PDA

View Full Version : P-51 newb planes? and bomber turrets.



Schwifty_161
05-04-2004, 03:32 PM
Okay well I thought I'd reply to a previous post and ask all this in the same post. Kinda related.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> While I was flying last night someone on the server commented on my aircraft choice (p51). They claimed it was a "clown crate." I asked them to elaborate on this and they said it required no skill and the modeling for it in the sim was a joke. I will not mention the name. I then proceeded to ask why and they said the 50 calibers were too powerful, too easy to hit with (they suggested that the tactic of 'spray and pray' was noobish), and also claimed that the p51 turns too well at low speeds. I didn't know how to reply to this, and I guess I should have ignored that person but it really offended me. My understanding is that the p51 should be "noob friendly" because it was that way in real life. Pilots claimed that it was really easy to fly. I guess I don't understand why people just can't respect my choice of aircraft and not bother me about it. I hope not everyone is like this online or I may dedice to go back to playing offline. What does everyone else think? Am I less of a pilot or not as skilled because I choose to fly the "clown crates"? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So yea, man, dont worry about people who say you're a bad pilot if you like the P-51, could be worse, you could be flying an LA.

Those .50 cals are actually toned down a little, if you watch closely they dont hit nearly as much as they should, like the rate of fire is toned down. They're great for torching engines if you can get an angle on them. Though I figure 6 brownings would tear up wings pretty darn well too. They should be more effective.

So I've heard rumors, so here are my 2 questions......

1. I heard the .50's were going to be given a little boost in rate of fire for online, to make them a little better, like they are in single player. True/false?

2. I heard there was talk about boosting the speed at which bomber turrets track targets. Which I figure all the bombers could use. True/false?

Okay so there's a couple more questions.. Is this being looked at for the patch? and is there going to be a flyable B-17 comming out which I've also heard rumors of?

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.

Schwifty_161
05-04-2004, 03:32 PM
Okay well I thought I'd reply to a previous post and ask all this in the same post. Kinda related.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> While I was flying last night someone on the server commented on my aircraft choice (p51). They claimed it was a "clown crate." I asked them to elaborate on this and they said it required no skill and the modeling for it in the sim was a joke. I will not mention the name. I then proceeded to ask why and they said the 50 calibers were too powerful, too easy to hit with (they suggested that the tactic of 'spray and pray' was noobish), and also claimed that the p51 turns too well at low speeds. I didn't know how to reply to this, and I guess I should have ignored that person but it really offended me. My understanding is that the p51 should be "noob friendly" because it was that way in real life. Pilots claimed that it was really easy to fly. I guess I don't understand why people just can't respect my choice of aircraft and not bother me about it. I hope not everyone is like this online or I may dedice to go back to playing offline. What does everyone else think? Am I less of a pilot or not as skilled because I choose to fly the "clown crates"? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So yea, man, dont worry about people who say you're a bad pilot if you like the P-51, could be worse, you could be flying an LA.

Those .50 cals are actually toned down a little, if you watch closely they dont hit nearly as much as they should, like the rate of fire is toned down. They're great for torching engines if you can get an angle on them. Though I figure 6 brownings would tear up wings pretty darn well too. They should be more effective.

So I've heard rumors, so here are my 2 questions......

1. I heard the .50's were going to be given a little boost in rate of fire for online, to make them a little better, like they are in single player. True/false?

2. I heard there was talk about boosting the speed at which bomber turrets track targets. Which I figure all the bombers could use. True/false?

Okay so there's a couple more questions.. Is this being looked at for the patch? and is there going to be a flyable B-17 comming out which I've also heard rumors of?

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.

Huckebein_UK
05-04-2004, 03:37 PM
I've just thought mate, in real life many of the turrets in bombers were manual, and so couldn't be traversed that quickly anyway - I'm not sure about the hydraulic ones though - you might be right there.

I'm doubtful about the flyable Fortress though mate - we can but hope. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

--------------
Huckebein_UK
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig_copy17.jpg
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig1_copy2.jpg
Il2skins.com for skins http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Schwifty_161
05-04-2004, 03:43 PM
Well the ball turrets on the 17's were failry quick, probably around 2-3 seconds for a full 360. All the mounted machine guns in the waists, and tails and such, I figure I could swing a weapon around on a mount faster than the down syndrom infected AI's.... They dont have that much to fight against.

I was thinking lower thier dead on accuracy a little and up thier tracking rate. For all bombers, not just the fortress's

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.

Huckebein_UK
05-04-2004, 03:45 PM
Point taken - especially re: the AI gunners' accuracy! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

--------------
Huckebein_UK
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig_copy17.jpg
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig1_copy2.jpg
Il2skins.com for skins http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Vortex_uk
05-04-2004, 03:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schwifty_161:

I was thinking lower thier dead on accuracy a little and up thier tracking rate. For all bombers, not just the fortress's

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed on the dead aim part,but the tracking? they get a one-shot-wonder kill through clouds http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif even if your coming to attack them through clouds and they shouldn't be able to see you,and they still hit you. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-

http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/Vortex_uk/VortexSig2.jpg


"We are not retreating, we are advancing in another direction. " ~ Gen. MacArthur

HyperLobby name : =97th=Vortex

Schwifty_161
05-04-2004, 04:06 PM
Oh no I meant just the tracking speed, how fast they move around. They're pretty slow. Gunners would be throwing the guns around in a panic ripping up the skies if they were getting jumped. Not all the time, but I'm sure they werent the calm cool, snipers they are..

but lol, no they shouldnt be able to see through clouds lol.

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.

Bearcat99
05-04-2004, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schwifty_161:
Okay well I thought I'd reply to a previous post and ask all this in the same post. Kinda related.

Those .50 cals are actually toned down a little, if you watch closely they dont hit nearly as much as they should, like the rate of fire is toned down. They're great for torching engines if you can get an angle on them. Though I figure 6 brownings would tear up wings pretty darn well too. They should be more effective.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Try setting the convergence on the Ponies to 200...... 225 max.. then see what they do http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

Schwifty_161
05-04-2004, 04:18 PM
Oh no, I have no problems flying the 51. Like the screen shot in my signature tells the tale. That was me, me and the 51 have an understanding.

http://img53.photobucket.com/albums/v163/Schwank/161banner.jpg
Also known as 161st_Schwank...... This thing doesnt seem to like the wank part of that name.

VW-IceFire
05-04-2004, 09:43 PM
As far as I've heard there are no ROF tweaks (that would be unrealistic) but there is likely to be a spread tweak in order to bring it down to more realistic levels of fire spread.

So it'll be a slightly more precise weapon than presently so those who count on the spray will not be pleased but everyone else who uses nose mounted .50 cal or prefers to have a concentrated stream will be pleased (and its more or less moving towards a more historically accurate performance).

So likely the .50 cal is changing but not in the way that you heard.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

lucas_valentine
05-05-2004, 03:21 AM
I don't know who said that the p51 was a noob plane, but they are so wrong! I find that the damn thing is very difficult to fly...it corners badly (with me flying) and the guns seem to do very little damage to anything. I'm not saying this is the planes fault because I have been shot down many a time by P51's, What I am saying is that if you wanna have any kinda success in it you need loads and loads of skill. From what I have seen the P51 can be deadly, but only in the hands of an experienced pilot. No noobie could just jump into it and hope they could do anything, cos they would be wrong. The plane for that is the La7!

NorrisMcWhirter
05-05-2004, 06:00 AM
Hi,

P51 noob plane? Probably not. Easier than LW? Certainly so.

Case study:

Last night, in a certain server, I was having a rough time in a 109G10. Shot a couple of planes down, but never got back to base because I'd picked up damage on the way (usually no fuel/damaged engine from spray and pray specials).

Switched sides to allied, first with P51-D.

First flight out, took down two aircraft in a mid alt caper.

Second flight out, was involved quite a long low altitude 4+ on 1 (wasn't counting but there were at least 4) furball where I took down a 'robust' 190 with a surprising short burst of fire before being bagged myself.

On next map, took out a P51C:

First flight, outflew a Dora and bagged it while attempting a hammerhead after a very long climb.

Next flight, bagged a 109 in a low alt furball.

Both times, landed OK.


Subjective, indeed. Couldn't help but feel it was much easier in the P51, though. Much easier.

Regards,
Norris

================================================== ==========

: Chris Morris - Blue Jam :
http://cabinessence.cream.org/

: More irreverence :
http://www.tvgohome.com/

: You've seen them... :
www.chavscum.co.uk (http://www.chavscum.co.uk)

Aztek_Eagle
05-05-2004, 07:45 AM
use the 50 cal at 250 meters, and enter into ur enemys patern of flight, i took down 4 late fws down wiht that config, yes about the most armored fighter around, and damaged other airplanes before runing out of amo, p51 and 50 cals are pretty good indeed, just ppl think they can do the sniper shoots like the 1 to 5 hits kill guns

http://www.angelfire.com/art2/robertosgallery/CORSAIR8.JPG

Bearcat99
05-05-2004, 07:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aztek_Eagle:
use the 50 cal at 250 meters, and enter into ur enemys patern of flight, i took down 4 late fws down wiht that config, yes about the most armored fighter around, and damaged other airplanes before runing out of amo, p51 and 50 cals are pretty good indeed, just ppl think they can do the sniper shoots like the 1 to 5 hits kill guns

http://www.angelfire.com/art2/robertosgallery/CORSAIR8.JPG <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good advice... I find that on all the .50 cal planes 200-300m convergence is best... more than that and you get too much dispersion.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

DONB3397
05-05-2004, 08:26 AM
Generally, these 'newb' threads tend to be adolescent shield-pounding bravado: "My plane is better than (yours)" and/or "I must be a far better pilot than you because I fly...(mine)."

They seldom add much information to the debate about the aircraft or tactics.

I fly the 109 in all its variants and find most models as easy to handle as the P-51s; just a little different. The 109s cone of fire, with the nose guns, seems more concentrated. But with closer convergence, as Bearcat has said, the P-51 doesn't spray so badly. And if it did, why would that make it a 'newb' plane?

Damage models? The P-51D has always had a glass chin; one hit in the engine and it's lights out. Whereas the 109, with the same hit, will fly for several minutes before seizing. That would seem to make it more difficult to pilot, not easier.

Would someone mind listing the criteria for a 'newb' plane? It might help me understand a little better. On the other hand...

http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/3fe77b7e_1812a/bc/Images/Sig---1.jpg?BCJ4FmAB6_VALZQo
"And now I see with eye serene/The very pulse of the machine;
A being breathing thoughtful breath,/A Traveller between life and death."
-- William Wordsworth

jenikovtaw
05-05-2004, 09:30 AM
Newb plane = one that can be flown aerobatically without any previous experience.

For example, if you fly a 190 aerobatically, lets even say barrel roll, chances are, you will stall, in a P51, not quite so.

mortoma
05-05-2004, 09:56 AM
I don't find the P-51 any easier to get kills in than anything else really. Nor is it any easier to fly. There's been much ado about how supposedly hard it is to fly LW planes and how challeneging they are. But I have always thought that all examples of the 109 are extremely easy to master and the 190 is not as much a handful as it's made out to be. The LW planes are just as much noob mounts as any IMHO. If the 109 is such a hard plane to master, why is it so easy to put it's nose ( even K4 ) on another plane and blast it out of the sky?? I get lots of kills in 109s, including the weakly armed F2.

Huckebein_UK
05-05-2004, 10:37 AM
A lot of the prejudice is probably based on the real-world characteristics of certain types rather than the FB models. In real life the '109,especially from the Gustav onwards, were proper brutes to fly, especially on takeoff and landing. I think 10,000 '109s were lost during take off or landing!?

In any case, it was well known that the '109 was not a friendly plane for new pilots to fly - it didn't suffer fools gladly at all.

--------------
Huckebein_UK
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig_copy17.jpg
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig1_copy2.jpg
Il2skins.com for skins http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

NorrisMcWhirter
05-05-2004, 10:52 AM
Hi,

You haven't actually mentioned what you have been killing in the 109 K4 or F2. I suspect VVS planes, mostly.

In v1.22, it wasn't hard to point the 109 nose at a plane and blast it out of the sky - you're quite correct. Not so correct for v2.0 and if it weren't the case, it wouldn't be in the process of being fixed, allegedly.

What makes the 190 particularly tricky [in FB], apart from it's twitchiness and porked guns, is the poor visibility from the cockpit (and this isn't a cockpit bar whine) because of the semi-vertical struts. I would bet against people saying that a 190 was 'easier' to fly than a P51, especially in combat. Of course, it doesn't help when your gunsight falls off, either.

I certainly wouldn't class myself as an ace or anything but in v2.0, the advantage goes with whoever has the .50s. I proved this, at least to myself, with both a higher rate of kills and survival after switching to the P51.

Cheers,
Norris

================================================== ==========

: Chris Morris - Blue Jam :
http://cabinessence.cream.org/

: More irreverence :
http://www.tvgohome.com/

: You've seen them... :
www.chavscum.co.uk (http://www.chavscum.co.uk)

icrash
05-05-2004, 06:53 PM
Fly whatever plane you want and don't worry about the what others think. I thought the idea was to have fun not give people flak about their choice of plane (maybe I'm wrong?) Kinda sounds like the person ragging you about the '51 was a whiner anyway. (possible lack of defensive skill?) I had read something that the '51 was quirky when the fuel got low, something about fuel tank location and center of gravity. Anyone confirm this?

RedDeth
05-05-2004, 08:00 PM
P-51 a noob plane? not even close. try fighting 1 v 1 a mustang late model vs a spit five in game. the spit equals its climb all the way to 11,000 meters and it out performs and out turns the stang at all altitudes. given equal energy states. weve tested this over and over. the spit is far superior to the mustang late models. fly around at 11000 with flaps and the spit can do no wrong. and dont forget the ki84. a b or c models own the stang at all alts. spitfire is surprisingly better than the mustang. i think the spit nine will indeed be impressive up high seeing what the spit five can do.

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of 12 time Champions AFJ http://www.alloutwar.com/IL2FS/round9.cfm http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/120_1083458407_knightsmove-taylor.jpg

Snow_Wolf_
05-05-2004, 08:09 PM
the P-51 is not as easy as what some people think it is. I fly the Fw-190D9 and other planes including the Yak-3 yes i fly the Yak3 too and got to say it a dream bird anyways back to the P-51. I know that the P-51's snap rolls alot in turns if you don't keep your speed up (like the 190 D9 which snap rolls in turns if you too slow) and the guns which i set to 550 can do major damage if you know where to aim on certain planes. (such as if you going to kill a 109 shoot it engine)

On the Note on bomber turret you want to zoom in as fast as you can on attack the bombers and zoom away as fast as you can so you don't expose yourself to the turrets that long. Usually if i am coming to attack a B-17 in a D9 i first come in a high speed head on attack then climb turn to left side. at about 1500m above them i snap roll the bird and dive in at full throttle for second attack. It works for me but stuff happens really really fast.

http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~jtsiekki/mono2.gif
"Master the art of Speed without ever getting a Ticket"

Hiriyu
05-05-2004, 08:16 PM
Just a quick (and honest)question from another noob here: What is it that makes an La more a "newb plane" than any other?

I've been flying offline since I picked up the game, and the La-5FN has been the plane that I've gravitated toward. It has a nice balance of speed, manueverability, and firepower; does not seem to enjoy any ungodly advantages in any of these respects when compared to contemporary planes; and is eye-searingly beautiful to boot. It seems just as easy to kick into a stall as anything else, and nowhere near as easy to recover as say, any P39/P40/P47 etc.

BS87
05-05-2004, 08:36 PM
This thread has provided me with some much needed humor.

Planes are only newb planes if a 'newb' pilot is flying it.

Hiriyu
05-05-2004, 08:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BS87:
Planes are only newb planes if a 'newb' pilot is flying it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. The irony. I knew it.

Huckebein_UK
05-06-2004, 12:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by icrash:
Fly whatever plane you want and don't worry about the what others think. I thought the idea was to have fun not give people flak about their choice of plane (maybe I'm wrong?) Kinda sounds like the person ragging you about the '51 was a whiner anyway. (possible lack of defensive skill?) I had read something that the '51 was quirky when the fuel got low, something about fuel tank location and center of gravity. Anyone confirm this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know that a 'Tangs did used to empty the tank in the raer fuselage first to stop its half-finished contents slopping about in combat, but I'm not sure about problems at the other end of the trip... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

--------------
Huckebein_UK
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig_copy17.jpg
http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/sig1_copy2.jpg
Il2skins.com for skins http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

icrash
05-08-2004, 05:46 PM
cool, that fits with what I had heard. thanks for the reply huckebein