New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!

[Krusty]

Well when I was skinning the new C.205 it originally only had the cannon option as well. I wasn't sure what the  current version had so I had a look at AH Wiki. This showed both options for the C.205, so I assumed that was already the case in-game.

I mentioned to HTC that the four mg version might be useful for Sicily and early Italian campaign scenarios and they later added it to the new C.205. I guess the lower weight should marginally improve performance but I can't see it being a popular choice in the MA somehow.....

So, what? They were going to leave out the MGs on the 205 this time around? Heh... That would be rather odd.

I'd like to see DTs on the 205s. 202s could take them but really didn't operationally. 205s actually did flying to the Balkans and back after the Italian split.

[Greebo]

The mgs may have just been an oversight or just "not done yet", some bits and pieces always get added after I start skinning a plane. The initial file often lacks things like small scale cockpit interior parts and weapons pylons, its just the minimum needed for me to start skinning it.

[TwinBoom]

htc has stated many times before screen shots are not final and subject to change, W.I.P. so too speak

[Krusty]

htc has stated many times before screen shots are not final and subject to change, W.I.P. so too speak

And?

We know this.

[TwinBoom]

And?

We know this.

If you know this stop crying like a baby enjoy the work in progress and simply point out errors

[Krusty]

You are the only one that could be accused of doing any of that.

[TwinBoom]

You are the only one that could be accused of doing any of that.

LOL!! You are always pissing on every thread not I sir.....

[Reaper90]

I think the layout in the cockpit should be as realistic as possible.....even to the point of being in the language it was originally.....I do not like the idea of random engine and gun failure and other such stuff that a real pilot had to deal with...IE the checklist for starting up....

this is a combat sim and when I am in combat I don't look at the instruments at all....no need to....everything that is needed to know while in combat has a sound association with it.....


so as far as I am concerned we can have realistic gauges and still have a combat sim without it being a full blown flight sim.


my .02$

absolutely.

I'm often embarrased that. as an instrument trained private pilot, very very rarely do I ever look down at the panel while fighting.... but I guess in reality, when your life was on the line, you looked up at what was trying to kill you, and not down at your rpm.

I agree... I'm all for 100% accurate panel layout, even if it means I'm at a slight disadvantage in my ride of choice.

[Volron]

Hmm...


So who will guess on the next update?  As a few of you have noticed, it's currently in a pattern.

Providing that it continues this pattern, what would you think is to be updated now?  Going off of the other pattern that it seems to be following, I am going to guess a GV update with a new GV added.  It's not outrageous to think that is a possibility if you look at the pattern.  While I am not holding my breath, GV update/gv added appears to be the next step.  If what I have gathered is correct about gv age, I would guess the T-34/76 gets updated, since it's the oldest GV now.  But if we base it off of usage, then the Wirbelwind will be on the top of the list.  Afterwards, we'll have a new GV added which will probably fall in the MW/LW era.

That's my guess based off the pattern.  And personally, hope that a gv update/gv addition is next.

Either way, I'm not going to complain.

[Karnak]

The T-34/76 was the first vehicle modeled to AH 2.00 standards.  At this time all GVs are up to date.  The remaining 19 aircraft ought to be done before any other unit is updated.

New additions are, of course, another matter.  My gut feeling is that we've now seen what we're getting.  I'd love to be surprised by a C.200 or Ki-43-I, but I think this is it for the next version.

[SmokinLoon]

The T-34/76 was the first vehicle modeled to AH 2.00 standards.  At this time all GVs are up to date.  The remaining 19 aircraft ought to be done before any other unit is updated.

New additions are, of course, another matter.  My gut feeling is that we've now seen what we're getting.  I'd love to be surprised by a C.200 or Ki-43-I, but I think this is it for the next version.

That is the trick, isn't it? Seeing if there is a pattern of how HTC is adding new aircraft or remodeling outdated models, always fun to see new things.  IMO, the two of the biggest gaps have been filled in adding the He111 and Oscar.  The next biggest gap in the AH plane set is a Soviet level bomber (IL-4 or Tu-2), imo.  Then take your pick between the Wellington, Beaufighter, Ki-100, D520, Macchi MC.200.  Otherwise, the Germans dont really have an obvious hole and neither does the US.  The RAF is missing a legit medium bomber (enter the Wellington), and the EW Beaufighter.  The Japanese have a few aircraft that could be added that make sense (Ki-100 and Ki-45), Italians have their C202/C205, so the MC200 makes sense.  The French and their D520 would be great to have for EW scenarios.  Oh, I guess HTC could add a "real" Brewster Buffalo for the south Asian campaigns, that would be nice too.   

It is anyone's guess, really.  But I too agree updating some of the models currently in AH is almost as important to adding new aircraft in general because in a sense that is what HTC is really doing.   

[Karnak]

Germans lack a mid-war bomber, candidates being Do217, He177 and Ju188.

Italians lack an entry fighter, C.200 or CR.42 and lack a bomber, SM.79-II or CANT Z.1007.

Russians lack fighter coverage for 1942 and most of 1943, LaGG-3, La-5, MiG-3, Yak-1 and/or Yak-7 and they lack a bomber, Il-4, Pe-2 or Tu-2.

British lack an early war bomber and a medium bomber, Wellington being by far the obvious choice.

Japanese lack later war carrier strike planes.

USA is light on early war carrier strike planes and late war carrier strike planes.

French lack everything.

Then there is the whole bunch of stuff that isn't needed, but would be fun and/or useful.

[palef]

Germans lack a mid-war bomber, candidates being Do217, He177 and Ju188.

Italians lack an entry fighter, C.200 or CR.42 and lack a bomber, SM.79-II or CANT Z.1007.

Russians lack fighter coverage for 1942 and most of 1943, LaGG-3, La-5, MiG-3, Yak-1 and/or Yak-7 and they lack a bomber, Il-4, Pe-2 or Tu-2.

British lack an early war bomber and a medium bomber, Wellington being by far the obvious choice.

Japanese lack later war carrier strike planes.

USA is light on early war carrier strike planes and late war carrier strike planes.

French lack everything.

Then there is the whole bunch of stuff that isn't needed, but would be fun and/or useful.

Completely agree, but I'd like a FIAT G.50bis as the Italian entry fighter, simply because it was the second kitset I built by myself, without Dad's help.

Remember, these updates have been going my way lately, so I just increased the odds of getting the G.50 tremendously.

[Oldman731]

Italians lack an entry fighter, C.200 or CR.42 and lack a bomber, SM.79-II or CANT Z.1007.

And here we become closer to fielding a Spanish Civil War plane set.

Hey, we already have the I-16.

- oldman (dialing Arlo)  (and wishing we could have a CR-32)

[Ack-Ack]

And here we become closer to fielding a Spanish Civil War plane set.

Hey, we already have the I-16.

- oldman (dialing Arlo)  (and wishing we could have a CR-32)

You can even throw in the Bf 109B for the Luftwhiners though it would be perked.

ack-ack