YOU put a bomber in a “non-bomber game mode” with no other aircraft in your lineup, where you are to bring a lineup of aircraft.
This is nobody’s fault but your own.
2 Likes
but CAS are better suited to bombing tanks while bombers are for bombing the enemy air field
1 Like
Thats why there are explicit “frontline bombers”. I grant you that four engined bombers are really good for base bombing, but we talk about a B-25 which is even sold as an attacker (PBJ), if you strap more guns to it’s nose.
3 Likes
This is about bombers being neglected
1 Like
But they are not neglected in arcade. They usually decide the games. It is often the players who neglect them.
2 Likes
You don’t - you get down to 50-100-200 feet and drop the bombs in front of them.
Do you get hit by AA and shot down by fighters? Sure - but that is how you do it - if you are at 16,000 ft don’y even try - just hit bases and stationary targets.
1 Like
No it isn’t - it’s about skill issues with bombers - specifically it is showing that most players do’t have any - they can’t see past kdr and getting shot down so avoid bombers and never work them out.
How? You cannot decide which games you get put in ahead of time, can you? It just seems like a lottery. That may be my fault for not adding multiple aircraft to my lineup, but the game doesn’t tell you that and it isn’t obvious or intuitive that that’s what you should do. I usually do have multiple aircraft - but I wanted to get all of my modifications done. But even if I had fighter aircraft selected to, it doesn’t negate anything? I still have bombers that I have to use on a game mode not made for them. So what does that really change, and what’s your point?
EXACTLY!! I’m not hitting a moving tank that are separate and sporadic in a bomber without going down to fighter level and then getting destroyed in two seconds - the gunners are largely useless and you can never outmanoeuvre a fighter. In a CAS bomber I can do that more easily, and I can see CAS bombers being suitable for that type of game - but not big bombers.
1 Like
I don’t understand what you are not getting. It’s not hard to put me in a game that’s appropriate for the aircraft I have selected. I’m not stupid or ret*rded for thinking this is dumb. I haven’t played 6 gorillion hours of this game and i don’t spend 23 hours a day playing so it’s just my fault!! How dumb am I? Of course it makes sense to put me - when I have a bomber selected - in a game with no targets to bomb and nothing to do in the match. How dumb I am? Thank you!
You are so rude, arrogant and condescending, while still being wrong.
yep, it’s my skill issue. I’m just not skilled enough to hit targets that aren’t there. Thanks for your useful input.
Bombers don’t do that. Not in the game and not in real life. You get shot down in two seconds, before you’ve even dropped the bombs. If you drop the bombs, you usually miss. It’s a small, moving target and you’re in a large, cumbersome, un-manoeuvrable aircraft. And then you get shot down anyway.
which has precisely FA to do with my post.
hmm…
The aircraft’s potential as a ground-attack aircraft emerged during the Pacific war. The jungle environment reduced the usefulness of medium-level bombing, and made low-level attack the best tactic. Using similar mast height level tactics and skip bombing, the B-25 proved itself to be a capable anti-shipping weapon and sank many enemy sea vessels. An ever-increasing number of forward firing guns made the B-25 a formidable strafing aircraft for island warfare. The strafer models were the B-25C1/D1, the B-25J1 and with the NAA strafer nose, the J2 subseries.
“Potential
adjective
- having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.”
As in theoretical. It COULD be used in that very specific manner. It wasn’t made for that, just that it could POTENTIALLY be used in that manner. You could seal all of your cars doors and try and use it as a boat or submersible - does that mean you should? Is that optimal? Is that what it’s meant for? Is it useful?
But wow, you sure did own me by searching wikipedia trying to prove me wrong! Tell me how any of that is applicable to war thunder? Does wikipedia also tell you how the B-25 flew down to ground level in an area populated by enemy fighter aircraft to act as a CAS bomber bombing tanks?
And you report my posts - yet you feel free to be as condescending, patronising, passive aggressive, rude, sarcastic and disrespectful as possible.
Also this is also STILL not the point or what I was saying in my original post.
Cambridge dictionary says
and yet - it’s still aside from the point of my original post! You just want to argue to argue, and prove the noob wrong. Don’t you have something better to do? You’re not owning me, you’re not winning any argument - you just look like a rude ars*hole. Non of your replies have been helpful, nice or in good faith. Find something better to do dude.
Must be your shining example. You pretend to have a question but you don’t. You have a rant and don’t want to be disturbed with answers.
2 Likes
have a rant about what? All I said was that I was put in a type of game not appropriate for the aircraft I had selected, and can war thunder fix this or is there any way around this or something I could do?
You don’t have to be this way. I don’t know what’s going on in your life and if you are depressed or whatever - but whatever feeling and feeling of power you get from winning an argument and getting one up on someone online is only temporary and doesn’t fix your problems. You don’t have to be so unpleasant and nasty and passive-aggressive. Being nice and pleasant makes you a good man, not a weak man. A weak man is someone who lashes out online to random people that have done nothing to you just to feel temporarily better. It ultimately gets you nothing. You don’t get relationships and friends from being like this; it’s repulsive to most people apart from other damaged and depressed individuals.
what about this is a rant to you? I describe and point out the problem, suggest a solution, ask if there is anything I do or if there is anything to be done on my end. You have either misrepresented what I said, completely ignored the point, blamed me, or talked about something aside from the point. Saying it’s my fault for having a bomber selected (why are they in the game then), then either moving onto the next, irrelevant point or moving the goalposts. First you say I shouldn’t have a bomber selected, then i’m not using it right, then it’s my fault for not being able to hit targets not appropriate to my aircraft type, then using wikipedia to win an argument that wasn’t made lol.