Jump to content


Bombers in Game

Bombers Escort Missions Battles mode suggestion developers

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
17 replies to this topic

JarethG #1 Posted 20 June 2013 - 12:38 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Now the I have your attention, no this isn't another typical bombers in game thread.

Ok, last night I was playing some World of Warcraft (Warcrack even) and thought about a way to get player controlled bombers into the game.  Yes, I know that the developers have said it would never happen, and I doubt seriously this idea would ever even come close to consideration for implementation, but I rather thought it was a good idea, worthy of idle discussion, even though it will never happen.

My thought is basically take a page from some of their PvP battles:

Ok, so the basic idea is an up to 3 round battle.  Before the battle, players would queue up the aircraft they want to use in the attack side of the battle.  The defense side of the battle would be something like the iconic B-17's which would be player controlled.

So, you are placed on a long map (ie width is far less than length of the map.)  The objective for the Bombers (defensive team) is placed at the far end of the map from the starting location of the bombers.  The Fighters (offensive team) would be placed over the bomb targets.  The Bombers must try to reach the objective and drop bombs on it, while being harassed by the Fighters.  If a single bomb is dropped on target, the Bombers win.  If all the B-17's are shot down before releasing their payload on target, the Fighters win.

The Bombers and Fighters would be determined randomly for the first round.  Regardless of who wins the first round, the teams would switch places for round two.  Round three would be randomly determined if a tie (IE each team has one win after the first two rounds) and final winner would be determined.

This would give players a chance to control the big bombers (like they want, but are not really going to be able to do otherwise.)  It would give the game a new "mode" of play that other WG games don't offer (this would be in addition to "Tank Companies" or "Clan Wars".)  It would give us a way to break up the monotony of regular game play.

I would love to hear others thoughts, ideas, expansions, or even constructive criticisms on this idea. Again, I point out I have no belief that this idea will even reach consideration for implementation in the game, but just thought it was a good idea and wanted to share.

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

JarethG #2 Posted 20 June 2013 - 01:58 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
43 views, and not one hate or flame?  WTF, come on.  Not one person who didn't read it and wants to point out that bombers won't ever be PC aircraft?

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

FreeFOXMIKE #3 Posted 20 June 2013 - 02:04 PM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Community Ace
  • 3963 battles
  • 4,529
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011
this is sorta a planed idea the WG have stated they intent to do they will bring in real bombers but they will be AI controlled and your task will be to follow and escort,or the meet and intercept

they have not gone into detail as to how many will they have formation mutual overlapping  fire support  or anything like that just they are comming ,but they will be bots if you will!
but hey pat your self on the back your think like a WG programmer  :great:

Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 20 June 2013 - 02:06 PM.


Galuzer #4 Posted 20 June 2013 - 02:08 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 143
  • Member since:
    08-03-2012
First of all, there is already a similar game mode planned, more about that later.

Your idea wouldn't work for one reason:
The only effective planes for attacking bombers would be Heavy Fighters (that was one of the main role they had historically, too).
Normal fighters sacrifice armour and armament for maneuverability, which isnt needed against bombers.
So only one fourth (just a rought estimation) will be effective, while the rest gets either shot down very quickly (fighters, especially japanese ones) or cant even get that high (soviet GA).

The plan for the new gamemode is to protect/intercept AI-controlled bombers,
so you can attack the escort as a fighter.

JarethG #5 Posted 20 June 2013 - 02:18 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Again, I want to point out, I know what the Developers plans are for possible bombers in game.  I also know that this idea won't work in game, as it isn't how the developers want it.

Basically, it was just an idea I ran through my brain last night, and thought I would get others feedback on the general idea.  Again, not trying to get the idea into the game itself.

Edited by JarethG, 20 June 2013 - 02:19 PM.


Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

NathanFlightLeader #6 Posted 20 June 2013 - 03:01 PM

    Flying Kiwi

  • Community Ace
  • 1548 battles
  • 2,465
  • Member since:
    10-09-2012
I was going to read this thread seriously and actually consider your point until I read WORLD OF WARCRAFT!!! GO HOME, NOBODY WANTS YOU HERE!!! WORLD OF WARCRAFT SUCKS!!!


How was that?

I think that solves your "43 views, and not one hate or flame" problem! Your welcome!  :veryhappy:

But seriously I hope they don't introduce bombers to the game because I think they will completely ruin it.
WW2 Bombers had like three or four tail and side gunners not to mention guns at the front. One bomber would absolutely chew through the enemy fighters if they even tried to attack it.
Not to mention AA fire wouldn't even dent the damn aircraft. :)
"It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed."
"The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire."
The three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation are: "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" And "Oh S...!"
"Airspeed, altitude and brains. Two are always needed to successfully complete the flight."
Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous.

JarethG #7 Posted 20 June 2013 - 03:12 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostNathanFlightLeader, on 20 June 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

I was going to read this thread seriously and actually consider your point until I read WORLD OF WARCRAFT!!! GO HOME, NOBODY WANTS YOU HERE!!! WORLD OF WARCRAFT SUCKS!!!

Well done, thank you. I feel better now!

As for Bombers in the game, this is the only place (in my idea) players would have any control over bombers.  They would not be in general (pubs) matches.

Of course, as so many like to point out, players will never control them anyway (which I don't disagree with).

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

NathanFlightLeader #8 Posted 20 June 2013 - 03:45 PM

    Flying Kiwi

  • Community Ace
  • 1548 battles
  • 2,465
  • Member since:
    10-09-2012

View PostJarethG, on 20 June 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

As for Bombers in the game, this is the only place (in my idea) players would have any control over bombers.  They would not be in general (pubs) matches.

Of course, as so many like to point out, players will never control them anyway (which I don't disagree with).

I would love to fly bombers in this game and would like to see a game mode like this (spice things up a little). But you still have to look at the facts. Yes a lot of bombers were shot down during sorties by groups of fighters teaming up against them. But the planes shot down were usually laggers who got left behind. A lot of bombers did get through to the target.

Maybe making the bombers have to destroy a large factory of ship (which can take three or four large bombs) and it might work.
But I still shudder to think of flying a fighter through all those bombers...shells ripping through the plane...fire coming from all sides...noooooo!!

But I do want to see a new game mode introduced. :)
"It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed."
"The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire."
The three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation are: "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" And "Oh S...!"
"Airspeed, altitude and brains. Two are always needed to successfully complete the flight."
Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous.

JarethG #9 Posted 20 June 2013 - 04:31 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostNathanFlightLeader, on 20 June 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

I would love to fly bombers in this game and would like to see a game mode like this (spice things up a little). But you still have to look at the facts. Yes a lot of bombers were shot down during sorties by groups of fighters teaming up against them. But the planes shot down were usually laggers who got left behind. A lot of bombers did get through to the target.

Maybe making the bombers have to destroy a large factory of ship (which can take three or four large bombs) and it might work.
But I still shudder to think of flying a fighter through all those bombers...shells ripping through the plane...fire coming from all sides...noooooo!!

But I do want to see a new game mode introduced. :)
Thus why Galuzer pointed out Heavy Fighters would pretty much be the only aircraft any one would queue up for this kind of match.

Remember, the Me-109's used to pounce on the bombers and tear them to shreds.  Depending on which reports you wish to believe, the average was 90 bombers downed per sortie.  Then of course you get the Tuskegee Airmen myth that they never lost a single bomber.  In a recent history I was reading, (after some after action reports were declassified) the actual number was about 20 per sortie were lost under the watch of the Tuskegee Airmen.

Depending on who you ask, all the defensive weapons the B-17's weren't that effective over the much faster moving fighters.

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

FreeFOXMIKE #10 Posted 20 June 2013 - 05:18 PM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Community Ace
  • 3963 battles
  • 4,529
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostJarethG, on 20 June 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Thus why Galuzer pointed out Heavy Fighters would pretty much be the only aircraft any one would queue up for this kind of match.

Remember, the Me-109's used to pounce on the bombers and tear them to shreds.  Depending on which reports you wish to believe, the average was 90 bombers downed per sortie.  Then of course you get the Tuskegee Airmen myth that they never lost a single bomber.  In a recent history I was reading, (after some after action reports were declassified) the actual number was about 20 per sortie were lost under the watch of the Tuskegee Airmen.

Depending on who you ask, all the defensive weapons the B-17's weren't that effective over the much faster moving fighters.


even if you accept the they lost fighter (it was to anti aircraft fire) the lost 23-25 that was during the whole time they were doing escorts in a time when all others were losing 25 a day 25 during the whole

even the most raciest ppl concerned in trying to discredit  them will admit this"

1378 combat missions, 1067 for the Twelfth Air Force; 311 for the Fifteenth Air Force

179 bomber escort missions,with the best  record of protection, losing only 25 bombers


so you statement has no teath to it they never lost 25 a day or per mission what it what your posting.

having been assigned to Balad AF in Iraq  and attached I can claim 332 AEW under a combat banner. I have had the honor and privilege to have talked to some of the actual members.

112 enemy aircraft destroyed in the air, another 150 on the ground and 148 damaged
950 rail cars, trucks and other motor vehicles destroyed (over 600 rail cars)

One destroyer put out of action. The ship concerned had been classified as a destroyer (Giuseppe Missori) by the Italian Navy, before being reclassified by the Germans as a torpedo boat, TA 22. It was attacked on 25 June 1944.
The German Navy decommissioned it on 8 November 1944, and finally scuttled it on 5 February 1945.
40 boats and barges destroyed

332d Fighter Group (and its 99th, 100th, 301st, and 302nd Fighter Squadrons): 24 March 1945: for a bomber escort mission to Berlin, during which it shot down 3 enemy jets

Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 20 June 2013 - 05:27 PM.


FreeFOXMIKE #11 Posted 20 June 2013 - 05:30 PM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Community Ace
  • 3963 battles
  • 4,529
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostNathanFlightLeader, on 20 June 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

I was going to read this thread seriously and actually consider your point until I read WORLD OF WARCRAFT!!! GO HOME, NOBODY WANTS YOU HERE!!! WORLD OF WARCRAFT SUCKS!!!


How was that?

I think that solves your "43 views, and not one hate or flame" problem! Your welcome!  :veryhappy:

But seriously I hope they don't introduce bombers to the game because I think they will completely ruin it.
WW2 Bombers had like three or four tail and side gunners not to mention guns at the front. One bomber would absolutely chew through the enemy fighters if they even tried to attack it.
Not to mention AA fire wouldn't even dent the damn aircraft. :)








Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 20 June 2013 - 05:41 PM.


NathanFlightLeader #12 Posted 20 June 2013 - 06:45 PM

    Flying Kiwi

  • Community Ace
  • 1548 battles
  • 2,465
  • Member since:
    10-09-2012
FreeFOXMIKE, i'm guessing those videos were for my comment about AA fire not denting the aircraft. I meant in the game with the current damage they do they wouldn't dent them. In real like the flak probably shot down more planes than the fighters did, or at least equal.
"It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed."
"The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire."
The three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation are: "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" And "Oh S...!"
"Airspeed, altitude and brains. Two are always needed to successfully complete the flight."
Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous.

JarethG #13 Posted 20 June 2013 - 08:18 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostFreeFOXMIKE, on 20 June 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:


so you statement has no teath to it they never lost 25 a day or per mission what it what your posting.

  I was basing my statement off of one report I read.

I don't deny that the Tuskegee Airmen were great aviators.  I would never deny such a thing.  Their accomplishments are nothing short of legend.  If you have met them personally, I envy you. I would give my eye teeth to talk to them.

My favorite conversation I ever had was with a WWII fighter pilot, F4UA1 Corsair pilot in the Pacific Theater of Operation.  To talk to an actual Tuskegee Airman would probably replace that conversation as my favorite.

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

johnmadara #14 Posted 20 June 2013 - 08:33 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 55
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Why don't they just add them? They are not like Artillery in WoT... Bombers go for ground targets not Players...+ finding a bomber will be like finding treasure!!  :playing:

JarethG #15 Posted 20 June 2013 - 08:55 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostJarethG, on 20 June 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Thus why Galuzer pointed out Heavy Fighters would pretty much be the only aircraft any one would queue up for this kind of match.

Remember, the Me-109's used to pounce on the bombers and tear them to shreds.  Depending on which reports you wish to believe, the average was 90 bombers downed per sortie.  Then of course you get the Tuskegee Airmen myth that they never lost a single bomber.  In a recent history I was reading, (after some after action reports were declassified) the actual number was about 20 per sortie were lost under the watch of the Tuskegee Airmen.

Depending on who you ask, all the defensive weapons the B-17's weren't that effective over the much faster moving fighters.
Correction.  I had to wait until I got home, but I reread the article, and it wasn't per sortie.  That is my error and my mis-remembering.  I own that mistake.  It was 96 planes downed overall under non-Tuskegee airplanes, and only 25 planes downed under Tuskegee escort.  That was total numbers, not per sortie.  My apologies for the misinformation.

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

JarethG #16 Posted 20 June 2013 - 09:08 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
For you bomber enthusiasts, I offer this thread for your perusal:  http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/17551-bud-farnsworth-passing-of-a-real-hero/

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

JarethG #17 Posted 28 June 2013 - 01:48 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
I still think this is a fun idea, and would love to see more discussion on it, even though it will never be implemented.

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E

JarethG #18 Posted 30 June 2013 - 08:21 PM

    Eclectic Dragon

  • Community Ace
  • 234 battles
  • 3,155
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
I guess not

Member of DirtyDozen! www.dirtydozengaming.com/
Director of WoWp FRAG! ACE: F4U, Bf 110B, Bf 110E