Originally Posted by Oberst Hajj
LOL!
LOL!
Last edited by kaufschtick; 01-20-2014 at 07:23.
OK so just to clear a few things up in my mind, series 2 nexus... the hurricanes? I am really surprised that its only the Bader that sold. Van De Hove’s hurricane looks awesome, I love the black and white underside. I do struggle to find information on that paint scheme online though. anyone got any links? Can you historically fly the belgian hurri in battle of britain scenarios? Ok now with Kutznetsov, why is his plane so disliked? and why is it not seen as a valid russian option?I do find it a bit ugly looking, but thats not enough to make me not buy one. (especially at bargain bin prices) and then again, its the 12 gunned MKIIb. More punch! Much better against that snow camo’d He111“that awfully painted Hurry is not really a Soviet plane.”
In terms of the Dewoitines, I am also realising they are really growing on me. I have 2 of each now, and I love that there is an italian axis option in there. Plus that Stuka. It only just hit me this week, we actually have 6 planes now for the axis italians! D.520, Stuka, 2x fiats, and 2x Regianne 2001’s. What I don’t know is if they are all from the same era or not, so can I historically fly them all at once against ... who? bader and the series 1 spits?
The vals, well, they are pretty ugly beasts as well. The Japanese planes have never really caught my interest, i admit i buy them now purely from a collectors standpoint, although the all green reisen in the original starter set, plus the new KI-84’s look great.
My issue here is, if all the japanese planes are apparently worth printing so often, why do I see not only the Vals on sale everywhere, but the new KI-84’s are already on sale at Miniature Market ($7.45 each) the KI-61’s are on sale in Australia at Milsims for $10 each (unheard of prices for ww1 minis here) and the Zero’s are pretty easy to find still as well... ebay currently has none above $20 buy it now, and several on $12.
Anyway, to summarise,
whats wrong with Van Den Hove and Kutznestov?
Whats a good scenario to use all 6 axis italians in?
and does anyone here actually LOVE all the japanese planes? or are they purely included to be fodder for the American fans?
Seems a lot of people here (self included) LOVE the Russian stuff... with this new release we now have 16 Japanese planes to fly across 5 types. Russian has 3 a 4th thats questionable.
Last edited by Xen; 02-16-2014 at 18:05. Reason: spelling
Disclaimer, 'this is trouble in paradise' I know
There are not as many options for the Axis. Essentially, you have the big three, Germany, Italy, and Japan. sure you can have a Romanian 109 or for the daring, a neutral Spanish 109, but the simple matter is there is a much more limited pool to choose from. The Japanese get as many planes as they do by default.
whoops bad info. deleted post.
Personally I think in the 1st release that all the Hurricans should of been British for the BoB. Extras to follow later. Personally I like the Russian Hurricane and have found it to be a good plane to fly. However nice the Belgium, French and Nowigan planes are as models I have no use for them due to there limited number or they were not used (Except for the French who only used them against the Allies) Therefor in the re-releas of WW2 series 2 I want to see is all British Hurricanes only and do not bother about the rest of the series (Personal gameing view point!)
I agree, if series II gets a reprint, I really hope we only get Hurricanes and Stukas. With DBs coming back in Series 6, there will be interest in Stukas. Plus getting two new Stuka designs would be cool. I also would hope the three Hurricanes are all British, with pilots from all over the Empire.
I would hate to see more D.520s and Vals. Why? I would believe they will take forever to sell, just like last time and that means Ares waits longer to recoup on their investment. Spend that money on new product. There are still dozens of viable options of WWII aircraft to be produced. No need to reprint bargain clearance bin fodder.
Agree Daniel I had forgoten about the Stukas, a tank buster one would be nice!
When it comes to the WGS reprints, everything we think we know should should pretty much be sent to the scrapyard
Very suttle hint there Boss! I look forward to seeing what they come up with!
I see what Ares were on about now re my email to them. Very pleased, no complaints at all from here........
I'm ready to add to shopping cart. A little troubled no F4U or Kate, but overall happy with the choices.
The Corsair can't be too far down the line, I am betting we see it in the next 18 months or so! Kate and Avenger will be nice additions to the game, when the time comes. Personally, I hope that is sooner than later, but not before the SBD and Corsair as far as American planes go. I still want the F6F Hellcat at some point as well!
Oh yes, the Hellcat! I completely forgot about that animal!
I just gotta have the plane to match my handle!
dittoOh yes, the Hellcat! I completely forgot about that animal!
I just gotta have the plane to match my handle!
My hope for the next series goes for F4U-Corsair and Lavotchin-La 7 as Allied planes, and I would love a Fw-190A and anything else Andrea wants for the Axis ones
The Nakajima B5N and Avenger I guess they would be great on a special torpedo series #1 -- Farley Swordfish and SM-79 as special torpedo series #2 is my wet dream
Oh, and I forgot another one...
We really need some Italian fighter love sooner than later. Both the Macchi 202 Folgore and 205 Veltro have yet to make appearances in the game. Seeing as the designers are Italians, I simply can't explain their exclusion up to this point....
I want those as much as many of the missing American birds. A series with Mossies, Lightnings, Nates, and Ju-88s would be awesome!
Series six adding the P-47 is a dream come true, I always figured the Thunderbolt would be the odd plane out when it came to the Americans.
Because they're not "iconic" [PTOOI!]; any British acft. which was available for Battle of Britain *MUST* be in BoB colors, or nothing. (To which I say "*FEH*!")
Not really -- the D.520s only served in North Italy, as there were severe problem with supply (none of the D.520's parts were compatible with Italian stores). The CR.42 and Re.2001 were used throughout the war, anywhere the Italians fought. The Ju 87s were only in service from '40 to '42. So there's not really any point where all four meet.
The Japanese acft. would be better if: 1) cannon were not overpowered, and; 2) the lack of self-sealing fuel tanks was more apparent. Then there's the matter of who the Japanese fought against -- not many chances for Spitfire-vs.-Zero....
I LOVE japanse planes and consider Wildcats and any other American fighter that shows up in the Pacific theater as fodder for my Samurai pilots!
I also LOVE the Soviet stuff and consider all German planes fodder for the Red Air Force
I can't really understand some things.
I love all planes that entered the war.
I will use them all.
I can't understand how someone cannot love the Dewoitine. It's beautiful, sleek and tragic. Mind you that I don't mind you don't like it. I was allowed to have 8 on the fact that they were so cheap.
I really can't understand how someone says that the Zeroes are cannon fodder for American planes. Have those people erased the Zero action between 1939 till 1943?
But once again I'm glad about it. I was able to buy more than I really could have if they were loved.
I'm waiting to see if the German CR.42 price goes down. And sad that the French P-40 was on the deluxe box. If he was in a blister, I would be able to get some more...
Would you please stop loving the Italian planes?
And I hope they make a Danish P-47.
And a Guatemalese Me-109K. That. Would. Be. Awesome.
haha who is this directed at?thanks for replying guys... good to see some voices supporting the japanese releases, I think I still count many more for the russians though!Would you please stop loving the Italian planes?
hmm I might have to start a poll for this!
Thanks Chris for your detailed response to my questions
I would be interested in reducing some of the japanese planes hit points to represent the lack of armour and general flamability of them, but one thing I have noticed with the zero, is its lack of evident manoeuvrability advantage over its counterpart... I guess history documents it as extreme advantage in a dogfight. but there is probably already a thread on this..
next question, was Van De Hove in the BoB? I can't find any info on him online
zero should be more maneuvrable than the Spitfire
Depends on speed and altitude? Spitfire vs Zero
Mike
ofcourse everything depends on speed and altitude... giving the right (hight) altitude and (fast) speed a P-40 was more maneuvrable than a zero
But in game terms, the zero is as maneuvrable as a Hurricane -- does that makes sence to you?
I was looking for some information on why a Zero might be better than a Spit, and posted a link of a comparison (in my post above).ofcourse everything depends on speed and altitude... giving the right (hight) altitude and (fast) speed a P-40 was more maneuvrable than a zero
But in game terms, the zero is as maneuvrable as a Hurricane -- does that makes sence to you?
It makes little difference to me, actually, as I will not likely be flying (or collecting) any Pacific Theater planes. Perhaps, the Zero's slow speed arrows on the maneuver cards should have allowed for tighter turns?
As it turns out, I was just looking through the maneuver deck of my one Hurricane, and it doesn't seem that maneuverable. I've never had it on a table, so probably not a good way to compare. Flying WWI planes almost exclusively, the WWII planes I have flown ( Spits & Bf 109s) seem to be trucks, not sports cars.
Mike
Same old song here - no self sealing tanks - too much hit points - overpowered cannons -
Seem everyone wants to win the Pacific war two days after the attack versus Pearl Harbor with rookies and Buffaloes.
Heared this the first time.
Better speed (when diving) and better armor for the P-40: Yes
Better maneuverability: No
Voilà le soleil d'Austerlitz!
Zero and Hawker Hurricane have the same C Maneuver Deck
Hurricane has just one more survival points (17 agaist's Zero's 16), something that doesn't makes much sense either.
For what I read from the link you quoted Zero could easily out-turn the Spitfire at low speed ... well that's not the case in the game: slow-speed turns from Deck A (Spitfire) and Deck C (Zero) are identical... but Spitfire's A Deck has two wide side-slips, which Zero's C Deck doesn't has... so the Spitfire is overall as more maneuvrable than the Zero.
I almost never play WoG WW2 games, I play mostly WW1, same as you -- I still buy some minis because they are pretty and some of my friends like WW2 better.
The reason for not playing WW2 is because I think the way planes maneuvrers are depicted (and hence tactics you can use) is (almost) completelly wrong
WW1 version if good, lots of fun, and easy to play, and if there is something I don't like I can change it with a couple of house-rules... but the WW2 version is like I would need to use so many house-rules that what I would be playing won't be WoG anymore -- I would need to re-draw the maneuver decks of almost every plane, change all the firing sistem and survavility points.
Hmmm... Might be hi-jacking this thread, but...
So, the Hurricane and the Zero have the same maneuver deck. And that means "zero" in the way of slow speed difference between two planes that were very different in flight characteristics?
Was this a design decision for simplifying the first boxed set? Perhaps there will be an adjustment, like the Sopwith Triplanes' new "T" deck? Well, it might be a bit late, as the Zero has been out in minis for a while, where the Sopwith Triplane didn't have an official mini until recently.
When I first joined the forum, there were maneuver decks in the files with climbing and diving turns (WGF). I never used them, because I started playing without altitude, and never found any rules or explanations for the "expanded" maneuver decks. Maybe there needs to be adjusted decks for some planes, until "officially" published? Or would we get into trouble with that (like the expanded maneuver decks being removed from the files)?
Mike
P-40 vs Zero maneuvarability:
Heared this the first time.
Better speed (when diving) and better armor for the P-40: Yes
Better maneuverability: No
this is what I was meaning: when we talk about maneuverability we should take three things into account: turn-rate, roll-rate and the ability to change direction from one side to another.
The game only takes into account turn-rate: how tight a plane can turn and for how long – without stalling for example. But the other two are very important – and if they are taking into account by WoG maneuver decks is only in a very abstract way.
Regarding Zero vs P-40, the Japanese fighter had better turn-rate than the P-40 at any speed. But at fast speed, the short wings of the P-40 allow the American plane to change direction quickly. That means a P-40 that was turning left at high speed could turn right immediately… the Zero could not do that while flying fast. In that sense (and only in that sense) the P-40 had better maneuverability than the Zero - and the same was true for the F4F Wildcat.
At low speed, however, the opposite was true: the Zero could turn left to right and vice-versa without stalling… P-40 couldn’t do that – nor could the F4F Wildcat.
The reason for all of this was wingspan: Zero had long and broad wings allowing it to perform better at low speed; P-40 had shorter ones making it better for faster maneuvers.
If you want to play more realistically do this: do not allow Zero to ‘counter turn’ (play a left turn right after a right one and vice-versa) when at high speed… and do not allow F4F Wildcat or P-40 to counter-turn at slow speed.
(Additionally I would recommend subtracting one of the two ‘short’ turns from those American planes since it was hard for them to keep a tight turn without stalling).
In some circumstances, it *wasn't* maneuverable -- the controls weren't power-assisted, so past about 200MPH, it couldn't maneuver well (or, in some cases, at all).
The problem here is: One need two entirely separate game systems to represent the fortes of each side -- climb and dive for Allies (esp. US), turning for Axis. Giving one or the other of the aspects "the call" means pretty-much handing the game to that side.
As far as balancing the Zero: I apply double damage from fires -- that tends to do the job. :)
If I wanted to do that, I'd play _Mustangs_.
No -- what we want is to not have to constantly explain to rookies "how did the Allies win the War when the Axis units are so superior in every way?".
*Cough*Quantity*Cough* Mid to late war most planes were starting to reach a plateau of performance. Propeller driven aircraft can only do so much performance before reaching flight envelopes that would be unobtainable without jet engines. Once aircraft started reaching this universal par decided by physics a lot of the difference came down to the fact that allies had factories and training centers basically unreachable by the axis. 500 hours for a standard U.S. pilot (Before specific type training) versus 150 by a German is going to make a whole lot of difference in combat. Early war WoG has a lot to work on but I am personally satisfied with where late war is going.
For planes with out self sealing tanks, just treat smoke as fire. That doubles the chance of them lighting up.
So many planes and so little time. Any new plane is great. I know we all have our favorites or the next ones we want to see. Can't wait for them to come out.
Ill be using this rule! so which minis don't have self sealing? the zero's, and which other ones?For planes with out self sealing tanks, just treat smoke as fire. That doubles the chance of them lighting up.
I think there is a pretty good thread on this subject in the WGS section.
The Soviets had Quantity -- which is part of why so many German pilots had triple-digit kill-counts. Allied pilots (including the Soviets) had Quality -- one year in the muck, then home to train the next batch; couple that to ever-improving units (something I've been having fun with in other games: Put Luftwaffe fighters against US *naval* acft.; a Hellcat vs. a -109G is... educational) and tactics (a Thach Weave works just as well against Germans as it does Japanese), and game results start to match reality more closely.
(We'll ignore for the moment the skull-crushing stupidity of the Axis leadership -- what kind of imbecile goes to war without putting his country on a war-economy footing?)
The real problems are:
1) Most games base unit quality off Western propaganda, rather than the reality of the situation; the Axis come off as bigger ubermenschen than even their own propaganda claimed. Not every Axis pilot was a Condor Legion (or China, for PTO) veteran with hundreds of hours of flight training, and not every airplane had 30mm cannons with explosive shells which always worked.
2) WW2 air-combat requires two entirely-separate games be played -- one horizontal, for the Axis and Western European planes; one vertical, for the US planes. Since it's far easier to configure a game for the horizontal (tabletops, etc.), the horizontal game gets most of the attention, which cripples the US units. (Couple this to an oversubscription of cannon effectiveness, and....)
This is so wrong in so many aspects that I can't even start to pull the threads to addressing it.
Ok, let's make a try...
Sovites had good and many planes and the pilots that break out of their tacticts and this "throw all in - as soon as it's out of flight shool and factories" strategy performed well.
Fact is that German Jagdgeschwader operatet very succesful at the Eastern Front, but their rookies died that fast like the Russian rookies without leading from the experts.
Maybe I repeat myself but the most succesful German pilots had a long training time, too. (Erich Hartmann - nearly a year - in wartimes) If they only hat the quantity of machines and pilots, I'm shure they would have done excatly the same with their experts - sent them home and train the next wave of pilots, but this wasn't possible.
Since 1942 (night) over 1943 (day and night) the entire Reich had an aerial front and Jagdgeschwader were needed anywere.
US Navy pilots belong to the best, that's right. But isn't it excatly the wrong way to argue if saying: Let them do the aerial combat work over Germany and the Luftwaffe is crushed in a day? Fighting with carriers and carrier based planes differs a lot to fighting with land based planes. (I wonder what the USAAF did in the Pacific when the Tach Wave ist the secret weapon that always clears the skies from axis planes).
Don't know what to say about this "skull-crushing stupidity" and "imbecile" stuff. It's easy to be the chief analyst if knowing all facts and backgrounds - afterwards.
In fall of 1944 the Allieds thougt they are at home for Christmas - a few weeks later they asked Stalin for starting another ground offensive because the German Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS did their best to stop the Allied advance at the Reich's frontiers. Did they fought like imbeciles with skull-crushing stupidity? With desperation, of course...
Maybe a teenager would say: Look at those German elite troops - they are soooo cool and unbeatable. I say that it was a last rear up versus an enemy that's confident of victory with short thermed, overstretched supply lines.
To come back on those games were the units base on Western propaganda, rather then the reality. It all depends on the scenarios you choose and the units you fight versus. Develop a game based on the Soviet Summer offensive in 1944 at the Mid-Eastern front and you have a huge Soviet force, well equipped with tanks, fighters, bombers and artillery that washes away the line of German infantry divisions.
I don't know much Cosims and no games where the German/Axis player always win. A Tiger II tank is a steel beast that resist much fire of different calibers, that's a fact. But this tank will not make it from Aachen to Cherbourg, because it's engine stops working before, it's low on fuel, a lucky Bazooka hit disables it's tracks or a P-47 drop a bomb on his turret.
We can't divide games and historical air combat in two different sections (horizontal & vertical), too. Planes use both of them and they need to meet somewhere to shoot each other down. Wings of Glory can't handle each aspect of aerial combat in WW I & WW II and needs compromises to make the game playable.
No one want's a toothless Luftwaffe with inoperable cannons or Zeros that burn with the second hit. No one wants an armored P-40 he has to be shot a dozend times before it's going down.
...and I'm shure no one would say: Look at the close range ACC firepower of this Messerschmitt. That's why the Huns performed so fantastic from 39 - 45.
(...maybe I'm a little bit responsible for this off-topic answer)
Last edited by Marechallannes; 02-24-2014 at 05:07. Reason: bad spelling
Voilà le soleil d'Austerlitz!
What Sven said.
Feel like saying something but have to bite tongue and cross fingers so's as to not get in trouble and cause problems and bad feeling !
basically what sven said
Back to the minis of Series 6 guys. If you want to discuss the pros and cons of each side, do it in the historical section in one of the many other threads were this is already discussed. Thanks.
Speaking of the Series 6 minis, any timeframe known yet, as to when to expect these bad boys to make their appearance? Is this time next year seeming realistic? Earlier would always be better, but as we all know these things take time, money, and the cooperation of the Chinese manufacturers and that doesn't always come off as easy as we would all hope.
That's a great post; well put and 100% agreed.
That is a great home brewed rule!
Good point, after all, that's what I came to this thread to get info on, then got side tracked myself with the lack of self sealing fuel tanks conversation!
Last edited by kaufschtick; 02-24-2014 at 08:07.
Typically it takes about a year from when we first start seeing pics and such of the initial prototypes once Ares gets them. In this case, they gave me the info before releasing said photos. I don't know if they even have prototypes in hand yet for these (I doubt it, else they would have shown them via FB I think). So, this time next year would be at the very earliest I think. I know we are going to see some reprints before we see these though... and I've been told about two reprints so far, one this year and one next. So, the time frame for these were either not given to me, or they are some time next year after the second reprints I know about (no rough dates on any of those either).
Wow, that means only the heavies for WGS this year, as far as new sculpts. On one hand, my pocket book has sighed a relief, on the other, it concerns me. Then again Ares has out a tremendous amount of money into launching SOG. I am guessing the capitol just isn't there to float WGS projects with what amounts to a second tier game for them and newer and more popular games. I am not saying by any means they arent supporting or pushing WGS, on the contrary I think the direction of WGS has been stupendous the last year or so! I want my SBDS! And I want them soon!
Except the people who missed out on series one and two.Personaly I see this series as a good release, after reading all the posts I came to the conclusion that there is something for everyone
I really enjoyed the Battle of Britain era stuff my elders and betters did at Salute and at Sheffield too. So much so that I burgled the household mess fund and splashed out on two FW190s a Spitfire IX and a P51 (BoB. A/c being unobtainable here except for those willing to give up a kidney or their firstborn child).
Alas! Every time I've brought them out there's one or at most two firing passes and someone (often both participants) are left hitting the silk or desperately heading for home trying to hold a near unflyable heap of scrap together. It seems to me the late war jobs are so deadly that they break the game and if I'm going to fly a Gladiator then I might as well stick to WWI.
Three Words: "Year/Theater Limits". No Gladiators vs. Fw190s that way...
Still wish there was a Kate for the torpedo plane and I guess the 109 is good against the B-17's that will be coming out.
You are right, Dave.
Quick and deadly games with the late war planes.
Time for a resurection house rule.
Voilà le soleil d'Austerlitz!
Great planes, im already waiting a lot for them. Although i agree that we could have the I-L2, but i like the Dauntless.... Whatever, a difficult discussion.
Thanks
Nick
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks