PDA

View Full Version : Late war Zeros- What are their strengths/weaknesses?



drose01
05-25-2005, 08:25 PM
I have just recently started to fly the late war AGM series, and wanted to see if there is any wisdom out there about them.

My impression is they are great turners, but lack max speed and lose performance at altitude, and are relatively sensitive to enemy fire.

My question is regarding comparisons to other turnfight/dogfight style planes. Can they outturn La/Yak/Spit/109F/G (late models)? Which of these planes can they outrun or outclimb?

drose01
05-25-2005, 08:25 PM
I have just recently started to fly the late war AGM series, and wanted to see if there is any wisdom out there about them.

My impression is they are great turners, but lack max speed and lose performance at altitude, and are relatively sensitive to enemy fire.

My question is regarding comparisons to other turnfight/dogfight style planes. Can they outturn La/Yak/Spit/109F/G (late models)? Which of these planes can they outrun or outclimb?

VW-IceFire
05-25-2005, 09:51 PM
Basically they can still out turn most of those (but not as good as the A6M2) but they are too slow to climb or run from any.

Bronzefist
05-25-2005, 10:07 PM
Heh I was wondering the same thing as well. I use the A6M7 abit online and EVERYBODY (save bombers) can outrrun you. The turning still seems to be great though, but thats about it. Its armament seems hella potent too.

I'm interested if finding out the differences between the two A6M7s. One is 1944 and the other 1945 I believe. I dont notice any difference btw them in my limited testing. Any insight?

Also is the Zero still Japan's best handling plane in 1944+? Or is the Ki-84 the best? The in-game description gives the impression that the Ki-84 actually handles better than the Zero.

3.JG51_BigBear
05-25-2005, 10:18 PM
The A6M7s were built for ground attack and suicide flights. In real life the difference between the 62 and the 63 was the removal of the water/methnonal system. Its not modelled in game and I don't think there are any other siginificant differences. The Ki-84 outclasses the zero in every respect except in turning and even then its still a far better turner than the American late war fighters in game.

Maj_Death
05-25-2005, 11:58 PM
In late war, the zero is slow, underpowered, very fragile and not terribly agile at normal combat speeds either (400+km/h). However it does retain the excellent low speed agility of previous versions. My recommendation is try to lure the enemy low and slow and then engage in a turn fight. If the enemy has any sense then this will never work and best you can really hope to do is periodically get the jump on someone and spend the rest of the time dodging enemy bullets.

The Ki-61 is reasonably good though still at a disadvantage once beyond 1943. The Ki-84 is excellent and certainly on the par with anything else in PF except the jets.

stansdds
05-26-2005, 04:09 AM
Low and slow is where the Zero operates best. It is not a great energy fighter, so lure your victim into low altitude turning battles. The late war Zeros replaced the machine guns with larger caliber weapons and added armor protection for the pilot. This came at the cost of speed and a little agility as engine output could not keep up with the increasing weight of the late war Zero.

jarink
05-26-2005, 04:56 PM
The two main weaknesses of the late war A6Ms are the F6F and the F4U.

JG53Frankyboy
05-26-2005, 06:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
The A6M7s were built for ground attack and suicide flights. In real life the difference between the 62 and the 63 was the removal of the water/methnonal system. Its not modelled in game and I don't think there are any other siginificant differences. The Ki-84 outclasses the zero in every respect except in turning and even then its still a far better turner than the American late war fighters in game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, in game the Model52c and 62 has MW injection - so they have the Sakae 31 engine.

that is wrong ! the both should have Sakae 21 without MW , only normal boost

the Model 63 should be the only ZEro with MW injection, that it has not in game

especially for the A6M7 it would be very nice to ad the armament option " 2 wingdroptanks + 250kg Bomb" . because behind these wingtanks the idea was to have both, tanks AND bomb !
without bomb these tanks are senseless.

best Zeros in game are Model52a&b.

the best at all isnt in game , the Model22.
speed close to the Model32 but can turn like model 21 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

MS_Siwarrior
05-26-2005, 11:00 PM
Hmm late war zeros weaknesses,
I think they would have to be the fact that the are underpowered and they arn't armoured enough around the fuel tanks.

I found a good way to shoot them down, aim for the tail area, it comes off quite easily with .50s.

Vipez-
05-27-2005, 10:07 AM
IMHO best zero in the game is Model52b..
the C has one more gun, but its not worth it considering its slightly slower and less agile, 5B feels overall the best zero . M7s are useless, their only streng is nice fire power, but like most planes, what good of those guns are if you can't get a chance to use then.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif