tsetse

3 new tank buster planes

14 posts in this topic

 Lets see some stats on these? I expect 2 of the 3 to be far better. One is a slow bomber with big guns, the others fighters. One will flutter and stall with a hard turn, the others will whip a 180 with a flick of the stick (like a drone, as Gs only apply to some planes).

One will take better then twice as long to get over the target, then twice as long to slog home after it's 20 cannon rounds have bounced off the ET.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stuka is getting the Bk37mm and IIRC the twin 81z tail gun.  Not sure if they are going AP.40 or pzGr.39 yet.

The Hurri2D is getting the 40mm Vickers S gun. Not sure if its the Mk1 or Mk2 or ammo type

The Bell is getting the 37mm M4 Cannon IIRC. 

 

If its all just plain AP ammo - the Stuka will have the best anti armor round of the three followed closely by the H2D with the Bell lagging pretty far behind the pack.

The H2D and Stuka having the most stabile gun platform, the bell will also suffer due to its stability issues at low speeds.. The bell will have to hit engine decks and low flanking hits to sides.  I rather the Bell get HE for A2A and let the 2D do the ground work IMHO, though you never know in this game. Ppl can get real good and take risks you don't take in real war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1.9.2017 at 11:38 PM, tsetse said:

One will take better then twice as long to get over the target, then twice as long to slog home

Let's take a look at the current kill stats for this campaign so far. Numbers are showing that the Allies are waymore effective in killing stuff than the german Stuka and they tend to stay alive a bit more.

Unbenannt.jpg

When you look at the details you see that of the 419 Stuka kills 273 where scored on vehicles of which 209 where tanks (including vickers and pz2 but no armored cars on both sides). So the Stuka performed best in it's designated role as a tank killer. The hurri scored 426 of its impressive 653 kills on vehicles of which 266 where tanks. The bell on the other side only scored 53 of its 197 kills on vehicles and only 25 on tanks. So the Stuka got 2 out of 4 kills against tanks, the hurri 2 out of 5 and the bell only 2 out of 11. While the hurri is way more effective in killing other stuff than the stuka, the bell seems to be no real tankbuster at all.

Of course you have to keep in mind how low these numbers are and how a few skilled players (zippy) can make a huge differnce here. But the numbers are fitting to what you guys were predicting and I think one can sum up that the stuka might have the best AT performance while being the worst overall performing plane which additionally has to fly in worse conditions - under enemy air superiority most of the time. That might be historical but not a good balance ;)

Edited by vanapo
inserting excel didnt work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stuka tank-buster is a pig to fly compared the Hurri.  The Stuka stick is very heavy and it maneuvers much slower than the regular Stuka.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, vanapo said:

Let's take a look at the current kill stats for this campaign so far. Numbers are showing that the Allies are waymore effective in killing stuff than the german Stuka and they tend to stay alive a bit more.

 

When you look at the details you see that of the 419 Stuka kills 273 where scored on vehicles of which 209 where tanks (including vickers and pz2 but no armored cars on both sides). So the Stuka performed best in it's designated role as a tank killer. The hurri scored 426 of its impressive 653 kills on vehicles of which 266 where tanks. The bell on the other side only scored 53 of its 197 kills on vehicles and only 25 on tanks. So the Stuka got 2 out of 4 kills against tanks, the hurri 2 out of 5 and the bell only 2 out of 11. While the hurri is way more effective in killing other stuff than the stuka, the bell seems to be no real tankbuster at all.

Of course you have to keep in mind how low these numbers are and how a few skilled players (zippy) can make a huge differnce here. But the numbers are fitting to what you guys were predicting and I think one can sum up that the stuka might have the best AT performance while being the worst overall performing plane which additionally has to fly in worse conditions - under enemy air superiority most of the time. That might be historical but not a good balance ;)

It kind of was however the Russian front was vast. All that open space still gave the stuka room to operate even out numbered.

 

I'm curious though what the weights and power are for the StukaG. Are we supposed to have the StukaG2 or the G1? It's very relevant as the G2 was based off the D5 which had enlarged wings and the Jumo-211J of 1420PS. The Stuka G1 was based off the earlier D1 spec with the smaller wing (same as our b2) and dive brakes. However, both the D1 and the D5 were installed with the Jumo 211J @1420PS. do we have the proper power rating and wing dimensions?

 

due note, even if it had 3000HP the G2 will be a dog that more or less requires air superiority to do well. This plane was a stop gap hack thought up by a sociopath (Rudel) - don't confuse it for the A-10 warthog (which btw, also requires air superiority).

Edited by madrebel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, madrebel said:

Are we supposed to have the StukaG2 or the G1? It's very relevant as the G2 was based off the D5 which had enlarged wings and the Jumo-211J of 1420PS. The Stuka G1 was based off the earlier D1 spec with the smaller wing (same as our b2) and dive brakes. However, both the D1 and the D5 were installed with the Jumo 211J @1420PS. do we have the proper power rating and wing dimensions?

That's a good question. I would be suprised if they did anything more to the flight model or other specifications than to just add more drag and weight to the wings - which results in the way the G2 handles. And of course they deactivated the wing mounted mgs and the possibility to engage the dive brakes.

In general I would love to see more variants of our LW bombers than we have in game. I don't understand why I have to fly a 39' Heinkel with it's single 7,62mm MGs and 39' engines while allies allready got the spitIX. Of course the 111 was outdated and didn't stand a chance against allied fighters especially late in the war. The uprgades it got in the later H series were weak but they existed. Same is true for the stuka with more powerfull engines and a bigger bomb load. Implementing one late war version per bomber would add a bit more fun (variation is alwas entertaining) and would not require as much work for crs as introducing new stuff like ... you know ... italians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, madrebel said:

It kind of was however the Russian front was vast. All that open space still gave the stuka room to operate even out numbered.

I guess the factor hampering tank busters the most in this game is the big red circle marking every plane flying at tree top level and patrol missions usually been flown at 2-3k very close to every AO which is the only place a tankbuster might find something to shoot at. All of that adding up to make a sortie in a tankbuster a one way ride most of the time. We allready talked about that in the "fixing the air war" section.

Edited by vanapo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, that's another can of worms. I've argued for the H3 over the H2. Technically the H3 would be the contemporary model rolling off the factory lines when our game starts, however, more H2s were in service at this time than H3s. 100Hp per engine difference between the H2 and H3 and like 2mph speed difference. From there you could go H6 in T1 and H20 in T3 where the 111 upgrades stop. or. you could do the HE-111Z as a MUCH simpler heavy bomber addition to the game than modeling the HE-177A5. i'd love the 177 but gluing together 2 111s seems to me to be the simpler addition.

 

just focus on the G1 vs the G2 for now. Either are acceptable and technically the first 'G' officially in service was Rudel's G1. G2 would be 'better' by a bit but either choice is acceptable. i just want to make sure the specifications are correct for whichever model is the one CRS wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the only way to find out is to park the two stuka variants next to each other and have a infantryman take a look at it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sure the mods will nudge the right person. player speculation can be helpful but not as helpful as the guy who did the model just telling it like it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ju87G-2 ingame has longer wings than the old B model.

You can select one offline then select a airfield, like bertrix or brussels and spawn in.

Hit space bar to make a clone.

Despawn and select the other one, select the same airfield and spawn.

Start engine and pull through the 1st clone a few feet and then stop.

Hit left ctrl+c (maybe left ctrl+x, check keymapper for external view)

Use insert/delete/home/end/page up/page down to rotate the views.

Or you can make a clone of the 2nd ju78 and despawn

Select a inf type, select that same airfield, not ab select the af just like with the planes and spawn in.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and we've got the 1420PS Jumo-211J? it shouldn't turn as well as the B, rather large guns hanging off the wings will make sure of that. just want to make sure the stats are right. sounds like the wings are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you oldzeke. Didn't know that and I take back my former assumptions regarding how they made the G2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.