Command T did a Q&A with the devs

[Aapje]

 

[Avimimus]

Interesting. A number of these questions were actually answered in the Briefing Room episodes.

A B-26 Invader could be a higher priority than a B-29. It uses much less resources and interacts with the other aircraft better. I'll not try to crush the dreams of those who really want a flyable four engine bomber! That said, it does seem that the B-26 Invader would at least make sense as an intermediate step. Anyway, we'll see how the bomber pack does.

[BlitzPig_EL]

The Invader would be far more useful for the majority of scenarios in Korea, and it could also work when/if we revisit WW2.

[Dash,Polder]

Twin engine bomber pack is a good test of the waters, if it sells well it just might work.

Have zero interest in purchasing them myself.  But an Invader or any Attack varient like a gun nosed A-20 is a sure thing for my hanger.

[sevenless]

5 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

The Invader would be far more useful for the majority of scenarios in Korea, and it could also work when/if we revisit WW2.

Yes. Douglas A-26 Invader would even work for the 1944/45 timeframe. They were used in the ETO by 9th Air Force from 9/44 onwards.

[Avimimus]

6 hours ago, Dash,Polder said:

Twin engine bomber pack is a good test of the waters, if it sells well it just might work.

Have zero interest in purchasing them myself.  But an Invader or any Attack varient like a gun nosed A-20 is a sure thing for my hanger.

I'm in that position too - if it has strafing capacity and/or rockets, I'm definitely more interested (maybe a bit too interested). 🙂 

I'd even prefer a 1943 scenario for the Pacific in some ways simply because the SBD could be equipped with gunpods at that point (and the TBMs received rockets around that time? Or was it '44?)

[MajorMagee]