55 replies to this topic

[Mattis_Santos]

plus it had supersonic performance in a dive

[12_inch_Hawk]

Mattis_Santos, on 28 December 2021 - 12:08 PM, said:

would be fun if we gave something to do to the torpedo bombers

Torpedo bombers still carried bombs for ground attack.  Just look at the TBM Avenger.  George Bush was shot down while hitting a radio tower.  The TBM-3 had wing hard points to carry rockets as well as bombs in the bomb bay.  It could carry 4 x 500lb bombs internally.  The TBM-3M could launch Tiny Tims.  Later models of the TBF/TBM omitted the cowl-mount synchronized 0.30 caliber (7.62 mm) gun, and replaced it with twin Browning AN/M2 0.50 caliber (12.7 mm) light-barrel guns, one in each wing outboard of the propeller arc, per pilots' requests for better forward firepower and increased strafing ability.  After the US gained naval supremacy they were mostly used to bomb and strafe islands in the ground attack role during the island hoping campaign.  

 

If the game gave the Avenger 4 x 500lb bombs and 8 x HVAR's with a good reload time it would make a pretty good GA at tier 7.  Compared to the IL-8 the Avenger had less guns but more payload, slightly higher service ceiling but slightly less speed,  It was probably more maneuverable and only slightly less rugged.   

Edited by 12_inch_Hawk, 28 December 2021 - 06:26 PM.

[12_inch_Hawk]

Here is what I think a TBM Avenger would look like as a tier 7 GA;

 

	il-8	il-10	me265	TBM Avenger
gun armament	54	31	21	11
front	2 x 45mm 2x 7.62	2x 23mm	2 x 20mm 2x 7.62	2 x .50
turret	1 x 20mm	1 x 20mm	4 x 13mm	1 x .50, 1 x 7.62
bombs and rockets	31	31	13	44
	2 x fab250	2 x fab250	2 x SC250	4 x 500lb
	8 x rockets	8 x rockets	2 x 30mm guns	8 x HVAR's
survivability	35	26	25	31
gross weight	16,887 lb	13,966 lb	24,251 lb	15,536 lb
airspeed	27	36	44	28
cruise		190 mph		215 mph
max	294 mph	342 mph	419 mph	278 mph
maneuverability	19	29	25	35
wing area	420 sq ft	322.9 sq ft	480 sq ft	490 sq ft
wing loading	40.21 lb/sq ft	43.25 lb/sq ft	50.52 lb/sq ft	31.71 lb/sq ft
altitude performance	4	6	9	7
service ceiling in game	5,259 ft	5,577 ft	6,234, ft	5,800 ft
service ceiling	21,000 ft	18,000 ft	31,200 ft	22,600 ft

 

The text in bold is in game numbers, all other numbers are real life.  It is hard to equate real life to in game because who knows where WG gets its numbers from.  For example the Me 265 has vastly higher wing loading than the IL-8 so should be less maneuverable not more but it is a twin engine so has more power to pull through the turn.  The IL-10 has a lower service ceiling than the IL-8 in real life (at least according to Wikipedia) but it is the opposite in game.  The Me 265 gets half of its real life payload but gets wing mounted 30mm cannons instead.

 

The Avenger has a similar service ceiling to the il-8 and il-10 but slightly better.  It has a higher cruise speed compared to the Il-10 but a lower max speed.  The guns are pitiful but the huge payload should make up for it if it gets a similar reload time.  A gun equipment slot should also help a little bit.  It is heavier than the il-10 but not as heavy as the il-8 so its survivability should be somewhere in between.  The lower wing loading of the Avenger should make it the most maneuverable GA at tier 7.   It would still not be nearly as maneuverable as the least maneuverable tier 7 multirole fighter, the P-47N.  That makes sense because it was even heavier than the P-47

Edited by 12_inch_Hawk, 28 December 2021 - 11:26 PM.

[CorvusCorvax]

12_inch_Hawk, on 28 December 2021 - 06:14 PM, said:

  Compared to the IL-8 the Avenger had less guns but more payload, slightly higher service ceiling but slightly less speed 

Considering how slow the IL-8 is, that would make the TBM almost intolerable.

The IL-8 on a map like Cold Peak is insufferable because of how long it takes to get anywhere.

[fredfredburger86]

P-61A BLACK WIDOW night fighter/heavyfighter. They can make a few a/b/c versions of it. I like this plane I built the revell-monogram model of it in 1:48 scale beautiful plane.

I also want a Poland Tech Tree by itself like in tanks and not "Europe" that is mixed with France, Israel, etc...

Poland had a decent number of planes before ww2 even such as this even in wikipedia:

 

List of 1939-1945[edit]

(Built vs Used in Combat)

Fighters[edit]

• PZL P.11 (175 vs 140)
• PZL P.7 (105 vs 30) - obsolete by 1939

Light/Tactical Bombers[edit]

• PZL 23A Karaś (30 vs 0) - experimental version
• PZL 23B Karaś (170 vs 120)
• PZL.46 Sum - (2 vs 2) - prototypes only

Medium/Heavy Bombers[edit]

• PZL 37 Los (61 vs 36) - few built due to Polish Army objections and not operational
• PZL 30 Żubr (30 vs 0) - obsolete by 1939
• PZL.49 Miś - never built due to outbreak of World War 2

Reconnaissance/Close Support aircraft[edit]

• Lublin R-XIII (150 vs 55)
• LWS-3 Mewa (2 vs 2) - prototypes only
• RWD-14 Czapla (60 vs 40)

Trainers[edit]

• PWS-10 (80 vs ?)
• PWS-26 (320 vs ?)
• RWD-8 (550 vs ?)

Transports[edit]

• PWS-24bis (3 vs 3)

[12_inch_Hawk]

CorvusCorvax, on 28 December 2021 - 06:27 PM, said:

Considering how slow the IL-8 is, that would make the TBM almost intolerable.

The IL-8 on a map like Cold Peak is insufferable because of how long it takes to get anywhere.

Not necessarily I couldn't find info on the IL-8's cruise speed but since it is slower than the IL-10 I am assuming its cruise speed is as well.  That would mean the Avenger would have a much higher cruise speed than the IL-8 and only slightly less boost speed.  On a map like cold peak the higher cruise speed would mean the Avenger would actually get around the map quicker than the IL-8.

[12_inch_Hawk]

fredfredburger86, on 28 December 2021 - 06:29 PM, said:

I also want a Poland Tech Tree by itself like in tanks and not "Europe" that is mixed with France, Israel, etc...

Poland had a decent number of planes before ww2 even such as this even in wikipedia:

There are a few problems with that.  First it would take away resources from finishing the tech trees of existing major nations like UK, US, and Japan for obscure planes that are less popular among non Polish players and historically built in less numbers.  Second If Poland had a decent number of planes before WW2 how would you fill out the tech tree from tier 4 up?  

[CorvusCorvax]

12_inch_Hawk, on 28 December 2021 - 11:32 PM, said:

Not necessarily I couldn't find info on the IL-8's cruise speed but since it is slower than the IL-10 I am assuming its cruise speed is as well.  That would mean the Avenger would have a much higher cruise speed than the IL-8 and only slightly less boost speed.  On a map like cold peak the higher cruise speed would mean the Avenger would actually get around the map quicker than the IL-8.

Ahhh, thank you.  Yes, higher cruise would make it acceptable at T7.  Maybe between the Me-265 and the IL-8.  Actually, maybe between the IL-10 and the Me-265...

[12_inch_Hawk]

CorvusCorvax, on 28 December 2021 - 07:51 PM, said:

Ahhh, thank you.  Yes, higher cruise would make it acceptable at T7.  Maybe between the Me-265 and the IL-8.  Actually, maybe between the IL-10 and the Me-265...

The Avenger did have a higher cruise speed than the il-10.  Il-10 was 190 mph and the Avenger was 215 mph.  So it is between the il-10 and the Me-265.  It is only the Avengers top speed that is lacking.  

[12_inch_Hawk]

Mattis_Santos, on 28 December 2021 - 12:08 PM, said:

would be fun if we gave something to do to the torpedo bombers

Another example is the B5N Kate "torpedo" bomber during the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Only 40 planes in the first wave were armed with torpedoes while all the rest were armed with bombs.  49 in the first wave (that were still targeting ships) and 54 in the second wave, 103 total B5N "torpedo" bombers were armed with bombs not a torpedo.  Bombs were much more commonly used than torpedoes even when targeting ships.

[J311yfish]

New Aircraft You Would Like to See In Game (2014)

Raindrops USA tech tree project (2014)

Edited by J311yfish, 29 December 2021 - 03:09 AM.

[jack_wdw]

Mattis_Santos, on 28 December 2021 - 05:08 PM, said:

would be fun if we gave something to do to the torpedo bombers

http://forum.worldof...er-iv-tier-vii/

[crzyhawk]

12_inch_Hawk, on 28 December 2021 - 06:10 AM, said:

tier	US bombers	US multirole	US GA	UK bombers	UK GA	Japan GA	Japan Bomber	Japan multirole
2							G3M Nell	ki 3
3						D1A Susie	ki 21 Sally	ki 32 Mary
4	PBY-5 catalina		devastator	wellington	swordfish	B5N Kate	ki 48 Lily	ki 36 Ida
5			dauntless	stirling	albacore	D3A Val	G4M Betty	ki 51 Sonia
6		hellcat	helldiver	halifax	baracuda	D4Y Judy	ki 67 Peggy	ki 44 Tojo
7		bearcat F8F-1	avenger	lancaster	spearfish	B6N Jill	P1Y Frances	N1Ki-J George
8	B-29	bearcat F8F-2	skyraider	valiant	firebrand		G8N Rita
9	YB-35	panther	skyshark	victor	wyvern		G10N
10	YB-49	cougar	skyhawk	vulcan	buccaneer

 

premiums 

B-25H

B-24 Liberator

P-63 kingcobra

CF-100 canuck

Ju 52

HP 52

Fw 200

I'd really like to see the USN Grumman fighters removed from the multi-role...role.  They were primarily fighters, and should be represented as much.

[wylleEcoyote]

crzyhawk, on 01 January 2022 - 12:20 PM, said:

I'd really like to see the USN Grumman fighters removed from the multi-role...role.  They were primarily fighters, and should be represented as much.

You arent wrong ... but if your light fighter can carry ordnance you are a Multirole in this game. 

[Dennez]

the devastator sucked.and our torpedoes sucked as well.

 

most of our torpedoes didnt even detonate and most of our pilots flying the devastator were shot down.

the dauntless however was a great bomber and fighter= multi-role.

Edited by Dennez, 02 January 2022 - 12:22 PM.

[J311yfish]

Quick overview of Japanese bombers below

 

 

It would be a mistake to try and mix/match bombers together from both Army and Navy, for at least 3 reasons:

- 1) it isn't necessary -- they can each get to VII or VIII on their own

- 2) different requirements -- Army preferred higher defensive armament, for example

- 3) differentiation vs. existing bombers -- pick the one from Japan that offers the greatest difference to Germany, U.S.S.R., and eventually U.K.  The major playable difference would be the ability to deliver bombs from afar (via Ohka for IJN, or I-Go for IJA).

Edited by J311yfish, 08 January 2022 - 06:03 AM.

[12_inch_Hawk]

J311yfish, on 02 January 2022 - 04:04 PM, said:

Quick overview of Japanese bombers below

 

 

It would be a mistake to try and mix/match bombers together from both Army and Navy, for at least 3 reasons:

- 1) it isn't necessary -- they can each get to VII or VIII on their own

- 2) different requirements -- Army preferred higher defensive armament, for example

- 3) differentiation vs. existing bombers -- pick the one from Japan that offers the greatest difference to Germany, U.S.S.R., and eventually U.K.  The major playable difference would be the ability to deliver bombs from afar (via Ohka for IJN, or I-Go for IJA).

The only Japanese bomber I care about is the betty so I will defer the rest to you.

[J311yfish]

 

	U.K. bombers	Japan interceptors (IJA)	Japan interceptors (IJN)	Germany interceptors	Europe	U.S.A. bombers
II
III	Whitley (Tiger, Deerhound)				Fiat CR.42 Gloster Gladiator (Mercury)
IV	Wellington (Pegasus, Hercules, Merlin)
V	Stirling (Hercules)	Nakajima Ki-44-I (Ha-41)
VI	Halifax (Hercules, Merlin)	Nakajima Ki-44-II (Ha-109)	Mitsubishi J2M (Kasei)		Savoia-Marchetti SM.89
VII	Lancaster (Merlin, Griffon)	Kayaba Katsuodori (Ne 20)	Kawanishi N1K2-J (Homare)
VIII	Windsor (Merlin, Griffon, Clyde)	Ki-200	Nakajima Kikka (Ne 130)	Me 163 Komet		B-29/50
IX	Vulcan B.1 (Avon, Sapphire, Olympus)	Ki-202-I	Kugisho R2Y2 Keiun	Me 263 Scholle		YB-35
X	Vulcan B.2 (Olympus)	Ki-202-III	Kugisho R2Y3	EF 127 Walli		YB-49

 

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

 

I am also partial to 'anything from Europe' because I like the option of being able to move them around.

-- Fiat CR.42 and Gloster Gladiator are both significant, and both had an export market so giving them to Europe for horizontal transferability could be fun

-- SM.89 is a mid-tier, big-gun, attack aircraft with a turret; horizontal transferability would give it to U.K., U.S., Japan, countries that otherwise do not have an attack aircraft

 

Regarding the Katsuodori, it began as a ramjet fighter, but was proposed also to use the Ne-20 (early jet engine used in Kikka), or Toku-Ro 2 (rocket engine used in J8M).  Using the Ne-20 makes sense for balance and provides variation from Kostikov 302 at same tier.  The Kikka as an interceptor was projected to use Ne-130 (as found on Ki-162-I and J7W2).

Edited by J311yfish, 09 January 2022 - 03:52 PM.

[crzyhawk]

wylleEcoyote, on 02 January 2022 - 05:02 AM, said:

You arent wrong ... but if your light fighter can carry ordnance you are a Multirole in this game. 

Take the bombs off and let them be the fighters they were born to be.  Mustangs could carry bombs as well, but nobody's trying to force them into a MR line.  P-40s spent more of the war being used as MR than they did as fighters, and were arguably better MR than they were pure air-to-air fighters.

 

The problem is, the Corsairs are /certainly/ a MR fighter and needed a /line/ so they got the Brewsters and Grummans and they created a USN line rather than a Grumman line and a Vought line.  They only Grumman that really carried any ordnance on anything resembling a regular basis, the F6F isn't even in game.

[crzyhawk]

Dennez, on 02 January 2022 - 07:19 AM, said:

the devastator sucked.and our torpedoes sucked as well.

 

most of our torpedoes didnt even detonate and most of our pilots flying the devastator were shot down.

the dauntless however was a great bomber and fighter= multi-role.

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.