Author Topic: so brady (Read 1763 times)

brady · « **Reply #15 on:** August 26, 2003, 01:56:09 PM »

Ya the customer so darn neady it just get's to be so anoying:)

ergRTC · « **Reply #16 on:** August 26, 2003, 02:31:08 PM »

What color did you want? Black right? Cause black is my favorite color. Why would anybody want a car that wasnt black? Dont be talkn to me about anything but black cause you are talking nonsense.....

Dennis · « **Reply #17 on:** August 26, 2003, 02:57:29 PM »

Bradys ain't changing the setup, 'cause bradys likes the setup this way. His setup. End of story. Despite a number of CT regulars suggesting that it might be just dandy without the bombers. So how about we just deal with it for another week?

Batz, you asked why we wouldn't just ignore the Bostons.
<"Its not like you have to chase it or its not like its going to do anything important.">

Interesting question, given your comment following the speed chart.

Like you, I usually try to ignore them, since I know I can't catch them unless they want me to. But ignoring them has two drawbacks:
1) Because they're available, a fair number of folks like to fly them as fighters. They can be a handful. Though certainly not invincible, they through a whole new dynamic into the a6m/f4f dogfight.
2) Because they're available, a fair number of folks like to pork bases with them. They kill fuel, ord and hangars. If ignored, you might find yourself with no useable base near the fight.

I've seen quite a bit of both this week.

Anyway. We're all just wasting breath/bandwidth.

Splash1

Batz · « **Reply #18 on:** August 26, 2003, 03:19:58 PM »

some folks like bombers. Some folks may only be flying in the ct and in this setup to fly bombers.

Without the ki-67 the only bombers the axis have are unarmed. the ju-88 carries 6000lbs x 3. So dont act like folks wont be whining the first time a ju88 sinks your entire fleet.

If ya get rid of the boston the the allies still have the out of place sbd and tbm.

The axis get unarmed bombers.

sounds like a good deal dont it

how about get rid of all the bombers except the val and kate.

But I bet the allies come back with "we need an sbd" blah blah blah. Its a never ending cycle. If the boston or ki-67s bug ya leave umm alone.

Its a helluva alot easier killling ki-67s with 50 cals then bostons with type 99 mk1s.

YMMV

Squire · « **Reply #19 on:** August 26, 2003, 04:45:57 PM »

How about adding the Ki-61, A6M5 and birdcage F4U-1 and stop with the silliness already? We dont have the planeset to do 1942 with the Ki-67 and BostonIII but we do for a late 1943 setup.

I beleive this has been asked for before, and its a much more balanced setup for fighter vs bomber.

brady · « **Reply #20 on:** August 26, 2003, 05:23:15 PM »

Except that the F4U-1 vs the A6m5 and Tony is Not a balanced set up.

Arlo · « **Reply #21 on:** August 26, 2003, 05:26:32 PM »

Yep. The A6M5 and Tony would have a clear advantage. But that don't scare us none. Bring it on.

Batz · « **Reply #22 on:** August 26, 2003, 05:32:54 PM »

Quote

How about adding the Ki-61, A6M5 and birdcage F4U-1 and stop with the silliness already? We dont have the planeset to do 1942 with the Ki-67 and BostonIII but we do for a late 1943 setup.

I beleive this has been asked for before, and its a much more balanced setup for fighter vs bomber.

If you are going to do all that just run Okinawa again. Its a better map for the ct anyway.

Squire · « **Reply #23 on:** August 26, 2003, 06:16:12 PM »

Okinawa has the F4U-1D, P-47D-30 and the N1K2.

No CT setup has been 100 percent fair since it began, give it a rest guys. If you doubt that, then tell me what one was, I will be eagerly awaiting the info...

For a group that is supposed to be so concerned for balanced play the Ki-67 and BostonIII in this setup is curious to say the least. Its ok to chase a BostonIII with your A6M2 untill it runs out of gas and thats ok, but god, we cant have a Ki-61 vs a F4U-1, that wont work. Righto.

In any event, the idea of the CT was to give some "WW2" and some "VARIETY", which we are no longer getting. We get the same F4F vs A6M2 setup, and if we dont like it, then to heck with us.

"Feedback" is just a joke now, there is none. I remember when that wasn't true. As for the "fair" thing, you guys are choking off innovation and variety by taking it well past where it was supposed to be, and I beleive the CT has lost its way. Rather than listening to our input you just cirlce the wagons and get increasingly defensive.

Do both these, one week after the next:

Channel Spring 1942:

RAF:

Spitfire V
Hurricane II
Boston III
Lancaster III

LW:

Fw 190A-5
Bf 109F-4
Ju 88A-4
Bf 110C-4
Ju 87 Stuka

Week after that:

End at Rabaul 1943:

USN/USMC/USAAC/ANZAC

F4U-1
P-40E
F4F-4
BostonIII
SBD
TBM

IJN/IJAAF

A6M5
Ki-61
A6M2
Val
Kate
Ki-67

I guarantee the world wont end. Lets see something else for a change. My squad will gladly fly both setups as Allied, and wont complain a word. Let the LW have its "Fw190" fun, and then let us have our "F4U" fun.

When did the CT get on this "100 percent fair" thing anyways? throw it out, its a failure, and embark on a "swinging pendelum" philosophy, were its OK to have one side advantaged.

Regards.

brady · « **Reply #24 on:** August 26, 2003, 06:29:14 PM »

One thing we are runing into is a totaly stale plane set, despite that we have still cranked out new set up's for the CT several times this year, by mixing it up.

Any set up with a F4U in it vs anything other than a George is not balanced, given the present Japanese planes, the preformance differance is simply to huge, now it should be mentioned that this is my openion and may not be shared by all the CT staff.

We have done those types of set up's in the past and I am shure we will in the future at some point, wheather I think it's a good idea or not:)

Balanced set up's is somthing we always strive for in the CT and we will I am shure continue that trend, creating set up's whear one side has to many advantages has proven a bad idea in the past and has been exemplified by lower atandance during those set up's, somthing we saw a lot of during the early days in the CT espichaly when bad unbalanced PAC set up's were made.

I think the rule of thumb is "Never sacrifice Gameplay for Historical accuracery".

The CM's can do that stuff in their sandbox if they want.

Arlo · « **Reply #25 on:** August 26, 2003, 06:43:03 PM »

LOL ....

That's it. I finally had to put that so-often ironically funny quote in my sig.

Slash27 · « **Reply #26 on:** August 26, 2003, 07:07:05 PM »

The CM's can do that stuff in their sandbox if they want. This sandbox is full of *****.

ergRTC · « **Reply #27 on:** August 26, 2003, 07:42:17 PM »

I thought I smelled something. Should have realized sooner, before I crawled in and tried to play with them.

I am all for warlocs setups. Particularly that lw setup with the spit v. Nice and tight. NOrmally those lw setups end up with fifty Golly-geen planes of every make and model.

Batz · « **Reply #28 on:** August 27, 2003, 03:12:47 AM »

umm spit 5 vrs 190a5 and guess what the whines will be. I'll spare ya but go ahead and search this forum for the old tunisia setups.

The allied folk couldnt agree to that then why would they now?

And what would ya need lanc III in 1942 for? Not that it matters most folks fly fun planes and i doudt the lanc would get much use. But aint it strange how you beat up on the peggy but offer something that deffinately has a greater potential to "unbalance" the fun as the lanc? But thats an allied plane isnt it.

Your pac setup has been run before. But if you look at it 3 pre 1940 planes for the axis and a 40-50mph speed advantage over the other 2. Sounds like fun....

But brady aint the only cm maybe the other guys will buy it.

Oldman731 · « **Reply #29 on:** August 27, 2003, 07:53:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by brady
Any set up with a F4U in it vs anything other than a George is not balanced, given the present Japanese planes, the preformance differance is simply to huge, now it should be mentioned that this is my openion and may not be shared by all the CT staff.

I know you think this is so, Brady, but it just doesn't fit with my experience. Seems to me that the Corsairs never do particularly well in any of these setups (well, OK, if they're just flying against A6M2s I suppose they do fine). As a Frequent Flyer for the Emperor, I worry a lot more about Hellcats, even P40Es, than I do about Corsairs. So if people want them, I say, let them have them.

- oldman