Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: SKYGUNS on July 29, 2008, 02:54:51 AM
-
I'm getting tired of going to Axis and Allies or FSO and be given an aircraft and be told to pretend its a different aircraft.
EX.
We don't have a JU52 so pretend the C47 is one
We don't have a Betty so pretend the ju88 is one
We don't have a B29 so pretend the b24 is one
Each of these aircraft played a historical role and deserves to be in the game.
I understand these aircraft already been wished for, Sort of more of a comment than a request...
Skyguns
-
I'm getting tired of going to Axis and Allies or FSO and be given an aircraft and be told to pretend its a different aircraft.
EX.
We don't have a JU52 so pretend the C47 is one
We don't have a Betty so pretend the ju88 is one
We don't have a B29 so pretend the b24 is one
Each of these aircraft played a historical role and deserves to be in the game.
I understand these aircraft already been wished for, Sort more of a comment than a request...
Skyguns
well i def think we should have they betty but the JU52 seems a little redundant
and the whole B29 subkect is just too much to comprehend now :P
-
Like I said before, no-one will climb to 30K+ just to bomb something. Most bombing will be at 7-15k, B-29 will only be a big easy target.
-
it would have the best defensive armermane of any plane in the game
-
Like I said before, no-one will climb to 30K+ just to bomb something. Most bombing will be at 7-15k, B-29 will only be a big easy target.
No one, huh? Done it myself. Others have too.
-
Like I said before, no-one will climb to 30K+ just to bomb something. Most bombing will be at 7-15k, B-29 will only be a big easy target.
Perk those puppies and I guarantee you will see it quite a bit.
-
it would have the best defensive armermane of any plane in the game
But the worst visability for that defensive armament. They didn't have it like any other WW2 bomber, you had to look out a little glass bubble to shoot. Poor visability I assume would make it very hard for someone to get a bead on you if you're attacking a B-29. Not to mention the frequent engine fires on it.
-
B-29s had excellent defensive capabilities, something that would tie into the game perfectly. The gunners operated from remote positions. AH could take that 1/2 step further by having the player gunner link weapons systems, much the same way the real B-29 could. In other words, instead of having a single gun mount trained on a target, the computing system linked to all weapons that could be brought to bear on the target...so, let's say you're attacking a B-29 from level altitude, 45 degrees off the tail, from the 4 or 7 o'clock position. The top turret, side turret, bottom turret, and tail turret could ALL be brought to bear on the target, in the same way the 4 gunners on the real B-29 would have historically. Then you have .50s and a 20mm in the tail. Makes killing B-29s a definite challenge.
So it carries more than a B-24/B-17/Lanc, and higher and faster. I've taken B-17s and B-24s up to those altitudes. It's the only way to ensure you're not going be attacked by dozens of players at once. Make it a perk bomber, give it the ability (if launched from the rear-most bases) to spawn at 10K to shorten flight times. It's still going to take that player time to fly across the map. Pre-burn the fuel if you spawn at altitude. Bombing from 30K also has disadvantages, including accuracy, so that effectively negates it being an uber-weapon in the hands of most players. Besides, most B-29 operations were done from lower altitudes after the USAAF realized the accuracy was terrible from anything higher than 30K. This also opens up the possibility of having some addition aircraft to compliment the B-29, Nicks, Jacks, and the Ta-152 in the game would finally have something worth climbing up to 30k for.
J
-
I absolutely agree. In fact, I'm not participating in Rangoon because of the substitutes. :mad: The CM staff says substitutes are a fact of life in AH, but that's only because they insist on them and choose matchups for which we don't have the planeset.
-
You guys are a bit off topic....
-
How is it off topic? You complain that we don't have a B-29... I justify the reasoning for having a B-29, supporting your original commentary, and then you say we're off topic?
A squeakin' session isn't going to get you results. A logical, intelligent dialog, supporting your wants and desires, and garnering support from your fellow players, will.
Jeff
-
well i def think we should have they betty but the JU52 seems a little redundant
How is the Ju52 redundant? We have NO Axis transports.
Like I said before, no-one will climb to 30K+ just to bomb something. Most bombing will be at 7-15k, B-29 will only be a big easy target.
No.
-
B-29s had excellent defensive capabilities, something that would tie into the game perfectly. The gunners operated from remote positions. AH could take that 1/2 step further by having the player gunner link weapons systems, much the same way the real B-29 could. In other words, instead of having a single gun mount trained on a target, the computing system linked to all weapons that could be brought to bear on the target...so, let's say you're attacking a B-29 from level altitude, 45 degrees off the tail, from the 4 or 7 o'clock position. The top turret, side turret, bottom turret, and tail turret could ALL be brought to bear on the target, in the same way the 4 gunners on the real B-29 would have historically. Then you have .50s and a 20mm in the tail. Makes killing B-29s a definite challenge.
So it carries more than a B-24/B-17/Lanc, and higher and faster. I've taken B-17s and B-24s up to those altitudes. It's the only way to ensure you're not going be attacked by dozens of players at once. Make it a perk bomber, give it the ability (if launched from the rear-most bases) to spawn at 10K to shorten flight times. It's still going to take that player time to fly across the map. Pre-burn the fuel if you spawn at altitude. Bombing from 30K also has disadvantages, including accuracy, so that effectively negates it being an uber-weapon in the hands of most players. Besides, most B-29 operations were done from lower altitudes after the USAAF realized the accuracy was terrible from anything higher than 30K. This also opens up the possibility of having some addition aircraft to compliment the B-29, Nicks, Jacks, and the Ta-152 in the game would finally have something worth climbing up to 30k for.
J
Take the guns off and fly it at night...er...wait!
-
Most bombing will be at 7-15k, B-29 will only be a big easy target.
I see bombers at 20K+ all the time, even Lancaster's. And the whole engine fire thing doesn't really work as an excuse here, since HTC doesn't coad random damage and I believe it has been said before that he won't. If you look into it some, you'll notice a lot of planes or vehicles we have had mechanical issues during WWII.
-
The B-29s engine troubles came from the amount of magnesium used in the engines, and the amount of time the aircraft spent on the ground with the engines running. When the problem was brought to Wright Aero, they revamped the R3350 and pretty much solved the problem by the time the B-29 force was up to strength. Did it continue to happen? Certainly, but as engines were replaced through general maintenance, the occurances dropped dramatically. The famous photo of the groundcrewman standing under the B-29 wing has given the engines a bad rep. In fact, it was pretty much standard procedure during the startup of any aircraft, especially heavies.
The R-3350 and -3350 turbocompound went on to become one of the most reliable radial engines ever produced, used on all sorts of aircraft including the Lockheed Constellation and Super Connies.
J
-
The ju-52 would probably be needed more than the b29, we already have several types of bombers but only one aerial troops transport plane.
-
<S> Gents,
In terms of priority, I would choose the G4M "Betty" immediatly! This was one of the most important Japanese bombers of WWII, a model without wich no historical sim will be complete. The Ju52 is a third or fourth priority...only to get things right, nothing to add, really, except on a Spanish Civil War setup...that would lack all the other planes...Much more important would be the introduction of the He-111, a Luftwaffe workhorse in early and some mid-war theatres of operations.
Personaly, I am sympathetic with the B-29 development - without the nuke - but there's so much to do before that...The Brewster Buffalo, the Curtiss Hawk 75, the Polikarpovs, the Fiats, the Savoia-Marchettis, oh, so much to do and so little time...
Cheers,
-
Sparow,
I agree wholeheartedly, but something we have to consider is the amount of playability those early-to-mid-war aircraft would provide.
When I log in, I go looking for the arena with the largest numbers. So far, it's always been a late-war arena. Most of those aircraft, P-35, P-36, Buffalo, I-16, I-15, I-153, are all hopelessly outclassed in the late-war arena, so chances are no one would use them.
Personally, I think Brewster Buffalos vs. Polikarpovs or early 109s would be great (Finland/Russia/Germany 1940-41), or P-36s vs. early 109s (France, 1940), or even Spanish Civil War, but all of those events put us in the minority of players in the game. If HTC is going to develop a new aircraft, I'm sure they want to select one that will be utilized by the majority of the players, not just a select few.
Don't get me wrong, I'm with ya on your choices. I'd love to see PZLs, IAR 80s, Mig-1, CR.42, Re2000, etc., but I doubt we're going to.
J
-
Correct if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Junkers 52 was also used as a light bomber in Spanish Civil War, and (if I'm correct) in early phases of WW2. I doubt the payload would be much, but hey, imagine several Junkers bombing a town, then 2 more goes in and drop their goons....
-
Isn't it a little strange that 90% of us say we need this or that early war bomber, or 1942 fighter, and 90% of us never take the opportunity to fly these aircraft when given the opportunity? Like in the ava? :rolleyes:
-
Isn't it a little strange that 90% of us say we need this or that early war bomber, or 1942 fighter, and 90% of us never take the opportunity to fly these aircraft when given the opportunity? Like in the ava? :rolleyes:
There would be more people in the EW arenas if we actually had a true early war plane set. The way it is now, there are only a few planes that can actually be considered early war (1939-1940) and the majority of the planes in our current EW plane set are better suited for the Mid War plane set.
ack-ack
-
Another one of the most common aircraft we are missing is the German He-111, founded in the 1930s and over 7,000 produced. Its the germans most popular. Yet, we don't have it... :( But we'll get it! :aok