Author Topic: planes we need  (Read 1823 times)

Offline Sikboy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6702
planes we need
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2007, 03:59:23 PM »
Judy, Judy, Judy

-Sik
You: Blah Blah Blah
Me: Meh, whatever.

Offline Odee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
      • 49th Fighter Group
planes we need
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2007, 04:07:36 PM »
Zorstorer, how true... how true.

Tedrbr, I started to say Them's pretty harsh words coming from a guy with the A-26 avatar, but my knee jerk is slower these days.

However, I do not like the partial quote on my B-25 comment.  If you're going to quote as a slap, then include the entire thing with highlights.
Quote
B-25 we need for Doolittle raids, and as American counter part for those that can't seem to fly the Mossie. Besides, I'm kind of fond of her too.


 That said, I still think the 25 is much needed in game, as a low to medium level/range buff. Make the H model with all those guns in the nose to supplement the Mossie, and A-20 at the least.

And Benny,"No",  the A-20 does not fill the role of the A-26 in any way, shape, or manner.

If I had any pull for the Allies plane set, I'd be pushing for the B-25C and H, as well as the A-26B...  Alas, I am but a small voice in the winds of change.

~Nobodee~   Get Poached!
Elite: Dangerous ~ Cmd Odeed

http://www.luxlibertas.com/

Offline Benny Moore

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
planes we need
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2007, 12:36:32 AM »
Easily the most important fighter which we do not now have in Aces High II is the P-39.  So if I were to vote for one airplane, it would be that.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
planes we need
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2007, 01:38:42 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Benny Moore
Easily the most important fighter which we do not now have in Aces High II is the P-39.  So if I were to vote for one airplane, it would be that.

One could make very strong counter arguments in favor of the Ki-43, the I-16-24, the Yak-1 and the Yak-7.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Raptor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7577
planes we need
« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2007, 02:13:21 AM »
Tedr is rather narrow minded if you ask me...

We've had the P51s, P47s, B17, 109s, 190s, spits, and f4u's all remodelled in the past 2 years. With the addition of the P47N, Spit8 and Spit16, F4U-1A, and Jeep. With the P38L having been remodelled with the addition of the P38G, P38J, B24, Ki84 and T34 the prior year.

We don't *need* any new perk planes. Perk planes are just that... a perk to the game. We *need* more representative planes of country planesets.

B25: very likely to be added. HTC is in full swing CT mode at the moment, so it is not likely to happen anytime soon. B25 would not be desregarded just because a some people would want to up it from a cv... It would be used off of the CV.... but only in the SEA.

HE-111: Again, this is likely to be added in the foreseeable future. At the moment we have 3 German bombers, one is a perk bomber and the other two are early war models. HE-111 would fill a large gap in part of the German planeset.

Ju-188: Again, there is a large gap in the German planeset this could fill. The He-111 would also be classified as early war, the Ju-188 would be a later war German bomber that wouldn't be a perk ride.

D4Y Judy: We desperately need some more representative Japanese planes, especially bombers. Scenarios start to lack a lot when you have use D3As and B5Ns as primary Japanese bombers for every special event.

P39 would be a nice addition that would probably see decent use and fill gaps in both the US and Soviet planesets (two birds with one stone)

With the recent changes to AA guns in the Main Arena, I don't think we *need* the 88mm flak anymore. I would have said "ok that's understandable prior to the AA changes, but now it takes a lot to get near an enemy airfield without the 88mm flak.

The A26 isn't *needed* I know you are all set on the A26, but it doesn't have that significant of a role in WWII to claim we need it as much as you say. As far as needing another perk bomber, fine, in that case yes we could use it. But we do not desperately need it, and I wont shed any tears if it isn't added anytime soon.

I would add the Oscar and Betty to the list of *needed* planes.





Benny Moore is even more narrow minded... Benny is too set on US planes. I myself prefer US planes over other nation's planes, but Benny takes it to another level sometimes...

Offline Odee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
      • 49th Fighter Group
planes we need
« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2007, 09:08:36 AM »
From "Raising an Invader"

The A-26 Invader had one of the longest service lives of any American warplane, serving in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. Designed and manufactured by the Douglas Aircraft Company, it first flew in 1942 but due to production delays was not used operationally until 1944. With 22 50 caliber machine guns the A-26 had the most awesome concentrations of firepower of any World War II aircraft. Unlike the B-17, B-25 and B-24 bombers, the A-26 used remote controlled gun turrets above and below the airframe. The remote turrets solved the problem of wind buffet and also allowed the guns to swing faster than possible with hand held guns. Tasked with the job of disrupting German logistical support routes, the 47th BG flying the A-26 flew around the clock and did pioneer work in night interdiction against enemy supply routes. Losses were relatively light, thanks to the beefy airframe, and on numerous occasions severely damaged aircraft made it home safely. Production of the type ceased at the end of World War II with a total of 2,450 manufactured. It was the last twin engine propeller driven bomber to be built for the US Air Force.  

I still advocate the A-26 for Late War era, over any other Allied buff.  Hey, the lady has more than paid her dues, and deserves her place in Historical Gaming... don't you think? ;)
~Nobodee~   Get Poached!
Elite: Dangerous ~ Cmd Odeed

http://www.luxlibertas.com/

Offline Benny Moore

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
planes we need
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2007, 12:43:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Raptor
Benny Moore is even more narrow minded... Benny is too set on US planes. I myself prefer US planes over other nation's planes, but Benny takes it to another level sometimes...


I don't get it.  Of the airplanes I picked that I think we need, one was American and the other two were German.  I also consider the Me-109 the most needed fighter in an aerial combat simulator.

But yes, I did forget about the Oscar.  So, in amendment, I'd say that it's a toss-up between the P-39 and the Ki-43 for most needed fighter.  Karnak, we already have a Yak, what's up with that?  Since we have a very capable Yak, let an airplane that doesn't have any model in.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2007, 12:45:42 PM by Benny Moore »

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
planes we need
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2007, 12:55:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Benny Moore
 Karnak, we already have a Yak, what's up with that?  Since we have a very capable Yak, let an airplane that doesn't have any model in.


We are also missing some of important Yak models, such as Yak-9 standard and Yak-3.  We don't have a Yak-9 standard with just 20mm nose cannon.  The Yak-9 standard with 20mm nose cannon is the most produced Soviet fighter at that time.  I'm not talking about the Yak-9U, i'm basically talking about introducing a Yak with Yak-9T's engine armed with 20mm nose cannon.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2007, 12:58:22 PM by 1K3 »

Offline SuBWaYCH

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1730
planes we need
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2007, 01:09:04 PM »
If you ask me, HE-111 bomber is highly needed in this game. I also have a suggestion which no one has made so far. The P-40B should be thrown out of game. We move the P-40E up to 40 on the eny and put in P-40N. This would help in things like FSO, since P-40E was almost obsolete by the time Tunisia rolled around. We put P-40N on eny of 25, since it was considerably better then the P-40E in all areas. If you like my idea, r-e-p-l-y




###############Everyone's Hero##############:aok :aok :aok
Axis C.O. for Battle of the Dnieper, Winter '43

Air superiority is a condition for all operations, at sea, on land, and in the air. - Air Marshal Arthur Tedder

364th Chawks

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
planes we need
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2007, 01:32:27 PM »
Why remove the P-40B?

That is moronic.

They could just add the P-40N if they wanted to, there is no reason to remove the P-40B.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
planes we need
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2007, 02:56:17 PM »
Also if P-39 is introduced, The P-39D should be classified as a U.S. plane and P-39Q-30 should be classified as a USSR plane.  P-39Q-30 only flew for Soviets and that variant is basically a Soviet request to remove armor, remove wing guns, and overboost the engine to improive low- alt performance.

Offline tedrbr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
planes we need
« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2007, 05:56:13 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Raptor
Tedr is rather narrow minded if you ask me...

We've had the P51s, P47s, B17, 109s, 190s, spits, and f4u's all remodelled in the past 2 years. With the addition of the P47N, Spit8 and Spit16, F4U-1A, and Jeep. With the P38L having been remodelled with the addition of the P38G, P38J, B24, Ki84 and T34 the prior year.

We don't *need* any new perk planes. Perk planes are just that... a perk to the game. We *need* more representative planes of country planesets.

B25: very likely to be added. HTC is in full swing CT mode at the moment, so it is not likely to happen anytime soon. B25 would not be desregarded just because a some people would want to up it from a cv... It would be used off of the CV.... but only in the SEA.

HE-111: Again, this is likely to be added in the foreseeable future. At the moment we have 3 German bombers, one is a perk bomber and the other two are early war models. HE-111 would fill a large gap in part of the German planeset.

Ju-188: Again, there is a large gap in the German planeset this could fill. The He-111 would also be classified as early war, the Ju-188 would be a later war German bomber that wouldn't be a perk ride.

D4Y Judy: We desperately need some more representative Japanese planes, especially bombers. Scenarios start to lack a lot when you have use D3As and B5Ns as primary Japanese bombers for every special event.

P39 would be a nice addition that would probably see decent use and fill gaps in both the US and Soviet planesets (two birds with one stone)

With the recent changes to AA guns in the Main Arena, I don't think we *need* the 88mm flak anymore. I would have said "ok that's understandable prior to the AA changes, but now it takes a lot to get near an enemy airfield without the 88mm flak.

The A26 isn't *needed* I know you are all set on the A26, but it doesn't have that significant of a role in WWII to claim we need it as much as you say. As far as needing another perk bomber, fine, in that case yes we could use it. But we do not desperately need it, and I wont shed any tears if it isn't added anytime soon.

I would add the Oscar and Betty to the list of *needed* planes.



Nice.

Wasn't aware of some of those remodeled planes over the past two year time frame.  Been playing about 1-1/2 years.  I should have remembered the latest Jug and Spit XVI.  My mistake.


* Perk Bomber Ride:  I argue for an additional perk plane for bomber drivers, due to complaints about buff drivers who "bomb and bail" or otherwise operate in a suicidal manner.  Part of the problem may be argued that the only perk bomber is the Ar-234, and not all buff drivers like the Arado.  No need for bomber perks if you don't fly the Arado.
Some argue for perking bomb load, or perking drones, or perking more of the existing bombers.  I counter that rather than gimping existing rides, that adding what was a popular plane in another venue, that is a perk worthy ride, to the plane set is a better answer.  
What I see are perk worthy planes are the B-29, the A-26, and the He-177 with guided ordnance.  Since the A-26 had so many configurations (as well as B and C versions), did not use guided ordnance, and does not have the heavy load out and high speed/altitude of the B-29 (as well as nook controversy), it is the one I push.
If there were another non-U.S. Allied or Axis bomber that I saw as being a perk-worthy addition to the game, I would argue for it, as the U.S. bomber line is pretty well represented already.  


* B-25:  as stated, only reason I push the A-26 is as a perk ride.  Otherwise, the U.S. planeset and bomber lineup are already pretty well represented sompared to the rest.
 
If the question or effort is in filling out the planeset, then I would agree that the He-111 for EW SEA and AvA events (BoB) would be a good choice.  The He-188 a good choice.  Petlyakov Pe-2, Bristol Beaufighter, Handley Page Halifax, Nakajima Ki 43 Hayabusa, Ilyushin Il-4 or Il-10,  Fiat G.55, Oscar or Betty.  More Yaks?  A MiG?  P-39 and P63 - even though American designs - were far more heavily used by the Soviets (1/2 of all P39's, nearly all P63's produced went to Soviets), so if adding the Bell plane, I'd argue for the Soviet version.  There are SEA and AvA (and possibly ToD) reasons  to bring some of them in, among other planes that could be considered, which also benefit the few pilots that fly EW and MW arenas.


* D4Y Judy - not only a needed addition to the small Japanese plane set, but a more effective plane for the carrier-borne plane set.


* 88mm Flak.  Not just a supplement to additional flak in game.  The FlaK36 was used as a tank killer, long range direct fire, indirect artillery fire, as well as high altitude AA.  It gives the GVr's an additional light perk ride; and I admit, in order to prevent over use, it's weak defense, poor maneuverability, and light perk cost are part of the package.  It is a unique multi role addition to the GV set.  Brings puff ack back to airfields and bases.  Not necessarily a "need", but a addition that is different from all existing ones.   Can be entered from EW onward.  It mixes things up a little.


Narrow minded?  The resource drain is ToD.  Remodeling existing planes also considered a priority.  I see any new additions as probably being few and far between, so I try to find and suggest additions that meet multiple goals.  If we might see more than a very few additions, if any, in the next few years, all the better.   I don't see 5 additions and over a dozen remodels coming in the next two years, but I am willing to be pleasantly wrong.  If you could see just 2 additions in the next 2 years, what would they be?

Offline Benny Moore

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
planes we need
« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2007, 08:50:31 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 1K3
We are also missing some of important Yak models, such as Yak-9 standard and Yak-3.  We don't have a Yak-9 standard with just 20mm nose cannon.  The Yak-9 standard with 20mm nose cannon is the most produced Soviet fighter at that time.  I'm not talking about the Yak-9U, i'm basically talking about introducing a Yak with Yak-9T's engine armed with 20mm nose cannon.


It's quite simple.  If you already have a model of one airplane, and you only have room for one other airplane, rather than getting another model of the airplane you already have, get another that we need more.  Having two Yaks and one P-39 is better than having three Yaks.

Offline Sikboy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6702
planes we need
« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2007, 08:59:10 AM »
Benny, by that logic we should have one of each plan before adding a second of any?

I agree that the P39 is an important addition (Well, I'd advocate the P-400 since the M4 was a total POS, though with the .50s and .303s it might still find some love), but I don't see it as any more deserving than the Yak-9m, or Yak-1.

Of course, both planes take a back seat to Judy.

-Sik
You: Blah Blah Blah
Me: Meh, whatever.

Offline Husky01

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4844
planes we need
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2007, 10:15:30 PM »
We i want a F16
But where NOT going to get a F16

Sign

only dreams :cry
BearKats
9GIAP VVS RKKA