Plane I Would like to see #2 (Hs 129 article)

[Tails]

I guess you can count on one hand the number of people here who -want- tank-busters. Me being one of them. And this post is an excelent example of such.

[Furball]

Originally posted by Tails
I guess you can count on one hand the number of people here who -want- tank-busters. Me being one of them. And this post is an excelent example of such.

i like tankbusters.. i love Hurricane IID's.. i just dont want that tankbuster.

[Tails]

What's so bad about it? It has a spare engine, a -huge- gun, and crap visibility to compensate. Sounds like a balanced winner to me.

[Crumpp]

i just dont want that tankbuster.

So why rain on others fun??

Crumpp

[Furball]

Originally posted by Crumpp
So why rain on others fun??

Crumpp

i was only joking. sorry. was only mocking the pilots view from it

The stuka would be much more funn'er!

[mrniel]

Look like a german version of a Beaufighter.

but OK OK. If i can´t have my my Beau.

[Flyboy]

is seems that the current trend is favoring GVs (IE look at all the GV kills)

i think adding more potent tank busters will swing the balance back to planes. and make AH aces HIGH once again

[Wotan]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Yep.  Be a fun plane to fly and do some tank bustin in.

Crumpp

Tanks busting? Any .50 cal or Hizooka armed aircraft can 'tank bust'. Any plane with a bomb can be a ‘tank buster’. There is no 'Hs 129' gap in the plane set.

As I said just because a few folks think it's a 'cool' plane (and it is) doesn't mean it’s needed. There are many holes in the plane set. Filling any number of which would actually help improve game play in events, CT, and the upcoming ToD.

Adding the Hs 129 doesn't fill any of them.

I believe that it is important when people request a favorite plane to keep in mind that it took 4 years to get the planes AH has now. How much longer do we want to wait for an earlier p38? An earlier '38 is needed. It can be plugged into the CT and events right now.

The Hs 129 can't. There is no 'plane set' to do an eastern front set up. Even late war events like Niemen and Kurland had huge holes in the plane set. The only place where the Hs 129 will get any use at all is in the main. But there are better aircraft for 'tank busting'. The Hs 129 is slow large target that will make surviving in one almost impossible in the main setting. Besides the occasional 'let me give the Hs 129 a try' it will be a hangar queen. Even the IL2 in AH doesn't get used that much.

You see what they got to do in the CT to put a '43 ETO up. Use all '44 era planes. Imagine ToD '43 ETO with all p38ls, D11’s and P51bs, vs. the G-6...

With a match up like that no new player will do that for long. I think it’s important to point that out. Even in the ‘we need a p39’ thread I said the same thing I said here. I am not picking on the guys suggestion.

I don’t think I will be shutting any time soon in relation to such suggestions. I just don’t think planes like this add anything to the game right now. You can disagree all you want and argue as such. but I will argue my point as well.

[Crumpp]

Tanks busting? Any .50 cal or Hizooka armed aircraft can 'tank bust'. Any plane with a bomb can be a ‘tank buster’. There is no 'Hs 129' gap in the plane set.

Hitech will make his own decisions about the planeset.  Your not informing anyone of anything they do not already know.  It's a matter of where to start.  You think the "P38F" is the start point.  I am sure their are others who would beg to differ.  Facts are it is in HTC's hand and the planesets need alot of work to fill the gaps for a historical lineup.

I am sure Hitech is not going to rush into this thread, loose focus, drop everything, and start working on the Hs 129.   And I don't think anyone is claiming it needs to be done NOW.  It would be nice to see it on the long range agenda.

The Luftwaffe will need a dedicated Tankbuster for TOD eventually.  The Ju 87 does not offer any real advantages over the Hs 129 and FW-190 does not have the PB rockets.  It is as good a candidate as any when it comes time.  In fact, it might be better.  It certainly was better armoured than the Ju 87 and just as effective on tanks.  

I just don’t think planes like this add anything to the game right now.

There is the problem, Wotan. Read back over the thread, no one is saying add it in right now.  

Thanks Waffle for posting the article.  Great read!

Crumpp

[g00b]

Read up on "fair use"  of copyrighted material. I don't like FUD being spead about. Essentially if you are not depriving the copyright owner of income, you are in the clear. They may ask you to remove it, and you should do so. But they can't sue you for damages if there are none.

g00b

http://fairuse.stanford.edu

[moot]

Fair use or not, boards have been shut down because of it before.

[Karnak]

Wotan,

The AH armor model was changed a few patches ago.  The .50 cal no longer has any chance of killing a Pamzer or Tiger.  The Hispano can kill the engine or turret on the Panzer IV H if it is fired from 300 yards in a 45° dive.  It cannot hurt the Tiger I and will not be able to hurt the T-34/76.

The only effective aircraft in AH fro killing tanks with guns is now the IL-2.  The Hurri IID is simply too hard to use and rarely gets any kills.

Your claim about .50s and Hispanos is FUD at this point.

[g00b]

If it is truly "fair use" someone can not take action against a forums owner/operator. If it is not truly "fair use" than they  should remove the offending material if notified. In neither case is a forums owner/operator liable for damages unless they are depriving the copyright owner of income.

I don't think that's what's happening here. I see someone sharing some info with his friends for personal use. This is why they still allow photo-copiers in libraries. It's unfortunate that you are willing to give up your rights, and encourage others too as well, out of fear.

g00b


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. "

--- Benjamin Franklin

[Wotan]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Hitech will make his own decisions about the planeset.  Your not informing anyone of anything they do not already know.  It's a matter of where to start.  You think the "P38F" is the start point.  I am sure their are others who would beg to differ.  Facts are it is in HTC's hand and the planesets need alot of work to fill the gaps for a historical lineup.

I am sure Hitech is not going to rush into this thread, loose focus, drop everything, and start working on the Hs 129.   And I don't think anyone is claiming it needs to be done NOW.  It would be nice to see it on the long range agenda.

The Luftwaffe will need a dedicated Tankbuster for TOD eventually.  The Ju 87 does not offer any real advantages over the Hs 129 and FW-190 does not have the PB rockets.  It is as good a candidate as any when it comes time.  In fact, it might be better.  It certainly was better armoured than the Ju 87 and just as effective on tanks.  

 

There is the problem, Wotan. Read back over the thread, no one is saying add it in right now.  

Thanks Waffle for posting the article.  Great read!

Crumpp

First there have been 1000 suggestions for planes over the years. Some of them good; some bad. Posting an opposite position shows that not everyone agrees.

In the latest news Pyro said:

we need to think about what planes/vehicles we’ll be doing next.

Several other threads have popped up following this news with suggestions. Whether or not HTC will be swayed by any of these suggestions is open. You can't claim to know any more then the rest of us.

However, if they decide to look at what the guys in the community are asking for (like the Ki-84 and B24 requests seemed to have influenced them) then there's nothing wrong with offering a counter position.

My opinioned reply to waffle's suggestion was:

"It’s not a good choice for a plane (now or in the near future). There’s too much other stuff that needs to be modeled. After 4 years look the planes we have and look at the planes we need."

 I don't care whether you agree with my opinion or not. You quoted a guy telling me to 'shut up'.  Waffle stated his opinion, I stated my mine. It doesn't matter who you agree with it's not going to stop me from replying. That was the point of my reply to you.

FYI:

I used the '38 as an example not as a request. The '38 is just an obvious choice if HT is going to do an ETO set up for the 1st ToD theater.  I can think of about 10 other aircraft depending on the theater.

Just like your claim that A-8s were serialized with GM-1 and MW-50, and C3 was never used in the D9, I am sure you will learn at some point that PB rockets were extremely rare and not widely used on the 190. But that’s another thread.

Goob,

Fair use generally doesn't mean you can scan whole books, articles etc and put on them in full on the internet.

Waffle says he has permission, if so great. Either way my caution is valid. As I said other forums have been closed for copy right issues. Of the 4 years I have been in AH this is the 1st time I have seen anyone post full scanned articles on this forum and thought it wise to pass on a word of caution. Take it with a grain of salt.

The problem posting on an open forum is it goes beyond sharing with friends for personal use. Everyone and anyone can come here and save those scans.  A few pages here and there maybe ok.

Karnak,

The last thing I did before I left AH was strafe a p4 with a D11 and knocked its turret out. This was on Furball Island on the NDisles. There has not been an update since then. They do not 'explode' mbt's any more; that changed back in AH1.

[Crumpp]

Just like your claim that A-8s were serialized with GM-1 and MW-50, and C3 was never used in the D9, I am sure you will learn at some point that PB rockets were extremely rare and not widely used on the 190. But that’s another thread.

Sure glad your here to keep us all straight, Wotan!




Crumpp