I wonder why twin-engine fighters have less attack than single-engine fighters. Indeed, in reality there was more weapons in twin-engine ones. After all, they used the advantage of height and tactics hit and fled. I understand when they have less defense against fighter jets, but an attack less is not realistic.
I hope modding will still be available.
Twin-engine fighters
Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators
-
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship
- Posts: 1690
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm
Re: Twin-engine fighters
If your look at the Bf110 which you can start with as the German, its actually pretty good.miv79 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:17 am I wonder why twin-engine fighters have less attack than single-engine fighters. Indeed, in reality there was more weapons in twin-engine ones. After all, they used the advantage of height and tactics hit and fled. I understand when they have less defense against fighter jets, but an attack less is not realistic.
I hope modding will still be available.
It's true that it isn't as good a tac bomber as the Stuka, or as good vs enemy fighters as the Bf109, but it's an excrement all rounder. It can bomb without escort without fear of annihilation, and does ok damage vs both soft and hard targets.
It's also super cheap, in prestige and slots both, making it an excellent candidate for overstrength. OS makes it durable and hard hitting, while still cheap to give replacements!
Mod support is present. PC2 is designed to be modder friendly.
Green Knight
https://www.youtube.com/c/GreenKnight2001
https://www.youtube.com/c/GreenKnight2001
Re: Twin-engine fighters
The problem is that in reality twin-engine fighters were the best killers of bombers, in the game on YouTube I saw less attack than bf 109.
Mods will fix everything
Oh, I will definitely help myself.
Mods will fix everything

-
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship
- Posts: 1690
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm
Re: Twin-engine fighters
You can cheaply os your Bf110 - and then it actually hits harder than an equally priced 109.
But yes, I could also have liked a little higher air attack on the 110. Low defense and lower initiative, but good attack.
If I feel really strongly about it I can mod it in about 1 minute
Green Knight
https://www.youtube.com/c/GreenKnight2001
https://www.youtube.com/c/GreenKnight2001
Re: Twin-engine fighters
That's right, this plane already has disadvantages in front of single-engine fighters, we will only return justice, it’s true that it will also have to be paidnexusno2000 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 12:35 pm But yes, I could also have liked a little higher air attack on the 110. Low defense and lower initiative, but good attack.

-
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 7:31 pm
- Location: Port Angeles, WA
Re: Twin-engine fighters
Something of a fallacy that a twin engine fighter carried more weapons than a single engine fighter. An Me 210 had 2x20mm cannons and 2x7.62 mgs. An Fw 190 D9 had 2x20mm cannonns and 2x13mm mgs. An F4U-4 Corsair had 4x20mm cannons and a P38-J had 1x20mm cannon and 4x12.7mm mgs.miv79 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:17 am I wonder why twin-engine fighters have less attack than single-engine fighters. Indeed, in reality there was more weapons in twin-engine ones. After all, they used the advantage of height and tactics hit and fled. I understand when they have less defense against fighter jets, but an attack less is not realistic.
I hope modding will still be available.
In both cases the single engine fighter had the heavier armament.
A lot of American fighters had only mgs, but that's because they only faced other fighters, they didn't have to contend with bomber interception in Europe
Re: Twin-engine fighters
You forget that at the beginning of the war they exceeded all single-engine fighters in salvo power. Also, then their firepower increased due to additional guns and an increase in caliber. fw 190 appeared only at the end of 41 years, I'm not talking about typhoons and american aircraft, which had problems with guns.Hemi wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:52 amSomething of a fallacy that a twin engine fighter carried more weapons than a single engine fighter. An Me 210 had 2x20mm cannons and 2x7.62 mgs. An Fw 190 D9 had 2x20mm cannonns and 2x13mm mgs. An F4U-4 Corsair had 4x20mm cannons and a P38-J had 1x20mm cannon and 4x12.7mm mgs.miv79 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:17 am I wonder why twin-engine fighters have less attack than single-engine fighters. Indeed, in reality there was more weapons in twin-engine ones. After all, they used the advantage of height and tactics hit and fled. I understand when they have less defense against fighter jets, but an attack less is not realistic.
I hope modding will still be available.
In both cases the single engine fighter had the heavier armament.
A lot of American fighters had only mgs, but that's because they only faced other fighters, they didn't have to contend with bomber interception in Europe
The americans really wanted their guns 20mm and higher, the problem was that they had the worst of all the major participants in the war.
Even at the end of the war, two-engine planes outnumbered single-engine ones on both sides by a full volley from the Germans.
-
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 7:31 pm
- Location: Port Angeles, WA
Re: Twin-engine fighters
They built 36,000 IL2s, 31,000 Yak-3s, 30,000 Bf109s, 30,000 FW190s. The twin engine plane with the highest production number was the Ju88 and that was at 15,000. I don't think twin engine planes outnumbered single engines at the end of the war.miv79 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:14 pmYou forget that at the beginning of the war they exceeded all single-engine fighters in salvo power. Also, then their firepower increased due to additional guns and an increase in caliber. fw 190 appeared only at the end of 41 years, I'm not talking about typhoons and american aircraft, which had problems with guns.Hemi wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:52 amSomething of a fallacy that a twin engine fighter carried more weapons than a single engine fighter. An Me 210 had 2x20mm cannons and 2x7.62 mgs. An Fw 190 D9 had 2x20mm cannonns and 2x13mm mgs. An F4U-4 Corsair had 4x20mm cannons and a P38-J had 1x20mm cannon and 4x12.7mm mgs.miv79 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:17 am I wonder why twin-engine fighters have less attack than single-engine fighters. Indeed, in reality there was more weapons in twin-engine ones. After all, they used the advantage of height and tactics hit and fled. I understand when they have less defense against fighter jets, but an attack less is not realistic.
I hope modding will still be available.
In both cases the single engine fighter had the heavier armament.
A lot of American fighters had only mgs, but that's because they only faced other fighters, they didn't have to contend with bomber interception in Europe
The americans really wanted their guns 20mm and higher, the problem was that they had the worst of all the major participants in the war.
Even at the end of the war, two-engine planes outnumbered single-engine ones on both sides by a full volley from the Germans.
I do agree America wanted more cannons but could not figure out how to manufacture a reliable one. But I believe we would have solved that if we faced bombers.
-
- Sergeant - Panzer IIC
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 3:57 pm
Re: Twin-engine fighters
There definately weren't more twin-engines fighters produced on either side than single-engines ones. Not early on, not late during the war. Adding bombers into the mix brings the numbers a bit closer, but that's not really something that matters much when talking about single or twin-engine fighters.
One also shouldn't forget that attack values might not just come from the installed guns. You have to take the whole package into account. Speed, agility, climb-rate, etc. Single-engine fighters were in general vastly superior to twin-engine ones when it came to those details.
The whole thing is more of an abstraction anyway. Every plane had its strengths and weaknesses. It might work excellently in one situation but be rather weak in another one. Take the Bf 110. When used as destroyer, it excelled. When used as bomber-escort that had to stick to its bombers, it was torn to shreds by enemy fighters. You can't really find one attack-value that properly reflects the abilities of a plane under all circumstances. The tools needed to fight bombers aren't necessarily the same you need t o fight fighters. At the very least you would need to seperate attack-values between the targets it is attacking, to make sure that you don't make a bomber-killer a great fighter-killer as well if it never was good at that stuff. Such a thing could get complex rather fast.
One also shouldn't forget that attack values might not just come from the installed guns. You have to take the whole package into account. Speed, agility, climb-rate, etc. Single-engine fighters were in general vastly superior to twin-engine ones when it came to those details.
The whole thing is more of an abstraction anyway. Every plane had its strengths and weaknesses. It might work excellently in one situation but be rather weak in another one. Take the Bf 110. When used as destroyer, it excelled. When used as bomber-escort that had to stick to its bombers, it was torn to shreds by enemy fighters. You can't really find one attack-value that properly reflects the abilities of a plane under all circumstances. The tools needed to fight bombers aren't necessarily the same you need t o fight fighters. At the very least you would need to seperate attack-values between the targets it is attacking, to make sure that you don't make a bomber-killer a great fighter-killer as well if it never was good at that stuff. Such a thing could get complex rather fast.
Re: Twin-engine fighters
Twin-engine fighters as an escort was significantly higher than its bombers and used the tactics of hit and run. In a direct battle, he is certainly not viable unless beginners fly against them. He already has disadvantages against conventional fighters, this is a poor incentive and protection. The problem is that he has a low air attack, if he had a skill against bombers, increasing damage would greatly improve the situation.