This covers "jet" type aircraft nicely.

But we still only have a transport helicopter equivalent.

I think there should be a Gunship to go with Dropships - smaller, with a focus on combat instead of transport capabilities.

The point of having the bomber vulnerable to fighter is to promote teamwork and force fighters to escort them to their are where they can deliver their payload. Though due to the nature of Dust, all planes will be customizable so you can have a stealth bomber equipped as a fighter and a fighter equipped as a bomber

The issue is that bombers wouldn't be usable unless you were fighting alongside your corp. They would need to be more versatile, and able to defend themselves to at least some degree for when they don't have support. I'm not suggesting they be able to easily knock out aircraft, just have a means of dealing some damage so that a skilled pilot has a fighting chance when his team of randoms won't help him out as he's trying to clear out an objective from the air.

There will have to be a lot of adjusting when it comes to the strength of the bomber where theyll keep changing it from being underpowered to overpowered untill they find a balance and I think that will be a problem with the bomber

I think a way to balance the power of bombers would be to have AA guns fitted on bomber that can be controlled by other players so that they can shoot down other planes. The bomber wouldnt be as powerful against aircraft as a fighter due to the lack of manoeuvrability. There would also be less powerful weaponry as CPU and PG would be taken up by the bombing modules and payload

I think the issue here is you're thinking more B52 where I'm thinking more F14. The heavy, carpet-bombing style bomber has all but been phased out in modern times, how much more so in the future? Modern fighter-bombers can pack such a wallop, there's no need for cumbersome aircraft anymore. If you took a Flying Fortress and beefed it up with EVE tech, then slapped it in a battlefield, you'd be looking more at a OB-esque ground attack, blasting a huge area.

A fighter-bomber just makes more sense. More survivable, more fun, more fitting, IMO.

The problem with that is that what would be the point of using a fighter when you could have the manoeuvrability and AA skills of a fighter and be able to bomb people?
I'm not thinking of a B52 but a slower jet with a large payload. The reason it would be slower is because it would be sacrificing CPU and PG for the bombing module and would therefore not be able to equip as large an engine. I guess it could be considered a fighter bomber but I do want it to be significantly less powerful than a fighter so that a player has to make a choice.

And while we're on the subject of bombers, what's your view on my stealth bomber idea?

Well, the fighter-bomber would have have a bombing module, the only thing it could use against aircraft would be blasters. The fighter would have missiles (perhaps lock ons?) in addition to blasters, in addition to better maneuverability. Not too much better, but definitely a difference.

I do like the idea of stealth bombers, as I prefer to play more covertly. Would only really work if the bomber had to decloak in order to drop its payload, similar to cloaking in EVE. Otherwise it could become too powerful.

I suppose that in 20k AD there will be a equivalent of Helicopters.
Anyway I would love to have Hoover Jets for sure: that would remove the need for Future Helicopters.

1. Bomber
A plane that can target areas to bomb with a heavy payload, medium speed and relatively high amounts of shield and armor. Can take out tanks, infantry and possibly building if a destructible environment is put into place. You should be able to select it's payload, engine, modules etc. These bombers would be really useful especially if their team could mark places to strike with electronic markers.

2. Fighters
A faster plane who specializes in being able to take out other planes. They would be fast but have weapons that are only really effective against other aircraft in dogfighting. Their primary use would be to defend against bombers or escort bombers to deliver their payload.

3. Stealth Bombers.
Bombers should have a cloaking device and a much larger payload than the standard bomber but they sacrifice their shields to power the cloaking device. Also, as they move, you can see a slight shimmer in the air so it is possible to see them without sensors. The planes can be detected with sensors that can be fitted on to other planes and I think these sensors should work so that Tier 1 sensors can detect Tier 1 cloaking, Tier 2 sensors can detect Tier 2 cloaking etc.

I'd love to hear your ideas on this

Bomber +1

Fighters +1

SB +...

I think the SB should have to decloak to do anything like the covert ops ships in EVE.

If they can attack while cloaked, that's going to get over powered abuse from everyone.

I did mention later that they had to travel under a certain speed and if they used modules or weapons, they would have to decloak. I think that stealth bombers would be a little trial and error to get the right amount of power. Also you have to consider that the stealth bomber will be expensive and would require a lot of skills so they wont be that popular

then +1

sounds good to me

bump?

Since the topic has been brought up; gonna throw in my two cents quick. Personally, I think aircraft should take more of a gunship type role. A VTOL type aircraft with mechanics similar to the drop ship except outfitted and designed for combat purposes. It almost seems to me that a more traditional aircraft along a traditional design like has been suggested here would require larger maps. I'm assuming that speed would be one of their greater assets similar to the battlefield series. I can't imagine maps around the size of what we presently have would support 'fast movers' of that nature. I'd suggest that they make them more like helicopter gunships. The concept would even seem to fit better with the idea that the players are independent mercenaries more so than a component of an organized military structure. A VTOL gunship concept requires less infrastructure to support and can be transported into and out of combat zones with a mobile force more effectively. Obviously, more traditional straight wing aircraft require airfields or carriers, which as I am understanding the back story, is not necessarily under the direct control of the Dust mercenaries. At best, it would imply more direct support and involvement from EVE players or organizations for those type of aircraft from a background perspective.