Jump to content

What Pacific battle are you looking forward to the most?


What Pacific Battle are you looking forward to the most?  

305 members have voted

  1. 1. Which one(s) are you looking forward to?

    • Midway ( Including Wake Island and Coral Sea)
      136
    • Guadalcanal (Solomon Islands)
      137
    • New Guinea
      87
    • Philippines
      48
    • Okinawa (Including Iwo and Chichi Jima)
      67
    • Other (Please comment)
      27


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

I have been doing some flying in X-Plane in the greater New Guinea / Bismark Archipelago / Solomon Islands / New Hebrides area.

With medium-sized GA twins (like a King Air 200 - kind of comparable in general performance with an A-20 or B-25), it takes ages to traverse the area - even in 3-4 times time acceleration.

Those maps will be enormous and that will be a challenge for campaign-missions, as there will be a lot of straight and level flying.

 

The real stunner in the area was the weather - it would be cool, if this could be accounted for. It's not really a wlk in the park to fly across the Owen Stanley Range when there are walls of cumulonimbus clouds leaning against the cliffs - going up to 50000ft and thus way past the operational altitude of your airplane. Flying around the weather is no option, since it will deplete your fuel reserves. You HAVE to punch through it, with all it's nastiness.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I have been doing some flying in X-Plane in the greater New Guinea / Bismark Archipelago / Solomon Islands / New Hebrides area.

With medium-sized GA twins (like a King Air 200 - kind of comparable in general performance with an A-20 or B-25), it takes ages to traverse the area - even in 3-4 times time acceleration.

Those maps will be enormous and that will be a challenge for campaign-missions, as there will be a lot of straight and level flying.

 

The real stunner in the area was the weather - it would be cool, if this could be accounted for. It's not really a wlk in the park to fly across the Owen Stanley Range when there are walls of cumulonimbus clouds leaning against the cliffs - going up to 50000ft and thus way past the operational altitude of your airplane. Flying around the weather is no option, since it will deplete your fuel reserves. You HAVE to punch through it, with all it's nastiness.

 

 

Got to agree about the challenges of flying in the Pacific, having bimbled around it in an X-Plane C-47. Not sure about the Owen Stanley Range going up to 50000 ft though, I think you may have misread something somewhere. ;) Wikipedia says the highest point is Mount Victoria, at 13,248 ft (4,038 metres), and even my C-47 can manage that comfortably, if you allow plenty of time for the climb.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

For me it is an obvious choice. Battle of Midway! It was more or less an even battle. It would be interesting how the battle had played out if it wasn't an ambush. I am not sure why carol Sea would be included. Geographically they are quite away from each other. If Coral Sea was separate, it would be hard choice for the same reasons for Midway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StaB/Tomio_VR*** said:

How can the pool author could forget Battle of Mariannas ??

The biggest carrier engagement ever (15 USN ones vs 9 IJN) with some ground based aircraft on japanese side as well

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2019 at 4:46 AM, Bremspropeller said:

I have been doing some flying in X-Plane in the greater New Guinea / Bismark Archipelago / Solomon Islands / New Hebrides area.

With medium-sized GA twins (like a King Air 200 - kind of comparable in general performance with an A-20 or B-25), it takes ages to traverse the area - even in 3-4 times time acceleration.

Those maps will be enormous and that will be a challenge for campaign-missions, as there will be a lot of straight and level flying.

 

 

Good points.  I like the potential of a Guadalcanal campaign for the mix of aircraft and land and sea operations, but the Japanese were flying quite a ways to the operations areas and that was also true for both sides in the various carrier battles.  I'm not sure there are any great solutions for that in a sim environment.  I can imagine a smaller map with one side spawning in the air at an edge point but that means only one set of carriers or bases.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2019 at 4:46 AM, Bremspropeller said:

I have been doing some flying in X-Plane in the greater New Guinea / Bismark Archipelago / Solomon Islands / New Hebrides area.

With medium-sized GA twins (like a King Air 200 - kind of comparable in general performance with an A-20 or B-25), it takes ages to traverse the area - even in 3-4 times time acceleration.

Those maps will be enormous and that will be a challenge for campaign-missions, as there will be a lot of straight and level flying.

 

 

Our current Rhineland map is already larger than most players will be willing/wanting to fly even halfway across.

 

I’ve learned this while building the P-47 campaign. From Chievres to Aachen is roughly 30-35 minutes in a Jug, that’s one way. Straight, level, no mountain peaks to fly between like Kuban. That’s not even halfway across the map. Early feedback = too far. From a testing standpoint I wholeheartedly agree.  So imagine just that distance in a Zero, or Wildcat, or Val.

 

What was/seemed like a short flight (and was a short flight relatively speaking) in real life is different than what constitutes a long flight in front of a computer monitor with ‘life’ tugging at us from all directions. 

 

So I solved the problem by changing bases in the case of this Jug campaign.

 

PTO? I propose the following.

A well thought out “generic” islands map that can serve as any theater we want, at different scales. If designed well, with some larger islands and land masses at either end/alone the borders, Bases at different distances etc, it can be the Solomons, it can be New Guinea, it can be the Philippines.

 

I can have Rabaul be a much shorter flight from Henderson etc by using a well designed base 3/4 of the way, or half-way  up the map.Most players can suspend disbelief enough for the sake of a campaign/mission that’s actually flyable.

 

Then if someone wants to fly a Zero for 4 hours the map provides that option as well. This solution provides room for creativity, flexibility while not sacrificing immersion in most respects.

 

I’d rather have a 20 minute flight from Rabaul to Henderson than NO flight from Rabaul to Henderson...and nobody is going to fly 2 hours one way anyway let alone 4.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Gambit21
  • Like 6
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

PTO? I propose the following.

A well thought out “generic” islands map that can serve as any theater we want, at different scales. If designed well, with some larger islands and land masses at either end/alone the borders, Bases at different distances etc, it can be the Solomons, it can be New Guinea, it can be the Philippines

 

I like the idea of a generic Pacific map. Make the islands on the map vaguely resemble the islands that the war fought over like Midway, Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal. Then simply release plane sets to better depict each of those battles.

 

However I doubt the devs would go for that idea. For the simple reason that it isn't realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what the answer will be, but very few battles in the PTO involved short distances to enemy airbases. Carriers usually launched at extreme range to get the first blow (another problem with the Battle of the Philippine Sea, the Japanese ships stayed out of range of the US carrier a/c through most of the battle--their planes were launched at maximum range, some being told to continue to Saipan for refuel before returning to the carrier which failed because of the US attacks on Saipan's airfields).

Link to post
Share on other sites

But carriers are best for PTO as they are flexible, you can use them for historic ranges for offical campaign/carer, then easy use them in playable ranges for single missions or user made campaigns, or in fast food df ranges that MP need, and there is few good carrier v carrier/islands battles that can be done with almost same 10x airplane set.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Motherbrain said:

 

I like the idea of a generic Pacific map. Make the islands on the map vaguely resemble the islands that the war fought over like Midway, Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal. Then simply release plane sets to better depict each of those battles.

 

However I doubt the devs would go for that idea. For the simple reason that it isn't realistic.

 

Yep - but something has to give somewhere. With the PTO concessions will have to be made, as is always the case with maps.  I can point out many concessions/compromises on the current Rhineland map for instance.

Kuban, all of them. Just the reality of resources and development.

 

So make the compromise work toward/in favor of gameplay.with PTO map/s.

Edited by Gambit21
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I agree with Gambit. PTO was working well in FB 46 and in cfs 2. 

This is played as a game online and artistic adjustment for customers needs won’t really be considered unhistorical. 

I liked to take a two hours flight partly over clouds to see if I could find that Japanese fleet based on briefing only. 

But acknowledge the fact that you can not sell that on commercial basis. 

But it is a true sense of accomplishment

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 10/25/2019 at 2:54 PM, Gambit21 said:

 

I’ve learned this while building the P-47 campaign. From Chievres to Aachen is roughly 30-35 minutes in a Jug, that’s one way. Straight, level, no mountain peaks to fly between like Kuban. That’s not even halfway across the map. Early feedback = too far. From a testing standpoint I wholeheartedly agree.  So imagine just that distance in a Zero, or Wildcat, or Val.

 

 

 

PTO? I propose the following.

A well thought out “generic” islands map that can serve as any theater we want, at different scales. If designed well, with some larger islands and land masses at either end/alone the borders, Bases at different distances etc, it can be the Solomons, it can be New Guinea, it can be the Philippines.

 

 

 

 

 

That's funny because when the Solomons map was being worked on for 46, people were all YAY FINALLY, and then when they started flying on it the complaints started...WOW THE FLIGHT TIMES ARE SO LONG or HOLY CRAP THERE'S SO MUCH WATER...

 

If you want Pacific island battles, you can break up the Solomons into smaller maps, such as say the New Georgia area to Vella Lavella. If they can make the full Solomons map, then great, they can break the islands down for online maps.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2019 at 1:54 PM, Gambit21 said:

I’d rather have a 20 minute flight from Rabaul to Henderson than NO flight from Rabaul to Henderson...and nobody is going to fly 2 hours one way anyway let alone 4.

 

 

 

 

I agree 100% with this.Something has to give.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Off course, 7. December 1941 at Hawai :)

Phillipines should be interesting.

The british colony Malaya and the Battle of Singapur would be interesting too.

Also, I would like to see Midway or the japanese conquest of Guam.

Flying Tigers over the Hump in West China, anyone?

 

 

 

PS:

"Finding Carrier Fleets" propably wont happen in multiplayer. First, its time consuming, secondly everybody just would click on the enemy team's side to check it out.

 

 

PPS:

If there ever would be Carriers on the game, where we could start from:

Not everybody could spawn at once, propably 4-6 planes on the end of the CV. Than imagine, if the first plane is AFK...you can not maneuvre around it.

For example on a possible 7. December '41 Hawaian map, the japanese spawn points would be in the air with a spawn window or something. All 5 Minutes 4 planes or something like that, just to simulate the "waves" of attack.

 

Edited by KG_S_Kalle_Kalutz82
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
47 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Out of curiosity: How many 10 plane/variant sets are we talking about to cover the Pacific (obviously leaving out the strategic bombing campaign that can't be modeled)?

 

You mean just new planes or planes already in the system? Also, the question could be applied to ETO/MTO, as we aren't done with them yet, and keep coming up with Bf-109 variants that are must haves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cardboard_killer said:

You mean just new planes or planes already in the system? Also, the question could be applied to ETO/MTO, as we aren't done with them yet, and keep coming up with Bf-109 variants that are must haves.

 

New planes mainly... I've been idly calculating how long it'll be before they've done everything... I've got estimates for ETO/GPW/MTO/Korea but I haven't looked into the Pacific...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2019 at 3:54 AM, Gambit21 said:

 

Our current Rhineland map is already larger than most players will be willing/wanting to fly even halfway across.

 

I’ve learned this while building the P-47 campaign. From Chievres to Aachen is roughly 30-35 minutes in a Jug, that’s one way. Straight, level, no mountain peaks to fly between like Kuban. That’s not even halfway across the map. Early feedback = too far. From a testing standpoint I wholeheartedly agree.  So imagine just that distance in a Zero, or Wildcat, or Val.

 

What was/seemed like a short flight (and was a short flight relatively speaking) in real life is different than what constitutes a long flight in front of a computer monitor with ‘life’ tugging at us from all directions. 

 

So I solved the problem by changing bases in the case of this Jug campaign.

 

PTO? I propose the following.

A well thought out “generic” islands map that can serve as any theater we want, at different scales. If designed well, with some larger islands and land masses at either end/alone the borders, Bases at different distances etc, it can be the Solomons, it can be New Guinea, it can be the Philippines.

 

I can have Rabaul be a much shorter flight from Henderson etc by using a well designed base 3/4 of the way, or half-way  up the map.Most players can suspend disbelief enough for the sake of a campaign/mission that’s actually flyable.

 

Then if someone wants to fly a Zero for 4 hours the map provides that option as well. This solution provides room for creativity, flexibility while not sacrificing immersion in most respects.

 

I’d rather have a 20 minute flight from Rabaul to Henderson than NO flight from Rabaul to Henderson...and nobody is going to fly 2 hours one way anyway let alone 4.

 

 

 

 

What if they implemented a 'skip to combat area' function? Like you take off from Rabaul, set a flightpath/waypoint to your designated combat area and hit a key to skip the 1-2 hour flight time. You could have it calculate whether you get intercepted, stumble across something or if have engine/fuel issues and then drop you out of skip mode to deal with that.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

All of them.  I just want some Pacific Theater action.  I would really like to be able to fly for the United States doing carrier operations, specifically flying the F4U Corsair, although the Hellcat and even the Wildcat would be welcome options.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

I'm a bit late to the poll, however I would like any and all of them as well.  I just want Pacific Ops.  Carriers & torpedoes!   And as similarly stated above I personally would like the F4U-C (4x20mm) as well as versions of the Hellcat and even the Wildcat, Hell diver this time would be nice too.  And Torpedo planes! 

 

Add to that any and all the Zeros, Georges, Franks, Tonys and Jacks and and and.... etc etc etc. 

 

Oh yeah... and  FLOAT PLANES!    Did anyone mention float planes?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • 1 month later...

I miss carriers too! I used to practice takeoffs (no catapults) and landings every morning, from escort carriers 'cause it made flying from the big fleet carriers that much easier. That was some years ago now, but I do miss it a bunch, so I guess I need to reinstall my old copy of 1946 and mods to get some of that fun back. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 25/10/2019 at 19:54, Gambit21 said:

 

Nuestro mapa actual de Renania ya es más grande de lo que la mayoría de los jugadores estarán dispuestos / queriendo volar incluso a la mitad.

 

Aprendí esto mientras construía la campaña P-47. De Chievres a Aachen son aproximadamente 30-35 minutos en un Jug, esa es una forma. Recto, nivelado, sin picos de montaña entre los que volar como Kuban. Eso ni siquiera está en la mitad del mapa. Retroalimentación temprana = demasiado lejos. Desde el punto de vista de la prueba, estoy totalmente de acuerdo. Así que imagina esa distancia en un Zero, Wildcat o Val.

 

Lo que fue / parecía un vuelo corto (y relativamente hablando fue un vuelo corto) en la vida real es diferente a lo que constituye un vuelo largo frente a un monitor de computadora con 'vida' tirando de nosotros desde todas las direcciones. 

 

Así que resolví el problema cambiando de base en el caso de esta campaña de Jug.

 

PTO? Propongo lo siguiente.

Un mapa de islas “genérico” bien pensado que puede servir como cualquier teatro que queramos, a diferentes escalas. Si está bien diseñado, con algunas islas más grandes y masas de tierra en cada extremo / solo las fronteras, Bases a diferentes distancias, etc., pueden ser las Islas Salomón, pueden ser Nueva Guinea, pueden ser las Filipinas.

 

Puedo hacer que Rabaul sea un vuelo mucho más corto desde Henderson, etc., usando una base bien diseñada a 3/4 del camino, o en la mitad del mapa.La mayoría de los jugadores pueden suspender la incredulidad lo suficiente por el bien de una campaña / misión que realmente se puede volar .

 

Entonces, si alguien quiere volar un Zero durante 4 horas, el mapa también ofrece esa opción. Esta solución ofrece espacio para la creatividad y la flexibilidad sin sacrificar la inmersión en la mayoría de los aspectos.

 

Prefiero tener un vuelo de 20 minutos de Rabaul a Henderson que NINGÚN vuelo de Rabaul a Henderson ... y nadie va a volar 2 horas de ida de todos modos y mucho menos 4.

 

 

 

 

Totalmente de acuerdo 👍🏼 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...