Increase the perk cost for the Me163

[HawkerMKII]

Ah really lets do away with the 163??  Why because its inconvenient to strat runners  

I could care less about strat runners, 163 had no value during war whats the point of it in this game

[FTJR]

Could the engine be throttled in RL as it is in AH?

[Chalenge]

Could the engine be throttled in RL as it is in AH?

Yes. In fact the 163C would have had an economy burn - larger fuel tanks - and more wing area in addition to the pressurized cockpit. I dont think any 163Cs ever saw combat and certainly the economy engine was never built. Even if it had the plane would have had power for a mere twelve minutes.

[Fish42]

Better fix, do away with 163's. I always thought this game was modeled somewhat by how many a/c were made and the role that a/c played in the war. From what I have read ( and I could be wrong) only 300 built and only 9 kills, that's not much of a war changer. Now you'll say "HQ will be undefended", well I say "Get your head out of that furball your always in and watch the map if you want dar"(players should have to man dar anyway in this game, but that another topic).

Link I looked at

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=107

It was in service from May 44 to May 45, in squadron strength (with JG 400) and had 9 confirmed kills. Lack of fuel keeped their number of shorties down and they only got 2-3 passes before they had to head home.  With its smaller ammo load and the speeds at which they attacked, I can imagine how hard it was to get a kill. How many times do you make a pass on a B-17 landing good hits only to see it flying along fine. True lines/cables/wires/people maybe damaged/killed but that does not mean its going down. Thats why they were working on that group of 50mm morters fired by PE cells that would fire from the upper wing of a 163 as it passed under the bombers.

How is the Me163 not worthy for AH?

[icepac]

Because it caters to 3 minute sorties at the expense of guys who fly 2 hours to bomb the strats or the guys who climb a fighter 30 minutes and set up a proper interception scenario.

The fact that I can fly one to 97,000 feet and fly 10 sectors is also a bit unrealistic.

[Chalenge]

I wish that HTC could code in an altitude affect (influence) that would limit time above 30k for any aircraft that does not have pressurized cockpits. This would make things much more difficult for anyone flying the aircraft and therefore the current perk cost would still make sense. That would stop 90k+ altitude runs and might promote even more 163 flights since the chances of flying at high alt and still getting multiple kills would be less. It would also decrease the likelihood of seeing B17s at 37k but also much fewer fighters that high. Plus throw in loss of pressurized cabins because of combat damage and then everything starts to more closely resemble reality.

[Fish42]

Ok, the OP requested a perk rise for the 163. Now I have taken my buffs to eny HQ quite alot lately and 1 thing is very clear. Alot of players are crap in a 163, but the good sticks will rip your formation apart. So the newer player has to work harder for those 25 more perks just to fly it for the first time (and probably smash it into the first buff they attack), while the good sticks who have buckets of perks will not even blink as they click the 163 and 4 mins later are picking you apart.

Someone else requested that we just remove the 163. ok we start removing planes that have every right to be in the game because some dont like having to fight against it, in a very small area of the map. When can I remove all those heavy bombs and fast fighters because they outrun my hurri and out score my B5N? Your upping buffs for the strats, you know you have a chance of finding a 163 defending it.

I wish that HTC could code in an altitude affect (influence) that would limit time above 30k for any aircraft that does not have pressurized cockpits. This would make things much more difficult for anyone flying the aircraft and therefore the current perk cost would still make sense. That would stop 90k+ altitude runs and might promote even more 163 flights since the chances of flying at high alt and still getting multiple kills would be less. It would also decrease the likelihood of seeing B17s at 37k but also much fewer fighters that high. Plus throw in loss of pressurized cabins because of combat damage and then everything starts to more closely resemble reality.

Now this is +1, but from my understanding with oxygen you can fly around 30k for a long time without too many problems. this would force buffs to fly lower, but would not really affect 163s who would zoom to 39,000 as they did in the war.

from wiki:

The performance of the Me 163 far exceeded that of contemporary piston engine fighters. At a speed of over 320 km/h (200 mph) the aircraft would take off, in a "sharp start" from the ground, from its two-wheeled dolly. The aircraft would be kept at low altitude until the best climbing speed of around 676 km/h (420 mph) was reached, at which point it would jettison the dolly, pull up into a 70° angle of climb, and rapidly climb to a bomber's altitude. It could go higher if required, reaching 12,000 m (39,000 ft) in an unheard-of three minutes. Once there, it would level off and quickly accelerate to speeds around 880 km/h (550 mph) or faster, which no Allied fighter could match.

[SmokinLoon]

I'm not exactly sure of how easy of a remedy my idea is, but if there were 6k or higher bases near the HQ many people would be more willing to grab a 109G-14/K-4, 190D-9, Ta152, or even a P47x for interception/interdiction duty instead of the Me163.  I really like how ice pointed out how the bomber guys spend 30+ minutes of time essentially being historically accurate and all it takes is a 3 minute sorte' by the Me163 to counter that.  That puts it in to perspective. 

The Me163 offers a lot for a very small risk of losing 50 perk points. 

[Lusche]

but if there were 6k or higher bases near the HQ many people would be more willing to grab a 109G-14/K-4, 190D-9, Ta152, or even a P47x for interception/interdiction duty instead of the Me163.  

If so, they would do it far more for psychological reasons than for a true advantage the 6k base is offering them.

A 109G-14 at 100% fuel takes 11 minutes to reach 30.5k from sea level. Lifting from a 6k base would shorten that time by less than 2 minutes only.
A P-51D at 75% fuel takes 14 minutes to reach the same altitude. A 6k base would reduce that time by only about 2.5 minutes.

Many bases currently close to the HQ are higher then sea level, sometimes reaching 4k and more, so the net effect of a 6k base would be even smaller. The advantage of high altitude bases for high (20k+) altitude sorties is generally very much overrated, for bombers even more than for fighters.

The main problem is that players do not identify HQ/strat raids in time. They have, for whatever reasons, no battle or map SA. If something doesn't make a base flash, it's not of any interest. And the only plane that can hope to catch a raider when the strats/hq are already flashing is the Me 163.

[Fish42]

If so, they would do it far more for psychological reasons than for a true advantage the 6k base is offering them.

A 109G-14 at 100% fuel takes 11 minutes to reach 30.5k from sea level. Lifting from a 6k base would shorten that time by less than 2 minutes only.
A P-51D at 75% fuel takes 14 minutes to reach the same altitude. A 6k base would reduce that tiem by only about 2.5 minutes.

Many bases currently close to the HQ are higher then sea level, sometimes reaching 4k and more, so the net effect of a 6k base would be even smaller. The advantage of high altitude bases for high (20k+) altitdue sorties is generally very much overated, for bombers even more than for fighters.

The main problem is that players do not identify HQ/strat raids in time. They have, for whatever reasons, no battle or map SA. If something doesn't make a base flash, it's not of any interest. And the only plane that can hope to catch a raider when the strats/hq are already flashing is the Me 163.

And some will not bother lifting a 109k4 etc because in the 11-20 mins you spent climbing there only to see the bomber pilot bail or turn and high tail it out of there, is really frustrating. a 163 takes 3 mins to be in combat and gives the bomber pilot few chances to advoid combat.

The Me163 offers a lot for a very small risk of losing 50 perk points. 

The 163 does not get it all its own way here, its current K/D is 3.81 for this tour. That falls to 3.32 when its B-17s vs 163.  Thats not good odds for the 163 when its 50 perks while the 3 x B17s will give you less then 1 or 2 perks. And that does not take into account the many ditches there must be for the 163 as I am sure more then a few run short fighting buffs/escort and end up ditching in view of the base.

[Lusche]

The 163 does not get it all its own way here, its current K/D is 3.81 for this tour. That falls to 3.32 when its B-17s vs 163. 

That's almost one Komet for every formation it shoots down. If you look at it as player vs player, it's almost 1-1. 

The Komet has an awesome performance, but it is one of those planes in need of a experienced hand to make use of that performance. 

[Wmaker]

B29s at high alt never depressurised. During action over Japan they were most times under 12k and not flying at 30-35k.

B-29 Superfortress Detail & Scale Part 1 for example clearly states how the cabin was depressurized 30 minutes prior to entering combat zone. Not all B-29 raids were conducted at lower altitudes.

----------------------



People don't just magically drop dead even at extreme altitudes as long as they have an appropriate supply of oxygen. There are previous glider altitude records that are as high as ~46000ft without pressure suits.

[save]

Not to mention the real b17,b24 raids didnt NOT fly @ 95% throttle all the way to target, like they do in AH.

[VonMessa]

or you could just.........I dont know......kill them



(Image removed from quote.)

WTF!?!?

How dare you suggest combat...

[pembquist]

B-29 Superfortress Detail & Scale Part 1 for example clearly states how the cabin was depressurized 30 minutes prior to entering combat zone. Not all B-29 raids were

Damn this weak brain, I have a distinct memory of a first person account of flying in b-29s over Japan before they started flying lower.  One of the things the veteran said was that they were supposed to depressurize before entering the combat zone but they didn't because they liked flying in short sleeves and comfort.  Wish I could remember the source, if it comes to me I'll post it.