I just started the final upgrade on my bomber... I see they tried to upgrade the amount of health they got per level and doubled their health but I think they will still die too fast. When it finishes leveling to strategic bomber mk 6... it'll have about 5.7k health. That's enough to bomb atomic age and lower defenses into oblivion if played well but against other CWA bases it'll get taken down easily still. Do you guys think that's enough health or that it should be around 6.5k to 7k health at max level?
So bomber planes...
- Thread starter Seraph
- Start date
FroggyKilla
Approved user
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2015
- Messages
- 550
I still don’t understand the philosophy behind them having less Hp than the fighters.
I get it from a game balance point. They do take out a whole line of buildings if used correctly so if they had health rivaling fighters they would be monstrous but 5.7k is like nothing when my fighters have 7.9k health. (8.6k including my museum artifacts).
Motaz Tarek
Approved user
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2015
- Messages
- 545
bombers are no good for multiplayer and wars
transporters are no good for wars
fighters are the only choice for wars and also good for multiplayer
honestly bomber's hp should be over 10k they are too damn slow and it's not acceptable to lose 2 air space at once so easily with their current hp
nexon tried to buff bombers multiple times in vain because they have 0 knowledge about their own game, and they may buff it in the future too or nerf fighters to force players into these trash bombers as their usual stupid decisions
transporters are no good for wars
fighters are the only choice for wars and also good for multiplayer
honestly bomber's hp should be over 10k they are too damn slow and it's not acceptable to lose 2 air space at once so easily with their current hp
nexon tried to buff bombers multiple times in vain because they have 0 knowledge about their own game, and they may buff it in the future too or nerf fighters to force players into these trash bombers as their usual stupid decisions
Bootney Lee Fonsworth
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Messages
- 459
^^^^^This guy gets it.^^^^^ Like tactical helis, the only thing they needed to really do with them is reduce the deployment radius at the front. Cut it to a semi-circle that begins at the front of the actual unit. Or just make the overall radius smaller. Instead.......
Bootney Lee Fonsworth
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2018
- Messages
- 459
I'm going with Navalis' nimble theory. Considering that Supersonic Fighters Mk. 6 move at the same speed as the humble OG biplane the nimbleness is more of an implied thing of course.
Manifesto
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,920
Sure, this can be a big problem if you use two bombers on a strong base but don't forget the bomber/fighter combo. In real life the bomber was slow (as Navalis said) and therefore usually travelled with fighter escorts.
The same applies to Dominations. I've used 2/3 fighters with a bomber combo to good success in the past. Timing is the key and it doesn't always work but sending out the fighters to clear a path with the bomber immediately behind is a low risk/ high survivability option.
If the bomber's hp was 10k or more chances are they'd be too strong and the fighters might be overlooked by most players.
Navalis
Approved user
- Joined
- May 31, 2016
- Messages
- 493
I can attest to this as in recent days I was attacked by a lone bomber for oil and it was shot down. In the following days I was attacked by fighter/bomber (zeppelin) combos to much better success. ie: fighters clear the way, setting off SAMs, suppressing AA, etc... Needless to say I tweaked my defense slightly to fill a gap I discovered.
Motaz Tarek
Approved user
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2015
- Messages
- 545
i have been attacked with this combo and always fails miserably
SAMs are not the only problem, yet u have 4 SAMs, u need to sacrifice 2 fighters to clear those SAMs which is absolutely impractical
i would rather getting each of my fighters hit by one SAM to minimize the loss and the only way to do that is to have plenty of fighters (4-5) at least
after getting rid of SAMs u still have towers, AA guns, castle (and redoubts must be considered cuz bombers has lower hp)
sending fighters over one of these defenses is not a problem cuz they hit and run so fast minimizing the damage they take from anti air buildings
unlike bombers which don't only have low hp but will also take significantly more damage from these buildings because of their flight speed making them spend more time getting him by buildings
bombers have 2 air space so giving them the hp of 2 fighters is not too much to ask, but anyway their current situation is very weak and the 0% usage in wars of bombers speaks of how useless they are
SAMs are not the only problem, yet u have 4 SAMs, u need to sacrifice 2 fighters to clear those SAMs which is absolutely impractical
i would rather getting each of my fighters hit by one SAM to minimize the loss and the only way to do that is to have plenty of fighters (4-5) at least
after getting rid of SAMs u still have towers, AA guns, castle (and redoubts must be considered cuz bombers has lower hp)
sending fighters over one of these defenses is not a problem cuz they hit and run so fast minimizing the damage they take from anti air buildings
unlike bombers which don't only have low hp but will also take significantly more damage from these buildings because of their flight speed making them spend more time getting him by buildings
bombers have 2 air space so giving them the hp of 2 fighters is not too much to ask, but anyway their current situation is very weak and the 0% usage in wars of bombers speaks of how useless they are
Similar threads
