Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RHS Allied Aircraft Thread: A Radical Proposal (at end)

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RHS Allied Aircraft Thread: A Radical Proposal (at end) Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RHS Allied Aircraft Thread: A Radical Proposal (at end) - 1/15/2007 7:58:53 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		There is a sense that we don't need two Allied aircraft:

the upgrade version of the B-26 - because it was not used in PTO (although it could have been)

and the A-36 - a rather awful version of the Mustang - not used extensively and subject to possible
gamey uses (although just why a P-51 variant could not be used in nasty ways doesn't sound too gamey
to me)

Assuming that these (or other) planes were removed from the RHS set (presumably both standard
and EOS) - what would we replace them with?

The only semi-obvious answer to me is the B-32 Dominator - a significant aircraft that was operational.
Like almost all suggestions - this one fails in one big way: it is a late war plane. We need more early and mid war planes - they matter more - and they get played a whole lot more. Late war planes mostly never are seen or used.
Obscure and minor as it may seem to have ANT-6 planes in only two units (one of those a squadron) in the seldom
used Soviet air order of battle - it probably matters more than ALL of the planes combined which appear only in 1945!
Certainly in the typical game they will never have any impact.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/17/2007 1:36:25 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/15/2007 8:22:52 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Like almost all suggestions - this one fails in one big way: it is a late war plane. We need more early and mid war planes - they matter more - and they get played a whole lot more. Late war planes mostly never are seen or used.



Mayby the RAF version of the P-39, the Airacobra. With a 20mm gun in place of the 37mm. But I don''t know if it was in the Pacific.


_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 2
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/15/2007 8:25:09 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Like almost all suggestions - this one fails in one big way: it is a late war plane. We need more early and mid war planes - they matter more - and they get played a whole lot more. Late war planes mostly never are seen or used.



Mayby the RAF version of the P-39, the Airacobra. With a 20mm gun in place of the 37mm. But I don''t know if it was in the Pacific.


_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 3
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/15/2007 10:10:40 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym


quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Like almost all suggestions - this one fails in one big way: it is a late war plane. We need more early and mid war planes - they matter more - and they get played a whole lot more. Late war planes mostly never are seen or used.



Mayby the RAF version of the P-39, the Airacobra. With a 20mm gun in place of the 37mm. But I don''t know if it was in the Pacific.



No, wasn't used in the CBI (and I think that there was only a single RAF squadron that used it operationally in WW2).

Maybe the P-40F as upgrade for the P-40E in August 1942 as this will allow for a higher/expanded P-40 production in the second half of 1942 while keeping a comparatively low production of the P-40E early in the war. Mainly a way to represent the increase of US P-40 production, but the P-40F was at least slightly better than the P-40E.

(in reply to Jo van der Pluym)
Post #: 4
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/15/2007 11:39:02 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline 		How about the Grumman Goose..It was used by almost every Allied power in the Pacific theatre.


Goose:
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/american.htm


Maybe the Stinson L 1 Vigilant? (Widespread use in Pacific.

Vigilant:
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/american.htm

My personal favourite, the Piper L 4 Grasshopper.

L 4:
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/american.htm

< Message edited by m10bob -- 1/16/2007 12:00:38 AM >

_____________________________




(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 5
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 12:04:59 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Jo,

The Airacobra appears in the game as the P-400. These were the aircraft from the British order taken up by the USAAF and used in the Solomons.

I would leave the A-36, they were used in reasonable numbers(100+?) by the USAAF in India/Burma and as a fighter bomber suffer a penalty in A-A so dont become a force in Aircombat.

It would be nice to get the B-32, especially if your war lasts into 1946.

K's idea about the P-40F is good, many of the P-40 variants have only minor changes and this would show the increase in production/allocation to the Pacific.

I wouldnt add any aircraft unless they have a "real"role, the light liason aircraft did little unless you could give a bonus to Arty bombardment if they spot in the same hex.

Maybe given the plethora of "what if" aircraft available to the Japanese there should be a look at adding some of the Allied aircraft that didnt make it and give them an earlier arrival.  P-75?, MB-5, CAC Woomera.



_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 6
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Thread - 1/16/2007 2:06:57 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Looking for aircraft, I sort of added the Boeing 314 Clipper. Without using a slot, I gave the USAAF a flight
of 4 a few days into the war. I used the Empire Flying Boat slot - making it a dual type.

I also converted the ROC 14th Squadron Transport Flight to a civil squadron of 6 Lockheed 212s at Hong Kong.
This represents the BT-32, a similar twin engine transport. 5 of the 6 were destroyed on the ground in the Japanese attack.

I found the CW-21 is misarmed. It might have had 4 x30s or 2x50s, but seems to have had a mixed pair of 30s - probably formerly 1x50 and 1x30 (which a CHINESE version had). We could give the type to ROC - the last 3 Dutch planes were lost in transit to China to join survivors there of a batch of 35 built in ROC. Most didn't last until 1941.

We might be able to bring in some C-47 squadrons early - on the C-73 - which is similar. 27 USAAF.
EDIT: I found some units indeed appear sooner - with different names. Some units start on the map.
I have turned the Lockheed 212 slot into a multiple slot for C-32/C-33/C-35/C-36/C-37 and C-40. One unit starts at Hawaii, one at Panama, one at Brisbane - all at game start. All are called Transport Squadron at that time.
All upgrade to C-47. Some other units had wrong dates or locations of appearence. But I cannot find a unit using the C-73 on our list.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/16/2007 6:40:07 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 7
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:08:45 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		RHS cannot last into 1946. It is recommended the game end 1 Sept 45 if atom bombs are used, 1 Nov 45 if not.
But you can go until 1 Jan 1946 if you wish - although NO reinforcements appear after 1 Nov 45. Aside from being better history - this permits us to gain a lot of slots of all types except devices.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/16/2007 2:20:33 AM >

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 8
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:10:55 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		P-40F count is included in P-40E - so it would reduce the E rate if included. Rates are a problem - because once on they never go off. This forces us to make monthly counts too low to start or end up with too many planes - or force an upgrade.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/16/2007 2:22:58 AM >

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 9
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 6:31:21 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		A what if plane is appropriate for EOS. ALL the rest of these planes are for ALL scenarios.

There is the B-36, the Hughes Flying boat - and a strange medium bomber of fantastic range - with fore and aft
engines! All share the problem of being late appearing - and I seek early or mid war planes.

So far I have been able to use our slots and art better - and to give the Allies a few units sooner.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 10
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 6:39:18 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Did you put the PB4Y-2 Privateer in there?  Deployments in the combat area began at the beginning of 1945 or end of 1944 and some at least used the "Bat" TV guided, flying bomb too which would be cool if not particularly effective.  Supposedly they did sink a couple of merchies and IJN DDs from 20 miles away though.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 11
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 6:43:10 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		We have the PB4Y-1 - not the -2.

I offered to do the Bat but no one was interested. This can be done - but it needs a device slot in a very very
narrow range already filled with things (aircraft weapons). I probably can put it into all scenarios EXCEPT EOS - the
one that needs it! - without losing anything. Bat can work from a number of planes - and I just read about a different one - didn't realize the PB used it.

It was effective. It was "non union" - and the flyboys didn't like losing their jobs. Not very macho either.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/16/2007 6:54:18 AM >

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 12
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 11:19:35 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline 		Sid, some of the units you suggest are rather obscure,(rare/limited in time/numbers).
Each on my list were used in the hundreds (if not thousands), are neglected in the game, and serve a purpose useful to the game.
I might exchange the Piper L 4 with the Stinson L 5 based on the range of the L 5.
I personally don't see a problem with an "American" plane with a ground recon role similar to the Lysander, and certainly serving in greater numbers in theatre than some of the other planes in game.
IMHO the Grumman Goose (or even Widget) would serve a greater purpose than some of those other planes suggested.??
I love the B 32, but even you suggest the game needing to end before 1946, and this makes the B 32 even less available (time-wise).
All on my list were in use for years.

_____________________________




(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 13
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 1:39:38 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Regretfully, there is a big problem - and the best solution probably is to REMOVE the Lysander - and perhaps the corresponding Japanese planes.

WITP is NOT designed - and lacks either plane slots or air unit slots for - spotter/coop/training/utility aircraft. I don't like that - I prefer the ENTIRE air OB - but we lack the slots to go for that. In fact - so many units use these planes they are a showstopper for consideration! No way we can put in such units - even for just one or two plane types.

Now the Lysander and the Ki-36 are "exceptions" - and indeed do NOT get fully (or even mainly) represented. There is a similar Dutch plane or two - a spotter and a trainer. All got used in significant combat roles in the early war period - and the units that had them in Western Pacific area are in the game. ALL OTHER units are not - unless they have a special function - as in the case of Ki-36 ground support and peculiar coastal patrol planes - and that only because they carry no less than ten bombs IRL! I don't mind a little bit of this sort of thing - and I inherited most of it - but we do not have the option to go all the way - and if pressed we lose the lot. Because the other way is not possible.

Losing the light planes might be a good idea? We would gain 1 Japanese slot in EOS and 2 in other scenarios - and about 4 Allied slots for planes. We would gain perhaps 6 Japanese unit slots in EOS and twice that in other scenarios, and perhaps a bit more than 12 Allied unit slots. Not much point - however - if there is no interest in other planes.

The one broad exception to "no spotters/utility planes" is NAVAL spotters. And for that reason the suggestion to put in a missing US plane is a good one. [I have "cheated" and put in some land based Walrus units as well - but not for their land roles - mainly for ASW and naval recon roles - which I feel nicely balance the many Japanese floatplane units doing similar things] This isn't my design preference - but WITP is a NAVAL game first of all - so I understand it.
Resources are always a problem - and the game was designed at a time that memory/storage was a much bigger deal than now. Further - it is built on a still older platform - and is restricted by some old design decisions that would not be made that way if done today. [Programming is hard. Successful programmers are very clever people. IF they did something - it was for a reason - even if it does not make sense to a user - and even if it becomes a legacy matter over time. These people were not trying to make bad choices - and they did remarkably well for such a simple system. It does not seem so today - but it was a miracle when it was done.] The good news is we can look forward to more slots - maybe - probably...

< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/16/2007 1:54:39 PM >

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 14
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 1:49:05 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
The good news is we can look forward to more slots - maybe - probably...


Where? How?

< Message edited by Terminus -- 1/16/2007 2:00:05 PM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 15
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:06:48 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Well - in two places - so the rumors go:

1) Maybe we get some slots (say device slots or plane slots) in WITP I in one of those updates?

2) Maybe Matrix will take the (apparently defined) WITP II project and turn it loose? Allegedly that project contemplated a more comprehensive increase of slot counts. Apparently this is now a funding issue - and that becomes a business decision. So long as money is to be made selling WITP I - I bet we keep seeing it being
supported. If it looks like more money will be made by a WITP II - I bet we get that. And I don't know how
anyone figures that out - marketing is not my thing.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 16
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Thread - 1/16/2007 2:15:14 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		What about a Glider (CG-13 I think)? It has twice the lift of the basic CG-4. Does anyone like the Gliders of RHS?
The ALLIED ones make sense. [The Japanese ones do not - IMHO.]

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 17
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:25:14 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Well - in two places - so the rumors go:

1) Maybe we get some slots (say device slots or plane slots) in WITP I in one of those updates?

2) Maybe Matrix will take the (apparently defined) WITP II project and turn it loose? Allegedly that project contemplated a more comprehensive increase of slot counts. Apparently this is now a funding issue - and that becomes a business decision. So long as money is to be made selling WITP I - I bet we keep seeing it being
supported. If it looks like more money will be made by a WITP II - I bet we get that. And I don't know how
anyone figures that out - marketing is not my thing.


A Scott Adams quote comes to mind: "Marketing is the career you choose when you wake up one morning and realise that you have become an adult without developing any professional skills".

The irony is that I'm almost finished in my business college marketing program...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 18
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:31:38 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Hmmmm, as far as I know, the B-32 only saw operational service with one bombardment squadron...?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 19
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:35:18 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		But if we're discussing what-if planes, how about the Avro Manchester?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 20
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:48:23 PM   
Dixie


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

ORIGINAL: Terminus

But if we're discussing what-if planes, how about the Avro Manchester?


I don't think that the Manchester would be likely to appear in the Pacific, even as a 'what if' with it's dodgy engines. I would have thought theat the Halifax or Stirling would be far more likely. IMO the Halifax would be a better candidate as BC back in the UK was intended to be almost entirely re-equipped with Lancs for the main force squadrons.

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 21
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:49:48 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		At one point we HAD the Stirling - but removed it when we learned it didn't serve PTO. It is one of only two planes (the Sturmovik being the other) rating a special protection value due to its structure.

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 22
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 2:51:37 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Well, we WERE talking early aircraft... Battle, Hampden, Whitley?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 23
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 5:50:32 PM   
Mifune


Posts: 787
Joined: 4/28/2005
From: Florida
Status: offline 		I too have long thought of the Grumman Goose. It was in good numbers in the Pacific, m10bob has certainly made a good early plane inclusion. In the case of considering eliminating light aircraft. The Ki-36 might have a limited role, but RHS has made it a useful aircraft in China. In the case of aircraft like the Goose and Lysander is early recon planes. I know there are no spotting bonus, but recon is certainly of major importance. Not that I am a lover of light aircraft, but they are of abundance for both sides. Of course if WitP II were out with those "extra" slots all this talk would be moot as most of us would plunk down the money right away.

_____________________________

Perennial Remedial Student of the Mike Solli School of Economics. One day I might graduate.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 24
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 7:03:41 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline
What about the P-40K. It was a P-40 with a supercharger. Because of this the version had double Bomb load (1000 in place of 500) then the ealier versions

_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to Mifune)
Post #: 25
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 8:03:16 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Need to see if we can work out some art for the Goose? And decide what goes away? It is a very useful plane - and it did do ASW and recon - so it has a job.

(in reply to Mifune)
Post #: 26
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 8:04:15 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym


What about the P-40K. It was a P-40 with a supercharger. Because of this the version had double Bomb load (1000 in place of 500) then the ealier versions


I think there used to be a P-40K - so we probably have the art. Good suggestion.

(in reply to Jo van der Pluym)
Post #: 27
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 8:28:22 PM   
Dixie


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

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Need to see if we can work out some art for the Goose? And decide what goes away? It is a very useful plane - and it did do ASW and recon - so it has a job.


It's a retouched version of an old side I had. I also have the top artwork as well.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 28
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Query (options) - 1/16/2007 8:36:26 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym


What about the P-40K. It was a P-40 with a supercharger. Because of this the version had double Bomb load (1000 in place of 500) then the ealier versions


I think there used to be a P-40K - so we probably have the art. Good suggestion.


One of the users of this plane is the 49th FG (7 FS, 8 FS & 9 FS) by Port Morseby. Thereafter received they the P-38 in November ?

_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 29
RE: RHS Allied Aircraft Thread - 1/17/2007 12:38:47 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		I'm coming in late on this thread.

As for el cid's original question about the A-36. I brought up the concern. The A-36 was intended as a bomber and the pilots were trained for dive bombing. However, it goes into a fighter bomber squadron that upgrades to P-51Bs. Because of game mechanics, the A-36 will be allowed to perform fighter missions, which is ahistorical. A-36s never flew escort or performed any of the P-51's fighter roles.

Someone asked how many were used in the PTO/CBI. As far as I can tell, only one squadron ever had them. The bulk of A-36s were used in North Africa and Italy.

I do believe the P-51A was used in the CBI. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I believe it was more than one squadron.

I'm not sure the P-40F was used in the PTO or CBI. The only pictures of P-40Fs I've ever seen were in North Africa or Italy. The Goose would be a good addition. It's rimary role, as a communication and utility aircraft, is not covered by the game's mechanics, but it's secondary role as an ASW aircraft is.

I also think the Privateer would be a good addition. It is somewhat late war, but it served in significant numbers.

Bill

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RHS Allied Aircraft Thread: A Radical Proposal (at end) Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
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

1.516