Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: daddog on June 29, 2004, 08:28:50 PM
-
:)
-
Ki-84
I-16
Pe-2
B-29
-
P39
I16 i think its called the RAT
HE111
B25
what i think the next planes are going to be
-
would like to add that i think HTC will be adding planes based on how much use they got in WW2 and played the biggest roll
so if thats true forget the KI84
-
Ki-84
Ki-84
Ki-84
Ki-84
-
Ki-84
I-16
Pe-2
B-29
Good choices! Except for the B-29. :)
-
Originally posted by simshell
would like to add that i think HTC will be adding planes based on how much use they got in WW2 and played the biggest roll
so if thats true forget the KI84
-
P38J
P39
B24
B25
PBY Catalina
Sherman
HE-111
G3M
[edit] Just now saw it said next 4.. oh well you can live with 8:D [/edit]
-
would like to add that i think HTC will be adding planes based on how much use they got in WW2 and played the biggest roll
So how would that explain the Me-163? Sorry, that is not how they always do it.
-
163 is a dorky ride... :D
-
Ki-84
B24J :D
He-111
Me-109K4
-
Yak9M
Pe-2
Lagg 3
P38F or G
Ki-84
-
Originally posted by daddog
So how would that explain the Me-163? Sorry, that is not how they always do it.
It's a "last ditch measure" plane to help save your HQ radar (and it's something they threw in to make you use some of those Perks...)
:lol
I'd like to see some more Italian, Japanese and Russian planes. Not that interested in more American planes (unless it's the B-24 Liberator) and DEFINITELY no more 109/190 variants for now...
-
New planes
Ki84
Ki43
Mig
New variants (much easier than entirely new models)
109K4
P51-A
Yak3
P38F
P40N
-
KI-84
KI-43
YAK-3
P39-Q
-
Originally posted by simshell
would like to add that i think HTC will be adding planes based on how much use they got in WW2 and played the biggest roll
so if thats true forget the KI84
So, 3,514 built (highest one year production of any aircraft in Japan ever) and in service before the P-51D, seeing heavy combat through the last year of the Pacific War doesn't count as heavily used?
What are you smoking?
Oh yeah,
Ki-84-1-Ko
Me410B-2
Tu-2S
Yak-9D
-
ki84
PB4y2
B24D
B24J
-
Ki-84, Ki-43, P-39D&Q, Ki-44. And Ki-45. I think. If it is the twin-engine one.
-
He didn't get it from me... *itches neck* ;)
-
Yes that is it! The Nick is the Ki-45 I think. I was thinking of that myself.
Good list here. I like just about all put down.
My list would look some thing like this, in no particular order.
1. P-39
2. P-38 F or J
4. Ki-84
5. Ki-45
6. Emily (IJN float plane/bomber) That would rock.
7. Pe2
8. He-111
9. PBY - Knew two PBY pilots before they passed away.
Umm that is longer than 4. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Raptor01
P38J
[edit] Just now saw it said next 4.. oh well you can live with 8:D [/edit]
We already have the P-38L, so the J would be kind of useless unless it was an ealy model J but then we'd be better served with either the G or H model.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Urchin
And Ki-45. I think. If it is the twin-engine one.
Hehe...that's the Toryus/Nick...the only plane Japanese plane that the P-38 was able to out maneuver with ease.
ack-ack
-
Bristol Beaufighter
J2M4 Jack <>
P-39 Airacobra
Ta 152 H
-
New Aircraft:
B-24D or J Liberator (USAAF)
B-25B or J Mitchell (USAAF)
Do-17/Z (Lufflewaffe)
Ki-84-Ia "Frank" (JAAF)
Ju 52/3m (Luffwaffe) :p
LaGG-3 (Russian)
MiG-3 (Russian)
Me 410A-2/Ul (Luffwaffe)
P-61B or C Black Widow (USAAF)
Sunderland MK III
Z.1007bis (Italy Air Force)
New Variants:
Bf 109K-4 (Luftwaffe)
F4U-1A Corsair (USN or USMC)
F4F-3 Wildcat (USN)
F6F-3 Hellcat (USN)
Fw 190A-7 (Luftwaffe)
P-38H Lighting (USAAF)
P-47C-5 or N-RE Thunderbolt (USAAF)
P-51A Mustang (USAAF)
Errrrrr I know it more than 4, but might thought some of them will probably will get new planes for AHII.
-
Rafe,
P-61C is post WWII.
-
Ki-84
I-16
TU-2
D4Y2
..........
It is hard to pick just 4, I realy would like to see another Italian plane soon as well, any New Italian plane would be cool imo. One of the Re 2000 series would be fun and give a Jabo capacity to Italy.
Or How about a D.520 Nice to have a French plane:)
For a Varient, I would like to see :
Ki-61-Ib
P 38 F
A6M3
Thats the restrained wish list:)
-
Pyro has said the 109G-10 in AH is really a K-4 but they decided to add a 20mm option and call it a G-10.
We don’t "need" a K-4.
They only 109 we "need" is a 109G-14.
We don’t "need" a Yak-3; the Yak-9u is a better plane anyway. It would be nice to have (:p right Straffo) but we don’t "need" it.
Yaks we need are
Yak-1
Yak-7
and a yak 9 or 9D. Right now the yak9t and be modified to make a yak-9m which can fill the role of the 9/9d.
The Tu-2 is a late war VVS bomber. I think it would be great to have but would prefer a Pe-2 variant.
The Ki-84 will do well in the main but just adding it to the Japanese plane set won’t necessarily fill out the set. IMO there are other Japanese planes that could be added to make a decent early Pac set up. For ToD the Pac Theater's need a lot of help with new planes.
We need to start thinking about ToD. There are wholes in the plane set that imho need to be filled just to run 1 decent theater let alone multiple theaters.
Ht has intimated that the first theater run would be an 8th AF eto theater.
Let’s look at the wholes,
These are mho but here goes
1st USAAF
Bombers
B-24D or J
We need earlier Jug Variants
We need earlier P-38 variants
2nd LW
We are mostly set here with the LW plane set but I would like to see a 190A-6. But that's just my preference.
The AH G-10/K-4 can fill in for the G6A/S, G-10 K-4.
A 410/210 would fit in but the 110G-2 is decent enough.
My point is to think beyond the main. Most planes suggested (except the Ki-84) would make no difference in the main. So I think we should narrow our suggestions (pretending that they matter for the sake of the thread) to filling in the gaps with the hopes of making ToD a success.
If it’s going to be left like the CT and some events using goofy match ups to get something that is at a minimum "playable" I don’t think interest will hold and doubt that it would draw in new players.
-
Ki-84
P-39
B-24j
Ju-52
-
Hmmm, B-239, IL-4, Some Mistels, and why not a bomber Me262?
-
New Planes:
Mikoyan-Gurevich Mig-3
I-16
Bell P-39Q-10 or N-1
Mitsubishi G4M
Variants:
Curtiss P-40N
Lockheed P-38F
F4U-1A
Spitfire MK8 with clipped wing
-
B25-H
He 111
JU 87 G
JU 52
-
Yak1M/Yak9M/YakD/Yak3 (guess the paint job Wotan ;))
Mig 3 or lagg 3
Pe2
Ki-84
P-39
P63 (perked IMO)
Originally posted by Wotan
We don’t "need" a Yak-3; the Yak-9u is a better plane anyway. It would be nice to have (:p right Straffo) but we don’t "need" it.
I need it ... so WE need it :)
-
Originally posted by Edbert MOL
New planes
Ki84
Ki43
Mig
New variants (much easier than entirely new models)
109K4
P51-A
Yak3
P38F
P40N
I don't know for the 109K4,P51-A ,P38F,P40N
But the Yak3 is not a variant of the Yak9 familly, it's an evolution from Yak1m when the Yak9s are from the Yak7 familly.
It's a light fighter dedicaced to air superiority when the Yak9 is more a multi-role fighter.
By light I'm using the description used by the Russian compared to US plane the Yak9 is a light plane ... and so a Yak 3 should be something like an ultra-light bird :D
-
most likely:
P-38F
Ki-84
B-25C
Me-410
***********************
Using my force powers on the HTC crew.... these are'nt the droids your looking for
Beaufighter Mk21/XIC
Spitfire mkVIII
B-24
Pe-2
Tronsky
-
I hope it'll be something out of this list-
Ki84
Ki44
a6m3
Spit LF IX (or something similar)
109 G14
Beaufighter (although it'll be a death trap)
Gloster gladiator
CR.42
macchi 200
and some ruskie planes (don't know much about them unfortunatly)
ooops forgot 2- Sea Hurri and Seafire L III:)
-
New planes/vehicles:
Meteor Mk III
Sherman (inc. perk Firefly)
T 34 (inc. perk T34/85)
U-boat
New variants:
F6F-3
F4U-1A
Allison Mustangs (inc perk 20mm armed version)
Seafire Mk III
KI 100 (reengined Ki 61)
Mosquito Mk XXX
-
Ki-84
J2M3
P-47M
MiG-3 (?)
First two I think would help flesh out the Japanese planeset.
Third one is the only perk plane you would find me flying on a consistent basis (none of the perk rides we have now make me WANT to fly them....I just do it out of curiousity). Plus, Pyro did tease us with it in his poll a couple years back.
Last one would help on the Russian side.
-
KI-84 looks really intriguing (I'm pretty much ignorant as far as WWII airplane history goes, so this stuff is very interesting to me). I assume arguments against it's introduction are it's spotty record as far as materials etc. goes. Additionally, it seems like it would be a perk ride, which means my chances of ever flying it in the main theatre are virtually nil :)
-
IJAF planes:
ki43
ki45
ki84
g4m
LW:
He111
Do17
ju52
early model fw190
RAF:
Bristol Blenheim
Vickers Wellington
spit mk.8
and i would love to see a Gloster Gladiator
USAAF:
P39q
B24
P47M (drools)
B25
italy:
cant Z 1007bis
Caproni CA310
FIAT G55
Piaggio P108
sorry, but i dobt care much for the russian planes
:D
-
wotan, or any other 109experts.
whats the difference between the g14 and the g6?
-
Brewster B-239.
-
P38G
Ki84
Me109k4
P39
~S~
-
I would like to see:
P39
He111
Me 323 Gigant (with the ability to carry a GV)
and....perked of course....Do335 Pfeil
Maltadog
-
Originally posted by Flyboy
wotan, or any other 109experts.
whats the difference between the g14 and the g6?
AFAIK not much difference. Maybe cockpit pressurization on the G14?
I think there was also a dual trainer version of the G14.
-
what is special about the G or H moddel in the P38?
-
Originally posted by Wotan
My point is to think beyond the main. Most planes suggested (except the Ki-84) would make no difference in the main.
The Ki-84 would be an MA killer, surely to become one of the new dweeb rides. The only other Jap plane that I can think of that would be so capable (even more so and surely be perked) would be the J2M4, US pilots were very glad that never flew in any significant numbers.
-
(http://www.collingsfoundation.org/hiresaircaft/high-B-24water2.jpg)
-
1) FIAT CR 42
2) FIAT G 55 CENTAURO or REGGIANE RE 2005 (you can choose)
3) Savoia Marchetti S.M. 79 "Sparviero"
Regia Aeronautica rules!
:D
-
Aircraft
New renderings
Pe2
P39
B24
Ki84
Upgrades/variants
Yak 9M (just change calibre of primary)
Sea Hurricane MkIIC (just add hook)
Mossie bomber (4000lb cookie capable)(may be a bit more work than a simple variant)
Tallboy on Lanc.
2 x 4000lb plus 6 x 500lb on Lanc.
IMO however its most important that (which ever period and theatre TOD will commence in) there is a complete plane set for TOD.
-
From a special events perspective:
[list=1]
- Ki-84 (good for MA and fills out mid and late war for SEA events)
- B-24 (good for MA and all theaters for SEA events)
- P-39 (good for SEA events early and mid war PAC and MED)
- HE111 (good for early war events EURO and MED for SEA events)
- G4M (good for SEA events)
You asked for 4 ideas and I gave 5 .. sue me, but those would head up mine list .. all good for SEA events and 2 decent for MA action.
Outside of the I would like to see the KI44, B25, PE2, Australian Boomerang, Beaufighter.
-
Originally posted by simshell
would like to add that i think HTC will be adding planes based on how much use they got in WW2 and played the biggest roll
so if thats true forget the KI84
If thats the case then we should and should have had the B24's LONG ago. Before the B17 even
I want the P61
Doubt I'll get it..but I want it LOL
-
What I'd really like to see is a much larger variety of GVs frmo all countries.
I can easily forsee how GVs are going to be playing amuch larger role in the game so it would be nice to have a larger selection to choose from.
-
I think the next four aircraft will be:
Ki-84 or Ki-100
Me410
P-38J
A-36A Apache or F-6A (recon Mustang Mk.IA 20mm)
Think they could do a Mosquito bomber (cookie) variant too.
I would like to see:
B24
B25
Beaufighter TF.X or Mk.21
Me410
Ju188 or Do217
Ki-100
He177
Meteor Mk.III
G4M
-
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
-
D4Y Suisei
TBD Devastator
Ki-84 Haiyate
Yak-9M(or D, or DD)
[edit]
Bomber-D4Y (does that count?)
Fighter-Ki-84
Tank- T-34
-Sik
-
TU-2
IAR-80 (Judy Tenudo voice.... WHaat? it could happen!)
T-34
-
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
LOL .. well that says it all.
How about a tree and building too. :)
-
He 111
Catalina (or any seaplane/F/boat)
Gloster Meteor
P 39
Ju 52/3
Sherman tank
T34
Although the me 262,is the better aeroplane overall,I would love to see how the Meteor copes with the Axis Jets: well the 262 anyhow.I know they never met.
Perk it like the 163.:D
-
What I think:
Tu-2
Ki-84
Sherman
What I hope:
Pe-2
Brewster
T-34
-
I like to see the T-34 over the Sherman to begin with.
PE-2 would be good and still would like to see the Ki-84
-
Originally posted by daddog
What do you think/hope the next 4 new aircraft will be? :)
Trumped by
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
hehe, what I think?
A B24, but it could easily be an He111
A Japanese fighter
The good Sherman, can't remember which one.
What I wish for?
The P61
-
B24
He111
P39
Whirlwind (yes the early war twin engined
Brit fighter with 4x20mm)
others:
Wellington
Beaufighter
Brewster Buffalo (the Finn's 'Pearl of the Sky')
P51-A
B25 Mitchell
A clipwinged Spit (V, VIII, or IX)
Dornier 117
-
How about a beginning of the war USA plane set?
Brewster Buffalo
P-36 Hawk
the old style B-17 (Collin Kelly's model....?)
TB1 Devastator
etc.
This would make a fun CT scenario....
-
Beaufighter
Fairey Firefly
Spiteful :)
Seafang ( Climbed to 20k in six minutes) x4 2omm max speed over 450 mph.
-
Being a Corsair pilot, I'd love to see the F4u-1A variant.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
If thats the case then we should and should have had the B24's LONG ago. Before the B17 even
Not before the B-17, since the B-24 was made to replace it, but yes, I think we should have at least one variation J :aok
Going by Pyro:
B24J
Ki-84
T-34
-
Betty
T-34
Ki-84 or Ki44
Think senarios.
What A/C are needed the most to round out the planeset?
Maybe the TU-2 in place of the Betty but I'm guessing no US, German or Brit birds. The Sherman would be awesome but the T-34 is more survivable and frankly much cooler looking.
MAC,
We have a -1A. I want the early -1.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
New stuff
TOD WETO 44
B24, Spit MkXIV (or MK XII) LF, Sherman (with all options?)
MA
Mossie BXVI, ki 84, Studebaker+ trailer (with all options)
-
my guess is that the next bomber and fighter will be ToD related, since it is starting with the 8th...
Bomber - B24
Fighter - P38F
Tank - Sherman
-
me 410/lw
p-400/british
b-25/us
bw-393/ finnish
-
Fighter... Ki-84
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088613969_ki84aj_3.jpg)
Bomber... PB4Y
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088613669_59750model.jpg)
Tank... T-34
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088616446_t-34_76_westerplatte_p_m1.jpg)
:aok
-
"Pyro: A bomber, a fighter, and a tank "
B24
P39
Sherman
This I think is what were likely to see, to bad if it a B24 though, based on my understanding of the time it takes to model a plane this size we could have 3 or 4 new Fighter types in stead. The Sherman will be a very cool adation though, great for events and the CT. I would not care at all to see a P39 now, I can think of many other planes I would rather see in it's stead. But I may be all wet We may see a Ki-84. Interesting to pounder this now:)
Nice teaser Pyro.:)
New planes was such a great thing to look forward to and think about before, I am realy excited about this now thanks:)
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
Hmmm....
Ki-84
A-26B
Sherman
-
Ok, I know I'm going to get slammed for this, but I think working on more Perk-birds is a waste of time, too much effort for not enough use (can you say Spit XIV?) Also, I'd like to see more emphasis on actually getting more of the aircraft that were massively used during WW2 into the game.
So, along those lines, here are my picks for Pyros Bomber, Fighter, Tank combo:
Bomber: HE111, B24, or B25 (Pref: HE 111, reason, we really need this 'un for the BoB planeset, plus it was one of the most widely produced/used Lufwaffle bombers. B24 would probably be flown most, but the 25 would give us some excellent and fun variants).
Fighter: This was a toughy, by rights in terms of historical use it should probably be the Airacobra (or the Kingcobra), in terms of game use, it should probably be the Ki-84, but in terms of reality I think we badly need another Russian fighter, I'm thinking Lagg-3, Yak 7, or the I-16.
Tank: T-34 or Sherman without a shadow of a doubt. If it is the Sherman, however, the Panzer IV will have to be perked or the entire vehicle ENY table will have to be adjusted.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
Okay, a rethink...
Bomber - B25 (could use as many allied then) or Ju188
Fighter - Me410 or A-36A Apache/or F-6A (recon Mustang Mk.IA 20mm)
Tank - T34 or Sherman
-
no KI84
P39!!!!
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Tank: T-34 or Sherman without a shadow of a doubt. If it is the Sherman, however, the Panzer IV will have to be perked or the entire vehicle ENY table will have to be adjusted.
I'm curious as to why you think the M4 would upset the tank balance so much. I guess it comes down to just which Sherman they put in. I'd suggest the M4A4-76 as a balanced version. If they use the E8 or Firefly the Sherman might need to be perked, but the early Shermans were not quite even with the MkIV and only the 76mm versions were truly equal (at least in the gun department) with the MkIV ausf-J with the 7.5cm KwK40 L/48. Maybe we'll get the 105mm Jumbo :D
On the other hand, put the T34 in there and the MkIV will become highly disadvantaged, if it were the late T34-85 then the Tigers better watch out. HTC will need to come out with the T34 only when the Panther is ready.
Not that it really matters to me anyhow, I can't get the hang of the ground game in the MA:o
-
P-39
-
Originally posted by Citabria
ki84
PB4y2
B24D
B24J
Hey Fester - how's the B24 model coming along.
-
P39 - Whatever the most built version was...and give it a Russian paint job as the default.
B29 - and perk it.
Oscar - It was used extensively by the Japanese and it was a fun ride in AW so it should do just fine in AH.
Ki84 - All the reasons everybody already stated. (Although I hate the squealing thing though only because of it's role in AW and it has high potential to become the next dweeb plane.)
The Russians could use a few more planes too but I don't have a preference there.
And lets not ignore the Auzzies, just because they only built the Boomerang doesn't mean we can't put it in the game:D (note: this logic doesn't apply to French planes)
Magoo
-
How about V-2 rockets:aok
-
hehe...missed the bomber, fighter, tank thing.
Throw in the T34
And if a B29 perked is out of the question then do a Russian Bomber, I'm not picky :)
Magoo
-
I'd like to see a p61 black widow, B29, sherman tanks, and an xwing!
-
Of course I am gonna say B-29!
B-29
P-39
B25-H
Finally, the one thats gonna get barbs - YES I do know that it never saw combat, but it was deployed on a carrier in theater -
F8F
But realistically If the F8F is impossible, then:
HE-111
-
FUDOA
We have the Birdcage F4U-1. I was referring to the F4U-1A with the reinforced bubble canopy.
(http://user.chollian.net/~hartmannshim/images/010712canopy.jpg)
Salute!
-
B-24
P-63 kingcobra
Gloster meteor
ME-262 A2 with bomb and rocket racks
-
Ok, my interpretation of the prophecy is
Ki-84
B-24
Sherman.
-
Oh, by the way... the Ki-84 won't be perked.
It is kind of a cross between a Spit-9 and an La-7 unless I'm to far off.
It'll be more manueverable than the La-7, but not as fast, and faster but less manueverable than the Spit-9. It'll have better guns that the La-7, but less firepower than the Spit-9.
Under 10k how fast is it? That is where it matters.
-
Sea Fury
Bearcat
any seaplane with floats
Sopwith camel! (for the ultimate perk points awarded per sortie!)
:aok
batfink
-
B-25 or the Betty
Ki-84
Shermie, baby
-
1. P-38G
2. P-47N
3.KI-84
4.Tommy gun for the chute 8)
-
Think:
P39
B24
Sherman
Hope:
Yak3 (lighter and higher performance than Yak9)
B25 (looks cool)
T34-76 (unperked, about equal to Panzer IV) and T34-85 (perked, about equal to Tiger)
715
-
Heya MAC,
It's strange that ours does not have the reenforced windshield bubble considering the FM is based on a late 1943 FM.
I have some performance stuff on the late 1944 -1A model and it is faster than the -1D because it had no pylons or rocket stubs. It is the fastest of the pre-4 varients.
Anyway it can't hurt to hope.
-
Pyro asked for it...
Bomber: He 111H-16
Fighter: Ki-84
Tank: Sherman
-
F4UDOA.......you de man!
Yep...can't hurt to hope and pray.....
"Now I lay me down to sleep....I pray HiTech my plane does keep......"
LOL.:aok
-
Originally posted by United
Not before the B-17, since the B-24 was made to replace it, but yes, I think we should have at least one variation J :aok
Going by Pyro:
B24J
Ki-84
T-34
If memory serves correct more 24's were made then the 17.
In fact there were more B24s then any other american aircraft ever built in WWII
but because most of the 24's flew out of italy, and the 17's flew out of England the 17 got all the glory because England is where all the top war correspondents went so it got the bulk of the publicity
-
Do17
ki43
firefly
-
Ki-84
P-38G
Yak-9M
I-16
-
B-25 -- has broadest allied use, widest time frame, and great variability (I WANT that strafing mod). Or, Russian Pe-2. German mediums already covered, and easier to shoot at anyway.
Mig -- broadens russian plane set, and low level usually all that matters here anyway. Or, another Yak. P-39 could die in many theaters with many skins, so also a good option. :lol
T-34 76mm. The 85 would need serious perking, as it would routinely snack on standard panzers. Of course, once the 76mm modelled, the T-34 85 would be and easy upgrade, and give the GV player with perks burning holes in his pockets something else to buy. Or how about Werbelwind -- wasn't that the 4x20mm flakpanzer? It would bridge the m16 to Ostwind gap, and make bases that much harder to take!
-
Originally posted by Cooley
Fighter... Ki-84
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088613969_ki84aj_3.jpg)
Bomber... PB4Y
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088613669_59750model.jpg)
Tank... T-34
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/147_1088616446_t-34_76_westerplatte_p_m1.jpg)
:aok
Oh, and Cooley -- very nice work, especially like the Ki84. :aok
Any contest ribbons among the bunch?
-
Originally posted by Edbert MOL
I'm curious as to why you think the M4 would upset the tank balance so much. I guess it comes down to just which Sherman they put in. I'd suggest the M4A4-76 as a balanced version.
Edbert,
My point was that most models of the Sherman prior to the Firefly were woefully inferior to even the Pzr IV (their crews called them "Ronsons" for good reasons.) So if we do get one of the early Shermans modeled, the long overdue adjustment of the Vehicle table will need to occur with the Tiger at the Top, then the Panzer IV, then the Sherman and the Ostwind and so on. Rather than continuing to have the silly "10" eny given to almost all the GVs.
Personally, while I know we want them for scenario use and for just the general historical coolness factor, I think the T34/76 would make a better addition, coming in as a non-perkie between the Pzr IV and the Tiger.
BTW - Does anyone know of a variant to the T34/76 that had an MG that could be used on Aircraft? That shortcoming could be the only gameplay advantage to introducing the Sherman.
Just my 0.0000002 cents
- SEAGOON
-
Oh.. missed Pyro's post.
Tu-2(or Pe-8)
Ki-84-Ia
T-34
-
are we saying that ht is going to actually add more plane?
sorry been on vacation
-
Originally posted by 68DevilM
are we saying that ht is going to actually add more plane?
sorry been on vacation
a long time ago, in the wayback there were new and magical planes released every 3-4 months or so. Pyro has mentioned that they will be working on new planes once AH2 is smoothed out.
Hopefully we'll be getting fat on a steady diet of new airframes again soon.
-Sik
-
I don't understand why people keep talking about the T-34/85 as a perk tank and the T-34/76 as better than the Panzer IV H. Have any of you actually looked at the ballistics of the weapons they carried?
The T-34/76 is superior to the Panzer IV H in most ways, true, but it's gun is completely inadequate. I'd give the Panzer IV H at least an even chance against it, probably better than even.
Against the Tiger I the T-34/76 would be nigh helpless. I'd much rather take a Panzer IV H against the Tiger I. If the Tiger I hits either the T-34/76 or Panzer IV H it will probably penetrate whereas the Panzer IV H has a realistic hope of penetrating the Tiger I's armor, unlike the T-34/76.
Now, it is true that the T-34/85 does out class the Panzer IV H in all ways (save the pintle machine gun which is far more important in AH than in reality) but the penetration on it's 85mm gun is still nothing to jump up and down about. I'd say that in AH terms the T-34/85 just about matches the overall usability of the Panzer IV H, with the edge going to the T-34/85. Certainly I cannot imagine the T-34/85 being a perk tank.
Perk Worthy Tanks, IMO:
Comet
Firefly Vc
Iosef Stalin 2
M26 Pershing
Panther V G
Tiger I
Tiger II
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
but because most of the 24's flew out of italy, and the 17's flew out of England the 17 got all the glory because England is where all the top war correspondents went so it got the bulk of the publicity
Actually, 24s flew in just about every theatre. In fact, 24s and 17s flew alongside each other on many missions from England. Not only did they serve in Italy and England, they also served in N Africa, The pacific, and in anti-submarine roles in the North Atlantic. It was widely used and would be a great addition to AHII.
And you are correct, just over 18,000 B-24 models were made, almost 10,000 more than B-17s.
-
Coming from an SEA/CT point of view:
I would just like to take a moment to reiterate my case that the single most important plane to the Pacific planeset is a mid-late war strike plane for the Japanese.
We can play out a few early and mid war battles with what we have, especially when we sub the Ju-88 for the Betty (frankly I feel this is an advantage for the IJN, as the Ju-88 can carry a decent bombload, whereas the Betty cant. Also betties spontaniously combust when sighted by the enemy... hmmm why did the betties die?) But the Japanese are unable to launch a Carrier assualt once the F6Fs, F4Us and FM2s start showing up.
Right now, when we try to put together anything after 1942-43 we end up putting people in Kates, and praying that they get within visual range of the enemy before being massacred to a man. The later war strike planes had significant increases in survivability, by being much faster (the D4Y being about 100 mph faster than the D3A1 we have, the difference between the Grace and Kate is even greater!)
One of these aircraft will provide a counter-balance to the TBM that we have, and will give the IJN a fighting chance of actually sinking a CV.
This is why, if I could have any single plane, I would ask for the D4Y "Judy Judy Judy"
-Sik
-
Originally posted by United
And you are correct, just over 18,000 B-24 models were made, almost 10,000 more than B-17s.
Just over 18,000 is not almost 10,000 more than the 12,731 B-17s built.
A quick google search produced a web site that claimed the B-17 dropped 640,000 tons of bombs in Europe, compared with 452,000 tons dropped by B-24s and 436,000 tons dropped by other U.S. aircraft. I can't vouch for that, but it sounds reasonable given that the B-17 saw much heaver use do to the fact that it was more survivable. Both the USAAF and Luftwaffe came to that conclusion.
-
I"m dreading a Ki-84, it will replace the Nik, the La7, and the Spit9 in one blow.
Its bad enough to see those 3 aircraft all the time, but seeing one replace it is even worse.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Edbert,
BTW - Does anyone know of a variant to the T34/76 that had an MG that could be used on Aircraft? That shortcoming could be the only gameplay advantage to introducing the Sherman.
- SEAGOON
I've got two books on T34s and neither has a single picture of any T34 with any kind of AA gun (except a post war Syrian one).
BTW- the T34-85 would not be a simple addition to a T34-76 in the game: although the hull is identical the turret is completely different.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Just over 18,000 is not almost 10,000 more than the 12,731 B-17s built.
Ooops, checked my source and it said that only 8,860 B-17Gs were built, not every model. My mistake.
But karnak, with the amounts of bombs dropped, you didnt include the Pacific, where the B-24 was utilized most. I couldnt find any numbers, but im sure there were many more thousands of pounds of bombs dropped in the Pacific.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
Geez pyro four new additions! :D
but in that case realistically:
Me-410
B-25C
Firefly
or:
Ki-84
Pe-2
T-34
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by United
karnak, with the amounts of bombs dropped, you didnt include the Pacific, where the B-24 was utilized most. I couldnt find any numbers, but im sure there were many more thousands of pounds of bombs dropped in the Pacific.
No I didn't. As stated, that was a quicky search. It also didn't include the Med. Theater.
But be serious, until we got in range of Japan itself heavy bombers didn't play a major role in the Pacific, and then it was the B-29A that did it.
Now, I've no problem with the B-24 and hope it is added someday. I don't think it is urgently needed, at least not the B-24J. What is needed for a USAAF heavy bomber is an earlier heavy bomber, be that a B-17E or B-24D. The fact of the matter is that there are far larger holes in the planeset than the B-24J when it comes to scenarios. We have no VVS or Regia Aeronautica bombers at all and only one early war Luftwaffe bomber. The early war Allied bomber is too fast for the early war Axis fighters to intercept. The Japanese bomber is late war and totally overmatches the early Allied fighters when used in place of an early war Japanese bomber.
I'd like to see the following before duplicate efforts like the B-24J (same role as the B-17G), Halifax Mk II (same role as the Lancaster Mk III) or He111H-16 (same role as the Ju88A-4) are added:
Early war Allied bomber: Wellington Mk III or B-25C Mitchell
Earlier USAAF heavy bomber: B-17E Flying Fortress or B-24D Liberator
Early war Japanese bomber: G4M2 "Betty"
Late war Luftwaffe bomber: Ju188A-2 or Do217E-2
Russian bombers: Pe-2 (early war VVS bomber), Pe-2FT (mid-war VVS bomber) and Pe-2B (late war VVS bomber)
Italian bomber: Cant Z.1007 Alcione or Savoia-Marchetti S.M.79-II Sparviero
What I objected to in the pro-B-24 posts was the talking up of the B-24 as though it were the main US bomber. It wasn't. It was produced in huge numbers and used for many vital, but not flashy, roles (anti sub patrols over the Atlantic for example), but the B-17 carried the main burden of the USAAF effort over Europe.
-
I hate to admit it, but yes the B-24 was not the mainly used bomber by the USAAF, and yes, it wouldnt do much to fill in the gaps in the planesets. I do think we need the HE-111 and Betty, maybe the Wellington before the B-24, but I can still hope, right? :D
But be serious, until we got in range of Japan itself heavy bombers didn't play a major role in the Pacific, and then it was the B-29A that did it.
Now, I will, OTOH, argue this point with you. I have many personal stories of heavy bombers being utilized in the Pacific before we were in reach of Japan. Now, it may not have been a very major role, but they did serve a very significant role, even though they may not have done much damage to the Japanese.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Now, I've no problem with the B-24 and hope it is added someday. I don't think it is urgently needed, at least not the B-24J. What is needed for a USAAF heavy bomber is an earlier heavy bomber, be that a B-17E or B-24D. The fact of the matter is that there are far larger holes in the planeset than the B-24J when it comes to scenarios. We have no VVS or Regia Aeronautica bombers at all and only one early war Luftwaffe bomber. The early war Allied bomber is too fast for the early war Axis fighters to intercept. The Japanese bomber is late war and totally overmatches the early Allied fighters when used in place of an early war Japanese bomber.
I'd like to see the following before duplicate efforts like the B-24J (same role as the B-17G), Halifax Mk II (same role as the Lancaster Mk III) or He111H-16 (same role as the Ju88A-4) are added:
Early war Allied bomber: Wellington Mk III or B-25C Mitchell
Earlier USAAF heavy bomber: B-17E Flying Fortress or B-24D Liberator
Early war Japanese bomber: G4M2 "Betty"
Late war Luftwaffe bomber: Ju188A-2 or Do217E-2
Russian bombers: Pe-2 (early war VVS bomber), Pe-2FT (mid-war VVS bomber) and Pe-2B (late war VVS bomber)
Italian bomber: Cant Z.1007 Alcione or Savoia-Marchetti S.M.79-II Sparviero
Ditto.
Karnak, masterful work proposing a reasoned position with definite goals! There's plenty to work with in the MA, if your main goal is a particular performance envelope. New planes can of course be used everywhere, but rationally the major benefit will be in rounded planesets for CT and special events.
1) If we're limited to just a couple new craft, we ought to get the ones that give the game experience the MOST boost. The MA has a broad planeset, but 10% of the list probably account for 90% of what's in the MA airspace. I'm strongly in favor of picking the new bomber/fighter pair that help with the limited timespan CT and special event arenas.
2) Going with airframes that have long derivation chains would help ease subsequent modelling, wouldn't it? If so, I vote for one of the Pe-2's, and the T-34/76 or an early Sherman. Or, for variety's sake, how about a 90mm TD --- killer gun but vulnerable chassis. Would make choices in the VH much more interesting....
3) As ground cover makes the GV's tougher to spot, I'd think an attack fighter would be good idea. So, I propose the P-39. Maybe things could be balanced by cutting the effectiveness of anti air cannon vs gv's, but giving full credit to the P-39 attack versions? Most action is at lower alts anyway, so P-39 MIGHT be survivable in the MA too.
-
Just sent Pyro the numbers. In order of most votes...
Ki-84
P-39
B-24
He-111
P-38 variants
B-25 variants
Sherman
Those with 4 or more
Pe-2
P-38F
G3M
Me-410
Ju-52
Tu-2S
Yak9
T-34
B-29
-
HE-111
HE-219
Sherman
ME-410
-
Flyboy,
I missed your post above. I am certainly no expert but here's some info:
The G-14 is mentioned in Mtt meetings minutes as the official name of the G-6/MW50 designation which was used internally by Mtt for G-6 equipped with the MW-50 system previously used on the recce G-6/R2 variant.
The G-10 is described as the evolution of the G-6 using MW-50 (same system as G-6/R2) and the DB605DM.
The G-14 used only the following engines:
DB605AM,
DB605ASM
Neither the DB605A nor the DB605AS were mounted on the G-14, since the main difference from G-6 was the presence of MW-50, which required either the DB605AM or the DB605ASM engine.
The DB605AS(M) used the same supercharger as the DB605D, they were rebuilt using DB605A casing and fitted with the DB603A supercharger. They required the same kind of cowling as the DB605D equipped aircraft. Yet there are some small cowling differences between a G-10 and a G-14/AS, so you can identify one from the other.
The difference between the A and AS in the one hand and the AM and ASM in the other hand is the addition of MW-50. Of course there were other differences such as sparkplugs, timings and other settings etc.
The G-14 was (as the others) produced by Messerschmitt in Regensburg, Erla Maschinenwerke in Leipzig and WNF (Wiener Neustädter Flugzeugwerke).
The minority was built by WNF. Many G-14s built by WNF had their MG 151/20 replaced by a MK 108, which resulted in the designation G-14/U4.
So the majority built by Messerschmitt and Erla kept their MG 151/20.
G-10s were not made from old airframes, they were produced alongside the G-14 as an evolution of the G-6 with DB605D and MW-50 while the G-14 was the evolution of G-6 with DB605AM with MW-50.
It is true some of the first airframes used for the G-10 were from G-6 as they were available, or from airframes planned for mounting the DB605AM (G-14) in case no DB605AM were available. Hence the twin data plate found on some G-10.
Basically a G-14 would be just adding mw50 to our G-6.
-
I'd like to see the following:
Pe-2 --- A very nice light bomber
MiG-3 --- One of the best fighters at high altitude
T-34/76 --- Best tank of the war, in my opinion
So, they're all Russian machines. Come on, there's not enough Russkie muscle in AH!
-
Me-410 or P-61
B-25 (Preferably with the oddball loadouts as options. Like nose-mount cannons, parachute retarded bombs, etc.)
As for tanks...uh...something shiney! (Seriously, I never drive tanks)
-
While I think the P-61 is a very cool plane, night fighters have limited usefulness for 2 very important reasons -- first, night is limited in AH (none in MA, short in CT); and (most importantly)second the presence of DAR and Dot radar for everyone. Historically, sacrificing performance to get airborne radar was an excellent design choice, but in AH all you'd have is the sacrificed performance.
Ixna on the night fighters. (even though I'd love the firepower of the Black Widow.)
-
>>MiG-3 --- One of the best fighters at high altitude<
Sure you are a rookie ;)
No high alt fights in AH. Only rooks who afraid to fight live up there. I have lost so many hours hunting high rooks who just run,
witch now i fight only against knits. Respectful warriors and some great fights.
Me too i use alt, highest 15.000ft but i use it to attack not to make
turism up there.
I ll never loose my time again with these sissys.
Rooks are under Fight Embargo.
(Ofcourse, they have some great sticks, but they are lost inside the numbers).
-
Originally posted by daddog
Just sent Pyro the numbers. In order of most votes...
Ki-84
P-39
B-24
He-111
P-38 variants
B-25 variants
Sherman
Those with 4 or more
Pe-2
P-38F
G3M
Me-410
Ju-52
Tu-2S
Yak9
T-34
The B-29 had 5 Votes as of that post.
-
[SIZE=76]P47M[/SIZE]
(I win, I used the biggest font. HTC start working):D
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
i bet the fighter will be in the p38 family, judging by the fact that somone said his flying pt had a nose firing gun.
:)
-
Originally posted by 6GunUSMC
The B-29 had 5 Votes as of that post.
But a B-29 is just so stupid that its a safe bet it wont be next.
So there's no bother even counting those votes :p
Back to a plane we could use, the Pe-2. Hopefully we could get a Pe-3 (fighter variant) without to much trouble.
The Yak-9m is a nothing fix to get it in game. So I cant imagine that would be considered a "new plane".
Hopefully, we will see anything other then a late war Ami plane.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
While I think the P-61 is a very cool plane, night fighters have limited usefulness for 2 very important reasons -- first, night is limited in AH (none in MA, short in CT); and (most importantly)second the presence of DAR and Dot radar for everyone. Historically, sacrificing performance to get airborne radar was an excellent design choice, but in AH all you'd have is the sacrificed performance.
Ixna on the night fighters. (even though I'd love the firepower of the Black Widow.)
I dont see how what a plane was designed for is a legitimate arguement for AH.
If that were the case We wouldnt have divebombing Lancs and B17's .
P61 was an extreamly manuverable plane
and while its primary use was a night fighter itwasnt limited to night fling only. It was also used in Air to ground operations.
Daytime, Night time., Dar. Doesnt matter as all planes have these in flight anyway. so whats to keep a plane that traditionally had it from being made available when we have planes that didnt traditionally have it having dar?
But wait. Now that I think about it There very well could be a use for a dar equipped fighter. There certainly is a need.Like when your countries dar is out. Have dar still available on the P61. Say maybe for a 1 sector radious
I dont think anyone who was a Knight last night could not have wanted a dar equipped aircraft.
I also think the P61 would also be used alot in attacking GVs. Much in the same way the 25 is used now
-
Originally posted by daddog
Just sent Pyro the numbers. In order of most votes...
Vote??
Since when were we voting? Or counting votes?
Thought this was a what do you think/hope thread?
Or you just warming up for November? LOL
Just funnin ya.
But seriously You cant go by whats posted on the threads as they make up only a very small portion of the overall population of the game
-
Ok how about this then?
(http://www.whatifmodelers.com/air/phobbins/p67b3.jpg)
P67Moonbat
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
P61 was an extreamly manuverable plane
and while its primary use was a night fighter itwasnt limited to night fling only. It was also used in Air to ground operations.
Daytime, Night time., Dar. Doesnt matter as all planes have these in flight anyway. so whats to keep a plane that traditionally had it from being made available when we have planes that didnt traditionally have it having dar?
But wait. Now that I think about it There very well could be a use for a dar equipped fighter. There certainly is a need.Like when your countries dar is out. Have dar still available on the P61. Say maybe for a 1 sector radious
I dont think anyone who was a Knight last night could not have wanted a dar equipped aircraft.
I also think the P61 would also be used alot in attacking GVs. Much in the same way the 25 is used now
I see your point, but I guess my point was more towards the relative value of adding the aircraft. In other words, if we only get one fighter, lets make it one with the greatest contribution towards enhancing the AH environment.
The P-61 was a great plane, and i did say I'd love to have it. But, I would argue that other planes could make greater, or broader contributions to the MA/CT/Special Event environments.
While the P-61 was maneuverable, it was maneuverable for a multiple engine, multiply crewed aricraft. Against a true fighter it would have the same problems the 110 has in fighter roles. With only 1 fighter available, I'd prefer one that had more anti-dayfighter capability.
However, VERY interesting idea about having 1 sector DAR available for nightfighters. Would that throw the game balance against HQ runs, essentially removing the value of those high risk operations? Or, would the performance limitations of the nightfighters balance that out. If implemented, should a LESS capable nightfighter be chosen, so as to balance gameplay? In other words, should we have a highly vulnerable, almost AWACS level local radar platform that enemies hunt and friendlies need to protect, as they now (theoretically) protect goons? This has some very interesting implications.....
-
Vote??
Since when were we voting? Or counting votes?
Thought this was a what do you think/hope thread?
I was counting from the start because I wanted to see what was out there. I realize that this forum is only a small % of the HTC customers, but at the same time they do read these forums and listen to what is the heart of the community IMHO.
As for the B-29, my mistake! I just put it out of my mind. ;) Not intentionally mind you.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
While I think the P-61 is a very cool plane, night fighters have limited usefulness for 2 very important reasons -- first, night is limited in AH (none in MA, short in CT); and (most importantly)second the presence of DAR and Dot radar for everyone. Historically, sacrificing performance to get airborne radar was an excellent design choice, but in AH all you'd have is the sacrificed performance.
Ixna on the night fighters. (even though I'd love the firepower of the Black Widow.)
As mentioned by others, the Black Widow was nicely meneuverable. It also had two tails, a black paintjob, and a cool name (I'm not a kid, really!)
As for modeling radar? I think I'm gonna go do a search on that, then start a new thread on it rather than derailing this one.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
But a B-29 is just so stupid that its a safe bet it wont be next.
So there's no bother even counting those votes :p
Back to a plane we could use, the Pe-2. Hopefully we could get a Pe-3 (fighter variant) without to much trouble.
The Yak-9m is a nothing fix to get it in game. So I cant imagine that would be considered a "new plane".
Hopefully, we will see anything other then a late war Ami plane.
A B-29 STUPID? You already have a post-war 3 canon LA-7. Better a B-29 Than any communist garbage...
-
Originally posted by 6GunUSMC
A B-29 STUPID? You already have a post-war 3 canon LA-7. Better a B-29 Than any communist garbage...
post war ?
Any source to back up this affirmation ?
It's not NS23 ,it's B20
-
Originally posted by 6GunUSMC
Better a B-29 Than any communist garbage...
lol :p
Here's another vote for Communist garbage over the B-29. Heck, I'd rather have the Yak-3, Yak-9UT, Yak-1, Yak-7, Pe-2. IL-4 (three torps? heh), Pe-8, Mig-3, Lagg-3-37, or Yak-9B before getting the B-29.
Grabage indeed :rofl
-Sik
-
Oh the B-29 would be useful alright.
Imagine the sheer dweebery a formation of 3x B-29s at 1000ft deck run without calibration. Heck, why up jabos at all?
-
1. Mig3
2. KI84
3. ME109K4
4. ME209V4 (sexy plane, I can dream can't I...)
-
Originally posted by 6GunUSMC
A B-29 STUPID? You already have a post-war 3 canon LA-7. Better a B-29 Than any communist garbage...
Yes it is stupid. It adds nothing to the game. There are huge wholes in the plane set that need to be filled for events and ToD. Even a Pac-setup where the B-29 could be used is lacking so many IJAAF/IJN aircraft that a set up including a B-29 couldn’t be run.
Outside of 2k suicide bomb runs in the main it’s useless.
I am tempted to say you are stupid as well but it must be just ignorance. Maybe you should do a little research on that "post-war 3 cannon La-7".
You may want to do some research on the eastern front. The battles both in the air and on the ground were epic in proportion and it’s a shame that in most mmpg flight games it is overlooked
Then research the Pe-2; it’s certainly not a late-war or even post-war.
A Pe-2 variant and a (provided it is easy enough to modify the Pe-2) Pe-3 (fighter variant) would go a long way to fill gaps in the Ostfront theater. An Yak-9m could easily be converted from the 9t with minimal effort. While a '44 plane it’s basically a Yak-9 and can fill the gaps there.
If you think about it the best way to get the La-7 perked is to develop a large VVS-RKKA plane set.
Then you have to consider the amount of labor that would need to go into a stupid plane like a B-29. I would hope that HTC has other priorities.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
[Eastern front] battles both in the air and on the ground were epic in proportion and it’s a shame that in most mmpg flight games it is overlooked
Then research the Pe-2; it’s certainly not a late-war or even post-war.
A Pe-2 variant and a (provided it is easy enough to modify the Pe-2) Pe-3 (fighter variant) would go a long way to fill gaps in the Ostfront theater. An Yak-9m could easily be converted from the 9t with minimal effort. While a '44 plane it’s basically a Yak-9 and can fill the gaps there.
If you think about it the best way to get the La-7 perked is to develop a large VVS-RKKA plane set.
Hear, hear. (Cue sound of shoe pounding on desk.) Balance the planesets!!! Move past narrowminded focus on only LW and Amis!! Expand historicity of CT and special events!!! Hear, Hear!!
-
Expand historicity of CT and special events!!! Hear, Hear!!
Well said! I agree! ;) We do need to fill out the plane sets. A B-29 would be one of my last choices.
-
Hades55...
I love flying at high altitudes because of the experience. When there's a nice, big furball that seems like it's going to last for a while, I take off from a distant runway in a KI-61 or a P-51D, complete with drop tanks. I climb to around 20k, and when I'm near an airfield/furball, I dive. I know about the people of which you speak --- I am not one of them.
I never run from combat, and I've died many times because of it. In a scramble, I'll take an A6M2 over any other fighter, even if there is a greater risk of explosion.
Get to know somebody before you make these wild assumptions.
-
Originally posted by daddog
A B-29 would be one of my last choices.
B-29 without perking would seriously disrupt play balance -- too much speed, firepower for most AH interceptors. If use limited by perking, not worth choosing as our only new bomber craft.
-
Black Widow!:aok
-
The B29 will no doubt be introduced (eventually!) so there is actually something besides the Ar234 that we can use the bomber perkies on. I would like to see the B29 but not at the expense of more important fighters/bombers etc., that would help develop the planeset. Japan, Germany, Soviets, Italians could all do with more aircraft, especially bombers.
-
A26, give me my vader, please
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
lol :p
Here's another vote for Communist garbage over the B-29. Heck, I'd rather have the Yak-3, Yak-9UT, Yak-1, Yak-7, Pe-2. IL-4 (three torps? heh), Pe-8, Mig-3, Lagg-3-37, or Yak-9B before getting the B-29.
Grabage indeed :rofl
-Sik
Oow, the Pe-8, now you're talking. :)
-
How about
P-36/ Hawk75?
it flew for more countys than any other bird, and would have a huge number of posable skins
A5m Japan Navy
Avia B534,
I really like WWII bipes
Fokker D21
with the ski undercarage
Gunns
-
Bomber: SM79 or Z.1007 (one can hope, no?)
Fighter: Ki84 (I dont know why, but my instinct suggest this one)
Tank: T34 or Sherman (Prob. Firefly version).
Placed my bet :)
-
Based on relative use and numbers during WW2 - there are a bunch that need to come to fruition first (and thats more than 4)
He111 Bomber
B24 Liberator
B25 Mitchell
JU52 Transport
P39 Airacobra
G4M2 Betty
LAGG3
PBY Catalina
Cant 1007
-
He 111
G. 55
Beaufighter
Pe 2 or Mig 3
-
Westland Whirlwind!
-
Originally posted by 715
BTW- the T34-85 would not be a simple addition to a T34-76 in the game: although the hull is identical the turret is completely different.
They also upped the number of crewmen with that change.
Originally posted by Karnak
The T-34/76 is superior to the Panzer IV H in most ways, true, but it's gun is completely inadequate. I'd give the Panzer IV H at least an even chance against it, probably better than even.
Against the Tiger I the T-34/76 would be nigh helpless. I'd much rather take a Panzer IV H against the Tiger I. If the Tiger I hits either the T-34/76 or Panzer IV H it will probably penetrate whereas the Panzer IV H has a realistic hope of penetrating the Tiger I's armor, unlike the T-34/76.
I would not say that the T34/76 had a completely inadequate gun. I'm sure there would have been thousands of German tankers who might disagree as well. The gun was certainly nothing special, but it had best in world mobility due to wide tracks (not pertinent to AH) as well as best in world armor design (sloped on 3 sides), it did suffer from a small crew (the 76 turret) as many duties were shared. The only real problem with its gun was velocity, and it WAS quite short in that suit, but no more so than the Panzer IV's it faced. By the time the L48s came around the T34s were upgunned as well. I have read many accounts that the T34 (not specific 76 vs 85) was the best all round tank of the entire war, with the only real rival being the Panther. Taken with regard to the year they were in service I'd take the T34 versus the MkIV every time... T34/76 versus Mk IV L24 or T34/85 versus Mk IV L48.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
A bomber, a fighter, and a tank.
I basically agree with Snefens:
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
What I think:
Tu-2
Ki-84
Sherman
What I hope:
Pe-2
Brewster
T-34
I do know that chances to see Brewster B-239 as a next fighter are slim at best but one has to hope! :)
I do think that Pe-2 gets added before Tu-2 though. It would be more suitable for events and still be a competetive enough in the MA.
But if pyro has managed to get enough resources for Tu-2 he might still execute is initial plan, who knows.
-
see wishlist below. i would also like a t34 variant and the "swimming" sherman.
oh, and landing craft that holds a tank
-
Originally posted by Edbert MOL
Taken with regard to the year they were in service I'd take the T34 versus the MkIV every time... T34/76 versus Mk IV L24 or T34/85 versus Mk IV L48.
I agree. However we are talking in the context of AH so you'd be facing a Panzer IV H with a 75mm L48 with your T-34/76 and that is the matchup I was talking about.
Personally I think the best non-perk tank in AH should be the T-34/85 as it was the best of the common tanks in WWII. The better tanks like the Firefly Vc, M26 Pershing, Comet, Panther V G, Tiger I, Tiger II and IS-2 were all comparitively rare. Less so in the case of the German machines.
-
This is another plug for the Sherman tank with options available in the hangar, like swim floats and Calliope rockets.
A Pershing would be nice, too.
And a Ki-44.
(edit: some points I want to bring up)
A ki-43 would be garbage unless there's a Flying Tigers scenario involved. A re-skinned Zero would be just as good a substituted for the Ki-43.
I'm guessing that most of the people clamoring for the Ki-84 remember that plane from Air Warrior. The IJ forces need a competitive airplane and the Ki-84 could be it. I'm guessing it would be perked in the MA and therefore we'd still see N1k's as the plane of choice by IJ fans.
Which brings me to the Ki-44. The variant that had the highest production was the Ki-44-IIb, armed with four 12.7mm machine guns. Later variants included options of four 20mm cannon or two 12.7mm guns with two 40mm cannon.
Major advantages of the Ki-44 were high speed and rate of climb; however, it had a nasty habit of high-speed stalls due to wing loading. A total of 1,225 Ki-44s of all types were manufactured, which is respectable considering the total number of Japanese fighters produced by Japan.
Given the armament and flight characteristics, this plane could be effective in the MA as a bomber interceptor (its historical role) without incurring a perk penalty.
That, and its a nice looking airplane.
(http://www.kotfsc.com/thunderbolt/graphics/ki44-plate1.jpg)
(http://www.kotfsc.com/thunderbolt/graphics/ki-44-main.jpg)