Next Setup

[R4M]

Originally posted by Westy MOL:
Maybe allow the B-26 as a Ju88 medium bomber counterpart and remove the Lanc - or perk it altogether?

 

I'd say rather put a cheap perk on the B26 (5 perks), and let the Lanc unperked (the B26s is much more able to defence itself than the lancaster)

[Westy MOL]

My thing about the Lanc is that there is no Axis counterpart right now. From my experience in AW and what I saw with the WB's WWII Arena and HA is that the situation becomes so unbalancing (once the arena starts to get good numbers in it) that many LW flyers abandon the arena from heavy frustration. Or at a minimum express thier frustration and demand action in the newsgroups.

 The same thing would happen with the Allied players should the ME-262 be available.

 Jet's and heavy bombers are very unbalancing  in these tyes of set-ups.
 
 So in my opinion the Lanc should be removed until there is a comparable LW bomber or the ME262 arrives.  Try to maintain parity in performance, where at all possible, and it will help the arena succeed.

 As it stand the Allied side has the CV, which is a very big bonus for them. I hope most if not all the mainland Euro bases have multiple shore batteries.

 I just thought..... What happens should the Axis "side" capture a port and gain a CV?    Or better yet, enable one Axis port where the CV could have 109F/G2's and Ju88's to fly off them. It would replicate the German CV having been completed and allow for some naval parity. Even though the naval Stuka and ME109T would have been outclassed by Allied 1941-1943 contemporaries.

  Westy

[ 08-13-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]

[R4M]

Huhhmmm I see your point, but do you think it will be so much of an issue?...

I mean in the CT at this moment there is a lanc enabled and almost noone uses it. The Plane has relatively weak defensive armament. I very much more fear a formation of 3 B26s than one of 2 lancasters. The 26s will disintegrate any fighter incoming.

Maybe if the buff gunnery gets a bit toned down in the CT...as it is I think that it is best to have lancasters than B26s. But that is only my opinion, of course.

About the "german CV thing" I hope it simply doesnt work that way. Germany had no CV in WWII, even while the GZ was 90% complete, and I want to see a german CV in an HA-like arena as much as I want to see a Zero in the Axis inventory. That is: Nothing.

[ 08-13-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]

[JimBear]

Originally posted by SWulfe:
SpitV, SpitIX, P51B, P47D-11 (or -25, or both), B26

-vs-

109F4, 109G2, 109G6, 190A5, 190A8, Ju88A-4

Sounds perfect to me too as a starting point. Save the perkies for the next change over.

[AKSWulfe]

The Zero was built by and for an AXIS country RAM...
-SW

[R4M]

Originally posted by SWulfe:
The Zero was built by and for an AXIS country RAM...
-SW

and was used in the ETO?  


 

Originally posted by JimBear:


Sounds perfect to me too as a starting point. Save the perkies for the next change over.

I have to insist that the lack of a 109G10 is not good. The 109G6 we have is a early 1943 one, and the only 1944 plane in the german inventory is the 190A8. If you want a 1943 set, erase the P51B, if you want an early 1944 set, put a 109G10 in to fill the void of hte lack of a proper early'44 109G6.

I really would like to see a 109G6 AS modelled to solve this kind of thing.

[ 08-13-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]

[AKDejaVu]

The only way the lancs could affect the gameplay balance was if HTC made it possible for them to do so.

If this arena is set up around base closures and captures, then the lanc would be an unfair advantage.  If its set up with real strategic targets, then it would be something the Allies would have to try to get deep into enemy territory.  The Axis would have the means to stop them.

Think outside of the MA for now.

Even does not mean 4 fighters vs 4 fighters, 1 med bomber vs 1 med bomber, 1 hvy bomber vs 1 hvy bomber.  Even means that in a given situation, either side has a chance of winning.  Defining the objective is how you modulate fairness.

AKDejaVu

[Westy MOL]

"Huhhmmm I see your point, but do you think it will be so much of an issue?..."

 It could be. Not yet. I'm not sure the MA folks who like bombers have had time to shake out the CA.

 As for the CV?  It was just a thought for a compromise to help keep a balance of sorts.  WWII was not balanced in RL but most often when players are face to face with too much reality they back off and go play in the MA. No matter wether they are Allied or Axis type. AH is the first place where the players can drive the CV to destinations. And there is more than CV's in the fleet. Cruisers, LVT's, PT boats, etc.  So it's impact on an HA type setting has yet to be seen. It might be fine.

 But if people think of how to provide parity to possibly unsettling aspects, without going into the fantasy realm too far or even removing options, then we can help make this work.  These details are all things that can be hashed out as we go along.  I'm just glad we have the place now to use.

  Westy

[hblair]

I like SWulfe's list. Leave the late war out please. I especially like the idea of B26's and JU88's as the bombers.

[AKSWulfe]

"and I want to see a german CV in an HA-like arena as much as I want to see a Zero in the Axis inventory."

You weren't implying ETO theater, but I just wanted to make sure you knew.
-SW

[R4M]

SW I am talking of the current CT. That implies ETO.  

 

Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
The only way the lancs could affect the gameplay balance was if HTC made it possible for them to do so.

If this arena is set up around base closures and captures, then the lanc would be an unfair advantage.  If its set up with real strategic targets, then it would be something the Allies would have to try to get deep into enemy territory.  The Axis would have the means to stop them.

Think outside of the MA for now.

Even does not mean 4 fighters vs 4 fighters, 1 med bomber vs 1 med bomber, 1 hvy bomber vs 1 hvy bomber.  Even means that in a given situation, either side has a chance of winning.  Defining the objective is how you modulate fairness.

AKDejaVu

Dangit Deja, is a really surprising day for me the one we agree so much!  .

[Steven]

===================
SpitV, SpitIX, P51B, P47D-11 (or -25, or both), B26
-vs-
109F4, 109G2, 109G6, 190A5, 190A8, Ju88A-4

I'm sure this will be dubbed unfair to one side or the other.. but you asked for ideas...
=====================

Swulf, I agree with your choices most.  However, I would probably want to add a 4-engine bomber for the allies.  The whole point of this arena is to match historical aircraft against each other and not necessarily make things even so you can get some sort of feel for operations in a certain battle or theater.  Yes, the LW did have to defend against a lot of 4-engine bombers so I see no problem with that if you choose to play that role.  Anyway, it seems LW players have been outnumbering the Brits as it is anyway.

-Puke
332nd Flying Mongrels

[hblair]

The main reason the axis out#ered the allies in the past few days was ya had to fly a looooong ways to get to fight if you were allied, unless you settled for the seafire. With the pony b and P47d25 available (please leave the d11 out) the allies will have more #'s. They always do in these matchups. I'd be very surprised otherwise.

I propose making the 4 engine allied bombers available only from a couple of rear fields, and the medium allied/axis bombers should not be available on the front fields...

[AKSWulfe]

My list was just an idea, or whatever, for you guys to use. I, and apparently a few others, would like to keep this next setup limited to a specific time period/scope of the war which means perhaps ditching the perk point system or somewhat modifying it so say a P51B would cost 3 points while a SpitV would be free.. something along those lines, but I assume that would be up to HTC in the end.

Anyways, good stuff by everybody (except Dejavu.. he's been huffing air in a can again)
 
-SW

[Wotan]

SW was right on target with his 1st ist good suggestion...................