Author Topic: Friday's set up........ (Read 9745 times)

LtMagee · « **Reply #30 on:** December 09, 2003, 04:56:58 PM »

I will do on this map just as I did the last time Brady ran it. I will be flying the F4U from three grids away due to the fact that some jerk will drive it up on some beach and the Ki-67s will kill themselves diving on it in which they will sink with ease...not to forget the beach gun batteries. The axis aircraft have the bigest advantage of being abler to reup faster than the allied aircraft. Simply get slow and you dead from both fast moving A6M5s and the N1J2k

LÃ¶we · « **Reply #31 on:** December 09, 2003, 05:17:03 PM »

Personally I don't see a problem with the Allied plane setup. Sheesh everything the Allies have is fast enough to walk away from the quck turning Japanese planes. Plus add to the fact the FM2 out turns everything but the A6M2 in this setup.

Stay fast, don't turn with A6M2s no matter what your in, and don't try an out HO the N1K2's, and you should do well as an Allied pilot.

50 cals against flying gas cans................. Boom Zoom, and Boom some more LtMagee.

Batz · « **Reply #32 on:** December 09, 2003, 05:20:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ergRTC
yak9t is as fast as the 109s? You should check your throttle grunherz. g6 and g2 put the 9t to shame.

bull**** up to 15k they are about equal........

Arlo · « **Reply #33 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:08:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MajTom

I take my F6F for F4U and try to get at least 3k before heading out no matter how many are out there. And when I get in trouble you bet I run for the ack coverage to save my prettythang.

Well then .... same prolly goes for the other guy. ;0)[/i]

I curious Arlo, what do you consider a slower climbing, less manuverable allied fighter, F4F? Slow maybe but manuverable, F6F?, faster than F4F, still very manuverable. F4U? Faster climb rate than Zero's maybe even the N1K2, but maybe not as manuverable.

Is the F4F in this set? Brady listed the "Wildcat FM2" ... which is a vast improvement over the F4F. Not a climber but it's been known to turn with a Zeke now and again. The F6F climbs better than the F4U and is more maneuverable than the F4U but it's not inherently a better turner than any of the IJ planes. I've successfully turn-fought it from the seat of my Hog before.

But obviously I'm more F4U-centric and that was my focus (since it generally has more "balance control" factors slanted against it than any other plane in the CT except for ... perhaps .... the German jet and rocket planes) ... and that's what I'm refering to.

No ..... the F4U-1 doesn't neccesarily outclimb the George in AH. If you were to take off from a shore base and I was to take off from a carrier a half sector away and we met in the middle ... you would be above me. And you would obviously be more maneuverable than me. Now if we were to start a couple of sectors out I might have a couple of thousand feet over you. It's no coincidence that a common flightplan of many F4U players is to climb out in a direction other than straight at the enemy then change course inbound after reaching a certain altitude and speed. Brady provided a chart he likes to think supports his theory that the F4U-1 outclimbs the George. I hope he presents it again so you can see how much of a jump-start the George has from the runway and what altitude it takes the F4U-1 to "catch-up."

Personally ... I don't make a habit of upping from a CV that is surrounded by enemy dots in an F4U. But options are limited in this setup. There's one CV for F4U-1s .... and one for F4U-1Ds. And the shore base for F4U-1Ds starts out in Japanese hands.

So, like you, I would use the ack to my best advantage. And you would do your best to make sure I don't get that advantage. I'd climb and stick close to the ack. I suspect you'd try to engage me as soon as I'm co-alt (though there may be nearby IJ planes that would do so before then).

Even co-alt, you're engaging a slower, less maneuverable plane than you (max climb doesn't make for a very fast plane at the top of the hill). Also the F4U accelerates very slowly ... so there's no speed advantage to speak of. That leaves diving back into the ack.

But hell .... you've admitted that's a practical option from your own pov anyway. So it's curious why you brought it up as any point of contention. *ShruG* Hope that clears up your curiousity.[/i]

Arlo · « **Reply #34 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:39:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
Lowe is right on

Except for the point that was entirely missed he's exactly right. Kinda sorta.

ergRTC · « **Reply #35 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:43:56 PM »

hmm.. looks like the 109s are much much faster. thanks.

Oh this is a bit clearer.

scJazz · « **Reply #36 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:45:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Soulyss
Axis bias? lol the F6F can handle any plane in the current planeset that the IJN can throw at it.

Ya whut he said!

TY Brady for putting my beloved Hellcat in the scenario!

Brady, this setup has been run several times with hardened SBs and soft ships. With a hardness of 5000lbs your increasing the SB hardness from 3700lbs by a factor of 1/3rd not the 1/4th you probably think your doing. Could we please try using just normal hardness on the SBs? I know your going to come up with some wonky excuse why you won't change a thing. It will sound really good to you as well.

Try changing your mind just once though... then a bunch of the people in the CT won't think your such a complete . Batz at this point you can not reply to this section which is directed at Brady you can tell because the first word in the paragraph is Brady and not Batz. Likewise the PREVIOUS sentence began with your name.

scJazz · « **Reply #37 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:48:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Löwe
don't try an out HO the N1K2's, and you should do well as an Allied pilot.

Do HO them if they insist just start firing at 1600 yards. You'll have a good 3 seconds of firing before they are in range. If they break first then HAHA you've already got angles on 'em.

Arlo · « **Reply #38 on:** December 09, 2003, 06:50:05 PM »

I thought your last sentence began with "Likewise."

scJazz · « **Reply #39 on:** December 09, 2003, 07:00:41 PM »

Damn it leave it to you to say something like that... hold on!

scJazz · « **Reply #40 on:** December 09, 2003, 07:02:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
I thought your last sentence began with "Likewise."

There is that better?!?

brady · « **Reply #41 on:** December 09, 2003, 07:02:29 PM »

"Brady, this setup has been run several times with hardened SBs and soft ships. With a hardness of 5000lbs your increasing the SB hardness from 3700lbs by a factor of 1/3rd not the 1/4th you probably think your doing. Could we please try using just normal hardness on the SBs? "

SB Hardness is set at 5K which is equilvent(or less than) to the ordance load out of any two of the following planes: P47D30,TBM,F6F-5,F4U-1D. A single A20 can toast one SB and a formation of B26's can as well.

"I know your going to come up with some wonky excuse why you won't change a thing. It will sound really good to you as well. Try changing your mind just once though... then a bunch of the people in the CT won't think your such a complete ."

F-off.

Arlo · « **Reply #42 on:** December 09, 2003, 07:02:34 PM »

That's better ..... it was bugging me.

Airscrew · « **Reply #43 on:** December 09, 2003, 08:03:36 PM »

Arlo, I think I didnt explain my thoughts well enough, I didnt have a lot time while I'm at work.

You're right FM2, I got confused reading about the CAP event and this setup.

I wouldnt say its a point of contention, its just a fustration, and I get over it easily. It wasnt even worth bringing up because it doesnt happen that often. I was only trying to make a point that those two things are the only things that I find fustrating, but that goes for the CT and the MA, Whereas a few individuals seem to think that this particular setup is biased towards Axis and I dont agree.
I do think that the CV's should be hardened maybe twice as hard as they are now and make the shore batteries a little weaker but add more shore batteries

I used fly the F4Us quite a bit, Mostly the F4U-1A, I think it handles better than the C and D (I have more problems with stalling in the C and D than I do in the 1A, but that could just me and I'm doing something wrong) and I have almost no real time in the -4. I'm no expert in them but I hold my own if I fly regularly. I'm now trying to learn the F6F and F4F-FM2.
But I'm also learning the Zero.

One other point, the allies do have an advantage with that CV ack, You can take off with out worring about vulching. The ack coverage on the land bases cant compare to the protection from the CV.

Arlo · « **Reply #44 on:** December 09, 2003, 08:10:53 PM »

Ok .... understood. Good enough for me and I agree.