Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: brady on November 02, 2002, 04:42:01 PM
-
Well, I for one elected not to play Midway because of the funky plane set, we have late model wildcats and early model Zero's...and other imbalances which have been debated to death and I will not go into that yet again.
I will mention why the A6M3 is such and important plane, and I realy just dont get Why In light of the Alled planes which were added oppset it in the last patch we got the A6M2.
The A6M3 begain to inter service in spring 1942.
The A6M3 had Type 99MK II cannons with 100 rpg. Not he Type 99 MK I cannons we have with 60rpg on the A6M2.
The A6M3 was slightly Faster than the "2"
The A6M3 had a slightly shorter range than the A6M2.
The primary diferances were the Cannons, With better balistics, better rof and more ammo, the durabality of the Allied planes and their 50cal uberness could be mitagated to some extant, curently it is exceunated. Which seams to be theam in the curent PAC plane set.
In all fairness the CM's did good with what they had to work with.
-
Hmmm. You might want to ask some of the USN pilots who fought in the Midway scenario today (those few who made it back) whether they would like to see a faster more heavily armed Zero. . .
:)
-
Hehe, I had a great time seeing those little paper planes falling to the SDB's guns of VMSB-241 at Midway scenario... :D
-
Each side lost 2 CV's.
Pretty even to me considering the plane set.
Both sides had over 170 pilots up each.
GREAT JOB BY ALL INVOLVED.
-
I think the biggest "hole" in the rule set was not requiring the IJN TBM's to empty their forward guns at takeoff (Kate had no foreward guns).
Of course this didn't affect me at all sicne I can't participate in this scenario :(
J_A_B
-
in RL midway the IJN did not know the USN had any CV's at midway , IJN thought the USN only had 2 CV's and they were at Hawaii, so they attacked the island.
in the SEA the IJN knew the USN had 3 CV's at midway so went looking for them right at first instead of attacking the island.
also because they did not expect any USN CV's , the IJN had all their CV's in one group so once the fleet was spotted all USN AC could be directed to that point.
-
This only pertains to the F4F vs Zero thing:
Whats to debate? The Midway F4F in real life was the F4F-4 and the IJN A6M was the A6M2. Thats what they had. A6M3? fine, add it, but not a single A6M3 saw service at Midway. None. You make it sound like the USN gets some unfair "unhistoric" fighter while the IJN has to make do with some lesser type?
In case there is some misconception that the Zeros ruled at Midway vs F4Fs they didnt. The F4Fs gave as good as they got in air to air battles there. Read any account you like of the battle.
Regards.
-
I wasn't aware that the A6M3 actually made it to carrier deployment by the time of Midway, with the A6M2-21 still being the carrier deployed version that took part in the battle. In fact, even though production began shortly before Midway, I though the first combat action occurred over New Guinea and the Solomons.
Following limited service in Japan, the A6M3s were deployed to the New Guinea/Solomons area in the late spring of 1942 in preparation for the invasion of Australia. Initially, the Allies thought that the A6M3 was an entirely new fighter because of its squared-off wingtips, and Capt. Frank McCoy's team at the Directorate of Intelligence of the Allied Air Forces, Southwest Pacific Area, assigned it the code name HAP, after the nickname of General Henry Arnold, the USAAF's Chief of Staff. The General was not amused, and had Capt. McCoy called onto the carpet to explain just what he was up to. Capt McCoy seems to have survived this particular episode, but the code name of the new square-winged fighter was quietly changed to HAMP. When Allied intelligence finally recognized that the aircraft was not a new design but was actually a modified version of the ZEKE, it was renamed ZEKE 32.
Charon
-
I want to see A6M3 Model 32 HAMP.
It has faster roll, faster speed, better ammo, better climb than Model 21. :)
-
.
-
Well my sources indiacted the F4F-3, and that the A6M3 was indead thier, but on closer inspection my Zero source is somewhat vauge on this point.
The adation of the A6M3 would go a long way to balancing out the allied firepower advantage, and in general be a better match up aganst the F4F-4.
-
The lack of Japanese planes seems to be a characteristic of AH. Examine any period of the Pacific war, and you'll find glaring holes in AH's Japanese planeset. With the addition of the B5N, the 1940-1941 planeset is pretty strong, but there is still absolutely nothing for the IJAAF during Japan's expansion years.
Many players are finally calling for more Japanese planes; I do hope the Japanese get more than just the B5N alongside the Tiger tank and Me163 rocket plane in v1.11. :(
I feel for the CMs trying to produce and run scenarios under these constraints. I was embarrassed yesterday, while taking part in the Midway scenario where I had to watch big blue TBMs roll down Kaga's deck on their way to strike the American fleet. That just weren't right!
Here's to v1.11, and succor for the Japanese faithful!
-
Thank goodness I am not anal enough to not participate in a great time due to a slight variance in a plane set.
I disregarded the small difference and had a great time in the Midway Frame 1.
I could not imagine going through life on the sidelines because everything was not perfect.
Have a wonderful day! :)
-
As I wasn't at the Midway scenario yesterday soI can't say for sure, but this seems like pretty clear evidence to me that either the F4F-4 is overmodeled or the A6M2 is under modeled:
Kills and Deaths in the first frame of the Midway scenario:
A6M2: Kills: 81 | Deaths: 86 | Ratio 0.96 to 1 |
F4F-4: Kills: 83 | Deaths: 51 | Ratio 1.63 to 1 |
That's just not right, especially as it is the A6M not the F4F that is widely agreed on to have been the first carrier fighter to match land based fighter's in performance.
-
One can not factor in the QUALITY of the pilots in each set of planes or the amount of PRACTICE time either set of pilots put in.
Plus probaly 1/2 of hte Zekes had to travel from the Sunk Norther CV's and try to land at the end of the frame at thier Southern Carriers.
I look at it this way - BOTH Sides sank 2 carriers - that made the OVERALL Balance pretty equal.
Your milage may vary.
-
Which side did you fly on jordi?
-
Originally posted by Oedipus
The absolute correct model should be the A6M3.1415926535897932...
Allied code name "Lamb-pi"
;)
LOL...funny Oedipus, and quite clever.:D
-
People in Jordi's position don't usually fly. I could be mistaken though.
J_A_B
-
Well, I for one elected not to play Midway because of the funky plane set, we have late model wildcats and early model Zero's...
Then your reasons for electing not to participate are flawed. It was my understanding (and is reinforced by others' postings on here) that the A6M2 was the enemy fighter type at the Battle Of Midway. As far as the Wildcat, I am more familiar with them and the F4F-4 was at the battle having just replaced many F4F-3s prior to the battle. In fact, many pilots preferred the F4F-3 to the -4. The British requested the "Martlett" (and thus the F4F-4) increase firepower to six .50s and a few other changes that made the type heavier but having the same exact powerplant (horsepower.) The -4 posessed folding wings and thus more could be carried on the CVs. But many pilots preferred the F4F-3 because it was lighter and thus was actually more manueverable and having just four .50s was not as critical during that period of the war in the Pacific as opposed to Europe. I would love to have the earlier model Wildcat, to be honest. But your reason for not playing based on the fighter matchups is in err and a poor decision.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Which side did you fly on jordi?
Just in case you are not aware . . .
I am the Lead Designer and Head CM for the CLASH at MIDWAY - CM run Historical Scenario.
As HEAD CM I do not FLY during the Scenario. Neither do the SIDE CM's who are in contact with the the CO's nor the SETUP CM who setups the paramaters of the Arena and handles any setting changes during the Scenario. Other CM Staff who are not DIRECTLY Involved in the scenario can and do fly.
I did do a lot of testing of the settings and Planes and Tactics we ended up using both offline and online with other CM's and both CO's and Command staffs and other Scenario pilots.
-
How well were the Zeros/F4Fs flown?
What types of fights?
Odds?
Experience on both sides?
Plain dumb luck???
Zeros hit by TBM gunners?
AAA?
Ect, ect ect ect ect.....you can go on to about 100 variables that we dont know. ***I will point out that in the BoB scenario the Hurricane had a better k/d than the 109E***. Proving what?
This is my position after fighting the A6M2 on many frames of the TODs, Snaps, in the CT, and at Midway scenario:
It is very close to its real life capabilities in AH, and there is absolutley nothing wrong with its modelling. The Zero A6M2 was a fine fighter, but it was not a superplane. I wish folks would stop expecting it to shoot down everything it encounters no matter what the circumstance or opposition!
Personally, I have a LOT of respect for Zeros when I fight them (and the pilots who regularily fly them) and I do not ever, underestimate them. To do so is folly.
Later.
P.S. I absolutely think the A6M3 should be added. We do need it, but it wasnt at Midway.
-
Originally posted by jordi
Just in case you are not aware . . .
I am the Lead Designer and Head CM for the CLASH at MIDWAY - CM run Historical Scenario.
Oops. I shoulda looked at your sig. to your hard work in bringing it together.
When I've tested the aircraft it always seems that the F4F way exceeds the comments I've read about it from US and Japanese pilots.
-
Ummm I had no problem whatsoever with the A6M2.
3 kills, including one F4F from a 3 F4Fs vs 1 Zeke fight.
-
The Funky plane set was a general refrence to all the planes and not just the Zero aganst the wildcat, I see how my initial statement might of given the impreshion that it was just about those two planes.
My deschion not to attend was based on the whole plane set, and the paramiters of the set up and the time involved relative to the amount of action contained in that time. I have attended several Events in the past and had much fun, In this case I prety Much knew what to expect and I did not feal like spending all that time to fly in a contrived replay of an event in History that basicaly boiled down to Just dumb luck on the Part of the US.( and ULTRA)
Somthing that you all should understand as a CT staffer I am constantly at odds over the Allied planes I have to Pit aganst the Japanese planes The A6M2 is most certainly not the Zero I would picked to put aganst the allied planes we receaved espichaly in the Slot whear a hug percentage of the battles we do in the CT take place. This Zero model issues is a small part of a larger Issue, incresing awarness of this is important for better set's and game play in the future. The intent of this post is directed toward that end and not ment to be a jab at the CM's for putting up a fine event of the size and scope that Midway is/was my personal reasions for not atending are just that, and have ltttle if nothing to with the issue at hand, other than perhaps pointing to plane ballance issues and models chosen to stand off aganst one another in general.
I to would say that the Wildcat saems a little to handy, based on my reading's.
-
I did not perticapate in the battle but I can almost guess that many of the F4F pilots dove and ran if a zero got on thier six. If so......The full effect of this discovery (in real life) was not to be felt till the end of 1942, well after Midway. This is not to say that it wasnt used earlier but my guess would be that it wasnt, based on what I read in the books. Even at the Battle of Midway the allies new practically nothing about what the Zero was or was not capable of doing.
In the course of the Aleutian operations (that led to Midway) the allies discovered a complete and only slightly damaged A6M2 that was ditched by Petty Officer Tadayoshi Koga in a marsh. Koga thought the ground to be firm but nosed over and was killed. By Oct 31, 1942 the weaknesses of this aircraft were discovered and new tactics were used to avoid the deadly turn fight.
The deadly turn fight!!
You must remember that the IJN pilots were already experianced fighter pilots by the time the US was involved in the war. The allied pilots new nothing of the capabilities of this new somewhat secret weapon the IJN had. The Japanese pilots had already encountered Martlets and Hurricains over the Indian Ocean with light losses, success was great!....hint hint!
The F4F-3 and F4F-4 were very close to the A6M2 and a zero pilot not being carfull in a turn fight could loose very easily. Both fighters were great turn fighters but the slightest slip in the F4F and the pilot lost( along with the sorry rear visability) . Not as bad for the A6M pilot but the A6M2 still had a slight turn fight advantage, therefore the allied pilot had to work a little harder and with not much if any combat experiance, allied pilots lost early on untill most IJN experianced fighters were killed ON THE CVs WHILE CVs GOT HIT, during Midway.
Pearl Harbor Speacial events are not accurate when allied pilots are allowd to take off early or even allowed to man Ack guns before the attack. This was the IJNs greatest advantage and is why the A6M was so greatly feared. It wasnt the plane, it was the way it was used along with the ignorance of the allies. The A6M was obsalete before it even started fighting.
The allies greatest advantage (for the purpose of this post) (diving and extending) was a tactic not widely used untill late 1942 early 1943. This canot be modeled in AH for early war set-ups.
Give us an honest set-up...handicap the allies ability to dive-extend or run.
The A6M3 had a greater roll advantage but turn radius was inferior to the A6M2, thus all you guys wanting the A6M3 will be shocked how much better the F4F will stick with you in the Turn Fight, however, it dives and climbs better than the A6M2 with a little better roll rate at higher speeds. With this extra speed, you may force an F4F into turn fight but again the F4F will have a better chance of gaining the advantage in a turn fight over the A6M3 rather than the A6M2!
As far as the allied planes being tanks and hard to shoot down.....read my signature!!
I VOTE BETTER IJN/A PLANES FOR BETTER GAMEPLAY!
-
Curtiss,
The problem is that the F4F absorbs stupid amounts of fire. It seems almost as though they over toughened it to set it off when compared to the A6M2.
-
Karnak I just dont really know any more. I know that many F4Fs returned home with big gapping cannon holes in thier fuselages and wings just to be junked. I also read where IJN pilots recall seldom using cannons claiming they sucked unless in really close without G forces and many kills came from just using the 7.7s. Also, cannons sucked while in a high G turn. Snap shots are practically usless. I think AH 7.7s are undermodeled and possibly the cannons are as well, not nessisarily the tuffness of the F4F, for say!
One thing I have learned is that I am told the books are wrong, the IJN/A pilots are liers, and allied pilots including IJN/A research pilots are/were GODS! Incorrect information or Bias?
To choose your side on the tuffness whatever the case, in Warbirds I had a kill streek alone in the A6M3 of 24 against F4Fs, P-40s, and a few slow F4Us (mostly turn fights with F4Fs and P-40s with a few sneek attacks on slow or sleeping F4Us- no vulches included. The A6M2 sucked and the A6M3 performed more like the A6M2 should have flown. Several good 500 yard hits and they went down easy. Same with good snap shot hits to the canopy, my favorite. Total kill streak in one TOD (A6M3 and Ki-84) I tallied up 28, maybe 32 kills, however, I bailed safe several times. In AH, canopy shots (pilot kills) dont exist for me.
In AH I have practially no kill streak in Zeros. F4Fs, turn fights and snap shots, are to hard kill but I dont know if its the tuffness or the guns. However, I think The A6M2 seams to perform correctly vs the F4F.
Absolutley nothing I know of is suppose to down right out turn a Zero. Untrue with WBs A6M2. AH A6M2 A/C looks good.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Curtiss,
The problem is that the F4F absorbs stupid amounts of fire. It seems almost as though they over toughened it to set it off when compared to the A6M2.
I fly the F4F-4/FM-2 on a regular basis. Yes, it is a very tough bird. But, so what? History shows us that no other allied aircraft could absorb more punishment than the Wildcat. None. You may ask why this was the case. The answer is can be summed up in a single sentence. Over-engineered, ultra-simple, well armored. Grumman had several test Wildcats survive 12.5 G sustained load pullouts with minimal damage to the aircraft, vitually no damage to the airframe. With the simplest of systems, there wasn't much to damage compared to the later, more sophisticated fighters.
Add to that the feeble 7.7 mm machine guns installed in early Japanese fighters, plus the relatively low lethality of the the 20 mm rounds, and you have a combination destined to frustrate any Zero pilot who is fortunate to bring his guns to bear.
That said, I have had no great difficulty shoot down Wildcats with Zeros. Yes, they absorb a great deal of ammunition. Nonetheless, they eventually go down. Now, if you are relying upon snapshots to kill a Wildcat, nothing less than four cannons will do that under most circumstances. With Wildcats, you had better saddle up and pour it in, or you will be disappointed in the result.
Maybe you can gain some perspective by flying the SBD for a while. It has just two .50 caliber MGs. It can out-turn the Wildcat, and you must expend a lot of ammo to get the kill. More than you will in the A6M2, that's for sure. Fortunately, it has a reasonable supply, meaning you should be able to get multiple kills.
I think that one must remember that the 6 fifties in the F4F-4 will shred a Zero in very short order. Indeed, the difference in killing power between the two is considerable.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Hmm, all interesting. But I beg to differ.
I engaged 3 F4Fs low with 7.7mm only. During the fight I saddled up on one, one disengaged, and the third seemed to lose visibility and wandered off. Earlier I had shot down a SBD and used up my cannon.
The fights generally operate at a lot closer range than your average MA fight, we turned quite a bit and I ended up between d50 and d100 chasing this kittie. In the end I was able to slap about 150-200 7.7mm rounds into his tail, I specifically aimed for his vators, managed to pop one, then shortly after the whole horizontal stab off.
Now I'm not a good shot, so a fair number of those rounds peppered nothing but fish.
I think the Zeke guns did a fine job, and 7.7mm's are much more usable simply because of the type of fight your average Zeke/F4F engage in.
-
o i love the zero, i was once flying this high alititude mission, with three other zeros in a close formation, and we saw 2 formations (6 planes) of b-26s, now we were high above the clouds and we could only see the red ID of them, so of course we slow down....get a little behind it, we tell one to slpit off infront of it to distract it, so he ducked below the clouds and said his last words, which were "here it goes" and thats all we heard from him...and we ducked below the clouds and started moving in
we were in deep cloud cover and he didnt see us
the first zero moved infront of it at about 2.0k away from the nose of the formations, the all went to the nose guns and starting spraying him with rounds, about 300 rounds later we we get them in sight, my wingman, hawk238, flips over and goes for the stabalizer, he shoots 100-150 rounds and gets the engine and a verticle stabalizer, one plane goes down...
now they know we are here....
we both split up and climb back up to about 15k ro sumtin like
that and we decide to split up and go for the sides, hes goes for the 1st formation i go for the second,
and we shoot down 5 out of the 6 planes.......the 1st zero is LONG gone and go shot about 10 miles back, hawk gets the radiator hit and my engine starts to smoke, we go to about 500 ft above sea level, that one bomber got out bomber hanger, but we most likley saved our team cause it was a 1 base per team map....
those zeros are very good to me they are my favorite, the only thing i dotn like about them is how far back you are in the cockpit and the color, i think grey or black would be better...but to make this long, boring story short, i love the zero it is very dependable and gets me outta tought situations...... the a6m5 is my Fav and the white one i dont use often, but hey....i have this on video if you ahve any doubts
:p :p
-
From above:
"The A6M3 had Type 99MK II cannons with 100 rpg. Not he Type 99 MK I cannons we have with 60rpg on the A6M2. "
Clearly the A6M3 would of been a better choice, for this fact alone, a note on the Damage caused by these weapons, They both fired the same projectile, and the Type 99 HEI rounds are/ should be very leathal. Hitting is the problem, the increased ammo load and the longer effective range of the Type 99 MK II would greatly inhance the Zero's abality to get rounds on target.
My impreshion from reading several acounts on the A6M3 is that reduced manuaverabailty was neglable in the A6M3 compared to the A6M2.
Once agin It can be said that choice of the F4F-4 and the A6M2 only magnify the diferances between the two types. The Wildcat is very durable the Zero is not. The Wildcat has a Huge firepower advantage over the Zero. The Zero is more manuaverable but only barely. The preformance differance firepower/flight preformance issues that could of lessened these differances were not chosen in the form of the A6M3 but rather inhanced by Chusing the A6M2. All this withen a time frame in Which the A6M3 would certainly see more use in the CT and in events withen a historical context than the A6M2 would virsues the Allied planes we have.
-
I am not a plane expert and I do not pretend to be.
All that I know is that when I started the DESIGN for this a YEAR ago when i first joined AH I said Moveable Carriers - WOW !
But what we NEED are some Dive bombers and Torp Bombers and some Fighters - not too much to ask for. Now remember this was before I even HEARD of the CM Staff.
Not much changed till ver 1.10 when we got the D3A1, SBD-5, A6M2 and the F4F-4. Hmmm - Ok - IJN DB, US DB, IJN Fighter and US Fighter. To me WHAT KIND of plane did not come into play ( others may be more passionate about the make and models of the planes we get). Now if we JUST had a KATE and Devastator and Brewster we would be set.
I suppose we could have WAITED 3 - 6 - 9 - 12 months for ALL the Planes to be done before running this specific scenario - but we choose to run it with what was going to be available in the time frame we had set.
To me the IJN IN GENERAL got 2 planes that were IN THE BATTLE - the VAL and ZEKE and a better replacement TORP plane from the KATE to the TBM instead.
The US IN GENERAL got 4 planes that were involved - the F4F, B17, SDB, TBM. They got a better TORP Bomber in the TBM instead of the Devestator and a better Midway fighter in the F4F-4 instead of the Buffalo. They got a WORSE scout plane with a C47 instead of the PBY which did make several Bomb / Torp runs on the IJN CV's plus we did not give the US B-26 at all.
To me this ABOUT evened out any precieved advantage one side had over the other.
Maybe a year from now we can re-run this with a better plane set - I do hope so becuase it means that HTC is still building and putting out more planes !
LETS HTC for giving us what we have and hope and pray they will continue to give us moreplanes so ALL pilots - regardless of what arena they perfer to fly in get more planes to choose from.