IIRC no torpedo bombers ingame carry more than 1 torpedo, when historically the 45 onwards ones could.
While a couple of very late model torpedo bombers could theoretically carry 2 torps, no in-service carrier-based torpedo bomber carried more than 1 torpedo on actual missions, for various reasons (including scarcity/expense of the torps, range & handling issues, landing issues - you generally don't want to land with a torp, so if you have 2 torps & don't use them you have to jettison & waste 2 torps instead of 1, etc...)
As one late example, with the AD-4 Skyraider raid on the Hwachon Dam on May 1st 1951 during the Korean War, each aircraft only carried a single torpedo on the center-line, even though they could theoretically carry two (one under each inner-wing pylon).
extreme wall of text
TLDR: the bombentorpedo a very experimental german weapon which i cant find any combat reports or uses of
is in game and used by all nations non dive bombing planes with much better presumed effective ness than in real life and in real life was a dead end tech wise
yet double torpedo torpedo bombers are not allowed despite very much being a thing and are claimed as being "too theoretical" well as far as i can find american torpedo bombers havent been used after the war until post 60s
if things like motabomba FFF or bombentorpedo are added why are so many less experimental things not in game due to "experimental or theoretical"
still dosent change the fact that theoretically they could carry 2 or more torpedoes and would most likely have done so had the actual need arose (which it never did)last i looked the koreans in the 50s did not have a navy deserving of sending more than 1-3 torpedo bombers after and rockets could have solved that problem too and the dam certainly did not need more than 8 torpedoes
on top of this there could be a very large variety of reasons as to why no more than 8 torpedoes were taken for the 8 planes
such as 16 torpedoes is horrendously overkill
it reduces the air to air capability of the skyraider which at first might look bad but the skyraider could fight in the air and they actually had several kills even during the war in vietnam
considering that in 1950 the north koreans used old soviet fighters (la5s and so on) and mig15s i dont think the skyraider would be totally helpless
also yes i know 12 escort corsairs were sent with them (all of which had 0 payload hmm i wonder why)
fuel reasons and range perhaps using extra fuel of which carriers still had a limited amount of before resupplying to overkill the dam was not needed (more torpedoes=more weight)
or perhaps they wanted a longer range
there are an endless amount of factors here
on top of that torpedoes were literally never used during the war except against this dam basing torpedo capacity on a singular attack against a dam is not a good idea
i could take multiple times where the stuka used 250kg bombs and could from that assume that the stuka couldnt carry more than 250kg of bombs (spoiler it could)
same goes for the fw190-A8 i can find plenty of scenarios where only 250-500kg bombs were used on the fw190-A8 despite it being able to and often carrying a 1000kg bomb
basing torpedo capacity of a plane or for that matter max bomb capacity on a singular attack in which attack range and circumstances are not known is dumband since EVERY SINGLE BOMB IN GAME is treated as an AP bomb after said tech is unlocked (and naval strike is selected) are somehow also a torpedobomben which was a TOTALLY EXPERIMENTAL PIECE OF WEAPONRY of which i can find no combat reports or actual cases of use
why the torpedobomben tech exists in game baffles me it was a german "wunderweapon" which quite frankly had no use due to having very specific circumstances it would work in (like diving AP shells) but unlike japanese diving shells it never entered service in any large numbers
why you refuse to give torpedo bombers their
"theoretical" loadouts
yet give fighters and torpedo bombers bombs which
A never existed for anyone but the germans and in EXTREMELY limited quantity and postwar was a technological dead end
B makes bombs unrealistically more effective than they would be literally all near miss hits turn into torpedo hits
C somehow performs almost exactly as well as a similair weight AP bomb dropped from a dive bomber because why not bombentorpedoes concrete nose and HE bomb inside could totally rival the penetrative power of a dive bomb dropped AP bomb
and while the bombentorpedo could theoretically have entered service on masse it dident which is why every single nation in game post 1945 gets it and hey as you said
remove torpedobomben if you say double torpedoes on torpedo bombers is too unrealistic
honestly just sounds like selective choosing of what you want in game and what you dont want in game not based AT ALL on history oh and while we are on the topic of bombentorpedoes WHY THE HELL IS THE MOTABOMBA FFF A THING ?
why is that a piece of tech for carrier borne torpedoes ?
oh wow the italians used a pattern running torpedo which upon entering the water just circled in 4k yards
therefor we give torpedo bombers in game (which carry anti ship torpedoes designed to hit fast traveling maneuvering warships which carriers planes fight) a pattern running torpedo dropped via PARACHUTE and doing circles of 4k yards literally not traveling at all except for that circle
and again postwar use of the motabomba FFF turned into an anti submarine torpedo
why do we have bombentorpedoes but we lack stuff like the bat bomb for carrier borne planes ?
lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/uT88ImkFU1hxnhGrIu6LCtndEWZCD05a-T2wcRoLA6s9NDfuBYsceLFP0BEvq7GJSPTXu0rrA-Jwm8sjTgoh look helldiver with bat bomb
another one
i.imgur.com/9vP61CB.jpganother one and its being dropped
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/SB2C_dropping_ASM-N-2_guided_bomb_1946.jpgoh look a corsair with one
lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/lgBgBNS8B8awtVGiNH-wmCMTkVXNTo-0JUsZnjcmoxs05vFVtmjnS30HY0rVJyEu0ByyK1TsWGc_aZWSIQGC1VfHcdn-live.warthunder.com/uploads/db/79243230ff0fd44007772fa6b5bb6231a51f4c/f4upretty.jpgand it still dosent change the fact that alot of planes whether carrier borne or not carried 2 torpedoes
ALL of the japanese 4 engined floatplane bombers had a 2 torpedo or 2 800kg bomb capacity
the pby catalina had 2 hardpoints for either bombs or 2 torpedoes
the wellington could carry 2 torpedoes
he111 carried 2 torpedoes and used them quite a bit to sink transports and so on
all of these planes almost certainly did carry 2 torpedoes at some point
there is no reason why medium bombers and flying boats should NOT be able to carry them
of which the admiral in charge of their game could choose to absolutely not care and launch with 2 torpedoes
BUT HEY he also has the option of launching his strike with each plane carrying 1 torpedo in case he wants less operational losses (there is a reason why we have that in the first place right) if i am absolutely certain of where their fleet is (engaging with mine at gun range) i dont think my main concern will be "HMMM i might end up needing to dump torpedoes as i dont have enough targets"
if i was afraid of too few targets i would
A reduce strike size
B change the torpedo loadout from 2 to 1 per plane
there is literally 0 reason to NOT add dual torpedoes to the game you can give them handling (ready time) debuffs (10% longer readying time) give them higher operational loss rates and so on but there is literally 0 reason not to add them as you would still be able to go into the aircraft strike screenclicking right click on the squadron bomb loadout
clicking T (M1) from T (H2) and now you are using 1 torpedo instead of 2yes it turned out ranty because ive heard the nws team say so many times "we cant add that because it wasent used much historically" or "we dont know if they used that" or "theoretically it could be used but it wasent" despite said period of tech existing no wars it COULD be used in were going on
oh wow a weapon of war wasent used during peace color me surprised
yet we have motabomba FFF as ALL OUR AIRBORNE TORPEDOES and the bombentorpedo is a tech that exists
if you want to use the historical accuracy argument make sure the game is historically accurate to begin with
it is not right now there are several things which were prototype or not really used (or straight up would not work the way they do in game) which are in game and according to alot of statements you have made you dont want to add stuff like this
yet here some of them are in game