F8F-1 Standard Characteristics... A genuine monster

[Karnak]

In a 1v1 scenario, most LW fighters will crush the Mossie in short order.  How would things be any different with an F8F?

I have performance advantages over most Luftwaffe birds, and for the few that have total performance advantage over the Mossie the margins are at least narrow in some areas.  The F8F is as fast as a Tempest, climbs much better than the Bf109K-4/Spitfire Mk XIV and turns better than the Spitfire Mk IX.  The four .50s are a bit light, but they are also well more than enough to get the job done.  No fighter in AH comes close to making fights this lopsided.  A highly perked Tempest would be helpless to it.

With an F8F on me I may as well just bail out.

I can dodge an Me262 at least.

[glzsqd]

 

The F8F could put out the same amount bullets as a p47.  Its guns had a higher rate of fire.

[BnZs]

F8F is a neat bird.  I would never fly in AH again if it were added.  The level of helplessness most aircraft in AH would have against it, four BMG .50s are plenty, make it a game killer.  Me262 is pathetic in comparison.

In a game that already has the Spit16, F4U-4, and Tempest, that is fairly freaking silly.

[Karnak]

In a game that already has the Spit16, F4U-4, and Tempest, that is fairly freaking silly.

Those are all tame compared to the F8F.

Most fighters have at least some performance edges on the Spit XVI, F4U-4 and Tempest.  Few fighters have any performance edge on the F8F, and other than the Me163 and Me262 the only edge is turn capability of the planes with exceptionally low wing loading.

To pretend the F8F is remotely in the same category as the Spit XVI, F4U-4 and Tempest is absurd.

[Lusche]

To pretend the F8F is remotely in the same category as the Spit XVI, F4U-4 and Tempest is absurd.

A  FM2 which outclimbs a 109K and just walks away from a Tempest would truly be in a leage of it's own.  Nothing here would be comparable.


(As per this thread, I took the FM2 turning data to stand in for the F8F)

On the deck, the F8F has about the same speed advantage over the Tempst as the Tempes has over the Spitfire 16.

[caldera]

I have performance advantages over most Luftwaffe birds, and for the few that have total performance advantage over the Mossie the margins are at least narrow in some areas.  The F8F is as fast as a Tempest, climbs much better than the Bf109K-4/Spitfire Mk XIV and turns better than the Spitfire Mk IX.  The four .50s are a bit light, but they are also well more than enough to get the job done.  No fighter in AH comes close to making fights this lopsided.  A highly perked Tempest would be helpless to it.

With an F8F on me I may as well just bail out.

I can dodge an Me262 at least.

So when I'm flying a P-40 and encounter a F4U, should I bail out? 
The F4U is faster, accelerates faster, climbs faster, zooms higher, turns better, rolls better, dives better, more durable and has a much better field of vision.

[Karnak]

So when I'm flying a P-40 and encounter a F4U, should I bail out? 
The F4U is faster, accelerates faster, climbs faster, zooms higher, turns better, rolls better, dives better, more durable and has a much better field of vision.

The margin of performance difference is much narrower between the P-40 and the F4U on some of those metrics.  I don't have a problem with an uphill fight, I will and have taken on Bf109K-4s and La-7s which do to my Mossie what the F4U does to your P-40.  We do this because the difference in performance in some aspects is close enough to be overcome.  The F8F is so much better that to have a chance, not win, just a chance, the F8F driver would need to be completely, absolutely incompetent.  As opposed to just not as good.  I don't think you are appreciating how very superior the F8F is.

[caldera]

The margin of performance difference is much narrower between the P-40 and the F4U on some of those metrics.  I don't have a problem with an uphill fight, I will and have taken on Bf109K-4s and La-7s which do to my Mossie what the F4U does to your P-40.  We do this because the difference in performance in some aspects is close enough to be overcome.  The F8F is so much better that to have a chance, not win, just a chance, the F8F driver would need to be completely, absolutely incompetent.  As opposed to just not as good.  I don't think you are appreciating how very superior the F8F is.

Most of those margins are not even close P-40 vs F4U.  The only way I can beat one is if I have the drop on him and he is slow on the deck, or just plain not very good.

If perked accordingly, you won't find too many F8Fs slowing down to dance with P-40s or Mossies in the MA.  I think you are overestimating how many Bearcats you will have to fight.

[glzsqd]

Be funny if they give it the F4F icon, just to see it run down a typhoon icon with ease. 




To be honest, I don't think the F8F would be that interesting of an addition. If anything it would make me appreciate the other Grumman birds more. If we added the P-63 it would just make me want to fly the p39 more. I really don't think the Bearcat should be a priority, mostly because it would make for a pretty unintresting plane to fly and fight.

[BnZs]

The Spixteen just plain owns the Focke Wulfe A5. Therefore, the spixteen should not have been added to the game. The F4u4 out-runs, out-climbs, out-rolls, and out-turns a whole long list of different planes. Therefore delete. Etc. ''The Bearcat is better than my favorite plane'' isn't an argument for not adding it, just for perking it as appropriate. I'm sure if is added HTC will watch usage and kill death ratio and adjust as needed, in no more than a decade 

[Arlo]

'Participated in combat' (shot down a plane, strafed a truck, dropped a bomb, deployed troops, shelled the shore, shot a tank, was shot by a tank, launched aircraft into battle, etc.) during WWII (before it ended) should be a hard line qualifier. This whole 'operational' (and argument over what that means) seems to bring out the most fervent Buck Rogers fans.  

[BnZs]

Thing is, they've already added most of the things that participated which are particularly interesting to the masses. And getting to see the absolute zenith prop planes as highly perked options will be very interesting. Come on...you telling me you have NO interest in seeing how a Spiteful stacks up against an F7F, or the like?

'Participated in combat' (shot down a plane, strafed a truck, dropped a bomb, deployed troops, shelled the shore, shot a tank, was shot by a tank, launched aircraft into battle, etc.) during WWII (before it ended) should be a hard line qualifier. This whole 'operational' (and argument over what that means) seems to bring out the most fervent Buck Rogers fans.  

[Arlo]

Thing is, they've already added most of the things that participated which are particularly interesting to the masses. And getting to see the absolute zenith prop planes as highly perked options will be very interesting. Come on...you telling me you have NO interest in seeing how a Spiteful stacks up against an F7F, or the like?

No, I'm not. I'm more into historical event play than MA chesspiece run-popping anyhoo. My stats reflect that all too well. I'm not against the MA. AAMOF, a corsair squadron will get more time in its bird there than anywhere. But this 'we've run out of interesting uber that fought in WWII so lets bring in those that missed the fight' thing isn't as appealing to me as a steady progression of gap filling and potential expansion of the ship and ground sets that'll entice players intrigued by that, as well.

[caldera]

Maybe some just don't want the UFO-4 knocked off it's "uberest prop fighter" perch. 

[glzsqd]

-4 sucks.  -1 is better.