Where my KI-43?

[Karnak]

Panzer III Ausf. L.

Is a GV, therefor of grossly less interest to most of us.

StuG III

Is a GV, therefor of grossly less interest to most of us.

IAR 80C

Not very significant compared to the Ki-43, nor does it extend the performance envelope of fighters.

G.55

Insignificant compared to the Ki-43, nor does it extend the performance envelope of fighters.

Non of these suggestions do everything the Ki-43 does, some of them don't do anything it does.

An He-111 would do everything but add something significantly different.

He111 is not, in AH terms, significantly different than the Ju88A-4.  We need it, but don't kid yourself about it.

We could also do with a better EW bomber for the brits, and the Russians are still missing a level bomber.

Agreed.

[Tank-Ace]

Is a GV, therefor of grossly less interest to most of us.

Irrelevent, adding this would do exactly the same thing as adding the Ki-43, and more besides. It would be significantly different, and on top of that, theres far more potential for expansion.

Is a GV, therefor of grossly less interest to most of us.

Irrelevent, adding this would do exactly the same thing as adding the Ki-43, and more besides. It would be significantly different, and on top of that, theres far more potential for expansion.

Not very significant compared to the Ki-43, nor does it extend the performance envelope of fighters.

Significant in that it was the main Romanian fighter for a good strech of WWII, would give us a plane from a completly new nation, and is significantly different from other aircraft in game

Insignificant compared to the Ki-43, nor does it extend the performance envelope of fighters.

Not true, the G.55 offers better preformance than the C.205, and its Italian. Italy currently has the second smallest plane set, definatly deserves its third plane before we add a superfluous Japanese fighter.

He111 is not, in AH terms, significantly different than the Ju88A-4. We need it, but don't kid yourself about it.

Not in the MA, but in special events (what was/is a big argument for the Ki-43), it much better fills the role of an EW bomber, particularly in BoB setups.

Agreed.

Duh.

[AirLynx]

Couldn't a clean D3A do just about the same thing as the Ki-43?

I think your Ki-43 is up your.... See rule no. 4

 

I do agree, however, that we need new fighters for Italy, Japan, and Russia.

[Pigslilspaz]

How is the Ki-43 superfluous? The Zero, Oscar, and Betty were the 3 most well known planes that the Japanese had, with the Oscar claiming the most aerial victories compared to any other Japanese plane, I'm pretty certain on that. Just saying "Oh it has 2 small MG's and the D3A has 2 small MG's and they both turn really tight, makes them the same plane" just weakens your argument.

[Karnak]

It would be significantly different, and on top of that, theres far more potential for expansion.Significant in that it was the main Romanian fighter for a good strech of WWII, would give us a plane from a completly new nation, and is significantly different from other aircraft in game

It does not expand fighter performance range in AH though.  It does not do anything better than an existing fighter.

Not true, the G.55 offers better preformance than the C.205, and its Italian. Italy currently has the second smallest plane set, definatly deserves its third plane before we add a superfluous Japanese fighter.Not in the MA, but in special events (what was/is a big argument for the Ki-43), it much better fills the role of an EW bomber, particularly in BoB setups.Duh.

Once again, the G.55 does not do anything better than an existing fighter.  The Ki-43 does, not better than any Japanese fighter, better than any fighter.

[Tank-Ace]

Its superfluous because it would be the hands down most maneuverable aircraft, a title that's already held by a similar Japanese plane, the A6M.

It wouldn't fill in any gaps in special events that can't be reasonably well filled by the A6M. Its weak firepower would make it less popular in the MA's, and pure maneuverability isn't enough of an asset to counter that issue (as is evidenced by the rarity of A6M's outside of CV battles).


So while it would add something new, it wouldn't add anything new that can't easily be countered with a speed advantage. If it was a new jet, that kicked the speed up to 600mph from 550, then I would agree it would be significant in AH.


@ Karnak: So? My main rides will still be about 50mph faster, dive better, climb quicker, and last I saw, hit approximatly 15 times harder. And thats just on the deck. At alt, I'll be about 75-100mph faster. Its advantage will be of dubious value, becuase it cannot dictate the fight. Most aircraft will be able to engage and disengage at will, and even planes that are notorious for being bad at diving (such as the Ki-84) will be able to dive away.

So my response is this: so what if they don't add anything new? Its nearly guaranteed that they will be of more value in the typical MA fight.


Right now, the main argument for the Ki-43 is its historical significance, as it doesn't fill in the most urgent gaps in special events, and will be out-preformed in the MA's.


My bet is that when they finally do add the Ki-43, you guys are going to freak out and jizz your pants, fly it for maybe a tour at most, and then drop it when you get frustrated with the lack of speed and firepower.

[Karnak]

Tank-Ace,

Your argument boils down to "We don't need the Fw190 because we have the similar Bf109 already."

[AirLynx]

Its superfluous because it would be the hands down most maneuverable aircraft, a title that's already held by a similar Japanese plane, the A6M.

I can tell you from experience that a D3A with flaps down and no bombload can out turn any A6M with flaps down (and I bet the storch could out maneuver that). Therefore, the A6M is NOT the most maneuverable aircraft right now.

[Tank-Ace]

Karnak, the 190 flys a lot differently from the 190. its better in different situations, its most effective manuvers are different, its peak altitude is lower, its a better multi-role aircraft.

My argument boils down to "we don't need a 190A-1, we have an A-4".


Alright airlynx, a point. The A6M is the most manuverable FIGHTER aircraft.



And karnak, my point still stands, based on the reasoning of your argument, there are other aircraft and vehicles that deserve to be added ahead of the Ki-43.

[Karnak]

Tank-Ace,

You're a fan of German stuff, so of course the Bf109 flies a lot differently than the Fw190, but....they are both just BnZ fighters.

The Ki-43 will handle a lot differently than the A6M2, just because you don't have an interest in Japanese aircraft doesn't mean they are all clones of each other.

[Tank-Ace]

Not quite what I meant: You can't fly a 190 like a 109 and expect to come out with a win. Well you can, I guess, but that doesn't mean your expectations will reflect reality.


However, both the Ki-43 and A6M are going to be TnB planes without any question. If the Ki-43 dives even as well as the A6M, then I'll eat my hat. Based on wing area, lenght, and aileron size, I'm guessing the Ki-43 will roll about as well as an A6M. It will be slightly faster, but not enough to result in a change in tactics.


That being so, you can probably fly a Ki-43 like an A6M and win your fight, and hence the 190A-1 vs the 190A-5 comparison.

And again, my point stands. The Ki-43 is not the best plane we could add based on filling gaps in special events, use in the MA, or historical significace.



don't get me wrong, I would enjoy seeing the Ki-43. But theres other stuff that should be added first, even based on your own reasoning. Fact is that a big reason you guys want this is personal affection for the plane, and thats fine, but that doesn't mean you automaticly get your way.

[Karnak]

I'd expect the Ki-43 to roll and turn significantly better than the A6M.  Speeds will be pretty much the same as the same generation A6M.

[Pigslilspaz]

In all honesty, I have no affection towards this plane. I however, would like to close the most blaring gaps in the plane set. The KI-43 is one of them. So is the Beaufighter. So is the He-111.

[Wofat]

Its like asking why we need a P-47 when we already have the F6F.

Perfect analogy.

[Butcher]

I only wish the Ki-43 came with a pair of Ho-5's, then again I didn't have much problem flying the C202 with only a pair of 50s