Author Topic: Who thinks aircraft that did not see Combat In WW2 should be modeled? (Read 1431 times)

brady · « **on:** November 30, 2001, 07:24:00 PM »

Well?, Who thinks HTC should model aircraft that did not see combat in WW2?

How do you feal yes or no?

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: brady ]

Tac · « **Reply #1 on:** November 30, 2001, 07:43:00 PM »

I'd be more inclined to give current planes some fantasy loadouts. Like 12X.303 in nose for the P-38

Raubvogel · « **Reply #2 on:** November 30, 2001, 07:43:00 PM »

Not just no, but HELL NO.

Kratzer · « **Reply #3 on:** November 30, 2001, 07:46:00 PM »

No as well. I think there are too many planes in there already that didn't see much service.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #4 on:** November 30, 2001, 07:55:00 PM »

I have always been asking for F86s and Mig15s.......

ra · « **Reply #5 on:** November 30, 2001, 08:00:00 PM »

After the planeset is filled out all the way back to 1939 I wouldn't mind seeing non-WWII planes modeled, so long as they could only be used in a separate arena. That should be about 5 years from now.

ra

Arlo · « **Reply #6 on:** November 30, 2001, 08:05:00 PM »

Obviously, I'm all for "pre-war" planesets. A dedicated SCW arena would rock. Planes don't have to be faster, higher and armed with boulder slinging cannons to be fun. Of course, if it's an "uber" mindset that appeals to the average player, then maybe promoting the SCW as an "Uber-WWI" arena would work.

Archangel114 · « **Reply #7 on:** November 30, 2001, 10:52:00 PM »

I agree with ra.

-Chris-

BRING ON THE IL-10!

wells · « **Reply #8 on:** December 01, 2001, 12:27:00 AM »

Sure they should be modelled, but the perk system would mean they don't see much use, so they certainly shouldn't be a priority. But what's the difference when you have zeros fighting 109s, that never happened in WW2 either.

J_A_B · « **Reply #9 on:** December 01, 2001, 01:21:00 AM »

I say yes, and WITHOUT the condition of modeling earlier planes first.

Add them as they're needed; if a P-51H or KIKKI or late 109K or some other "didn't quite make it" plane would be interesting, add it. I might not LIKE the individual choice, but its service record in WW2 doesn't mean squat to AH.

AH is NOT a WW2 sim, so whether a plane saw action in WW2 is completely and totally irrevelant.

Perhaps N1K2's should have random engine fires and gear failures, after all that happened during WW2 to the real N1K2. Or how about modeling LW planes so they randomly perform differently, as not all LW planes ran om the same fuel/boost system. And why are you allowed to fly whatever mission/plane you want? WW2 pilots had to fly where and what they were told!

J_A_B

Buzzbait · « **Reply #10 on:** December 01, 2001, 02:03:00 AM »

S!

No. Absolutely not.

Create a Korean war game if that's what you want.

funkedup · « **Reply #11 on:** December 01, 2001, 02:42:00 AM »

Exactly what Wells said!

gripen · « **Reply #12 on:** December 01, 2001, 03:27:00 AM »

Well, this a game so I don't really care about the combat record. Anyway, I want bi-planes...

gripen

HoHun · « **Reply #13 on:** December 01, 2001, 07:42:00 AM »

Hi Brady,

finally, every aircraft that was conceived in or around the WW2 era should be modelled by Aces High. Not only should those that never saw combat should be included, but also those that never flew, and even those that were never built.

I'm going to leave the question unanswered, though, in which exact sequence they should be included.

The more interesting question I'll also leave unanswered is how game structure has to be developed for a hyper-complete planeset to provide interesting, challenging and balanced gameplay. My impression is that perk points won't quite cut it in the end.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

K West · « **Reply #14 on:** December 01, 2001, 09:18:00 AM »

To the specific question in the subject line? YES. No reason why not at all.

Why? Because several planes (such as the DO335, P51H, Meteor, P80, P82, F7F, F8F, Tempest V, SeaFury, late mark Spitfires.. for several off the top of my head) were definately in mass production and deployed to combat units and on the line. Well before wars end in September of 1945.

Seems every time this question comes up the line always attempts to be drawn which tries stack the advantage based on ones personal tastes and preferences - with very, very few exceptions.

Simply because they did not see the enemy nor shot one down doesn't mean a thing except to those who prefer flying mainly Axis, or more specifically, LW aircraft. Because in 1945 it was impossible for a LW airplane of any type no to take to a hostile and combat sky be it a one off prototype, test model or even a low production plane which simply wasn't the case for the Allies at all.

OT a bit from the discussion but voting YES for late war aircrtaft is not a "sure" sign that anyone is anti-early war. Too often that accusation or inuendo can be seen in others posts as evidenced here and in other discussions on this in the past. Also, HTC isn't anti-early war either as they have stated many, many times in the past. It's fairly obvious to me that they simply started AH off with a late war theme (had to somewhere right?) and it just happens to be the time frame where most people like to pick thier planes when flying in an MA.

Westy

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]