PDA

View Full Version : DEVASTATOR CLAUDE AND IS IT THE JILL?DEV UPDATE



aminx
12-03-2004, 06:30 AM
HI,

DEVASTATOR:Looking great but is it flyable?

CLAUDE:For the early war China campaign,is it flyable?

Y 15,11,5: Is this the JILL carrier born torp plane which replaced the KATE?And finally will it be flyable?

cross your fingers.
aminx

Mr_Nakajima
12-03-2004, 06:40 AM
Yes, the B6N is the 'Jill'.

And yes, fingers crossed that they are flyable!

JG51Beolke
12-03-2004, 06:52 AM
And there's probably much, much more instore for PF in the future. I can't even imagine what the end product will be, once all the add-on's and patches are done.

This game is great, and it's only going to get better and better. The game that came on CD was impressive enough for me. The first time I landed on a Carrier, I couldn't stop being amazed.

And the personal level of support from Oleg and 1C is absolutely outstanding!!!!

Best Regards

hotspace
12-03-2004, 06:53 AM
I wonder when though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hot Space

VW-IceFire
12-03-2004, 07:08 AM
Good stuff...the Devastator and Jill are something I've been missing in my mission building. This will help quite a bit to make things more interesting and varried.

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 07:14 AM
And an Irving. All we need is a Nick, and a few IJAAF bombers like a Sally/Helen/etc...

Course we saw a screenshot of the Liberty Ship many months ago, haven't seen that yet...

tater

Jieitai_Tsunami
12-03-2004, 07:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>We have some brand new screenshots of a number of Work in Progress AI planes which may be made available in the free add-on, these are:
Douglas TBD "Devastator"
Mitsubishi A5M "Claude"
Nakajima B6N "Tenzan"
Nakajima J1N "Gekko"
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 07:36 AM
The dev update does say "AI planes which may be made available..."

tater

goshikisen
12-03-2004, 08:04 AM
Though the Gekko is going to be an interesting addition... is the IL2/FB/PF engine set up for night fighting scenarios? The Toryu would have been a better choice... but I'll take any Japanese aircraft they put in there.

Regards, Goshikisen

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 08:15 AM
Yeah, I agree, the Nick would have been a much better choice with ~1700 built vs ~500.

The US probably lost more fighters than they built both those planes combined (not in combat, I mean just "misplaced" lol).

"Honey, where'd I put those Wildcats?"

"Did you LOOK in your hanger?"

"No"

"I didn't think so."

"They're not there."

"They're YOUR stupid fighters, why should I know where you left them..."


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

tater

goshikisen
12-03-2004, 08:21 AM
Anyone have any idea as to when we'll see these aircraft in the game? Two weeks?

WildeSau
12-03-2004, 08:24 AM
Hope that at least the TBD Devastator and the Jill are flyable. The A5M would be nice too but not as important as the others are.

MiszaNC
12-03-2004, 09:36 AM
Devastator - AI sweet, flyable not worthy?
Kate - flyable pleeeeease
Avanger - flyable pleeeease
Helldiver - flyable pleeeease
Claude - AI OK. flyable love that baby! remember how nice it was whan it was added to CFS2
Kingfishe - flyable just for fun! pleeease
Catalina - flyable with SAR missions and let that guys jamp into the plane! Would be nice to have the rescude pilot just visible in the cocpit and no more in the water after Catalina take off. That would be greate for coop missions to rescue pilots back to squadrons. Well just a few Santa Claus wishes...

Zneg1
12-03-2004, 10:07 AM
sure it would be easy to make all of these flyable but do you know this requires resources to do from research to gathering technical data to modeling the interior to actual programming and debugging for each plane? Projects like this always requires money and time to do. We are so lucky IC;maddox patches and fixes and GIVES AWAY flyable planes during a products point release while others do make people pay for it.

I think the question is, will the community be willing to pay for say American plane sets, Japanese, British, German etc. for PF and BoB?

MiszaNC
12-03-2004, 10:13 AM
Well personally I am willing to pay extra for just a set of USN and JIN planes. Looking at what modellers have already done it will be worthy. They doing a greate job it should be paied.

NORAD_Zooly10
12-03-2004, 10:18 AM
I concur, why not release as an addon like AEP was for Forgotten Battles? lets call it: PFAEP.

Ruy Horta
12-03-2004, 10:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by goshikisen:
Though the Gekko is going to be an interesting addition... is the IL2/FB/PF engine set up for night fighting scenarios? The Toryu would have been a better choice... but I'll take any Japanese aircraft they put in there.

Regards, Goshikisen <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its one of those odd developments indeed.

I offered Ki 45 material and there hardly was any interest, the chances are not too good when it comes to this work horse.

Ruy Horta
12-03-2004, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MiszaNC:
Devastator - AI sweet, flyable not worthy?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amazing...

Is the benchmark historical background, a challenge or simply modeling "kewl" crates for action packed arena flying?

The Devastator was the main TB for the opening phase of the war, it particpated in the early Carrier raids, Coral Sea and the all important set piece battle of Midway

Worthy?

Yes, God****it, it particpated in the most important Naval Battle of WW2, as such it took part in taking away the Japanese Initiative.

Initiative is perhaps the single most important element of war.

The war started with a Naval parity (some might argue that), but full Japanese initiative, Midway ended the parity and from than on it was the Japanese who had to follow up on US action, always one step behind.

ElAurens
12-03-2004, 11:04 AM
Agree totally Ruy, the Devastator is needed!

And please, a flyable Ki27 to make AVG missions historical....

MiszaNC
12-03-2004, 11:05 AM
Ruy Horta,

you are right, it is worthy.
"PFAEP" sounds good for me, with Devastator http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

butzbeast
12-03-2004, 11:07 AM
btw, where is the flyable G4M "Betty" ?

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 11:13 AM
Ruy Horta said: "Initiative is perhaps the single most important element of war."

No, LOGISTICS is the single most important factor in war. That's why the Japanese were such rank amatures with zero chance of success. They had no ability at all to deal with their new far-flug empire. Not remotely enough merchant tonnage, and no system of defending what shipping they did have en route.

They completely misunderstood Mahan to their great misfortune.

It's also why wasting time modelling a German CV is just that, a waste of time. Realistic use means it goes out to sea, fights or not, wins or not, either way it runs out of stores and bunker oil since they had no ability to supply it at sea short of using "sea cow" subs (man, how many to gas up a CVBG, lol?).

tater

A.K.Davis
12-03-2004, 11:17 AM
Funny thing about the Devastator is that when you look at the number of combat missions flown by the type, it is very insignificant. It's significance comes from the two high-profile battles it participated in, but these are just a handful of days out of the whole war.

It becomes important through association more than contribution to the war.

goshikisen
12-03-2004, 11:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
Agree totally Ruy, the Devastator is _needed!_

And please, a __flyable Ki27__ to make AVG missions historical.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Although all work done by all modellers for this series is highly appreciated I sometimes wonder at the choice of models. It'd almost be better if Oleg made a list of priority aircraft and let modeller's choose which they'd like to do from that master list. As it is we have talented people modelling obscure aircraft.

Today's dev. update is a perfect example of what I see as an issue. (but, before you jump all over me, I think of this as a "good" issue as opposed to a criticism... I'll take anything you artisans decide to build) We have the Claude and the Gekko being modelled when in fact the Nate and the Nick would have complemented the current stable of aircraft and scenarios to a greater degree.

Is there any method to the choices made for the sim? Why waste a ton of effort on aircraft that people will almost never fly?

to repeat - I appreciate all effort invested in the betterment of the series - I only pose these questions because I want PF to be as good as it can be.

Regards, Goshikisen

CHDT
12-03-2004, 11:32 AM
The Ki-100 is wonderful, but any news of the Tempest and the JU-88?

Ruy Horta
12-03-2004, 11:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
No, LOGISTICS is the single most important factor in war. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its the difference between the art of war and the business of war. In a battle of attrition you are absolutely right, when it comes to a fast and nasty clash, you are not (although logistics always play a role, as such it cannot be ignored, but I simply differ on its primacy).

I'll not start a discussion between the role of inititative and logistics, however if you have plenty of time, space and manpower you can dedicate yourself to winning "through the battle of logistics" and win almost any war, but unfortunately most countries do not have that luxury.

Fact is that as long as the Japanese were having the inititaive they were dictating the war in the pacific, Midway took away the initiative and started the battle of attrition, only after a year or so of that could the US bring in its logistical advantage in an overwhelming avalanche of Naval power - it took however some time to get there.

mllaneza
12-03-2004, 11:50 AM
Devastator. Geeze, it was replaced early in the war and the Avenger flew many more missions, and a wider variety as well. So I'll understand if the Avenger gets flyable first.

However, a lot of people feel strongly about the TBD (myself included) because it was used in the near-suicide missions at Midway. I want it. I'll happily take it flyable after the Avenger, but it should be in the game.

Besides, the only time you can have too many torpedo planes is when they're the other guy's and their inbound on your TF.

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 12:15 PM
goshikisen is spot on with nate and nick making more sense than claude and irving. Oh well. I suppose with the lack of viable AAF maps for either side, naval planes make more sense at some level.

OT:
As for initiative, the Pacific war was nothing but logistics by virtue of the huge distances involved. Logistics was all that ever really mattered. Initiative in naval combat REQUIRES huge logistical trains in the PTO. Even tactically CVs needed to withdraw to fuel themselves and their escorts in particular frequently which had a major bearing on what units were in harm's way at any given moment. Early on the USN was critically low on fleet oilers, for example. Regradless, IJN initiative would have expired of its own accord without major USN sucesses like Midway due to their overextension. Also, it was always going to be a war of attrition. They fantasized that it might be won quickly, but they could wish the sky polka dot too, that doesn't make it possible. There is no possible alternate history where the Pacific War isn't a war of attrition.

So the Japanese engaged themselves against a foe they knew precisely to have the resources, space, and manpower to kill them in any war of attrition, yet they did nothing at all to foster a culture of logistics within their own armed forces (the duplication of shipping in their Army, and utter lack of ASW capabilities are prime examples).

Initiative means forcing the other guy to react to you instead of you reacting to him. It pays some role assuming that by keeping the initiative, you make him do what you'd like him to do. If what you'd like him to do, and what you'd like to do are just plain wrong, initiative doesn't really matter.

BTW, IMHO, the IJN lost the initiative at the Coral Sea anyway when they did the timid thing and cancelled the invasion even though they won the fight. The fall of the SWPA was fait accompli at that point.

tater

F19_Olli72
12-03-2004, 12:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by goshikisen:
Is there any method to the choices made for the sim? Why waste a ton of effort on aircraft that people will almost never fly?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I protest against this comment as if Claude was flyable i would fly it all the time! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

chris455
12-03-2004, 12:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
Agree totally Ruy, the Devastator is _needed!_

And please, a __flyable Ki27__ to make AVG missions historical.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I second that, a Nate would be great
(hey that rhymes....................) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Tater-SW-
12-03-2004, 12:40 PM
In the short term we could sub Claudes for Nates for AVG stuff (they are somewhat similar). Too bad there are no IJAAF bombers.

tater

unseen84
12-03-2004, 12:59 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
This is indeed the best news about PF i've seen in quite a long time. The Devastator was not unexpected, but I was a bit surprised to the Claude and Jill, and all the models look awesome. I hope they'll all be flyable someday, especially the TBD.

Now I'd just like to see a Judy and then I'll be content.

goshikisen
12-03-2004, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
In the short term we could sub Claudes for Nates for AVG stuff (they are somewhat similar). Too bad there are no IJAAF bombers.

tater <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Out of interest... I've read some of the history of the AVG but I can't recall if they ever engaged Claudes in combat. Does anyone know if they didi? What kind of scenarios would the Claude appropriate for?

Ruy Horta
12-03-2004, 02:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by goshikisen:
Out of interest... I've read some of the history of the AVG but I can't recall if they ever engaged Claudes in combat. Does anyone know if they didi? What kind of scenarios would the Claude appropriate for? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The main scenarios are Chino-Japanese and early USN carrier raids (pre-Coral Sea) which encountered mainly A5Ms.

Can't recall if the type was active in the East Indies campaign.

GerritJ9
12-03-2004, 03:38 PM
IJAAF aircraft were mainly used over West Java and Sumatra, with the IJNAF primarily active over Borneo, Ambon, Celebes, Bali and East Java.
The A5M was not reported over the NEI, but A6M2, Ki27 and Ki43 were.