War Thunder - B-52 in GAME? COULD it be ADDED? Are STRATEGIC BOMBERS an option for the FUTURE?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 чер 2024
- Here are the links for the creator:
Mod: live.warthunder.com/post/1098...
His channel: / @noffie
Thanks for doing this!
Join our Discord: / discord
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @matawg
Patreon: / matawg
Ajude o canal com o PIX de qualquer valor: matawg@hotmail.com
Donate with Paypal: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted... My Secondary GTA Channel: / @thatmatt-kq9uu - Ігри
maybe not as playable aircraft but as strategic targets. B-52, E-2's, C-130 would be good AI targets for strategic value
Yh they would, but adding aircraft like those, they would have to revamp EC maps so it can play like Gunship IV. That’s how war thunder Top tier should be like with objectives that require aircraft to carry out specific roles.
@@swarv5027 they should give cas and sead aircraft a lot more targets. That’s part of the reason people don’t grind them in air rb and ruin peoples experiences in tank rb.
Gunship IV was the best reference I've ever heard used. Even if you could play these aircraft and get points by doing their specific abilities, ie b52s carpet bombing larger bases or even using the cruise/guided air to ground missles for larg targes or even underground bunkers which could be spotted by scout aircraft roles and even e2 Hawkeye or awacs players could get points over time for scouting aircraft or a slight percentage of assists with scouted aircraft destroyed for a more passive relaxing playstyle so not everyone has to be a try hard to level up. And even air to ground scouter aircraft can assist bombers in finding hidden targets and get a percent from that. Sead aircraft/loadouts would be great and could have multiple different abilities with vast playstyles since the come and many shapes sizes and specs. And maybe even in sim there could be a pilot recovery via helicopter that you could skip and still fly while someone recovers your last pilot and maybe get some sl points or even rp for both you and much more for the person that recovered it. And jammers would have a great place after that because many large bomers or awacs and even smaller fighters and sead craft would too making their job less stressful and making bvr a challenge since it's gonna dominate at its current state
Bombers would also have an incredible amount of countermeasures too and ircms
You could also get points or a kill point multiplier for being in the vicinity of a bomber to encourage escorts
why they dont add the ac130?
-it has the most flares of all aircrafts
-it carried 16 hellfire rockets
- 102 mm M102 howitzer
- 40 mm Bofors cannon
- AN/AAQ-24 Directed Infrared Countermeasures System
thats exactily why
Sooo don’t give it loads of flares then
@@TinyBearTim like you want
@@duknit wouldn’t be OP
AC-130 would have American pilots crying and Russian tanks laughing
Would be nice but possibly wouldnt work with the current meta
Edit 2: then enemy fighters could attempt to shoot down the cruise missiles which could and should also be rewarded.
actually yeah that is a good idea, they should reward players for shooting down enemy munitions
Depending on the variants, there is a capacity for the B-52 to carry various air to surface missiles, anti-ship missiles, and guided bombs as well. So this can stand in in addition to the massive bombloads. This also holds true for many of the other cold war bombers and interdictor aircraft.
Early b52 with its tail gunner
It was a vulcan 20mm iirc
They had gunners into the 1990's. The ones that lost their guns were said to be "Bobbitted." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_and_Lorena_Bobbitt
I think these kind of aircraft would be amazing as AI targets or escort objectives. If people actually got their hands on this, they would just sit in orbit and watch something suspicious on their second monitor in the meantime.
I’ve been waiting for the b-36 for 1 and a half years
it would be nice i think we should get on with modern planes
the B-52 is not modern at all
@@dragongod8481 Hes saying that he thinks they should focus on modern varients of aircraft. Not aircraft from the 50s.
@@Shooter10m thats the oppusite we need more aircraft from the 60's,60's in game
@@niceburger6479 I’m telling him what the other comment was saying. Not what my opinion is on what they should add.
@@Shooter10m ok
i think it would be an interesting nuclear bomber for ground rb, but that it spawns at high altitude where current SAM's can't reach it... and where it could be downed only by a jet that is present in battle at the time if it manages to scramble in enough time.
Nah make it be able to be shot by aa
Nice bomber, I would like to have it in game with B-1 and Tu-160
Nah. Blackjack and bone are too modern. We need backfire, Vulcan and B52
@@ArmUkraine
not the Tu22 M backfire but the original Tu 22 or the booze carrier as its known
@@perfectcell1157 fair
Like the Lancaster and B-29, it's a sitting duck. Doubly so considering it will face air to air missiles.
i think it should have no tail gunner but great counter measures and ecm forcing jets to get within 1.5 km of it. this would give it a good defense since it would force jets to leave the deck which would also spice up the meta a bit since top tier has been played the same for the past year. what would be very cool is if the ecm was good enough to allow a small area around it to be safer for ally fighters which would bring more team strategy into the game
Could work as the replacement for Nuke Canberra
I think Vulcan has a place in War Thunder as it could be operated like it was IRL in the Falklands conflict, performing long range SEAD missions to take out enemy SPAA and SAM sites and then a second wave, B52 etc(which would arrive later as Vulcan is faster and flies higher) could come in with their massive bomb loads and there’s no SPAA to protect the ground targets
The spawn calling for something like this would have to be well above 10,000m to even have a chance especially in higher tier matches. Be far enough from fighters, have countermeasures, big enough maps to even be viable.
The aircraft these bombers would have to face either rince them at those altitudes with radar guided missiles and/or have such a superior climb rate that they would reach them regardless
Strategic bombers and AWACS can be target objectives in potential new game modes
I have an idea for a game mode where players play as bombers and there’s other players to protect the bombers, vice versa, and destroying target on the map
I really hope we get strategic bombers or at least something like the tu-22 blinder or tu-16 , b-66 destroyer.
Yes is the answer, as long as they added F-16, f15 fighter jets, they need to add bombers now.
I think it could be added at 10.7 for starters with the first cariant of the B 52 which had a radar guided gattling gun on the Rear for self defence, Aircraft around this BR already go past Mach 1.0 and have radar guided missiles, The B 52 with it's Tail gunner will be able to defend itself from rear aspect shots and it would be a massive target for the enemy in return but it won't be an easy picking either.
It has 0 chance at 10.7 even at 9.0 its a sitting duck.
@@jtl05 way too low
B52 should be 8.3, it can be balanced first gajin needs to stop being lazy and put the b29 at 6.7 and tu-4 at 7.0
@@kurnass2000 They did once, People would climb up to altitude and none would ever get close to them so no, 10.7 for the B 52 is more than reasonable.
@@StealthCloudchaserThe b29 would be balance at 6.7 there are jets lower than that br, the ta-152 exists and other Japanese interceptors they can kill it and 50 cals are weak while the tu-4 could be 7.0 so it always faces jets and it can die, how is it fair that a tu-4 has to fight air to air missles and me 163
You clearly don’t have top tier, the b52 would be useless at 10.7, it would face f14a and get phoenixed and plenty of jets can gun it down.
It should be 8.3,-8.7 😢where it faces mig-21s, and early jets that can climb to it perfectly fine, it shouldn’t be higher than 9.0
I think it would be cool to see it as the nuke carrier. I think anything else, it would be OP or useless
Necessita de um novo modo.... algo com mapas gigantesco, onde bombardeiro teriam mais chances de sobreviver. Mas ainda vou sonha com um novo modo para aumenta duração das partidas, e ajuda entrada da veículos como f117, b52... etc
I think supersonic bombers could work, Hustlers or Blinders or Vigilantes.
if it where playable, we would need huge runways for sim
Only if they can spawn at like 50 or 60,000 feet and be able to climb to like 80,000 feet. Even still, they'll be picked off so easily.
they should add the f117 nighthawk
how they have no data on its stealth characteristics
@@ilias-mu4vtit is the most stealthy
Aircraft ever
@@ArmUkraine I hope thats sarcasm. Tech advanced A LOT in the last 45 years and theres good reason the F117 is retired from active service.
Just has guided bombs and a laser pointer, no counter measures or anything
@@user-lc5sr6mq4r why? It is the most stealthy. It’s just not very useful which is why it was taken out of frontline service. Which is another reason you show lack of knowledge, it has not been retired
Give them really good jammers. In the Vietnam Era, the fighters attacked them with guns from the sides. Their jammers were too good for missiles of the era, and the tail gun was too dangerous.
An early version at like 9.3 ish would be great
nah 9.3 is too much, considering that you are gonna face strelas and other spaas on top tiers. 8.3-8.7 is fine, because it was produced during the early 50s with m48 tanks
Oh man, B-1B pleeeeaase!!!!
Looks good
fun for sim
I dont see why they couldn't be with larger maps. Just add an objective or incentive to keep bombers alive, right now they're unimportant to gameplay in air realistic matches.
tu 22 and tu 16 or tu 160 and b1 they fit into the game better
I want an ac 130 in warthunder
Can we get the B-36 first
Only if we get enduring confrontation rb back. Sim is too restrictive and inaccessible for most of the community.
It's pronounce bomb-mer. The 2nd b is silent.
Id love it but it be pointless all the SuperSonics would steal the bases, for gaijin to give us cooler higher tier bombers, they’d have to rework the bases. Whether make them respawn quicker or add the air field as a target in RB like AB is
The bases need a rework regardless. To many people going for too few bases.
@@timb3499 100% agree with you it was nice right before the F-111 bases seemed to respawn almost right away, after 111, you’d be lucky if the game didn’t end before they respawned
it just does not work, only option would be carrying smaller payloads and a lower BR for these things. US air force got absolutely bodied in Vietnam btw, +10k lost aircraft for the USA versus +1k for Vietnam
I want Vulcan
Bud needs missiles beacause he sufers from chronic skill issue
9.3 should be perfect
Doubt with the actual game....thing is made for WWII vehicles,maps are actually very small to even what we already have...if everything can basically hit you the moment you take off,imagine a B52/Tu95....
Playable probably not fun, ai target in assault arcade could be good
There is 0 usage to bombers in WT
The game right now only rewards fast and maneuverable jets
Alot of poeple who want these Mid-Late cold war and Modern Bombers forget what they are playing.
War thunder at high BRs is not the same as low tiers, you can't just fly higher to bomb bases safely, Supersonic aircraft can easily climb and catch up with you, kill you before your AI gunners can do anything and fly back to kill fighters, even before you drop your bombs. This doesn't take in account heat seeking, radar lock missiles. These types of vehicles don't have a place in the gameplay loop. And in GRB a Single B52 would be able to bomb all 3 points with High yield bombs and have some left over to bomb the base, of course if it doesn't get shot down by SPAA. There's a reason why all the bomber lines currently end with heavy fighters and ground attackers, they can actually kill fighters and bomb bases, Modern Bombers can't.
isnt the a-10 already in the game? 6:31
he means the a10C
as ai sure but until then nah
add TU-95 give it cruise missiles :) problem solved
In a bigger game mode as a2a refueling yes, otherwise no
could be added?? yes, players would use it?? no
Just simple and very logic answer; NO!
L
B-52s and Tu-95s as AI planes on EC maps having specific targets/areas to bomb and then depart the battle would be fine. As a player driven plane... Not so much. ECM yes, chaff/flares yes, tail 20mm radar controled, yes. Where are you going to land? The landing distance for one of these planes is enormous as is the take-off run. Untill Gaijin makes MUCH larger maps with better target dispersion a player B-52/Tu-95/Vulcan is not feasable.
I think War Thunder needs more nuke planes. Playing with Jaguar and Su-7 on Top tier is💩
It wouldn’t be hard to add it. It would just require gayjin to INVEST IN NEW SCENARIOS and BATTLE TYPES.
We know they won’t do that because they’re lazy and uninspired.
ahahahaha
First
Nobody cares