Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: titanic3 on February 14, 2007, 08:38:58 AM
-
i think these are the planes and gv that we need in AH
B-25
He-111
Pe-8
H8K Emily
Ju-90 trasnport
IAR-80/81
He-115
Gloster Meteor
Halifax
Fw-200 Condor
A-26 Invader
Do-217
Do-335
Me-410
Catalina Flying Boat
Bristol Beaufighter
P-36 Kingcobra
Short Stirling
Ar-196
That's about it, i would like at least 2 of those planes
-
Originally posted by titanic3
i think these are the planes and gv that we need in AH
B-25
He-111
Pe-8
H8K Emily
Ju-90 trasnport
IAR-80/81
He-115
Gloster Meteor
Halifax
Fw-200 Condor
A-26 Invader
Do-217
Do-335
Me-410
Catalina Flying Boat
Bristol Beaufighter
P-36 Kingcobra
Short Stirling
Ar-196
That's about it, i would like at least 2 of those planes
you forgot Yak
-
i can get you two of those planes for about $600,000
-
Of that list, only a few were both significantly used and commonly known. The B-25 and He-111 are the only ones which we "need," as those two ships made a significant contribution (in the case of the He-111, in the bombing of London).
The P-63 was not nearly as significant as the P-39, and the Do-217 was not nearly as significant as the Do-17. The P-39 and Do-17 would be much more appropriate than the P-63 and Do-217.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
Of that list, only a few were both significantly used and commonly known. The B-25 and He-111 are the only ones which we "need," as those two ships made a significant contribution (in the case of the He-111, in the bombing of London).
The P-63 was not nearly as significant as the P-39, and the Do-217 was not nearly as significant as the Do-17. The P-39 and Do-17 would be much more appropriate than the P-63 and Do-217.
However, if the P-39 and Do-17 are added, the P-63 and Do-217 could be added as varients. Best of both worlds!
Also, you forgot the P-61B :D
-
The P-63 and Do-217 are rather different airplanes which would require a lot of extra effort to model. The P-61 would be very, very nice (as it is one of my favorite airplanes, taking after my lady with its twin booms), but it really didn't have a significant impact on the air war. In fact, its most important contribution was probably using its radar to locate damaged B-29s and help them home.
So, personal favorites aside, the only ones we "need," historically, are the P-39, the He-111, and the Do-17.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
The P-63 and Do-217 are rather different airplanes which would require a lot of extra effort to model. The P-61 would be very, very nice (as it is one of my favorite airplanes, taking after my lady with its twin booms), but it really didn't have a significant impact on the air war. In fact, its most important contribution was probably using its radar to locate damaged B-29s and help them home.
So, personal favorites aside, the only ones we "need," historically, are the P-39, the He-111, and the Do-17.
You forget the historical significance of the A-26 :aok Best low to medium altitude attack bomber ever made! Fought in WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and a few others. Recently retired from the Smoke Eaters forest fire bombers.
B-25 we need for Doolittle raids, and as American counter part for those that can't seem to fly the Mossie. Besides, I'm kind of fond of her too.
PB-Y Catalina! :aok I mean seriously now folks, how many float planes we have in the game so far?
P-61, just because nobody has yet to model it, despite the fact it only really fought for 8 months of WW2 and then throughout Korea.
-
Again, I love the P-61, but I think it only made twelve kills in World War Two. But you're right, no aerial combat simulator has ever had the Black Widow, as far as I know. And we already have the A-20 Havok, so the A-26 is not "necessary." Like the P-63 to the P-39, it is just a later variant that was less significant.
You need to prioritize. Aircraft should be included based primarily on their historical significance and usage. As such, if I was creating a list of fighters to model in a an aerial combat simulator, in order of importance, it would look something like this: Me-109, P-47, Spitfire, P-38, P-40, F6F, P-51, FW-190, Hurricane, F4U, P-39, et cetera. Obviously there's quite a bit of room for debate about the exact order of such things (some claim that the P-51 "won the war," while I say that the P-47 and P-38 had things covered well enough), but what is certain is that ships like the P-61 and P-63 are near the bottom of the list.
-
Just a comment on AC importance.
Just think if the US had no P-39 , P-40, and F4f at the entry of the war.
How wost off would bipes be against the zero and the like?
Bronk
-
Good point! The situation would have been hilariously reversed, with the Japs telling their pilots, "No, no! Do not turning with the roundeye biplanes. You is must shooting once and then to right blow pass them."
-
We need:
G4M2 (fills gap in early war Japanese set)
Wellington Mk III (usable early war bomber that the Luftwaffe can actually catch)
B-25C (early war bomber the Japanese can actually catch)
P-39 (very widely used fighter)
Ki-43-II-Otsu (very widely used Japanese fighter, heck, even the French used it post war)
Ju188A-2/Do217/He177A-5 (fills mid/late war bomber hole for the Luftwaffe)
B6N2 (fills mid-late war CV torpedo plane gap for the Japanese)
D4Y (fills mid-late war CV dive bomber gap for the Japanese)
Those are the most critical holes that I can see. There are other, smaller ones, but those are the big ones.
-
I love these long lists we get..... we've seen 1 jeep, the F4U-1A, and a makeover of the B-17 in the past 2 years. How many additions and make overs do you expect over the next 2 years? We'd like to see every plane used added to the plane set, but we are not going to see that. And it has been stated that one future priority is the makeover of existing planes (like what was done with 1A and B-17), rather than new additions.
Think carefully; if we are only going to possibly see a very few planes possibly added in the foreseeable future, what should they be? What roles should they fill?
* First of all, both the bomber pilots and GV drivers could each use an additional perk ride added to spend perk points on.
* Lots of Early War suggestions often are made.
Maybe good for some early war senerios, but really, neither the SEA events, nor either the Early War or Late Ware Arenas, get anywhere the draw that the 2 LW arenas do. So, is directing limited development time to a Spanish Civil War or Early War era plane which won't see use in LW a very good use of this limited resource? If we were going to see an effort from HTC to add to the plane set a number of planes, then sure, some EW planes would be great. But if we might only see 1 to 3 planes added over the next 2 or 3 years?
A few comments on those mentioned:
B-25 we need for Doolittle raids
Which is why you won't see it. People will want CV-launched ones, no matter those planes were running chopped with light loads. Nothing a standard B-25 can do that B-26 or B17 can't do in game now.
Catalina Flying Boat
Nothing more than a Hangar Queen. After a few fun little trips, you would not see them again. We don't do S&R missions. No Maritime Patrols. No subs to depth charge. Go load up a Catalina in FS 9 or X.
Fw-200 Condor
A dedicated long range Maritine Patrol Plane? No formations the way they operated. 4,600 bomb load. Henschel Hs 293 anti-ship guided missiles are not going to be modeled. Anti-shipping operations not a big deal in-game.... a few drone barge convoys is all. Doubt they will model the airborne radar. Very limited nitch use and ultimately a Hangar Queen. Any heavy bomber formation can do the job this could in arenas.
He-111
Nice Spanish War edition. Obsolete by Battle of Britain. Might see some use in EW, and some senerios... but EW does not see very many pilots, and is not taking off as a war arena. Ultimately, another Hangar Queen except some limited use.
P-61 Black Widow
We don't have night time in the arenas. This was a night fighter and bomber interceptor. Made use of radar to make attacks - model airborne radar in-game? Doubt it. Nothing in game presently supports the operational environment this thing operated in. Hangar Queen.
Ju188A-2/Do217/He177A-5 (fills mid/late war bomber hole for the Luftwaffe)
* Guided missiles Henschel Hs 293 or Fritz X will prevent addition of He-177 like nook will prevent the B-29.
* Ju188A2 would be LW only, minor improvement of Ju88. A high altitude fast heavy bomber with poor defensive armaments. Late Ju-188's were very high altitude high speed bombers..... which is yet another reason given as to why the B-29 will not be added to the game.
* Do217 Fritz X missiles might axe this idea. Heavier load and faster than Ju-88.
Ultimately though, buff pilots need a perk ride other than the Ar-234, and none of these really rate, except maybe the He-177 with guided munitions.... which we are not going to see..... rate perk points.
Of note:
D4Y (fills mid-late war CV dive bomber gap for the Japanese)
And it gives the CV force a decent dive bomber. Faster than other CV attack planes offered now. Could carry half the load of a TBM.
P-36 Airacobra or P63 Kingcobra - This could be added, but I'd give it Russian skin and put in Russian plane set. They got more use out of them both, and second highest Allied Ace was Russian flying the P-36 (and possibly P-63). A decent EW addition that could see LW use.
The two I push for the most:
A-26 Invader One of the few WWII perk-worthy bombers that could be added for buff pilots to spend perk on (especially since we aren't going to see the B-29 or He-177). Both the glass-nosed C-model penetration bomber and pathfinder and solid nose B model attack bomber could be done. B-model also has option for a 75mm nose cannon, manually loaded, with 20 rounds held in racks. 14 forward firing .50's another option for B-model. 6K bombload, rockets, even 2 torpedos as load out options.
Much more than just another A-20 Havoc. 50% more power, 50% more ord and more ord options. Ultimate strafer. Ultimate penetration bomber. And buff pilots need something other than the Ar234. And for the investment of development time, you get TWO perk worthy bombers.... a cheaper C-model, and a more expensive B-model.
And the one not seen here yet.
German 88mm Flak36 Early War, but useful through LW. Manned puffy ack for field defense and force buffs off deck, and able to defend against high buffs. Manned indirect artillery. Long range direct fire weapon vs GV's. Even against TGs that roll up on the shore line. Strong offense, multi-use, weak defense, poor maneuverability and fire only from stopped (deployed) position. Lightly perked to prevent overuse.
-
The Ju188A-2 is much faster (about 80mph) than the Ju88 and has MUCH better defensive firepower, 20mm and 13mm guns instead of 7.92mm guns and the 20mm is in a full turret.
It also had a heavier bomb load.
-
The turret had one of the two 13mm, not the 20mm which was in the nose. The placement of the weapons still left lower flanks and sides undefended.
Junkers Ju 188
Origin: Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke AG
Models: Ju 188A, D, E
Crew: Five
Final Delivery: 1945-46
Number Produced: 1,130
Model: Junkers Jumo 213A
Type: 12-Cylinder inverted liquid cooled vee
Number: Two Horsepower: 1,776 hp
Loaded:
Ju 188A & D: 33,730 lb. (15,300 kg)
Maximum Speed:
Ju 188A: 325 mph at 20,500 ft. (6250m)
Service Ceiling:
Ju 188A: 33,000 ft. (10,060m)
Range with 3,300 lb. (1500kg) bomb load:
Ju 188A & E: 1,360 miles (2160 km)
Armament: Typical.
1x 20mm MG 151/20 cannon in nose. (not in the top turret)
One 13mm MG 131 machine gun in dorsal turret.
One 13mm MG 131 machine gun manually aimed from rear dorsal position.
One 13mm MG 131 machine gun or twin 7.92mm MG 81 machine gun manually aimed from rear ventral position.
Payload: Typical.
6,614 lb. (3000kg) of bombs internally or two 2,200 lb. (1000kg) torpedos under inner wings.
"The Ju-188" from Tactical and Technical Trends
A report on the Luftwaffe Ju-188 twin-engine bomber, from Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 39, December 2, 1943.
[DISCLAIMER: The following text is taken from the U.S. War Department publication Tactical and Technical Trends. As with all wartime intelligence information, data may be incomplete or inaccurate. No attempt has been made to update or correct the text. Any views or opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of the website.]
THE JU-188
A specimen of the Ju-188, twin-engine bomber, which is currently being encountered in small numbers over England, has been examined, and a number of probable differences from its predecessor, the Ju-88, are described below.
The nose appears to have been re-designed to accomodate the increased armament and provide better pilot vision, showing a smoothly curving line in place of the usual angular faceted nose and stepped-up windshield.
The wing span is believed to be approximately 72 feet 6 inches and the wing tips nearly pointed, although those of the stabilizer and elevators are square. The fin and rudder are higher and wider than the Ju-88 and square in appearance, resembling somewhat the Ju-87. A large trimming tab is a noticeable feature of the rudder. Some modification of the top line of the fuselage is effected by a power-operated gun turret which is incorporated in the cockpit, similar to the installation in the Do-217. The landing gear is of the standard oleo-pneumatic retractable type and the tail wheel is also fully retractable. The leading edge of the wings were fitted with balloon cable cutters.
The aircraft is powered by two BMW 801 G-2 14-cylinder aircooled radial engines, fully rated and fitted with three-bladed metal propellers. The fuel tank installation is the same as in the Ju-88 with a normal capacity of 146 U.S. gallons in the wing tanks. Possible additional capacity of 325 gallons in the forward bomb compartment and 181 in the rear bomb compartment gives a maximum supply of 952 gallons. The fuel of any individual tank may be jettisoned through the operation of a selector switch on the instrument panel. Performance estimates, which are approximately 15 per cent higher than corresponding figures for the Ju-88 equipped with Jumo 211 J engines, include maximum emergency speeds of 285 mph at sea level and 325 mph at 20,000 feet. Ranges, with 771 gallons of fuel are 800 miles at cruising speed of 254 mph and 1,200 miles with a weak mixture economical cruising speed of 232 mph. Service ceiling is estimated to be between 33,000 and 34,000 feet.
The armament is considerably more powerful than that of the Ju-88. There are two 13-mm MG 131s, one in a dorsal power-rotated turret with a perspex dome, similar to that installed in the Do-217, and the other in a manually-operated ring fitted with a bullet-proof glass shield in the dorsal rear of the cockpit. One 20-mm MG 151, with limited movement, is mounted in the nose and twin 7.9-mm MG 81s are installed in the ventral position, firing aft.
As the forward bomb compartment was apparently fitted with a long-range tank, the bomb load probably consisted of ten 110-pound bombs carried in the rear bomb compartment and two 2,200-pound and two 1,100-pound bombs in four carriers, two fitted externally under each wing. The bomb doors are operated by an electric motor, a new feature in German aircraft.
The armor found consisted of plate protection for the back, shoulders, and head of the pilot, a bullet-proof windshield for the radio operator, another plate behind the radio set, and a curved plate on the floor.
The presence of A.S.V. (air-to-surface vessel apparatus) may indicate the use of the aircraft for antishipping operations.
The Ju-188 has participated in the recent hit-and-run raids over England and may be encountered by convoys in the near future.
Slightly larger bomb load than B-17. Higher speeds. Shorter legs. Possibly higher ceiling. A few heavier weapons than B-17, but poorer coverage areas and fewer overall weapons and firepower. All in all, if we are only going to maybe see a very few additions to the plane set in AHII..... the Ju-188 is not one of the planes I'd argue for.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
...Lots and lots of stuff here...
Remember one thing...new planes are not about what is needed or will be used in the MA's. Play some scenarios and you will see the need for the planes you like to call hanger queens. The He111 and Do17 come to mind for the very popular BoB scenario. No fun trying to chase down the hotrod of the sky (Ju88) with a Hurri Mk1 ;)
Oh well we will get what HT gives us and most will be happy just to get something and others will still biatch about it.
-
Judy, Judy, Judy
-Sik
-
Zorstorer, how true... how true.
Tedrbr, I started to say Them's pretty harsh words coming from a guy with the A-26 avatar, but my knee jerk is slower these days.
However, I do not like the partial quote on my B-25 comment. If you're going to quote as a slap, then include the entire thing with highlights.
B-25 we need for Doolittle raids, and as American counter part for those that can't seem to fly the Mossie. Besides, I'm kind of fond of her too.
That said, I still think the 25 is much needed in game, as a low to medium level/range buff. Make the H model with all those guns in the nose to supplement the Mossie, and A-20 at the least.
And Benny,"No", the A-20 does not fill the role of the A-26 in any way, shape, or manner.
If I had any pull for the Allies plane set, I'd be pushing for the B-25C and H, as well as the A-26B... Alas, I am but a small voice in the winds of change.
-
Easily the most important fighter which we do not now have in Aces High II is the P-39. So if I were to vote for one airplane, it would be that.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
Easily the most important fighter which we do not now have in Aces High II is the P-39. So if I were to vote for one airplane, it would be that.
One could make very strong counter arguments in favor of the Ki-43, the I-16-24, the Yak-1 and the Yak-7.
-
Tedr is rather narrow minded if you ask me...
We've had the P51s, P47s, B17, 109s, 190s, spits, and f4u's all remodelled in the past 2 years. With the addition of the P47N, Spit8 and Spit16, F4U-1A, and Jeep. With the P38L having been remodelled with the addition of the P38G, P38J, B24, Ki84 and T34 the prior year.
We don't *need* any new perk planes. Perk planes are just that... a perk to the game. We *need* more representative planes of country planesets.
B25: very likely to be added. HTC is in full swing CT mode at the moment, so it is not likely to happen anytime soon. B25 would not be desregarded just because a some people would want to up it from a cv... It would be used off of the CV.... but only in the SEA.
HE-111: Again, this is likely to be added in the foreseeable future. At the moment we have 3 German bombers, one is a perk bomber and the other two are early war models. HE-111 would fill a large gap in part of the German planeset.
Ju-188: Again, there is a large gap in the German planeset this could fill. The He-111 would also be classified as early war, the Ju-188 would be a later war German bomber that wouldn't be a perk ride.
D4Y Judy: We desperately need some more representative Japanese planes, especially bombers. Scenarios start to lack a lot when you have use D3As and B5Ns as primary Japanese bombers for every special event.
P39 would be a nice addition that would probably see decent use and fill gaps in both the US and Soviet planesets (two birds with one stone)
With the recent changes to AA guns in the Main Arena, I don't think we *need* the 88mm flak anymore. I would have said "ok that's understandable prior to the AA changes, but now it takes a lot to get near an enemy airfield without the 88mm flak.
The A26 isn't *needed* I know you are all set on the A26, but it doesn't have that significant of a role in WWII to claim we need it as much as you say. As far as needing another perk bomber, fine, in that case yes we could use it. But we do not desperately need it, and I wont shed any tears if it isn't added anytime soon.
I would add the Oscar and Betty to the list of *needed* planes.
Benny Moore is even more narrow minded... Benny is too set on US planes. I myself prefer US planes over other nation's planes, but Benny takes it to another level sometimes...
-
From "Raising an Invader" (http://www.airclassicsmuseum.org/Archive%20Articles/A-26%20-%20Invader.htm)
The A-26 Invader had one of the longest service lives of any American warplane, serving in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. Designed and manufactured by the Douglas Aircraft Company, it first flew in 1942 but due to production delays was not used operationally until 1944. With 22 50 caliber machine guns the A-26 had the most awesome concentrations of firepower of any World War II aircraft. Unlike the B-17, B-25 and B-24 bombers, the A-26 used remote controlled gun turrets above and below the airframe. The remote turrets solved the problem of wind buffet and also allowed the guns to swing faster than possible with hand held guns. Tasked with the job of disrupting German logistical support routes, the 47th BG flying the A-26 flew around the clock and did pioneer work in night interdiction against enemy supply routes. Losses were relatively light, thanks to the beefy airframe, and on numerous occasions severely damaged aircraft made it home safely. Production of the type ceased at the end of World War II with a total of 2,450 manufactured. It was the last twin engine propeller driven bomber to be built for the US Air Force.
I still advocate the A-26 for Late War era, over any other Allied buff. Hey, the lady has more than paid her dues, and deserves her place in Historical Gaming... don't you think? ;)
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Benny Moore is even more narrow minded... Benny is too set on US planes. I myself prefer US planes over other nation's planes, but Benny takes it to another level sometimes...
I don't get it. Of the airplanes I picked that I think we need, one was American and the other two were German. I also consider the Me-109 the most needed fighter in an aerial combat simulator.
But yes, I did forget about the Oscar. So, in amendment, I'd say that it's a toss-up between the P-39 and the Ki-43 for most needed fighter. Karnak, we already have a Yak, what's up with that? Since we have a very capable Yak, let an airplane that doesn't have any model in.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
Karnak, we already have a Yak, what's up with that? Since we have a very capable Yak, let an airplane that doesn't have any model in.
We are also missing some of important Yak models, such as Yak-9 standard and Yak-3. We don't have a Yak-9 standard with just 20mm nose cannon. The Yak-9 standard with 20mm nose cannon is the most produced Soviet fighter at that time. I'm not talking about the Yak-9U, i'm basically talking about introducing a Yak with Yak-9T's engine armed with 20mm nose cannon.
-
If you ask me, HE-111 bomber is highly needed in this game. I also have a suggestion which no one has made so far. The P-40B should be thrown out of game. We move the P-40E up to 40 on the eny and put in P-40N. This would help in things like FSO, since P-40E was almost obsolete by the time Tunisia rolled around. We put P-40N on eny of 25, since it was considerably better then the P-40E in all areas. If you like my idea, r-e-p-l-y
###############Everyone's Hero##############:aok :aok :aok
-
Why remove the P-40B?
That is moronic.
They could just add the P-40N if they wanted to, there is no reason to remove the P-40B.
-
Also if P-39 is introduced, The P-39D should be classified as a U.S. plane and P-39Q-30 should be classified as a USSR plane. P-39Q-30 only flew for Soviets and that variant is basically a Soviet request to remove armor, remove wing guns, and overboost the engine to improive low- alt performance.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Tedr is rather narrow minded if you ask me...
We've had the P51s, P47s, B17, 109s, 190s, spits, and f4u's all remodelled in the past 2 years. With the addition of the P47N, Spit8 and Spit16, F4U-1A, and Jeep. With the P38L having been remodelled with the addition of the P38G, P38J, B24, Ki84 and T34 the prior year.
We don't *need* any new perk planes. Perk planes are just that... a perk to the game. We *need* more representative planes of country planesets.
B25: very likely to be added. HTC is in full swing CT mode at the moment, so it is not likely to happen anytime soon. B25 would not be desregarded just because a some people would want to up it from a cv... It would be used off of the CV.... but only in the SEA.
HE-111: Again, this is likely to be added in the foreseeable future. At the moment we have 3 German bombers, one is a perk bomber and the other two are early war models. HE-111 would fill a large gap in part of the German planeset.
Ju-188: Again, there is a large gap in the German planeset this could fill. The He-111 would also be classified as early war, the Ju-188 would be a later war German bomber that wouldn't be a perk ride.
D4Y Judy: We desperately need some more representative Japanese planes, especially bombers. Scenarios start to lack a lot when you have use D3As and B5Ns as primary Japanese bombers for every special event.
P39 would be a nice addition that would probably see decent use and fill gaps in both the US and Soviet planesets (two birds with one stone)
With the recent changes to AA guns in the Main Arena, I don't think we *need* the 88mm flak anymore. I would have said "ok that's understandable prior to the AA changes, but now it takes a lot to get near an enemy airfield without the 88mm flak.
The A26 isn't *needed* I know you are all set on the A26, but it doesn't have that significant of a role in WWII to claim we need it as much as you say. As far as needing another perk bomber, fine, in that case yes we could use it. But we do not desperately need it, and I wont shed any tears if it isn't added anytime soon.
I would add the Oscar and Betty to the list of *needed* planes.
Nice.
Wasn't aware of some of those remodeled planes over the past two year time frame. Been playing about 1-1/2 years. I should have remembered the latest Jug and Spit XVI. My mistake.
* Perk Bomber Ride: I argue for an additional perk plane for bomber drivers, due to complaints about buff drivers who "bomb and bail" or otherwise operate in a suicidal manner. Part of the problem may be argued that the only perk bomber is the Ar-234, and not all buff drivers like the Arado. No need for bomber perks if you don't fly the Arado.
Some argue for perking bomb load, or perking drones, or perking more of the existing bombers. I counter that rather than gimping existing rides, that adding what was a popular plane in another venue, that is a perk worthy ride, to the plane set is a better answer.
What I see are perk worthy planes are the B-29, the A-26, and the He-177 with guided ordnance. Since the A-26 had so many configurations (as well as B and C versions), did not use guided ordnance, and does not have the heavy load out and high speed/altitude of the B-29 (as well as nook controversy), it is the one I push.
If there were another non-U.S. Allied or Axis bomber that I saw as being a perk-worthy addition to the game, I would argue for it, as the U.S. bomber line is pretty well represented already.
* B-25: as stated, only reason I push the A-26 is as a perk ride. Otherwise, the U.S. planeset and bomber lineup are already pretty well represented sompared to the rest.
If the question or effort is in filling out the planeset, then I would agree that the He-111 for EW SEA and AvA events (BoB) would be a good choice. The He-188 a good choice. Petlyakov Pe-2, Bristol Beaufighter, Handley Page Halifax, Nakajima Ki 43 Hayabusa, Ilyushin Il-4 or Il-10, Fiat G.55, Oscar or Betty. More Yaks? A MiG? P-39 and P63 - even though American designs - were far more heavily used by the Soviets (1/2 of all P39's, nearly all P63's produced went to Soviets), so if adding the Bell plane, I'd argue for the Soviet version. There are SEA and AvA (and possibly ToD) reasons to bring some of them in, among other planes that could be considered, which also benefit the few pilots that fly EW and MW arenas.
* D4Y Judy - not only a needed addition to the small Japanese plane set, but a more effective plane for the carrier-borne plane set.
* 88mm Flak. Not just a supplement to additional flak in game. The FlaK36 was used as a tank killer, long range direct fire, indirect artillery fire, as well as high altitude AA. It gives the GVr's an additional light perk ride; and I admit, in order to prevent over use, it's weak defense, poor maneuverability, and light perk cost are part of the package. It is a unique multi role addition to the GV set. Brings puff ack back to airfields and bases. Not necessarily a "need", but a addition that is different from all existing ones. Can be entered from EW onward. It mixes things up a little.
Narrow minded? The resource drain is ToD. Remodeling existing planes also considered a priority. I see any new additions as probably being few and far between, so I try to find and suggest additions that meet multiple goals. If we might see more than a very few additions, if any, in the next few years, all the better. I don't see 5 additions and over a dozen remodels coming in the next two years, but I am willing to be pleasantly wrong. If you could see just 2 additions in the next 2 years, what would they be?
-
Originally posted by 1K3
We are also missing some of important Yak models, such as Yak-9 standard and Yak-3. We don't have a Yak-9 standard with just 20mm nose cannon. The Yak-9 standard with 20mm nose cannon is the most produced Soviet fighter at that time. I'm not talking about the Yak-9U, i'm basically talking about introducing a Yak with Yak-9T's engine armed with 20mm nose cannon.
It's quite simple. If you already have a model of one airplane, and you only have room for one other airplane, rather than getting another model of the airplane you already have, get another that we need more. Having two Yaks and one P-39 is better than having three Yaks.
-
Benny, by that logic we should have one of each plan before adding a second of any?
I agree that the P39 is an important addition (Well, I'd advocate the P-400 since the M4 was a total POS, though with the .50s and .303s it might still find some love), but I don't see it as any more deserving than the Yak-9m, or Yak-1.
Of course, both planes take a back seat to Judy.
-Sik
-
We i want a F16
But where NOT going to get a F16
Sign
only dreams :cry
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Benny, by that logic we should have one of each plan before adding a second of any?
If only one or the other can be added, then yes, I advocate adding another airplane. Also, the new airplane must have been more significant than the old airplane's new model. Lastly, I'd give fighters priority over bombers, since the game is primarily about fighters.
-
Originally posted by Husky01
We i want a F16
But where NOT going to get a F16
Sign
only dreams :cry
i dunt think teh 109f series went that hi
u want 109g-10
-
i think ah2 should have a game with all the planes (ww1, ww2, korea, veitnam, gulf war and the iraq war.)it be awsome:aok
p51srule:aok
-
How about X-Wings and Tie Fighters also? And the ornithopters from Dune! That'd be even more awesome, dude.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
How about X-Wings and Tie Fighters also? And the ornithopters from Dune! That'd be even more awesome, dude.
Thought that's what the Splixteens and LaLas were for?
Oh yeah... /.squelch Jonny boy 8
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
If only one or the other can be added, then yes, I advocate adding another airplane. Also, the new airplane must have been more significant than the old airplane's new model. Lastly, I'd give fighters priority over bombers, since the game is primarily about fighters.
Well, I think we're pretty much done here.
1. There is no such constraint
2. The significance test undermines point 1 (Since now we are looking not at the number of models, but rather the significance of each proposed addition).
3. I can't disagree more with the idea that the game is primarily about fighters. At least, not to the degree that there should be a bias in plane additions.
-Sik
-
Dewoitine 520....
Hey it was supposed to be as good as a Spitfire and if France had more of them it might have delayed the inevitable...for a bit.
Anyway it would be cool in Early war France alongside Spits and Hurricanes