Author Topic: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA  (Read 3874 times)

Offline titanic3

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4235
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #90 on: September 27, 2011, 07:40:13 PM »
Simple solution.

Make the A20s (or any bomber that can take off empty) HAVE to take ordnance. Like a B24/B17/Lancaster. This means they won't be able to take off if ordnance is porked.

Now I don't know if it was historical or not for these planes to take off without bombs, if it IS historical that these took off with bombs 99% of the time, then I say add it. If it's not, then disregard the above suggestion.

  the game is concentrated on combat, not on shaking the screen.

semp

Offline Mitsu.

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 195
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #91 on: September 27, 2011, 09:36:58 PM »
I really want the Ki-84-Ib (Ki-84-I-Otsu) in the LWA.

20mm*4 loadout will be nice against huge buff missions. :)

Offline Rino

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8495
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #92 on: September 27, 2011, 11:15:52 PM »
     One problem to your simple solution.  No one says you have to CARRY the ord with you once you takeoff.
80th FS Headhunters
PHAN
Proud veteran of the Cola Wars

Offline AceHavok

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 510
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #93 on: September 28, 2011, 12:22:08 AM »
I think the Sea-Hurricane might be a good add to Aces High. I'm not sure on it's statistics though, I believe it had 4 20mm cannons like the Hurricane 2C (Correct me if I'm wrong). What do you all think about it being added?

Ace
Currently inactive.


Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein

Offline titanic3

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4235
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #94 on: September 28, 2011, 05:55:52 AM »
     One problem to your simple solution.  No one says you have to CARRY the ord with you once you takeoff.

Try taking off in a B17/B24 when ords are down yet the BH is still up. You can't.
What I'm suggesting is that the same be done for A20s and the like. Now I'm not sure if it's historical or not to do this because A20s mightve taken off empty in RL regularly.

  the game is concentrated on combat, not on shaking the screen.

semp

Offline AHTbolt

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 582
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #95 on: September 28, 2011, 08:58:46 AM »
Thanks guys your insite was pretty much what i was thinking. I dont care what people fly or how they fly, I dont mind being ho'ed vulched or ramed and would up a washing machine with wings into a furball if I was haveing fun. My main ride is an F6F so I do kinda ride a washing machine with wings. And I have never been able to get through the flock of fightes yelling mine mine mine to ever get a shot at A20 lol.
AWWWWW CRAP YOU SHOT WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In the desert somewhere west of Kuwait 1991.

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8096
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #96 on: September 28, 2011, 10:29:14 AM »
Out of this list, I think the Yak-3 and J2M would be excellent competitive additions.  I'd like to see something new as well, and not have it be the variant of something we already have with ZOMG 4x20mm.

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4487
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #97 on: September 28, 2011, 10:39:54 AM »
Flame suit on
I dont want to see the ki84 with 4 cannons. Why?
It already has enough firepower to kill in one snapshot, theres no need for another "ho-bird".
+1 for the updated Jak series, C2xx series (hopefully with the g55), j2ms, ki-44 tho
G-6/AS with the tater would be very nice for the scenarios even tho in the MA it would be useless.
AoM
City of ice

Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Potentially Competive fighters for the LWA
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2011, 07:46:10 PM »
We just want something and don't really car too much what as long as it's fun to fly, right?  :salute
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,