Jump to content


Why no MiG-15 as Tier 10?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
25 replies to this topic

pyantoryng #21 Posted 29 June 2014 - 11:36 AM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2992 battles
  • 8,582
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostAurabird, on 29 June 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:


I have to mention this because it's been on my mind for a while.

Doesnt the F7U have 2 engines? If so, why hasn't WG classed it as a heavy?

 

I'd like to think that the F7U is an "exception" to the 2-engine rule.

 

...although, it used to be in the class of its own - Carrier-based Fighter. The F5U, which was a full-blown twin-engine aircraft, went with this designation too.



WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

Aurabird #22 Posted 29 June 2014 - 04:08 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 3 battles
  • 1,116
  • Member since:
    07-23-2012
It's a rather odd exception at that. I mean, all other twin engines are heavies, the F7U acts 'kind of' like a heavy. Why not just make it one?

I hope they plan for more classes of planes down the road other than the 3 we currently have.

Kind of got off topic from the OP here :veryhappy:

Edited by Aurabird, 29 June 2014 - 04:08 PM.


pyantoryng #23 Posted 29 June 2014 - 05:27 PM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2992 battles
  • 8,582
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

To get slightly on-topic, to classify the MiG-9 as heavy fighter based solely on that it is twin-engined would be...ridiculous, considering its build and armaments.



WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

Demon93IT #24 Posted 29 June 2014 - 07:40 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View Postpyantoryng, on 29 June 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

To get slightly on-topic, to classify the MiG-9 as heavy fighter based solely on that it is twin-engined would be...ridiculous, considering its build and armaments.


Same goes for the F2H Banshee but it is a HF(at least ingame)



pyantoryng #25 Posted 29 June 2014 - 07:56 PM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2992 battles
  • 8,582
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostDemon93IT, on 29 June 2014 - 07:40 PM, said:


Same goes for the F2H Banshee but it is a HF(at least ingame)

 

...now I deflect it to gameplay reason - the Cutlass was preceded by fighters, all the way from tier 1 down to 9.

I'd say the same to the Banshee - wouldn't make much sense when you have to shift class from HF to LF or vice-versa outta the blue.

Then again, the FJ-1 was classified a normal fighter in the days when CBF designation existed...

 



WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

Demon93IT #26 Posted 29 June 2014 - 08:07 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View Postpyantoryng, on 29 June 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

 

...now I deflect it to gameplay reason - the Cutlass was preceded by fighters, all the way from tier 1 down to 9.

I'd say the same to the Banshee - wouldn't make much sense when you have to shift class from HF to LF or vice-versa outta the blue.

Then again, the FJ-1 was classified a normal fighter in the days when CBF designation existed...

 

The Banshee got placed with HF from day 1 without any reason. It doesn't even have logical links to both the plane below and above it(not that having the XF-88 at tier X would have solved the problem but at least they would have had the same manufacturer).

 

Then there are the 262s: back in the ages they were LFs and they they got shifted to HF in 0.4.3.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users