Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: jarbo on September 13, 2002, 02:45:00 AM
-
Situation: The allied advancement in the pacific has stagnated. The Solomon Islands continue to be a highly contested area. The Japanese carriers Shokaku and Zuikaku are operating in the region. The U.S. carriers Princeton and Saratoga are also operating in the area. The Cactus Air Force is operating out of Henderson Field (A1) currently and has a wide variety of planes at their disposal. Allied commanders wish to move their foothold deeper into the island chain. The Marines currently hold a single base (A5) but have their eyes set on A10 as a forward base of operations. The Japanese, however, have made an unexpected technological advancements several months back and are deploying three new aircraft in full production to the region, the A6M5b, the N1K2J, and the KI67.
The M16, M3, LVTs enabled at all land bases
Japanese (Knights)
C23,C24,C29 – Amphibious Assault Groups – LVTs only
C30 - Shokaku – A6M5, A6M2, D3A, TBM (for Torpedos)
C22 - Zuikaku – A6M5, A6M2, D3A, TBM (for Torpedos)
A11,A15,A16,A17,A18,A19,A20 – A6M2/5, KI-61, N1K2J, KI-67
U.S. (Bishop)
C7,C27,C28 – Amphibious Assault Groups – LVTs only
C3 – Princeton – F6F, TBM
C8 – Saratoga – F4F-4, FM2, TBM
A5 – Marines – F4U-1, SBD
A1 – Cactus Air Force – A20, Boston III, P40B/E, P47D-11, P51B, F4F-4, SBD, TBM
CV Downtime 1 hour (BTW: CVs have no LVTs)
Radar/Bar Alt at 1000ft
Jarbo
CT Staff
-
You just made a bunch of Sailors very happy, us Ij's are'nt too sad ethier. Thanks Jarbo!
It's a good time for a Shameless recruiting plug as well.:D
-
Damn Skippy Poster there lowejg!
BTW I owe you 2... ;)
CIU
-
WOW cool Poster whear did u get hat?
-
Aanvil of Warbirds 27th Sentai made it.
He allowed us in the AH Division of 27th Sentai to use it.
CIU, don't worry I know you'll be ballancing the account in the next few days.;)
-
just curious as to why the Boston vs the B-26? The USAAF used B-24s, B-25's, B-26s and B-17s in 1943 in the South Pacific Theater as level bombers. (The A-20 was obviously present as well.) Did you do this for a balance issue?
It bites that we don't have a 1943 P-38. (tho you are allowing the 1945 N1K2J to be developed "early" ;) ) Would be perfect for this setup, as well as the Tunisia setup I'm running for the TOD.
-
The concern was balance. The jabo capability of the allied aircraft easily account for the loss of the B26. I provided the Boston as a level bomber for use by anyone who really wants to do a buff run. In addition, I feel...again my opinion.. the Japanese plane set available for this era doesn't give the IJN either variety and equal footing w/ the allies.
Jarbo
CT Staff
-
I would like to see an early B17 model would be a really nice addition to the pacific plane set, but would rather a betty bomber first to the Japanese. We do need an early P38 though for the 38 drivers.
P.S. Did ya like the added touch of the airvraft carrier names? :)
-
Just left the CT on the Axis side. As much fun as the Nik is... um, it seems a bit much.
How would folks feel about replacing it with a FW190A-5 or LA-5 as stand in for the missing 1943 IJ Army plane? Or is the Ki-61 good enough in the hand of a better stick then I?
-
And I just flew on the Allied side. This is complete science fiction. Not only have the Japanese made "unexpected advances", they have suddenly developed an industrial capacity greater than that of the Allies!! There is a canopy of NIK2s in there. I fly the CT for the historical setups. See you next week.
PS: You can do that sort of setup when AH allows you to give the japanese low octane fuel, unreliable engines, and no spare parts.
-
Miska,
All Japanese aircraft in AH always fly with low octane fuel. There is no way to give the Japanese aircraft the performance they'd have with high octane fuel.
If you want reliability problems on the N1K2 and Ki-61 (A6Ms were very reliable), then its only fair if the Allies get jacked by their crap reliability in the early war when the Japanese didn't suffer it.
Your post displays a typically myopic view of history as taught by John Wayne movies.
-
"PS: You can do that sort of setup when AH allows you to give the japanese low octane fuel, unreliable engines, and no spare parts."
And the pos P 40 engine would be modled, and the jamming on the hispanos would be modeled, and the ..... Preformance figures for Japanese aircraft in AH are based on how they preformed when the Japanese were using them with Japanese fuel, not US fuel, and reliabality issues cut both ways.
-
This is another 1944 setup. NIk2s and P-51Bs. The USN has to fly F6Fs to compete with the Nikkies, and so forth and so on...
Please remove the P-51s, F6Fs, and NIK2s, and you have a fine setup.
What do we have to do to get a genuine 1943 CT setup in the CT?
Ki-61 and A6M5 are a fine match for the F4F/FM-2 and P-40E.
Regards.
-
The Wildcat is very capable in terms of dogfighting the George, I have on numiours occashion out fought 2 of them at the same time in a turn fight using this plane, The Hellcat is faster and can be used to Zoom and Boom the George if you are trying to gog fight it then you get what u deserve. Funny we dont hear people complain like this when the Germans have to fight spits for a weeak at a pop, the same tactis the germans use vs the spits are the one's the allise nead to use aganst the George, except for the Wildcat of cours which should turn fight those Georges.
This set up serves to further illistrate how despertaly we nead more Japanese planes so we can provide a balenced set up in PTO events, I would very much like to see an Early P 38, but I realy think any more effort put forth deaping the US plane set before the Japanese one is a seriously bad idea.
-
Believe me Miska, I'd much rather have Ki-44s and J2M3s than the N1K2 in this setup, but HTC hasn't put any midwar Japanese fighter designs into the game yet.
Even the Ki-84-Ia would be more reasonable. It was in the hands of the evaluation chutai in October, 1943, and made its operational debut in March, 1944. That is earlier than the P-51D's operational debut. Further, the Japanese built 3,500 of them.
The N1K1-J (the predecessor to our N1K2-J) was also in service in early 1944.
Maybe if US fans would lobby for some of their opposition and show a bit of interest in non-US aircraft you guys wouldn't be forced to fight N1K2s in a 1943 setup, N1K2s that were added merely for balance. You reap what you sow.
-
I absolutely agree!! By all means, make every plane as ugly as it was. The more (historically accurate) problems for each side, the better. I especially agree that AH (and any other sim) is badly in need of weapon stoppages and unreliable engines.
And this is not a "side" thing, either (that's quite insulting actually). 880 flies both sides, purely based on numbers in the arena.
But please, stick to historical setups. If one side is losing badly because it should (ie France 1940) I will fly that side and be happy to do my best in the historical situation. Did you hear me complain about fighting 109s in Hurricane Is all last week? No! I loved Norway. One of my favourite setups so far. But if you call something The Slot 1943, don't give me a Ray Bradbury set up where a 1944 Japanese engineer travels back to 1941! Call it Ray Bradbury's Time Traveller set-up. Then I'll know to do something else with my time. Again, I fly the CT for the historical atmosphere.
-
Our Ki 61 and the A6M5 are 44 planes, although The Ki 61 we have is not named corectly so I may be mistaken on that one.
-
Several posts popped up while I was writing:
This has NOTHING to do with being a "fan" of some side or other!!!!!! If you feel you can't do a 1943 PAC setup, then don't! Do something that you feel you CAN do. Again, we fly both sides. When is the last time I have complained about ANYTHING around here? Get a clue.
-
Miska,
I appricate your point but in the interest of gameplay we follow this premis, "Never sacrifce gameplay for Historical Accuracery" No In the CT we always strive for the most part to make our sets as historicaly accurate as possable, but frankely we do not have all the tools to do that all the time espichaly in the PTO and VVS type set up's, also early war is still lacking severly, no good Italian and a compleat lack of anything French. Bearing this all in mind I do think that the above set up is ballenced plane wise, a bit of historical license was taken to creat it but it is not that far outa wack, Hellcats did fight Georges after all.
-
Change the name and I'll withdraw my objections :) This is NOT the Slot 1943. So what's on tap for next week?
-
Well I am up next week, I am going to do a Tempest vs 109e setup using the DA map.
-
All and all it is my general feelings that the sides are reasonably well matched up in most the scenarios I've seen since I started flying in the CT a little over a month ago (starting with the original slot setup).
As for modelling engine failure, etc. etc. etc. bad idea all around. Just think how miffed you get when you have a succesful sortie going and you get a disconnection. Adding things like engine failure and so forth just multiplies those issues. No one wants to fly for 5 minutes to get to a battle only to have their engine seize on them and have to do it all over again. Gun jamming is the same way, if you're flyin a Yak for example and you line up on someone and your 20mm jams you're outta luck, you're left with 2 little MG's. Gun jams and engine failure just sound like quick trips to high blood pressure to me.
-
or you would learn to fly differently instead of always being right at the edge of performance. Before committing to a fight, you might ask yourself "if my guns jam in this situation, can I get out"? You might learn to avoid some fights and take advantage of others. All in all a richer gaming experience, and more factors to favour historical flying on everyone's part = more immersion = more intense fun for all. Just my opinion.
Oh, and Brady, have fun next week ;)
-
miska,
The point is that the CT crew can't do a 1943 US vs IJ setup. The Japanese aircraft simply aren't there and the US will have an atifically easy time of it.
(Did you like having Spit Is added to Norway?)
brady,
The A6M5b and Ki-61-I-KAIc are both 1944 aircraft, but they are also both early war airframes. In the case of the Ki-61 it is, performance wise, prety much a 1942 Ki-61, but it has better guns and bigger bombs. Its no Ki-61-II though.
The A6M5b still suffers all the high speed handling issues, and with the over optimistic turning F4Fs it can't even be used in turn fights. Hell, the A6M2 can barely be used to turn against the F4Fs.
I'm with soulyss on the engine and gun bits. You're fantasizing if you think it would lead to a richer game experience. It'd just lead to empty arenas as people canceled their accounts, or avoided the arenas where it was enabled. Its no fun to be climbing out in your P-51D/Fw190D-9/Spitfire Mk IX/La-7/N1K2-J only to have the engine seize after 10 minutes of flight. Why would people want to log on to that after a stressful day of work?
It would also put an end to any concept of a "fair" fight.
I'm all for engine heat management that works in a predictible way and only punishes people for abusing the engine, but random failures outside of their control would add nothing good to tha game.
-
Karnak,
If that's true, then I would urge them not to do a 1943 PAC until they feel they can.
I wasn't aware that the Spit had been added to Norway. I wouldn't have flown it anyway. I only flew the Hurri in there. I was looking for the gladiator so I could fly off a frozen lake, but no such luck.
PS: Have you looked at some subs for the Ki-43 and such? How does the 202 stack up? I'll have to look that up.
-
The C.202 is much, much faster and handles vastly poorer when compared with the Ki-43. It is also very much tougher.
-
Yes, I just saw that. Armament is wrong too. 320 vs 370 mph!
-
* The tactics of FM-2 vs George is not the issue.
* The Ki-61 and A6M5 are 1943 technology a/c. You are splitting hairs by calling them 1944.
The issue here is having *ANY* pacific setup without the N1K2 and some 1944/5 US type involved.
Why cant we have this setup?:
USN: FM-2 (CV)
F4F-4 (CV)
TBM (CV)
SBD (CV)
USAAF: P-40E
BostonIII (early A-20A)
USMC: F4U-1A (perked at 1 pt) land only
F4F-4 (land)
SBD (land)
IJN: A6M2/A6M5 (CV and land)
VAL (CV and land)
IJAAF: Ki-61
Ki-67
No Hellcats, No Mustangs, No Nikkies For once.
It may be a semi fudge setup (like most are), but its interesting, and workable I think. Could represent late 1943 or early 1944 in some parts of the SW Pacific.
I would be interested in hearing from the 27th Sentai on this.
Regards.
-
Plane sets can be debated till were all blue in the face, I think wahats important hear is that this one is balenced, no side has a clear advantage over the other.
Yes the Zero and the Tony are 43 ish planes but both models would never of seen combat till 44 that we curently have not to be anal about it all, I think my point is if were going to anal abot the historical license taken to creat this balenced set then we shoud look at how it was arived at and why, we dont have a good Japanese plane set to work with and we have to do som things we would rather not do to creat balenced set up's.
The George is rarely included in CT set ups, Most Pac set ups lately have been early war, and the one I did in AUG 45 was a couple months ago.
Next week we are doing what I posted we would be doing this week, VVS vs Luftwaffe 43, another A hsitorical set done because we do not have the proper aircraft to do it 100% accurately, see the right up on the forum.
-
IMHO
If you want to sub something for a Ki-43. Grab a A6M2 and empty the cannon rounds on the runway and fly with just the two MG, or fly the Vals. Those are about the best way I can see to sub the Oscar as things are now.:)
-
I'm all for engine heat management that works in a predictible way and only punishes people for abusing the engine
I'd love to see more indepth modelling of the aircraft subsystems and their damage. Engine management is one thing I would like to see, or an oxygen system that could be damaged affecting the pilot like a wound at high alts maybe. And more little switches and such in the cockpit for me to fiddle with. :)
-
Karnak, I thought I was the only one who was VERY suprised at how well the Wildcat handels, kinda made me wounder wtf all that stuff I read about it being unmanuaverable compared to the Zero.
-
That we want a balanced setup is a given, nobody here has asked for P-38Ls vs A6M2s.
Look, call it 1944 if it makes you happy, I dont care. The above setup I outlined is still workable, and fair IMHO.
No setup is perfect, but there are enough IJ and US a/c to do a good setup without resorting to the N1K2 and/or Hellcat every time.
I am also at a loss as to what a/c you would add that would make the mid war setup workable for the Japanese? Ki-43?, too slow and very lightly armed. I want it in AH, sure, but it doesnt do much for the IJ in the CT. Ki-84? hey, great fighter, but its late 1944, so it doesnt get included anyways. Ki-45? too slow again. Bottom line was, the IJ fought in the mid war SW Pacific with A6M2/3/5 and Ki-61s as their best fighters. There is no "missing 1943 IJ fighter" that would make up much for them, is there? For early US types, you have 2: P-40E and F4F. The P-39 is a "so so P-40", I dont see it changing much in CT setups either. Adding the P-38F only makes it worse for the IJ as well, it did 400 mph and had a wallop in the nose. Thems the breaks.
I do very much like the CT, and I dont want a good debate mistaken for anything other than passion for a point of view. We all appreciate the fine work the CMs do. I just disagee with some designs frome time to time .
Regards.
-
Squire,
Easy. The Ki.44 and J2M3.
BTW, the Ki.84 is not late 1944. As I stated above it was in the hands of evaluation units in October, 1943 and deployed to combat sentais in March, 1944 whereupon it was in immediate combat. The P-51D didn't enter squadron service for more than a month after the Ki.84 had seen its first combat.
-
Well said Warloc.
I think Jarbo is doing his best to make everyone happy, and giving both sides good aircraft, for which we should all be thanking him.
If we want to pick it down to an acceptable 1943 type plane set, and you did ask for a 27th Sentai opinion on your setup.
Warloc as far as a 1943 setup yours is as good as your going to get, I do think the early model Corsair ( A 1943 BIRD) should be added, other than that it looks great to me.
Last time Jarbo did a setup we came down hard like this on him, and we ended up with him backing off and somebody else's set-up coming in. I was responsable for a big part of the whining, and I don't want it to happen to him again. He's one of the guys that makes the CT great, and I'll be happy with whatever he decides to do.
SALUTE ALL
-
EARLY WAR? LOL, try the A6M2 / Brewster Buff and the arena will stay allied empty.
You allied flyers cry worse than my child. If you dont have the fastest, strongest, most fire power, you grab up your ball and go home with your lip poked out so far, it drags the ground.
Been flying AH for about a week now and this is what I have seen:
Allied spit drivers yelling about not having the spits even though the 109F guys actually turn fight with you so you can shoot them down. One too many burps of the cannons and the 109 is empty. The Hurri is built like a tank in AH and takes alot from the 110 to kill it. Then for the sorry shot like me, I land 100 assists..hehehe
The zeke dives a little too fast, who gives a mooses lips? The thing is like a 400mph unguided missle. Just turn your silly little F4F, Spit etc and the zeke will zoom right by so you can slip right back in at D500 and splash it!! Oh yeah,one small hit and the zeke losses one elyvator, all the advantage you F4F drivers need. Slows the radious down worse than what it already is.
P-51s, F4Us, and F6Fs B&Z the zeke but cry when the Goerge is out?..hmmmmm.............I promised myself I wouldnt do this in AH did enough of it in another flight sim.
If you want realistic, sub nothing. Design the planes and get them in there!!!!!!!!
Where is the P-39, early P-38, A6M3 and Ki-43?
-
Nice site Hawk:)
-
Karnak: The Ki-84 was not in service in the Solomons, or the New Guinea theater, ever. Anyways, thats not my point, its hardly a 1943 fighter, which is the setup im arguing to see. You also mentioned the P-51D. It doesnt belong there either, I agree. Okinawa in 1945 for that one.
The Ki-44? Sure, add it at some point, I would like to see it. The 1943 version only did 360mph though, and had 4 x 12.7s. It was also built for speed, not manueverbility. No, its no magic solution either to the woes of the IJ.
J2M2? Nope. Service delivery in December 1943, true, but speed 370mph. The 1944-5 versions were faster (382mph), but not much faster than the N1K2 of the same period. This is not a 1943 fighter, and it never served in the Solomons or New Guinea either.
*The Ki-61 is as fast as either of the two above (370mph) , with as good or better armament (2 x 20mm and 2 x 12.7s), and AH has them already.* If the Ki-61 is not good enough then the Ki-44 and J2M2 wont be either.
*You guys DID notice that the F6F Hellcat is not even in my proposed 1943 setup at all right?
Btw, I would like to see the Ki-44, and J2M added to AH lineup. I am absolutely all for the IJ getting a lot more planes!!! They deserve them.
Btw 27th Sentai.
Regards.
p.s. Comments like: "You allied flyers cry worse than my child. If you dont have the fastest, strongest, most fire power, you grab up your ball and go home with your lip poked out so far, it drags the ground."
-are made by those with nothing to say in the first place. Go ahead, sling more mud.
-
Originally posted by Squire
*You guys DID notice that the F6F Hellcat is not even in my proposed 1943 setup at all right?
Yes Warloc, I noticed, personally I don't have a problem with the F6F in a 1943 setup, maybe I still got some VF-27 contamination left in me.:D
Musta been the blood donation I got from Hijacker once.
Also I don't know how but for some reason I missed the F4U1 in your post last night. It was the only plane I could think of adding to your set-up, tired eyes last night I guess.
Again we can't do nothing about planes we don't have, and you are correct the planes that really fought the war in the Solomons for the Japanese were the Ki 43, A6m2/3/5 , and Ki-61.
The Ki44 was first used in Burma I believe, and never made it to the Solomons, just like the Ki-84 was not used in the Solomons, and I am almost certain the J2m was never there ethier.
Allies biggest assets to that operation were F4F, F4U1, P-40 , P-39, and P-38.
Not much we can do guys but fly what we have and hope we get additions to the plane set that will help both sides with realistic matchups.
Look I am not going to lie, I want the best possible plane I can have for each setup, however I'm not looking for N1k2 vs P-40B's, just like you guys are not looking for F4U4.s vs A6m2s.:)
I also appreciate the arguements made by both sides, debate is a good thing I always learn something from these threads. No matter how passionate the dissagreement guys, use facts and opinions, try and wave off the outright insults, and we'll make better progress.
ERG YOUR A TATER HEAD! See it can be done.:D
-
I like the set up. I'm having fun.
I flew the A6m5 all last night and did o.k. unless i met Soulyss, lol.
I personally won't be flying the N1K because I want to learn to fly the Zero, and being in a N1K isn't gonna teach me anything, besides, it would really damage my ego....
.........i can appreciate why people do fly it though, most of the time i was in yesterday, the U.S. had a 3 to 2 or better advantage in numbers.
I appreciate the set up, the work that goes into it, and bizarrely enough find myself agreeing with something Miska said:-
"If one side is losing badly because it should (ie France 1940) I will fly that side and be happy to do my best in the historical situation."
If i'm outnumbered, or hit by an F6F with alt and E advantage, hell, i'll just do my best and learn some defensive flying.....sides were never, ever balanced in the real war, why on earth should we come in here moaning about that now?
Some scenarios will have realistic planesets, some will have fair planesets, but only within the scope of the available models, i can live with that.
-
The A6M5 is no cupcake. I do better in it than any of the other 3 Japanese planes. It's got good speed, for zeke, great firepower, and manuverability.
Actually I don't see all the buzz over the N1k2, havent flown it much, I may fly it more this setup if it stays, but everytime I fly the N1 I die. Maybe with it's reputation I'm expecting it to do the fighting for me.:)
-
I haven't made it in there yet myself, but thanks for running a PTO this week.
I would be fine with the removal of the P-51B, P-47, F6F, and N1K2 if we're trying to simulate early to mid 1943.
P40Es, F4Fs, and F4U-1s vs A6Ms and Ki61s should be the focus of the Solomons at this time anyway, shouldn't it?
Would love to see Ki43, A6M3, an earlier Ki.61, P-39D, and P-38F for the setup but until HTC gives us more, this is all the CMs have to work with.
-
Reading the posts above, i want to thank all of you for the intput. I know that some of the aircraft I included in the current setup were not in the Solomons in 1943. However, I intended this setup to reflect a August 1943 setup, and many decisions were made for gameplay.....and I stand by them. I have no desire to create a setup that the Japanese are destined to have their arses handed to them on a platter. The N1K2J gives them a force balancer. If I see the Japanese consistently keeping the U.S. pinned to one side I will consider removing it or pushing it to the back fields as it would obviously be an imbalance, but I will reserve the right to make that decision at a later date and when I feel the decision is not a "snap" decision.
As for the F6F, VF-33 operated them in the Solomon Islands from August 43 to Jan 44. I placed in on a CV for 2 reasons: 1) we have an actual hellcat squadron in the CT 2) The CV can be sunk denying use of F6F for 1 - hour plus drive time to next fight
(BTW: VF-27 actually operated off of the Princeton in 44)
On 12 July 1943, Rear Admiral Walden Ainsworth leads three cruisers and five destroyers on a combat mission up the Slot, the channel that divides the Solomon Islands in two. It wasn't till 1 November 1943, that the U.S. Marines landed on Bougainville in the Solomon Islands. So i think this setup is not all that far off the mark, based on the premise of allied stagnation in the area, availability of IJN planes, and variety and balanced gameplay.
Jarbo
CT Staff
-
Karnak:
Get your facts straight before you post.
The Spitfire 1 was in active service in the RAF in April of 1940.
In fact there were Squadrons stationed in the North of Britain.
There were no Spitfires actually landed and flown in Norway, but it is NOT a stretch to place them on a British base.
And in any case, I only added it at the end of the Setup, as a example of what might have happened, if the British had held out longer and chosen to deploy reinforcements.
In actual fact, I should have only allowed the Me110C4 on the Axis side, since the 109E was not used much in the campaign due to its limited range.
So you Axis flyers were doing just fine.
-
I think I have to disagree with the "balance at all cost" position the CT staff have expressed above. It is interesting to see how and why the air battles were lost or won. I don't fly in the CT to furball. I could do that in the MA (and I don't). Therefore, plane vs plane matchups are not how I evaluate a set-up. I evaluate it in terms of 1) whether I learn anything about the period and place portrayed and 2) whether historical tactics and operational practices (at the squad level and above, NOT (NOT!) at the plane vs plane level) provide the results that they should.
In that sense, the Burma setups have been among the most succesful. I am also very much looking forward to Wotan's 8th AF thing. There was rarely ever a balanced situation in any airwar (WWII or other). You win some, you lose some. If the CT helps me learn about the factors involved in the historical outcome, I am happy. And this is true whehter I get 5 kills in the week, or I don't fire my guns once (and that happens on a regular basis).
If anything, being on the bad end of an unbalanced situation should leave you in awe of the people who stuck it out and tried to make a difference (no matter what side they were on). Being on the good end of an unbalanced setup should leave you with no illusion that wars are won through individual skill. In either case you should feel the futility and helplessness of it all.
That is difficult to do with Sci-Fi setups.
-
I have to say I take a different approach to the CT. The main attraction to the CT for me, is the plane vs plane matchups. Most my time is spent looking for the air to air battle in the MA to, but because of the axis vs allied nature of the CT it's even more true in the CT. That along with the reduced icon ranges are the biggest draw the CT has IMHO.
That being said, I feel that CM's have to make those consessions to balance. A job I think they do rather well, I've had a couple differences of opinion with decisions they've made in regards to planeset, but everyone does from time to time. It is my opinion that trying to give both sides a viable option for victory is a must.
Even if it has to bend history a little given the planeset available to work with. The biggest problem the CT has is a low population of regulars. Creating a setup where one side has little or no hope of prevailing would dwindle those numbers even further.
-
Somebody better tell those P-47 drivers the N1k2 is uber.
A couple of 880 FAA, and VF-27 boys have been running amuk in the CT this morning. They don't give a crap what your in, their just killing everything.
Whats tha motto Sancho has in his signature? "Fear the Thunderbolt". I'm a believer.:eek:
Personally I think it's bad form for you guys not to wet your pants and die for me when I up in a N1k2.
Hijacker, Warloc, I demand you make your pilots fight fair!!:D
-
I will have to concede that the p47 is the most fearsome machine in AH :)
-
Was in CT all yesterday evening and had a blast. Started at a5 with 2 invasion fleets. Shelled the VH, de- acked, then landed LTV.From there, we sent the invasion fleets east and met with the Shokaku(or however u spell it) and worked our way SE. We sunk 2 CV fleets in the course of the evening. We re-captured a11(that had been captured) to reset.
Love the setup, thnx.
I don't think engine failure and gun jamming is a good idea, it would empty an arena, discos are bad enough.
The invasion fleets are brilliant. I like having 2 battleships in a group,I thought that was real kewl. And thank you for the lack of PT boats, nothing like watching someone respawn repeatedly launching 100's of torpedoes.
I would like to say they should bring in the Frank(Ki-84)There were 2 versions I think, the 1a and 1c the 1a had 20mm and mg, the 1c had 30 and 20mm(bomber hunter)
-
Boy you guys were relentless last night at A1 Sixpence was a bit frustrating on the allied side as usual when you're back's against the wall. I remember I stopped flying cap over the beaches for 2 seconds to try and help sink a cruiser and that's when you guys got A1 I was rather upset. But ended the evening having some success flying the F4F-4 and getting into some real good scraps, boy that thing will hang on to a A6M5 when it's limited to 25% fuel. ;)
Great fights last night axis! :D
-
Squire--
What the Ki-44 could do, that the Zeke and Tony can't, is climb. That thing climbs like a rocket compared to the other 2.
1943 is a bad year for balance in terms of Pacific setups. The Allies were introducing the F6F's, F4U's, P-47's, P-38's and such and the Japanese were largely stuck with Zekes, Tojo's and Tony's--all slower. Even if we DID have all the 1943 PAC planes, it'd still be impossible to balance well for gameplay. The fact is, war isn't terribly fair and doesn't always make for a good game.
1944 is a little better; at least the Japanese got the Ki-84 which can match most the Allied fighters at low altitudes. The one other Japanese fighter that might be able to match the Allied jobs in speed is the Ki-61-II; I've never seen much data on this airplane's speed. I've heard that it was faster than the Ki-100 (which was itself one of the faster Japanese fighters), but that's about all I've heard.
J_A_B
-
Service Entry dates for AH Pacific Theatre aircraft for all you purists:
Japan:
A6M2: July, 1940
A6M5b: June, 1944? (production began in April, 1944)
D3A1: 1937
Ki-61-KAIc: January, 1944
Ki-67: April, 1944
N1K2: November, 1944?
UK:
Seafire Mk IIc: October, 1942
USA:
F4U-1: October, 1942
F4U-1C: April, 1945
F4U-1D: April, 1944
F4U-4: April, 1945
F4F-4: 1941
F6F-5: July, 1944
FM-2: September, 1943
P-38L: July, 1944
P-40B: January, 1941
P-40E: August, 1941
TBD-5: April, 1943
TBM-3: March, 1942
-
Thats basically the problem I have with this. The notion that no matter what, we CANT have a Solomons 1943 setup, even though we have a good many of the a/c needed.
The entry dates are fine, changes nothing to the central argument.
As for the Ki-44. It never flew in the Solomons as far as I know, and I dont think it climbed much better than the Ki-61 either.
Look, the IJ flew the Ki-43, A6M2/3/5 and The Ki-61 in the SW Pacific. The US opposed them with P-40s, P-39s, F4Fs, P-38s. We have the P-40 and the F4F, it doesnt matter that we dont have the early P-38, we can use the USMC F4U-1A if that works, and call it a day.
BTW, I guess we will never see a Channel Front 1941-2 in the CT? RAF with Spitfire Vs vs the LW with 190A-5s and 109F-4s. Thats hardly fair either, so lets cross that one off too.
I just did the CAP event today. RAF with all HurricaneIs vs 109Es and 110s. Hmmm, no more of that either I guess, no more Norway 1940 designs.
The next TOD "Tunisia" is having the Allies face 190s, 109Gs and 109Fs in P-40s and SpitfireVs. Fair? hell no. Accurate? yes.
Have a look at my proposed CT set again and tell me whats unbalanced out of it.
Regards.
-
Squire,
You do know that the Ki-44 was designed for climb and speed, right?
The Ki-44 climbs faster than the N1K2-J or Ki-84. Even the J2M, also designed for climb and speed, doesn't outclimb the Ki-44.
The Ki-44 was the fastest climbing Japanese fighter, not just from among its contemporaries, but among all Japanese fighters.
-
In re-evaluating the inclusion of the N1K2J , i am gonna try to simulate limiting the production of it. It will only be enabled at rear japanese airfields. It is a bit too imbalancing at ALL airfields, as I had it set up originally.
I am always open to suggestions, and thanks for the feedback.
Jarbo
CT Staff
-
I'm not saying you can't have a balanced 1943 PAC setup. I'm saying you can't have a balanced 1943 PAC setup AND stay 100% true-to-history, because in history it wasn't balanced.
That's fine by me. It isn't fine by some people, which is why this thread got so long.
As for the Ki-44, as Karnak pointed out it out-climbs all other Japanese fighters that saw signifigant use. This also means it out-climbs all US fighters currently in AH by a useful margin. Its climbrate is over 1000 FPM better than the Ki-61 we have in AH.
J_A_B
-
Late model planes at limited bases is a good idea Jarbo. I hear all this talk about realistic times of serviced planes, and although some good points are made, I think this is a good arena. Don't forget, we only have so many maps, so tweaking them with different planes can put one map to many uses. I would like to make some maps but it is not working on my OS(windows XP pro).
Soulyss Great flyin
-
Jarbo.
If you take away the N1k2 it's gonna be a slaughter. If you saw what the P-47s did today you wouldn't be pulling it. I've said this before and everybody laughs, but the P-47 against Zekes is like the 262 vs anything.
In fact it's worse, the P-47 guns are accurate at 500 yds, and it carries a buttload of ammo.
I flew in the CT on and off most of the day, and the N1k2's were not stopping anything the Allies were trying to do.
Pull it if you want, but if you do it's just going to be a cake walk for the Allies. Maybe it's supposed to be, but this will be the third time in the last 3 setups you guys have come back and made adjustments to help the Allies.
The Hedge rows setup they came back and perked the 262, Norway halfway through the spit was added, now your considering the putting the N1k2 at rear bases.
If you do that, do the same thing with the P-47, it's the monster of this setup not the George.
If you pull it though this is going to be another Kurile Islands, everybody and their uncle flying Allied, and only handsomehunk Sentai pukes flying Japanese. Hmm did I just call myself a handsomehunk puke?:rolleyes:
Anyway Jarbo your call. If your feeling the heat because the George didnt fight in the Solomons, I understand, but the P-47 wasn't there ethier. I know guys are calling your set-up Science fiction, the butt whupping I took today may have had everything to do with science, but it sure as hell wasn't fictional.:D
-
I am not pulling it totally, just moving it to rear airbases. This way as allied advances deep in to japanese territory, it becomes tougher. I also still want it available for some Japanese variety as well.
jarbo
-
Just went in and checked, you already did it huh??
LOL Figures.
Well better give the Allies the Chog, and the PonyD too, they belong there as much as the PonyB, and P47.
Christ you guys beat all sometimes.
LOL why don't we just agree right now to never include the N1K2, the ME262, the TA-152, and the FW-19D, in CT setups. That will save everyone a lot of trouble and typing.
Even though an Allied plane can dominate an arena like the Jug is doing right now, by all means don't allow an Axis one to counter it.
This is too funny to even be pissed about .:D
AXIS PILOTS BEND OVER AND TAKE IT LIKE A MAN!
-
No you didnt pull it, you just took it out of the fight.
The Allies squads are not stupid they'll figure out real quick how to exploit this. No biggie just another day in the IJA.:D
-
Im not calling for this setup to be changed, Im just saying, down the road, we could have another setup perhaps and try a few things out with the 1943ish set. Thats all. For the future.
As for the Ki-44, ya ok, I admit, It climbs better. I looked up the data and was surprised at how well it did climb. It is still slower than most US Iron though (early Ki-44), and I really dont see it changing the balance too much. It really was not a "Solomons" fighter, but even if it was, it certainly doesnt fix the problem of facing F4Us and P-38s, both doing better than 400mph at best alt.
As for the P-47, it did see service in SW Pacific, whereas the P-51B never did. Btw I find it interesting nobody has mentioned the Mustang, it far and away outclasses every fighter in that current setup. It is untouachable after getting alt.
When they add the Ki-84 that will make "Phillipines 1944-5" setups better for the IJ to be sure. Early war is doable as well, but we need a torp bomber like B5N.
In any case, I will leave it here. It has been a very good discussion. Bottom line for me is, the CT is not MA, its not supposed to be 100 percent "fair", but it should be balanced to some degree, to make it workable, as long as some boundaries are observed. This "grey area" is often a hot topic :) yes Indeed.
Regards, and all.
p.s Lowe, if you recall, I asked for a setup with no P-47, P-51, or F6F, so dont look at me :) I didnt ground your N1K2. I never lobbied for 1944 US iron in there vs your A6M5s and Ki-61s. I dont want this taken out of context.
-
well i havent seen the jug dominate....not to say that it didn't. I just havent seen it. I will look for it and make an assessment as to whether or not it is good for gameplay. Again, i know not everyone is going to be happy with my decisions, and maybe i am wrong. But i am willing to take suggestiosn from the CT community , make my best evaluation, try something out..in an attempt to make it better...and if it truly doesn't work... I am man enough to admit it.
There is a big learning curve to setups. And if your unwilling to give new ideas a try, then your just being close-minded. I am a firm believer in trying thing out rather than just assuming that I know whats best the first time I try something. Maybe you should consider doing the same.
Jarbo
CT Staff
-
Yay. Another setup where we get to fly A6M5s and Ki-61s against massively superior Allied fighters like the F4U-1, P-47D-anything and P-51B. Fighters that are so much faster that the pilot has to be an idiot to ever give a shot to the Japanese pilot.
I'm so happy I can't stand it.
-
Personally I wish we could see a PAC setup with F4F's and P-40E's versus A6M2's and Ki-61's. (TBM/SBD/D3A/A-20/Ki-67 also) No F4U-1's, No N1K2's, none of that junk.
Historical? Not completely. But it would IMO be fun--and the Japanese would, probably for the first time ever, actually have the speed advantage. The P-40E and Ki-61 in particular seem very closely matched.
J_A_B
-
Japanese pilots better get used to Allied controlling the fight with their speed, or they will be frustrated without end. Though I like J_A_B's setup above...
A setup that should allow the Japanese to dominate historically would be Malaya, 1940. Ki.43s and A6M2s against Hurricanes and Brewster Buffalos. Think we'll ever see that in the CT?
-
Malaya would be a great idea. I hope we see that soon. Ok, with the NIK2 removed, I'll fly Japanese all week. Need a wingman, 27th Sentai? I need to work on my defensive ACM, anyway.
-
Originally posted by Miska
Malaya would be a great idea. I hope we see that soon. Ok, with the NIK2 removed, I'll fly Japanese all week. Need a wingman, 27th Sentai? I need to work on my defensive ACM, anyway.
You will be playing dodge ball. keep your neck bent.
-
Times like this I think the CT needs a 'slot' system.
People can fly whatever is provided in the initial set-up, but there might be a special "slot" with limited numbers(such as you would see in a mission) for people to join.
Only these people will be able to fly certain aircraft - for instance, in 1942 ETO setup, with the 'slot-system' assigned to the Fw190A-5, the majority of LW pilots would be able to choose as far as up to the Bf109F-4, but some of the lucky people who got into the CT first gets a chance to join the slot and use the Fw190A-5.
This could effectively shapen up the percentage and balance of fighter-types based on historical usage. The slot would be an arena setting, allowed up to maybe something like 5 slots.. a setting like "slot - Fw190A-5: 15%" would enable 15% of the total number of one country to use the specifed Fw190A-5. This would mean when the slot is full, the another player would have to wait.. if he really wants to fly the Fw190A-5. If some other player in the 190 is shot down, 1 slot would come open, and the next person who chooses the 190 will get to fly it.
This is not a good system for the MA, but for the CT, where just the "plane set" itself is not enough, it'd be very useful. Want to limit the numbers of late war planes like the 262 or the F4U-4 in certain setups?? Assign a "slot" and input their percentage!
:)
-
Jarbo.
If you re-add the George, your just gonna get grief from somebody else. So your damned if you do, damned if you don't, you've already had to put up with my whine, why go through any more ? :) Warloc, yes I think your setup was a good one, and I really hope to see it someday. The F6F would make a good addition to your setup, and NO George is needed.
-
My question would be if the allies actually advance up the chain, what planes would be available at the fields they took? right now A1 has the USAAF planeset while a5 (the only other airfield the allies get to start with AFAIK) has the F4U-1. If the allies move up the chain what planes would be enabled from captured fields? If it's the full planeset I agree that would seem a bit excessive. But at the get go it seems to me that the axis control the vast majority of the map. So it seems that if you flip the situation and the allies were on the offensive and the aixs were down to the last couple fields, the allies would be running right into the N1K just like the the aixs are running right into the P-47 and P-51 now. Might just be the luck of being on the "winning side" as the map is setup on reset. Naturally this point of view is based on a couple asumptions, the biggest of which is that the allies would be denied the use of the P-47 and P-51 is you dirty axis types would only let us off Guadalcanal and A1. ;)
Sure some arguments could be made that the N1K doesn't compare to the P-47 et al. But given the planeset I'm not sure what else the CM's can do about it.
As for the other cases of CM's hamstringing the Axis I just don't see it myself. In Europe the 262 should have been perked not much but enough to keep everyone from flying it all the time (I know that by and large wasn't the case but it could have happened). The exclusion of the 190D did surprise me some but the axis still had competitive choices in speed with the 109G10 and the earlier models of 109's were competitive in other performance catagories. I know from flying axis in the BoB CT setup that I perfer fighting the spit I in the 109E than the Hurricane so I don't really see that as a big knock against the axis either.
-
So the Allies get what they want again. I just assume fly the A6Ms but how about fix the damn things. My God its just like WBs.
If you guys insists on early war setups how about get off your duffs and get the IJN/A some more airplanes. Lets get the A6M2 flying like it should if nothing else. This just goes to show that I am right and you guys are........opps never mind, Squire will yell at me again.
oboe I said the same thing about the Brewsters but they ignored it. YES the arena would stay Allied empty. My Brewster posts have had the same replys for four years....NONE!
-
In my opinion the F4F and FM2 either turn much better than they should or the A6M2 and A6M5b turn much worse than they should. As it is, it is nigh suicide for an A6M of any kind to turn with an F4F / FM2 and must use its marginally better speed and climb to BnZ the F4F / FM2.
Wingloading and powerloading of six manuverable fighters ranked best to worst:
Wingloading:
A6M2:
Empty: 15.34lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 22.00lbs/sq.ft.
A6M5a:
Empty: 18.18lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 26.38lbs/sq.ft.
Spitfire Mk Vb:
Empty: 20.93lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 27.48lbs/sq.ft.
F4F-4:
Empty: 22.25lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 30.67lbs/sq.ft.
FM2:
Empty: 20.95lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 31.81lbs/sq.ft.
Spitfire Mk XIV:
Empty: 27.27lbs/sq.ft.
Loaded: 34.61lbs/sq.ft.
Powerloading:
Spitfire Mk XIV:
Empty: 3.22lbs/hp.
Loaded: 4.07lbs/hp.
Spitfire Mk Vb:
Empty: 3.52lbs/hp.
Loaded: 4.62lbs/hp.
A6M5a:
Empty: 3.69lbs/hp.
Loaded: 5.35lbs/hp.
A6M2:
Empty: 3.90lbs/hp.
Loaded: 5.59lbs/hp.
FM2:
Empty: 4.04lbs/hp.
Loaded: 6.08lbs/hp.
F4F-4:
Empty: 4.82lbs/hp.
Laoded: 6.65lbs/hp.
Unless there is something funky going on with the F4Fs wings it should not be outturning A6Ms often. The F4F-4 should be about a match for the Spitfire Mk V, though the Mk V can probably sustain the turn longer, and the FM2 should probably be a bit worse than the Spitfire Mk Vb. The A6M5b out turns the Spitfire Mk Vb. I think the F4F / FM2 flight models are overly optimistic. As it is, the F4F-4 is simply better than the A6M2.
-
The zeke is not much good unless you are at "Combat Speed" At this speed any Allied airplane with energy can climb, extend, or dive as we all know. It can turn once or twice with a zeke but should be shark bait after that. Notice I said AFTER that? The Zeke SHOULD be able to hold this combat speed with not much resistance, however once the zeke slows down it will not regain combat speed as fast as it should. Once in a turn or two with the Navy guys, the zeke is slow and slugish and will not turn, climb or even roll worth a #$it. Cmon guys fix it!!
Its been a while and I caint find the Combat Speed however, at slow combat speed an A6M2 has a 360 deg turn radius of 612ft.
At230mph it turns in a radius of 1,118 and is agile at both speeds!!!!!!! NOT IN AH!
-
Well, I was on all friday evening flying the IJN. We won the room(reset), so why are the axis pilots whining? I you are up at high altitude expecting to catch a p47, then you deserve to get your arse shot down. If you are capturing fields(the objective of the game), how can a p47 bother you? Let him come down and burn off his "E", then shoot his arse down. P47 dominate? Only if you play to it's strength. If you start porking his fields, he is going to have to come down and stop you or lose the game. The allies are in the same boat when they have to fly spits against the LW planes. But what I think is most important in this map is fleet management. We kept 2 assault fleets(4 battleships) and one CV group together to form a massive fleet. And it worked, we worked our way east before they could sink our ships, where one fleet wouldn't have got the job done. The navy plays a vital role in this map, use it wisely and you can win the room. Honestly, I see no reason to go above 12k in this room. That would give advantage to axis , no? Maybe I'm wrong, but like I said, IJN won the room friday night.
-
The flow of the battle in this map seems to be dictated many times by the naval forces in the game. When the IJN can get down near A1 it's pretty easy to pin the allies in the corner. That happened on Friday night. Now tonight (sunday) the allies who enjoyed a 2:1 advantage in #'s later in the evening started the push back up the island chain a few hours earlier when they still had the advantage but only by 2-3 people. And every succesfull field capture was supported by off shore shelling by the heavy guns of the fleet. Sea power is the key to success on this map.