Author Topic: Set-up Idea: Battle of the Turds! (Read 977 times)

HFMudd · « **Reply #15 on:** November 05, 2002, 01:21:23 PM »

That's certainy fair.

Bring on the Yak-9T! Bombers Beware!

Karnak · « **Reply #16 on:** November 05, 2002, 03:12:19 PM »

The Yak-9T most certainly does not suck.

Fly it for awhile in the MA. It really doesn't suck.

ergRTC · « **Reply #17 on:** November 05, 2002, 04:55:18 PM »

Its not that it sucks, its just rarely flown. Even in russian setups in the ct it rarely gets flown. I think its big tater gun would be interesting.

eskimo2 · « **Reply #18 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:18:06 PM »

If aircraft in this set up were to be classified as follows:

Allied Land-Based = P-40B, Hurri I, Hurri IID, Spit I, IL-2 *, & Boston III
Axis Land-Based = 109E, 110C, C.202, & JU-88
Allied Carrier-Based = F4F-4 & SBD
Axis Carrier-Based = A6M2 & D3A1
* (IL-2 being the oddball of any group)

***************************************
This set-up would present 7 possible group match-ups, and my opinion as to how historical a match they would present:

1. Allied Land-Based Vs. Axis Land-Based - (Semi-historical match-up, similar to the Libya set-up)
2. Allied Carrier-Based Vs. Axis Land-Based - (Bogus/Not a historical match-up)
3. Allied Land-Based Vs. Axis Carrier-Based - (Semi-historical match-up)
4. Allied Carrier-Based Vs. Axis Carrier-Based - (Classic historical match-up)

5. Allied Land & Carrier-Based Vs. Axis Carrier-Based - (Semi-historical match-up, similar to the Libya set-up)
6. Allied Land-Based Vs. Axis Land & Carrier-Based - (Bogus/Not a historical match-up)
7. Allied Land & Carrier -Based Vs. Axis Land & Carrier-Based - (Bogus/Not a historical match-up)

***************************************
Of these seven possible clashes, the first (#1, land vs. land) will be the most common fight found, and will likely always be present/possible.
#2 & #3 will occur if one side uses a Task group to attack an enemy base away from the front lines. Both are likely to occur throughout the set-up. #2 being bogus, #3 being historical.
#4 presents a great match if and when the fleets ever find each other at sea. (With the short CT side-switch time, they very likely will find each other.)
#s 5, 6 & 7 will only occur if one or both sides use Fleets to attack front-line bases. I would think that most CT players would avoid these scenarios for both historical and strategic value.

So where does this leave this set-up as having a historical basis? The only likely situation that will seem historically odd, will be when Allied Carrier-Based planes attack Axis Land-Based planes. (F4Fs & SBds fighting 109s, 202s, 110s &Ju-88s) I would bet that we would see this 10 to 20% of the time. The rest, should look fairly historical.

eskimo

eskimo2 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:20:52 PM »

The Yak-9T should only be included if the Allied whines exceed the Axis whines.

eskimo

J_A_B · « **Reply #20 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:23:38 PM »

From AKDejavu's plane stats page:

The 10 LEAST-used unperked fighters of the MA:

P-40B
Hurricane IID
Me-109E
Hurricane I
Me-110C
P-40E
Spitfire I
FW-190F-8
Macchi 202
F4F-4

Numbers 11-13 are the A6M2, Ki-61 and Yak-9T

J_A_B

HFMudd · « **Reply #21 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:47:16 PM »

Hmmm, so just how long a burst would it take to bring down an IL-2 with the C.202?

eskimo2 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:55:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by HFMudd
Hmmm, so just how long a burst would it take to bring down an IL-2 with the C.202?

LOL, I think if you put them all in the tail you could take one down...

eskimo

eskimo2 · « **Reply #23 on:** November 05, 2002, 05:57:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
From AKDejavu's plane stats page:

The 10 LEAST-used unperked fighters of the MA:

P-40B
Hurricane IID
Me-109E
Hurricane I
Me-110C
P-40E
Spitfire I
FW-190F-8
Macchi 202
F4F-4

Numbers 11-13 are the A6M2, Ki-61 and Yak-9T

J_A_B

Hmm... Pretty much this set-up.

IMHO, the P-40E, FW190F-8, Ki-61, & Yak9T are a bit too uber for this set-up. Espescially with the Axis being a bit short already...

eskimo

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #24 on:** November 05, 2002, 11:53:32 PM »

F4F4 does not suck, in fact its prolly the best overall plane in that setup...

ergRTC · « **Reply #25 on:** November 06, 2002, 08:48:12 AM »

exactly, when you compare it to a sopwith camel the f4f kicks butt.

i retract the 9t and agree it is probably too uber.

Now a plane with a top speed of 280 under 10k and 320 above that, is not what I would call 'the most uber plane in the setup'. A6m2 and 202 are both outstanding aircraft (in the world of turds). The hurri 1 and spit 1 I believe are probalby going to see more time than the f4f. I will be flying it cause its usn though. That an the il2....