Matrix Games Forums

I've noticed that my Liberator bombers are almost impossible to get up to full strength and are very fragile in combat compared to the B17s. Even resting at Brisbane and Noumea, they never seem to repair all damaged planes. (yes, plenty of pilots) Have others experienced this? While not as sturdy as the forts, the liberator was a tough and sturdy plane-as all American products were. Funny, how much difference there is in game terms

On another note, the slow repair and fragility for the Liberators is pretty much on target, as any four engine plane in the South Pacific was a nightmare to maintain. It just strikes me as curious the big difference between the forts and liberators. I would actually like to see the forts toned down a bit rather than the liberators improved.

No real beef here and no need for a patch tomorrow. Just an observation.

I have been playing allies only in my PBEM's so far and as much as I like B17's, I find them incredibly fragile.

I just had a turn in one PBEM game where 60 B17's bombed ports within their normal range in clear weather and even though there was no AA or fighter opposition I lost 7 (!) in the sorties.
All were high morale, low fatigue.

Pilots must have fallen asleep.

I don't want to start up the dreaded B17 debate again but just wanted to comment on the fragility of allied heavy bombers.

I just get the impression that Matrix have made them incredibly frail to stop them becoming uber weapons.
The biggest threat to the B17's is not enemy action but operational loss.

What you are probably seeing are the results that range has on fatigue which then produces op losses.

A6M's, G4M's, G3M's and long ranged Allied bombers and will usually top the op loss chart in most games as a result because all share one trait in common....long range.

That is only supposed to be true when they use their long range, not because they are capable of it right?

I get operation losses when they fly from PM to Buna (use it as a training base, only 1 regiment of infantry are stationed there).

Like everyone else, I keep my fatiuge sub 20 and morale 80+.

yes, if you are careful to rest your units and only fly them short to moderate ranges your op losses 'should' be minimal assuming there is no serious opposition from the air or from ground flak

That is at least has been my experience when playing as Allies. Because of the no B-17 production though i tend not to use mine for bombing very often unless vital. 17's do very well at naval search

Originally posted by Mike_B20
I have been playing allies only in my PBEM's so far and as much as I like B17's, I find them incredibly fragile.

I just had a turn in one PBEM game where 60 B17's bombed ports within their normal range in clear weather and even though there was no AA or fighter opposition I lost 7 (!) in the sorties.
All were high morale, low fatigue.

Pilots must have fallen asleep.

I don't want to start up the dreaded B17 debate again but just wanted to comment on the fragility of allied heavy bombers.

I just get the impression that Matrix have made them incredibly frail to stop them becoming uber weapons.
The biggest threat to the B17's is not enemy action but operational loss.

Just curious here. What altitude are you bombing at? Flak seems to be the biggest killer of forts. I find that the are pretty effective at higher altitudes and the flak does not bother them much.

I flew them at 6000 feet, because I knew there was no AA.
One flight was from Cairns to Buna and he other from Luganville to Lunga, both within their normal range.
There was no oppostion of any kind and they suffered no damage, yet seven failed to return.

I have read of the B17's travelling enormous distances without losses in the Pacific, eg the tran Pacific hops to the Phillipines.

It just seems strange that four engined bombers, loved by their crews for their ability to get them home even with an engine or two out, should drop like flies in a heatwave on unopposed short flights in clear weather.

The public should be thankful they never made passenger versions of the B17...doubt they would have accepted a 90% chance of reaching destination in one piece.