We all know the B-17 was one of the greatest weapons of WW2 and probably did a very large share in winning the war for them. Bristling with .50 cal Machine Guns a few hits and a German fighter would go down. The balance to this was that it was pretty damn hard for a gunner to get some good hits in. All bombers in the game suffer from what I am about to say. Weak MG's. Competent or lucky gunners that get a few goods hits in should send a BF-109, Zero, etc hurtling toward the ground. If you think about it, the MG rounds would either A. Hit the Pilot killing him near instantly B. Hit the engine, most likely destroying it C. Clip off a wing Fighters are rewarded when they get good hits in by blowing a heavily armed and armored bomber toward the ground, but the brave gunners who sometimes fly along with the Pilot are usually rewarded within 5 seconds of an enemy figher opening up with 20+mm cannons on the bomber. This is wrong plain and simple. We've already given the fighters a better survival rate, and they don't have to really worry about reloading their plane because they are so maneverable and can land reload and take off again. Bomber Pilots once exhausting their bomb supply (pitiful bomb supply) have to land and reload for the most part. While this mod does focus on realism, their is a point where it needs to be balanced. My Proposals for the B-17 and other similar bombers are as follows. Better MG's - Good hits should knock a fighter out quick. In addition, the tail gunner and nose gunner on bombers sights just plain suck. If you aim toward the outside of your radius of fire, your bullets fall out of alignment with your crosshair (not that they already weren't badly aligned). More Armor - While 20mm+ rounds in the war did inflict a lot of hurt, for games sake they should be less effective against a bomber. A single pilot can knock a bomber with 6 people out of the air with little to no effort. More bombs - Either implement it like the original where they slowly reload until maybe 2 or 3 reloads are gone, then they have to land. It's a pain in the butt to have to turn your bomber around to reload every minute because you've dropped your load. Comments, Questions, Concerns? Constructive Criticism is welcome here.
I doubt mg's can tear of wings, some engines could run with several cilinders busted, and the glass of the plane was armored a little.
But you are right, the devensive mg's vs fighters is way to weak, there is no point trying to shoot a plane down, unless you didnt bring a parashute ;)
Bombers need way more hitpoints, damage from their mg's VS planes increased alot
7th December 2003
I don't think one bombermg is such a serious problem for a fighter. But b17 flew in formation, so a fighter was in the middle of a crossfire of several mgs from different angels, which is a large problem.
I also don't think that B17s performed very well in tactical situations. Didn't the Allies bomb Monte Cassino with little effect except creating better defensive positions for the Germans?
B-17's should not even be in FH except for a few Pacific maps.
Anlushac11B-17's should not even be in FH except for a few Pacific maps.
Doesnt make much sense to have any large bombers such as lancaster and such in FH at all, simply to big and they werent used for close air support now were they?
I back up these sentiments. These are .50 cal guns they are firing. Those are huge rounds pounding an air plane.
More fighters were shot down by the combined Allied bomber formations in the war than the combined Allied fighter kills. The weapons damage on the guns in game don't reflect the proper damage values. Let me correct Raptor. Wings were easily severed by machine gun fire. The wings held ammunition/fuel depending on the make and model. They also support the airplane while in the air. Bullets hitting the wings in concentration or othewise are ripping through the very support structure for the airplane. That is heavy stress. Wings would rip off or explode under the right conditions. The BF engine doesn't factor in flight control surfaces being damaged either. You are right about engines being able to run on only a few cylinders. However the BF game engine does not consider other things like oil and fuel lines, flight controls etc. when tallying damage to the engine cowling. The armored glass in cockpits wasn't very useful. It helped in some cases obviously where a deflection of a round or two took place. But they were largely useless at protecting a pilot from sustained fire from enemy guns. So yes, the guns on bombers in FH need to have the same damage values as their conterparts mounted in fighters. If this is currently the case then maybe there needs to be adjustments to how this damage is determined.
just give the B17 a REAL loadout, like 30 250 lb bombs
malone1313I back up these sentiments. These are .50 cal guns they are firing. Those are huge rounds pounding an air plane.
I hate to burst your bubble but the only thing worse than the .50 is the British .303 or the German 7.62mm. If you want to kill an aircraft you will need 15mm and up.
Pvt. Ryanjust give the B17 a REAL loadout, like 30 250 lb bombs
Right. Normal loadout for a B-17 was 6000lbs of bombs.
I think the B-17 is good as it is right now,if you are having trouble with enemy fighter taking you down you can always ask one of your teammates to escort you..