POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

well i guess it's no secret which one i picked..... [:'(]

I am 100% for idea "Nikademus "posted...


Leo "Apollo11"

[WiTP_Dude]

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude
This all seems kind of silly. When the Japanese were designing the new plane models, they didn't know beforehand how they would work out. Maybe if the player was blind as to what the end result would be, it would make sense to have ahistorical upgrades. Then maybe you pour a lot of resources into one design and it ends up that the plane is a real stinker. Or you get lucky and plane really flies well.

Otherwise the current system of pushing or delaying historical plane models by a few months seems best. You already know which planes are the better ones vs those that didn't work out too well. You can use this knowledge to give the Japanese a little lift.

Yes and no. Take the Ki-44. The requirements set out by the Japanese Army were not initially reached, so the design team made some modifications so that the aircraft would meet or at least come close to requirements.

I think the best way to measure historical plane performance is how did the bulk of planes fly in the war. If the Ki-44 performed well, then that is how it should be modeled in the game.

However, if WiTP is to take an ahistorical path, then it seems fair that the performance data not be known before hand by players. That's right, blind. Then you can decide if you want to scatter your resources around or put it all in only a few planes.

Otherwise you'd just put all of your research resources into the planes you know will be the best and forget about the rest.

[DrewMatrix]

However, if WiTP is to take an ahistorical path, then it seems fair that the performance data not be known before hand by players.

Here here! The P-39 went into production because people thought it was a good, innovative design. They didn't know ahead it would perform poorly then decide not to waste resources actually building them.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Yes I agree now is the time to lobby for The Med game. Can I suggest a title?
"A War that never actualy happened but is played in the Med about the same time as WWII occured"

I'm not sending My Afrika Korps out with Pz-II and III I'm building Tigers

Crucial question is:

Will the Italians get to upgrade all their Stormos to their native version of Me-262 (Macchi 262) by mid-43? [:D]

O.

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: Beezle

However, if WiTP is to take an ahistorical path, then it seems fair that the performance data not be known before hand by players.

Here here! The P-39 went into production because people thought it was a good, innovative design. They didn't know ahead it would perform poorly then decide not to waste resources actually building them.

Hi Did you know the USA sent over 4700 P39/400 to the Soviets? The Soviets used over 3200 of these in combat. They even had a female ace who flew nothing but P-39. They did not use them just as ground attack aircraft but mostly as low level intercepters. (A P-39/400 was a terror to Stuka pilots)

In WITP watch the fun when P-39/400 intercept unescorted Japanese bombers. (Not just below 10k but at any altitude)

[BartM]

I voted for #3, though #2 works, as I stated earlier, with exceptions.

The upgrade paths should still involve the actual upgrades of some units that had to fill out new units comming in... example would be the bolo's some went to B-25s, some went to B-17s while others were kinda split up to various new air groups. As long as we can keep thos historical upgrades in, with the #2 option (the first post of this thread), I really do not see a problem with it

[Lemurs!]

Hi all,

That is my pet plane!

What American aircraft achieved the losest per combat sortie loss rate in WW2? The P39!

Mike

[Banquet]

I voted for option 2.

I couldn't give a hoot about research, or getting aircraft sooner than they were available. Scrap research for all I care. I just want the ability to do what the Japanese did.. to choose where to deploy my replacement aircraft.

Having something like that set in stone is fine for a short scale wargame, but for anything simulating 5 years of war across such a massive front it's too limiting.

[pyaeen]

Good solution![:D]

[Jaws_slith]

Will this mean we can choose the aircraft we want at the factory too[&:]

[2ndACR]

another punt until stickied.

[SeaWolF K]

I voted against any changes at all for the following. I don't mind if you make the upgrade paths changable with the limits but only if you remove the upgrade restrictions on the allies and let them control production as well. If you are going to let Japan only produce and field her best A/C, you have to let the Allies do the same. Which takes away some of the strategy behind this game, where do you commit your low density/high demand assets?

[2ndACR]

punt.

[WiTP_Dude]

The more I think about, the more it doesn't make sense to give either side upgradable aircraft with no limitations. How do you know beforehand which models will work out and which won't? Don't later model design upgrades rely at least partly on the lessons learned from earlier models?

Actually, changing aircraft group classification makes more sense than having the ability to look into the future and see which aircraft fly the best. Want more fighter groups vs. torpedo bomber groups? Fine, go ahead and make that decision. It may or may not work out depending on how the game goes.

However to say the IJA should only build one model of fighter and scrap the rest doesn't work. They have no idea which model will turn out to be the best. Even during the war, there was a lot of FOW which muddied the waters in terms of grading performance. Eventually they could figure out what was working but it took a long time.

[2ndACR]

Works the same way as the allied player knows his Essex CV's are way better and not "floating fire bombs" with a fatal flaw.
Or that this radar is better or this DD is even better. Or that the Corsair, Hellcat are not dogs.

We all have hindsight.

[WiTP_Dude]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Works the same way as the allied player knows his Essex CV's are way better and not "floating fire bombs" with a fatal flaw.
Or that this radar is better or this DD is even better. Or that the Corsair, Hellcat are not dogs.

Then the Allies shouldn't have complete control over production either. It seems if you have this kind of control over what is being produced, you should also have to deal with some of the draw backs. Like not knowning exactly what would work or not work, for example.

Maybe the Hellcat does turn out to be a dog so the Allied player should produce two seperate carrier fighter lines. This does waste some resources but increases the chances of having at least one really good plane. Once both aircrafts fly some, their performances can be judged. Now you increase production of the better plane and lower the amount of the other one at the same time.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

The more I think about, the more it doesn't make sense to give either side upgradable aircraft with no limitations. How do you know beforehand which models will work out and which won't? Don't later model design upgrades rely at least partly on the lessons learned from earlier models?

Actually, changing aircraft group classification makes more sense than having the ability to look into the future and see which aircraft fly the best. Want more fighter groups vs. torpedo bomber groups? Fine, go ahead and make that decision. It may or may not work out depending on how the game goes.

However to say the IJA should only build one model of fighter and scrap the rest doesn't work. They have no idea which model will turn out to be the best. Even during the war, there was a lot of FOW which muddied the waters in terms of grading performance. Eventually they could figure out what was working but it took a long time.

Good point. I like FOW at every level. As an example, I wanted the dev guys to randomise and mask the ratings of leaders in WITP. Only time and combat would reveal if they were any good. As it is now, players all give Spruance or Yamaguchi jobs, but Fletcher and Nagumo stay ashore.

[TheHellPatrol]

I think having upgradeable aircraft without limitations would greatly enhance the longevity of this game as it would allow many of us to investigate many "what-if" situations. Could Japan have won the war? What if Hitler had been more adept at understanding the potential of his Jet aircraft capabilites and not decided to equip the ME-262 as a fighter- bomber during the latter stages of the war? The tools are there as well as the toys...it would be nice to be able to play with them. It certainly would make it much more compelling to play as the Japanese.

[SpitfireIX]

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

Maybe the Hellcat does turn out to be a dog so the Allied player should produce two seperate carrier fighter lines. This does waste some resources but increases the chances of having at least one really good plane. Once both aircrafts fly some, their performances can be judged. Now you increase production of the better plane and lower the amount of the other one at the same time.

It's worth keeping in mind that the Buffalo actually beat the Wildcat in the Navy's carrier-fighter competition before the war, but the Navy decided to buy some F4Fs anyway, "just in case." Imagine the consequences for the Allies if the only carrier fighter available all through 1942 had been the F2A!

[2ndACR]

punt.