
Also we don’t have implemented electronic warfare, which would benefit bombers a bit

1 Like
13

What for to get shotdown? you like that? if for NPC then yes

14

A real beauty - carrying amazing tech for it’s time. But replaced by subs…

16

Although i share your general view on this topic - i am quite sure that gaijin won’t follow this path. I mean they earn money with satisfying customer needs, and the current state of Air RB reflects their needs quite accurate: Fast & almost instant action, almost no tactics/strategy necessary - a FPS shooter with aircraft. Full stop. At least for the majority of players, otherwise we would not have this high player numbers…

The game setup (Maps, Spawns, BRs & MM) is not suited to create any kind of realistic combat scenarios - mainly because wt has nothing to do with irl events - the demand for such settings is simply too low - from a cost-benefit ratio pov it would make no sense to invest a hell of money to satisfy a minority looking for realism.

I admit that creating maps with integrated air defenses (Radar & SAMs) to be attacked by EF-111s & Wild Weasels (in order to clear the path) would be worth to try, but what kind of game play you would create for (modern) strategic bombers?

Flying on a 500x500 km map in order to release stand-off weapons 200 km away from the target to avoid air defenses and hoping that SAMs and fighters with LDSD radar won’t intercept all of your Cruise Missiles in order to gain a few SLs/RPs? Sounds for me suited for just a few guys…

The whole point of shooter games is to enforce player interactions, and not to prevent them…

1 Like
17

yeah sure I guess?

18

Sorry ,I removed the post I made as I felt it was attacking the guy who made the OP in a way that seemed overly aggressive upon reading it back myself. lol ,sorry to make a mess of things here.

I do think suggestions can be made without looking at the big picture overall though.

1 Like
19

Would absolutely love the Vulcan, but as others have said they would be impossible to balance or place and might have no future in the game…

That being said… Would that matter? So long as they were end of line, premium or event. Or some unique new type of vehicle. That meant plating them was entirely optional… Would it matter?

I’d love them for ASB and I’d love them just for the models as ai targets in game.

1 Like
20

If we got an ongoing RB EC mode then these could certainly be added. Right now they’d be hard to balance.

21

Yes please! The Vulcan, B-52, and B-36 would all be especially neat. :)