1. #1
    Yellonet's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,314
    Or planes that never actually flew?

    Or in a WW2 simulation flying an aircraft that was not used in said war? E.g. Bearcat.

    Personally I can't see what's so appealing about these planes.. you can't really pretend that you're in a WW2 battle, because the plane you're flying wasn't available... so, why?

    Is it only people who want an "edge" in a non-historical game of air-quake who wants these planes so badly?

    Or is it serious simmers that want to experience a certain what-if scenario?

    Personally I don't see any need for such aircraft at all, I want to fly historical missions/dogfights with planes that actually made a difference in the PTO.

    Planes that wasn't in the PTO shouldn't be in a PTO-sim.


    - Yellonet

    [This message was edited by Yellonet on Sat July 10 2004 at 09:15 AM.]
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Yellonet's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,314
    Or planes that never actually flew?

    Or in a WW2 simulation flying an aircraft that was not used in said war? E.g. Bearcat.

    Personally I can't see what's so appealing about these planes.. you can't really pretend that you're in a WW2 battle, because the plane you're flying wasn't available... so, why?

    Is it only people who want an "edge" in a non-historical game of air-quake who wants these planes so badly?

    Or is it serious simmers that want to experience a certain what-if scenario?

    Personally I don't see any need for such aircraft at all, I want to fly historical missions/dogfights with planes that actually made a difference in the PTO.

    Planes that wasn't in the PTO shouldn't be in a PTO-sim.


    - Yellonet

    [This message was edited by Yellonet on Sat July 10 2004 at 09:15 AM.]
    Share this post

  3. #3
    i'm not mate i'll fly nething, if i happen to like a certain plane i'll usually fly that one or if i get bored with it i'll move onto something else thats more of a challenge.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    All kidding aside, I've been wondering that myself. I get a lot more pleasure out of flying things like the 109E/F, the I-16, or the older planes than I do the only-four-hundred-built, last-two-weeks-of-the-war hot rods. I've never understood the fascination with ├╝berplanes. It's the same like with cars... 650K+ Ferraris are interesting as a curiosity, but they are by no means the reality.

    In real life, though, obviously if I'm standing on a carrier deck and there are forty Kamikaze A6M5's coming in, and I've got the choice between an F8F and an F6F, it's the Bearcat every time. No brainer.

    "Or is it serious simmers that want to experience a certain what-if scenario?"

    Hopefully, yes. Air Quake sucks. :P

    I do really want to fly the Bearcat and Hellcat both. Mainly because they were both extraordinary designs, and Grumman products. But if I look at, say, the F4U line... I'm much more interested in a birdcage F4U-1 than a U-4 or an FG-whatever ├╝berCorsair.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    heywooood's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,902
    Yellonet - Personally I am happy to fly whatever the good people behind this project are willing to make... after all - we can select planesets ourselves.

    As Penguin and planeater are often saying.. these planes take a preponderance of work to create and make flyable so it seems that the least I can do is appreciate the efforts - besides as I have often said - if they make it, I will fly it. Happily - with a big ol' grin - thank-you modelers and devs.




    "Check your guns"
    Share this post

  6. #6
    It is not about the best,at least for me. Take the Bearcat, it was heading to the combat zone.
    Recreating what if,s and seeing how they might perform in combat.
    The Bearcat was meant for small decks. Might be fun if a CVE is included in the game.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Yellonet, I share your opinion, if you want to fly better aircraft, you just have to buy another Sim

    The flying Dutchman
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Yellonet's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,314
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I do really want to fly the Bearcat and Hellcat both. Mainly because they were both extraordinary designs, and Grumman products. But if I look at, say, the F4U line... I'm much more interested in a birdcage F4U-1 than a U-4 or an FG-whatever ├╝berCorsair.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I would fly the Bearcat a few times just to feel the power and speed, just as I have with the Me-163, but if I had to choose which plane would be in PF on release between the F8F and ANY other plane that saw action in the pacific, it would have to be the latter, no hesitation.

    The F8F and other wasn't-in-the-war and only-flew-three-missions along with late '45 planes could be in the payable addon "├┼ôberplanes of the Pacific" that wouldn't update the version (you could choose not to buy and still play online). Then the historically correct addon could be developed at the same time as the other and we wouldn't have to hear the "I want my ├╝berplane now"-whine all the time as each addon would get it's own forum... Man do I have some great ideas!


    - Yellonet
    Share this post

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by owlwatcher:
    It is not about the best,at least for me. Take the Bearcat, it was heading to the combat zone.
    Recreating what if,s and seeing how they might perform in combat.
    The Bearcat was meant for small decks. Might be fun if a CVE is included in the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I agree.

    But think also of the problem of gameplay balance... And before you do, forget Il-2 and FB, because this is not the Il-2/FB/AEP series we're talking about, its a different game. What do you counter the late-'45 Grumman stuff with? You'd have people playing F8F against... What? The Shiden-Kai? There wasn't really anything there to counter the American fighters in a real way (which is good, in real life!). Imagine how much it would suck to be tooling around online in a Shiden-Kai or A6M5 and get bushwacked by a fast twin-engine plane with four cannons that practically climbs like an F-86.

    Add to that the whole "never saw combat" thing, and when you've got less than one year to develop the game from concept to boxed product, then you can see why the focus would be on planes that were the meat of the opposing air forces, for most of the conflict. Absurd fantasies about anti-American bias notwithstanding, of course.

    What I'm saying is, the reasons planes are there or not there initially, or even later, are not light reasons. No one factor determines these kinds of things. It's lovely to paint things in black and white (BIAS! ANTI-AMERICAN/LUFTWAFFLE SCUM!!!) but that's not the real world.

    "Yellonet, I share your opinion, if you want to fly better aircraft, you just have to buy another Sim"

    In keeping with my policy of Strategic Ambiguity, how do you know that?
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Yellonet's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,314
    Well... maybe I'm being a little hard on people who want's to fly the "late planes", everyone should be able to enjoy the sim..

    But I get so annoyed when people nags about adding the planes that wasn't major contributors to the war effort before we even have the one's that was. Worry about the "common" planes first and add the "beasts" later.


    - Yellonet
    Share this post