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

Author Topic: Grumman G-51  (Read 1004 times)

Offline SnakeEyes

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Grumman G-51
« Reply #30 on: November 12, 1999, 11:07:00 AM »
I'd rather see some different stuff.  Otherwise they might as well call this "Warbirds Again:  The Nice Terrain Version"

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
Logged

funked

  • Guest
Grumman G-51
« Reply #31 on: November 12, 1999, 01:27:00 PM »
Lynx - Do 335 had an ejection seat.  If you think the 262 is just a nuisance, you haven't met a good JetDweeb yet.    

Also remember that it has an enormous billboard announcing its presence.  Take away the bogus SA advantage of icons, and it would dominate.

I agree about the takeoff/landing and engine problems though.  Not a plane for an inexperienced pilot.

I'm with Snakeyes - bring them all on!

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 11-12-1999).]
Logged

Offline SnakeEyes

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Grumman G-51
« Reply #32 on: November 12, 1999, 02:31:00 PM »
Hey funky... how you like my quote?  

"Sheesh... some of you people couldn't expand your horizons even if your heads exploded."



------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
Logged

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Grumman G-51
« Reply #33 on: November 12, 1999, 02:48:00 PM »
Sucks, mines better.

"blow me."

------------------
1./Jagdgeshwader 51 "Mölders"
Logged

funked

  • Guest
Grumman G-51
« Reply #34 on: November 12, 1999, 03:22:00 PM »
Snake Eyes - I liked it.  

Here's my quote for game developers:

"Free your plane set and my prettythang will follow!"
Logged

Offline fd ski

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1530
      • http://www.northotwing.com/wing/
Grumman G-51
« Reply #35 on: November 12, 1999, 03:33:00 PM »
spitfire 21 anyone ?  

On the subject - D9 is deadmeat against properly modeled Spit 14 ( not the cripple we're fed for arena balance in WB )

Cheers..  


------------------


Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
   www.raf303.org  

Logged

Offline SnakeEyes

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Grumman G-51
« Reply #36 on: November 12, 1999, 04:14:00 PM »
Just to make things clear... I'm not opposed to stuff like the F2A or anything like that... but this a priori emphasis on numbers, impact, and all that stuff constrains the planeset in a way that leaves out pansies like me who want late war uberplanes.

Tell someone that you're gonna model the P-40E and they're gonna say "so what, I can fly that in WB, AW, FA, or whatever" (you get the point).  Be the first to model the Ta-152, and you're gonna get "WOW!!".

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
Logged

Offline fats

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 210
Grumman G-51
« Reply #37 on: November 12, 1999, 08:31:00 PM »
SnakeEyes:

My quote is more elite than ya'll put togethter: "Bite me!"


//fats

Logged

funked

  • Guest
Grumman G-51
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 1999, 04:06:00 PM »
SnakeEyes, stop you are making me drool!

BTW I think an all F2A arena would be a hoot!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
« previous next »