Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Babalonian on October 19, 2011, 05:13:08 PM
-
Why was the Beufighter and Me-410 listed as choices for this recent poll?
I'm no expert (calling Lusche or anyone else) but wouldn't their repeated presence in the current poll also heavily nullify the complete and utter purpose of it?... I mean, not to be condencending, but it would suggest that you are so disattached form this community that you're unaware of the following and demand form the community that those two aircraft already have?... :confused: :uhoh Lets say this game were about basketball and basketball players instead of air combat and aircraft simmulation - you just gave us a poll of which players you're looking into developing next, included on it is Kobe and Lebron and a dozen other scrubs that less than 1/3 of the community has even heard about.... oh and Kobe and Lebron were on the last poll and came in runner-ups...
Those two aircraft have contended previously or been heavily and consistently requested before, their desireability and reputation has already been well-established amongst the community. Would the poll not be of greater benefit to everyone if it only listed non-runner ups whose desireability is questionable mongst more than 50% of the community?
And now for a little math from someone who doesn't really like the stuff himself (I really am trying to not be condencending here but productive):
Players could vote for a total of three choices/votes in this recent poll.
Total votes: 1012
Total Voters: 359
Totale Potential Votes: 1077 (65 votes withheld)
Just less than 50% of voters all voted for both the 410 AND Beu, meaning just under 50% voted for an aircarft on that list that hasn't previously been a strong contender or favorable addition, and just under 50% of all voters only casted one single vote for an aircraft perviouly not under consideration for addition.
About 1/3 of all voters voted for the Ki-43, Meteor, and Yak-3 (<- interesting and something new for us to chew over).
-
Haven't we figured out the in game vote is going to differ from the BBS vote?
-
Nice story bro.
-
As long as we're griping, I'm calling it as of now. If the Meteor makes it onto the in game vote, the Meteor is going to win, because ZOMGjet!
(Ye gods I hope I'm wrong. Either the Beau or the 410 would be preferable.)
Wiley.
-
As long as we're griping, I'm calling it as of now. If the Meteor makes it onto the in game vote, the Meteor is going to win, because ZOMGjet!
(Ye gods I hope I'm wrong. Either the Beau or the 410 would be preferable.)
Wiley.
The in game poll is up already. Yes the Meteor is on it. If it wins, it will be a massive waste of an opportunity to get a plane that is needed to fill gaps. Such as the Beaufighter or the Ki43.
-
In the first round at least I'd expect the the Me 410 to win as the British plane vote will be split between the Beau and the Meteor. Not bothered what wins the final vote so long as its not the Meteor, jets both suck and blow. :D
-
Wow. I find it concerning that the Meteor made the cut at all. The last thing this game needs is another elite jet plane streaking around and ruining the fights for everyone else. By perking it you insure it will only be flown by the best which insures it will be completely lethal. You are going to allow these pilots to wrack up endless strings of kills thereby snubbing the rank and file that the game depends on.
IMHO, elite planes are not are not what is needed. Addressing game play issues like uber puffy ack would be a far better solution.
-
Wow. I find it concerning that the Meteor made the cut at all. The last thing this game needs is another elite jet plane streaking around and ruining the fights for everyone else. By perking it you insure it will only be flown by the best which insures it will be completely lethal. You are going to allow these pilots to wrack up endless strings of kills thereby snubbing the rank and file that the game depends on.
IMHO, elite planes are not are not what is needed. Addressing game play issues like uber puffy ack would be a far better solution.
The two aren't mutually exclusive though.
Wiley.
-
I've always wondered if HTC runs their own office pool when these votes happen to see if anyone can pick the winner. :)
-
I've always wondered if HTC runs their own office pool when these votes happen to see if anyone can pick the whiners. :)
fixed... :devil
babalon, are you suggesting that htc should just go ahead and add the beaufighter and me410 because they are consistently popular compared to others?
-
IMHO one of the voting options should be to remove a plane instead. Specifically, the 262.
-
IMHO one of the voting options should be to remove a plane instead. Specifically, the 262.
What purpose would this serve? Increase your K/D?
-
Why...
2/10. You tried to hard to troll. Thanks for playin'.
PS: The Beaufighter will pwn you.
-
Ki43 would be a great ACM choice.
-
fixed... :devil
babalon, are you suggesting that htc should just go ahead and add the beaufighter and me410 because they are consistently popular compared to others?
Not exactly, I'm not raising the issue of suggesting they add them or not, but rather that they don't need to ask us if the 410 or Beau would be desirable amongst the community ("us") AND that in doing so it... "pollutes" the true intended purpose of the poll and all the results supporting or dismissing other contenders.
2/10. You tried to hard to troll. Thanks for playin'.
PS: The Beaufighter will pwn you.
What's a Beau? Is this some plane you and others would be interested in? :t :bolt:
-
My concern with the Yak-3 is that it will be too similar to the Yak-9U.
-
As for the "griping" discussion sparking up - I been thinking about it. As is, most likely winner very well may be the Meteor, and what's wrong with that? I see three pros that are outweighing other cons: 1) It'll be fun.* 2) It'll be a contender for the 262s that do exist out there in the LWMA skies.* 3) It's gonna change "the book" on what criteria planes need to meet before being considered for addition to the game. (Forget just the 152c and D-13! We're talking F7Fs, F8Fs, P51_s, and an etc. of aircraft on the brink of seeing combat in WWII.)
* = Obviously, not for free.
My concern with the Yak-3 is that it will be too similar to the Yak-9U.
True, but it would fill a huge gap in scenarios and the soviet lineup in general for the game. I don't think it would be any more popular than other earlier-era aircraft in the MAs though, but I don't think that is the same concern as yours.
-
The Meteor Mk III would not change the rules of what can be added at all.
1) It was in series production.
2) It was in service in squadron strength. If the Ta152C and Fw190D-9 didn't fail on step 1, they fail here.
3) It saw combat. This is where the F7F, F8F and P-51H fail.
That said, HTC can always add whatever they want. Rules are, after all, made to be broken. Just don't think the Meteor breaks any currently understood rules as it doesn't.
EDIT:
It occurs to me that we are assuming the Meteor in question is the 490mph Meteor Mk III when it could be the 408mph Meteor Mk I.
-
The Meteor Mk III would not change the rules of what can be added at all.
1) It was in series production.
2) It was in service in squadron strength. If the Ta152C and Fw190D-9 didn't fail on step 1, they fail here.
3) It saw combat. This is where the F7F, F8F and P-51H fail.
That said, HTC can always add whatever they want. Rules are, after all, made to be broken. Just don't think the Meteor breaks any currently understood rules as it doesn't.
EDIT:
It occurs to me that we are assuming the Meteor in question is the 490mph Meteor Mk III when it could be the 408mph Meteor Mk I.
Well, if intercepting V1s was the action, then it'll likely be the Mk1s, if it's during it's ground attacking days then the Meteor Mk III. And the F7F was already in service with Marines in the Philippines I think, although I don't know what if any combat was left around there that they may of seen that late in the war.
-
Well, if intercepting V1s was the action, then it'll likely be the Mk1s, if it's during it's ground attacking days then the Meteor Mk III. And the F7F was already in service with Marines in the Philippines I think, although I don't know what if any combat was left around there that they may of seen that late in the war.
No combat for the F7F or F8F. I can see HTC putting them in someday, but I can also see them never getting put in.
(I believe Mk IIIs also did V1 work as well as the ground attack on the continent.)
-
And the F7F was already in service with Marines in the Philippines I think, although I don't know what if any combat was left around there that they may of seen that late in the war.
we already had that discussion a few months back, the majority of ww2 era f7fs were used in state side training squadrons. the 5 or 6 combat squadrons that got them in the pto, got them in limited numbers, used them for night patrols and never saw combat.
sure hope no version of the meteor gets added with this go around...although i suspect the squeakers will tilt the voting balance toward it.
-
TBH, I really think the Me-410 will win
-
Very few planes that have been added lately have seen more combat in ah than the ta52 saw in ww2. In other words they just sit pretty in the hangar. Just look at the b29 everybody wanted. I go weeks without seeing one in flight.
About the only thing that may get some use is the m18.
semp
-
The Meteor is a no brainer, as are the me410 and yak3. All are late war and as some may have observed that is where the vast majority spend their time. I think adding yet more early aircraft like the ki43 and beaufighter that have little chance of survival in the late war is a mistake, I understand for scenarios and FSO's and so on they have a place to fill but they will only be used by a small percentage of players in certain events while the other 95% of players who spend 99% of their time in the late war arena will just have another useless plane to scroll past. Bring on the allied jet already instead of a tissue paper thin slow sadly undergunned plane like the ki43 or most of the list that was up for vote. I also think some of the comments about how the jets shouldnt exist and the 262 should be removed and that its some kind of magic killing machine that cannot be defended against and so on and so forth. I have always found defending against a 262 to be very easy as it really only requires the very most basic SA to spot and then avoid. I would always prefer to have a 262 buzzing around than some dweeb in a pony running all day from anything within 5k of em while they are trying to find someone to pick. If you folks dont want the jets how about we do away with them but perk everything currently under 20ENY? Bottom line is we will see the Meteor every day in the MA and if one were ever to spot the rare ki43 in the same MA it would be circling in its ack as thats all it would be capable of against the common rides used.
:rolleyes:
Mendo
-
What purpose would this serve? Increase your K/D?
I very rarely get killed by 262s, I just don't like the effect they have on a fight or the timid way most people tend to fight in them due to the perk cost being an order of magnitude higher than any other fighter (not counting the 163 with its severe base restrictions). I don't like the fact that, while it takes skill to land kills in one, it takes almost no skill to dominate any fight you bring one to. I generally don't like the inclusion of uber late-war Axis planes and tanks without modeling the disadvantages that made them much less effective IRL than they are in the game (the Tiger II is particularly galling in this respect: to be even halfway realistic it ought to break or bog down more often than it actually makes it to the battlefield). But mostly I just don't think jets have any place in a game that is primarily about prop planes.
-
2/10. You tried to hard to troll. Thanks for playin'.
PS: The Beaufighter will pwn you.
Want to fly a Beau? Up a Mossie 6 with 100% fuel, and droptanks, and fly around at 2/3 throttle the whole sortie.
INstant Beau.
-
Wow. I find it concerning that the Meteor made the cut at all. The last thing this game needs is another elite jet plane streaking around and ruining the fights for everyone else. By perking it you insure it will only be flown by the best which insures it will be completely lethal. You are going to allow these pilots to wrack up endless strings of kills thereby snubbing the rank and file that the game depends on.
IMHO, elite planes are not are not what is needed. Addressing game play issues like uber puffy ack would be a far better solution.
I dont think the Meteor even belongs in the game..period. They were forbidden to fly over German held territory until january of 45. The only aircraft it ever destroyed were on the ground a (total whopping 46 of them). The only air anything it shot down were buzz bombs. And the very vast majority werent delivered until after WWII. If it were allowed it should be perked like the 163 and made available only at specific bases like the 163 currently is
-
I voted meteor thank you :aok
me410 and beaufighter should be in a bomber poll
-
I dont think the Meteor even belongs in the game..period. They were forbidden to fly over German held territory until january of 45. The only aircraft it ever destroyed were on the ground a (total whopping 46 of them). The only air anything it shot down were buzz bombs. And the very vast majority werent delivered until after WWII. If it were allowed it should be perked like the 163 and made available only at specific bases like the 163 currently is
thats good, perk it for 60 :aok But limiting the bases you can roll one at? Utter nonsense, 262's are faster and can roll anywhere.
-
All you Meteor junkies keep in mind the 262 was the better of the two in WW2. I realize that much of this is the old 'we want the best-est' late war bird. When the novelty wears off and folks find out it's not going to dominate the 262s, it will make it's way back to the corner of the hanger too. I would bet that once the dust settles there will be more sorties flown in P39s and 40s then there will be in Meteors.
In terms of game use in the MA, I would also bet that the 410 would get the most use of the choices listed. In terms of scenario, special event use, the Ki-43 is the most glaring omission since there is no way to have an accurate historical match up without the primary Japanese Army fighter of the war. How much use would it get otherwise? Considering you don't see many if any AM62 Zeros in the MA, probably not much.
I think the question that folks should ask in the end, is which new addition provides the most 'bang for the buck' in terms of all parts of the game.
I'm not including the Beaufighter in the conversation since I have a real bias for that bird.
-
The last thing we need is more jets.
That said, the yak3 will be very similar to the 9u - it should climb a little better and accelerate a little better - but it will still have the sucktastic ShivaK 20mm with 120 rounds (its ok at 200, but really anything is ok at 200) - it should not win any new yak fans but I know when I first came into AH, I was eager to fly the yak3 and worked on the 9U as practice (before I became a die hard luftwaffle).
The 410 actually adds something new, but I felt that since this was a fighter vote - it would be nice to get a LW fighter. Which the 410 is not.
People who want the Oscar or the Beau make no sense to me. . . they will see use in EW/MW/AvA/historical and that is it. . . I can't see anyone taking one machine gun on a paper and wood candle stick Japanese fighter into the LWA and expect to have a good time (except as entertainment for all of us who love lighting them on fire) - at least the zero has 2 cannons.
Anwway, I am happy with the pace new aircraft are added and appreciate the poll a lot.
-
People who want the Oscar or the Beau make no sense to me
Scenarios, FSOs, Snapshots...its where WW2 happens in AH. If we had a planeset that only appealed to the LWA flyers we could just roll out "Aces High:1946" and be done with it filled with a lot of hardly flew or never saw combat zooper neeto wonder planes like the YP-80, F7F and Kikka, oh and the V-2 rocket. Got to have one of those.
Ki-43 Oscar? ya....why have the Japanese Air Forces most widely used second word war fighter in a WW2 flight game?
Call us crazy. ;)
-
Don't assume too much on the meteor votes, most of us just want to have fun in the LWA horde with an uber fighter. Wishing for hangar queens don't make people any smarter.
-
I think the question that folks should ask in the end, is which new addition provides the most 'bang for the buck' in terms of all parts of the game.
I think the Yak3 is the best answer to this question
However I voted for the Meteor :neener:
-
The Meteor Mk III would not change the rules of what can be added at all.
1) It was in series production.
2) It was in service in squadron strength. If the Ta152C and Fw190D-9 didn't fail on step 1, they fail here.
3) It saw combat. This is where the F7F, F8F and P-51H fail.
Karnak - out of curiosity: would you approve of a variant of some major WWII warbird (e.g. Mossie or 410 or Beau) that satisfied the above criteria? As in, on top of satisfying the criteria, the variant is inarguably different from that model's more common variants and what's different about it also happens to make it a truly novel and fun aircraft type - much more so than the main variants... Which'd make adding it along with the other main variants much more bang for our buck.
The 410 actually adds something new, but I felt that since this was a fighter vote - it would be nice to get a LW fighter. Which the 410 is not.
How's that?
which new addition provides the most 'bang for the buck' in terms of all parts of the game.
Uncanny.. I don't read the forum much anymore but.. Pretty much every other time I've read your posts the last times I've checked in, there's some idiom or other turn of phrase in your post, identical to what I just wrote before getting to your post.
-
People who want the Oscar or the Beau make no sense to me. . . they will see use in EW/MW/AvA/historical and that is it. . . I can't see anyone taking one machine gun on a paper and wood candle stick Japanese fighter into the LWA and expect to have a good time (except as entertainment for all of us who love lighting them on fire) - at least the zero has 2 cannons.
As others have (repeatedly) pointed out, Late War already has all the best late war planes. See, e.g., Guppy's comment about the Meteor on the preceding page of this thread. Late War people should be very happy that they already have everything they could reasonably want. Now HTC can move on and fill out the plane sets for the other arenas and the special events, which have glaring gaps.
- oldman
-
People who want the Oscar or the Beau make no sense to me. . . they will see use in EW/MW/AvA/historical and that is it. . . I can't see anyone taking one machine gun on a paper and wood candle stick Japanese fighter into the LWA and expect to have a good time (except as entertainment for all of us who love lighting them on fire) - at least the zero has 2 cannons.
You have to understand that what you and others consider a "good time" is often likely to be very different.
The Beaufighter would be a very potent aircraft in any arena. I often fly the A-20 as a fighter (with good success). The slightly more maneuverable Beaufighter with a nose full of cannons is something I'd love to fly. As to the Ki-43, I would fly it as well. It's agility would make it very enjoyable. I often fly the less capable aircraft because it presents a challenge to get kills and survive. This past week, I've been flying the P-40N a bit and having a blast in it.
-
I voted meteor thank you :aok
:rofl that figures...
me410 and beaufighter should be in a bomber poll
i'm curious how "heavy fighter" translates to "bomber" on your planet...because they are twin engine and carry bombs? perhaps where you're from the p-38 and bf-110 are considered bombers as well... :rolleyes:
Don't assume too much on the meteor votes, most of us just want to have fun in the LWA horde with an uber fighter. Wishing for hangar queens don't make people any smarter.
if the pony and the dora aren't "uber" enough...fly the tempest or 262.
-
The Meteor is a no brainer, as are the me410 and yak3. All are late war and as some may have observed that is where the vast majority spend their time. I think adding yet more early aircraft like the ki43 and beaufighter that have little chance of survival in the late war is a mistake, I understand for scenarios and FSO's and so on they have a place to fill but they will only be used by a small percentage of players in certain events while the other 95% of players who spend 99% of their time in the late war arena will just have another useless plane to scroll past. Bring on the allied jet already instead of a tissue paper thin slow sadly undergunned plane like the ki43 or most of the list that was up for vote. I also think some of the comments about how the jets shouldnt exist and the 262 should be removed and that its some kind of magic killing machine that cannot be defended against and so on and so forth. I have always found defending against a 262 to be very easy as it really only requires the very most basic SA to spot and then avoid. I would always prefer to have a 262 buzzing around than some dweeb in a pony running all day from anything within 5k of em while they are trying to find someone to pick. If you folks dont want the jets how about we do away with them but perk everything currently under 20ENY? Bottom line is we will see the Meteor every day in the MA and if one were ever to spot the rare ki43 in the same MA it would be circling in its ack as thats all it would be capable of against the common rides used.
:rolleyes:
Mendo
This right here is the attitude I believe will be the majority, and this is why I'm expecting the Meteor to win.
The only planes worth adding are ones that are either better than or very competitive with the top end stuff we currently have.
-
This right here is the attitude I believe will be the majority, and this is why I'm expecting the Meteor to win.
The only planes worth adding are ones that are either better than or very competitive with the top end stuff we currently have.
:bhead
If the Meteor wins, I hope that Hitech gives up this poll plan for future additions. He needs to go back to the philosophy that the players don't really know what they want.
-
Meteor mk III is just like asking for the p-80. nuff said
There are MANY core fighters missing. Yet the sheep is asking for the uber, then the more uberer, then the post-war stuff, then go play il-2 1946. Competitive mid-war fighters ftw.
-
wowa!
in defense of my beau/oscar comment - I am a huge fan of the scenerio/AvA/historical stuff and it was a major reason I subscribe. That said though, I am of the opinion that there are still some fighters that fill a LWA slot that are missing, and these planes should get some degree of priority. As I wrote at the very end, I think eventually everything will be added - but - its a matter of prioritization. And I feel that the yak3 and a few other LW Japanese and Italian fighters should get introduced before others should. The end is the same, the path there is different. And that is a personal opinion. Th reason is simply because while historical stuff is great, 90% of my time in AH is spent in LWA, and until that changes, I prioritize as such.
-
I won't quote quotes, but I would expect a fighter poll to feature pure fighter airframes. It was sarcasm based on the B38 joke....ok i was bad
I flew hundreds of hours of 190's, ponies...tempests are not my cup of tea and 262's are useless against fighters....the meteor will hopefully be able to give me a fix of high speed with good maneuvrabity....some fun! Is that bad ? :)
-
gimme the do-335 then
oh and the messer p-1101 too
weirdo allies high
-
Noir: Pure fighter only?
You and Tilt have the same wrong mentality about what a fighter is... I'll quote my response to him because it applies here:
Tilt you have a far more narrow personal definition of what "fighter" is than most nations in the world. While you might argue the Beau is an "attacker" (variation on "fighter") the 410 is a fighter just as much as the 110 is, just as much as a Sturmbock Fw190 is. Just as much as a 262 is. None of these were "air superiority" fighters, a term which was not created until the F-15 design many many years later.
They simply were fighters. Or do you consider a P-47 no longer a "fighter" because it's used to carry bombs so much?
Generally speaking, everything on that list is a fighter. They're not bombers. In WW2 you carried guns and went out to kill the enemy. Or you bombed them THEN killed them. There was no such narrow-minded definition even in the stricter designations of the USN. Even "bombers" and "dive bombers" performed CAP and fighter duties off of their carriers regularly.
-
I won't quote quotes, but I would expect a fighter poll to feature pure fighter airframes. It was sarcasm based on the B38 joke....ok i was bad
I flew hundreds of hours of 190's, ponies...tempests are not my cup of tea and 262's are useless against fighters....the meteor will hopefully be able to give me a fix of high speed with good maneuvrabity....some fun! Is that bad ? :)
You do understand that the Meteor was not as capable as the 262 in WW2 correct?
-
I won't quote quotes, but I would expect a fighter poll to feature pure fighter airframes. It was sarcasm based on the B38 joke....ok i was bad
I flew hundreds of hours of 190's, ponies...tempests are not my cup of tea and 262's are useless against fighters....the meteor will hopefully be able to give me a fix of high speed with good maneuvrabity....some fun! Is that bad ? :)
LOL you do understand that there were no pure fighter airframes by late war. All were multi-role capable. You do also understand that the best performers of late war are already in game?
-
You do understand that the Meteor was not as capable as the 262 in WW2 correct?
Yes, the wing design amongst other things didn't allow it to be as fast as the 262, I expect it to turn much better tho, and handle much better at low speeds.
LOL you do understand that there were no pure fighter airframes by late war. All were multi-role capable. You do also understand that the best performers of late war are already in game?
I get the spirit, it has guns so it can strafe ground targets. But you can't say that the 410 and the Beau are made to shoot down fighters, or bombers by daytime.
In the best performers category I'd like to see the meteor, both latest 190A and D models, a spitfire XII, thats all I can think of right now.
-
Yes, the wing design amongst other things didn't allow it to be as fast as the 262, I expect it to turn much better tho, and handle much better at low speeds.
I get the spirit, it has guns so it can strafe ground targets. But you can't say that the 410 and the Beau are made to shoot down fighters, or bombers by daytime.
In the best performers category I'd like to see the meteor, both latest 190A and D models, a spitfire XII, thats all I can think of right now.
Might want to check up on the Meteor handling. A 616 squadron pilot I got to know back in the 80s flew the Meteor with them from the time they got them in 44 til the end. He also flew the 262. His comments are what I base mine on. Hard to argue with a service test pilot who flew them both :) He said the only thing better about the Meteor was the engine was more reliable. But since we don't have engine reliability modeled into the game, that's not much of an issue.
Looking back at his letters, I note he said the 262 cruised near the all out speed of the Meteor III among other things.
I'm not against having the Meteor. I just think folks are expecting it to be a world beater and it wasn't.
You mention the Spit XII and other 190 models. Not new birds though, which is what I think the vote is about.
Selfishly I would take the Spit XII before anything else, but I try and look at what would have the biggest impact on the game overall, not just what sounds good to me. That leads me back to the Ki-43, Beau and 410
-
For my two cents....
I favor adding planes that would be fun to fly for a large portion of the playing populus.
KI-43 will be a hangar queen.
Beau fighter will be hangar queen.
Meteors...hmmm depends on perking. If they are lower cost than 262s and are not as fast or accelerate even worse, than they may be easy pray for typhies, ponies, and P-47s.
If so they might be fun to try to get kills in and to kill. Although, I think they will be perked just to keep the numbers down. A high perk cost will make them hangar queens.
Me 410 will get a lot of use for its capability and diversity. A great new toy that lots of folks will find ways to use on a continuing basis. No brainer.
I voted for the 410. :aok
...because the P-63 wasn't on the list. ;)
-
Why pick 2 losers like Kobe and Lebron lol.
You need a better comparison.
Your post made no sense to me. Evidently your sayinf once a plane has been in a vote that it should no longer be a choice? That would scratch moff the list most all contenders.
-
For my two cents....
I favor adding planes that would be fun to fly for a large portion of the playing populus.
KI-43 will be a hangar queen.
Beau fighter will be hangar queen.
Meteors...hmmm depends on perking. If they are lower cost than 262s and are not as fast or accelerate even worse, than they may be easy pray for typhies, ponies, and P-47s.
If so they might be fun to try to get kills in and to kill. Although, I think they will be perked just to keep the numbers down. A high perk cost will make them hangar queens.
Me 410 will get a lot of use for its capability and diversity. A great new toy that lots of folks will find ways to use on a continuing basis. No brainer.
I voted for the 410. :aok
...because the P-63 wasn't on the list. ;)
Sure Vink. I support your P-63 wish and you bash my Beaufighter dreams. Thanks a lot! :)
Beau actually has more capability and diversity then the 410. Torp, Rockets, bombs, 4 20mm. Fast on the deck.
-
Wow :O Amazing the amount of moaning of what should or should not be in.
Look at it this way what ever gets in if it was not your choice. The chances of what you preferred is one step closer.
After all at some point we will run out of aircraft to choose from.
-
Guppy,
Keep in mind that the Meteor III's top speed on the deck was still about 100 miles an hour faster than the Tempest on 100 octane. Sure, the Me262 is faster, but the Meteor III is still very fast compared to piston fighters. Its climb rate is also superior to the Me262's and the four Hispanos will likely be significantly easier to hit fighters with than the four MK108s, though against bombers probably not as nice. The Me262 should also be the more stable gun platform as the Meteor experienced "snaking" until the post war Mk IV.
As to the wings, the Mk IV with the same wings set a world speed record of 615mph in 1946. It just needed more thrust to reach that speed than would the Me262.
From a fighter perspective in AH I would be more worried about Meteors showing up than Me262s due to the guns.
-
I don't think Noir really knows the first thing about Me410s after his last comment there....
Seriously? :headscratch:
-
All very interesting. I wonder if maybe there ought to be polls for specific arenas. Poll the AvA guys and see what they want/need to make the game more fun for them. Do the same with the other arenas, if this is possible. With regards to the LW arena, IMHO I think the selection boils down to which plane/s the majority of folks want to try, IE which ones may be the most fun to fly, not fill out any gaps in the plane set (which I personally don't agree with).
If it isn't too much trouble for HTC, perhaps a temporary trial of of the planes selected, say spread out over a few months, in order to compile a "usage" report of that plane. If it's determined to be nothing more than a hanger queen, remove it and move on to the next one.
So for that reason, I voted ME410, Beaufighter and a write in for the P61. Again they may not fill a specific need, but I think they would be a Hoot to fly! :)
Nutz
-
If it isn't too much trouble for HTC, perhaps a temporary trial of of the planes selected
It IS too much trouble... Once the plane is built it's not temporary, and it's not a trial. They're not going to REVOKE the plane.
The question is, with 1 team and limited man-hours, which do they work on first. That's the only question. It's not about testing it with different sub-arenas to see who likes it most in the AvA. I'm sorry but that's just a terrible idea.
EDIT: Also, you're against planes that fill holes in the planeset, but the AvA and the EWA and the MWA all are affected very much BY planes that fill holes in the planeset. Just food for thought.
-
I find it hilarious...
The poll is pretty much pointless to ask what we want to have next... We're just gunna end up getting them anyways... Ki-43 - Yak3 - ME 410 - they're more than likely been in the works already and HTC just wanted to make you feel like they want your opinion!
Its like a mother telling their kids before xmas what they already got for them - then asking - oh what do you want first
-
My argument against the Meteor is that it really does not fill any gaps in the plane set, considering how it was used in the war.
Also, I don't believe that the Main Arena needs another plane that is basically designed to pick and run. There are plenty that fill that role already.
-
Sure Vink. I support your P-63 wish and you bash my Beaufighter dreams. Thanks a lot! :)
Beau actually has more capability and diversity then the 410. Torp, Rockets, bombs, 4 20mm. Fast on the deck.
I took a quick look at Beaufighter specs and plane layout. So perhaps I have yet to develop the appreciation for this palne that it deserves. ;)
-
nm
-
Of course we are going to get all those eventually, but its highly unlikely they are doing anything more than collecting data on them at the moment. The past poll winners didn't appear in the skinner's forum until weeks after the poll was run. The only time a runner up was skinned as well was the P-39 which almost dead heated the winner. A great number of man-hours of work are needed to create a new plane, the 3D shapes inside and out, the skins, the flight and damage models. They are not going to undertake that lightly.
hey Greebo, just curious...Assuming they have the data they need, how many man hours do you think it take to develop a new plane? 300? 600? 1200? and is there a big difference between a single engine fighter and a large bomber? Or does the actual shape make more of a difference for example would a Moonbat with all those crazy contoured compound curves take longer to produce than a B-29?
Where I work when they want to make a 3D model of a something they buy one and run it through an X-ray scanner and then software digitizes the x-ray slices and then they are imported into Catia, IDEAS and other such 3D design programs. The scanners can scan most materials. But coverting "blue" prints to 3D is still done the old fashion way as well. But I always thought it would cool to see if a good scale model of a warbird could be scanned and converted. I wonder if it would save time. Then I wondered if outside firms do for-hire scanning and conversion. then I wondered if it would cost less than 1200 of Superfly's hours. Then he could use those 1200 hours ot group sections into subsections, and do the damage models etc...and for those hours we'd get more planes per hour. [Not trying to put SuperFly out of job]
Just a daydream brought on by folks aguing over which plane should be next. An argument that would disapear if planes took weeks, instead of months to develop.
-
hey Greebo, just curious...Assuming they have the data they need, how many man hours do you think it take to develop a new plane? 300? 600? 1200? and is there a big difference between a single engine fighter and a large bomber? Or does the actual shape make more of a difference for example would a Moonbat with all those crazy contoured compound curves take longer to produce than a B-29?
Where I work when they want to make a 3D model of a something they buy one and run it through an X-ray scanner and then software digitizes the x-ray slices and then they are imported into Catia, IDEAS and other such 3D design programs. The scanners can scan most materials. But coverting "blue" prints to 3D is still done the old fashion way as well. But I always thought it would cool to see if a good scale model of a warbird could be scanned and converted. I wonder if it would save time. Then I wondered if outside firms do for-hire scanning and conversion. then I wondered if it would cost less than 1200 of Superfly's hours. Then he could use those 1200 hours ot group sections into subsections, and do the damage models etc...and for those hours we'd get more planes per hour. [Not trying to put SuperFly out of job]
Just a daydream brought on by folks aguing over which plane should be next. An argument that would disapear if planes took weeks, instead of months to develop.
I am not greebo, but I have a clue as to how long it takes to model a plane........LOTS of time...I have easy 60 hrs in this and I am very far from done, still in the very early stages of it. I highly doubt it takes 1200 man hrs though
maybe 200 hrs to complete the 3D modeling and UV mapping.
I did a dragon, had it to the point of animating it,(when the comp crashed and I lost everything) I had easy 200 hrs in that, big difference though between that and a plane. the plane being much easier to model.
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/ScreenHunter_05Oct201816.jpg)
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/ScreenHunter_06Oct201816.jpg)
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/ScreenHunter_07Oct201816.jpg)
-
you can't say that the 410 and the Beau are made to shoot down fighters, or bombers by daytime.
They are. Failed as they did historically.
-
The last thing we need is more jets.
That said, the yak3 will be very similar to the 9u - it should climb a little better and accelerate a little better - but it will still have the sucktastic ShivaK 20mm with 120 rounds (its ok at 200, but really anything is ok at 200) - it should not win any new yak fans but I know when I first came into AH, I was eager to fly the yak3 and worked on the 9U as practice (before I became a die hard luftwaffle).
The 410 actually adds something new, but I felt that since this was a fighter vote - it would be nice to get a LW fighter. Which the 410 is not.
People who want the Oscar or the Beau make no sense to me. . . they will see use in EW/MW/AvA/historical and that is it. . . I can't see anyone taking one machine gun on a paper and wood candle stick Japanese fighter into the LWA and expect to have a good time (except as entertainment for all of us who love lighting them on fire) - at least the zero has 2 cannons.
Anwway, I am happy with the pace new aircraft are added and appreciate the poll a lot.
I like your post, and second that I'm happy with HTC's pace of new aircraft and I too also really appreciate that there is a poll out too - although as someone else pointed out, if these were more frequent happenings then the debate over them wouldn't be so heated.
Why pick 2 losers like Kobe and Lebron lol.
You need a better comparison.
Your post made no sense to me. Evidently your sayinf once a plane has been in a vote that it should no longer be a choice? That would scratch moff the list most all contenders.
I do see your point that excluding all previous candidates makes no sense, but you seem to be missing mine. I'm referring specifically to the obvious favorites: those being the 410 - which came in a very close 2nd place to the B-29, which we now have in-game - and the Beau, which has had a longstanding and ongoing following in mass within the the forum community. And, surprise, of all the candidates on that *cough* new *cough* forum poll, the clear winners were.....
-
The Me410 lost in a landslide to the B-29, about 40% to 60%. Close was the B-25 beating the P-39 by less than 0.5%.
The only reason the final in the last vote was the B-29 vs the Me410 is because the B-29 sucked off so much of the "American, <bleep> yeah!" votes that the A-26 narrowly failed to make the final. Anybody who thinks the Me410 would have beaten the A-26 had the B-29 not been on the poll is gravely mistaken.
For what it is worth, while I voted for the Me410, I am very glad it was against the B-29 and not the A-26.
-
You do understand that the Meteor was not as capable as the 262 in WW2 correct?
Thats not the point.
The point is it was used so little that it can only barely be considered a participant in WWII.
Any of the other planes in the selection would be a more worthy addition
If we're gonna add that. Might as well add the Fl 282 as well for artillery spotting
-
Thats not the point.
The point is it was used so little that it can only barely be considered a participant in WWII.
Any of the other planes in the selection would be a more worthy addition
If we're gonna add that. Might as well add the Fl 282 as well for artillery spotting
While I agree that it is not the best choice on the poll we have now, it did play a larger part in WWII than at least one aircraft already in AH.
-
While I agree that it is not the best choice on the poll we have now, it did play a larger part in WWII than at least one aircraft already in AH.
That doesn't strike me as a good argument. Two wrongs don't make a right, as they say.
-
The Meteor Mk III would not change the rules of what can be added at all.
1) It was in series production.
2) It was in service in squadron strength. If the Ta152C and Fw190D-9 didn't fail on step 1, they fail here.
the only information numbers of the Meteor I've found seeing service over enemy territory total 14. which were assigned to the 616 squadron the very vast majority didnt enter service until after WWII ended
The first volume production version of the Meteor was the Mk III (G.41C) with a total of 210 aircraft built..
By comparison the D9, over 700 were built and actually saw combat service. which near as I have been able to find. were far more numorous in numbers then all variants of the Meteor that were built during the war combined.
-
The Beaufighter or the 410 would fill a slot that is needed. Why the Ki43,when we already have several flying Ronson variants?A Ki 100 or a Jack would fit better.This is my own opinion,and I agree with Greebo,jets suck and blow!!We already have the rocket ship 163 dancing around for way longer than it could stay in the sky,and the 262 is only flown by the elite or guys that play this game night and day.The Yak 3 would be nice,but then we should have the P-63,as it had about the same amount of flight hours.I know the maker of the game says making the other guy angry is what this sim is all about!That's why I can only handle a month at a time,and quit for awhile!I prefer Panzer Corps or Chess most of the time,and Birds of Prey is a refreshing sim if played at the highest difficulty.
The Dawg
-
the only information numbers of the Meteor I've found seeing service over enemy territory total 14. which were assigned to the 616 squadron the very vast majority didnt enter service until after WWII ended
The first volume production version of the Meteor was the Mk III (G.41C) with a total of 210 aircraft built..
By comparison the D9, over 700 were built and actually saw combat service. which near as I have been able to find. were far more numorous in numbers then all variants of the Meteor that were built during the war combined.
I meant to say Fw190D-11 or D-13.
Fw190D-9 is, of course, a core late war German fighter and entirely appropriate to a WWII sim.
IronDog,
You need to read up on the Yak-3. It had VASTLY more combat time than the P-63.
Hint: Germans issued combat directives about Yak-3s. Kinda silent about P-63s though. Why? because they were fighting Yak-3s and not P-63s.
-
Regarding P-63 WWII use, more than 2500 of them were delivered to the Soviets. That's a lot of planes -- it would be surprising if almost none of them made it into combat, but there is the statement in Wikipedia on the P-63 purporting that there was an agreement that the P-63's were only to be used against Japanese forces. There is no reference given, though, so who knows if that's true.
-
Wow :O Amazing the amount of moaning of what should or should not be in.
Look at it this way what ever gets in if it was not your choice. The chances of what you preferred is one step closer.
After all at some point we will run out of aircraft to choose from.
Same thing happened after the last poll. Everyone has their opinions and some people just don't appreciate
majority rules. Perfect case in point are those who moan about any American iron in a poll. Of course the
great unwashed will automagically pick those "because they don't know any better" :cry :D
-
Same thing happened after the last poll. Everyone has their opinions and some people just don't appreciate
majority rules. Perfect case in point are those who moan about any American iron in a poll. Of course the
great unwashed will automagically pick those "because they don't know any better" :cry :D
They don't. Most people playing this game aren't grognards. Look at the comments that crop up occasionally on the board. I recall a recent one by a prolific poster saying he didn't know the Japanese had any fighter other than the Zero until he started playing Aces High. How can somebody like that make an informed choice when a list with a bunch of number letter combinations appear asking him to choose one? What he'll likely do is pick something he has a clue as to what it is so he can get on with his evening in Aces High. If it is a "P-xx", "A-xx" or "B-xx" he, most likely being American, is 1) more likely to actually know what it is and 2) failing that to have an idea of what it probably is simply based on the number. E.g. a B-29 will likely be a later, more advanced bomber than the B-24 he plays with in the game whereas what the heck is a G.55, Ki-43, Me410 or Beaufighter? Sure, they might be surprised at what they get if they voted the P-61 in, but they had a fair guess that it was a later, more potent fighter than a P-51.
This is not to insult those guys, not everybody is a hobbiest like some of us. Nor is it to say that the stuff they would vote for are the wrong things. It is to say that sometimes it is good to mix it up even if the powers that be have to rig the polls to do so.
-
P-63 does not belong in AH imho. It served only in the last few weeks of the war in August 1945 vs Japan and much of that time after the August 15th surrender date. It scored one kill. Aces High should be about the planes that actually did something worthy of mentioning not "6 were delivered and they flew 4 sorties and saw a B-29 before they landed and the pilot was taken into custody by the MPs" or "the were aboard a dock ready for shipment when the war ended" or "they were test flown 3 times over Berlin according to one drunken aviator who also swore he saw a UFO over Berlin on VE Day".
A-26, P-61, Yak-3, Me 410, Beaufighter, Ki-100, they all actually fought in the war in some credible number. By all means add them.
-
The only reason the final in the last vote was the B-29 vs the Me410 is because the B-29 sucked off so much of the "American, <bleep> yeah!" votes that the A-26 narrowly failed to make the final.
Yep
-
hey Greebo, just curious...Assuming they have the data they need, how many man hours do you think it take to develop a new plane? 300? 600? 1200? and is there a big difference between a single engine fighter and a large bomber? Or does the actual shape make more of a difference for example would a Moonbat with all those crazy contoured compound curves take longer to produce than a B-29?
I don't know how many hours it takes for Waffle or Superfly to produce the 3D shape of a new ride. I would hazard a guess it takes them up to a month for the basic exterior shape. This includes animating all the control surfaces and gear. This is enough to give a skinner like me something to skin. If it is an aircraft they then have to do the cockpit including animating all the controls. Later they have to do the damaged parts/bullet hole bits. Also there is the low level of detail 3D shapes and skins, these are low poly count versions of the shape that are viewed from further away.
The flight modelling/damage modelling and testing is I believe done by Pyro. I've no idea how long that takes.
It takes me about 3-4 weeks to skin a new ride, the same again for a cockpit. I've never worked out what that is in hours. I usually do 1-2 hours each morning before going to work plus whenever else i feel like it, so maybe 50 hours.
A bomber is a more complex shape and needs extra 3D, animation and skinning work for the gunners and bomb aimer's positions and bomb bay so it takes longer to do than a fighter. GVs now have no interior art to do so take much less time overall.
-
I meant to say Fw190D-11 or D-13.
Fw190D-9 is, of course, a core late war German fighter and entirely appropriate to a WWII sim.
IronDog,
You need to read up on the Yak-3. It had VASTLY more combat time than the P-63.
Hint: Germans issued combat directives about Yak-3s. Kinda silent about P-63s though. Why? because they were fighting Yak-3s and not P-63s.
Ahhh ok
Thats ok We have enough 190 variants already
-
I find it hilarious...
The poll is pretty much pointless to ask what we want to have next... We're just gunna end up getting them anyways... Ki-43 - Yak3 - ME 410 - they're more than likely been in the works already and HTC just wanted to make you feel like they want your opinion!
Its like a mother telling their kids before xmas what they already got for them - then asking - oh what do you want first
Obviously written by a Johnny come lately, votes do matter :aok
Just like in other polls though, some of the planes that folks "need"
will wind up as "Hangar Queens". Of course the first 2-3 days, everyone will fly them.
Then they'll collect dust, only to be used in SEA.
:cheers: Oz
-
They don't. Most people playing this game aren't grognards. Look at the comments that crop up occasionally on the board. I recall a recent one by a prolific poster saying he didn't know the Japanese had any fighter other than the Zero until he started playing Aces High. How can somebody like that make an informed choice when a list with a bunch of number letter combinations appear asking him to choose one? What he'll likely do is pick something he has a clue as to what it is so he can get on with his evening in Aces High. If it is a "P-xx", "A-xx" or "B-xx" he, most likely being American, is 1) more likely to actually know what it is and 2) failing that to have an idea of what it probably is simply based on the number. E.g. a B-29 will likely be a later, more advanced bomber than the B-24 he plays with in the game whereas what the heck is a G.55, Ki-43, Me410 or Beaufighter? Sure, they might be surprised at what they get if they voted the P-61 in, but they had a fair guess that it was a later, more potent fighter than a P-51.
This is not to insult those guys, not everybody is a hobbiest like some of us. Nor is it to say that the stuff they would vote for are the wrong things. It is to say that sometimes it is good to mix it up even if the powers that be have to rig the polls to do so.
I'm sensing a flashback to when I started playing and posting and made a comment like "no one knows what an Oscar is." So I will reply to this point and remake my point from back then. You see everything from an historic perspective because you are a history buff. But most people see it from a fame perspective. They want to fly planes they have heard people talk about, and planes they are familiar with, and have already developed a connection to. Maybe their dad talked aboutit, maybe they watched a movie or a show that featured that plane, maybe they went to an airshow ans sow one, or had a uncle that flew one, maybe they built the Revelle model of it when they were young. My point then as it is now, the Zero is famous, the Oscar isn't. What makes something famous is not always clear, but it's always irrelevant. The fact that it is famous means it has a built in following of people which is perfect to a game developer for two reasons. 1) it attracts people to the game. 2) it satisfies people that are already here and want it.
Just because people want a plane that is famous, does not mean that choice is invalid. The game will benefit more from having planes most people want to fly, than from having a bunch of hangars queens that make the history buffs feel good about filling out the historical record.
Your knowlege on plane subjects is always appreciated. Maybe you could be less snobby about it. :P :salute
-
only to be used in SEA.
:cheers: Oz
A lot of people fly in special events, and some folks play AH mainly for the special events.
-
I'm not a big history buff. I don't know jack about all the different planes. I like to fly and fight. I voted "Don't know...don't care". Whatever we get is what we get. I'm sure I'll fly one now and then, but I [like most others] have a small number of planes that I fly on a regular basis. So for me, there are plenty of "hangar queens". Why is everyone still arguing about a poll and what/why/when will we get "the plane"?
-
Because we do know and care.
-
Welp...
Aces High CM in Training
...and...
I'm not a big history buff. I don't know jack about all the different planes. I like to fly and fight. I voted "Don't know...don't care".
...certainly go well together.
:aok
-
When I'm looking at the polls, I'm sort of torn between filling holes in the scenario planesets and wanting something that will give a slightly different experience when flying it.
Most of the planes in the poll aren't really going to offer gameplay that is substantially different from other planes in the set. Like somebody said about the Beau, take up a mossie 6 with drop tanks, full fuel, and fly around at 75% throttle, you're pretty much replicating the authentic Beaufighter experience. True, but it was still a fairly significant plane in the war, and IMO deserves to be represented ingame.
The meteor would be 262-lite. Basically a fast-ish BnZ brick in the hands of all but the best in it. Nothing much exciting there either in the MAs or scenarios, unless they figure out a system for having buzzbombs in game that isn't lame. I doublt that'll happen, so I don't believe it's a good fit.
The Ki-43 would be a neat plane to have as a ton of them were produced in the war and it would be good for scenarios., but it would be effectively useless in the MA.
Of everything that was in the forum poll, the one plane that I would probably have flown a fair bit in the MA is the J2M3. Twistier than a typhoon or tempest, good climb rate, 4x20mm, faster than the N1K. That's something we don't have, and I feel it would be a good and fun plane to fly in the MA. Not particularly necessary for scenarios, but it would add something to late war pacific stuff. It unfortunately didn't make the cut for the ingame poll, so the point is moot.
I've got a faint glimmer of hope because the forum poll didn't have many people looking at the Meteor, but we'll just have to see what the ingame poll says after today.
Wmaker- What does one have to do with the other? It doesn't take a bounty of historic knowledge to help run stuff. Design is a different thing altogether. Just as an example, would I need to know what happened at Midway to run a Friday KOTH? There are plenty of things for CMs to do other than design historic scenarios.
Wiley.
-
balls
-
One thing that might set the Ki-43 apart from the others is that we would likely get two or three different versions of it. A Ki-43-III, while light on firepower, would still be pretty usable in the MA due to its handling.
-
Wmaker- What does one have to do with the other? It doesn't take a bounty of historic knowledge to help run stuff. Design is a different thing altogether. Just as an example, would I need to know what happened at Midway to run a Friday KOTH? There are plenty of things for CMs to do other than design historic scenarios.
Welp...
Definately sounds like a promising future for the AH Special Events! :aok
-
Welp...
Definately sounds like a promising future for the AH Special Events! :aok
Have you volunteered? :salute
-
Welp...
Definately sounds like a promising future for the AH Special Events! :aok
I'll take a guy who's willing to help over a nonexistent Ph. D in history any day.
Wiley.
-
Have you volunteered? :salute
It is actually not about someone volunteering or not. Setting up these events it is good to have some understanding of the actual war and the planes that fought in it considering that the majority of the events are based on real historic events.
The above is actually a no brainer, and considering that, the reaction in the last few posts was immensely entertaining. Especially considering that the "I don't know and I don't care - attitude" regards the history might not exactly be the best attitude to run such events.
-
Especially considering that the "I don't know and I don't care - attitude" regards the history might not exactly be the best attitude to run such events.
The poll ingame for the vote on new planes contained a 'Don't know, don't care' option. He was referring to his response to the poll, not the history stuff. Reading comprehension FTW. :aok
Wiley.
-
The poll ingame for the vote on new planes contained a 'Don't know, don't care' option. He was referring to his response to the poll, not the history stuff. Reading comprehension FTW. :aok
"I'm not a big history buff. I don't know jack about all the different planes. I like to fly and fight."
...in this context my actual choise of words is irrelevant.
So indeed...
Reading comprehension FTW. :aok
-
I don't know how many hours it takes for Waffle or Superfly to produce the 3D shape of a new ride. I would hazard a guess it takes them up to a month for the basic exterior shape. This includes animating all the control surfaces and gear. This is enough to give a skinner like me something to skin. If it is an aircraft they then have to do the cockpit including animating all the controls. Later they have to do the damaged parts/bullet hole bits. Also there is the low level of detail 3D shapes and skins, these are low poly count versions of the shape that are viewed from further away.
The flight modelling/damage modelling and testing is I believe done by Pyro. I've no idea how long that takes.
It takes me about 3-4 weeks to skin a new ride, the same again for a cockpit. I've never worked out what that is in hours. I usually do 1-2 hours each morning before going to work plus whenever else i feel like it, so maybe 50 hours.
A bomber is a more complex shape and needs extra 3D, animation and skinning work for the gunners and bomb aimer's positions and bomb bay so it takes longer to do than a fighter. GVs now have no interior art to do so take much less time overall.
I missed your reply first time through. thanks for the info! :aok :salute
-
...in this context my actual choise of words is irrelevant.
No it's not. You used the same words he did when referring to the other part.
Regardless, your elitism is duly noted. People like you being around to dump on people who volunteer their time to help run the game we play really improves the situation. :aok
Wiley.
-
No it's not. You used the same words he did when referring to the other part.
Regardless, your elitism is duly noted. People like you being around to dump on people who volunteer their time to help run the game we play really improves the situation. :aok
I know this ain't headed anywhere but it is hardly about elitism. One really does not have to know much as long as he has a good attitude for the job.
-
I know this ain't headed anywhere but it is hardly about elitism. One really does not have to know much as long as he has a good attitude for the job.
The point is that a historical buff can send in a write up for a scenario. But it takes someone to set up the arena, send out e-mails, register participants, track scores, send out marketting e-mails etc...
Lots of work outside the "historical" part. So to end on a positive note, maybe you could do the historical part and send it to Imadot, and he would do the work to turn it into a scenario. Then the future would look bright indeed. :salute
-
WMaker has a point. It's well and good to have somebody that knows what to type, but overall the CMs have a lot more duties and responsibilities than just typing in server commands. You generally want ones that care about what they're doing. When people care about the subject of their work, the quality of work benefits.
-
I know this ain't headed anywhere but it is hardly about elitism. One really does not have to know much as long as he has a good attitude for the job.
You will find I have a great attitude - and a growing understanding of how all the various arena settings work to give players what an event designer hopes to give them. I don't have to know the difference between a 109E and a 109F to set up the arena according to how someone who DOES know that difference wants it to be set up. :salute
The point is that a historical buff can send in a write up for a scenario. But it takes someone to set up the arena, send out e-mails, register participants, track scores, send out marketting e-mails etc...
Lots of work outside the "historical" part. So to end on a positive note, maybe you could do the historical part and send it to Imadot, and he would do the work to turn it into a scenario. Then the future would look bright indeed. :salute
The event designer (Admin CM) does all the heavy-lifting to research and figure out how things should look in the arena for an event.
The host (Setup CM) does all the arena setup to make the arena play like the Admin CM envisioned.
Because I am admittedly not a history buff, nor do I have the time or resources to research all things WWII, I have volunteered to be a Setup CM for the FSO events. I know many people are deep into the details and are very involved with the history of WWII. The last thing I'd want to do is try to design something for these guys and do something stupid like match up LW German birds against EW Japanese birds.
Let's go :airplane: and :cheers:
:banana:
-
One last point: There's a difference special events-wise weather the new fighter added is a Ki-43 or Meteor.
I'll just leave it at that...
-
Dot, I hope no offense was taken from my comment. I was speaking in a general manner and not specifically picking on you.
-
Dot, I hope no offense was taken from my comment. I was speaking in a general manner and not specifically picking on you.
Nope. I didn't even see your post until after mine was posted (I was distracted by actual work here at work while typing it :D). Even if I did, I would not have.
-
One last point: There's a difference special events-wise weather the new fighter added is a Ki-43 or Meteor.
I'll just leave it at that...
Amen to this. The Ki43 would be heavily used in scenarios and FSO setups. The Meteor will be useless for anything except some quasi fantasy setup.
-
..................PBY. I'd even settle for the Gliders the C47's towed on D-day.... or where are those subs? These would all add something "NEW" to the game. Who really needs another fighter?
999000 <S>
-
And I see that the Ki43 has been eliminated from the contest. I voted for the 410... More of an anything but the Meteor vote. :bhead
-
..................PBY. I'd even settle for the Gliders the C47's towed on D-day.... or where are those subs? These would all add something "NEW" to the game. Who really needs another fighter?
999000 <S>
you bored? :lol try the b5n for a while if you really want to fly slow...
-
What is the list of planes as of now as I am stuck at work and wont be able to get on till tomorrow?
-
What is the list of planes as of now as I am stuck at work and wont be able to get on till tomorrow?
I second this, what is the list of contenders now? I gather the Me410 and Meteor are both on it. Anything else?
-
They are the Beaufighter, Me 410, Meteor, and Yak 3.
-
Gloster Meteor F Mk.III please.
-
Hoping the 410 will pull through.
-
How about instead of adding yet another array of tanks, HTC models the final four planes.
-
great, Kazaa, awsome
the meteor 1 at least seen v1s...
gimme the do-335 then... oh and the Maus. Both seen more enemy than the meteor mk 3.
-
I'm hoping that the Beaufighter will win. It would be a lot of fun in special events.
-
great, Kazaa, awsome
the meteor 1 at least seen v1s...
gimme the do-335 then... oh and the Maus. Both seen more enemy than the meteor mk 3.
Debrody,
Meteor III destroyed 46 German planes on the ground as well as V1s in the air.
Care to revise your claim?
-
So the meteor only can vulch here?
nope, im all against adding planes what never scored air to air kills. The meteor3 is the last plane what should be added.
Why? Never seen any "flying" enemy. All AH needs is another ho n run aircraft. Core types are missing. Its all damn nonsense. Whats next, p80, p-86, f104, sr-71?
Jak, beau, 410 all ok but that? its a real, a real bad joke.
-
I don't want the Meteor in AH. I feel it would be detrimental to MA gameplay, add nothing for special events and subject to how its perked have a much greater influence on the game than it ever had in RL. However I think this scorning of how it only saw action fighting V-1s and doing ground attack is disrespectful of the pilots that flew them. LW airfields were protected by masses of AA and were not targets to be attacked lightly. Also there are cases of RAF and USAAF pilots who died when they got too close to the V-1 they were attacking and it exploded, so it was not a milk run by any means.
-
I would still take a Me-262 over a Meteor if it was added.
-
I don't want the Meteor in AH. I feel it would be detrimental to MA gameplay, add nothing for special events and subject to how its perked have a much greater influence on the game than it ever had in RL. However I think this scorning of how it only saw action fighting V-1s and doing ground attack is disrespectful of the pilots that flew them. LW airfields were protected by masses of AA and were not targets to be attacked lightly. Also there are cases of RAF and USAAF pilots who died when they got too close to the V-1 they were attacking and it exploded, so it was not a milk run by any means.
I fully agree with all of this. Having a preference is one thing, but slandering the historical stuff you don't want in the game is another thing.
I will be voting for something with props. Not sure if it will be the Beaufighter or Me410 though.
-
I will be voting for something with props. Not sure if it will be the Beaufighter or Me410 though.
(. . . Beaufighter, Beaufighter, Beaufighter . . . !) :)
-
It IS too much trouble... Once the plane is built it's not temporary, and it's not a trial. They're not going to REVOKE the plane.
The question is, with 1 team and limited man-hours, which do they work on first. That's the only question. It's not about testing it with different sub-arenas to see who likes it most in the AvA. I'm sorry but that's just a terrible idea.
EDIT: Also, you're against planes that fill holes in the planeset, but the AvA and the EWA and the MWA all are affected very much BY planes that fill holes in the planeset. Just food for thought.
Well how do you know it's too much trouble? Do you work at HTC, do you have special input the rest of us do not? And how is it that that you think I'm against filling out the plane set? When did that ever matter? Exp. B29. Are you going to set there and say that it "fills out the plane set". Then perhaps you need to take a course in human behavior. The only reason we have the 29 in game now is because people wanted it because they thought it would be COOL, not because it filled out the plane set.
Nutz
-
Well how do you know it's too much trouble? Do you work at HTC, do you have special input the rest of us do not? And how is it that that you think I'm against filling out the plane set? When did that ever matter? Exp. B29. Are you going to set there and say that it "fills out the plane set". Then perhaps you need to take a course in human behavior. The only reason we have the 29 in game now is because people wanted it because they thought it would be COOL, not because it filled out the plane set.
Nutz
If common sense is not enough for you, HTC has made statements in the past as to the work needed to add a new airplane.
-
If common sense is not enough for you, HTC has made statements in the past as to the work needed to add a new airplane.
Well thank you very much for your nearsighted input, Karnak. Go back and research how many planes and vehicles have been added in the last year. While I'm sure there's plenty of work in bringing bring a new anything to the game,
how can you comment one way or the other. Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.
Nutz
-
Oh and BTW, if there WAS a way to try out a plane, in some way, shape, form or fashion, then perhaps we wouldn't have the hanger queens we are starting to get.
One more thing about filling out plane sets, if that is such a concern for.....well whomever, then where's the HE111 among others?
Nutz
-
I voted meteor thank you :aok
me410 and beaufighter should be in a bomber poll
Methinks someone best get some information on the Beau before calling it a bomber.
Beaufighter, Night fighter, Torpedo plane, and attack aircraft which performed in all theaters of the
war during its' duration.
-
Well thank you very much for your nearsighted input, Karnak. Go back and research how many planes and vehicles have been added in the last year. While I'm sure there's plenty of work in bringing bring a new anything to the game,
how can you comment one way or the other. Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.
Nutz
They made the comments a long time ago. It takes quite a bit of effort on their part to add a unit. Common sense will tell you that even without seeing their old comments. The idea that they would do the work to add it and then withdraw it after a trial is absurd. There would be no fathomable reason to do so. All the aircraft on this poll they are fine with adding to the game, so why make them and then withdraw them?
-
They made the comments a long time ago. It takes quite a bit of effort on their part to add a unit. Common sense will tell you that even without seeing their old comments. The idea that they would do the work to add it and then withdraw it after a trial is absurd. There would be no fathomable reason to do so. All the aircraft on this poll they are fine with adding to the game, so why make them and then withdraw them?
Do you know how to read? I stated that if there were a way.........never mind. You say it takes quite a bit to bring in a new plane and perhaps your right. (BTW, anyone could have "made comments a long time ago") But look at some we have in game now. Almost complete hanger queens. I'm all for getting new birds and such, but we get them and for whatever reason, after the initial enthusiasm wears off, then what? More often than not, they just sit around and only get used as quirky thing to up "for fun". While I'm not opposed to upping something for just the pure fun of it, I'm almost certain HT didn't intend for their hard work to just sit by and only get used once in a while. I could be wrong. But again it seems to me that group at HTC would rather see their stuff getting put to maximum use.
Nutz
-
Dude... you have little common sense if you think it's possible to try something on the part of all the players of the game BEFORE it's actually added to the game....
Further.... Your comment "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hangar queens" is also seriously lacking in common sense.
EDIT: I think you're also super-imposing YOUR own idea of what is good and useful on the game as a whole. Who's to say the D3A isn't worth every second of effort they put into it? It sees no MA use but it's used widely in almost any PTO setup. In fact the ones that plug holes often get used outside their own scope because the holes are often too big for 1 plane to plug. They often sub for other planes as well. Your entire idea is based on the thought that you don't consider some planes worth being in the game (that are already) if they sit unused. That's just faulty thinking IMO.
-
Do you know how to read? I stated that if there were a way.........never mind. You say it takes quite a bit to bring in a new plane and perhaps your right. (BTW, anyone could have "made comments a long time ago") But look at some we have in game now. Almost complete hanger queens. I'm all for getting new birds and such, but we get them and for whatever reason, after the initial enthusiasm wears off, then what? More often than not, they just sit around and only get used as quirky thing to up "for fun". While I'm not opposed to upping something for just the pure fun of it, I'm almost certain HT didn't intend for their hard work to just sit by and only get used once in a while. I could be wrong. But again it seems to me that group at HTC would rather see their stuff getting put to maximum use.
Nutz
I think you're pretty much wrong. Nobody at HTC is naive enough to think the Spitfire Mk I is going to get lots of use in the MA, but they will include it because it is a core aircraft from WWII. They know many aircraft have a primary use in scenarios and they are fine with that. They know some people for varied reasons will find uses for "hangar queens" in the LWA as well. Obviously they want the additions to be good for their bread and butter LWA, the additions they have made are certainly heavier in the late war time period, and yet they still added the D3A1 and SBD-5.
The people demanding that only things that will see massive use in the MA be added are the ones with the blinders on. They are blind to the other aspects of the game and, mostly, they are blind to the fact that there is now a very limited number of aircraft left that even qualify under their demands.
-
Dude... you have little common sense if you think it's possible to try something on the part of all the players of the game BEFORE it's actually added to the game....
Further.... Your comment "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hangar queens" is also seriously lacking in common sense.
DUDE.......need i remind you that it's been done before? Remember a foray into what what was going to be "Combat Tour"? While it didn't focus on new planes per se, it did offer some a chance to "try out" a whole new arena.
And again, how in the hell do you know? You need to reread what I said. No where did I say "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hanger queens". As far as common sense goes, I may not be the computer, Aces High experten that you seem to be, but I've been around the block a bit. I would like to think my 50+ years on this planet have accorded me some. So if your talking "common sense" look in the mirror and and measure your own instead of trying to come accross as the know all to end all.
Nutz
-
Where are these so called HTC statements you speak of in regard to fielding a new cartoon peice.
Nutz
From a conversation I had with Hitech.
Flight model about 40 - 80 hours.
Artwork model 1 - 2 months.
Neither of these do I do.
And research of the model many times takes longer then to implement it.
HiTech
-
Well, now... I suppose it is possible. Let's not be too harsh...
He just needs to build a matter transportation device that allows you to compress matter through a gap smaller than a quark to pass into a parallel universe where everything is the same except it's 6 months in the future, report on the success of the addition, and travel back to make the report and sway HTC from any mistakes they are planning.
Or, there's always time travel.... Travel ahead into a possible future and see the outcome, come back and report it.
Or HTC could perfect cloning and infinitely clone themselves until even the great Texas itself has no more room left, work on every model that ever existed in a single release, that way they hedge their bets so they always get the popular ones, no matter how many rotten eggs slip through.... Although the strain on the food supply of the world and the energy required would destroy the planet, pretty much.
or......
Well isn't that enough?
:banana: :rofl :banana: :rofl :banana: :neener:
-
I think you're pretty much wrong. Nobody at HTC is naive enough to think the Spitfire Mk I is going to get lots of use in the MA, but they will include it because it is a core aircraft from WWII. They know many aircraft have a primary use in scenarios and they are fine with that. They know some people for varied reasons will find uses for "hangar queens" in the LWA as well. Obviously they want the additions to be good for their bread and butter LWA, the additions they have made are certainly heavier in the late war time period, and yet they still added the D3A1 and SBD-5.
The people demanding that only things that will see massive use in the MA be added are the ones with the blinders on. They are blind to the other aspects of the game and, mostly, they are blind to the fact that there is now a very limited number of aircraft left that even qualify under their demands.
Karnak, if this were true then again, where is the 111? It surely was a "core" aircraft. Please think about what your saying before posting.
Nutz
-
DUDE.......need i remind you that it's been done before? Remember a foray into what what was going to be "Combat Tour"? While it didn't focus on new planes per se, it did offer some a chance to "try out" a whole new arena.
And again, how in the hell do you know? You need to reread what I said. No where did I say "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hanger queens". As far as common sense goes, I may not be the computer, Aces High experten that you seem to be, but I've been around the block a bit. I would like to think my 50+ years on this planet have accorded me some. So if your talking "common sense" look in the mirror and and measure your own instead of trying to come accross as the know all to end all.
I'm afraid you are universally wrong on this subject. There is nothing else to say. Not one thing you have said is remotely correct in regards to how things work or even should work.
P.S. Nutzoid, Combat Tour? Are you confusing the old name of the AvA as an arena you could join? Because that was called Combat Tour for a while as well. The main differences were code based and many of the improvements have been integrated into your current Aces High game engine, not the least of which is the strat model, moving strats, offline AI, improved grapics and many other subtle differences. They put the effort it. They didn't rescind that effort and say "Nah... Let's go back to AH1 base code" when they cancelled it. They decided it was taking too long and keeping them from better work, but they never added something to the game as a trial then removed it if unpopular. Not actual content. Settings, sure... Things that took a line of code and that's it, sure (server limits, if you recall?) but not actual content.
-
Putting out a new airplane would take a significant amount of work. Folks with exposure to the software business or software development or 3d modelling or skinning will tell you that it is not a trivial amount of work. There's researching and gathering the performance data, getting the 3d and appearance data, making the 3d model, skinning it, making its flight model, testing and tweaking to make sure the performance is as you intend, putting it into a patch, testing prior to release, etc.
Oh and BTW, if there WAS a way to try out a plane, in some way, shape, form or fashion, then perhaps we wouldn't have the hanger queens we are starting to get.
Most of those planes are used a great deal in special events.
One more thing about filling out plane sets, if that is such a concern for.....well whomever
Whomever = the folks who care a lot about special events or historical significance. It is a sizeable number of players.
, then where's the HE111 among others?
I would count others such as D3A, B5N, Spit I, Hurri I, C.202, SBD, TBM, G4M, Brewster, P-40, P-39, B-25C, Bf 110C-4b, Bf 109E, Boston III, F4F-4, etc., which aren't the most-popular late-war Main Arena planes, but are all used a lot in special events.
There seem to be two broad groups of players: those who don't fly in special events and those who do. The former's main focus is the late-war Main Arena and how planes will compete against late-war fighters. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't the only portion of the player base. The latter care about planes that are historically important even if they don't do well vs. late-war fighters. The two groups are, I'm guessing, about equal in number, because in some votes we get winners like the B-29 (which is not very useful for special events) and in some votes we get winners like the B-25 and the P-39 (which are not ueber vs. late-war planes but are very, very useful in special events).
In the vote where the B-25/P-39 ended up winning, the He 111 got a decent number of votes. (I think so did the Pe-2, which is very interesting because that really tells you that some history buffs are voting.) At any rate, the lack of an He 111 is not because people don't care about historical significance or don't want the He 111 -- it tells you that folks wanted the B-25 and P-39 even more than the He 111 and the Pe-2.
-
DUDE.......need i remind you that it's been done before? Remember a foray into what what was going to be "Combat Tour"? While it didn't focus on new planes per se, it did offer some a chance to "try out" a whole new arena.
Nutz
Who got to try Combat Tour?
What was it like?
:noid
wrongway
-
Karnak, if this were true then again, where is the 111? It surely was a "core" aircraft. Please think about what your saying before posting.
Nutz
The He111 is not the be all and end off of gap fillers, the Ju88A-4 more or less fills that slot. Compare that to the Japanese medium bomber situation prior to the G4M1 being added. The Ki-67 would flat out outrun the early war American stuff, and those that could catch it crawled headlong into firepower far better than a 1942 Japanese bomber should have.
There are few players here who spend more time thinking about gap fillers and the like than I do.
-
I'm afraid you are universally wrong on this subject. There is nothing else to say. Not one thing you have said is remotely correct in regards to how things work or even should work.
P.S. Nutzoid, Combat Tour? Are you confusing the old name of the AvA as an arena you could join? Because that was called Combat Tour for a while as well. The main differences were code based and many of the improvements have been integrated into your current Aces High game engine, not the least of which is the strat model, moving strats, offline AI, improved grapics and many other subtle differences. They put the effort it. They didn't rescind that effort and say "Nah... Let's go back to AH1 base code" when they cancelled it. They decided it was taking too long and keeping them from better work, but they never added something to the game as a trial then removed it if unpopular. Not actual content. Settings, sure... Things that took a line of code and that's it, sure (server limits, if you recall?) but not actual content.
Well you say I'm universally wrong. How do you figure that? I was basically thinking out loud. (you might have discerned this from my first post on the subject) Perhaps I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying we SHOULD have a way of testing out a new plane, I meant to say IF we could have a way of testing it, it might help eliminate some future hanger queens. So your comment about "not one thing you have said is remotely correct" is in itself not correct. The inference is that I somehow know what goes into bringing a new plane into the game. I assure you I do not. Simply speaking, it would be nice to be able to try them out, say in the training arena, for example.
With regard to Combat Tour, I'm talking about the plan to have a new arena where we "construct" our pilots in there and fly them, earn medals and so forth. AI's were to be a big part of that. So yeah, that's what I meant about "trying out" a new addition to the game. Simply a way to try out some new stuff, that's all.
Nutz
-
By the way, Nutzoid, please come play in the next scenario "Enemy Coast Ahead" with us. It starts mid November. Come get more play time on the special events side.
Spit 9, Spit V, Typhoon, Mossie, and B-25C vs. Bf 109G-2, Bf 109G-6, FW 190A-5, FW 190F-8, and Ju 88 in a 1943 fight for dominance over the English Channel.
-
Putting out a new airplane would take a significant amount of work. Folks with exposure to the software business or software development or 3d modelling or skinning will tell you that it is not a trivial amount of work. There's researching and gathering the performance data, getting the 3d and appearance data, making the 3d model, skinning it, making its flight model, testing and tweaking to make sure the performance is as you intend, putting it into a patch, testing prior to release, etc.
Most of those planes are used a great deal in special events.
Whomever = the folks who care a lot about special events or historical significance. It is a sizeable number of players.
I would count others such as D3A, B5N, Spit I, Hurri I, C.202, SBD, TBM, G4M, Brewster, P-40, P-39, B-25C, Bf 110C-4b, Bf 109E, Boston III, F4F-4, etc., which aren't the most-popular late-war Main Arena planes, but are all used a lot in special events.
There seem to be two broad groups of players: those who don't fly in special events and those who do. The former's main focus is the late-war Main Arena and how planes will compete against late-war fighters. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't the only portion of the player base. The latter care about planes that are historically important even if they don't do well vs. late-war fighters. The two groups are, I'm guessing, about equal in number, because in some votes we get winners like the B-29 (which is not very useful for special events) and in some votes we get winners like the B-25 and the P-39 (which are not ueber vs. late-war planes but are very, very useful in special events).
In the vote where the B-25/P-39 ended up winning, the He 111 got a decent number of votes. (I think so did the Pe-2, which is very interesting because that really tells you that some history buffs are voting.) At any rate, the lack of an He 111 is not because people don't care about historical significance or don't want the He 111 -- it tells you that folks wanted the B-25 and P-39 even more than the He 111 and the Pe-2.
Brooke, I have flown in almost every event since Stalin's Forth, IIRC. I'm not talking about filling the plane set, I'm saying that most of the players in the game choose the plane with the most anticipated "wow" effect. Plane set is the last thing on most of their minds, IMO. While it's true that we have BIG gaps in the plane set, these polls seem to be geared toward the folks looking for the next cool or uber ride. I'm all for the historically correct plane for scenarios.
Nutz
-
By the way, Nutzoid, please come play in the next scenario "Enemy Coast Ahead" with us. It starts mid November. Come get more play time on the special events side.
Spit 9, Spit V, Typhoon, Mossie, and B-25C vs. Bf 109G-2, Bf 109G-6, FW 190A-5, FW 190F-8, and Ju 88 in a 1943 fight for dominance over the English Channel.
Check the registration page. Been there since the second day, or there abouts
Nutz
-
Another question I have is where the "hangar queen" line is?
In Tour 140 the P-51D got the most kills of any fighter at ~25,000. What kill number denotes a hangar queen in relation to that?
-
Another question I have is where the "hangar queen" line is?
In Tour 140 the P-51D got the most kills of any fighter at ~25,000. What kill number denotes a hangar queen in relation to that?
Maybe it's late IDK. But read your question and see if you can answer it.
Nutz
-
Dude... you have little common sense if you think it's possible to try something on the part of all the players of the game BEFORE it's actually added to the game....
Further.... Your comment "if they could test them all for popularity first, we'd have no hangar queens" is also seriously lacking in common sense.
EDIT: I think you're also super-imposing YOUR own idea of what is good and useful on the game as a whole. Who's to say the D3A isn't worth every second of effort they put into it? It sees no MA use but it's used widely in almost any PTO setup. In fact the ones that plug holes often get used outside their own scope because the holes are often too big for 1 plane to plug. They often sub for other planes as well. Your entire idea is based on the thought that you don't consider some planes worth being in the game (that are already) if they sit unused. That's just faulty thinking IMO.
Do you read what you write or just dump and leave? I've "super-imposed" nothing. I've never mentioned the D3A in any post of mine. You and others have. Humm are we to gather from this that some out there DO believe it's a hanger queen? LOL You'll not hear or see me write that it is. I know it gets used. Hell I've used it myself. Oh and Krusty, your dead wrong. The D3A has made a splendid target in the MA on several occasions! :t
Nutz
-
Later all, I'm out.
Nutz
>pfft<
-
Check the registration page. Been there since the second day, or there abouts
Nutz
Heh! OK -- good! Sorry for not looking first. Thanks for flying in it (although I wish you were flying with me on the LW side :) ).
-
Maybe it's late IDK. But read your question and see if you can answer it.
Nutz
You're response makes no sense.
It is going to be a personal opinion. Some people might say less than 10,000 is a hangar queen, others might say less than one kill a day, most somewhere between the two.
-
Another question I have is where the "hangar queen" line is?
In Tour 140 the P-51D got the most kills of any fighter at ~25,000. What kill number denotes a hangar queen in relation to that?
look at the kills for a P40C - its a hanger queen for LWA, I-16 is probably up there, C202 etc
-
look at the kills for a P40C - its a hanger queen for LWA, I-16 is probably up there, C202 etc
Yes, but what is the cut point?
<x kills/month = hangar queen
solve for x.
-
Yes, but what is the cut point?
<x kills/month = hangar queen
solve for x.
Kills doesn't have anything to with being a queen or not. It's the number of SORTIES (usage) that counts. jeesh
Nutz
-
Kills doesn't have anything to with being a queen or not. It's the number of SORTIES (usage) that counts. jeesh
Nutz
Yes, I know, but HTC doesn't publish that data so we can't ask for it. Here. I'll make it as accurate as we can get with the data available to us.
<x kills+deaths/month = hangar queen
solve for x. x may be described as a percentage.
-
Yes, I know, but HTC doesn't publish that data so we can't ask for it. Here. I'll make it as accurate as we can get with the data available to us.
<x kills+deaths/month = hangar queen
solve for x. x may be described as a percentage.
Well ok then. I'm thinking like in RL. Hanger queens were planes that for whatever reason, rarely saw action( think usage, sorties)and was therefore confined to the hanger. ergo Hanger Queen. So from that perspective we have a few in AH. In reality, it doesn't matter if a plane had 500 kills one tour but only upped a dozen times, compared to a plane that upped 500 times but maybe only landed a small number of kills. The plane (in this example) with 500 kills and little usage, would be considered a hanger queen compared to the one that upped 500 times, because it had the greater amount of usage, not kills.
Nutz
-
Who got to try Combat Tour?
What was it like?
:noid
wrongway
Don't remember who all was involved but some of us got to be Beta Testers. It was a neat concept and I sometimes wish to this day they could have pulled it off.
Nutz
-
It's a hangar queen if it makes a big fuss over being added and then barely gets used.
-
Kazaa is a hangar queen :old:
-
Whats new Nuke?
-
Kazaa is a hangar queen :old:
This is the truth.
-
This is the truth.
When u coming back so you can :ahand
-
Well ok then. I'm thinking like in RL. Hanger queens were planes that for whatever reason, rarely saw action( think usage, sorties)and was therefore confined to the hanger. ergo Hanger Queen. So from that perspective we have a few in AH. In reality, it doesn't matter if a plane had 500 kills one tour but only upped a dozen times, compared to a plane that upped 500 times but maybe only landed a small number of kills. The plane (in this example) with 500 kills and little usage, would be considered a hanger queen compared to the one that upped 500 times, because it had the greater amount of usage, not kills.
Nutz
What's your hanger queen may be someone else main ride. ALL new content is a plus. Hopefully HTC stays around long enough to add everything they used during the war.
-
When u coming back so you can :ahand
Dream on. :)
If the Meteor wins the poll there's a good chance I'll be resubbing straight away to gather up a nice perk pool before its release.
-
Dream on. :)
If the Meteor wins the poll there's a good chance I'll be resubbing couse i cant resist to pick in a post war ride.
fixed
-
Lots of V1s need shooting down in the MA these days. Oh wait...
-
Dream on. :)
If the Meteor wins the poll there's a good chance I'll be resubbing straight away to gather up a nice perk pool before its release.
I'll vote for meteor. :) mk3 to be exact :D
-
My little book says the Meteor accounted for 48 aircraft shot down, all through ground attack or 'vulch'. And 14 V-1s.
-
My little book says the Meteor accounted for 48 aircraft shot down, all through ground attack or 'vulch'. And 14 V-1s.
well, at least they can be historically accurate about its usage. not counting the v1s of course.
-
I vote for Zeppelins!
:bolt: Oz
-
Debrody,
I don't see your objections to the Ta152 being in the game. Why not? It was even less significant than the Meteor.
-
Uh oh. This should be good. Sources and explanation please.
-
Uh oh. This should be good. Sources and explanation please.
No time for sources.
Explanation. The destruction of 46 or 48 aircraft and an unknown number of German/German allied personnel, on the ground and the stopping of 19 V1s was more significant and affected more people than a small (single digit) number of kills.
-
Victors' spoils bias
-
Debrody,
I don't see your objections to the Ta152 being in the game. Why not? It was even less significant than the Meteor.
Have you ever seen me flying a 152?
That plane at least seen "flying" enemy aircraft, and seen action other than vulch. What about the p47M then? Or f4u4? The 152 was operational way before the f4u4.
"History is written by the victors" even the virtual history.
-
The Germans used the 152's to cap 262 bases,to keep them from getting vulched on landing and take off!The Germans were always building something for one purpose,and then using it in another role.
-
The 152 airfield cover story is mostly myth IIRC.
-
The 152 airfield cover story is mostly myth IIRC.
+1
Yes, they built a 190 variant with larger wings for High altitude performance to use it on the deck over airfields.
Notice the D-9 with red and white stripes along the bottom so friendly field ack can identify it?
While I don't doubt 152s engaged enemy aircraft at low altitude I vary much doubt someone said, "The 262s are returning, scramble the 152s".
wrongway
-
hmm...the Meteor isn't even in the game yet, and probably won't be any time soon, but the usual babies are already crying about it... :cry
:headscratch:
-
hmm...the Meteor isn't even in the game yet, and probably won't be any time soon, but the usual babies are already crying about it... :cry
For me, it is more about avoiding another waste of developement efforts a la the B29.
-
Have you ever seen me flying a 152?
That plane at least seen "flying" enemy aircraft, and seen action other than vulch. What about the p47M then? Or f4u4? The 152 was operational way before the f4u4.
"History is written by the victors" even the virtual history.
You know, there was this little war with Japan going on about that time. Maybe you've heard of it? Maybe you're also aware that Germany had surrendered some months before Japan followed suit?
In other words, claiming that the Ta152's earlier service date means jack toejam is disingenuous in the extreme.
I voted for the Me410, not the Meteor, but try to have a little honesty in your arguments.
-
Karnak Germany was in the toilet by then. If the 152 came as late as it did it wasn't because it was some uber wonder. There is at least a little bit of adjustment to be made in that respect. Just like the Meteor or any other plane can't be faulted for not having anything left to shoot at despite being fielded at squadron+ strength relatively long before the end.
-
For me, it is more about avoiding another waste of developement efforts a la the B29.
The ludicrously high perk price and lack of viable strategic targets has doomed her from seeing any use in the late war arena. Who in this game wants to waste 2-3 hours of doing practically nothing of value and avoiding all excitement? it's beyond me.
Give us a B-29 with a very limited bomb load and no perk price and I'm sure you'll see them flying around the skies of aces high in "gun-ship mode", à la Dantoo style. Flying into a full red sector, under 10K, manning the turrets and fending off fighters is a bloody good rush which trumps flying around doing jack all.
A perk ordnance system may well be the answer.
-
Well, I think that the only way to solve all of this is for everyone to vote for the Beaufighter.
Those of you who want the Me 410 or Meteor, as you can easily verify in Yog-Sothoth's Illustrated Compendium of WWII Aircraft, the Beaufighter, the Me 410, and the Meteor are all essentially the same aircraft. According to Yog-Sothoth's, Meteor development started in 1938, but as the Whittle and de Havilland jet engines weren't ready in time, designers had to re-engine the prototype aircraft with conventional Taurus and Hercules engines (and, while they were at it, as it was rather a trivial amount of effort, changed the airframe, armament, landing gear, control systems, and crew layout). The re-engined aircraft proved worthy in its own right, so it was renamed "Beaufighter" and went into production separately while development of the Whittle and de Havilland jet engines continued. Meanwhile, German spies learned of the Meteor/Beaufighter development project and stole the plans. Germany used those as the basis for the Me 410 (which is why it looks almost exactly the same as a Beaufighter). Now it is true that the Meteor with its jet engines has a slightly different performance profile than the Beaufighter with its Bristol engines, but you will find that, upon loading the JAMP ("Jet Assisted Meteor Performance") pack available as a standard option for all Beaufighters after 1943, that the (once you shut down and feather the props) the Beaufighter has about the same performance as the Meteor.
So, as you can see, picking the Beaufighter satisfies all needs.
-
Karnak, following your logic: if the japanese could stop the americans for 2 more years, then AH could have the f-84 too?
There were amazing developements in the prototype phase in '44-'45, we all know. Just look how the germans improved from '44 summer to '45 winter: from g-6 to the k-4, from the a8 to the d9, from tiger1 to the tiger2, etc etc.
The mid-44 rides dont even play in the same league as the early-45 ones, right?
Germany surrendered, couse it was beaten. But the allies could continue the developement with doubled energy, so plz dont compare the early-45 allied rides with the ones fighting (sometimes in very low numbers) in august. Especially considering that the only standing axis force /japanese/ couldnt continue their developement.
The same is true with Germany: the heavies bombed the crap outta it. How could they produce the newest developements in maximum capacity while the british had a nearly untouched background, not to talk about the americans. Thats why i feel the meteor nonsense.
Edit: im not blind, sure am a luftwheenie, but will be happy with the jak or the beau too. Those were core aircrafts, played major roles in the war.
-
Debrody,
I don't see your objections to the Ta152 being in the game. Why not? It was even less significant than the Meteor.
Comparing apples to oranges, same argument can be made for the CAC boomerang, did it serve a purpose in the war? Sure! It dropped smoke bombs so other aircraft can bomb, and did some strafing. What did the Meteor do? Shot down a few unmanned bombs and did some strafing.
Sure they served a purpose in the war, but when it comes down to it the Me-262 engaged enemy aircraft and flew over enemy lines, the Meteor wasn't
allowed to fly near the enemy lines let alone over enemy held territory.
History is written, my opinion is this and its only an opinion - the aircraft men flew and died in - while in combat deserve a spot in this game first. He-111, Do-17, Mig Series, Yak Series, Ki-43, 45, I mean the list can go on forever.
Sure the Meteor will be added to the game, eventually - when the rest of the slots get filled first.
-
Karnak, following your logic: if the japanese could stop the americans for 2 more years, then AH could have the f-84 too?
If it had entered service and seen combat, yes. Had the Japanese held for two more years, WWII would have been from 1939 through 1947. What is hard to understand about that?
There were amazing developements in the prototype phase in '44-'45, we all know. Just look how the germans improved from '44 summer to '45 winter: from g-6 to the k-4, from the a8 to the d9, from tiger1 to the tiger2, etc etc.
The mid-44 rides dont even play in the same league as the early-45 ones, right?
The 1943 Spitfire LF.Mk IX seems to do pretty well mixed in with the 1945 rides.
Germany surrendered, couse it was beaten. But the allies could continue the developement with doubled energy, so plz dont compare the early-45 allied rides with the ones fighting (sometimes in very low numbers) in august. Especially considering that the only standing axis force /japanese/ couldnt continue their developement.
This is countered, probably to the strong overall benefit of the Germans in these games, by the fact that the Allies were not throwing whatever wonder weapon the could think of into immediate service. Do you really think that the Allies would have held back on using the F7F, F8F, Meteor or other programs had they been pressed for survival? The reason the Meteor III was limited in use was because the British did not want to risk technology falling into German hands. They had the luxury of that choice. I can give more examples as well.
The same is true with Germany: the heavies bombed the crap outta it. How could they produce the newest developements in maximum capacity while the british had a nearly untouched background, not to talk about the americans. Thats why i feel the meteor nonsense.
And it is more than compensated by the fact that the Germans tossed wonder weapons into combat that were not remotely ready for prime time, such as the Me163.
Edit: im not blind, sure am a luftwheenie, but will be happy with the jak or the beau too. Those were core aircrafts, played major roles in the war.
You are ignoring the fact that the Allies had wonder weapon projects as well, but unlike the Germans were not pressed into using them. The YP-80's sent to England and Italy would not have be YP-80s had the USAAF been pressed like the Luftwaffe, they would have been P-80s and we'd have been pushing them into combat as fast as possible.
The Beaufighter, Me410 and Yak-3 are obviously more significant to WWII history and more appropriate to the game. You don't have to lie or distort the truth about the Meteor to make that point.
-
The 152 airfield cover story is mostly myth IIRC.
Your probably right,as the Germans didn't have enough fuel to spend on fighter cap.They couldn't even keep the Luftwaffe in the air for lack of fuel,much less a bunch of 152's!They actually made a D-13,but I think it was a lot like the 152.I'm too lazy to drag my Axis war plane book out off my pile of aviation books to check it out!
I was watching a UFO Files program,and when Werner von Braun was asked how the German's had so many technical advanced weapons,he said "they helped us!",referring to aliens.I'm thinking if they had alien help,why did they get their butts whipped!!!
-
No time for sources.
Explanation. The destruction of 46 or 48 aircraft and an unknown number of German/German allied personnel, on the ground and the stopping of 19 V1s was more significant and affected more people than a small (single digit) number of kills.
We dont play this game to win a war for civilians bro. We play to kill other aircraft through the air with dignity and honor. Some like to shoot at tool sheds. In some cases, it is a shed for tools. Either way, how can you base a plane's value on how many civilians it saved? Think about the planes we have that killed so many civilians. Youre logic is pathetic with the civilian bit. Still havent proved how the Meteor is a better fit than the 152.
-
Your probably right,as the Germans didn't have enough fuel to spend on fighter cap.They couldn't even keep the Luftwaffe in the air for lack of fuel,much less a bunch of 152's!They actually made a D-13,but I think it was a lot like the 152.I'm too lazy to drag my Axis war plane book out off my pile of aviation books to check it out!
I was watching a UFO Files program,and when Werner von Braun was asked how the German's had so many technical advanced weapons,he said "they helped us!",referring to aliens.I'm thinking if they had alien help,why did they get their butts whipped!!!
Tin foil hat!
152 was a high alt plane used mostly to be high above the planes hitting buffs they were a cap for that. 30,000 ft+
Fuel was of course a problem but the main problem for the 152s was replacement parts. Near the end they were throwing on whatever parts they could find to keep at least a couple up. The confusion with the cap 262s thing comes because jg301 actually had a staffel who did just that, but in older 190s.
-
wow. . .epic fail thread this has become.
1) Meteor is a jet, and the only reason people want it is because its an allied jet. This is the sentimentalist argument.
2) Meteor is inferior in terms of performance except maby the Hispanos. . .but honestly those 30mm are a big reason the 262 is so deadly.
3) Meteor was not really designed or used for air-combat or even ground attack. It was made to stop v1 rockets. Even if it did venture to the continent, those were rare.
4) We don't need more jets. (opinion)
5) There is a quite long list of other planes that should be added before the Meteor - a host of Russian bombers and attack aircraft, lots of early war planes from all the countries with the possible exception of the US, UK and GER.
- its disappointing that people want things like the 29 and the meteor when there are so many other things that would add so much more to the game. But then again - see pt. 1.
-
Beaufighter.
-
Tin foil hat!
152 was a high alt plane used mostly to be high above the planes hitting buffs they were a cap for that. 30,000 ft+
Fuel was of course a problem but the main problem for the 152s was replacement parts. Near the end they were throwing on whatever parts they could find to keep at least a couple up. The confusion with the cap 262s thing comes because jg301 actually had a staffel who did just that, but in older 190s.
I made a model FW-190 D9 once,and to make it look authentic,I had mismatched parts all over the plane,as that's how they looked,because different parts coming from all over Germany were used,and they just slapped them together.Interestingly and due to the fact that parts for war equipment came from many small shops,Germany was actually still making good production at the wars end.
-
There seems to be lot of passionate Beaufighter fans. The problem I have with this plane is that looking at the pictures I've seen it seems to have zero reward visibility. Is it a fighter? Not very good performance, coupled with bad rear views makes for a flying death trap. No one likes flying death traps in the MA.
Not trying to poo poo on this plane, just wondering if those that want it think they will be competitive in it as a fighter, since this was a fighter poll.
If so, how?
:salute
-
So when do we find out who won?
-
There seems to ba lot of passionate Beaufighter fans. The problem I have with this plane is from the pictures I've seen is that it looks to have zero reward visibility. Is it a fighter? Not very good performance, coupled with bad rear views make a flying death trap. No one like flying death traps in the MA.
Not trying to poo poo on this plane, just wondering if those that want it think they will be competitive in it as a fighter, since this was a fighter poll.
If so, how?
:salute
Yeah, it has zero rear viability from what I can see. But we can use F3 mode, right? Or is F3 disabled for all Fighter/Bombers now?
-
Like the Mossie it would most likely have no F3 mode.
-
Yeah, it has zero rear viability from what I can see. But we can use F3 mode, right? Or is F3 disabled for all Fighter/Bombers now?
Something tells me in one of the next Patches planes will have the F3 capability assigned to the plane instead of its hangar assignment and this won't be F3 enabled.
-
wow. . .epic fail thread this has become.
1) Meteor is a jet, and the only reason people want it is because its an allied jet. This is the sentimentalist argument.
2) Meteor is inferior in terms of performance except maby the Hispanos. . .but honestly those 30mm are a big reason the 262 is so deadly.
3) Meteor was not really designed or used for air-combat or even ground attack. It was made to stop v1 rockets. Even if it did venture to the continent, those were rare.
4) We don't need more jets. (opinion)
5) There is a quite long list of other planes that should be added before the Meteor - a host of Russian bombers and attack aircraft, lots of early war planes from all the countries with the possible exception of the US, UK and GER.
- its disappointing that people want things like the 29 and the meteor when there are so many other things that would add so much more to the game. But then again - see pt. 1.
1) The main reason most people want it is it is a jet, full stop. If it was a He 162 they would still want it. Come to think of it, I suspect you would too.
2) It will easily out turn the 262 as well, it has something like half the wing loading. It also has air brakes. Biggest weakness is the compressibility that caused it to snake from side to side at high speed.
3) The initial Meteor design was proposed in 1940 as a jet fighter, pure and simple. The prototypes were ordered in 1941 and flew in 43. The V-1 was designed in 1942. Or are you suggesting the British Air Ministry were clairvoyant?
4) Totally agree.
5) Totally agree.
Bring back the HTC dictatorship I say.
-
See Rule #14
-
So, it's the final two? What planes are left?
-
According to my squadmate, Beau/Meteor....
The fact the meteor is in the final 2 is just an indicator how fouled up the vote is. :furious
-
A sad day and a great indicator that the voting is heavily skewed or influenced by the uninformed.
There was a guy on bishland lobbying for the Meteor Friday night. When I informed him it would easily be run down by 262s, and easily caught by diving 51s and 47s, he said "LMAO....yea right"
-
Greebo, I wouldn't necessarily want "the old dictatorship" back per se....
But I don't like this whole popular vote to get new rides in game when they ought not be. I wouldn't mind if HTC on their own terms came up with "X" planes they planned to work on next.... Let's say 6 or 8. That would be their "to-do" list. Then they have us vote on what they have already chosen as a good addition to the game, and we just set the order in which they work on that list....
That way we can still influence which one we want to see first, bu no more P-61s in votes, no more B-29s (blech), no more Meteors. Not until HTC says it's time for them.
Just a thought....
-
all these whiny elitist posts are the main reason I want the Meteor to get in :aok :D
as someone very aptly put it earlier this week "it makes the experts so mad that their vote is worth just as much as every clueless noob"
-
I feel sorry for the people who like to fly German iron, it has been forever since one of their flying toys got updated or anther one added.
-
You don't have to be elitist OR an expert to see that some clueless dolt 2-weeker who has no clue what is what and votes for a jet is going to skew the vote. Add enough of them in and you get a mob mentality.
To quote a line, "A person is smart. People are dumb." </MenInBlack>
P.S. Kazaa, I enjoy some German planes, but it's not even about nationality... The meteor has no real place historically or combat wise. Compared to (almost) ALL other planes on the list, they all were useful in many ways. The meteor does nothing other than cater to those that go "ZOMGZORS! A JET!" and wet themselves. (uh.... you .... didn't wet yourself, did you Kazaa? Okay, good! Just checking. :D )
-
before you guys get mis information
the in game poll says
don't care / yak3 / meteor / me410
-
You don't have to be elitist OR an expert to see that some clueless dolt 2-weeker who has no clue what is what and votes for a jet is going to skew the vote. Add enough of them in and you get a mob mentality.
To quote a line, "A person is smart. People are dumb." </MenInBlack>
P.S. Kazaa, I enjoy some German planes, but it's not even about nationality... The meteor has no real place historically or combat wise. Compared to (almost) ALL other planes on the list, they all were useful in many ways. The meteor does nothing other than cater to those that go "ZOMGZORS! A JET!" and wet themselves. (uh.... you .... didn't wet yourself, did you Kazaa? Okay, good! Just checking. :D )
When I heard that the Meteor was in the vote, I wet myself, but just a little.
-
Greebo, I wouldn't necessarily want "the old dictatorship" back per se....
But I don't like this whole popular vote to get new rides in game when they ought not be. I wouldn't mind if HTC on their own terms came up with "X" planes they planned to work on next.... Let's say 6 or 8. That would be their "to-do" list. Then they have us vote on what they have already chosen as a good addition to the game, and we just set the order in which they work on that list....
That way we can still influence which one we want to see first, bu no more P-61s in votes, no more B-29s (blech), no more Meteors. Not until HTC says it's time for them.
Just a thought....
Every vote is a "popular" vote, in AH as well as in real life. ;)
And in some way, HTC has already stated that it might be about time for a Meteor because they put it on that very small list (just like they did with the B-29). The was no reason to them to do so if they wouldn't think of the Meteor as a good addition to the game.
Not that I would necessary agree with that ;)
Oh, and by the way, there's a significant difference between the B-29 and the Meteor. The B-29 had seen a lot of combat (more than 30,000 sorties over Japan at a loss of about 370 planes), the Meteor basically none...
-
before you guys get mis information
the in game poll says
don't care / yak3 / meteor / me410
Oh, THANK COD!
I can't check it myself, was going off something in the squad forum.
Sorry for the scare, all!
-
Oh, and by the way, there's a significant difference between the B-29 and the Meteor. The B-29 had seen a lot of combat (more than 30,000 sorties over Japan at a loss of about 370 planes), the Meteor basically none...
Yes but surely you'd agree the first knee-jerk reaction is "OMG! UBER!! MUST HAVE!" right?
-
My estimation is that speed and firepower rule the day in popular votes, and that might favor the Meteor (for those who know what it is).
I wouldn't be opposed to implementing a weighted vote system - basically your vote counts as 'x' amount of votes based on the number of months your account has been active. Two-weekers would get 1/2 vote.
I think any of the choices will be OK; nothing here will ruin the game (as many had feared about the B-29).
-
This is a subscriber poll, free trials don't get to vote.
-
I would be very happy to see all three of these planes added to aces high. It would be the most ultimate "late war plane" patch.
-
Side comment:
I think the impact of the B-29 has been all but removed because there is nothing to bomb...
/side comment
EDIT: By 2-weeker, I think we're talking full subscribers that are green behind the ears, fresh off the boat, just off the bus, (and fill in any colloquialism you like).
-
I think any of the choices will be OK; nothing here will ruin the game (as many had feared about the B-29).
I don't think anyone's saying it'll ruin the game, it's just if we can only get one plane, all the other choices in that list will provide more gameplay than the Meteor.
Wiley.
-
Well once again the Beau is out of it.
Voted 410 but I expect we'll get a useless in a scenario jet next.
:bhead
-
My estimation is that speed and firepower rule the day in popular votes, and that might favor the Meteor (for those who know what it is).
I wouldn't be opposed to implementing a weighted vote system - basically your vote counts as 'x' amount of votes based on the number of months your account has been active. Two-weekers would get 1/2 vote.
I think any of the choices will be OK; nothing here will ruin the game (as many had feared about the B-29).
What about those of us that have been here for 10 years, but have unsubscribed and resubscribed over the course?
-
Well once again the Beau is out of it.
Voted 410 but I expect we'll get a useless in a scenario jet next.
:bhead
It is? As of a few minutes ago, it was still the 4 of them:
before you guys get mis information
the in game poll says
don't care / yak3 / meteor / me410
EDIT: D'oh you're right... I was thinking the 4th was the Beau! My bad
-
nm
-
:rolleyes:
I understand why HTC does these polls, and I understand why the Meteor is on the list. I think the polls create a great vibe in the MA. People feel as though they have a say in what's next to be added, and it sparks (usually) good conversation. The Meteor is just the next "latest and greatest" aircraft to be added. Smart of HTC to add it to the poll, makes the majority happy.
With that said, all us non-Meteor guys should sync our votes. Yak-3 or 410? :old:
-
With that said, all us non-Meteor guys should sync our votes. Yak-3 or 410? :old:
I voted 410
-
I voted 410
I'd rather see the Yak but will most likely vote 410 as it was runner up last poll, and voting for the Yak may take from the 410.
-
Much as I would love many different planes, I discarded the Meteor and looked at the Yak3 and Me410. Of the two, the 410 was the better choice personally, but also the more useful and practical choice as far as AH goes.
-
I no longer have a horse in this race, but could someone clear up my thinking here:
Beaufighter - Another British twin engine heavy attack fighter (but with torpedo capability - does anyone ever do torpedo attacks? - otherwise is this just a slower version of the Mossie?)
Me410 - Another German twin engine heavy attack fighter. About 20 mph faster than the 110G, but with less armament choices?
Yak 3 - Another small, fast, manueverable, great-climbing, short-ranged Russian fighter.
Meteor - the only Allied jet to see combat (also used in Korea).
I'm not one of the "OMGZ zorks jetz rulez!" crowd but it does look to me like the Meteor is the standout choice among these that brings something different to the game.
Have I gone batty?
-
Meteor = Shiny Red Ball
-
Me410 - Another German twin engine heavy attack fighter. About 20 mph faster than the 110G, but with less armament choices?
more not less.
It's basically WWII's swiss knife
-
I no longer have a horse in this race, but could someone clear up my thinking here:
Beaufighter - Another British twin engine heavy attack fighter (but with torpedo capability - does anyone ever do torpedo attacks? - otherwise is this just a slower version of the Mossie?)
Me410 - Another German twin engine heavy attack fighter. About 20 mph faster than the 110G, but with less armament choices?
Yak 3 - Another small, fast, manueverable, great-climbing, short-ranged Russian fighter.
Meteor - the only Allied jet to see combat (also used in Korea).
I'm not one of the "OMGZ zorks jetz rulez!" crowd but it does look to me like the Meteor is the standout choice among these that brings something different to the game.
Have I gone batty?
All 3 of the other planes, you mentioned what they do/how they'd be used. Applying the same logic to the Meteor, you get
Meteor- Another heavily armed late war fast plane that will be used 99% of the time for ho and run tactics.
Basically, it's 262 lite, and IMO brings even less new to the game than any one of the other choices.
Wiley.
-
I just had a mental comparison of the Me410 to the Jug.... Kind of lumbering, not the most manuverable, but if anything gets in front of its guns it will go "poof" very quickly, and can alternately carry 3K of ord to a target or escort B-29s across the map and back.
(*or hunt them across the map and back :devil )
-
I'm not one of the "OMGZ zorks jetz rulez!" crowd but it does look to me like the Meteor is the standout choice among these that brings something different to the game.
Have I gone batty?
Yes, you have. Slap yourself across the face with a wet carp. Three times. Then repeat after me, "The Meteor is a silly choice. The Meteor is a silly choice. The Meteor is a silly choice."
- oldman
-
:rofl Thanks Oldman!
-
I understand that the best thing about democracy is that everyone gets to vote. I also understand that the worst thing about democracy is that everyone gets to vote. In this context, I bet 80% of the players don't really understand the relative historical significance of the aircraft. They are gamers - much more concerned about lowering their scores and taking bases than in the actual aircraft. Therefore, they tend to pick the bestest, fastest aircraft they can find. I had to argue with a guy who wanted the G.55 over the Ki-43 in the original poll. Silly really.
We've lost the chance at the Ki-43 (Japan's #1 scoring fighter of WWII) and the Beaufighter (fought in every theatre - more than 6,000 built) in favor of more shiny, sparkly aircraft that were much less significant. Of course, there is a case for the Meteor. The Yak-3 is a popular choice only because of its performance. Of course, the Russkis built thousands of them - but the existing Yak 9 is almost the same plane. Visually, I bet 99% of players couldn't tell the Yak 3 and the Yak 9 apart. The Me-410 will prove highly vulnerable in the main arena - and it wasn't that significant with only 1,200 built. It entered squadron service in July 1943 and was switched to reconnaisance duties in mid-1944.
I say, scrap democracy and bring in a HTC dictatorship! Let the enthusiasts pick the planes and I'll be happy.
-
The 410 could kick all the other twins' asses. 38 mossie and all. Significant or not historically, it could be a real contender for luftwaffe twin instead of the frozen piece of dogtoejam on a stick that is the 110.
-
There are only a few more superplanes to go and then HTC will HAVE to start backfilling the historically significant a/c into the game.
The Yak-9U outperforms the Yak-3. (Outclimbs and outruns, anyway). And looks almost the same; slightly smaller dimensions.
For me its between the Meteor and Me410. An Allied jet would be interesting diversion from the 262 when I feel the need fer speed (apologies!), and the 50mm cannon on the 410, well, whoa! Doctor! you get the idea.
-
It's obvious that many players clearly didnt read the rules of the vote.
In fine print it states this is a reverse poll and the first plane illiminated will be added first and last plane or winner to be add last.... :devil
If I had things my way all the planes on the list would be added and I'd start a bomber poll with 5 or 6 on that list that all would be added,but I have no say so it's wishful thinking.
:salute
-
Beaufighter - Another British twin engine heavy attack fighter (but with torpedo capability - does anyone ever do torpedo attacks?
They figure prominently in scenarios.
-
And, in MA use OF said torpedo planes, it would be the most capable of pressing the attack and/or fighting its way out (or just getting lots of kills) after it dropped that torpedo! No running home in Ju88s, avoiding big fights in TBM/B5N... You could drop then quad-hizzo the heck out of any bad guys flying around!
MA use, definitely.
As for the 410, one thing that really interests me (other than the guns packages) is the ability to shoot below the tail. That was one of the requirements in the specifications for the plane. I know when I'm in a 110 and I am resorting to tail gun use it's almost impossible to hit anybody that's level or lower than me and just trying for a shot gets me killed. It might be interesting to see how effective (... or NOT...) the rear guns are since they can depress 40 degrees downwards.
-
The MA is a full melee arena at best. Nothing to do with historical WWII fighting at all.
-
I don't think you can argue that. Despite some characteristics of the gameplay, many aspects are close to WW2 combat. We use the same tactics. We use the same manuvers. We pull the same immelmans, rope-a-dopes, we B the same Zs.
The fact that some fights devolve into furballs in this game isn't unhistorical by itself. Many's the time from BOB all the way to end of war when a fight would become a swirling cloud of fighters, all trying to out turn and outmanuver each other.
Ignoring the plane vs plane setup, some of it is quite historical. Otherwise we wouldn't enjoy it nearly as much.
-
With the clear understanding that I'm an RAF fan, and not a Luftwaffle. I would rather the time go into adding or updating the 190 line up then put the time into the Meteor. And I don't fly 190s.
-
That hurt a little to say, didn't it? :D
-
I think we should get the F14 Tomcat in AH.
According to the Historical Records, Final Countdown, 2 F14s went back in time
and shot down 2 Japanese zeros therefor they must be included.
-
That hurt a little to say, didn't it? :D
Not even a little. It makes far more sense to me then adding another jet. If jets is going to be the game, then lets do Korea and get the Sabres, Migs, Thunderjets, Panthers etc going. Meteors and F-80s work better in Korea for me.
-
That part I get, yes, but 'twas a joke. Never mind :lol
-
I think we should get the F14 Tomcat in AH.
According to the Historical Records, Final Countdown, 2 F14s went back in time
and shot down 2 Japanese zeros therefor they must be included.
:aok
-
We need a TARDIS. It flew alongside Spitfires in the Battle of Britain. Just make the pilot head look like David Tennant.
-
We need a TARDIS. It flew alongside Spitfires in the Battle of Britain. Just make the pilot head look like David Tennant.
Heh! My wife saw the other day a Toyota Sienna van, painted blue, with a TARDIS painted on the side of it, and license plate that said "TARDIS". She was excited to tell me about it. :)
We also need the space Spitfires. And we need Captain Jack as well.
-
No no, that's the early war model. Nobody flies EWA. To get the LWA crowd in we need the uber model. Give us the Face of Bo.
-
We need a TARDIS. It flew alongside Spitfires in the Battle of Britain. Just make the pilot head look like David Tennant.
hey there were spitfires in space with lazer beams, be careful what you wish for!! :t
and they did see action in squadron strength versus the baddies spaceship.
-
Not even a little. It makes far more sense to me then adding another jet. If jets is going to be the game, then lets do Korea and get the Sabres, Migs, Thunderjets, Panthers etc going. Meteors and F-80s work better in Korea for me.
If having the Meteor helps HTC along to a real Korean War arena I'd definitely consider voting for it. Definitely some interesting planes to fly there on the Allied side!
-
I have a question: How many planes do we currently have which saw significant action in WW2?
-
I have a question: How many planes do we have which saw significant action in WW2?
By my measure, I'd say the only ones we have that did not see significant combat would be the Ar234, three gun La-7, Me163 and Ta152. Close to the edge might be the P-47M (P47N too?), F4U-1C, N1K2-J and C.205.
-
By my measure, I'd say the only ones we have that did not see significant combat would be the Ar234, three gun La-7, Me163 and Ta152. Close to the edge might be the P-47M (P47N too?), F4U-1C, N1K2-J and C.205.
Cheers Karnak.
Seems to me like every country has a rare ride in game other than the Brits. Obvious gap must be filled. /trollface.
-
I very rarely get killed by 262s, I just don't like the effect they have on a fight or the timid way most people tend to fight in them due to the perk cost being an order of magnitude higher than any other fighter (not counting the 163 with its severe base restrictions). I don't like the fact that, while it takes skill to land kills in one, it takes almost no skill to dominate any fight you bring one to. I generally don't like the inclusion of uber late-war Axis planes and tanks without modeling the disadvantages that made them much less effective IRL than they are in the game (the Tiger II is particularly galling in this respect: to be even halfway realistic it ought to break or bog down more often than it actually makes it to the battlefield). But mostly I just don't think jets have any place in a game that is primarily about prop planes.
Translated...
I hate the me 262, a well flown 262 is capable of singlehandedly busting up my 30+ man horde when I want to attack undefended bases or gang the 5h1t out of one plane with 30 other friendlies who happens to have enough balls to up and take on my horde.
-
I just read wikipedia and am now a self proclaimed expert with the meteor.
It destroyed 46 German aircraft in a ground attack role! :old:
-
Over a thousand (if I recall) P-47Ns were serving in the PTO at the end of the war, moving tons of mud. Escorting bombers. Long-range fighter sweeps. Definitely a late player, but a player nonetheless.
While the C205 may be low in numbers compared to the industrial juggernaughts, for Italy's consideration it was a big enough player. It saw plenty of action, being on a losing defense front, and was also used by the other side after the surrender.
Just food for thought.
-
Over a thousand (if I recall) P-47Ns were serving in the PTO at the end of the war, moving tons of mud. Escorting bombers. Long-range fighter sweeps. Definitely a late player, but a player nonetheless.
While the C205 may be low in numbers compared to the industrial juggernaughts, for Italy's consideration it was a big enough player. It saw plenty of action, being on a losing defense front, and was also used by the other side after the surrender.
Just food for thought.
As I said, I don't consider any of those to be truly in the category that saw insignificant combat. Over 400 N1K2-Js were built and used for eight months. The P-47M and F4U-1C were only produced low numbers, but they got used (I was not familiar with the P-47N's actual usage once in theater) and, as you said, the C.205 saw significant combat as well despite its low production.
-
I just read wikipedia and am now a self proclaimed expert with the meteor.
It destroyed 46 German aircraft in a ground attack role! :old:
That was only after the taking of france. It was not used in ground attack or fighting before then for concern of losing one in enemy territory.
-
That was only after the taking of france. It was not used in ground attack or fighting before then for concern of losing one in enemy territory.
Does that disqualify the ground attack work in some way?
-
Does that disqualify the ground attack work in some way?
Do you think it will help the health of the game?
The Meteor will be the new least used plane in the game. Meaning they were hardly used at all in the War.
-
Beaufighter didn't get in which to shuffler was the only choice. No amount of argument is going to change his mind.
410 or Yak-3 are perfectly good choices. We could even use them in events.
I want to vote yak-3 but I don't hold out hope its going to win. So its 410.
-
Do you think it will help the health of the game?
The Meteor will be the new least used plane in the game. Meaning they were hardly used at all in the War.
No, that is why I voted for the Me410.
Now answer the question. You, and others, seem to feel the need to lie or distort the Meteor's record in order to invalidate it. You can argue against its validity perfectly well while being honest about it.
-
No, that is why I voted for the Me410.
Now answer the question. You, and others, seem to feel the need to lie or distort the Meteor's record in order to invalidate it. You can argue against its validity perfectly well while being honest about it.
I don't think it's a desire to invalidate it's record. I think it's really trying to understand why folks can't get beyond the need for what they perceive is a late war monster. But the logic is the same I see for not begging for the Spit XII, which saw far more combat, and is by far my favorite WW2 bird. There are other more significant birds historically not in game yet.
In the end it feels like folks just want Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe 1946.
-
I don't think it's a desire to invalidate it's record. I think it's really trying to understand why folks can't get beyond the need for what they perceive is a late war monster. But the logic is the same I see for not begging for the Spit XII, which saw far more combat, and is by far my favorite WW2 bird. There are other more significant birds historically not in game yet.
In the end it feels like folks just want Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe 1946.
You're not one of the guys I am talking about Dan, though I think you are significantly underestimating the Meteor's capability.
I am talking about the guys who claim it didn't see combat, or it only shot down V1s, or it was less significant than the Ta152 and such.
-
With the clear understanding that I'm an RAF fan, and not a Luftwaffle. I would rather the time go into adding or updating the 190 line up then put the time into the Meteor. And I don't fly 190s.
*Grasps the left-half of his chest, gasping for air, falls onto the floor, and passes out*
This thread has both exceeded my expectation for this conversation, and also troughed some real gutter balls. The vote is progressing, as we all expected, interestingly, with the Meteor still holding fast as a strong contender. I am not surprised that the 410 has stuck around this long in the standings, however I am very surprised it beat out the Beau along with the Meteor.
-
This thread has both exceeded my expectation for this conversation, and also troughed some real gutter balls. The vote is progressing, as we all expected, interestingly, with the Meteor still holding fast as a strong contender. I am not surprised that the 410 has stuck around this long in the standings, however I am very surprised it beat out the Beau along with the Meteor.
I think in the US people, with even a casual interest in the subject, think German stuff is neater than British stuff.
-
Personally, I"d like all 4 included in game. Before that however, I'd like new japanese, italian, russian planes (yes, I know the yak is there)
As for the meteor being bad for the game, its inclusion would counterpoint the 262 - if 1 jet is bad for the game, why not the other one? (Just curious about that).
Bearing in mind I'm a brit, I'm all for the spit XII - once the other plane sets are rounded out. Heck, I'm all for any new planes, once we have a more complete rounded set overall.
Wurz
-
As for the meteor being bad for the game, its inclusion would counterpoint the 262 - if 1 jet is bad for the game, why not the other one? (Just curious about that).
Not bad for the game, just there's better stuff that could be added instead IMO.
Wiley.
-
if 1 jet is bad for the game, why not the other one? (Just curious about that).
For me, the Meteor was simply so insignificant to WW2 as a whole, I hate the thought of HTC spending all that developement time to produce it when there are sooooo many other planes that were VERY significant that have yet to be included. It's not like they are adding new airframes all that often. Look at the time that passed between the last one and this upcoming addition. The Meteor also adds absolutely nothing to the scenarios and FSO. It will be a perked novelty in the LW arena and will be totally useless pretty much everywhere else.
It's not so much that the Meteor would be bad for the game, but it would add so little that I don't think HTC should bother with it yet.
My $0.02.
-
In the end it feels like folks just want Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe 1946.
I've been thinking the same thing all week. P-80 will be next. Could Tigercats, Bearcats and B-36s be far behind?
- oldman (OTOH, the P-80 v 262 scenario in SWOTL was fun)
-
A case can be made for the Meteor under the validity guidelines but I don't think the same can't be said for the P-80, Bearcat, and B-36.
The voting is taking place in the MA, and on balance, the MA crowd prefers bigger guns and lots of speed. So I'm concluding the Meteor will win. (Though I'm confused about the poor showing of the J2M, since that a/c had quad 20s and pretty fair speed and climb rate - if the MA flyer loves the N1K2, they should also love the Raiden)
I'm thinking I"ll vote Me410 now, not only for the a/c itself but a vote in favor of the sentiment that the new aircraft doesn't always have to be the fastest and most powerfully armed.
-
(Though I'm confused about the poor showing of the J2M, since that a/c had quad 20s and
My guess is many had never heard of it before this poll.
-
My guess is many had never heard of it before this poll.
That's my thinking as well. I thought its combo of attributes would make it a contender for people who like the MA.
I wonder what it would have been like if the ingame poll window had looked something in the general direction of this:
X Me410: Engines: 2 Top speed: 388mph Armament:2x7.92, 2x20mm,2x13mm, up to 1000kg bombs, Maneuverability: Slightly better than Me110
X Ki43: Engines: 1 Top speed: 329mph Armament 2x12.7mm Maneuverability: Godlike.
X J2M3: Engines: 1 Top speed: 382mph Armament: 4x20mm Maneuverability: Somewhat like Ki-84
etc.
That way people wouldn't be voting completely blind on the stuff they've never heard of, but they don't have to, y'know... read and go to wikipedia to find out about them.
I wonder if it would've changed the outcome. Wish this had occurred to me when they put up the first forum poll.
Wiley.
-
I have no doubt the J2M would have received more votes if more were informed about it.
-
Beaufighter didn't get in which to shuffler was the only choice. No amount of argument is going to change his mind.
410 or Yak-3 are perfectly good choices. We could even use them in events.
I want to vote yak-3 but I don't hold out hope its going to win. So its 410.
Your opinion... go with it. Not going to try to explain to you as you'd not understand.
-
No, that is why I voted for the Me410.
Now answer the question. You, and others, seem to feel the need to lie or distort the Meteor's record in order to invalidate it. You can argue against its validity perfectly well while being honest about it.
If you want to rewrite history of the meteor go ahead.
I have seen no one lie. Facts are facts.
-
Beaufighter didn't get in which to shuffler was the only choice. No amount of argument is going to change his mind.
410 or Yak-3 are perfectly good choices. We could even use them in events.
I want to vote yak-3 but I don't hold out hope its going to win. So its 410.
this - although I feel strongly that the ki-43 would have been better, and then the Yak-3. But the overall logic is sound. especially the last bit.
-
The Beau was not the only plane worth voting in, in Shuff's mind.
-
If you want to rewrite history of the meteor go ahead.
I have seen no one lie. Facts are facts.
Its a "fact" that the Meteor didn't see combat? Its a "fact" that it was less significant the Ta152?
Those don't look like facts to me. They look like opinions.
-
Its a "fact" that it was less significant the Ta152?
The inclusion of the Ta152 in AH really is something of an aberration. Back in the 1970s there was a whole crowd of people saying, essentially, "Wow, that Kurt Tank was a genius! If he'd had his way the Ta152 would have won the war!" I understand why it's here, but really, it isn't representative of the overall plane set and it ought not to be used as a minimum standard like you're doing here.
- oldman (I mean, if it was, then the P80 squadron in Italy would probably qualify for inclusion in the game)
-
The inclusion of the Ta152 in AH really is something of an aberration. Back in the 1970s there was a whole crowd of people saying, essentially, "Wow, that Kurt Tank was a genius! If he'd had his way the Ta152 would have won the war!" I understand why it's here, but really, it isn't representative of the overall plane set and it ought not to be used as a minimum standard like you're doing here.
- oldman (I mean, if it was, then the P80 squadron in Italy would probably qualify for inclusion in the game)
I agree that the Ta152 is an aberration. It is the current bar that a potential add has to match or exceed. To my mind, the Meteor III's 19 V1 kills and 46 aircraft destroyed on the ground exceed that mark.
The Two YP-80s in Italy do not exceed that mark as unlike the Ta152 the YP-80 was not 1) in series production 2) in use at a squadron level and 3) did not see combat.
-
And just what kind of cheese do you want with this Whiny post? :huh
-
I don't see the Westland Whirlwind in that list, WTF?
JUGgler
-
I agree that the Ta152 is an aberration. It is the current bar that a potential add has to match or exceed. To my mind, the Meteor III's 19 V1 kills and 46 aircraft destroyed on the ground exceed that mark.
The Two YP-80s in Italy do not exceed that mark as unlike the Ta152 the YP-80 was not 1) in series production 2) in use at a squadron level and 3) did not see combat.
My point was: We don't need two aberrations. One is just fine. Otherwise we start having to decide how many times the plane took off, whether its pilot flew over enemy lines, saw people fighting on the ground, whatever.
For that matter, was Ta152 ever in series production and in use at squadron level?
- oldman
-
My point was: We don't need two aberrations. One is just fine. Otherwise we start having to decide how many times the plane took off, whether its pilot flew over enemy lines, saw people fighting on the ground, whatever.
I voted for the Me410 for a reason. :P For my part I don't really see the Meteor III as any more of an aberration than the Me163, Ta152 or perhaps the Ar234 and three gun La-7. We certainly don't need it and it doesn't fill any holes, but it does fit in with the established group of almost never used superplanes. By including it in the poll HTC has made their position on it pretty clear.
For that matter, was Ta152 ever in series production and in use at squadron level?
- oldman
Series production, yes, for sure. Squadron service? I've seen claims both ways for that.
-
And just what kind of cheese do you want with this Whiny post? :huh
Brie of course :lol
-
99% of the votes were cast in the main arena which means the late war speedsters with heavy armament will be voted in.
-
I am never going to vote again after my final vote today as whenever I vote for the Beaufighter, it gets buried.
-
You want your choice to win so you're not going to vote for it?
Might want to re-think that strategy...
-
Meteor voted out. Check FB :aok
-
SO.... where were we... ah yes, with no confirmation or comments from HTCs on the consideration of the success of the Yak-3's relative success from this *cough* *hack* *gag* new round of polling......
how long ago was the B-29 poll held, again?....
(can I has cookie now?)
-
SO.... where were we... ah yes, with no confirmation or comments from HTCs on the consideration of the success of the Yak-3's relative success from this *cough* *hack* *gag* new round of polling......
:noid
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,322843.0.html
:noid