Author Topic: Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?  (Read 1273 times)

Offline ergRTC

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1632
      • http://bio2.elmira.edu/DMS/index.pl?table=content&faculty=1&page=1
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2002, 10:20:37 PM »
brady I still dont agree with your pos markings.  This is the ct, you are staff, if you have any pull you should be telling htc to do this: for ever rocket ship you give the MA give a turd to the rest of us.  If they truly did just take the planes that had a production run of greater than 2000 and got all of them built (included), this whining would not be necessary.  They have kinda stuck to this, but in some cases they have not.  I think it is time they went back to it.  13,000 p40s built and they finally get to them in 3 years after the game was developed (after the 152, 262)?  If they are serious about this mission arena (which I am sure they are) then they will need to start filling out the roster with all planes.  Particularly those that match parts of ww2 that would be interesting to simulate (1939-late 1943) after that as mentioned before, the war was pretty much won in the air.

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #31 on: November 15, 2002, 02:08:47 AM »
"brady I still dont agree with your pos markings", The only pos I refered to is the Lagg 3.


  I doubt very much that I have anymore pull than any of you all hear when it comes to modeling planes, in fact mybe less after a few of my tempertantriums, In gerneral I feal threads like this are good for the comunity because it can serve as a learning tool, point out new planes, one maybe we had not thought of, also it helps to show us all just how hard it is for Pyro to decide what planes to add, look at how Karnak choped that list to 10, imagine pyro doing that but instead of 10 he picks 3, also he does have the luxery of catering just to US the miniourity comunity in AH, he must cater to the MA and us.

 Look at the Boston for example, a superlative choice for a bomber, great early war use, was used in the Battle for France, and the later varients prety much till the end of the war, good usefull bombload fast well armed, both models withen their respective timeframes. Their he killed two birds with one stone. I imagine that is a primary concern the MA is their bread a butter.

   Production numbers historicaly apear to have no bearing on wheather or not HTC adds a plane, nore imo should they, it is a double edged swoard, their are numiours planes that would of been excluded on both sides of the fence, and realy countries like Japan and a much small industrial base and their production numbers were dwarfed by US standards the figure of 1,400 some odd Georges, or 3,500 Franks may not seam like much compared to 39,000 IL-2's( I think it was 39k,or was it 35k?) but they were  importnat plane's for Japan, and fantastic ones at that, the C hog only some 200 were built and it is included why?, well heck it's a blast to fly and represents one of the most potentent US planes of the war, The Ta 152 was added because Pyro asked what perk  prop plane we wanted and we voted ,it wone. The Me 163 will be a blast to fly, true not many were used but it has captured all of our imaginations and is as famious (almost) as the 262 is. Why do you think their are so many US planes in the plane set, because the player base is largly US and they are catering to a preceaved demand for those planes, Russian planes are not as popular, in the US we wone WW2, while the truth is that Russia realy had hittler by the balls and all we realy did was secure western Europe so it would not become comunist, that is obviously an oversimplifacation, but goes to point out that while planes for Italy Russia and Japan are wanted and imo neaded they are not popular, how many people apon intering this game do you think expect that Italian plane to be such a joy to fly, Figure that a Japanese fighter would be one of the most dreaded planes in the MA, and that a Russian fighter owns all the US planes below 10k? Despite all the squeaking and moaning I do, have done, and will do about the plane choices they have made or will make it is in part to bolster suport for plane adations from the forgoten 3, Russia, Japan, Italy( France....imagine a D520:) ), it is also always done with the realazation that the making of those choices was not always easy and driven by forces outside my scope of concern.

  These planes the odd ducks are fun, and very MA I am not bumed we are geting the  Me 163 I cant wait to fly it:)

  HTC is adding new planes all the time and they will continue to add early war planes, hopefully they will see these posts of ours and relise we are very interested in broading the plane set, and see what planes for what theaters we want, big brother is watching m8t.

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2002, 08:00:27 AM »
P-38F Lightning. It was the USAAFs best fighter interceptor from 1942-44 in the Med, Europe and the Pacific. Right now all it has is the P-40 for early war, and then a jump to P-47D-11 later on.

Add the Ki-84 first though, to counter all the late war Allied stuff.

After that, the Ju-87 Stuka. Its too major an a/c not to have. It fought in all fronts the LW fought in from 1939-45.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2002, 08:13:24 AM by Squire »
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline cajun

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2002, 10:29:01 AM »
Lotta talk about the I-16 but no 1's sayin ne thing bout I153! :D
Anyway If we have one we got to have the other.
The I-153 was actuelly designed After the I-16, it could even out run some of the earlier versions of the I-16, had a surprisingly good acceleration rate, even though it was a biplane.  It Carried 2 bombs of I think 200-300 lbs 8xrockets and 4x7.7mm machine guns.  Allso the I-153 was actuelly produced at a higher rate than the I-16 during ww2 and Mongolia replaced their I-16s with the much more manuverable I-153 (and the I-16 was pretty manuverable lol!)

Offline Odee

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2718
      • 49th Fighter Group
What planes???
« Reply #34 on: November 25, 2002, 08:42:56 PM »
??? Seriously?
A6M3
A-26 Intruder? (not the one we have now)
B-25B
B-29A
Beaufighter Mk 21
Bf109G-14
F6F-3
Fw190A-1
G4M2
H8K2
He111H-3
He177A-5
Ju87D-1
Ju87G-1
Ju88G-7b
Ki.43-Ic
Ki.43-IIb
Ki.43-IIIb
Ki.44-IIb
Ki.61-Ia
Ki.61-IIb
Ki.84-Ia
Ki.100
Ki.102b
LaGG-3
La-5
MiG-3
Mosquito NF.Mk II
Mosquito B.Mk IV
Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII
Mosquito NF.Mk XXX
P-38G
P-39D
PBY-Catalina


And that should just about make it into 2020... :D
~Nobodee~   Get Poached!
Elite: Dangerous ~ Cmd Odeed

http://www.luxlibertas.com/

Offline Jester

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2753
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #35 on: November 27, 2002, 04:34:49 PM »
IMO here is what we need, in oder of priortiy:

JAPAN: (First Call!)(Japanese are realy hurting for some decent a/c)
KI-84 FRANK
B6N2 GRACE
KI-44 TOJO
G4M2 BETTY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GERMANY: (Second)
ME-109T (That can operate from the CV :D)
ME-109G-14
JU-87D STUKA (w/th conversion to G anti-tank model)
JU-88G-7 Gun Nose Package (should be an easy conversion)
HE-177A-5
(Increased ORD package for the 190F & other 190's)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITALY: (Third)
Cantz Z.1007 (Ities need a bomber bad)
(Italy already has some of the best fighters with the 202-205 package.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUSSIA: (Forth)
TU-2 (or PE-2, needs some kind of med bomber/attack a/c.)
(Russia has some of the best fighters there are already plus a good light attack plane with the IL-2)
I-16 (ok, for early war)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISC: (Fifth)
F2A BUFFALO (for the Fins, only if there is a version for the USMC)
D.520 (for the French, early war and Africa scenarios)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US: (Sixth)
P-39D (Maybe)(Could be used by the Russians also)
TBD (Maybe)
B-25B (maybe)(Could be used early war, by British and by Russians)
(US side is very well rounded already, doesn't need any new toys till the above get theirs.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENGLAND: (Seventh)
(Has one of the best sets on the board. Good fighter set with Hurri/Spit/Phoon/Tiffy. Good fighter/bombers early/late with Hurri II & Phoon. Good light/med bombers with Boston/Mossie set and a heavy with the Lanc.)(Plus all the Lend-Lease gear from the US plane-set.)

Only thing that I can see would be to make the straight bomber version of the Mossie. Later on maybe add the Beaufighter and the Wellington for a Med Bomber after the above has theirs.

IMO we have enough versions of the Spit at the moment.

!
Lt. JESTER
VF-10 "GRIM REAPERS"

WEBSITE:  www.VF10.org

Offline Löwe

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 821
      • http://www.geocities.com/duxfordeagles
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #36 on: November 29, 2002, 07:36:16 AM »
Those are all great ideas. I tell you some planes I'd like to see in the CT. The P-47, TA-152, FW-190D, P-51D, AR 234, and all the other planes we already have and never get to fly in CT.:(

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #37 on: November 29, 2002, 01:05:35 PM »
In terms of lacking crucial planes, Japan and Soviet Russia is definately in the top. No way we can consider Germany and Italy as any sort of priority(There can be different opinions about Italy though, since their significance in the war is in question).

 In the point of view concerning the CT, USSR planes are actually in more dire need than Japanese. Japanese planes are lacking very crucial planes, and they also have been missing their best fighter of the war, but at least the plane choices are enough to try putting up different settings of different time lines.

 In the case of the VVS, the whole first half of the Eastern Front setup is totally impossible. VVS is also missing a fighter with the most production numbers(Yak-9), and their plane set is totally empty from 1939 to 1943.

 People really love playing in a balanced arena where early war planes meet, and I can bet with confidence that if introduced, the Yak-7, Yak-1B, LaGG-3, and I-16 is going to put up some terrific fights against 109s from E-4 to G-2.

Offline Jester

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2753
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #38 on: November 29, 2002, 06:52:17 PM »
I am with Lowe. I would like to see some of the a/c we already have like the P-47, P-51, FW-190D, ME-109G, B-17, B-26 in a ETO set-up. Remember them? Hadn't seen a Jugg in so long probially have forgotten how to fly it. Don't think I EVER saw a 190D in a CT scenario!
Lt. JESTER
VF-10 "GRIM REAPERS"

WEBSITE:  www.VF10.org

Offline Jester

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2753
Planes you would like to see for CT/SEA?
« Reply #39 on: November 30, 2002, 07:05:13 AM »
Secretly though I am still wishing for the Vought F-8E CRUSADER.
:D
Lt. JESTER
VF-10 "GRIM REAPERS"

WEBSITE:  www.VF10.org