Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Anaxogoras on January 27, 2009, 10:56:38 AM

Title: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 27, 2009, 10:56:38 AM
http://www2.hitechcreations.com/news/2007/mar2007.html (http://www2.hitechcreations.com/news/2007/mar2007.html)
Quote
March 27, 2007
Aces High II: Development News We're having a subscriber vote of the most asked for planes to determine the next plane in Aces High II. Here are the choices.

    * A-26
    * B-25
    * Brewster Buffalo
    * G.55
    * He 111
    * A Japanese fighter - either Ki 44, J2M, Ki 45, or Ki 43
    * Me 410
    * P-39
    * A Russian bomber - either Pe-2 or Tu-2
    * Yak 3

Out of all these the two finalists were the P-39 and B-25, and hence what we have now.  Yes, even though the planeset was already overloaded with American aircraft, we got the B-25 and P-39.  I'm not saying those are bad and didn't deserve a place in the game, but others should have come first.  Call me an elitist, but I am right and the majority of you were wrong. :D
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Selino631 on January 27, 2009, 11:05:11 AM
Everyone should have voted for the G.55.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Banshee7 on January 27, 2009, 11:11:35 AM
I do agree gavagai.  I believe it's time for something other than American planes.  The He111 and the Russian bombers would be a good addition.  We also need a few more fighters..the ones we have are starting to get boring  :)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 27, 2009, 11:12:14 AM
Everyone should have voted for the G.55.

Great plane, but not what's needed for complete scenario planesets.  At least, it's not at the top of that list.  My guess is that G.55 votes helped the B-25 and P-39.  You guys should have organized around one or two choices to outvote the American-everything crowd.

At least then the final vote would not have been between two American planes.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Makarov9 on January 27, 2009, 11:45:48 AM
Plane production should always be priority number one for HTC.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Lusche on January 27, 2009, 12:12:14 PM
Plane production should always be priority number one for HTC.

Ok.. bring on the Po-2 (U-2)! With about 40,000 built it MUST be the next plane added to AH  :D

(http://www.airmuseumsuk.org/airshow/2003/Shut030823/800/images/011%20Polikarpov%20PO2.jpg)

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Rino on January 27, 2009, 12:29:03 PM
     Yeah, that majority rules thing sure sucks.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on January 27, 2009, 12:31:40 PM
What you have is only "proof" that the majority do not agree with your opinions. You have no proof that "aircraft polls are bad". You only have "proof" that you disagree with the results. Cartoon life is tough.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: druski85 on January 27, 2009, 12:35:03 PM
What you have is only "proof" that the majority do not agree with your opinions. You have no proof that "aircraft polls are bad". You only have "proof" that you disagree with the results. Cartoon life is tough.

Bah. beat me to it
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on January 27, 2009, 12:35:11 PM
How did we not get this beast

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: oakranger on January 27, 2009, 01:25:29 PM
I agree with you Gava.  We need to bring more JI, LW, and Russian in the game.  But wait, i do see other countries, may i say vary few of them, that had their own planes.  Italy has a few that could be added.  Lets not forget Frances and Finn.   Like i say, diversity in countries and planes is badly needed. 
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Shifty on January 27, 2009, 01:33:10 PM
  Lets not forget Frances

Take it easy Frances.

(http://www.movieactors.com/photos/stripes127.jpeg)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: 96Delta on January 27, 2009, 02:02:14 PM
Junkers Ju-52!
Fallschirmjager!!!


(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb209/StracCop/Ju52.gif)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: FireDrgn on January 27, 2009, 02:29:56 PM
I dint think if i remember right that either plane was the most voted for initially.  If it would have been one vote we would have had a differant plane..... but all the people that lost there plane switched votes and it came down to sympathy vote for the b25....
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Boozeman on January 27, 2009, 02:57:29 PM
The really funny thing about that vote was that in the final round almost 50% voted for the P-39, but ever since its introduction, only 5% fly it once in a while...

So next time, watch out for what you actually vote, you just might get it.  ;)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bronk on January 27, 2009, 02:59:49 PM
 :cry :cry :cry :cry


Is all I'm reading.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Banshee7 on January 27, 2009, 03:00:33 PM
:cry :cry :cry :cry


Is all I'm reading.

Can't a guy cry every now and then <sniffle>  :cry
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Shifty on January 27, 2009, 03:01:33 PM
The really funny thing about that vote was that in the final round almost 50% voted for the P-39, but ever since its introduction, only 5% fly it once in a while...

So next time, watch out for what you actually vote, you just might get it.  ;)

Many people voted for the P-39 for Special Events purposes. It gets plenty of use in the SEA.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Scotch on January 27, 2009, 03:02:28 PM
Though I voted for the g55, the P-39 at least filled a large gap in scenarios and events.

The b25...well... BEN AFFLECK!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: apcampbell on January 27, 2009, 03:04:55 PM
Although I agree with him, let's not get Yossarian started again  :D I'm anxiously waiting to see what HTC releases next.

Yeah I know...........2 weeks!  :cry

How did we not get this beast

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 27, 2009, 03:10:42 PM
     Yeah, that majority rules thing sure sucks.  :rolleyes:

If the B-29 had been in the list it probably would have won.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bronk on January 27, 2009, 03:12:09 PM
If the B-29 had been in the list it probably would have won.
How would that have been bad?  Fluffers would stop whining about perk bombers.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: ColKLink on January 27, 2009, 03:29:47 PM
Can you ho in that thing lusche? thats my only question??? <S>
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Fulmar on January 27, 2009, 03:31:46 PM
Everyone assumes B-29 = nukes.  I mean, only two were dropped during the war!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: llama on January 27, 2009, 04:07:01 PM
Take it easy Frances.

(http://www.movieactors.com/photos/stripes127.jpeg)

(http://www.movieactors.com/photos/stripes127.jpeg)

Um, the line is "Lighten up, Frances."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k

If you're going to quote a movie, at least QUOTE the movie. ;-)

-Llama
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Shifty on January 27, 2009, 04:11:31 PM
(http://www.movieactors.com/photos/stripes127.jpeg)

Um, the line is "Lighten up, Frances."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k

If you're going to quote a movie, at least QUOTE the movie. ;-)

-Llama

Actually the line is "Lighten up Francis".

If you're going to correct somebody, do it correctly.  :P
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: John Curnutte on January 27, 2009, 07:11:25 PM
 Lets face it , there are lots of aircraft that fill scenario needs . If HTC put out everything at once what would we have to anticipate in new releases ! And now that new terrain is being worked on , maybe we get snow capped mountains and palm trees and all of the cool airfields like you find on the PTO maps . A game like this is always a work in progress gentlemen , lets keep that in mind as we await the next releases . But I'm hoping the He 111 comes out and some more GV's .
                                Nutte :salute
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Yossarian on January 27, 2009, 07:56:03 PM
Although I agree with him, let's not get Yossarian started again  :D I'm anxiously waiting to see what HTC releases next.

Yeah I know...........2 weeks!  :cry


Too late!!!  :D :D :D

What you have is only "proof" that the majority do not agree with your opinions. You have no proof that "aircraft polls are bad". You only have "proof" that you disagree with the results. Cartoon life is tough.

Very true.

How did we not get this beast

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)

W000T!!



http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,247406.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,247406.0.html)
 ;)

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Oldman731 on January 27, 2009, 08:30:04 PM
Many people voted for the P-39 for Special Events purposes. It gets plenty of use in the SEA.

And in AvA.  And in Mid-war.

The 1945 plane set is quite full, and has been for a long time.  Additions now should be to fill out the rest of the war.

- oldman
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bobtom on January 27, 2009, 10:01:02 PM
HE-111  :rock
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: VonMessa on January 27, 2009, 10:11:31 PM
(http://www.movieactors.com/photos/stripes127.jpeg)

Um, the line is "Lighten up, Frances."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k

If you're going to quote a movie, at least QUOTE the movie. ;-)

-Llama

Um, and it's actually a Sit-Com, not a movie.     :D
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Larry on January 27, 2009, 10:24:17 PM
The really funny thing about that vote was that in the final round almost 50% voted for the P-39, but ever since its introduction, only 5% fly it once in a while...

So next time, watch out for what you actually vote, you just might get it.  ;)


This is why we needed/got the P39s. Just because you dont see them a lot in the LW MAs doesnt mean people arent using them.


(http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/4/24/1013733/lots-of-targets.png)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 27, 2009, 11:17:46 PM
Absolutely, the P-39 is an excellent aircraft for FSO/Scenarios, but I still think an He-111, Pe-2 or Ki-43 would've been even better on the same merits.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: 1pLUs44 on January 27, 2009, 11:20:05 PM
Plane production should always be priority number one for HTC.

Didn't they build B-25s and P-39s throughout almost the entire war?

:P

B-25 was a front line bomber when it came to attack sorties and anti shipping runs... etc.

2nd Highest scoring allied ace of WWII Flew the P39...  :)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: VonMessa on January 28, 2009, 06:25:36 AM
Absolutely, the P-39 is an excellent aircraft for FSO/Scenarios, but I still think an He-111, Pe-2 or Ki-43 would've been even better on the same merits.

They made good targets in last week's FSO, too   :devil
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Scotch on January 28, 2009, 07:25:59 AM
Every one of those p39's in that screen shot died at the hands of a Muppet.  :t :t :rock

FLY FSO!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Fencer51 on January 28, 2009, 07:30:24 AM
Maybe a "MA Poll" and a "SEA Poll" ?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: LTARghst on January 28, 2009, 07:33:46 AM
Forget the new Bombers, already enough toolshedders here, lets get some new maps!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: The Fugitive on January 28, 2009, 07:36:48 AM
Um, and it's actually a Sit-Com, not a movie.     :D

ummm no, it's a movie called "Stripes" with Bill Murry. What Sitcom are you thinking of?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: VonMessa on January 28, 2009, 07:47:06 AM
ummm no, it's a movie called "Stripes" with Bill Murry. What Sitcom are you thinking of?

Fixed  :aok (it was really late)  So late I don't remember, now.  :D
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bozon on January 28, 2009, 07:54:56 AM
P-39 is a Russian plane as much as it is an American. At least if who used them counts more than who made them.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 28, 2009, 09:23:34 AM
Alright.  I'm done being polemical.  We will now return to our regularly scheduled whine.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: VonMessa on January 28, 2009, 09:26:53 AM
Alright.  I'm done being polemical.  We will now return to our regularly scheduled whine.

That should slow some of the whiners down while they dash for the dictionary.  ;)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bongaroo on January 28, 2009, 03:37:49 PM
So the moral of this thread is...we need the He-111 right?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Makarov9 on January 28, 2009, 03:48:56 PM
So the moral of this thread is...we need the He-111 right?

Yep, pretty much...
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: NoBaddy on January 28, 2009, 04:20:22 PM
So the moral of this thread is...we need the He-111 right?

Sorry...I thought it was "HEY, LOOK AT ME!!". :rolleyes:

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: iTunes on January 28, 2009, 04:23:48 PM
I wonder what the useage stats are for the P39 now, after all there was such a clamour for it that it should be up in the top 5 of crates being used surely?....
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bongaroo on January 28, 2009, 04:27:09 PM
I've seen it included in many special events.  I'll even up one in the MAs every now and again when I'm looking for a challenge.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BnZs on January 28, 2009, 04:41:37 PM
Anax...let me get this straight....

The masses are "smart" when you are endorsing a popularity-based ENY system but "dumb" when asked to vote for new planes?  :devil
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: NoBaddy on January 28, 2009, 04:44:01 PM
I wonder what the useage stats are for the P39 now, after all there was such a clamour for it that it should be up in the top 5 of crates being used surely?....

In mid war it can be a very competitive bird, in the right hands. I know of a couple of folks with those hands and I virtually soil myself when I find them above me. :D

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Oldman731 on January 28, 2009, 08:24:58 PM
I wonder what the useage stats are for the P39 now, after all there was such a clamour for it that it should be up in the top 5 of crates being used surely?....

Come see us in AvA.  P-39 used a lot in the FinRus setup running this week.

- oldman
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Boozeman on January 29, 2009, 05:07:38 AM
I wonder what the useage stats are for the P39 now, after all there was such a clamour for it that it should be up in the top 5 of crates being used surely?....

Well, here are some recent (tour 107) "usage" (kills+deaths) stats compared to the respective arena top plane:

LWA
P-39D = 1145
P-39Q = 2396
P-51D = 78398

MWA
P-39D = 161
P-39Q = 293
P-38J = 6637

EWA
P-39D = 171
P-39Q = n/a
Hurri2c = 2328

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Oldman731 on January 29, 2009, 08:02:03 AM
Well, here are some recent (tour 107) "usage" (kills+deaths) stats compared to the respective arena top plane:

LWA
P-39D = 1145
P-39Q = 2396
P-51D = 78398

MWA
P-39D = 161
P-39Q = 293
P-38J = 6637

EWA
P-39D = 171
P-39Q = n/a
Hurri2c = 2328

Apples and oranges.  Very few planes will be able to compete with the 51D (or Spits &c) in terms of use.

Let's look at something more comparable, for the same tour:

LWA
Bf 109E-4 = 48
C 202 = 43
F4F-4 = 249
FW 190A5 = 92 (there's a surprise)
P-38G = 123
P-40E = 190
Spit 9 = 110 (another surprise)

MWA
Bf 109E-4 = 49
C 202 = 77
F4F-4 = 295
FW 190A5 = 2231 (no surprise)
P-38G = 592
P-40E = 351
Spit 9 = 3499

EWA
Bf 109E-4 = 72
C 202 = 66
F4F-4 = 569
FW 190A5 = 142
P-38G = 210
P-40E = 273
Spit 9 = 167

Compared to these planes, the P-39 doesn't do so bad.

If HTC creates a new super plane, I'm sure it will get used as much as the 51Ds and Spit 16s and La7s, but the fact is that virtually all of the historically-operational super planes are already here.  Any new planes naturally will be used less than the hot rods, once the initial enthusiasm wears off.  The 39 has done well because - among its contemporaries - it's a fun plane to fly and fairly capable.

- oldman
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: dedalos on January 29, 2009, 08:06:13 AM
The really funny thing about that vote was that in the final round almost 50% voted for the P-39, but ever since its introduction, only 5% fly it once in a while...

So next time, watch out for what you actually vote, you just might get it.  ;)

That is because the majority can be clueless at times.  If they knew what the p39 was only 5% would have voted for it.  But clueless went for the one with the cool name that was made here.  :rofl  We always give the good stuff to the Rusians don't we? lol
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Nilsen on January 29, 2009, 08:19:58 AM
HE-111  :rock

what boobtom said  :aok
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bongaroo on January 29, 2009, 08:30:42 AM
The masses are "smart" when you are endorsing a popularity-based ENY system but "dumb" when asked to vote for new planes?  :devil

I think the popularity-based ENY he's talked about would actually rely on the fact that the masses are somewhat "dumb".
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 29, 2009, 09:23:41 AM
I think the popularity-based ENY he's talked about would actually rely on the fact that the masses are somewhat "dumb".

BnZs just knows that I enjoy his cynical, cheap shots. :P

Anyway, I don't think the masses are dumb, far from it.  On the other hand, you might get me to admit that the majority here exhibit the natural human tendency to favor their own side's equipment, even if that means not having very diverse opposition.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: iTunes on January 29, 2009, 02:18:50 PM
Come see us in AvA.  P-39 used a lot in the FinRus setup running this week.

- oldman
I'll have to Finrus should be fun.
<S>
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Boozeman on January 29, 2009, 03:23:53 PM
I feel free to enter the correct numbers for LWA just behind yours. I think something went wrong during your research...
Also, some EW rides you quoted are actually perked...

Apples and oranges.  Very few planes will be able to compete with the 51D (or Spits &c) in terms of use.

Let's look at something more comparable, for the same tour:

LWA
Bf 109E-4 = 48 (736)
C 202 = 43 (1002)
F4F-4 = 249 (1309)
FW 190A5 = 92 (there's a surprise) well not really, actually its 7606
P-38G = 123 (2255)
P-40E = 190 (2788)
Spit 9 = 110 (another surprise) well, again, not really, actually its 16722

MWA
Bf 109E-4 = 49
C 202 = 77
F4F-4 = 295
FW 190A5 = 2231 (no surprise)
P-38G = 592
P-40E = 351
Spit 9 = 3499

EWA
Bf 109E-4 = 72
C 202 = 66
F4F-4 = 569
FW 190A5 = 142 perked
P-38G = 210 perked
P-40E = 273
Spit 9 = 167 perked

Compared to these planes, the P-39 doesn't do so bad.

If HTC creates a new super plane, I'm sure it will get used as much as the 51Ds and Spit 16s and La7s, but the fact is that virtually all of the historically-operational super planes are already here.  Any new planes naturally will be used less than the hot rods, once the initial enthusiasm wears off.  The 39 has done well because - among its contemporaries - it's a fun plane to fly and fairly capable.

- oldman


And it's really not apples and oranges. Fact is, the P-39s are, no matter in which of the regular arenas, among the least used planes. And, as I said before, this is very odd considering the amount of votes it got. And I strongly doubt that scenario and AvA usabillity was a driving force behind the votes. Most of the AH players do not participate in such events, yet those very same players did cast their votes.   

I can remember the euphoric mood here on this board just before its release. It was all about the mains...   
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Oldman731 on January 29, 2009, 04:44:59 PM
I feel free to enter the correct numbers for LWA just behind yours. I think something went wrong during your research...
Also, some EW rides you quoted are actually perked...

And it's really not apples and oranges. Fact is, the P-39s are, no matter in which of the regular arenas, among the least used planes. And, as I said before, this is very odd considering the amount of votes it got. And I strongly doubt that scenario and AvA usabillity was a driving force behind the votes. Most of the AH players do not participate in such events, yet those very same players did cast their votes.   

I can remember the euphoric mood here on this board just before its release. It was all about the mains...   

Yikes!  Can't tell where I got those Late War stats from - odd, since I got it right for the other two arenas.

My point still stands, I think.  No new plane is likely to compete with the Spit-P-51D-La7-Nik crowd after the initial love affair.  Had the Yak 3 or G55 been selected, I don't expect that their usage would be much different from the P-39's.

- oldman
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: A8TOOL on January 29, 2009, 04:47:32 PM
Not sure how many times I took it up in tour 107 but I flew it a lot.


122 kills in a spit 9 in tour 107, I killed 8 and was killed by 6 dieing 44 time in one. I like the plane :aok

Spitfire Mk IX    122    8    6    44

EDIT:
This tour I've been liking the f6 and fm2... and Ki-61, c202 since flying them in Roscoroo's event held on Tuesday. Only 56 kills in a 9 this tour

F6F-5    51    11    5    28
FM2    46    2    0    22
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bubbajj on January 29, 2009, 06:44:22 PM
Explain to me why we need the 111 again? Slow, underpowered, underarmed, and otherwise completely inept. Will be nothing but cannon fodder. Why would anyone take a 111 when about any other bomber would be way better for the job? Complete waste of time.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bongaroo on January 29, 2009, 07:49:58 PM
Explain to me why we need the 111 again? Slow, underpowered, underarmed, and otherwise completely inept. Will be nothing but cannon fodder. Why would anyone take a 111 when about any other bomber would be way better for the job? Complete waste of time.

Because most of us realize that there aren't many more "uber" rides left to model that don't already have multiple equilivalent rides already modeled.

A lot of us are now looking forward to the holes in the plane set to be filled so we can enjoy more FSO and scenario setups.

I don't know you in game but if you weren't in the top rankings of some category we could say the same comments about your flying... :D

Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Larry on January 29, 2009, 07:51:09 PM
Explain to me why we need the 111 again? Slow, underpowered, underarmed, and otherwise completely inept. Will be nothing but cannon fodder. Why would anyone take a 111 when about any other bomber would be way better for the job? Complete waste of time.

For one we need it for BoB scenarios. Second some of us like to fly planes that aren't the best of the best.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BnZs on January 29, 2009, 10:40:41 PM
BnZs just knows that I enjoy his cynical, cheap shots. :P

Anyway, I don't think the masses are dumb, far from it.  On the other hand, you might get me to admit that the majority here exhibit the natural human tendency to favor their own side's equipment, even if that means not having very diverse opposition.

If I were designing my own sim, I'd go for a perfect representation of every plane in operation on the Western Front on October 17, 1944 at 10:30 A.M. When that task was done, I'd flip a coin to decide whether I was going to now move on to the 16th or the 18th. If there were say two Bf-109 G-6/AS variations in operation, the difference being the optional cupholder, I'd want to model them both.  That is my taste. Since all of this is occurring in my imagination, I do not have to appeal to the masses or otherwise endeavor to make money on the project.  :devil
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: MORAY37 on January 29, 2009, 11:17:59 PM
Yikes!  Can't tell where I got those Late War stats from - odd, since I got it right for the other two arenas.

My point still stands, I think.  No new plane is likely to compete with the Spit-P-51D-La7-Nik crowd after the initial love affair.  Had the Yak 3 or G55 been selected, I don't expect that their usage would be much different from the P-39's.

- oldman

You kidding?  Yeah, nobody would want to fly the G.55 series 1..... around 400MPH level, with 3x20mm cannon and 2x 12.7 mg's, with time to climb (23,000 feet) in eight minutes.  Handled better than all contemporary Luftwaffe aircraft, and was slated for production in GERMANY over the 109 series.  (It didn't go into production in Germany due to the calculated higher man hours to produce per copy (15,000 for G.55 versus 5,000 for a 109 G-6)  It was in squadron service in Italy from 1943. The engine from it ended up in the late model TA-152. 
(http://www.preservedaxisaircraft.com/Italy/images/FiatG55.jpg)
Quote
The tests began 20 February 1943. The German commission was very impressed by the Italian aircraft, the G.55 in particular. In general, all the Serie 5 fighters were very good at low altitudes, but the G.55 was also competitive with its German opponents in term of speed and climb rate at high altitudes still maintaining superior handling characteristics. The definitive evaluation by the German commission was "excellent" for the G.55, "good" for the Re.2005 and "average" for the C.205. Oberst Petersen defined the G.55 "the best fighter in the Axis" and immediately telegraphed his impressions to Goering. After listening the recommendations of Petersen, Milch and Galland, a meeting held by Goering on 22 February 1943 voted to produce the G.55 in Germany.


No, no one would still be flying it.

Instead we vote the P-39 in, a plane that was completely obsolete except for its' gun, at the start of the war..... I hope someday soon we finish the entire American WW2 set, so we can get about the business of actually having a world "set" of aircraft.  I feel until that happens, we won't see any other country's planes. 

The He-111 and G.55 should have been the selections from last vote. 
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: AWwrgwy on January 30, 2009, 01:36:37 AM
Explain to me why we need the 111 again? Slow, underpowered, underarmed, and otherwise completely inept. Will be nothing but cannon fodder. Why would anyone take a 111 when about any other bomber would be way better for the job? Complete waste of time.

Underarmed and underpowered describes all German bombers.  Are you suggesting there be no German bombers?


wrongway
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bubbajj on January 30, 2009, 01:49:33 AM
I say we have enough bombers of all sorts. No more needed.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Larry on January 30, 2009, 03:03:51 AM
I say we have enough bombers of all sorts. No more needed.


wow :rofl
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Shifty on January 30, 2009, 07:32:32 AM
The He-111 and G.55 should have been the selections from last vote.

Since HTC setup and sponsered the vote and the voters selected the B-25 and P-39.
The planes that should have won... DID.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on January 30, 2009, 08:58:25 AM
You kidding?  Yeah, nobody would want to fly the G.55 series 1..... around 400MPH level

That seems to be an overestimation.  Most sources quote about 387mph as the top speed for the G.55 at ~22000 feet (like the 109G-6, but slower).  What the G.55 was praised for, however, was its high altitude performance and handling: it had a service ceiling of ~42,000 ft.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Motherland on January 30, 2009, 02:09:25 PM
The G.55 is not a scenario plane. It was a very low production model... Italy's last ditch effort. Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful aircraft, and I'd love to fly it, but the G.50, CR42 etc. are bigger holes in our Regia Aeronautica planeset.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bubbajj on February 01, 2009, 04:23:57 AM
The French had fighters too. They should be popular with the runtard set.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bronk on February 01, 2009, 06:42:00 AM
The He-111 and G.55 should have been the selections from last vote.

Since HTC setup and sponsered the vote and the voters selected the B-25 and P-39.
The planes that should have won... DID.

Recount  :rofl I'm guessing Moray is looking for hanging chads. :D
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: streakeagle on February 01, 2009, 06:46:43 AM
How are these polls broken?
People vote for whatever they want not what is needed or even what they will fly.
So, really, this post is all about whining because the majority of people want something other than what a minority wants or "needs".
Of course, I put "needs" in quotes because no one "needs" a combat flight sim game as opposed to food and water.
The amount of flight time any new aircraft will get is a poor argument since the most popular aircraft have long been available and most people will fly these aircraft over any new aircraft aside from the initial release when people might try the newest plane just to see what it is like.
Since this is a business, HTC should probably release aircraft based on keeping the majority of their customers happy.
The fact that HTC conducted a poll at all shows that is exactly what they are trying to do.
Of course the poll reveals that the majority want to complete the American planeset without regard for historical scenarios or international planeset balance.
This should not be surprising if the majority of players are from the United States.
I personally don't get that much time to play anymore, but remain a subscriber to further HTC's development.
I don't care what plane they add, as long as they keep adding planes.
If they could get their plane development rate back up to where it was before resources were sucked dry by the Combat Tour thing, nobody would need to whine at all since the planeset would be filled in fairly quickly.
Of course, the standards for planes, cockpits, and textures are higher than they once were, so development time is going to be slower and they still need to get the entire AH1 planeset up to the standards of AH2... but surely the release rate will increase significantly compared to what it has been since the release of AH2 and the beginning of Combat Tour development.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: iTunes on February 13, 2009, 04:56:05 PM
I suspect the next list of planes to vote for will be along the lines of:
P51-A
P51-C
P38-F
B25-A
B17-F
PBY Catalina
F6F-3
F6F-4
F6F-5
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Brooke on February 17, 2009, 03:45:41 AM
I think all the planes that would be popular in the Main Arena are already in the game.  Thus, whatever is added likely isn't going to change much what people see flying around in the Main Arena.

However, there are planes that can make a significant difference to special events:  the He 111 (a major aircraft of Battle of Britain, Ju 88 isn't a good substitute), Pe-2 (a major Soviet attack plane, 11,000 produced, no good substitute), G4M (the main Japanese bomber, no good substitute), LaGG-3 (we need early-war Soviet fighters for eastern-front events), etc.

For special events, the P-39 and B-25 were excellent additions (and I do see them around even in the Late War Arena).
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Lusche on February 17, 2009, 03:51:54 AM
I think all the planes that would be popular in the Main Arena are already in the game. 

I think all the German Iron fans & squads (there many out there) would highly welcome a mid/late war german bomber. That one could get pretty popular I think. Right now, you are stuck with a very slow, almost defensless early bomber. In that context, the HE 111 would be just another flying target.

A Do 217, Ju 188 or He 177 would really close a gap.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bruv119 on February 17, 2009, 04:10:27 AM
out of those 3  the dornier 217 gets my vote,

2 other critical bombers that will help variation for scenarios and impact in MA,  TU-2 and G4M2 (a better ki67)

then there is the other LW fighter to add and thats the yak-3 which did quite well in the vote.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on February 17, 2009, 04:17:49 AM
Oh noes you didn't, we need the B-29! :salute
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Plawranc on February 17, 2009, 04:23:46 AM
I want a Beaufighter and a B29

Beau cuz of Aussie pride and B29 FOR THE PERKED NUKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Bruv119 on February 17, 2009, 04:25:22 AM
and the beau I might add  :aok
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: bongaroo on February 17, 2009, 07:47:05 AM
Why are the b29 requests never joined with a request for a high altitude japanese interceptor?  Why would HTC put a plane in game that nothing could touch if some dweebs were boring enough to let it climb to 35,000ft?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 17, 2009, 09:11:13 AM
out of those 3  the dornier 217 gets my vote,

Yes, and with radio controlled anti-ship missiles please. :t
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: 5PointOh on February 17, 2009, 11:35:06 AM
I think all the German Iron fans & squads (there many out there) would highly welcome a mid/late war german bomber. That one could get pretty popular I think. Right now, you are stuck with a very slow, almost defensless early bomber. In that context, the HE 111 would be just another flying target.

A Do 217, Ju 188 or He 177 would really close a gap.

What he said...add the Beaufighter.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on February 17, 2009, 01:59:04 PM
Ok.. bring on the Po-2 (U-2)! With about 40,000 built it MUST be the next plane added to AH  :D

(http://www.airmuseumsuk.org/airshow/2003/Shut030823/800/images/011%20Polikarpov%20PO2.jpg)




Good point.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 02:00:38 PM
How do I get in on the next vote..... or will it be using an electoral college?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: CountD90 on June 03, 2009, 02:06:04 PM
(http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k171/Kickmiester/NecroBumpBatman.jpg)

yea i got one up!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: antivortex on June 03, 2009, 02:38:00 PM
Only for the G.55 fans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on June 03, 2009, 04:22:18 PM
I do agree gavagai.  I believe it's time for something other than American planes.  The He111 and the Russian bombers would be a good addition.  We also need a few more fighters..the ones we have are starting to get boring  :)


we dont need any russian bombers maybe the he-111 for ew would be another choice. Wheres the B-17c for ew?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on June 03, 2009, 04:24:15 PM
Junkers Ju-52!
Fallschirmjager!!!


(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb209/StracCop/Ju52.gif)


actually not a bad choice for another goon, BTW.... Hi Delta
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: 68Wooley on June 03, 2009, 04:39:50 PM

we dont need any russian bombers maybe the he-111 for ew would be another choice. Wheres the B-17c for ew?

America wasn't involved in the early war. US participation started mid war.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Yossarian on June 03, 2009, 05:50:46 PM
Quote from: Kazaa
How did we not get this beast

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)

That is SUCH a cool picture.
Go A-26!!!!
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Enker on June 03, 2009, 05:51:59 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/B-26.jpg)

That is SUCH a cool picture.
Go A-26!!!!

We didn't get it because we needed a plane so ugly, that it was sexy, just like the Brewster Buffalo.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 04:16:38 AM
I suspect that half the people that voted did not know what most of the aircraft were on the list.  I don't mean that as an insult, but the average guy probably knows the main aircraft of the war but the Russian/Japanese and German types are probably a bit unknown.  I suspect that it is a low % of the subscriber base which checks the forums too.  The in game poll didn't have any information on the types if i recall, otherwise i think that the A-26 or Me-410 would have been voted in.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on June 04, 2009, 04:48:37 AM
Quote from wiki.

"After about 1,570 production aircraft, three guns were installed in each wing, coinciding with the introduction of the "eight-gun nose" for A-26Bs, giving some configurations as many as 14 .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns in a fixed forward mount. An A-26C nose section could be exchanged for an A-26B nose section, or vice versa, in a few man-hours, thus physically (and officially) changing the designation and operational role. The "flat-topped" canopy was changed in late 1944 after about 820 production aircraft, to a clamshell style with greatly improved visibility."

That's what I call "over the top" fire power.

Does anyone know how well the A-26 could turn? It has a wing loading of 51 lb/ft² (250 kg/m²) but I have nothing to compare it too.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/A-26B_Invader.jpg)
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: moot on June 04, 2009, 05:13:03 AM
Kazaa you would need to know what cfg that 51lb/ft2 figure is for.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: cobia38 on June 04, 2009, 06:23:33 AM

 give it to me and i,ll show you how well it will turn  :D
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Warchief on June 04, 2009, 07:04:41 AM
I think four aircraft should be added over the next four months but that is me.
1) A-26 outstanding aircraft that stayed in service all the way to Vietnam
2) Ju-52- be kinda of nice considering it had a gun in the back
3) Mig-3 Russians should have an aircraft added
4) He-111

One added aircraft from each category, one attack, one fighter, one bomber, and a new transport aircraft. Now will this happen, I seriously doubt it but all 4 would be a nice addition. Now I think the A-26 should be perked for good reasons but would give us something to use bomber perk points on. I got way too many and would be nice to have something to spend it on.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on June 04, 2009, 07:08:31 AM
lol, you can't perk the A-26, that's just crazy talk.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on June 04, 2009, 09:59:14 AM
America wasn't involved in the early war. US participation started mid war.




1941 wasn't early war? Do you consider the battle of Britain early war?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: dev1ant on June 04, 2009, 11:36:05 AM
How would that have been bad?  Fluffers would stop whining about perk bombers.

In just about every way imaginable.

Toolshedders ruin too many good fights as it is.

I would of loved the A-26 though.  :cool:
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 12:42:15 PM



1941 wasn't early war? Do you consider the battle of Britain early war?

Pretty much 1942 when you consider Pearl Harbour was in December, the 8th Air Force did not start proper operations until mid/late 1942.  The Battle of Britain was approximately 2 years before the start of the 8th AF bomber offensive.  Coral Sea was also mid 42.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 04, 2009, 01:24:10 PM
Great plane, but not what's needed for complete scenario planesets.  At least, it's not at the top of that list.  My guess is that G.55 votes helped the B-25 and P-39.  You guys should have organized around one or two choices to outvote the American-everything crowd.

At least then the final vote would not have been between two American planes.

The incentive for the B-25H was to honor the father of one of the players that flew the B-25 (think it was the C) during the war.  I believe the default skin is the one that the player's father flew.  It had nothing to do with being an American plane.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on June 04, 2009, 01:41:40 PM
Pretty much 1942 when you consider Pearl Harbour was in December, the 8th Air Force did not start proper operations until mid/late 1942.  The Battle of Britain was approximately 2 years before the start of the 8th AF bomber offensive.  Coral Sea was also mid 42.



Then explain why the P-40E, P-38g, Boston, Landcaster, Spitfire IX, P-39, FW 199 A/5 are in the EW plane set. These planes were not around in 1940 and  some not until late 1941.

The B-17C was at Henderson field in 1941 and most likely earlier due to the fact that the Japanerse attacked the Philipanines virtually at the same time they attacked pearl Harbor and B-17C's were at Henderson field when they attacked. B-17C's were delivered to units in November of 1940. B-17's were also flying inbound to pearl harbor while under attack and were also destroyed on the ground as well. So what do you consider to be the EW time frame?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 01:55:42 PM


Then explain why the P-40E, P-38g, Boston, Landcaster, Spitfire IX, P-39, FW 199 A/5 are in the EW plane set. These planes were not around in 1940 and  some not until late 1941.

The B-17C was at Henderson field in 1941 and most likely earlier due to the fact that the Japanerse attacked the Philipanines virtually at the same time they attacked pearl Harbor and B-17C's were at Henderson field when they attacked. B-17C's were delivered to units in November of 1940. B-17's were also flying inbound to pearl harbor while under attack and were also destroyed on the ground as well. So what do you consider to be the EW time frame?

I was just saying...

Anyway, we only have the B-17G which was in service in i think late 1943, and there is no such thing as a Landcaster. Some of the aircraft you mention are probably there due to lack of other types.

Personally, i would consider 1939 - end 1941 early war, 1942 - end 1943 mid war, 1944 - VJ day late war.  What would you define it as?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: BigPlay on June 04, 2009, 03:30:48 PM
I was just saying...

Anyway, we only have the B-17G which was in service in i think late 1943, and there is no such thing as a Landcaster. Some of the aircraft you mention are probably there due to lack of other types.

Personally, i would consider 1939 - end 1941 early war, 1942 - end 1943 mid war, 1944 - VJ day late war.  What would you define it as?


So I added a D to Lancaster no need to get that picky considering your former post has more wrong with it than a misspelled name. There a many planes in here with same type airframes that have different model designations. The B-25C and H are 2 completely different planes but they were able to model the 2 of them. Why would the B-17C be much different. I think the point of this game is to first have fun not  pure historical  accuracy.If it were then there really would be very limited plane sets in both MW and EW. I doubt that any amount of new plane, tank or anything else will draw a large group of players away from the MA to the ew arena.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: 68Wooley on June 04, 2009, 04:08:49 PM

1941 wasn't early war? Do you consider the battle of Britain early war?

Personally, I consider Pearl Harbor the point at which we moved from early war to mid-war.

Certainly, 1942 - when US participation really started - is mid-war.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 04:12:23 PM
lol, you can't perk the A-26, that's just crazy talk.

Pyro's synopsis on it during the plane-vote:

"A-26 -  Honestly, this plane will end up as a light perk but more things to spend bomber perks on are needed.  Helluva plane that would completely upstage every other medium bomber in the game."
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on June 04, 2009, 04:14:36 PM
How many late war medium bombers do we have in game again?
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Oldman731 on June 04, 2009, 04:18:04 PM
How many late war medium bombers do we have in game again?

..er...how many WERE there?  By late war the fighter-bomber concept had pretty well shown that there would no longer be a need for either dive bombers or medium bombers.  We've got the Arado, some day we'll probably have the A26...were there others?

- oldman
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 04:23:41 PM
How many late war medium bombers do we have in game again?

I just posted HTC's staff's take on the matter. I'm not going argue about it with you. :)

I totally agree with pyro that it is one helluva plane. One of the best airshow performances I've ever seen was flown by one. It was quite a sight and sound to see a plane of that size being thrown about....high speed passes that were pulled into complete loops, beautiful. Still, I personally hope that is pretty low on the list of priorities for HTC.

1) Our US planeset is already huge compared to the other nations.

2) As a bomber it would draw lot of art recources and would take a longer time to develop than single engined fighters for example and still be somewhat redundant as AH already has the A-20.

3) It's involvement in the WWII itself was rather short and small compared to many capable planes left to be added.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kazaa on June 04, 2009, 04:27:50 PM
Imo, perking the A26 all depends on how well it can deal with enemy fighters. You can’t drop bombs on target, on time, if you can’t defend yourself.  If you going to milk run a strat then I guess that’s another story.
Title: Re: Proof aircraft polls are bad
Post by: Kev367th on June 04, 2009, 05:53:39 PM
Time frames - easy.

The War proper didn't really kick of until the Battle of France / Battle of Britain.

So you have 2 years per period -

Early - 40 / 41
Mid - 42 / 43
Late - 44 / 45

Can't get any simpler than that.

Irrespective of the Spit IX and the early 190 being available (perked) in the EW arena.