PDA

View Full Version : spitfire



01-30-2004, 05:14 AM
Is there a reason that the spitfire , which saw action in russian squadrons during world war 11 has beeen left out of the game Forgotten battles. I know there was russian squadrons I have a photo showing the planes.

01-30-2004, 05:14 AM
Is there a reason that the spitfire , which saw action in russian squadrons during world war 11 has beeen left out of the game Forgotten battles. I know there was russian squadrons I have a photo showing the planes.

blabla0001
01-30-2004, 05:34 AM
The Spitfires are comming in the Add-on due in a few weeks and in a patch after the Add-on.

owlwatcher
01-30-2004, 05:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Darrayn:
Is there a reason that the spitfire , which saw action in russian squadrons during world war 11 has beeen left out of the game Forgotten battles. I know there was russian squadrons I have a photo showing the planes.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody wanted the Spitfire http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Everyone wants bombers.

SeaFireLIV
01-30-2004, 06:01 AM
Yes. Originally I thought they were extremely few or no Spits on the Eastern Front and that must be why they were left out.

To my astonishment I learned quite a lot of Spits flew over the USSR skies, so it has been a case of constant amazement to me that it`s not been featured for so long.

Considering it`s the symbol of Britain`s defence against opression (similar in a way to Russia when it was attacked), it`s quite a jaw-dropping omission.

Well, at least we will soon have it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Dark.jpg

VW-IceFire
01-30-2004, 06:42 AM
Multiple versions in the works for the addon and post addon.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

XyZspineZyX
01-30-2004, 12:20 PM
I wouldn't call it a "jaw dropping omission".

Yes, there were large quantities of Spits in Russia, but they were also very limited in where they'd appear. They were sighted in the Murmansk/Leningrad area, and a couple times farther south in '43. Many of them were held back for patrolling Moscow, long after the capital was in danger. This was politically motivated, of course. But the point is, the numbers of Spits delivered to Russia is a misleading one, compared to the number that actually outfitted frontline squads that were fighting. Same with the P-47.

But, there were many, MANY more Yaks, Lavochkins, MiGs and Russian planes fighting day to day against the Germans. And, if it's British planes we're talking about, many more Hurricanes than Spits.

Oleg was smart to leave the Spit out of IL-2 for as long as possible, because we can see how everyone wants to flock to it and engage in the same revisionist history that we see with the (over)use of the P-51 and P-47. Normandy maps notwithstanding, you see more P-51s and Jugs flying around than Russian planes online. The Spit will continue and expand on this sorry trend. But at least now, we're seeing more maps where Spits definitely do belong, so it'll be less of a problem going forward.

Finally, I'll add this little tidbit: if you're a pilot who thinks he'll magically get much better because you have a Spit to fly, you're deluding yourself. If you suck in a Yak, or a La5 or a MiG, you'll probably suck in a Spit, too. You need to just get better as a virtual pilot, not just a virtual Spit pilot.

SeaFireLIV
01-30-2004, 12:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:

Finally, I'll add this little tidbit: if you're a pilot who thinks he'll magically get much better because you have a Spit to fly, you're deluding yourself. If you suck in a Yak, or a La5 or a MiG, you'll probably suck in a Spit, too. You need to just get better as a virtual pilot, not just a virtual Spit pilot.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

NO, no, no, I`m not. I know your little hate-relationship with people who swap around for just the best performing aircraft.

Since FB I`ve stuck with mostly the I16 (for early war years), Hurricane and LA5fn. But I have dabbled with lots of others partly because you need some experience when flying with a squad online.

I am BRITISH and in EAW I always flew the Spitfire almost totally/ though I tried the Typhoon a couple of times. If it had featured first in IL2/Fb it would`ve been that almost exclusively.

I DO NOT THINK the Spit is going to be a super plane! In fact I hope it isn`t which was the mistake with the out of the box Hurri.

It may suit you to talk to us like were all 12 years old, but I assure some of us are MUCH older!

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/greypilots.jpg

XyZspineZyX
01-30-2004, 02:11 PM
Obviously, you're one of the guys that comment didn't apply to; precisely why I used the word "IF" before the description.

But believe it, there are many guys out there just like I describe.

VW-IceFire
01-30-2004, 02:17 PM
Stiglr...fortunately there are plenty of co-op missions were only Russian and German planes are setup in combat. Infact I hope to see a good mix...and obviously what you refer to is the wide open dogfight servers. That can be fun and I'm sure we'll see a proliferation of Spitfires.

I know I'll be flying them alot more than most other planes largely because the Spitfire is sort of the plane thats been a favorite since I was 5 or 6 years old but we'll see if they fit my style or not. I suspect they will be I think the Tempest will be more my thing http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I have however noticed that although there are slightly less Russian fighters being flown around on the servers the numbers of American aircraft have dropped off. Alot of people jump in and try the new thing and then the numbers even out again. So in the end it shouldn't be too bad for even the big wide open servers.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

XyZspineZyX
01-30-2004, 02:27 PM
I disagree, but that's just my prediction.

The problem is just as you described it: people wanting to fly the plane "they've loved since they were six", whether or not that plane was instrumental or not. Few in the community seem to have any knowledge of, or true respect for, history. They just go with "what's cool" or "what they're familiar with" from their western-centric viewpoint.

There are even folks who refuse to fly German planes because they *really* believe that doing so means they're some kind of closet Neo-Nazi. I'm not kidding.

People are missing out on an opportunity to make history come alive when they ignore some of the more representative planes we have here, just because they're not familiar with them. They can *get* familiar with them.

All things being equal, I don't mind Spitfires. They're a worthy adversary and a gorgeous aircraft. I take more exception to their disproportionate use, not to the plane itself, per se.

Zen--
01-30-2004, 02:57 PM
Stiglr, what plane do you fly online and why?

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

XyZspineZyX
01-30-2004, 03:10 PM
Bf109. That should need no further explanation, but in case you think it does...

109s flew the entire war, and even before it, in the Spanish Civil War.

Some 35,000 of them were produced.

It's the ultimate plane for an "alt monkey" like myself.

It's the defacto "representative" German plane. You can find no theatre the Germans flew in that didn't have lots of 109 Geschwadern flying.

I originally developed an interest in 109s when I first began flying flight sims in Warbirds. Back then, 109s in that sim were pretty crappy; they had a 109G4 that was as much a pig as the G6s we're used to. Over time, Warbirds added more versions of it, and improved the modeling of them somewhat. I learned a LOT about fighting (like respect for altitude, energy fighting, even boom and zoom) while flying the 109s. I *was* a dyed in the wool FW190 guy, but I was won over to the 109 eventually, because I feel it's (arguably) a better plane overall.

Eagle_361st
01-30-2004, 03:22 PM
Some people need to remember this is a game after all and not everyone need's to follow history. And the argument no longer exists that this is only an Eastern Front Sim, it has expanded beyond that and will continue to do so. To me the more aircraft to fly the better as long as they actually flew and saw combat in WWII. I will and do fly the Russian or
German aircraft, but I came to FB because of the P-47 and how great IL2 was. I have flown the P-47, P-51 and P-38 since Janes and EAW and they are my favorite planes. Nobody should be denied to fly what they wish because this game started(IL2, FB was always going to expand out pending good sales) as an Eastern Front game. Nor should they be bashed in any form for it.

~S!
Eagle
Commanding Officer 361st vFG
www.361stvfg.com (http://www.361stvfg.com)
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1003.jpg

Zen--
01-30-2004, 03:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
Bf109.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Thank you .

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

XyZspineZyX
01-30-2004, 03:54 PM
Eagle, really, it's just two ways of looking at it, is all.

To you, it's "just a game". To me, it is a *sim*, and can be so much more than "just a game" ...provided it isn't marginalized with such a laissez-faire, play fast and loose with the facts and figures affair as you are satisfied with.

I fully understand why it's as open as it is; Oleg is a businessman. It's just a shame that it has to lose its rather considerable character to cater to those with, uh, lesser expectations.

faustnik
01-30-2004, 04:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eagle_361st:
Some people need to remember this is a game after all and not everyone need's to follow history. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not that "game" label again. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

FB is a historical simulation, it should follow history as close as possible.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

SeaFireLIV
01-30-2004, 05:14 PM
Let me let you in on a little secret. Personally, I would have prefered that it stayed wholly Eastern Front. This sim was unique because of this theatre, and there are many other sims featuring the West.

In fact I`m still going through a long Soviet Campaign even though a Brit/USa MODS campaigns are out. Why? Because I like the originality of the Eastern Front.

To have a Spit in it wil just be even better.

But now it`s evolved into other theatres, so be it.
http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Dark.jpg

Eagle_361st
01-30-2004, 05:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
Eagle, really, it's just two ways of looking at it, is all.

To you, it's "just a game". To me, it is a *sim*, and can be so much more than "just a game" ...provided it isn't marginalized with such a laissez-faire, play fast and loose with the facts and figures affair as you are satisfied with.

I fully understand why it's as open as it is; Oleg is a businessman. It's just a shame that it has to lose its rather considerable character to cater to those with, uh, lesser expectations.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me tell you something, I do not consider it just a game, so do not belittle me like some child. Our squad is founded on historical accuracy, and we hold to that up to and including the using of correct a/c codes and serial #'s. We use that same radio brevity, command structure and tactics as the real 361st FG did. So we simulate how our grandfathers operated in WWII, even though this is an absolute work of art, break it down it is still a game and you are way too full of yourself. Oleg and team created the best simulator ever and we came here to fly our aircraft, now that it is not only an Eastern Front sim, we can operate fairly accurately and we regularly recreate actual missions flown by the 361st. I am sorry that you feel the USAAF and RAF invaded "your" game, but nevertheless we are here and have as much right to enjoy whatever part of this sim we wish without any feelings of guilt. It's not "our" fault that Oleg created this wonderful sim and was kind and smart(to create more sims in a series) enough to branch out beyond just the Eastern Front. I am sorry many of us were not pleased nor satisfied with the many sub-par sims out there with the tittle "CFS". Mostly I am sorry you are such an egomaniac to actually think your tirade will make us leave or feel guilty. Again I stress while we can recreate this piece of history on many fronts, it is made for people to enjoy and not to train(thus the real meaning of a simulator), while it is the best simulator out period without question, anything we load onto a computer and we can simply hit refly everytime we die is a GAME period.

~S!
Eagle
Commanding Officer 361st vFG
www.361stvfg.com (http://www.361stvfg.com)
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1003.jpg

Gunner_361st
01-30-2004, 05:35 PM
The Me109 a better plane than the FW190? I'd have to disagree tremendously.

The FW190 has 1-3 more cannon standard. It also has at least 100 rounds more ammo for the wingroot cannons than the 109.

Its just as fast if not faster than all but the last 109's at most altitudes. It was much more durable, both in the way it was designed and the fact it had a radial engine instead of an inline with lots of piping.

It also had considerable more range, which is not a big deal in FB, but was very important in real life.

While the Fw190 is more control sensitive and less stable than the 109, its high speed performance and great roll rate at almost all speeds makes up for that.

You'd never be able to fly a Fw190 like a Me109 (in terms of angle fighting) but hey... Why would you even want or need to?

"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

British Air Marshall, Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

And to answer any curiousities... I'm not really a FW190 fan. I fly it sometimes online. But I do recogonize the fact it was an excellent third-generation german aircraft.

As for the people who in anger will correct those who call Forgotten Battles a "game" by declaring that its a "Historical Flight Simulator" I say...

LOL. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Do you fly simulated airplanes in Forgotten Battles for entertainment?

Newsflash fellas... You are playing a game. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Sure, its a game that is extremely well made and made as historically accurate as possible! Its still a game though... I guess some people see the word "game" as derogatory... When its really not. But hey... People are funny like that. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ~S~

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

HellToupee
01-30-2004, 05:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
Bf109. That should need no further explanation, but in case you think it does...

109s flew the entire war, and even before it, in the Spanish Civil War.

Some 35,000 of them were produced.

It's the ultimate plane for an "alt monkey" like myself.

It's the defacto "representative" German plane. You can find no theatre the Germans flew in that didn't have lots of 109 Geschwadern flying.

I originally developed an interest in 109s when I first began flying flight sims in Warbirds. Back then, 109s in that sim were pretty crappy; they had a 109G4 that was as much a pig as the G6s we're used to. Over time, Warbirds added more versions of it, and improved the modeling of them somewhat. I learned a LOT about fighting (like respect for altitude, energy fighting, even boom and zoom) while flying the 109s. I *was* a dyed in the wool FW190 guy, but I was won over to the 109 eventually, because I feel it's (arguably) a better plane overall.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why i want the spitfire

Spitfires flew the entire war, first flew 1935

some 32000 were produced

Even more an ultimate plane for an alt monkey.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

WWMaxGunz
01-30-2004, 06:28 PM
I don't see why history buffs should care at all if some player are not. It's not like they'll interact since flying DF is so very unhistoric even if you limit the planes.

History buffs should be pleased that the sim sells outside their narrow niche. More copies sell which not only lowers the price some but allows the makers to keep on making addons and newer, better versions.

Only a person with a personal problem of some kind (inadequacy complex or egomania?) would think so badly of anyone who does not make so much of their life about the same things he or she does. Guess what? Maybe they have something else to spend the energy and time on. If you are so big then be bigger than to crap on others if you can.


Neal

01-30-2004, 10:12 PM
well that sort of explains it thanks for all who replied I personaly fly mostly a 109a6 which I have learned to operate ok

VMF-214_HaVoK
01-30-2004, 11:30 PM
I flew US only 99% of the time. Why? Well not because of how they pertain to FB but for two other reasons.
1. Im American and a proud one at that.
2. They are far from the so called "Uber" and
"Noob" planes that so many planes get tagged
with.

So maybe the people who want the Spitfire so bad just happen to be British and want there beloved plane. It certainly belongs and they are intitled to it IMO.
Maybe alot of the LW flyers who complain about the people wanting the Spit in the game are just scared of it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif or maybe not http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Just a thought.
=S=

http://www.aviation-history.com/vought/98027.jpg

MiloMorai
01-30-2004, 11:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HellToupee:

Why i want the spitfire

Spitfires flew the entire war, first flew 1935

some 32000 were produced

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you make a typo? The Spitfire/Seafire production was in the 22,000 area.



Long live the Horse Clans.

Korolov
01-31-2004, 01:18 AM
So if a game is made for east front it should stay east front?

Right. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

Theres nothing that inhibits the original content of the game. We still have online wars that are 100% east front, coops that are 100% east front, hell even DFs that are 100% east front.

We've been flying east front ever since IL-2 was released. Whats wrong with expanding the game a bit so the developers can make some dough?

Not like everyone will quit flying '43 Kuban w/ IL-2s just because the Spitfire came out.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

Zacast51
01-31-2004, 01:52 AM
I have absolutely no idea why so many people struggled so hard to keep "the west" out of IL-2 for so long.

Even with the American and British planes flying around this sim still takes place in the east, all its in box single player missions except for mabye 1 or 2 are set in the east, and it still has what is probably the most complete collection of Russian planes ever modeled in one flight sim.

What more do you "history buffs" want? This is still almost completely an eastern front game with some western planes added for the enjoyment of other players who like American and British planes.

If you are so completely against flying against Western planes, please, go to a historical server online (greatergreen comes to mind) and PLAY THERE.

Please, don't spend your time trying to bring down those who like playing on western front servers when you can ALWAYS play in the enviornment YOU WANT at a historically accurate server.

HellToupee
01-31-2004, 04:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MiloMorai:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HellToupee:

Why i want the spitfire

Spitfires flew the entire war, first flew 1935

some 32000 were produced

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you make a typo? The Spitfire/Seafire production was in the 22,000 area.



Long live the Horse Clans.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea we will call it a typo :P

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
01-31-2004, 05:27 PM
I must say, it's easy for you Spit whiners and Ami whiners to talk about inclusion when this is the FIRST sim ever not to immediately cater to the Western centric POV from the get-go. I see it as incredibly self-serving. Everything's been done from your narrow POV for so long, you now think that Stangs and Spits are some kind of birthright.

As a WWII history buff, my POV comes from exploring the real matchups (read, mostly VVS vs. LW, with a few Hungarian, Italian, British and US incursions here and there). I'm not German, but I do like their planeset from a technical standpoint. I don't feel I have to 'do my patriotic bit' and fly American planes because I'm American. That's limiting and also pretty "predictable", isn't it?

If everyone weren't so predictably flagwaving, and was just interested in the period, the amount of P-51/P-47/Spit whining (not to mention use of the planes) would be commensurate with their historical impact on the East front (read: minimal). THIS is why I keep harping on this: if you fly online, you see an OVERrepresentation of P-51s and -47s. It looks less and less like the Eastern Front every day.

I'm not "afraid" of Spits, any more than P-51s or -47s. I actually find them easier to down than the Yaks and Las. But, I'd much rather see more Russian planes opposing me than West front planes. As we get new Western maps or other theatres where the Stangs and Jugs were more repesentative, then fine, bring 'em on.

biggs222
01-31-2004, 05:41 PM
helltoupee, dont forget the spit was in all the theatres of war, 109s only in western/eastern/med, not pacific http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the spitfire knows no boundaries http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://www.stenbergaa.com/stenberg/wong-friendlyord.jpg

JG7_Rall
01-31-2004, 08:06 PM
Stiglr, my friend, what I am about to say is in no way to bash on what you are saying, because I respect your opinion. But just step back for a second and look at the broader picture.

First off, this game is very realistic. That, however, doesn't mean that realism should come at the expense of fun. After all, aren't we all in this game to have fun? I mean, I also love to emulate WWII aerial combat, being a rl pilot myself, but other than that, I'm in it to have fun. Just get over your whole "it-didn't-fly-here-so-you-shouldn't-fly-it-here-either" mindset and just let people fly what they want.

Next, I myself and a patriotic American. Call me a flag waving banshee if you wish, it matters not to me. But to be honest with you, I am FASCINATED by German aircraft, and only like a few US and British ones.

And just to clarify, the only plane in this game that is WAY overused is the La-7. It's wooden and takes tremendous damage, and hardly participated in WWII. The P-47 is only flown by a select few, and the P-51 is and was an awesome plane, and a beautiful one as well. Can you blame people for flying it?

Oh well, I'm just happy that we have a game of this calibre to play.

Regards,

Rall (Hutch51 on UBI)

PS-FW 190&gt;Bf 109 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (but I do like the 109 better)

p1ngu666
01-31-2004, 08:08 PM
ill fly the spitfire a fair amount cos im a brit. it will also be a aircraft that will probably suit my style.
fully intend to fly every other damn plane in the sim tho http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

pourshot
01-31-2004, 10:23 PM
I have paid my money for il2 and for FB and I will pay agian when the addon comes out so I will fly what I bloody like anyway I see fit.If that meens playing a game or a realistic coop thats my choice.If you dont like it tuff ( you know who this is aimed at right http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif )

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/mybaby.jpeg.JPG
Ride It Like Ya Stole It

JG77Hawk_9
02-01-2004, 01:36 AM
If the Germans get the Ta152 can the Brits get the Spit Mk21 or 24? I'm sure that would be more than a fair match-up. Oh and BTW thow in a La9 and an Il10 for the Russians (-; after all, this is an Eastern Front War Ground Pounder sim.

VW-IceFire
02-02-2004, 08:10 AM
I'll take a Ta-152 on in any Spitfire right down to and including a Mk I or a Mk V if thats the way its going to be http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I happen to be a Canadian and since the RCAF was so tightly integrated into the RAF and flew mostly RAF aircraft my interest does definately wander there. I've learned alot about the Eastern Front and while I agree that lots of games have focused on the Western front before I have absolutely no regrets that this game is going back to the West because while its been done before...its never looked this good or worked this well...and by all means I'd love to have a composite flight of Russian and British aircraft in a online fight...or whatever. Really I like having a mix of aircraft and the more the better.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Korolov
02-02-2004, 08:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
I must say, it's easy for you Spit whiners and Ami whiners to talk about inclusion when this is the FIRST sim ever not to immediately cater to the Western centric POV from the get-go. I see it as incredibly self-serving. Everything's been done from your narrow POV for so long, you now think that Stangs and Spits are some kind of birthright.

As a WWII history buff, my POV comes from exploring the real matchups (read, mostly VVS vs. LW, with a few Hungarian, Italian, British and US incursions here and there). I'm not German, but I do like their planeset from a technical standpoint. I don't feel I have to 'do my patriotic bit' and fly American planes because I'm American. That's limiting and also pretty "predictable", isn't it?

If everyone weren't so predictably flagwaving, and was just interested in the period, the amount of P-51/P-47/Spit whining (not to mention use of the planes) would be commensurate with their historical impact on the East front (read: minimal). THIS is why I keep harping on this: if you fly online, you see an OVERrepresentation of P-51s and -47s. It looks less and less like the Eastern Front every day.

I'm not "afraid" of Spits, any more than P-51s or -47s. I actually find them easier to down than the Yaks and Las. But, I'd much rather see more Russian planes opposing me than West front planes. As we get new Western maps or other theatres where the Stangs and Jugs were more repesentative, then fine, bring 'em on.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have no idea where you're playing, because where I'm usually flying at, we see russian planes more often than american or british planes.

I also don't understand why you're so stubbornly set against any western planes included into the game. 1C did the P-51 themselves, so obviously they do want to expand it beyond the east front. According to you, the 1C team should scrap everything they've done so far and start all over again if they want to do a western front sim.

Most of these planes in the addon have been done by fans of these planes; that leaves 1C free to do whatever else they want to go into the sim. Unfortunately for the east front, most surviving russian A/C don't have comprehensive cockpit data, and as a result modelers have great difficulty working with them.

In any case, you get the choice as to what server to play on and whether or not to play. I myself had a blast with the finnish campaign yesterday, and I'm a big west front fan. So certainly, while I will be flying the P-38 a lot when it comes, it doesn't mean I'm going to quit listening to Ivan's east front translations or quit playing with east front planes.

Like I said...

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
02-02-2004, 12:19 PM
Korolov wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I myself had a blast with the finnish campaign yesterday, and I'm a big west front fan.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly my point. You discovered a very interesting part of WWII aerial warfare...and one that included NO P-51s. There were some Spit Vs there every now and again... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

My point is, if the "popularity contest" way holds sway, you'll rarely see a good Finland campaign (or Stalingrad, or Kursk, or....), because everyone's shoehorning in the planes that had little or no impact, and for no better reason than "it's a cool plane" or "it's an American plane". You can't explore "Buffaloes vs. Yak 1s" if P-47s are barreling around; for one the -47s don't belong there, and for two, the earlier planes that DO belong aren't competitive...so their pilots likely have to jump into some unrepresentative plane themselves just to have a chance. Similarly, if you add the Spit V to this equation, it will be so popular that you'll see 5x as many of these machines as you will Yaks or Hurricanes (when the Spits maybe outfitted one or two VVS squads the whole Finland war). So now, it's not Finland at all; it's just another boring late war dogfight arena played over the Finland map.

My point is, there is a point where total player choice starts to erode the flavor of the campaigns the sim is supposed to be simulating. And because it's so easy to do so, players tend to go for the silly & fun fantasy scenario rather than explore any of the real (and STILL INTERESTING) historical matchups. You can see this in effect every time you go onto HyperLobby.

I feel Oleg's "marketing" of the sim, and failure to exercise any control over what is in it, has had the effect of destroying its flavor. It seems, ironically enough, that the "Forgotten Battles" are the historical ones. And that's our loss.

Korolov
02-02-2004, 12:57 PM
I don't think you read my post fully, Stiglr. The point is that despite the fact that I'd usually be playing with a P-47 or a P-51, I wanted to try something fresh, and so I loaded up the finnish campaign.

When people get tired of their spitfires and need something to liven it up, they'll go do what I did. We have plenty of planes to do the east front now, the winter war, etc. New ones like a Mc.202 pit or a Fokker DXXI wouldn't be bad, but its up to the modelers who WANT to do them whether or not they get into the game.

It's very difficult to model something you don't like and don't want to do. So until you find someone who really WANTS to do these exotics, you'll have to stick with what you got. Meanwhile the rest of us will enjoy our favorites while still returning to the original content of the game every once in a while.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

MiloMorai
02-02-2004, 01:44 PM
Stiglr do you know how many 'eastern' Europians, and that includes those from the former USSR, 'play' only eastern scenarios? How many will switch to 'western' scenarios?

There is nothing wrong with Oleg's marketing. By including popular 'western' a/c he is exposing a large number of people who would not looked at his sim/game otherwise. These people, who would never have looked at his sim/game, are then exposed to the war in the east and the a/c involved in that part of of the conflict that was WW2.

Anice way to get extra customers.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Long live the Horse Clans.

XyZspineZyX
02-02-2004, 01:52 PM
It (the marketing of FB) is a great way to get more customers, I fully agree.

But, the fact remains that the sim loses its flavor.

I don't buy the argument that the game wouldn't have succeeded without Western Planes. IL-2 sold much better than ANYONE expected it to, before all the whining for Spits, P-51s and other planes began. And many were the guys who came in to this and other forums saying, "I like the idea, but Yaks and MiGs don't interest me"... and then bought it anyway. They were drawn in because the sim was well regarded, looked good and was fun, not *just* because of the planeset or its perceived omissions.

While I can't necessarily argue that the sim should NEVER have any of these planes, I can argue that the fact that they're almost never used in *representative numbers*, rather than by their overall popularity (among many who know bugger all about WWII or history in general), results in a loss of the sim's character. You can't have WWII if all you can stand to fly is P-51s. They didn't actually appear in combat until 1943 (not counting the Apache). The Spitfire, of course, is much more ubiquitous, yet is an asterisk on the Eastern Front.

[This message was edited by Stiglr on Mon February 02 2004 at 01:03 PM.]

biggs222
02-02-2004, 02:36 PM
ok Stiglr, when u say the Spit and other western planes will not and are not used in *representative numbers*, are u talking about when ur in DF server?...if so ur agrument holds no weight, DF servers are for fun and nothgin else, planes are never used in their representative numbers in DF servers. however Coops and campaignes manage the planes numbers very well....so i dont see what ur problem is....DF servers will always have people flying the most popular/highest performing planes in them and coops will manage their plane #'s according to the senario.

even before the P51 and P47 came along it was painfully obvious that the spit belonged in this sim...just because it was a popular plane doesnt make it a sim "flavor" killer, if anythgin it will enhance the "flavor".

VW-IceFire
02-02-2004, 02:59 PM
Just to clear up what seems to be some kind of confusion...the Spitfire Mark V is not a late war fighter at all. Its a 1941 fighter in the same realm as the Yak-1B and the Bf 109F. The Mark V's were considered obsolete when the FW190's showed up on the scene. A Mark V is a modified Mark I with a more powerful engine and more powerful armament.

The IX and the XIV represent middle and late war fighting...but not the V.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

XyZspineZyX
02-02-2004, 03:29 PM
Biggs,

Well, some DF servers are scripted ones, where the planeset *can be* controlled by the host. More often than not, the set is made overly broad, such as "all planes up to 1943" or "all planes 1942 and later". This is where "ueberplaneism" takes over, reducing these seemingly broad planesets, as you said, to the two to four most capable planes (perhaps two a side, maybe not even that). You can't really even explore other matchups because there are too few non-ueberplane types ever in the air.

Now, back to our "favorite" Spit: say you run a historical Finland scripted server. There was at least one squad fully equipped with Spits operating in Leningrad/Murmansk/Finnish Gulf area. So Spits WERE there, sure, but they were hardly a common sight. However, with no control, every allied pilot and his dog will fly a Spit V, and you'll see only the "odd" Yak1B, Hurricane or other plane, when those were there in large numbers, far more ubiquitous than any Spitfire.

The "popular" Spit, then, definitely ruins the flavor of that particular server.

I'm just saying it would be better if Oleg had built in some more "historical control" into the sim instead of simply leaving it to the whims of others who will exercise little restraint or are merely ignorant of the subject.

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 03:41 PM
Kind of what we allied flyers see every day Stiglr with servers full of LW pilots carrying MK108's or nearly all flying the Me262.

The MK108 cannon was not fitted on every plane that could carry it on the East Front but I hardly ever see a Bf109 without a MK108 if it can carry one or the FW190's with the dual MK108 cannons in the wings.

I am also 99% sure that when the add-on is out we will see hords of Ta-152's flying around.

And your crying about the Spitfire making it into FB and that it kills the realism or the East Front setting?

Dude, it has never been there in the first place because as long as I can remember I have been dodging MK108 shells in IL2 and IL2 FB.

VW-IceFire
02-02-2004, 03:50 PM
Excellent point. Historical control has absolutely nothing to do with Spitfires. There are broader issues....and if the historical favour of the server admin wants to limit Spitfires in such a scenario than the tools are easily accessible (scripted or not).

What your now making points about is admins and how they run their server rather than inclusion of said plane into the game.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Korolov
02-02-2004, 03:55 PM
Excellent point, Cappadocian. All the flying 30mm cannons are less realistic than a Spitfire on the east front.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

p1ngu666
02-02-2004, 03:58 PM
then again most dogfight servers never get above 1 squadron strength each side..
im sure ppl will still fly yaks etc cos there good planes down low. spits for up high http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 04:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
then again most dogfight servers never get above 1 squadron strength each side..
im sure ppl will still fly yaks etc cos there good planes down low. spits for up high http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it doesn't really matter what server your logging into, if it has Bf109's or FW190's available that can carry a 30mm cannon you rarely see one with a 20mm cannon.

On top of that these very same people where posting topics here about all the big cannon Yak's and LaGG's flying around and that it wasn't realistic.

I nearly soiled myself laughing when I read these whine posts.

Zen--
02-02-2004, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cappadocian_317:

I am also 99% sure that when the add-on is out we will see hords of Ta-152's flying around.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I must say (quite proudly) that I will be one of the ones flying the TA152 99% of the time. People might complain about historical accuracy but if they do, let them remove it from their own server. If a host allows it, I don't see any reason not to fly it...as a FW jock from the early IL2 days and suffering through all the wacked FM's back then, I'll have no problems flying the uber plane of the series.

If others don't like the TA, I'll host my own server then, so we can all peacefully coexist http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

faustnik
02-02-2004, 04:27 PM
I can't see flying the Ta152. It will take all the fun out of being a 190 pilot.

A 190 in FB that can turn? That's just wrong. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

MiloMorai
02-02-2004, 04:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
I can't see flying the Ta152. It will take all the fun out of being a 190 pilot.

A 190 in FB that can turn? That's just wrong. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe all the b!tchen will stop about the Fw190's uber roll rate.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif



Long live the Horse Clans.

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 04:39 PM
Flying a plane that is completely uber is boring, especially when there is no plane on the oppositions side that can match it.

I am staying clear of all the dogfight servers after the Ace expansion because it will be full of little wannabies in their uber birds and only host closed sessions with my buddies.

The more fantasy/uber planes that are added in the game the average age and sadly also the average IQ drops down like a ton of rocks on the dogfight servers, even the semi mission objective servers are getting infested lately.

XyZspineZyX
02-02-2004, 04:49 PM
I agree with you, Cap. But then, I don't take 108s every time I can.

And, you also have to admit: with the penal ballistics code (over)applied to that particular gun, and the stingy round count, that gun is not some kind of instant acemaker. It seems those slugs fly sideways at times, and "can't miss" bursts at 50 yards, with your gunsight BLACK with target inexplicably do "miss". The alternative, of course, is to bore in even closer and then collide. Hmm.

Anyway, yes, the improper application of historical planes (and loadouts) does cut both ways. However, on the German side you don't see it that much, since they only have TWO main fighter types (the third being hors d'combat so far). By definition, those were both ubiquitous and "belong" just about everywhere. Also, you don't see as many "rabid" 109 fans or FW fans as you see Spit- and Stang-whiners. Not by a factor of 10.

Zen--
02-02-2004, 04:57 PM
I agree in a general sense Cap, thats why I don't fly the La or Yak...too easy in many ways.

The TA152 has been my favorite plane as far back as I can remember...as people feel about their ponies, their jugs, their P39's and spits, is the same way I feel about the TA152 and the Dora series.

I doubt it will be uber in the sense of unstoppable...every patch brings a new uber plane and the same crowd of people you are talking about migrates from bird to bird...but few of them are any good and they will be shot down in droves while flying the Ta152, just like they are in the Zero, the Ki84 and whatever flavor of plane is dominant at the moment.


On the bright side, the large influx of people that many complain are ruining the game with their arcade mentality and all that...these are the people that for good or bad are generating revenue to keep the sim going. Without them (and their annoying habits, which is subjective on the observers part) 1C/ and UBI don't make as much money...and we all know revenue drives the gaming market.

Take it with a grain salt...they may be flapping around with unrealistic attitudes, strange vocabulary, unreasonable expectations and may not have a clue about ww2, but thats the way they are and they don't know anything else.

Alot of people in the community DO know alot though...so the question is will we cut them off, sneer at their noobishness as they fly around in their unstoppable noob planes spouting unintelligable noob phrases, or will we try in various ways to teach them what we know, to bring them into the community, to make them understand what a simmer is?

I would think that we as a community can do alot to help transition the new comers into the proper frame of mind...after all, unless each of us bought a thousand copies of the game, they are a big big reason why the game still grows. They have money...UBI likes that.

Lastly, even though there may be an influx of 'undesirables' that many of us don't care for, there will be an influx of potential aces as well, people who are new to sims but who may learn to carry on the tradition that many of you are proud of. They are the next generation so to speak.

You cannot educate everyone, you will always find aholes galore in online gaming...but there are ways to minimize their impact, there are ways to extend a hand of welcome and to turn the other cheek at times.

It all depends on how much we care about the community and how much we are willing to stretch to accomodate 'the other guy'.


Just a small bit of my opinion on a big subject.

S~!!

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 05:06 PM
"Also, you don't see as many "rabid" 109 fans or FW fans as you see Spit- and Stang-whiners. Not by a factor of 10"

It's pretty obvious that you have not been here from the beginning.

I am still paying for the Tetanus shots because of all the rabid luftwhiners that nearly drowned this forum with posts about their favorate planes.

As for the MK108 being a lowsy cannon, well all I have to say is learn how to fly and learn how to aim.

I am a dedicated Hurricane pilot myself and 7 out of 10 times I attack a plane with a Bf109 with an 30mm cannon it's gone after the first pass.
Even at longer ranges you can make a kill if you line up well enough with the 30mm cannon.

Also with the "German 20mm cannon bullets don't fly as straight as the Allied 20mm bullets" remarks are funny at best.

You can place a ruler on these smoke trails and I am impressed if someone finds them dropping down like bricks like some here claim.

http://www.cappadocian.demon.nl///IL2screen12.jpg

http://www.cappadocian.demon.nl///IL2screen13.jpg

http://www.cappadocian.demon.nl///IL2screen14.jpg

faustnik
02-02-2004, 05:11 PM
Don't start down that "lousy German guns" road with Capp. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

VW-IceFire
02-02-2004, 05:15 PM
Excellent points Zen. Part of the process for people playing these games is that many gradually accept what it is to be a simmer rather than an arcade gamer (although we should probably check any of our own snobish simmer tendancies at the door too).

I actually like the idea of the Ta-152 being added to the game because it will give the Luftwaffe crowd another propeller plane that has another dimension and set of properties that should make it a good counter balance. I can actually see this plane potentially scaring the crap out of the La-7 crowd (except for the pilots who are actually quite adept at the La-7).

I also must say that I disagree about rabit fans. There are plenty of fans of the FW190 (ie. the cockpit debate was HUGE) and many are quite vocal. By comparison we've only just now seen quite a bit of interest in the Spitfire...and most of them are probably somewhat like myself who live in a Commonwealth country, who have a fascination based party on family history as well as the Spitfires mystique.

Its actually kind of heartening that the Spitfires reputation has lasted this long. Its the 21st century and people still fear/cheer its presence in a flight simulation http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Either way...I still plan to fly for Blue team as much as Red team and shoot down the Spitfires (no matter what marks) with a FW190. Either way I'm happy but I'm glad to have the chance to do both.

BTW: My gunnery accuracy is substantially better in a FW190D-9 than in a La-5FN or a Yak-3/9U.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 05:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Don't start down that "lousy German guns" road with Capp. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Here are some 20mm and 30mm action shots. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://www.cappadocian.demon.nl/IL2.html

faustnik
02-02-2004, 05:21 PM
There is really no comparison between the Spitfire and the Ta152 as to "belonging" in FB. The Spitfire was a significant player on every front, built and used by the thousands. The Ta152 was still in operational testing when the war ended, with maybe thirty total seeing service. I'll stick with old A8 in late war servers or maybe the A9 if I'm having a bad day.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 05:22 PM
My favorate LW birds are the Emil and the G2.

S77th-brooks
02-02-2004, 06:00 PM
LA 7 can to the front in september 44 ,TA 152 can in xmas of 44/45 it as all rights to be there

lrrp22
02-02-2004, 06:13 PM
You're kidding, right? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I have been amazed at how quite the introduction of the Mustang has been relative to the 109 and 190. Partially this is due to the fact that it is modeled quite well, and partially because the Luft crowd did such a good job of lowering everyone's expectations of how it should perform, especially at low altitude.

If you want a Mustang whine, how about this: The in-game D-5-NT represents a stateside, factory-boosted configuration that is substantially underpowered compared to the boost settings used in the ETO.

On the other hand, we have D-9's and K-4's (and La-7's, La-5FN's, etc.) that represent the best possible horsepower ratings authorized for the types.

Stiglr wrote:

"Also, you don't see as many "rabid" 109 fans or FW fans as you see Spit- and Stang-whiners. Not by a factor of 10.[/QUOTE]"

blabla0001
02-02-2004, 06:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S77th-brooks:
LA 7 can to the front in september 44 ,TA 152 can in xmas of 44/45 it as all rights to be there<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You kinda missed the point brooks, by a few miles I might add.

WUAF_Badsight
02-02-2004, 11:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
And, you also have to admit: with the penal ballistics code (over)applied to that particular gun, that gun is not some kind of instant acemaker. It seems those slugs fly sideways at times, and "can't miss" bursts at 50 yards, with your gunsight BLACK with target inexplicably do "miss". Also, you don't see as many "rabid" 109 fans or FW fans as you see Spit- and Stang-whiners. Not by a factor of 10.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


LMAO

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

OMG are you a german Fanboy !

LEARN TO FLY DUDE

WUAF_Badsight
02-02-2004, 11:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
More often than not, the set is made overly broad, such as "all planes up to 1943" or "all planes 1942 and later". This is where "ueberplaneism" takes over, reducing these seemingly broad planesets, as you said, to the two to four most capable planes (perhaps two a side, maybe not even that). You can't really even explore other matchups because there are too few non-ueberplane types ever in the air.

The "popular" Spit, then, definitely ruins the flavor of that particular server.

I'm just saying it would be better if Oleg had built in some more "historical control" into the sim instead of simply leaving it to the whims of others who will exercise little restraint or are merely ignorant of the subject.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



WHAT ! ARE MY EYES DECIEVEING ME !

you are expecting to play in a Realistic "historical" DOGFIGHT SERVER ! ! ! !

LOOOOOOL

HAHAHAHAHAHA

have you never heard the word "Coop" ?

DF servers are for dueling , they have nothing to do with historical

as good as it gets is plane sets limited by year

just face it ..... your BF-109 is gunna get a whole lotta Spitfire lovin

as it should

WOLFMondo
02-03-2004, 02:54 AM
Sod the Spit, I want the Tempest flyablehttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I want the spit and I will fly the spit and enjoy it. If people want historically accuracy go play on a server with that, better yet host your own server and make maps with settings you like or make maps and ask a server owner/admin to host them for you. I know of at least one that will.

Wolfgaming.net. Where the Gameplay is teamplay (http://www.wolfgaming.net)

XyZspineZyX
02-03-2004, 10:14 AM
For badsight and irrp:

You get me wrong.

So far, I haven't had what I consider a lot of trouble with P-51s or -47s. Overall, I've given a little more than I've took from them. I've shot down bunches of both, mostly because their pilots *think* they're invincible just by flying them, and don't have a clue on how to make use of their stellar qualities. To be expected from pilots who lack any historical perspective. I expect about the same with your garden variety Spit pilot.

A La-7 or Yak-3 (both of which belong in spades) or even La-5 are more of a challenge. So, it's not about "wanting a lesser opponent". I actually like battling Spits...in the proper environment, that is.

As far as "historical matchups in DF servers", uh, yes, it CAN happen and does. GreaterGreen used to have a *killer* one before they went "3-armies" and ruined it (again, shoehorning in the Stang and Jug makes all the difference). A couple of other dedicated scripted servers also take a bit of care and make nicely themed setups with historical planesets; planesets that "advance" with each side victory; they'll load the same map with new frontlines and a new planeset, representing the same battle a couple of weeks or months later.

It can be done. In fact, it *should* be done much more often.

Gunner_361st
02-03-2004, 10:34 AM
What is wrong with you gentlemen? It is obvious that all servers SHOULD play historical missions with airplanes of certain types limited with high realism on. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

It is also obvious that we should only be allowed to have fun with this game the way certain egomaniacs tell us to. and then complain, whenever German side loses in a server. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

My apologies gents, but I really had to get that off my chest. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

LuftKuhMist
02-03-2004, 11:25 AM
I'd love to fly the Spit but since FB is an eastern front sim, it's not a must.

Stiglr is right about the philosophy of many virtual pilots, that's why I don't fly online with strangers, that's why I get tired of overperforming P51s and P47s (in other sims).

My favorite plane of all time is the FW190. But I enjoy a lot more flying obscure planes that I never had the chance to try out. The P51 in FB is a great plane, but I am just tired of mustangs, I'd rather fly a gladiator, a gamecock or an MC202. What's the point of playing if we don't get new challenges and exeperiences?

SeaFireLIV
02-03-2004, 11:33 AM
Isn`t this subject done and done? Let`s face it, NOONE`s going to give in. So we may as well agree to disagree.

End of argument- from me anyway.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/greypilots.jpg

Korolov
02-03-2004, 01:50 PM
But why? It's so much fun to make the other guy look like a control freak who wouldn't allow anything but a G.50 and a Gladiator! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
02-03-2004, 02:15 PM
..and that's also so much easier than picking up a book or two and actually learning something.

[g,d,r]

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

MiloMorai
02-03-2004, 02:30 PM
I wish people would spell 'no one' correctly. It sounds like that quicky taking during the noon hour.



Long live the Horse Clans.

VW-IceFire
02-03-2004, 05:34 PM
Two things...this isn't a Eastern Front simulation. It is a WWII simulation...it says so on the packaging and also in the content. Its primarily focused around the Eastern Front but no where does it strictly say that it must take place on the Eastern Front (which in itself is quite large and we cover areas which I consider to be outside of the main Eastern Front but which still are present and are not Western Front).

Stiglr - again you don't really seem to be arguing specifically against the "historically ruining Spitfire" but more against servers that aren't so much historical but more generally aimed towards fun. History is a possible minor for me when I graduate from University and while I'm all for historical correctness and accuracy I think you are generalizing that this is a historical game and therefore everything should take place in it is historical. It certainly sounds that way...alot of people would rather be having fun. If fun is flying a Spitfire on a server that allows it...is that so much of a problem? Is that so much in conflict with what you think online gaming should be about for everyone?

I don't for a minute think that 6 versions of the Spitfire or the P-51 or any plane has ruined your online experience. Only if you want it to...otherwise play on servers or setup a server that runs things in a historical fashion. I point you to the F16_Dedicated server on HL that does a pretty good job of creating historical planesets. Nothing is preventing them from not using the P-51 right now and nothing is preventing them from not using the Spitfire later...and vice versa.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

XyZspineZyX
02-03-2004, 05:57 PM
VW-IceFire wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>alot of people would rather be having fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, there's one of the principal misconceptions of the arcadists and the historically ignorant: the idea that being historically accurate isn't fun.

It absolutely IS. And, I might add, what good does it do to attempt to have accurate flight modeling, accurate weaponry and accurate physical worlds and then totally ignore the historical Orders of Battle, plane matchups, etc.??? It is occasionally interesting to explore that stuff, sure, but when it makes for 75% of the experience online, I'd say that's gone too far.

As for that one server you mention: good for them! Now, how many arcade joke servers can you compare it to? And how many totally inaccurate ones (planeset wise)? I rest my case.

The sim allows us to have a historical experience, but it's the community and the overabundance of unrestricted choice that's creating the "dweebing down" of the sim.

VW-IceFire
02-03-2004, 06:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
VW-IceFire wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>alot of people would rather be having fun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, there's one of the principal misconceptions of the arcadists and the historically ignorant: the idea that being historically accurate isn't fun.

It absolutely IS. And, I might add, what good does it do to attempt to have accurate flight modeling, accurate weaponry and accurate physical worlds and then totally ignore the historical Orders of Battle, plane matchups, etc.??? It is occasionally interesting to explore that stuff, sure, but when it makes for 75% of the experience online, I'd say that's gone too far.

As for that one server you mention: good for them! Now, how many arcade joke servers can you compare it to? And how many totally inaccurate ones (planeset wise)? I rest my case.

The sim allows us to have a historical experience, but it's the community and the overabundance of unrestricted choice that's creating the "dweebing down" of the sim.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'd say its equally a misconception of what I've just stated was infact suggesting that a historical matchup was not fun. However some people would rather not be bothered to have to read a whole pile of books to grab a joystick and fly about and relax after the usual days stress.

The so called Arcade joke servers are actually quite popular yes...and I don't believe it in any way detracts from the experience of the sim and the community as long as its not made out to detract from it. We do have some people on this forum who have made it their mission (not saying its you either) to force one set of rules (so called realism or "real" against the "arcade") on everyone when the whole point of making simming accessible is to ensure that there are different ways to approach the game.

A historical game can definately be just as good a time as a non-historical one. Some are going to find one more interesting than another...what you think doesn't mean that another won't have a better time under a different planeset and a different set of realism levels.

As far as the represnted online experience being 75% non-historical and 25% historical or similarly valued numbers in "real" and "arcade" games thats a ebb and flow of the community running private servers to his or her own interests or interests of their audience. You can't mandate that the community should have a 75% historical/real server ratio...if you could it'd be a dictatorship and we all know much fun dictators are http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (dripping sarcasm for those who didn't catch it)

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Schmouddle_WT
02-04-2004, 01:52 AM
Hey, come on guys, youre talking about cr*p.

The fact is, there are so-called arcade servers and so-called full real servers and all you can do is talk about that. (We have a proverb in CZ "Dogs are barking, the caravan moves on). There will be always hot-shoot guys and full-real-elite guys. It has been said here, that those "full-real-elite" pilots should not end up with precedence against the so-called newbies. This problem I felt with Counter-Strike and never really get into the game.

I am afraid there are not enough full-real freaks to buy the sim, thus it would not be worth for publisher to tune the sim after its release. So those newbies (aka arcade players) are really needed here. And besides everyone from the so-called elite was newbie in his/her past, so wassup?

You (and me and everybody) could choose server on your own, just to feel comfortable there, have some fun and possibly learn something.

Stiglr, however youre trying to convince us the histrically correct servers are the only correct option, your sword is twin-bladed. There are plenty of servers both on HL and UBI looking like having historically correct planeset in their rotating maps (stating place, year and season) and it will suprise you in late 1943 in Prokhorovka Germans would have late 1943 Bf109 but Russians would not have LA5F, and you can still fly your Yak1B being out of frontline service that time....strange, dont ya think? In order not to start a flamewar here, this also often apply opposite way. So if you call for historical corectenss, it shall be kept up by historical server in first step.

We shall teach the newbies (and please NOTE this is not meant as an offence) how to behave and lead them to understand the way we enjoy our historically correct servers. Neverthenless there will always be newbies.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WT_Schmouddle

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 10:09 AM
Schmouddle wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>There are plenty of servers both on HL and UBI looking like having historically correct planeset in their rotating maps (stating place, year and season) and it will suprise you in late 1943 in Prokhorovka Germans would have late 1943 Bf109 but Russians would not have LA5F, and you can still fly your Yak1B being out of frontline service that time....strange, dont ya think? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I fail to see your point. Sounds like the server author just forgot to add the La5, or disable the early Yak-1b? Easy fixes; edit the planeset and move on. And, if we're just talking about an introduction date or two, that's nit-picking compared to taking that same map and shoehorning in planes that weren't within 1000 miles of it just because that plane is "kewl". That latter scenario is much more common a problem than the one you state.

Yes, there will always be newbies, but are you saying "newbies can't *handle* history"? That less experienced players (or even experienced ones) *have* to have stupid, non-historical DF servers and *can't* have fun if they have a little historical structure to them? Hogwash. Really, this all boils down to the lack of structure in the sim itself. Too much choice creates dweebery, as we see all too plainly.

Schmouddle_WT
02-04-2004, 10:38 AM
Stiglr, you really missed my point.

The example with LA5F was only an exmaple, there are many other inaccuraties to be found, so there is no need to catch it as a bite.

I tried to tell you, that I do not see *many* historically acurate maps down there in HL - means the servers youre talking about.
If you want to have 100% accurate server, host your own (as we in White Tigers do), but do not push others just because they enjoy the game in
a different way. That was the point.
I said it clearly, newbies need a place where they can find themselves /realism settings and historical settings/ and learn how to handle the plane and get into a mission thus non-scripted DF /innacurate as you call them/ have definately the place here. Being thrown into a deadly combat in full-real servers on plane you cant handle /you cant take your favourite one in order to keep it up historically-wise/ is confusing....

This is going off-topic, so I will end with this.

Gunner_361st
02-04-2004, 11:44 AM
Excellent point Schmouddle. Forgotten Battles is all about choice, with the huge range of difficulty setting options available. People can fly however and whatever they want.

People want to complain about no structure? Make your own historically accurate dogfight server then. There are a few, admittedly not a lot, but they are there and are usually well-populated.

Almost all of the dogfight maps I make are about a certain battle or timeperiod in history, with year and theater specific planes available. I have dial-up though, so cannot host. I enjoy historically accurate servers with high realism settings, but I'm not saying everyone should play like that and by NO MEANS look down on people who don't. This flight simulator game is meant to be enjoyed. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Also, if you want to crack down on "dweebery" then you should start telling people who fly the FW190A8/A9 and ME109 G6/G6-Late/G6-AS to not take the MK108 cannon or gun cannons, which are choices but not "standard" on those aircraft. Don't be surprised when people don't listen though. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I personally prefer the MG-151/20 ... Much better muzzle velocity, and plenty of power as long as you know how to aim... Try taking up a standard armament Me109 G2 and try shooting down 2 PE8 Russian Heavy Bombers. It can be done without too much difficult as long as you aim right. I've actually taken a wing off a few times. Watch out for those gunners though. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Easy does it, and to each his own. ~S~

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

gkll
02-04-2004, 12:47 PM
Gotta post on this one as I am both a history buff and a stuck-up snob when it comes to FM accuracy (I don't mean relative FM accuracy though ... whatever I won't get too long-winded)

For me the main bit is the plane and the 'feeling of flight' others have ascribed to Il2. Beautiful graphics, a high quality FFB stick and good visual and tactile feedback to the plane are what counts to me. I like to imagine that we are getting close enough on the physics side that pretty much how a real plane flies is how Il2 is.... a cherished figment perhaps... but that is what is best to me

The ground is an irritant that I occasionally fly into (BADDDDD ground....) - well not quite as it can be very nice to fly over. I find I am fascinated by finding that the Crimea map is very very close to the real map - cool! However if I want to fly a Spit XIV over the crimea - so what? STiglr I find you a bit too adamant on your position and agree with those haggling with you...

Anyhow each to his own and in fact the game allows this

History is books and imagination - Il2 is flying.

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 02:36 PM
No, gkil, IL-2 is supposed to be *both*.

The whole "choice" argument is really moot, unless the entire subject never gets past, "it's just a game", the most tired and lame of the low-fi/arcade excuses.

Yeah, sure, you can play it any way you wanna; yeah, sure, you paid your $40, yadda yadda, yadda. (dismissive wave)

But, if we're talking simulation, I just feel most pilots in this community take a "convenient" and "lazy" approach to what the sim could be, and what it offers, opting for the "the quick, the easy and the downright silly", without ever even exploring the historical and educational parts of this sim.

This is where I feel the dev team *could* have stepped in and exercised some direction and control (more of a compromise between serious sim and mass-market accessibility in the features). I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to do weird what-ifs, fantasy setups and silly fun stuff at ALL; I'm saying it might be better if the sim itself guided you more to the historical side of things as part of "normal play", and made you "work" to have to make it sillier. If that makes any sense.

It's their loss in the end (the "gamers" loss, that is). Because approaching it in a more historical way really IS fun and more enriching, because you come closer to perhaps understanding what thousands of young men and women did 60 years ago.

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 02:45 PM
Yeah, I am sure a few what if planes and planes from other fronts will make us forget what happend 60 years ago. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 03:36 PM
Forgetting or remembering is not the same as "understanding", Cappadoc. You know that...

Indeed, http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 03:46 PM
Well, I do understand what happend and a few planes in a WWII combat sim is not going to make me forget to understand.

And since money is needed to keep a company like 1C Maddox make more games they need to extend their market product.

You just tie too much historical value on this WWII sim.

The majority of people play games on their computer to have fun, not to understand history, they got schools for that.

faustnik
02-04-2004, 04:00 PM
Yeah, but, if you take the history out of the sim it leaves no fun.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 04:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Yeah, but, if you take the history out of the sim it leaves no fun.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
http://www.7jg77.com

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They are not taking it out, they extend it to other fronts.

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 04:10 PM
Yep, and the history (and you can count *accurate* flight modeling as a form of "history") is what separates it from Crimson Skies, Fighter Ace, etc.

Cap is part of the crowd who instantly makes the erroneous judgment that anything that's historically accurate, by definition, can't be fun. Further, I'd wager EVERY person who flies and values/respects history still "has fun"; going even further, I predict that those who don't know much about history would enjoy a more historical setup if it were presented that way; it's just that the "dumb-fun" version of the sim is easier to get to. Like with TV, movies and music, people naturally gravitate to the lowest common denominator. And then can't even *see* how they're being condescended to.

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 04:17 PM
"Cap is part of the crowd who instantly makes the erroneous judgment that anything that's historically accurate, by definition, can't be fun"

Where did I say that?

Maybe you should stop ASSUMING so much.

So I want a Spitfire in this game, big f*cking deal.

What OTHER people do with THEIR game or THEIR server is NOT your concern.
Don't like it? Then don't play on that server or better yet, host your own and make a setup 100% to your personal taste.

What you are doing here is force your idea of what this sim should be about to EVERYONE else here on the forum.

Stigls for President, or better said, Dictator.

Korolov
02-04-2004, 04:48 PM
Might as well give up Cappadocian, Stiglr will still call us all ******ed fools for not playing the game his way with his planes.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 05:21 PM
I'm not "forcing" anything, just espousing a point of view.

It might be a better strategy for you to simply refute my viewpoint or prove one of your own rather than be so frustrated that someone else has the nerve to *have* an opinion that might be a bit different.

As you say, "play it the way you want".

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 05:28 PM
I already did Stiglr, but I guess it went over your head.

The same as you read this: "The majority of people play games on their computer to have fun, not to understand history, they got schools for that." into this: "Cap is part of the crowd who instantly makes the erroneous judgment that anything that's historically accurate, by definition, can't be fun"

[This message was edited by Cappadocian_317 on Wed February 04 2004 at 04:36 PM.]

XyZspineZyX
02-04-2004, 05:44 PM
Funny, I thought that was an incredibly apropos response to the former comment. I thought your initial thought there to be a "classic" gamer diatribe.

ZG77_Nagual
02-04-2004, 05:46 PM
Stiglr - I understand your point of view - and I think we'll see it manifested in the BOB simm - to the extent that is possible.

However - we all want this simm - and we want to be able to play it - and see it supported -(and see new things - such as BOB from these guys) so expanding it plane-wise is a way to broaden the audience without really compromising quality at all - since we can exclude planes in online servers (and be sure, many servers will exclude the p80 etc.)I'm sure the development team made the decision they have based on a number of factors - a major one being the willingness of 3rd party models to build the planes. Frankly I think it was a pretty cool decision - it made us all feel like we were part of the development team and brought out some incredible creative talent. From an airplane enthusiasts perspective - it is just plain fun. But now the stage is set for a truly historical simm - and it sure looks like BOB will be it - limited planeset, very close performance and a real commitment to learning to use your ride to the max.

I personally stay away from planes that are too easy to fly - except once in awhile - and I don't allow jets on my server simply because the times I've flown the 262 it just seemed silly.

Taking the position that allowing 'what if's' and even marginals like the ta152 - takes away from the educational value of the simm is probably erroneous - your not going to garner More interest by reducing the planeset - and those of us who are interested in that sort of thing; are. From the standpoint of plane performance this simm is intrinsically educational - and we see the results of altered expectations all over this board in various ways.

Well - to summarize: It's true that forcing historical scenarios would increase the historical value - but it could also limit the simms audience and the spectrum of it's community. Big picture - I agree with the decision the dev team made - my picture - I'm mostly interested in lesser-known or underestimated types that were actually there - or planes that are difficult,but have potential. I was a big campainer for the P-63 way back when IL2 came out - and I was thrilled to see yaks, las and the P39 get their due. Another perspective is that this simm is the seed crystal for future works that, from what seems to be in the wind, will be even more focused and precise. I wouldn't go so far as to say they've revived a dying genre - ww2 combat flight simms - but maybe they have!

blabla0001
02-04-2004, 05:50 PM
Well, I guess you thought wrong.

Just to make it clear to you, I was talking about games in general, that's why I wrote "games" and "WWII sims" but it looks like you assumed too much again.

WUAF_Badsight
02-05-2004, 01:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
that's nit-picking compared to taking that same map and shoehorning in planes that weren't within 1000 miles of it just because that plane is "kewl". That latter scenario is much more common a problem than the one you state.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

its only you that has the problem

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> That less experienced players (or even experienced ones) *have* to have stupid, non-historical DF servers and *can't* have fun if they have a little historical structure to them? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whats stupid is your idea that this game *has* to have correct planesets always


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> this all boils down to the lack of structure in the sim itself. Too much choice creates dweebery, as we see all too plainly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Stigler with FB comforming to your idears FB would turn into a dumb limited game

the more options you give the consumer , the more he can play it his way

you see how that works ?

people actually have fun by doing it differently to you .... amazing isnt it

have you posted anything at this forum that ISNT a complaining session of some kind ?

MiloMorai
02-05-2004, 01:53 AM
Playing 'sandlot' pickup baseball is more fun than playing 'pro' baseball.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2 on 2 basketball is fun as well.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Niether example given are 'full real'.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

When sports become more 'full real' that is when the fun ends and the kids drop out.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Long live the Horse Clans.

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 11:20 AM
WUAF, your comments would be totally spot on... if they were posted at BF42, or Crimson Skies.

Why "should" the planesets be correct? Because it's a *simulation* and not "just a game".

Every one of your rants proves my points, please continue. You're a shining Low-Fi Gamer example.

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 12:19 PM
Stiglr didn't notice the Western/Pacific maps in the patches I guess.

Or is the mission builder too hard for you to understand?

We got and will get a few more planes that go well with those new maps.

So just because it's called IL2 Sturmovik the Forgotten Battles it's wrong to get some Western/Pacific flavor in this game?

Your view on marketing is pretty poor and the final goal for Oleg and his team is to make money of their product so they have a roof over their heads, eat and do some fun things in their spare time is a bad thing?

I hope your not a financial adviser or something like that because people who seek your advice will go bankrupt within weeks.

WUAF_Badsight
02-05-2004, 12:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
You're a shining Low-Fi Gamer example.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok so much you know

flowen with me have you ?

been in my BoB DF map or BoB coops have you ?

winged with me in the VEF have you ?

you got to stop with all the complaining Stigler , its getting old

is their a post you have made with something too add at all at FBs forums ?

WUAF_Badsight
02-05-2004, 12:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
Why "should" the planesets be correct? Because it's a *simulation* and not "just a game". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

did you not see the ability to turn off limited ammo ?

how do you explain the "no stalls / spins" option ?

this is "JUST" a computer game

it has options .......

it has a FMB ........


if FB was stuck your way this community would number in the hundreds rather than the thousands

VW-IceFire
02-05-2004, 02:31 PM
You'd never know that this thread started off about the Spitfire.

I like Spitfires! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 02:45 PM
Same here, I cannot wait to finally get Spitfires in a great Sim, CFS3 really doesn't do it for me, even with the Spitfire in it.

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 03:11 PM
Cappadocian wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Your view on marketing is pretty poor and the final goal for Oleg and his team is to make money of their product so they have a roof over their heads, eat and do some fun things in their spare time is a bad thing?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, my view is spot on, and you'll notice I did NOT say that it was BAD that that decision was made to move boxes; I of course understand those business realities, and sales is a necessary aim. I am pointing out the effect that has on the SIM. Subtle difference there.

Basically, I'm arguing that if the game were a bit more respectful of history, it wouldn't necessarily be "not fun", or even that much harder to fly and enjoy. It would still be a LOT of fun. IL-2, with its much-higher-than-expected sales, proves that point on the planeset side. On the feature side, I predict many of the people who now rely on crutches would simply suck up and learn to get on with it if those "easy switches" weren't there in easy reach. From my experience in Warbirds, that was the case not too long ago.

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 03:16 PM
Like I said Stiglr.

"Stiglr didn't notice the Western/Pacific maps in the patches I guess.

Or is the mission builder too hard for you to understand?

We got and will get a few more planes that go well with those new maps.

So just because it's called IL2 Sturmovik the Forgotten Battles it's wrong to get some Western/Pacific flavor in this game?"

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 03:44 PM
No, I noticed the new maps. They've given a place for "all the fighters that don't *really* belong, but are whined for constantly by those with an arrogant, western-centric viewpoint".

As that process continues, the less these planes will "stick out" like sore thumbs (yet still be wildly popular and overrepresented). It might have been better if they were introduced in the "packs" we're now seeing; that way, you'd have relevant planesets, on relevant maps all released at the same time.

YMMV http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 04:23 PM
That's what marketing is all about, you deliver what customers ask for or else they loose interest or worse, buy it from someone else that does deliver it.

I am a member of a virtual demo team of a Dutch RAF Squadron and instead of getting frustrated with CFS3 and the very user unfriendly mission editor, poor graphics and arcade FM I rather use a vastly superious program like IL2 Sturmovik to present the history of the Squadron to the public on flight shows and squadron weekends.

So in your view that makes me a "arrogant, western-centric" person?

Do you talk like this and slap labels on the people around you as well?
In a very arrogant fasion I might add.

Your also very quick with generalization too.

Pretty sad if you ask me.

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 04:43 PM
I can say I'm better with spelling, that's for sure.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

I understand the marketing angle, as I said (you did read that, didn't you?). But there is a point past which marketing has an adverse affect on the product itself, which it should not, IMHO, do. I was merely pointing out some of the factors that might have been part of the design team's decision to not take a firmer hand with the historical elements of the sim, leaving it (too) open in several respects.

It's great that you use the sim to create virtual demos. I can only hope that you're not using them to "re-write history" and show "how P-51Ds singlehandedly won the war from the time they were introduced in 1940 in the Battle of Britain". The way some people operate in this community, you could arrive at such a assumption.

And that is my whole point. The sim is fun and can be fun if it is more faithful to history. This also has the desirable side effect that it can be a learning tool, on many levels.

WUAF_Badsight
02-05-2004, 05:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:
It might have been better if they were introduced in the "packs" we're now seeing; that way, you'd have relevant planesets, on relevant maps all released at the same time.

YMMV http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so your complaining that planes other than ETO are comming to FB

but your also saying thats ok if they come all at the same time ????

thank god you have nothing to do with IL2:FBs development

ive never seen as big a complainer spoil sport as yourself

your views on FB & how it should run are elietest

then you also post about how you bearly get anything shot when you fly in full settings

if FB bothers you this much then stop playing & clear off to your beloved targetware

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 05:10 PM
Stiglr, first this is not a spelling contest, English is not my first language and it's nearly 1 AM here.

Second, here you go assuming again.

We are a Virtual Demo Team, backed up by the Squadron that was formed during WWII and still exists today, since the change of Command and our visit to the base we are now official members of the Squadron's PR team.
We are not allowed to re-write history nor do we seek to do so.
How stupid do you think it looks if we are sitting there re-writing history when actual WWII veteran pilots are watching us do it, not to mention how fast they are going to pull the plug and kick us out of the PR team for being unprofessional.

We talked to these guys, we have official mission documentation of the missions flown during WWII and I design the missions to match these documents as close as I can.

We have access to a lot of inside information regarding the Squadron and have contacts inside and even outside of the Netherlands to make sure we get it right before we present it to the public.

I am very proud and feel privelidged to be a part of this select small group of people and I am glad that Oleg was able to release his idea into the world and expanded it into a wider setting then just the East Front or else we would still be stuck with CFS3.

Personally I cannot wait to get the Ace Expansion so I can design the missions in this game and fly a Spitfire the way it's ment to be flown instead of getting agravated with that joke of a Spitfire in CFS3.

On top of that I am sooooo going to ritually burn the CFS3 CD's after I have flown my first mission in the FB Spitfire and cleanse myself of all the frustration I had to endure with that crappy piece of software that it feels awsome just by thinking about it.

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 05:17 PM
My point was, Capp, that if you took the same impression from FB that most would get from "P-51 only" servers and "Jugs over Smolensk", you wouldn't have much of historical value to show with your demos.

I wasn't being sarcastic when I said it's great that you use the sim as a learning tool. It absolutely can be used for that. AND also "still" be fun, too. That's exactly the point that many in this community miss.

As for the Spit (nice segue back onto topic http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) they're wonderful planes and worthy opponents, and well met in most any arena where the war raged. But, the way this sim is so unstructured, the plane will be widely over-represented, like its North American and Republic neighbors.

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 05:27 PM
To be honest I really don't care what is happing on all these dogfight servers in Hyperlobby since I never logon to them anyway, besides none of them have any historical value to begin with.
If I was you I would just stick with VOW or something like that or setup your own server and seek out others who seek what you want.

I only play with my friends in closed sessions, mostly testing my missions to make sure they run well for all team members with acceptable framerate and we practice to make sure most of us come back alive from the missions we fly at the demo's.

XyZspineZyX
02-05-2004, 05:35 PM
Capp wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>To be honest I really don't care what is happing on all these dogfight servers in Hyperlobby since I never logon to them anyway, besides none of them have any historical value to begin with.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what a loss that is for all concerned.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

blabla0001
02-05-2004, 05:46 PM
Maybe you should setup a demo team of your own about the Squadron you have interest in, that way you can poor as much historical value into is as you want and leave the air quake servers behind.

They are the one's that fill Oleg's wallet so he can go on and make even better Sims.

Just avoid the arcade crowd or better yet, ignore them.

faustnik
02-05-2004, 05:49 PM
Gotta agree with Capp on this one. Going to a DF server for realism is like going to a strip bar to meet a nice girl.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)

VW-IceFire
02-05-2004, 06:23 PM
If Western centric arrogance is bringing us some more maps I can't complain about that.

Seriously...if you don't like the way things are online either make your own server or just don't play online or just don't play at all. I think we've done the topic to death...everyone knows where they stand and has said it to death (myself included) and its time to move on. Its obvious that most of us feel relatively happy with expansion of the series into all sorts of new directions (I'm actually kinda interested in the whole Italian perspective thats getting explored as well).

So lets move of into some new debate where we can make some kind of progress please http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

biggs222
02-05-2004, 08:02 PM
Faustnik i couldnt have said it better myself.

now seriously this topic has added 3 more pages since i was in here, and has yet to say anything new. now lets stop waisting our time talking in circles. stiglr u have said ur point over and over and over again, and we have said ours, time to stop. save ur crying for when the addon ACTUALLY arrives.

WUAF_Badsight
02-05-2004, 10:22 PM
Stigler wrote :
"whaa whaa the spitfires coming & its gunna waste my over-used Mk108 butt"

you know it baby