Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

253 Excellent

1 Follower

About =27=Davesteu

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4400 profile views
  1. The A-6 is a slightly heavier A-5 equipped with MG 151/20 in the outer wings. Nothing more, nothing less. "Redesigned wing" is a bit over the top - they changed the outer weapon bay. Mk 103 and 108 armaments were only trialled. I expect: ETC 501 rack (Bombs, Droptank) Sturmjäger (additional armour) Outer MG 151/20 removed BR 21 F-3; G-3 (ground attack aircraft; fighter-bomber) Nothing new; it's most likely the easiest plane to do. I'm more interested in seeing how they are going to adopt the omnipresent A-8 we already got in BoBP with increased boost.
  2. Operation Overlord isn't for you if you are not into a butchered Luftwaffe. The Ju 188 is indispensable for an accurate representation of the BoN timeframe. I'm still positive they are not going to model an unarmed Ar 234 prototype pressed into service as a recon, but the regular B-2 model - which simply does not fit BoN. Long story short, Jason himself summed it up: If you are happy with that: honestly, good for you. I'm interested in a historical air war simulation, not a themed sandbox. I'm in the minority. Nothing wrong with the Ju 88C-6 itself, I just don't like the package: Ju 88 C-6 (= Ju 88 A-4), Bf 109 G-6 "Late" (= G-6, G-14), Fw 190 A-6 (= A-5) Added to that, the airfields ZG 1 operated from are far off the proposed map and the unit's in-game career will be limited to a few mauling sorties. I still wish they had done the P-38J-15 or -20 and a Droop Snoot modification for it. Unlike the rare J-25, it would have been usable throughout the BoN timeframe. But I digress. ZG 1 operated Ju 88 R-2 (C-6 with BMW 801) alongside the C-6 - more viable, more worthwhile. Maybe it's going to be a modification? I wouldn't get my hopes up. Overdue!
  3. Thanks for the reply Jason! I do understand and sympathize with your situation. That said, my priorities seem to be different ones - I will have to live with that.
  4. Only two(!) Ar 234 prototypes(!) were utilized for reconnaissance flights during the Battle of Normandy timeframe. The first bombing sortie was conducted by regular B-2 models on 24 December 1944. I'm positive they are not going to model an unarmed prototype version pressed into service as a recon, but the regular B-2 model - which doesn't fit BoN at all. The prototypes in question still used the take-off trolley and landing skids instead of a conventional landing gear and do not fit BoBP. Including this aircraft instead of a Ju 88 S-1, Ju 188A-2/E-1 or even Do 217M-1 is super weird and it's not going to fit BoN and BoBP, only one of the two. The Ju 88 C-6 operated over the Bay of Biscay from airfield far outside the proposed map area; the few missions countering Overlord were an unsuccessful act of desperation. There's no Spitfire Mk. IXc, but a (straight-)flying V-1 and a Spitfire Mk. XIV to counter it. The only bomber is yet again going to be an AI-only version, this time of the B-26. Finally, the AI C-47 are going to conduct the famous airdrop at night, so nobody is going to witness it. Good for those who are satisfied.
  5. Can't say I'm looking forward to this. Yet again not the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre you committed to Too many rehashed aircraft Yet again no playable Allied bomber Personally not very interested in the Channel Front As of now, I can't see myself backing it. Nonetheless: The best of luck!
  6. Let me translate that for you: they are telling us it's not going to be Pearl Harbor or Operation Overlord. So it must be... : Papua & New Guinea 1942/43 means C-47 - jumping over the Owen Stanley Range while evading nasty Ki-43 or dropping paratroopers over Nadzab. ----------------------------------------------------------- Honestly: It's way too late for something like that. I wouldn't be able to accept it.
  7. Midway!? Definitely Asiatic-Pacific Theatre - it has to be.
  8. I wholeheartedly agree with your first sentence, as is evidenced by many of my posts. The IJNAS, and consequently the Zero, did play a very important role in the Papua & New Guinea campaign. In fact, the IJAAS wasn't involved until December 1942. This offers us a very diverse planeset - which is a very good thing. The IJAAS' involvement in the Solomon Islands Campaign was limited to a brief deployment of Ki-43 and Ki-48 in the last days of January 1943. The British involvement was limited to "USS Robin". As of now, I still doubt the viability of carrier scenarios. The Papua & New Guinea Campaign 1942/43 and the involved assets are doable(!) - this scenario is the obvious choice to get a foot in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre. That said, I don't care too much as long as they stay true to their commitment and produce something set in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre.
  9. For me, the next instalment has to be set in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre - even if it continues the tedious focus on the Pacific Ocean Areas (btw: there was no "PTO"). Is this ever-popular "Pacific = naval stuff"-thingy going to play out in this game? Who knows, but at least they stay true to their commitment. This is what I care about. Maybe they even take heart and do the favourable Papua New Guinea 1942/43 campaign. Maybe not. I'm convinced it is doable. Japan being listed in the mission editor is nice, but so are Italy, Austria-Hungary and the Russian Empire. Only an official announcement will tell - and it's going to be telling.
  10. Even more carriers to model, but the same limited gameplay options of Midway. And what are the players of the Japanese side supposed do to? Play target drones? For a game like this, the Battles of the Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf are even worse scenarios than Okinawa.
  11. Agreed, unhistorical planes should definitely be marked (campaign interface) and advertised as such to avoid misinformation. Preferably, unhistorical aircraft should not even be included. Dreams are made of Hs 123, I-153, Hurricane, IAR-80, B-25, Ar 234, Typhoon, ... Well, it is what it is. Let's see what (how many Hinomarus) the next instalment brings.
  12. Not exactly the planes I personally hoped for. Hurricane: Kind of interesting, but nothing special or needed; limited service during the BoM & BOS campaigns Yak-9: This initial production model closely resembles the Yak-1b; minuscule numbers used during the BoK campaign Yak-9T: Interesting aircraft (used to love it in first Gen. IL-2); doesn't fit any of the campaigns - I'm definitely not a fan of sandbox stuff I expected and hoped for the B-25D to be on the list. After several statements of intent and a two year development cycle (BoBP) without a playable bomber* it would have been a welcome addition. *: Strangely enough, the light night bomber U-2 lacks a working bombsight Eastern Front specific collector aircraft - fine: I-153 (still in service during the BoK campaign), IAR-37/38/39, IAR-80, Yak-1 M-105PA, ...
  13. There's quite a bit of guesswork and chit-chat going on here. First of all, the ventral turret of the in-game "B-25D (RAF)" is definitely simplified; for example: extending it and getting ready for combat took about 1 min The RAF noted the shortcomings of the ventral turret, but it was indispensable over Western Europe 1943/44 The in-game "B-25D (RAF)" is a B-25D-20/-25/-30/ or -35 block - the RAF received copies of each A number of those late block Mitchell II were delivered in the revised B-25D2 configuration (ventral turret replaced with waist guns & tail turret) 2 Group did operate a few modified pre-D-20 Mitchell II (waist guns replacing the ventral turret, no tail turret) in 1945 I really want a B-25D2 modification if they are going to rework the Mitchell into a collector plane, but the standard configuration was omnipresent throughout the war and is absolutely essential. The fire control system used in the B-29 and the ventral Bendix turret used in the B-25 are hard to compare. Now, what about the periscope-sighted defensive armament of the Douglas A/B-26? It worked. ------------------------------- Ki-44-II Otsu w/ Ho-301, Ki-45 Kai Hei or J2M for example.
  14. I can't think of a single historical mission during the Battle of Midway worth adding a PBY, E13A or F1M instead of a SB2U, B-26 or F4F-3. Spending hours in a PBY hoping to spot a ship and turn back - entertaining. There are too many important features missing anyway. The PBY is just a worse B-26, the E13A a worse B5N, and the F1M a worse D3A in terms of this (and any other) combat flight simulator. The extremely limited number of historical missions - just one of the many reasons I'm not a fan of the Midway scenario.
  15. As already stated earlier in this thread: A6M2 Model 21, D3A1 Model 11, B5N2 Model 3, F2A-3, F4F-4, TBD-1, SBD-3 - there is no way of doing Midway without them. The eighth aircraft should be the SB2U-3, representing the Midway-based attack aircraft. Collector planes (B-26 & F4F-3) are nice, but optional. If the Developers are set on doing Midway (I hope not), they should focus on the ships rather than aircraft. Any additional Japanese aircraft would be a waste of resources. Seaplanes are highly interesting aircraft, but serve no purpose in-game.
  • Create New...