Looking good Wes. From your last photo if you don't sink the Japanese ship you'll at least chase it over the table edge!
Looking good Wes. From your last photo if you don't sink the Japanese ship you'll at least chase it over the table edge!
Thanks Peter. Yes I should be able to sink it provided no Zero's show up!
Wes
Very nice! Where are those Jap carriers! When i saw them last August, i knew they were winners!
Rich
Wes nice job. By SBD's and TBD's are still sitting the plastic they came in. I am hoping they will come out with the Japanese planes. The Kate would be the one I would want. I see you have a Topside mini ship for them to attach.
Thanks Rich and Bob. I've been looking at getting some more topside minis just been very busy lately and a little short on funds. That one is a nice sample that they sent me and I'm quite pleased with them. I would like to get some torpedo bombers too, Kate's and TBD's would be nice but again budgeting and time... Soon .
I have a question - I got the TBD-1 Devastator's from Merit. What stats do they use? Same as the Dauntless/Val's?
Also, while I'm at it, TBF Avenger's, what to use for them? Also the same as the Val's? There is a RAR file in the custom cards, but I can't open it.
Thanks Paul. I didn't see it there, but I did a forum search (not sure why I didn't do that first) and found it.
I deck, 18 hits (19 for the Dauntless). A at short and long, front and back.
Essentially the same as the Val's, but w/ 1 more damage.
Last edited by Gotham Resident; 04-30-2015 at 12:01.
Did you find the cards in either Max Headrooms' or my albums? They were done by Max quite a while ago, before we had as many decks as now, and knew more about the mechanics of how the cards were done for the planes.
An I deck is too fast for a Devastator; use an R deck, and use Zoe Brain’s system of moving just the length of the arrow on the card.
Found here: http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...-cards-needed)
the R deck is further modified by not allowing reversals or the extreme side slips.
18 hits is right, as are the guns. Ceiling 7 climb 9.
The Avenger should use the K deck, without reversals. 21 hits for all models. The guns are:
wing guns: front arc, B/A;
dorsal turret: 3:00 to 9:00, low to high; A/A (with the tail blindspot);
ventral gun: rear arc, low only: A/A
The TBF-1 has a ceiling of 8, climb of 5
The TBF-3 has a ceiling of 10, climb of 5.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Yes, Karl, the "forum search" text in my post was to a thread w/ a card. And that links to your album. So I took those.
Isn't the "R" deck a faster deck, one of new ones on larger cards? But by using it post to post method, it slows it down? (I don't own the "R" deck, just the P-51 deck.)
The K deck, is that in the Revolution in the Sky blister pack? I found some for $7 w/ free shipping on ebay. But the front card on the image says it uses a J deck.
Last edited by Gotham Resident; 04-30-2015 at 12:37.
Thanks Allen. The fantasy flight website says it includes 3 K's. But the front card displayed says J.
No worries Mischa.
The downside, if I remember properly, is the two J decks are the same (i.e. no J1 and J2).
It is a neat pack if you are interested in I-16s - Spanish Civil War (fighting itself), Russo-Japanese War (chasing Ki-27s), or just ramming tails of Bf.110s. I have two, and will probably get a couple more.
Indeed; remember that using the normal method, the plane "travels" the length of the arrow plus the length of the base card, while with Zoe's slower plane method,
it only travels the length of the arrow.
So with the R deck, for example, the normal method would yield a speed of 420MPH (fast speed) or 390MPH (slow speed), while the arrow only method yields a speed of
210MPH/100MPH. Even with these mods, it still may be too spritely a deck for the Devastator
The R deck, BTW, is from the Fw-190D.
Hope this helps.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Since the Avenger is a single engined aircraft, a standard single engine base is correct. That is what i have used with my 144 scale Avengers in games. It is the engines not the plane size that determine the base size.
Rich
That works for me Rich. I have those bases.
Mischa
I like to keep it simple. Here are some examples! Those are 144 scale!
Rich
I usually go with the width of base it needs not to go base over apex.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
I'm afraid I don't follow.
The width of the base can't exceed the ....? Length? Nose to tail? Or height of the plane?
Wingspans
P-51 37' (11 m)
F4F 38' (12 m)
F190 31'2" (9.5 m)
Zero 39'4" (12 m)
Ki-62 39'4" (12 m)
SBD Dauntless 42' (13 m)
Val - 47'2" (14.37 m) (3.8 meters tall)
TBD Devastator 50'0" (15.24 m) (4.6 tall)
TBF Avenger 54'2" (16.51 m) (4.7 m tall)
ME-110 53'4" (16.3 m) (3.3 m tall)
Beaufighter 57'10" (17.65 m) (4.84 meters tall)
B25 68' (21 m)
He-111 74'2" (22.6 m) (4 m tall)
B17 104' (32 m)
Last edited by Gotham Resident; 05-20-2015 at 14:22.
A over T.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Usually talk of T&A is NOT forum appropriate. G&T's are more acceptable.
Mischa
You are correct! More G&t none of that inappropriate stuff! Smacks of algebra to me, we can`t have that here!
Rich
I am reading "A Dawn Like Thunder: The True Story of Torpedo Squadron Eight" (and I will do a review in the books section when I am done, as I don't see one there now). On the way to Midway, the pilots are hoping the new Avengers reach them so they don't have to fly the "Widowmaker" Devastators. The Devastators flew at 100 mph and the Zero's at 300. And the Avengers fly almost as fast the wildcats so the books says. I'm gonna be doing a lot of scenarios from this when I'm done with the book.
OK; on thought and discussion w/ Zoe, I believe the base should be a HF. This is due to the wingspan, and the maneuverability capable and used in combat (esp. the Devastator and both with a torpedo).
In another discussion, I would say the Lightning is an example of a fighter, with a wingspan close to the Bf-110 and Beaufighter, that should use the fighter base.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
For simplification, I can see the single engine = small base argument, especially since the Vals were released on small bases. But as the size of the planes increase, we also know they are easier to hit.
I might mix and match for now, until we come arrive at a consensus. I'll know we have done that when the "cards" come out.
I might personally try the Avengers on a fighter base & the Devastators on the heavy fighter base (but still moving them the revised method of just the length of the arrow); the bigger base will make them more of a target. I won't really have play testing time until July, but I keep setting them up to admire each night.
Most people have been cutting the undercarriage legs on the Merit models but are the legs glued into the wings and, if so, has anyone tried to remove the legs by softening the glue?
This site is handy for paint jobs...
http://www.markstyling.com/wwll_s_view_header.htm
For the Devastator the official unofficial rules are a R(Z)** deck, the R deck with bits removed and using Zoe's slow rules. I have been working on decks for the slow rules..
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/dow...o=file&id=2187
If I remember correctly, after a conversation with Karl, 50' became the unofficial official cut off point for the step up to the Heavy Fighter Base. So I would think as Devastators are a HF, so should Avengers.
The base for the Devastator is the same as the Beaufighter Mk.VIF.
Last edited by Foz; 11-06-2015 at 10:52.
Have you done a deck for the kate? (please) Or does it use the one for the Devastator too?
See you on the Dark Side......
Very nice site. Thanks Steve
I have it using the ZJ deck Zoe Brain created with Max Headroom: http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/dow...o=file&id=1244
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
You're welcome.
Another site I was trying to remember...
http://www.cybermodeler.com/references.shtml
Though it doesn't have any useful info on Wildcats
What Karl said
I wish I had tuned in sooner. First off, nicely done. Although I am only into WGF I have modeled extensively primarily in WWII. USN markings are both time and ship dependent. If you tell me what date and off what ship I can let you know what's appropriate.
Bookmarks