PDA

View Full Version : Oleg, something to look at...



kyrule2
12-21-2003, 11:47 PM
Could you please take a look at the results of the weapon testing for FB done by Jtd. Alot of work went into this and there are some interesting results. It shows that the FW-190 is indeed too weak/fragile now (weaker than 109, mig-3, P-51 & most others) and that some guns/cannons may need some changes (like further range for Hispano and less for UBS). Here is the thread, please have a look if you get the opportunity.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=44810566


Thanks.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

kyrule2
12-21-2003, 11:47 PM
Could you please take a look at the results of the weapon testing for FB done by Jtd. Alot of work went into this and there are some interesting results. It shows that the FW-190 is indeed too weak/fragile now (weaker than 109, mig-3, P-51 & most others) and that some guns/cannons may need some changes (like further range for Hispano and less for UBS). Here is the thread, please have a look if you get the opportunity.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=44810566


Thanks.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

clint-ruin
12-22-2003, 03:23 AM
Bump for this.

It would be really good if Oleg or other Maddox staff could post the community the current shell/gun damage values list as was done for Il-2 as well.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

LeadSpitter_
12-22-2003, 08:29 AM
not true at all, I take massive hits while flying the 190 you just cant get your wing roots hit. what oleg seriously needs to look at is the stukas 7.9 mm, they cannot vulch any plane, cannot destroy oildrums or jeeps personal trucks. And the problem isnt the 190 being weak the problem is that the yak and la series is stronger then the 190s, p51 p47.

Another thing oleg needs to do is correct the p11 damage model dueling p11s need to get a pilot kill to down another p11.

And with the useless ai gunners, pilots need absolutely no tactics at all to avoid the gunners like they arent even there and attack the gun station with no worries and easy kill before with the realistic ai aim fighters had to use tactics to avoid the guns. Hopefully oleg will open his eyes and take a look at these issues

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt

VW-IceFire
12-22-2003, 03:40 PM
Really? Massive hits? It does seem much less durable from both points of view of flying it and shooting it down. But the ultimate problem is that its not got the complex damage modeling apparently...many of the FW problems (like instant pilot kills) would then go away.

- IceFire
http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig.jpg

kyrule2
12-22-2003, 06:40 PM
Just to clarify, as Icefire said the problem with the 190 is that it REALLY needs a complex DM. The community has supported this for some time. But if Oleg/1C do not plan to incorporate one into FB, then a balance between the 190's toughness from 1.11 and 1.21 should be found (again, many in the community support this). This along with the inaccuracies of some of the guns/cannons should be fixed and Jtd's work is certainly a good push in the right direction.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

Copperhead310th
12-22-2003, 10:38 PM
Not everyone supports that. the 190 DM is better after the add on but it is (IMO) still to strong. Either that or the US .50 cals are too weak. I fly against 190's every day online & fly US planes almost 90% of the time & i can tell you with absolute certinty that the 190 DM is fine the the way it is now. If fact it needs to be toned down considerably in the A9. Thant thing is a tank with wings when hit by 50's.

Another thing i cannot under stand is this. the 6 50's on a P-50 hit harder than the 6 50's on a P-51. Even worse the P-40 guns seem to do more damage that the 8 .50's on a P-47!

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1091.gif

Copperhead310th
12-22-2003, 11:07 PM
outstanding work he did there.
Compleate & unbiised.

& here's part of the problem with the US Browning .50 cal guns. Dispersion
http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/fbg/P39N1050.jpg
Remarks and Conclusions {Dispersion}
(all things afaik)
For the small MG everything seems to be fine, the only exception is the overly accurate MG17. Everything else is within a certain range. Strangest thing however are the ShKAS on the I-16, which are way less accurate than the same guns on any other plane.
Heavy MG are a two classes group, one is the M2 Browning, the other is everything else. It is unexplainable to me why the Browning has to be this inaccurate, esp. since all mounts are affected, not only wing mounts.
Cannons do shake the plane a lot. The dispersion of the Hispanos is probably smaller than in the picture, but the Hurricane just shakes to much. Looking at the pictures above, I find the B-20 and ShVAK to be more accurate than other cannons, only exception might be Hispano. This is not correct, as they shouldn't be more accurate than any other gun.
MK108 isn't very accurate, but it wasn't anyway.
This is probably the worst aspect of gun modelling. So I give it a poor, until everything is put into good relation with other guns. Browning has to improve a lot while MG17, B-20 and ShVAK should lose some accuracy. Machine guns are no sniper rifles.

JG77Hawk_9
12-23-2003, 12:13 AM
I don't think the damage model is too weak but then maybe I'm good a side slipping the attackers rounds (-:

I've had instances where either I've been caught by a pair of P51's or La's and have managed with hard work, to evade and drage back to my base or help. Fw's hold together long enough for my purposes.

kyrule2
12-23-2003, 01:10 AM
I love it when people try to correlate DM's with their percieved abilities. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway, in this thread I got a bit off of what I have been saying all along. The 190 doesn't need to be tougher or weaker, it needs a complex DM badly. If they don't put one in and they don't change the 190 then I can live with it, though I think it is a real shame to have such an important plane lacking in a crucial area (damage modelling).

Either way I hope Oleg takes a look at Jtd's findings.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

Fehler
12-23-2003, 02:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
Not everyone supports that. the 190 DM is better after the add on but it is (IMO) still to strong. Either that or the US .50 cals are too weak. I fly against 190's every day online & fly US planes almost 90% of the time & i can tell you with absolute certinty that the 190 DM is fine the the way it is now. If fact it needs to be toned down considerably in the A9. Thant thing is a tank with wings when hit by 50's.

Another thing i cannot under stand is this. the 6 50's on a P-50 hit harder than the 6 50's on a P-51. Even worse the P-40 guns seem to do more damage that the 8 .50's on a P-47!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, with all due respect, I fly the 190 about 90% of the time and all I have to say is that the DM is still off. What you may not realize is that people here are not wanting a stronger 190, just a more realistic one. For example, there are still areas on the 190 that are made of concrete - you cant hurt the plane if you hit them in those areas. On the other hand, the wings seem like they are made of paper. One hit from a machine gun round in the right spot and "bloop" off goes your wing. No one that I know of is asking that the 190 be strengthened at all. But unfortunately, until a complex damage model is done for this plane, the debate will continue forever.

For example.. You dont get oil on your windscreen, you dont get holes in the cockpit, I cant recall ever getting pilot killed. But a guy can take a shot from 1km away and spray a bunch of rounds at me, hit me with one single magic bullet and "Bloop" my wing falls off.

It's almost comical. The 190 was a tough bird. Sure not quite as stout as the P47 by any means, but it could take a lot of damage. It had a complex control system with both rods and cables (I have a cut away picture if you would like to see it) But in it's current state, when hit, you wont lose control surfaces, the Radial is almost indestructable, and it is pretty much a flying tank... offset by paper wings.

You also mentioned the A-9. It really WAS a flying tank by fighter standards. A lot of areas were reinforced over the A-2. It was a real ground attack fighter. It should be sturdy.

I dont know if the 50 cals are too strong/weak, but you cant use the 190 damage resistance as an example of why they need to be fixed. "Strengthen my 50 cals because I have a hard time killing a plane without a complex damage model" makes no sense if you look at it logically. Instead.. Fix the dang 190 the right way, and stop giving us tweaked original IL2 Dm for it. It was one of two main line German fighters for God's sake. On a test, of you get 1 out of 2 you score 50%. That's a failing grade... repeat the course!

Again I have to stress this point. The FW 190 demands a complex DM. And the simple truth is that all us 190 jockeys really want is parity. Critical hits should be critical, superficial hits should detract from overall performance, but not be game ending. A single bullet into a wing root (Not a HE cannon round, but a simple AP round) should NOT be able to decapitate a wing. It doesnt on any other plane, why does it on the 190? (Answer - Simple overtweaked DM)

I think that FW jocks would prefer having the DM of a Ki-84 than the current DM. Actually, the Ki-84 and the 190 are very similar planes, with the 190 being a little more damage resistant. Perhaps Oleg would consider tweaking a Ki-84 Dm for the 190 if he doesnt have time to do a brand new DM for the plane.

Would it be super accurate? No. But my next statement would be, "Who cares, it's not accurate now..."

My 2 cents.

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehlersig.jpg
http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/9JG54.html

1.JaVA_Razer
12-23-2003, 02:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
pilot kill to down another p11.

And with the useless ai gunners, pilots need absolutely no tactics at all to avoid the gunners like they arent even there and attack the gun station with no worries and easy kill before with the realistic ai aim fighters had to use tactics to avoid the guns. Hopefully oleg will open his eyes and take a look at these issues

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Leadspitter,you don't actually mean that do you?come on. ever tried taking on a B 17? try with Yak,P 51 FW 190 D and A,with P 47's with the hole works. everytime same result,engine gets blowed out or wing gets ripped of or whatever. I can manage to kill a B 17 now and then but always to the result of me only flying a Kilometer or 2,3 before engine goes dead on me or something happen

Fehler
12-23-2003, 02:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by razer3:
Leadspitter,you don't actually mean that do you?come on. ever tried taking on a B 17? try with Yak,P 51 FW 190 D and A,with P 47's with the hole works. everytime same result,engine gets blowed out or wing gets ripped of or whatever. I can manage to kill a B 17 now and then but always to the result of me only flying a Kilometer or 2,3 before engine goes dead on me or something happen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Attack from a very high angle deflection (dive) to take all but the top turret out of the picture and you will have greater success. G anywhere near the undercarriage and you are toast.

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehlersig.jpg
http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/9JG54.html

clint-ruin
12-23-2003, 03:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fehler:

For example.. You dont get oil on your windscreen, you dont get holes in the cockpit, I cant recall ever getting pilot killed. But a guy can take a shot from 1km away and spray a bunch of rounds at me, hit me with one single magic bullet and "Bloop" my wing falls off.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've been doing some tests along the lines of JtDs, but solely focussing on which shells work best vs which parts of which planes. From the first couple of days testing, the 190DM is not 'strong' or 'weak'. It occasionally doesn't register hits at all, and sometimes the hits it does register do massively disproportionate damage. So far the 190 is leading the stakes for eating 37mms - 6 hits of the T9 HE, 7 hits of mixed HE/AP from the NS37. Even the P-47 goes down pretty reliably to 3 T9 hits to the body of the plane.

The case with the .50s is most likely that though each shot does less damage than a 37mm hit, the chance of a hit 'counting' for something on the DM is far greater due to the larger number of individual bullets.

So basically what seems to have happened is that the fact that some hits won't count has been factored in, and the ones that do count now do a lot more damage. Certainly a quick way to go about fixing the problem but not exactly elegant.

IMHO it is wrong to get too fixated on any single specific result from JtDs tests - too many guns to test, too many planes to test against, not enough statistical runs through it. 10 runs per is enough to get a reasonable trend but there is no magical number of tests that will provide a completely utterly accurate picture. It is by far the most comprehensive thing done yet on the topic, but it is a panorama rather than a zoom shot on any one specific plane. Bottom line: people shouldn't choke on numbers down to the last M/sec [or even 100m/s] or whether a plane is ranked one too high or low in the DM toughness ranking.

I am sure Oleg knows his stuff on guns and on coding, but I really think FB could do with a shakedown internal test just to make sure the numbers that are supposed to be in the game really are in the game. There is only so much people can test for from outside the codebase.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

Fehler
12-23-2003, 04:03 AM
Clint, that's my position exactly. (Reference to the 190) At times I think (While flying) "Man, there is no way I should have been able to survive THAT!" Other times I think.. "Good grief, my wing came off again? Where did that bullet come from?"

Where are the little subtleties like loss of elevator control from hits, throttle sticking, etc.?

Until 1C decides to give the 190 a complex DM, it will always be an item for debate.

And the question I really have is, why has it taken so long to make a complex DM? Are there really any plans to put one together before FB is no longer supported? No one seems to be able to answer this. Why even spend a second to tweak a simple DM (Like they did for the last patch) when the time would have been better served figuring out a complex damage model?

You can only fix a leaky pipe so many times before you have to replace it. The 190 has gone from pilot kill plane-o-rama to concrete bullet eating titanium plane to balsa wood winged aircraft; all on the same old junky damage model. Fix it. Or at least give us a complex DM from another similar plane, who cares. As it stands, it's not fun for the guys attacking it, and it is certainly not fun for the guys flying it. (And we Luft fliers only have two real choices) So we are either stuck with the baby plane (109) - Oh, Im going to get flamed for that statement! Or a plane that truly deserves a complex DM. After all, real men fly radials! (Gonna get flamed for that too! LOL)

S!

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehlersig.jpg
http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/9JG54.html

WUAF_Badsight
12-23-2003, 04:16 AM
imagine if - in FB - the BF & FW were as strong as the LAs & Yaks have been all this time ......

also , imagine if - in FB - there was a accurate HE-100


BTW .... JtD did an EXCELLENT job of his tests

LeadSpitter_
12-23-2003, 07:02 AM
yes razor i can blowup 12 of them with the 190a9 and gunpods on ace with ease.

in 1.2 rc to kill a b17 it took talent doing headon nose attacks and breaking right or left so the top turrent or bottom turrent didnt catch you now you can just fly in from any angle squeeze once million piece explosion zzz boring no skill.

same goes for he111s il2s stukas tb3s, now they are just to damn easy to shootdown. Im definatly not one whos wants a stronger dm model on the 190 and its my ride of choice in FB, people are just to use to when the 190 people would run out of ammo trying to shoot one down, and i was one to complain about it and glad oleg fixed the problem. Im very happy with damage models in fb but think the yak and la need it reduced slightly seeing hours of eastern front gun camera footage of yaks and las being shotdown in reality. very similiar to the way ki84s got shot down one hit and huge fireball and wings ripping off, and many times the whole nose tearing off of the fuselage. Theres a reason the yak 11 was a all metal airframe http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt

Willey
12-23-2003, 09:11 AM
alright, the .50s spread like 108s... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

kyrule2
12-23-2003, 01:06 PM
Fehler wrote:

"(Reference to the 190) At times I think (While flying) "Man, there is no way I should have been able to survive THAT!" Other times I think.. "Good grief, my wing came off again? Where did that bullet come from?"

Where are the little subtleties like loss of elevator control from hits, throttle sticking, etc.?"

Exactly. It is the inconsistencies that drive you mad. And I would love to see oil on my windscreen, bullet holes in glass, sticking throttle, etc. It really adds to immersion. As it is now my performance takes a huge hit with any damage, or my wing falls off and that is about it most of the time. A complex DM is a must for the 190. Many HAVE agreed on this subject (dig the thread up if you wish) and I'm sure Oleg is probably aware of it whatever he plans to do.

I still hope they look at Jtd's findings, regardless of DM's, for weapon accuracy and lack of discrepencies (range, dispersion, etc.). At least use this as a starting point to take a deeper look and examine weapon characteristics.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

Copperhead310th
12-23-2003, 03:27 PM
Ok Ok i give in....Fehler makes a good point. Give the FW a more complex DM....just dont make it Uber.

And while your at it Please give the US planes self sealing fuel tanks. They don't have them in FB. Also the Damage model on the P-47 needs to be increased in the engine area. The Black outs in P-51's are way overdone. & fix the Gun converganeces on US Browning .50's....Increase the top speed on the P40 by 20 kph. & the stall rate on all p-47's & i'll be happy. that seems like a fair trade.

http://imageshack.us/files/380th%20siggy.jpg

faustnik
12-23-2003, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
Ok Ok i give in....Fehler makes a good point. Give the FW a more complex DM....just dont make it Uber.

And while your at it Please give the US planes self sealing fuel tanks. They don't have them in FB. Also the Damage model on the P-47 needs to be increased in the engine area. The Black outs in P-51's are way overdone. & fix the Gun converganeces on US Browning .50's....Increase the top speed on the P40 by 20 kph. & the stall rate on all p-47's & i'll be happy. that seems like a fair trade.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif You crack me up Copperhead. Pulling for one side a little are you?

Fixing the 109 DM should make both sides happy. Red pilots will happy when a good burst into a 190 fusalage has an effect, us 190 pilots will be happy when the wings don't "pop off" with one .50 hit.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig

aGunfighter
12-25-2003, 07:34 AM
The current 190 DM does support pilot and engine kills.

LeadSpitter_
12-26-2003, 01:52 PM
I guess im going to have to post some guncamera footage of many 190s getting shotdown along with p47 and p51s to show the people they dont take massive hits, the engine part is true tho as for pks the armo can be penatrated at close range just like the p4710 22 and is very easy to get a pk on while the il2s iron bathtub defects any range hits

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt
VIEW MY PAINTSCHEMES HERE (http://www.il2skins.com/?planeidfilter=all&planefamilyfilter=all&screenshotfilter=allskins&countryidfilter=all&authoridfilter=%3ALeadspitter%3A&historicalidfilter=all&Submit=+++Apply+filters++&action=list&ts=1072257400)

A.K.Davis
12-26-2003, 11:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aGunfighter:
The current 190 DM does support pilot and engine kills.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Untrue. The current 190 DM does not support engine damage or pilot wounding. If the engine is hit it will either continue to function normally or die instantly. If the pilot/cockpit area is hit, the pilot will die instantly.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

Copperhead310th
12-27-2003, 01:06 PM
Well Faustnik...it's been kinda 1 sided up till now anyway....with the edge always going to the Axis side.i think it's late enough in the FB war that the tide should be turned in our (Allied) favor. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
& yes I am pulling for the good guys. Why should i support the enemy? lol
in the 2 years i've been envolved with IL-2 & FB i've watched the LW guys whine & b*tch thier way into anything they wanted. Both in FM & DM as with other things as well. The LW guys in this sim make an effective lobby. they should all move the Washington. They'd be more powerful than the NRA. Lets leval the playing field shall we? It's funny that they're happy as long as they have an obvious advantage in FM & DM....but when the US plane set gets patched to our advantige they start screaming bloody murder on how Fecked the Allied FM's/DM's are.
"Oh the P-39 is too Uber" Ect. ect,
or they start crying to Oleg that thier Uber palnes arn't so uber anymore & need to be fixed since the last patch porked them. lol
It's all very funny really.
Case in point......the top speed of the P-51.
in thier minds there was no way that anyUS/Allied plane should be fast enough to catch them in an D-9 or a K-4. So they start whining.What happens? the top speed of the P-51 is reduced. lol it's laughable really.

http://imageshack.us/files/380th%20siggy.jpg

kyrule2
12-27-2003, 01:53 PM
Copperhead, your posts are always good for a laugh as well. Really.

Since when did the 190 have any advantage in FM? It was a dog for a LONG time and now it is pretty decent but it certainly doesn't have any advantage where performance in concerned, other than some stupid roll-rate issue which is more of a hinderance than an advantage to good pilots. It's DM sucks and always has. This was said by many LW guys even when it was to our advantage. We want a complex DM for the 190, whether it helps us or not I really don't give a sh1t I just want it to be more accurate. I get really tired of repeating myself (along with AKD, Isbskier, and others) to try and make it sink in for the slow of mind.

In the past the USAAF planes have gotten some raw deals and I have agreed most of the time (P-47 roll rate, P-51 high alt. performance, low top speed of P-40). I fully supported the changes and even e-mailed Oleg during beta with my concerns. But all of this has nothing to do with the LW planes (like the 190 which this thread is about along with a request to look at gun/cannon modelling and Jtd's findings). You on the other hand talking about bias is certainly laughable with nothing more to contribute than your normal woman-like b1tch.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

CARBONFREEZE
12-27-2003, 06:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
Well Faustnik...it's been kinda 1 sided up till now anyway....with the edge always going to the Axis side.i think it's late enough in the FB war that the tide should be turned in our (Allied) favor. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
& yes I am pulling for the good guys. Why should i support the enemy? lol
in the 2 years i've been envolved with IL-2 & FB i've watched the LW guys whine & b*tch thier way into anything they wanted. Both in FM & DM as with other things as well. The LW guys in this sim make an effective lobby. they should all move the Washington. They'd be more powerful than the NRA. Lets leval the playing field shall we? It's funny that they're happy as long as they have an obvious advantage in FM & DM....but when the US plane set gets patched to our advantige they start screaming bloody murder on how Fecked the Allied FM's/DM's are.
"Oh the P-39 is too Uber" Ect. ect,
or they start crying to Oleg that thier Uber palnes arn't so uber anymore & need to be fixed since the last patch porked them. lol
It's all very funny really.
Case in point......the top speed of the P-51.
in thier minds there was no way that anyUS/Allied plane should be fast enough to catch them in an D-9 or a K-4. So they start whining.What happens? the top speed of the P-51 is reduced. lol it's laughable really. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The reason LW pilots were whining about IL-2 is because the German aircraft really were undermodeld or incorrectly modeled in some respect (ala Focke Wulf 190). The Fw190 was total crap until a bunch of people started complaining about it, and came up with the evidence to support their claims. If you ever flew online durning IL-2, you would know that hardly anyone flew the Fw-190. Maybe three people on UBI flew it online consistantly(myself included). It was a crap plane that an IL-2 could take out on equal terms. Now it has been improved because of the 500 page threads; and I am glad some of the systems are being modeled somewhat correctly (Kommandgrat, Erholte Nolteistung, ect) along with the aircraft being closer to its "historical" performance.

AFAIK the P-39 is overmodeled (some have come to suggest that it has the flight characteristics of the P-63). I liked to fly it in IL-2 because it was a challenge, and you had to use half your brain to be sucessfull and return home. But now it is simply another Yak-3 clone.

It seems like you are a genuine "Ameriwhiner" because whenever I see you in a thread your always attacking some axis aircraft or saying that all of the American aircraft are "porked" or somesuch. The P-51 was a great escort fighter, but it wasn't the uber-plane you make it out to be; and neither is the Dora or the Kurfurst. They all had their advantages and disadvantages, and these are modeled to some extent.

Russian aircraft require skill to fly.
German aircraft require ten times that skill, and one hundred times the patience!

WUAF_CO_CRBNFRZ on HyperLobby

Copperhead310th
12-29-2003, 02:03 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif *Sigh*

Whatever. I'm tired of arguing about it.
We're gonna get the $h*ty end of the DM/FM stick no matter what. I find it funny that when i hoped in a 109E for the VERY 1st time ever since FB came out that it's perfomance was better than a P-40E or a P-47D 10. & it's a 1940 Aircraft. I killed 8 Ai p-40's with it on ace level & i'm a poor fighter pilot at best. Basically i'm through arguing about FM's & DM's for the US plane set. I'll just settle for what the Dev team gives us & make the best of it. The luftwhiners can have this argument. i'm finnished with it.

http://imageshack.us/files/380th%20siggy.jpg

Jetbuff
12-29-2003, 04:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif *Sigh*

Whatever. I'm tired of arguing about it.
We're gonna get the $h*ty end of the DM/FM stick no matter what.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hold on... before you go. I'd really like to get ahold of whatever it is you're smoking, it sounds downright amazing! :P http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg

Copperhead310th
12-29-2003, 07:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jetbuff:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Copperhead310th:
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif *Sigh*

Whatever. I'm tired of arguing about it.
We're gonna get the $h*ty end of the DM/FM stick no matter what.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hold on... before you go. I'd really like to get ahold of whatever it is you're smoking, it sounds downright amazing! :P http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As much as i'm tempted to be a smart @ss & say something mean....i'll just let it pass.
Maybe if you come down off that high horse FW 190A-9 you LW guys love so much & fly a P-47 for a week you'll see things as they truly are.

http://imageshack.us/files/380th%20siggy.jpg

aGunfighter
12-31-2003, 04:02 PM
Hehe.

VW-IceFire
12-31-2003, 04:39 PM
Copperhead, I fly lots of American fighters...infact we had a great game some months back but its a bit hard to argue that the Allied planes always get the short end of the stick. And by Allied most people mean that the Yak's and the La's get put in there too. Most of those have had the benefit of the doubt (ie. they don't express the lack of consistency in quality from unit to unit which did plague VVS units in the early part of the war) while in some instances the German planes haven't had quite as much benefit (the FW190 in 1.0 was VERY tough to handel - much like the P-47). I agree, the Luftwaffe crew have quite a lobby going however it isn't all totally unfounded and in some instances it falls along the same lines as the P-47's terribly bad roll rate modeling in 1.0 FB. Some (not all) of the complaints are justified.

The issue surrounding this argument (and I'm not sure WHY its in argument) isn't about toughness but rather about complexity. Despite this statement from MANY people in this thread it still has not yet sunk in...EVERYONE should want to have a complex DM for the FW190. Its a subtlety that its currently lacking. That will mean that every .50 cal will count, that will mean that not every hit to a specific point on the wing will shear it right off while another hit will do no damage whatsoever. And that will make everyone regardless of if they are flying or shooting it much happier.

The problem is consistency in damage and the answer is a more complex damage model on the same level as any other plane. What the argument is for is totally beyond me. It isn't about lobby groups, it isn't about gaining unrealistic advanatage, and it certainly is not a unfair question to ask from the developers if they can manage to do it.

- IceFire
http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/spit-sig.jpg