Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Jester on July 02, 2003, 02:58:53 PM
-
OPERATION BURMA!
Set up is for late 1941 during the battle through the jungles for the Burma Road.
ALLIES (BISHOPS)
P-40B Tomahawk
Hurricane I
SBD-5 Dauntless
Boston III
C-47 Dakota
M's
LVT's
AXIS (KNIGHTS)
A6M2 ZERO
B5N2 KATE
D3A1 VAL
KI-67 PEGGY
C-47
M's
LVT's
ARENA SETTINGS
MAP: Burma
RADAR: 500ft - Full Friendly
ACK: .7
FUEL: 1.2
DOWNTIMES:
Hangars - 20 min.
Ack - 25 min.
All others - 30 min
NITE/DAY: standard time setting
-
I know we have to live with substitutions sometimes but the Ki-67 in 1941?
-
nothing in this set up will be able to catch a Ki67.
Key's gonna love this, A6M2's all around.
-
Jester!
Love this setup each time it comes around.
I'm sure you'll see some 13th Sentai in there this week.
Re the fast bombers. Has anyone thought about ditching the bombers altogether for a future similar setup? Not suggesting it here ... but I wouldn't complain if you did.
I have about as much trouble chasing down Bostons in a zeke as the allies have chasing down the Peggy ... although I'm sure the speed differential is closer (too lazy to look) ... but the Boston's still pretty fast.
Anyway, aren't the Zekes, Kates, Vals, Dauntlesses and gvs adequate for jabo/base capture?
More of a challenge, yes. Require a little coordination, yes.
Anyway, just musings on my part. Looking forward to returning to Burma.
One question: What does "standard time setting" mean?
Splash1
13th Sentai
-
true, that would force the kate and val to be used. I say lose the ki
-
mixed feelings on this:
1. ki-67 way out of place. 110c4 would be a better substitution (appropriately skinned as something something).
2. allies currently have p40e and hurri1; back to back with a degradation to the p40b.
3. were them clouds from hell fixed? were they present this map?
-
The Boston can catch the ki 67, and both are rarely used to any great effect and it does give the Buff guys a toy to play with, so in a crazy way they are a balanced option for the bomber aspect of the set up. Their both fast for the fighters that apose them, they both cary about the same bombload, but the Boston can be used as an effective atack plane and the Ki 67 cant, other than that their prety even.
-
No no no, we've had this thread before, and the Ki-67 this early is absurd no matter what matches are envisioned.
Use the Kate if a bomber is that important, but no airplane three years more advanced.
The whole idea of CT depends on an equitable rolling plane set. When popular scenarios identify significant gaps like this one, it's time for HiTech and crew to crank out a couple new aircraft solutions.
-
I agree that the Ki-67 is overkill here, but the Allied guys are suffering myopia.
The Boston III is just as bad for the Axis as the Ki-67 is for the Allies yet they all want the setup to lose the Ki-67 without mentioning the Boston III.
Lose both or lose neither.
-
agreed, lose the uber-buffs... make the strat-milk-rank-potatos earn it the hard way.
:D
-
Neither of those planes are good for rank related sorties, except perhaps the Boston for atack sorties, so if their off bombing some depo or town or somthing it's for the fun of it more than likely.
-
you forgot the 109f ..... :)
-
yay the a6m2, in here I might be able to land some kills in it,sure cant do that very often in the MA.
I agree loose the ki67 & boston
-
Well the presence of Ki-67 isn't going to ruin this setup, it just seems to be a bit much, but I realize the current alternatives are slim.
And brady is correct that if compared to a Boston, the speed, and bombload of the ki-67 are pretty even. It's the defensive armament that gives the Ki-67 the undue advantage in the bomber role imho. It can be a real ack machine if you don't make smart passes on it. The Boston (not A20) is fast but pretty much defensless, but historically that is correct too.
The Ki-67 in this setup is supposed to represent the Ki-21 sally which was the predominant bomber for the Japanese over Burma. So from a historical standpoint the Ki-21II sally was 30 mph slower than the Ki-67 and it's defensive armament consisted of 4 7.7mm type 89 mg and 1 12.7mm type 1 mg where as the Ki-67 utilized 12.7mm guns and a 20mm cannon. So if you look at it like that then there is a pretty big difference between the substitution and what was actually used over Burma in the late 41 time frame.
But if you look at if from the point of being balanced then yes there is not much else that can be done unless you dropped both buffs from the setup and that would just spoil the fun for the guys that do enjoy buffing.
Not much we can do except make smart passes, which after all is what we should be doing anyway. ;)
Cya over Burma
-
Have fun in Burma.
I'll be in North Carolina with the family for the next week and 1/2. See you guys in the middle of July.
eskimo
-
Guys, this argument is basicly a waste of time. We see this every damn time.
I also would much rather have a SALLY or BETTY to use instead of the PEGGY for this set-up. We have many holes in the plane set so we do with what we have.
It is a Japanese vs Allied set-up so I use the "JAPANESE PLANES." I could sub it with the JU 88 or the BF-110C as has been suggested but the guys that like to fly IJN/IJAAF iron don't get to fly their birds much so I decided not to substitute.
Come on - just how much damage DOES the KI-67 do? Most of the pilots I have seen killed by the PEGGY wasn't mainly due to it's "Ubberness" but mainly due to the fact that they did something STUPID like flying straight into attack it from the "Dead 6" position. (They don't call it that for nothing.) :rolleyes:
The bomb load of both the BOSTON III & PEGGY are pretty close as Brady said and IMO the Boston has the edge due to it's forward mounted MG's that can be used in the attack mode. Add to that the superiority of the SBD to both the KATE & VAL in this set-up and the Allies have almost all the Aces in the deck.
Guys, I sympathize with you about the holes in the plane set and what we are forced to use in the CT set-up's. We try to do the best we can. But your "Hate Mail" would better be directed to HTC - then maybe they would get the idea that "Those of us that pay the bills" are still out here and would like some new aircraft.
-
Because as we all know having the Betty or Sally is going to make things so much better.:rolleyes:
B5N2: 1938
D3A1: 1937
G4M1: 1941 (Betty) 265mph, no armor
Ki-21: 1937 (Sally) 268mph, no armor
Ki-67: 1944
Boston Mk III: 1941 ~340mph, armored
SBD-5: 1943
TMB-3: 1943
A6M2: ~325mph, no armor
F4F-4:~315mph, armored
Hurricane Mk I: 316mph, armored
Hurricane Mk IIc: 334mph, armored
P-40B: ~340mph, armor?
P-40E: `360mph, armored
As can be seen, if the Sally or Betty were added the balance would be that Japanese bombers are easy to catch and easy kills and the Allied bombers would be practically invulnerable.
-
Karnak raises an interesting pont, one that I have often poundered, if by some freakish chance we did get a Betty, Sally, Helen or a Nell, we would nead a Hudson, or preferably a Blenhim to off set it.
-
Or you could add the Ki-49 Dinah (1942) instead, 306mph.
Armament:
Dorsal Mount:
1 x 20 mm Ho-1 flexible cannon
Nose Mount:
1 x 12.7 mm Ho-103 flexible machine gun
Ventral Mount:
1 x 12.7 mm Ho-103 flexible machine gun
Tail Mount :
1 x 12.7 mm Ho-103 flexible machine gun
Side Mount:
2 x .3 (7.7 mm) type 89 flexible machine gun
bomb / rocket load Max Bomb Load of 2,205 lbs (1000 kg)
-
I think that a Helen, Sally, Nell or Betty and a B-25B or B-25C would go together reasonably well.
The Allies would still have a solid boost over the Japanese from this, but at least the Japanese could catch the Allied bomber.
B-25B: 300mph, armor?
B-25C: 284mph, armor?
Squire,
The Ki-49 was the Helen.
The Ki-46 recon aircraft was the Dinah.
-
Ya on the B25 Karnak, but with a Blenhim we get many early war theaters we could use it in, and your half way to a beaufigheter:) or better yet a beaufort, Another Problem with the B25 is it's defensive firepower, compared to the Blenhim, the Blenhim would work better balance wise overall than the B25 if set aganst an Early War Japanese Buff.
It should be noted that the Ho-1 20mm was a serious pos, it was adopted from an AT gun and had a very slow rate of fire and was found to be inaduacate as an aircraft weapon.
I would rather see an Early B26 Varient than have new work done on a B25.
Blenhim:
Spead (depending on model): 245-288mph
Defensive guns, varied but typicaly two 303's in Dorsal, another pair in the chin turet, some had various fixed 303's in nose.
Bombload Typical: 1,000 pounds.
Beaufort:
Spead, around 260mph
Defensive guns similar to the Blenhim except later vershions had Beam guns (303's) and twin 50 cal's in the dorsal turet.
Bombload was 2000 pounds and they were torpedo capable.
-
I just can't agree that any time should be wasted on the Blenheim until many, many other aircraft have been added. It would be so vulnerable and carry such a light bombload that it would be nigh useless in any scenario. It can't be balanced against the Ju88A-4 and it can't even be balanced against the theoretical Helen, Betty or Sally.
If the B-25 is too much, then I would suggest the Wellington Mk III.
Wellington Mk III: 1941
Speed: 247mph
Durability: Excellent
Armament: two .303s in the nose turret, four .303s in the tail turret, one .303 in each beam position
Payload: 4,500lbs
I think the Wellington would be far better balanced across the scenario spectrum. The Wellington would be a decent opposite for the Helen or G4M2 and an excellent opposite for the Ju88A-4.
-
Well the Blenhim would work well in the PTO aganst an early Japanes buff, and the Beaufort would be best imo, for any ETO set up we could still use the Boston III and the Beaufort was used in both theaters (as was the Blenhim).
Welingtons were great planes though, I just think more could be done with the Blenhim, since you can get a Beaufort (beter choice imo) and the Beaufighter. Also the Welington would not be a balanced choice to set aganst the Betty or Helen, it caries over twice the bombload, is way more survibable and as a very deadly defensive gun package aganst the A6M2 Zero.
I too an not realy advocating time be spent on any of these at present, this is realy just for the sake of argument.
When considering the Balance equation one neads to consider the bombers not only in terms of comparison between themselvs but how they are going to fair aganst the Fighter's that will hunt them, a Pair of 303's can kill a Zero prety quick.
The Beaufort realy looks to be the best choice for a new mount to set aganst a posable new early War Japanese Buff, prety much the same bombload, comperable surviabality to the Japanese Types, efective defensive guns that are on a par with the Japanese guns in their Machines (althought the allies have an advantge in killing the Japanese Buff's), they were used in the SWPA, and the CBI in the early war perioud, comperable preformance.
Austrailian Beaufort:
(http://www2.freepichosting.com/Images/54393/0.jpg)
-
Ki-49 Helen, yes.
I have oft wondered, about the "75 percent solution" to a lot of CT setups, Snaps, Squad Ops ect, concerning the Ki-67 Peggy, in 1941-43 designs.
Truth be told, I very much doubt we will see another IJ medium bomber in AH. I wish I was wrong, but I dont think I am.
In any case...there are precedents for using a faster bomber and having an "understanding" that said bomber is to be flown at 75 throttle (or call it manifold XX), to make it more usable.
I know that Brady, was it you? that asked for the Ki-67 in Guadalcanal 1942 Scenario, with an idea of a limit on its throttle, to make it a Ki-49, or G4M2 type, rather than use the Ju88 sub.
Warbirds did a "Battle of Britain" Scenario in Aug 2000. The Ju88s in WB (Ju88A4 with wep too) were a bit too fast for the Hurricane, so the rule was "75 throttle" for the Ju88. Guess what? most of the players obliged.
I wonder if we asked in event setups and the CT, If we asked, would most abide by it? Its a simple solution that works, if enough fair minded players understand the reason for it. I would kind of like it better than the Ju88, and in return, the IJ get a better a/c, certainly better guns.
Also, I see a need for the Bostons to be flown under the same restrictions, for some setups (esp PAC 1941) to better represent slower allied types where appropriate.
Just a thought I had. Certainly more realistic engine management will also help, in AH2, so that bombers and fighters are not flown "to the wall" for the entire mission. I hope that will be a change.
Btw Man 35 for the Ki-67 gives it 250 on the deck, for the Boston, its about Man 25 to get @250, slow enough to be caught at least.
-
I too would be very suprised to see another Japanease buff in the near future.
Yes I was battling hard to get them to agree to a lower man seting for the crews flying the Peggy in Guadacanal but they dident beleave they (the players) would do this, so we were stuck with the JU 88.
The funny thing is in the BoB event whear Wotan was in chagre they flew the JU 88's at a reduced man seting to represent the slightly slower JU 88's that were their and everyone ablidged, In fact Wotan sugested this to me as a means to be able to use the Peggy in the slot.
But that is all well (and maby not so) Good for an event, in an open areana we cant expect people to slow it down.
-
We going to ask the Allies to please not "Dogfight" with the Boston at the same time?
-
lol.:)
-
"Hate mail" ??
Sounded like a reasonable discussion to me. Whatever.
:rolleyes:
-
I'll add my voice to the Ki67 debate.
Its too fast for any allied aircraft in the present setup, if the pilot flies straight its uncatchable. Its guns are far too powerful for the allies 1941 pea shooting planes :).
Its a late war aircraft and i just cant understand why you always put one aircraft in these setups which is historically incorrect. We can use the D3a1 and Bn5!!
THE CT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MORE REALISTIC ARENA.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE CT STAFF DONT USE LATE WAR PLANES TO SUBSTITUTE EARLY ONES.
The major problem is this:
If you have a choice between a D3A1 or a BN5 or a 1944 ki67 with 20mm and huge bombload which will you choose?
the ki67 obviously.
result is we see no other types used :(
In 4 hours of playing this setup I have to say it was FANTASTIC jester. EXCEPT when the ki67s arrived at the battles.It was the only time it got annoying as an allied pilot.Did i see a d3a1 or BN5? nope :(
One thing i must commend you on is having the Axis having an advantage for a change. Far too offten they seem to be at a disadvantage.
For instance the Libiya setup: 109E's vs P40E's? thats not fair or realistic.
109F4's were around when P40E's arrived in africa.
INTERESTING FACT: 190A3's were in africa on 8th November 1942: II./JG2 saw action in africa at this time flying 190s.
As we dont have 190A3's im happy as an axis type to not use the 190A5 as a substitute.
P40F of the 57th FG were to be sent to Africa on rosevelts orders by the 1st of september 1942. There were 72 brand new p40F's that were given to the 56th FG when they were in New England and they gave a clue as to where the group would be heading because they were painted in desert camo :).However the Ranger aircraft carrier had delivered a shipment of 68 P40E-1's to Accra, on the gold coast of Africa, in late may 1942.However the FIRST encounter with enemy aircraft the 57th FG had came on the 14th of august 1942 after some training with the british DAF, 6 P40F's defending bostons were attacked by 14 Bf109s.
lt. William O'Neill claimed two 109s but they were not officially recognised. The first official P40 kill came on the 4th of september 1942. a 109 shot down by 2lt. Thomas Williams of the 66th FS.
The 57th FG got their first officially recognised kill in the MTO on 7th of October 1942. (six P40F's escorting 18 Bostons) attacked by bf109s and 202s. Maj Clermont Wheeler bagged a 109.
109F-4 was first built in 1941. By 1942 the 109s began to be produced in the 109G-1 format and even the 109G-6 was built in late 1942. The 109E's were being totally phased out by 1941 let alone 1942.Please dont use them where they werent used :)
So as you can see when i say i think the set ups are wrong it isnt just so i can gain some advantage over allied flyers.Its just that i want it to TRUELLY represent the theatre.
If you want proof that im not out for an advantage you should note that the present setup has Axis powers with an advantage.They have the zero which is far superior to the p40B and is a better fighter than the hurricane I, they have the ki-67 which i dont agree should be in the setup but well its there now :( and yet i decided to fly allied for the entire time.
I dont seek advantage by any unfair means yet ive been accused of it every time i ask for axis to have a later model introduced.It really sucks, especially when HT himself accused me of it :(
anyhow thats my view:
Libiya needs the 109F4 added.
Burma needs the Ki-67 removed.
if the 109F4 is perked thats fine, im ok with that.It can even be very expensive, but it has to be added.
The ki-67 i realise is the only IJA medium bomber we have but it is far too unballancing to be a fair substitute for a 1941/42 arena.
we have the skins for ju88 in IJN and thats a far better substitute in my veiw.Although the bomb load is a little excessive for a 'betty' replacement. I can live with that though.
jester on the burma setup though. Truelly enjoying it.you resisted the temptation to add a later allied fighter aircraft as a substitute! Well done.....the zekes are really appearing as a Dangerous aircraf the way its set now and i think thats a feather in your cap for this setup jester. Its good that the axis types get a chance to dominate a setup for a change. I was all but ready to quit when i flew in a syria 1942 setup and a p38J was used to substitute the P38E/F. I hope it doesnt happen again. I loved the CT but this sort of thing made me leave the CT alone for well over 4 tours! Im creeping back in there now and im enjoying it again.
-
what hazed said..
my vote:
take both big bombers out
they'll only ruin the a2a for the fighters as they cruise around porking the fuel and/or fh's - making one travel farther and farther to find a ftr
or..
leave them in so I can rack up some bmbr/attack points :)
-
sbd and kates/vals are fine. Will be more fun with just them. That is untill they add the b25. Which will be never.
Hazed, I dont agree with your f4 at all. p40b vs a 109f4 is almost as much fun as an sbd alone against an a6m5. Remember that part of this game is to have fun, that would not be fun. 202 was already uber as hell in that setup, luckily it has crap for guns. They have to make a comprimise. In the case of super bombers in burma I think there is just no purpose.
-
Well, in the interest of having fun, I'd suggest no more A6M2 vs P40B matches. The P40E vs the A6M2 is a decent matchup, the P40B just plain sucks. On paper it is about 5 mph faster, but since you'll run out of gas before you get to your top speed in a P-40B, it is slower, turns much worse, has less firepower, accelerates worse, and climbs worse. The P-40E at least had more firepower than the A6M2.
-
Actualy the P40B has more firepower than the A6M2.
Lets take a look at the comparative weights of fire of the primary apponts in the Curent CT set up:
P40b:
Four Browning 30M2 1200 rpm / 490 rpg @ 835m/s, weight 9.73g=15.89
Two Browning 50cal 750 rpm / 380 rpg @ 870m/s, weight 48.5g=38.64
Total:54.53
Huricane MK I:
Eight Browning 303's 1140 rpm / 333 rpg @ 745m/s, weight 11.3g=26.406
A6M2:
Two Type 97 7.7mm 1000 rpm / 680 rpg @750m/s, weight 11.3g=15.368
Two Type 99 MK I 20mm 520 rpm / 60 rpg @525m/s, weight 129g=29.76
Total:45.129
C.202:
Two Breda SAFAT 7.7mm 900 rpm / 500 rpg @730 m/s, weight 11.9g=13.222
Two Breda SAFAT 12.7mm 700 rpm / 400 rpg @ 760 m/s, weight 36.7g=41.94
Total: 55.16
The Nate(Ki-27) and the Oscar(ki-43 early model) both had only Two 7.7mm MG's, so clearly they would be at a serious firepower disavantage, or rather "Firepower Chalanged.
Somthing the above Numbers do not cover is Effctive range, the US 50 cal has a tremendious effective range advantage over the 20mm and 7mm rounds on the Zero, at least 3 times the range, this being said the 50cal could acheave meaningfull hits withen an envelope at least 3 time larger than Zero's.
Another point not covered is time on target, the 8 gun pack on the Huricane can deleaver damage Four times faster than the Japanese 7mm rounds.
When I say the Allies have a fire Power advantage this is what I am refering to, compound that advantage with the Fragile Zero, and tough P40 and Huricane and you have the full picture.
The Peggy also has prety much the same bombload as any other Japanese Bomber, around 1800 pounds, so it's not uber in this since.
-
no were not complaining about the bombload. its that 20mm, the 12.7s and the mach 1 airspeed.
Urchin, spiral dive to get away from the zero. If you are too low to do that you bought the farm long before the zero got near you.
-
ergRTC you do realise the boston III outruns a 109E at sea level dont you ?
you agree the ki-67 outrunning the allies isnst fair because the matchup against the slower P40B/HurriI yet you say you dont want the 109F which is what would have chased those Bostons and caught them quite easily.
The reason i thought libiya was setup wrong was two-fold.
1) the P40Es would have been fighting 109F's mainly at the time in WW2 and its highly unlikey they saw 109E's.
2) I flew the 109E and found it severely lacking vs the Boston III i chased. he dived and outran me!. I fought a p40E and managed to hit but it dived away and left me behind.I then decided to fly back to base and took a stuka which was totally desroyed by a P40E very easily :).
sort of makes you want the real 109F if you know what i mean. :mad: hehe
its the same situation only reversed in the case of bombers burma setup. i know the 109F will make the P40E look bad but hey thats what they faced in 1942.I know it means axis have the best plane but theres a lot of other set ups where the allies have the top ride. why not have it axis favoured? at this point of the war it did favour the axis.
The Malta air battles for instance are special BECAUSE of the fact the allies fought with (generally) inferior machines vs Germanies best types. Faith Hope and Charity were 3 Gloster Gladiator bi-plane fighters and they were all that Malta had to defend itself for quite a while.Amazingly they held the Germans off.would you have this setup with the gladiators and germans in Fokker triplanes? :) I know its more fun for the allies to have the better P40E but the flipside is the axis flyers dont have that same fun with their (historically) superior 109F. To me its completely fair. Surely there are many setups with USN vs IJN where the allies enjoy a great deal of performance advantage?
Fairs , Fair , everyone should get their turns right?
-
Bottom line is we need a lot more a/c modelled to be able to have historical match ups.
-
It all depends on the singular advantages of each plane though. And by the way I thought the boston was a bit fast too, but its not a 1944 bird.
P40e or b climbs like the titanic, is slow, accelerates like my camry, and in a <250mph dogfight is about even par with the 109f. That pretty much means the 109f owns you, I would rather fly a hurri cause at least it handles like a dream, has great e retention, and can take a lot of punishment. I dont know many people that would rather fly a plane where the engine cuts out and the stukas are passing you, so I dont see that as a viable setup.
When the allies have the advantage, tends to be the f4u1, the ijn tends to have the ki61. Which I believe is a fine match for the f4u1. Handles better, can dive with the f4u1, and has great low speed handling and acceleration to boot.
Didnt we just have a map that was yak9ts vs g10s cause that was the realistic matchup? I dont remember a whole lot of squeaking then.
-
You guys mind if I say something? I do still rather enjoy reading this stuff.
I have to agree with what Hazed is saying, to a point. If it wasn't there, dont use it. If it was there, but in low quantities, perk it to a point were it is not abused.
A while back when the F4U got removed from a nice set-up. It was at rear bases. If it had been perked, it would not have been abused.
Then the CMs run into the problem of being able to perk the planes for only a weeks set-up.
I would have much rather seen two or three week set-ups like this. It would give guys a chance to earn perks for thier rides of choice. Then you have to worry about how perk tallies would be abused. Fly the better country to build perks then switch to the country with the better perked fighter.
Oh, I guess that is what AH II is gonna be for.
-
These threads are great when everyone is so cooperative and genuinely trying to find the best solutions with what vehicles are available.
CT participants are pretty savvy and fair-minded, so in the future why not again ask participants to observe throttle and/or other limitations on planes that otherwise are a bit too uber for the earlier birds they simulate? Can be done easily in the initial rule box.
Same for please don't dogfight or divebomb the bomber if that also is applicable. I remember getting that request almost from the beginning in the more historical scenarios.
Of course if we're going to get THAT sincere, I would have to ask that C-47s release paratroopers and supplies from horizontal flight rather than the super sport sudden climb and jettison.
-
I must just point out something for ergRTC,
I took time yesterday to go through my books to see what 109s were in North Africa in 1941/1942 and you DO indeed have some 109E-4's in the area. I didnt think they would have used them but there you are i was wrong.
heres a quote from 'Bf109 the operational record' by jerry scutts:
"I./ JG27 remained in Libya while II and III Gruppen had also in the meantime, been alerted for duty in the desert.They transfered respectively in spetember and december 1941,II Gruppe having by then spent some three months in Russia.In the meantime, the nomadic 7./ JG26 had become more familiar with Gela, Sicily and had breifly served alongside I. / JG27 before returning to france inaugust.During its time overseas, the 'Red Heart Staffel' had been outstandingly successful and had scored 52 kills without losing a single aircraft in combat.
The already diverse list of Allied aircraft opposing the Jagdfliegern over the desert was increased further in JUNE 1941 when the first P40 B/C Warhawks and P40 D/E Kittyhawks operated by RAF squadrons, were encountered.Neither American fighter, though well armed and armoured, gave the desert Experten too much trouble- in fact their victory claims and combat reports began to include the word 'Curtiss' (the Germans universal generic term irrespective of the correct sub-type) with increasing regularity!.
Things on the RAF side slowly improved however and Germans' understandable failure to distinguish readily the finer points of early and later model P-40s could work against them.The P-40E for example had six .50-in machine guns against the .303s installed in the P40B and as pilot experience built up, so the allies could count much more on the Kittyhawk, even in a dogfight with 109s. But the Bf 109 itself was about to be improved as far as the desert jagdfliegern were concerned.The lull in the ground war that extended into the autumn of 1941 allowed I./ JG27 to dispatch a staffel at a time back to Germany to re-equip with the Bf 109F-2/Trop."
So as you can see the 109E-4's did indeed fight P40Bs and P40E's but of the RAF not USA's squadrons which came later in 1942. Basically the setup IS authentic if it models the mid 1941- but from september/October 1941 the bf109E-4s were phased out (replaced with 109F's) .A four month period.
So my appologies for calling it unhistorical.
P.S. Perhaps as a compromise you would consider putting the 109F-4 in as a High priced perk. Make it very hard to afford and id agree to it being fair.
Just as another snippit of info you might be interested in and as a possible high priced perk for the Allied side:
after operation Crusader by the allies in november 1941 they made substantial gains but it ran out of steam and the Germans took back much of the gains by February 1942.The axis emphasis swung again to contain malta and in march 1942 the first spitfire V's were introduced.heres the snippet from same book as above:
'Neither did the newly arrived spitfires, the supposed master of the 109, give much trouble.Pitted against the Mk V, the Bf109F often came off best, particularly as at that stage ,the RAF pilots were not generally very experienced.Germany was however, never able to fully exploit any gains in the Mediteranean after the start of the campaign in the East.'
Id need to find some evidence of spitfir V's being in libya in order for it to qualify as a possible perk ride but I'd take a gamble and guess they did fly there atsome point in early 1942.Maybe some Allied fans can dig up the info.Then again you have it historical already and no doubt dont want to add 109F or spitV even as high perks?
anyhow thought id best own up to being wrong hehe
-
The P-40D/E (Kittyhawk) was in service with the RAF @ Dec 1941, with 112 RAF and 3 Sqn RAAF to start with. The earlier B model (Tomahawk) like you say, was @June 1941 and into 1942.
As with all combat types, the change over is gradual, case in point, by the end of 1942, most Spit squadrons in the RAF flew Vs not IXs, and most 109 units had 109Fs, not G2s. Just an example.
-
Originally posted by Squire
The P-40D/E (Kittyhawk) was in service with the RAF @ Dec 1941, with 112 RAF and 3 Sqn RAAF to start with. The earlier B model (Tomahawk) like you say, was @June 1941 and into 1942.
Ah i see my 109 book didnt go into the actual dates for the different P40 marks. Its too focused on the 109 records i guess.
So basically From june 1941 likely match ups would have been 109E-4s vs hurricane I and P40B/C's Then as we pass through autumn the 109F's started to replace the 109E's but then in December the P40 D/E's arrived and started to replace P40B's.At this time operation Crusade was pushing the Germans back.If im not mistaken , which i may be the HurricaneIIC was in service in North Africa in 1941-42 so at some point this arrived too. by March 1942 things had swung back again.Around this time the RAF was introducing the spit VB / VC's to malta.
quite an interesting period it seems for aircombats.
-
yep. interesting.
-
Nice work Hazed.
Jester did say late 41', so how hard could it be for HTC to apoint someone to adjust perks for each week?
Perk the Peggy....remove bomber "flight" mode
-
In reguards to the 109 comment - the ME-109 "Emil" fought long into 1943 as part of "Schlachtgeschwader's" (or Fighter/Bomber units) in N. Africa & Russia after they had been replaced by the F & G models in the Fighter role.
-
I don't know why the TBM can't be used as the bomber for both sides. It's not like there were early war super bombers in Burma. So the TBM especially if you could turn the formation option on would be a great sub for whatever crap both sides used then. Sorry not a bomber guy....... On the P-40B will get it's butt handed to it constantly by the A6M2 is uber debate............. Early Sunday when I flew the P-40s were dropping like flys. I came back Sunday night and all the sudden people were getting alt in P-40s, B&Zing, and becoming a big threat. The B model was very effective last night. Yeah you had to plan ahead a little , but it was effective. The Hurri is tough as hell , and will catch a A6M2 driver in turns if he doesn't respect it. Guys complaining about 303's........... Your shooting at A6M2s, a battery of 8 303's is very leathel against it. Much less the two 50 cals in the P-40 in combo with it's 30 cals. Even the two 303's in the Boston are leathel against the Zeke. I got caught twice yesterday by Bostons that had decided to double back, and become fighter planes trolling through furrballs.
Look at who was landing their kills, yesterday afternoon it was the Japanese guys, last night the Allies were landing the majority of the kills. It was like the shock wore off and , and the Allied pilots got down to business.
Yeah the Zeke has the advantage in most areas. Hell the A6M2 was prob never used in Burma. We should be flying Nates, and Ocars. Once the zeke pilots have shot their cannon rounds off, basically they are an oscar........... Firepower wise anyway. I know I never liked this setup, Burma has always been my least favorite. I don't ever remember seeing so many complaints about it before though.
-
I'll vote to take the Ki=67 out of the set-up but can live with it if you guys decide not to.
Above there was a comment that if you stupidly attack it from dead 6 you deserve to die. Here's a tip for you ... even with an alt advantage you can't fuggin catch them very easy. Luckily most pilots flying them are rather low and give a guy a chance to make a head on pass or a deflection shot on the initial pass .... from there it is persuit mode with no choice but to put yourself at the mercy of the 20mm or disengage.
That being said, the set-up is alot of fun and a guy can take a few hits and not end up in the tower so fast.
-
Originally posted by skernsk
I'll vote to take the Ki=67 out of the set-up but can live with it if you guys decide not to.
Problem with Ju88 is it gives Japs a huge bombload delivery advantage.
Sakai
-
Lowe its not a 'complaint'. Its a bit annoying that any suggestion or question about a set up is regarded as a complaint.
The basis of the REQUEST is to have a historical setup (WHERE POSSIBLE)
As I have discovered above You CAN have a set up where the 109F wasnt available BUT it is a VERY short period! in fact if you look the P40E kittyhawk was introduced in DECEMBER 1941. The 109F-2 was introduced in the autumn just before this. So although yes you COULD have 109E-4's fighting P40E's it could only have happened AFTER december 1941.
So in theory the 109F and p40E were, in 1941 much rarer than say the 109E-4 and P40B/C (+ hurricanes).
basically at no point in WW2 in North Africa did the P40E fight 109E's WITHOUT the possibility of 109F's being around.
This is what the request for the 109F to be put in was based on.
Now as ErgRTC has pointed out he wanted a more even matchup for 'FUN' and i can agree its completely ok to do this but in the interest of those of us who cant stand unrealistic stuff we could have the 109F in there and give it a perk cost of 20 or so.You wont see many around and this would closely match the real fights.It adds the POSSIBILITY of running into a 109F but doesnt disturb the majority of 109E vs P40E fights which is what ergRTC appears to favour. Seems to me this would please everyone.
As an Allied perk ride we could add the hurricane II C or SPITFIRE VB/VC(if we had it) or decide not to add them if you like but to be honest, as the hurricane IIC was in North Africa in 1941-42 so if allied players called for it it would be exactly the same as me asking for the 109F and historically its fair.
The spit5 arrived in march 1942 so it doesnt suit libya too well as the war had moved on from that area by then. Malta became the main target in March-April for the LW and Italian airforces(mainly italian as more and more LW squadrons were transfered to the eastern front.
All this historical information allows CMs to set up almost any combination of fights but they need to research what was flying at the time they set the map. If planes were there but the CM decides they are unballancing then they cant just remove them, they should perk them. Thats just my opinion and i guess not everyone agrees. I tried though :)
ergRTC(im hoping you see my point :D),and jester for a great set up.
If i was to set this up i would have this:
Libya 1941-1942
Allies:
P40B
P40E
Hurri I
Boston III
Perked:
Hurri IIC (15 perks)
Spit VB (20 perks)
Axis:
109E
110C4
202
Ju87
Ju88
Perked:
109F (20 perks)
me262 (1 perk)
Hehehehe ok the me262 was a joke :)
oh and if perking is a pain in the bellybutton to setup why not wait until wednesday and then add the 109F and hurriC to simulate the war moving on time wise.Then you get saturday to wednesday with the 109e vs P40 fighting then the 109f and hurriC are added and wednesday to friday you have the later (1942) matchups.couldnt that work too? its VERY simple to add planes.
-
what hazed said
-
I think the problem here is the non realistic behavior of ah pilots. Nobody in north africa would have upped a p40b alone and gone looking for 109s and 202s. Often that is the only choice for guys in this game. That means planes that could have been competitive (even if only barely) are at an extreme disadvantage. When a plane set includes planes that dominate in all categories of performance, it is too unbalanced for average enjoyable game play.
Now one of the most squeaked about planes in this arena is the f4u1. Look at the following graphs and you will see why it is okay to have the ki61 vs the f4u. Or even better ki61, nik vs the f4u1.
(these graphs are for the 109f, the E is close to the b on speed, this is to show how difficult it will be to survive as allied in the 109f scenario).
(http://141.161.196.100/speed.jpg)
(http://141.161.196.100/climb.jpg)
(http://141.161.196.100/acc.jpg)
-
(http://141.161.196.100/speed1.jpg)
(http://141.161.196.100/climb1.jpg)
(http://141.161.196.100/acc2.jpg)
-
Agree 100 percent. Thats why I think its important for all of us to accept setups that may have one side at a disadvantage (real or imagined) from time to time, allied and axis both, and stop the endless pettiness about it all. Do a 1942 SpitVs vs 190s, do Hurricanes vs LW in France 1940 with no Spits, do a Ki-61 vs F4U-1, 109Fs vs P-40Es in N. Africa. Do it all, and lets stop pretending that it will ever be "fair" and have fun with the setups. The whole notion that the CT was ever going to be an even playing field (thats never happened) is the biggest contributer, imho, to all the nastiness.
Its not fair, thats ok, just fly.
-
What Haze said...or narrow down the time frame. Give spacifics:
Libya 1941, October - December
..and what Squire said....Kinda like Jesters set-up I squeaked about but have a spit vs spit, see who the real pilots are.
Sure we all know the A6M2 has to fly defensive against the F4U and some spits have to fly defensive with the Fw1900 or 109G-10 (not a LW guy).
However, the Ki's, Nike, Georges etc did not see as much action(maybe?) as the A6Ms. Maybe thats were the perks should come in.
Lets face it, most just want to log-in, depart, fly to the nearest furball, kill something before being killed----recycle. What use is alt, and speed if you just loose it, with higher faster cons inbound to the furball your in, then squeak about it?
When ever there is a "sea battle", there ends up being land bases somewere. duh!! ...not much of a sea battle then is it?