F4F-3s versus F4F-4s armor, etc

[Buck Beach]

The data base shows that the F4F-4 has a one armor and the F4F-3 has none. Both planes duriability are the same. Does armor serve another purpose such as better pilot survival rate (game wise and not historical)?

I also see that the earlier model has a greater speed and climb rate as a trade off for the armor, gun value and bomb load. Is the game F4F-3 a better interceptor or can its attributes be put to good use? I'm thinking of preserving the exsisting units through replacements and not upgrading them, specifically some of the Marine base AC.

[Mr.Frag]

Armor makes the plane tougher ... more likely that a hit is not doing to destroy it and it is will be only damaged.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Armor makes the plane tougher ... more likely that a hit is not doing to destroy it and it is will be only damaged.

Then I must have misunderstood what the durability is. Both show 30, is this just an error and shoud I adjust it?

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Armor makes the plane tougher ... more likely that a hit is not doing to destroy it and it is will be only damaged.

Then I must have misunderstood what the durability is. Both show 30, is this just an error and shoud I adjust it?

Nope, you didn't ... two planes can have identical durability but one *also* has an armor plate behind the pilots seat that means the pilot lives instead of dies and makes it back home.

[Wildhack]

I haven't played one of the grand campaigns yet, but I've noticed (in SouthPac at least, around late June '42) that F4F-3 replacements stop coming. So for instance I upgraded one F4F-3 squadron, and then it's planes went into the replacement pool to keep my other F4F-3 squadron flying a bit longer.

Therefore my guess is at some point you'll have no choice but to upgrade these planes.

[KPAX]

Mr Fra, as always is correct.

Armor of 1 for a plane is to represent self sealing tanks, which is rather important for surviability of the pilot.

Armor of 2 is meant to mean additional armor, such as the T-Bolt had.

[Nikademus]

actually armor=2 represents planes that had unusually heavy protection vs the standard 'armor/self sealing' pkg that the majority of planes have (armor=1)

an example would be the IL-2 Stormovik, a dedicated ground attack plane.

[Feinder]

It's my understanding of the way the numbers work (and this may be WAY off).

Guns are rated for Penetration and Effectiveness (not sure this the right name for the value, I'm at the office).
Targets (whether a plane or ship) is rated for Armor and Durability.

To be damaged, it takes the penetration value of the gun vs. the armor rating of the target. If the penetration value is greater than the armor rating, their will be damage (or destroy) the target.

If the armor is penetrated (automatically if Armor = 0), it matches the Effectiveness vs. the Durability. The greater the ratio, the greater the damage done.

That's definately an over-simplification, but I'm fairly sure that's generally how things work.

-F-

[Ron Saueracker]

OH.........no.......this thread is gonna get huge, just watch. [;)]

[rogueusmc]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

OH.........no.......this thread is gonna get huge, just watch. [;)]

Such a pessimist....[:D]...you're probably right though...wait til folks get home from work.

[rogueusmc]

ORIGINAL: KPAX

Mr Fra, as always is correct.

I'm waiting for the 'anti-Frag fanboy club' to catch that one...[:D]

[anarchyintheuk]

In the mean time we could start up the .50cal v. 20mm argument again.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

In the mean time we could start up the .50cal v. 20mm argument again.

Shhhhhhht![X(][:-]

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

In the mean time we could start up the .50cal v. 20mm argument again.

Shhhhhhht![X(][:-]

You're probably right. It's bar time anyway. Y'all have a good weekend.

[Ron Saueracker]

Stay away from them new country bars that play Alan Jackson and Shania drivel and serve chick drinks. Nashville blows these days! Only old style country goes with beer. Old 97s, Hank Williams, Go to Blazes, Flatlanders...good stuff.

[jcjordan]

How about a little Boxcar Willie??? [:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

How about a little Boxcar Willie??? [:D]

I'veheard alot worse!

[Twotribes]

Reading the rules seems to me it said that replacements will continue to come until a set number over those need for active or not yet arrived units is reached. At which time it will stop adding more till some are used, the gest being that as long as you keep an active unit , replacement aircraft will continue to arrive.

I have left my marine units in the F4F3 and all F4F4 are for carriers, once I have a large enough pool I may change that, or once the 4's begin to be replaced by the next aircraft.

[Hard Sarge]

From the battles I have seen, I would say, if it is a frontline combat unit, change it to the F4f4, the 3 goes down real easy

besides, doesn't the 4 have more firepower (6 50's over 4 50's for the 3, LOL Love the extra numbers)

but I would keep the back area units in the 3, when you need planes, it can seem like forever for them to be built, when you don't need them, they seem to grow on trees

HARD_Sarge

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

From the battles I have seen, I would say, if it is a frontline combat unit, change it to the F4f4, the 3 goes down real easy

besides, doesn't the 4 have more firepower (6 50's over 4 50's for the 3, LOL Love the extra numbers)

but I would keep the back area units in the 3, when you need planes, it can seem like forever for them to be built, when you don't need them, they seem to grow on trees

HARD_Sarge

As we used to say in another game, it goes down like a 2 bit hooker!