Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Lukanian-7 on April 03, 2009, 03:59:33 PM

Title: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lukanian-7 on April 03, 2009, 03:59:33 PM
I am wondering why so much of the community disaproves the HE-111.

Not trying to be a smartass or get flamed, but I'm quite confident it was used a lot, and should'nt be unbalancing; yet, many players cringe at the mere thought of it.

Reason?
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: moot on April 03, 2009, 04:09:12 PM
Hangar queen.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lukanian-7 on April 03, 2009, 04:12:54 PM
Really?Noone would fly it?

albeit I would but--
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: 1Boner on April 03, 2009, 04:41:11 PM
I don't think anyone really "disapproves" of it.

Most people want planes that are fast and have tons of firepower etc.

You really can't blame them, its just human nature.

The way I look at it, more planes are coming, I'm not gonna get all flustered if a plane comes and I don't like the choice.

My choice will eventually come.

Patience.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lusche on April 03, 2009, 04:47:50 PM
Actually many. many planes do not cringe at the mere thought of it but do really wish for the He-111.


90% of those will fly it a few times in MA, then drop it for more "capable" planes.

See P-39 ;)
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: sethipus on April 03, 2009, 04:49:44 PM
The funny thing is that people still fly formations of Bostons, and B-25Cs, and it would be easy to argue that both of those are very poor choices in comparison to some type of bomber or other.  They really should be hangar queens too, but people do fly them.

If only just for the scenarios, the midwar and early war arenas, and things like that the HE-111 should be in the game.  Heck, I'd fly them sometimes in the LW arenas jsut because they look friggin awesome.  And I'm not alone in that.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lusche on April 03, 2009, 04:50:52 PM
The funny thing is that people still fly formations of Bostons, and B-25Cs, and it would be easy to argue that both of those are very poor choices in comparison to some type of bomber or other.  They really should be hangar queens too, but people do fly them.

B-25C are hangar queens in MW & LW. :)
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Greebo on April 03, 2009, 05:06:28 PM
Some want a particular ride introduced because it will be uber in the MA; B-29, King Tiger etc. Of course all three sides will get the ride, so I'm not sure why. Other's want something because they have a historical attachment to it; i.e. Finns and the Brewster.

The He-111 would be a hangar queen in the MA, its usefulness would be for special events. It, or for that matter a Wellington, SM79, Betty, IL-4 etc, could sub for each other much better than the too-fast Boston or Ju88 currently can. Our early war fighters often have trouble keeping up with these two bombers, let alone shooting them down.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Motherland on April 03, 2009, 05:08:05 PM
The He-111 would be a hangar queen in the MA, its usefulness would be for special events. It, or for that matter a Wellington, SM79, Betty, IL-4 etc, could sub for each other much better than the too-fast Boston or Ju88 currently can. Our early war fighters often have trouble keeping up with these two bombers, let alone shooting them down.
:aok
The Boston III is actually faster than the Bf.109E.  :uhoh
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: E25280 on April 03, 2009, 05:18:00 PM
B-25C are hangar queens in MW & LW. :)
I often wonder if the EW and MW arenas would see more use if the early plane sets were filled out a bit more.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lusche on April 03, 2009, 05:22:24 PM
I often wonder if the EW and MW arenas would see more use if the early plane sets were filled out a bit more.

It could have some positive impact... but in EW, most players would still end up in the unperked and relatively high ENY Hurricane IIC ;)

But aside from having more choices and maybe a more thought out perk policy in EW, there would have to be more balances and ajustments in settings. More GVS. Less ack on bases and maybe even CVs - the ack setting is made to balance gameplay in LW with all those cannon-wielding high speed jabos.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Ack-Ack on April 03, 2009, 06:20:01 PM
B-25C are hangar queens in MW & LW. :)

Yep, in most cases in the MW arena, if you see a B-25 flying around it's going to be the H model doing anti-GV work.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: thndregg on April 03, 2009, 06:45:56 PM
Most people treat this wishlist forum like an arms race (not fast enough, underpowered this & that, not enough ammo, blah, blah, blah). So what? Bring in the hangar queens. They add to the plane set that encompasses WW2 from start to finish. It definitely helps those who host scenarios. It adds to the fun & flavor of the game.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Rich46yo on April 03, 2009, 07:15:40 PM
I dont think its "hated" or the idea behind it is "hated".

How often do we get a new bomber? Maybe once a year? If that much? Thing is there are some major holes in the bomber selection, one of them being only one perked bomber that very few guys fly much. And we are all drowning in bomber perks that we never use.

No Russian level bomber yet. Holes in the Brit and Jap set. And here comes the 111 to sit next to the bomber that replaced it, which isn't used much either, and which we already have.

My belief is we need a perked bomber and/or a Russian bomber next. Best of all would be both at one time, "but they aint going to happen". There really are only two perked bomber possibilities. One of them, that we dont dare name, might actually be exciting enough to get guys to fly them, dump their points, and then fly lesser bombers to build points back to fly again, "the plane we dont dare name" So that "we dont dare name" would probably reinvigorate the bomber/strat war cause its so cool. The other option is the A-26 .

My hope is for a Russian bomber this year. That doesn't mean I hate the thought of a HE-111 .
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: danny37 on April 03, 2009, 07:48:18 PM
I am wondering why so much of the community disaproves the HE-111.

Not trying to be a smartass or get flamed, but I'm quite confident it was used a lot, and should'nt be unbalancing; yet, many players cringe at the mere thought of it.

Reason?
for 1, it was mostly used as night bomber in the battle of britain and the blitz,2 it was easy prey,3 it was not a significant contribution to the war other than maybe as a troop/supply transport/torp carrier/ glider tug.and was pretty much replaced by the ju-88 in the bomber role.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_he111_peter.html
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/heinkel_iii.htm
not knockin your wish just some possiblities to why it most likely wont be added.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Krusty on April 03, 2009, 08:48:57 PM
Not only is the He111 vital for many early scenarios, INCLUDING Battle of Britain, it was a daylight bomber before and after its night bombing prominence. Various different models served long after the Ju88 showed up (Ju88 taking precedence because it was easier to build, FYI). Later models of He111 had multiple heavier gun placements, including a 20mm cannon, MG131s, and were used to air launch buzz bombs later in the war.

It was just as versatile as the Ju88, just a little more outdated because the airframe/powerplant development took a backseat to a cheaper plane.

Just keep in mind spitfires and hurricanes can barely even catch our post-BOB Ju-888A-4 bomber, and we have NO suitable bombers to use in THE most popular scenario run through the many years of Aces High scenarios. I think it's been run more than any other scenario bar none.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: BigKev03 on April 03, 2009, 09:30:50 PM
I think the He 111H, would be the version bet suited for this game.  But like others have said not many would fly it after the "new plane" tag fell off and the reason being is that it lacks a good defensive guns.  Bomb load though is surprising:  4,409lbs externally and one 1,102lb bomb internally or 8 551lb bombs all internally.  The B25H could only carry a little more than 3000lbs (this depended on misson range) and the B17G could only carry 4500lbs of bombs if it was a long range mission if it was short range it could carry 8000lbs.  So when it comes to bomb load the He 111 is not that bad it just doesnt have the guns to defend itself.  Speed was not that bad as the He 111's max speed was 270 compared to the B17's 287 and the B25's 275.  I would fly it religously if we had it. 

BigKev
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Krusty on April 03, 2009, 09:39:45 PM
External racks prohibit use of internal bombload. External racks only carried 1 bomb each, for 2 bombs. Pretty limited bombload, but still a much-needed plane.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: StokesAk on April 03, 2009, 10:19:36 PM
Hanger Queens are for time when you get bored. +1  :aok
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Serenity on April 04, 2009, 04:57:56 AM
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/FCPs/Pre-FabHe-111.gif)
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Dan216TH on April 04, 2009, 11:08:17 AM
the He-111 will find itself into this game just like the P-39
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Krusty on April 04, 2009, 03:29:08 PM
(image removed)

I'm not even going to bother reading that until it's in a font that is NOT designed to piss off the folks reading it.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: JETBLST on April 04, 2009, 04:09:19 PM
:aok
The Boston III is actually faster than the Bf.109E.  :uhoh

Isn't a dead segull faster than the Bf.109E?
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Serenity on April 04, 2009, 04:30:28 PM
I'm not even going to bother reading that until it's in a font that is NOT designed to piss off the folks reading it.

lol. But I <3 German font! :D
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Motherland on April 04, 2009, 06:21:46 PM
Isn't a dead segull faster than the Bf.109E?
The Bf.109E is pretty quick for EW. At the outbreak of the war it was one of the fastest fighters in the world.
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: JETBLST on April 05, 2009, 01:04:36 AM
 :aok  Roger that!
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: chris3 on April 06, 2009, 09:22:31 AM
moin

give her a interestening load out, and we will see it alot in air. for example as the v1 rocket carrier or with a telegided bomb (fritz X or so).

i often fly the ju88 and ju 87, i gues i will take the he 111 too.
i think we will see it alot oftener as a b5n for example.

cu chris3
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Anaxogoras on April 06, 2009, 10:19:43 AM
I've given up on seeing the He-111 in the next two years.  We'll get at least two more American planes before we see the He-111. :P
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Lukanian-7 on April 06, 2009, 05:47:03 PM
Ha I think I used that 'Fritz' X or whatver in Secret Weapons Over Normany. lol

Fun Stuff That Was
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: Karnak on April 06, 2009, 08:40:52 PM
Things to be added before the He111:

A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
B-32 Dominator
C-46 Commando
M-26 Pershing
P-61B Black Widow
PBY Catalina
SB2C Helldiver
TBD Devastator



 :P
Title: Re: Hating on the Heinkel
Post by: AWwrgwy on April 06, 2009, 10:06:43 PM
Things to be added before the He111:

A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
B-32 Dominator
C-46 Commando
M-26 Pershing
P-61B Black Widow
PBY Catalina
SB2C Helldiver
TBD Devastator



 :P

You only get two sides with your HE 111.

 :lol


wrongway