Macchi 202?205?

[sturmkraehe]

I-16 is nice (for the fun of it) but if this is all VVS gets then good night. Axis will win the Battle of Stalingrad. I also don't quite understand why axis side gets another potent fighter and no IAR 81 which could make up for more interesting online match-ups (IAR vs Lagg3 matches). Axis can only pit high performance planes right now while VVS has little choice in order to stay competitive. I understand that for this scenario few options are available to provide VVS with planes at par with axis planes but then it would make more sense to offer options on axis side on par with the lower performance side on VVS.

[150GCT_Pag]

About the performance, the C.202 was powered by an  Alfa Romeo RA1000 RC41-I “Monsone”. (a license built Daimler Benz 601 Aa - 1175HP)

So it had the same engine of a Bf 109 E, not of a Bf 109 F (DB601 E 1350HP) or a G (DB605A - 1475 HP), and was heavier ...2350 /2930 Kg (empty/equipped) versus 2020 /2385 (i think..) of an F-4 (that had a powerful engine...) 

Edited December 20, 2014 by 150GCT_Pag

[Danziger]

New planes aren't even finished yet and already people are griping about it.

 

Any new content is a good thing.

[Finkeren]

About the performance, the C.202 was powered by an  Alfa Romeo RA1000 RC41-I “Monsone”. (a license built Daimler Benz 601 Aa - 1175HP)

So it had the same engine of a Bf 109 E, not of a Bf 109 F (DB601 E 1350HP) or a G (DB605A - 1475 HP), and was heavier ...2350 /2930 Kg (empty/equipped) versus 2020 /2385 (i think..) of an F-4 (that had a powerful engine...) 

 

It's true, that the DB601 was more powerful than the Monsone, but the 109 was not really lighter than the Folgore, both weighed in at a loaded weight around 2900 kg with the Folgore being just a very small tad heavier and a good deal lighter than the 109G.

[A-E-Hartmann]

 

from the FB page

 

I see that 202 has not 20mm in wings . I think that it will be part of the unlocking for the 202 .  

[Juri_JS]

 

I see that 202 has not 20mm in wings . I think that it will be part of the unlocking for the 202 .

The guns in the wings of the 202 were merely two 7.7 mm Breda-SAFAT not 20 mm cannons. In the engine cowling were two 12.7 mm guns. So it will be really tricky to bring down an Il-2 with the Macchi.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Juri_JS

[FlatSpinMan]

So what happened with the IAR? It won the poll you posted. what was the reason for the poll if you modeled  the losing plane? Closed to 1500 players voted in that poll. Was that just for kicks?

Why would you instantly assume they're only making one plane? We've seen what, 3 pictures in about two days? Maybe, just maybe that is not all they are working on. 

Or maybe they're deliberately not making the IAR just to spite all those who voted for it.

 

Which seems the more likely scenario to you, honestly? Now I have no inside knowledge at all - hell, perhaps they really are intending to annoy all the people who voted by just making the least favoured option. However, I suspect they are not. I cannot substantiate my speculation of course. 

I-16 is nice (for the fun of it) but if this is all VVS gets then good night. Axis will win the Battle of Stalingrad. I also don't quite understand why axis side gets another potent fighter and no IAR 81 which could make up for more interesting online match-ups (IAR vs Lagg3 matches). Axis can only pit high performance planes right now while VVS has little choice in order to stay competitive. I understand that for this scenario few options are available to provide VVS with planes at par with axis planes but then it would make more sense to offer options on axis side on par with the lower performance side on VVS.

 

 

It's almost like war isn't fair or something.

[150GCT_Pag]

From the late serie V (1942 onwards) The C.202 had two 7,7mm SAFAT machine guns in the wings, but often pilots ask to ground personel to remove them, due to the weight of weapons and ammo that decrease performance (maneuver and roll rate).

 

Only C.205 III serie had wings mounted cannons (20mm Mauser).

 

In any case the 12,7 SAFAT could fire explosive shell, so if correctly modeled can cause more damage than standard 12,7mm or 13mm machine guns.

 

The problem was the rate of fire, reduced by the syncronization to fire throught the prop disc... below the cockpit was a plate that warn the pilot to not open fire with engine running below 1000RPM

Edited December 20, 2014 by 150GCT_Pag

[Jaws2002]

Why would you instantly assume they're only making one plane? We've seen what, 3 pictures in about two days? Maybe, just maybe that is not all they are working on. 

Or maybe they're deliberately not making the IAR just to spite all those who voted for it.

 

Which seems the more likely scenario to you, honestly? Now I have no inside knowledge at all - hell, perhaps they really are intending to annoy all the people who voted by just making the least favoured option. However, I suspect they are not. I cannot substantiate my speculation of course. 

 

they only showed screens of the loosing candidate in that poll, I asked few times since yesterday to clarify this and multiple people in the development team passed right by and never answered. I don't know, but if they are going to do more planes, why show first the one that lost without any clarification? 

 It just makes no sense.

[FlatSpinMan]

Maybe that's just one they happen to have pictures of. Maybe it's the one they like the most. Maybe Loft just felt like uploading a picture for the hell of it. Who knows?Why does it matter? It's just a few sodding pictures of a plane they're working on that they hope (HOPE) to be able to release.

 

Anyway, enough of this carry on. 

Adieu.

[sturmkraehe]

It's almost like war isn't fair or something.

 

I cannot hear this argument any more. IL2 is a GAME and not a war. It is a flight combat sim and not an air warfare sim. Let the mission makers and server operators decide if they want to simulate war or if they want to offer missions that give both parties similar chances. With the planeset as it is now and proposed by the devs for the near future it will only alow for unbalanced plane match-ups. This may appeal to those who want to simulate a war but not those who have other tastes. Imho the devs should be interested in catering for a broad bandwidth of tastes in terms of mission design and should therefore offer OPTIONS to the mission designers.

Edited December 20, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Not everything is about peformance. There is a huge bunch of guys that would instantly clear their pockets for an I-16 or Mig-3 (gimme my Mig-3!) just for the sake of special interest in this particular plane or simply dev support.

 

The VVS already has it's best planes ingame without takign lend-lease ones into account, there just hasn't been anything better back than...be it. There are plenty of players that can easily compete with Lagg-3s and I'm not seing any kind of "unfairness" ingame (if you don't take FM bugs into account).

 

That said it's absolutely increadible to blame devs for throwing the balance over by introducing more content If you feel like you can't compete with an I-16 don't buy / fly it, you're not forced to.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Danziger]

Seeing as this is a Russian game made by mostly Russians about a battle in Russia, I am fairly certain they aren't trying to make the battle unfair. They are probably just trying to be historically accurate like they have stated before.

[Beazil]

Someday an E4... but this is excellent!

[Yakdriver]

I find the 202 to be an ugly, nasty piece of poo, because of the engine section, so many intakes, lumps and bumps - like the emil.

The rest of the Body is awesome, and the wings are derived from the good fighters G50/Mc200.

wide gear, 4 MG's...

 

she will be a very welcome, well-respected opponent i am sure.

looking forward to her, and hopefully many more.

 

"shut up and take my money"-> +1!
 

[pencon]

So if not The MTO then Africa is the other place I can think of for the Macchi. By the way lets not be skipping the macchi 200 or the i16

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I16 is already in development. Looking forward to throwing money at an expanded plane set.......................................and hopefully a greener map.

[Yakmaster]

From what i see im willing to guess next project is Stalingrad Summer Battles   

 

no MTO, that means this airplane only fits stalingrad battle (i dont know if MC202 saw any action anywere els exept MTO and Stalingrad). And as they dont wont to go with RoF model where they make player buying one airplane at time, this MC202 has to be part of next project of group of airplanes and new map.

 

My long shoot guess for next project they are working on is:

Summer Stalingrad Map

Bf-109E7

MC202

Ju88

Bf-110

Yak-7

I-16

P-40

DB-3

 

Edited December 21, 2014 by Yakmaster

[TJT]

The hangar queen dozen .."yay".....

[LizLemon]

So if not The MTO then Africa is the other place I can think of for the Macchi. By the way lets not be skipping the macchi 200 or the i16

Or crimea, which loft has said he has an interest in.

[IIN8II]

P-40 has already been shot down many times by the devs so it is probably best to put your hopes in another plane like the MiG-3 ;p.

 

I think I remember a rumor of the Kuban theatre being of interest as a possible expansion?

[150GCT_Pag]

 

The rest of the Body is awesome, and the wings are derived from the good fighters G50/Mc200.

 

 

Nothingt to see with G.50, that was a totally different aircraft, built by FIAT (and not soo good...   )

 

In fact the C.202 was a C.200 design adapted to a new engine, so a more streamlined fuselage, with the same wings (or little modifications, such the possibility to mount two 7,7 mm machineguns). Many late C.200 were fitted with C.202 wings

[ST_ami7b5]

Or crimea, which loft has said he has an interest in.

Well, Putin outran him.

 

Back to topic: 202 is a very nice plane.

Edited December 21, 2014 by ST_ami7b5

[Brano]

I cannot hear this argument any more. IL2 is a GAME and not a war. It is a flight combat sim and not an air warfare sim. Let the mission makers and server operators decide if they want to simulate war or if they want to offer missions that give both parties similar chances. With the planeset as it is now and proposed by the devs for the near future it will only alow for unbalanced plane match-ups. This may appeal to those who want to simulate a war but not those who have other tastes. Imho the devs should be interested in catering for a broad bandwidth of tastes in terms of mission design and should therefore offer OPTIONS to the mission designers.

Can you elaborate? What is the difference here "It is a flight combat sim and not an air warfare sim." VVS and LW had different tactics how to use their fighter plane force.You cant expect to be waging air war on same terms for both.For what you want,wait for Dserver release and you can run messer vs messer or I16 vs I16 duel missions.

For the rest of us,we will create defensive circle in our ishaks and will try to cover our arses while messers will try to put our circle into some different geometric shape.Most probably defined by craters on the ground down below

And my ishak will be perfect gun platform to deal with them heinkels and stukas,if caught unguarded.Air war is not about figter vs figter duels,as most would like to believe.

[A-E-Hartmann]

 

 

possumkiller, on 20 Dec 2014 - 14:27, said: Any new content is a good thing.

 

Yes, I agree.

 

1+

Edited December 21, 2014 by A-E-Hartmann

[sturmkraehe]

Can you elaborate? What is the difference here "It is a flight combat sim and not an air warfare sim." VVS and LW had different tactics how to use their fighter plane force.You cant expect to be waging air war on same terms for both.For what you want,wait for Dserver release and you can run messer vs messer or I16 vs I16 duel missions.

For the rest of us,we will create defensive circle in our ishaks and will try to cover our arses while messers will try to put our circle into some different geometric shape.Most probably defined by craters on the ground down below

And my ishak will be perfect gun platform to deal with them heinkels and stukas,if caught unguarded.Air war is not about figter vs figter duels,as most would like to believe.

 

Let me be well understood. I don't mind to have missions where air war is simulated including historic imbalance. My point is: This is a flight combat sim for which should be possible to be either used to offer dogfight-oriented game play (= team death matches) OR team battle oriented (focusing on mission objectives with both teams having equal chances to win a map) OR air warfare simulating (=recreating a historic air battle) OR whatever. Air warfare is therefore just one possibility to enjoy this game. Or at least it should be imho. A team battle oriented gameplay for instance will fail if both teams don't have equal chances to win a map. This objective of equal team chances are heavily hampered if there is an imbalance in planeset that is too huge to be compensated by mission design. 

 

To conclude: I think the most important thing for BoS in order to survive for several years is to allow a variety of gameplay and not cater only for one group of flight simmers (for instance only to those who want historic battles or only for those who want to dogfight).

Edited December 21, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[GP*]

Thank you for the update, Loft and Zak. Any plane is always welcome, as is communication with the community .

 

A P-40 would be especially welcome...

[BlitzPig_EL]

Thank you for the update, Loft and Zak. Any plane is always welcome, as is communication with the community .

 

A P-40 would be especially welcome...

 

Oh yeah!

[Godspeed]

Been flying Bf-110 since Their Finest Hour (Old Simulator)

Started to train Macchi's from first series of Sturmovik.

Its good fighter plane and definitely needed after BF-110

[ShamrockOneFive]

 

From what i see im willing to guess next project is Stalingrad Summer Battles   

 

no MTO, that means this airplane only fits stalingrad battle (i dont know if MC202 saw any action anywere els exept MTO and Stalingrad). And as they dont wont to go with RoF model where they make player buying one airplane at time, this MC202 has to be part of next project of group of airplanes and new map.

 

My long shoot guess for next project they are working on is:

Summer Stalingrad Map

Bf-109E7

MC202

Ju88

Bf-110

Yak-7

I-16

P-40

DB-3

 

 

 

I'm not sure if we'd see the whole list of aircraft there (although I fully support it )... but Stalingrad summer would probably be a "quick" next step. It would be lots of work but a summer edition of the map would be less work than a whole new theatre somewhere else. I'm still holding out hope for the Kuban battles to arrive sometime after.

[IIN8II]

I'll say it again lol. The p-40 is not coming to BoS anytime soon.

[A-E-Hartmann]

I'll say it again lol. The p-40 is not coming to BoS anytime soon.

Too bad, but one day may be . keep hope  

[BeastyBaiter]

Why do you think the P-40 won't be added anytime soon? The Russians flew thousands of them, loved them and they were present pretty much everywhere. The same is true of the P-39. The I-16 was confirmed early on in the EA period and it looks like the MC.202 is going to be the next axis fighter. But after those two, why wouldn't they toss in one of the two big lend lease fighters? The only other in demand VVS fighter of the period is the MiG-3. So even if that came first, we're still looking at a P-40 or P-39 as a near certainty in the next year assuming development continues at a moderate pace.

[CIA_Yankee_]

Why do you think the P-40 won't be added anytime soon? The Russians flew thousands of them, loved them and they were present pretty much everywhere. The same is true of the P-39. The I-16 was confirmed early on in the EA period and it looks like the MC.202 is going to be the next axis fighter. But after those two, why wouldn't they toss in one of the two big lend lease fighters? The only other in demand VVS fighter of the period is the MiG-3. So even if that came first, we're still looking at a P-40 or P-39 as a near certainty in the next year assuming development continues at a moderate pace.

 

I would agree with that, the P-40 is an obvious choice for a new VVS fighter. Though admittedly it might present unique challenges for modeling, given its unique engine placement and center of mass. On the other hand, RoF has pusher planes, so we know the engine can handle unusual airplane layouts.

 

Also, wouldn't the Yak-7 also be a good choice (and likely faster to implement, given how similar to the Yak-1 it was)? It flew over Stalingrad as far as I can tell, so it's a definite possibility.

 

As for fairness, that's really up to the mission designers I would say, and can be handled by managing airplane availability.

[IIN8II]

Why do you think the P-40 won't be added anytime soon? The Russians flew thousands of them, loved them and they were present pretty much everywhere. The same is true of the P-39. The I-16 was confirmed early on in the EA period and it looks like the MC.202 is going to be the next axis fighter. But after those two, why wouldn't they toss in one of the two big lend lease fighters? The only other in demand VVS fighter of the period is the MiG-3. So even if that came first, we're still looking at a P-40 or P-39 as a near certainty in the next year assuming development continues at a moderate pace.

The devs have said a number times that the p-40 is not in the plans at all. I would love to fly it in BoS as well.

[CIA_Yankee_]

tou meant P39 right? or did the p40 had an unusual engine placement? 

 

Oops, you're right, I got my Ps mixed up.

 

I meant the P-39.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

IIN8II,

 

Do you have a quote or thread saying no P-40? Not saying it didn't happed but I don't recall reading that.

 

On the other hand, I'd be surprised if there was no P-39 in the next full release. I can wait on the P-40.

[CIA_Yankee_]

I'd be happy with a Yak-7, to be honest.

[Leaf]

New picture of the Ju52 is up on the same thread. Looks great (if just as a target).

[Danziger]

I hope they eventually make it flyable. I agree with the "no AI only" policy. She is beautiful though.