Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: tedrbr on November 19, 2006, 03:50:35 PM
-
From the revision notes:
Revised the 3D shapes of the F4U's. The F4U-1C was excluded from the revision as it will eventually be dropped as a separate plane when a perk ordnance system is developed.
Okay....some of us will panic, other will cheer, but really there is little to no info to go on for this.
Speculation part. Assuming you will spend perks on an F4U-1A or F4F-4 to outfit it as a C-Hog with cannons, what other rides have varients that could come under this kind of system?
Fighter-side I can think of a couple planes, mostly German and Japanese side (Americans planes have pretty good lead now, so I'd put effort into other nation planes first, then move to U.S. stables). I can't find any varients of the existing British, Russian, or Italian fighter or attack planes that would be an ordanance issue only.
The Ki-84 la had several varients such as:
* Ki-84 Ib (Mark Ib) -four cannons Ho-5 of 20 mm
* Ki-84 Ic (Mark Ic) -Version against Bombers, with two cannons Ho-5 of 20 mm and Ho-105 of 30 mm in wings
The Ta-152 C varient:
from Wiki."C-model was designed to operate at lower altitudes than the H-model, and had an even heavier armament consisting of one MK 108 30 mm cannon firing through the propeller hub, and four MG 151/20 20 mm cannons. Two of the 20 mm cannons were mounted above the engine (in the engine cowling), and the other two in the wing roots. The Ta 152 C could destroy even the heaviest enemy bombers with a short burst, but the added weight of the armament affected speed and turn rates negatively"
* Ki-61-II-KAIb with 4x 20 mm cannon, although I don't know if this varient had the reinforced wing to carry the bomb load that the Ki-61-I-KAIc could.
* A A6M5b upgrade to: "A6M5c Model 52c «Hei»" with more armor plate on the cabin's windshield (5.5 cm) and in the pilot's seat. This version also possessed armament of three 13.2 millimeter guns (one in the cowling, and one in each wing with a rate of fire at 800 rpm), twin 20 millimeter Type 99-II guns and an additional fuel tank with a capacity of 367 liters, often replaced by a 250 kg bomb.
* Guessing gondola pods on german fighters become a perk cost.
* Would heavy ammo loads in Jugs and P38's and such become a perk cost?
------------------------------------------------
Bomber side
Since buffs may be considered more important in the taking of bases and towns now with newest revisions, I'm not sure how you can put a ord perk into effect with bombers. I certainly can't see nerfing the existing bombers and buff drivers from the current situation, despite what some rabid make-everything-fightertown furballer may want to see.
Buff driving now takes time, and low alt attacks are almost certain suicide against new flack positons, so even more time is needed for buff drivers to get to at least 10K AGL over targets. Nerf the buffs, you'll see even fewer of them, and static WWI trench-line warfare in the arenas with little movement (which some tactically-only minded folks would like to see of course....they would not have to consider strategic parts of the game any more at all... and avoid their heads hurting....ouchie ouchie ouchie).
Do you bring out the huge mother Tallboy and Grand Slam Bombs?
Noted, bomb bay doors needed to be refitted, and these were carried by B1 Specials, but the differences between the BI and BIII were very slight, mostly engine installation proceedures at assembly.
21 foot (6.4 m) long 12,000 lb (5,448 kg) 'Tallboy' or 25.5 foot (7.77 m) long 22,000 lb (9,979 kg) "Grand Slam" "earthquake" bombs.
:O :O :O
Could these even be modeled to produce the right effect in the arena, or would code limitations mean these would not be as effective as they were in real life?
Do you allow perk points spent on loading a bomber to it's maximum bomb load?
* Lancs in game carry Typical Load of 14,000 lb (6,400 kg) but had a Maximum Load of 22,000 lb (10,000 kg).... the Grand Slam. Here, bomb bay space limitations would be the biggest factor in loadout.
* B17's in the game carry a medium (for B17's) bomb load of up to 6K pounds. B17's could install aux fuel tanks which took up space in the bomb bay. The most a B17 could carry was 8K pounds for an 800 miles round trip to 4,500 lbs on a 1,600 miles round trip. Historical average was 4,000 to 5,000 pounds ord per planes, but the bomb bay space limitations often came to bear on this, especially with inboard aux tanks.
* B24's in game carry the typical maximum of 8,000 pounds, although B-24's have been know to carry up to 12,000 pounds at times, even over great distances when stripped of extra weight:
From Wiki: In the China Burma India (CBI) theater, one RAF commander stripped his B-24’s of what he considered excess weight (including all centerline guns) and carried 8,000 lb bomb loads at night to Bangkok, a roundtrip of over 2,100 miles, and 12,000 lb to Rangoon, a roundtrip of over 1,400 miles.
Can bombers buy additional drones with perks as was once considered in the Wish List Forums? Say, purchase up to 3 more drones flying behind the first formation? Might be more difficult than it's worth, and drone gunnery would be pretty poor with 800 intersection point for whole flight, but might be worth spending perks on.
Buff drivers probably would like the ability to spend perks on maximum load outs at times, or tall-boy and grand slam bombs. Although, another perk-worthy plane would be nice as well.
A-26 Invader would be my choice.
:t
Or maybe an He-177?
What other thoughts to the "perk ordnance system is developed" do people here have?
:huh
-
Couple I can think of -
4x20mm Spits (but not on the current Vb, wouldn't be worth the perk price, but bring back the old Vc, then yep)
Mossie with 57mm ship/Uboat killer.
12 x .303 Hurricane. (death by a gazillion cuts)
Give the XVI a .303 option it is then also a 1943 LF IX. (Probably change tag from XVI to LF IXe)
Wonder if they could extend the idea to different motors for the Spits and other aircraft-
i.e. Mk IX the choice of Merlin 61/66/70 etc, maybe even include wingtip options.
-
bring back the old Vc
I second, third, and fourth that motion !!!
-
You guys might wanna check it out, But I remember reading something about an F6F with 20mm's in the wings. And some early versions of the P-38's had 2 .30's, 2 .50's, and 1 37mm.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
You guys might wanna check it out, But I remember reading something about an F6F with 20mm's in the wings. And some early versions of the P-38's had 2 .30's, 2 .50's, and 1 37mm.
THe F6F-5 was factory engineered to accpet the 2x20mm, 4 x.50 load out. This wasnt a modified production run or a field mod....every single F6F-5 was capable of this load out. The F6F-5P (recon) and the F6F-5N (night fighter) both had this package as standard. The RN operated all its F6F-5's with this loadout.
The US navy did not operate any F6F's (except models above) with the 2 x 20mm loadout....but it literally could have been done in the field at any time by fleet armourers.....simply pop out the inbourd .50's and replace with 20mm. All fittings etc were already in place.
-
I dont beleive the RN ever operated the Hellcat II (F6F-5) with any 20mm. I have found no evidence of it so far. All the photos of Fleet Air Arm Hellcats in 1945 show 6 x 50s. I have also seen no references in print.
Most of the US F6F night fighters were armed with 6 50s, many did have the 20mm, but it actually wasnt a popular mount with the pilots. The reasons are many, firstly, it complicated servicing among the night fighter wings, that needed 20mm supplies, secondly, the pilots didnt like the mixed ballistics, and lastly, to shoot down a Japanese bomber at night was really just a question of finding it...you just didnt need 20mm to blast a G4M Betty or a Ki-49 from 200 yards with incindiary and tracer fire. They would go up like roman candles anyways, as would the B6N and other strike a/c they would catch, especially Kamikaze a/c loaded with fuel and explosives.
As to wether HTC ever gives the F6F the 20mm option, I wouldn't care a great deal either way.
-
In addition to having the mentioned planes perked in terms of weapons, the Spitfires with C/E-type wings may have perked ordnance systems for additional bomb shackles and/or the C-type armament of 4x 20mm cannon. I can see many-a noob (such as myself =D) running for the fit, as, in a Spitfire, maneuverability isn't affected too much since those separated .303" MG's and their ammunition already were degrading maneuverability.
But it would be smarter to give only the Mk.IX and VIII those options since the other Spits are spammed (most notably the Spixteen) and giving them 4x 20mm would be quite annoying. Besides, there aren't many people who fly the Spit as an energy fighter anyway, so they'll just hand their tulips to you.
O and a SpitVc would be great... it should be fitted with a better Merlin... like the 47, I think it was, which gave it slightly better performance, a +16 boost instead of our current 12 and, IMO - the best advantage from the new motor - a clearer edge over those Zekes. A rear, 36 Imp. Gal. rear fuselage fuel tank would be fun too.
-
I don't know if it could be included in a similar manner as the spits, but I'd love to have a hurri with rockets on it.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
4x20mm Spits (but not on the current Vb, wouldn't be worth the perk price, but bring back the old Vc, then yep)
I'd be so happy I would weep!
most later spit (5 and beyond) wings had the capacity to carry 4x20mm... Few did.. Would be fun as an expensive perk.
-
I can see that 152C becoming the HOtard ride of choice. Just what we need, ANOTHER plane with three cannon in the nose, including one tater. :p
Of course, the downside of the Grand Slam is that even if you bull's-eye a Tiger he'll STILL roll away without a scratch.
-
Ta152C is an entirely different design airplane - engine, wings and fuselage than the Ta152H. It would be another plane in AH and not just an ordenance option to the Ta152H.
-
The P-38 was planned to use the 37mm gun but none ever actually had them.
-
Ta152C is an entirely different design airplane - engine, wings and fuselage than the Ta152H. It would be another plane in AH and not just an ordenance option to the Ta152H
The C would be kinda like a long-wing Dora, eh?
-
Ta152C.. hmm never heard of that partcular variant... Do yo have any performance figures?
Hmm still thinking about that Spitfire Vc. They could give it 4x 20mm cannon, and/or a Merlin 46/47 for better performace (than those pesky A6M5's), but I don't think HTC will allow BOTH if the SpitVc is put into the game.
What do you people want? 4x 20mm cannon, or the improved Merlin (and/or the possibility of the additional rear-fuel tank)? I'm sorry I don't have performance figures, but I'm sure 'Spitfire Mark V Aces: 1941 - 45' by Alfred Price has the figures... I wish I had that book! Too bad it's super expensive...
-
IL-10!!!! option of either two 37mm cannon and two 7.62's or four 23mm cannons,and a 20mm in the tail. :) Top speed of 342 mph compaired to the IL-2's 258 mph....
JU 87G of course with the 37mm's under the wings.
Would like to see the Ar 232 german transport and pay perks to fly an armed goon :D but this is an entirely new plane so a bit off topic
-
First of all, HTC said weapons packages. They've stated before they can't do things like switching out engines, wingtips (cropped/extended) or anything like that. Folks have asked (especially with spitfires' different engines and wings being clipped).
That won't happen. They're just taking a plane, as-is, and changing an ammo load, then perking that one ammo load.
A few points:
- Ki84 with 30mm? Only like 5 were made, none saw action
- Ki61 with 4x20mm? Hell the 2x20mm were very late ware as it was, I don't think 4x20mm saw any service, as even the Ki100 had 2x20mm, and it came AFTER the production of Ki61s stopped.
- Ta152C-0, while I would LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE to have this plane, it's not just a Ta152 with different guns. It had a different engine for lower alts, was more of a pig to fly (hard to believe, but yes) and had short wings. Slightly longer than a Doras, but without the 6 foot extension of the 152H series. It also was not a production plane, although a couple C-0s did serve with the 152H unit, and they did see combat.
- F6Fs with 20mm Most photos out there show entire flights of F6F-Ps and so forth with all guns being 50cal. The 20mm were unpopular (as has been stated) and as there were probably less than 1% with 20mm out of the many many tens of thousands built, I don't think it has a place in Aces High. Hell the 6x50cal in the game do better, methinks.
- SpitVc often was ferried with 4x20mm then removed 2 of the guns when it got to its destination. When they had the chance, they didn't use 4x20mm, because the extra weight wasn't worth it (2 got the job done just fine). There's no reason to bring back the super boosted SpitV. There was no reason to fly the spit9 back then. NOW there is. To all those that "miss the old spitV" -- just fly the 9, people! Order now and get a free slipper tank (not available on spitV models)
- Luftwaffe gunpods were standard equipment. You could add or remove it in the field, but many models came from the factories with them installed (including the K-4s, but these were all removed before deployment, which is why we don't have them in-game). These would not be perked any more than the 8-gun option on the P47 would be, or the 6-gun option on the P51s. They were standard. Now if you added NEW gunpods, that weren't as standard (30mm gunpods, or 2x 20mm gunpods for each wing on the 190as) then maybe those would be worth a perk, but the MG151/20 gunpods should never be.
- Bombers and bombs. HTC has said previously that they won't do anything larger than the 4k bomb already in the game. I know skuzzy or pyro recently hinted at a tall boy for the lanc, but they might have been throwing out examples (like, from day 1 the B29 has been referenced on the webpage, but 6 years later it's still not in the game). So I don't know if they've changed their stance or not.
However, the bombs we have were HISTORICAL loadouts. While B17s COULD carry 17,000lbs of bombs, they never did carry that much into battle. Why? Because they'd only get 50 miles with that much ord on board. We have the historic bomb load of the bombers that had to fly thousands of miles. As-is we're spoiled with bombers that run at full throttle the entire flight, bombers that take off with 25% gas and never get near to running low before their sortie is ended, because they fly 1 sector and back (total 50 miles) before they're done. Real bombers had to cruise even in climb, had to take 100% gas all the time, and had to fly a long long way. You are already spoiled with 3 planes, super fast speed (nearly uncatchable by fighters) and 3 planes' worth of laser guns. Now you want to do all that with 10x the bomb load? Pshaw! Fix the engine overheat FIRST then the gas consumption THEN think about adding new bombs. Chances are you won't WANT them because you'll climb 10 feet per minute, max.
P.S. HTC said no to the 57mm on the Mossie because they don't want people sniping bomber formations from outside gun range. Again, they might have changed their stance, but that's what they said.
-
"As-is we're spoiled with bombers that run at full throttle the entire flight, bombers that take off with 25% gas and never get near to running low before their sortie is ended, because they fly 1 sector and back (total 50 miles) before they're done. Real bombers had to cruise even in climb, had to take 100% gas all the time, and had to fly a long long way. You are already spoiled with 3 planes, super fast speed (nearly uncatchable by fighters) and 3 planes' worth of laser guns."
As well as fighters that run around at full power all the time........
-
Flayed, Fighters historically ran at higher power for longer periods of times. Historically, bombers did NOT. So what do we get?
Historically: Fighters had a closure rate to bombers of over 300mph. Bombers fired at most a couple of guns at short range into the fighters.
Aces High: Fighters have a closure rate of 50mph to bombers, which can fire laser-accurate guns from 3 planes and up to 4-5 gun positions from EVERY plane all at the same spot in space and time, able to kill the plane in a single burst at over 1.5k ranges.
Yeah, see, to me I don't think the problem is the fighters. The problem is the bombers.
-
I hope they make anything with four cannons very very expensive.
-
Why? Chog as-is has piss-poor stopping power. I was on the tail of a P51D and I put 4 hit sprites directly into one wing. I put a further 5 along the center of the fuselage spread out about 10 feet long. Then I hit the same wing again with 1 more hit sprite. Then I managed to get a FOURTH burst that killed him. I bet I landed 50+ 20mm rounds onto a single P51 within the time span of 30 seconds before he went down. He didn't lose a single part or start leaking or anything until he died at the end.
Maybe if the 20mm **DID** anything, lol!
*note* before that p51 there were some lancasers and some B24s that soaked up 300+ 20mm before going down. Localized all in the same spots, too. Chog ammo is/was kinda wacky last night.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Flayed, Fighters historically ran at higher power for longer periods of times. Historically, bombers did NOT. So what do we get?
Historically: Fighters had a closure rate to bombers of over 300mph. Bombers fired at most a couple of guns at short range into the fighters.
Aces High: Fighters have a closure rate of 50mph to bombers, which can fire laser-accurate guns from 3 planes and up to 4-5 gun positions from EVERY plane all at the same spot in space and time, able to kill the plane in a single burst at over 1.5k ranges.
Yeah, see, to me I don't think the problem is the fighters. The problem is the bombers.
Note: "longer".....fighters still did not run with throttle up against the gates the whole time any more than the bombers did. They do in game.
Historically, bombers would normally fly in combat wings of at least 60 bombers, with escorting fighters at least part of the way. Not 3 bombers by themsleves.
Historically, lone fighters did not tackle bombers all by themselves.
Get rid of the drone catch up speed, and it will take care of most of the throttle concerns. Lead planes will have to roll back just to keep from losing drones in turns. I'd gladly give up drone catch up speed to increase from a flight to a squadron formation by spending perkies.
If you close with a flight of buffs with only a 50 mph advantage, you deserve to get kilt. Buff interception requires a little patience and set up to conduct well. Come from 6-oclock, you get zapped. Take a plane worthy of intercepting buffs. Get alt advantage, then build up speed, then come in on the buffs were they will at best be able to bring 1 or 2 sets of turrents to bear.
If the buffs are level, and you are climbing to chase from low six, yes, your closure rate will sux. This also represents most of the fighters I tag when driving a buff. I wait until D900, then fire a good burst. Sprites every time.
Laser-guns is bogus issue; see above mention about 60-plane wings. The turrents from all three planes converge at about 800 from the lead plane, IIRC. From dead 6-o'clock position, I'm sure it seems like a laser aimed gun. You can be running into up to 11 guns. You only see a few tracers, but they are laying down a lot of fire. A good gunner can rake you're path, especially if you chose your approach poorly, knowing how all three planes fire. A good gunner can line up on a stable, non-manuvering fighter plane, and get hits up to 1.5K with a little Kentucky windage. A bad gunner sprays and prays, and can still get lucky at times.
You've got a single gunner trying to aim and fire the whole flight's turrents. The majority of which are not firing at the gunner's aim point, except at range 800.
Any Search of your name, Krusty, and the word bomber will show you've always had an issue with the bombers, use of drones, turrents, in-game bomb calibration, bomber toughness, dive bombing buffs, and even the overuse and improper use of the term "buff" in the game. If we hand single bombers with every gun manable in-game, I'm sure we'd have a thread against the use of Death Stars.
I've suggested ways to reduce the dive bombing buffs in another thread re> buff perkies. Elliminate drone catch up burst speed would be acceptable to many as a means to slow the buffs down a little.
It seems some won't be happy until bombers are limited to no drones, with the old calibration reinstated, guns accurate out to maybe D100, bombs that don't arm unless they've fallen at least 5K first, bombs won't release unless flying dead-level, airframes so weak that if you airspawn one in the TA the wings come off almost immediately, and with engines that begin to overheat shortly after takeoff if left at full throttle. That, *might* be acceptable for some.
:noid :noid :noid
Maybe
-
How does the 20 on the chog compare to other 20s? I haven't noticed them being ineffective at all, but then again I generally don't put any faith in any numbers Krusty uses in his AH Fairie Tale Stories.