24-10-2002 04:07									#1
	It's a bird! It's a plane! Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

It's... 4 planes!

Here's the problem: I have to give stats to the F-15, F-16, Su-27, and MiG-29 for my new scenario. Right now, the stats are in the neighbourhood of 15 attack, 8 defense (not x2 vs. air) and 16 movement. Can you suggest stats for each of these fighters or, failing that, tell me which should be better?

	24-10-2002 05:58									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

When is the scenario set? - all those aircraft have evolved considerably since they were first introduced in the later 70s/early 80s

Personally, I think that the Su-27 should have the same attack and slightly higher defence values then the F-15, and that the MiG-29 and F-16 should have the same stats.

	24-10-2002 06:14									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It's BICYCLE REPAIRMAN!

	24-10-2002 06:35									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

The scenario's roughly 1984.

But what about the F-15 in relation to the F-16, and SU-27 in relation to the MiG-29?

	24-10-2002 06:54									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Lawrence, could you explain your post?

	24-10-2002 07:06									#6
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Goingonit The scenario's roughly 1984.

OK. In that case the F-16 should primarily be a ground attack plane, and the Soviets shouldn't have many MiG-29s (you may want to check when the MiG-29 and Su-27 was introduced - for some reason I'm thinking that they weren't common until 1987+ )

quote: But what about the F-15 in relation to the F-16, and SU-27 in relation to the MiG-29?

The F-15 and Su-27 were almost exclusively used as air superiority fighters, and lacked the avionics and hard points needed to serve as bombers. The F-16 was primarily a light attack fighter, and had only a secondary air to air capability thanks to its Sidewinder missiles and crappy radar. The MiG-29 was an all purpose fighter, and was great in the air to air or air to ground roles.

To convert this into civ stats, how about the following? (note: I'm using huge numbers to make comparisons easy )

F-15: A: 50 D: 50, HP: 5 FP: 5 air to air flag on
Su-27: A: 45 D: 55, HP: 4 FP: 5 air to air flag on

F-16: A: ? [this depends on how tough your ground units are], D: 50, HP: 4, FP: 3?
MiG 29: A: 40, D: 45, HP: 3 FP 3? air to air flag on

The lower hitpoints for Soviets is meant to reflect their lousy maitance facilities and the generally inferior structual quality of their aifcraft.

	24-10-2002 07:08									#7
	Full PM-box? Change here!

BTW, check out: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/index.html for information on these planes

	24-10-2002 07:34									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I'm already using the FAS site as my main source of military info. Thanks, though.

I'll implement your ideas. Now, how about 2 more planes:
Mirage III in comparison, and F-4 Phantom II?

Thanks everyone for your help!

	24-10-2002 10:12									#9
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Goingonit Now, how about 2 more planes: Mirage III in comparison, and F-4 Phantom II?

Well, the Mirage III was obselete by 1984, so it's stats should be quite low

How about : A: 25, D:15 [the Mirage was a lousy dogfighter], HP 2 FP 2

The Phantom was old, but remained an extreamly capable aircraft.

How about : A: 35 D:30 HP: 3 [or 4?], FP: 4

	24-10-2002 13:46									#10
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by St Leo Lawrence, could you explain your post?

It's an old Monty Python sketch. "Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's bicycle repairman!"

	25-10-2002 05:55									#11
	Suffering from ads?

I looked at various things (such as the OOB) and decided to replace the SU-27 with the SU-25 Frogfoot (lovely name!) to act as a Russian fighter/bomber.

Here are the SU-25 and Mirage III.

Attachment: airforce.gif
This has been downloaded 87 time(s).

	25-10-2002 07:22									#12
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: SU-25 Frogfoot (lovely name!)

The Russians didn't choose it Frogfoot was the name that NATO assigned to the aircraft.
It certainly beats the Su-17(?) Faggot

	25-10-2002 07:34									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Where did NATO get the names? Fencer? Frogfoot? Fulcrum? Fishbed? Fishpot?

And it's the MiG-15 Fagot.

	25-10-2002 10:23									#14
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Goingonit Where did NATO get the names? Fencer? Frogfoot? Fulcrum? Fishbed? Fishpot?

From what I understand, they wanted easy to pronounce names that were unlikely to be normally usedby pilots. Soviet fighter names started with F, bombers with B, cargo/special purpose planes with M, heliopters with H and so on.

The modern, commercial savvy Russian aircraft manufacturers now name their own planes

	25-10-2002 20:30									#15
	Inflate your Upload Space

Su-25... Russian gruntos nicknamed it "Schiacciapatate" *in afghan conflict. More akind then several NATO nicknames for western planes...


( "Potato-masher" *)

	02-11-2002 04:56									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

To review the differences between the planes, i'd highly suggest reading up on their abilities at FAS.

http://www.fas.org/man/index.html

Check out ROW Military Aircraft.

That should give you the stats and the history of all those planes. Additionally, it will tell you their drawbacks and advantages, allowing you to interpret them into a Civ strategy. It also has a lot of photos if you're an accuracy freak.