Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: icepac on May 03, 2011, 09:26:31 PM
-
I was wondering about exploring variants of planes that already exist within the planeset.
This would be a lot easier than adding complete new airplanes.
The JU88 is an interesting plane that had many loadouts and variants not represented here as was the BF110 and more than a few other planes.
I understand some planes.........maybe the 110 could affect arena life negatively if equipped with some loadouts because the general performance of the plane is pretty high but adding the additional variants to the JU88 line as well as other relatively low performance planes could net us some diversity.
Anyone have any ideas? Schrage Musik or it's japanese counterpart? Big and slow firing guns?
-
I'm all for more variants of existing aircraft. I think there are some neat Ju88s that could be done.
But....
I doubt there is any version of the Bf110 that would be unbalancing to gameplay, nor would I really describe it as "high performance". :p
-
eeeehhhh......only if we include the YB-40. :D :bolt:
-
Some variants I'd like to see:
A6M2-N
Bf109G-6/AS or G-14/AS
Brewster B339
F4F-3
F6F-3
Fw190A-3
Hurricane Mk.IIb (loadout)
Il-2 single seater
Ju-87B-2
Ju-87D-5
Ju-87G-2
Ju-88S-1
Ki-61-I
Ki-84-Ib
La-5
La-5F
Yak-7
Yak-9/9D
-
eeeehhhh......only if we include the YB-40. :D :bolt:
Hummm.....
-
I think there are some neat Ju88s that could be done.
With a decent fwd firing gun :aok
OMG imagine the crying :aok
JUGgler
-
Some variants I'd like to see:
A6M2-N
Bf109G-6/AS or G-14/AS
Brewster B339
F4F-3
F6F-3
Fw190A-3
Hurricane Mk.IIb (loadout)
Il-2 single seater
Ju-87B-2
Ju-87D-5
Ju-87G-2
Ju-88S-1
Ki-61-I
Ki-84-Ib
La-5
La-5F
Yak-7
Yak-9/9D
You forgot P-38H.
:)
-
Need: Seafire Mk III, Seafire Mk XV, & Spitfire Mk XII :old:
-
Some variants I'd like to see:
A6M2-N
Bf109G-6/AS or G-14/AS
Brewster B339
F4F-3
F6F-3
Fw190A-3
Hurricane Mk.IIb (loadout)
Il-2 single seater
Ju-87B-2
Ju-87D-5
Ju-87G-2
Ju-88S-1
Ki-61-I
Ki-84-Ib
La-5
La-5F
Yak-7
Yak-9/9D yak3
-
You forgot P-38H.
:)
Darn, beat me to it. :airplane:
-
Sea Hurricane
[/thread]
-
Need: Seafire Mk III, Seafire Mk XV, & Spitfire Mk XII :old:
Seafire Mk XV was too late for the war.
-
No, he didn't forget the P-28H :t
WMaker's list has some I agree with, some I don't... I would add:
P-40N (ground pounder)
B-25J (mix of C and H features)
Bf109E-7 (with centerline bomb option)
He mentions Ki-61-I. There's a number of different ways of naming those, I want to guess he's suggesting the 4x12.7mm option. I would be for that but also would love to see (just as an option) the Ki-61-Ia, which had 2x MG151/20 in the wings. These were imported German guns and depending on sources outfitted between 200 adn 400 airframes.
It would be an interesting reversal from the 20mm-in-nose option we have now, even if the actual performance were no different.
-
+10 For B-25J. Had a relative that was a gunner in one, got a Zero and a Ki-43. Bailed out of one if I recall.
-
B-25J would allow the Mitchell to have a glide torpedo as an orndance option.
ack-ack
-
B-25J would allow the Mitchell to have a glide torpedo as an orndance option.
ack-ack
Sounds cool :lol
How good did they do in RL?
-
How good did they do in RL?
The results were not able to be determined.
ack-ack
-
Some variants I'd like to see:
A6M2-N
Bf109G-6/AS or G-14/AS
Brewster B339
F4F-3
F6F-3
Fw190A-3
Hurricane Mk.IIb (loadout)
Il-2 single seater
Ju-87B-2
Ju-87D-5
Ju-87G-2
Ju-88S-1
Ki-61-I
Ki-84-Ib
La-5
La-5F
Yak-7
Yak-9/9D
hey, what about the FW190-A9?
-
hey, what about the FW190-A9?
rather have the a6 model...
-
I don't care for the rare or test packages like torpedoes, but what I would like is the level bomber glass nose but with a tail gun, and the option for the solid strafer package with 8 in the nose and 4 in the cheeks, 12 guns total fixed firing forward. Those 2 options standout for the B-25J.
-
Oh yeah, have to have a strafer B25J also. Many good skinning opportunities for that.
(http://i547.photobucket.com/albums/hh473/cactuskooler/4976041656_c6be7c3b3e_o.jpg)
-
Seafire Mk XV was too late for the war.
I don't have the exact date but I know it entered service in 1944, and as far as I remember it flew in PTO.
-
I don't have the exact date but I know it entered service in 1944, and as far as I remember it flew in PTO.
It came too late to see any front line service during the war.
ack-ack
-
It came too late to see any front line service during the war.
ack-ack
You might be right about that.
I don't have any books with me right now so I can't confirm.
-
I'd also like to see the Sea Hurricane
-
how about SAS version of the jeep? 8 lewis K guns anyone?
-
how about SAS version of the jeep? 8 lewis K guns anyone?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/26/article-1370249-0B58BB7E00000578-879_634x482.jpg)
ack-ack
-
there was a secound heavy version that had 3 twin lewis guns on the back plus the one up front . I'll grab some pics in a minute
-
Lots of the variants suggested seem to have performance or functionality that overlaps planes that already exist within the game.
I'm hoping for variants that bring something different that what we already have.
-
KI-84lb
-
Lots of the variants suggested seem to have performance or functionality that overlaps planes that already exist within the game.
I'm hoping for variants that bring something different that what we already have.
Every option you can think of overlaps...
They all fly, fire bullets, and drop bombs, right?
In that respect there is nothing different you can request.
It's the different performance and capabilities that allow the sub-variants listed above fill key holes in the current planeset.
For example: The B-25J would allow a level bomber that could actually defend itself (tail guns, waist guns, formations, and still retain the glass nose). Can the B-26 already do this? Yes. Can the B-17 already do this? Yes. But for B-25 fans, we cannot. The B-25C is a bullet sponge but outside of that it has poor defensive guns.
For example: The Bf109E-7 would fill a major gap in 1941 and 1942 where the Bf109E soldiered on against ever-improving RAF fighters but before the Bf109F arrived on the scene. It would also serve as a major JABO player on the Eastern Front once the LW invades Russia. As it is now we jump from a 1940 Bf109E-4 to a late 1941 Bf109F4 with nothing in between. That's a long time.
-
there was a secound heavy version that had 3 twin lewis guns on the back plus the one up front . I'll grab some pics in a minute
Is this the one you are referring to?
(http://www.m201.com/sasjeep.jpg)
This site has a lot of information on the SAS jeeps.
SAS Jeeps (http://www.m201.com/sasjeep.htm)
In any event, I would also like to see the jeep get various options added to the game.
ack-ack
-
Some variants I'd like to see:
...
Ki-84-Ib
La-5
La-5F
Yak-7
Yak-9/9D
or a Ki-84 Ic if we want a fun cheater ac.
-
hurricane IIa series 1 maybe?
109g6/as and g14/as for sure
ju-87/g1
-
P-47D-23...
-
Every option you can think of overlaps...
They all fly, fire bullets, and drop bombs, right?
In that respect there is nothing different you can request.
It's the different performance and capabilities that allow the sub-variants listed above fill key holes in the current planeset.
For example: The B-25J would allow a level bomber that could actually defend itself (tail guns, waist guns, formations, and still retain the glass nose). Can the B-26 already do this? Yes. Can the B-17 already do this? Yes. But for B-25 fans, we cannot. The B-25C is a bullet sponge but outside of that it has poor defensive guns.
For example: The Bf109E-7 would fill a major gap in 1941 and 1942 where the Bf109E soldiered on against ever-improving RAF fighters but before the Bf109F arrived on the scene. It would also serve as a major JABO player on the Eastern Front once the LW invades Russia. As it is now we jump from a 1940 Bf109E-4 to a late 1941 Bf109F4 with nothing in between. That's a long time.
I agree with the b25 and other planes but the spit and 109 recommendations don't really count because there is no current arena where any cut-off date for planeset would create the need for such a 109.
Now I wouldn't mind the early war arena being a bit more early war......which would make that 109 important.
-
Uh... it has NOTHING to do with arena cutoff dates. Nothing whatsoever.
Just in case there was any doubt... NOTHING to do with it!
-
Ju88G would be nice.
-
I agree with the b25 and other planes but the spit and 109 recommendations don't really count because there is no current arena where any cut-off date for planeset would create the need for such a 109.
Now I wouldn't mind the early war arena being a bit more early war......which would make that 109 important.
Bf109 and/or Spitfire/Seafire requests are scenario requests, not EWA/MWA/LWA requests.
-
Is this the one you are referring to?
(http://www.m201.com/sasjeep.jpg)
This site has a lot of information on the SAS jeeps.
SAS Jeeps (http://www.m201.com/sasjeep.htm)
In any event, I would also like to see the jeep get various options added to the game.
ack-ack
not quite . It had that twin vickers mount but there were three that faced backwards and one on the passenger side that faced forwards. I did also see one that had an anti tank rifle instead of the vickers
-
not quite . It had that twin vickers mount but there were three that faced backwards and one on the passenger side that faced forwards. I did also see one that had an anti tank rifle instead of the vickers
Would that be the widely reviled Boys .55 ATR?
-
Bf109 and/or Spitfire/Seafire requests are scenario requests, not EWA/MWA/LWA requests.
That makes sense.
What is the planeset limit of total planes in aces high's current engine?
-
Would that be the widely reviled Boys .55 ATR?
that would be the gun .
-
That makes sense.
What is the planeset limit of total planes in aces high's current engine?
There is no limit.
-
There is no limit.
Then I suggest the only qualification should be:
1. existed b/w the Japanese invasion of asia proper and August '45
2. has sufficient flight data to allow HTC to model
Conditioned on those two, I WANT ALL OF 'EM.
-
In that case, F7F and F8F:
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/180-a-1280.jpg)
(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/F8fMidland06.jpg)
-
There is no limit on the NUMBER of craft that can be included. I think you all know the limits that HTC has imposed as to potential additions (i.e. "criteria")
-
Well......now that I know there are no limits, then we must explore every variant of existing planes as possible.
It is far easier to add variants than new models which might take some heat off of the developers.
I think some sort of minimum accepted confirmed action criteria should be established, though or we will end up with some pretty unreal planes.
-
Variants are good, but they don't have the same draw as an entirely new unit. What interests you more, getting a Bf110D, Mosquito Mk 30, P-38H or an Me410?
-
I came from sims that included the 410 and flew the 110 26 times as often but.....I flew the ki44 and j2m (before it was uber) much more often.
I stopped flying the J2m once it became uber around 2006.
-
I thought about why the 410 was not used at the other sims and it was probably because the nature of the play there was more jabo/die/repeat than it is here.
I think the 410 would be a great addition here.
-
Then I suggest the only qualification should be:
1. existed b/w the Japanese invasion of asia proper and August '45
2. has sufficient flight data to allow HTC to model
3. saw combat
combat: engaged enemy forces of any kind during the course of a mission in WWII.... i.e. fighter/attack plane strafing ground targets and encountering ground fire / AA qualifies as a "combat sortie" whether it engaged in air combat with hostile aircraft of any form or not.....
-
i agree all variants of current aircraft should be added. that includes diffrent bomb loads and bombs like tall boy and the tiny tim roocket carried by the avenger and the grand slam. icould find a use for them.
-
Since the F4Fs are due for remodeling, I'd like to see the addition of the F4F-3:
This was the variant used at Coral Sea and most of the early carrier actions. The -4 wasn't widely deployed with the fleet until Midway.
The -3 was the main type deployed with USMC squadrons in the Solomons, particularly during Guadalcanal.
An F4F-4 with the 4x .50cal option is NOT the same aircraft. That's an FM-1. The F4F-3 was some 1000lbs lighter than the -4 at full internal loading on the same engine and airframe.
-
Since the F4Fs are due for remodeling, I'd like to see the addition of the F4F-3:
This was the variant used at Coral Sea and most of the early carrier actions. The -4 wasn't widely deployed with the fleet until Midway.
The -3 was the main type deployed with USMC squadrons in the Solomons, particularly during Guadalcanal.
An F4F-4 with the 4x .50cal option is NOT the same aircraft. That's an FM-1. The F4F-3 was some 1000lbs lighter than the -4 at full internal loading on the same engine and airframe.
Thing I am skeptical about the F4F in AH is its durability. I don't see how an airplane that weighs the same, basically, as a Spitfire Mk IX is so much tougher. A bit tougher, sure, but there is only so much that can be done with that weight of aluminum and steel.
-
Thing I am skeptical about the F4F in AH is its durability. I don't see how an airplane that weighs the same, basically, as a Spitfire Mk IX is so much tougher. A bit tougher, sure, but there is only so much that can be done with that weight of aluminum and steel.
Its the only thing going for it. I love upping the 4f4 wildcat (Not the FM2) and just attempting to get people to fight me.
-
Thing I am skeptical about the F4F in AH is its durability. I don't see how an airplane that weighs the same, basically, as a Spitfire Mk IX is so much tougher. A bit tougher, sure, but there is only so much that can be done with that weight of aluminum and steel.
How the weight was distributed and for what purpose? The Merlin 61 alone weighed ~400-500lbs more than the R-1830 Twin Wasp of the Wildcat, not to mention the added weight of the Merlin's radiator (which the air-cooled Twin Wasp lacks). Considering the additional operational stresses endured by carrier aircraft, that extra weight could very likely have been put instead into strengthening the airframe.
Ardy,
The F4F is actually quite a nice little fighter, especially in the Early War arenas (assuming you can find someone willing to fight and who's not just out to milk run bases). She'll give the early-mark Spits, Hurricanes and 109s a run for their money, especially if they're dumb enough to try turn-fighting you. It's really the Zero and Brewster she has to watch out for.
-
The problem I have with that durability is that it is so durable, more so even than P-47s and F6F-5s in my experience, that it makes it very lopsided against the A6M2s in scenarios. The A6M2 is so fragile and a brief snap shot from the F4F will likely destroy it while the A6M2 has virtually no chance to destroy the F4F with a snap shot and must saddle up for a long, sustained burst of 20mm fire in order to down one. Saddling up on one F4F means another F4F can easily saddle up on you, and his shot is easier due to ballistics of the Type 99 Model 1 compared to the Browning .50.
I don't think the A6M2 should wholesale sweep the F4F from the skies, but I think the domination the F4F has over the A6M2 in AH is accurate either, and that is largely due to the ability of the F4F to ignore the fact it is being hit by 20mm rounds for a little while.
-
we need to stick a tater on a brewster :D, imagine the hell that thing could cause
-
is there a finnish employee at HTC?
-
The problem I have with that durability is that it is so durable, more so even than P-47s and F6F-5s in my experience, that it makes it very lopsided against the A6M2s in scenarios. The A6M2 is so fragile and a brief snap shot from the F4F will likely destroy it while the A6M2 has virtually no chance to destroy the F4F with a snap shot and must saddle up for a long, sustained burst of 20mm fire in order to down one. Saddling up on one F4F means another F4F can easily saddle up on you, and his shot is easier due to ballistics of the Type 99 Model 1 compared to the Browning .50.
I don't think the A6M2 should wholesale sweep the F4F from the skies, but I think the domination the F4F has over the A6M2 in AH is accurate either, and that is largely due to the ability of the F4F to ignore the fact it is being hit by 20mm rounds for a little while.
I beg to differ. I had no trouble at all getting shot down by an A6M2 in the Coral Sea scenario today with a very short burst, and 1v1 the F4F is still going to lose most fights if it doesn't start at an advantage or take the HO. And I'm almost willing to bet those "long, sustained bursts" you describe involve a whole lot of 7.7 pings and maybe a couple of 20mm due to the awful ballistics. The scenario you're describing is largely tactical, and EXACTLY why the F4F ultimately ended up successful against the Zero: Its durability was an important factor in the effectiveness of American team fighter tactics employed from Midway forward.
-
P-47D-23...
+1 :aok Easy addition~ D-25 performance and pylons on a D-11 template. Some of the existing D-11 skins are actually later model variants: 57fg/65fs, 35fg/39fs, 56fg/62fs x2 and 404fg/506fs.
It would also open up some room for 15 new and badly needed fresh skins.
-
I beg to differ. I had no trouble at all getting shot down by an A6M2 in the Coral Sea scenario today with a very short burst, and 1v1 the F4F is still going to lose most fights if it doesn't start at an advantage or take the HO. And I'm almost willing to bet those "long, sustained bursts" you describe involve a whole lot of 7.7 pings and maybe a couple of 20mm due to the awful ballistics. The scenario you're describing is largely tactical, and EXACTLY why the F4F ultimately ended up successful against the Zero: Its durability was an important factor in the effectiveness of American team fighter tactics employed from Midway forward.
Yes, in a 1 v 1 unless the F4F significantly out flies the A6M2 it will lose. I have shot down an F4F with just my 7.7mms in the AvA long ago. I shot down a P-47N with a D3A once as well, and it took far less 7.7s to do that. If I have 20mm rounds available I only fire the 20mm due to the ballistic differences with them and the 7.7s.
The problem with the F4F's toughness in AH is that it doesn't just allow teamwork as a counter to the A6M, it allows it to almost completely nullify the A6Ms no matter the teamwork the A6Ms use.