Jump to content
III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson

Current Ju-88 vs C6

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, OrLoK said:

are you sure they're not more different than you think? I'm no expert on axis aircraft!

 

Its essentially nothing but an A4 - same aircraft with the same engines - with primary differences being a smooth nose and forward firing guns, along with a virtually useless bomb load - much smaller than our already existing 1941 vintage A4.

 

As a mod to our existing A4 it's OK for a few bucks. As a standalone for Normandy it's pure filler, like the air in a big bag of potato chips.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ahh but the "air" in a bag of chips/crisps nonetheless, whilst not sexy, is very useful indeed.

 

but I get your point ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Its essentially nothing but an A4 - same aircraft with the same engines - with primary differences being a smooth nose and forward firing guns, along with a virtually useless bomb load - much smaller than our already existing 1941 vintage A4.

 

...and an overhauled cockpit interior. It's far more than just a glorified A-4.

 

Or, are we going to apply the same logic to the Bf 109 F-2 and F-4?

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Or, are we going to apply the same logic to the Bf 109 F-2 and F-4?

 

Those are fighters and überplanes for their period.

Naturally not...

 

10 50kg bombs can mess up a railway-station, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

...and an overhauled cockpit interior. It's far more than just a glorified A-4.

 

Or, are we going to apply the same logic to the Bf 109 F-2 and F-4?

 

I agree with the comparison between the F-2 and F-4 (or some of the G variants)...

 

The historical fact is that over 900 Ju-88 C-6 were produced. If people had to fly them into combat - then I am interested in the experience - and this will be an experience we haven't had before. It also finally gives us a reason for the Ju-88 to have a gun-sight (especially as the pilot operated trigger for the Mg-17 isn't modeled). It can be used to strafe anti-aircraft guns (on land and on ships) and to attack trains.

 

Of course, it would be ideal to have a slower target... the Lancaster, Ilyushin Il-4 or even a Wellington. Similarly, Coastal Command aircraft over the Bay of Biscay would provide slower targets in most cases (Beaufighter is the best match, although a Hudson, Wellington, or Avenger Avenger could do).

 

With the exception of the Mk.VIC... the C-2 has a healthy edge on all of them:

317 / 510 Ju-88 C2
348 / 560 Ju-88 R2

 

250 / 410 Ilyushin Il-4 
282 / 454 Lancaster Mk.I
302 / 410 Wellington Mk.X/Mk.XI  (Gradually phased out in 1943)

 

246 / 397 Hudson Mk.I
333 / 536 Beaufighter Mk.VIC 
303 / 408 Beaufighter TF Mk.X 
275 / 442 Avenger (Introduced in 1944)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

then I am interested in the experience

I get that. But it means low and slow. 
In this game I can tell you that going in low with a fast Tempest with bombs is suicide. 
So the experience is pretty obvious. 
I would love to use this in BOS but not for latewar. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

with primary differences being a smooth nose and forward firing guns

 

You talk as if this were small-potatoes differences. The ju88c6 would be our first really heavy-fighter, with lots of uses, and btw the mosquito FB comes to supply the other side's counterpart. 

 

Weird that people all the time post "can I haz nachtjaeger" but, when the first actual NJ plane appears (sans the radar), it causes beffudlement. 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, No.322_LuseKofte said:

I get that. But it means low and slow. 
In this game I can tell you that going in low with a fast Tempest with bombs is suicide. 
So the experience is pretty obvious. 
I would love to use this in BOS but not for latewar. 

 

It depends on how heavily defended the target is... the time of day and the tactics used. We have the U-2/Po-2 afterall... and that was used until the end of the war.

23 minutes ago, danielprates said:

Weird that people all the time post "can I haz nachtjaeger" but, when the first actual NJ plane appears (sans the radar), it causes beffudlement. 

 

Might be entirely different crowds... :)

Share this post


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

The ju88c6 would be our first really heavy-fighter

 

I think the Bf-110 fits that label already. Also, the Me-410 will be part of the same release, and it also is a heavy fighter.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not un-interested in the C6 at all, and hope that aside from the use we get with it through BoN etc. we eventually get a simulated radar set, too. But I think the 110 is certainly a heavy fighter; the quintessential heavy fighter, almost.

Share this post


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

 

Might be entirely different crowds... :)

 

This is true.

 

46 minutes ago, cardboard_killer said:

I think the Bf-110 fits that label already.

 

Maybe I should have written "really, really heavy"! Well, you know what I meant. Fighters developed out of twin-engine medium bombers, like the do217K or the Blenheim fighter, or the Mosquito for that matter. We are only now getting this very "niche" category of planes, which were important in their time but are insofar badly represented in flight sims (and none at all in this game). Time will tell, though, if they play out well in the game. I am optimistic however!

Edited by danielprates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right! The Bf-110 weighs about half as much as those!

 

If you want a really heavy fighter... there was a fighter version of the TB-3 armed with three 76mm cannons. Of course, we'll never see it in a sim (with the exception of an unreleased mod for Il-2 1946 that I made, which is still lacking the 3d model tweaks but is otherwise functional).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

It depends on how heavily defended the target is... the time of day and the tactics used. We have the U-2/Po-2 afterall... and that was used until the end of the war.

 

Might be entirely different crowds... :)

I guess I am one of the few going to fly it. 
I like flying heavy slow things with low life expectancy. 
It is a victory surviving 1 out of 5 times. You have to take your time and plan every mission. 
Problem is we are getting the ME 410 and it is going to be used the same way with same precaution. Or should I say it is a luxury problem. We would not get the 188 anyway so I am happy for getting it. 
I just hope missionmakers make the C6 available in Stalingrad map

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm super excited to fly it in the career mode. I always love fighting in something that is clearly out matched.  Especially one armed to the teeth and can double as a ground attack aircraft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, -LUCKY-ThanksSkeletor said:

I'm super excited to fly it in the career mode. I always love fighting in something that is clearly out matched.  Especially one armed to the teeth and can double as a ground attack aircraft. 

Yes I rather fly C 6 than a 110. I do not know why but I do

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This all points to the next title after BoN: battle of the defense of the reich.

 

There are some hidden signs pointing to Half Life 3 too.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope to see the BMW engined variants, that would give them at least some performance edge, particularly due to way more lenient engine timers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the idea behind this very heavy fighters were to bring some guns far behind enemy lines and to avoid enemy fighters as much as possible.

Not exactly what at dogfightservers is needed i guess.

15 minutes ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

Hope to see the BMW engined variants, that would give them at least some performance edge, particularly due to way more lenient engine timers.

these few extra km/h will not save you 😏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, III/JG53Frankyboy said:

these few extra km/h will not save you 😏

 

I can't even tell if this is sarcasm anymore or what, but these sort of replies are tiring.

 

Maybe they won't save you, good pilots can make use of a extra speed and climb to survive.

Share this post


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

Weird that people all the time post "can I haz nachtjaeger" but, when the first actual NJ plane appears (sans the radar), it causes beffudlement. 

 

Night fighters need night targets.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we talking MP or SP?  I get that it might not be of great value in an MP environment given that the missions are not usually going to land in its sweet spot.  TBH I would much rather take up an Me110 against almost anything.  

 

For SP there is fun to be had.  Coastal anti shipping.  Bomber interceptor day and night (granted no radar).  Nighttime raider.  Daytime attack plane.  There is a feeling that everything the Ju88C does the Me110 does better, but it's not all about best.

 

For night targets I use the existing bombers on night missions.  It wasn't just the heavies that did night operations.

Edited by PatrickAWlson
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

Night fighters need night targets.  

3 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

Its easy to agree with that.

 

You aren't going to find any argument here.

 

I mean, it is the day fighter version... but I'd overlook that in a heartbeat to justify getting a Wellington or a Lancaster (heck, a Mk.I special could have as few as one turret - which basically makes it like a Ju-52 with an extra engine from a technical perspective... ;) So long as it doesn't have H2S).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

...and an overhauled cockpit interior. It's far more than just a glorified A-4.

 

It's a swing and a miss is what it is.

 

This aircraft is simply the wrong Ju88 to be including with BoN. It represents very little value to the consumer as a Normandy standalone.

 

As an A4 mod its a cool addition to an eastern front scenario. As a standalone for Normandy it's a bitter disappointment taking the place of vastly more relevant and useful BMW equipped Ju88s and/or Ju188 - both of which would have been strong selling points (especially the Ju188) and given much more value and relevance to the BoN planeset.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skepticism is justified based on experiences from bobp. If your slow and big and spotted it take seconds and your pulverized. 
Planes like Arado will do ground attack much better and safer. JU 88 A4 can hit targets at 7 k not as exposed as being low. 
ME 410 is a slightly better choice. And we have the great 110 G2. 
So the C6 is just another option that we can play with. I am going to fly it just for the fun. 
Common sense won’t let you, fun will. 
Anyway , again please utilize this in earlier packs. I really wanted it during Stalingrad period

Share this post


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

You aren't going to find any argument here

 

Amirite?!

 

My point was, all over this forum you will find people asking for this or that plane, on grounds of it being a "stepping stone" towards PTO or whatever. So I reason, maybe the ju88c6 could be a stepping stone towards some night action.

 

I would consider a great idea to have lower-resolution AI Lancasters roaming the skies, coming from the edge of the map, and perhaps easy to implement as it has only 3 turrets - same as the halifax. The way I see it the biggest obstacle to a decent NJ experience is the proper modeling of radar, ground-control guidance and radio nav/landing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

It's a swing and a miss is what it is.

 

This aircraft is simply the wrong Ju88 to be including with BoN. It represents very little value to the consumer as a Normandy standalone.

 

As an A4 mod its a cool addition to an eastern front scenario. As a standalone for Normandy it's a bitter disappointment taking the place of vastly more relevant and useful BMW equipped Ju88s and/or Ju188 - both of which would have been strong selling points (especially the Ju188) and given much more value and relevance to the BoN planeset.

 

 

Given that the C6 did see action at Normandy, I'm curious as to why this is a swing and a miss for Normandy?  If anything the Arado and Spit IV are the planes that are out of place in Normandy, although they are a very nice fit in Bodenplatte.  Luke says whole new cockpit and you reply with mod - that's not a mod unless you think the cockpit can be done in a week or two.  Maybe it can, but I'm guessing not.

 

The argument that it is not competitive in multiplayer, while probably true, is valid only for multiplayer.  There are lots of historically accurate planes that are not competitive in multiplayer.  How many people do you see burning to get into a LaGG (as opposes to burning because they got into a LaGG)?

 

I get the argument for the Ju188, as this type was also at Normandy.  Having said that there is a bit of a shrug.  Both Ju88C and Ju188 were produced in similar numbers.  They were both at Normandy.  They were both on the eastern front.  They both suffered heavy losses.  Both will get slaughtered in multiplayer.  The team decided to go with the Ju88C.  IMHO the Ju88C offers more interesting options than the Ju188 in terms of shipping attacks, but that is opinion.

 

As a single player the allied planes and the map are the biggest wins for me.  It allows a German career to go from 1941 to end without significant gaps.  It allows an American career to go from 1943 to the end. A British career can go from 1942 until the end.  For me that is the best part of Normandy.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the C-6 will get the underwing ETC as a modification , than a yes for shipattack.

In the west its main daytime duty was to cover the Submarineroutes and shoot down enemy seaspotters.

For these long missions both bombbays were filled with fueltanks.

 

Shipattack was still the job of glasnosed Ju88s - most times with a MG-FF (replacing the bombsight)in the nose  to suppress the ship AAA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2019 at 3:36 AM, CUJO_1970 said:

Trying to present this as some new aircraft and offering it as anything other than a (relatively small) mod to the existing A4 is perplexing and disappointing. 

 

As a mod it's cool to have - I'd even pay a few bucks for it. As a standalone aircraft being sold in a new title it's a half measure.

 

 

 

 

 


I agree. Even the orginal Ju 88 A-4 needs some hefty additional work to be about completed and now they release two half-assed Ju-88s. It is not very wise move business wise. 

I strongly suggest that next heavy Ju bomber would be a Ju-188 to give at least some (still minor) differences over Ju-88 series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Given that the C6 did see action at Normandy, I'm curious as to why this is a swing and a miss for Normandy?  If anything the Arado and Spit IV are the planes that are out of place in Normandy, although they are a very nice fit in Bodenplatte. 

 

With respect, I've explained earlier why it's a swing and a miss. I honestly don't want to continue to downgrade it.

 

I agree completely the Arado and Spit XIV are a very nice fit in Bodenplatte.

 

12 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I get the argument for the Ju188, as this type was also at Normandy.  Having said that there is a bit of a shrug.  Both Ju88C and Ju188 were produced in similar numbers.  They were both at Normandy.  They were both on the eastern front.  They both suffered heavy losses.  Both will get slaughtered in multiplayer.  The team decided to go with the Ju88C.  IMHO the Ju88C offers more interesting options than the Ju188 in terms of shipping attacks, but that is opinion.

 

You are comparing the entire production run of ~900 C6 when you say they are produced in similar numbers. This is not correct. We are getting a sub-variant of the C6 only - the C6a and it was produced in much smaller numbers and played a vastly less important role than the Ju-188. The Ju-188 was much more performant, versatile, more heavily armed {C6a has the bomb load of a 109, literally} and much more relevant to the theater.

 

The Arado will be restricted or banned online, just like they do with the 262. Therefore, the exclusion of the Ju-188 will leave the Axis with a couple of obsolete, 1941 vintage medium bombers to roll with through the end of the war. It's a glaring omission.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wet dream that could fit Normandy;

Ju88-A17 :)

whole new gameplay element!

 

"In the early hours of 13 June, 91 torpedoaircraft of Ju 88 successfully attacked a convoy in the Portland Bill area. In addition to operations against ship targets in the extensive region of the Seine bay and the Channel area, attacks on vessels unloading at and near the bridgeheads took place daily.

 
Edited by EAF_Ribbon
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The Arado will be restricted or banned online, just like they do with the 262. Therefore, the exclusion of the Ju-188 will leave the Axis with a couple of obsolete, 1941 vintage medium bombers to roll with through the end of the war. It's a glaring omission.

 

Dude Jason literally said the 188 was not doable with the time and resources they have.

 

But yes, you are literally being cheated here. After all, why would those dumb developers give us a C6 when they could choose to give us an He177 AND a 188 AND a He162?

 

Also, why stop at 10 aircraft in the expansion? Why not choose to do more?

 

Would deleting the C6 from the line up make you happier? Because that's literally the only option you have here.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will get a planeset, that was never represented before in an sim.... and the people start complaining about it

C6 is the same as A4 but with a solid nose ... mimimi
Why the 410 ... i want someting else ... mimimi
A6... is the same as the 8.. but i want the 7 mimimi
the G6 late .... we have already the G14 .. for what do we need it ... blabla ...

really? Are you serious guys? What the hell is wrong with you?
that planeset is a dream combined with BOBP, it is the most complete western lineup i can find on the market... if you don't like it.. go back to 46

For me, im so excited about the new planes, to make the collection of the il2 Series more complete. The second jet is coming, the Mossi, the 410!!!! We had so many 110 in any other simulations that the 410 is one of the greates additions.
The C6 is a dream in the il2 series ... :friends:

Why is nobody complaining about the La5,F and FN?! It is the same plane with a different engine or mod... 
Or the upcoming P-51B/C?! We have already a D we dont need a B/C mimimi ..

Really guys? Go find a girl and come back when the work is done ... on both sides ... :big_boss:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The Ju-188 was much more performant, versatile, more heavily armed {C6a has the bomb load of a 109, literally} and much more relevant to the theater.

 

The C-6 also has the range of literally an entire squadron of 109s.

Flying the 188, you'll be just as dead online, as in the C-6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 76IAP-Black said:

Go find a girl

Will be same as the last one ... mimimi :biggrin:

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Will be same as the last one ... mimimi :biggrin:


Just different engines ... :joy:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2019 at 10:58 AM, danielprates said:

 

Amirite?!

 

My point was, all over this forum you will find people asking for this or that plane, on grounds of it being a "stepping stone" towards PTO or whatever. So I reason, maybe the ju88c6 could be a stepping stone towards some night action.

 

I would consider a great idea to have lower-resolution AI Lancasters roaming the skies, coming from the edge of the map, and perhaps easy to implement as it has only 3 turrets - same as the halifax. The way I see it the biggest obstacle to a decent NJ experience is the proper modeling of radar, ground-control guidance and radio nav/landing.

Yes. +9999

In my mind there is no argument against a low poly Lancaster target drone, exept ThIs iS A taCtIcAl siM, and the coding for the electronics. 

And before the luftwhiner-whiner types start to smash thier keys, let me emphasise that i have a rough understanding of the concepts of 'time' and 'money'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

 

Dude Jason literally said the 188 was not doable with the time and resources they have.

 

Any aircraft can fall victim to time and resources - the difference is where your priorities are and what value you want in your product.

 

The rest of your post was all your words only and a predictable straw-man - especially the "dumb developers" remark. It is possible to strongly disagree with their decisions without insulting them personally - so I'll ignore that and you from here on out.

7 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Flying the 188, you'll be just as dead online, as in the C-6.

 

Yeah, that's so true - especially if we ignore the fact that the 188 is much faster and has much better defensive armament 🤣

 

 

Share this post


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...