Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Skyfoxx on October 17, 2003, 03:27:08 PM

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Skyfoxx on October 17, 2003, 03:27:08 PM

For your consideration...

Aleutians Campaign June 1942

Kurils Map

Planseset:

USAAF/RCAF:

Airfields: P40-B, (subbing for the USAAF P40-C)
P-40E, (subbing for RCAF KittyHawk IIa/P40-F)  
SBD, (subbing for PBY shipping patrols)
B-17 from rear field (*Formations disabled on bombers*)
C-47
PT's
GV's: M-3, M-8, M-16
 
IJN:

CVs: A6M2, Kate, Val, LVT's, PT's

Airfields: A6M2, Kate, Val, C-47, PT's
GV's: M-3, M-8, M-16

No perk points, standard arena settings except as noted below.

*Note: This is intended to be primarilly a defensive setup for the allies.
          Ship hardness would need to be increased in order to protect the   single cv available to the IJN.
          Rebuild times and or field object hardness would also most likely need to be adjusted.


Thank you for your consideration.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Tuck on October 17, 2003, 03:56:13 PM

at least it's a WW-freaking-II setup!  i hate pac stuff, but compared to the current one, it's sure as hell got my vote.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Arlo on October 17, 2003, 05:47:10 PM

Sure as hell didn't take much to convert ya. Reschke, it worked! :D

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Skyfoxx on October 17, 2003, 06:25:54 PM

No converstion neccesary. Like I said, I research for AH events and myself, not so much for the CT but what the heck, if we need more variety and it works, feel free to use it.
This setup idea has been around for a while and we actually have the plane set for it and guess what, it is even historically correct. :eek:
I know it doesn't have the variety of rides that most are used to or like but it was requested a while back by a regular CT player, Diablo, if I remember correctly.
Imagine that, a request that could be accomodated.
It's not what I would call a favorite, but it is different and without having to go to post WWII.
 

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Arlo on October 17, 2003, 06:47:54 PM

Heh ... was nipping at Tuck but hey.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: brady on October 17, 2003, 07:03:35 PM

Well other than the B17 and the P40E it looks good:)

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Skyfoxx on October 17, 2003, 07:04:30 PM

:rofl
Thought that bait was mine.
Aye I see now the adimral had it right, "old Blackburn's boys are a slick bunch.
;)


Brady
 Yes the B17 could go away as it would play little role anyway.
The P40E would make a better sub for the canadians KittyHawk IIa,  no?

Title: Setup Request
Post by: brady on October 17, 2003, 07:16:38 PM

IMO, niether The B17(espichaly the one we have in AH) or the P40E is a good match for fighting the A6M2 playbalnce wise. But Neither is the P40B a good match aganst he A6M2.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Skyfoxx on October 18, 2003, 08:06:40 AM

Quote

Originally posted by brady
IMO, niether The B17(espichaly the one we have in AH) or the P40E is a good match for fighting the A6M2 playbalnce wise. But Neither is the P40B a good match aganst he A6M2.

Like I said earlier, the B17 could easily be absent from this setup.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the P40E is to strong of a match for the A6M2 and that the A6M2 is really to strong for the P40B. But with that said, you think it would only be fair to have the P40B. If you follow what you said above, how can this be "fair"? confused:
I'm sorry but I can't follow your logic here.
 
If there is that big of a concern over the use of the P40E, then why not institute a comprimise through the use of low perk points or aircraft placement instead of just neutering the setup.

Thanks for listening anyway.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: brady on October 18, 2003, 01:28:26 PM

"If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the P40E is to strong of a match for the A6M2 and that the A6M2 is really to strong for the P40B"


  Yes That is what I am saying.


"But with that said, you think it would only be fair to have the P40B. "

 No I dont, I am sry if I implied that.


  I think what it boils down to is we can make better set up's using the planes above in concert with other mount's, this allows these planes to be used and enjoyed in a better game enviourment, one that fosters better fights and a larger apeal.

 For Example we can use the P40B in a set up with the Wildcatt vs the A6M2. We can use the P40E in a set up with the A6M5.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: o0Stream140o on October 18, 2003, 03:59:32 PM

I would like to see this set up run,  but didn't they have the P-38 in this theater also?  I think I remember a set up in snapshot... probably a different time period.  Good luck with trying to get it ran Skyfoxx

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Reschke on October 18, 2003, 08:54:09 PM

Looks like a good one there Skyfoxx.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Skyfoxx on October 19, 2003, 08:59:03 AM

Thanks Reschke.

Brady, the F4F has no valid reason that I can see to be in this aleutians setup (based mainly on the defense of Dutch Harbor time period) as neither does the A6M5 but I understand that you and I are looking at this setup from different perspectives. The P40-b/ P40e vs A6M2 battle is still the only appropriate fighter choice imo.

You are correct stream, some P38e's were sent to the Aleutians in mid June of 1942 and were quickly placed in service.
However I was not gonna even bring that up. ;)
That is why this setup is mainly to simulate the battles that took place in and around Dutch Harbor during the first week of June 1942 just prior to the arrival of the P38e.

You could try to expand the timeframe to include more of the aleutians campaign but it really would become to one sided with the planset we have to work with imo.
 

Thanks for the feedback.

Title: Re: Setup Request
Post by: MajorDay on October 21, 2003, 02:31:11 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Skyfoxx
For your consideration...

Aleutians Campaign June 1942

Kurils Map

Planseset:

USAAF/RCAF:

Airfields: P40-B, (subbing for the USAAF P40-C)
P-40E, (subbing for RCAF KittyHawk IIa/P40-F)  
SBD, (subbing for PBY shipping patrols)
B-17 from rear field (*Formations disabled on bombers*)
C-47
PT's
GV's: M-3, M-8, M-16
 
IJN:

CVs: A6M2, Kate, Val, LVT's, PT's

Airfields: A6M2, Kate, Val, C-47, PT's
GV's: M-3, M-8, M-16

No perk points, standard arena settings except as noted below.

*Note: This is intended to be primarilly a defensive setup for the allies.
          Ship hardness would need to be increased in order to protect the   single cv available to the IJN.
          Rebuild times and or field object hardness would also most likely need to be adjusted.


Thank you for your consideration.

Hey, I agree with this setup, Skyfox and how about added TBF(Known as TBM)?

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Dennis on October 21, 2003, 03:47:09 PM

I doubt many would fly the P40B, so you'd end up with basicly a a6m2 vs. P40E setup.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. ;)

It could be a bit of a challenge for the Rising Sun crowd, but I kind of liked that matchup most of the time in the recent slot setup.

As long as the fighterbostons are left in the hangar and the year is pre-1946 I'm good to go for the IJN.

Splash1

Title: Setup Request
Post by: keyapaha on October 21, 2003, 04:10:06 PM

sounds good to me :aok


oh yeah some nice strong  surface winds and multiple wind layers aloft would be nice.

Title: Setup Request
Post by: scJazz on October 21, 2003, 07:07:40 PM

Plz can some1 explain? Why in hell is it that everytime the P38 comes up in a setup it is either perked or removed?

For god sake can I please drive one of my favorite rides without it being perked or just removed?

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Arlo on October 21, 2003, 07:16:07 PM

Lightning and Corsair pilots a kindred lot? :D

Title: Setup Request
Post by: eskimo2 on October 21, 2003, 07:41:37 PM

This set-up sounds good.

I think there were P-38s in the Aleutians, I know that I have seen many pictures, but am not sure of the dates they were in Alaska.

If it is included, make it available at just one or two remote bases.

Just for fairness, the Japanese should get the A6M-5.  Again, make them available at just one or two remote bases.

eskimo

Title: Setup Request
Post by: Arlo on October 21, 2003, 07:52:10 PM

And if someone goes to the trouble to ferry one or the other to the fight, don't have a cow about it, folks. :D