Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Glorious Arstotzka

17 (16%)

Glorious Moskurg

13 (12.3%)

Ingloriously Didn't Play

76 (71.7%)

Total Members Voted: 106

[Kashyyk]

Our firecracker bombing runs are repeatedly called out as effective in the jungle. The Canner bombers are not.

[evictedSaint]

The Hammer includes Napalm bombs >.>

[NAV]

We don't have a bomber advantage, we have air superiority allowing us to make better use of our inadequate bombers. Which is a damn good argument for making new a new bomber.

The bomber is still my third choice behind the ekranoplane and the sub. I want to focus on sea.

EDIT: WE ALREADY HAVE AND USE NAPALM BOMBS. THEY CAME FREE WITH THE SALAMANDER-F

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Our firecracker bombing runs are repeatedly called out as effective in the jungle. The Canner bombers are not.

That does not equal bomber advantage.  That means we have better bombs and air superiority.  The bomber itself is flat out objectively horrifically worse except for countermeasures, which is also something separate.

The Hammer includes Napalm bombs >.>

As NAV pointed out, we already have those.  May want to replace that with a stronger Fair Fight.

[Kashyyk]

We could have the best bomber in the hemisphere, but without the right bombs or the air superiority they'll still do diddly squat.

[evictedSaint]

EDIT: WE ALREADY HAVE AND USE NAPALM BOMBS. THEY CAME FREE WITH THE SALAMANDER-F

Do we? I've not heard any mention of them.  Where did Sensei mention it in the BR? As far as I could tell only the firecrackers were ever mentioned :0

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

We could have the best bomber in the hemisphere, but without the right bombs or the air superiority they'll still do diddly squat.

And we can have the best bombs and air superiority possible, but it won't have the impact it could if our bomber is complete shit.  Our bomber's max payload is the one B-17s had for its extreme range missions, and that was one with a comparatively low payload compared to shit like the Halifax, the Avro Lancaster, or the XB-19.  All of which we can easily push beyond, as shown with how big the Canallans made theirs.

[Wizgrot]

I would suggest then voting for the dustbiter, while focussing on cargo and lifting capacity to develop a truly insane bombing ability.

[NAV]

EDIT: WE ALREADY HAVE AND USE NAPALM BOMBS. THEY CAME FREE WITH THE SALAMANDER-F

Do we? I've not heard any mention of them.  Where did Sensei mention it in the BR? As far as I could tell only the firecrackers were ever mentioned :0

He confirmed it on discord shortly after the slamander-F was built. Never directly showed up in a battle report.

I suppose reminding Sensei of it in a related design is a good idea. Just make sure he knows its a reminder and not something new.

[Parsely]

UFAF-SNB-45 'Tubby Duckling' (1) : Madman
Microprocessors (0) :
UF-GEV-45 Ekaterina (6) : Andrea, Kot, NAV, RAM, 10ebbor10, Kashyyk
UFN-SS-45 Archer II (2) : Cnidaros, Chiefwaffles
UFAF-JB-45 Hammer of Forenia (8): Zanzetkuken, eS, Happerry, Jilladilla, Taricus, Conscript Five, Powder Miner, Parsely
UFAF-LAB-45 Dustbiter (2) : NUKE9.13, Wizgrot

People have brought up valid concerns about enemy SAM threats, the answer is SEAD aircraft and anti-radiation missiles, that way they're forced to rely on short-ranged IR missiles.

[Kashyyk]

If you really want an updated bomber, then I would back it as a revision. Our design needs to be the one that stretches the boundaries.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

If you really want an updated bomber, then I would back it as a revision. Our design needs to be the one that stretches the boundaries.

Our bomber is Archer-tier!  There is way too much we need to do to improve it for a mere revision!

[Powder Miner]

When I was making my gamechanger arguments last turn it was in the context of a research credit and having a special resource that lets us confidently spring for high difficulty designs. We can’t put out an entirely new paradigm of combat every single turn — some things need updating, and we aren’taways going to be able to rely upon good rolls on very hard difficulties. But even if we could the state of the HAFB is so damn sorry that a better bomber might just be one anyway.

[andrea]

UFAF-SNB-45 'Tubby Duckling' (1) : Madman
Microprocessors (0) :
UF-GEV-45 Ekaterina (5) :, Kot, NAV, RAM, 10ebbor10, Kashyyk
UFN-SS-45 Archer II (2) : Cnidaros, Chiefwaffles
UFAF-JB-45 Hammer of Forenia (8): Zanzetkuken, eS, Happerry, Jilladilla, Taricus, Conscript Five, Powder Miner, Parsely
UFAF-LAB-45 Dustbiter (3) : NUKE9.13, Wizgrot, Andrea

Low flying bomber seems a good idea, and ekaterina is falling out of grace. Lets see if we can find a middle ground between GEV and high flying, and vote for the low flying bomber.

[RAM]

unguided torpedoes are super inaccurate and therefore ineffective? I suppose WWII Britain had absolutely nothing to fear from those German u-boats then, must have been all exaggeration. Guess things like "leading your target" and trigonometry also don't exist in this universe either? FYI most of the Battle of the Atlantic was fought with unguided torpedoes.

Did W.W.II Britain lose many military vessels to subs? Merchant fleets don't seem to exist in this war, and I was under the impression that unguided torpedoes had far fewer difficulties against transport craft...

Then again, if they invest in torpedoes to hunt subs, they will have wasted that effort when we build ekranoplans...

Low flying bomber seems a good idea, and ekaterina is falling out of grace. Lets see if we can find a middle ground between GEV and high flying, and vote for the low flying bomber.

I agree on all counts : (

UFAF-SNB-45 'Tubby Duckling' (1) : Madman
Microprocessors (0) :
UF-GEV-45 Ekaterina (4) :, Kot, NAV, 10ebbor10, Kashyyk
UFN-SS-45 Archer II (2) : Cnidaros, Chiefwaffles
UFAF-JB-45 Hammer of Forenia (8): Zanzetkuken, eS, Happerry, Jilladilla, Taricus, Conscript Five, Powder Miner, Parsely
UFAF-LAB-45 Dustbiter (4) : NUKE9.13, Wizgrot, Andrea, RAM