Jump to content

What are you looking forward to the most in Battle of Normandy?


Recommended Posts

The map and career are always welcome, but in terms of planes, here's my ranking of most anticipated to least:

 

1) Me 410. From what I've read, its handling is meh. Speed is likewise meh (for a late war fighter; it's not bad for a bomber). But I want it for the interesting canopy and cockpit placement.

2) Spitfire XIV. Even though it will likely handle noticeably worse than the IX, the speed and climbing ability should be fun.

3) Ar 234. I don't like jets, honestly, but I still want it for pure novelty alone.

4) 109G-6 Late. While I originally thought, 'oh no, not another 109', I've since decided that it fills a valuable niche between the somewhat underpowered (for '44) basic G6 and the bloated G-14 and K.

5) Mosquito. Don't know much about them, other than that they're iconic and a superb design.

6) Typhoon. Again, don't know what to expect in terms of handling. But anything with 4 20mm is fine by me.

7) Fw 190 A-6. The A-3 is my favorite 190 by far, so this one doesn't excite me much.

8 ) Ju 88. Don't like bombers, but it'll be nice to have a late-war German variant for the once a year I fly a bomber.

9) P-47D. Nope, don't like American planes much.

10) P-51B/C. I like American planes with 4 .50 cals even less than ones with 8.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

The map and career are always welcome, but in terms of planes, here's my ranking of most anticipated to least:

 

1) Me 410. From what I've read, its handling is meh. Speed is likewise meh (for a late war fighter; it's not bad for a bomber). But I want it for the interesting canopy and cockpit placement.

2) Spitfire XIV. Even though it will likely handle noticeably worse than the IX, the speed and climbing ability should be fun.

3) Ar 234. I don't like jets, honestly, but I still want it for pure novelty alone.

4) 109G-6 Late. While I originally thought, 'oh no, not another 109', I've since decided that it fills a valuable niche between the somewhat underpowered (for '44) basic G6 and the bloated G-14 and K.

5) Mosquito. Don't know much about them, other than that they're iconic and a superb design.

6) Typhoon. Again, don't know what to expect in terms of handling. But anything with 4 20mm is fine by me.

7) Fw 190 A-6. The A-3 is my favorite 190 by far, so this one doesn't excite me much.

8 ) Ju 88. Don't like bombers, but it'll be nice to have a late-war German variant for the once a year I fly a bomber.

9) P-47D. Nope, don't like American planes much.

10) P-51B/C. I like American planes with 4 .50 cals even less than ones with 8.

 

Re:

 

410: In Il2 '46 there were some MP guys who could really put that thing through it paces. There are guys in BoX who are a handfull in the 110 now as well. I probably won't fly it online but respect to those who do

Spit: Should be fun to fly and fight against

234: Meh, jets............let's go to Korea. I think they seriously detract from the overall vibe here. Especially in MP where they are (nearly) untouchable.

G-6 Late: It is quickly becoming my favorite 109. Turns better than the bloats, has great speed in bursts, and I prefer the 20mm over the 30 for the ammo load and ballistics if nothing else.

Mosquito: Yummy, yummy, yummy!

Typhoon: Really looking forward to watching it dump a load of HVAR's (correction RP-3's)

A-6: Sure, why not. 

Ju-88: Happy to escort them but not moving the needle much on this end.

P-47: Still getting used to it offline

P-51B: My favorite Mustang (visually) when adorned with a Malcolm hood. Marginally better speed and handling than the D. I do well enough with 6 .50's. Four will be a challenge. Here's hoping for APIT to be introduced at the same time.

 

 

 

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

Re:

 

410: In Il2 '46 there were some MP guys who could really put that thing through it paces. There are guys in BoX who are a handfull in the 110 now as well. I probably won't fly it online but respect to those who do

Spit: Should be fun to fly and fight against

234: Meh, jets............let's go to Korea. I think they seriously detract from the overall vibe here. Especially in MP where they are (nearly) untouchable.

G-6 Late: It is quickly becoming my favorite 109. Turns better than the bloats, has great speed in bursts, and I prefer the 20mm over the 30 for the ammo load and ballistics if nothing else.

Mosquito: Yummy, yummy, yummy!

Typhoon: Really looking forward to watching it dump a load of HVAR's (correction RP-3's)

A-6: Sure, why not. 

Ju-88: Happy to escort them but not moving the needle much on this end.

P-47: Still getting used to it offline

P-51B: My favorite Mustang (visually) when adorned with a Malcolm hood. Marginally better speed and handling than the D. I do well enough with 6 .50's. Four will be a challenge. Here's hoping for APIT to be introduced at the same time.

 

 

 

5) Mosquito

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

8 ) Ju 88. Don't like bombers, but it'll be nice to have a late-war German variant for the once a year I fly a bomber.

The Ju88C6a is an heavy fighter which carried 3x20mm and 3x7.7mm guns in the nose and gunpod, it can only carry 10x50kg bombs max.

We might get an engine modification with the more powerfull BMW engines which was renamed to Ju88R.

 

This aircraft was used as an trainbuster in the eastern front and hunting ships in the Bay of Biscay.

It was used (Both Ju88C and Ju88R) very few times in the Normandy campaign.

 

An late war Junkers bomber for Normandy would be the Ju188 or Ju88S, another alternative is the Do217 series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

234: Meh, jets............let's go to Korea. I think they seriously detract from the overall vibe here. Especially in MP where they are (nearly) untouchable.

 

That was the general idea...

The Me 262 outclassed virtually everything the Allies could throw at it. Its top speed of 540 mph made it almost untouchable, and its four 30 mm MK-108 cannons, each capable of firing up to 650 rounds a minute, tore up anything they shot at.

The fighter could also carry 24 R4M air-to-air rockets, which proved to be devastating when fired en masse against tight formations of Allied bombers.

 

MP is a bit skewed because the numbers per side never represent the actual scale for the mostly fictitious scenarios (though some are historically based). 

Brainstorming a MP scenario. The allies mission is to destroy German factories, as the allies destroy factories the ability of the Axis to produce Me 262 is reduced with each succeeding round. If the allies fail to destroy the factories, then more Me 262 would become available. Initially the number of Me 262 available is low but if no factories are destroyed, this number rises. 

 

I am not sure if that is possible to be done, but I think I lot of MP'ers would probably enjoy the challenge. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

That was the general idea...

The Me 262 outclassed virtually everything the Allies could throw at it. Its top speed of 540 mph made it almost untouchable, and its four 30 mm MK-108 cannons, each capable of firing up to 650 rounds a minute, tore up anything they shot at.

The fighter could also carry 24 R4M air-to-air rockets, which proved to be devastating when fired en masse against tight formations of Allied bombers.

 

MP is a bit skewed because the numbers per side never represent the actual scale for the mostly fictitious scenarios (though some are historically based). 

Brainstorming a MP scenario. The allies mission is to destroy German factories, as the allies destroy factories the ability of the Axis to produce Me 262 is reduced with each succeeding round. If the allies fail to destroy the factories, then more Me 262 would become available. Initially the number of Me 262 available is low but if no factories are destroyed, this number rises. 

 

I am not sure if that is possible to be done, but I think I lot of MP'ers would probably enjoy the challenge. 

 

I used to fly exclusively Axis online and hated it when they were on the map. It's a divisive AC and makes for terrible online play for nearly everyone except the 262 pilots. I fly both sides now and dislike it even more as an opponent. Prop vs prop largely comes down to the pilot online. Even a LaGG-3 vs a mid-war 109 can be a good fight against someone who knows how to use the LaGG to it's strengths. Unless the 262 driver is a true noob and tries to get into a turn fight it's either a nuisance that disturbs the flow of the battle/fight or an untouchable tack driver in the right hands. Both detract from the fun for everyone except the 262 driver - who I also imagine must get bored with no real competition unless his only goal is to pad points.

 

The 262, in this sim, is here largely as a technology demonstrator. Better to give Han his dream Korea scenario with closely matched opponents on both sides and some very high power prop jobs as a supporting class. I'd buy four copies and gift three as soon as it was released. You can bet I'd also move a ton of mud with Corsairs and Skyraiders while enjoying both F-86's and MiG-15's.

 

The same is true for our WWII sim if we stick with the prop jobs. Neither side had an exclusive upper hand in performance IRL and it came down to the pilots in individual and small unit engagements which is largely what is modeled both on and offline. I'm not calling for balance. I'm simply against an imbalance if you know what I mean. Prop vs prop naturally balances the servers.

 

I'm unconcerned about the reality of the 262 performance, it's deployment or the overwhelming weight of Allied airpower at the end of the war. It's a game and we don't model any of that on or offline. It's a tactical airwar game at it's heart.  I'm fine with it for career mode but I think I've said my piece about where the 262 fits, or doesn't fit, in MP.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

I used to fly exclusively Axis online and hated it when they were on the map. It's a divisive AC and makes for terrible online play for nearly everyone except the 262 pilots. I fly both sides now and dislike it even more as an opponent. Prop vs prop largely comes down to the pilot online. Even a LaGG-3 vs a mid-war 109 can be a good fight against someone who knows how to use the LaGG to it's strengths. Unless the 262 driver is a true noob and tries to get into a turn fight it's either a nuisance that disturbs the flow of the battle/fight or an untouchable tack driver in the right hands. Both detract from the fun for everyone except the 262 driver - who I also imagine must get bored with no real competition unless his only goal is to pad points.

 

The 262, in this sim, is here largely as a technology demonstrator. Better to give Han his dream Korea scenario with closely matched opponents on both sides and some very high power prop jobs as a supporting class. I'd buy four copies and gift three as soon as it was released. You can bet I'd also move a ton of mud with Corsairs and Skyraiders while enjoying both F-86's and MiG-15's.

 

The same is true for our WWII sim if we stick with the prop jobs. Neither side had an exclusive upper hand in performance IRL and it came down to the pilots in individual and small unit engagements which is largely what is modeled both on and offline. I'm not calling for balance. I'm simply against an imbalance if you know what I mean. Prop vs prop naturally balances the servers.

 

I'm unconcerned about the reality of the 262 performance, it's deployment or the overwhelming weight of Allied airpower at the end of the war. It's a game and we don't model any of that on or offline. It's a tactical airwar game at it's heart.  I'm fine with it for career mode but I think I've said my piece about where the 262 fits, or doesn't fit, in MP.

 

 

This is a tireless argument. Apart from the fact the game is not developed for MP, It is hardly worth a discussion However, MP'ers seem to think that equity is in a/c when it fact, as in real life, equity is not possible because it has always been the skill of the pilot. This is obviously discomforting for an MP'er because this means if defeated then they must feel they are not as good. "I wasn't shot down because the other guy was better in the engagement, it is because my a/c was inferior/ or there a/c was superior. The ultimately irony is, in real life, pilots needed to learn how to combat jets in real time. MP'ers have all the time int he world to learn what allied pilots had to learn on the fly. Real life is infinitely more difficult than virtual reality in every respect. The fact is, the a/c was there competing. As an online player, you have all the time int he world to figure out how to deal with it. To quote Chuck Yaeger, "the first time I saw a jet, I shot it down." Online MP'er," the first time I saw a jet, a pissed my pants and complained how unfair it on a forum." I am with Chuck on this one!

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

410: In Il2 '46 there were some MP guys who could really put that thing through it paces. There are guys in BoX who are a handfull in the 110 now as well. I probably won't fly it online but respect to those who do

 

 

If the handling in the sim is anything like it's described in the 410 book I read, I think the 110 will handle like a dream by comparison. It sounds like the 410 was designed for multirole use, but given its sub-400 MPH top speed and mediocre maneuverability, it really only would've excelled as a dive bomber or ground attacker. Its combat record as a heavy fighter was very underwhelming in all but a few cases. There were several accounts of Allied pilots who, when chasing it down, described it as fast... but not quite fast enough. It needed to go well over 400 at that stage of the war, to be at all competitive in daylight operations.

 

As for how it'll perform in this sim, I think its lack of the 110's leading edge slats will hurt it. It should stall much more easily, and be less forgiving overall.

 

*edit: correction. I looked it up and the 410 had slats. The 210 originally didn't. I was confused because Eric Brown described his evaluated 410 as having very sharp stall characteristics, and severe wing drop in a stall. These are things that would've been true of the 210, but I don't see how a 410 with slats would behave the same way. Unless this is another case of a German plane being tested with the slats taped up.

 

15 hours ago, ww2fighter20 said:

The Ju88C6a is an heavy fighter which carried 3x20mm and 3x7.7mm guns in the nose and gunpod, it can only carry 10x50kg bombs max.

We might get an engine modification with the more powerfull BMW engines which was renamed to Ju88R.

 

Ah, thanks for the clarification. That does make this particular Ju-88 version a bit more appealing. I imagine it'll still handle poorly compared to, say, a 110 or a P-38, but at least the heavy forward armament compensates.

Edited by oc2209
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

I was under the impression the Me 410 was used as a night fighter and a "bomber destroyer." 

 

And it wasn't very good at either... that's why it would've been better suited to replace the Stuka. Not much else. 

 

Its performance wasn't good enough to penetrate fighter screens to reach the bombers. And as a night fighter, it wasn't substantially superior to the 110; not enough to justify replacing it even in that limited role.

Edited by oc2209
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

I was under the impression the Me 410 was used as a night fighter and a "bomber destroyer." 

 

I'm not sure how much it was used, but I was surprised to find out it does actually have a bomb bay in the nose

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

And it wasn't very good at either... that's why it would've been better suited to replace the Stuka. Not much else. 

 

Its performance wasn't good enough to penetrate fighter screens to reach the bombers. And as a night fighter, it wasn't substantially superior to the 110; not enough to justify replacing it even in that limited role.

 

Given the poor performance of the 110 outside of the night fighting role and some success on the Eastern front, you would have thought they would have had a complete rethink on the design. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally Me-410, but being almost an online player, loving the dynamic campaign style, i would say also C-47 flyable. This aircraft would dramatically improved the online immersion during complex mission and campaigns.

Edited by 150GCT_Veltro
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2021 at 6:20 AM, oc2209 said:

 

If the handling in the sim is anything like it's described in the 410 book I read, I think the 110 will handle like a dream by comparison. It sounds like the 410 was designed for multirole use, but given its sub-400 MPH top speed and mediocre maneuverability, it really only would've excelled as a dive bomber or ground attacker. Its combat record as a heavy fighter was very underwhelming in all but a few cases. There were several accounts of Allied pilots who, when chasing it down, described it as fast... but not quite fast enough. It needed to go well over 400 at that stage of the war, to be at all competitive in daylight operations.

 

As for how it'll perform in this sim, I think its lack of the 110's leading edge slats will hurt it. It should stall much more easily, and be less forgiving overall.

 

 

Ah, thanks for the clarification. That does make this particular Ju-88 version a bit more appealing. I imagine it'll still handle poorly compared to, say, a 110 or a P-38, but at least the heavy forward armament compensates.

 

Just a quick one, I think there are a few reasons why the Me 410 gets a bad name for itself, not all of it is well deserved though... some things to keep in mind.

 

1. Any twin engined aircraft in 1944 was going to be at a disadvantage in intense daylight ops against most single engined fighters of the time (including, but much less so for the P-38). Against a heavy escort which was in advance of the bomber formations they inevitably suffered, just like the Bf 110. 

2. Much of the poor handling is actually attributed to the Me 210, its failed younger brother. With some significant wing design changes and the addition of leading edge slats - this improved the handling greatly and was actually pretty reasonable.

3. It is heavier compared to the Bf 110 G, but because of its much greater power output (and higher power-to-weight ratio) plus superior wing area - it should retain energy much better including in maneuvers. This will compensate somewhat for its weight increase and should not be miles off what you might expect from the Bf 110 G-4 in terms of overall maneuverability. It will probably have a somewhat larger turning circle and perhaps slightly slower roll rate but who cares if you do everything else much better.

4. Because you can carry bombs internally with the 410, unlike with the Bf 110; you will suffer much less performance loss thanks to the lack of that additional drag. This will pronounce the difference in speed even more between the two when doing ground attack runs. It also has a dive brake, because... [Germany likes dive bombers] lol.

5. You can do surprisingly high speeds in a dive in the Me 410 (466mph rated I believe - not sure if this is Vne), and accelerate faster including in a dive than a Bf 110. You don't have to necessarily go faster than your enemy, just fast enough for your gunner on the MG barbettes to give a few squirts back. Once incendiary rounds are introduced, that could also become a real headache for a chasing fighter, provided the differences in speed are not too great to start with.

Edited by Aurora_Stealth
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

 

This is a tireless argument. Apart from the fact the game is not developed for MP, It is hardly worth a discussion However, MP'ers seem to think that equity is in a/c when it fact, as in real life, equity is not possible because it has always been the skill of the pilot. This is obviously discomforting for an MP'er because this means if defeated then they must feel they are not as good. "I wasn't shot down because the other guy was better in the engagement, it is because my a/c was inferior/ or there a/c was superior. The ultimately irony is, in real life, pilots needed to learn how to combat jets in real time. MP'ers have all the time int he world to learn what allied pilots had to learn on the fly. Real life is infinitely more difficult than virtual reality in every respect. The fact is, the a/c was there competing. As an online player, you have all the time int he world to figure out how to deal with it. To quote Chuck Yaeger, "the first time I saw a jet, I shot it down." Online MP'er," the first time I saw a jet, a pissed my pants and complained how unfair it on a forum." I am with Chuck on this one!

 

Actually, your argument is no less tireless as well. AND.............we have essentially argued the same point. I concede that it has a place in SP to a certain extent except the main opponnent of the 262 was, in fact, heavy bombers, which we will never have in this tactical sim.

 

And I generally have no problem avoiding 262's in open combat in MP with a few exceptions. I also generally shoot them down in the historic ways: either by diving from considerable height to briefly match their speed or killing them when they are low and slow from turn fighting or while entering the pattern. You assumed I utilize poor tactics or have a problem fighting in inferior AC. I dedicated almost the entire first paragraph to pilot competency.

 

While the game is largely populated by SP, the game developers built it with a specific eye to MP as has been stated a few times during EA. The most ardent arguments for the 262 are generally by those who fly it the most. I don't mean to tell an SP guy how to fly, ever, but the 262 in MP is out of place for any number of reasons, many of which I mentioned above.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

I still hope devs will change development plans and swap ju88c6 or me410 with ju88a17!

Ju88a17 would bring new gameplay feature (torpedos) unlike just another boring/vunerable ground attackers that are terrible at it/closer to fighter role than bomber.

 

I have to agree, unfortunately.

 

The Ju88c6 is one of my favorite planes, yet it feels out of place to me. When the plane roster for BoN was announced, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it being listed on there. Don't get me wrong, I was happy that the devs picked this plane up, for as stated above it is one of my favorites. But from a business outlook I couldn't really understand the pick and still can't.

 

In a 1944 setting the plane is underpowered, even if we should get the optional BMW powered variant. It won't be able to outrun any of the Allied planes. For a heavy fighter its' weapons are also quite underwhelming, consisting only of rifle caliber MGs and the cannons being only 20mm MG FF, making it quite a bad choice for the given scenario.

 

Plus I feel like gameplay wise it doesn't add as much as much as a dedicated bomber would, especially if it would bring the use of torpedoes to the game. I'm no bomber guy myself, yet I still feel like the dedicated bomber pilots deserve a little more love.

 

I honestly could fully understand if the devs would replace the plane with something else. As much as I like the type myself and would love to see it come to life in our sim, I still couldn't feel mad about it.

Edited by Fritz_X
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

Actually, your argument is no less tireless as well. AND.............we have essentially argued the same point. I concede that it has a place in SP to a certain extent except the main opponnent of the 262 was, in fact, heavy bombers, which we will never have in this tactical sim.

 

And I generally have no problem avoiding 262's in open combat in MP with a few exceptions. I also generally shoot them down in the historic ways: either by diving from considerable height to briefly match their speed or killing them when they are low and slow from turn fighting or while entering the pattern. You assumed I utilize poor tactics or have a problem fighting in inferior AC. I dedicated almost the entire first paragraph to pilot competency.

 

While the game is largely populated by SP, the game developers built it with a specific eye to MP as has been stated a few times during EA. The most ardent arguments for the 262 are generally by those who fly it the most. I don't mean to tell an SP guy how to fly, ever, but the 262 in MP is out of place for any number of reasons, many of which I mentioned above.

 

I guess I "buck" the trend because I hardly ever fly the Me 262. I do intend to "practice" in it, but thus far I have only started it up and took it for a spin. 

My point which you either didn't get or ignored is that the Me 262 is not out of place in both SP and MP. The only argument you made was that it was nearly impossible to shoot down, unless it is flown by a "noob." Yet, we are now reading how you rather easily shoot them down, so I hardly see the problem. If a "Ace" MP'er is flying the Me 262, he should be very hard or next to impossible to shoot down. That seems very true to life to me. Anyway, if you can shoot them down, I am not sure why you are making this argument. Your other statement is more silly. There is no such thing has balance in war. The very nature of the war is to create imbalance and thus an advantage. Moreover, in MP, there is no balance. At any given time, one side could have stronger pilots than the other. As actual pilots have stated, in the war, it wasn't the a/c that made the pilot, but the pilot that made the a/c. If you want pretend, there is War Thunder. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fritz_X said:

 

The Ju88c6 is one of my favorite planes, yet it feels out of place to me. When the plane roster for BoN was announced, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it being listed on there. Don't get me wrong, I was happy that the devs picked this plane up, for as stated above it is one of my favorites. But from a business outlook I couldn't really understand the pick and still can't.

 

 

Here's what I know - or at least what I think I know.  The Ju88C served on the French coast.  Prior to Overlord they were used for maritime patrols and anti shipping.  As a mission designer I can also probably get them into nuisance raids, although that might not be 100% accurate.  After Normandy they were used directly against the landing.  They suffered terrible losses and didn't make much of an impression, but they were there.  They also served in the east as train busters and other ground attack.  

 

From a min/max point of view there might not be justification.  Anything the Ju88C can do in the game the Me110 can probably do better.  The Ju88C had better range, which justified its existence in real life, but what mission designer is really going to put the player in the cockpit for several hours.  1C, however, does not put planes in for min/max reasons.  They put them in because they were interesting and because they actually got used.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Here's what I know - or at least what I think I know.  The Ju88C served on the French coast.  Prior to Overlord they were used for maritime patrols and anti shipping.  As a mission designer I can also probably get them into nuisance raids, although that might not be 100% accurate.  After Normandy they were used directly against the landing.  They suffered terrible losses and didn't make much of an impression, but they were there.  They also served in the east as train busters and other ground attack.  

 

From a min/max point of view there might not be justification.  Anything the Ju88C can do in the game the Me110 can probably do better.  The Ju88C had better range, which justified its existence in real life, but what mission designer is really going to put the player in the cockpit for several hours.  1C, however, does not put planes in for min/max reasons.  They put them in because they were interesting and because they actually got used.  

 

I must be one of the few here that is actually looking forward to the Ju88C-6. Although I really would like a Biscay map and scenario to go with it. A view not shared by many I suspect, for by nature it involves a lot of long missions over empty sea. But the Ju88C that we are getting is going to go after ships and trains, so it's all right by me no matter how many times it leads me to my doom 😊.

Edited by 216th_Cat
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess for me the thing I like most is the map. This map is unique in that we had a static front line for 4 years and we have a plane set already which can utilize it (though it will probably be through PWCG).  We can have night blitz missions over Southhampton, rodeo missions over Normandy, early USAAF bombing raids in 1943. This on top of the 1944 campaigns we get with the stock game. It really opens the Western Front up from just a few months in 1944-45 to an entire theater of the war. Ok, that and the Typhoon.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

I guess I "buck" the trend because I hardly ever fly the Me 262. I do intend to "practice" in it, but thus far I have only started it up and took it for a spin. 

My point which you either didn't get or ignored is that the Me 262 is not out of place in both SP and MP. The only argument you made was that it was nearly impossible to shoot down, unless it is flown by a "noob." Yet, we are now reading how you rather easily shoot them down, so I hardly see the problem. If a "Ace" MP'er is flying the Me 262, he should be very hard or next to impossible to shoot down. That seems very true to life to me. Anyway, if you can shoot them down, I am not sure why you are making this argument. Your other statement is more silly. There is no such thing has balance in war. The very nature of the war is to create imbalance and thus an advantage. Moreover, in MP, there is no balance. At any given time, one side could have stronger pilots than the other. As actual pilots have stated, in the war, it wasn't the a/c that made the pilot, but the pilot that made the a/c. If you want pretend, there is War Thunder. 

 

You continuously misquote me, make circular arguments and use logical fallacys. Good day sir. I.....said..........good day!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

I guess I "buck" the trend because I hardly ever fly the Me 262. I do intend to "practice" in it, but thus far I have only started it up and took it for a spin. 

My point which you either didn't get or ignored is that the Me 262 is not out of place in both SP and MP. The only argument you made was that it was nearly impossible to shoot down, unless it is flown by a "noob." Yet, we are now reading how you rather easily shoot them down, so I hardly see the problem. If a "Ace" MP'er is flying the Me 262, he should be very hard or next to impossible to shoot down. That seems very true to life to me. Anyway, if you can shoot them down, I am not sure why you are making this argument. Your other statement is more silly. There is no such thing has balance in war. The very nature of the war is to create imbalance and thus an advantage. Moreover, in MP, there is no balance. At any given time, one side could have stronger pilots than the other. As actual pilots have stated, in the war, it wasn't the a/c that made the pilot, but the pilot that made the a/c. If you want pretend, there is War Thunder. 

Look at any DLC for this game and its 5v5, game is teling you from start we are balancing both sides.

If Ace MP 262 flyer had to fight heavy outnumbered online like ace ww2 262 pilot had to he would not be as safe as he is in this game online where he has all advantages real ww2 262 pilot didnt have.

Also looking at BoN if they wont to represent it historicly they would ditch 234 and have Spit 9c or P-38j atleast as min, and not force some airplanes just to have balanced 5v5.

262 has no room in MP as its now with no restrictions in side numbers, where you have allieds at disadvantage in number of airplanes in air almost all the time, cant have cake and eat it to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

I guess I "buck" the trend because I hardly ever fly the Me 262. I do intend to "practice" in it, but thus far I have only started it up and took it for a spin. 

My point which you either didn't get or ignored is that the Me 262 is not out of place in both SP and MP. The only argument you made was that it was nearly impossible to shoot down, unless it is flown by a "noob." Yet, we are now reading how you rather easily shoot them down, so I hardly see the problem. If a "Ace" MP'er is flying the Me 262, he should be very hard or next to impossible to shoot down. That seems very true to life to me. Anyway, if you can shoot them down, I am not sure why you are making this argument. Your other statement is more silly. There is no such thing has balance in war. The very nature of the war is to create imbalance and thus an advantage. Moreover, in MP, there is no balance. At any given time, one side could have stronger pilots than the other. As actual pilots have stated, in the war, it wasn't the a/c that made the pilot, but the pilot that made the a/c. If you want pretend, there is War Thunder. 

 

 

It's available in limited quantities on some servers. 

 

More often then not they are bombed before they can take off, or shot down while climbing. The 262 doesn't carry alot of love from many on MP. 

 

A few will camp the server for hours trying to get one which is comical to say the least. 

 

Most servers (Atleast the two more popular ones I frequent) are not interested in allowing them in significant numbers because 

A-They do really screw the game up. We are there to have fun. If people want dead set historical accuracy they'll be happier in SP

B-Axis is generally player heavy 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 216th_Cat said:

 

I must be one of the few here that is actually looking forward to the Ju88C-6. Although I really would like a Biscay map and scenario to go with it. A view not shared by many I suspect, for by nature it involves a lot of long missions over empty sea. But the Ju88C that we are getting is going to go after ships and trains, so it's all right by me no matter how many times it leads me to my doom 😊.

 

Maybe I worded myself not too well in my initial post, but I'm in the very same boat as you: I'm greatly looking forward to fly the C6. Can't wait to do some mock-up night fighter missions in it.

 

I'm just still quite astonished the devs actually went for this plane type.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Ju88C discussion, I think it provides a new type of mission with heavy fighters and anti shipping, so I welcome the addition of a different kind of plane. 

It's not going to be for everyone and it clearly wasn't meant to be competitive in MP. I do think it will make some interesting SP missions.

 

Regarding balance, people are confusing many aspects in a single discussion. It's fine to give 5:5 planes for each side, it gives everyone a something to play with and cater to their interests. 

 

Having jets is absolutely a mission design issue for SP and MP folks alike. No reason to shut it down from an expansion just because YOU don't like it, or the numbers were balance a different way historically. Just play on servers that take those factors into consideration such as CB. Remember there are people who just want to fly their jets in SP wether it's in career or Pat Wilson's tool and enjoy everything BoX has to offer. I for one think the Me262 is wonderfully modeled and I love the startup process and well as the flameout modeling. I'm glad I had the chance to experience it in this game. I look forward to flying the Arado bomber jet.

 

 

Edited by Jade_Monkey
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 150GCT_Veltro said:

Personally Me-410, but being almost an online player, loving the dynamic campaign style, i would say also C-47 flyable. This aircraft would dramatically improved the online immersion during complex mission and campaigns.

 

Hear hear ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

V1 flyable, please.

 

They told the pilots that they could eject.  One look at that jet engine two inches behind the cockpit says otherwise.  And if you did eject you would do so right in front of your target.  Doubt you would be received with great kindness by the survivors.

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

 

Just a quick one, I think there are a few reasons why the Me 410 gets a bad name for itself, not all of it is well deserved though... some things to keep in mind.

 

2. Much of the poor handling is actually attributed to the Me 210, its failed younger brother. With some significant wing design changes and the addition of leading edge slats - this improved the handling greatly and was actually pretty reasonable.

3. It is heavier compared to the Bf 110 G, but because of its much greater power output (and higher power-to-weight ratio) plus superior wing area - it should retain energy much better including in maneuvers. This will compensate somewhat for its weight increase and should not be miles off what you might expect from the Bf 110 G-4 in terms of overall maneuverability. It will probably have a somewhat larger turning circle and perhaps slightly slower roll rate but who cares if you do everything else much better.

 

 

This is true; I had to look it up last night (before I saw your post today) to remember that the 410 did have slats added.

 

My problem was that Eric Brown described the 410 he tested as still having bad stall characteristics. So I'm not sure what to think. Either he flew a 410 with its slats taped up, or he flew a 210 and thought it was a 410. Otherwise, I don't see how a 410 with working slats would have sharp stalls and severe wing drop (his words).

 

There are a few German accounts of the 410 as well (in this book serving as my source), and they're very unflattering in describing its maneuverability.

 

Fritz Stehle (22 kill ace, went on to fly 262s) described the 410 as being "much better than the 110" (presumably he meant in speed alone), "but it was still not good enough. It was too heavy and not maneuverable enough." "The 410 was useless as a dogfighter, it could not turn or do anything like that."

 

As far as I can tell, all the 410 was good at was diving (as you mentioned). It would have very likely been a great precision bomber, had the Germans been in a position to have enough air superiority to use the 410s in that capacity.

 

What surprises me most is that the 410 carried around 1,000 pounds of armor. Yet it's not described (anywhere I've seen) as being exceptionally tough to shoot down. The armor wasn't only around the cockpit, either, but engines and radiators as well.

 

Here's an interesting armament alternative I just read: one pilot put 8 20mm in the nose, instead of the hated 5cm cannon. He supposedly liked the results very much. Like a 20mm shotgun.

 

2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

V1 flyable, please.

 

 

With a Hanna Reitsch pilot model as well.

 

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

They told the pilots that they could eject.  One look at that jet engine two inches behind the cockpit says otherwise.  And if you did eject you would do so right in front of your target.  Doubt you would be received with great kindness by the survivors.

 

Did they have ejection seats, or no?

 

*Edit: no. They could've been made less suicidal by either adding ejection seats or by having a metal plate pop up to cover the jet intake, right before bailing out. 

Edited by oc2209
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

I'm not sure how much it was used, but I was surprised to find out it does actually have a bomb bay in the nose

 

13 hours ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

I was under the impression the Me 410 was used as a night fighter and a "bomber destroyer." 

 

Reconnaissance, daylight bomber destroyer and nighttime intruder / dive bomber over England. One of the surviving Me 410s is a recon model.

Edited by LukeFF
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

You continuously misquote me, make circular arguments and use logical fallacys. Good day sir. I.....said..........good day!

 

Well, I told you my opinion and you decided to reiterate your point. If it was circular it is your own making. Moreover, it was you who argued that they were nearly impossible to shoot down and then later "bragged" that you shot many down. I am not sure what you want me to take away from that other than what I did. 

The Me 262 was a contemporaneous a/c thus it belongs in all scenarios. That is not a logical fallacy, it is fact! 

 

Don't be so defensive. This is just a game and this i just a discussion. 

 

6 hours ago, CountZero said:

Look at any DLC for this game and its 5v5, game is teling you from start we are balancing both sides.

If Ace MP 262 flyer had to fight heavy outnumbered online like ace ww2 262 pilot had to he would not be as safe as he is in this game online where he has all advantages real ww2 262 pilot didnt have.

Also looking at BoN if they wont to represent it historicly they would ditch 234 and have Spit 9c or P-38j atleast as min, and not force some airplanes just to have balanced 5v5.

262 has no room in MP as its now with no restrictions in side numbers, where you have allieds at disadvantage in number of airplanes in air almost all the time, cant have cake and eat it to.

 

Servers can restrict the numbers and to what I understand they do. And it is not unhistorical to do so. 

5 hours ago, Denum said:

 

It's available in limited quantities on some servers. 

 

More often then not they are bombed before they can take off, or shot down while climbing. The 262 doesn't carry alot of love from many on MP. 

 

A few will camp the server for hours trying to get one which is comical to say the least. 

 

Most servers (Atleast the two more popular ones I frequent) are not interested in allowing them in significant numbers because 

A-They do really screw the game up. We are there to have fun. If people want dead set historical accuracy they'll be happier in SP

B-Axis is generally player heavy 

 

 

What you describe is more or less historical. Me 262 was never "the a/c" in the sky. They produced in few numbers; only a fraction made it to the units and of those only a fraction was serviceable. Restricting them makes sense. The imbalance on MP has more to do with player choices of sides than any one a/c. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

 

 

Servers can restrict the numbers and to what I understand they do. And it is not unhistorical to do so. 

 

What you describe is more or less historical. Me 262 was never "the a/c" in the sky. They produced in few numbers; only a fraction made it to the units and of those only a fraction was serviceable. Restricting them makes sense. The imbalance on MP has more to do with player choices of sides than any one a/c. 

 

100%

 

Personally I'm looking forward to catching (atleast attempting) the AR 234 in the Griffon Spitfire

 

Should be fun in a controlled setting. 

Controlled meaning them being limited in numbers in some fashion. 

 

 

Edited by Denum
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

This is true; I had to look it up last night (before I saw your post today) to remember that the 410 did have slats added.

 

My problem was that Eric Brown described the 410 he tested as still having bad stall characteristics. So I'm not sure what to think. Either he flew a 410 with its slats taped up, or he flew a 210 and thought it was a 410. Otherwise, I don't see how a 410 with working slats would have sharp stalls and severe wing drop (his words).

 

There are a few German accounts of the 410 as well (in this book serving as my source), and they're very unflattering in describing its maneuverability.

 

Fritz Stehle (22 kill ace, went on to fly 262s) described the 410 as being "much better than the 110" (presumably he meant in speed alone), "but it was still not good enough. It was too heavy and not maneuverable enough." "The 410 was useless as a dogfighter, it could not turn or do anything like that."

 

As far as I can tell, all the 410 was good at was diving (as you mentioned). It would have very likely been a great precision bomber, had the Germans been in a position to have enough air superiority to use the 410s in that capacity.

 

What surprises me most is that the 410 carried around 1,000 pounds of armor. Yet it's not described (anywhere I've seen) as being exceptionally tough to shoot down. The armor wasn't only around the cockpit, either, but engines and radiators as well.

 

 

Interesting yes, I'm quite perplexed by Eric Brown - I respect him hugely and he had very unique and tremendous personal experience including with the Luftwaffe aircraft but I agree that something doesn't seem quite right in some of his assessments which departs greatly from the consensus. Coincidentally he is very, very critical of the operation of slats on the Luftwaffe aircraft he tests early on in the war and it makes me think that they were not maintaining them sufficiently well... this would make sense from reading the Luftwaffe field reports which makes specific recommendations including when the aircraft is sitting dormant.

 

He makes similar assessments about models of the Bf 109 (E and G models) including when in a stall, and the RAE reports make mention that the slats in the Bf 109 E are like a terrible nuisance... almost as if they need to be taping them up to "get it to work" type of language. I have a sinking feeling you are correct about them taping the slats during certain testing, and I've heard this mentioned in numerous discussions including some ex-test pilots I met who worked at Boscombe Down so I suspect this could be true. The comments of many other pilots as well as modern warbird pilots go out of their way to describe the very forgiving stall characteristics with the Bf 109 thanks directly to the slats and don't resonate at all with Brown in this respect.

 

What I would suspect is, the Me 410 had a stall which was more pronounced than something like a Bf 109 or Bf 110 (for obvious reasons) - with significantly more wing drop after a stall did occur; but would still be miles better than without using them and this probably also enhanced the maneuverability. Just like with many other aircraft... including the swept high speed wings of the Me 262... it should allow you to pull further into maneuvers without a harsh stall and a sharp wing drop which would otherwise limit how far you can pull.

 

You can only imagine the effect on the handling/maneuverability if these were not operating properly or were taped up, that would certainly turn it back into the "knife edge" type of aircraft being described... and is precisely the reason for installing the slats in the first place.

 

14 hours ago, oc2209 said:

There are a few German accounts of the 410 as well (in this book serving as my source), and they're very unflattering in describing its maneuverability.

 

Fritz Stehle (22 kill ace, went on to fly 262s) described the 410 as being "much better than the 110" (presumably he meant in speed alone), "but it was still not good enough. It was too heavy and not maneuverable enough." "The 410 was useless as a dogfighter, it could not turn or do anything like that."

 

As far as I can tell, all the 410 was good at was diving (as you mentioned). It would have very likely been a great precision bomber, had the Germans been in a position to have enough air superiority to use the 410s in that capacity.

 

Yeah, generally the comments from the Luftwaffe pilots come as no major surprise - its mainly designed to achieve an improvement in speed and a stronger overall performance than a Bf 110. It's otherwise going to be lackluster in terms of dogfighting ability as its not really designed for it - it weighs too much and isn't going to be anywhere near as responsive as a single engined fighter. Personally, I largely see the Me 410 in the context of a light bomber rather than a heavy fighter, with the ability to take on the heavies and some ground attack/recon ability mixed in.

 

14 hours ago, oc2209 said:

What surprises me most is that the 410 carried around 1,000 pounds of armor. Yet it's not described (anywhere I've seen) as being exceptionally tough to shoot down. The armor wasn't only around the cockpit, either, but engines and radiators as well.

 

This - I am also astonished it is little mentioned. They seem to have gone to quite far lengths to improve this aspect compared to the Bf 110. I suspect they either didn't catch them easily when operating in recon or at night and otherwise when it was operating in anti-bomber interception the overwhelming Allied air cover just clobbered them. Perhaps the API/I rounds caught them on fire on the wing root tanks... not sure... its an interesting one.

Edited by Aurora_Stealth
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

Sometimes, pilots just don't like a particular aircraft, while others do like it.

Taking personal taste and subjectivity out of an assessment is hard.

 

That's very true Brem, and I guess it depends to some extent on the aircraft you are familiar with in the first place; and what you prize as the more important/useful characteristics for the circumstances you as a pilot have already experienced.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm perplexed that the "heavy fighter" concept/type was still a thing for the Luftwaffe after the thrashing the Bf110 took at the hands of single seater pilots during the Battle of Britain.  One would think that any objective evaluation of the type would have seen them be re-classed as what the British would call "Army cooperation types", a role for which they are very good at, and one that would not have them directly compared to the true single seater fighters.

 

For all their technical mastery, the Germans sure seemed clueless about real world needs for their forces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I guess I'm perplexed that the "heavy fighter" concept/type was still a thing for the Luftwaffe after the thrashing the Bf110 took at the hands of single seater pilots during the Battle of Britain.  One would think that any objective evaluation of the type would have seen them be re-classed as what the British would call "Army cooperation types", a role for which they are very good at, and one that would not have them directly compared to the true single seater fighters.

 

For all their technical mastery, the Germans sure seemed clueless about real world needs for their forces.

 

Quite, well they did get relegated after the Battle of Britain to more of the secondary types of roles due to their losses although the Bf 110 still helped to flesh out numbers while the Soviet Union was on the back foot; however the appearance of four engined bombers over Germany caused them to panic and mobilise whatever they had - including by then the largely obsolescent Bf 110.

 

They struggled to get sufficient numbers of new aircraft into the air by 1943 (the Bf 109 being an exception to that rule) but were either creating overburdened designs or got carried away with increasingly complex or expensive ones. In fact Germany didn't start full wartime production and mobilisation in its true sense till 1942 if you can believe that. It's in some part due to promises made following the effects of the first world war.

 

They definitely had a habit of making pet projects and concepts which were often pushed by people like Hitler and Goering, dive bombers were another example. Who an earth really needed a Ju88, a Me410 or a He 177 to do dive bombing? I think they were just trying to replicate previous successes they had earlier in the war, like with the Ju87 over the low countries.

 

Except like you say, the world had already moved on.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for the Ju88C-6 is that the Luftwaffe actually attempted to use them as daylight attackers on D-Day and a few days following.  This was predictably disastrous for the poor pilots of KG40/ZG1.  But if you’re looking for German aircraft to put into a Normandy battle, it’s tough to find 5 that played any significant daytime role.

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...