Jump to content
BlitzPig_EL

New Collector Planes Speculation Thread.

Recommended Posts

You could use it on the Kuban map, torpedoing shipping, for one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

And just exactly where are you going to use a Swordfish?

Some people are asking for a Mosquito FB Mk. VI - asking for a Swordfish is about as (un-)reasonable.
Both aircraft were stationed at airfields close to, but outside of the BoBP map. Both don't fit the historical career.
Unlike the Mosquito FB, the Swordfish would add something new to BoBP and not just the 11th fighter-bomber.

    

1927309727_Royal_Air_Force_Coastal_Command_1939-1945._CL2277.jpg.3d8261bf63948c7495c06b1d8793b941.jpg

"Royal Air Force Coastal Command, 1939-1945. Armourers unload 250-lb GP bombs in front of a line of Fairey Swordfish Mark IIIs of No. 119 Squadron RAF, undergoing maintenance at B83/Knokke le Zoute, Belgium. The Squadron flew anti-shipping patrols, principally against German midget-submarines, in the North Sea and off the Durch coast"

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, =27=Davesteu said:

Some people are asking for a Mosquito FB Mk. VI - asking for a Swordfish is about as (un-)reasonable.
Both aircraft were stationed at airfields close to, but outside of the BoBP map. Both don't fit the historical career.
Unlike the Mosquito FB, the Swordfish would add something new to BoBP and not just the 11th fighter-bomber.

    

 

Sorry, did you just suggest that Swordfish were stationed just outside the BoBp map in Autumn ‘44? Not sure that is true, and in any case the Swordfish is certainly less relevant than a Mossie by any sensible measure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Sorry, did you just suggest that Swordfish were stationed just outside the BoBp map in Autumn ‘44? Not sure that is true, and in any case the Swordfish is certainly less relevant than a Mossie by any sensible measure.

It fits map area 😄

http://www.historyofwar.org/air/units/RAF/119_wwII.html

 

July 1944-January 1945: Fairey Albacore I
January-May 1945: Fairey Swordfish III

October 1944-May 1945: B.83 Knocke/ Le Zoute

 

and on last picture of map area that town is here:

B83.thumb.jpg.0e6fa806543eb98741055ffc3a5ce91a.jpg

 

 

so next airplane is Swordfish III its done deal, their secret is out 😄

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have any sense they wont release anither fw or bf109. There isnt anything different enough to warrant any of those types being added IMO and we have literally 5 or 6 variants of each.  I mean really itd be like if we had spit I, II, V, IX XIV, ..

Or P51A B C D and all the spit variants... I really think they need to add like Fw189 (thatd be better for ai) amd for flyable German idk. Ar234 seems good. Different etc. For a fighter thats more a problem

 Ta152 didnt rlly see combat but at least its different enough..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

... the Swordfish is certainly less relevant than a Mossie by any sensible measure.

Relevance? The Typhoon is way more relevant and fits the map.

There is no way around the Ar 234 B-2, Mitchell II, Spitfire Mk. XIV, and Typhoon Ib in terms of gameplay and historical significance.
  

10 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

It fits map area 😄 ... so next airplane is Swordfish III its done deal, their secret is out 😄

Not exactly - I guess the unpopulated 30 km border area (no cities or airfields marked) is going to be the "automated return"-zone. Close call. :biggrin:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the ar 234 for the German side. Its unique and a cool bomber but also was used enough for me not to feel totally ridiculous using it. 

The typhoon is a no brainer for a collector ac - popular, famous, heabily used, and good performance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

And just exactly where are you going to use a Swordfish?

 

DCS over Nevada

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

Some people are asking for a Mosquito FB Mk. VI - asking for a Swordfish is about as (un-)reasonable.
Both aircraft were stationed at airfields close to, but outside of the BoBP map. Both don't fit the historical career.
Unlike the Mosquito FB, the Swordfish would add something new to BoBP and not just the 11th fighter-bomber.

    

1927309727_Royal_Air_Force_Coastal_Command_1939-1945._CL2277.jpg.3d8261bf63948c7495c06b1d8793b941.jpg

"Royal Air Force Coastal Command, 1939-1945. Armourers unload 250-lb GP bombs in front of a line of Fairey Swordfish Mark IIIs of No. 119 Squadron RAF, undergoing maintenance at B83/Knokke le Zoute, Belgium. The Squadron flew anti-shipping patrols, principally against German midget-submarines, in the North Sea and off the Durch coast"

 

I have asked for this on a few occasions.  It would also give the developers an excuse to model a carrier as practice for their Pacific module.... 

Share this post


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

 

DCS over Nevada

This made me smile.  Memories of dcs when theyd release ww2 planes with zero other ww2 content or missions over modern day Kuban. Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say maybe some of these or two:

 

  • B-25G "Mitchell" - Made Flyable
  • P-47D-23 "Razorback"
  • Fw-190D-11
  • Ju-88C-6
  • Mosquito FB.VI
  • Spitfire Mk. XIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

And just exactly where are you going to use a Swordfish?

 

Well, ideally I'd much prefer the Li-2/C-47 (which I have a strong feeling one of them is that plane) but the swordfish would be a neat collector's plane for BoBP. (even if it wasn't 100% accurate to the time frame)

 

But failing the swordfish, I wouldn't be surprised if it was another fighter of some sort... tho tbh we have enough of those. I REALLY hope its not another flipping 109 or 190... I mean, how many more of those do we need!?

 

Would be really nice to see another german bomber. Like another variant of the Stuka for example. Got tons of 109s, but only a single Stuka.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

You could use it on the Kuban map, torpedoing shipping, for one.

And That is exactly the Problem why we can't have it. I Don't think they will programm Torpedos just for one collector Plane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personaly I don't think collectors need to be Bo* specific. I would love to see some British/commonwealth aircraft. Just to fill out that side. Were not going to N Africa, thats been said on many occasions so how about A P-40C, Hurricaine or a Beaufighter? Would love to see those three in this engine. At some point were going to the Pacific, which to most folk means the USN against the Japanese. "The forgotten war", CBI, will no doubt be forgotten in this title also which doesnt leave much for us commonwealth flyers. I'd pay for a British/Commonwealth expansion because I know theyre going to be overlooked.

Beaufighter

Hurricane

P-40c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [GG]Sarpalaxan said:

And That is exactly the Problem why we can't have it. I Don't think they will programm Torpedos just for one collector Plane. 

 

If "they" are ever going to the Pacific then they will have to get round to torpedoes eventually.  People will be much more forgiving of a not quite right torpedo modelling in the context of an optional - and rather odd - collector plane, giving them time to learn before the big Pacific release.

 

Not that I am actually expecting this collector plane: but it would be my third choice after Typhoon and Mosquito.  I actually expect another 109 variant and a late war Soviet fighter.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Sure, everything is relative. My point merely was that the Mosquito units had been flying various missions over that area since 1942 and were doing so in 1944-45 period, though happened to be based outside the exact coverage of the Bp map. I'd love to see the Arado, even if it had been outside the map area. There is a precedent to this (190A-3) while the A-8 with the armoured mod is not especially relevant to the Bp operations but within the wider context they meet in the middle.

 

A Mosquito would be interesting, fun, a useful addition and a very minor extension of the 'served within the map boundaries approach. IT;'s not the only game in town, but from a utility, popularity and revenue perspective it has a good case.

Yes, relevance is relative. That said, "Battle of Bodenplatte" portrays the air war over the Low Countries and Western Germany from September 1944 to March 1945 and nothing else.
Fw 190 A-8/R2 Sturmjäger of IV./JG 3 and II./JG 4 took part in the Ardennes Offensive and Unternehmen Bodenplatte itself. The Fw 190 A-3 (P-40E, MC.202) argument is outdated. All collector aircraft released after the reworked career mode was announced fit the related timeframe, map, units and airfields.

 

Now onto the Mosquito FB Mk. VI: "Fun" and "useful" are also relative terms. I strongly disagree with at least the "useful" part. How would a Mosquito enhance the game(play)?
Resources, including time, are limited. Adding a Mosquito prevents them from doing a Mitchell II, Ar 234 B-2, Spitfire XIV, or Typhoon Ib - all way more important. There are no bombers in BoBP, the Spitfire hot rod is not included, and the mainstay of 2 TAF, the Typhoon, is missing. A Mosquito FB is just the 11th fighter-bomber, less relevant in general, and waters down the historical approach of the career mode.

 

 

4 hours ago, Talon_ said:

Screenshot_20190828-100422.png

Small annotation: The Mosquito XVI were operated by photo-reconnaissance squadrons and not in the bomber role.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, =27=Davesteu said:

Yes, relevance is relative. That said, "Battle of Bodenplatte" portrays the air war over the Low Countries and Western Germany from September 1944 to March 1945 and nothing else.
Fw 190 A-8/R2 Sturmjäger of IV./JG 3 and II./JG 4 took part in the Ardennes Offensive and Unternehmen Bodenplatte itself. The Fw 190 A-3 (P-40E, MC.202) argument is outdated. All collector aircraft released after the reworked career mode was announced fit the related timeframe, map, units and airfields.

 

Yet the precedent remains, so dismissing out of hand runs the risk of ut quoque. Also, none that the inclusion of the Sturmjager units was an act of desperation, not a core element of the units involved. How far do we want to pursue this? No 262 fighter units were involved in BoBp, only the fighter-bomber units. But you can use the 262 as a fighter. Similar to how you can use a Spitfire IXE with a Merlin 70 and rockets - a total chimera, but technically possible given the selection: wholly unsuitable, but has been allowed by a combination of a + b does not preclude c
 

Quote


Now onto the Mosquito FB Mk. VI: "Fun" and "useful" are also relative terms. I strongly disagree with at least the "useful" part. How would a Mosquito enhance the game(play)?

 

 

Well, adding the RAF's foremost tactical bomber over NW Europe to a sim based on the tactical air war over NW Europe, I am unsure why that is a point of contention. Literally one of the core prongs of the RAF tactical effort was the Mosquito over this campaign. By a coincidence, it was based just outside the map despite flying hundreds of sorties over the map. It adds 'gameplay' by another tactical aircraft that would be excluded by literally a few miles of the BoBp map. If that's the objection, then fair enough, but it is a fairly minor one given the wider solre of the aircraft. Not like it appeared in numbers limited to one hand of whcih no one has any actual records.

 

Quote

Adding a Mosquito prevents them from doing a Mitchell II, Ar 234 B-2, Spitfire XIV, or Typhoon Ib - all way more important.

 

Opportunity cost is possible, but it depends on the team. The Ar-234 (which I would like very much) in terms of numbers and sorties is 'more important'? Open to question, that is. How many were built, used present, flew, impacted the campaign etc? Careful

 

Quote

There are no bombers in BoBP

 

The Me 262 is a bomber, if we follow your logic. The B-25 is a bomber. The past 3 maps / releases have been quite bomber-oriented.

 

Quote

A Mosquito FB is just the 11th fighter-bomber,

 

11th? How is that calculated, out of interest?

 

Quote

and waters down the historical approach of the career mode.

 

As long as it does not cover certain 109s or Ez-42 usage, of course. Heaven forbid!

 

Quote

the Spitfire hot rod is not included, and the mainstay of 2 TAF, the Typhoon, is missing

 

Happy to see them both also. The Mosquito strikes me as more interesting as both a flyable aircrfat and an opponent. I would pay for all 3.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not sure this has been settled, but the flyable B-25 has long been disclosed a plane they devs would like to make flyable when resources are available. 

 

However the recent announcement makes it seem like they are two brand new (I read "unannounced") planes they are researching and eventually releasing. This is just an assumption on my part, but has that been confirmed anywhere? Based on my assumption there would be two new collector planes, and possibly a flyable B-25 down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Also, none that the inclusion of the Sturmjager units was an act of desperation, not a core element of the units involved. How far do we want to pursue this? No 262 fighter units were involved in BoBp, only the fighter-bomber units. But you can use the 262 as a fighter. Similar to how you can use a Spitfire IXE with a Merlin 70 and rockets - a total chimera, but technically possible given the selection: wholly unsuitable, but has been allowed by a combination of a + b does not preclude c

You questioned the inclusion of the Sturmjäger modification; I mentioned its relevance to BoBP. Wheter it was operated out of desperation is not up to debate.

Non-fitting modification can be and are locked in the historical career mode. You can't lock a ~25$ collector plain out of the career, which happens to be the game's main feature.

 

3 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Opportunity cost is possible, but it depends on the team. The Ar-234 (which I would like very much) in terms of numbers and sorties is 'more important'? Open to question, that is. How many were built, used present, flew, impacted the campaign etc? Careful

Adding a bomber is certainly way more important than adding fighter-bomber No. 11. That's why I keep mentioning the term "gameplay".

 

15 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

11th? How is that calculated, out of interest?

Spitfire IX + Tempest V + P-51D + P-47D + P-38J + Bf 109 K + Bf 109 G + Fw 190 A + Fw 190 D + Me 262 A + Mosquito FB VI = 11 fighter-bombers

 

4 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

The Me 262 is a bomber, if we follow your logic. The B-25 is a bomber. The past 3 maps / releases have been quite bomber-oriented.

The Me 262 is a fighter-bomber and I never suggested anything else. The Mitchell II is an AI-only aircraft. I can't see where the past three releases were bomber-oriented.

 

33 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

As long as it does not cover certain 109s or Ez-42 usage, of course. Heaven forbid!

Ah come on, that's weak. You are merely trying to defame me on no basis.

 

38 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Well, adding the RAF's foremost tactical bomber over NW Europe to a sim based on the tactical air war over NW Europe, I am unsure why that is a point of contention. Literally one of the core prongs of the RAF tactical effort was the Mosquito over this campaign. By a coincidence, it was based just outside the map despite flying hundreds of sorties over the map. It adds 'gameplay' by another tactical aircraft that would be excluded by literally a few miles of the BoBp map. If that's the objection, then fair enough, but it is a fairly minor one given the wider solre of the aircraft. Not like it appeared in numbers limited to one hand of whcih no one has any actual records.

You are massively overestimating the importance of the seven Mosquito FB VI squadrons, principally operating in the nocturnal intruder role. I argue the Mosquito NF and PR were more important for 2 TAF than the Mosquito FB.

 

 

I guess this is pointless; you like the Mosquito and that's totally fine - it's the only valid pro-Mosquito argument, in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, =27=Davesteu said:

You questioned the inclusion of the Sturmjäger modification; I mentioned its relevance to BoBP. Wheter it was operated out of desperation is not up to debate.

Non-fitting modification can be and are locked in the historical career mode. You can't lock a ~25$ collector plain out of the career, which happens to be the game's main feature.

 

I referenced it: moved into the map area out of desperation. Mosquitos were not moved there owing to a lack of desperation. So we have the RAF's main tactical bomber operating over the map area in sortie numbers out of all proportion to the Sturmjager units, but the former is excluded despite it being integral to the campaign while the Stormjager mod - used as an absolute minority - is OK, despite it being totally unsuited and not intended (by its own operators) for the Ardennes operation

 

Quote

Adding a bomber is certainly way more important than adding fighter-bomber No. 11. That's why I keep mentioning the term "gameplay". .

 

Yet 'bombers' (define, please) are complicated owing to multiple crew positions. The Mosquito was a 'bomber' but with few positions (actually, by the team;s approach, only one). So it is both neatly a 'bomber' and relatively low effort. We agree that tactical bombers are important, right?

 

Quote

Spitfire IX + Tempest V + P-51D + P-47D + P-38J + Bf 109 K + Bf 109 G + Fw 190 A + Fw 190 D + Me 262 A + Mosquito FB VI = 11 fighter-bombers

 

And U-2s. In fact, every aircraft in the sim bar the B-25. Which was a tactical bomber. Am not sure how you are playing this. What do you suggest?

 

Quote

The Me 262 is a fighter-bomber and I never suggested anything else. The Mitchell II is an AI-only aircraft. I can't see where the past three releases were bomber-oriented.

 

They are tactical air-war oriented, hence the IL-2 in the series title. With the Pe-2, the He-111 and Ju-88 in starring roles. This is a tactical air war sim: it is called ll-2 for a reason. The ability to hit ground targets has been a core element of the philosophy, game engine and development. This is a sim intended to reflect the hitting, defending and escorting a load of hurt from low level; that is about as Mosquito as it gets alongside the Pe-2 and Ju-88

 

Quote

Ah come on, that's weak. You are merely trying to defame me on no basis

 

But the point remains: a tiny minority aircraft is OK but an aircraft that served in hundreds over the map is not because its bases were 30 miles West despite its critical utility, popularity and importance? Bit weak there yourself, I might say.

 

Quote

You are massively overestimating the importance of the seven Mosquito FB VI squadrons, principally operating in the nocturnal intruder role. I argue the Mosquito NF and PR were more important for 2 TAF than the Mosquito FB.

 

No, I am putting these in perspective as a nominally additional aircraft. I do not dispute there being more Typhoons - that would be foolish - but Mosquito is an interesting aircraft and adds to the tactical 'gameplay' for both sides. It was heavily involved and is not an outrider. It gives the RAF a tactical bomber that was heavily engaged over the campaign, even if it was based just outside the map. It gives the Luftwaffe a common target. It does not have a ridiculous performance that leaves other aircraft behind, but it is competitive.

 

Quote

I guess this is pointless; you like the Mosquito and that's totally fine - it's the only valid pro-Mosquito argument, in my book.

 

On the contrary, I have given you my perspective and - I think - reasoned arguments. It is not my decision to make. But a Typhoon would very much be 'another fighter-bomber', the XIV 'another fighter' (I would buy them both) and the -234 'another niche aircraft' (I would also buy it). But that a Mosquito 'does not fit the BoBp scenario in spirit or intention strikes me as untrue.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

Now onto the Mosquito FB Mk. VI: "Fun" and "useful" are also relative terms. I strongly disagree with at least the "useful" part. How would a Mosquito enhance the game(play)?
Resources, including time, are limited. Adding a Mosquito prevents them from doing a Mitchell II, Ar 234 B-2, Spitfire XIV, or Typhoon Ib - all way more important. There are no bombers in BoBP, the Spitfire hot rod is not included, and the mainstay of 2 TAF, the Typhoon, is missing. A Mosquito FB is just the 11th fighter-bomber, less relevant in general, and waters down the historical approach of the career mode.

 

 

I'm sorry Dave, but that argument holds no grund:

 

How does a Spitfire, Typhoon or the Arado "enhance gameplay"?

- We already have Spitfires and a hotrod with the Tempest.

- We already have kick-butt fighter bombers in the Fw 190 and P-47D-28.

- We already have jet-bombers and larger bombers if you're into fiddling with bombsights.

 

I don't see how a Typhoon adds any more to the gameplay than the Mosquito. It's just another fighter bomber. Plus it's single engine, single pilot. The Mossie is a two-seater, at least.

Both can carry the same weaponry.

 

The historical approach is not watered down at all, since the simulation of the battle-aspect is still depicted in the correct area and time-frame.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I have a compromise to this argument.  They should make them all.  Problem solved.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BraveSirRobin said:

I think I have a compromise to this argument.  They should make them all.  Problem solved.

 

Gordian Knot you have truly cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Gordian Knot you have truly cut.

 

Everyone says that I am too negative.  I decided to try posting something positive.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Everyone says that I am too negative.  I decided to try posting something positive.

 

It was positive.  Somewhat final, but positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

It was positive.  Somewhat final, but positive.

 

It was my first try.  

 

And let’s face it, the argument is basically over the hottest super model.  When the reality is that we’ll take any of them, and the devs will give us a C-47.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

It was my first try.  

 

And let’s face it, the argument is basically over the hottest super model.  When the reality is that we’ll take any of them, and the devs will give us a C-47.

 

I wasted time

And now doth time waste me.

Edited by EAF19_Marsh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

I wast'd time

And now doth time waste me.

 

No.  I don’t really want to stop the argument.  I was just going for some comic relief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BraveSirRobin said:

 

No.  I don’t really want to stop the argument.  I was just going for some comic relief.

 

I was adding merely some iambic pentameter.

 

Keeping it real, yo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

I predicted B-25 and Spit XIV.  So I’m totally on board with getting super models.

 

You and Huey. 2 for you, 2 for me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back at devblog 227 it actually is noted at the start that the tempest, P38, P51 and B25D where the most difficult aircraft they ever had to make, this also means these aircraft where more difficult then the pe2, he111, ju88 and a20 which shows bombers which have several gunner positions can actually be easier to make then some single seat aircraft.

 

So are potential future aircraft like the Typhoon or Mosquito actually easier to create compared to aircraft like the C47 or IL4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La-7 please.

 

Along with some other late war soviet fighters, so we can use BoP content from axis and make eastern front. 

 

Also, more Soviet bombers, Axis get all the bombing toys and all Soviets have is Pe-2 from soviet arsenal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

La-7 please.

 

Along with some other late war soviet fighters, so we can use BoP content from axis and make eastern front. 

 

Also, more Soviet bombers, Axis get all the bombing toys and all Soviets have is Pe-2 from soviet arsenal. 

 

The soviets have the Po-2, the IL-2, and the A-20 (even tho yes it was lend lease, but still) They may not be dedicated bombers, but they're still more than usable in that role.

 

And all these people speculating about all these "hot rod" fighters... I'm gonna laugh so hard if the devs announce its gonna be the C-47/Li-2, and some other Axis or Allied medium bomber xD

Edited by kitsunelegend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idd like to have VVS heavy or medium bomber in game.  Some diesel engine contraption that was used to raid Berlin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

No 262 fighter units were involved in BoBp, only the fighter-bomber units. But you can use the 262 as a fighter. Similar to how you can use a Spitfire IXE with a Merlin 70 and rockets - a total chimera, but technically possible given the selection: wholly unsuitable, but has been allowed by a combination of a + b does not preclude c

 

Huh? I think it's been quite well-known by now that BoBP includes way more than just the Bodenplatte operation, so of course the 262 was used as a fighter during that timeframe.

 

And, I hate to keep bringing it up, but there is zero issue with having Spitfires with rockets - there was a full squadron of them operational on the map, during the timeframe being depicted. If that's not what should qualify whether or not a weapon system should be included in the game, then I don't know what is.

13 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

How many were built, used present, flew, impacted the campaign etc? Careful

 

I've written / listed elsewhere here what the Ar 234s were doing after they became operational. Long story short, they were plenty busy for last ~5 months of the war.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I'm sorry Dave, but that argument holds no grund:

How does a Spitfire, Typhoon or the Arado "enhance gameplay"?

- We already have Spitfires and a hotrod with the Tempest.

- We already have kick-butt fighter bombers in the Fw 190 and P-47D-28.

- We already have jet-bombers and larger bombers if you're into fiddling with bombsights.

  • Spitfire XIV: much asked-for variant of the famous fighter aircraft excelling at medium to high altitudes, compared to the low altitude advantage of the Tempest
  • Typhoon IB: bread and butter of 2 TAF - not adding it is like excluding 9 AF's P-47; equipped with 8 (rarely up to 12) RP-3 rockets
  • Bomber: Me 262 A is not a bomber, but a fighter-bomber;  tell me more about the importance of Pe-2, A-20B, He 111 and Ju 88 A equipped bomber units operating within the BoBP map during the BoBP timeframe
14 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I don't see how a Typhoon adds any more to the gameplay than the Mosquito. It's just another fighter bomber. Plus it's single engine, single pilot. The Mossie is a two-seater, at least.

Both can carry the same weaponry. The historical approach is not watered down at all, since the simulation of the battle-aspect is still depicted in the correct area and time-frame.

Exactly - the Mosquito FB VI adds nothing new. Compared to the Typhoon, it is of lesser historical significance in the context of BoBP, and on top of that it operated from airfields outside the map.
Not to mention the arguably more interesting modifications and payload options of the Typhoon IB (sixth batch).

Payload options: up to 2 x 1000 lb. bombs (including cluster projectiles); up to 12 RP-3 (usually eight)

Modifications: Sabre IIB; Rocket Projector Mk.IA; Rocket Projector Mk.III (lightweight version introduced in late 1944)

Mosquito FB VI: up to 4 x 500 lb. bombs; no rockets used in 2 TAF service

 

I neither disregard nor 'hate' the Mosquito FB VI - this is about prioritization. Priorities may vary, but my arguments are definitely not groundless.

Edited by =27=Davesteu
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Huh? I think it's been quite well-known by now that BoBP includes way more than just the Bodenplatte operation, so of course the 262 was used as a fighter during that timeframe.

 

But - IIRC - the 262 fighter groups were not on the map? It was a fighter, but JG7, Jv44 and EJG 2 are not on the Bp map. So it was used, but not in this scenario.Splitting hairs, maybe, but people seem determined to argue that the map area is inviolate.

 

Quote

And, I hate to keep bringing it up, but there is zero issue with having Spitfires with rockets - there was a full squadron of them operational on the map,

 

I think you missed my point: we have an LF IXE with the option of a Merlin 70 (which makes it halfway to an HF IX) but you could take the Merlin 70 and rockets. Certain individuals who have a limited grasp of logic see this is evidence that the whole procedure is open to any SWOTL combination, while anyone with a brain understand that this is simply a result of options not being mutually exclusive (like they are on the A8). Thus we ahve the rocket option (good, though not terribly important) which has been used to defend far wilder and capable combinations (1.98 ata, Ez-42 etc) as 'equivalent'.

 

 

Quote

I've written / listed elsewhere here what the Ar 234s were doing after they became operational. Long story short, they were plenty busy for last ~5 months of the war.

 

Again, I think you missed the point, The -234 units in very, very small numbers were involved. I would love to see one. But arguing that the hundreds of Mosquitoes are somehow less relevant is odd in the extreme.

 

The basic question is: does aircraft selection depend upon numbers involved, impact, interest or none of the above?

 

 

Quote

Bomber: Me 262 A is not a bomber, but a fighter-bomber;  tell me more about the importance of Pe-2, A-20B, He 111 and Ju 88 A equipped bomber units operating within the BoBP map during the BoBP timeframe

 

a) you were the one saying that there were too many fighter bombers. Is Typhoon not another fighter-bomber? Mosquito is a tactical bomber and interdiction aircraft, much like the Pe-2. So a change from the current single-engined, multi-role menu.

 

and

 

b) I think you'll find that the twins that you mentioned were not released for BoBp but do indicate the tactical air war focus of the series. or I might be mistaken if I missed IL-2: Battle of Schweinfurt / Night Battle of the Ruhr

Edited by EAF19_Marsh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...