PDA

View Full Version : Analysis of statistics on WarCloud WF server shows dominance of Luftwaffe; bias



Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 12:56 PM
Greetings All,

This is not intended to denigrate the WarClouds server in any way, but to provide some constructive criticism.

I have performed some statistical analysis of the planeesets being used in this server and here are the results..

Luftwaffe
----------
Sorties flown: 12825
Kills: 6043
Shot Down: 6734
K\D ratio: 0.957

Allies
-------
Sorties flown: 13548
Kills: 4685
Shot Down: 8371
K\D ratio: 0.5275

As you can see the difference in kill to death ratio between luftwaffe and allied is almost 2 to 1.

There are many causes for this, some of which are not able to be controlled by the administrators of this server.

However, by looking at the planesets available
I have come to the conclusion that more can be done to even the playing field..

Luftaffe plane sets:
--------------------
Bf-109G-2
Bf-109G-6AS
Fw-190D-9
Bf-109K-4
Fw-190A-9
Bf-109G-10
Bf-109G-14
Fw-190A-6
Ta-152H-1
Bf-109G-6

Allied plane sets:
------------------
SpitfireMkIXe
P-38L_Late
SpitfireMkIXeHF
SpitfireMkVc4xH
P-51D-20NA
P-47d-27
MustangIII
P-63C

If you notice, every single 109 variant is being flown in the server on the Luftwaffe side..

When you look at the allied side you will notice that only a limited planeset is being used for the Spitfires available..

It would seem logical that to redress the balance every Spitfire variant should be made available as well..

The abscence of the L.F. spit as well as the clip winged versions puts the Allies at a distinct disadvantage in the low altitude combats which dominate this server..

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 12:56 PM
Greetings All,

This is not intended to denigrate the WarClouds server in any way, but to provide some constructive criticism.

I have performed some statistical analysis of the planeesets being used in this server and here are the results..

Luftwaffe
----------
Sorties flown: 12825
Kills: 6043
Shot Down: 6734
K\D ratio: 0.957

Allies
-------
Sorties flown: 13548
Kills: 4685
Shot Down: 8371
K\D ratio: 0.5275

As you can see the difference in kill to death ratio between luftwaffe and allied is almost 2 to 1.

There are many causes for this, some of which are not able to be controlled by the administrators of this server.

However, by looking at the planesets available
I have come to the conclusion that more can be done to even the playing field..

Luftaffe plane sets:
--------------------
Bf-109G-2
Bf-109G-6AS
Fw-190D-9
Bf-109K-4
Fw-190A-9
Bf-109G-10
Bf-109G-14
Fw-190A-6
Ta-152H-1
Bf-109G-6

Allied plane sets:
------------------
SpitfireMkIXe
P-38L_Late
SpitfireMkIXeHF
SpitfireMkVc4xH
P-51D-20NA
P-47d-27
MustangIII
P-63C

If you notice, every single 109 variant is being flown in the server on the Luftwaffe side..

When you look at the allied side you will notice that only a limited planeset is being used for the Spitfires available..

It would seem logical that to redress the balance every Spitfire variant should be made available as well..

The abscence of the L.F. spit as well as the clip winged versions puts the Allies at a distinct disadvantage in the low altitude combats which dominate this server..

F19_Ob
09-28-2005, 01:10 PM
30mm cannon (MK108) One or two hits one kill.
20mm requires several more hits usually.
Machinegunequipped planes usually wont kill in one pass.

Simple equation to solve. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
This is also why LW have better hitpercentage vs shots fired.

faustnik
09-28-2005, 01:11 PM
Doesn't Warclouds have a forum? I think they would be more likely to notice your thread there.

Adding more a/c to the bases would be easy for the administrators I'm sure. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
09-28-2005, 01:21 PM
with this 4.01 patch oleg, u are making us all heros of the luftwaffles

SlickStick
09-28-2005, 01:34 PM
Interesting plane sets. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 01:35 PM
Yes, I will post this on their forum as well, although I figured I could reach a bigger Warclouds audience from here as well..

And I understand the difference in caliber of the weaponry as well..

The point I'm trying to make is to question the absence of spit variants, especially those that would benefit dog fighting at low level..

faustnik
09-28-2005, 01:37 PM
Well, that planeset will get a nice boost with the P-47D late.

I wonder why there is no Spit IXc, I'd pick that as the best of the current Spits?

p1ngu666
09-28-2005, 01:40 PM
the VIII is best of current spits, but didnt see much eto service...
more than p63 tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the CW versions should be there tbh..

could remove the g2 aswell if u wanted

faustnik
09-28-2005, 01:42 PM
Oh, before we enter the next thread stage of naming calling and silliness...

Sparx has mentioned before that he would be happy to accept new missions for Warclouds WF. So, maybe the best appraoch would be to get a quality mission made and send it to the Warclouds admin. Certainly a balanced DF could be made with our existing planeset. A Fall 1944 historical mission could be made with the existing set that would be very well balanced.

CUJO_1970
09-28-2005, 01:44 PM
The blues won the "desperate experten" map again last night http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

HaHa.

CUJO_1970
09-28-2005, 01:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
dog fighting at low level.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


One definition of insanity is to keep doing the same things over and over again, and expect a different result.

The "low level dogfight" mentality won't get you anywhere but a sub .50 k/d ratio, and it absolutely will not help you on a server like WarClouds.

Stigler_9_JG52
09-28-2005, 02:05 PM
Incomplete data.

Incomplete analysis.

You need to factor in what roles the planes are playing (and compare them to the roles the planes were built for).

You need to factor in the fact that yours is a DF server. Is there anything else to do but dogfight? If there is, are the players actually DOING any of those other things?

And lastly: what's this about balance? Things weren't fair in real life, and they shouldn't be 50/50, even steven on a server either. The thing to look for is, are the planes well modelled? (Said another way, do the planes that should have an advantage actually have an advantage? Is the environment well modelled? Do typical events happen more or less as they should?

faustnik
09-28-2005, 02:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:

And lastly: what's this about balance? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is a huge difference between balance on a server and "balancing" the sim. Individual a/c should be modeled with complete disregard for any type of balance. Good scripted DF servers are created so that both sides have an equal chance to win.

Kurfurst__
09-28-2005, 02:12 PM
Hint : An Axis player would either fly only the 109 or 190 ever since he got his hands on Il2, depending on the prefence.

Is it`s really surpising he had grown a goddam expert of that plane, both with powerful guns?

WWSensei
09-28-2005, 02:13 PM
Oddly, the analysis leaves off the bombers...funny considering that for quite some time the highest scoring blue pilot with the most points and kills was an He111 driver.

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 02:38 PM
I have left out the bombers purposefully..

Again I must point out that I question the absence of many of the Spit variants..

As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible..

To fly historically accurate, the luftwaffe would be forced to assail B-17's flying at high altitude under escort by Spits, Thunderbolts, and Mustangs..

faustnik
09-28-2005, 02:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:

As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible..

To fly historically accurate, the luftwaffe would be forced to assail B-17's flying at high altitude under escort by Spits, Thunderbolts, and Mustangs.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not true. There were many cases of low level combat. You think the only air-to-air combat that occurred in the ETO was related to B-17 raids?

stathem
09-28-2005, 03:06 PM
Since no-one from the warclouds team seems to be around to explain,

Warclouds ploughs a very popular path by having as many late war aircraft available as possible. However, since larger numbers of available flyables means more spawn issues and lag, they limit that number, and so as to be fair, both sides have the same number of aircraft types available.

Since the Blue side have only 2 main fighter types, they get more variants of each.

It was covered in their forums a little while ago.

As to why blue is so superior statistically, you might also note that the stats collecter they use only registers clean kills (ie does not regiuster the rtb damaged kills that the game does)

Since the allied weaponry does not favour single pass clean kills, and the Luftwaffe planes can usually disengage even if damaged(esp if they have altitude), this will also skew the stats.

HeinzBar
09-28-2005, 03:10 PM
S!,
Gator, you should know that WC has never stated to be a historical server. It's a popularity server w/ a pseudo western front feel. The planeset is based on what people want to fly so long as it was manufactured by a western power.

Another thing to consider, the volume of players limits the server's ability to load every possible plane. So, each side is limited to 13 planes. Now, the problem is how do you satisfy everyone? You can't. So, the admins ask players on a regular basis what planes do you like to fly in the western planeset. Thus, the planeset you find in WC is what the people have requested most often.

Perhaps, you should have read this post placed on WC some time ago.


http://www.war-clouds.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=320&si...67a511ff19b1a8def4e9 (http://www.war-clouds.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=320&amp;sid=b335ffdfa15767a511ff19b1a8 def4e9)

After so many differences of opinions based on what should be or shouldn't be, the admins had to take a stand. The hint of bias isn't appreciated as the admins take great pains to make sure the sides are balanced planeset wise. They listen to requests, discuss the pros & cons of adding or subtracting planes, and make a decision based on what the people want. Changing planesets isn't a job to be taken lightly. With 45+ maps in rotation, the changing of planes is a time consuming job which the admins don't have enough of as it is.

HB

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 03:16 PM
I appreciate your post Heinzbar, sorry I wasn't aware of the 13 plane limitation.. My bad..

But you must agree that given the data created by the WC server, the RED is getting its hat handed to it on a daily basis..

And I agree with Faustnik not all battles were fought on high..

I guess I'll just have to fly blue...

If you can't beat em, join em..

SlickStick
09-28-2005, 03:22 PM
As the CW Spitfires were designed to counter the FW and it's superior roll rate, not including them, while including the Late FWs is biased.

Maybe no Mk. VIII is feasible, but certainly there should be CW IXs available?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 03:26 PM
I wish some genius could figure out a way to instill balance into the server such that the RED side has statistically even score probabilities..

The server admins must realize the unfairness that is built into the present system by the results thus generated..

Those stats tell the whole story.. As it presently stands the blue side is heavily favored to score.. That is undeniable..

XyZspineZyX
09-28-2005, 03:41 PM
hows about a 1942 / 43 map

to me those are the best planeset matches

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 03:43 PM
Quoted by Cujo:
"
One definition of insanity is to keep doing the same things over and over again, and expect a different result.

The "low level dogfight" mentality won't get you anywhere but a sub .50 k/d ratio, and it absolutely will not help you on a server like WarClouds."


True Cujo, but the luftwaffe have no incentive to fly to high altitude, since there is no bomber stream for them to stop from wrecking their homeland...

Its pretty lonely up there, you'll rarely find a luftwaffe A/C above 5k, so inevitably one has to descend to the depths to find any kind of action at all..

It'd be nice if the luftwaffe would fly high now and again.. But they don't...

The insanity of fighting low is being forced by the issue not by choice... Any P-47 pilot knows he don't stand a chance at low altitude...

HeinzBar
09-28-2005, 03:45 PM
S! Gator,
NP buddy. I wouldn't quite make the switch to flying blue only just yet. I suspect the 4.02m patch will change your mind http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

However, for the time being, I believe Stathem nailed the answer to the lop-sided D/K ratio. Unfortunately, the current stats application isn't capbable of recording all kills in an efficient manner. So, those kills for damaged planes returning to base will not register w/ the WC server. If this was possible, I suspect that the numbers would be nearly balanced. Sparx is working w/ the gents that developed the program in the hopes of finding a solution for this particular problem.

Thanks for the inquiry though. Perhaps, this thread will open the eyes to others that fly in the WarClouds server that don't frequent the WC forums. The admins actually have a reasonable explaination what they do and don't do in the server..... most of the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HB

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 03:51 PM
One more thing:

Of the top 20 planesets being used the luftwaffe has 10 fighters fighter\bombers in the mix..

If you look a the Allied side you find only 8 A\C..

Namely:
SpitfireMkIXe
P-38L_Late
SpitfireMkIXeHF
SpitfireMkVc4xH
P-51D-20NA
P-47d-27
MustangIII
P-63C

If we added two more fighters like the CW versions, that would bring it to 10..

There must be certain A\C on the RED side that are being used so rarely that they don't show up on the list of the top 20 A\C being used..

If we can identify two of these A\C we can replace them with two C\W spits..

There you go, now I'm offering solutions not just gripes..

HeinzBar
09-28-2005, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlickStick:
As the CW Spitfires were designed to counter the FW and it's superior roll rate, not including them, while including the Late FWs is biased. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SlickStick,
We originally had the clipped wing spit in the server(IXe clp), but after so many requests for an early model spitfire (Vb,Vc), I posted a poll on WC to find out what the people wanted. The most requested spit was the Vc4 and the spit that was most voted to be removed was the clip wing!!

Bias? I think not since it was the spit pilots that requested such a change. This poll was up and available for all to vote on and voice an opinion for over a month. Once again, WC caters to what the majority of the virtual pilots want to fly in the western front.

Gator, I really wouldn't worry about the stats. They swing one way or the other w/ each patch release. The kill/death ratio has been explained earlier w/ the lack of allied planes equipped w/ cannons for the registerable kills while all of the Axis planes are cannon armed. The win/loss ratio of maps is far more important in my opinion.

Edit: the correct list for the open planeset maps is:

Allies
A-20G
B-25J-1NA
P-38J
P-38L_Late
P-39Q-10
P-40M
P-47D-27
P-51D-20NA
MustangIII
P-63C
SpitfireMkVc4xH
SpitfireMkIXe
SpitfireMkIXeHF
Axis
Bf-109G-2
Bf-109G-6AS
Bf-109G-10
Bf-109G-14
Bf-109K-4
Bf-110G-2
Fw-190A-6
Fw-190A-9
Fw-190D-9
Ta-152H-1
Fw-190F-8
He-111H-6
Ju-87D-5

So, you actually see that the Axis only have 9 true fighter planes while the Allies have 11 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifBTW, replacing planes is a tricky matter. By replacing one plane w/ another plane type creates another thread requesting another change...and so on...and so on....

Now, you see the trouble admins have in dealing w/ planesets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HB

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 03:56 PM
Thanks again Heinzbar..

Yes I too have noticed that damaged A\C that make it back too often don't get tallied..

I must congratulate Sparx and the rest of the gang that run the WC server.. It is truly the best server available out there.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

You know what they say: It ain't perfect but its the best dang thing out there!!!

p1ngu666
09-28-2005, 04:04 PM
the spitvc sticks out abit, but the p63 moreso..

but with limited planeset what u gonna do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

p1ngu666
09-28-2005, 04:05 PM
oh, what happens when the mossie and tempest arrive? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

WOLFMondo
09-28-2005, 04:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Oh, before we enter the next thread stage of naming calling and silliness...

Sparx has mentioned before that he would be happy to accept new missions for Warclouds WF. So, maybe the best appraoch would be to get a quality mission made and send it to the Warclouds admin. Certainly a balanced DF could be made with our existing planeset. A Fall 1944 historical mission could be made with the existing set that would be very well balanced. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've just finished reading 2nd TAF volume 2, given me allot of ideas. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Its a shame we will never get the tiffy.

HeinzBar
09-28-2005, 04:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
oh, what happens when the mossie and tempest arrive? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

S!,
Yikes!! some people are going to hate the admins, while others will love them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Plane balance is a double edged sword. One thing I know for sure, the admins will hear more complaints than praise http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Seriously, the admins will have to either, replace a couple of allied planes..likely the lesser used planes much to those dedicated pilots chagrin, or push the server's ability to provide a stutter & lag free server in order to add the additional planes.

HB

WOLFMondo
09-28-2005, 04:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:

Its pretty lonely up there, you'll rarely find a luftwaffe A/C above 5k, so inevitably one has to descend to the depths to find any kind of action at all..

It'd be nice if the luftwaffe would fly high now and again.. But they don't...
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There down that low chasing all the Spitfires:P.

Most of the FW190 flyers on WC don't starting fighting unless they have 3 or 4k beneath them. Its worth pointing out the 190 is much better at low and medium altitude, going up high is not a healthy prospect for a 190 flyer. Even the D9 is a pain cause it overheats so quickly at altitude.

RAF74_Poker
09-28-2005, 04:14 PM
I fly red on WC quite often.
And yes, I get killed ... A LOT !
Is it frustrating ... yep !
Is it gonna change .... nope !

Actually, I'm having the most success lately by flying the Spit Vc(4) !

A '41 against any and all ... It's become fun again .. for the most part.

I think the bias is actually w/ the people who fly on WC, rather than anything the admins have set up.

All the people who switched to blue to fly the big cannonised planes .. will switch back once there is a change in the wind after the next patch or the next update.
When their FW can't take hits and fly home, they'll get discouraged at their stats dropping and go looking for some other plane that can get them back onto the almighty k/d ratio list.

Sadly .. the last patch has seemed to bear some hard feelings nowadays .. I see more chute shooting, and less sportsmanship ... if I'm hit I don't bother trying to escape back to base ... even if smoking, some 190 will do it's best to bring me down - now I just stay and try to make someone pay.
I don't care to congratulate an opponent unless they truly showed something other than the ability to fly by and spray cannon shells.

Ah, the wistfull times when it was honorable to dogfight .. now the "realism" has infected and the romanticism is a jaded memory. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
A reflection of our times, I think ... c'est le guerre.
WC doesn't need to really change much - the blues will be blues, and the reds will be reds .. some will act with honor, and some will act like pigs, but most will just fly and die and hit refly ... the world won't stop turning.

PS: Leave my Spit Vc(4) in there tho !

faustnik
09-28-2005, 04:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:


I've just finished reading 2nd TAF volume 2, given me allot of ideas. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Its a shame we will never get the tiffy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm still reading Vol. 1, Vol.2 will be on my Christmas wish list. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I didn't realize how important the Typhoon and Mustang I were until I started reading that book.

MEGILE
09-28-2005, 04:24 PM
From where can i purchase both volumes, mondy? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

StellarRat
09-28-2005, 04:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:

As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible..

To fly historically accurate, the luftwaffe would be forced to assail B-17's flying at high altitude under escort by Spits, Thunderbolts, and Mustangs.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not true. There were many cases of low level combat. You think the only air-to-air combat that occurred in the ETO was related to B-17 raids? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, but I'd say 90%+ was high altitude and a lot of the one low altitude combats resulted from chasing stragglers down to the deck. The Allied planes flew close air support, interdiction, OCA (all low level) missions AFTER they had gained total air superiority. And, as you know, the Allied planes are mostly designed for good high alt performance. Of course, the Eastern Front is a different story.

That's why my Biggest Wish List for Oleg has only two items:

1. An Allied in cockpit four engine bomber either B-17, B-24 or Lancaster.

2. Air start bases at 7000 meters.

These two item would make it possible to have some awesome missions in WC.

faustnik
09-28-2005, 04:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
Yes, but I'd say 90%+ was high altitude and a lot of the one low altitude combats resulted from chasing stragglers down to the deck. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read up on the 2nd TAF and 9th AF and all the work they did at low altitudes.

BaldieJr
09-28-2005, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
I wish some genius could figure out a way to instill balance into the server such that the RED side has statistically even score probabilities..
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its been done. You give everyone the same plane. Good sports come out of the woodwork while jerks dry up.

Some of you work so hard to avoid a little humble pie.. making charts and graphs, researching tidbits of obscurity and quote subject-matter-experts.... Maybe blue just has better pilots. WC should put everyone in the same plane for a few days and see how the stats work out.

I'd like to see that sometime.

StellarRat
09-28-2005, 05:11 PM
Maybe all the Blue flyer and Red flyers should trade sides for a week and then compare scores. I don't see a lot of skill difference just bigger guns and better turning planes on one side. Everything changed when Blue got the new ammo belts. While Red has been stuck flying low with .50s that fire in pulses and planes that were designed for fighting at altitudes that no maps really support.

SlickStick
09-28-2005, 05:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HeinzBar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlickStick:
As the CW Spitfires were designed to counter the FW and it's superior roll rate, not including them, while including the Late FWs is biased. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SlickStick,
We originally had the clipped wing spit in the server(IXe clp), but after so many requests for an early model spitfire (Vb,Vc), I posted a poll on WC to find out what the people wanted. The most requested spit was the Vc4 and the spit that was most voted to be removed was the clip wing!!

Bias? I think not since it was the spit pilots that requested such a change. This poll was up and available for all to vote on and voice an opinion for over a month. Once again, WC caters to what the majority of the virtual pilots want to fly in the western front.

Gator, I really wouldn't worry about the stats. They swing one way or the other w/ each patch release. The kill/death ratio has been explained earlier w/ the lack of allied planes equipped w/ cannons for the registerable kills while all of the Axis planes are cannon armed. The win/loss ratio of maps is far more important in my opinion.

Edit: the correct list for the open planeset maps is:

Allies
A-20G
B-25J-1NA
P-38J
P-38L_Late
P-39Q-10
P-40M
P-47D-27
P-51D-20NA
MustangIII
P-63C
SpitfireMkVc4xH
SpitfireMkIXe
SpitfireMkIXeHF
Axis
Bf-109G-2
Bf-109G-6AS
Bf-109G-10
Bf-109G-14
Bf-109K-4
Bf-110G-2
Fw-190A-6
Fw-190A-9
Fw-190D-9
Ta-152H-1
Fw-190F-8
He-111H-6
Ju-87D-5

So, you actually see that the Axis only have 9 true fighter planes while the Allies have 11 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifBTW, replacing planes is a tricky matter. By replacing one plane w/ another plane type creates another thread requesting another change...and so on...and so on....

Now, you see the trouble admins have in dealing w/ planesets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HB </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll have to check, but last time I was there, it was a heavily-Blue flying server and has been for some time, so that may skew a Spitfire-voting process or two.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

However, a majority vote is all that matters. What I don't understand is why a Spitfire pilot would not want to be be flying a CW version between 1-3km, where most of the action is happening, in lieu of a very slow, albeit 4-hispanoed, Vc?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Cdn.401GATOR
09-28-2005, 05:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:

As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible..

To fly historically accurate, the luftwaffe would be forced to assail B-17's flying at high altitude under escort by Spits, Thunderbolts, and Mustangs.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not true. There were many cases of low level combat. You think the only air-to-air combat that occurred in the ETO was related to B-17 raids? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, but I'd say 90%+ was high altitude and a lot of the one low altitude combats resulted from chasing stragglers down to the deck. The Allied planes flew close air support, interdiction, OCA (all low level) missions AFTER they had gained total air superiority. And, as you know, the Allied planes are mostly designed for good high alt performance. Of course, the Eastern Front is a different story.

That's why my Biggest Wish List for Oleg has only two items:

1. An Allied in cockpit four engine bomber either B-17, B-24 or Lancaster.

2. Air start bases at 7000 meters.

These two item would make it possible to have some awesome missions in WC. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Stellar post, my stellar friend...

I agree 100%, those two items on your wish list would force the luftwaffe out of their comfortable low altitude havens and redress the balance by forcing the issue..

Stigler u said life ain't fair? How about them apples?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

The luftwaffe could pick their poison then, either come up like men and fight, or watch their bases turn into the surface of the moon; desolate and cratered..

Don't get me wrong, u ask anybody in my squad or look up my profile, http://www.401squadron.com, (http://www.401squadron.com) you'll see my favorite A\C to fly is and always has been the 109..

The T\A 152 would be truly useful for a change..

It would be fun to see everyone poo pooing me now whining for the ME262 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

tomtheyak
09-28-2005, 05:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:

As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible..

To fly historically accurate, the luftwaffe would be forced to assail B-17's flying at high altitude under escort by Spits, Thunderbolts, and Mustangs.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not true. There were many cases of low level combat. You think the only air-to-air combat that occurred in the ETO was related to B-17 raids? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Faustnik...

as much as I applaud your unbiased views in these forums, I have to point out that from late 1942 till early '44 that the majority of sorties involving action with the LW by the RAF over France were Ramrod missions, a flight or squadron of bombers escorted by as many as 6 x wings + advance Rodeo (fighter sweep) missions, during which the RAF were less likely - especially with spits - to engage e/a down to low alt, especially with the prevelant low alt flak at the time.
When the spits were tied to bombers (i.e B-17s, B-26s or Mitchells) they would tend to resolve the issue with inconclusive med alt chases b4 disengaging for fuel factors (Wing Commander Tom Neil covers this to a good extent in 'Spitfire; from the cockpit', albeit he flew MkXII Spits).

What escapes most people in these forums is that much ATA action on the WF during 42-43 did NOT result in many kills or even action. And it occurred mainly at med (~10,000ft+ or 3000m) alt.

The majority of low level ATA would have occcured between Tiffies and their close escort being caught at low to mid alt during attack runs and withdrawal, with dragging down to low alt only occurring early to mid '44 with operation ARGUEMENT and the policy of he USAAF 8th AF to seek out the LW at any alt (or undisciplined pilots getting caught up in the moment)- this tends to (but not uniformly) exclude RAF spits from the low alt D/F till OVERLORD and after when increasing fighter-bomber missions were run with spit IXs.

I know this is generalisation, but it is fact!

Forgive me Faustnik - as a Bl/ed flyer I understand ur position, just trying to illuminate somethings I think are pertinent

Kuna15
09-28-2005, 05:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Doesn't Warclouds have a forum? I think they would be more likely to notice your thread there.

Adding more a/c to the bases would be easy for the administrators I'm sure. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
with this 4.01 patch oleg, u are making us all heros of the luftwaffles </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

faustnik
09-28-2005, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tomtheyak:


Faustnik...

I have to point out that from late 1942 till early '44 that the majority of sorties involving action with the LW by the RAF over France were Ramrod missions, a flight or squadron of bombers escorted by as many as 6 x wings + advance Rodeo (fighter sweep) missions, during which the RAF were less likely - especially with spits - to engage e/a down to low alt, especially with the prevelant low alt flak at the time.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The time period in question would have to be considered post D-Day though, right? After D-Day the LW began to change focus to lower altitudes and intercepting Allied Jabos. I mean , we are talking a '45 server here aren't we, it's got P-63s, Ta-152s, and Bf109G10s? That's also why I suggested Fall '44 for a more historic and balanced mission. The 2nd TAF and 9th AF were doing a lot of low level work and LW focus was shifting to them. The Allies would have a similar planeset but, the LW would be much more limited.

Von_Rat
09-28-2005, 06:10 PM
i fly blue alot on wc, i also fly alot well above 5k. so do alot of others who fly blue.

unless im in a ta152 i wont go much over 7k because all the other german planes are totally outclassed higher than that.

when i do fly low its chasing grass mowing spits.

Tachyon1000
09-28-2005, 06:25 PM
Perhaps the original poster needs to be reminded that Blue only has two basic fighter types, 109 and 190, while Red has P-51, P-47, Spit, P-38, P-39, P-63, P-40. Hence this is why most of the Luft plane variants are represented no matter how inferior they may be, while the Allies often get the best variant for each of their fighter types.

HellToupee
09-28-2005, 06:55 PM
yet most allied types are early 44, the best spitfire type is a 1943 plane, p51 early 44 p47 same again p63 well dunno but its weapons are terrible, a20 b25 pathectic less load than the p38 and mk108s make them seem like paper, saw one 190 take 3 b25s down in formation from dead 6 in a few seconds. While blue only has 2 fighter types, they get the latest and greatest, red has more types but most are outperformed in some or all aspects. Along with the one shot wounder thats easyer to hit with than 2 hispanos and planes with the stability of a washing machine..

Pirschjaeger
09-28-2005, 08:09 PM
This is a cool and realistic sim. We even have propaganda threads! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I didn't bother reading it all so someone else may have already mentioned what I'll point out now.

The first poster was talking about the server having all LW variants while the Allied planes sets don't. OK, no problem. The LW basically has two planes. See where this is going?

I don't think it's the variants that are causing the 2:1 ratio.

The second poster mentioned Mk108 with one or two hits equals a kill while the 20mm needs to make a lot of hits. This isn't very valid IMO since the P-51, among other Allied planes, take many hits to go down. I've had to use 4 direct mk108 hits to make a P-51 go down, on more than one occasion.

4 short bursts from a 20mm will make a 109 or 190 virtually useless.

To add, no matter how powerful a weapon is, it is only as useful as the pilot. You still have to be a good aim and better pilot to make the kill.

Has someone ever taken the stats from a LW dominance thread? Check out the post ratio. See who's flying and who's posting.

Posting is not a waste of time; it will make you quicker at finding keys such as "Ctrl" and "E".

Ha ha ha, propaganda thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


Fritz

CUJO_1970
09-28-2005, 08:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:


True Cujo, but the luftwaffe have no incentive to fly to high altitude, since there is no bomber stream for them to stop from wrecking their homeland...

Its pretty lonely up there, you'll rarely find a luftwaffe A/C above 5k, so inevitably one has to descend to the depths to find any kind of action at all..

It'd be nice if the luftwaffe would fly high now and again.. But they don't...

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Gator,

On the map before you joined blue last night(desperate experten map) I was with no fewer than 8 FW190s at 4500-5000m.

It was us that had to come down from high alt. to fight.

On the map where you joined blue, there were several of us at 6,000m - I shot down a P-47 at ~5000m on that map.

The natural progression of fights in WC gradually drops lower and lower, it's not because one side forces that battle to be low on the deck, that's just where they end up.

The maps also make it difficult for high alt combat for two reasons:

1. Map size

2. Ground based objectives (destroy and defend)

WC is essentially a Jabo/anti-Jabo server.

StellarRat
09-28-2005, 08:34 PM
It is truly unfortunate that Oleg has not given the ability to air start at 7000m. This seems to me like a small coding change. I've been tempted to try and hack the code to allow this. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Even with the lack of 4 engine bombers we could at least muster up a force of B-25s or A-20s. I actually like flying B-25s and dropping bombs from high altitude, but I hate spending 10 minutes per mission getting to 6000m and another 5 or 10 minutes flying to the target.

Pirschjaeger
09-28-2005, 08:42 PM
If in fact, the blue side will not fly at high alts there is a good reason; The enemy isn't either.

This raises a strange question; who is the blueside shooting down? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

You can't blame the blue for not flying high alts. With the stats in mind, it seems the blue has atleast some sort of alt advantage over the reds.

The people who post "I was at 7000 and saw no blue planes" are not team players and your team is obviously suffering for it.

Fritz

HellToupee
09-28-2005, 08:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
It is truly unfortunate that Oleg has not given the ability to air start at 7000m. This seems to me like a small coding change. I've been tempted to try and hack the code to allow this. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Even with the lack of 4 engine bombers we could at least muster up a force of B-25s or A-20s. I actually like flying B-25s and dropping bombs from high altitude, but I hate spending 10 minutes per mission getting to 6000m and another 5 or 10 minutes flying to the target. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

and i hate landing bombs dead on target in a b25 and getting like 1-2 trucks or nothing at all.

HayateAce
09-28-2005, 09:04 PM
Instant equalizer:

http://www.nnavirex.com/shots_avion/NNsans.jpg

Pirschjaeger
09-28-2005, 09:13 PM
Hayate, I have always liked the LaGG and the P-40. They'd be deadly if they had power.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
09-28-2005, 09:32 PM
Actually, I was just thinking, maybe planesets does have something to do with the ratio. With blue pilots they've had two airplanes for years while the reds have had many choices for years. This would make the blue flyer, by default, much more consistant.

Take Cajun for example. He lives in the P-47 and is very good with it.

The red flyers seem to jump from plane to plane, therefor, being an expert of none. Remember, a simmer that's been with the il-2 series for years has propably been flying the 109 for years, making him a great 109 pilot.

How many redds have been flying the p-47, p-51, Spits, and others for 4 or more years? Get the point.

Stick to one plane for years and you will become equal with the 109 or 190 pilots.

Remember, this has nothing to do with history and reality.

Fritz

LeadSpitter_
09-28-2005, 09:49 PM
winning much easier in the 1 second burst, 1 immediate kill department, both close and far distance aiming and both the high speed as well as low speed combat which is the problem.

Thats all there really is to this game.

HayateAce
09-28-2005, 11:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Hayate, I have always liked the LaGG and the P-40. They'd be deadly if they had power.

Fritz </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pirsch,

It would only mean that low and slow combat by the blues would disappear alltogether, but until that lesson was learned....

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

faustnik
09-28-2005, 11:22 PM
Don't the Allies on Warclouds WF have a good low speed fighter with 1 second burst kill ability? It was called a Spitsomething I think?

mr_20-20
09-29-2005, 12:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RAF74_Poker:
Sadly .. the last patch has seemed to bear some hard feelings nowadays .. I see more chute shooting, and less sportsmanship ...

Ah, the wistfull times when it was honorable to dogfight .. now the "realism" has infected and the romanticism is a jaded memory. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
A reflection of our times, I think ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i find this very telling

from my POV , peoples idea that the sim is wrong & biased has become a lot more cemented since v4.01 came out

faustnik
09-29-2005, 12:21 AM
What's with the name change Badsight?

mr_20-20
09-29-2005, 12:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
As to flying true historical maps, this is impossible... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>this is exactly correct

but it has nothing to do with the plane-sets , its about what a DF room is - its the opportunity to shoot other people down . people dont Airquake to replicate history . its the making kills that people like about DF rooms , that & wingman gameplay

so once you get past the false notion of a DF room representing history's aircombat , you can see what a DF actually is :

the opportunity for people to pit different planes against each other - & thats all

a DF room can be "gameplay balanced" , but the sim should never be , no matter how much people want it

mr_20-20
09-29-2005, 12:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
What's with the name change Badsight? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>ask Jestur's_ink http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

seriously tho , i seem to live up to "Badsight" more than "20/20" in-game! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 12:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:


I've just finished reading 2nd TAF volume 2, given me allot of ideas. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Its a shame we will never get the tiffy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm still reading Vol. 1, Vol.2 will be on my Christmas wish list. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I didn't realize how important the Typhoon and Mustang I were until I started reading that book. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a real eye opener to what went on, I do not envy what 2nd TAF pilots went through. Very interesting read and I like the way they compare loss rates with official British and German records.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 12:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
From where can i purchase both volumes, mondy? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amazon http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif , Volume 1 is the forming of the 2nd TAF, 2 is mid 44 to Bodenplatte and 3 is January 45 to the end.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 01:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
Yes, but I'd say 90%+ was high altitude and a lot of the one low altitude combats resulted from chasing stragglers down to the deck. The Allied planes flew close air support, interdiction, OCA (all low level) missions AFTER they had gained total air superiority. And, as you know, the Allied planes are mostly designed for good high alt performance. Of course, the Eastern Front is a different story.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

High altitude combat made up probably 10-20% of all combat in WW2 on the ETO. Just read up on what the offensive airwar before the Americans started big raids in 1944 and what the 2nd TAF and 9th AF did, those guys where doing thousands of sorties a week. And no, they did not have air superiority, not when records show that meeting 10, 20 or up to 40 patrolling 190's and 109's was a common thing in France 1944, not when 2nd TAF airfields where being bombed so much they had to be abandoned.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 01:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HellToupee:
yet most allied types are early 44, the best spitfire type is a 1943 plane, p51 early 44 p47 same again p63 well dunno but its weapons are terrible, a20 b25 pathectic less load than the p38 and mk108s make them seem like paper, saw one 190 take 3 b25s down in formation from dead 6 in a few seconds. While blue only has 2 fighter types, they get the latest and greatest, red has more types but most are outperformed in some or all aspects. Along with the one shot wounder thats easyer to hit with than 2 hispanos and planes with the stability of a washing machine.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tempest. 3 lone B25's vs 1 190 with 108's? I'd put my money on the 190 every time. Lets be honest about this. The Mustangs are the ones that where used, no P51H ever saw combat in the ETO. The D27 jug was also pretty common, only 130 M's where built and they where utterly un reliable. The Spitfire could be beefed up to 44 standards but again I say TEMPEST! That will be a great equalizer, if you can handle it.

DangerForward
09-29-2005, 05:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlickStick:

However, a majority vote is all that matters. What I don't understand is why a Spitfire pilot would not want to be be flying a CW version between 1-3km, where most of the action is happening, in lieu of a very slow, albeit 4-hispanoed, Vc?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I could replace one plane with the Spit IX clip it would be the Spit IX HF. With the Spit IXe already there, the HF doesn't seem to have much benefit. The clip wing Spit though has fairly different performance and weapons. I like the 6 .303s versus the two .50s anyway. Maybe they're unsynced? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG53Frankyboy
09-29-2005, 06:06 AM
im not interested in dogfight servers at all , but is it worth to mention that the Spitfire Mk.IXc/e (with normal wing span)in the game are actually ALSO LF.Mk.IXc/e with Merlin66 engine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

that the LF designation has nothing to do if a Spitfire has clipped wings or not. its always only saying something about its engine.

? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

the clipped wings should make a spitfire:
-little bit faster
-let it better roll
-let it worser climb
-give it a little worser turnradius

how it is programmed in game, i have no idea.

Diablo310th
09-29-2005, 06:06 AM
Actually, and I ahte to say this but.....to see teh real balance of things on WC check missions won. Who is accomplishing their mission most regularly? I do think Allied planes are at a disadvantage right now and that will hopefully change, but...look at teh missions. Which side is winning the map? WC has always been about winning the map and not individual kills..at least from us old timers point of view. I think one reason Red k/d is low could be because we are losing fighters and bombers ie. P-38's to attacking the target or trying to provide air cover to low flying attack aircraft. If it was up to me I would keep my Jug at 15,000-20,000 ft but I can't escort an attack plane on it's run from that high up. So I start tehre...look for someone needing help then zoom down. That is where I run into my problems and get shot down...but that's my job to provide cover. Most people who know me on WC knows that I fly my Jug as fighter cover not ground pounding...which leads to many deaths on my part.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 06:43 AM
Why are they at a disadvantage Diablo? Objectivly as a person who flies for both sides I'd say its very equal at the moment. One thing I do notice though is those P38's ground pounding hang about the target way too long. Theres no one pass, unload all your ordanance and run for it mentality which would greatly increase survivability. They make themselves easy targets to BnZ'ing 190's and TnB'ing 109's.

Red undoubtably has a greater selection of better ground pounders than blues selection. Granted the 190 and 110 are great mud movers but they pale in comparison to the P38 and P47's ability to carry vast amounts of ordanance.

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 07:08 AM
hm shame about plane limit, cos there should be some good RAF types added "soon"

mossie, 355mph @ SL WITH droptanks, 366mph clean (dont know if thats ias or tas)
plus its got 4 cannon, 283rounds each (should be anyways), 4 303 with 1000 rounds each. not sure on the bomb config, but 2x 500lb and 2x 500lb on the wingracks..
hopefully 8x 60lb rockets too

tempest, 4 cannon, 200rounds each i think (mkV with more rof) tons of speed at low level

IX with 25lb boost ~maybe~ should match the alholic 109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 07:10 AM
oh and p51 mk3 with 2 bombs, u can push it past 300mph just, but itll overheat..

a20 ur lookin at 250mph? dunno, b25 be abit slower..

Diablo310th
09-29-2005, 07:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Why are they at a disadvantage Diablo? Objectivly as a person who flies for both sides I'd say its very equal at the moment. One thing I do notice though is those P38's ground pounding hang about the target way too long. Theres no one pass, unload all your ordanance and run for it mentality which would greatly increase survivability. They make themselves easy targets to BnZ'ing 190's and TnB'ing 109's.

Red undoubtably has a greater selection of better ground pounders than blues selection. Granted the 190 and 110 are great mud movers but they pale in comparison to the P38 and P47's ability to carry vast amounts of ordanance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

~S~ Mondo. I agree that the Allies do ahve better ground pounders and that some do hang around wayy to long after dropping their ordinace. The disadvantage I feel is in teh 1 hit 1 kill cannons. Axis planes and it's well documented can take a licking and keep on ticking right back to base. Sure they are damaged but not to teh point they cannot RTB. Most allied planes cannot achieve that. I find myself much more often now patrolling the border so i ahve a chance to bail out over friendly ground. The advantage lies there...the ability to take hits and RTB. Even my Jug won't make it home far when hit hard...but I can unload a full ammo load on a FW and it make it home, damaged yes but still make it home. Hopefully 4.02 will change some of this.

An example would be ...How does a 109 with 2 mg's and 1 cannon do more damage to a Jug in 1 sec. than a Jug can do to a 109 with 8 50 cal HMG and a 3 sec. burst? We all know there is a DM problem...so hopefully this will change.

RAF74_Poker
09-29-2005, 07:19 AM
Re: high altitude fighting ....
I rarely see a 109 at high altitude .. usually a 190.
So ... the predominance is 190's .... and what is the main defensive tactic of 190 pilots ? Or even the few 109's I see up there.

That's why the fight is always on the deck - after a while there is no more alt to dive away.

Diablo310th
09-29-2005, 07:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RAF74_Poker:
Re: high altitude fighting ....
I rarely see a 109 at high altitude .. usually a 190.
So ... the predominance is 190's .... and what is the main defensive tactic of 190 pilots ? Or even the few 109's I see up there.

That's why the fight is always on the deck - after a while there is no more alt to dive away. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Poker..I agree. I have been involved in many high alt. fights but like you said....it almost always ends up on teh deck. I get bounced and damaged and i dive away to escape. I bounce a 109 or 190 and they dive and head for the deck for clouds or friends. It's rare to find a battle that will stay high...when it does however..it's a blast.

stathem
09-29-2005, 07:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
hm shame about plane limit, cos there should be some good RAF types added "soon"

mossie, 355mph @ SL WITH droptanks, 366mph clean (dont know if thats ias or tas)
plus its got 4 cannon, 283rounds each (should be anyways), 4 303 with 1000 rounds each. not sure on the bomb config, but 2x 500lb and 2x 500lb on the wingracks..
hopefully 8x 60lb rockets too

tempest, 4 cannon, 200rounds each i think (mkV with more rof) tons of speed at low level

IX with 25lb boost ~maybe~ should match the alholic 109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe the answer when and if it does happen, would be to alternate missions - RAF vs Luftwaffe then USAAF vs Luftwaffe. Maybe even one map, RAF vs USAAF, just for giggles.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 07:35 AM
Diablo, The Jug Dm is way off and I don't think anyone will disagree with that.

I do disagree with the 109, I find them very easy to shoot down with the Mustang III whereas the 190 is almost impossible unless I get a PK. In all honesty I think the 109's DM is ok. Its the 190's DM thats at issue. I fly them and admit theres no fear of structurale failure from .50's, good chance of broken cables though and no chance of fire. Definate bug there but the 109, I don't think there is a problem.

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 07:41 AM
109 is sometimes tough, or it seems like u hitting but your not

Loki-PF
09-29-2005, 07:50 AM
~S~ All,

I'm a casual WC flyer.... I pop over there if there's nothing going on in the PTO.

Since I'm not there alot take what I'm saying with a grain of salt, but does anyone have an idea of the map balance? Specifically what I mean is what the percentage is that RED has to attack and Blue has to defend?

Seems like most of the time I visit Red is always on the offensive and blue is sitting back behind the fence circling and waiting for our bomb trucks to show up.....

Jumoschwanz
09-29-2005, 08:33 AM
You could go fly on Greatergreen, they have servers with the slowest and worst handling 109, the g6 and g6late, vs La5fn, so the axis are down on speed almost 100km/hr! They love to build maps at GG and give the axis this **** plane as the only 109 option, they have been at it for years, enjoy!

Jumoschwanz

Diablo310th
09-29-2005, 08:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Diablo, The Jug Dm is way off and I don't think anyone will disagree with that.

I do disagree with the 109, I find them very easy to shoot down with the Mustang III whereas the 190 is almost impossible unless I get a PK. In all honesty I think the 109's DM is ok. Its the 190's DM thats at issue. I fly them and admit theres no fear of structurale failure from .50's, good chance of broken cables though and no chance of fire. Definate bug there but the 109, I don't think there is a problem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

~S~ Mondo......you could be right. a 190 is definately tougher.....I just know that I ahve hit 109's rally hard and not seen them go down. That could be of course from the fact that aftr i hit them somebody else is finishing them off or I'm going down in a pile of dust before seeing the fruits of my labor. LOL S!!

BSS_CUDA
09-29-2005, 08:51 AM
the maps are a 50-50 balance, part of the problem that I see, is when blue is on the offensive they dont need to fly the 111 or the JU-87, they can fly the same planes they do when defensive, its a sad thing when a 30mm round will make as big an explosion as a 500lb bomb. as for high alt combat,is you fly it they will come, last Saturday Fatboy and I were at 25k ft and engaged 2 190's the dogfight went on for 20 minutes, I had finally gotten the advantage on 1 of the 190's when I spot another friendly passing underneath me, I was closing in fast on the 190, contrails's a spewing, I was just about into guns range when all of the sudden tracers go whizzing by me. I'm like WTH how did I miss that other bandit. so I do a quick pull up to check my 6 and what to I see????? I see a spitfire behind me blazing away!!!! (I won't mention his name even tho I should) then he crashes into me and kills us both. GD intentional TKers, HTH do you mistake a P-38 for a 109 or a 190?!?!?!? a 20 minute High Alt DF shot to **** because of a TKer, ~S~ anways to Dey- Tiger good fight

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 09:12 AM
Cuda, the Mk108 makes a nice explosion on the ground but it doesn't have the power of a 500lbs bomb, let alone a 60lbs rocket. That I can say with certainty. For ground pounding the MG151's higher rate of fire and greater accuracy is much better.

Red does have the same option if not better. 190A's can carry 1 500KG bomb and couple of little 60kg bombs or just the 500KG'er, P38 can carry way more weight in bombs and rockets/HVARS too and has the very accurate guns in the nose! Both are also great fighters. For the luftwaffles to carry any more ordanance they need to take the Spitfire magnet BF110. A total pig unless the pilot is really very good.

I really don't see your point here since all allied fighters on the WC set apart from some Spits can carry a minimum of 500lbs of bombs, most can carry at least 1000lbs, some even more with other ordanance and can fight afterwards. With the addition of the Mossie and Tempest thats another 2 aircraft capable of carrying 2000lbs of bombs and both have 4 cannons. Scary prospect.

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 09:19 AM
wolf, i think the german fighters might be quick with the bombs on..

with p51mk3 280/90tas @ SL or low level is probably all u gonna get without overheat..

190 is fast, even with bomb

25lb boost mossie would give us near 400mph, like the mk3 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

faustnik
09-29-2005, 09:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
I see a spitfire behind me blazing away!!!! (I won't mention his name even tho I should) then he crashes into me and kills us both. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That SUCKS Cuda. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif That story makes me mad just reading it.

WOLFMondo
09-29-2005, 09:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
wolf, i think the german fighters might be quick with the bombs on..

with p51mk3 280/90tas @ SL or low level is probably all u gonna get without overheat..

190 is fast, even with bomb

25lb boost mossie would give us near 400mph, like the mk3 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And a P38 isn't fast with a bomb? Approach any ground target from 2 or 3K up and any plane is fast. The plane doesn't sound like the problem here. It really sounds like how people ground pound. Approach on the deck and leave on the deck gives you no energy to escape flak or fighters, your basically defenseless and a target. Dive from 2 or 3K onto the target, unload all the ordanance and leave with the energy you've got from the dive and survivability is much higher.

faustnik
09-29-2005, 09:56 AM
Well, we have very good LW data on speed loss for the Fw190 and various loadouts. When 4.02 is released it should be easy for us to check it.

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 10:32 AM
faus, dunno if its wrong or right tbh, but i used to rag my poor f8 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

wolf, the slow laden jabos are easier targets than the same plane but lighter...

JG53Frankyboy
09-29-2005, 11:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
You could go fly on Greatergreen, they have servers with the slowest and worst handling 109, the g6 and g6late, vs La5fn, so the axis are down on speed almost 100km/hr! They love to build maps at GG and give the axis this **** plane as the only 109 option, they have been at it for years, enjoy!

Jumoschwanz </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

early 1944 is realy the bset time frame in the moment for a good western front fight:
red:
P-51B
P-47D-22
P-38J
Spitfire LF.IXc
Spitfire LF.Vb CW
A-20G
B-25J

blue:
Bf109G6Late
Fw190A6
Bf110G-2
He111H-6

Pirschjaeger
09-29-2005, 12:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
You could go fly on Greatergreen, they have servers with the slowest and worst handling 109, the g6 and g6late, vs La5fn, so the axis are down on speed almost 100km/hr! They love to build maps at GG and give the axis this **** plane as the only 109 option, they have been at it for years, enjoy!

Jumoschwanz </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude! You just gave away the secret to blue's success; training on GG. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Fritz

NorrisMcWhirter
09-29-2005, 12:15 PM
Hi,

Red holds most of the ground attack cards especially late war what with the P47 & P38 which are excellent jabo choices.

If you take a look at the UKD1 server, red has won maps at a ratio of 196:128 and the maps are mostly ground objective based but most of the blue aircraft enjoy high kill/death ratios.

There's a lot more than 'oh, axis must have better planes' to be taken into account when looking at server statistics. There are a whole boatload of variables to take into account and ignoring them is just naive.

Ta,
Norris

LeadSpitter_
09-29-2005, 12:35 PM
actually no server has the majority of ac on western front that faced each other in 44-45

109g6 190a8 vs p38l p51D p47D spit9

more then 85% of the ac that faced each other in the west.

the rest were in such small numbers in general but are most used.

Greater green has the most accurate and historical planesets around besides some of thier what if maps.

then virtualpilots is another with historic planesets and a few others.

Jumoschwanz im suprised you dont think thats a pretty **** close and even match up the la5fn and g6, g6 wings in firepower, turn is identical on deck, la5fn has a bit more accelaration but the 109g6 turns circles around the la5fn highspeed with its lack of compressibility the russian ac all have elevator compressibility very early.

Theres alot of bs with russian dive speeds dont get me wrong gain up to 150kmph in 50-100m but locks up 650kmph.

I dunno the new trim made this game like the original il2 sturmovik, i dont know why after all these patches they would ruin what they had by taking another step backwards.

Kwiatos
09-29-2005, 12:52 PM
Wait all for patch 4.02 i think it will change situation a lot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
(besides still userfriendly 109)

CUJO_1970
09-29-2005, 01:40 PM
Oleg and crew decided for whatever reason to not add a large number of loadout options for German fighters, despite having had the info for years.

The FW190F-8 "bomb tractors" could carry some really heavy bombloads(SC1800 anyone?), but are limited to the SC500s as the biggest they can carry in the sim.

And the D-9s can't carry bombs or even droptanks.

CUJO_1970
09-29-2005, 01:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
actually no server has the majority of ac on western front that faced each other in 44-45

109g6 190a8 vs p38l p51D p47D spit9

more then 85% of the ac that faced each other in the west.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


This is a pretty bad oversimplification.

NorrisMcWhirter
09-29-2005, 02:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kwiatos:
Wait all for patch 4.02 i think it will change situation a lot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
(besides still userfriendly 109) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you really mean is that there is going to be a 'correction' applied because of whining irrespective of how a-historical it makes this game?

That's the real problem - if such a thing happens; it means the game/developer lacks credibility because who they favour swings like a pendulum with each patch.

Oh woe.

Ta,
Norris

StellarRat
09-29-2005, 02:25 PM
No ahistorical "corrections" a being applied just to balance the game. The flight models are just being refined and a couple of planes added. That being said, I do think 4.02 will favor the Allied planes more than the German planes. Remember 4.01 was just the first version of the new flight model. I'm sure many more revisions will come with BOB and possibly some more with IL2 (although I'm just guessing on this one.)

As far as discrediting the accuracy of the flight models I think your comment is way off base, Norris. There is always room for improvement in any model. Only through persistance and learning from mistakes can great things be accomplished in life. To assume your work is perfect and not try to improve on it is foolish and arrogant. It's a credit to Oleg that he has tried to move us closer to perfection over the years instead of just releasing one or two patches and saying "That's it." like most companies do. If you remember your ancient IL2 history we've come a long way since this game was first released. This is the main reason so many of us are still playing. This is by far the longest any game has ever stayed on my systems and I still enjoy it just as much as I did when I bought it.

NorrisMcWhirter
09-29-2005, 02:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
No ahistorical "corrections" a being applied just to balance the game. The flight models are just being refined and a couple of planes added. That being said, I do think 4.02 will favor the Allied planes more than the German planes. Remember 4.01 was just the first version of the new flight model. I'm sure many more revisions will come with BOB and possibly some more with IL2 (although I'm just guessing on this one.)

As far as discrediting the accuracy of the flight models I think your comment is way off base, Norris. There is always room for improvement in any model. Only through persistance and learning from mistakes can great things be accomplished in life. To assume your work is perfect and not try to improve on it is foolish and arrogant. It's a credit to Oleg that he has tried to move us closer to perfection over the years instead of just releasing one or two patches and saying "That's it." like most companies do. If you remember your ancient IL2 history we've come a long way since this game was first released. This is the main reason so many of us are still playing. This is by far the longest any game has ever stayed on my systems and I still enjoy it just as much as I did when I bought it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I actually think the FMs in 4.01 are the best they've been for some time and I've said that before. I was also pleased that they finally sorted the 151/20.

Also, I doubt anyone would mind if individual flight models were simply 'refined' in each patch especially where new, credible information had come to light. But, that rarely seems to be the case and we seem to have the case where people whine and the next patch is affected in some manner which correlates to the whining beforehand.

So, let me ask why you think 4.02 will favour Allied over Germans? Is this because the allied FMs will suddenly match their test documentation where they didn't before? Or maybe because the German planes no longer do? Or that they both do and the Allied simply had better planes? Frankly, I could stomach any of those scenarios quite easily and without any problems.

However, it's more likely that because there has been lots of crying about WC of late and things need to be 'balanced'?

If you were to perceive that final possibility as an improvement then that is very dubious.

Ta,
Norris

p1ngu666
09-29-2005, 02:50 PM
a8 a9 can take a bomb, keep outer cannons too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

its as good as a dora would be for jabo, thats what the experts said to me anyways

u dont have any jabos with decent large loadout like p38 and p47

f8's 4 50kg bombs arent that great, and thats probably the best http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

its a speed/loadout balence, tb3 carries TONS, but slower than a 2cv, hence it gets hacked out of the sky...

the a8 a9 loadout is good, depending on target and how much a2a u wanna do.
u could mow down a ton of trucks with the extra cannons...

HeinzBar
09-29-2005, 03:28 PM
S!,
The F8 is actually one of my favorite rides. While it doesn't have the loadout of a p38 or p47, it is still exceptional at what it does. The 4x50kg + 1x500kg can ruin a target area fairly quick. Combine this loadout w/ a fast run in at the target and it chalks up to be one hellava ground pounder.

However, I must give credit to all of the axis pilots I fly w/ on comms while making my jabo runs. Without their escort, I'd be less likely to make my strike and return safely. Typically, I make a strike and run for home unless the escort is in the mood to cap me while I do straffing runs. Keep in mind, the escorts are flying above me at 4km while I'm at 2km...most of the time. This allows me to have escape speed and it allows the escorts to have an advantage over any bandit that may have picked me up. It may take me a couple of extra runs as compared to the p38/p47, but I usually last throughout the map w/o getting DK'd http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HB

StellarRat
09-29-2005, 03:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:

I actually think the FMs in 4.01 are the best they've been for some time and I've said that before. I was also pleased that they finally sorted the 151/20.

Also, I doubt anyone would mind if individual flight models were simply 'refined' in each patch especially where new, credible information had come to light. But, that rarely seems to be the case and we seem to have the case where people whine and the next patch is affected in some manner which correlates to the whining beforehand.

So, let me ask why you think 4.02 will favour Allied over Germans? Is this because the allied FMs will suddenly match their test documentation where they didn't before? Or maybe because the German planes no longer do? Or that they both do and the Allied simply had better planes? Frankly, I could stomach any of those scenarios quite easily and without any problems.

However, it's more likely that because there has been lots of crying about WC of late and things need to be 'balanced'?

If you were to perceive that final possibility as an improvement then that is very dubious.

Ta,
Norris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>First let me clarify something: I think 4.02 will not tip balance of the game greatly. I think it just makes a few FM changes that will do more good for the Allied planes than the German. Here are the five that I saw:

1. The DM is fixed for the 190 so that the .50s can disable the engine, cause fuel leaks, or light it on fire (again.) It still doesn't suffer structural failure nearly as often as a 109 (I think this is correct.) I'm sure you can agree that the 190 DM was bugged.

2. The snap spin caused by a power stall is easier to cause now and a bit harder to get out of for all planes. This will cause hard manuevering close to the ground to become a lot more dangerous. Even the 109 will snap stall now. This favors the Allied side because it is not a new problem for them, but it is a new problem for the 109.

3. Some of the Allied planes retain energy better now (at least they seem to for me.) In particular the P-51. To me it seemed to hold it energy better in a turn or climb. This makes it possible to B and Z some of the German planes even at low level and get away cleanly. I was able to engage a G2 on the deck he could not get round fast enough to ever go offensive on me. All he could do was dodge my gun passes.

4. The boosted P-47D with 150 octane simply walks away from the German planes above 3000m. I didn't have a chance to test against the TA-152, but the Dora and the 109s I tried just couldn't touch it. In fact, even the Mustang Mk. III was hard pressed to keep up and above 8000m it left it in the dust.

5. There seems to less "nose wonder" in the Allied planes and a bit less recoil effect while firing except for the P-47 still has a tendency to "wonder" (still no fillet.)

So, as you can see, even though nothing is really changed specifically on the German planes (except the 190 DM bug being fixed) these FM changes seem to help the Allied planes more than the German.

HayateAce
09-29-2005, 04:56 PM
http://www.lionsclubs.org/EN/content/convention/scrapbook/images/wednesday_large/Cheering_Crowd.jpg

GRYPHON_401Cdn
09-29-2005, 09:41 PM
Well if 4.02 does one thing, fixing the DM of the 190 is a must. I have spent / wasted many hours of my time engaging 190s at all alts, pumping rounds into them, and getting no / very few kills. The folks I shoot at will acknowledge that I hit them if I ask. Flying anything against a 190 under 4.01 is pretty much a waste of time. A subset of the problem is that the 50 cals seem particularly useless. In only one kill in recent weeks have I seen the wing come off a LW ac as a result of a 50 cal burst. If you dont believe me, run a QM offline a few times with a P51 against a friendly 190 (it wont evade) It wont explode when you nail it either.

CUJO_1970
09-30-2005, 06:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
The boosted P-47D with 150 octane simply walks away from the German planes above 3000m. I didn't have a chance to test against the TA-152, but the Dora and the 109s I tried just couldn't touch it.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Sorry if it hurts anyone's feelings, but this is simply not true.

At these altitudes (4,000m down to the deck) the FW190A-9 and both FW190D-9 44/45 more than hold their own against the new P-47Late.

Haven't had a chance to test it at higher alts.

Above 8,000m it should be the best unless there are Ta-152s flying around.

StellarRat
09-30-2005, 10:16 AM
In our test the D9 was never able to catch up with the P-47D. I simply started a shallow climb at 1000m he was unable to catch me all the way up to 8000m without overheating. However, I didn't turn to engage him until we were over 7000m then it was no contest. The fact the P-47 can stay away from the German A/C is a huge advantage they didn't have before. It also has better zoom climb now. As far as a turning battle at low alt with a P-47 vs. Axis, well I just don't do that, so I can't say anything about it.

NorrisMcWhirter
09-30-2005, 11:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:

I actually think the FMs in 4.01 are the best they've been for some time and I've said that before. I was also pleased that they finally sorted the 151/20.

Also, I doubt anyone would mind if individual flight models were simply 'refined' in each patch especially where new, credible information had come to light. But, that rarely seems to be the case and we seem to have the case where people whine and the next patch is affected in some manner which correlates to the whining beforehand.

So, let me ask why you think 4.02 will favour Allied over Germans? Is this because the allied FMs will suddenly match their test documentation where they didn't before? Or maybe because the German planes no longer do? Or that they both do and the Allied simply had better planes? Frankly, I could stomach any of those scenarios quite easily and without any problems.

However, it's more likely that because there has been lots of crying about WC of late and things need to be 'balanced'?

If you were to perceive that final possibility as an improvement then that is very dubious.

Ta,
Norris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>First let me clarify something: I think 4.02 will not tip balance of the game greatly. I think it just makes a few FM changes that will do more good for the Allied planes than the German. Here are the five that I saw:

1. The DM is fixed for the 190 so that the .50s can disable the engine, cause fuel leaks, or light it on fire (again.) It still doesn't suffer structural failure nearly as often as a 109 (I think this is correct.) I'm sure you can agree that the 190 DM was bugged.

2. The snap spin caused by a power stall is easier to cause now and a bit harder to get out of for all planes. This will cause hard manuevering close to the ground to become a lot more dangerous. Even the 109 will snap stall now. This favors the Allied side because it is not a new problem for them, but it is a new problem for the 109.

3. Some of the Allied planes retain energy better now (at least they seem to for me.) In particular the P-51. To me it seemed to hold it energy better in a turn or climb. This makes it possible to B and Z some of the German planes even at low level and get away cleanly. I was able to engage a G2 on the deck he could not get round fast enough to ever go offensive on me. All he could do was dodge my gun passes.

4. The boosted P-47D with 150 octane simply walks away from the German planes above 3000m. I didn't have a chance to test against the TA-152, but the Dora and the 109s I tried just couldn't touch it. In fact, even the Mustang Mk. III was hard pressed to keep up and above 8000m it left it in the dust.

5. There seems to less "nose wonder" in the Allied planes and a bit less recoil effect while firing except for the P-47 still has a tendency to "wonder" (still no fillet.)

So, as you can see, even though nothing is really changed specifically on the German planes (except the 190 DM bug being fixed) these FM changes seem to help the Allied planes more than the German. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 190 DM is bugged, I agree, although not to the extent that people make out. Case in point of this was the cacophony of whining about it just after 4.01 and it's fall to background level since Oleg's statement about it. The 190 engine has always been susceptible to .50s fire as anyone who has attacked a B25 or A20 can verify - there is no reason why the same would not apply to a fighter with .50s. In general, the 4.01 DM compensates for the ridiculous fuel leak bug which it had before (and which I have no doubt will come back), the reduction in performance with only minor wing damage and the easy PK kill(TM) feature. Bring on the fire, again, however.

As to the P51 "retaining" energy better, that and the pendulum effect are entirely subjective and I have no doubt that they will benefit the allies measurably in 4.02. After all, no one can prove it - if they could have done, they would have produced a track. They didn't. And besides, the FM "wobble" affected all aircraft, not just allied.

As to overboosted aircraft, axis will just have to make do with their derated Eastern front versions so allied players can feel better when their stats improve on the "highly representative of WW2 combat" WC server http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If we were to believe that 4.01 was "heavily biased towards blue", we would have to expect a heavy bias towards red JUST to even things up. No doubt the subjective changes etc will make up for this and more.

Like I always said, if you open up enough threads and complain loudly enough about something around here, it will happen. Let's see if 4.02 proves that theory.

This next patch may also turn PF into 'Heroes of the Pacific' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Talking of which, I like the 190 model in it for the cannon placement, if nothing else.
http://www.heroesofthepacific.com/images/screens/images/Heroes36.JPG

Ta,
Norris

HayateAce
09-30-2005, 11:39 AM
Poor little guy, your mum must go through a lot of rubber sheets. Now I see how the guys around here nicked you Chip McSquirter.

http://altura.speedera.net/ccimg.catalogcity.com/220000/226600/226655/Products/10849498.jpg

Cdn.401GATOR
09-30-2005, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:

If we were to believe that 4.01 was "heavily biased towards blue".

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If???

I don't mean to carry StellarRat's water but you haven't addressed his point #2..

"
2. The snap spin caused by a power stall is easier to cause now and a bit harder to get out of for all planes. This will cause hard manuevering close to the ground to become a lot more dangerous. Even the 109 will snap stall now. This favors the Allied side because it is not a new problem for them, but it is a new problem for the 109.
"



Just this one alone would seem to dispel assertions that the 4.01 is a satisfactory FM or unbiased.. This flaw heavily biases fights on the deck to the 109..


I've noticed a common thread among the luftwaffe proponents in this entire thread and I don't apply this to all of them but many of them seem to be working overtime to deny obvious phenomena that disadvantages Allied A/C or benefits Axis A/C...

Their sometimes eloquent arguments are being undermined greatly IMHO by their resistance to such obvious flaws.

A little more acceptance of the obvious errors in the FM of 4.01 by all of us would go a long way towards establishing a common ground and good faith discussion to positively influence future patches..

The 109 has always been my favorite A\C in the whole series, I have always appreciated the look of the A\C, and taken pride in flying it knowing that it has the distinction of being one of the more difficult A\C to master..

The 4.01 patch has turned it into an unbelievably easy handler..

It is much more challenging and difficult to fly a Spit these 4.01 days..

StellarRat
09-30-2005, 01:25 PM
The P-51 was a very slippery A/C due to those laminar wings (I can't remember, but I think it was one of the only planes in WWII that had them??). Anyway, it SHOULD retain it's energy better than almost any other A/C. Currently I don't see much of that in this FM. As another poster stated it should lose less speed in the turns.

I'd trade all the changes in 4.02 for desync'ed .50s with API ammo though. That would really change things.

Badsight.
09-30-2005, 01:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
I've noticed a common thread among the luftwaffe proponents in this entire thread and I don't apply this to all of them but many of them seem to be working overtime to deny obvious phenomena that disadvantages Allied A/C or benefits Axis A/C..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>whats particularily amazing in this patch is how some LW plane fans will not only keep quiet about how good their planes are now , but they will defend them . . . . . . . as if the Bf-109 was supposed to be this user-freindly all along

this amazes me!

Badsight.
09-30-2005, 01:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
As to overboosted aircraft, axis will just have to make do with their derated Eastern front versions so allied players can feel better when their stats improve on the "highly representative of WW2 combat" WC server ; </div></BLOCKQUOTE>while i too cant stand how people complain that their War Clouds stats are indicative of a bias in a FB patch , i thought for sure we dont have ETO spec LW planes in FB

we dont have ETO Bf-109s , & the F8 & F9 FW-190s are WTO power levels no ? , its just the weight of the FW-190s thats in question isnt it ?

MEGILE
09-30-2005, 01:43 PM
I think only the A4 boost is in contention Badsight... A6, A8, A9, D9, and all 109s running at boosts they should be running at.
Just let norris believe what he wants to believe.

StellarRat
09-30-2005, 01:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
whats particularily amazing in this patch is how some LW plane fans will not only keep quiet about how good their planes are now , but they will defend them . . . . . . . as if the Bf-109 was supposed to be this user-freindly all along this amazes me! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Exactly! The 109 was known to be a difficult airplane to fly requiring much more training than a Spitfire yet in 4.01 the 109 doesn't seem to even be affected by the law of aeronautics. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif My favorite is the 109 flip flop (super fast half split S and return to same heading) which no Allied AC can perform without spinning yet seems to have no effect on the 109's speed or stability.

NorrisMcWhirter
09-30-2005, 02:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
The P-51 was a very slippery A/C due to those laminar wings (I can't remember, but I think it was one of the only planes in WWII that had them??). Anyway, it SHOULD retain it's energy better than almost any other A/C. Currently I don't see much of that in this FM. As another poster stated it should lose less speed in the turns.

I'd trade all the changes in 4.02 for desync'ed .50s with API ammo though. That would really change things. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"*should* retain it's energy"

There you go - case in point. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta,
Norris

NorrisMcWhirter
09-30-2005, 02:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
I think only the A4 boost is in contention Badsight... A6, A8, A9, D9, and all 109s running at boosts they should be running at.
Just let norris believe what he wants to believe. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, the A4 is derated. And everything else is boosted to normal levels. Allied planes are now overboosted with little or no written evidence.

You believe what you wish to believe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Ta,
Norris

Ankanor
09-30-2005, 03:10 PM
Since I'm not a Me109 Pilot, I can't talk about it. The FW190DM needs correction, but I sincerely hope that it won't be overcorrected to a flying Zippo or a paper kite. As for the new P-47... Well, who said life should be easy or fair? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif We lived despite the fuel and gunsight bugs, the optimistic Spitfire E-retention, thru' the age of the pea-shooting MG151, we'll sure as H3LL live thru' that one! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

MEGILE
09-30-2005, 03:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:


Yes, the A4 is derated. And everything else is boosted to normal levels. Allied planes are now overboosted with little or no written evidence.

You believe what you wish to believe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Ta,
Norris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where did I mention Allied planes being over boosted to realistic levels? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Never the less you are wrong. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

StellarRat
09-30-2005, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:

"*should* retain it's energy"

There you go - case in point. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta,
Norris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Sheesh, I'm sure Oleg knows how to calculate the difference.

carguy_
09-30-2005, 04:19 PM
WTF?The 109 never had tricky stall characteristics!It was always known as a plane that gives LOTS of warning until the stall.I remember that problem being raised back in the days of IL2 when 109 was very tricky plane at stalls.In FB 1.0 109 was a joke,however the stall characteristics were closer to those in real life.
109,even the heavier wingloaded variants were always stall friendly even if they required expert hands but that just proves how powereful the 109 was at low speed combat.

As for the Spit,it is far easier than 109 with an exception of the Vb having a pretty weak engine.

As for WC I can`t really comment but in coops I observe a strong tendency for LW side to have better latewar 109 as in G10/G14 instead of say a G6Late.Not really historical although one must remember that some units in certain areas were indeed fitted with better,latewar 109s.

Cdn.401GATOR
09-30-2005, 07:01 PM
You're right Carguy... It had gentle stall characteristics..

However these days there is little to no buffeting on the ailerons as the stall is approached... It doesn't shudder as it once did, try Battle of Britain WOV and you'll see what I mean..

If you remember the old days of the 09 and this game, you'd remember those many instances in which in dives you'd plow into the earth after exceeding the dive speed of the A/C.. This is no more.. You can dive these days to your hearts content without experiencing such ill effects..

It just seems like the 9 gets easier and easier to fly with each patch...

Cdn.401GATOR
09-30-2005, 09:40 PM
This is a vivid example of the type of FM difficulties absent today from the 4.01 FM that once existed in some form in this sim in its early days... Namely the difficulties of controlling 109 once speed picks up.. This is totally absent as I see it from the FM of 4.01 today..

The excerpt below is from JG26 - Top Guns of the Luftwaffe by Donald Caldwell, pages 293-4:


"
On 27 November, a high-altitude mission in a K-4 almost cost Genth his life. The First and Third Gruppen were ordered to intercept heavy bombers. The Third Gruppe's Bf 109s flew with those of JG 3 and JG 27. At 32,000 feet, Genth's canopy iced over. He could see only straight ahead, through the thick, armored glass panel. George Genth remembers well the events of the next few minutes:

"I cleared a small aperture in my left canopy pane, a few centimeters in diameter, by exhaling on it. I could then see behind me to my left. The canopy was otherwise covered in a thick layer of ice. As usual, my tactical position was at the rear of the formation, in the place of honor! I observed two Thunderbolts banking toward our formation. In my condition I could not fight them. Being totally unable to defrost my canopy with my heater, I reported my condition over the radio, and dove in a split-S into the cloud layer only a few hundred meters below. I remembered just in time that I had not switched on the artificial horizon. I did it while diving, since it was clear to me that I would have no chance to align the gyro properly in the clouds.

What should I do? I had escaped the immediate danger of being shot down, but I would have no chance to regain control of my aircraft in a cloud thousands of feet thick. I attempted to reduce my speed-about 600km/h [360 mph] indicated--by pulling on the stick. To my discomfort, however, my speed kept increasing-the indicator now hit 750km/h! I realized that I was in an inverted bank and now pushed the stick forward. My speed dropped immediately. I attempted to slow down to about 500km/h, so that I could make visual contact with the ground. However, this was very difficult. Just as the indicator hit the desired mark, I left the cloud in a 60-degree inverted bank, about 500 meters [1,600 feet] above the ground. The canopy had now warmed up and defrosted, and I could see again in all directions. Control forces were so great that I could not center the stick, so I clenched both hands together and struck the side of the stick as hard as I could. The unbelievable happened--the brave old 109 flipped over into a normal steep descent attitude, from which I could then pull out with the help of the trim wheel! At my terminal speed the engine cowling panels had torn off, and oil lines had split open from overpressure, but I could see again, and had my bird under control. I flew to Rheine, about three or four minutes away, without touching the throttle, my speed decreasing slowly.

I landed my oil-smeared bird smoothly, and returned to Plantluenne by "Kuebelwagen," a kind of jeep. Probably my good friend Helmut Lohrberg had had similar problems with icing, and had not been as lucky as I. He has been missing since this flight. As I stood on the landing ground at Rheine after landing, I heard three aircraft crash with overstraining engines, all right around the Rheine! To this day, I have not been able to strike these ghastly noises from my memory. "

"

gkll
09-30-2005, 11:23 PM
Finally got around to testing the 109. My son and I just ran a series of 1v1 based on head on merges after a scramble for altitude,g2 against VIII clip, 25% fuel. Spit wins everytime, just like pre-patch. It could be that if the spit driver lets the fight get down to 240 the 109 might have something for the spit, but with superior e retention the spit driver can just keep his e up and be patient in lag.

The Lagg, there's something else. Poorer wingloading and powerloading to the spit, but outturns it except over maybe 320. Now there's the hidden hero of the set... lagg3. We'll try some more, I think the spit should still win, but much closer than the 109. Those slats help a lot, don't know if this is realistic or not. All slat equipped birds got a nice little stocking stuffer with 401.

GR142-Pipper
09-30-2005, 11:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Like I always said, if you open up enough threads and complain loudly enough about something around here, it will happen. Let's see if 4.02 proves that theory. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>That theory has already been proven with the near Yak-like turning abilities of the 109G/K series in 3.04 and especially in 4.01.

GR142-Pipper

GR142-Pipper
09-30-2005, 11:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
It just seems like the 9 gets easier and easier to fly with each patch... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Indeed. Not only easier, much more capable as well. The G-2's can turn with Yaks. So it's not only easier...it's more bogus with each patch.

As an aside, two other aircraft that need attention that few have mentioned are the Bf-110 and the IL-2. The 110s were hammered so badly that they were relegated to night activities. 110's are completely farcical in this game as its tailgunner is often a sniper. The same holds true for the IL-2. I was on a server the other night and watched an IL-2 engage 109s in dogfights...and win. That too is a completely phoney situation.

109/190 issues aside for a moment, the IL-2 and the 110 also amply demonstrate how historically incorrect some of these aircraft are portrayed.

GR142-Pipper

Pirschjaeger
10-01-2005, 12:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cdn.401GATOR:
It just seems like the 9 gets easier and easier to fly with each patch... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Indeed. Not only easier, much more capable as well. The G-2's can turn with Yaks. So it's not only easier...it's more bogus with each patch.

As an aside, two other aircraft that need attention that few have mentioned are the Bf-110 and the IL-2. The 110s were hammered so badly that they were relegated to night activities. 110's are completely farcical in this game as its tailgunner is often a sniper. The same holds true for the IL-2. I was on a server the other night and watched an IL-2 engage 109s in dogfights...and win. That too is a completely phoney situation.

109/190 issues aside for a moment, the IL-2 and the 110 also amply demonstrate how historically incorrect some of these aircraft are portrayed.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe the pilot of the 109 was historically incorrect?

I beat YP-80 with a P11. It's got nothing to do with modelling.

Fritz

JtD
10-01-2005, 01:57 AM
Try fighting with the IL-2 and Bf-110 yourself before you blame excellent piloting skills on overmodelled aircraft. Both planes are flying coffins if they are on their own, early IL-2's do stand a decent chance against early 109's if flown in pairs and with good team tectics. The 110 only has a chance as long as it is faster than it's oppositions. The 110's sustained turn is most likely undermodelled.

GR142-Pipper
10-01-2005, 03:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Try fighting with the IL-2 and Bf-110 yourself before you blame excellent piloting skills on overmodelled aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> It has nothing to do with the piloting skills of the 110/IL-2 drivers. In real life the 110's were decimated straight out of fighter squadrons with the survivors going into either night or ground attack units. The IL-2's were excellent ground attack aircraft. Neither was a competitive fighter. It's amazing what's done for game play's sake.

GR142-Pipper

carguy_
10-01-2005, 03:35 AM
There are German pilot accounts of IL2 flying cover for other IL2s.Also early Sturmoviks were proven to be good horizontal planes.I know I know those nazis are always lying. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

The tail of IL2 is supposed to be its weakest DM part yet is absorbes 20mm nicely in that part of airframe.

neural_dream
10-01-2005, 03:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
As an aside, two other aircraft that need attention that few have mentioned are the Bf-110 and the IL-2. The 110s were hammered so badly that they were relegated to night activities. 110's are completely farcical in this game as its tailgunner is often a sniper. The same holds true for the IL-2. I was on a server the other night and watched an IL-2 engage 109s in dogfights...and win. That too is a completely phoney situation.

109/190 issues aside for a moment, the IL-2 and the 110 also amply demonstrate how historically incorrect some of these aircraft are portrayed.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If you can't kill Il-2s and 110s without being hit by the tailgunner then you clearly use bad tactics or there is too much lag. And btw i have done that dogfight il2 vs 109 once, because i had absolutely no other option. Due to luck, immense concentration and a mistake by the 109 pilot, i won. I was very proud for that victory. Now please don't tell me that it happened because my Il2 was overmodelled.
And the 110s were not exactly decimated (they would take protection circle formation and would not be touched by the spitfires and hurris; at the same time they were useless of course because they would leave the 109s to fight alone).

JtD
10-01-2005, 03:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
...Neither was a competitive fighter... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They aren't in the this game (you'd know if you flew them) - so what exactly is done for the sake of gameplay?

HellToupee
10-01-2005, 04:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Tempest. 3 lone B25's vs 1 190 with 108's? I'd put my money on the 190 every time. Lets be honest about this. The Mustangs are the ones that where used, no P51H ever saw combat in the ETO. The D27 jug was also pretty common, only 130 M's where built and they where utterly un reliable. The Spitfire could be beefed up to 44 standards but again I say TEMPEST! That will be a great equalizer, if you can handle it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes my moneys on the tempest to,yes i am aware those generally were the only US ac types used but its still late war german planes vs much earlyer allied planes. But the tempest will equalize things greatly especially give 190 pilots a cause for alarm.

JG53Frankyboy
10-01-2005, 04:51 AM
did i get i right and some claiming the Bf110G2 overmodelled ??

hell, i'm flying that bird in VOW as often i can. we fight vs Hurricanes, Wildcats, Spitfires , Beaufighters - and im alwasy happy to survive, not to speak to get a kill http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

the only way to get a kill is to surprise the enemy - and we are palyaing in VOW in the moment only with default weapons - NO Mk108 overkill !

the enemy is
faster
rolls better
turns better
climbs better
dives better (110 brakes at ~700Km/h IAS)


but if you call it only "├╝ber" because of its rearguner, well...............

Ankanor
10-01-2005, 05:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Try fighting with the IL-2 and Bf-110 yourself before you blame excellent piloting skills on overmodelled aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> It has nothing to do with the piloting skills of the 110/IL-2 drivers. In real life the 110's were decimated straight out of fighter squadrons with the survivors going into either night or ground attack units. The IL-2's were excellent ground attack aircraft. Neither was a competitive fighter. It's amazing what's done for game play's sake.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You'd better read before talking next time. There are numerous cases when overconfident Me109 engaged IL-2s and were blown out of the air. There's a particular case when an excellent pilot flew IL-2 against a Yak ace in a mock fight. the result was a draw, but the Sturmovik engine had to be replaced. Is this possible online? Of Course! the average IL-2 wasn't a "competitive fighter". It could never be in the hands of newbish cadets with 15 hours of flight time.

Whining and demanding planes be neutered because your ego got bruised is laughable. I personally know people who devote half of their time to flying and the other half to shooting from the gunners position.

WWSensei
10-01-2005, 05:45 AM
ROFL! Now the 110 is overmodelled! That's a joke. I fly the 110 almost exclusively on Warclouds. I do ok, better than most that fly it and my kill/death ratio is barely 1:1.

There are only three ways I get kills.

1) Stupid enemy pilots who don't see me and I sneak up on them or worse they try a head on with me.
2) Stupid enemy pilots who park on my 6 and let me shoot them.
3) If inally catch a slow bomber.

After hours of flyng the 110 on WC I can attest to the fact that you don't need sniper AI tailgunners. 99% of the Spit/P-51 driver will fly directly on my 6 about 100 meters back and 10 meters up from my tail. Perfect killing zone. I've yet to have my AI gunner shoot anyone down.

Any P-51/47 or Spit driver who lets an Me110 tail gunner shoot him down is just a pathetic pilot using stupid tactics. Mediocre pilots using even a hair of intelligence simply do a couple of vertical maneuvers and kill me easily.

It's simple, I kill enemy fighters when the other guy gets stupid. I've found about 90% of the fliers out there will get stupid quite often. They just stay around because there is a refly button. About the only aircraft mine outclasses is a Stuka.

IL2s are not tough either. You can take one down in a P-40 just attack from angles &gt; 20 degrees and the gunner can't touch you or hit him for below. The tails are extremly weak and can be knocked off in one pass. 20mm will shred it too pieces.

If you honestly think Il2s and 110s are overmodelled and need to be nerfed try flying them for a period of time. If you can't kill them by now as underperforming as they are you should probably just hang up the sim and get a new hobby.

People expect historical results based on FMs when tactics has 99.999% more to do with the outcome of a fight than anything else. In my several years of flying online sims I've met less than 20 pilots who knew and used tactics consistently and effectively.

CUJO_1970
10-01-2005, 08:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSensei:
ROFL! Now the 110 is overmodelled! That's a joke. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



LOL, isn't that the truth!

Just when you thought the crybabies couldn't go any lower they continue to push the whine envelope even further http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

We could definitely use a good "110 is overmodelled" thread to round things out around here.

Von_Rat
10-01-2005, 09:50 AM
if someones getting consistantly outflown by a 110, they really should rethink their tactics.


yep we need a,,, 110 IS UBER NOOB PLANE PLEASE NERF,,,, thread.

HellToupee
10-01-2005, 10:01 AM
dont think ild ever accuse a bf110 as overmoddeled, hell it takes less dammage than a 109, lights on fire extremly easy and cant make small turns without shuddering and shaking. Tail gunner tho is the only strength of the plane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, gimme a defiant that thing with the way ppl fly online would make me an instant ace.

Ugly_Kid
10-01-2005, 10:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Like I always said, if you open up enough threads and complain loudly enough about something around here, it will happen. Let's see if 4.02 proves that theory. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>That theory has already been proven with the near Yak-like turning abilities of the 109G/K series in 3.04 and especially in 4.01.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must have missed the said tons of whines where people obstinently yearned for a better turning 109, now have I. Instead I have seen quite a lot of other kind of unqualified whines that makes these forums really not worth spending any time.

NorrisMcWhirter
10-02-2005, 06:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StellarRat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:

"*should* retain it's energy"

There you go - case in point. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta,
Norris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Sheesh, I'm sure Oleg knows how to calculate the difference. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes, he should. But how do you know what it should be like short of trying each aircraft, IRL, yourself..or having some hard evidence.

If you could post a verifiable test report then fair enough.

What I am saying is that it is quite difficult to pork an aircraft through giving it the wrong speed or climb etc because people can check it relatively simply.

However, making changes to largely subjective areas of the FM *can* be done for the sake of play balance and is harder to verify. How many times have I said the same thing now? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta,
Norris

NorrisMcWhirter
10-02-2005, 06:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ugly_Kid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Like I always said, if you open up enough threads and complain loudly enough about something around here, it will happen. Let's see if 4.02 proves that theory. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>That theory has already been proven with the near Yak-like turning abilities of the 109G/K series in 3.04 and especially in 4.01.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must have missed the said tons of whines where people obstinently yearned for a better turning 109, now have I. Instead I have seen quite a lot of other kind of unqualified whines that makes these forums really not worth spending any time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't recall many of them either. What I do see plenty of are complaints about the P-38/47/51 not being good enough, backed up with a few pilot anecdotes and not much else.

Ta,
Norris