PDA

View Full Version : Channel May 1943



Zorin
10-02-2008, 14:48
May 1943

Royal Airforce/USAAF

Fighter


Spitfire Mk.IXc
Spitfire MK.Vb (CW)
P47D-10 (8th AF; 4th FG)

Anti shipping


Beaufighter (No. 248 Squadron) bombs + torpedo only
A20C (No 2 Group of Bomber Command)


Luftwaffe

Fighter/Fighter bomber


Fw190A5 (II. + III./JG26)
Bf109G6 (III./JG26)

Zorin
10-02-2008, 18:43
Opinions?

Zorin
10-02-2008, 22:39
8 hours and not a single comment? It can't be that bad an idea.

T}{OR
11-02-2008, 08:19
Don't panic Z. :) I wanted to answer this but waited until someone else posts first.

I acctually quite like this planeset. IMHO I'd like to see less planes per map if possible. And this is just the proper example. Focusing on certain planes and giving a different feeling to the map.

Sonko
11-02-2008, 11:15
Looking good so far, I expect a lot 190's being in the air!
I guess you leave out a bomber for blues because of the target layout?

Zorin
11-02-2008, 12:35
Looking good so far, I expect a lot 190's being in the air!
I guess you leave out a bomber for blues because of the target layout?

Actually, they were all busy in the south of france or the eastern front.

Zorin
11-02-2008, 12:37
Don't panic Z. :) I wanted to answer this but waited until someone else posts first.

I acctually quite like this planeset. IMHO I'd like to see less planes per map if possible. And this is just the proper example. Focusing on certain planes and giving a different feeling to the map.

I actually got a little afraid, as the regular bunch did not post after a certain time and thread views. One never knows ;)

Chatanooga
11-02-2008, 13:50
Looks a nice plane set to me.

Xiola
11-02-2008, 22:17
Looks Very hard for Blue.

Spitfire IX vs G6 and A5.

190A6 vs Spitfire IX is hard enough for blue.

Also the is the underdog vs the mkIX.

Could you limit the IX's?

Zorin
11-02-2008, 22:40
The Fw190A6 first appeared in reasonable numbers in October-November 1943 at the channel front.

I guess a test will show if we need to limit the Spitfire IX.

NS-IceFire
11-02-2008, 23:56
I was going to post but thought I should stand back and consider it. Typhoon isn't an option so I imagine thats a stand in Tempest? I love the Tempest as you know but I think a limit of 3 is silly (sorry...it is) and should be removed.

This is one of those scenarios where the P-38 is the king of performance but balanced out by its tricky handling and large size. I think the P-38J should probably be here...

This is pretty much like Channel43 but with different objectives. Is the idea to replace Channel43? I'm not opposed...its one of my oldest maps but I'm just curious.

I tried the Spit V alone setup and we ended up limiting the IX in addition to. You may have to do the same but who knows...opinions may be different nowadays.

Zorin
12-02-2008, 00:10
What is so silly about a flight of Typhoons (Tempest with bombs as only loadout)?

Can you provide data for the P-38 being deployed over the channel front in May 1943?

All I could find where P38s stationed at Iceland and North Africa/Mediterraneans.

I had not in mind to replace anything. I'm simply trying to develop more focused scenarios to stop the maps with 20 different plane types.

NS-IceFire
12-02-2008, 04:01
Tempest is simply too fast even with bombs. Bombs are also easily dropped.

I realize you like the focused scenarios and even I like the focused scenarios but I'm a bit concerned that some of those might be the reason for the decline in popularity on the server as of late. Focused are great when you're really into it...but on the other hand people like variety and choice so having a large 20 different plane setup means that the most number of people get what they want. Just a thought thats been rattling about in my head...

Zorin
12-02-2008, 09:39
1. There is only Kauen on the server which features a very focused planeset.

2. As of late, I found out that the 20 plus planesets are very unhistorical, checking all the references.

3. The Mods and 4.09 beta test are the true reasons for the decline in numbers I'd say.

Zorin
12-02-2008, 23:26
I think I will leave out the Typhoon (Tempest) and as we have Scheldt with Rocketphoons there is no point in making a similar scenario.

Altered first post.

NS-IceFire
12-02-2008, 23:27
1) There's a few we've branded about that feature some more focused plane sets. Some of them are not as focused so much as locked with so many weapons and configurations that people get kicked too often. Already brought that one up but its just an example. I spend all day at work trying to find new ways to be user friendly and so sometimes I have to shake my head when we map makers restrict things too much (I'm guilty too). Again...thats just my personal observation as of late.

2) History is important and I say that as a graduating history minor...but the point is to mostly have fun. Large numbers of folks on the server likely don't care...and based on my conversations with many of them don't know a shred of history anyways. Believe me when I say that I totally understand where you're coming from and I understand the want to be historical to the extreme...some of my single player campaigns go pretty far in this regard (right down to the movements to correct airbases when data is available and so on). BUT...I think it has to be fun too. So sometimes 20 planes gives everyone what they want and they have fun...lock things up too much and maybe its not going to be quite so good for some of those people. If it was a server full of clones of you and me we wouldn't be having this discussion as we'd all be perfectly happy :D

3) Thats a fair point. I'm looking forward to 4.09 final and a resurgence of people. I miss the regulars and the big air battles on the weekends. Gives me something to do...been replaying C&C3 and lots of Battlefield 2 seeing as the servers are so empty.

Zorin
12-02-2008, 23:45
1. Well, if people would read the brief and get the idea behind the planes command our lifes would be so much easier :D

2. Very true, very true. Having a passion for accuracy and history can be a limiting factor ;)

3. Oh yes, I do hope to return with 4.09. :)

Lets compare your channel 43 planeset with this one:

RED
A-20G
A-20C

Why have both A20s?

B-25J-1NA

I already have a medium bomber with the A20

P-38J

Not present in the Northern WTO at the time

P-47D-10
P-47D-22=12

Why two P47s? The loadouts of the D-10 are sufficient

SpitfireMkVbLF
SpitfireMkVbLFCLP
SpitfireMkIXc=16

I chose to have one very maneuverable Spit and an allrounder

BLUE
Bf-109G-2

G-2s were not present, 90% spent their lifes in the MTO or ETO

Bf-109G-6={No MK108 cannon}
Bf-110G-2={No MK108 cannon or BK Cannon.}

Few operating over the Bay of Biscay, but not the channel front

Fw-190A-5

Fw-190A-6=15

A6s appeared in October-November over the channel

He-111H-6
Ju-88A-4

No Kampfgeschwader in northern france

So my planeset is simply correct, which happens to make it limited, but that is simply the truth. :D

NS-IceFire
13-02-2008, 04:58
I don't think you get why I added all of those planes :)

So lets start:

A-20C versus A-20G...some folks like level bombing in a fast light bomber and the A-20C is the perfect aircraft for the task. The A-20G was added at a time when no other A-20 was available and its stayed because some folks prefer to be a strafer and the 6x.50cal is much more impressive than the 4x.30cal. The B-25 is not always liked by the A-20 pilots so these two are viable. The B-25 on the other hand offers a much more robust medium bomber with allot of turrets and makes for a good attacker as well as a great target for FW190 pilots so its in too.

A-20 is considered a light bomber or attack aircraft while the B-25 is in a separate class as a medium bomber. The B-25 is better defended and protected but slower.

P-38J included for its speed, unique design, and fun factor above all else. Plus it gives people who are sick of Thunderbolts and Spitfires something else to fly. I spent most of my time on this map when flying Red flying the P-38. Its a good mix.

P-47D-10 is slightly different in handling and doesn't have the bomb racks attached. At the time this made a bigger difference than it does now because now the D-22 I believe has its proper paddle prop climb performance and Oleg corrected the roll rates for all P-47 models. But at the time there were reasons for flying the D-22 as an fighter-bomber and the D-10 as a fighter. Less so now but a real Thunderbolt fan will probably take the D-10. FYI one of the top performing Thunderbolts in the 8th AF was actually a hotrodded D-5 that makes all of our Thunderbolts look weak in comparison :)

G-2 is for the people who really like to dogfight in Spitfires but who had to join the Blue side. History or not the G-2 is a top performer in the right year range and makes sense as an option for the people who prefer to mix it up. The G-6 is for the people who prefer the extra weight of fire from the G-6. When choosing between 109s I'll usually pick the G-6 myself. I know this works because usually the planeset is half and half. Whatever people like.

FW190A-5 and A-6 are offered because they have differing armament schemes as I'm sure you know. I used to prefer the MG-FF wing cannons because of the greater spread and easier ability to hit the target aircraft. I don't anymore because my shooting is so much better and I'd take the A-6 instead...again these two tend to be split half and half.

Doesn't matter if there were no He-111s or Ju-88s. The bombers are fun to fly and great to hit the targets with. Creates an intense scenario that seems to have lasted a very long time as an enjoyable map. We did need to add the Spitfire IX in limited numbers to make it really work and the planeset has changed considerably since it started but this is a pretty good matchup I think. This is one of my few that nobody complains about :)

So I think its a bad idea to loose sight of the fact that its fun. Most people won't care and haven't ever commented on the fact that there were no Luftwaffe bombers for instance at this time. The guy who just nailed two ships with his KG500s dodging a diving Thunderbolt probably doesn't care too much :)

Zorin
13-02-2008, 12:58
I don't think you get why I added all of those planes :)

So lets start:

A-20C versus A-20G...some folks like level bombing in a fast light bomber and the A-20C is the perfect aircraft for the task. The A-20G was added at a time when no other A-20 was available and its stayed because some folks prefer to be a strafer and the 6x.50cal is much more impressive than the 4x.30cal. The B-25 is not always liked by the A-20 pilots so these two are viable. The B-25 on the other hand offers a much more robust medium bomber with allot of turrets and makes for a good attacker as well as a great target for FW190 pilots so its in too.

A-20 is considered a light bomber or attack aircraft while the B-25 is in a separate class as a medium bomber. The B-25 is better defended and protected but slower.

P-38J included for its speed, unique design, and fun factor above all else. Plus it gives people who are sick of Thunderbolts and Spitfires something else to fly. I spent most of my time on this map when flying Red flying the P-38. Its a good mix.

P-47D-10 is slightly different in handling and doesn't have the bomb racks attached. At the time this made a bigger difference than it does now because now the D-22 I believe has its proper paddle prop climb performance and Oleg corrected the roll rates for all P-47 models. But at the time there were reasons for flying the D-22 as an fighter-bomber and the D-10 as a fighter. Less so now but a real Thunderbolt fan will probably take the D-10. FYI one of the top performing Thunderbolts in the 8th AF was actually a hotrodded D-5 that makes all of our Thunderbolts look weak in comparison :)

G-2 is for the people who really like to dogfight in Spitfires but who had to join the Blue side. History or not the G-2 is a top performer in the right year range and makes sense as an option for the people who prefer to mix it up. The G-6 is for the people who prefer the extra weight of fire from the G-6. When choosing between 109s I'll usually pick the G-6 myself. I know this works because usually the planeset is half and half. Whatever people like.

FW190A-5 and A-6 are offered because they have differing armament schemes as I'm sure you know. I used to prefer the MG-FF wing cannons because of the greater spread and easier ability to hit the target aircraft. I don't anymore because my shooting is so much better and I'd take the A-6 instead...again these two tend to be split half and half.

Doesn't matter if there were no He-111s or Ju-88s. The bombers are fun to fly and great to hit the targets with. Creates an intense scenario that seems to have lasted a very long time as an enjoyable map. We did need to add the Spitfire IX in limited numbers to make it really work and the planeset has changed considerably since it started but this is a pretty good matchup I think. This is one of my few that nobody complains about :)

So I think its a bad idea to loose sight of the fact that its fun. Most people won't care and haven't ever commented on the fact that there were no Luftwaffe bombers for instance at this time. The guy who just nailed two ships with his KG500s dodging a diving Thunderbolt probably doesn't care too much :)

This may all be very true but why should we actually bother with scenarios anymore if we can just put together a fun planeset completely disregarding even the most obvious facts? :eek:

Sonko
13-02-2008, 13:28
I'd call it semi-historical planesets.

Think of this: On a "normal" mission only a handful of plane types were involved over all, so we'd have to create a own mission for every aircraft, more or less.

I think a mix of both is needed - missions with many planes to choose from and missions with only half a handful of choices :)

Zorin
13-02-2008, 13:38
I'd call it semi-historical planesets.

Think of this: On a "normal" mission only a handful of plane types were involved over all, so we'd have to create a own mission for every aircraft, more or less.

I think a mix of both is needed - missions with many planes to choose from and missions with only half a handful of choices :)

I'll keep the planeset as it is and see how it plays out.

Algorex
13-02-2008, 15:13
Just call it september '43 and the G2 can stand in for the G1/G3/G4 very much present in the west.

Zorin
13-02-2008, 15:31
Just call it september '43 and the G2 can stand in for the G1/G3/G4 very much present in the west.

July 1943 saw the most G4s (22) as part of JG26, but those were part of III JG26 stationed in Russia and returned to Northern Germany, so they were not present at the channel front.

#402FOX
13-02-2008, 18:03
Looking good Zorin :fluffle:

NS-IceFire
13-02-2008, 23:57
This may all be very true but why should we actually bother with scenarios anymore if we can just put together a fun planeset completely disregarding even the most obvious facts? :eek:

See and thats where it goes too far the other side. The scenarios can be influenced by history without having to necessarily being completely accurate down to the last detail. Semi-historical with as much historical flavour and influence but with an eye to fun. Its an art form which is why there isn't a right answer to this...but I do think the audience needs to be somewhat catered to.

I'm concerned...thats all.

I still think a limit of 3 planes is "dangerous" (will kick too many slow people) and a stand in Tempest is less historical than a P-38J which arrives a bit too early. If more than a few people are removed from the server then it kills the numbers and the map. I've already tried to help and calm/promote some understanding for these folks who are either very new or unfortunately just not as quick.

Also...you wanted comments :D

Otherwise I'm looking forward to seeing what you've got up your sleeve as your target areas are always very interesting and well put together.

Zorin
14-02-2008, 00:18
See and thats where it goes too far the other side. The scenarios can be influenced by history without having to necessarily being completely accurate down to the last detail. Semi-historical with as much historical flavour and influence but with an eye to fun. Its an art form which is why there isn't a right answer to this...but I do think the audience needs to be somewhat catered to.

I'm concerned...thats all.

I still think a limit of 3 planes is "dangerous" (will kick too many slow people) and a stand in Tempest is less historical than a P-38J which arrives a bit too early. If more than a few people are removed from the server then it kills the numbers and the map. I've already tried to help and calm/promote some understanding for these folks who are either very new or unfortunately just not as quick.

Also...you wanted comments :D

Otherwise I'm looking forward to seeing what you've got up your sleeve as your target areas are always very interesting and well put together.

Now I see where you got me wrong about the 3 planes limit. I actually would have set up a limited spawn area so that only 3 Typhoons would be in the air at the same time. That way limiting the dominant potential of the bombless Tempest.

But that idea is past anyway. We'll try the planeset as it is and see how it goes. :)

And I'm more than grateful for all comments and at the same time I'm very please to see such a vibrant discussion going on :)