Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Karnak on March 27, 2012, 05:52:12 PM
-
Pick one variant of a unit that is in AH that you would like to see added. The variant must be compliant with known rules of addition so no prototypes like the YB-40 and no post war variants like the F4U-5 and Sea Fury. Please do your best to limit it to one pick, or a discussion of others picks.
I am torn between the four 20mm cannon armed Ki-84-I-Otsu and the Mosquito Mk.30, but in the end I find I must, for myself, pick the Mosquito Mk.30.
I don't care that it had radar and I don't ask that the avionics be modeled at all, what I want it for is purely as a Mosquito fighter with high blown engines.
Mosquito Mk.30:
Sea Level Speed: 335-340mph
Top Speed, 28,000ft: 424mph
Range: 1,200 miles or 1,800 miles with drop tanks
Climb Rate: Probably the same as the Mosquito Mk XVI with two or three internal 500lb bombs
Maneuverability: Probably the same as the Mosquito Mk XVI with two or three internal 500lb bombs
Armament: four Hispano Mk II 20mm cannons
Ordnance: two 500lb bombs, one under each wing
This Mosquito fighter would make bomber hunting in the Mossie a lot more effective.
-
Pick one variant of a unit that is in AH that you would like to see added. The variant must be compliant with known rules of addition so no prototypes like the YB-40 and no post war variants like the F4U-5 and Sea Fury. Please do your best to limit it to one pick, or a discussion of others picks.
I am torn between the four 20mm cannon armed Ki-84-I-Otsu and the Mosquito Mk.30, but in the end I find I must, for myself, pick the Mosquito Mk.30.
I don't care that it had radar and I don't ask that the avionics be modeled at all, what I want it for is purely as a Mosquito fighter with high blown engines.
Mosquito Mk.30:
Sea Level Speed: 335-340mph
Top Speed, 28,000ft: 424mph
Range: 1,200 miles or 1,800 miles with drop tanks
Climb Rate: Probably the same as the Mosquito Mk XVI with two or three internal 500lb bombs
Maneuverability: Probably the same as the Mosquito Mk XVI with two or three internal 500lb bombs
Armament: four Hispano Mk II 20mm cannons
Ordnance: two 500lb bombs, one under each wing
This Mosquito fighter would make bomber hunting in the Mossie a lot more effective.
I'll help you out and say Ki-84-I-Otsu. Now the bases are covered!
-
F6F-5N Hellcat
Had 4x 50s and a pair of 20mm hispanos.
-
Only because you really gave two also! :devil
1) Fw190A-9
2) Fw190D-13 (it's a long shot though)
-
109 G6/14 with an ASM motor!
But I'd be happy with a Mk30 or Mk18 mossie!
:salute
-
Easy!
P-47D15
P-47D23
Upgrade the D-11 in MW with wing pylons
and replace the D-25 in the game with the far more numerously produced D-23 Razorback!
Razorbacks Rule!
-
Me-262 with R4M rockets.
-
P-38F and P-38H.
ack-ack
-
Bf 109G6/U4
-
Does the Ki-61 with the 1,500Hp radial engine count? (Ki-100!)
Other than that you can sign me up for the 4-cannon Ki-84.
Failing that, how about the Me-262 A-2 (2 x 500kg bombs added), or the A-1b (R4M rockets).
-
Simple..... B-25J.
-
109 G6/14 with an ASM motor!
YES!!!
:aok
Oh and B-17 E or F please!
-
(http://www.combinedfleet.com/shokak01.jpg)
-
Arlo,
Nothing in that painting is a variant of an existing unit in AH.
-
A Japanese task group? :headscratch: They were wooden so if they were added, they'll require less tonnage to sink (8,000lb?) for gameplay purposes, but have more ships in the group to balance things out. You could go on ahead and have a British Task group that had a metal flight deck which will require more tonnage to sink (15,000lb?) but with less ships.
Arlo,
Nothing in that painting is a variant of an existing unit in AH.
-
Hurricane Mark IIB!
-
Arlo,
Nothing in that painting is a variant of an existing unit in AH.
A Japanese carrier is a variant of an existing unit in AH and a somewhat sought after target.
-
A Japanese task group? :headscratch: They were wooden so if they were added, they'll require less tonnage to sink (8,000lb?) for gameplay purposes, but have more ships in the group to balance things out. You could go on ahead and have a British Task group that had a metal flight deck which will require more tonnage to sink (15,000lb?) but with less ships.
Japanese fleet carriers were just as tough and armored as ours were. The British carriers with concrete decks were tougher against bombs, but they also carried about half the number of aircraft that a US or Japanese carrier did.
A Japanese carrier is a variant of an existing unit in AH and a somewhat sought after target.
Not really. A variant of an existing unit implies the ability to reuse some of the artwork. A Japanese task force, while being very nice to have, would be entirely new artwork.
-
How bout the A36 Apache? :aok
-
Having different country task forces would be a great addition to senarios and FSO! or even adding an escort carrier into the mix.
-
FW-190A-2
The first variant to mount 20mm MG-151 cannon in the wing roots, in service Summer/Fall '41.
-
Not really. A variant of an existing unit implies the ability to reuse some of the artwork. A Japanese task force, while being very nice to have, would be entirely new artwork.
Artwork is skinning, shaping is physical modeling, performance is behavioral modeling and ordinance/weapons is collateral modeling. You said a variant of an existing unit. A carrier is an existing unit. I would like to see a variant of a carrier that is not an Essex class. Preferably something along the Shokaku class. I'm inclined to think players that are fans of Japanese carrier based aircraft might be similarly inclined (as would be Allied pacific pilots who may like to sink something other than a 'Japanese Essex', as well). *ShruG* Was this a serious inquiry? :D
-
A-20 G with 4 x 20 mm 2 x .50 nose package
-
A6M2-N floatplane variant of the Zero. Let it up from anywhere a PT can, i.e. ports, ocean spawn points and fleets even after the CV is down.
-
YB-40! or maybe the B-29 silver plate with NOOK! haha
-
P38F & P38H :old:
-
I cant believe anyone has yet to wish for a proper Brewster Buffalo!!! :headscratch:
ANY of the early war Brewster variants needs to be added. Having the race car version of the Brewster (B-239) currently in AH represent Allied air power in the south Pacific is like having the La5 represent the PZL P.11 during the invasion of Poland.
Swapping out some weight, engine torque/HP, and some gun options cant be all that time consuming in comparison. There are no changes in the frame or wings or anything, just the weight, engine, and guns.
-
G4M3
-
Ju87-G with the 37mm gondies and a earlier model B17 with a radio room gun and no chin turret.
-
me 262 w/ rockets would love seeing 300 perks lawn dart
-
How bout the A36 Apache? :aok
Great idea.
In warbirds, that plane is always the one that spawns when you make a mistake selecting planes.........so I started flying it.
It was pretty cool.
I'd like to see a couple more JU88 variants including the Ju88p-3 even though I rarely attack tanks.
(http://www.luftarchiv.de/bordgerate/bk37_ju88p2.jpg)
Can't figure out what this is.......
(http://img9.echo.cx/img9/6466/ju28849vj.jpg)
-
G4M3
Out curiosity, why the G4M3, Lusche? Is this pretty much for the same reason as people ask for the B-25J, to get one that is more survivable in the LWA?
-
F4F-3
F4U-1, land-based, without arresting gear
-
Out curiosity, why the G4M3, Lusche? Is this pretty much for the same reason as people ask for the B-25J, to get one that is more survivable in the LWA?
xactly. And a B-25J would be nice for the same reasons. Or even an Ju 88 S, though the degrees of "improved survivability" would be quite varying between those "upgrades".
That being said, I have lot more "new" airframes in mind than adding variants of already existing ones...
-
Early Model B-17
-
F4U-1, land-based, without arresting gear
Not seeing a need. Just fly it off land bases. They have no arresting gear there.
-
American:
B-17 E AND F
B-25 J
A TRUE F4F-3 and F4F-4
British:
The Lancaster with the 4 .303's in the tail
Boston with the Ventral Gun
German:
Ju-188
Ju-87B
Ju-87 w/BK 37's
Russian:
Li-2VV (pretty much the C-47 with bombs)
-
Not seeing a need. Just fly it off land bases. They have no arresting gear there.
Saxman could make the case - without arresting gear and hydraulic wing folding units the plane is lighter.
Otherwise, true, no difference.
-
Spitfire XII
-
I'd like my old Spit V back.
-
Well, thus far we're all over the place with no clear favorite for a new variant:
B-17E: 2
Bf109G-14/AS: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Ki-100: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
-
Well, thus far we're all over the place with no clear favorite for a new variant:
B-17E: 2
Bf109G-14/AS: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Ki-100: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
And a Shokaku class CV: 1
-
Since Karnak put the vote out - Ill go with either Bf-109g14/AS or P-38F
-
no F 38 only the H
-
B-17E :D
-
The glass nose p-38 with bombadier...So we can score these as the bombers they are :devil :aok
The second major variant was the Droop-Snoot conversion (see Image 7 below). This variant had it's armament removed and the entire nose rebuilt with a glass nose to accomodate a bombadier. The unfortunate bombadier spent the entire trip lying prone within the nose and his chances for bail out were slim at best. The Droop-Snoot would lead a formation of P-38L's loaded with bombs. The L's would drop thier bombs when the Droop-Snoot did.
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/p38-8.jpg)
-
*cough* P-38k *cough*
-
(http://www.combinedfleet.com/shokak01.jpg)
/thread
You, sir, thought bigger and better than everyone else.
-
/thread
You, sir, thought bigger and better than everyone else.
I'm gonna show my wife this. :D
-
Well, thus far we're all over the place with no clear favorite for a new variant:
B-17E: 2
Bf109G-14/AS: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Ki-100: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
You forgot the P-38H, of which there were a couple of wishes for that plane in this thread.
ack-ack
-
You forgot the P-38H, of which there were a couple of wishes for that plane in this thread.
ack-ack
They were inevitably included with the P-38F and I simply took the one listed first. One vote per person. Well, there is a vote for the P-38H, but that was posted after I posted the current tally.
-
Sea-Hurri (or just enable the Hurri's we have now on CV's, no need for a hook, they're not hard to stop on the deck)
Salute
Steely
-
P-38H
-
Sea-Hurri (or just enable the Hurri's we have now on CV's, no need for a hook, they're not hard to stop on the deck)
Salute
Steely
+1
-
It depends on what is meant by a variant.
Curtiss Hawk75A was in many ways its own plane time and was designated as P-36 opposed to P-40 which followed it but as far as the art work and partially flight characteristics go, it can be considered a variant. So if that qualifies, I'd pick the Hawk.
Second choice would be Ki-61-Ia/b (+Mauser mod.).
-
Lisunov LI-2 Bomber.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,322970.0.html
-
Yak3
-
ANY of the early war Brewster variants needs to be added.
The variant in AH is already as early as it gets. B239s first fired their guns in anger in June '41, Pacific War was still almost half a year away.
Swapping out some weight, engine torque/HP, and some gun options cant be all that time consuming in comparison.
Later variants had more power and weight, not the other way around.
There are no changes in the frame or wings or anything, just the weight, engine, and guns.
Doesn't work quite that easily. Just for an example. There were differences in the length of the fuselage between variants. But as this is a thread about variants, later variants of the Brewster are certainly within the scope of this thread.
-
P-38H
:)
-
Lisunov LI-2 Bomber.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,322970.0.html
I third the LI-2... and make it able to launch from vehicle fields :devil
-
I third the LI-2... and make it able to launch from vehicle fields :devil
Yes to the plane, a "HELL NO" to the vbase launch. :aok :lol
-
If we can shoehorn this in as a variant, then my choice is:-
(http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/4936/dscf0864x.jpg)
Kawasaki Ki-100 I-Otsu.
-
Ki-100
-
Well, B-17E, Bf109G-14/AS, Ki-100 and P-38H are edging ahead.
B-17E: 3
Bf109G-14/AS: 3
Ki-100: 3
P-38H: 3
Li-2 bomber: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
Sea Hurricane: 2
P-38 Droop Snoot: 1
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hawk 75A: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
Yak-3: 1
-
Well, B-17E, Bf109G-14/AS, Ki-100 and P-38H are edging ahead.
B-17E: 3
Bf109G-14/AS: 3
Ki-100: 3
P-38H: 3
Li-2 bomber: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
Sea Hurricane: 2
P-38 Droop Snoot: 1
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hawk 75A: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
Yak-3: 1
Li-2 has three votes. :furious :D
-
Well, B-17E, Bf109G-14/AS, Ki-100 and P-38H are edging ahead.
B-17E: 3
Bf109G-14/AS: 3
Ki-100: 3
P-38H: 3
Li-2 bomber: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
Sea Hurricane: 2
P-38 Droop Snoot: 1
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-25J: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
G4M3: 1
Hawk 75A: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-47D-15: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
Yak-3: 1
You left out Shokaku class CV again: 1 :D
-
Why a Japanes CV is a reasonable request for a new variant of an existing unit:
The behavioral modeling need not be modified - it can be left to cruise at the same speed and operating it on the 2 dimensional water terrain remains the same.
All that needs to be addressed is shaping and skinning and where to place turrets and aaa (ok, modeling slightly different armament but, for the most part, the ai ack cloud is the ai ack cloud - player operated mounts would be a selected part of: 12 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/65 cal anti-aircraft guns in twin turrets and 51 × 25 mm (1 in) anti-aircraft guns).
It really will make a MAJOR difference, regarding Pacific scenarios when it comes to immersion.
The Taiho is also a possibility:
(http://imperialjapanesewarships.devhub.com/img/upload/ngfhghfhg.jpg)
-
B-25J (or the navy Pbj1j) :D
-
Why are folk asking for a B17E?
If there were another 17 added, the F makes far more sense in terms of numbers and Tuesdays of operation. It would stand in better for the E then vice versa. Considering the most well known B17 of them all was an F only strengthens the point.
-
Hate to say it but i like to see the P-38H. Also P-47D-23 or 30. However, what we really need is more Italy, Russia, Japs, Finn, and French AC.
-
Yak 3 and P38H :bolt:
-
Yak 3 and P38H :bolt:
i thought you where going to say M18B or somthing :D
-
F6F-3, B-17E+F, B-25J, P-38H
But most of all I'd like the B-24D
-
Li-2 has three votes. :furious :D
No it doesn't. Volron had already voted.
-
Ki-100 wins my vote, Late war and a very nice design too, and Japanese!
-
Did I meantion that I vote for the 109G14 A/S?
-
P-47D-23 and FW-190A2. I know you said one but I'm torn. :D
-
190F-8/U1 (500lb bomb on the centerline, and 2 500lbers under each wing).
109G-5
Ju-88P-1 through P-3 (various weapon load outs ranging from 37mm BK cannons to a 75mm BK 7)
Ju-87G1
190A-8 with weight of armor removed, or the actual armor protection added
Jagdpanther
-
No it doesn't. Volron had already voted.
Vote early & often I guess is not relevant here?
Oops political. :)
-
I would want the B25J glass nose. Having tail guns in my B25 would be nice! :)
-
Seafire LF Mk.III :)
-
Seafire LF Mk.III :)
That would be a nice addition.
-
... and it certainly wouldnt be a hangar queen ...
-
Mossie Tse-Tse. 25 rounds of 57mm please.
-
Bf109G-14/AS, Ki-100 and P-38H maintain the shared lead with the B-17E falling a vote behind.
Bf109G-14/AS: 4
Ki-100: 4
P-38H: 4
B-17E: 3
B-25J: 3
Li-2 bomber: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
Sea Hurricane: 2
Yak-3: 2
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A-36: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-24D: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F4F-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
Fw190F-8/U1: 1
G4M3: 1
Hawk 75A: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 1
Mosquito Mk XVIII: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-38 Droop Snoot: 1
P-47D-15: 1
P-47D-23: 1
Seafire LF.Mk III: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
Special note to Arlo: In the case of a variant of an existing model, artwork is what counts as the flight model would need to be either largely or completely redone on many of these. While a Shokaku class CV along with a Takao class cruiser and four Akizuki class destroyers would be an awesome addition to AH and I'd love to see them added, they don't fall under the variant clause as they would require 100% new artwork.
-
Special note to Karnak. I didn't request another cruiser or destroyer. They may suffice. The CV would require shape modeling and a skin, perhaps armament coding. It's as doable as taking an existing shape of a modeled aircraft and coding in all the new flight and handling characteristics. I wouldn't be surprised if would be easier, aamof. You said a variant of an existing unit. This actually fills the parameters of that. If you don't want to include this suggestion or take it seriously then ... *ShruG* ... I see it as tunnel-vision. :)
-
Special note to Karnak. I didn't request another cruiser or destroyer. They may suffice. The CV would require shape modeling and a skin, perhaps armament coding. It's as doable as taking an existing shape of a modeled aircraft and coding in all the new flight and handling characteristics. I wouldn't be surprised if would be easier, aamof. You said a variant of an existing unit. This actually fills the parameters of that. If you don't want to include this suggestion or take it seriously then ... *ShruG* ... I see it as tunnel-vision. :)
Well, by that definition one could ask for, say, a Ki-45 and claim it is just a variant of an existing unit, that existing unit being any twin engined fighter, or if you wanted to be more specific the Bf110C-4b. If you loosen definitions too much they cease to mean anything and thus cease to be useful.
-
Well, by that definition one could ask for, say, a Ki-45 and claim it is just a variant of an existing unit, that existing unit being any twin engined fighter, or if you wanted to be more specific the Bf110C-4b. If you loosen definitions too much they cease to mean anything and thus cease to be useful.
"Pick one variant of a unit that is in AH that you would like to see added. The variant must be compliant with known rules of addition so no prototypes like the YB-40 and no post war variants like the F4U-5 and Sea Fury. Please do your best to limit it to one pick, or a discussion of others picks."
The addition is useful and within the scope of what you originally proposed (whether you decided to change that because you didn't think it may involve something other than a specific existing aircraft shape or not).
-
The Shokaku is not a variant of the Essex.
-
The Shokaku is not a variant of the Essex.
But it is a variant of the CV (a unit that in all but the shape and skin is somewhat generic, in nature). You know, as well as I, that the CV is not modeled to be a detailed example of the Essex. It's a passable model of the Essex. Change the shape and skin and it's a passable model of the Shokaku. You keep mentioning art (for the most part). This matches a request to change the 'art' more than any other request in the thread. It's an easier request than the Ki-100 (in my opinion, not being a coder of the game). :)
-
There has to be a handicap system for American and Luftwobble planes :old:
The Ki-100 therefore wins by a country mile :neener:
Two weeks :banana:
-
Oh and B-17 E or F please!
Agree with the B17F. Used heavily before the "G".
http://www.markstyling.com/mto_b17s1.htm
-
Arlo,
As I understand it, the art is the biggest, but not only, obstacle to adding new units. The Ki-100 would probably be on the outside edge of being a variant, but the P-38H, for example, would require very little artwork.
-
Arlo,
As I understand it, the art is the biggest, but not only, obstacle to adding new units. The Ki-100 would probably be on the outside edge of being a variant, but the P-38H, for example, would require very little artwork.
Players make skins - that's no obstacle. Pyro and HT make the shapes and model performance. What you suggest it would require exact performance modeling. The CV wouldn't. So there you have it - modify shape and skin and a whole new variant of a unit (the CV) exists. Players make skins - that's no obstacle. Pyro and HT make the shapes and model performance. Most likely without bugs. Enhancement to the game. Include my vote or not but it's a genuine one made per your parameters.
-
When I say "art" I mean the polygons, shape, what have you.
If HTC were to make a Shokaku, they would not modify the Essex, they would start from scratch as that would be far easier than doing a modification. You can only use existing shapes if they are identical, say the Ki-61's wings and tail for the Ki-100's wings and tail.
-
When I say "art" I mean the polygons, shape, what have you.
Well then let's talk shape modeling. So, you're saying that you want a variant of an 'existing unit' that has the exact same (or very similar) shape. You want this, I take, because it's a 'easy addition' to the game. You also want it to be an enhancement to the game. I contend that stretching or adding polys to the CV and painting it in the Japanese scheme the shape represents might well be as easy (easier) as asking Pyro and HT to clone an existing shape and code all the differences in flight parameters.
-
Per statements from HTC and other 3D modelers, modifying is much harder than creating from scratch. You can't just stretch polys into a new shape like that. It creates more problems than it solves.
-
As much as I would love to see Japanese fleet carriers in game, a CV is a field, not a unit...
-
Karnak, the count is off, you missed a couple of votes for several aircraft, and you skipped some of the suggested units.
-
Karnak, the count is off, you missed a couple of votes for several aircraft, and you skipped some of the suggested units.
Which are missing? Remember, I only count the first aircraft somebody mentions, Fw190F-8/U1 in your case, and I only count the person once. If I see that somebody has done a "+1" or such as Volron did to the Li-2 bomber but had already posted their requests I dismiss it.
If somebody were to post something like: "I said Fw190F-8/U1, but I'd like to change that to Fw190A-9." I would duly lower the vote count for the Fw190F-8/U1 and increase the count for the Fw190A-9.
-
Well, if you're only going based on the first vote/post people made, then we need to have an 'official' vote based on whats already on the list.
Some people may not have even thought of the 190F-8/U1, or the Ki-45 before they already posted.
-
As much as I would love to see Japanese fleet carriers in game, a CV is a field, not a unit...
Capture one. You have to capture it's port. It spawns from said port. Unlike the port or any air field or vehicle base (or strat), a player can take command of it, guide it. So, rather than say it's one and not the other ... it's both. It's obviously a 'field' because planes can be spawned and launched (as can PT boats and LVTs). It's a 'unit' because it can be player controlled and can be used as a mobile offensive platform.
Back to the topic at hand. What's the point of this exercise? Is it to see what players can possibly suggest that's a reasonable enhancement to the game that would not be either an exercise in futility or would at least be something that wouldn't turn out to be an excessive workload?
This is my contribution to this bit of wishful thinking. I've campaigned for the Sherman and the Mosca. Those came into being. I've campaigned for the Sparviero and a Spanish Civil War enviroment. Those haven't. This is more like the former and less like the latter, imo, when it comes to a reasonable request that stands a chance. :)
-
Well, if you're only going based on the first vote/post people made, then we need to have an 'official' vote based on whats already on the list.
Some people may not have even thought of the 190F-8/U1, or the Ki-45 before they already posted.
I am curious about what people want, so I am not really after limiting the choices.
As far as the Shokaku, I am fine counting it as a unit, but Arlo and I just disagree on whether or not it is a variant.
-
As far as the Shokaku, I am fine counting it as a unit, but Arlo and I just disagree on whether or not it is a variant.
Disagreement noted. (p.s. - my next choice woulda been Ki-100, btw)
-
(http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k526/rwrk2/facepalm.gif)
-
I am curious about what people want, so I am not really after limiting the choices.
As far as the Shokaku, I am fine counting it as a unit, but Arlo and I just disagree on whether or not it is a variant.
Problem is that you might be getting a weighted sample here. If things have been up longer, they'll have had more time to draw attention and +1's. And maybe the first poster didn't think of the Ju-88P untill after they had already posted, or maybe they didn't think of the shokaku.
Posting a list of everything listed thus far, and asking people to choose their favorite (or post another variant not on the list) is not limiting the choices. Its asking for a sort of semi-official count after people have had more time to think about what they want.
-
Thing is Karnak, if this is a 'how to economically model more 'units' into the game' concept, something like the Kawasaki Ki-100 I-Otsu is already a problem on two counts: first the fuselage is different as it had a cut down rear compared to the 61 so you couldn't even reuse the tail really (and the front half is radically different already (and the belly)). Secondly, yes you could reuse the wings and landing gear and surfaces but the Ki-61 AH model looks well outdated compared to the other aircraft and probably needs a remodel anyway, so you'd have to redo that in the first place. Or was this the idea, to look for possible additions when an aircraft (say) is renewed?
-
Or was this the idea, to look for possible additions when an aircraft (say) is renewed?
I think it is more along the lines of this.
What surprises me is no one has mentioned a Yak yet, though I haven't followed too closely after my last post and I don't recall seeing Yak prior.... :noid
-
Thing is Karnak, if this is a 'how to economically model more 'units' into the game' concept, something like the Kawasaki Ki-100 I-Otsu is already a problem on two counts: first the fuselage is different as it had a cut down rear compared to the 61 so you couldn't even reuse the tail really (and the front half is radically different already (and the belly)). Secondly, yes you could reuse the wings and landing gear and surfaces but the Ki-61 AH model looks well outdated compared to the other aircraft and probably needs a remodel anyway, so you'd have to redo that in the first place. Or was this the idea, to look for possible additions when an aircraft (say) is renewed?
For an AH1 model it would have to be for when it was brought up to AH2 standards, for a model that is already at AH2 standard it would just be a cheap model to add.
Obviously something like a Mosquito Mk II, which can be visually identical to a Mosquito Mk VI, would be much easier to add than the Ki-100 which shares only the wings and tail with the Ki-61. I consider the Ki-100 to be marginal in terms of being a variant, though if the Ki-61-II is added then the Ki-100 suddenly only needs a new nose.
-
Ki-84-I-Otsu: +1 :aok
Followed close by the Ki-100 and G4M3. (or heck the G4M2)
-
109G14/AS
-
Ki-100 wins my vote, Late war and a very nice design too, and Japanese!
i LOVE YOU.
i vote Ki-100 I-Otsu too! Ho-5 20mm cannons on the nose have an enough punch for enemy aircrafts with 400 rounds.
and Ki-43-III, Ki-44-II, Ki-84-I-Otsu, J2M3 or 5. :D
-
nm
-
P-38H-10-Lo
-
F4F-3
-
Fw 190F-8/U1
-
A-36A :aok
-
how about the TBD Devastator! great for senarios and FSO :aok
-
how about the TBD Devastator! great for senarios and FSO :aok
LOL Great for who? The Zero pilots?
-
LOL Great for who? The Zero pilots?
Great for me. :aok I've been wanting to do some scouting with it for a while. :D Sadly, it's a new plane altogether, and not a variant of something we have. :cry
-
+1 Ki-100
...after the Ki-43 of course.
-
land mine drops from bombers
the Lancaster was known for doing this
droping parachute mines out over a set of enemy tanks or a area they where defending against enemy movement
-
P-38H
-
Well it would be nice to see the actual aircraft that flew in an event than some substitute. And yes, great for the zero pilots! unescorted devastators of course! :aok
-
Yak-3
-
Yak-3
-
Ki-84-I-Otsu and the Yak-3...and I have a ? about the KI. Is it just the extra 2-20mm Cannon that set the 2 apart or does it have a more powerful engine, different Prop, etc. Just curious?
-
ME-410 to be added..
-
Well it would be nice to see the actual aircraft that flew in an event than some substitute. And yes, great for the zero pilots! unescorted devastators of course! :aok
Good luck finding TBD pilots :rolleyes:
-
Simple..... B-25J.
*Bump*
-
I'll say it again..... 190F-8/U1.
Litterally, all that we would need to do is slap a pair of 500lbers on the wings, and we would have an F-8/U1.
-
Well, this thread has pretty much run its course. Because of the way I tallied votes, giving a person's vote to the first plane they mentioned unless a clearly stated preference for another, and the way some aircraft, particularly the B-17s E and F and the P-38s F and H, it is likely the the effective lead would be the P-38H with 7 or 8 votes. The Ki-100 and Yak-3 barely qualify as variants, and in fact may not by HTC's estimations, both did well with 6 and 4 votes respectively. The Bf109G-14/AS and, probably, B-17F tied for third with 5 votes each. Obviously something like the Fw190F-8/U1 would be a lot cheaper in terms of work time for HTC than would a variant with significant differences such as the Ki-100.
Ki-100: 6
P-38H: 6
Bf109G-14/AS: 5
Yak-3: 4
B-17E: 3
B-25J: 3
Ki-84-I-Otsu: 3
A-36: 2
B-17F: 2
F4F-3: 2
Li-2 bomber: 2
Me262 w/R4M: 2
P-38F: 2
Sea Hurricane: 2
A-20G w/four 20mm: 1
A6M2-N: 1
B-24D: 1
Bf109G-6/U4: 1
F2A-3: 1
F6F-5N: 1
Fw190A-2: 1
Fw190A-9: 1
Fw190F-8/U1: 1
G4M3: 1
Hawk 75A: 1
Hurricane Mk IIb: 1
Ju87G: 1
Ju88P-3: 1
Mosquito Mk XVIII: 1
Mosquito Mk.30: 1
P-38 Droop Snoot: 1
P-47D-15: 1
P-47D-23: 1
Seafire LF.Mk III: 1
Spitfire Mk Vc: 1
Spitfire Mk XII: 1
Brownien, the TBD Devastator is not a variant of an existing airframe in AH. Also, you already gave a vote on the first page.
Scotty55OEFVet, I understand it to be the replacing of the two 12.7mm guns with two 20mm cannons and an engine change that would have slightly more power and perhaps a higher critical altitude.
-
Good luck finding TBD pilots :rolleyes:
I'd fly it. :D
-
The Ki-84 Otsu has a tiny bit less weight, slightly different gun ports & also a rectangular instrument panel as well.
-
38H :airplane:
-
Thank you karnak and nrshida for for enlightening me on the KI :salute
-
My pick is a fighter or ground attack variant of the Ju88 I think the C P and G perhaps? I understand the fighter variants to be more oriented to night fighters, but they must have fought in the daytime as well. (I think?)
-
I'd fly it. :D
Correction! We'd die in it. :D But a glorious death it would be! :rock :salute
-
My pick is a fighter or ground attack variant of the Ju88 I think the C P and G perhaps? I understand the fighter variants to be more oriented to night fighters, but they must have fought in the daytime as well. (I think?)
Musta had some serious firepower if they hunted the nighttime bomber stream.
-
Hate to say it but i like to see the P-38H. Also P-47D-23 or 30.
Shifty also voted for the P-47D-23
I second that, making a total of 3 votes for the P-47D-23.
I would also like to see the Ki-43, It was Thunderbolt food in the Pacific after all~
we need them for setups and events and they were incredibly widespread with nearly 6k built.
-
Sign me up for the F4U-3 and any other F4U that flew during the war.
:airplane: :airplane:
Just saying
-
Seadog36,
Only the first vote counted, so when he said "Hate to say it but i like to see the P-38H. Also P-47D-23 or 30." that was a vote for the P-38H only.
-
You know I am a shameless Razorback Jug promoter Karnak, I'm going to push it even in unofficial polls :D