Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: faminz on June 23, 2002, 07:22:47 PM

Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: faminz on June 23, 2002, 07:22:47 PM
I see the question keeps arising somehow in almost every and any post!!! LOL.

So lets answer it once and for all.

My guess is NO!
Title: Well........
Post by: eddiek on June 23, 2002, 08:04:22 PM
AH doesn't "need" a Brewster per se, but there are some who would like to see it added.   I'd rather see a Finnish bird added than more LW/RAF/US birds.
We have four FW190 models, five 190 models, yet we hear clamoring for more more more of them.  In the same breath, the same folks say the US and Brits have enough planes......lol.
Would be nice to see some of these folks get off the LW bandwagon and encourage HTC to add more IJA/IJN/VVS aircraft, ya know?
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: palef on June 23, 2002, 08:17:54 PM
And I say it's about time we perked the Finns!

palef

PS and Hermit/Mitsu
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Glasses on June 23, 2002, 09:13:18 PM
Eddiek, plenty of us .
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Hristo on June 23, 2002, 10:29:53 PM
4 190s and 5 109s. Well, that's what you get if you stick to 2 fighter types most of the war - many many versions. Be fair.

But for the record, I would like to see Ki84, Ki100 and Me410 ASAP.
Title: Do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Xjazz on June 23, 2002, 11:49:58 PM
YES!
Title: Re: Do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Grendel on June 24, 2002, 05:26:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Xjazz
YES!


Definitely ;-)

Just think, wouldn't it be strange NOT to model the most successfull fighter of WW2, the Brewster model B-239? Highest kills-losses ratio of WW2, higest scoring single airframe of WW2, the single airframe with most kills by a single pilot... All those by the Sky Pearl, Brewster.
Title: Re: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Tilt on June 24, 2002, 05:38:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by faminz
I see the question keeps arising somehow in almost every and any post!!! LOL.

So lets answer it once and for all.

My guess is NO!


When we get an early war VVS set it would make sense......until then...........????

well based on the "thousands" of Finns who seem to play this game it should be here by popular demand.:rolleyes:

Tilt
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: eskimo2 on June 24, 2002, 07:49:33 AM
The Buffalo is a turd, and I would fly it for that very reason!

eskimo
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Dr Zhivago on June 24, 2002, 09:04:07 AM
do we really need a Brewster in AH?
YES !!!(http://www.britney-pictures.com/images/laola.gif)
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Squire on June 24, 2002, 09:42:59 AM
We could use more early types, I would like to see it eventually.
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: john9001 on June 24, 2002, 10:17:50 AM
the finns need the brewster so they can shoot down all them nasty lala7's that keep bothering me
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Red Tail 444 on June 24, 2002, 10:35:05 AM
I will apologize in advance regarding my lack of information regarding the Buffalo.

With that being said, I recall hearing bad things about this bird, one of which being called a "flying coffin," and although I cannot recall where I saw that, it has stayed with me all these years. I read this over 20 years ago.

Can someone fill in the enormous holes in my story? I'd give it a shot if it were here, I'm a PTO guy mostly :)
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: whgates3 on June 24, 2002, 11:26:44 AM
If aircrafts of more varying nationalities are desired I suggest the following:

Austrailian - CA-13 Boomerang Mk II
Czechoslovakian - Avia B.534
Dutch - FokkeAvia D.XXI
Finnish - Myrsky II
French - Dewoitine D.520
Polish - PZL P.11
Romianian - IAR 80A
Swedish - FFVS J.22
Yugoslavian - Rogozarsky IK-3

of these plane all saw combat except the swede and all scored air-to-air kills (also the Greek air force scored w/ the PLZ P.24 and i dont think the Czechs scored with their Avia B.534, but the Bulgarians did - against B-24s at Polesti).
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: udet on June 24, 2002, 11:44:39 AM
oh...stfu with this brewster stuff. i'm getting really bored
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: AKSWulfe on June 24, 2002, 11:59:15 AM
The Brewster the Finns have is not really the same as the Buffalo the US had... the Finns did some modifications to it, like all of their other planes, and if I'm not mistaken, made it lighter with a better armement.

Is it needed? No, but then again... no plane is really NEEDED... but is the plane wanted? Obviously.
-SW
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Fishu on June 24, 2002, 12:29:31 PM
of course brewster is needed, what do you think!
every plane is more or less needed, but of course there has to be brewsters!



whgates,

for finnish perk plane; Pyörremyrsky  :D
With DB engine and better looking than 109!

Anyway.. why would swedes need a plane?
they didn't even fight in WWII, other than their fight against illegal border crossings of civilians and random troops. :>
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: whgates3 on June 24, 2002, 01:08:52 PM
Swedish 19. flygflottiljen (19th wing) fought w/ the Finns against USSR, but not w/ Svvedish planes (Gloster Gladiators...on skis in the winter... Ski-Gladiators ?) and scored maybe a dozen air-to-air victories.  Also Ulf Christiernsson flew w/ the RAF and was the first allied pilot to report seeing the Me 262 (he was attacked by one while flying a photo recon DH98)
Title: Re: Re: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: qrki on June 24, 2002, 01:58:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Tilt


When we get an early war VVS set it would make sense......until then...........????


I have to agree with you there, even though I am a Finn. Brewster would probably be no match to Yak 9s or even La.5s.
If Brewster is included, I would like to see the I-16, I-15, Pe-2 or MiG-3 introduced at the same time.

For scenario plays, the Brewster would be nice. Besides, the beer bottle labels as kill markings in one of the Brewsters would look cool. In fact, that is why they called it Brewster. :D  Not to mention the airframe which looks like a beer barrel with wings.


Quote

well based on the "thousands" of Finns who seem to play this game it should be here by popular demand.:rolleyes:


True, but then again, there is always the Il-2 add-on, Forgotten Battles, to wait. That should include the Brewster as well as a Blenheim with skis. Cool!

Qrki
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: cajun on June 24, 2002, 02:25:40 PM
Yes add a Brewster, it will add to the early war planeset, and be a good opponent for a I-153 or Gladiator (The germans used the brewster as well didnt they?) and other early war planes :)

add it along with
the stuka, I-16, some early war Italian fighters and bombers, I-153, GlosterGladiator and CR42.

I think we will prolly see some of the planes above in ver 1.11 cuz HT will prolly focus on early war European theater now that late war Pac, European and Early war Pac  theaters are pretty Much complete (with the exception of 1-2 more japanese fighters or bombers).
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Red Tail 444 on June 24, 2002, 03:54:48 PM
Quote
late war Pac, European and Early war Pac  theaters are pretty Much complete (with the exception of 1-2 more japanese fighters or bombers). [/B]


Respectfully disagreeing there, Cajun. There are significant numbers of IJN planes missing from the PTO planeset, IMO. Vals, Kates, and the early model zeke (AGM2, I think) all were major players for Japan early on, while the Ki-84, Oscar would be nice additions, and the Raiden (low-perked for sure) would make a more well-rounded representation of the PTO Axis planeset.

Hope this doesn't sound like a flame-out at anyone. It's not :)

Sorry for digressing, this is a Brewster Buffalo thread, yes?...:rolleyes:
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: cajun on June 24, 2002, 05:22:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Red Tail 444


Respectfully disagreeing there, Cajun. There are significant numbers of IJN planes missing from the PTO planeset, IMO. Vals, Kates, and the early model zeke (AGM2, I think) all were major players for Japan early on, while the Ki-84, Oscar would be nice additions, and the Raiden (low-perked for sure) would make a more well-rounded representation of the PTO Axis planeset.


I was including the japanese planes we are getting in patch 1.10 (val and A6m2).  However I would like to see a "kate", which japanese fighter was it that could carry torpedos?
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Karnak on June 24, 2002, 05:38:35 PM
Yes, the Finnish Brewster should be added.  The Finns did incredibly well in it, unlike everybody else (yes, I know about the differences) and it is an essential addition to the early-mid Eastern Front lineup.

cajun,

You're off your rocker if you think that the Japanese planeset is anywhere near finished.  I'll grant you that the US Pacific Theatre stuff is doing pretty well, but the Japanese don't even have a third of what they need before they can be seen in the same light as the US, and this is counting the aircraft in 1.10.

None of the aircraft in my signature have been added, and there are many more besides those.

Red Tail,

The J2M Raiden doesn't even begin to qualify for perking.  There isn't a Japanese fighter that saw combat that was good enough toqualify for perking.
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: cajun on June 24, 2002, 05:50:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Yes,
cajun,

You're off your rocker if you think that the Japanese planeset is anywhere near finished.  I'll grant you that the US Pacific Theatre stuff is doing pretty well, but the Japanese don't even have a third of what they need before they can be seen in the same light as the US, and this is counting the aircraft in 1.10.

None of the aircraft in my signature have been added, and there are many more besides those.



I didn't mean complete, what I was saying is look at the italian, Russian,earlywar german & RAF planes. (Not really any italian planes to look at! :) )

I'm not saying we don't need anymore japanese planes, of course we do.  but I think version 1.11 will have a more european aircraft, as well as finish the japanese earlywar planeset.

And I bet plane#10 (if there will be another plane in ver1.10) will be a kate or another early-mid war japanese plane.
Title: Re: Re: Do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: LLv34_Camouflage on June 25, 2002, 10:59:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Grendel


Definitely ;-)

Just think, wouldn't it be strange NOT to model the most successfull fighter of WW2, the Brewster model B-239? Highest kills-losses ratio of WW2, higest scoring single airframe of WW2, the single airframe with most kills by a single pilot... All those by the Sky Pearl, Brewster.


What Grendel said! :)

Camo
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: Viper17 on June 26, 2002, 01:17:28 AM
Ok im risking this. What is a Brewster? Is it the thing the marines used on Midway and were ANAILATED by the Zeeks? Isnt it called a Buffilo. And we do have a Finn plane allredy. The 109G2. Isnt it?:confused: :confused:
Title: do we really need a Brewster in AH?
Post by: mipoikel on June 26, 2002, 01:56:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Viper17
Ok im risking this. What is a Brewster? Is it the thing the marines used on Midway and were ANAILATED by the Zeeks? Isnt it called a Buffilo. And we do have a Finn plane allredy. The 109G2. Isnt it?:confused: :confused:



ok. Dont add more US planes because we allready have US planes. And yes, G2 have finnish markings.

Brewster, YES.