Please, please, please STOP putting doctrine ahead of reason.
If bombing ships with skyhawks loaded with iron bombs wasnt effective , no one would do it
Oh WAIT, someone did do it .
AND WHY did they do it ?Was it their doctrine ? Was it the best choice in the whole wide world ?
Of course not, they did it becuase it was the BEST they could do under their current circumstance.
SOOOOOOOO..... again ,stop acting like some doctrine zombie who can only see what he's told to see.
I mean geez, even even a third world nation had the smarts to realize you do what you can with what you can.
AND remember the sinkex tests, in which ONLY ONE B-52 attacked.NOW multiply that by 17.
AND remember in the game ONE full unit of heavy bombers can be MANY aircraft.
150% increase would put the bombers on par with the fighters.Which though not perfect (like anything ever is
) would be a large step in the right direction.
You could spend the time putting in all the weapon systems that each individual bomber can use
Call me silly but choice one seems the way to go.
Remember the bombs and missile a bomber can use that are not represented in the game for bombers.
Those alone justify a greatly increased attack strength for bombers.
But if for some reason you still cant accept the need, picture 17 b-52s attacking a ship .All dropping 4-8 smart bombs at the target.
Now honesty tell me you "think" that ship would survive said attack once.
Let alone 2 or 3 such attacks.