Please no freak show Pyro...

[fscott]

You mentioned the Arado and the Ta152 in your latest news. Hrm... what I'm afraid of is feeling like I'm flying in a freak show sim of experimental planes. I do realize these planes were flown during actual combat time but the Ta152? It was only a prototype.

The perk system does not bother me, but I was hoping for a more conservative plane set such as the Spit 14, Dora9, P47m, Ki84.

Plese Pyro, we should take a vote not on what planes to include specifically, but whether or not we all want prototypes flying around. If you do that then there is no end to what prototypes you could include. I'm fine with any plane that was proven in actual combat such as the Me163.

Microsoft has already released Crimson Skies, we don't need abnother.

fscott

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by fscott:
You mentioned the Arado and the Ta152 in your latest news. Hrm... what I'm afraid of is feeling like I'm flying in a freak show sim of experimental planes. I do realize these planes were flown during actual combat time but the Ta152? It was only a prototype.

I'd ask you to stop this toejam. The Ta152H made aces and flew operationally in WWII. They were NOT prototypes,but front line planes, and were on full production when the war ended. That many of them weren't delivered to front line units doesnt make them prototypes. A Ta152C could be seen as that, a Ta152H clearly, not.

The Arado Ar234 was operational over normandy. Go figure its "prototype" status  

so,stop this crap please.

The perk system does not bother me, but I was hoping for a more conservative plane set such as the Spit 14, Dora9, P47m, Ki84.

And of course the P51. Isnt it?. No?. then let the Ki84 and the MW50 Fw190D9 out of the perk system. And maybe the SpitXIV and P47m too.

 

Plese Pyro, we should take a vote not on what planes to include specifically, but whether or not we all want prototypes flying around. If you do that then there is no end to what prototypes you could include. I'm fine with any plane that was proven in actual combat such as the Me163.

Name one Me163 ace. I will name one Ta152: Willi Reschke.

That proofs that you have no idea on what are you talking about, because the ME163 WAS a prototype. Rushed into combat until the allieds avoided flying over the Me163 bases, but still a prototype.

 

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 12-01-2000).]

[juzz]

Ta 152 was NOT a prototype; there were a fair number of pre-production H-0, and a handful of H-1 built and used in combat.

The Ar 234 also saw combat use in recon and bombing roles.

A prototype would be the M.B.5 or P-38K.

[fscott]

Well I'll admit then I had no idea that the Ta152 was an operational fighter, let alone it even had an ace. I thought I've read several places that the only time the Ta152 saw"combat" was when Kurt Tank had to run away from a squad of P51's. I would like to read about the combat reports of the Ta152 if you could direct me to somewhere on the web or a book.

I wasn't arguing the Ar234, I know it was a combat fighter. The Me163 from what I've read had numerous engagements in combat. I would venture to guess many more than a Ta152. More power to Pyro and friends then. If Ta152 saw real combat then include it.

fscott

 

[Yeager]

Do not forget the role these unique plane types can play in scenarios!

A perk system is definately needed but I would much much MUCH rather have a ROLLING PLANE SET.

Yeager

[Luke Skywalker]

 

Originally posted by Yeager:

A perk system is definately needed but I would much much MUCH rather have a ROLLING PLANE SET.

I definitely have to agree..PREACH ON!!!

Fdscott I have a link over here about a fight between Ta152s from JG301 and Tempests in may 1945...if I find it I will post it.


I dont see the use of a Ta152 on the Main arena, anyway, it was only a high altitude fighter.

------------------
Hey, dont shoot me! I'm on the light side!!
   

   



[This message has been edited by Luke Skywalker (edited 12-01-2000).]

[Wanker]

<banana sits down on the sofa, pours Ripsnort a cold one>

   

"Here Rip, have some popcorn"

   

[fscott]

Me again. I like followup posts.

Kill me but I like Warbirds planeset. There's something very strange about flying unproven airplanes in combat. When I'm flying a P47D-30, I'm thinking now here's what this plane can and can't do in combat cause I've read and ehard the pilots who flew them. There's also extensive data on it's preformance. SO when I'm flying the proven airplanes I feel good about the fact that what I am doing the plane could actually do in combat.

Now say I'm in a P51-H, we all know it was fast, but if I make some awesome maneuver and get the kill, how can I feel comfortable that this plane could really do this? I hope some of you guys understand what I'm saying.

"We want to fly what they flew."  It gives me a sense of accomplishing the same missions in the same planes.

As usual someone will misunderstand me.

fscott
 

[Ripsnort]

 

Originally posted by banana:
<banana sits down on the sofa, pours Ripsnort a cold one>

   

"Here Rip, have some popcorn"

   

<Rip graciously accepts the beer, popcorn, and smiles, sits back with an Artero Fuente jutting out of his jaw, and snickers...>  

[juzz]

 

Name one Me163 ace. I will name one Ta152: Willi Reschke.

That proofs that you have no idea on what are you talking about, because the ME163 WAS a prototype. Rushed into combat until the allieds avoided flying over the Me163 bases, but still a prototype.

The Me 163 was NOT a prototype. About 300 production model Me 163B-1 were built.

The Me 163 equipped I, II and III Gruppe of JG 400 When JG 400 was surrendered to the Allies it was equipped with 80 Me 163.

The first powered flight was over 2 years before it saw combat - hardly "rushed into combat".

 

Fdscott I have a link over here about a fight between Ta152s from JG301 and Tempests in may 1945...if I find it I will post it.

Here it is: http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/tempest.htm
click on "Pilots" on the left menu, and then "pilot stories" at the bottom of the drop-down menu that appears.

[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 12-01-2000).]

[Purzel]

Hi!

I understand your worries, ppl who are good at shooting others down will only get better.

That would imply that I will never get to fly any of these monsters  

And once a plane is ready no one will ever take it back out of the set I believe. So I think the only possibility to manage this is to raise and steady correct the amount of perk-point needed to fly these.

Imagine you can have a ME163. Surely a great plane to perforate some buff-formations, but not a fighter-vs-fighter-fighter  
How many of one country having x hard-earned-perk-points will risk them when they see some red dots approaching their HQ?
I know im a rook and often rooks do not really work together. But I dont know if its is really better in other countries.
I think the planes the most of us were looking for are "dogfighters".

So knowing that, just make these dogfighters more expensive. You wont have so many of them flying around at once, because only few can afford.

And WHEN u see one, it is prolly an ace, someone who would even shoot you down in a C.202. But not you and 10 of your fellow pilots at the same time, who are in desperate need to fly right this thing too one day  

Ace or not 10vs1 is no good...

I beleive such a thing with HTC watching over it will be pretty self-balancing.

But after all: It isnt out yet, so we can wait and see and invite our sheep for a BBQ   Oh, although Im the enemy, may I have a Beer too?  



------------------
CU

Purzel

--
"Find the enemy and shoot him down, everything else is nonsense!"
M. von Richthofen

[Ripsnort]

Heres the most important factor to weigh in:

Ripsnort: "Hey, just spotted a TA152 heading for A29"

Knights: Suddenly there are 10 knights climbing for alt to intercept a Perk Plane because what it is worth if destroyed, more perk points for you.

 

[Westy]

"Now say I'm in a P51-H, we all know it was fast, but if I make some awesome maneuver and get the kill, how can I feel comfortable that this plane could really do this?"

 The plane doesn't do the manevuer and the plane doesn't get the kill. You do, no matter what ride you are flying.  Now, just suppose the kill was a TA-152 or Tempest or P-47M/N? would you feel "guilty" then?    If you shoot down a 202, a 109-F or Spit-V while flying a 51D, 38L a "Niki" do you feel guilty now? No. So why would you feel guilty otherwise?

 They are not proposing adding in proto-types or one off freaks. Every plane in the aircraft forumn that Pyro polled us on was in deployment in 1945. Anyone who wants to argue "saw combat"/"didn't see combat" take a hike. It's not the point of his topic.
 And remember all. The war in Europe ended in May 1945. Not so for the Pacific.

 Should folks ask Pyro not to add the early war Polish, French or Dutch fighters because they too saw very little action for a very breif time too?
 
 -Westy

[Fury]

hmmm yea Rip, perk planes might be a good distraction tool.  Fly one around doing nothing, get 10-15 guys chasing you, and then your teammates go pound a few bases while the defenders are busy drooling all overthemselves trying to get a few points.

Fury

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by juzz:
The Me 163 was NOT a prototype. About 300 production model Me 163B-1 were built. ]

Juzz, we can argue about this all day long...but for me a plane that explodes while landing, melts down its pilots, and has more loses due its rocket&fuel combo than because enemy action can't be seen as a front line plane.

Me163 was a nightmare. for its pilots. Not so for the Allied. Again, hardly a "in service" plane.