CT Set-Up July 4th - 10th

[Löwe]

I don't know why the TBM can't be used as the bomber for both sides. It's not like there were early war super bombers in Burma. So the TBM especially if you could turn the formation option on would be a great sub for whatever crap both sides used then. Sorry not a bomber guy.......  On the P-40B will get it's butt handed to it constantly by the A6M2 is uber debate............. Early Sunday when I flew the P-40s were dropping like flys. I came back Sunday night and all the sudden people were getting alt in P-40s, B&Zing, and becoming a big threat. The B model was very effective last night. Yeah you had to plan ahead a little , but it was effective. The Hurri is tough as hell , and will catch a A6M2 driver in turns if he doesn't respect it. Guys complaining about 303's........... Your shooting at A6M2s, a battery of 8 303's is very leathel against it. Much less the two 50 cals in the P-40 in combo with it's 30 cals. Even the two 303's in the Boston are leathel against the Zeke. I got caught twice yesterday by Bostons that had decided to double back, and become fighter planes trolling through furrballs.

Look at who was  landing their kills, yesterday afternoon it was the Japanese guys, last night the Allies were landing the majority of the kills. It was like the shock wore off and , and the Allied  pilots got down to business.

Yeah the Zeke has the advantage in most areas. Hell the A6M2 was prob never used in Burma. We should be flying  Nates, and Ocars.  Once the zeke pilots have shot their cannon rounds off, basically they are an oscar........... Firepower wise anyway. I know I never liked this setup, Burma has always been my least favorite.  I don't ever remember seeing so many complaints about it before though.

[skernsk]

I'll vote to take the Ki=67 out of the set-up but can live with it if you guys decide not to.  

Above there was a comment that if you stupidly attack it from dead 6 you deserve to die.  Here's a tip for you ... even with an alt advantage you can't fuggin catch them very easy.  Luckily most pilots flying them are rather low and give a guy a chance to make a head on pass or a deflection shot on the initial pass .... from there it is persuit mode with no choice but to put yourself at the mercy of the 20mm or disengage.

That being said, the set-up is alot of fun and a guy can take a few hits and not end up in the tower so fast.  

>

[Sakai]

Originally posted by skernsk
I'll vote to take the Ki=67 out of the set-up but can live with it if you guys decide not to.  



>

Problem with Ju88 is it gives Japs a huge bombload delivery advantage.  

Sakai

[hazed-]

Lowe its not a 'complaint'. Its a bit annoying that any suggestion or question about a set up is regarded as a complaint.

The basis of the REQUEST is to have a historical setup (WHERE POSSIBLE)

As I have discovered above You CAN have a set up where the 109F wasnt available BUT it is a VERY short period! in fact if you look the P40E kittyhawk was introduced in DECEMBER 1941. The 109F-2 was introduced in the autumn just before this. So although yes you COULD have 109E-4's fighting P40E's it could only have happened AFTER december 1941.

So in theory the 109F and p40E were, in 1941 much rarer than say the 109E-4 and P40B/C (+ hurricanes).
basically at no point in WW2 in North Africa did the P40E fight 109E's WITHOUT the possibility of 109F's being around.

This is what the request for the 109F to be put in was based on.

Now as ErgRTC has pointed out he wanted a more even matchup for 'FUN' and i can agree its completely ok to do this but in the interest of those of us who cant stand unrealistic stuff we could have the 109F in there and give it a perk cost of 20 or so.You wont see many around and this would closely match the real fights.It adds the POSSIBILITY of running into a 109F but doesnt disturb the majority of 109E vs P40E fights which is what ergRTC appears to favour. Seems to me this would please everyone.

As an Allied perk ride we could add the hurricane II C or SPITFIRE VB/VC(if we had it) or decide not to add them if you like but to be honest, as the hurricane IIC was in North Africa in 1941-42 so if allied players called for it it would be exactly the same as me asking for the 109F and historically its fair.

The spit5 arrived in march 1942 so it doesnt suit libya too well as the war had moved on from that area by then. Malta became the main target in March-April for the LW and Italian airforces(mainly italian as more and more LW squadrons were transfered to the eastern front.

All this historical information allows CMs to set up almost any combination of fights but they need to research what was flying at the time they set the map. If planes were there but the CM decides they are unballancing then they cant just remove them, they should perk them. Thats just my opinion and i guess not everyone agrees. I tried though

ergRTC(im hoping you see my point ),and jester for a great set up.

If i was to set this up i would have this:

Libya 1941-1942

Allies:
P40B
P40E
Hurri I
Boston III
Perked:
Hurri IIC (15 perks)
Spit VB (20 perks)

Axis:
109E
110C4
202
Ju87
Ju88
Perked:
109F (20 perks)
me262 (1 perk)

Hehehehe ok the me262 was a joke

oh and if perking is a pain in the bellybutton to setup why not wait until wednesday and then add the 109F and hurriC to simulate the war moving on time wise.Then you get saturday to wednesday with the 109e vs P40 fighting then the 109f and hurriC are added and wednesday to friday you have the later (1942) matchups.couldnt that work too? its VERY simple to add planes.

[Eagler]

what hazed said

[ergRTC]

I think the problem here is the non realistic behavior of ah pilots.  Nobody in north africa would have upped a p40b alone and gone looking for 109s and 202s.   Often that is the only choice for guys in this game.  That means planes that could have been competitive (even if only barely) are at an extreme disadvantage.  When a plane set includes planes that dominate in all categories of performance, it is too unbalanced for average enjoyable game play.

Now one of the most squeaked about planes in this arena is the f4u1.  Look at the following graphs and you will see why it is okay to have the ki61 vs the f4u.  Or even better ki61, nik vs the f4u1.

(these graphs are for the 109f, the E is close to the b on speed, this is to show how difficult it will be to survive as allied in the 109f scenario).

[ergRTC]

 

 

[Squire]

Agree 100 percent. Thats why I think its important for all of us to accept setups that may have one side at a disadvantage (real or imagined) from time to time, allied and axis both, and stop the endless pettiness about it all. Do a 1942 SpitVs vs 190s, do Hurricanes vs LW in France 1940 with no Spits, do a Ki-61 vs F4U-1, 109Fs vs P-40Es in N. Africa.  Do it all, and lets stop pretending that it will ever be "fair" and have fun with the setups. The whole notion that the CT was ever going to be an even playing field (thats never happened) is the biggest contributer, imho, to all the nastiness.

Its not fair, thats ok, just fly.

[CurtissP-6EHawk]

What Haze said...or narrow down the time frame. Give spacifics:

Libya 1941, October - December

..and what Squire said....Kinda like Jesters set-up I squeaked about but have a spit vs spit, see who the real pilots are.

Sure we all know the A6M2 has to fly defensive against the F4U and some spits have to fly defensive with the Fw1900 or 109G-10 (not a LW guy).

However, the Ki's, Nike, Georges etc did not see as much action(maybe?) as the A6Ms. Maybe thats were the perks should come in.

Lets face it, most just want to log-in, depart, fly to the nearest furball, kill something before being killed----recycle. What use is alt, and speed if you just loose it, with higher faster cons inbound to the furball your in, then squeak about it?

When ever there is a "sea battle", there ends up being land bases somewere. duh!! ...not much of a sea battle then is it?