Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

LW in 1946?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> LW in 1946? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
LW in 1946? - 4/8/2009 8:43:14 PM   
MaraTheFinn

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 3/3/2009
From: Finland
Status: offline
For a realistic game:

- If the air war is not going as it did, allies had still few aces in their sleeve.
- There is always a weapon to counter an other weapon. It was so in ancient times and still is today.
- So if LW get very good planes and achieve some results the allies really have needed P51H, B29 etc. They had them but they never needed them. If USAAF had 100 P51D’s against a handful of Ta152’s with poor pilots, why bother.
- According to LW success allies should have their own miracle weapons too and only in that case.

If that is not possible because of the programming difficulties, you should at least limit all miracle weapons to some special squadrons. After a few months time in the game they might be generalized to all units. As always there might be difficulties in programming that .

That leads to:

Some 500 P51H’s were made before VJ-day but none left USA before Korea. By then they were called F-51H’s. Even then more D’s than H’s were used in there. That was because Mustang was by then fighter bomber and jets dominated. P51H might enter Europe if and only if escort fighter losses start to go over 10% in every mission for at least two months in a row after mid 1945. Does that sound right? To include standard P51H’s into game needs inclusion of Luftwaffe’s 1946 miracle machines to the game too. That might lead to major extension to the game.
Sources: AF Legends number 209, NA P-51H Mustang by David McLaren and WW2 Aircraft Fact File Part 2, USAAF Fighters by W. Green and G. Swanborough.

B29’s might enter Europe if and only if B17 and B24 combat losses start to go over 10% in every mission for at least two months in a row after end of 1944. Does that sound right? In Casablanca conference January 1943 they decide to use B29’s also against Germany. The plan was to fly shuttle missions between North Africa and England. That did not materialize because of B29’s development delays. In June 1944 it was seen that air war against Germany would be over until B29’s could arrive. The decision was made to use them solely against Japan.
Source: B-29 Superfortress The Ultimate Look: From drawing board to VJ-day by William Wolf. If and only if Germany can strugle beyond year 1945 then you should decide if B29’ should have been equipped with atomic bombs. That too should be in major extension of the game.

About late war British planes I miss only Spitfire 21. 22 and 24 were its derivates with buble hood. Spit 21 had a different, stronger wing with speedier dive. It was also some 10-12 mph faster than XIV at all altitudes. All that in spite it weighted more. First squadron was operational in April 1945 (Squadron 91). That was the only unit to see combat in 21’s.
Post #: 1
RE: LW in 1946? - 4/9/2009 6:49:11 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MaraTheFinn

For a realistic game:

- If the air war is not going as it did, allies had still few aces in their sleeve.
- There is always a weapon to counter an other weapon. It was so in ancient times and still is today.
- So if LW get very good planes and achieve some results the allies really have needed P51H, B29 etc. They had them but they never needed them. If USAAF had 100 P51D’s against a handful of Ta152’s with poor pilots, why bother.
the real trouble will be if the Allied player, has not broken the LW, if the LW is healthy, then the fancy late war models could be war winners
- According to LW success allies should have their own miracle weapons too and only in that case.

If that is not possible because of the programming difficulties, you should at least limit all miracle weapons to some special squadrons. After a few months time in the game they might be generalized to all units. As always there might be difficulties in programming that .

That leads to:

Some 500 P51H’s were made before VJ-day but none left USA before Korea. By then they were called F-51H’s. Even then more D’s than H’s were used in there. That was because Mustang was by then fighter bomber and jets dominated. P51H might enter Europe if and only if escort fighter losses start to go over 10% in every mission for at least two months in a row after mid 1945. Does that sound right? To include standard P51H’s into game needs inclusion of Luftwaffe’s 1946 miracle machines to the game too. That might lead to major extension to the game.
Sources: AF Legends number 209, NA P-51H Mustang by David McLaren and WW2 Aircraft Fact File Part 2, USAAF Fighters by W. Green and G. Swanborough.
H is in the game

B29’s might enter Europe if and only if B17 and B24 combat losses start to go over 10% in every mission for at least two months in a row after end of 1944. Does that sound right? In Casablanca conference January 1943 they decide to use B29’s also against Germany. The plan was to fly shuttle missions between North Africa and England. That did not materialize because of B29’s development delays. In June 1944 it was seen that air war against Germany would be over until B29’s could arrive. The decision was made to use them solely against Japan.
Source: B-29 Superfortress The Ultimate Look: From drawing board to VJ-day by William Wolf. If and only if Germany can strugle beyond year 1945 then you should decide if B29’ should have been equipped with atomic bombs. That too should be in major extension of the game.
the 29 can be added, the trouble is when, the early test model I made of it, was a lot of fun to play with (well, for the Allies it was fun

no A-Bombs, game is not set up for that kind of damage

About late war British planes I miss only Spitfire 21. 22 and 24 were its derivates with buble hood. Spit 21 had a different, stronger wing with speedier dive. It was also some 10-12 mph faster than XIV at all altitudes. All that in spite it weighted more. First squadron was operational in April 1945 (Squadron 91). That was the only unit to see combat in 21’s.

almost any plane type can/could be added, as long as I got good stats on the plane, I can model it (hassle is getting good stats) but overall, the biggest drawback, is artwork, our artist a long time ago was given a list of planes, some one else wanted, once I took over, I added a number of planes I could think of in a hurry, as the artist was almost done, of course, I missed some that I would of liked in hindsight





_____________________________


(in reply to MaraTheFinn)
Post #: 2
RE: LW in 1946? - 4/14/2009 4:33:10 PM   
MaraTheFinn

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 3/3/2009
From: Finland
Status: offline
Yes I proposed the H after contacting Ron Lorenze. You can easily add Spit 21 according to the information I gave. Remember still it had Four 20mm's. The silhuette is very much like ordinary Spit with different wings.

I propose for the B29 entry as follows:
If and only if USAAF had not won the game by the end of 1944 let B29's enter ETO. That should be simple enough for programmers. After all B29's started operations from Marianas against Japan in November 1944. That operation should then spare some B29's to ETO on 1945. This would not postpone VJ too far away.

No nukes I understand!

ME262 was a good weapon platform! It only lagged weapons to work outside those 50cal's. Cure was in preparation in Germany. X4 a wire guided missile did not enter operations because the BMW motor factory (Stargard) was bombed to pieces. They had other missile parts ready, but they were useless without motors. Without bombing X4 would have been operational early 1945. Four X4's could be fittet under ME262's wings. There is a scale model of that configuration in IWM in London.

Still better anti-bomber weapon for ME262 was in developement. R100BS was a rocket with 460 incendiary pellets. It was fired automatically by Oberon radar ranging system. It would have been possible to jam the radar of course but still. Two such rockets would easily fit in underfuselage weapon racks. That system could be operational by mid 1945.

Both these long range systems should have a free fire outside defensive armament and score multiple hits with only the escorts to worry about. They should not degrade ME262's performance too much. Remember the weapon platform (ME262) already existed. LW's miracle planes and other weapons were untested and available only in far future. If B29's enter ETO give ME262 weapon systems a change to enter too.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 3
RE: LW in 1946? - 4/15/2009 4:30:45 AM   
TechSgt

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MaraTheFinn

... If B29's enter ETO give ME262 weapon systems a change to enter too...



Since we are adding, "what if's"...

The first aircraft were delivered to the Royal Air Force on July 12, 1944 and one was also sent to the US in exchange for a Bell YP-59A Airacomet for comparative evaluation. The Meteor Mk. I saw action for the first time on July 27, 1944 against the V1 Flying Bomb. The Meteor never saw aerial combat against the Luftwaffe despite flying missions over Germany from January 1945, using the Mk. III variant from bases in Belgium.



TS

(in reply to MaraTheFinn)
Post #: 4
RE: LW in 1946? - 4/15/2009 12:27:39 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
MK.I and MK.III are already in

_____________________________


(in reply to TechSgt)
Post #: 5
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 9:16:58 AM   
Once Joey


Posts: 50
Joined: 3/22/2006
Status: offline
Is Werner von Braun in this game? Will it be released for public consumption by 2012...

Will My grand son reach my age by the time this ridiculos "Game" is completd to actually play hands-on?!!?
Grandson wants Fallout III, Now... I say son, that cannot even hold a candle to this B-17 Game, now can it!?

I'm like that Benjamin Button guy, I think I will be 18 this spring>>>>>

< Message edited by Bakerstaffel -- 5/13/2009 9:28:20 AM >

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 6
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 9:27:54 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
the Big vB wants to get his rocket to the moon before he will finish his part of the job for us, so we have been waiting for him to get his launch date completed

but really, that may be a good idea, if we put nukes on the B-17s, then we could do a combined game, BTR Fallout IV, but I think we would have to wait for the Vaults to open, before it would be released




_____________________________


(in reply to Once Joey)
Post #: 7
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 9:59:54 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

About late war British planes I miss only Spitfire 21. 22 and 24 were its derivates with buble hood. Spit 21 had a different, stronger wing with speedier dive. It was also some 10-12 mph faster than XIV at all altitudes. All that in spite it weighted more. First squadron was operational in April 1945 (Squadron 91). That was the only unit to see combat in 21’s.

almost any plane type can/could be added, as long as I got good stats on the plane, I can model it (hassle is getting good stats) but overall, the biggest drawback, is artwork, our artist a long time ago was given a list of planes, some one else wanted, once I took over, I added a number of planes I could think of in a hurry, as the artist was almost done, of course, I missed some that I would of liked in hindsight




Artwork is easy, at least compared to programming and the like





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 8
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 10:39:54 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
if I only needed the side veiw, those would be great

I need top down art, 3/4 top down art (turned 45 degree), top down pink screen, 3/4 top down pink screen

(don't know the correct name, but when I look at it, it is a pink screen)


you know, I got to say, all my life, I never been a big spit fan, but if nothing else, this game has given me a very healthy respect for the plane


(on a side note though, the biggest improvement to the Spit, was the US fuel, the LW with poorer fuel, was able to stay close, and at times get ahead, what would of happened if the LW would of been able to use the same fuel the Allies were using (side, side note, look at the Frank, war time, stats, JP stats, it is a nice plane, but.., after war testing, they got that thing flying faster then the P-51 and P-47s and were shocked at how good a plane it really could of been, George too, to a lesser degree, both had the design, and the engine, just not the fuel to fly it to what they could of really of done)

(hassle in a lot of flight sims, they use the after war testing, to model the planes, when the planes couldn't do what they did in the afterwar testings, of course, as good as they were, or could of been in the air, you still didn't want to land them)



_____________________________


(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 9
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 10:59:43 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

if I only needed the side veiw, those would be great

I need top down art, 3/4 top down art (turned 45 degree), top down pink screen, 3/4 top down pink screen

(don't know the correct name, but when I look at it, it is a pink screen)


you know, I got to say, all my life, I never been a big spit fan, but if nothing else, this game has given me a very healthy respect for the plane


(on a side note though, the biggest improvement to the Spit, was the US fuel, the LW with poorer fuel, was able to stay close, and at times get ahead, what would of happened if the LW would of been able to use the same fuel the Allies were using (side, side note, look at the Frank, war time, stats, JP stats, it is a nice plane, but.., after war testing, they got that thing flying faster then the P-51 and P-47s and were shocked at how good a plane it really could of been, George too, to a lesser degree, both had the design, and the engine, just not the fuel to fly it to what they could of really of done)

(hassle in a lot of flight sims, they use the after war testing, to model the planes, when the planes couldn't do what they did in the afterwar testings, of course, as good as they were, or could of been in the air, you still didn't want to land them)



quote:

de note though, the biggest improvement to the Spit, was the US fuel, the LW with poorer fuel, was able to stay close, and at times get ahead, what would of happened if the LW would of been able to use the same fuel the Allies were using (side, side note, look at the Frank, war time, stats, JP stats, it is a nice plane, but.., after war testing, they got that thing flying faster then the P-51 and P-47s and were shocked at how good a plane it really could of been, George too, to a lesser degree, both had the design, and the engine, just not the fuel to fly it to what they could of really of done)



Just a quick effort




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 10
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 11:02:21 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
dang it

when I save that, it dirties up the pink (one of the reasons, I can't do much with the art myself)

but here is some of what the art needs (of course, needs to all line up correctly, those are off on my copy

if you can give me top and side, I may be able to play with pink ???




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 11
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 11:07:58 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
hmmm, if you can give me tops and sides, I think I can handle the pink
hassle, I need the 45 top down, I can't make that (or I am forgetting something)




_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 12
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/13/2009 11:14:48 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

hmmm, if you can give me tops and sides, I think I can handle the pink
hassle, I need the 45 top down, I can't make that (or I am forgetting something)





Stand by for a pm old boy

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 13
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/28/2009 5:51:14 AM   
Fallschirmjager


Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline
I would rather the game be released and then 'what if' scenarios added after release. I for one would love to see a scenario starting in July 1942 when the USSAF first started bombing Germany.

I would also love to see a 'clean map' scenario starting in January 1943 with no damage at all done to Europe.

Another scenario adding German 'wunder jets' and the Allies getting early jets and B-29s would also be fun.

But as I said, first I would just like to see the game released.

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 14
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/28/2009 12:25:43 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
that is not going to hold us up, mainly the manual is the hold up right now

starting the game in 42 or early 43, would take a lot of new reseach (I have been able to turn a blind eye to anything that happens before Aug 17th or Aug 12th)

(oddly, aug 11th 1940, was a major battle day, with very heavy losses, really screws up trying to figure out what happened)

as of now, I could do a zeroed out damage for the 43 Campaign, and either release it as a OOB( save the old one, or let this overwrite) take all damage from targets and zero all damage back to 0 for score (that is just time/a pain, but only time)

the Jet campaign, could be done, a little trickier, as it is HARD coded, but I could work the OOB to let in Jets and Allied Jets early, that side again, is just time, unless I could free up some programming time (don't hold your breath)

once we get it out, those are things I could do, the 42 or early 43 start would be Much HARDer, maybe doable (lot of side issues with the OOB though, I can't really do all the change of command stuff that would really be needed, a good part of the 12th Airforce would be stuck in England, most of 9th BC would still be in 8th BC and things like that, almost all of 2nd Tac would be in FC, 2 Group would still be in BC)



_____________________________


(in reply to Fallschirmjager)
Post #: 15
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/28/2009 11:38:50 PM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Not to mention what you'd have to do for N Africa on the ground war & air bases since the campaign would be starting just after Torch

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 16
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/29/2009 5:19:22 PM   
SireChaos

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 8/14/2006
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

dang it

when I save that, it dirties up the pink (one of the reasons, I can't do much with the art myself)

but here is some of what the art needs (of course, needs to all line up correctly, those are off on my copy

if you can give me top and side, I may be able to play with pink ???





Excuse me, but what the hell is that? It looks like a piloted version of the V1.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 17
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/29/2009 6:06:57 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
It's a Bachem Ba349.  They were rocket powered interceptors armed with a nose full of rockets, they weren't a great (or indeed any type of) success.  Another bad idea on paper that turned out to be just as bad in reality


_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to SireChaos)
Post #: 18
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/29/2009 10:42:46 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Not to mention what you'd have to do for N Africa on the ground war & air bases since the campaign would be starting just after Torch


ahhh, forgot about that part of it, yes, that is going to be a major issue, there is nothing there for land combat in NA or for hitting Sicily (which one reason the Allied Airforce is all out of place in the Med at start is, Sicily had just fallen

Dixie

well, not so sure it was really a bad idea, the Idea itself is pretty good, getting it to work, now that was a different story :)

a small, light, cheap reuseable weapon, that wouldn't take much of a trained person to use, massive firepower, something that didn't really need to aimmed correctly, to have a chance to hit something

hassle is, it is a rocket, attached to a plywood frame, kind of ruff to have a good mission, when take off, tended to kill the pilot

(I think they tried to use some of those features in the F-104, that didn't work out too well either)

still don't understand why they never went with the air to ground missles they already had (of course, I would hate to be the guy in the He 177 or Do 217 trying to fire and guide one into a Bomber formation)



_____________________________


(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 19
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/30/2009 5:30:32 AM   
TechSgt

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge


quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Not to mention what you'd have to do for N Africa on the ground war & air bases since the campaign would be starting just after Torch


...

still don't understand why they never went with the air to ground missles they already had (of course, I would hate to be the guy in the He 177 or Do 217 trying to fire and guide one into a Bomber formation)




HS;

Interesting...
I remember reading "Last year of the Luftwaffe", Ethal or Price? And it mentioned a number of ground to air missiles the axis had/working on.

I guess it would be handled just like the current flak, but it might be a "label only" addition. So the only true impact would be psychological.

Forget this! Let's get the game out! I need a new computer!

TS

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 20
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/30/2009 8:39:16 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
roger TS

they had some interesting Ground to Air stuff, one hassle with the Germens, they kept wanted perfect, when, shoddy or decent would of been very nasty

but I was meaning the Air to Ground stuff they already had working

could you see what a 1000/2000 HE warhead set on a controlable rocket would of done ? (they were glide bombs, but they were powered, not sure they could of gotten the Height needed to have it glide into the formation, but...)




_____________________________


(in reply to TechSgt)
Post #: 21
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/30/2009 11:13:23 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Dixie

well, not so sure it was really a bad idea, the Idea itself is pretty good, getting it to work, now that was a different story :)

a small, light, cheap reuseable weapon, that wouldn't take much of a trained person to use, massive firepower, something that didn't really need to aimmed correctly, to have a chance to hit something

hassle is, it is a rocket, attached to a plywood frame, kind of ruff to have a good mission, when take off, tended to kill the pilot

(I think they tried to use some of those features in the F-104, that didn't work out too well either)

still don't understand why they never went with the air to ground missles they already had (of course, I would hate to be the guy in the He 177 or Do 217 trying to fire and guide one into a Bomber formation)




Not sure it's a bad idea? What would you say if someone said they wanted to strap you into a SAM and launch you at a formation of enemy aircraft before you had to parachute to safety Assuming that you made it to height without your ride breaking up or the rocket motor playing silly buggers

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 22
RE: LW in 1946? - 5/30/2009 4:51:47 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
well, again, is it the idea that was bad or getting it to work that was wrong ?

as I said, the US and Germens tried something of the same idea with the f-104, and had much of the same troubles, and that was a soild/good aircraft

I did say they had trouble keeping the pilot alive



_____________________________


(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> LW in 1946? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.781