Bf-109F Ordinance

[Megalodon]

I have seen some requests for the Spit Vc to be returned, but not real hysterics and blame games. 

I don't think the Spit Vc needs to be returned to the game.  The Spit IX fills the 1942 hole for the Spits just fine.  The only new Spitfire that I think should be added is the Seafire Mk III, of which more than 1200 were built being the main Seafire version.

The new options for the Bf109F-4 and Bf109G-6 as well as a Bf109G-6/AS being added would be great.  Particularly the latter would be a big help for scenarios as there is currently no high altitude Bf109 until the very late war Bf109K-4, which makes American Bomber offensive settings very lopsided.

I'm glad that You don't think the Spit Vc should be returned ... I bet if you took a vote amongst your pals you would be in the minority.... Now!... a vote for the SpitVc <how many were made?>  versus the P-51 <150>   who do you think would win? Not a vote on the forum either, an in game vote with description.

As far as the ME-109F4 ....You would see the F-4 use skyrocket back up and they would not be new options on the F-4 as we had them allready....

Gondies and an Egg,

[LCADolby]

Gondolas on a bf109F4... *vomit*

[Karnak]

Well, you may have your opinion, but just before the Spits were redone I made my post and Guppy, Kev and other Spitfire fans (not fair weather fans that just use it because it is good/easy, but historical Spit fans) all concurred about that change for representative purposes and when HTC redid the Spit's Pyro made the change, so he must have agreed as well.  Having a Spit Vc as our Spit V left us with no 1941 Spitfire.  The lineup jumped from the 1940 Mk Ia to the mid-1942 Mk IX with the Mk Vc coming even later in 1942.

You seem to like to portray me as whacked and way out there on my own, but such is just not the case.  I don't have the influence with HTC you have ascribed to me, but it seems I see things mostly eye to eye with them.

[Megalodon]

Gondolas on a bf109F4... *vomit*

Don't use them 

[Megalodon]

Well, you may have your opinion, but just before the Spits were redone I made my post and Guppy, Kev and other Spitfire fans (not fair weather fans that just use it because it is good/easy, but historical Spit fans) all concurred about that change for representative purposes and when HTC redid the Spit's Pyro made the change, so he must have agreed as well.  Having a Spit Vc as our Spit V left us with no 1941 Spitfire.  The lineup jumped from the 1940 Mk Ia to the mid-1942 Mk IX with the Mk Vc coming even later in 1942.

You seem to like to portray me as whacked and way out there on my own, but such is just not the case.  I don't have the influence with HTC you have ascribed to me, but it seems I see things mostly eye to eye with them.

Okay the 3 of you  

Missed the Post,

[Karnak]

Okay the 3 of you  

Missed the Post,

You weren't hear at the time, assuming your 2006 registration date is accurate.

It was more then three of us, but I named the other two that stand out/stood out (Kev isn't around anymore) as guys who know what they're talking about when it comes to Spitfires.

And as noted, none of us have any particular pull with HTC.  We can't make them do something they don't think is a good idea.  It is entirely possible that Pyro would have done it without us discussing it.

[thrila]

There were several large threads which discussed what models would best represent the spitfire as it was modified through the war.  From memory i would have to say it was pretty unanimous amongst the spit fans to have the current crop of spits we have now; even the spit XVI to differentiate between F IX from a spit LF IX.

[BaldEagl]

You weren't here at the time...

[Karnak]

There were several large threads which discussed what models would best represent the spitfire as it was modified through the war.  From memory i would have to say it was pretty unanimous amongst the spit fans to have the current crop of spits we have now; even the spit XVI to differentiate between F IX from a spit LF IX.

Well, I suggested the Seafire Mk III either in place of or in addition to the Seafire Mk II given that 1220 Seafire MK IIIs were built compared to 372 Seafire Mk IIs and that the Mk XVI be modeled on 150 octane.  Neither of those were done.  I still think the Seafire Mk III should be added, but the 150 octane Spitfire Mk XVI would clearly be a perk plane and I don't mourn its absence at all.

[Megalodon]

You weren't hear at the time, assuming your 2006 registration date is accurate.

It was more then three of us, but I named the other two that stand out/stood out (Kev isn't around anymore) as guys who know what they're talking about when it comes to Spitfires.

And as noted, none of us have any particular pull with HTC.  We can't make them do something they don't think is a good idea.  It is entirely possible that Pyro would have done it without us discussing it.

Actually... I was here at the time..  I registered on the boards August 2004. I started in tour 53 .... May, 2004. .

Well I'm glad Kev got his way and split. Tiff is still around <an old spit guy> but mostly flys the 38, glad he got his way. You are still here but mostly fly the mossie, glad you got your way.

None of you fly the 109F-4, plain sucks that a few spit dweebs got there way concerning the 109F-4!


Pyro? Possible but not likely.


So you did mention it? Thought you said you were only advocating the spit be changed and didn't say anything about the 109F-4?

Which is it?,

[Lusche]

 

[Karnak]

None of us "Spit dweebs" made requests about the Bf109F-4 as I recall.  I certainly would not have made any such request as I was not aware that gondolas were rare on Bf109F-4s until discussions about it were started by others.  I don't even recall who, if anybody, brought it up before they vanished from the Bf109F-4.  I'll grant you that I would have supported such a suggestion once it was laid out with evidence as to why it should be so, just as I would have with the Bf109G-6 being a representation of an early G-6.  With the change to the ability for CMs to limit loadout availability my prior positions on both of those are null and void, as stated in my first post in this thread.

You are very far from the mark when you accuse us of having nerfed the Bf109s.  You also seem to be focused only on the MA and not considering the need to fill gaps in scenarios.  A Spitfire Mk Vc, as I said earlier, leaves a two year gap in the Spitfire line.

FWIW, I also said the .50 cals, bombs and rockets should be removed from the Spitfire Mk IX, so you can get upset with me for that too if you like.  I stand by that position as no Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX carried that stuff.

[Megalodon]

None of us "Spit dweebs" made requests about the Bf109F-4 as I recall.  I certainly would not have made any such request as I was not aware that gondolas were rare on Bf109F-4s until discussions about it were started by others.  I don't even recall who, if anybody, brought it up before they vanished from the Bf109F-4.  I'll grant you that I would have supported such a suggestion once it was laid out with evidence as to why it should be so, just as I would have with the Bf109G-6 being a representation of an early G-6.  With the change to the ability for CMs to limit loadout availability my prior positions on both of those are null and void, as stated in my first post in this thread.

You are very far from the mark when you accuse us of having nerfed the Bf109s.  You also seem to be focused only on the MA and not considering the need to fill gaps in scenarios.  A Spitfire Mk Vc, as I said earlier, leaves a two year gap in the Spitfire line.

FWIW, I also said the .50 cals, bombs and rockets should be removed from the Spitfire Mk IX, so you can get upset with me for that too if you like.  I stand by that position as no Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX carried that stuff.

Rare?

240 109F-4/R1 made at the factory..... not field mods, prototypes or test planes.


Rare is 16 TA-152 that were in combat.

Rare is the 163

Rare is the P-47M <200>

Rare is the Arado 234 <200> certainly not all in use

Rare is the B-239 with <44>

Rare is the F4U-C <200>

Rare is the P-51  <150> not in game we need the allison mustang.... couple of em...

All complete planes that were more rare than a simple ordinance package  


I am focused on the MA... thats where 98% of the folks fly.....DAILY!. The scenario managers are able to set the planes the way they want. The more options for the planes the more they are flown.


I really don't care about your spitfires, don't fly them, no desire to, but I certainly wouldn't be trying to take thing's from them or out of the game.... especially if they were used historically in the war!

If the MKIX did not have whatever...   then I would be with you for whatever it was, but  I don't know and don't care and am not going to look it up, even though I have plenty of resources to do so.

 

[moot]

You're focused on the MA, but would rather have a planeset that is/had been filled by historical production volumes?

[Karnak]

Rare?

240 109F-4/R1 made at the factory..... not field mods, prototypes or test planes.

A heavy minority of Bf109F-4s and when CMs lacked the option to limit it when appropriate would result in inappropriate aircraft matchups.

Rare is 16 TA-152 that were in combat.

I would not have added the Ta152 if it were up to me.  In addition I wouldn't count that as rare so much as almost nonexistent.  Suspect it was added because it reused some Fw190D-9 art work.

Rare is the 163

See: Ta152. Suspect it was added for Wow! factor.

Rare is the P-47M <200>

Yes, but it was only added because it uses the exact same 3D model as the P-47D-40 making it resource cheap for HTC to add.

Rare is the Arado 234 <200> certainly not all in use

Yes, it was added because a perk bomber was needed and I suspect that of the two obvious ones the Ar234 was much less work compared to the B-29.

Rare is the B-239 with <44>

Kinda.  It saw heavy use and had outsized impact for its low airframe count.  It was also added, as I am sure you're aware, as a bone to the Finns that have long supported this game.

Rare is the F4U-1C <200>

This was probably the most problematic of all aircraft added given there were no controls on its use before being perked.  It is another cheap addition though.  At least it isn't an F4U-4C like was added to WarBirds based on a mislabeled photo.  

Rare is the P-51  <150> not in game we need the allison mustang.... couple of em...

I have advocated to Allison Mustangs to be added.

All complete planes that were more rare than a simple ordinance package  

This completely misses the point of removing the gondolas or 30mm at the time.  Don't want a P-47M in your scenario?  Don't enable it.  Don't want Ta152s in your event?  Don't add them.  Don't want gondolas for the Bf109F-4 in your setting?  Tough, it has them.

I am focused on the MA... thats where 98% of the folks fly.....DAILY!. The scenario managers are able to set the planes the way they want. The more options for the planes the more they are flown.

Got those numbers from HTC did you?

I really don't care about your spitfires, don't fly them, no desire to, but I certainly wouldn't be trying to take thing's from them or out of the game.... especially if they were used historically in the war!

If the MKIX did not have whatever...   then I would be with you for whatever it was, but  I don't know and don't care and am not going to look it up, even though I have plenty of resources to do so.

 

And this sort of thing is why your opinions don't really matter in the end.