Sure, that would be nice but can you honestly ever see this happening? This would be too much work.

A more realistic suggestion along the same lines would be to give each nation a different kind of bomber. Like for example: US could have fighter-bomber DBs, heavy-bomber TBs. IJN could have medium-bomber DBs, fighter-bomber TBs. UK could have light-bomber DBs, medium bomber TBs.

To accomplish this, all that would need to be done is to exaggerate pros and cons on the stats of the existing planes. This way, instead of having nations with crappy bombers you would just have nations with bombers that are good at certain things and bad at others, the same way BBs are balanced currently.

I love where your head's at though.

Medium bombers with 2+ bomb drops...less HE per bomb. Net effect would be similar, but add exposure time to AA. A decent B3 would nice, but can't be much more powerful than existing MN bombers. Maybe slower but more DP to take hits while delivering payload.

Torp bombers probably wouldn't get much more than a little extra HE and/or DP for the plane. Maybe a little faster, or a rear gunner for defense.

Scouts with small bombs, depth charges or 10-second sonar-bouys would be effective too.

awesome idea :)

fighter/bomber could be interesting. I believe there are fix to be had to the current planes before trying to change the balance even more tough.



Heavy Bombers do not take off from CVs tough. Not enough runway and too much plane :P

Ju88 is a medium bomber not a heavy bomber.

Heavy bombers were for example the Lancaster and B17 they are both much bigger than a ju88.

Medium bombers took off from a cv once in ww2, the famous Mitchell raid on japan, which was a one way mission with the crews hoping to bail out over china.

Think there is mileage in fighter bomber providing they can be given a major nerf while carrying bombs and a better air air once those bombs are dropped.