Please Change Ki-67 to Ju-88

[Arlo]

Sorry, Karn ...

 Guess I was baitin' ya ... and it's true that some whine over minimal stuff (and I'm refering to the subject of this thread). I just didn't see it as precipitating more. I'll try to keep an open mind and not yell "pot/kettle" and make a stink if I see a post I percieve (I ain't perfect ... course, you know that) as "axis whining." Maybe Brady will try a similar setup sometime without both the 67 and the Boston. Either way, though, it's pretty fun as long as it's give and take there in the middle and the rook base isn't porked and causes timewarps and ocean wormholes. Hehe.

Honestly ... the setup isn't a problem for me. It promotes fun as far as I'm concerned. Even if the dedicated buff drivers destroy and take a base .. or two ... or three .... four at most .... no more .... stop there .... c'mon guys ... where ya at?! Let's stop `em!



p.s. I'm even .... ulp .... tempted to fly some sorties for the emperor when and if  the scales stay slanted in the Allies favor 2:1 for too long a time. But only for awhile and until things start to regain parity. After all, I may have an almost uncontrollable desire to paint the zero blue and put stars on it - and I hear tell Tojo frowns on that.

[brady]

They actualy dident grab anything, I moved the front so we could see more of the map, and it also shortened up the flight time a bit by moving it to whear the bases were closer together.

 On this map it all but imposable to take airfields so I move the front on ocashion for the above reasions.

[Kweassa]

Er.. Karnak, I was suggesting you just put Arlo on the ignore list, as have I.

[Sakai]

Originally posted by MRPLUTO
The current plane set in the CT is great except for the very out-of-place, way-too-fast Ki-67.  The "Peggy" was a 1944-era plane, not 1942.  The people who made the Slot map were very smart to include the Ju-88 with Japanese markings, since the Ju-88 is much more representative of the early Japanese bombers the F4F's and P-40's would have faced.

Please don't add the Ju-88, substitute it for the Ki-67.

Anyone agree?

MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33

The Ju88 would not be terrible if we could limit the payload options to say the bay load-out only since as configured in the game it can carry 20 100 kg (bay) and 4 500kg eggs (wing hard points).  The Ju88 carries 2x-6x what any Jap bomber carried.  But I did love the 88 in Japanese Livery, it was cool as hell.  

In other words, the Ju-88 is tougher, faster (than early Jap bombers) and waaaaay more leathal and useful for bombing than any Jap bomber including the Ki-67 (Ju88 vastly superior in dive bomb to Ki-67).  If the Ju88 was included the allies would whine that it was too effective--I for one would be happy to bring me squaddies in there to prove it; likely we could sweep the Nancy-boy allies out in a couple hours with Ju88s.  Oh, and I routinely get 2-5 kills in 88s when bombing in the MA against multiple cannon-equipped interceptors.  Care to guess how many Mildcats one could kill in a box of Junkers Wunderkinds?  I agree entirely with Brady: the Ki-67 is a better surrogate for early Japanese Iron when you look at its effectiveness as a bomber.  Its only redeeming feature is that 20mm gun and its speed but it has teh typically poor payload and the fragility that made Japanese planes less effective.  The speed can be countered by staying high and diving and the gun is only useful in some attacks.  Dive on it and loop under the thing, gut shoot it, you'll blow them to hell and gone.  Frontal low attacks also quite effective.  

All things being equal, I'd say remove the Ki-67, Boston and the TBM.  The matchup that is interesting here is the Zeke vs. F4F and when they have only these to fly folks do in fact take out the Val, Kate and SBD.  The Val/Kate vs, SBD matchup is an even one in terms of delivery.  Face it, no one does torpedo runs in the CT anyways so it isn't as if the Alllies are losing any real functionality.

You can almost kill a TBM with a Zeke2--almost--but really, I'd love to see a small island setup with no Twin Engined planes just one time.

Just once Brady, really, is that so bad?

Hey when is Greece due out again?  Or was that Crete . . . I forget.

Oh, love the map and except for socially, the CT staff is my role model.

Peace out.

Sakai

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Kweassa
Er.. Karnak, I was suggesting you just put Arlo on the ignore list, as have I.

Kweassa is a sensitive type, after all.

[DiabloTX]

<------------ I just like my new avatar!!!!  

[kesolei]

Originally posted by DiabloTX
<------------ I just like my new avatar!!!!  

Anyone else think Diablo's bored?

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by TW9
its HERE not HEAR

Someone obviously doesn't get it...and how could it not be any clearer I will never know...

[Shane]

Originally posted by DiabloTX
Someone obviously doesn't get it...and how could it not be any clearer I will never know...

"HEIAR"

[Mister Fork]

One of the problems with any PTO (Pacific Theatre of Operations) is the limited planeset we have.

If there were 5-8 additional IJN and IJAAF, we could balance it out by adding more warbirds to either side. We have plenty USN and USAF fighters for the period but few Japanese (21 vs 7) and half those are pre-42 fighters.

It makes it very hard to balance out the arena with few aircraft.  There is only one Japanese bomber, the Ki-67 and it's American counterpart is the Boston.  We could of added the Apache, but it's an attack aircraft, doesn't have a bomb sight, and doesn't allow formations.

Given time, Dale and Doug will add more Japanese planes . That will allow us to post more interesting setups.

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by Shane
"HEIAR"

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by Mister Fork
One of the problems with any PTO (Pacific Theatre of Operations) is the limited planeset we have.

If there were 5-8 additional IJN and IJAAF, we could balance it out by adding more warbirds to either side. We have plenty USN and USAF fighters for the period but few Japanese (21 vs 7) and half those are pre-42 fighters.

It makes it very hard to balance out the arena with few aircraft.  There is only one Japanese bomber, the Ki-67 and it's American counterpart is the Boston.  We could of added the Apache, but it's an attack aircraft, doesn't have a bomb sight, and doesn't allow formations.

Given time, Dale and Doug will add more Japanese planes . That will allow us to post more interesting setups.

I don't understand.  I thought AH1 was done and served, no more additions or patched forthcoming.  The Apache?  The A-36 single engine plane that the Mustang evolved from?  No bomb site?  Can't fly in formation?  I must be missing something here.

Also bear in mind that the Japanese didn't have a whole lot to choose from during these early years of the war, most of the odd machines and equipment were in Indo/China/Burma, the thinking that the Betty's, Val's, Kates, and Zero's could handle the ANZac/American hardware.

What I really don't get is the amount of whining that every map gets when it's turn to be rotated comes around.  Not all plane set are going to match up 50/50 so get used to it.  If anything it lets you work on team work skills when you have the disadvantaged plane set.  You think O'hare or Thatch had the opportunity to whine about how much better the A6M2 was to the Pentagon?  No, they worked on teamwork skills and showed what it could do.  I actually look forward to the planesets (when I could get my computer to run AH) that made you fly a little smarter, think a little faster, etc...Now everytime there is a map with a "disadvantage" to one side out come the same old whines from both sides.  I say cowboy up, get back in the saddle, and when that map that features the Spitfire comes back around STFU!!!!!

[MRPLUTO]

Ouch!  Why are so many people being mean to MRPLUTO?

It didn't take long before people were calling me an idiot and a whiner!

Am I an idiot?  Perhaps, and if I am you're doing me a favor telling me so I can change my thinking and no longer be one.  But I wasn't told why, so I think I'm not an idiot.  At least in this matter.

Am I a whiner?  Am I guilty of a "myopic Allied whine"?  Well, I'm just as likely to fly for either side in the CT, depending on numbers.  And, I personally love the Ki-67 "Hiryu / Peggy" and fly it in the MA often.  I was just making a suggestion, regardless of how it might or might not benefit me.  It's an easy and common tactic to dismiss someone's arguments without examining them by simply claiming that person is arguing in his own self-interest.  While there is nothing wrong with arguing on one's own behalf,  the facts in this case don't support such a charge.

*******

Here are some facts, and they are why I said what I did.

Brady:  You're right that the Ki-67 is more representative of the G4M2 "Betty" than the Ju-88.  The similarities being defensive armament and bombload.  The differences being a top speed  334 mph vs. 292-298 mph for G4M2, and the Ki-67's greater durability and self-sealing fuel tanks.

The G4M2 was Japan's most produced twin-engine bomber (2446).  The second and third most produced were the Mitsubishi Ki-21 "Sally" (2064) and the Kawasaki Ki-48 "Lily" (1977).  Both of these planes are better represented by the Ju-88.  Speed and defensive armament are similar.  Each had between three and five 7.7 and 12.7mm machine guns.  The Ju-88 is more durable, and, as Sakai pointed out above, its bombload is over twice the Japanese planes'.  In a scenario you could limit the Ju-88's load to 4 x 250 kg., but in the open CT that would be hard, obviously.  Though if anytime Allied pilots saw Ju-88s they could always remind him on chan one to drop any ordnance beyond 4 x 250 kgs.  There is some chivalry left in the CT, so it might work sometimes.

The Boston Mk III was deployed in early 1942, though mostly in Europe and North Africa.  As far as I can tell, 69 of them served from 1942-1945 with the Royal Australian Air Force in Asia.  The Boston was fast for a 1942 bomber...that was one of its strengths.  The A6M2 was slow for its time...that was one of its weaknesses.  It is a mismatch, but a historical one, so it doesn't bother me too much.

Why is no one complaining about the 1944 model TBM?  Probably because it was about 6-7 mph slower than the earlier model from of the addtion of one machine gun and rocket launchers.

The 1943 SBD has a 1,200 hp engine instead of a 1,000 hp, but it's still slow as molassas, so who cares?

*******

So those are my reasons.

MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33

[Sakai]

Originally posted by MRPLUTO
Ouch!  Why are so many people being mean to MRPLUTO?

It didn't take long before people were calling me an idiot and a whiner!

[/B]

I think you are being reasonable in your dialectic Plutosaur, I guess my bottom line is that I don't mind the 88 vs. the Boston but the Allies would simply whine about that.  Why not make it 88 vs. B-26--that's much closer in terms of payloads and the 26 is far better defensively equipped, making the tradeoff a reasonable one?  Both sides have an uber bomber, so fuggedaboutit

Also, early war . . .why no A-20?

You mentioned the honor system for bomb loads, you might ask guys to fly the Peggy at x manifold, that is as reasonable as asking them to limit their load-out, no?  

Also, when did rockets come into widespread use in the US Navy? 1942?  I honestly do not know a thing about ordinance (or women, or cars, or airplanes  . . .)

Notice though, that the only whining Nancy-boy milk running dweebs are the US guys, so given their obvious proclivity toward dress wearing it is reasonable to assume they will mince and fuss regardless of what bomber the face shooting weinie boys who never have enough of an advantage have to see.  

But I digress.  Hey!  Allow 163s to counter the Peggys!

You know what I mean?

;-)

Sakai

[brady]

The Japanese Army Bombers did not see service in the solomons, they were deployed in some numbers during the New Gunie fighting, which was I beleave as close to the slot as they got, so for this set up the comparasions between the Sally and the Lilly are kinda mute, both types did prety much cary the same bombload as the Peggy (prety much all Japanese bombers did) and they are both still better defended than the JU 88 is, not just because of the type (larger caliber) of guns also the posation of the guns, In the case of the Sally she is actualy a Bit faster than the Betty so these two are realy prety close preformance wise.

 Nobody is going to mind themselfs and take the lighter load, at least not reliably they arent.

    The mismatch does bother me though, thats why we have the Peggy/Boston combo, If we had a Beaufort and a Betty I would gladely use them instead.