Does Number of aircraft produced matter to AH?

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by Knegel
There is more out there than the MA.

The HurriIa, SpitIa, 109E, F4F, A6M´s and even the Yak9T, 109G6 and SpitV need somewhat masochistic pilots, or at least very good pilots to survive in the MA, but there are the events and the H2H limited setups where this planes get used rather often.

Yes, I agree that there is more out there than the "MA".  The SEA has some good matches.  AvA has nice maps.  Both of them, and EW and MW arenas, suffer from drawing a very small portion of the overall player base.  The paying player base is concentrated in the two LW arenas, which is why I brought up the fact that HTC has a business model to follow and player base to support if they want them to keep being paying customers.  Until a sizable chunk of the player base discovers that there is more than the LW arena, there is only so much time and resources that can be invested in the EW and SEA development --- and adding player content, that most players will come in contact with, is important to keeping players interested over time.

I don't believe in the "build it and they will come" argument for the EW arena..... I don't care how many EW planes get added, I don't see that being a draw to EW arena by a significant percentage of the players, most of whom fly LW rides in LW arenas most of the time.  They want their "uber-ride" crutches.  

The P39 simply miss the good success and reputation of the N1K, Ki84, F4U-4, Temp, Ta152H and even F4F and P40. Of course the VVS aces did like this plane, but if we see the high losts of the VVS with their other main fighters(I-16, Yak1/7/9, La5, La5F and even La5FN), the P39 had to offer something(specialy regarding its cockpit layout, radio, guns etc), while the brit´s and American´s mainly took their other planes over it.  Maybe the P40 and F4F was in he same class, but the P40 had its big success with the Flying Tigers and the F4F was the Navys backbone while the critical years of the PTO.  

Well, Americans and Brits disregarded the P-39 because it was not a good high altitude plane..... it preformed best down low, which worked fine for the VVS on their front.  A part of the reason the P39 and P63 don't have the reputation is probably because over 1/2 the P-39's and nearly all of the P-63's that saw combat did so under the VVS, but Russia tended to downplay equipment from Lend Lease and promote the things they made themselves in the War effort (yak, la's, IL-2's...).

[Krusty]

I wouldn't say SEA participation is as insignificant as AvA or EWA arenas...

The SEA gets packed with 300+ on scenarios, has up to 200+ during FSOs every Friday, packs in folks on Wednesday Snapshots and pretty much has a high attendance no matter what goes on in there.

It just doesn't have any outside of that schedule.


SEA is as big as MA. Trust me!

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Larry
I wouldnt say they were "picked with little thought to production nmbers". More of a we need a so and so type of plane. Or ones that are popular. I dont see the I-16 coming to AH unless we ever have a Operation Barbarossa CT. Two .30cal MGs arent for MA use.

The Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 carried 2x20mm cannons, more than sufficient for MA use.

[tedrbr]

I'd agree with SEA being more fun that the LW arenas often enough.
And it has far better maps and tiles available. Scenarios are fun, draw a good crowd, but are infrequent.  KoTH has been getting nice turnouts twice a month. Not sure about the air races, and I haven't been on FSO since the early break up of LCA last year.  Wed and Thursday Snapshots have a mixed attendance.... I've been in a few with maybe a dozen to two dozen players in the arena, but usually still a lot of fun.
As a percentage of the overall player base, even SEA numbers are small compared to the combined LW arenas 24/7.  But, yes, SEA attendance is far above EW, MW, and AvA.... just not quite up to both LW yet.

I could see and welcome the addition of planes to support SEA, if the planes will draw fliers.

For example, Snapshot Tigers Over Rangoon has P40's vs Zeke's.  Now the Axis are supposed to the have the numbers over the Allies in that one, but usually the best you can do is a 50/50 split and switch plane-sets for frame 2.  
Now, switch those Zekes for the more historical Oscar, and you will have a very difficult time finding players that will want to fly that underarmed, less rugged Japanese Army fighter against the P40's.  Especially since with the Oscar, the original 60% axis / 40% allies split becomes more crucial to game balance.

More historical? Yes?  Will it get used?  Probably not much.  Does it help the snapshot event?  Probably will see a few players actually leave the event and you'll not be able to get a balanced 60/40 split for the snapshot.

OTOH, adding P-39's and Pe-2's to the Russian plane-set in a Russian front SEA event to complement La-5's, IL-2's, and Yak's would probably work in the SEA as well as finding users in the EW, MW, and LW arenas.  

I'm not opposed to EW additions, so long as they are competitive for use in the game in more than one special scenario.

[toonces3]

tedrbr,
Nice post above.  I pretty much agree with you.

I haven't been playing all that long, but it certainly seems that HTC has made more planes that are popular, rather than what were historically most prevalent during ww2.  This makes sense, though.  You want to attract players and the way to do that is give them planes they want to fly.

Having said that, there are any number of planes I would love to see added.  I agree that it doesn't make sense, in a way, to have planes like the Me-262 instead of the P-39.  

Not so much a complaint as an understanding of where HTC is coming from.

[Larry]

Originally posted by BaldEagl
The Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 carried 2x20mm cannons, more than sufficient for MA use.

I-16 Type 24

Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.

I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.


I think you wre thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I dont have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by Larry
I-16 Type 24
Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.

I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.
I think you were thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I don't have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.

Actually, some sources state the I-16 Type 24, at least some of them, were originally fitted with the 20mms, plus added radios, and added armor.... the result was a heavy bird whose performance numbers dropped significantly from earlier models.  Many other I-16's were field refitted with various weapons, including 20mm, and as you stated, HTC stays away from field refits.  And the TYpe 24 represents roughly only 10% of the total number of I-16's built, IIRC.

The I-16 in AHII would come down to which model and historical data sets the company would use as it's baseline.  

I-16 was pretty much out of date and outclassed by 1940/41.  Unless there was a "plane pack" of, say, 4 EW birds being added to the game together.... I can't see limited development resources being put toward what is really a 1930's warplane that would be so completely over-matched in the LW arenas, were most of the customer base is at.

[battel gnome94]

but did we relly need the B-25 because relly who here is going to use it?

i know i wont.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by battel gnome94
but did we relly need the B-25 because relly who here is going to use it?

i know i wont.

The players voted for the B-25 after several weeks of voting off other aircraft offered by HTC.

You don't have to use it, but it will see a fair amount of usage, especially for base capture and GV defense.

My regards,

Widewing

[battel gnome94]

ya but we could of had way better planes then that but its because it is famous that we get this plane:mad:

[Bronk]

Originally posted by battel gnome94
because it is famous that we get this plane:mad:

You hard of reading or something? We're getting it because that's what the community voted for.
Ohh yea, almost forgot.
SQUEAK!!!!





Bronk

[Souless]

I personally believe the current version of our Moaquito needs to be updated and fixed to historical standards before we introduce new planes.
Fix the inconsistancies first.


Save the mossie

[scottydawg]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Actually you do.  The community voted and the P-39 lost out to the B-25.  But you wouldn't know that because 1) You don't read the front page 2) you're new to this game.

Now carry on, you're dismissed.

ack-ack

PWND.

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Larry
I-16 Type 24

Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.

I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.


I think you wre thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I dont have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.

 
Oops, it was the type 28 with the 2 x 7.6mm and 2 x 20mm's.  You are correct in that the Type 24 had 4 x 7.6mm's.  My mistake.

[devild0g]

Planes with large numbers of production usually meant they where easy to build and where adequate for fighting not top notch what we fly are pretty much the best version of the plane but its not true with america quality AND quantity