Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa ("Oscar")

[Krusty]

To be fair the only real differences on the SBD-5 vs the SBD-3 were different voltage power systems, double the ammo in the nose .50cals, and 200 more horsepower. Overall the armor and defensive capabilities were the same. The 200 hp is the most notable difference, but IMO when talking about such a slow and vulnerable craft to begin with I think it can substitute for its earlier brother without too much harm.

[Karnak]

To be fair the only real differences on the SBD-5 vs the SBD-3 were different voltage power systems, double the ammo in the nose .50cals, and 200 more horsepower. Overall the armor and defensive capabilities were the same. The 200 hp is the most notable difference, but IMO when talking about such a slow and vulnerable craft to begin with I think it can substitute for its earlier brother without too much harm.

Speed is the best defense they have.  If we had the D3A2, the SBD-5's contemporary, it would be 40mph faster than the D3A1.  That is a significant improvement in speed and would significantly improve its chances of reaching the target.

[Krusty]

Oh, to be sure. Please don't misunderstand: I'm not saying there's no difference. I'm saying that even with the "better case scenario" (the 1200 hp variant) it's still extremely catchable and vulnerable. It's not a what-if issue like with the D3A2, it's a "we have it now" issue and it's not like it's running around owning the arena like the Hurr2C is.

That's all I meant.

[Tank-Ace]

besides that, we only have 2 legitimate EW tanks, and 2 other cannon-armed vehicles. Not saying that we need an EW addition for out next update or anything, but I'm just saying that EW GV's should take priority over EW Aircraft, from a purely "What are we most lacking of?" standpoint.

[nrshida]

Tank-Ace, most of us play this air combat simulator to fly. With an incomplete plane set you can hardly justify us needing this tank or that.

[Pigslilspaz]

Tank-Ace, most of us play this air combat simulator to fly. With an incomplete plane set you can hardly justify us needing this tank or that.

[icepac]

He's too busy running up his tank score by abusing a bug in his video driver that allows him to see tanks he would otherwise not be able to see.

[morfiend]

He's too busy running up his tank score by abusing a bug in his video driver that allows him to see tanks he would otherwise not be able to see.

  You'd have to have a online account to do that!




   

[Butcher]

  You'd have to have a online account to do that!




   

He's to busy running up his post count - fixed.

[nrshida]

I have no problem with people liking tanks and ground battles if that's their thing, and I further understand HTC's decision to expand the armoured vehicle set to attract the WOT LOT, however there is no leverage you can apply until some of the obvious aircraft holes are filled.

There shouldn't need to be a vote or an overwhelming petition to have things like the He111, the Ki-43, the Beaufighter etc. added. Not unless, err, oh dear, hadn't thought of that before... 

[Tank-Ace]

This isn't and never has been an air combat simmulator. Show me a quote from the HTC staff or the website that explicitly says that it is an air combat simmulator. Not that aerial combat will be the primary focus, but that this game is an 'Air Combat Simulator'.


Point being that you can't use the "well we need it for its historical significance, for EW and scenarios, and nothing else really matches it for a substitution in Special Events  " rationale for why ki-43 should be the next addition when there are other more needed additons (based on those criterion), particularly in the EW GV lineup.

You want the Ki-43? Fine, but don't use the "well its needed for EW" reasoning if you don't want me to raise perfectly valid and legitimate arguments against it, or for other additions ahead of it.

[Ack-Ack]

This isn't and never has been an air combat simmulator. Show me a quote from the HTC staff or the website that explicitly says that it is an air combat simmulator. Not that aerial combat will be the primary focus, but that this game is an 'Air Combat Simulator'.

In the main page it clearly says:

"Get Started!
-With the best combat flight simulator

It also clearly states in the main page that this game at it's heart is a "high fidelity flight simulation" and doesn't mention how the ground war is the "heart of the game".

We understand that you prefer the ground portion and why you feel GVs should take a center stage but the developers think otherwise.

ack-ack

[Tank-Ace]

Aw crap.... I feel dumb now  . Though it said "WWI and WWII combat simmulator".


Either way, my point about the reasoning for the Ki-43 still stands.

If you bring up the EW, use, or holes in the plane set thing, I'll come right back at you with our whopping total of 2 tank in EW.

[icepac]

KI43s shot down B29s in the war.

That sounds to me like successful late war operations.

[Butcher]

In the main page it clearly says:

"Get Started!
-With the best combat flight simulator

It also clearly states in the main page that this game at it's heart is a "high fidelity flight simulation" and doesn't mention how the ground war is the "heart of the game".

We understand that you prefer the ground portion and why you feel GVs should take a center stage but the developers think otherwise.

ack-ack

I certainly agree, I enjoy the ground warfare aces high brings, however it's named "Aces High" for a reason, up to a few years ago the ground vehicles were never much an interest to HTC, I think the expanding of it brings plenty of great ideas and fun to the game, it's always going to take a
back seat to the air war.