Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5924 Excellent

1 Follower

About Finkeren

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark

Recent Profile Visitors

5791 profile views
  1. 109G6 late and 190A6 are gonna be first for sure. Both are very low hanging fruit, as they don't require much work beyond merging features from planes that are already modeled. Next I think will be the P-51B/C. Not that much work required either. Even the cockpit is largely the same as the D save for the canopy. P-47D razorback would also not require that much, but I have a feeling it will come a bit later, since it is possible, that they will take the time to alter some things on the bubble-top version as well to adress some of the issues some see with the FM. Then I think we'll see the Ju 88C6. Larger plane, multiple crew positions, but not too much work from the A4 either. Typhoon and Spit mk. XIV will come next, which one is first is anyone's guess. Both require sustancial research and modeling work. The Spit might be a bit closer to its Merlin powered cousins than the Typhoon is to the Tempest, but a Griffon-Spit is still a very different beast to a Merlin one. The rest of the twin engined planes will come last. I think we will see the Mossie first, as it is well documented and in practical terms a single-seater. Then possibly the Arado and last the Me 410, as it seems to me to be the most complex to model (two crew positions, remote controlled guns, bomb bay integrated with the cockpit, complex cockpit layout, aerodynamic quirks) Like with the B-25, I think the AI B-26 will be very last, as it is fairly low-priority compared to the flyables. That's my prediction.
  2. Just to put the whole issue into perspective, here's another of Mark Felton's excellent documentary short: Basically it was not until November 1944 that American forces met Tiger Is in actual combat. The British met them in Normandy, but it was rare with only 6 Tiger tanks in all of France on June 6th. Despite this there are literally hundreds of combat reports detailing encounters with Tiger tanks which either weren't Tigers or simply didn't happen.
  3. Regardless of the details of how exactly the M8 managed to destroy the King Tiger, my point was, that this was only possible due to the crew of the M8 spotting the Tiger first and managing to achieve complete surprise. The only reason I brought up that story was as an example of how important situational awareness is in combat.
  4. Indeed. Though in this case it was the M8's main gun that did the job.
  5. Still more than there were Tigers on the West Front.
  6. But let's, for the sake of argument, put your question in a somewhat realistic historical context: A single troop of Shermans with a single Firefly having to assault a position held by a single well-positioned Tiger, neither side being backed by infantry with any significant anti-tank capability and neither being able to call in artillery strikes or air support. In that case, the choice is not as obvious. I'm not liking the odds for the Tiger crew, being outnumbered 5-to-1 is never a good position to be in, but neither can any of the Allies crews feel particularly safe. In the end, I'd probably still take the Firefly, for the simple reason, that you have 4 other tanks at your disposal and 5 times the number of eyes scouting for targets, and that's just such a big advantage, that I really can't pass on it. Having seen your target without being spotted yourself is the biggest advantage you can have in an armored engagement. It is situations like that that lead to stuff like light armored scout cars defeating King Tigers.
  7. To be honest, I have little interest in 'all else being equal'-hypotheticals. Once you take all context away and look at pure numbers, you have abandoned any semblance of historical analysis and might just as well ask, if you would rather sit in a Tiger I or an M1 Abrams. The Sherman was a great tank for the war the US was fighting, because it could readily be deployed and operated in large numbers anywhere in the world. A one-to-one comparison to one of the monstrous German heavies is meaningless.
  8. But all else was NOT equal. Most Allied tank crews never had to engage a German heavy tank. And it's a verifiable fact, that the crew of a Sherman had a much, much better chance of surviving the war than the crew of a Tiger. Also: Be very, very careful trusting documentaries like that. They are far more preoccupied with constructing a compelling narrative than actual historical realities.
  9. Definitely the Tommy Cooker, because it would mean, that my side would be vastly superior in numbers and logistics and in all likelihood, I would never even see a Tiger, let alone have to face one in combat. And even if things should take a turn for the worse, the Sherman arguably had the best crew survivability of any tank once penetrated.
  10. No offenses, but a Yak-52 flies at a fraction of the speed we do in-game. Judging how many Gs you're pulling in a given situation based on the movement of the plane can be quite deceiving. If you are used to a certain pitch movement producing a certain G-force in the Yak-52 at 250kph, the effect of the same movrment is gonna be drastically different in the Tempest at 500kph. I honestly think you think that you're pulling far fewer Gs than you actually are when flying in the game.
  11. The one major stopping block to making these heavies is their impact on performance due to the large number of AI (all gunners are separate AI) so making them AI-only will not solve the issue.
  12. I gotta be honest raaaid, I never thought much of your work, but this might be your best attempt at a portrait yet. I actually really like the effects on the shoulders, chest and hair. I wish you'd applied it to the face as well. Your grasp on perspective when it comes to facial features still needs a lot of work, but I can see improvement from some of your earlier work. If drawing/painting gives you joy, please by all means keep it going. You are getting better.
  13. Haven't tried it online yet, but from what I can gather from the first few tries in QMB, using the Su-122 as a regular tank will just be an exercise in frustration. Because of the low muzzle velocity and high trajectory, you have to get your range estimate down to a tee or your shots will miss every single time, and the reload time simply doesn't allow for a second attempt. Once the HEAT connects it will generally hit the upper armor and thus be a one-shot-one-kill weapon against anything that moves. It is landing the shot that's the issue. I think the best use of the Su-122 is as an ambusher targeting a pre-sighted choke point like a bridge or a street corner, where you can count of your first shot landing. Also maybe to area bombard spawn- or rallying points. You could potentially lay down some seriously annoying barrages from afar, if you could get to a good elevated vantage point, but how deadly it would be, I don't know. However, the Su-122 is making me thirsty for an Su-85 (unfortunately the Kursk timeline doesn't quite allow for it) The low profile is great, and that part of the roof that lifts up to allow the commander a full 360 view is to die for - sorta like the raised commander's position on a Panther, where he's peeking out from underneath the raised hatch. Su-85 would be the perfect ambush predator.
  • Create New...