Pyro, HiTech, what engines does our Lancaster MkIII have?

[Karnak]

Pyro, HiTech,

There is a rumor out there that the AH Lancaster MkIII is underpowered.  Could you kill that rumor and tell us which Merlin engines the AH Lancaster MkIII has?

Thanks.

[Karnak]

Punt

[LtHans]

Ok, this isn't direct at you Karnak, so don't get too riled up.

I wish Aces High would borrow a bit from World War II Online in this case.  WW2OL has stated that, "...For better or worse, once a machine is introduced into the gameworld...thats it.  Barring any major bugs in it we will not change it's statistics even if they're proven to be somewhat off.  We feel consistancy is more important than accuracy, though we'll be as acurate as possible BEFORE it is added to the game.  After that, just deal with it.  There is too much to do besides nitpicking everything else."

These constant discussions about how this is overmodeled, and this other bit here is undermodeled, and this part over there is wrong, wrong turbo charger, wrong ammo load....to me after a point it stops being important.  I am now officially convinced there is no such thing as getting it 100% right, so stop trying.  We have what we have, lets use it and get on with the buisness of winning the game.

In other words, quite griping and start doing some of that pilot S#!+ if you want to win.

Hans.

[hazed-]

well said hans, i gotta admit im beginning to feel sorry for HTC what with all the demands for accuracy that conforms to this test or that.And i admit Im one of the guys that do the demanding!  
its not that i want to nitpick but there is a certain amount of desire to get it as close as it would have been as possible.

After reading what you said ive decided not to keep demanding changes( too much  ).I'll tone down my demands.
But as to loadout options I think these add to the game.Whats more it helps make certain types (that we may have used so much they lose their appeal) of aircraft suddenly interesting again.
A perfect example of this was the ju88 torpedo loadout.That got my interest for quite a few months until i perfected their use.
what would be good is to give a proper specification list on each plane maybe.
like a list of weight,engine type,year introduced etc. and instead of us knowalls trying to point out 'this is innaccurate' or 'that engine is the wrong one' we all have to accept that this is what we have, and thats the way it will stay.
the only reason theres so much conjecture on these aircraft is that we are never sure which exact type we have.Not HTCs fault but just because many 'types' have various subtle changes(eg p47 had different engines at different times with different turbo chargers).

good point though, and its sunk in.

[Grayarea]

Originally posted by LtHans:
"...For better or worse, once a machine is introduced into the gameworld...thats it.  Barring any major bugs in it we will not change it's statistics even if they're proven to be somewhat off.  We feel consistancy is more important than accuracy, though we'll be as acurate as possible BEFORE it is added to the game.  After that, just deal with it.  There is too much to do besides nitpicking everything else."

This is an interesting quote for a company that currently has 'place holder' sights in the tanks.

I think it is ment to reduce the call for historical accuracy, however as it is accuracy that they are selling (cockpits for example) in WWIIONLINE, I cannot see this holding up very well. If somthing is obviously off, then the howls of the customers will soon put them in an imposible position. Time will tell. (I like and play WWIIONLINE BTW)

As far as this pertains to AH, as far as I know if there are 64 planes in a sector then you are still libel to be killed by an invisible enemy. So there is a lot more than historical accuracy in the mix.

This is not to say that I don't like AH, I think it is excellent at providing the illusion of combat in WWII based planes. And my subscription is the most telling testement of my view of the game.

Also to say that customers can expect to have no overall input into the direction of a company is wrong, they pay for it.

Grayarea.

[BenDover]

hans,rumor is that the lancaster mkIII in AH has the engines of lancaster mkI!!!

and i don't think u should be paying attention to the makers of something as toejam as ww2online.

rember! "the customer is always right"

[flakbait]

All I can find is the engine type for the B.I special. Four 1,620 HP RR Merlin 28 engines.

-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"With all due respect Chaplian, I don't think my maker wants to hear from me right now. I'm gonna go out there and remove one of His creations from this universe.
And when I get back I'm gonna drink a bottle of Scotch like it was Chiggy von
Richthofen's blood and celebrate his death."
Col. McQueen, Space: Above and Beyond
 

[Karnak]

I have plenty of info on which Mks of Lancs had which engines.

I believe that the Lanc in AH has one of the kinds of engines that the Lancaster MkIII used.

I just want HTC to specify which engines the AH Lanc has to kill the rumor.

Ongoing rumors like that bother me.  They cause whining.

[Pongo]

This game has been much inproved by the discussions into the details of how each aircraft is modeled.
WW2OL is denying themselves a great resource for research by slamming the door on input from the customer base.

[SOB]

Holy toejam!  I agree with Pongo!  What is this world coming to???  


SOB

[Karnak]

Another question as well.

Does the AH Lanc III have the paddle bladed props that were standard from mid-1943 on?

It should as its tail turret is of a kind not introduced until 1944.

[juzz]

AH Lancaster III probably has Packard Merlin 38 engines. Max boost is +16lbs, the Merlin 24 had +18lbs combat boost. Thus no paddle props, as they were used with the more powerful M24.