Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 08:20:12 AM

Title: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 08:20:12 AM
1) He-111

2) King Tiger

3) B-29

4) IS-2/3

5) Submarines

6) Dukw

7) I-16

8) Me-323

9) Panther

10) Nooks

What we Do need

1) Crusader MkIII/IV

2) Beaufighter

3) A-26

4) Pe-2

5) P-61

6) MiG-3 or D.520

7) G.55

8) D4Y

9) Skdzf 251/9 (carrying 5 troops)

10) StuG III or Su-85
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: PFactorDave on October 03, 2008, 08:41:39 AM
JU-52 should be on the NEED list, IMHO. 
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: opposum on October 03, 2008, 08:51:47 AM
sorry, we need the panther........


Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Denholm on October 03, 2008, 08:53:05 AM
Right.... So we don't need to update the lacking german bomber plane-set. But we do need to keep adding to the already superior american bomber plane-set.

What's wrong here?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: zuii on October 03, 2008, 08:56:00 AM
We need Ki84-Ib ki84-Ic.


zuii


Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: VansCrew1 on October 03, 2008, 09:10:12 AM
We do need the HE-111.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Chalenge on October 03, 2008, 10:15:31 AM
We do not need prejudiced lists like the OP made and his suggestions carry no more weight then other wishes.  :D
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 03, 2008, 11:16:33 AM
Right.... So we don't need to update the lacking german bomber plane-set. But we do need to keep adding to the already superior american bomber plane-set.

What's wrong here?

The OP doesn't have a clue? :aok
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: bongaroo on October 03, 2008, 11:34:18 AM
We need Ki84-Ib ki84-Ic.


zuii




YES!  I vote more Ki-84s!
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 11:59:39 AM
Right.... So we don't need to update the lacking german bomber plane-set. But we do need to keep adding to the already superior american bomber plane-set.

What's wrong here?

Nothing is wrong, O great leader of the He-111 requester minions.  Another hanger queen is a waste of resources and time, a plane that will see lots of use is a good investment.  Proper economies of scale and all that. 

And please do continue to ignore the inclusion of the much lacking VVS items in lieu of one German pseudo-buff that will have neglible impact on the game; aside from making another easy kill in LW arena.  :)
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 12:09:07 PM
We do not need prejudiced lists like the OP made and his suggestions carry no more weight then other wishes.  :D

Show how the list is prejudicial rather than a concise disagreemnt with the listed items in their own deliniated threads. I never said my list was God's writ, just a list I prefer; thus it stands to reason that my "suggestions" are of equal merit as any other "wishes" made in this forum by other members.

The OP doesn't have a clue? :aok

The OP has clue that the He-111 will be a hanger queen within 1, I say ONE, tour.  i.e. use will fall to say 1% of all buff flights in its second tour.  :devil


Might need Snailman to get the exact metrics together regarding usage  :aok
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 03, 2008, 12:22:58 PM
We have the BoB scenario coming up, but I guess we're wrong about needing the He 111. :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Amsoil21 on October 03, 2008, 12:25:47 PM
put the fairy firefly on need list :aok
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 12:27:33 PM
We have the BoB scenario coming up, but I guess we're wrong about needing the He 111. :rolleyes:

I completely agree that for BoB it is a necessity; for the other 47 weeks in a year; totally not needed. :)

After an additional rum & coke, I've decided that it would be fair to add the He-111 if we can have the "Tallboy" bomb for the Lanc. <whoops, there I go being God again.  How dare I dictate what is equitable in a public forum> :rofl
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 12:28:26 PM
put the fairy firefly on need list :aok

Make your own list with the FF on it; I'll fully support it. :aok
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Saxman on October 03, 2008, 12:35:49 PM
I completely agree that for BoB it is a necessity; for the other 47 weeks in a year; totally not needed. :)

Then there's FSO, snapshots, the Early War Arena, scenarios....
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Denholm on October 03, 2008, 12:55:27 PM
Nothing is wrong, O great leader of the He-111 requester minions.  Another hanger queen is a waste of resources and time, a plane that will see lots of use is a good investment.  Proper economies of scale and all that. 

And please do continue to ignore the inclusion of the much lacking VVS items in lieu of one German pseudo-buff that will have neglible impact on the game; aside from making another easy kill in LW arena.  :)
Hah... Nothing is wrong.... Both sides are supposed to be represented adequately. Same as historians provide information of what was going on during the war behind both enemy lines, not just one side. The HE-111 would not be a superior bomber by any means, considering it's not as great as the JU-88. Yet it would be an advancement in further representing the Axis bomber's plane-set.

Therefore I consider any additions to the already superior allied bomber plane-set to be silly, since there's so much to be added to the lacking axis bomber plane-set, from all three countries.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 01:13:58 PM
Hah... Nothing is wrong.... Both sides are supposed to be represented adequately. Same as historians provide information of what was going on during the war behind both enemy lines, not just one side. The HE-111 would not be a superior bomber by any means, considering it's not as great as the JU-88. Yet it would be an advancement in further representing the Axis bomber's plane-set.

Then remove the P-61 from my list and add the SM.79; the Italians (you know, the other 1/3 of the major Axis powers) have NO buff yet, not even ONE of their planes can carry a bomb right now.  I did place the D4Y on my list, thus the Axis were represented in the bomber category now they get two bomber slots on my list.  Fully 1/5 of the list. :D
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Motherland on October 03, 2008, 01:16:03 PM
Nothing is wrong, O great leader of the He-111 requester minions.  Another hanger queen is a waste of resources and time, a plane that will see lots of use is a good investment.  Proper economies of scale and all that. 

Yet, you say we need the MiG-3, which would be the worst plane on that list. :rofl

Out of all the VVS aircraft we do need, IMO, the MiG3 is not one of them... The I15/16 yes... Yak1, Yak7, Yak3, LaGG3, yes... Pe2, Tu2, yes (both of which would probably be hangar queens anyway because they're not American or British 4-engines that carry 6000 lbs+ of ord). But the MiG3 was a dog.

However, with the exception of the He111 and the I16 on your first list, and the MiG3, A26 and the two vehicles at the tail end of your second list, I for the most part agree with you.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 01:38:57 PM
Yet, you say we need the MiG-3, which would be the worst plane on that list. :rofl

Out of all the VVS aircraft we do need, IMO, the MiG3 is not one of them... The I15/16 yes... Yak1, Yak7, Yak3, LaGG3, yes... Pe2, Tu2, yes (both of which would probably be hangar queens anyway because they're not American or British 4-engines that carry 6000 lbs+ of ord). But the MiG3 was a dog.

However, with the exception of the He111 and the I16 on your first list, and the MiG3, A26 and the two vehicles at the tail end of your second list, I for the most part agree with you.

Then put in the D.520 in place of the MiG-3, heck France is not even represented in AH yet; it is not if they didn't fight in the war...oh wait :lol

Thank you for the rest of your support regarding the list.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 02:13:01 PM
You know the G.55 wont be added didn't see that much action He-111 or Do-17 or Do-217 would be nice to have panther don't need the A-26.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 03, 2008, 02:29:22 PM
Then put in the D.520 in place of the MiG-3, heck France is not even represented in AH yet; it is not if they didn't fight in the war...oh wait :lol

Thank you for the rest of your support regarding the list.

Actually, there's a Ju-88 with a French skin!  It would also be possible to have a French P-38.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 02:33:23 PM
Actually, there's a Ju-88 with a French skin!  It would also be possible to have a French P-38.
There no French tanks ha. :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Denholm on October 03, 2008, 02:45:45 PM
You know the G.55 wont be added didn't see that much action He-111 or Do-17 or Do-217 would be nice to have panther don't need the A-26.
Could you re-phrase the last part? Is it the panther or the A-26 that you don't think we need? Or is it both?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 02:47:46 PM
Could you re-phrase the last part? Is it the panther or the A-26 that you don't think we need? Or is it both?
Don't need the A-26 Panther need to be added.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Saxman on October 03, 2008, 04:33:20 PM
Quote
Don't need the A-26. Panther need to be added.

*loans glock a "." *
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 04:33:58 PM
*loans glock a "." *
Woot i win. :rock :rock
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: oakranger on October 03, 2008, 04:35:51 PM
1) He-111

2) King Tiger

3) B-29

4) IS-2/3

5) Submarines

6) Dukw

7) I-16

8) Me-323

9) Panther

10) Nooks

What we Do need

1) Crusader MkIII/IV

2) Beaufighter

3) A-26

4) Pe-2

5) P-61

6) MiG-3 or D.520

7) G.55

8) D4Y

9) Skdzf 251/9 (carrying 5 troops)

10) StuG III or Su-85


We need all that stuff.  Not sub, what is a noob and King tiger was develop but the weight was too much to move.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: bluefalcon32 on October 03, 2008, 04:46:19 PM
BUT WE NEED TEH B29 WITH NOOKS!!!!   :D

no, but seriously, you put a p61 night fighter above my He 111 and I-16?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 04:47:57 PM
BUT WE NEED TEH B29 WITH NOOKS!!!!
Ya sure you use it and you get ban for life how that sound? :t
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: oakranger on October 03, 2008, 05:24:29 PM
Ya sure you use it and you get ban for life how that sound? :t

Get the B-29,  Have it at bases where 163 are at, perk it like 262. That will cover it.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: minke on October 03, 2008, 05:36:47 PM
Get the B-29,  Have it at bases where 163 are at, perk it like 262. That will cover it.

And limit its flight characteristics ,so it doesn't become a stuka
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 05:47:58 PM
And limit its flight characteristics ,so it doesn't become a stuka
Ya no 20mm gun.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Spikes on October 03, 2008, 08:11:28 PM
Need He-111.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Lukanian-7 on October 03, 2008, 08:23:10 PM
What's So Terrible About The He-111, It Served A BIG Part Of The War, And We Can't Do Much With Just Stukas And A Med. Bomber
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: thedudee95 on October 03, 2008, 08:49:40 PM
1) He-111

2) King Tiger

3) B-29

4) IS-2/3

5) Submarines

6) Dukw

7) I-16

8) Me-323

9) Panther

10) Nooks

What we Do need

1) Crusader MkIII/IV

2) Beaufighter

3) A-26

4) Pe-2

5) P-61

6) MiG-3 or D.520

7) G.55

8) D4Y

9) Skdzf 251/9 (carrying 5 troops)

10) StuG III or Su-85
reverse it and then you got a good list. and the b-29 is not need . but we do need the he-111. nd me-323 cuase its uber.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 03, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Actually, there's a Ju-88 with a French skin!  It would also be possible to have a French P-38.

 :huh Sticking a skin on a foreign sourced a/c does not make it French.  Would you accept VVS skinned Brit & U.S. produced a/c as being Soviet?

What's So Terrible About The He-111, It Served A BIG Part Of The War, And We Can't Do Much With Just Stukas And A Med. Bomber

<COUGH> the He-111 is a medium bomber, H model payload around 4500lbs; could also carry one torpedo in lieu of bombs.  Is also S-L-O-W-E-R than Ju-88.  It is not superior, but inferior to the Ju-88.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 03, 2008, 08:57:39 PM
:huhSticking a skin on a foreign sourced a/c does not make it French.  Would you accept VVS skinned Brit & U.S. produced a/c as being Soviet?


I would.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: oakranger on October 04, 2008, 12:06:03 PM
Ya no 20mm gun.

OK, we wil add the 30mm gun
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 04, 2008, 12:07:38 PM
OK, we wil add the 30mm gun
It never had the 30mm gun on it B-29 to big you just ram into.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: oakranger on October 04, 2008, 04:32:18 PM
It never had the 30mm gun on it B-29 to big you just ram into.

Yea, i know it only had 20mm on the tail. 

I wonder if these engineers thought of putting in a flam thrower on the tail.  The kind that will shoot out 300 ft or so.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Anaxogoras on October 04, 2008, 04:36:52 PM
:huh Sticking a skin on a foreign sourced a/c does not make it French.  Would you accept VVS skinned Brit & U.S. produced a/c as being Soviet?

Kind of like our P-39Q?  Saint-Exupery died in a P-38 with French insignia.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: 1pLUs44 on October 04, 2008, 04:47:18 PM
who forgot the P-63 King Cobra?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 04, 2008, 04:48:28 PM
who forgot the P-63 King Cobra?
The flying tank.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: JHerne on October 04, 2008, 06:16:27 PM
P-63s weren't flown operationally by the US, the vast majority were Lend Leased to the Soviets. A few were sent to France at the end of the war, but didn't see action. The P-63 Lend Lease deal also had a provision that P-63s sent to the Soviets would only be used on the Russian Eastern Front in an eventual attack on Japan. No one really believes they were held from combat against the Germans, but Soviet records only indicate P-39s being used.

P-61 is interesting, provided we have true nighttime operations and on-board radar, otherwise it simply turns into another de-acker and heavy bomber killer...but then we need to consider the He-219, Bf-110, J1N1 Irving, Do-217Z, and Mossie as night fighters.

The G.55 saw limited use, but that was based on its production numbers and the fact that Italy surrendered and split as the fighter was coming online. In the hands of an experienced pilot, it was a formidable aircraft.

if you're looking to expand the Axis plane-set, then why not consider the Ki-100 as a potential perk plane? It was considered one of the premier fighter designs to come from wartime Japan.

French aircraft aren't represented, but again, the D.520 and Moraine Ms.406, France's 'front-line' fighters, were only comparable to the early versions of the 109 and Spitfire.

Someone posted in another thread that instead of asking for more and more aircraft, tanks, etc., that we should start asking for improvements to the player interface, larger variety in the groundset scenery, buildings, etc., or start considering additional infrastructure elements to the game that are not in place, field artillery, pilot/player rescue, etc.

The reason I think that 99% of the requests on this list go unnoticed stems from a.) the ridiculous requests and b.) a lack of supporting material, data, history, and justifications for the requested items. Simply stating "we need the _______" doesn't justify the request.... I remember when I'd my parents "why?" when I was a kid, and I was told "because I said so". Didn't work then, doesn't work now.

J
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Lukanian-7 on October 04, 2008, 06:43:12 PM
<COUGH> the He-111 is a medium bomber, H model payload around 4500lbs; could also carry one torpedo in lieu of bombs.  Is also S-L-O-W-E-R than Ju-88.  It is not superior, but inferior to the Ju-88.

It Has Better Defense, And Who Says It Must Be Better? Well Over Half Of The Community Says We Must Fill In The Gaps With More Just Under-par Aircraft
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Iron_Cross on October 04, 2008, 07:03:59 PM
Things we don't need:

1.) Another American bomber.\
-------------------------------Already very well represented in game.
2.) Another American fighter. /

3.) Another German Tank.  Fill out the other countries tanks before adding anything else.

4.) Another British fighter.  Already have the most typical types, anything else is just semantics.

5.) Another German fighter.  Same as the British.

What we do need:

1.) VVS bombers.  Sorely lacking any, besides the Il-2, and a repainted Boston III.

2.) Italian bombers.  Currently none, the Sm 79 at the least, and P108 would be great.

3.) German bombers.  Ju-88, and Stuka, just aren't cutting it. 

4.) British medium bombers.  C'mon it's like having only two choices of American bombers; a-20 or B-29, and nothing in between.  Something is needed to fill in-between.

5.) VVS fighters.  Only four currently in game?  Seriously WTF.

6.) More Japanese fighters.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 04, 2008, 07:11:53 PM
Things we don't need:

1.) Another American bomber.\
-------------------------------Already very well represented in game.
2.) Another American fighter. /

3.) Another German Tank.  Fill out the other countries tanks before adding anything else.

4.) Another British fighter.  Already have the most typical types, anything else is just semantics.

5.) Another German fighter.  Same as the British.

What we do need:

1.) VVS bombers.  Sorely lacking any, besides the Il-2, and a repainted Boston III.

2.) Italian bombers.  Currently none, the Sm 79 at the least, and P108 would be great.

3.) German bombers.  Ju-88, and Stuka, just aren't cutting it. 

4.) British medium bombers.  C'mon it's like having only two choices of American bombers; a-20 or B-29, and nothing in between.  Something is needed to fill in-between.

5.) VVS fighters.  Only four currently in game?  Seriously WTF.

6.) More Japanese fighters.
Japs fighters Ki-45 would be great there 110.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Motherland on October 04, 2008, 07:39:15 PM
Things we don't need:

1.) Another American bomber.\
-------------------------------Already very well represented in game.
2.) Another American fighter. /

3.) Another German Tank.  Fill out the other countries tanks before adding anything else.

4.) Another British fighter.  Already have the most typical types, anything else is just semantics.

5.) Another German fighter.  Same as the British.

What we do need:

1.) VVS bombers.  Sorely lacking any, besides the Il-2, and a repainted Boston III.

2.) Italian bombers.  Currently none, the Sm 79 at the least, and P108 would be great.

3.) German bombers.  Ju-88, and Stuka, just aren't cutting it. 

4.) British medium bombers.  C'mon it's like having only two choices of American bombers; a-20 or B-29, and nothing in between.  Something is needed to fill in-between.

5.) VVS fighters.  Only four currently in game?  Seriously WTF.

6.) More Japanese fighters.
Yes!
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Banshee7 on October 04, 2008, 08:02:02 PM
What we need - Update all the older aircraft to fit the new 3D model

What we dont need - New aircraft (until some remodeling has been done  :))
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Iron_Cross on October 04, 2008, 09:07:44 PM
What we need - Update all the older aircraft to fit the new 3D model


That seems to be what is happening now.  If you didn't notice, there were no "new" aircraft added, just updates to existing craft.  The F6F, Il-2, Me-262, and N1K2, were updated, the only thing new was the T-34/85.  I think the tank was only a bone to throw the masses, "See, we're adding new stuff every update."
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Bronk on October 04, 2008, 09:13:49 PM
P-63s weren't flown operationally by the US, the vast majority were Lend Leased to the Soviets. A few were sent to France at the end of the war, but didn't see action. The P-63 Lend Lease deal also had a provision that P-63s sent to the Soviets would only be used on the Russian Eastern Front in an eventual attack on Japan. No one really believes they were held from combat against the Germans, but Soviet records only indicate P-39s being used.


J
IIRC
Russian P-63 reported shooting down ki 43 or 44 over sea of japan at the end of the war.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: SuBWaYCH on October 04, 2008, 09:14:52 PM
Priority list:

He-111 is easily #1. This plane has been requested probably since the creation of Aces High 2.
Tu-2, Pe-2, Yak-3, I-16 all come tied for 2nd. All saw major service.
Italian bombers (SM.79, P.108), Japanese fighters (Ki-43, 44 and JM2) #3
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Banshee7 on October 04, 2008, 09:31:54 PM
That seems to be what is happening now.  If you didn't notice, there were no "new" aircraft added, just updates to existing craft.  The F6F, Il-2, Me-262, and N1K2, were updated, the only thing new was the T-34/85.  I think the tank was only a bone to throw the masses, "See, we're adding new stuff every update."

Yes, I know no new planes were added.  But there are several other aircraft that could use a facelift.  :aok
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Iron_Cross on October 04, 2008, 09:50:05 PM
I think that is what we are going to see, in the next few updates.  Four or so aircraft updated to the new standard, and maybe a new "play pretty".  IIRC Hitech, stated he wanted to update all the existing aircraft to the new standard, before launching CT.  That way he could focus on shaking out errant bugs in CT, improving the AI, ect...ect, for CT.  Sort of button up AHII, so the only headaches he would have would be CT related.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: stroker71 on October 04, 2008, 10:01:48 PM
There no French tanks ha. :rofl :rofl :rofl

All the French tanks just retreat!!!!!!  Wierd to have no forward gears....lol
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: JHerne on October 05, 2008, 10:33:59 AM
The French Char B is probably the only French tank that could be compared to anything  remotely close in the game. It was heavily armored, but matched up only against the Panzer III and early Ausf of the IV.

Pitting a Char B against a T-34/85, M4, or Tiger, is like flying a Spit I against a Temp.

J
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 05, 2008, 11:45:34 AM
The French Char B is probably the only French tank that could be compared to anything  remotely close in the game. It was heavily armored, but matched up only against the Panzer III and early Ausf of the IV.

Pitting a Char B against a T-34/85, M4, or Tiger, is like flying a Spit I against a Temp.

J
It to slow.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: stroker71 on October 05, 2008, 02:12:47 PM
It to slow.

So is the HE-111 but you still want it!
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 05, 2008, 03:07:02 PM
So is the HE-111 but you still want it!
But it put up a fight.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: macerxgp on October 05, 2008, 03:17:43 PM
But it put up a fight.

What, no smileys?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: 1pLUs44 on October 05, 2008, 03:20:00 PM
IIRC
Russian P-63 reported shooting down ki 43 or 44 over sea of japan at the end of the war.

I think it was a Ki-84.... But still, US never used the P-63, good argument to count it as a VVS Aircraft (and the soviets helped design it too IIRC)
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 05, 2008, 03:20:34 PM
What, no smileys?
:noidthere.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: macerxgp on October 05, 2008, 03:26:34 PM
:noidthere.
(http://www.pisnnapalm.com/tank_fail.jpg)
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Bronk on October 05, 2008, 04:44:06 PM
I think it was a Ki-84.... But still, US never used the P-63, good argument to count it as a VVS Aircraft (and the soviets helped design it too IIRC)
Nope was a 43 or a 44.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 05, 2008, 07:26:06 PM
(http://www.pisnnapalm.com/tank_fail.jpg)
:cry :cry
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Bronk on October 05, 2008, 07:29:15 PM
I know the biggest thing we do not need.

Squeaker who use excessive emoticons  in every one of their posts.

Anyone else?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 05, 2008, 07:29:49 PM
I know the biggest thing we do not need.

Squeaker who use excessive emoticons  in every one of their posts.

Anyone else?
And you are the winner.  :O
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: 1pLUs44 on October 05, 2008, 11:53:05 PM
Nope was a 43 or a 44.

ah. :salute
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Odisseo on October 06, 2008, 09:16:59 AM
what's the meaning of VVS?

thanks!
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Denholm on October 06, 2008, 09:22:33 AM
Very Very Stupid?
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 06, 2008, 10:01:18 AM
what's the meaning of VVS?

thanks!

Voenno-Vozdushnye Sily; or Air Force in Russian.  In Cyrillic alphabet it looks like this: военно-воздушная сила

Very Very Stupid?

^ He-111 Neanderthal  :D
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Denholm on October 06, 2008, 10:02:56 AM
Well.... It was worth a shot. :P
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Motherland on October 06, 2008, 10:04:07 AM
Voenno-Vozdushnye Sily; or Air Force in Russian.
a.k.a. The most under-represented airforce in the game.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 06, 2008, 10:10:31 AM
a.k.a. The most under-represented airforce in the game.

I guess we could take it that VVS in AH translates as Very Very Sparse; and no the MOST under represented country by those in the game now would be Italy.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Motherland on October 06, 2008, 10:25:17 AM
I guess we could take it that VVS in AH translates as Very Very Sparse; and no the MOST under represented country by those in the game now would be Italy.
True, the Italian representation in this game is comparatively small; however, Italy didn't play a particularly large part in the war, either. Beside contributing a unit here and there to help Germany in their efforts, (in which cases, not to discredit Regia Aeronautica pilots, but they generally didn't do near as well as their German counterparts) you could say Italy's largest contribution in the war was opening up a third front (North Africa, and then Italy itself) for Germany to spread their forces out over.

The VVS, on the other hand, was from the outbreak of Operation Barbarossa one of the largest airforces in the world (largely obsolete, yes, but still huge) and it's sheer numbers played a large part in wearing down the Luftwaffe and winning the war for the Allies.
For example...the Yakovlev 1-9 series was the most produced fighter series ever, with IIRC 35,000 being built, beating out even the 109 series. It served from the beginning of the war until the end of the war, yet we have two late war examples in game.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: Dadsguns on October 06, 2008, 01:17:14 PM
You telling us what we DO NOT need.... :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 06, 2008, 02:00:46 PM
You telling us what we DO NOT need.... :rolleyes:
We need axis bombers panther short barrel Sherman and the Tu-2.
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: vonKrimm on October 06, 2008, 03:39:43 PM
You telling us what we DO NOT need.... :rolleyes:

No. I am saying what WE do and don't need in AH2 (which is entirely subjective; hence two lists).  One of things to keep out & one list of things to bring in. :D
Title: Re: Things we DO NOT need...
Post by: glock89 on October 06, 2008, 03:47:34 PM
No. I am saying what WE do and don't need in AH2 (which is entirely subjective; hence two lists).  One of things to keep out & one list of things to bring in. :D
We need axis bombers panther short barrel Sherman and the Tu-2.
Oh and the Sm.79 or Sm.84 would just do.