This game needs a Ju-88 or similar tactical bomber.

[Pegon]

You are right Kondi about the Fw190 taking over the role of the Stuka. The Stuka however had a bigger brother in the Ju-88c that served as a ground attack aircraft until the Allied air campaign against Germany forced the Luftwaffe to pull them back from frontline service to defend the Reich. A role they failed in like all the others.

[GabeKnight]

If you want so much, maybe you should try Ar 234 as a close support aircraft, or if you prefer a tactical bomber

I did play with a mod that used various "switch modes" with planes, like dogfighter<->tac. bomber and strat. bomber <-> tac. bomber switches. And I've just checked and the Ju188 in tactical mode has quite nice inf/veh attack values.
(The Ar234 tactical stats are quite low, you're right there)

Below link to web article and image which confirm my opinion about Stukas and Focke-Wulfs

I did read the article and beside a lot of story the only actual facts that I saw in there are
- that the Ju-87G-2 seems to be very effective against Soviet tanks and
- that the stats of the FW190A (and probably higher tiers) should be changed in OoB as it was clearly a better plane than the P-47D Tunderbolt.

And there is a Ju-88 in WinterWar, true. Completely forgot about it. A strategic bomber unit put into the tactical class. A solid "12" air defense. But my guess: this unit would still be smashed to pieces in the Endsieg DLC with that many Allied dogfighters around. The AI always goes after the weakest units with the best damage dealt:recieved ratio.

[kondi754]

You are right Kondi about the Fw190 taking over the role of the Stuka. The Stuka however had a bigger brother in the Ju-88c that served as a ground attack aircraft until the Allied air campaign against Germany forced the Luftwaffe to pull them back from frontline service to defend the Reich. A role they failed in like all the others.

Of course, there are references to usage of Ju 88 in such a role, but there are no specific examples, and even if we have evidence in these cases such experiments were unsuccessful

I did read the article and beside a lot of story the only actual facts that I saw in there are
- that the Ju-87G-2 seems to be very effective against Soviet tanks and
- that the stats of the FW190A (and probably higher tiers) should be changed in OoB as it was clearly a better plane than the P-47D Tunderbolt.

I try to explain only that there wasn't such plane that could replace Stuka, direct support (Sturzkampfgeschwader, StG) regiments equipped with Ju 87D, turned in 1944 into assault regiments (Schlachtgeschwader, SG) equipped in whole or in part in Focke Wulfs 190F, G or D (or A adapted to carry bombs), because Focke Wulf was a fantastic universal aircraft
Sometimes 1 anti-tank squadron was left in a regiment equipped with Ju 87G, like SG2, where the commander was the famous Rudel, he also completed over 450 missions in Fw 190D
As far as P-47 is concerned, it is very debatable because on the other hand there are US pilots, such as Gabreski, Zemke, Manchurin and Robert Johnson, who on Thunderbolt could shoot 3-4 Focke-Wulfs during one combat mission
Remember that from mid-1944 P-47 were mainly used as aircraft supporting the battlefield, so were armed with bombs and rockets, so heavily overloaded. In such a situation they could have been an easier target, but in general Thunderbolt was a heavily armored and armed aircraft, with a powerful engine and hardly anyone matched it in air combat (probably only Me 262)

I did play with a mod that used various "switch modes" with planes, like dogfighter<->tac. bomber and strat. bomber <-> tac. bomber switches. And I've just checked and the Ju188 in tactical mode has quite nice inf/veh attack values.
(The Ar234 tactical stats are quite low, you're right there)

I think, if you don't accept the historical truth, don't relate to the realities, just choose yourself a plane and pick up his statistics.

[kondi754]

There were also anti-tank versions of Focke Wulf
Focke Wulf 190F-8 with 8cm Panzerblitz rockets - this aircraft was in some of the Panzerstaffeln (Squadron) in SGs (assault regiments) instead of Ju 87G

fw 190 panzerblitz.jpg (97.87 KiB) Viewed 2141 times

panzerblitz_d92.jpg.f745960b8ba403baea386e76728a0f94.jpg (23.06 KiB) Viewed 2141 times

Or with Panzerschrecks

fw190pzschreck2.jpg (138.98 KiB) Viewed 2141 times

[Pegon]

Well, look at the combat records of Kg51,KG 54 and how they destroyed soviet tanks and trucks in the thousands before they were pulled away from the eastern front.

[kondi754]

Well, look at the combat records of Kg51,KG 54 and how they destroyed soviet tanks and trucks in the thousands before they were pulled away from the eastern front.

Okay, but just don't know how many of these tanks were destroyed on railway platforms or in the concentration zones of troops on the back of the front, and how much directly on the battlefield
Trucks are probably only at the back of the front

[Pegon]

Then just study this, read Wikipedia. the Ju-88 is credited with destroying the armored spearheads of advancing soviet armies. These are historical facts that disqualify your opinion.

[kondi754]

Then just study this, read Wikipedia. the Ju-88 is credited with destroying the armored spearheads of advancing soviet armies. These are historical facts that disqualify your opinion.

It is better not to base all your knowledge on Wikipedia, because these are articles written by enthusiast in fact but amateurs, often on the basis of widely available knowledge based on a few books.
The problem is that most authors rewrite the information with books from the 1950s and 60s, when scrupulous research is currently underway and many things are verified.
Summing up, I prefer to base my knowledge on specialist literature and journals, if it provides links to Wikipedia, here it is only in a situation where I know that the information is reliable there.
This is the curse of the internet, that everything is inside web, so anyone can read an article on Wikipedia and consider himself a great expert on the subject but knowledge there is very superficial.
Believe me, in Wikipedia there is only maybe 10% of information about World War II, the remaining 90% are in specialist literature.
They write there that it was generally used in this role, but there are no specific examples, reliable statistics, and the comparison of Ju 88 with Stuka or Fw 190F results.
Often, however, I meet with information about huge losses as a result of the use of Ju 88 in such way or even about the fiasco of certain projects (Ju 88P version).

[Pegon]

I am not an expert on ww2 history, so I will not argue against you there. My personal hobby is aircraft design, so my interest in the Ju-88 comes from a technical perspective. So you might ask why the Ju-88 was a interesting design.
When McDonnell Douglas marketed the F-4 Phantom, it was promoted as the world's first multirole aircraft. However, there are some (amongst them me) that argue that the Ju-88 was first, as it by merits of its design, was able to serve as a level bomber, ground attack aircraft and fighter.
(and it performed all roles reasonably well)

[kondi754]

And long range recon, meteo aircracft and of course for naval purposes
Ju 88 was much more universal than the F-4.

BTW I'm an enthusiast of P-47
In my opinion it was the first multi-purpose fighter (I think it is more suitable ancestor for F-4 )
But it's only my opinion, not supported by any facts or sources

[Mercutio]

Several aircraft were used in multiple roles in mid to late WWII. One could argue the P-38 lightning was the first as it wasn't that great a fighter late war and had its role changed.
The F4U was used ground attacks a lot in the later years of the war as well. It was even used in Korea IIRC.
I won't argue that the P-47 excelled at the multi-purpose role.
One could even say the ME-110 was a multi-role fighter, although it was pretty bad at all of them.