Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: eddiek on October 04, 2003, 11:56:36 PM
-
Added the B-26B to one US base: A40
Moved the Ki-61 up to A10 and A11
Moved the P-38 closer also, to A30 and A40
If it works out, I will (maybe) take out the A-20G, but again, maybe not.
Will check back and see how things are going before deciding to leave the B-26 enabled or take it back out.
-
Originally posted by eddiek
If it works out, I will (maybe) take out the A-20G
Yes, please.
Got to fly the setup some this morning. Enjoyed it, mostly flying A6M2s against P40Es (Love that kiwi paintjob, btw) with the occasional fighterboston or fighterhavoc or whatever it is jumping in to spoil things. Only saw 1 P38.
Had to hang it up when fights got to be 6:1 ... but 'sall good.
Splash1
-
Glad you're enjoying things, Dennis.
I took the A-20G out of play this afternoon, will amend the MOTD to reflect that change.
One question (I think I know the answer already, but I figured I would ask anyway):
I know the perks are kinda high for the P-38 (I've never perked a plane before, as a result I went too high on the perk cost), but looking at the stats, hardly anyone is using it. So what is keeping US pilots from using the Lightning? (The current crop of Zero pilots seem to be trained by Saburo Sakai himself and they are wreaking havoc on the P-40 drivers)
I leave for a three day job assignment early in the morning, and would like to get things ironed out before I leave. Some setups are a work in progress, this is one of them.....;)
-
fwiw,
I have yet to see an IJAAF flyer in a Tony, yet, either.
Perks aren't too high. I just think most are enjoying the P40-Zeke matchup for a change. just mho.
Splash1
-
Oh .... there's plenty o' Tonys up and about. :D
-
Why not disable formations in these types of setups? gets rid of the "ack-wagon" BS. Esp Ki-67s and B-26s.
-
I wasnt aware their was a tool for that?????
-
but looking at the stats, hardly anyone is using it. So what is keeping US pilots from using the Lightning?
I still dont have enough points for one. Maybe the same situation for some others. But Ill be in one soon:D
-
Originally posted by brady
I wasnt aware their was a tool for that?????
I'd guess it's an arena setting. Formations are disabled in the DA. But like I said ... a guess. It'd be nice if the CT staff had that option, I think. :D
-
I think the reason you arent seeing too many P-38's is that guys are having trouble getting to 10 perks, I know I am.
-
P40E has an eny value of 35/10
A6M5 has an eny value of 25/20
A6M2......................... .......45/10
Ki 61........................... ......18/20
P38.......................... .........19/10
Ki 67........................... .......17/20
B26.......................... ..........25/20
So the best way to make hay is to fly a P40, everything except a A6M2 will, pay prety good, landing is important though, if you dont land you loase most of what you can make, I beleave the landing multiplier is 1.5, ditching or bailing suxcesfully are next in line then deth of course loses you the most of your point's.
-
That was just a tad bit condenscending, Brady. Trust me, every single Allied player in this CT setup knows that you must get and land kills in the the P-40 to eventually get a chance to fly the P-38. What's being reported is the difficulty in accomplishing that goal. That being the case. You will not see the P-38 flying much in this setup. OTOH .... the Tony makes a fairly regular appearance.
I think that was fairly clear.
As it is, this setup basically features the P-40 vs. the entire IJ planeset minus the N1K.
That's just practical honesty. Let's not pretend anything else. :D
-
Originally posted by brady
I wasnt aware their was a tool for that?????
For future reference, you can disable formations, under setup, arena settings and find the flightmode flags setting.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
As it is, this setup basically features the P-40 vs. the entire IJ planeset minus the N1K.
Which is...two Zekes and the Tony...?
- oldman
-
fighter dweeb!! u forgot the uber ki-67 ack star.... haven't seen any kates/vals, not even sure if they're enabled.
-
Ty Skyfoxx, I appricate that:)
-
Originally posted by Shane
fighter dweeb!! u forgot the uber ki-67 ack star.... haven't seen any kates/vals, not even sure if they're enabled.
Ah. You're right, I forgot.
Saw one enterprising lad flying a Kate the other night, and a couple of people in SBDs. Would be fun to ditch the twin-engine fluffers, see what happens then.
- oldman
-
well, i finally made it to 10 perks yesterday, saw no dar bar at a30 so jumped in p38 only to get shot by an m16 on takeoff roll, so now back to 2 perks and counting. :( very frustrating.
-
The poblem here is Brady. I hate to say it, but from what I have seen he seems to think the P40 is an even match up for the IJN AC. That the P51B and P47 would be unfair becuase they are too fast. Never mind the fact that in both the P47 and P51 E is ever so important. I am tired of seeing CTs like this.... Its just sad, whats more sad is an unfair CM. The CTs.... ahh screw it we have all been down this road many time... all I have to say is I know its not eddies fault this set up is as one sided as it is. 4 perks for a Tony.... 10 perks for a 38....sad.... ever so sad....
-
Put the A-20 back in. That is my SECOND favorite plane, and I can't afford a P-38 with the 10 point perk...
-
Originally posted by Kegger26
The problem here is Brady...
... this set up is as one sided as it is. 4 perks for a Tony.... 10 perks for a 38....sad.... ever so sad....
I have to agree 100% on this.
-
Originally posted by Kegger26
The poblem here is Brady. I hate to say it, but from what I have seen he seems to think the P40 is an even match up for the IJN AC. That the P51B and P47 would be unfair becuase they are too fast. Never mind the fact that in both the P47 and P51 E is ever so important. I am tired of seeing CTs like this.... Its just sad, whats more sad is an unfair CM. The CTs.... ahh screw it we have all been down this road many time... all I have to say is I know its not eddies fault this set up is as one sided as it is. 4 perks for a Tony.... 10 perks for a 38....sad.... ever so sad....
Hmmm. Have we not just recently witnessed a number of people criticizing the CT because it values balance over historical accuracy? This week we have a scenario which appears to me, at least, to be fairly accurate, history-wise. Let's look at what eddiek said in his initial post:
"Also, please read closely the descriptions of aircraft deployment:
The Lightning and Tony will be enabled at rear bases only at first, but I will enable them at more and more forward bases as the week progresses. I was toying with the idea of having the Lighinings perk points removed as the week progressed to indicate that it was more and more common as time went by, but that would be a LOT of work for Skuzzy, so the perk cost will remain in place through out the setup. Only change that I will make is to enable the Lightning at more bases. "
"Now, as Sabre told me in the CT Staff forum, this is an imperfect setup, but all the major players are represented for both the IJAAF/IJN and the USAAF.
The A6M5b is faster than the A6M3 which was in service at the time, but I added it add flavor and a touch of equality to the planesets.
Initially, I expect to see mostly Zeroes against P-40's, which was pretty much what you would have seen had you been there. Later, there will be more Ki-61's and P-38 matchups. "
I think this is a fine way of doing things. Fact is, for the first part of 1943, if you were an AAF pilot in SWPA, you were flying a P39 or a P40. Sure, there were some 38s, but we all know that if 38s were generally enabled here, everyone would be flying them and there wouldn't be any P40s. By Thursday, if eddiek is to be taken at his word, we will have most people flying 38s. Seems a very imaginative way of duplicating history, so far as I'm concerned.
So I say: If you don't enjoy the challenge of flying P40s, or if you are score-conscious, then just wait until later on in the week. If you are one of those who thinks that historical accuracy should prevail over balance, then I expect to see your butt in a P40.
- oldman (PS: While there was one group of 47s in SWPA in 1944, there were no P51s until we invaded the Phillippines, so far as I know.)
-
*This is a good setup, but one wonders why a similar setup with a F4U-1 (which served in this setup) perked at 10 pts, could not be done also, esp looking at the capabilities of the P-38L...
*The formations need disabling on the uber bombers...a single Ki-67 or B-26 is still better than a TBM, Kate, or SBD is.
*As for the P-40E, it does surpisingly well sometimes? but is not in the same class as the A6M5 and Ki-61...still, its "doable".
*Why not add the USMC F4F btw? why keep it out? Its slower than a P-40E with the same armament.
The CT staff has come closest to a good Rabaul 1943 (late) setup here...a few more tweeks, and some more variety, it would work.
-
Wow Oldman!!! Thats the most I've ever seen you say. :D I have to agree with most you say too. As a guy who flys Axis most of the time , I think the P-40E A6M2/5 setup is pretty good.
I am not much of a furballer, I'm more of a boom and zoomer, so I have been getting my teeth kicked in by P-40s. I think all I've landed this weekend was 5 kills total , and two of those were in a KI-61.
I do think the 10 perk points are way too much for the P-38. I think having them down at 4 like the Ki-61 would be reasonable. I do like Eddiek's idea though and think as the P-38 becomes more available , things to complain about will become less available.
However if you really think the CT is Axis biased........ Fly Axis for at least a month. See if you still have that opinon. Guys complain about the KI-67 when there is a PTO , yes it's a lousy sub for the G4M, and it's hard to shoot down. However as a guy who's always having to deal with B-17s, B-26's, Lancs, and A20's, it's fun to see the whining go on when the KI-67 is present. Plus add to the mix there are people out there using the A20 , and SBD as fighters with success, makes the complaints about the KI-67 absurd.
No matter how hard these CM's try somebody is always upset.
Each side can find something they don't like. The grass is just greener on the other side of the front.
If you think the P-40/A6m matchup has been unfair fly with Skatsr, and Storch . They been knocking down A6M's like theres no tommorow.
-
10 perks is a lot of points for some people to get; myself included in that. I agree with the people saying to lower it some.
Other than that... 3 cheers to Oldman and Lowe.
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
Which is...two Zekes and the Tony...?
- oldman
Yes ... fighter vs. fighter it's pretty much the P-40e vs. the A6M2, the A6M5 and the Ki-41 Tony. You've got it! Throw in the formations of Peggies lowflying and bombing the spawnpoints then circling to get another 4-5 kills and the picture is even more complete. :D
It's definately a character building setup. Which is great. I just can't abide any rationalization by IJ players or supporters that try to play the "it's perfectly balanced but you guys just plain suck" card. It's not perfectly balanced. But like I've already said ... so what? "Balance" is highly over-rated. ;)
Once again ... it's all good. :D
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
Hmmm. Have we not just recently witnessed a number of people criticizing the CT because it values balance over historical accuracy? This week we have a scenario which appears to me, at least, to be fairly accurate, history-wise.
Well if you wanna go that route ... it'd probably be alot more historically accurate to swap the perk point values of the Tony and the Lightning. Just sayin'. ;)