Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: C(Sea)Bass on July 17, 2007, 02:23:06 AM
-
It seems to me that they aircraft selected were picked with little thought to production nmbers as we are missing some very heavily produced aircraft, and have some that barely saw service.
Here are a few examples.
800 tempests made (which we have)
20,000 I-16's made(which we do not have)
698 Ki-67's made
11,461 Wellingtons made
other major missing peices:
9558 P-39's
7450 He-111's
6600 SB-2's
7002 SB2C's( not realted to SB-2)
5213 Bristol Blenheim's
5000 Il-4's
4835 Ju.52/3m's
30,000 Yak-1's
5919 Ki-43's
5562 Beafighter's
6176 Halifax's
Recon Planes
Although I see little use for these they were built in mass quantities
3290 PBY's
2900 Fi.156's
Since I have recon I'll add these, maybe make noobs fly them for two weeks before they fly anything else? You guessed it, Trainers!
20,000 Polikarpov PO-2's
15,000 AT-6 Texan's
11,020 Avro Ansons
and just cause i like the name
4000 Bu.131 Jungmann's (Oddly enough USA not GER.)
-
Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
It seems to me that they aircraft selected were picked with little thought to production nmbers as we are missing some very heavily produced aircraft, and have some that barely saw service.
Here are a few examples.
800 tempests made (which we have)
20,000 I-16's made(which we do not have)
I wouldnt say they were "picked with little thought to production nmbers". More of a we need a so and so type of plane. Or ones that are popular. I dont see the I-16 coming to AH unless we ever have a Operation Barbarossa CT. Two .30cal MGs arent for MA use.
-
No they do not care in the least,
We have a NIKI
We don't have a P-39
Need I say more
-
To the best of my memory, HTC has never publically stated what goes into the decision making process governing what gets added and when. Course I've been wrong before.
One way or the other I wouldn't expect them to let us know what that process is.
-
Bring the Polikarpov PO-2 to Aces High!
and enable it at Vehicle Fields in the Night Witch markings............
http://pratt.edu/~rsilva/witches.htm
-
Just give me an I.A.R. 81c!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Nimrod45
No they do not care in the least,
We don't have a P-39
Need I say more
Actually you do. The community voted and the P-39 lost out to the B-25. But you wouldn't know that because 1) You don't read the front page 2) you're new to this game.
Now carry on, you're dismissed.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Actually you do. The community voted and the P-39 lost out to the B-25. But you wouldn't know that because 1) You don't read the front page 2) you're new to this game.
Now carry on, you're dismissed.
ack-ack
:aok :rofl
-
Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
It seems to me that they aircraft selected were picked with little thought to production numbers as we are missing some very heavily produced aircraft, and have some that barely saw service.
Have to remember that it is a game.
Not all aircraft produced during the war would be fun to fly in the arena, save for the occasional masochist looking for the ultimate challenge. There is a limited amount of resources (money, coding and testing time) that HTC can put toward adding new aircraft, maps, and features, especially with the ToD project (if it hasn't become vaporware) and on a game that has been around as long as this one has.
You have to add content under the above constraints that will add game play to your customer base in order to keep that base and attract new players. It is a game, and HTC has a business model to follow. It's not primarily a historical re-creation. You can't have everything, and "filling a hole in the plane-set" or "it would be cool" are not by themselves a good enough reason to include a ride in the game (although they are widely given arguments in the forums).
Example: the Buffalo, Ki-27, Macchi MC.200, I-16 and other EW planes would make a great deal of sense, if there was a big EW arena following, or many EW events in SEA with a good turnout to use them. Possibly also be added if ToD ever gets released and there is a strong interest in EW there.
The reality is most of the players hang in LW and in LW rides. That's your primary customer base. The one's you want to keep paying to keep playing.
Example: recon planes, trainers, float planes, maritime patrol craft.
Lot's of them produced as WWII spanned the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans with the sub war and attacks on convoys and merchant shipping. Recon planes flew over the battlefields to photograph troops movements and spot for artillery. We don't have much in the way of mass troop movements, there are planes in the existing plane-sets that can be used in the role of spotter planes, and there is no artillery, submarines or merchant shipping to worry about in the game.
Example: We don't have nighttime in the war arenas, nor do we have on-board early generation night vision or in-plane radar arrays, so, no need for night fighters. But, they keep getting asked for in the forums.
You compared the Ki-67 and the Wellington. The Ki-67 is the only representative of the Japanese bomber forces in the game, and arguably the best model they made so it can be pressed into SEA service as a reasonable substitute for other Japanese medium bombers. The British already have the Lancaster to represent British Heavy bombers, ergo: no Betty's and no Wellingtons.
The Tempest is an elite plane, a worthy perk ride to spend points on. Similarly, the Fiat G.55 would make a decent low perk ride for the Italian plane set. Only about 350 made, IIRC, small numbers overall in the War, but probably the best Italian plane made and a significant number when compared to other Italian plane production numbers (similar to the Niki's in the game for the Japanese).
Why would you bother adding the Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa "Oscar"? A lighter, less rugged plane than the Zeke, and (outside of a few Mark 3b models) under-armed with a pair of bee-bee guns. There are a very few pilots that would fly it for the challenge, or the maneuverability it possessed, but trying to get enough pilots into them for a SEA event would be like pulling teeth. It would be a hangar queen, and completely outclassed in war arenas and underrepresented in SEA.
Similarly, the Ki-100 is close enough to the Ki-61 that a second model for it is not really the best use of limited development time.
You can't have everything.
So, instead of simply production numbers, think about what else a potential plane added to the game can add to the game play. What is different about it? What role would it perform?
Examples:
Mitsubishi J2M "Raiden" could offer a quick short ranged ability to intercept incoming buffs on short notice --- like a 163 but available at all fields.
The A-26B Invader Attack Bomber and A-26C Invader Level Bomber (with drones) would be a perk-worthy medium bomber for buff drivers to spend perk points on other than the Arado that can work in penetration bomber or ground attack roles.
The Mosquito B.Mk XVI as a level bomber with drone options would be another perkable ride for buff drivers to spend points on, and try to limit the number of "bomb-and-bails" and suicidal "dive buffs" experienced in the game (right now, buff drivers don't really need their perks, and Arado is not flown by very many).
The Fiat G.55 would be a low perk Italian ride that many Luffenwobble pilots would probably enjoy flying and has a great canon load out. Perk price added to limit it's use due to historically low production numbers, but a fun ride nonetheless.
The Nakajima Ki-44 Shōki "Tojo" would add a Japanese plane that could B&Z, haul butt, and actually climb at a decent rate for an interceptor role.
The P-39 Airacobra (or even P-63 Kingcobra, which would fair better in LW) could be added to the Russian plane set as a nod to Lend Lease, as well as the second highest scoring Allied Ace of the War who flew one, and the Russians made the best use of this plane during WWII. It is in many ways a low level Pony, would find use in Russian front SEA, and would be a unique ride with it's mid-engine design and CG, and should do well in the low level dogfighting found in the War Arenas.
The D4Y2 "Judy" would give the blue water plane set a pretty good dive bomber from MW onward. Better than existing Japanese CV-based egg droppers.
Possibly the Yak-3, as it was considered probably the best furballer of WWII. Yak 3 was an air superiority fighter to the Yak-9's interceptor role. Actual in-game performance numbers would determine if it was worth pursuing this addition to Yak lineup.
The He-177 would add a Heavy bomber for the Axis. Something that is seriously lacking for SEA event variety. Carries a bit more than the Lanc could in overall ord weight (depending on how ord would be represented, as we would not be getting guided Fritz-X missiles) and is faster than the Lanc (which may require a small perk price added to the He-177's use).
The towed German 88mm FlaK36 offers the ability of GVr's to use the weapon as a manned puffy ack against incoming buffs, long range indirect artillery fire (which is not represented in the game other than the CA guns), and as a long range direct fire weapon against other GV's.
There are certainly other planes that can be argued for in an effort to fill out plane sets, and certainly the non-American plane set's are pretty light, especially Russian, Japanese and Italian. But adding a plane due to historical production numbers that will sit in the hangar in the game is not the way to go about it.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Actually you do. The community voted and the P-39 lost out to the B-25. But you wouldn't know that because 1) You don't read the front page 2) you're new to this game.
Now carry on, you're dismissed.
ack-ack
Blah Blah Blah.
Wasn't refering to the decicion between those to, B-25s were used and produced very heavilly, if you would care to recap my whole comment I refered to the Niki which was not produced or used heavilly, nor were a lot of our aircraft options. If they considered the number of aircraft produced then our selection would be very different.
But thanks for your comment, ignorence is entertaining.
Now carry on, your dissed.
-
I didnt mean for my post to be understood as though I wanted those planes added. I just thought it should be pointed out that it seems production has lttle to do with selection of aircraft. I do understand that they need to keep the customers happy as any business does, but some more attention should be paid to these aircraft in the future as I know some do have a reasonable base of people who would use them, for example the SB2C.
-
You are absolutly right CBASS, that is what I was commenting on the first time about the P-39 and the Niki, one was produced in great numbers and one wasn't, we have the one that wasn't though it is a very fun plane to fly. Obviously Ack-Ack misunderstood my comment as well. And I was part of the vote when the B-25 was selected so I was not ignorent to that little tid bit he so politly enlitend me on.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
Have to remember that it is a game.
Not all aircraft produced during the war would be fun to fly in the arena, save for the occasional masochist looking for the ultimate challenge.
There is more out there than the MA.
The HurriIa, SpitIa, 109E, F4F, A6Mīs and even the Yak9T, 109G6 and SpitV need somewhat masochistic pilots, or at least very good pilots to survive in the MA, but there are the events and the H2H limited setups where this planes get used rather often.
Otherwise i think they simply took a wide range of the most interesting WWII planes, which saw service. Interesting regarding their performence and their reputation in general.
The P39 simply miss the good success and reputation of the N1K, Ki84, F4U-4, Temp, Ta152H and even F4F and P40. Of course the VVS aces did like this plane, but if we see the high losts of the VVS with their other main fighters(I-16, Yak1/7/9, La5, La5F and even La5FN), the P39 had to offer something(specialy regarding its cockpit layout, radio, guns etc), while the britīs and Americanīs mainly took their other planes over it. Maybe the P40 and F4F was in he same class, but the P40 had its big success with the Flying Tigers and the F4F was the Navys backbone while the critical years of the PTO.
Personally i would like to see the MS406, I-16, Yak1 + 1b, Mig3, a early IL-2, F2A, Ju87G-2(gunpods for the D would be enough), Ki-43, He111, Welli, Pe-2 and Hawk75 before the P39, no matter in what numbers they got produced.
Greetings,
Knegel
-
Originally posted by Nimrod45
Squeak
:rolleyes:
-
Actually Cbass the planes you listed would make a good "wish list" for AH.
Granted there are a LOT of planes I'd like to see added.
I'd love to see HTC do nothing for a whole year but add planes.
But then I'm greedy.
Some planes are here that perhaps shouldn't be, looking at production numbers. Yet others with big production numbers have never been added.
I suspect a lot had to do with interest of the people involved.
-
Originally posted by Knegel
There is more out there than the MA.
The HurriIa, SpitIa, 109E, F4F, A6Mīs and even the Yak9T, 109G6 and SpitV need somewhat masochistic pilots, or at least very good pilots to survive in the MA, but there are the events and the H2H limited setups where this planes get used rather often.
Yes, I agree that there is more out there than the "MA". The SEA has some good matches. AvA has nice maps. Both of them, and EW and MW arenas, suffer from drawing a very small portion of the overall player base. The paying player base is concentrated in the two LW arenas, which is why I brought up the fact that HTC has a business model to follow and player base to support if they want them to keep being paying customers. Until a sizable chunk of the player base discovers that there is more than the LW arena, there is only so much time and resources that can be invested in the EW and SEA development --- and adding player content, that most players will come in contact with, is important to keeping players interested over time.
I don't believe in the "build it and they will come" argument for the EW arena..... I don't care how many EW planes get added, I don't see that being a draw to EW arena by a significant percentage of the players, most of whom fly LW rides in LW arenas most of the time. They want their "uber-ride" crutches.
The P39 simply miss the good success and reputation of the N1K, Ki84, F4U-4, Temp, Ta152H and even F4F and P40. Of course the VVS aces did like this plane, but if we see the high losts of the VVS with their other main fighters(I-16, Yak1/7/9, La5, La5F and even La5FN), the P39 had to offer something(specialy regarding its cockpit layout, radio, guns etc), while the britīs and Americanīs mainly took their other planes over it. Maybe the P40 and F4F was in he same class, but the P40 had its big success with the Flying Tigers and the F4F was the Navys backbone while the critical years of the PTO.
Well, Americans and Brits disregarded the P-39 because it was not a good high altitude plane..... it preformed best down low, which worked fine for the VVS on their front. A part of the reason the P39 and P63 don't have the reputation is probably because over 1/2 the P-39's and nearly all of the P-63's that saw combat did so under the VVS, but Russia tended to downplay equipment from Lend Lease and promote the things they made themselves in the War effort (yak, la's, IL-2's...).
-
I wouldn't say SEA participation is as insignificant as AvA or EWA arenas...
The SEA gets packed with 300+ on scenarios, has up to 200+ during FSOs every Friday, packs in folks on Wednesday Snapshots and pretty much has a high attendance no matter what goes on in there.
It just doesn't have any outside of that schedule.
SEA is as big as MA. Trust me!
-
Originally posted by Larry
I wouldnt say they were "picked with little thought to production nmbers". More of a we need a so and so type of plane. Or ones that are popular. I dont see the I-16 coming to AH unless we ever have a Operation Barbarossa CT. Two .30cal MGs arent for MA use.
The Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 carried 2x20mm cannons, more than sufficient for MA use.
-
I'd agree with SEA being more fun that the LW arenas often enough.
And it has far better maps and tiles available. Scenarios are fun, draw a good crowd, but are infrequent. KoTH has been getting nice turnouts twice a month. Not sure about the air races, and I haven't been on FSO since the early break up of LCA last year. Wed and Thursday Snapshots have a mixed attendance.... I've been in a few with maybe a dozen to two dozen players in the arena, but usually still a lot of fun.
As a percentage of the overall player base, even SEA numbers are small compared to the combined LW arenas 24/7. But, yes, SEA attendance is far above EW, MW, and AvA.... just not quite up to both LW yet.
I could see and welcome the addition of planes to support SEA, if the planes will draw fliers.
For example, Snapshot Tigers Over Rangoon has P40's vs Zeke's. Now the Axis are supposed to the have the numbers over the Allies in that one, but usually the best you can do is a 50/50 split and switch plane-sets for frame 2.
Now, switch those Zekes for the more historical Oscar, and you will have a very difficult time finding players that will want to fly that underarmed, less rugged Japanese Army fighter against the P40's. Especially since with the Oscar, the original 60% axis / 40% allies split becomes more crucial to game balance.
More historical? Yes? Will it get used? Probably not much. Does it help the snapshot event? Probably will see a few players actually leave the event and you'll not be able to get a balanced 60/40 split for the snapshot.
OTOH, adding P-39's and Pe-2's to the Russian plane-set in a Russian front SEA event to complement La-5's, IL-2's, and Yak's would probably work in the SEA as well as finding users in the EW, MW, and LW arenas.
I'm not opposed to EW additions, so long as they are competitive for use in the game in more than one special scenario.
-
tedrbr,
Nice post above. I pretty much agree with you.
I haven't been playing all that long, but it certainly seems that HTC has made more planes that are popular, rather than what were historically most prevalent during ww2. This makes sense, though. You want to attract players and the way to do that is give them planes they want to fly.
Having said that, there are any number of planes I would love to see added. I agree that it doesn't make sense, in a way, to have planes like the Me-262 instead of the P-39.
Not so much a complaint as an understanding of where HTC is coming from.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
The Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 carried 2x20mm cannons, more than sufficient for MA use.
I-16 Type 24
Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.
I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.
I think you wre thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I dont have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.
-
Originally posted by Larry
I-16 Type 24
Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.
I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.
I think you were thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I don't have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.
Actually, some sources state the I-16 Type 24, at least some of them, were originally fitted with the 20mms, plus added radios, and added armor.... the result was a heavy bird whose performance numbers dropped significantly from earlier models. Many other I-16's were field refitted with various weapons, including 20mm, and as you stated, HTC stays away from field refits. And the TYpe 24 represents roughly only 10% of the total number of I-16's built, IIRC.
The I-16 in AHII would come down to which model and historical data sets the company would use as it's baseline.
I-16 was pretty much out of date and outclassed by 1940/41. Unless there was a "plane pack" of, say, 4 EW birds being added to the game together.... I can't see limited development resources being put toward what is really a 1930's warplane that would be so completely over-matched in the LW arenas, were most of the customer base is at.
-
but did we relly need the B-25 because relly who here is going to use it?
i know i wont.
-
Originally posted by battel gnome94
but did we relly need the B-25 because relly who here is going to use it?
i know i wont.
The players voted for the B-25 after several weeks of voting off other aircraft offered by HTC.
You don't have to use it, but it will see a fair amount of usage, especially for base capture and GV defense.
My regards,
Widewing
-
ya but we could of had way better planes then that but its because it is famous that we get this plane:mad:
-
Originally posted by battel gnome94
because it is famous that we get this plane:mad:
You hard of reading or something? We're getting it because that's what the community voted for.
Ohh yea, almost forgot.
SQUEAK!!!!
:p
Bronk
-
I personally believe the current version of our Moaquito needs to be updated and fixed to historical standards before we introduce new planes.
Fix the inconsistancies first.
Save the mossie
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Actually you do. The community voted and the P-39 lost out to the B-25. But you wouldn't know that because 1) You don't read the front page 2) you're new to this game.
Now carry on, you're dismissed.
ack-ack
PWND.
-
Originally posted by Larry
I-16 Type 24
Armament: Four 7.62 mm (0.303 in) ShKAS machine guns, two synchronised in forward fuselage and two in the wings. An alternate configuration consisted of the removal of the wing machine guns in favour of two 20 mm ShVAK cannon. A single 12.7 mm (0.50 in) sometimes was added to the fuselage mounted armament. Up to 440 lbs (200 kg) of bombs on underwing racks or six RS-82 rockets.
I think these were field mods. HTC has already said no to those.
I think you wre thinking of the type 17 or even the I-16P which had then wing cannons. I dont have the numbers right now but Ill look them up later.
Oops, it was the type 28 with the 2 x 7.6mm and 2 x 20mm's. You are correct in that the Type 24 had 4 x 7.6mm's. My mistake.
-
Planes with large numbers of production usually meant they where easy to build and where adequate for fighting not top notch what we fly are pretty much the best version of the plane but its not true with america quality AND quantity