Jump to content


Planes you would like to see


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

Dennez #41 Posted 10 January 2022 - 12:32 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1388 battles
  • 441
  • [COD-] COD-
  • Member since:
    09-25-2021
well if we do get the devastator i hope you can fly it without torpedos.
just a man with a big rooster.

DieselTech #42 Posted 10 January 2022 - 01:23 AM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 14 battles
  • 1
  • [B13TH] B13TH
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

sea planes and flying boats

 

especially the various pby catalina models and the japanese four and six engine flying boats from ww2



hoom #43 Posted 15 January 2022 - 12:08 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 15302 battles
  • 2,993
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Sea Fury & the mighty Boulton Paul Defiant! :izmena:
C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas le SerB.

CorvusCorvax #44 Posted 15 January 2022 - 02:02 AM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 6638 battles
  • 7,813
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posthoom, on 15 January 2022 - 12:08 AM, said:

Sea Fury & the mighty Boulton Paul Defiant! :izmena:

YES.

 

The Defiant would make an awesome T4 LF.  Sucker someone into a turnfight.  

Win.



hoom #45 Posted 16 January 2022 - 09:12 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 15302 battles
  • 2,993
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Give the turret equal stats to the Beaufighter V & a Turret slot and it actually could work in T4.
C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas le SerB.

qu33kKC #46 Posted 16 January 2022 - 12:12 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 17074 battles
  • 1,828
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-14-2017

View Postcrzyhawk, on 09 January 2022 - 11:43 PM, said:

The Devastator wasn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be.  It was the second best torpedo bomber in the world in 1941, behind only the B5N Kate.  The Kate would have been murdered just as badly if employed like the TBD was at Midway, against Zeroes without fighter protection.  People talk about the greatness of the Swordfish, but I'd rather fly against the Kido Butai in a Devastator than a Swordfish.

 

Which says more about the dismal state of naval airpower at the start of the war than it says about the Devastator.  It was obsolescent at best, and the US knew it.  The TBF first flew at Midway as well (from Midway itself) and was treated pretty roughly, as were unescorted Kates at Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz.  Rough life being a torpedo bomber. . . . .

 

It would have been very interesting to see what the radar-equipped Swordfish could have done at night, but alas, Somerville didn't realize how close he was to the Japanese.



12_inch_Hawk #47 Posted 16 January 2022 - 03:06 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 36817 battles
  • 1,048
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    06-02-2018

View PostJ311yfish, on 08 January 2022 - 11:54 PM, said:

I remain hopeful for the following, and this order of introduction makes sense to me:

 

1 -- U.S. flying wing bombers

2 -- rocket-powered interceptors for Germany or Japan

3 -- U.K. bombers

4 -- mid-tier interceptors to bolster Japan

 

It might be what you want but it doesn't make sense

1 High tier US bombers are in development and announced years ago so that one makes sense

2 It has been said the bearcat line is in development so that will probably be next.  Germany's tech tree is already complete. Japan already has high tier fighters.  what japan needs is bombers, GA's, and multiroles.  Iconic planes that actually existed, saw combat, and were built in high numbers should take precedent like the betty, val and kate.

3 UK bombers are needed but they are probably a lower priority.  The only thing the American tech tree is lacking after the introduction of the previous two is GA's line.  Finishing off the American tech tree would make sense because the game could than be marketed more heavily in North America (one of the biggest video game markets) and get better reception if ALL the iconic American planes are available.

4 Japanese carrier planes like the val and kate would be a good compliment to the American counterparts in a GA line and would help round out the Japanese tech tree.  Ideally they could be released at the same time as the US line or slightly after the US line but at the same time as the UK line.  If the UK line isn't released at the same time as the  the UK line will have to wait until way later.

5 This would be a good time for UK bombers to help round out their tech tree.   I give UK bombers a higher priority than Japanese bombers because bombing was one of the most significant parts of the UK's offensive war effort after they were forced out of France until D-day.  

6 Japanese bombers would be best after UK bombers.  Since Japan would be the only major nation without a bomber line at this point.

7 Japanese multiroles and UK GA's (if not already released) to finish off the tech trees of all the major nations (I'm not including Russian heavies because the closest thing they had was planes like the Pe-2 which are already in the bomber line)

View PostDieselTech, on 09 January 2022 - 08:23 PM, said:

sea planes and flying boats

 

especially the various pby catalina models and the japanese four and six engine flying boats from ww2

They have said they have no intention of introducing seaplanes (float planes or flying boats).  The Catalina may still have a chance but a slim one only because the later models were amphibious and they were so iconic, built in large numbers, and were a major contribution to the war.


Edited by 12_inch_Hawk, 16 January 2022 - 03:08 PM.


J311yfish #48 Posted 16 January 2022 - 06:02 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6747 battles
  • 1,593
  • [343] 343
  • Member since:
    12-13-2013

View Post12_inch_Hawk, on 16 January 2022 - 10:06 AM, said:

1 High tier US bombers are in development and announced years ago so that one makes sense

 

We do not know the reason for their delay.  Is the delay due to 1) an absence of manpower, 2) a change in strategic vision, or 3) game balance?  The first two cannot be reasonably accounted for by anyone here on the forum -- that leaves game balance.  We know that there has been debate in the past about tier X bombers being unstoppable -- so does the introduction of USA 8-10 exacerbate that (make it worse)?  And if so, how would you counter it?  The weakness of a high-altitude flying wing is going to be its large profile from directly above/below.  So, rocket-based interceptors answer that directly.

 

(We can't solve #1 or #2, but we can offer solutions for #3).

 

View Post12_inch_Hawk, on 16 January 2022 - 10:06 AM, said:

2 It has been said the bearcat line is in development so that will probably be next.

 

It has also been said that there will be no commitment to a roadmap.  (Search your feelings, you know it to be true!)

 

In the absence of a transparent roadmap, all we can really do here is:

 

-- look back over the past ~9 years, understand the vision, and use that knowledge to show how things might work within the existing game 2.X (Ex: bombers, interceptors; more fighters, MRFs, etc.)

-- offer ideas that don't involve a heavy commitment to manpower or change in vision (Ex: unique pilots, events)

-- generate some enthusiasm for the game

 

//edit: added link to History of World of Warplanes


Edited by J311yfish, 17 January 2022 - 09:52 AM.

Main tech tree projects:   JAPAN    UNITED KINGDOM  •  UNITED STATES    GERMANY  •  USSR  // aircraft to China

Europe tech tree projects:  ITALY    FRANCE    SWEDEN    Finland (skins•  Poland  •  International  //  Retired projects:  China    Brazil

Historical scenarios:  Spanish Civil War (skins•  Invasion of Poland  •  Winter War  •  Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes

Map proposals:   Panama Canal    Great Wall of China    Cliffs of Dover   //  Clan:  343 Kokutai  //  Tutorial:  How to ignore forum posts and signatures


Viper_7242NC #49 Posted 16 January 2022 - 06:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 19252 battles
  • 1,230
  • [VIPR3] VIPR3
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012
If we are going to have made up planes, I would like to see these. 
 
So say we all.

J311yfish #50 Posted 17 January 2022 - 09:55 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6747 battles
  • 1,593
  • [343] 343
  • Member since:
    12-13-2013

View PostViper_7242NC, on 16 January 2022 - 01:28 PM, said:

If we are going to have made up planes, I would like to see these. [Microsoft game: Crimson Skies]

 

Of course you are joking, but also, according to that game World War II does not even exist! 


Main tech tree projects:   JAPAN    UNITED KINGDOM  •  UNITED STATES    GERMANY  •  USSR  // aircraft to China

Europe tech tree projects:  ITALY    FRANCE    SWEDEN    Finland (skins•  Poland  •  International  //  Retired projects:  China    Brazil

Historical scenarios:  Spanish Civil War (skins•  Invasion of Poland  •  Winter War  •  Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes

Map proposals:   Panama Canal    Great Wall of China    Cliffs of Dover   //  Clan:  343 Kokutai  //  Tutorial:  How to ignore forum posts and signatures





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users