Jump to content

=27=Davesteu

Testers
  • Content Count

    313
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

147 Excellent

1 Follower

About =27=Davesteu

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1645 profile views
  1. They were one out of only three USAAF units operating the A-36 and put up a serious fight in air-to-air and air-to-ground combat. That's not to disregard the equally eventful and interesting histories of 86th and 311th FBG.
  2. Guys, I think he is specifically asking about USAAF Fighter Groups. I don't have a "favourite Fighter Group", but the 49th Fighter Group (Fifth Air Force) would be a contender if I had to have one. "Kill counts" and "Aces" are of limited interest to me, so R. Bong isn't a factor. Instead, I care about the overall campaign(s) a unit was involved in and thus basically all 5th, 10th, 13th, and 14th Air Force units would be eligible. Honourable mention: 27th Fighter Bomber Group.
  3. That's Sonia's mom, Ann, in the picture.
  4. I sincerely hope the closure of the "Pacific Theatre Discussion and Assistance"-subforum does indicate a very welcomed shift in focus to the Asiatic part of the theatre and not a long-term postponement. There are too many intriguing Japanese aircraft to choose from and too many categories for me to elect one favourite, but the Ki-44 and Ki-51 tick many of the boxes. Both are nice looking, had colourful yet largely unknown service lives and they deviate from many other Japanese designs in their general conception. Japanese Army aircraft are slightly more interesting to me as they are unjustifiably overshadowed by Navy ones in public perception, but I'm really interested in all of them.
  5. I'm usually not convinced by a particular (set of) airframe(s) alone, but I'd love the SCW just for the Do-17 E/F and early series SB-2. They are both lookers for sure. Probably not going to happen. I'm just happy there won't be a Battle of Britain instalment. Covered to death by all sorts of media and lacking dynamic in my opinion.
  6. We weren't told for how long they are postponing the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre. Maybe your supposition of a long wait or even a new engine turns out to be true, maybe it doesn't. Anyway, they first indicated and later pre-announced this theatre a long time ago now and this played a big part in my return to the game. After an initial phase of disappointment I grew to accept their decision as it was/is reasonable and the BoBP-timeframe is about the only Western Front scenario I'm somewhat interested in. I was finally sold on BoBP after I offered some historical data and got into contact with the Developers. This promoted my personal interest in the BoBP-scenario and I learned of their enthusiasm and devotion first hand. Nonetheless, for me the next instalment has to be Asiatic-Pacific Theatre themed. I'm saying this not only out of personal interest in this theatre, but also because I feel it's about time after BoBP (and TC/FC) to implement their intentions/promises. Even though I have a general idea of how the Devs work, I don't claim any experience in developing a sim-game like this. I do claim knowledge of the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre and, having created dozens, if not hundreds, of single- and multiplayer missions for the first generation IL2, I do claim knowledge of player dynamics. Based on this, I'm convinced that Papua New Guinea 1942/43 is doable and the best/only starting point for a multitude of reasons. Quite a few of the potential Allied aircraft, such as the P-39D/P-400, P-38F, P-40K, and P-47D (early), are variants of already modelled aircraft, while others, such as the B-26, CAC Boomerang, or Beaufighter Mk. I, are just as researchable as their Japanese opponents. Midway and especially Okinawa were bad ideas from the beginning. This played an important role in the postponement (cf. Jason's comments on why they had to delay it).
  7. I for one highly doubt we would get multiple carrier scenarios in one pack for reasons partially explained in my previous posts in this thread. Ships reminiscent of Pacific Fighters would be the only way to make this happen - no thanks. @Legioneod You would get an early P-47D with New Guinea 1943 and the TBD with the Coral Sea light pack if the Devs recognize the versatility of this release sequence.
  8. I really don't want to be condescending, but at least Rabaul, Port Moresby, Kokoda Trail and SWPA should be recallable names for each and everyone claiming the slightest interest in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre. The Papua and New Guinea campaigns were among the major campaigns of 1942-44. Midway comes with a huge number of technical and gameplay related problems and just the name won't covered them up. Potential users with moderate to limited interest in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre might get fascinated by the idea of carrier gameplay, but most of them would get bored out by its monotony soon thereafter. Selling them any further Asiatic-Pacific Theatre themed pack would be rather hard. That's assuming Midway could be convincingly realized from a technical point of view. A lot of potential pitfalls for the sake of a name. If they would do Papua & New Guinea 1942/43 first and Coral Sea second they could avoid most of them and players could always revert to the varity of New Guinea. You can hardly compare WoWS and a potential Great Battles carrier scenario. WoWS is an arcade PvP ship game with little and simple AI, whereas Great Battles carrier scenarios would require the exact opposite. Accurately researching and modelling the individual ships directly involved in the Battle of Midway would be a laborious task in itself, but they also need a high fidelity AI capable of executing prudent evasive manoeuvres, utilizing some sort of damage control, radar, gun directors, etc, as well as a detailed damage model to go along. The work involved in finishing a carrier might very well equal a aircraft model. You can't skimp on the natural points of interest in a carrier battle - ships.
  9. First of all, the Zuikaku and Shoukaku weren't involed in the Battle of Midway. Midway: Akagi(✝), Kaga(✝), Hiryu(✝), Soryu(✝) - Yorktown(✝), Enterprise, Hornet They could get away with a generic June 1942 Yorktown-class resembling the Yorktown and Enterprise, but they shouldn't as they weren't alike in each and every feature. The Hornet differed slightly more and couldn't be unified. This means that they would have to research and model five or six floating airfields in detail. There would be no shortcut to this as they are the airfields each and every player would take off from, attack, and land on. It's a massive task and they are not used to modelling ships, let alone programming them. The current ship AI wouldn't cut it at all(!). The amount of work involved in finishing one carrier might very well equal one aircraft model. At least all other capital ship would need a similar treatment - that's the reason you can't expect multiple carrier battles at once. The ships simply differ too much (frequent refits, differences within classes) and require a lot of work.
  10. Some official documents call them dive flaps, others call them dive recovery flaps. Every type of dive flap assists recovery in a direct or indirect way, that's why I prefer to reserve the term "recovery flap" for automated and assisted systems. But let's not argue over connotations. They definitely have their merits, as do the boosted ailerons, but they didn't and won't reinvent the aircraft. That's true. With only 105 airframes delivered, the J-25 was in fact quite a rare bird. Nothing wrong with that block per se, but a J-20 with Droop Snoot modification available would have added more than just another fighter. 9th AF P-38 units all had Droop Snoots assigned to them during the BoBO timeframe and most of the time flew CAS and attack missions.
  11. Yes, Korea mods worked in 1946 but they never proved to be particularly popular. That aside, splitting one gigantic map into three smaller ones doesn't reduce the human workload at all. It's not even possible as the opposing airfields have to be on one map. Moreover, very few, if any, assets are shared: Korean War Corsairs aren't WW2 ones, F-51D aren't P-51D-15, and Korean War carriers aren't WW2 carriers. Lastly, the "forgotten war" won't attract the huge masses of new players you are predicting. Regarding Midway and Papua New Guinea: I completely disagree. Midway wouldn't offer much versatility in gameplay, but it requires a massive amount of (re)work. With Papua New Guinea 1942/43 you would get four air forces/services (USAAF, RAAF, IJNAS, IJAAS), their respective aircraft (including British ones for the RAAF), a lot of tactical war, strategic bombing campaigns(!), naval strikes, extremely scenic landscapes, huge bodies of water, and a lot more without reinventing the game or overstretching the development cycle. Introducing carrier battles, the closely related Battle of the Coral Sea could be added thereafter. The Developers would be used to modelling Japanese aircraft by then and could focus their efforts on proper implementation of the naval aspects of this battle. Most of the six Coral Sea aircraft (seven if the A5M4 would be included) would also fit the previous Papua New Guinea pack. I don't think so. As you said yourself, the amount of work required to do the ships involved in the Battle of Midway is already a huge concern - most ships wouldn't be reusable with other naval battles.
  12. That's you fair opinion. The dive flaps are not going to recover or decelerate anything. They are meant to adjust the airflow at high diving speeds. Boosted ailerons come to effect mostly at high speeds. So if you like boom and zoom tactics, which I do, you may benefit from those features, but they don't reinvent the Lightning. Many people are apparently looking forward to the airframe's ground attack capabilities - the Droop Snoot would add a lot of possibilities to this and a "bomber" for the non-fighter centric users.
  13. I don't think there is any hope left for a Droop Snoot modification. Only blocks up to and including the J-20 were converted. Unfortunately a missed opportunity, but I guess they felt obligated to do the J-25 as it's the closest to the initially announced P-38L. Very unfortunate in fact...
×
×
  • Create New...