Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: TwinBoom on October 10, 2010, 04:17:39 PM
-
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/1183/beaufightertorpattack1.jpg)
-
We gettin a new patch/bomber?
perdweeb
-
(http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/1183/beaufightertorpattack1.jpg)
Nice shopping. We allready have a bad allied craft to axis craft ratio, IMHO.
-
Sure TB, start picking on me :)
I wish we had the Beau. Whoever that is got it wrong though as no wing guns on a Torbeau :)
As for the Allied to Axis ratio, the fact that there were that many more Allied birds might contribute. Beau was in from 40-45 ETO, MTO, PTO, CBI. It's a fairly big omission in terms of Allied birds
-
As for the Allied to Axis ratio, the fact that there were that many more Allied birds might contribute.
The one place I'll disagree with you on there is the Japanese. They may not have fielded as many aircraft of a given design as we did, but they fielded a large number of designs due to having the Army and Navy use separate designs like we did. The problem with the Japanese aircraft is performance data is hard to get.
Still, there are a fair number of Japanese aircraft that should be added, starting with the Ki-43-II.
-
Been a while since I've looked at this, but IIRC the Ki-43 I-III could all be done just with different gun packages.
The A6M3 would be a good mid-war fighter to add, along with multiple gun packages for the A6M5 to represent the a, b and c versions. Include the N1K1-J as an mid-war option for the George, and you can add several Ki-61 variants just with gun packages. G4M is an absolute MUST, while the Ki-44 and Ki-45 would be invaluable to round-out the IJAAF (interceptor and Heavy Fighter, respectively). Add the Ki-100 for another late-war fighter option alongside the J2M. Then toss in the B6N and D4Y for mid/late naval strike craft.
Probably the BEST lineup for the Japanese to cover the full range of the war would be:
IJN
A5M
A6M2
A6M3
A6M5a/b/c
A6M6 (I still argue there's enough evidence for the Model 53).
N1K1-J
N1K2-J
B5N
D3A
B6N
D4Y
J2M
G4M-1
G4M-2
IJAAF
Ki-21
Ki-27
Ki-43 I/II/III
Ki-44
Ki-45
Ki-49
Ki-61 (multiple with gun packages)
Ki-67
Ki-84
Ki-100
With more options for bombers I would arguably perk the Ki-67, owing to its extreme speed and defensive firepower (unless HTC wants to add the all-20mm armed G4M).
-
The one place I'll disagree with you on there is the Japanese. They may not have fielded as many aircraft of a given design as we did, but they fielded a large number of designs due to having the Army and Navy use separate designs like we did. The problem with the Japanese aircraft is performance data is hard to get.
Still, there are a fair number of Japanese aircraft that should be added, starting with the Ki-43-II.
Been a while since I've looked at this, but IIRC the Ki-43 I-III could all be done just with different gun packages.
The A6M3 would be a good mid-war fighter to add, along with multiple gun packages for the A6M5 to represent the a, b and c versions. Include the N1K1-J as an mid-war option for the George, and you can add several Ki-61 variants just with gun packages. G4M is an absolute MUST, while the Ki-44 and Ki-45 would be invaluable to round-out the IJAAF (interceptor and Heavy Fighter, respectively). Add the Ki-100 for another late-war fighter option alongside the J2M. Then toss in the B6N and D4Y for mid/late naval strike craft.
Probably the BEST lineup for the Japanese to cover the full range of the war would be:
IJN
A5M
A6M2
A6M3
A6M5a/b/c
A6M6 (I still argue there's enough evidence for the Model 53).
N1K1-J
N1K2-J
B5N
D3A
B6N
D4Y
J2M
G4M-1
G4M-2
IJAAF
Ki-21
Ki-27
Ki-43 I/II/III
Ki-44
Ki-45
Ki-49
Ki-61 (multiple with gun packages)
Ki-67
Ki-84
Ki-100
With more options for bombers I would arguably perk the Ki-67, owing to its extreme speed and defensive firepower (unless HTC wants to add the all-20mm armed G4M).
-
Is this the same guy that kills shogun?? :noid
:neener: :old: elfy
-
Saxman,
I'd add the P1Y1 to the IJN list. More than 1000 were built.
Ki-102 might be viable for the INA list as well.
-
The one place I'll disagree with you on there is the Japanese. They may not have fielded as many aircraft of a given design as we did, but they fielded a large number of designs due to having the Army and Navy use separate designs like we did. The problem with the Japanese aircraft is performance data is hard to get.
Still, there are a fair number of Japanese aircraft that should be added, starting with the Ki-43-II.
True, but it was a Luftwaffe driver who commented :)
-
The one place I'll disagree with you on there is the Japanese...
I was about to say something to this extent. I agree that the Luftwaffe set is pretty well rounded, but not having such influential designs as the G4m in the game is a bit sad.
-
Saxman,
I'd add the P1Y1 to the IJN list. More than 1000 were built.
Ki-102 might be viable for the INA list as well.
P1Y might be a good addition. However the Ki-102 looks like it would occupy that gray area where it would be useful as a late-war option that might be more competitive, but there's a question over whether it saw enough combat to justify its addition.
I was about to say something to this extent. I agree that the Luftwaffe set is pretty well rounded, but not having such influential designs as the G4m in the game is a bit sad.
The main thing the Luftwaffe needs is the He-111 and maybe a one or two more Ju-88 variants.
-
TB, is that from IL2?
-
The main thing the Luftwaffe needs is the He-111 and maybe a one or two more Ju-88 variants.
The biggest gap in the Luftwaffe / Axis arsenal in AH is a more competitive mid/late war bomber, like the Do 217, Ju 188, He 177.
Yes, I know... He 111 is needed for BoB scenario.... once every 2 years. ;)
-
The biggest gap in the Luftwaffe / Axis arsenal in AH is a more competitive mid/late war bomber, like the Do 217, Ju 188, He 177.
Woohoo, I am not alone!
-
TB, is that from IL2?
Believe it is.
-
Been a while since I've looked at this, but IIRC the Ki-43 I-III could all be done just with different gun packages.
The A6M3 would be a good mid-war fighter to add, along with multiple gun packages for the A6M5 to represent the a, b and c versions. Include the N1K1-J as an mid-war option for the George, and you can add several Ki-61 variants just with gun packages. G4M is an absolute MUST, while the Ki-44 and Ki-45 would be invaluable to round-out the IJAAF (interceptor and Heavy Fighter, respectively). Add the Ki-100 for another late-war fighter option alongside the J2M. Then toss in the B6N and D4Y for mid/late naval strike craft.
Probably the BEST lineup for the Japanese to cover the full range of the war would be:
IJN
A5M
A6M2
A6M3
A6M5a/b/c
A6M6 (I still argue there's enough evidence for the Model 53).
N1K1-J
N1K2-J
B5N
D3A
B6N
D4Y
J2M
G4M-1
G4M-2
IJAAF
Ki-21
Ki-27
Ki-43 I/II/III
Ki-44
Ki-45
Ki-49
Ki-61 (multiple with gun packages)
Ki-67
Ki-84
Ki-100
With more options for bombers I would arguably perk the Ki-67, owing to its extreme speed and defensive firepower (unless HTC wants to add the all-20mm armed G4M).
Throw a N1K-2A in there also for those CV dweebs :D
-
There was no carrier-based N1K-2A. There was an N1K2-Ja, which was a fighter-bomber variant with four 250kg bombs (which if we have bombs as a load-out option in game, we already have). Except for the original N1K1 floatplane, all other production N1Ks were land-based.
There were two carrier-based projects, the N1K3-A and N1K4-A, but both were strictly prototypes (of the latter only one was built).
-
Nice shopping. We allready have a bad allied craft to axis craft ratio, IMHO.
We do?
ack-ack
-
There was no carrier-based N1K-2A. There was an N1K2-Ja, which was a fighter-bomber variant with four 250kg bombs (which if we have bombs as a load-out option in game, we already have). Except for the original N1K1 floatplane, all other production N1Ks were land-based.
There were two carrier-based projects, the N1K3-A and N1K4-A, but both were strictly prototypes (of the latter only one was built).
i had heard otherwise... :headscratch: time for months of research to see if im wrong :rolleyes:
-
No carrier based Georges. In fact, the Sam "Reppu" A7M was intended to replace the A6M as the principle carrier-borne fighter.
With the game the way it is, ppl using 47s with 1000lbers and a 500lber centerline to kill CVs and CAs, I wonder how much use D4Y and B6N would actually get. Probably the same reason why no one really complains about not having an SB2C.
I do agree, however, that there are gaps in the IJN, Russian, and Italian planesets.
However - since the Brewster broke some ground - there's a slew of aircraft that could be considered that came from smaller countries, or for whatever reason, have been neglected by history...IAR 80s, Dewotine D.520, Moraine Ms.406, Boomerang, Wirraway, etc., that fit the criteria for combat as well as some aircraft we currently have. Yes, its true, most would be FSO or AvA aircraft, would be hangar queens in the LW, but so are a bunch of planes we have now.
-
How about the Savoia Marchetti S.M.79-1 Sparviero. It carried a torpedo and did about 260 mph. That would fill some of the AVA needs as well as EW & MW. Plus we only have two Italian birds in the game.