Author Topic: Question for HT about the N1K. (Read 1658 times)

Charge · « **Reply #30 on:** November 06, 2006, 04:30:13 PM »

I have to say that I'm more or less convinced that the plane sets could be better after reading your posts.

However, actually how much faster is C4-B than the plain C4? 10mph?

The Spit1 beats the110C4-B in every other aspect than in concentrated firepower and you say (again, Kev) that it is not enough?!?

It is obvious that 110 can make every fleeting snapshot count, where as the Brit planes need a few seconds of concentrated fire to cause a catastrophic failure during which time they are most vulnerable. Well I'm sure the situation was not much better during the actual BoB. But in our scenarios the axis has habit of putting excellent pilots in 110 because it needs discipline and good tactics to be flown effectively. It also has good firepower which rewards good shooters -and they do not do the same mistakes LW did above England. No defensive circles or relying on TG to clear six etc.

I don't think I managed to say anything that was not quite clear already...

"110s in BoB scenarios are a joke, even a Spit has problems getting close when they come in with alt, but they have yet to be remodelled, so you never know."

No, that sentence is a joke.

-C+

DadRabit · « **Reply #31 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:24:03 PM »

S!

is it me or does the nik seem like the nik of old in ah? seems to handle better. just wondering.

S!

Kev367th · « **Reply #32 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:25:40 PM »

Without getting into a pissing contest.

It's not a question of whats enough.

10mph makes a big difference when your still climbing to try and intercept something as you know.

In fact I believe towards the end of the BoB the 110s underperformed that badly they were given 109 escorts, yup fighters escorting fighters.

Krusty · « **Reply #33 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:19:38 PM »

Keep in mind the 110s were ordered into close formation escort for the bombers. They weren't allowed to develop effective tactics. Tactics make the battle, it seems. P40s vs highly manuverable planes and sturdy bombers, yet they still slaughtered the Japanese planes in China. Because they were able to develop tactics that worked.

109s weren't so feared at the beginning of the war because they were the best plane around, but rather because the LW pilots had spend half a decade training in other wars, as a pretext to develop wingman tactics, 2-flight splits for flights of 4, and so on.

In the Battle of Britian they were micro-managed to the extreme, being told how to fly, how fast, and where. They were not allowed to do anything which might have ultimately allowed them to be effective. Good thing for us, really. Bad thing for the reputation of their rides.

EDIT: On the previous posts: Ta152s might have had 60-70 made, but only 12 got to a unit (and just 1 unit's strength) before the end of the war. So it beats out all others for scarcity.

Kev367th · « **Reply #34 on:** November 09, 2006, 10:49:41 AM »

Charge - Was thinking about the whole thing.

You remember why the old Spit V was very rarely used in scenarios?

Because a whole 5 mins of uber-boost was considered to over the top.
Yet a constant 10mph+ speed increase is OK?

HT missed their chance on the Spit / 109 / 190 remodel to finally have historic adversaries, maybe they will learn in the coming remodels.

As I pointed out if you were to do an accurate RPS the Spit IX ('42) would appear before the earliest 190 ('43), rather than vice versa.

Krusty · « **Reply #35 on:** November 09, 2006, 11:59:49 AM »

Keep in mind the "b" use used to denote bomb rack kit attachment. The 109E-4B had a bomb rack attached to the belly. The 110C-4B was the same. HTC doesn't say this plane has the DB 601N engines in it, on the planes page.

I'm curious, where did you come by this info, that the AH 110 has 601N's? As I recall it was always a fast plane. That's why it was developed, due to its amazing prototype top speed. However, it was never very aerobatic (historically).

So I'm curious (and maybe I've totally just overlooked this, if it's obvious I'm sorry), where did you find mention of the improved 601Ns?

Bruno · « **Reply #36 on:** November 09, 2006, 03:40:48 PM »

We know the speed and power settings for the Bf 110C-4/B in AH...

Quote

The 110C in the game is technically a 110C-4b which differs from the 110C-4 not just with the addition of bomb racks, but also with the more powerful DB 601N engines.

Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

The Bf 110C-4/B in AH is modeled with DB601N engines. I gave a book reference to what could be consider the 'bible' on the subject:

H. Mankau and P. Petrick
Messerschmidt Bf 110, Me 210, Me 410.

Bruno · « **Reply #37 on:** November 09, 2006, 03:42:29 PM »

Quote

Because a whole 5 mins of uber-boost was considered to over the top.
Yet a constant 10mph+ speed increase is OK?

I haven't seen any recent speed test for the Bf11C-4/B in AH but an old test showed it to be 20 to 25mph faster then the Standard Bf 110C-4 w/ DB601A.

typo edit

1K3 · « **Reply #38 on:** November 09, 2006, 06:04:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th

As the Spits and 109/190s planes were remodelled together HT missed a great chance to finally have contempory adverseries.

Only 2 are the Spit I and 109E, rest are a mishmash of different time periods.

Surprising really because one of Pyros guidelines is that they should be useful for scenarios.
Yet we have an early 190 that if historically used wouldn't be around till 1943, way after the Spit IX introduction.

I agree, spit 1 / 109E are contemporary adversaries. The later ones do have contemporaries (spit 9 vs 109G2/G6, Spit 14 vs 109K) while others are "mishmash".

My hard core vision of spit-109-190-typh/temp contemporaries would look like this...

Early War
Spit 1A vs 109E-3/E-4
Spit 2B/5B vs 109E-7/F-2

Mid War
Spit 5C/LF 8/F 9, Typhoon vs 190A-3/A-6, 109F-4/G-2/G-6

Late war
Spit 14/LF 16, Temp vs 109G-14/K-4, 190A-8/D-9

Kev367th · « **Reply #39 on:** November 09, 2006, 06:20:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bruno
I haven't seen any recent speed test for the Bf11C-4/B in AH but an old test showed it to be 20 to 25mph faster then the Standard Bf 110C-4 w/ DB601A.

typo edit

Quite a bit more than the 10mph suggested.

Add that to the Ju-88's it's easy to see why in the BoB scenario its difficult for the RAF to intercept a lot of the time.

Hoping for the more used He-111 sometime, lot slower and less well defensively armed.

Squire · « **Reply #40 on:** November 09, 2006, 08:31:03 PM »

He-111 or a Dornier 17 would be great for 1940 stuff. We have been asking for awhile, but there are a lot of requests out there, oh well, maybe at some point.

We need more axis bombers, not jets. Even a He-177 I would welcome, just as something other than a Ju-88.

Bruno · « **Reply #41 on:** November 09, 2006, 09:26:39 PM »

The Ju-88A-4 is 12 mph faster then the A-1 (most common Ju-88 during BoB))and 24 mph then the A-5 (A-4 airframe with A-1 engines).

The problems with bombers is that you are only guaranteed to see one variant. So if you model all early BoB variantLW bombers then the LW has nothing for '40 and beyond. If you go mid-war as a compromise then early war suffers.

I can understand that to a degree but with chosing a plane like the 110C-4/b or P-47N when there are clear needs for earlier / different models then it only makes sense for the old main.

viper215 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 09, 2006, 09:28:41 PM »

38s are still better

handy169 · « **Reply #43 on:** November 09, 2006, 09:34:33 PM »

my whole take on it plane selection is this .. if you dont have the varients and planes then your really not doing any justice by seperating the arenas into time era's certain planes where made for purposes during those time periods and the excuse they are not useful in the AH arena cause you already have planes that cover the jobs. but thats not the point .. or shouldnt be. the fact the different varients where there is reason to have them in the game. and also having the planes in the right time periods. you didnt see early model planes in the 1944-45 did you? most where out dated and replaced or shot down. yet in LW they are there. you HT isnt gonna use the right planes that where actually in the time period then what is really going on? its like 95% of the GV's in EW arena .. are all LW gvs that came out in '44-45' .. HT should have thought of that and got some GVS from 39-42 and put them in there to fill in the other gvs before spliting the arena into time era's..

Reynolds · « **Reply #44 on:** November 10, 2006, 02:56:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by 1K3
Typhoon vs 109F-4/G-2/G-6

Unless that is an experience 109 pilot, that F-4 is pretty much dead and burried. The typhoon, when flown properly (This isnt from experience, I cannot fly one to save my life, but form watching others) can outrun as well as boom-and-zoom far better than the 109F requiring the messerschmitt pilot to have a pretty good knowledge of ACM.