Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: juzz on February 15, 2000, 08:48:00 AM
-
Seems some/most have an (unhealthy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)) desire to get their mitts on them "last days of WW2/never saw combat/only a handful did, etc...", "uberplanes". By my reckoning, the majority are just developments of existing planes.
P-47M = P-47D
F4U-4 = F4U-1
Ta-152 = Fw190D-9
Etc.
*Yawn!*
Would it not be nicer to have totally new types, "never-seen-before" and from the other "end" of the war?
I-16 - Some models had two ShVAK cannons!
D.520 - French! And used by both Axis/Allied forces.
CR.42 - Two wings! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Gladiator - A "partner" for the Falco.
Hmmm?
-
I would like to see any and all planes possible, late, early, mid, pre, whatever!
-
I think it all boils down to the normal human desire for bigger, better, MORE !! Higher speeds, faster climbs, and more cannons, its a natural progression.
And the "uberplanes" as you call them are the pinnacle of developement of the planes most of us were weaned on, from birth. These are the planes that "won the war" or "almost turned the tide" depending on your perspective.
For instance my father was in the AirForce as a Navigator. I practically grew up on a base that has a P-51D sitting right by the front gate, so it means alot to me. FYI my unit (I joined it when I was old enought) was one of the last units (maybe the last) to actively fly the P-51 for the USA (WV ANG, 130th TAC Airlift Wing now).
To be honest, very few people identify with those early war birds.
However I can understand the desire for them since they are different from what you are use too.
But lets be honest? Do you expect HTC to go from mostly Latewar planes to early war planes? In my opinon thats not likely since this is the "niche" (uber/rare planes) that they have gone for to distinguish themselves from the other sims, just like WWIIOnline has gone initially for the "total war/early war niche".
My feelings are that, given the initial track of developement, HTC should fill out the late war set entirely, and then start working their way back. And fill in the set.
Realistically, until we get to scenario's or some sort of rolling plane set, the early war birds just won't get flown.
How many people fly the 109F now? And how many will fly the Spit V or C.202? Not very many would be my bet. And compared to these "very early" planes, the 109F, Spit V, and C.202 are all "uberplanes". Its all a matter of perspective.
Just my opinon (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Here's how ya make a plane set:
If you wanna make money and are based in the US, you do the P-51D and F4U.
You choose all the other planes to be able to compete with these two.
-
Originally posted by funked:
Here's how ya make a plane set:
If you wanna make money and are based in the US, you do the P-51D and F4U.
You choose all the other planes to be able to compete with these two.
Hehe (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Good one!
I am assuming that you are or have been involved in the production of an online multiplayer WW2 simulation. <S>
Mino
-
..or maybe it's because most of the people who have migrated here fully learned the alt=life lesson in other online sims.
So..if you want to live and you want fast action then you want better climbing aircraft.
Just a thought.
-
Why D-9, its already done in too many games (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
We need something new, aka D-12 or D-13.
Also, Ta-152 wouldn't be for bad either, i havent ever flown one, luftwaffe has had no real uber planes ever in flight sims, not before allies has had one. (funny, but they do often also mess up FMs with those LW planes, usually by the bad way, allies, most often its positive mess up)
F4u-4 has seen the delight alright in games, but ta-152 or later doras still missing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
How many waterborne aircraft are there in other sims? For the allied side why not a Marlin or Mars? would make a new addition to the bomber ranks. Think it would make for something new once CV's arrive and a PTO terrian is added <G> (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Rocket
------------------
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________
www.reddragons.de
-
(http://www.aardman.com/wallaceandgromit/gimmes/w.gif)
-
Fishu
Kick your table the needle is stuck on your record player..
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
Originally posted by juzz:
Seems some/most have an (unhealthy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)) desire to get their mitts on them "last days of WW2/never saw combat/only a handful did, etc...", "uberplanes". ...
Hmmm?
Not me. I want to get my mits on the good old fashioned Warhawk type P-40. Gimme one with four 50's and another for standby with six 50's please. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
O.E. 'Tern' Dillon
"Live to Fly! Fly to Fight! Fight to Live!"
-
Originally posted by Rocket:
How many waterborne aircraft are there in other sims? For the allied side why not a Marlin or Mars? ... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Rocket
Or the Catalina PBY? Works on land and sea. She carried torps, bombs, depth charges and a couple of nifty 50's crew served. Ain't EVER seen that modeled anywhere.
However sitting in the observers seat at the ripe old age of 7 was a blast! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) :P "Port of call; The Dalls, Oregon. Mission; Fire swampers." Boooh-rah!
------------------
O.E. 'Tern' Dillon
"Live to Fly! Fly to Fight! Fight to Live!"
-
I think flight simmers these days are more knowledgable about WW2 AC types than they were even two years ago. It is true that a lot of folks in the US are drawn to horsepower and speed but there are more and more of us that feel there is more to a sim than having the most powerful/fastest plane. I see more comments about correct flight and weapon modeling than I used to. Whether the developers take us seriously is another question. I have always felt that the P51, P38 and F4U have been used too much because the developers believe that the gamers only know these planes. Things change. I think a lot of us could have a great time just flying 109E's against Spit I's in a decent scenario. Maybe Westy's got the right idea- beer and sandwich- I don't think anyone listens to us anyway.
-
Mino I know NAAAAAAAAATHING!
-
<gack!>
That's cheese and crackers BBGun. To go with that whine...lol...
Hmmmm. Beer and a sandwich sounds better though! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-Westy
-
Well digest this with y'alls cheesencrackers
I guesstimate that there were something on the order of 273 types! of aircraft that saw service in WW2,this does not include varients, eg; 109g6-g10, now anybody willing to work out how long it would take HTC to model them all? (assuming 2 weeks production time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ) now think on how old you'll be by then. Me I would rather see some early war stuff, why? because if you put down a spit V in the main arena whilst flying an I16 your gonna be insufferable for days to come (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
You know what disappoints me? Almost every time this topic comes up, some joker assigns the desire for "Uberplanes" (their term, not mine) to a base "dweebish" instinct for having the "best", with the implication that it's more macho or more "grognardish" to want to fly the underachieving aircraft. It's a mindset that is passed on from many of the "old" folks, to the "new" folks in a way that makes it part of the online flight sim culture... *hey boy, you're not _vet_ until you rip someone's urge to fly a Ta152, and shout out your desire to fly the Brewster Buffalo, and prove your manhood!*
And it's a complete bunch of ballocks.
Virtual piloting is all about the combination of both history and fantasy. In fact, I personally think that there's nothing more exciting than to be able to recreate the battles that never happened, but that we've *all* imagined at one time or another... the P-51H vs the Ta152, the P-47M vs the Do335, the F8F against the Ki84 or N1K2. Furthermore, for me, very little catches the imagination more than these aircraft... which represent the penultimate achievements of piston-powered aircraft technology. Hell, I'd fly them even if they were armed with only .303s, just for the thrill of it.
Meanwhile, it seems rather uninteresting to recreate the outcomes that we already know regarding a whole slew of aircraft which were obsolescent before the war even got rolling -- the Buffaloes, Swordfish, Gladiators, etc. When these aircraft excel in the virtual environment it is only due to two reasons: 1) The things that aren't/can't be modeled lets us get away with stuff a real pilot couldn't have done; and 2) Because we don't really die when we mess up, so we learn when a real pilot might be dead and gone... and eventually we become good virtual pilots. If you really had to fly some of these dregs, you might come to understand why they were moved off the front lines as quickly as possible. But instead, they become a vehicle for someone's ego... and meanwhile, plenty of us interested in *ahem* uberplanes get shouted down every time we ask for them.
Finally, the idea that they shouldn't be valid targets for modeling simply because they (time for the tired old quote...) "never saw combat" is exactly that -- tired. Let's stop lying to ourselves... neither Aces High nor Warbirds is reality... it is a fantasy world. The fact that certain aircraft saw or didn't see combat is often a matter of luck. Someone did or didn't allocate resources. A general decided to continue equipping with P-51Ds because they had more instructors versed in it. A industrial leader decided it was more efficient to keep building the F6F, rather than switching over to the F8F. Meanwhile, the Germans were so desparate that anything that came off the line went to the *much closer* front.
It's asinine to limit WB, Aces High, or anything else to such a stupid, narrow focus... while the basis of these games might be history, there's a very strong dose of fantasy right underneath the hood.
One final note... I've always found that the *ahem* Uberplanes were actually more competitive with each other (they're all good aircraft) than the many of the early war aircraft that some tout (as if a Defiant is going to be competitive with a 109E or F).
In any case, so far so good... no one has ruled against it, out of hand... maybe there's a first for everything!
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 02-15-2000).]
-
SnakeEyes Ill take 1 F8F 1 F7F 1 F4U-4 with cannons 1 Seafury and one of them other things that were built in World War II but didnt make it to combat. I agree 100% with your statement its a fantasy game the planes dont make the pilots if they did we would only have F4u-1c's in the arena now.
I vote for if it had wings a prop and guns put it in the game, you guys who want the early metal fine bring it on I need more targets i enjoy shooting things down bring them on. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Tommy (INDIAN) Toon
Cherokee Indian
My Homepage
Where you can find the Key Commands in files for Word6 Wordpad and text mode.
indians Homepage (http://www.geocities.com/~tltoon)
Aces High Word6 and Wordpad Doc's available on my web site.
-
Nice Post SnakeEyes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Oh and everyone complains about the F4U-1C? Hell... I really like em.
Why? Because they make really good targets. You just gotta know how to stalk em, and have a little patience. mmmmm.... tasty snacks.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
I dunno, the debate reminds me of an interview I once saw with a Russian Olympic weightlifter, heavyweight class. The interviewer asked him why no one went to the
events featuring the flyweight weightlifters. He said, "Who wants to watch little men lifting little weights?" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I hope that they finish the late war plane set and then start on the mid war in a more structured way. I fly all the planes now, I imagine I would fly all the planes then. I think that most of the resistence to getting the last of the last in the game is from people that like to fly a particular aircraft almost exclusivly and are worried that it will be rendered impotent by a plane that they dont particularly care about. Some thing to keep people to 1 a day for the more exotic planes would be cool. Then you could get to fly it but the sky would not be full of them. Maybe they can do that once they get refueling and rearming to develop kill streaks...
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Fishu
Kick your table the needle is stuck on your record player..
It's just new style music you know?
-
Just one note... while I'd much prefer to have late war aircraft, I don't "despise" the early war stuff. I've just become really attentive to the tendency of those wanting early war aircraft to *bash* late war "uberplane" lovers, rather than discussing the merits of which aircraft should be modeled.
Thanks for hearing my loudmouthed opinion. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
I don't bash "uber whatevers" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) fact is, I'll fly any plane you put up, against any other, but yes i'm a grognard (and when did that become a bad thing?) I'd like to see all 273 types and the varients (extermely unlikely) but I understand folks who want to cut the crust off the bread, (just don't make my sandwich, and I won't make yours, fair?) Let's hear it for an I16 going mano a mano with a TA152, it will be silly and short,but what the hell, even I shoot people down sometimes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
There's absolutely nothing wrong with modeling all of them. I simply quibble with the contention that the "Fantasy aircraft" should wait until everything else has been done.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
I'm goin for the dark beer and a ham and cheese on rye!
-
MMM... I like every plane...(except the 109 for some reason). I love the current planeset... I'd love to see the P47M, Ta152, spitmk23, F8F, etc... they were all designed to fight in WOII so they should get in...So I'm a dweeb thinking that this good planes will give me the edge. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
On the other hand I would love to fly a dewoitine 520,polikarnov, buffalo, etc... So I'm a macho grognard thinking that these planes will give me the aura of 'ace of aces'. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif)
The current arena is indeed very competitive... but it's not the plane that makes an ace it's the 'experten' driving it.
What I fear tho... is not the fact that this is an überplane arena (it is not, ask the dweeb trying to fly the F4u, 109 or 190) it's the fact that earlier planes will be totaly redundant. I don't mind getting killed... but I like some competiveness in the arena and clearly that's not the case when a P47M is diving at my heinkel 152.This is indeed a fantasy world. But the emergence factor is a big one for most of us.
What I would like to see is all the late planes but also all the early to midwar planes and a RPS! Otherwise all the guys wanting to fly an early plane are relegated to the HA for play.
You can say that everybody is free to fly the plane he likes, that's true. But nobody will fly those early planes cause they plain and simple suck in comparison to the top of the foodchain rides you see know.
In my 190A8 I have a decent chance against a F4u1C (even tho it is a 1944 plane) at Co-E. Well if I fly the brewster buffalo... that same slow climbing, slow accelerating F4u1C can be 5000 feet lower and it will still climb up to me with ease... I can try to get on it's six and the F4u will smile at me while I fire 10 secs of 2x .303 in him. When he gets enough he accelerates away and flies 250 mph faster (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Wait a min this is just a joke (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) it would make a good film (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Anyway you know what I mean
Bee
Nemo impune lacessit
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/bee.gif)
-
Well Bee, now that you brought up the BW... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(http://www.hut.fi/~vpitkane/LLv34/hasse_wind.jpg)
Camo
PS: The F2A-1 export model, that the Finns used, had 4x .50's and was about as maneuverable as a Spit V.
-
The Brewster Buffalo was as good as a Spit V in 1939 (the year of production of the export model 239, same as F2A-1)??
Come on guys, I know you Fins have a love affair with the Buffalo, but don't you think your might be exaggerating a little bit (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
WAW... very nice pic... realy love it.. do you mind if I save it on my HD (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
BEE
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/bee.gif)
-
The Finns did well for a variety of reasons, most relating the the specific strategies and tactics used, as well as the fact that it really was the Pilot and not the Plane.
The same situation doesn't exist in virtual sims... while we don't get involved in the physical aspects of jerking a plane around the sky, many of us have thousands of hours in our virtual cockpits, and have had the luxury of reading Shaw... hell, the elevation of ACM to a science is a relatively recent phenomenon (I believe the Finger Four formation wasn't even introduced until WW2).
As a result, I fully expect that the F2A pilots would generally get their arses handed to them in AH, WB, or anywhere else the plane was modeled with a reasonable sense of fidelity.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
SnakeEyes keep writeing I like what you are saying. It realy isnt the plane its the skill of the use of the plane. We dont suffer real black outs and when we crash we just go right back up again. Lets have the so called super planes Im sure most got involved in the mop up after WWII ended. If it had a prop could fly and had guns put it in the game.
------------------
Tommy (INDIAN) Toon
Cherokee Indian
Home of The Allied Fighter Wing A.F.W.
A.F.W. Homepage (http://www.geocities.com/~tltoon)
-
This whole argument is really about "Fantasy ACM Arena" planes vs "Historical Recreation Arena" planes.
-
What an interesting parallel the demand for "uber" planes has to the real life thinking in the years of WW2 and beyond. The demand back then was for better armed, faster, higher... but mostly faster flying aircraft. The thinking was faster is better and if (insert your favorite side here) had it, the balance would tip in their favor. Just like here! There is one problem in AH though: every side has the same selection of airplanes to keep some sort of play balance and to keep subscribers. Won't be much fun for the Spit 5 and 109F fans (got to be as many of them as superplane fans) to be constantly dodging attacks from considerably faster flying attackers. Remember the virtual rage over the pre .46 version Mustang? At what point does it stop before the demand goes up for turbine powered aircraft to get that sought after edge on the enemy Ta-152's, P-47N's and Tempests? Will we get a "Summer-Fall 1945 Arena" for all these great airplanes? Sure hope so, I'd definately fly there myself.
MiG
-
Isn't it fair to say that between all of us we want it ALL!! And why not. I would love to fly a DO335, a p47n, a p51h, and especially a ta152. BTW Juzz, a ta152 does not = a d9. It had a 13 ft longer wing span and entirely new design to the wing, making it in essence quite a different aircraft. So what if only 200 were built and only some of those saw combat. I would be just as excited about getting the pre-war biplanes from britain and italy, romania etc. that topped out around 200-250mph and were greatly maneuverable. Or a fokker Dxxi flown by the dutch against the invading 109's, or a HE 219 night fighter with it's 6 30mm canons against that awesome looking p61 black widow nightfighter with it's remote control turret.!!! Let's just push Hitech, Pyro and the likes of em to build it all. After all, we are paying them, not the other way around.
Daniko
-
Duh. But what about the B? Hmmm...?
The point I made right at the start has been totally overlooked by most it seems.
The fact is most of these super-prop planes will fly just like their "little brother" versions, only 50mph faster. Seems the desire to fly them is really the desire to see that extra 50mph on the dial.
Don't people realise that a fight between a P-47M and P-51H would be exactly the same as between a P-47D and P-51D? You would prefer that same old fight rather than something totally different like Gladiator vs Falco?
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 02-20-2000).]
-
Ah but Juzz, why would the fight between the Gladiator and the Falco be any different?
Its just the same fight as a Spitfire versus a Zero, but 50 mph slower and much weaker guns.
I say that partly in jest, but the more I think of it, the more I believe its true.
I personally think there is just as much "mysticism & mythology" associated with the early war planes, as you accuse with the "uber dweebs".
Its all in your personal perspective (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 02-20-2000).]
-
Not really. How similar is a Spitfire to the Gladiator, versus the similarity of the P-47M and P-47D?
Oh, and here's what the USN test centre at Patuxent River, Maryland recommended you do in your Seafire(Spitfire)vs Zero fights.
Tactics: Never dogfight with the Zeke 52 - it is too manoeverable.
At low altitudes where the Seafire is at it's best, it should make use of its superior rate of climb and speed to obtain a height advantage before attacking.
If jumped, the Seafire should evade by using superior rate of roll. The Zeke cannot follow high speed rolls and aileron turns.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Juzz - I guess that'd be like saying that the P-51D flies exactly like the P-51B with a bubble canopy... and that would be incorrect.
IMO Verm has nailed it. There is a "mysticism", perpetuated particularly by a lot of WB Vets, that early war aircraft are somehow more nuanced than latewar aircraft, and that flying one somehow makes you "more macho" or "more vetlike." Similarly, expressing an interest in latewar aircraft get you labeled as a "dweeb" with the implication that you couldn't excel without your "uberplane." IMO this is merely a selfish and deceptive way for these folks to get what they want (early war aircraft) to the exclusion of the desires of others.
Frankly, I'm rather surprised and pleased with the largely positive reception this idea has received here. If anything could get me to reconsider Aces High, flying an F8F, Ta152, P-51H, etc., would be the ticket.
And, of course, there is *always* room for more early war planes too.. but I'm just tired-to-death of hearing this specious argument that somehow early war planes are "different." Every period of the war has its uberplanes... and that doesn't change regardless of whether we're talking 109 or Spitfire versus the Hurricane/P-36/etc., or a 190 versus a Spitfire V, or the Hellcat against the Zeke, or the P-51 versus the 190A8, or the Ta152 against the P-51... IMO the latewar uberplanes are *more* evenly matched than the early war aircraft are.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
[This message has been edited by SnakeEyes (edited 02-20-2000).]
-
I'll re-use this one here...
Kick your table the needle is stuck on your record player..
"don't call me an uberdweeb"
"I'll fly any plane, early or late"
zzzzzzzzz
-
Camo said:
"PS: The F2A-1 export model, that the Finns used, had 4x .50's and was about as maneuverable as a Spit V."
According to "Illu", if Finland could have Brewsters in the beginning of the war, no Russian planes could flew in Finland's air space. He stated Brewster was excellent plane and he liked it more than Bf109G-2/G-6!
-
Juzz: I'm not quibbling with your approach, I too will fly anything put in front of me.
What I disagree with is your comment that there is no difference between brands of latewar aircraft. That comment, which is indirectly based on the mysticism that early war aircraft are *somehow* different, is just wrong, IMO.
Riddle me this... how do the differences between the 109D, 109E, and 109F compare with the differences between the P-47C, P-47D, and P-47N?
Or how about combat between a Spit V and a 190A3 as compared with a P-51D fighting a Ta-152?
If there's some "special" difference between the early war matchups that I don't understand, I'd love to have someone enlighten me regarding this. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
What it boils down to is everyone has his favorite plane. I dont realy care for the early war plane set becuse I would get bored at slow speed. I like the newer faster ones thats my choice you some of you guys like the low flying slow early planes. If it is mocho to fly the early plane then why did airplanes get trashed so newer faster ones could be brought in. I had an instructor in A&P scholl that said during WWII they would push planes over the side of carriers to make way for the bigger faster planes. Those planes could still fly.
So when do I get my Brand new F18 Super Hornet. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Tommy (INDIAN) Toon
Cherokee Indian
Home of The Allied Fighter Wing A.F.W.
A.F.W. Homepage (http://www.geocities.com/~tltoon)
-
How do you know that the early war aircraft aren't different? Noone has ever flown them in an online sim. The late-war stuff we already have before.
The early war planes happen to cover the so far ignored/overlooked airwars; like Barbarossa(I-16, LaGG-3 Yak-1 MiG-3 etc), Malta/Nth Africa(Gladiator, CR.42), the Winter war?(Buffalo, I-16) etc. Even the worlds first ever(and arguably the most important of WW2) air battle, the Battle of Britain hasn't been properly simulated yet!!!
The latewar planes cover 1946 ETO only, since Japan has no real latewar superprops.
The superprops are as obsolete as the biplanes anyway, since Jets killed them off. The only thing the superprops were good for was air racing, and CAS in post WW2 conflicts(Korea). The real use for the superprops in online sims is for "Fantasy ACM Arena" use. Any kind of What If? scenario would have to include JETS if you want to be realistic.
There's the impossible task of modelling planes that saw very little use, or were only in prototype stage(J7W Shinden). Make a list of the superprops, and see how many are American/British/Russian, and how many are German/Japanese... and then some of the German/Japanese are prototypes that you can't model anyway. So you HAVE to limit the types to what was in service in WW2.
One other thing, bomber pilots suffer the most in the superprops era, since the best they can get is the B-29 which the Japanese were managing to shoot down with 1942-level aircraft like the Ki-61. In an Arena setting, planes like the Do-335 would massacre them.
-
Juzz:
A) Who is trying to recreate history? Does the AH arena recreate history? Of course not. Only in historical scenarios is there any reason to necessarily include jets for purposes of realism.
B) Bombers wouldn't suffer any more than they do today. The B-17 is no more equipped to handle a 190A8 than the the B-29 is equipped to handle the Do335... and yet they survive in the arena. And remember, the Do335 has the potential of running into defenders in P47Ms, P51Hs, etc., prior to getting to the buff.
C) Again, getting back to the fact that a Main Arena is not a historical recreation, who says that we need to have competitive superplanes from every power. If we don't have info on anything useful from the Japanese, we'll just have to make due with the uberplanes we can reliably create and there are a reasonable number that we have data for.
D) Additionally, you'll get no argument from me that AH/WB/whatever shouldn't model early war aircraft. The only people arguing the exclusionary approach are the early war fans with regard to the latewar aircraft.
E) You can take the *same* strategic approach to flying late and early war aircraft, it is only the individual tactics that change. I don't think we need to fly a given plane to be able to make a reasonable hypothesis about its capabilities and how to fly it.
F) Finally, as for the WB thing, the reason that no one talks about it there isn't fear... it's just that I'm the only one willing to bang my head up against that brick wall.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Even if I never expected it, I agree with Snake Eyes here. And even though I recognize his intention to smuggle Bearcat in (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Sure, have it, but only after Ta 152, He 162 and Me 262 get in (by the time when it entered service). Bring Bearcat at the time of the Go 229 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Now seriously, the planes we have here would be uberplanes against 1941-42 planes. But between themselves they are fairly close. 1945 planes would be slightly uber to the ones now, but again, not between themselves.
So, let HTC finish what it has started. Continue to follow the plane development until mid 1945, or even later. Finish the timeline with late war what-if planes and what-if scenarios, and then develop the planeset from early war. Spain would be nice indeed.
Ta 152, for example, has such an incredible charisma among Luftwaffe types. Not to disregard it from marketing aspects. I guess we all agree that AH would not be so popular if it started with 1940 period, with no F4U or P 51. Ta 152 would attract new players - even the loud ones who shout 'dweeb mobile' would come to try it out.
For once, do not listen to elitism crowd, calling everything produced after 1943 a dweeb plane.
-
Yee-haw... Hristo, you rock. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
As I stated before I'll try and fly anything from the Fairland Swordfish to the Gotha 229.
However... I do believe that you are depriving the 'early bird' types of their passion. Without the RPS, which most don't want (hey hangtime.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)..). So however wants to fly some early planes is relegated to the Scenario arena.
About the difference between planes... I do believe like snakeEyes says that the relative difference between the Ta152 and the P-47M for example is very little indeed. However these latewar birds are all made with speed in mind (ea BnZ) and that's not the case with the early ones. You see a real change in tactics in the war. Most planes used in 1939-40 were manufactured with turnability in mind... (except maybe the german planes what makes sense since they were ahead in the use of tactics). The late planes were manufactured with speed in mind (not that they will be used that way in the arena) and are kings at the E-game.
As I said before I want to be able to fly both kind of planes (early and late) but both in a competitive enviroment.
BEE
Nemo impune lacessit
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/bee.gif)
-
Jeng:
Even now, you cannot model the early war aircraft without having some type of RPS... or do you think anyone is reasonably going to fly a Spitfire Ia or a 109E against a FW190 or P51?
Once an RPS or Era-based Planeset is added, there is room for any and all aircraft. But don't deceive yourself... any early war aircraft modeled today without an RPS would already be relegated to "scenario-only" duty (and that's without adding the aircraft I'm talking about -- such as Tempests, F8Fs, and Ta152s).
Aircraft in 1939 were generally built to turn well... but, even then, you'll find that the _successful_ users of those aircraft quickly turned to tactics that become the basis for E-fighting (or simple B&Z in other cases). A good example of this is the Flying Tigers against the Japanese. And I suspect that the Finns didn't engage the Soviets in extended Turn & Burn duels with their F2As.
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Glad you agree with what I'm saying...
Indeed I would like to see every plane (early and late). And of course they should keep adding late war planes now... (work their way up to 1945) and then start on the early planes.
I'm not seeying that tho (C202, Spit Vb)... but that could be cause they are only different types of planes already in the game.
My biggest fear is what you are saying and I've been ranting about that for 3 months now. I'm almost certain that HT said (somewhere on this BB)that there will not be a RPS. The reason being that people pay 30$ per month and if they want to fly their favorite plane (for example hangtime and his pony) the whole month they should have the chance to do that instead of waiting for 2 weeks before it becomes available.
In this case (without RPS) there is no need for early planes and I would hate that. Even now the 190a8 is becoming a bit obsolete... (I know I fly it alot)what would that be with a hurricane or a F2a?
You are absolutely right about the shift in tactics during WWII. In the beginning the finnish and german airforces where ahead (flying finger4 formations, using hit and run tactics, BnZ). The English, French, etc had to catch up (they still used vic formations). But consider this... even a 109E4 (basicly an E-fighter) is a good turner compared to the latewarplanes.
What I would like to see is a resemblance of this 'shift in tactics' in the game. So in the beginning of RPS more will E-fight and TnB (planes better for this)... later on people will change more to BnZ cause the planes are better suited for this. (OK,OK, I'll fly the 109E4 also in BnZ-mode (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)...)
BEE
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/bee.gif)
-
double post :S
[This message has been edited by JENG (edited 02-21-2000).]
-
Please don't flame me as it's my first post and I'm just looking trying to find an online sim I can join.
As I understand it the only RAF aircraft in Aces High is the SpitIX. Why are other British aircraft like the SpitXIV and Tempest from early 44 only considered for inclusion along with late/post war planes like the TA152 and P51H?
-
Because they are just too damn good! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Or, they are better than the Mustang, and anything better than the Mustang is automatically labelled as an "uberplane". (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Aircraft in 1939 were generally built to turn well... but, even then, you'll find that the _successful_ users of those aircraft quickly turned to tactics that become the basis for E-fighting (or simple B&Z in other cases). A good example of this is the Flying Tigers against the Japanese. And I suspect that the Finns didn't engage the Soviets in extended Turn & Burn duels with their F2As.
That doesn't make sense. Aircraft built in 1939 were not generally designed to turn well. In fact only the Japanese really demanded manoeverability at the expense of all else.
Look at the Bf109. It was designed for speed: with short, thin wings that gave it a high wingloading for a 1935 fighter.
MiG-1?
P-38?
The reason the AVG were using "Hit and Run" tactics because they simply could not dogfight the more manoeverable Japanese fighters with their P-40's. They had no other option if they wanted to shoot down Japanese aircraft and survive.
Half a decade earlier the Germans had already learnt the same lesson flying Bf109's against the more manoeverable I-16's etc. in Spain, and again in Poland and France against similarly agile types of enemy aircraft.
It was really the planes themselves that forced the changes in tactics, not any great foresight on the part of military tacticians.
-
Pre-, early, mid, late, and Post-. Put them all in AH. That would be my preference. As for the earlier aircraft suffering from lack of use in an arena where all era of props are lumped into one - I seriously doubt that HTC would let this happen. It would be a waste of resources. Thus, you can be fairly certain that some form of RPS will be in effect as the plane set fills in. Enough aircraft abounded in all these eras to allow for a well rounded, chronologically sound plane set. As long as the plane sets are complete with enough fighter and bomber types for each era, an RPS system could be quite exciting.
------------------
leonid, Komandir
5 GIAP VVS RKKA (http://www.adamfive.com/guerrero)
"Our cause is just. The enemy will be crushed. Victory will be ours."
-
Nashwan currently there is no Ta-152H or P-51H in the game, and I don't expect to see them anytime soon. There is the Fw190A8 (1944) and the P-51D (1944).
The Spitfire Mk IX in the game is a 1944 model F.
It has just been announced officially, that the very next new plane after this coming version will be the Typhoon Ib.
Realistically, I would also expect to see the Spit XIV and the Tempest, at least someday.
So I don't think the British Pilots are getting the short end of the stick.
Hell if you want to see it bad, just look at the Russian (VVS) aircraft in the game. Their most advanced model is the La-5, which is a midwar 1943 aircraft. They deserve a La-7, or a Yak-3, or a Yak-9U.
At least the Spit IX is competitive in the arena.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
The Typhoon sounds good, but again it is a 1942 aircraft. So is the SpitIX, which may have remained in production until 44 or even 45, but was virtually unchanged from the 42 model. It is just that the P51D and the 109G10 (I think) both entered service in 44, a good 2 years later than the newest RAF aircraft.
As to the Spit14 being compared to The p51h and TA152, I know they are not in yet, but it concerns me that when we finally get the Spit14 it will be in the company of planes that are 18months newer again.
[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 02-22-2000).]
-
Nashwan, I wouldn't be too disappointed in the Tiffy until you try it.
Right now the plane that everyone complains about as being too "deadly" and "shouldnt' be in the game" is the Corsair F4U-1C.
Which is basically a 1943 design (engine, speed, performance), which has had x4 20mm cannons slapped on instead of the machine guns.
In some cases the year of introduction is deceiving.
Anyways, its all up too you and what you like that will make you decided whether to speed the money or not.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Didn't one of the other sims have separate early and late war arenas for a while?
As I recall, the early was usually lightly populated with most guys in the late.
This is what led to the RPS unless I'm having one of my "oldtimer's disease" attacks.
-
It won't put me off joining, I am just waiting untill I get my ADSL link in a month or so then I'm almost certainly going to sign up with Aces High. I like the Tiffie but if modelled accuratley the high alt performance will be disappointing. Don't forget that the Typhoon was neaarly cancelled until it's value as a ground attack aircraft became clear.
-
Well guys i know 1 plane i wouldn't mind seeing in ah and thats a b-29 superfortress but i also want to see planes that have never been modeled in a sim before thats y i like ah the planes ar modeled really well the b-17 could use a little work though
but i cant wait for the rest of them