Fixing Bombers In 2024
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ธ.ค. 2023
- The snail recently solicited some feedback from content creators to consider for their upcoming quality of life roadmap in 2024. I wanted to submit something that nobody else was talking about (or at least, few were talking about) so I submitted a shorter version of my proposal from 2022 on how to fix bomber gameplay in War Thunder.
- เกม
![อยู่ได้แล้ว - LIPTA feat. Mirrr [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-9-hpntNym4/mqdefault.jpg)
Looks like the QOL suggestion form is now live and public, you can submit your own ideas here:
warthunder.com/en/news/8671-development-collecting-your-ideas-for-the-2024-roadmap-en
How about making the target locations random and more of them as you suggested But 1 difference. Make the targets unknown to the enemy at the start of the battle. Then a few minutes in "intelligence reports come in" and the bases become known to the enemy. This mimics real life because the enemy shouldn't know what the objectives where until the bombers were well and tuely on the way and even then not until hit. From a game play perspective it gives time for the bombers to get closer to the bases and then the fighters have to scramble once the targets are known and can't just fly to a known repeatable location. Edit: intelligence on the bombing locations could be gotten from smaller, targets for the attackers etc. They destroy a target and an intelligence report bives a bombing location to the enemy. This give additional purpose for cas type planes and their smaller load puts and make their role more important to the team. Some Ai reckon planes could be targets for fighters who give the same intelligence.
For ground battles make the enemy bases targets for bombers, when one is damages it puts a cool down on when the enemy can spawn a new plane. A way to reduce potential cas in a ground battle.
I think it'd be cool to have targets be more dynamic like Il-2.
Finally someone talks about strategic bombers when in air battle. I mean in ground battle it's alright could be better like spawn you higher or something because you spawn in front of enemy jets in arcade it's almost impossible to not get shot down 😂
The only thing I can disagree with is most maps on arcade now have stronger bases and due to them being shorter games, bases are not worth attacking. Plus with fighters being more manoeuvrable and usually spawning in air, good luck in lighter bombers.
Naval Arcade or realistic is fun for bombers, you have to learn how to survive anti air or high altitude bombing.
Gaijin be like, "Very well put together, well articulated, and well thought out. No."
Hey they have their vision, it's just to gather idea ^^
Why? Why is Gaijin like this? I don't understand this studio. Why are they a pain in the ass?
@@emreerkin5557 Probably because money, everything you do is a risk, and when it involves millions or billions, sometimes the best is to change nothing
I guess that's how they see the thing, but unless someone is in their studios, no one can tell :)
"Your objections have been duly noted and promptly denied."
unfortunate truth. good games compromised by greedy publishers
What’s really sad is that the community has become so frustrated that they have thought out and created some really great ideas on how we could fix gamemodes. Fully fleshed out and planned, but they rarely listen. I hope they listen this time.
Forget your hope. Such changes cost to much time, too much money. No no tovarich, but you are allowed to give them u cred card details lol
people need to suffer to buy GE
@@cherchezlesoir7166ok not to suck the snail but they have put an insane amount of work into this game? It's not like this is a fucking War gaming game.
Man you should have seen the rework for naval battles one player pulled a couple years ago, he tought about everything from mission design to complex damage models and realistic floding mechanics, it was practically perfect but gaijin just "pased it to developers" and forgot it into oblivion.
@@mit4c it really feels like that doesent it? like motivation trough frustration
One thing I always thought could be fun is if teammates that have already died can man the gunners while you fly, and then you split the rewards between the pilot and the gunner
That sounds awesome
Premium players only
Slight problem if you get a dingus who takes the gunner seat and either is a bot or just stupid.
Make it selective by the bomber Pilot both in taking requests by other teammates, and who of those dead teammates they can choose.
or possibly you could have a squad in the plane, like the tu4 or b-29. hell the bv-238 could be 6 or 7 people by itself and can individually select targets to protect the plane.
i have searching for a game like that for years. where me and a group of friends could just be dumbasses in a plane or ship and make it fun as a group. it would also help naval a ton.
@@LadyWrathOfficialIt’s technically against WT tos, but if you have multiple methods of control you can use custom keybinds to let multiple people play the game at the same time. I once had a friend bring over a steering wheel, and I managed to get three people manning the same tank, one person using a steering wheel and pedals driving, another using a drawing table to fire the gun, and a third playing as the commander. Additionally, although I haven’t tested it myself, there’s some kind of google/chrome feature that somehow lets you have both the gunner view and flight view of a bomber open on two different monitors, and then you could have at least one separate person controlling guns
I wish war thunder would take steps to prevent teamkilling, stuff like "Assist counts as kill" once you hit a certain amount of damage, plus more bomb targets.
They were testing new mechanics for how kills will be counted, but I don't know when they'll add that to the game
@@hansohasashi5093 probably around the time they add the f22 raptor and the t14 but we can only hope
they went and nerfed assists a few years ago, it used to be that crits didn't expire and even hits game assists, now clipping the wing of a plane and causing it crash into the ground is not a guaranteed assist even.
@@jeremyfisher8512 the F-22 isn't ever coming until other countries produce an equivalent, it's presently the best fighter unopposed... whether you huff Russian copium or not. The Chinese J-20 is iffy, depends on if you really want to take Chinese state media on its word...
Man, i started playing Battlefield 1 again recently. The quality of life is just THERE from the get-go.
Capturing zones in BF1...gives you score every few seconds so if you die just before taking a zone you don't miss out on ALL the points. Gaijin NEEDS to do this for sim air supremacy zones.
'Assist counts as kill' has been requested by players for years now. They WERE going to implement a 'severe damage' mechanic that was to serve as a step above 'critical hit' that pretty much guarantees you the kill if someone steals it, but they're d r a g g i n g their heels on it something fierce.
Gaijin's quality-of-life approach is fucking awwwwful. At best it's because they don't care, at worst, it could be a frustration monetisation strategy.
Gaijin tries really hard to make Air RB become a fighter only mode, it's already one at top tier
It’s not like there are any bombers at 11.0 +
@@yarndog514 F4, MiG23
@@andysstuff1mig 23bn still has role if you know trick. Sometimes I can make 4 or 5 bases game. Mig 27 game is harder but still availble. The thing I hate most is not knowing which teamates bring bombs. Lack of believable icon in list player screen
@yarndog514 theres phantoms, mig 23s, mig 27s, harriers, strike planes also function as bombers. Maybe youre referring to strategic bombers like the B1 or stratofortress?
Wym, top tier has the most teamkilling over bases, and the most zombers of any other BR bracket. It’s even more than lower tier since it isnt limited to 4 zombers.
Reviving bomber population would be also mean giving the 'interceptors' actually the targets that they can 'intercept' using their great climb performance. So yeah, I really like all your suggestions.
-from a former WT player who played bombers quite a bit
Yep, life of the solo bomber for your team is hard: you either have 5 interceptors drooling for you, or no one is bothering wasting the time to climb
@@Mohenjo_Daro_I have a picture of a single b-17 getting attacked by 4 Do-335’s in a match with 3 bombers. Guess they really didn’t like that guy in particular
They need to either make the bombers actually have a decent impact on the fate of the match or revert the change that makes them be constructed out of paper
Me-262 immedietly comes to mind, but I still think they should lower their Br. by 1.0 regardless of bombers. like 6.0 and 6.3
Yeah I really love playing interceptors but honestly I find that the smaller fighters are just superior more often than not because the type of targets that a interceptor would prefer are largely absent. So it's better to just specialize with fighting other fighters and then go after the larger targets anyways.
More modern bombers also allows more modern interceptors. It's hard for them to add MiG-25, a truly iconic aircraft that should be added, into the game because it doesn't fit into the meta at all.
Adding more modern bombers fixes that aspect as well
Problem with that tho is, current speed bombers CANT fight back, all they can do is run away. Meaning one of the people in the fight will just get cucked, either the interceptor or the bomber.
And that's the issue with adding modern bombers. They aren't designed to even operate in contested airspace let alone actually fight someone.
At best we could add the b52 seeing that's the last of the old style of bombers. But that does have like 50,000lb payload. And I think that's all internal too.
@@Thekilleroftanksthe b1 can be a missile truck and use DataLink and launch on coordinates set by friendlies and is fast enough to stay safe
We might be able to now that we have the f-15
@@ThekilleroftanksThis is exactly why the bomber-interceptor dynamic just can't work in War Thunder. Either the bombers are helpless or they can't be touched, I don't think there's too much of an in between there.
Furthermore, big bombers tend to function more on a strategic level; War Thunder (and almost all other flight sims) tend to function on more of a tactical level. I don't personally think there is really much of a place for any large bomber in the game outside of events.
@@_ace_defective_a specific game mode could work. A team of bombers with maybe some escorts, and a team of fighters that is slightly smaller than the attacking team. Interceptors have about 10 minutes to get airborne and into position as the bomber stream approaches. Objective is to destroy/protect a city potentially.
One of the main reasons, in my opinion, that the player base is 'allergic to teamwork' because they rightly recognize the real enemy is the grind, not the other team. The snail should really consider creating either new game modes or other incentives to encourage actual team play.
True. All the achievement linked to teamwork like ground/air force defender, base defender, help with repairing, the classic teamwork achievement, and saving teammates should be rewarded with more silver lions, and most importantly research points.
At the very least they need to crank these way up as you say. They also should consider different game modes that more heavily encourage team play.
Which is why its kind of upsetting that giving your team intel via aircraft or scout drone doesn't yield any reward. I'm not asking for anything big, even just the "Teamwork x1" mark would be fitting, because a guy in the air providing intelligence can easily turn the tide of battle. That kind of team based playstyle isn't rewarded at all, if anything its less efficient than regular gameplay because you are instead providing your team with valuable intel rather than going out and blindly killing tanks
Tbh support roles are minorly rewarded in general, kind of sucks
What I think is happening in 'No team in teamwork' is that there are so many things going on. Someone is going for the daily, someone is finishing up the modifications, someone is playing Battle Pass, someone is doing this while someone is doing that. 32 Players doing 32 different things.
Oh yea, then there is the seasoned veterans playing lower tier, wiping everyone off the map.
Something I like to do in realistic mod when I get shot out of the sky is to just remain inside of the critically damaged aircraft. So that other people might be able to get assists from shooting me on the way down.
I love bombers, even though I mostly play fighters.
The whole reason I started playing WarThunder was it's "combined arms" self label. Just another fighter vs fighter arcade game would have lost my attention immediately. The more variety that's added, the better the game will get, I think.
I really like the idea of the adition of strategic bomber as a category but it should not stop there, it would be really beneficial for this category if gaijin added objectives for strategic bombers that required huge amounts of bombs to be destroyed like some big factory complexes with indiviual buildings that could be destroyed and not the generic hp based bases that we have right now.
Like needing to level a certain percentage of the buildings in the target zone, etc etc.
Or having a time window to drop as much damage as possible on the base, sayyy like 3 minutes after the air raid sirens would go off
Honestly this would be a great addition, it'd make it feel more intense and would promote collaboration between bombers rather then the usual "this is my base" "No this is my base!" arguments that flood the chat. Good idea.
I like this because it would incentivise bomber players to fly in formation and cover each other, while contributing towards a common goal.
good for sim, but not for RB sadly
Call me old but all these cut throat only fighter aircraft allowed people get me frustrated since playing same mode same battles endlessly drives me insane!
I just want variety of game modes it’ll be fun for everyone involved make it more thought out and tactical instead of smashing aircraft together like action toys.
Thank you Tim for your suggestions to the snail! :)
We desperately need revisions to Air RB. The current 16 vs 16 nightmare just isn't working. Some form of an Air RB EC would really be nice.
they should take it from realistic air battles cause that's pretty much how that mode works. Also did you mean like PvE like the Helicopter mode cause we already have EC maps for AirRB?
RBEC basically saves the game
@@platapus112it doesn’t because teams will still just hold wep and go to the side of the map
You mean bigger maps ?
@@luuvutuanbaoI think he means like sim air maps/battles but for rb which work a lot better and are much more enjoyable then air rb but not many players because of the skill wall that sim controls create
Add back Enduring Confrontation. Fixes most the issues entirely with RB TDM.
Absolutely. Being able to fly out in my bomber, take out a base or some clusters of ground targets and _actually_ be contributing to victory would be amazing.
I've won matches via ground strike before, but only ever when one or two players just fly off to Narnia and vanish
@@TheDarklingWolf it also solves the mundanity of bomber gameplay by making it dynamic. Interceptors have to look for you intentionally (like they would in real life) and bomber pilots would be constantly shitting their pants hoping an interceptor didn't show up.
People who say bomber gameplay is spacebar simulator have never had this experience, and that's why bombers don't get added anymore
Thanks for looking out for us bomber players. I play on console, use a controller, been doing that for 25 years now don't want to bother with m&k. Going out in a bomber hitting bases and returning is about all I can manage in a plane. And grinding the Lancaster III with JU288s taking every base on the map as I wait to die to a FW109 was not fun
They need to fix the assists and camera for controller players
It's just not a great plane all in all considering the meta, with a US bomber you could just turn to the side and kill the usual dummy Fw-s which you get a 50% roll of the dice that don't maneuver before they get to you but Lancasters are on the weaker side though still the 12.7-s can be effective.
My advice would be a sneaky approach from low alt until you finish your stock grind to the 12000lb-s bombs plus Engine+Injection, then you only need to use it for Ground RB and you will slowly get the other useful mods like FPE just bombing caps.
You wouldn't want to use it for anything beside that other than maybe the occasional task but there are better planes for that.
The stealthy approach takes more patience though and it's not guaranteed you get to a base either but you usually got a better chance flanking and waiting for the bases to respawn which is still a way better strategy than trying to spaceclimb with a plane that can't climb all while you're visible as a huge dot for the entire enemy team and while someone ends the game with a ticket bleed by lawnmowing hard.
I honestly don't find basebombing as rewarding as just lawnmowing in some freemium plane (which i think should be manageable with a controller), on top of all the drawbacks of a strategic bomber.
Note it might also not work as of now because of the broken AAA over the bases. (again)
This is me with the A-26C-45DT. Usually I can wipe a target or 2 off the map or be king of the skies and strike everywhere and everything. More times than not I can get 2 or 3 passes before I dive and run before getting pounced on
It would be also really good if gaijin made the winning conditions and the rewards dependant on objectives completed instead of tickets so if there were objectives that required specific types of planes to be completed every plane would feel like it has a place and no one could make coments about bombers and attackers dragging the team down.
Tickets works very well rn: you kill bases to decrease them by a big constant value. You kill ground troops and it decreases by a smaller value, but you tip the battle a little in favour of your allies. A good uncontested atack plane today can win any match really easily.
The problem is the uncontested part, in the current meta of brawns at the middle of the map really hurt atackers since they need uncontested airspace.
@@TheEmolano In the few times Strikers or bombers have uncontested airspace, the match usually ends a little while later because the entire enemy team is dead.
I play war thunder like a slug. Its my end of the day game to relax. Personally I ground a lot of my air trees by bombing or ai killing. Im really happy that you made a point to talk about it. Thanks again Tim for using your time and platform for the better of the game.
As a bomber player really thanks man. I appreciate that we have a voice represent us and bring new ideas.
One of the things that I have wanted most that I think would benefit vehicles of all types would be changing objectives. For example, control points and bomb bases that become available after ones before them are taken/destroyed.
I have a suggestion for a mechanic that would improve bombers gameplay as well an help everyone grind experience. Just like how in air arcade battles there’s can be a capture point in the air that you get experience for being within the vicinity or on ground battles capturing a base and getting experience for helping being in the circle. Make it so fighters get experience points for being in the vicinity of a bomber like 1.0km or less encouraging fighters to actually escort the bombers. Likewise make it so that bombers and fighters that are near each other when an enemy plane gets downed that they both get bonus points for being near each other when this happens say like within 1.5-2.0km of the bomber.
Or also if bombers are close together they get experience points for just being in formation encouraging teamwork.
Sorry to say, but that's far to close a range for escorts. If you hang around a bomber around even 3km, you are basically useless for defending the bomber and putting yourself in a massive disadvantage when the enemy appears. Bombers are very, very slow, and fighters need to get fast and engage interceptors before they get even 10km from bombers. (Funnily enough during WW2 Escorts had this same problem. Bomber guys wanted fighters close for moral support, but it was practically useless for defending them)
@@sebastiannelson6355 distances can be adjusted just suggesting a basic concept to hopefully encourage some team play as well as just give some players some free experience for grinding parts or planes. Obviously lots of players will ignore this feature entirely anyway just like how you get totally crushed in ground battles because on one goes to the caps. But it could spice things up and change the battles a little more than the typical take off turn slightly to the left off the runway and climb until you run into the enemy then hope you climbed higher than them. That’s the typical cut an paste gameplay we have now with vary little exceptions.
I agree and to those who don't want bombers.... remember they give you more stuff to do and think about and adds more variety even if you are just in a light fighter with just fox 2s...
Love your content, Tim. I'm an ex-wt player, I used to play this in the time period between air beta and the addition of ground units. Your non-elitist and broad coverage of all things air reminds me of my original enthusiasm for this game. Thanks.
o7
In a similar way to what you're doing regarding bomber gameplay, the sim community is focusing on feedback regarding the enduring confrontation gamemode and the current state of rewards for it. Hopefully some good stuff will come out of this
Gaijin could also add ai planes that try to damage or destroy the bombers controlled by players, that would not only make the gameplay loop for bombers less monoitonous but will also make it feel like more packed with action.
this used to be a thing.
@@AirsoftFaction It really should be brought back, there are a lot of players complaining about the "dead time flying" and adding ai targets will improve this a lot
My graint of salt is that those should fly a predetermined fly path, and they would only try to intercept you if you get close.
Not all bombers have good defensive firepower, so you should be able to avoid them. Oe you could take a high risk high reward aproach and fly through these.
@@mullayho1759they could add a bunch of friendly AI carpet bombers as well making the overall environment more target rich.
I vehemently disagree, there is nothing I hate more than an AI controlled spaa getting a lucky shot in, having the incredibly dumb ai fighters try to do that would be more annoying
I would love to see more bombers in general. B-1 and Tu-160 would be awesome. Or B-52 and Tu-95. They would of course need significant bomber gameplay changes. Thanks for bringing up some interesting ideas. Let's hope Gaijin does something with it.
I remember playing the b17 with my homie from germany and it was the most fun i've had in the game. I really hope that bombing can make some kind of a return with dedicated aircraft at top tier and in this game in general
These are the types of videos I immediately click on.. idk why
Because the best and brightest of youtube knows what's best fir war thunder with no alternative motive, the snail wants money.
I actually wish when you flew bombers you got "3" of them to fly in formation. It would help with the feel while also adding survivability.
Also they need to fix the gunners on bombers. They won't shoot at enemies until you can shake hands with them.
There's an older flight sim called Aces High that did this. When you spawned in you would get 2 other ai that flew in formation and would mimic your controls. It would be cool if they added this.
I think it would add a lot of value. And provide that criss/cross of gunner fire bombers actually rely on. Players would have to use actual strats such as diving/climbing into weak coverage areas.@@Jojcib
U just gotta max them out with crew points by giving gajin your weeks wage
@@JojcibUse to play aces high back in the day. Haven’t hear anyone mention it in years
In the end all fighters are there to get bombers/attackers to their targets so they can advance the ground war. The air battle is there to enable bombing so it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of fighters in a large part of the community.
Nice to know bombers haven't been forgotten, and any change that can potentially have the knock-on effect to make my poor IDS MFG feel even remotely more usable in ARB sounds amazing. Thanks for putting those suggestions forward.
I cannot believe that bomber video is almost 2 years old. I have been watching this channel for a whhhhile already!
I used to play bombers a lot when I was on props, and I thought that once I got to jets it would be easier. It was NOT any easier. With the exception of only certain planes being able to attack certain targets, I think these are really good ideas and could work very well. I'm currently using the F-4E, my favorite phantom, to get the F-15, and having more targets for my 6 1,000 lbs. bombs would be sweet!!!
Making friendly bases invisible to your team will also go a long way in increasing bomber survivability. Knowing exactly where the bombers are heading makes interecepting them extremely easy.
I remember playing Air RB with the Wellington with the massive single bomb with all 4 of my friends wayyy back in the day, back when there was 3 bases- you could single-handedly win the game if none of you died, I miss that kind of bomber energy. High risk high reward- or at least some form of reward instead of instant dying. Appreciate the insight and all the hard work you are putting in this!
Same with farman, its one hell of a brick, but it can win the game alone, if no one is intercepting or cant shoot. But gjn sent it to 2.3, where it cant do it anymore and helpless against much more capable aircrafts.
The only fun I've had in a bomber was in the nc223 with two friends winning matches by or own. That plane is super broken.
These are all doable changes that would improve the player experience and the grind, to some degree. As such, they will never come to pass. Excellent video.
These are all great suggestions, honestly, the game would just be instantly improved if all of them were added as you suggested.
I'd love to see some changes made to AirRB as well, either increased numbers of players, with a a 5 min increased duration or similar to try to make it feel less like you're rushing to get into a fight before the game ends.
I love the ideas. Ive always wanted to try bombers out but the current meta does not really allow that to occur. Hopefully something can be done next year :)
As someone that occasionally likes flying bombers time to time, id absolutely love some of these changes
As someone who primarily plays heavy bombers, I like all of the suggestions here.
The one thing I would add is making base destruction more consistent. A lot of the appeal of heavy bombers is being able to carry a lot of bombs. But to consistently destroy bases, you really need to bring a few large bombs instead. I'd love to see bases having a set amount of ordinance you need to drop on them, so we can plan our runs more scientifically with smaller bombs instead of saying "I'll drop 6 and flip a coin on whether it'll be enough".
always down for more changes that help out bombers and strike aircraft great video
I think the ability to multi crew a bomber with actual players would be really cool.
only complaint i have with this video is that we didn't get to see the landing in the background footage
You actually didn't miss out, the match ran out of time when I was about 10 meters off the runway....
@@TimsVariety god thats sad
@@TimsVarietyReal Arcade Battles
The problem with bombers is that game modes arent made to suport them and this was made worse when gaijin started nerfing maps on air rb, for example removing the hability to destroy the enemy airfield and reducing up to 66% of the rewards for ai targets.
I would love to play bombers and ground attackers but for that to work gaijin would have to change their focus form pvp only and start redesigning missions and objectives to addapt to the capabilities of those planes.
"game modes arent made to suport them" , hence why these suggestions are ways to change the existing game modes.
@@TimsVariety Thats what i mean, its time that gaijin heavily reworks game modes so it feels that every plane has a place and a role to fulfill.
@@StrayGuard Not being able to bomb out the airfield was a massive positive change. As much as bomber players might not like it now there were a few bombers that could wipe out the airfield without the opposing team having a chance to intercept them at all and NOBODY but those bombers would get any score out of the game. Some of those bombers are still at that same BR and technically nothing has changed on some of those maps in question to prevent it outside of removing the ability to bomb out the airfield. The lesser of two evils between those options really is not being able to bomb out the airfield. It really is better that way.
For the record that change was part of my suggestions that I submitted when Gaijin asked for suggested changes to improve air RB. They also included AI attackers, ground targets being put in a "front line" like position and soft targets on the ground that count to ticket loss to go with the hardened pillboxes and medium/heavy tanks. (Edit: They also included the respawning bombing bases.) Ultimately they implemented about half of my suggestions from my proposal. Even just half of them was at least a step forward from where things were. My changes were the only ones in the English part of the forums that stayed within the limits that Gaijin devs said that we had to stay within with our suggestions and got a substantial number of popular votes in the forums. The really annoying thing to me is that Gaijin said that they were going to implement these changes across all maps. Instead they implemented it across 1/3rd to half of the maps and then stopped.
Ultimately so long as you stay within the limits of what the devs say that they want to keep air RB within as a game mode then any suggestions that you make at least have a chance of being considered. This is something that a number of people straight up ignore either because they don't know what those limits are or because they don't care to follow them.
Thank fuck someone cared about bombers. I love playing bombers all the time and playing them are fun but I get all my bases taken or I get tked. I hope this goes through and at least one of these changes get made. Thanks for talking about this Tim. Great vid!
what's really frustrating is how earlier this year they seemed to accidentally reduce the base respawn time to a matter of seconds, and it instantly made life so much easier. i was routinely top 3 of my team in the Buccaneer of all things and grinding RP out the backside because i'd be guaranteed my 3 bases per sortie that thing has the capacity for, and should i survive to sortie again that becomes 6. everyone hated the SPAAs being put at the bases in that update because they were and still are pointless, and Gaijin somewhat listened to feedback on that and nerfed them (though at the point theyve been nerfed to, what's the point? literally just be rid of them alltogether) but they put the base respawn back to 5 minutes without mentioning it or consulting on it. Easily one of the best quality of life improvements of 2023 seemed to be a mistake, and was reverted, despite literally everyone liking it.
Though an entirely different game, id point to iRacing's new Gen 4 cup car as an example of an accident that can just stay like that. in an update they accidentally reverted a car with 4-500hp to its original state with in excess of 800, and everyone loved it. so it stayed. i see no reason why Gaijin couldn't have done the same
Nah, spaas are fun on bases. Makes ccip somewhat useful, because you couldnt just fly close and bomb like no one buisness. But once they nerfed them, its kinda pointless now, might as well put old AA`s that could do nothing.
@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 air RB is a pvp game mode. flying high in a Buccaneer is a death sentence, it has no real means to protect itself nor fight back. If you want strategy based on ground targets, SB's EC format is made with that in mind. Some of us are just trying to grind, not die to AI RNG
@@firetruck1255they reverted the change because it would make the grind too easy. If everyone gets their 3 bases almost every single player will make it to 12.0 in less than a months.
@@georgeousthegorgeous every single player is already at 9.3 to have the strike bombers to take advantage of it? i remember 4-5 months of gameplay before i even got to that point. for the entirety of that update, i think i got 7 planes with the Buccaneer. none of them rank 7. it wasnt *that* OP to drop the bomb load the plane is built to have
I have an idea to make bombers better in War thunder: a new gamemode or just event in a match where the target is a city for example. All strategic and long-range bombers are the olny ones allowed to destroy it and maybe it's guarded by 3 vawes of AI interceptors/fighters. And you get rewarded based on how many damage you caused and not just one who destroyed last. Maybe then you'll get enough SL and RP to at least worth taking a bomber in late game
I agree 100% with what you’ve said as I mainly drive the Buccaneer and find it so frustrating seeing everyone else rush a target I’ve spent ages getting to. Even had games where I’m stuck with 13 1000pounders and only have ground targets left. Would love to see the V Bombers in game
I appreciate videos like this. I strongly disagree with the idea that War Thunder should be all air-to-air. The B-29 is already unplayable. A B-47 or a Vulcan would be worse. I can’t get my B-29 spated because I can’t avoid getting intercepted by jet fighters with early air-to-air missiles. I can’t climb or dodge. It’s just fly half way and get blown out of the sky.
reminds me of the existence of the Vautour IIN with the Matra R511 missiles or the F9F-8 with the AIM-9Bs at 8.3. i could imagine the hell that players of B-29s and Tu-4s have to experience when they see any of those in the game
It’s stupid because there’s an easy solution for gaijin, just replace the current b-29 with the late Korean War b-29 variants that the navy used to an extent that had chaff, better air defense, and some semblance of a radar
Really cool video, great ideas. I really think that bombers and attackers should have some purpose other than loosing the battle bc there are less fighters to dominate the sky. There might be many historical missions added and i mean REALLY A LOT OF MISSIONS where bombers maybe are not absolutely necessary for winning but they have huge impact on tickets and how the battle goes. I think that battle should be more about completing the goal rather than killing everybody in enemy team. But it can only be achieved if battle rewards were closely related with victory
a possible thing would be a 'mission' type longer match where you either start on the runway as a bomber or inflight as a bomber or an escort. a formation is created that you are given a designated slot in, and you need to follow a certain flight path that is surrounded by heavy flak, so that if you stray from the flight path there is flak right there, and there is a chance you get shot down anyway while staying in the flight path, and there are enemy fighters, proportional to the number or escorts. you arrive at the target, the whole formation drops their loads, then depending on the mode, the mission ends there with success, or you need to make it back to either friendly air space or the base you took off from
Great video and, as usual, great and well thought through ideas Tim!
I was kinda mad at the suggestion form, as it only allowed for ONE single submission and were very clear that we were only allowed to describe one suggestion per submission.
I entered one idea about a game mode that works like Air Simulator, but with realistic physics. I think that would be a great foundation to, in the future, add AWACS, more interesting bomber game play (escorting, intercepting etc. that actually gives tangible rewards for completing them).
But I also had two other ideas.
1: Give us a menu where we ourselves can specify that for vehicle X, map Y (or at least map type, like urban, desert, etc.) and time/weather Z, use skin 1. Or, at the very least, give us an "active/inactive"-switch on each camouflage so that we can de-activate camouflages we don't want to use from rotation in the current automatic camouflages picker-system. I know they did release some kind of camouflage-mechanic-related fix before Christmas, but I haven't noticed any difference to be honest.
2: Give us a menu where we can setup the default state for each of the systems found in the "Y"-menu (can't remember its name right now, but there is an in-game menu you can bring up, similar to the voice chat menu, where you for example can turn on and off IR Search light). I would LOVE not to have to start each game with turning on and off a bunch of systems each and every match. For example, every match in T-80U/UK I have to start by turning of IR Search light so that it doesn't give my position away to everyone, same with activating the "shoot-from-commander-sight"-feature. Would be great to have a menu where you can setup what default state a vehicle should spawn in.
Some great QoL-features in my opinion, I don't care if I get creds for them or not, I just want them added. So if you think they sound like good ideas, feel free to bring them in to Gaijin in whatever manner you see fit.
Once again thanks for great content, you really add a lot of value to the community and your efforts in trying to better the game we all love (well, some times at least..) is impressive to say the least!
Wish you an amazing 2024!
I appreciate someone advocating to the most ignored aspect of Air modes and the one I personally enjoy the most. Thanks Tim
What if they added a completely different game mode only available to bombers, strike fighters, and interceptors? Make the maps similar to ec maps with size and bomb targets, give strike fighters the ability to essentially provide CAS to certain specific objectives. And of course allow interceptor specific players to find and shoot down the bombers and such. I love the mig 25 so maybe this could be an opportunity?🤷♂️
I think air RB could be better if we had at least 2 opposite spawn or AFs in the same team, and automatic squads of 4 or 3 players spawning together.
They'll also need to fix the damage models of quite a few planes if they do any revamping of how bombers play, stuff like the B-17's tail falling off as soon as someone on the other team sneezes within 20km.
I 1000% love your idea! A bit of tweaking to it would be reintroducing the airfields in RB but creating strategic facilities in it sort of like in Sim mode. Strategic bombers get exclusive mission priority for those and hell to justify adding bunker busters, make them underground, or at least armored targets that bombers can carry payloads to deal with.
Another suggestion that could benefit bombers that I've advocated for is introducing a RB mode with Sim EC mechanics. they've already introduced the maps but it lacks in uniqueness. As it stands, its just larger maps for larger maps sake. If they can have respawning players, meaningful objectives and so on, it would be super phenomenal.
I also in the past posted this suggestion to the forums and any discussion board i could but either mods didn't allow it on the forums or something else. This is pre implementation of the roadmap its a tad dated but i feel there's some ideas worth some merit. If you read this Tim, I'd appreciate feedback and I'll keep trying to get it through to the devs.
> "some feedback regarding SL costs to purchase new vehicles and how it should either be eliminated or reduced by 90%, I offered the option to create a monetary incentive by having 2 tiers of reduction, non premium reduces sl costs by 40-50%, just enough to create an achievable top tier grind, without hindering it, and a premium tier which eliminates cost or reduces it by 90%. This mainly aims to combat the dual grind players face currently in game. In which they must grind both RP and SL and the progress for both is so grindy it should be a job. Reducing or eliminating one of them will not cause people to run through the game as there's so many vehicles that they'll have plenty to discover, and make top tier achievable within a few months."
More game modes and bomber variety would be awesome -- I imagine some sort of Red Rover game would be awesome.
And I'd do almost anything to have a B-1B in the game......
Tu-160 would be a great addition IMO.
Another good addition would be if Long Range Bombers could destroy the enemy Airfield in RB's. Not to instantly win, but to prevent the enemy Aircraft from repairing/resupplying, so your fighters have a better chance to win the match for you. That way there's more of an incentive for fighters to actually escort Bombers as well. Also give increased rewards for the "Bomber Rescuer" & "Bomber Hunter" Awards. Maybe give the fighters a choice to spawn in the air next to the bombers as a specific Escort Spawn, and add Awards for targeting Bombers and Escort planes over regular fighters? Just spitballing here (:
Love flying Bombers in War Thunder but they feel kinda pointless the way they are now
The bomber and ground attack parts of air RB really need some help. A few changes that I have thought of for bombers.
First: get rid of the idea of bombing out bases/bomb points and respawning bases/bomb points. Just make 4, or however many bases/bomb points, and make them permanent. Make them bomb sponges and however many tons of explosives get dropped on them reduces ticket count by a given amount per ton. No more wasted bombs because a teammate "stole" a base. This also potentially promotes the bombers flying together to one drop point which improves their survivability due to concentrated defensive fire, at least in theory because with everything hitting so strong at the moment everything goes down fairly quickly. This also has the benefit of improving the back end of the game via no more respawning bases and random bases out of x number of locations.
Second: Something you slightly touched on with the B-29 and Tu-4. Better balanced BRs for a lot of bombers. I cannot understate how much this would actually improve game play for many bombers. Currently WW2 era US and British bombers, with some Soviet bombers, are badly over BRed relative to their German counterparts that have relatively similar performance in regards to the bomber triangle.
Here is a French and British comparison. The Short Stirlings vs the N.C.223.3. Flight performance they are very similar. Defensively the N.C.222.3 is much better with 2 20mm turrets that give near 360 degree protection vs the Stirlings with only 7.7s and massive blind spots. Bomb load wise the Stirlings can carry a max of 13,500lbs vs the N.C.223.3's max payload of nearly 8,200lbs. Is the 3.0 vs 4.0/4.7 BR difference worth a not even double the payload? Heck no. Both Stirlings should be 3.3 tops. The bigger payload comes at the heavy price of a lack of protection. I'd even argue that the Mk.I Stirling should have been a premium given that the only difference between it and the Mk.III is the improved engines of the Mk.III. If that isn't enough to show how over BRed the Stirlings are compare them to the Halifax. Halifax has better flight performance with similar defense and a slightly worse bomb load yet virtually everyone will say that the Halifax is the better bomber than the Stirlings.
One final example as I could easily go on with bomber BR changes. The B-17 family, B-24 family, Lancasters, Lincoln and Shackleton vs the Me-264. The 264 is the best of the lot yet it nearly sits at a BR that the B-17s start at with everything else above it, and in some cases way above it. The 264 is among the fastest in level flight but has the worst climb rate of the group performance wise. It has the best defenses of the group and a payload between the US and UK bombers. The B-17s and B-24 family all have slightly worse flight performance, at best slightly worse defenses and either much worse bomb loads, for the B-17Es (6 or 8k lbs for the G), to worse bomb loads for the B-24 families (8k lbs). The Lancasters have a bigger bomb load of 14k vs 9.6k lbs but they have significantly worse defenses. Performance wise they are similar to the 264. The Lincoln has 14k too but with much improved defensive guns but still poor defensive coverage with, again, similar flight performance. The Shackleton has arguably the best overall flight performance and the best bomb load at 15k lbs but has horrible defensive coverage. The B-17s should be 4.0-4.3. The PB4Ys should be 4.3 and the B-24 4.7. The Lancasters should be 4.3-4.7. The Lincoln 4.7, maybe 5.0 and the Shackleton 4.7. These BRs are just my opinion and are fully up to debate.
This is just two examples of the BR changes that I think need to be done to bombers as a great number of them are at bad BRs. Again I cannot say enough how massively improved bomber game play would be for many bombers if a lot of them went to BRs that they should be at rather than being over BRed like so many of them are.
I mean there still hasn't been BR decompression... 9.3 flareless 50s-60s fighters going up against 9Ls is ridiculous, a 11.3 F1C/F4J going up against a 12.3 F15 is also ridiculous lol
I was in the f15 today and no joke I wound up in an 11.0 lobby, that was just cruel.
Best part is a teamate smoked me with a 9L while trying to steal a kill, so that was just magical.
Some great suggestions! Just having 6 bases would fix alot you are absolutly right.....I play every type of vehicle and enjoy them all dont let the trolls be trolls
I remember back in 2015 and 2016 where bomber gunners would care. ESPECIALLY for the B17 and B24. Your gunners had 100% laser accuracy. You could dive down and EASILY get 3 or 4 kills from the amount of people who truly thought you would be a easy kill. Good times. That's how I quickly grinded the US air tree until I maxed it and until jets came
I honestly think your ideas are really great! It’ll add variety and more sense to overall air RB gameplay aswell as opportunities for Gajin to add more unique older planes
It`s quite deplorable how gaijin gets so much feedback from so many devoted players, only to ignore them and keep the same old, tiresome gameplay that is way overdue for expanding on to other modes. I`m so sick of tdm matches I could puke!
Trying to fix bombers seems way to familiar to Sisyphus torture...
I love the thought you add in ideas for interceptors and not just bombers as well and you are right it would make it so much more interesting
If the snail doesnt want bombers taking out airfields to win the game really quick then they should add secondary FOB airfields like the ones in EC type maps that they can bomb to force the enemy team to use the main airfield thats farther away from the action. this would make it harder for the enemy to make it back to repair and would make trips to rearm take longer giving your team an advantage.
I really like this! What are your thoughts about a team wide bonus of some sort on research/SL when bases are destroyed? Would incentivize people to actually fly escort missions. Might also shut up the people who insist on fighters only… 😅
While I don’t particularly enjoy bombers… I would love to have them in a match if there were some actual incentive to protect them.
I completely agree. Perhaps an award similar to the "Bomber Rescuer" award, except it would give a lot more SL and RP, and would trigger if you were near a bomber when it dropped its bombs (assuming the bombs hit their target). There needs to be more & bigger rewards for teamwork in War Thunder, so that even if you don't actually shoot anyone down or destroy a base, you can still get rewarded for helping your team (such as putting pressure on an enemy to help your teammate shoot him down in a dogfight, or covering a bomber as mentioned earlier).
As a CAS guy... yes, 6 bases please :)
Really appreciate you putting the time and thought into this. Been with the game more or less from the jump, and it's been so dismal to watch so many of these unique giants sidelined for this reason or that when they have so much potential. Best wishes to you and yours, and thank you again for the all the positive vibes~
Agreed. I suggested fixes for coastal vessel progression and completely forgot about bombers. I mostly play sim, but these fixes could even help there. If this was ten years ago and we were just having a discussion on whether or not bombers should be in the game, then maybe we could continue to pretend that the game is all about shooting things, but that can of worms was opened long ago. Just like supersonic aircraft, helicopters, drones, and even SPGs to some extent, most types of weapons are going to be represented for monetary gain if nothing else, and we might as well just try to figure out how they would work. We already have information to suggest they're adding subs and missile ships despite facing a myriad of gameplay problems, and it's always possible we could see aircraft carriers someday too.
f15 and su27 isn't moving to 12.7 :(
I saw. Not ideal. :-\
Quality of life improvements? Hell I got a few, maybe when we have 50% on sales, maybe we should have 50% off on RP so we dont have to grind as much on the danm holidays.
Second, a few aircraft need fuel tanks, one really good example, is the Draken's. They only get 20 minutes of fuel, max, it needs a lead indicator as well.
I want to be able to test any vehicles in a test flight, so I can check if they over perform or not. That's just a personal thing, but I think others could use it to see if the tech tree is wroth the grind.
In Simulator, people only go for Airfields, and the defensive Roland's suck, sim airfields need a massive upgrade, primarily from rank 10.0 to 12.3 BR.
missiles are still some times invisible, spotting players or vehicles in sim visually is still horrible.
The airfield bots in Simulator keeps increasing.
I feel like the RP needs to be decreased a bit, 400k rp to grind a single vehicle is actually absurd, I feel like 300k is best, still a grind, but now it doesn't feel like torture.
I'm sorry for thr rant but this game is so absurd with its bs.
There should be a link up on the warthunder website for public roadmap suggestions "by the weekend", if its not up already.
@@TimsVariety thank you
I’ll say for the jets, I’m loving the larger maps. I’d like to see map and spawn dynamics that help prevent giant fur balls.
Agree with ALL your suggestions Re Bombers. One more thing, perhaps an equal amount of fighters and then bombers on top of that. Too many matches with 4 Bombers and 2-4 Strikes on one side and ALL fighters on the other. That team nearly always wins because there are 16 fighters against 8-10
Thank you for your advocacy for bomber players!
Idea: Restrict strike fighters to 4 per team just like bombers, so you don't have people trying to kill eachother to get to a base.
Terrible idea I know.
Edit: I just wanted to add after thinking about it further, I feel like this would be a kinda Monkey's Paw wish, makes it easier for strike aircraft to get bases, but makes matchmaking a living hell for a lot of people.
I could live with that, and its been suggested a few times, but theres never any comment from the snail.
welll stuff like the f4 is marked as a fighter but is multirole
Only 2 strike is still hard to get base. Some fighters can bomb 2 base like f4
Maybe restrict total bombs an entire team can bring out instead.
@@matiastorres1510 how? you select your bomb load after you enter a match
I always wanted Gaijin to add mini task to bombers, like you have at the begining of the match a specific target to destroy :
Base for high altitude bombers.
Ground targets for attackers.
If you succesfully destroy your target and fufil your mission, you would receive a bonus silver lions and research points.
This way each player could have its own mission and its own path allowing objetives share. You can even go further and add those kind of missions to intercepors : protect this base or these ground target / convoy for an X amount of time, protect this player's bomber until he destroy its target.
I'm a huge fan of RP in any game, those missions could add a bit of RP and some nice situations and interactions between players.
Keep the good work buddy !
With love from france !
As a british bomber player this would help a ton thank you so much
Hello
o7
It's funny because if you complain about anything in this game there is always at least 1 guy calling you a baby or some other name or just trolls you for saying anything negative about a videogame. God forbid you don't suck off Gaijin and praise them as Gods all the time. Acting like the game is perfect or that people should never criticize something helps solve no problems. Acting like the problems are not a big deal when they clearly are just because they don't bother you is a display of ignorance. Just because you can't understand the problem or don't believe there is a problem does not automatically eliminate the problem.
The "Sounds like you have a skill issue" player is usually the very first one to complain if some tank they were in doesn't have the armor they think its supposed to have and they got killed as a result.
Every game has these sorts of people, best they can do with their lives is talk down to people online because obviously that's the only achievement and social interaction they will ever have. (if you let them to piss you off instead of seeing them as what they are and just pitying them silently, before ignoring them)
I don't think they enjoy the game themselves, in some games like APB these types abuse scripts forcing themselves into the dullest kinds of gameplay for some sort of weird 'but i probably managed to piss off some real person, this is the most significant part of my life that i will write in my resumé' kind of narcissistic instant gratification.
I always felt that bomber and attacker gameplay should be a little like playing a PvE mode, give bombers strategic target markers that only they can see and attackers tactical target markers that only they can see and give each target an effect on the battlefield when either destroyed or not destroyed within a certain time limit. For example, have strategic targets like power stations and tank factories that when destroyed somehow buff or spawn additional friendly units or in some way change the way the map plays such as a dam that when burst floods a valley or a forest that when bombed with napalm creates an inferno that blocks ground unit movement and changes the PvE gameplay. Likewise attackers might recieve information on certain tank columns or supply depots that could fulfil similar PvE effects. This would work kind of like the idea of destroying the landing craft on Saipan before they release their tanks that capture the airfield for the American team, it would change the way the map flows but not in a way that instantly ends the mission while also creating interesting points of contact for the fighters to contest for air superiority.
You could then build upon this with a system that would work a little like Dota or LoL with "tower tiers" where a tier 2 target becomes available after destroying a tier 1 target and tier 3 after tier 2 with each tier having a more decisive impact on the outcome of a mission. For example a train station as a tier 1 tactical objective that if destroyed releases an armoured train as a T2 objective, that sort of thing. These could have significant imapcts on the outcome of a mission for both AI and for players. Maybe after destroying a power plant as a tier 1 strategic objective then a secondary airfield would become a tier 2 target that could be permanently destroyed followed by a radar station as a tier 3 objective which if destroyed then disables the other team's tactical map or reduces AI effectiveness, or maybe if the attacker's manage to destroy that armoured train from earlier then a missile defence system appears as a tier 3 objective that allows for a V2 or tactical nuclear missile strike draining a significant amount of tickets and destroying a city on the map. There's a lot of interesting back and forth that could be played with here and I really think a well crafted and balanced attacker/bomber gameplay loop could bring a lot of dynamic gameplay to air battles while also giving fighters a more focussed role in fighting over these points of interest.
Watching this video for the first time in late july, so I get that my comment is late to the party, here. But I really dig the idea of all the game modes facilitating a diverse choise of gameplay in a balanced way in the same battle. That is why I only fly sim, because it's dynamic and one can choose to do what one feels like, or react to events and missions happening in the battle.
Had one of the most exciting battle ever when bombing in vietnam in a Lansen, with no radar active, only RWR. And I had to hold my breath flying low in the valleys, as some players hunted me from above, but failing to locate me as I flew subsonic w/o afterburner and used the terrain to mitigate the radar blips I was getting. Felt like playing Splinter Cell but in air sim against other players. You won't get that in RB, because it lacks mechanisms to allow different kind of playing in the same battle. And I believe your ideas for strategic bombing could really help spice up that, for all modes of air combat.
Good suggestions. Especially the different target classification which could be done with "Industrial Complex Zones" which function like airbases damagewise. And optimally this should be best done in an enduring confrontation map which by itself should always be available in both modes. Rotating spawns and target locations seem such a simple mechanic that you wonder why it hasn't been implemented like seven years ago. Also Strategic Bombers should not be available in Ground Battles hence the designation.
Realy good points, I have 1 thing too add. Besides making more bomb points and maybe give some different spawn options, we could also really use some more spacing of the bases and ground targets, right now the problem (mostly noticeable at top tier) is that all the ground units and bases are near the middle, this causes everyone to end up in one or maybe 2 giant fireballs.
When you space out the bomb bases and ground targets however the fighters aso needs to desperse more evenly over the map, cause otherwise they will lose on tickets, this will result in better dogfights, and better game loop for ground attackers and bombers.
The only tricky thing about it is to get the balance for the ticket bleed correctly, so that the matches are not instantly won by ground attacker/bombers, but they are still a treath that needs to be dealt with.
Man every time you make one of these types of videos I always think about thangs differently then what I thought before and I love it it brings a new level understanding of the game to me it's great!
I just recently started playing, but you’re putting up some great ideas! The bombers vs defenders game mode you mentioned sounds really fun too
MY MAN SPEAKS. This has been an unresolved issue for me since I started playing. Literally every sentence was spoken in my head in the last several years at some point. We have all run into these issues and it's why you only see these planes in 1% of matches. We need drastic changes to this gameplay loop. I suggest double the strategic bases and then divide them half between bases that are flammable and half that aren't. It all resignated with me, brother. Love you and have a Merry Christmas!
Many thanks tim for your suggestions, you really got something off of my chest...bombers needed a rework in their gameplay and gaijin rarely does that.
Personally i would love to see a variety in bombing bases looks....not very important but would be a nice aesthetic update to them.
Your suggestions are great and i hope they either work on them or improve on these ideas.
These are all great ideas and as someone who loves bombers and strike aircraft this would be much appreciated. Plus this would add avenues for things like the c-47 spooky and the ac-130 which could be able to target those strategic targets you talked about. If they were to implement your ideas it would also allow for things like penetration bombs used for bunkers. It would be perfect for the F-111 to get that one bomb made out of an old howitzer barrel used in desert storm. Idk I’m just a wishful nerd.
Excellent suggestions, some of them in our heads from a while back but incredibly glad you had the chance to put them forward for the Snail to see and assimilate. Randomizing targets for bombing, AND adding Bomber-Only mission objectives would be a quick, efficient, and dare I say reliable method to improve variability of gameplay.
Adding routes and targets will turn matches from mindlessly head-butting the enemy into a mesh (or mess) of fighters, attackers, and bombers all fighting for their lives. Count me in for this sh**.
Honestly i’m pretty happy with what you suggested. I play a bit of everything so i genuinely enjoy all game modes. I’m just a bit sad that most bombers are gun bait do to their BR and facing planes that outclass them so hard it makes your head spin with how fast you die.
Really liked the ideas for bombers. Especially with strategic bomb targets. Soo tired of having to compete with fighters to get to a bomb target and have it yoinked from me by a fighter. Appreciate the videos concerning the bombers as well. I get so tired of people saying “get good” or “learn to dogfight” to bombers. Ill be in a bomber for a change of pace and get that all the time when I also have the f-16(f-15j now) ect. But you covered a lot of great points that would help alleviate the issues that usually lead to tk’s over bases. (Got an AIM-9H rammed up my engine cuz i intentionally half bombed a base so a team mate could share the points.
The worst thing playing bombers is when you have your target and you're almost there, bomb bays open, and right before your crosshairs hit the base, 5 spitfires appear behind you, take off your wings and you just start to spin and can't drop your bombs. Every fucking time.
As someone who started playing the game because of the idea of flying a bomber, I already made my suggestion about the state of heavy bombing in the game before this video came out.
So thank you for shedding light to this issue to the rest of the community, even if it’s not the top priority right now.
One thing that made the base stealing more prevelant is the increased respawn timer that they've added a while ago. Before you could reasonably assume that the base would have respawned before you arrived there in a slower attacker/bomber.
Thank you Tim as a bomber enjoyer myself because, I like the more laid back play style (plus big plane go brrrrr) I think everything you said would be great and go a long way in improving the gameplay! (Grammar is not the best) but love the content man you always do great work
Those are really good points for improving bomber gameplay. I’m very happy you used your position to give a voice to bomber players. Personally I love bombers, obviously the classics like the B-17 and Lancaster I think are absolutely beautiful and these heavier bombers that aren’t as nimble as mid-low altitude bombers deserve to have good gameplay to accompany them. I had to take to Sim battles to enjoy bombers, it was the only way to be successful. One thing is like to add to your suggestion, is something someone else commented on a recent Tankenstein video on how 2023 went. She suggested bombers spawned with an additional two AI wingman bombers that flew in formation with the player, much like the “Mission Editor” in the test flight. It would add a layer of defence to an otherwise vulnerable heavy bomber, and also a layer of realism and coolness to the experience. As having one lone strategic bomber doesn’t compare to the contrails of a box formation flying over a target.
Just found your video, and I appreciate and agree with your ideas. They would work a lot better than my own since I've been ichting to play planes like the ac130, B36, B47, and more. Keep it up and thanks.