« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Spit and 109 Update  (Read 3943 times)

Offline Pooface

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2520
Spit and 109 Update
« on: July 11, 2005, 05:30:46 PM »
ok, once work begins on the spits and 109's, i think we need to look at the models. i would hope that the list looks like this:

Spits

spit1
spit5 - downgrade the engne power
spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package
NEW, spit lf 9e - clipped wing, with low alt rated engine, 50 cal setup
spit14 - upgrade performance a little, bring down the perk price, because it doesnt turn well at low alt and speed, which is the main advantage of the spits. it a high alt fighter, and has no real need for a heavy perk
NEW, spit 16

109's

109e4
109f4
109g2
109g6
NEW, 109g14
109g10 - we all know its the best buff hunter in the game, but people use it as a fighter, and run coz it cant turn. we could reduce this by changing the eny.
NEW, 109k4


anyone elses thoughts. (sorry, i dont know much about the 109's :))
Logged

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2005, 06:26:54 PM »
(Ahem! Remove Seafire II and add Seafire L III)

:D

nice list though
---------------------------------------------------
spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package

Early spitfire 9s were basically spitfire 5 airframe with more powerful merlin 61 engine. I think HTC will need 2 spitfire 9s for mid war (F. IX) and late war (LF. IX).
« Last Edit: July 11, 2005, 06:34:04 PM by 1K3 »
Logged

Offline Pooface

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2520
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2005, 06:48:11 PM »
oh yeah, forgot about that:lol

no need to remove the seafire 2, its good to have a variety. but yes, SF3 needs to be added, and ty ike:aok
Logged

Offline Pooface

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2520
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2005, 06:51:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 1K3

spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package

Early spitfire 9s were basically spitfire 5 airframe with more powerful merlin 61 engine. I think HTC will need 2 spitfire 9s for mid war (F. IX) and late war (LF. IX).


yeah, thats what i meant. f9 for earlier, which should only have a 303 option, but the performance needs to be tweaked up a bit. at the moment its only 5 mph faster than the 5 :)

then add LF9 as a later war plane with clipped wings, and only a 50cal/cannon loadout
Logged

Offline Messiah

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
      • http://www.theblueknights.com
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2005, 07:04:17 PM »
spit5 - downgrade the engne power
spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package
Why?

109g10 - we all know its the best buff hunter in the game, but people use it as a fighter, and run coz it cant turn. we could reduce this by changing

I disagree on the statement that the g10 can't turnfight well.
Logged
Messiah(The O.G.)
The Blue Knights

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2005, 07:21:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Messiah
spit5 - downgrade the engne power
spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package
Why?

109g10 - we all know its the best buff hunter in the game, but people use it as a fighter, and run coz it cant turn. we could reduce this by changing the ENY

I disagree on the statement that the g10 can't turnfight well.


Downgrade engine power for Spitfire Mk. 5  to +12 boost (standard in 1941)  because our current spit 5 doesnt represent its correct timeframe... 1941. Our spit 5 (with +16 boost) is based on 1942, at the time when spit 9s were more common.
-----------------------------
Evolution of Spitfires

1940: Spitfire 1a
1941: Spitfire 5 (standard +12 booost)
1942: Spitfire F. 9 (early spit 9 mark)
1943: Spitfire 8, Spitfire LF 9
1944-45: Spitfire 14, Spitfire LF 16
Logged

Offline Pooface

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2520
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2005, 07:45:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Messiah
spit5 - downgrade the engne power
spit9 - upgrade engine. get rid of 50 cals package
Why?

109g10 - we all know its the best buff hunter in the game, but people use it as a fighter, and run coz it cant turn. we could reduce this by changing

I disagree on the statement that the g10 can't turnfight well.


irl, the difference between the 5 and 9 were quite big. the 5 wasnt as powerful as that for a long time, and the 9 was a lot more powerful than it is now. our 9 is set as an earlier war variant, so there should not be a 50 setup. then, we introduce a LF9, which is a later version, which has 50cals, and clipped wings, with a merlin created specifically for low fighting, which is also more powerful than the 9 we have now.

i would then suggest perk prices as follows

seaf2c 25
seaf3 20
spit1 60
spit5 20
F spit9 15
Lf spit 9 10
spit14 5
spit16 5, or quite low

oh, and btw, i dont think that the g10 cant turn fight, but most people dont use it that way. it is a very high performance plane - high speed, amazing climb, amazing guns, good armour, good fuel endurance. all around amazing plane. giving it an eny of 20 while the very un spitlike spit14 is perked and has eny of 5!!!. thats silly. g10 should have a lower eny
« Last Edit: July 11, 2005, 07:49:12 PM by Pooface »
Logged

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2005, 09:53:12 PM »
At a minimum I would like to see added:

Spitfire LF.Mk VIIIc (full span, universal wing, Merlin 66 at +18lbs boost)
Bf109G-14 (Bf109G-6 with MW50, top speed about 420mph, fills the gap between the Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-10)
Boost on the Spitfire Mk V reduced to +12lbs boost.


Here is the complete Spitfire lineup I'd really like to see:

Here is my prefered list:

1940: Spitfire Mk Ia (increase performance to +12lbs boost levels)

1941-1942: Spitfire Mk Vc, +12lbs boost (120 rounds per cannon, but reduce the boost to 1941 levels so Merlin 45 at +12lbs boost)

1942-1943: Spitfire F.Mk IXc (remove the options for the .50 cals, rockets and 250lb bombs, otherwise keep it as it is with Merlin 61 at +15lbs boost.)

1943-1944: Spitfire LF.Mk VIII (Merlin 66 at +18lbs boost, full length Universal wings. Can stand in for the 1943 LF.Mk IX as well as be suitable for Med. and Pac. theatre usage)

1944-1945: Spitfire F.Mk XIV, +21lbs boost (Keep the armament options, but raise the boost to the +21lbs level to justify it's perked status and keep it as the ultimate Spitfire in AH)

1944-1945: Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe, +25lbs boost (clipped wing and perhaps bubble canopy as the Mk VIII is available to stand in for the high back Mk IX in 1943/44. This would be the ultimate free Spitfire)

Royal Navy: Seafire L.Mk III (the most common wartime Seafire)


In total those six Spitfires and one Seafire give the most comprehensive coverage of Spitfires/Seafires that saw service in WWII while keeping the total number of units to a minimum.

See this recent thread for an extensive discussion about it:
Suggested, complete Spitfire lineup for Aces High
« Last Edit: July 11, 2005, 10:04:06 PM by Karnak »
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline TheThang

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 280
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2005, 12:43:30 AM »
pooface is a true spitdweeb =D
Logged

Offline Seeker

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #9 on: July 12, 2005, 06:39:34 AM »
"NEW, spit 16 "

AFAIK; Spit XVI was merely a normal Spit IX powered by a Packard built Merlin. It would be redundant.
Logged

Offline Dead Man Flying

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6301
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2005, 08:33:16 AM »
I think people forget that the +12 Spit V was still a very good plane.  All the complaints about the extra boost are much ado about nothing.  Whether the Spit V is at +12 or +16, it's going to anger and disappoint a select group of you no matter what.  Yes, that means it's still going to beat up your planes, steal your girlfriends, and key your cars.

-- Todd/Leviathn
Logged

Offline Pooface

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2520
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2005, 09:35:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Seeker
"NEW, spit 16 "

AFAIK; Spit XVI was merely a normal Spit IX powered by a Packard built Merlin. It would be redundant.


bubble canopy and more power than the 9, also had option for clipped wings
Logged

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2005, 09:53:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Seeker
"NEW, spit 16 "

AFAIK; Spit XVI was merely a normal Spit IX powered by a Packard built Merlin. It would be redundant.


Spit 9 and 16 are very different (check the engine ratings;))

Spit 9 and 16 will be different using karnak's list. In the list, Spit 9 will be presented as a  "stopgap aircraft" (1942) untill the spit 8 comes in full production (1943). Spit 16 will be the ultimate merlin powered spits, Just like the planned Bf-109G-14.

 

Quote
1942-1943: Spitfire F.Mk IXc (remove the options for the .50 cals, rockets and 250lb bombs, otherwise keep it as it is with Merlin 61 at +15lbs boost.)

1943-1944: Spitfire LF.Mk VIII (Merlin 66 at +18lbs boost, full length Universal wings. Can stand in for the 1943 LF.Mk IX as well as be suitable for Med. and Pac. theatre usage)


1944-1945: Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe, +25lbs boost (clipped wing. This would be the ultimate free Spitfire)
Logged

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2005, 11:36:47 AM »
1K3,

Well, the Spitfire LF.Mk IX and Spitfire LF.Mk XVI are the same aircraft, other than the British Merlin 66 in the Mk IX and the American Merlin 266 in the Mk XVI, and those are the same engine except for where they were built.  By the time the Mk XVI was in service the Mk IX's were at +25lbs boost as well.

In terms of AH it is an easy thing to use the LF.Mk IX and LF.Mk XVI to separate out the 1943 and 1944/45 performance of the LF.Mk IX while still enableing HTC to use simple mark numbers to identify them like the current Spitfire Mk IX is identified as a Spitfire Mk IX instead of as a Spitfire F.Mk IXc.

Which brings me to the reasons I did not include the Spitfire LF.Mk IX in my list.  1) Keeping the simple mark identification meant that to have a Spitfire LF.Mk IX in AH it would preclude the Spitfire F.Mk IX and that would leave 1942 coverage bare. 2) The Spitfire LF.Mk IX would leave the CBI and Pacific Theaters without a representative Spitfire.  3) The Spitfire LF.Mk VIII would solve both point 1 and 2 and still be a suitable substitute for the Spitfire LF.Mk IX for European or Mediteranean theater settings.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Kurfürst

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 921
      • http://www.kurfurst.org
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2005, 12:21:10 PM »
IMHO, counterparts with good balance :
1939
Spit I, 2-pitch, 87 octane vs. Bf 109E-3

1940
Spit I, CS, 100 octane vs. Bf 109E-4/N or E-7/N

1941
Spit Vb, +12lbs, vs. 109F-2 MG151/15

1942
Spit Vc, +16lbs vs. 109F-4 MG 151/20 at 1.42ata :cool:
Spit IXF Merlin 61/+15, vs. 109G-2
Perhaps G-2 would suffice instead of F-4/1.42, as they are similiar in performance and 109G was more typical

1943
Spit VIIILF, +18, vs. Bf 109G-6 at 1.42ata, opt. glass head armor

1944/45
Spit IX/XVI at +25 vs Bf 109G-14 with MW50. optional MK 108
Spit XIV +18 vs. G-10/1.8ata with MG 151/20. Also stands for G-6/AS and G-14/AS.
Spit XIV +21 vs. K-4 at 1.98ata and MK 108

This would bring a very balanced Spit vs. Messer setup.
Logged
The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site
http://www.kurfurst.org
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 8   Go Up
« previous next »