PDA

View Full Version : plane K/D at WarClouds



Hristo_
06-21-2005, 01:39 PM
Quite interestingly, 4.01 has produced some new, even if somewhat unexpected stars http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

http://www.war-clouds.com/wf-stats/index.php?navigation=plane/all/index.html

No Red plane has K/D higher than 1. The new P-38Lame and MkIII are among the worst Red performers. Most successful red plane seems to be Spitfire Mk.IXe, sporting a K/D of 0.73.

On Blue side, the usual war winners are, as expected, the A-9 and D-9, but even better is the A-6.

LeadSpitter_
06-21-2005, 01:57 PM
i'd say let the stats run for at least a month i had at least 150-200 kills in the k4 and 100 alone in the dora but the wc stats got reset 3 times since 4.01

Lixma
06-21-2005, 01:58 PM
Well if people are going to take their brand new Mustang IIIs and P-38Ls and drive them around in little circles on the deck like they were Fokker D.1s (and then come charging into the forums screaming bias/FM- borkedness/conspiracy/end of the world).....well....f*ck 'em.

FatBoyHK
06-21-2005, 02:01 PM
are you showing us that it takes more skill to fly red?

Vipez-
06-21-2005, 02:03 PM
Or he is just saying it takes more patience to fly successfully P51, P38, than let's say Spitfires.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
06-21-2005, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Lixma:
Well if people are going to take their brand new Mustang IIIs and P-38Ls and drive them around in little circles on the deck like they were Fokker D.1s (and then come charging into the forums screaming bias/FM- borkedness/conspiracy/end of the world).....well....f*ck 'em.

I have to seen no such complaint requarding those statements. What plane you fly? Umm lemme guess...G2 or something http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

LeadSpitter_
06-21-2005, 02:19 PM
lixma thats all the doras 109k4s 190a are doing pretty much winning the 1000m turnfight then still having e to zoom away at will http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In fact i have not seen much fighting at all except under 2000m in wc greatergreen all the servers prett much.

Above 3000m you can not see dots on the deck anymore with olegs new disapearing dots at very close distances, so its very difficult to bnz.

Before most players would still be on the deck but many would fly 4000-7000m and be able to bnz dots on the ground. Its seems higher resolutions the visibility distance of dots is increases and so is the draw distance of ground items but the majority can not play higher resolutions then 1024x768.

I mean you can see tracer fire but there is no dot until very close range even over snow and water maps.

faustnik
06-21-2005, 02:28 PM
Those stats mean nothing. The Mustang III works great on Warclouds. You can B&Z the cr4p out of anything. I ran down a couple a couple Doras on the deck last time, it was fun.

The P-38L late is great too, you just have to find an good pilot for it.

As for Leadspitter's claim of "super turning Fw190As", that's pure 100% B.S. The plane is broken but, it has nothing to do with the FM. (Leadpitter sure is right about the low dots though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif )

Hristo_
06-21-2005, 03:28 PM
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 03:55 PM
It would be quite interesting to see veteran blue and red players to switch side.
And for instance, veteran blues to fly red for a little bit, and veteran reds to fly FW190 and Bf109s.

I may be wrong, but I presume that in beginning result would be almost equal (plane stats), and then again, the 'blue' side (veteran red players) will begin to slowly holding the situation in their hands, and boosting the specific plane stats.

Whole concept of online gaming lead me to conclude this. Other than Spitfire (which is great plane all around) Yak9U/T and LA7 red side simply do not have fighter planes that can display such great teamwork all around like FW190 and Bf109 combined.
Jug is somewhere near FW190, TBH it's armament is somewhat inferior to FW190 armament especially A8 & A9.
How many BnZ passes do you need to shot down 'ACE' level player online with P47D27 in comparation to FW190A9; if you imagine them in the same combat situation (enemy ace level pilot is awared of your presence and is attempting to evade your BnZ pass)?

Even if you hit with the Jug you wont most likely bring him down in first pass, unlike in FW190 where you can literally cut him in half with just few hits from considerable range. That is why is FW190 from my point of view more rewarding plane, both to new and old players.


---------
In the end, equation is simple; whoever display better teamwork online - wins. Plain and simple.
New players are severaly excluded from this concept since they tend to be very disorganized and after a few moments in combat they disregard whole teamwork concept.
While red side (especially Russians) have an outstanding dogfighters and duel (one vs. one) planes, in teamwork area FW190 and Bf109 combined have the edge.

---------
All of this is of course, my humble opinion on matter. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

faustnik
06-21-2005, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

OK, but, they say little about the relative strengths of the planeset. 4.01 has made the T&B approach more difficult. A lot of people are complaining about the torque/stall model in low speed turnfights. The Fw190 pilots, and to an extent the Bf109 guys, are more used to B&Z approach. This method has not been as heavily effected by the new universal FM. So, it's going to take more adjusting by the red side.

The Fw190 DM could be an influencing factor. .50 fire, or anything else, is not igniting the Fw190 fuel tanks. This would have an effect on the munber of Fw190 shot down.

crazyivan1970
06-21-2005, 04:15 PM
I wonder if odds were even 60 years ago (Thank god they weren`t)... who would be losing more planes. Not implying anything... just a tought http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hristo_
06-21-2005, 04:22 PM
Yes, my thoughts exactly, Ivan.

hobnail
06-21-2005, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
many would fly 4000-7000m and be able to bnz dots on the ground.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
The Fw190 DM could be an influencing factor. .50 fire, or anything else, is not igniting the Fw190 fuel tanks. This would have an effect on the munber of Fw190 shot down.

Well you are right no doubt about it.
In fact I have making some gun cam footages from game, and I have set up FMB mission.

I jumped in P51D and I have put FW190A8 in front of me at distance .10km. My intention was to set him on fire so footage can be attractive.
I have started to shoot and FW190 was just taking the punch without tank fire. Few seconds later it crashed without visible serious damage (I was most likely disabled some of his ctrls or PKed him).

OK. I tried that *many* times but I simply couldn't set him on fire. Then I have remembered taht my gun conv. is on 370m. I lower it to 100m.
No change, in spite of trying for several times.

I have tried with TA152 also, just once I have managed to set TA152 on fire after he tried evasive manoeuver - breaking to the left. He exposed the whole aircraft profile to me so I sprayed him from nose to tail.

Finally I give up trying to fire up the 190 from dead 6 with P51D and I used P38.
Hispanos cut half of his wing so he spiralled to earth. I figured that is attractive enough. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

StellarRat
06-21-2005, 05:04 PM
This argument is a waste of time. The stats will always favor the Germans until someone can force the battle to over 6000m where the "real" fighting took place. Allied planes were built for high altitude performance not for fighting at less than 3000m. Unfortunately, since we have no flyable full cockpit four engine bombers (B17s) and no scenarios that require high altitude bombing we can't make anyone fly at those altitudes.

WOLFMondo
06-21-2005, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Vipez-:
Or he is just saying it takes more patience to fly successfully P51, P38, than let's say Spitfires.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

or does that make spitfire pilots better than p38 or p51 pilots...


Originally posted by faustnik:

The Fw190 DM could be an influencing factor. .50 fire, or anything else, is not igniting the Fw190 fuel tanks. This would have an effect on the munber of Fw190 shot down.

the DM has its bad points too, if you get hit on the wing dipping like mad. makes any evasive manouver using the fw's roll almost impossible.

MEGILE
06-21-2005, 06:03 PM
Spitfires get worse K/D ratio because they are experten planes.. they take skill to survive in.

Having a high K/D ratio is easy on the blue side

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Olli72
06-21-2005, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

So Hristos the P-38L (K/D ratio 0.47)is a much better plane than Bf-109G-14 (K/D ratio 0.39), and apparantly the B25 is better than both of the above (0.61 K/D)?

Or is that the limit of when "stats say a lot"? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Or is it just a case of just G-14 jocks in particular are worse than P-38 and B-25 pilots?

BigKahuna_GS
06-21-2005, 06:58 PM
S!


Ivan--I wonder if odds were even 60 years ago (Thank god they weren`t)... who would be losing more planes. Not implying anything... just a tought


Hya Ivan,

This is a common misconception. USAAF fighter strength in England was below that of the luftwaffe for most of 1943-44. During this time while the Luftwaffe was at the peak of their strength on the Western Front they had their backs broken by the P47 and P38 FG's.

It wasn't until mid to late 1944 that USAAF fighter strength in the ETO passed the Luftwaffe.


As for Warclouds we have a bunch of very late model 1944/45 german aircraft going against; 1942 Spit 9, 1943 Mustangs, Early/mid 1944 Mustangs, P38 and P47. There are NO late 1944/1945 Red aircraft. If the Spit 14, Tempest and P47M were included in the plane set to balance out the ETO, I think the stats would be reading a little different. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


__

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by F19_Olli72:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

So Hristos the P-38L (K/D ratio 0.47)is a much better plane than Bf-109G-14 (K/D ratio 0.39), and apparantly the B25 is better than both of the above (0.61 K/D)?

Or is that the limit of when "stats say a lot"? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Or is it just a case of just G-14 jocks in particular are worse than P-38 and B-25 pilots? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Leadspitter wrote:
i'd say let the stats run for at least a month..

This is true.. I believe that we would be seeing much more correct results if the server collects stats over longer period of time.

Trouble is, of what good stats can be out of any particular context?

bolillo_loco
06-21-2005, 08:01 PM
let us not confuse war clouds with the real war, that being said, Hristo.........if you take every Red player in w/c and make them fly blue then make the blue guys fly red......you could put the entire blue/now flying red in P-38s and the red/now flying blue into A9s and D9s the stats would show the 38 is better than the A9 and D9s. I have played in war clouds and do so here and there. I only fly red and when I enter the "combat zone" I find only blue players at my altitude whether it be 5000 meters or 3000 meters. where is the red team? underneath the blue team being boomed and zoomed........why? because most people who fly red do so as individualists unlike the blue team that flys around in packs and uses effective wingman tactics.

W/C is a prime example of "its the pilot not the plane"

BBB_Hyperion
06-21-2005, 08:03 PM
I see no points in this stats at all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

They dont tell how the situation looked 5 vs 1 or 1 vs 1, disadvantage or advantage , landing or take off , bounce or not, using TS or not ,killsteal or not. They tell maybe the average choices of common planes and which planes are able to shoot down other planes fast.

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 08:17 PM
That is all true what you said bolilo.

But about red/blue side thingy -- there is a lot of factors that can be put into equation why, for instance Spitfire MK9 is performing worse than FW190A8/9..

First, planes like Spitfire have a good reputation as being forgiving to pilot errors and rookie friendly (that does not mean superpowerful, like some new guys think in their heads when they choose it to fly online).

Second, on blue side you will usually find a bunch of veteran guys who flys this sim for years. On red side, you will find many rookies (mostly due to my first observation above) as well as few veterans. And now, that is common picture of many online servers. In fact majority of them.
You have said yourself that when you enter in combat zone there is almost *always* more blue than red players.(that is because more red players obey

respawn-take off-fly as fast as you could to enemy base direction-(maybe get some lucky kill from time to time)-die .. repeat for hours ..

routine).

Now, just for a second imagine that same blue veterans all flying Spitfires in formation (of 4 and more) on let's say 5500m.
And then they dive on FW190s and Bf109s that are on 4000m alt.

On which side will you put your money?

Like you said it is almost never a machine, it is a pilot(s).

FritzGryphon
06-21-2005, 08:29 PM
I find it funny that almost all the planes are less than 1/1 K/D.

I think the terrain has the best kill ratio.

And yeah, all the inexperienced players will be on Spits, rushing off to their doom, and experten weighing themselves down with FW for a challenge. Nothing to do with the planes, all pilot.

I usually get 3/1 or more in P.11. Doesn't mean it's best plane... Well, maybe for crazy deck furball, it is best plane.

CUJO_1970
06-21-2005, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

This is a common misconception. USAAF fighter strength in England was below that of the luftwaffe for most of 1943-44. During this time while the Luftwaffe was at the peak of their strength on the Western Front they had their backs broken by the P47 and P38 FG's.

_


Yes, lets conveniently ignore the thousands of B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, B-26s and the contributions of their aircrew - which were the primary targets of the Luftwaffe as well as the major players in German fighter attrition anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


And let's also ignore the entire Royal Air Force with their Spitfires, Hurricanes, Mosquitos, Lancasters, Typhoons etc. etc.

Poor outnumbered USA fighters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
I think the terrain has the best kill ratio.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v442/Atomic_Marten/lmao_data.jpg


FritzGryphon wrote:
And yeah, all the inexperienced players wil be on Spits, and experten weighing themselves down with FW. Nothing to do with the planes, all pilot.

True .. if we really want to see some kind of 'relevant' info, put those veterans in Spits and let 'em fly for a while on server.

Even that kind of collected info will be partial and incomplete.


BBB_Hyperion wrote:
I see no points in this stats at all

Me neither.
The stats are No1 cause for 'cheating' attempts, disconnecting etc. And sometimes even causes lag. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Atomic_Marten
06-21-2005, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

This is a common misconception. USAAF fighter strength in England was below that of the luftwaffe for most of 1943-44. During this time while the Luftwaffe was at the peak of their strength on the Western Front they had their backs broken by the P47 and P38 FG's.

_


Yes, lets conveniently ignore the thousands of B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, B-26s and the contributions of their aircrew - which were the primary targets of the Luftwaffe as well as the major players in German fighter attrition anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


And let's also ignore the entire Royal Air Force with their Spitfires, Hurricanes, Mosquitos, Lancasters, Typhoons etc. etc.

Poor outnumbered USA fighters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
It would be interesting to see some numbers here.
And also fighter squadrons strength (number of operational machines that were available) of specifical area (theater) in question at certain time (43-44 period).

Also it would be interesting to see;
was the majority of allied missions where fighter escorts were provided encountered more enemy fighter interceptors than escort, or are, in most cases escorting fighters outnumbered LW attackers?

Simple -- who had more fighters involved in most 43-44 aerial combat between fighters in specified theater?

I think that kind of questions would require much more researching job.

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

BSS_CUDA
06-21-2005, 09:06 PM
for me the invisadots is the biggest factor if you get over 5k ft and you cant see anything on the deck. so that keeps most furballs at or below that level where red is at a disadvantage. also it has alot to do with the maps, a majority of the map red is on the offensive. and the key point is mission objective, NOT to fly defensivly. and we unlike the nuclear bullet blue planes cannot take out targets with the 50's, so blue sacrifices nothing when attacking ground targets. and when blue is on the offensive what do they shoot at??? parked B17's and trains, he!! you can fart on those and get kills. stats are for the individual to measure your improvement, they mean nothing for the plane as a whole.

faustnik
06-21-2005, 09:33 PM
and we unlike the nuclear bullet blue planes cannot take out targets with the 50's

Nuclear bullet blue planes? Don't you fly a plane with a Hispano in the nose Cuda? You shouldn't be too outgunned.

BSS_CUDA
06-21-2005, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">and we unlike the nuclear bullet blue planes cannot take out targets with the 50's

Nuclear bullet blue planes? Don't you fly a plane with a Hispano in the nose Cuda? You shouldn't be too outgunned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I fly a plane with a SINGLE hispano, not like the spits http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and I have yet to see a hispano make a mushroom cloud on the ground when it hits http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

faustnik
06-21-2005, 09:54 PM
Ha! Yeah, but, you get rockets. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Badsight.
06-22-2005, 12:21 AM
Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
And let's also ignore the entire Royal Air Force with their Spitfires, Hurricanes, Mosquitos, Lancasters, Typhoons etc. etc.

Poor outnumbered USA fighters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif lol

BSS_CUDA , you been shot by the fiftys cals in FB-PF lately ?

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 12:44 AM
Originally posted by F19_Olli72:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

So Hristos the P-38L (K/D ratio 0.47)is a much better plane than Bf-109G-14 (K/D ratio 0.39), and apparantly the B25 is better than both of the above (0.61 K/D)?

Or is that the limit of when "stats say a lot"? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Or is it just a case of just G-14 jocks in particular are worse than P-38 and B-25 pilots? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you think ?

I know what plane I'd rather be in.

Fact is that accumalated kills are already enough not to be influenced by individual pilots or engagements. While there are some experts on this or that side, most players do actually switch sides.

Most players on WarClouds fly as individualists, not using comms. Usually up to 1/3 of players in game are on comms. Sometimes comms are empty.

Both sides have their experts, as well as large pool of average Joes. Even experts fly both sides, sometimes under aliases, though. Not to mention average pilots, trying both sides.

You can find similar pilot quality on boh sides. You can find using/not using comms on both sides. You can see both sides having relative advantage at times. The only thing consistent though, is different planes.

"When Red gets plane XXX, thing will change", you say. XXX = P-38L in 3.xx. XXX = Tempest 4.xx. When is it going to end ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Monty_Thrud
06-22-2005, 01:10 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ivan--I wonder if odds were even 60 years ago (Thank god they weren`t)... who would be losing more planes. Not implying anything... just a tought


Hya Ivan,

This is a common misconception. USAAF fighter strength in England was below that of the luftwaffe for most of 1943-44. During this time while the Luftwaffe was at the peak of their strength on the Western Front they had their backs broken by the P47 and P38 FG's.

It wasn't until mid to late 1944 that USAAF fighter strength in the ETO passed the Luftwaffe.


As for Warclouds we have a bunch of very late model 1944/45 german aircraft going against; 1942 Spit 9, 1943 Mustangs, Early/mid 1944 Mustangs, P38 and P47. There are NO late 1944/1945 Red aircraft. If the Spit 14, Tempest and P47M were included in the plane set to balance out the ETO, I think the stats would be reading a little different. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


__ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And also the 25LBs boost Spitfire MkIXe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 01:35 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

As for Warclouds we have a bunch of very late model 1944/45 german aircraft going against; 1942 Spit 9, 1943 Mustangs, Early/mid 1944 Mustangs, P38 and P47. There are NO late 1944/1945 Red aircraft. If the Spit 14, Tempest and P47M were included in the plane set to balance out the ETO, I think the stats would be reading a little different. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


__

The highest K/D is sported by a 1943 plane, Fw 190A-6.

Blue side has Bf 109G-2 (1942) as well as Bf 109G-6 (1943).

Only the Ta-152 is a 1945 plane on Blue side.

P-63 seems to me a late 1944/45 aircraft, don't you think ?

1942 Spit IX ? What about 1944 Spit IX that are there ? In both clipped and standard version ?

P-38L Late ? So is it late or not ?

And how about the best Luftwaffe 1944/45 aircraft ? The one which is actually banned for being too dominant ? What do you think its stats would be if ever allowed into WarClouds ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LeadSpitter_
06-22-2005, 03:08 AM
I would actually love to see the me262 available in warclouds, if they can limit the number to 4 3 or 2 of them at one runway.

I certainly would not have a problem with the me262 being available in warclouds.

In fact i would like to see the dora 109k4 ta152 p38 late p63 with very limited numbers 4 each base.

75% of the luft in 44-45 was 109g6 and 190a8

AerialTarget
06-22-2005, 03:38 AM
However, the P-38 L "Late" was not a rare plane in real life. In fact, more Ls were made than any other model - well over three thousand. According to Oleg, over two thousand of those were the "late" ones.

Others states that all Ls were able to do one thousand seven hundred and twenty five horsepower, and that there was no "late" version. In that case, we have over three thousand. Even if not, we still have over two thousand.

There is no reason to put a limit on the only P-38 in the game that comes close to its real life specifications. Both the J and especially the L (the L should be faster, not slower!) are far too slow, in addition to the deficiencies shared by the "late" L.

F19_Olli72
06-22-2005, 04:19 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Olli72:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

So Hristos the P-38L (K/D ratio 0.47)is a much better plane than Bf-109G-14 (K/D ratio 0.39), and apparantly the B25 is better than both of the above (0.61 K/D)?

Or is that the limit of when "stats say a lot"? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Or is it just a case of just G-14 jocks in particular are worse than P-38 and B-25 pilots? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you think ?

I know what plane I'd rather be in.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me too, i.e the planes i like to fly; if i cared too much about stats, id never fly bombers or Il-2s ....or Hurricanes....or biplanes.


Originally posted by Hristo_:
Fact is that accumalated kills are already enough not to be influenced by individual pilots or engagements.


Originally posted by Hristo_:
You can find similar pilot quality on boh sides. You can find using/not using comms on both sides. You can see both sides having relative advantage at times. The only thing consistent though, is different planes.

So you are in fact saying that the stats show B-25s is a better plane than P-38L or 109 G-14? Or otherwise im not sure what you're trying to say.


Originally posted by Hristo_:
"When Red gets plane XXX, thing will change", you say. XXX = P-38L in 3.xx. XXX = Tempest 4.xx. When is it going to end ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Never said that or even implied such thing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, quite the contrary i wish they made it backwards...more early models is what FB/PF needs....not uberplanes. If i had the choise to only include either Tempest or Fokker DXXI in the game id take the Fokker every time (no offense Tempest fans http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ). And not only allied planes, id love early german birds as well, so many ignored for FB :/ Henschel 123, Dornier 17/217, Arado 196, Heinkel 115 the list goes on..

I merely made an observation that indeed stats does not say a whole lot actually.

And like others pointed out its too many factors that arent included in stats to measure plane vs plane. Vulching, disconnects, rookie vs veterans etc...

Because, wasnt your initial post about how 'best' the Fw's are? Again, im not disputing FW is a good plane, cos it is. Im just saying stats isnt that reliable in the context to show any 'uberness'. It may hint certain tendencies, but final 'proof'...its not.

BUG3222
06-22-2005, 04:52 AM
Who needs these **** uber late war planes that can kill with 1 ping and turn like a zero.

I fly the P38 J and yesterday i even shaked a 109 from my *** and killed it in the turning fight.

I fly on warclouds btw

Real man fly P38 J

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BUG3222
06-22-2005, 04:54 AM
Who needs these **** uber late war planes that can kill with 1 ping and turn like a zero.

I fly the P38 J and yesterday i even shaked a 109 from my *** and killed it in the turning fight.

I fly on warclouds btw

Real man fly P38 J and i wish for even more earlie models like the G those are really beautiful lightnings.


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 04:55 AM
Really, how can you interpret the numbers differently ?

Blue planes outmatch Red planes, that's a fact.

B-25 ? If it shot more planes than P-38, than it is obviously better air combat plane. However, since both have miserable K/D, it speaks more about P-38 as a fighter http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Regarding P-38 vs B-25, or any Red plane for that matter, I think the word "better" is missplaced.

Instead, I'd say B-25 is less bad than P-38.

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 04:57 AM
Originally posted by bug3222:
Who needs these **** uber late war planes that can kill with 1 ping and turn like a zero.

I fly the P38 J and yesterday i even shaked a 109 from my *** and killed it in the turning fight.

I fly on warclouds btw

Real man fly P38 J and i wish for even more earlie models like the G those are really beautiful lightnings.


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I fly on WarClouds too, and so far nobody has beaten me in my 1943 Fw 190A-6. How about that ?

But this thread is about simple numbers, where Red planes show inferiority.

MEGILE
06-22-2005, 05:28 AM
Hristo_ you n00b, but I agree with your sentiment.

I fly only FW-190A6 on Warclouds... seeing as the Spitfire guys have to fly a 1943 plane, so do I.
13/0 K/D ratio, and number 2 on the stats http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

A6 - Faster than spitfires, and 4 MG-151s.. killer plane. I can stil run-o-ninety when I have to, and out turn all USAAF planes.

JG54_Arnie
06-22-2005, 05:33 AM
And invincible as well, good job. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MEGILE
06-22-2005, 05:45 AM
Hristo, fly a Spitfire and watch that K/D ratio crumble faster than the berlin wall when Hasselhof was ontop singing

F19_Olli72
06-22-2005, 05:59 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Really, how can you interpret the numbers differently ?

Blue planes outmatch Red planes, that's a fact.

B-25 ? If it shot more planes than P-38, than it is obviously better air combat plane. However, since both have miserable K/D, it speaks more about P-38 as a fighter http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Regarding P-38 vs B-25, or any Red plane for that matter, I think the word "better" is missplaced.

Instead, I'd say B-25 is less bad than P-38.

So its official then? LW has the n00bplanes now? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

But inline with your reasoning, your also saying 109 G-14 is really crappier than both P-38 and B-25. Last thing we need is a bunch of luftwhiners who complain about the G-14, theres enough of them already http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BSS_CUDA
06-22-2005, 07:05 AM
looking at the page 1 stats all US fighters are below .5 K/D ratio. and almost all Luft planes are above .75 K/D ratio. and all spits are right at .6 K/D ratio, HRM maybe there is something to this Oleg hate's american stuff http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif there is no question that the DM on the luft planes particularly the 190's is too strong, very VERY seldom do you see a 190 lose a wing. and they NEVER burn, your lucky if they even get a fuel leak even when hitting them with the 20's. hell even the HE-111 is easier to shoot down than the 190 at least they burn. 190A's are easy targets. ALL OF THEM!!! they can be so easily out flown or caught its not even funny now since 4.01 but bringing them down is next to impossible.

MEGILE
06-22-2005, 07:15 AM
or maybe they are just trying to turn fight with more maneuvrable planes? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BSS_CUDA
06-22-2005, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by Megile:
or maybe they are just trying to turn fight with more maneuvrable planes? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
dont need to turn fight with them. you can run them down now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 07:29 AM
Funny how pilots with low K/D, flying planes with miserable K/D, are boasting here about their superiority.

Based on what, exactly ?

Wait, I see. They are superior all the way. However, whenever they fail, it is someone else's fault, usually Oleg's.

In online sims I've played (Warbirds, Aces High) P-38 was always a poor performer regarding K/D. Strangely enough, these games were not coded by Oleg. Hmmmm...

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 07:48 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I think Stats have caused more harm than good to the online community and the general gameplay.
Causes players reveal thier lowest sides.
If there are positive effects I haven't noticed them during all these years.

BSS_CUDA
06-22-2005, 08:05 AM
Originally posted by F19_Ob:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I think Stats have caused more harm than good to the online community and the general gameplay.
Causes players reveal thier lowest sides.
If there are positive effects I haven't noticed them during all these years.

agreed OB, as I stated before stats should be used only to judge one's progress against himself. the stats as a whole can and do lie, there is a TON of things that are not and cannot be takin into account when you look at them. I still havent figured out how some ppl can get 9 kills with their rudder? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

BUG3222
06-22-2005, 08:46 AM
FW pilots are the most timid around they only fight with lotsa friendly help around them.

i havent seen a fw outturning my p38 jet.

in AH i really have no trouble fighting uber waffe planes but in here the 109 especialy looks like zero.

WWSensei
06-22-2005, 10:57 AM
My K/D ratio on WC is 1.00.

7 Kills. 7 Deaths. 2 of those deaths were from friendly aircraft running into me (both last night in fact--was a bad night for it). The rest were an assortment of 6 Spits, and 1 P-38L. In no case could be argued I flew the superior aircraft.

I fly the Me-110G2. Overmodelled Me-110 or undermodelled Spit drivers?

...and no...no kills from the AI gunner...3 of those kills are from the rear gunner, but I did the shooting while they stupidly sat on my high 6 at 100 meters while I filled their engine with lead.

HayateAce
06-22-2005, 12:00 PM
Ahh,

LimpWristo still moaning about losing the big WW2.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

http://www.arc-duxford.co.uk/images/me109crash.jpg

JG27_Stacko
06-22-2005, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by F19_Ob:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I think Stats have caused more harm than good to the online community and the general gameplay.
Causes players reveal thier lowest sides.
If there are positive effects I haven't noticed them during all these years.

Agreed.... All stats have done is increase the amount of shoulder shooting, Kill-stealing and all-around *****ing on the server. look at the new Sportsmanship rules that have been introduced on GreaterGreen. Statisitics were vital in WW2, but not the sort of stats we have.

OB this is a very good comment.

JG27_Stacko
06-22-2005, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by WWSensei:
My K/D ratio on WC is 1.00.

7 Kills. 7 Deaths. 2 of those deaths were from friendly aircraft running into me (both last night in fact--was a bad night for it). The rest were an assortment of 6 Spits, and 1 P-38L. In no case could be argued I flew the superior aircraft.

I fly the Me-110G2. Overmodelled Me-110 or undermodelled Spit drivers?

...and no...no kills from the AI gunner...3 of those kills are from the rear gunner, but I did the shooting while they stupidly sat on my high 6 at 100 meters while I filled their engine with lead.
Oh yeah... Mantra time.

MothershipMothershipMothershipMothershipMothership Mothership

JG54_Arnie
06-22-2005, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by JG27_Stacko:
Agreed.... All stats have done is increase the amount of shoulder shooting, Kill-stealing and all-around *****ing on the server. look at the new Sportsmanship rules that have been introduced on GreaterGreen. Statisitics were vital in WW2, but not the sort of stats we have.

OB this is a very good comment.

Yep, I agree as well. I really noticed it in myself when flying. for example when I flew a lot on GreaterGreen, great server for sure, nothing against that. But I started to really care about my stats and although I flew safer, I also risked a lot more when I suspected someone was going after my kill. Or I only flew for those kills, and not the fun that is to be had when you fly to enjoy yourself.
Yes, its fun to see a number of what you destroyed. But no, it doesnt equal the fun you have when you dont have to care for such a number.

HellToupee
06-22-2005, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Megile:
Spitfires get worse K/D ratio because they are experten planes.. they take skill to survive in.

Having a high K/D ratio is easy on the blue side

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I agree http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, survving in a d9 is easy peazy.

BSS_CUDA
06-22-2005, 05:58 PM
usually you'll find the pilots with the higher K/D ratio are the ones that dont help a teammate, they are only concerned with thier stats so they get a kill and bugout, leaving others to fend for themselves. there are exceptions to this tho

Atomic_Marten
06-22-2005, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by JG54_Arnie:
I really noticed it in myself when flying. for example when I flew a lot on GreaterGreen, great server for sure, nothing against that. But I started to really care about my stats and although I flew safer, I also risked a lot more when I suspected someone was going after my kill. Or I only flew for those kills, and not the fun that is to be had when you fly to enjoy yourself.
Yes, its fun to see a number of what you destroyed. But no, it doesnt equal the fun you have when you dont have to care for such a number.

Well, now that is so true.

In fact, after a while flying on server with stats -- joy dissapear and what is left is only nervous thrill feeling.

About your result.
Constant checking stats page, who is in front of you, who has the most kills, who's better in gunnery than you, who is the best ground pounder etc.

That is NOT fun at all. From my point of view. It only encourages, otherwise I suppose normal guys, to show everyone what a big hotshot aces they are.

Guys like Hristo_ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hristo_
06-22-2005, 09:27 PM
From my point of view, it is very hard to survive in an arena full of suicide dweebs. You can takeoff-shoot-die all the time, but if you try to fly more realistically, it gets progressively harder.

Mindless furballing gets old rather quickly, but to fly with a goal of scoring and surviving is why I fly online at all.

I try to help my teammates whenever I can. Sometimes I break off my attack to help them out, many times I take impossible shots to scare the enemy off their six etc etc. But if I see a friendly with a deathwish, I certainly won't allow him to drag me down with him.

I don't mind "killstealing". In fact, it is a non issue for me, as the sooner an enemy is brought down, the better for the team. I've been called a killstealer few times, usually by those furballing whirling dervishes. My kills have been "stolen" from me too, at times when Mausers were impotent. But as I said, a non-issue for me.

P.S.
Another prime motivation for me is downing those cocky P-51 and P-38 types. They won the war, afterall http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Too bad HayateAce is an ace only in these forums, so far he has been too afraid to come up online.

exos-
06-22-2005, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Funny how pilots with low K/D, flying planes with miserable K/D, are boasting here about their superiority.

Based on what, exactly ?

Wait, I see. They are superior all the way. However, whenever they fail, it is someone else's fault, usually Oleg's.

In online sims I've played (Warbirds, Aces High) P-38 was always a poor performer regarding K/D. Strangely enough, these games were not coded by Oleg. Hmmmm...

OK, I'll bite.

What's really funny, is what stats can tell you if you look in the right way. For instance, check WHO they have shot down, and whether the shoot downs were actually capable of defending themselves, ie. have they ANY kills themselves?

Or do we hang around HL for hours, waiting, waiting, until the time is right to fly so we can "pad our stats" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

pourshot
06-23-2005, 01:53 AM
I think stats are great, for the guys who want to post about how uber they are http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Hristo_
06-23-2005, 02:14 AM
Exos, you're allowing your personal aversion to cloud your judgement. Still, it kinda flatters me, thank you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Old hands are harder to kill, no doubt. Just like real life, majority of kills are newbies. Is it my fault ?

Here and there you get someone more familiar with concept of air combat, but that is rare. Just ask Blackbird, Fatboy, Locutis or Guard if bad ole Hristo ever shot them down. Nobody except BlackBird put up a decent fight, to be honest. And that one was BlackBird and Schlumberger vs Hristo. Hristo won http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

However, waiting for the right time ? Aren't you a little paranoid here ? I have 1-2 hours a day to play, mostly evening GMT+1 time during weekdays. So, yes, I have to wait for hours of R/L to pad my score. Anyone willing to shoot me down can join at that time, I won't log off. Any takers ?

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 02:34 AM
S!

__________________________________________________ ________________________
Cujo--Yes, lets conveniently ignore the thousands of B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, B-26s and the contributions of their aircrew - which were the primary targets of the Luftwaffe as well as the major players in German fighter attrition anyway
And let's also ignore the entire Royal Air Force with their Spitfires, Hurricanes, Mosquitos, Lancasters, Typhoons etc. etc.
Poor outnumbered USA fighters
Regards,
FW190fan
__________________________________________________ ________________________



I thought we were talking about US Fighter Strength in the ETO vs Luft.

I am just curios, how many of those Spitfires, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Mosquitos were escorting 8th Air Force bombers on deep penatrations into Germany ? NONE

Did the Luftwaffe lose more fighters to the gunners on board bombers or the the US Fighter escort ?

The US Fighter escort shot down more enemy fighters by a large margin.

It is a historical myth that the only reason US Fighters did well against Luftwaffe fighters (109,190) is because the USAAF had more fighters and numerical superiority. For the years 1942-43' there was the build up of 8th AF strategic bomber forces in England. Fighter strength at this time consisted of mostly P40's, P39's & P38's. The P40's and P39's certainly were not going to escort bombers at 30,000ft.


Early 1943 B-17 penetrations into Germany where flown without fighter escorts. USAAF commanders thought the defensive armament on the B-17 was strong enough to protect themselves. How wrong they were. Bomber losses were a staggering 30% of the attacking force and strategic bombing operations ceased until enough fighter escorts were available.

During 1943-44' outnumbered P38's and P47s took on the Luftwaffe at the peak of their strength on the Western front. Both fighters had positive kill ratios with the P47 kill ratios better. This may be due that the P38 was the only fighter capable of flying deep into Germany. Once there the P38s were severely out numbered during 43-44'.

Click on this link-Official USAF historical archives of aircraft strength by type in England 1941-45. It wasn't until the middle of 1944 that US fighter strength had a numerical advantage over the Luftwaffe. By that time the Luftwaffe had been already reduced down and was no longer an effective fighting force.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/aafsd/aafsd_list_...rcraftequipment.html (http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/aafsd/aafsd_list_of_tables_aircraftequipment.html)

Look at tables 88 thru 94. ETO & PTO USAAF Aircraft Strength
Very Interesting

Heres is the odds early US Fighter Escorts faced on deep penatrations into Germany:

P47 Ace Robert Johnson on 1943-44':
The P-47 was faster; it just did not have the climb and range the
Mustang did. But it had speed, roll, dive and the necessary ruggedness that
allowed it to do such a great job in the Ninth Air Force. As far as aerial kills go, we met and beat the best the Luftwaffe had when we first got there. It was the P-47 groups that pushed them back, as I said before.


On being outnumbered:

Some additional citations as to the ratio of Luftwaffe fighters to AAF
escorts.

Robert Johnson:
Later he spotted fighters heading towards the heavies. At first he thought
that they were P-47's from the 56th. They turned out to be Focke Wulfs. I had only eight airplanes to protect 180 bombers."

"We were line abreast, all eight of us and we just opened fire and went right through some 60 or so 190s and 109s. As we turned to get on their tails, we saw another 60 or so above and another 60 or so to their left. Probably 175 - 180 German aircraft. Eight of us."
After the fight erupted into a free for all, Johnson comments:

"I didn't have to think about the situation, it was there. I thought only of survival, and hitting the enemy. If there are crosses, shoot at 'em."


An additional citation about the training given pilots reporting to P-38 Groups:

Max Woolley of the 364th FG says:

"I had about four or five hours of training in England before I went 'active'. A pilot learned combat by being in combat."

On March 15th, Woolley's squadron ran into what he estimates as 120 Germans.The rest of the Group was about 5 miles away when his squadron C.O.
led them into the Germans. Only 12 P-38s taking on ten times as many of the
Luftwaffe. This was Woolley's first combat mission. After surviving by out-turning several 109s who had worked onto his tail and shredding the
rudder of one 109, Woolley noted that the fight had been "a great lesson."


Yeah I would say being out numbered 10-1 deep inside enemy territory would be difficult to say the least.


http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/anderson4.jpg



This is an excerpt from P51 Ace Bud Anderson in the early- of 1944. Notice how the germans practiced "Local Superiority" by massing large amounts of fighters in one area to attack the bomber streams.

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/anderson/anderson.htm


Subject: Outnumbered P51 during Bomber Escort Duty


The Germans liked to roar through the bombers head-on, firing long bursts, and then roll and go down. They would circle around to get ahead of the bomber stream, groping for altitude, avoiding the escorts if possible, then reassemble and come through head-on again. When their fuel or ammunition was exhausted, they would land and refuel and take off again, flying mission after mission, for as long as there were bombers to shoot at. They seldom came after us. Normally, they would skirmish the escorts only out of necessity. We were an inconvenience, best avoided. It was the bombers they wanted, and the German pilots threw themselves at them smartly and bravely. It was our job to stop them.

It seemed we were always outnumbered. We had more fighters than they did, but what mattered was how many they could put up in one area. They would concentrate in huge numbers, by the hundreds at times. They would assemble way up ahead, pick a section of the bomber formation, and then come in head-on, their guns blazing, sometimes biting the bombers below us before we knew what was happening.

In the distance, a red and black smear marked the spot where a B-17 and its 10 men had been. Planes still bearing their bomb loads erupted and fell, trailing flame, streaking the sky, leaving gaps in the bomber formation that were quickly closed up.

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/anderson9.jpg
"Bud" Anderson on wing of his "Old Crow" - the signed photo from collection of Martin Welsh (thanks!).

Through our headsets we could hear the war, working its way back toward us, coming straight at us at hundreds of miles per hour. The adrenaline began gushing, and I scanned the sky frantically, trying to pick out the fly-speck against the horizon that might have been somebody coming to kill us, trying to see him before be saw me, looking, squinting, breathless . . .

Over the radio: "Here they come!"

They'd worked over the bombers up ahead and now it was our turn.

Things happen quickly. We get rid of our drop tanks, slam the power up, and make a sweeping left turn to engage. My flight of four Mustangs is on the outside of the turn, a wingman close behind to my left, my element leader and his wingman behind to my right, all in finger formation. Open your right hand, tuck the thumb under, put the fingers together, and check the fingernails. That's how we flew, and fought. Two shooters, and two men to cover their tails. The Luftwaffe flew that way, too. German ace Werner Molders is generally credited with inventing the tactic during the Spanish Civil War.

Being on the outside of the turn, we are vulnerable to attack from the rear. I look over my right shoulder and, sure enough, I see four dots above us, way back, no threat at the moment, but coming hard down the chute. I start to call out, but . . .

"Four bogeys, five o'clock high!" My element leader, Eddie Simpson, has already seen them. Bogeys are unknowns and bandits are hostile. Quickly, the dots close and take shape. They're hostile, all right. They're Messerschmitts.

We turn hard to the right, pulling up into a tight string formation, spoiling their angle, and we try to come around and go at them head on. The Me 109s change course, charge past, and continue on down, and we wheel and give chase. There are four of them, single-seat fighters, and they pull up, turn hard, and we begin turning with them. We are circling now, tighter and tighter, chasing each other's tails, and I'm sitting there wondering what the hell's happening. These guys want to hang around.

Curious. I'm wondering why they aren't after the bombers, why they're messing with us, whether they're simply creating some kind of a diversion or what. I would fly 116 combat missions, engage the enemy perhaps 40 times, shoot down 16 fighters, share in the destruction of a bomber, destroy another fighter on the ground, have a couple of aerial probables, and over that span it would be us bouncing them far more often than not. This was a switch.

We're flying tighter circles, gaining a little each turn, our throttles wide open, 30,000 feet up. The Mustang is a wonderful airplane, 37 feet wingtip to wingtip, just a little faster than the smaller German fighters, and also just a little more nimble. Suddenly the 109s, sensing things are not going well, roll out and run, turning east, flying level. Then one lifts up his nose and climbs away from the rest.

We roll out and go after them. They're flying full power, the black smoke pouring out their exhaust stacks. I'm looking at the one who is climbing, wondering what he is up to, and I'm thinking that if we stay with the other three, this guy will wind up above us. I send Simpson up after him. He and his wingman break off. My wingman, John Skara, and I chase the other three fighters, throttles all the way forward, and I can see that we're gaining.

I close to within 250 yards of the nearest Messerschmitt--dead astern, 6 o'clock, no maneuvering, no nothing--and squeeze the trigger on the control stick between my knees gently. Bambambambambam! The sound is loud in the cockpit in spite of the wind shriek and engine roar. And the vibration of the Mustang's four. 50-caliber machine guns, two in each wing, weighing 60-odd pounds apiece, is pronounced. In fact, you had to be careful in dogfights when you were turning hard, flying on the brink of a stall, because the buck of the guns was enough to peel off a few critical miles per hour and make the Mustang simply stop flying. That could prove downright embarrassing.

But I'm going like hell now, and I can see the bullets tearing at the Messerschmitt's wing root and fuselage. The armor-piercing ammunition we used was also incendiary, and hits were easily visible, making a bright flash and puff. Now the 109's trailing smoke thickens, and it's something more than exhaust smoke. He slows, and then suddenly rolls over. But the plane doesn't fall. It continues on, upside down, straight and level! What the hell . . . ?

The pilot can't be dead. It takes considerable effort to fly one of these fighter planes upside down. You have to push hard on the controls. Flying upside down isn't easy. It isn't something that happens all by itself, or that you do accidentally. So what in the world is be doing?

Well. It's an academic question, because I haven't the time to wait and find out. I pour another burst into him, pieces start flying off, I see flame, and the 109 plummets and falls into a spin, belching smoke. My sixth kill.

The other two Messerschmitt pilots have pulled away now, and they're nervous. Their airplanes are twitching, the fliers obviously straining to look over their shoulders and see what is happening. As we take up the chase again, two against two now, the trailing 109 peels away and dives for home, and the leader pulls up into a sharp climbing turn to the left. This one can fly, and he obviously has no thought of running. I'm thinking this one could be trouble.

We turn inside him, my wingman and I, still at long range, and he pulls around harder, passing in front of us right-to-left at an impossible angle. I want to swing in behind him, but I'm going too fast, and figure I would only go skidding on past. A Mustang at speed simply can't make a square corner. And in a dogfight you don't want to surrender your airspeed. I decide to overshoot him and climb.

He reverses his turn, trying to fall in behind us. My wingman is vulnerable now. I tell Skara, "Break off!" and be peels away. The German goes after him, and I go after the German, closing on his tail before he can close on my wingman. He sees me coming and dives away with me after him, then makes a climbing left turn. I go screaming by, pull up, and he's reversing his turn--man, be can fly!--and be comes crawling right up behind me, close enough that I can see him distinctly. He's bringing his nose up for a shot, and I haul back on the stick and climb even harder. I keep going up, because I'm out of alternatives.

This is what I see all these years later. If I were the sort to be troubled with nightmares, this is what would shock me awake. I am in this steep climb, pulling the stick into my navel, making it steeper, steeper . . . and I am looking back down, over my shoulder, at this classic gray Me 109 with black crosses that is pulling up, too, steeper, steeper, the pilot trying to get his nose up just a little bit more and bring me into his sights.

There is nothing distinctive about the aircraft, no fancy markings, nothing to identify it as the plane of an ace, as one of the "dreaded yellow-noses" like you see in the movies. Some of them did that, I know, but I never saw one. And in any event, all of their aces weren't flamboyant types who splashed paint on their airplanes to show who they were. I suppose I could go look it up in the archives. There's the chance I could find him in some gruppe's log book, having flown on this particular day, in this particular place, a few miles northwest of the French town of Strasbourg that sits on the Rhine. There are fellows who've done that, gone back and looked up their opponents. I never have. I never saw any point.

He was someone who was trying to kill me, is all.

So I'm looking back, almost straight down now, and I can see this 20-millimeter cannon sticking through the middle of the fighter's propeller hub. In the theater of my memory, it is enormous. An elephant gun. And that isn't far wrong. It is a gun designed to bring down a bomber, one that fires shells as long as your hand, shells that explode and tear big holes in metal. It is the single most frightening thing I have seen in my life, then and now.

But I'm too busy to be frightened. Later on, you might sit back and perspire about it, maybe 40-50 years later, say, sitting on your porch 7,000 miles away, but while it is happening you are just too **** busy. And I am extremely busy up here, hanging by my propeller, going almost straight up, full emergency power, which a Mustang could do for only so long before losing speed, shuddering, stalling, and falling back down; and I am thinking that if the Mustang stalls before the Messerschmitt stalls, I have had it.

I look back, and I can see that he's shuddering, on the verge of a stall. He hasn't been able to get his nose up enough, hasn't been able to bring that big gun to bear. Almost, but not quite. I'm a fallen-down-dead man almost, but not quite. His nose begins dropping just as my airplane, too, begins shuddering. He stalls a second or two before I stall, drops away before I do.

Good old Mustang.

He is falling away now, and I flop the nose over and go after him hard. We are very high by this time, six miles and then some, and falling very, very fast. The Messerschmitt had a head start, plummeting out of my range, but I'm closing up quickly. Then he flattens out and comes around hard to the left and starts climbing again, as if he wants to come at me head on. Suddenly we're right back where we started.

A lot of this is just instinct now. Things are happening too fast to think everything out. You steer with your right hand and feet. The right hand also triggers the guns. With your left, you work the throttle, and keep the airplane in trim, which is easier to do than describe.

Any airplane with a single propeller produces torque. The more horsepower you have, the more the prop will pull you off to one side. The Mustangs I flew used a 12-cylinder Packard Merlin engine that displaced 1,649 cubic inches. That is 10 times the size of the engine that powers an Indy car. It developed power enough that you never applied full power sitting still on the ground because it would pull the plane's tail up off the runway and the propeller would chew up the concrete. With so much power, you were continually making minor adjustments on the controls to keep the Mustang and its wing-mounted guns pointed straight.

There were three little palm-sized wheels you had to keep fiddling with. They trimmed you up for hands-off level flight. One was for the little trim tab on the tail's rudder, the vertical slab which moves the plane left or right. Another adjusted the tab on the tail's horizontal elevators that raise or lower the nose and help reduce the force you had to apply for hard turning. The third was for aileron trim, to keep your wings level, although you didn't have to fuss much with that one. Your left hand was down there a lot if you were changing speeds, as in combat . . . while at the same time you were making minor adjustments with your feet on the rudder pedals and your hand on the stick. At first it was awkward. But, with experience, it was something you did without thinking, like driving a car and twirling the radio dial.

It's a little unnerving to think about how many things you have to deal with all at once to fly combat.

So the Messerschmitt is coming around again, climbing hard to his left, and I've had about enough of this. My angle is a little bit better this time. So I roll the dice. Instead of cobbing it like before and sailing on by him, I decide to turn hard left inside him, knowing that if I lose speed and don't make it I probably won't get home. I pull back on the throttle slightly, put down 10 degrees of flaps, and haul back on the stick just as hard as I can. And the nose begins coming up and around, slowly, slowly. . .

Hot ****! I'm going to make it! I'm inside him, pulling my sights up to him. And the German pilot can see this. This time, it's the Messerschmitt that breaks away and goes zooming straight up, engine at maximum power, without much alternative. I come in with full power and follow him up, and the gap narrows swiftly. He is hanging by his prop, not quite vertically, and I am right there behind him, and it is terribly clear, having tested the theory less than a minute ago, that he is going to stall and fall away before I do.

I have him. He must know that I have him.

I bring my nose up, he comes into my sights, and from less than 300 yards I trigger a long, merciless burst from my Brownings. Every fifth bullet or so is a tracer, leaving a thin trail of smoke, marking the path of the bullet stream. The tracers race upward and find him. The bullets chew at the wing root, the cockpit, the engine, making bright little flashes. I hose the Messerschmitt down the way you'd hose down a campfire, methodically, from one end to the other, not wanting to make a mistake here. The 109 shakes like a retriever coming out of the water, throwing off pieces. He slows, almost stops, as if parked in the sky, his propeller just windmilling, and he begins smoking heavily.

My momentum carries me to him. I throttle back to ease my plane alongside, just off his right wing. Have I killed him? I do not particularly want to fight this man again. I am coming up even with the cockpit, and although I figure the less I know about him the better, I find myself looking in spite of myself. There is smoke in the cockpit. I can see that, nothing more. Another few feet. . . .

And then he falls away suddenly, left wing down, right wing rising up, obscuring my view. I am looking at the 109's sky blue belly, the wheel wells, twin radiators, grease marks, streaks from the guns, the black crosses. I am close enough to make out the rivets. The Messerschmitt is right there and then it is gone, just like that, rolling away and dropping its nose and falling (flying?) almost straight down, leaking coolant and trailing flame and smoke so black and thick that it has to be oil smoke. It simply plunges, heading straight for the deck. No spin, not even a wobble, no parachute, and now I am wondering. His ship seems a death ship--but is it?

Undecided, I peel off and begin chasing him down. Did I squander a chance here? Have I let him escape? He is diving hard enough to be shedding his wings, harder than anyone designed those airplanes to dive, 500 miles an hour and more, and if 109s will stall sooner than Mustangs going straight up, now I am worrying that maybe their wings stay on longer. At 25,000 feet I begin to grow nervous. I pull back on the throttle, ease out of the dive, and watch him go down. I have no more stomach for this kind of thing, not right now, not with this guy. Enough. Let him go and to hell with him.

Straight down be plunges, from as high as 35,000 feet, through this beautiful, crystal clear May morning toward the green-on-green checkerboard fields, leaving a wake of black smoke. From four miles straight up I watch as the Messerschmitt and the shadow it makes on the ground rush toward one another . . .

. . . and then, finally, silently, merge.

Eddie Simpson joins up with me. Both wingmen, too. Simpson, my old wingman and friend, had gotten the one who'd climbed out. We'd bagged three of the four. We were very excited. It had been a good day.

I had lived and my opponent had died. But it was a near thing. It could have been the other way around just as easily, and what probably made the difference was the airplane I flew. Made in America. I would live to see the day when people would try to tell me the United States can't make cars like some other folks do. What a laugh. ..."

Note: The above article is excerpted from the book To Fly and Fight: Memoirs of a Triple Ace by Col C. E. "Bud" Anderson with Joseph P. Hamelin.

For more details about "Bud" Anderson and his book, check here: http://www.cebudanderson.com/



______

exos-
06-23-2005, 02:45 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Exos, you're allowing your personal aversion to cloud your judgement. Still, it kinda flatters me, thank you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Old hands are harder to kill, no doubt. Just like real life, majority of kills are newbies. Is it my fault ?

Here and there you get someone more familiar with concept of air combat, but that is rare. Just ask Blackbird, Fatboy, Locutis or Guard if bad ole Hristo ever shot them down. Nobody except BlackBird put up a decent fight, to be honest. And that one was BlackBird and Schlumberger vs Hristo. Hristo won http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

However, waiting for the right time ? Aren't you a little paranoid here ? I have 1-2 hours a day to play, mostly evening GMT+1 time during weekdays. So, yes, I have to wait for hours of R/L to pad my score. Anyone willing to shoot me down can join at that time, I won't log off. Any takers ?

Ahhhh Hristo,

You assumed I was talking specifically about your stats? Me thinks you're paranoid. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

I merely posed a different perspective to seemingly good K/D ratios. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hristo_
06-23-2005, 02:52 AM
<relieved>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Fehler
06-23-2005, 03:08 AM
Well, I will tell you why Warclouds stats are not a tell-all sign of plane effectiveness...

First of all, the server is mission based. That means every map, one team guards while the other attacks... ground targets!

Getting wacked by AAA counts as a death. So, a person could have a low K/D ratio in any plane and have never been shot down at all.

Secondly, at different times of the day, differnt styles prevail on the server. In the afternoons, I rarely see a plane above 3km! Most of the time I am forced to fly red because blue outnumbers red by a large margin when I fly in the afternoons (USA time). In the evenings it is fairly matched, and late at night red outnumbers blue by a large margin.

Also, there are dedicated squads that play at certain times, and when those squads are online, their attacks are much more coordinated.

So, there is really no way to figure what are the hot planes on the server because there are too many variables.

The fact is, he who gets the bounce wins... most of the time. If two guys working together catch one guy alone, the lone wolf should (And most of the time will) die.

Also, some people, like myself get on the server to compete in an historical fashion. Just yesterday, a guy (Remaining nameless) started badmouthing me and my wingmate because we drug him away from the main action and killed him 2-1. Still, he put up a hell of a fight, but if you look at the numbers only for that engagement, it would look like he was in an inferior plane, after all, he got killed.

In other words... so much for numbers. They are meaningless. Winning maps is what it is all about on Warclouds, and the only thing that statistic shows is who has the better team tactics.

I must also say this, as I fly both red and blue on WC. The afternoon reds never have their **** together. Too many lone wolfs, to compete with the European (Blue) squads that come there and dominate. In the evenings (US time) it is more balanced, and most maps last their duration, which shows the dedication of teams to defend their targets.

Personally, I think Warclouds maps and missions are designed brilliantly! There is fun for everyone, whether you like to CAP, attack, bomb, or suppress the enemy's airbases. It is a server that resembles COOP play as much as possible without being a single flight game.

But it should never be looked at as a template to decide what planes are more effective or dominate over others.

anarchy52
06-23-2005, 05:20 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
Just yesterday, a guy (Remaining nameless) started badmouthing me and my wingmate because we drug him away from the main action and killed him 2-1. Still, he put up a hell of a fight, but if you look at the numbers only for that engagement, it would look like he was in an inferior plane, after all, he got killed.

Ohhh the sommersaulting P-38...that was a WTF?!? moment to remember. I was no.2 (15/JG52_Riddler) in that 2 on 1 fight.
I've seen Su-37 with thrust-vectoring, fly-by wire and 13 tons of thrust per engine pull off a similar manuever (although in horizontal flight) called 'Kulbit'.

As for K/D:
I agree that K/D does not tell the story of either the pilot or the plane. I'm writing this as currently 2nd pilot by K/D. It means nothing.

The very concept of DF server prevents it to be a realistic source of stats on plane's (and pilot's) relative performance. If You wan't to see things in a more realistic light - play online wars where people stick to the mission objectives, and which are played as coops so no refly and much more tactical and organized flying from both sides. There were a few pilots in Bellum, CzechWar with exceptionally impressive K/D (we're talking about 60-100:1 kill ratio, although a certain percentage were AIs), but those players were almost useless in regards to the mission objectives, as they ignored them and went for the kills.

DF server is, from the point of view of virtual war fanatic, chaotic and random furball with ocassional trace of coordination and tactics.

WOLFMondo
06-23-2005, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

I am just curios, how many of those Spitfires, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Mosquitos were escorting 8th Air Force bombers on deep penatrations into Germany ? NONE


Just a quick historical pointer for you. The RAF usually did the first and last leg of escorts for the 8th Airforce. They also performed full escorts over France when 8th AF P47's were to few or too unreliable to use in 1943 as a complete escort force.

When the US fighters were coming back in dribs and drabs low on fuel and ammo and bomber formations were broken up and the flak over France was hitting the stragglers its was RAF Spitfires who were tasked with bring those bombers home and protecting them from the hundreds of Luftwaffe fighters based in France and the low countries. This is massivly overlooked by people, usually trumpet blowing Americans who utterly ignore the RAF as anything but a token force.

Some of you US guys seem to think the only airwar was over Germany and the only fighting happened over Germany and it only happened when the US where there. The RAF had been flying over occupied Europe day and night, high and low for 4 years before the USAAF began to make a real impact in 1944.

jessi1
06-23-2005, 05:53 AM
Ahhh hayateace the quick mission builder ace of aces, never seen him online and you never will, he (or she) flys on the ace server called qmb.

Atomic_Marten
06-23-2005, 08:20 AM
609IAP_Kahuna wrote:
Note: The above article is excerpted from the book To Fly and Fight: Memoirs of a Triple Ace by Col C. E. "Bud" Anderson with Joseph P. Hamelin.

Thanks.. I always like to read good pilot stories.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BTW in one point of the story pilot points out that they had every 5th bullet in M2s tracer bullet -- one that is trailing smoke.(he also said 4 M2s, so I suppose that he is flying Mustang C equipped with MG53-2 guns)

Well, it is really bad that we do not have that in game.

Slater_51st
06-23-2005, 09:28 AM
Hi,

I personally feel stats are a cool addition to the sim. However, they're just an addition, you shouldn't fly the sim for the stats. I mean, your team is what matters, and destroying enemies/accomplishing the mission is the important thing. It doesn't matter all that much which team member does it. I've "lost" a bunch of kills the last few days, but it's no biggie, I knew that I did the work, had the skills, and that's enough satisfaction for me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I don't like it when the enemy is obviously going down and someone cuts in, but it's still not important enough to get bent out of shape about.

As for the Red/Blue K/D ratios, the other night on W/C, the Red team was complaining about not having even teams. They managed, however, to somehow manage to completely avoid me and quite a few other blue guys and destroy our ground stuff and win the mission. After all, that's the goal of the War Cloud games isn't it?

Just curious, does anyone else get really really into it when they fly on WC? I get really excited, hehe.

S! Slater

JG7_Rall
06-23-2005, 10:08 AM
I think the terrain has the best kill ratio.

LOL!

I used to really care about my stats when flying on WC. I took about a 3 month break from IL2 and flew on WC yesterday, and I did alright...even tho I only shot down 1 plane and somehow got credit for another, and was shot down myself and had to ditch once because of fuel (or lack thereof), I still had a great time. It was probably because I didn't give a **** about my stats. I think the game is much more enjoyable when you just fly how you want to fly and have fun. It's great when you do get a kill and getting killed still isn't the best that that'll ever happen to you, but if you fly smart and avoid the furballs, I think you'll find that each kill has much more meaning and getting back to base is a much greater relief than it once was.

I was actually pretty embarrassed last night. I kept getting virus alerts while flying (so the game was kinda choppy), and on the tarmac with EVERYONE watching I backflipped twice in my dora. No one said anything, but I bet they were all thinking "what a noob". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I still laughed at myself though...whereas before I would be quite upset.

JG7_Rall
06-23-2005, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
I would actually love to see the me262 available in warclouds, if they can limit the number to 4 3 or 2 of them at one runway.

I certainly would not have a problem with the me262 being available in warclouds.

In fact i would like to see the dora 109k4 ta152 p38 late p63 with very limited numbers 4 each base.

75% of the luft in 44-45 was 109g6 and 190a8

I think this is one time where I agree with you. I'd love to see a limited number of the planes you mentioned available, while the majority of the game has to fly planes that where most oftenly encountered in the skies by both sides. It'd be pretty neat for a red flyer to assume that this 109 they're fighting is just another G6, only to find out it's a G10 or K4 and get his a$$ kicked http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

AerialTarget
06-23-2005, 11:41 AM
Ah, yes... Hristo never misses an opportunity to gloat over the fact that his beloved Focke Wulf is so much better in the game than it really was, and that none of the American airplanes meet their real specifications. I do, however, fail to see his point; he's happy that the game is unrealistic?

Hey, Hristo! There's a song (http://eri.ca/refer/diefahne.MP3) I think you'd like.

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 11:48 AM
S!



Wolfmondo-When the US fighters were coming back in dribs and drabs low on fuel and ammo and bomber formations were broken up and the flak over France was hitting the stragglers its was RAF Spitfires who were tasked with bring those bombers home and protecting them from the hundreds of Luftwaffe fighters based in France and the low countries. This is massivly overlooked by people, usually trumpet blowing Americans who utterly ignore the RAF as anything but a token force.

Some of you US guys seem to think the only airwar was over Germany and the only fighting happened over Germany and it only happened when the US where there. The RAF had been flying over occupied Europe day and night, high and low for 4 years before the USAAF began to make a real impact in 1944.


Rgr that Wolf. The question was about US Fighter Strength in England and I was also refering to deep raids into Germany. I think we all realize that in order to get to Germany you have to fly over France unless your flying from Italy. I'm sure many 8thAF bombers were glad to see Spits on their way home over France. Also remember that the Spit had short legs so it's combat raidius was limited in France.



__

jessi1
06-23-2005, 11:57 AM
I dont worry much about the stats and it shows, i worry more about my flying and my squad mates as well as those that fly blue wisely and not get in deep sh1t doing something stupid, I enjoy the communication of freinds on teamspeak and helping others down the enemy. I think worrying about stats to much can ruin the fun of the game but if you fly with caution and smarts you will receive good stats anyways. My 2 cents see ya

F19_Olli72
06-23-2005, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
Ah, yes... Hristo never misses an opportunity to gloat over the fact that his beloved Focke Wulf is so much better in the game than it really was, and that none of the American airplanes meet their real specifications. I do, however, fail to see his point; he's happy that the game is unrealistic?

Hey, Hristo! There's a song (http://eri.ca/refer/diefahne.MP3) I think you'd like.

Agreed. Reading Gibbages bugreport in ORR i find it hard to see why hes so happy about his stats anyway. If anything he should be embarrassed flying the FW190s.

Happy now? (http://www.gibbageart.com/files/test/fwwing01.jpg)

AerialTarget
06-23-2005, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Here and there you get someone more familiar with concept of air combat, but that is rare. Just ask Blackbird, Fatboy, Locutis or Guard if bad ole Hristo ever shot them down. Nobody except BlackBird put up a decent fight, to be honest. And that one was BlackBird and Schlumberger vs Hristo. Hristo won

Hmm, I think I put up a decent fight! Just wait until I try again armed with TrackIR and the knowledge that the airbrake no longer sends me into a spin with prolonged usage.

Yes, I have a pretty bad kill ratio. Why is that? It's because I don't have time to waste "flying" around at high altitude where you are unrealistically unable to see things below you. This is especially true because, unlike real life flying, simulated flight without combat is simply not exciting.

Therefore, if I see an enemy, I attack, regardless of the circumstances. Would I do so in real life? No, I wouldn't. However, I enjoy aerial combat, not patrolling empty skies. Since I do not actually die when I am shot down, I see no reason to waste my time doing something that is boring in the game for the sole reason that it is supposed to simulate the same activity in real life, which, unlike the activity in the game, is not boring.

faustnik
06-23-2005, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
Ah, yes... Hristo never misses an opportunity to gloat over the fact that his beloved Focke Wulf is so much better in the game than it really was, and that none of the American airplanes meet their real specifications.

Wow, I didn't think I'd hear that total cr4p coming from you AerialTarget. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif I know you are P-38 fan #1 and that was kind of fun, but, your post above is total cr4p.

AerialTarget
06-23-2005, 12:15 PM
I'm sorry to hear that you think so! It matters little, because I have done my research and most people haven't. Kahuna, Gibbage, Bollilo Loco, myself, and one or two others are just about the only ones here who know anything about the real P-38 Lightning.

Or are you taking offense to my impication that the Focke Wulf is overmodelled? Well, all you have to do is look at the picture referred to a few posts ago and you will see what I am talking about!

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 12:29 PM
S!


__________________________________________________ ________________________
Atomic_Marten Posted Thu June 23 2005 07:20
quote:Thanks.. I always like to read good pilot stories.
BTW in one point of the story pilot points out that they had every 5th bullet in M2s tracer bullet -- one that is trailing smoke.(he also said 4 M2s, so I suppose that he is flying Mustang C equipped with MG53-2 guns)
Well, it is really bad that we do not have that in game.
__________________________________________________ ________________________



It is a great book highly recommend it. I had the pleasure of eating dinner with Bud Anderson and Bob Goebel at a WW2 Fighter Pilot Symposium.
We talked about tactics, plane performance, gunsights and the effectiveness of the M2 Browning .50cal vs enemy A/C.

It was great time, nothing like listening to the men that were there doing the flying and fighting first hand.

Anderson's P51C had 4 M2.50cal Brownings.

http://www.cebudanderson.com/images/verticalfight.jpg
"Vertical Duel at Angles 33"

May 27, 1944, Capt. C. E. "Bud" Anderson's flight was attacked by Me 109s while protecting B-17s en route to Ludwigshaven, Germany. After breaking up their attack, Anderson ends up in a dramatic one on one dogfight at high altitude. The Me 109 makes a hard left climbing turn. Anderson cannot follow and counters by overshooting, climbing steeply trading airspeed for altitude. The Messerschmitt reverses his turn and tries to follow, but can't bring his 20mm cannon to bear on the steeply climbing P-51. The Me 109 shudders, stalls and falls away. Anderson reverses and follows. The German dives away, but seeing the Mustang now on his tail he again makes a hard left climbing turn. This time Anderson attempts to stay inside the turn of his opponent. The German reverses his turn and pulls up steeply in a bid to out climb the Mustang. Anderson follows, closes and fires the four .50 caliber machine guns getting good hits at 300 yards. The Messerschmitt bursts into smoke and flames. As it hangs on its propeller, Old Crow pulls along side for a closer look. The stricken Me 109 slowly turns and falls at high speed straight down from 33,000 feet, making a tremendous explosion as it impacts the ground. This marked Capt. Anderson's 7th victory.

___

Ankanor
06-23-2005, 12:58 PM
A really wonderful story. from my pure simming point of view the Me109 pilot was at energy disadvantage and tried to stall his opponent, which, as it occured, cost him his life. Also the Mustangs worked as a team and they had slightly better performance. and last but not least, the German Schwarm made a few mistakes.

About the FW and it's modelling, the Brownings are the problem, not the aircraft. at 100m they are deadly. it should be fixed to 300m, with gradual decrease in hitting power, IMHO. Also, I am sick of repeating this: The Butcherbird is one of the most(if not THE most) armored fighters we have ingame. check this thread (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9331077233) I wonder how much armor the P-47 sports?

@ Aerial target, what's up, you couldn't find Horst Wessel?

faustnik
06-23-2005, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:

Or are you taking offense to my impication that the Focke Wulf is overmodelled? Well, all you have to do is look at the picture referred to a few posts ago and you will see what I am talking about!

Yes. There is a known bug with the DM. What is overmodeled in the FM? Or are you just whining?

Do you take offense to unfounded BS claims of P-38 overmodeling?

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 01:11 PM
S!
__________________________________________________ ________________________
Ankanor Posted Thu June 23 2005 11:58
A really wonderful story. from my pure simming point of view the Me109 pilot was at energy disadvantage and tried to stall his opponent, which, as it occured, cost him his life. Also the Mustangs worked as a team and they had slightly better performance. and last but not least, the German Schwarm made a few mistakes.
__________________________________________________ ________________________



The 109 Schwarm started with the energy advantage. They were above and behind the P51 flight. Also notice that all 8 aircraft (4 109-4 P51)go into a high speed full throttle turning duel at 30,000ft with the P51 gaining the advantage.


Anderson:

"Being on the outside of the turn, we are vulnerable to attack from the rear. I look over my right shoulder and, sure enough, I see four dots above us, way back, no threat at the moment, but coming hard down the chute. I start to call out, but . . .

"Four bogeys, five o'clock high!" My element leader, Eddie Simpson, has already seen them. Bogeys are unknowns and bandits are hostile. Quickly, the dots close and take shape. They're hostile, all right. They're Messerschmitts.

We turn hard to the right, pulling up into a tight string formation, spoiling their angle, and we try to come around and go at them head on. The Me 109s change course, charge past, and continue on down, and we wheel and give chase. There are four of them, single-seat fighters, and they pull up, turn hard, and we begin turning with them. We are circling now, tighter and tighter, chasing each other's tails, and I'm sitting there wondering what the hell's happening. These guys want to hang around.

We're flying tighter circles, gaining a little each turn, our throttles wide open, 30,000 feet up. The Mustang is a wonderful airplane, 37 feet wingtip to wingtip, just a little faster than the smaller German fighters, and also just a little more nimble. Suddenly the 109s, sensing things are not going well, roll out and run, turning east, flying level. Then one lifts up his nose and climbs away from the rest."


__

Atomic_Marten
06-23-2005, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Here and there you get someone more familiar with concept of air combat, but that is rare. Just ask Blackbird, Fatboy, Locutis or Guard if bad ole Hristo ever shot them down. Nobody except BlackBird put up a decent fight, to be honest. And that one was BlackBird and Schlumberger vs Hristo. Hristo won

Hmm, I think I put up a decent fight! Just wait until I try again armed with TrackIR and the knowledge that the airbrake no longer sends me into a spin with prolonged usage.

Yes, I have a pretty bad kill ratio. Why is that? It's because I don't have time to waste "flying" around at high altitude where you are unrealistically unable to see things below you. This is especially true because, unlike real life flying, simulated flight without combat is simply not exciting.

Therefore, if I see an enemy, I attack, regardless of the circumstances. Would I do so in real life? No, I wouldn't. However, I enjoy aerial combat, not patrolling empty skies. Since I do not actually die when I am shot down, I see no reason to waste my time doing something that is boring in the game for the sole reason that it is supposed to simulate the same activity in real life, which, unlike the activity in the game, is not boring. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He he.. use that P38 airbrake A-Target http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I don't know any fighter in game, that can put such type of turn like P38.

On one ocassion, I have enforced head-on versus Zero (I was in shallow dive heading directly toward him -- ), at some point I break up - so did he (he breaked off earlier).

As we pass by each other I have observed that he is trying to execute hard vertical 180Ô? turn in order to end up on my tail; I have predicted that and have immediatelly engaged airbrake (without deploying flaps) -- if I remember correctly in that particular moment my speed was slightly over 300mph!.

To my great surpise, P38 responded beyond all expectations to airbrake input, I have ended up in favourable position to take shot from astern on him.. amazing.
And not only that, after turn I have still going faster than him.

Before the P38_LATE introduction in the sim, I have never rated P38 as an airplane with much potential in fighter role.. but my opinion on P38 capabilities has changed a lot since 4.01.

With proper usage of airbrake on high speeds no late LW figher can match P38 in turn.
So there. An (little) advantage.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 02:07 PM
S!

__________________________________________________ _______________________
Hristo-The highest K/D is sported by a 1943 plane, Fw 190A-6.
Blue side has Bf 109G-2 (1942) as well as Bf 109G-6 (1943).
Only the Ta-152 is a 1945 plane on Blue side.
P-63 seems to me a late 1944/45 aircraft, don't you think ?
1942 Spit IX ? What about 1944 Spit IX that are there ? In both clipped and standard version ?
P-38L Late ? So is it late or not ? And how about the best Luftwaffe 1944/45 aircraft ? The one which is actually banned for being too dominant ? What do you think its stats would be if ever allowed into WarClouds ?
__________________________________________________ ______________________



The 109K4, 109G10, 109G14 are all very late 1944 planes. The 109K4/G10 are almost 1945 planes.
The 190D9 has 2 varients a 1944 model and a 1945 model. The Ta152 is a 1945 plane. So you end up with 5 aircraft that are about as late war as you can get.

I am not sure why the P63 is in the ETO, it never saw service there.
1942 Spit IX ? ---The Spit 9 first came out in 1942.

What about 1944 Spit IX that are there ? In both clipped and standard version ? -------There is no performance differance between these Spit models. Also the Spit 9 is not boosted to 25lbs like the Mustang mark III is.

For example--the Corsair F4U-1C is listed as a 1945 aircraft when in fact it is a 1943 aircraft.

P38L=====P38L Late. This is what the P38L should of been from the beginning. Deleivery date June 44.

There is no 1945 allied aircraft.

Can you honestly say that the addition of the Spit XIV, Tempest and P47M at 470mph would not have an impact ?

I am not opposed to having the 262 on Warclouds, I think it could make for some interesting scenarios.


___

Stigler_9_JG52
06-23-2005, 02:23 PM
All these stats reflect is the flying style of the community.

When you factor in the very astute observation that the "invisidots" render B&Z impotent, it invalidates any takeaway assumptions on "how good/bad the flight model is". You can't make those judgments without the ability to emulate historical tactics in the fighting, and use planes according to their historical strengths.

Not to mention, the lack of bombers contributing to a lack of intercept missions, which was a huge part of the air war everywhere.

Ankanor
06-23-2005, 03:37 PM
@ Kahuna, Yes, the Germans started with an energy advantage. What happened then? They dove, then pulled up hard and started turning. Does this sound like an energy conserving maneuver? Not to me. This is not a FW-190, this is a Me109 and we all know it's not good at high speed handling. they attempt turning at high speed, trying to gain on the Mustangs when the reasonable thing to do would be go back up above them.

About the 1vs1 fight, the german and Anderson were initially at par(they were gainning on the Me109s, but let's say they slowed down to finish the third). The German actually does the right thing, saving his wingman's life by engaging the Mustangs, thus giving him time to dive for home. on the fight:
The german turns hard, trying to fool the Mustangs to chase. Anderson is tempted, but he knows he won't be able to turn and "And in a dogfight you don't want to surrender your airspeed". Energy conservation. He goes up. The german then reverses, sudden change in maneuver=loss of energy(plus, he's turning, not climbing) and starts chasing the Anderson's wingmnan. After the German pulls up, he turns hard again and then follows Bud Anderson up. For me from this moment on, the German is clearly at energy disadvantage. Yet, Anderson is lucky the enemy pilot could't make his gun to bear.
After the hammerhead Anderson decides he could sacrifice some of his energy and deploys flaps and turns. the Mustang is better in high speed handling and doesn't bleed so much energy. so, once his scare tactics work and the German makes a maneuver he is definitely worse at, he was done for, Anderson brought his Brownings to bear.

I say again, I am making those conclusions from my limited knowledge about energy fighting. The above doesn't diminish the achievement of Bud Anderson. On the contrary. OK, maybe he exaggerated a bit his opponents skills(IMHO) and based on the time period(Early 1944) he was facing Me109 G-6 , which was slower than his P-51 B or C. But we have a prime example of a pilot who is completely at home with his ride, knows how to fiddle with it and flies it to its limits, exploiting the strengths.

bolillo_loco
06-23-2005, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
I'm sorry to hear that you think so! It matters little, because I have done my research and most people haven't. Kahuna, Gibbage, Bollilo Loco, myself, and one or two others are just about the only ones here who know anything about the real P-38 Lightning.

Or are you taking offense to my impication that the Focke Wulf is overmodelled? Well, all you have to do is look at the picture referred to a few posts ago and you will see what I am talking about!

I would say I know something about the real lighting, I just have over 40 books written on it and the men that flew them. I usually post things directly out of a book.

Stachl
06-23-2005, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:

This is a common misconception. USAAF fighter strength in England was below that of the luftwaffe for most of 1943-44. During this time while the Luftwaffe was at the peak of their strength on the Western Front they had their backs broken by the P47 and P38 FG's.

_


Yes, lets conveniently ignore the thousands of B-17s, B-24s, B-25s, B-26s and the contributions of their aircrew - which were the primary targets of the Luftwaffe as well as the major players in German fighter attrition anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


And let's also ignore the entire Royal Air Force with their Spitfires, Hurricanes, Mosquitos, Lancasters, Typhoons etc. etc.

Poor outnumbered USA fighters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
It would be interesting to see some numbers here.
And also fighter squadrons strength (number of operational machines that were available) of specifical area (theater) in question at certain time (43-44 period).

Also it would be interesting to see;
was the majority of allied missions where fighter escorts were provided encountered more enemy fighter interceptors than escort, or are, in most cases escorting fighters outnumbered LW attackers?

Simple -- who had more fighters involved in most 43-44 aerial combat between fighters in specified theater?

I think that kind of questions would require much more researching job.

Anyone? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Here's a quote from The JG 26 War Diary, Volume 2 1943-1945: "Although the claim-to-loss ratio for the Geschwader in 1943 was about four to one, indicating a high degree of combat efficiency, there were strong signs that the Allies' war of attrition was starting to wear it down. . . .

"Although Galland's plans for expanding the Jagdwaffe had finally been put into effect, they were too little and too late. The Luftwaffe was rapidly losing the war of numbers in the ETO. The Allied fighter force in England already exceeded Germany's total fighter strength on all fronts, and was still growing rapidly. The Americans were now deploying fighters with the range to accompany the bombers to any target in Germany. With the coming of better weather in the spring, the stage would be set for the total defeat of Germany's aerial defenders."

I personally think 609IAP_Kahuna's post is very misleading as he completely disregards the British, Canadian, French, Polish, etc. Air Forces. I'm sure there were many aerial battles in which the USAAF was outnumbered, but with those kinds of numbers how could this be anything else but the exception rather than the rule. And when you take into account the actual number of operational aircraft as compared to the authorized strength for a Geschwader, the German's were really hurting. Again from the War Diary for JG 26 in 1943, "the aircraft inventory had remained at about 50% of authorized strength in December, but only two-thirds of these aircraft were operational. At year's end the entire Geschwader had only sixty-eight operational fighters." So at this point in time, with three Gruppen per Geschwader the authorized strength would of been somewhere in the region of 144 aircraft! When 609IAP_Kahuna talks about the Luftwaffe's "peak of strength" I have to wonder if he is taking this little detail into consideration?

Actually I try to avoid these nationalistic posts as it is so irrelavant to this fine sim, but some times I just can't take it any more. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 07:11 PM
S!


I agree with your assesment Ankanor. I didnt know if you realized the 109s had the intial advantage from the start-which you did. As far as Anderson's evaluation of the german pilot, I will take it at face value, he was there we weren't. I have had the pleasure to meet and talk with Col.Bud Anderson on several occasions, he is a very humble and kind man not given to exaggerations.

___

BigKahuna_GS
06-23-2005, 07:38 PM
S!



Stachl-Actually I try to avoid these nationalistic posts as it is so irrelavant to this fine sim, but some times I just can't take it any more.



Actually this has nothing to do nationalism and everything to do with history. I was trying to post specific information on US fighter strength in the ETO. It is a common theme here that the "ONLY" reason US fighters did well is because the Luftwaffe was outnumbered 20-1 over Germany.

If you simply click on the link I provided to the USAF Historical Archives you'll simply see the numbers werent there in 1943-44. I think you would agree that the Luftwaffe was stronger on the Western Front in 1943-44 than it was in 1944-45.

I am NOT discounting anyones role in defeating the nazis, it was a team effort. But I am being realistic about the combat radius of aircraft. Only long range US fighters could make the deep penetrations into Germany. The Spitfire, an excellent aircraft was limited to those areas of France that it would not run out of fuel on it's return trip back to base.

As for operation strength, do you think that problem was limited to the Luftwaffe? The GAF had "Homefield" advantage. If they got low on fuel or had engine problems they came down in friendly terroritory. US long range fighters had to be prepped and maintained to be able to fly 7-8 hour missions. The wear and tear of flying these missions was enormus. Anyways this post was about history to me and nothing more. You read into something that wasn't there.


___



__

AerialTarget
06-24-2005, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes. There is a known bug with the DM. What is overmodeled in the FM? Or are you just whining?

Do you take offense to unfounded BS claims of P-38 overmodeling?

It seems we misunderstand one another. I was indicating damage model; knowing little about the real life Focke Wulf, I would not be so presumptuous as to say that the flight model is overmodelled. Indeed, my personal, uninformed opinion is that the Focke Wulf is probably undermodelled in terms of flight model. I don't go around making strong statements about it, though!

When I say that the Focke Wulf is much better in game that it was in real life, I am indicating the ability to take eighty fifty caliber hits in the engine with no consequence. Bug, overmodelled - it's semantics. Either way it's much more able to take damage than it was in real life, making it a very unrealistically frustrating airplane to fight against, and providing Hristo with incredible game statistics with which to mock Allied flyers.

On a completely different note, I happen to be on your side about the cockpit struts issue. While I do not doubt that the model is accurate, the fact is that human eyes see around objects of that size. In real life, those all-obstructive struts would be transparent to human vision. And this from one who only regards the Focke Wulf as an opponent!


Originally posted by Ankanor:
Aerial target, what's up, you couldn't find Horst Wessel?

What do you mean by this question? Please reprase.

anarchy52
06-24-2005, 04:57 AM
Ancient Chinese story or arnament marketing:
I sell spears that can pierce any armour.
I sell armour that can not be pierced by any spear.

A more recent story of (US) defense industry marketing:
1) P-51 Mustang was the best fighter of the war, mustang won the war. Mustang ruled the skies.
2) P-47 was better then P-51.
3) Lightning was superior to both 51 and 47 and broke the spine of Luftwaffe, 51 and 47 only got leftovers.

And finally, the truth: 2/3 of all german losses occured on the eastern front.

jugent
06-24-2005, 05:58 AM
I have flown the P38L in Warbirds ZeekesVSWildcats but abandomed it because it was too "uber".
How I did it; I took off loaded with rockets, flow to 2000m and made a shallow dive against the japaneese airbase/groundtargets and took away what I could see.
I countinued fore some minutes and outran everything that followed me.
Climbed up to 2000 m and went back to the base again.
If I was lucky I found a "Betty" and if you dont attack from low6 they are easy to take out.
The only thing that can take you out is when you land or take-off, or if some enemy catches you from above when you make a turn towards the target.
If you became to overconfident and unpatient and starts to turn against a zero, your out.
Luckily most "P-38 jocks" take risks to get high points and returns to groundtarget to early.
The P-38L is a lifeinsurance, I felt safe there.

Ankanor
06-24-2005, 06:00 AM
Aerial target, my mistake, I didn't recognize it WAS the Horst WEssel Song. And btw, the song sucks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

F4UDash4
06-24-2005, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

Unlike the historical record.

F4UDash4
06-24-2005, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Yes, my thoughts exactly, Ivan.

A little wistful thinking for a Hitler victory?

Mmmmmm

WWSensei
06-24-2005, 09:58 AM
Actually, I think it's a condemnation of the fallacy that virtual pilots are better than their real world counter-parts were.

In the real world about 90% of the pilots sucked and were usually target practice for the other 10%.

In the virtual world about 95% of the pilots suck and end up being target practice for the other 5%.

The difference is in WW2 the pilots knew they weren't particularly good. In the virtual world most think they are aces.

faustnik
06-24-2005, 10:01 AM
When I say that the Focke Wulf is much better in game that it was in real life, I am indicating the ability to take eighty fifty caliber hits in the engine with no consequence. Bug, overmodelled - it's semantics. Either way it's much more able to take damage than it was in real life, making it a very unrealistically frustrating airplane to fight against, and providing Hristo with incredible game statistics with which to mock Allied flyers.

OK AT, I see what you are saying. The damage is certainly unrealistic. The difference that I see between over-modeling and a bug is that over-modeling is intentional and a bug is just a mistake. As it is now the Fw190 DM is just a mistake. Don't expect historical results from it, it's broken.

The Fw190 bug has me flying the P-39, Mustang and even the Bf109 (I'm not a 109 fan http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif ).

MEGILE
06-24-2005, 10:59 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif This thread still going?

Fehler
06-24-2005, 10:42 PM
I find it funny that when the 190 had the insta-leak bug or the -40 KPH from a single HMG round bug, or the gunsight bug, or the flame-out with any light mg hit bug, no red guys whined then...

So it is historical accuracy that it wanted or human target drones?

Just today, I was bounced by a P-51 on WC. His first burst took out all three axis of controls... I bailed.

Next flight out, got hit in the engine with a burst of 50's during a head on. I was unable to control my engine RPM and fried my engine... I had to bail. (Cool DM affect though!)

A few flights later got another pony on me and he sprayed and sprayed. I kept slipping the streams of bullets while I watched him miss over and over from .5-.8k, maybe connecting with less than 5 hits overall. Then the guy starts complaining about the DM! Got to hit something before you damage it!

The point I am making here is that a lot of times, people *Think* they see something that is not really happening. For them their misconception becomes Gospel. (There is a lot of that that goes on around here)

For me, I wont stop flying the 190. I had to endure more quirky bugs that can be listed in this plane since it's inception in IL2. So, if the tail is a bit tough against 50 cal, I dont really think it is so terrible that I will refuse to fly it. It still takes damage everywhere else, and the fact is that if someone is dumb enough to camp my tail and not shoot at my wings, then they need to go re-figure their game. I had to do that when I was firing popcorn-fart ammo, and I had to do that when I was shooting at concrete I-16's or Concrete P-63's, or 30mm resistant P-XX or P-38's that absorbed 70-100 20mm rounds in earlier patches. With the only other plane at our disposal in late war scenarios being the 109, what else should I fly?

Hopefully, they will fix the tailsection DM soon, and give the engine a little less resistance, but as we have always seen from the FW, I am sure the bugs will be a little "Over fixed." Will the red guys whine about it then? I doubt it...

Recon_609IAP
06-24-2005, 11:37 PM
....maybe they wouldn't need to turn fight on the deck if visibility was better...

good one WWSensei http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AerialTarget
06-25-2005, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
the fact is that if someone is dumb enough to camp my tail and not shoot at my wings, then they need to go re-figure their game.

The historical tactic, as well as the sensible one, is to aim for the fusellage.

FatBoyHK
06-25-2005, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Here and there you get someone more familiar with concept of air combat, but that is rare. Just ask Blackbird, Fatboy, Locutis or Guard if bad ole Hristo ever shot them down. Nobody except BlackBird put up a decent fight, to be honest. And that one was BlackBird and Schlumberger vs Hristo. Hristo won

Lol, is it a praise? may be the opposite :P

Fehler
06-25-2005, 02:35 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fehler:
the fact is that if someone is dumb enough to camp my tail and not shoot at my wings, then they need to go re-figure their game.

The historical tactic, as well as the sensible one, is to aim for the fusellage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That totally depends on the plane type. For example, the FW190 was most vulnerable from a low six position. Due to the positioning of it's two fuel tanks, it was most susceptable from fire at that position. From a dead six, the pilot was afforded very adequate armor protection, and it used a series of control rods which were very durable.

Different planes, different vulnerable positions. Would you think shooting at an IL2 from dead six to be a great idea? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Sure, if you just wanted to use up your ammo and go home, I suppose.

Look, I am not saying that the 190 is correct as it stands. But what I am saying is that the very same people whining about it never had a word to say when it was plagued by DM bugs before. The only bugs people are interested in are the ones that beneficial to the side they most commonly fly on.

Personally, I want to see a damage model that is consistant with historical accounts. For all planes! I realize that sometimes I will get off a lucky shot and disable someone's controls or snap a wing, while other times it will appear that I pour ammo into a bandit and nothing happens. Sometimes you just dont hit anything vital. That's the weird thing about air combat or combat in general. Sometimes you read stories of a P-47 that had 20x 20mm holes in it, but returned home, while other times a few hits rendered the plane useless and killed the pilot. But I am not so full of myself to think that anytime I pull the trigger the bandit I am shooting at should fall out of the sky like Chicken Little's acorn.

The 190 is not the only plane that has DM issues, either. The P-47 is too weak in the nose, we all know this. The Spit can still absorb multiple rounds in the wings and still turn and turn without loss of lift. The P-38 blows up too easily against any 30mm ammo, and it seems like it's elevator is shot off 50% of the time the plane is hit. And let's not talk about delta wood.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But you would swear by these forums that the only incorrect DM is that of the German planes... all two of them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
06-25-2005, 02:51 AM
WWSensai wrote:

"The difference is in WW2 the pilots knew they weren't particularly good. In the virtual world most think they are aces."

Hmmm, not sure about this. I remember watching a show about P-51 pilots and one said (or said something very similar):

If there were 25 pilots in a room, and a guy came in and said 24 of you won't make it back from today's mission, every pilot in the room would look around and think the same thing, "I sure feel sorry for you unlucky bastards."

WWSensei
06-25-2005, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
WWSensai wrote:

"The difference is in WW2 the pilots knew they weren't particularly good. In the virtual world most think they are aces."

Hmmm, not sure about this. I remember watching a show about P-51 pilots and one said (or said something very similar):

If there were 25 pilots in a room, and a guy came in and said 24 of you won't make it back from today's mission, every pilot in the room would look around and think the same thing, "I sure feel sorry for you unlucky bastards."

Pilots, especially fighter pilots, come with a special sort of attitude. Especailly when they are 18-25 years old all full of piss and vinegar. Flying the Viper for a few years showed me we were an arrogant lot. ;-)

But I bet every one of them looked to themselves when they knew they got away with something in a dogfight that should have gotten them killed--and they looked to themselves to figure out how to correct. A lot them also knew surviving those first 5 missions had more to do with luck than skill.

Virtual pilots blame the aircraft.

If you had 25 virtual pilots in a chat room and someone came in and said only one of you will return from this mission, 18 would look around and say "those poor sobs are flying porked aircraft". The other 7 would say the enemy aircraft was overmodelled.

In air combat there about 1000 things that can go wrong to insure defeat at the hands of the enemy. 999 of them are pilot induced. I'm constantly amazed how many times virtual pilots beat the odds, flew perfectly and come to the natural conclusion the aircraft MUST be at fault.

Comparing in-game results and stats to historical outcomes is laughable at best. Of all the things that could make the outcomes different, aircraft modelling is probably pretty close to the bottom of the list. Combat scenario, multi-aircraft engagement training, pilot-skill, weather would all have several orders of magnitude more impact to deviations from history yet "historical comparisons" are one of the first tools of evidence to support claims of over and under modelled aircraft.

I'm not talking about the guys who do extensive testing and match up to perfromance numbers etc, but the rest of the so-called experts using anecdotal tales of virtual combat or comparisons from a dogfight server or online war to real world events as some sort of measure.

NorrisMcWhirter
06-25-2005, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
I find it funny that when the 190 had the insta-leak bug or the -40 KPH from a single HMG round bug, or the gunsight bug, or the flame-out with any light mg hit bug, no red guys whined then...

Yes...odd that, isn't it? Still, if something fits with what you've been indoctrinated with, you are less likely to complain http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta
Norris

Hunde_3.JG51
06-25-2005, 11:54 AM
"If you had 25 virtual pilots in a chat room and someone came in and said only one of you will return from this mission, 18 would look around and say "those poor sobs are flying porked aircraft". The other 7 would say the enemy aircraft was overmodelled."

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif, too true.

I agree with what you are saying sensei, what I posted was just to show the confidence fighter pilots had. It may have been a false, or empty confidence. Maybe they had to feel that way to deal with the stress of possibly dying on every mission.

"Comparing in-game results and stats to historical outcomes is laughable at best...I'm not talking about the guys who do extensive testing and match up to perfromance numbers etc, but the rest of the so-called experts using anecdotal tales of virtual combat or comparisons from a dogfight server or online war to real world events as some sort of measure."

Couldn't agree more.

Vipez-
06-26-2005, 07:10 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!

__________________________________________________ _______________________
Hristo-The highest K/D is sported by a 1943 plane, Fw 190A-6.
Blue side has Bf 109G-2 (1942) as well as Bf 109G-6 (1943).
Only the Ta-152 is a 1945 plane on Blue side.
P-63 seems to me a late 1944/45 aircraft, don't you think ?
1942 Spit IX ? What about 1944 Spit IX that are there ? In both clipped and standard version ?
P-38L Late ? So is it late or not ? And how about the best Luftwaffe 1944/45 aircraft ? The one which is actually banned for being too dominant ? What do you think its stats would be if ever allowed into WarClouds ?
__________________________________________________ ______________________



The 109K4, 109G10, 109G14 are all very late 1944 planes. The 109K4/G10 are almost 1945 planes.
The 190D9 has 2 varients a 1944 model and a 1945 model. The Ta152 is a 1945 plane. So you end up with 5 aircraft that are about as late war as you can get.

I am not sure why the P63 is in the ETO, it never saw service there.
1942 Spit IX ? ---The Spit 9 first came out in 1942.

What about 1944 Spit IX that are there ? In both clipped and standard version ? -------There is no performance differance between these Spit models. Also the Spit 9 is not boosted to 25lbs like the Mustang mark III is.

For example--the Corsair F4U-1C is listed as a 1945 aircraft when in fact it is a 1943 aircraft.

P38L=====P38L Late. This is what the P38L should of been from the beginning. Deleivery date June 44.

There is no 1945 allied aircraft.

Can you honestly say that the addition of the Spit XIV, Tempest and P47M at 470mph would not have an impact ?

I am not opposed to having the 262 on Warclouds, I think it could make for some interesting scenarios.
___

To be accurate first BF109 G-14s came in february 1944 (this plane is not G-14/AS), First G-10s in summer 1944, and K-4 autumn 1944 (i dont remember exact month, i think it was september when the first K-4s were passed to front line units).. P63C is pretty much a 1945 plane, firsts to receive this plane in the front line units were around january 1945, and russians received them bit later. TA-152 is a 1945 plane, so germans have pretty much only one 1945-piston plane. Allies have some more, like the YAK9UT, Yak3P, and P63C.. i am not sure what you are exactly whining here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Nobody is saying we wouldn't welcome planes like P47N, P47M, Spit mk14, or Tempest.. I am not counting planes like Go-229 or109Z, but it's not like anyone uses them anyway

If we would get planes like P47M, and Spit 21 flyable, then presence of 1945 bf109 K-4 and G-10 would also be required, with DB 605 DC engine at 1.98ata, or DB 605 DB with 1.8ata for a 1945 109K-4 .. (just dreaming http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )


To be honest, i much prefer more early / mid war planes, instead of more late war ├╝ber-planes.

JG7_Rall
06-26-2005, 10:45 AM
I don't know where to start....


Either way, I love your sig, Hunde

Atomic_Marten
06-26-2005, 11:32 AM
"Comparing in-game results and stats to historical outcomes is laughable at best...I'm not talking about the guys who do extensive testing and match up to perfromance numbers etc, but the rest of the so-called experts using anecdotal tales of virtual combat or comparisons from a dogfight server or online war to real world events as some sort of measure."

Couldn't agree more.

I agree on that also.

For any kind of serious 'combat' testing of these same planes in game, it would require group of people about same skill, that are playing on specific server for some time.

And you must provide them same equipment, too. This is important, since flying on pit on servers with good equipment make a BIG difference (read=advantage http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif). I have make a poll about it and out of 35 votes so far, only 10 of them are using trackIR+HOTAS+pedals combo. I suppose these guys have an advantage over, let's say, guys who flys only with joystick..

If those conditions are fulfilled, I know that these results will be as close in game as possibile.

But anyway, any such attempt to compare game and real thing is utter BS, no matter how precise/exact results you get in game.

Any game's 'equation' is child play compared to real life's 'equation'.. there is simply too much variables in real life, and no game can simulate them.

mynameisroland
06-26-2005, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by F4UDash4:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
Stats say a lot, actually. Reds are losing more planes than they are shooting down.

Unlike the historical record. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong. Exactly like the hisorical record.

Wolf-Strike
06-26-2005, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by WWSensei:
Actually, I think it's a condemnation of the fallacy that virtual pilots are better than their real world counter-parts were.

In the real world about 90% of the pilots sucked and were usually target practice for the other 10%.

In the virtual world about 95% of the pilots suck and end up being target practice for the other 5%.

The difference is in WW2 the pilots knew they weren't particularly good. In the virtual world most think they are aces.

Are you an ACE??

Hristo_
06-26-2005, 01:07 PM
Just got back from vacation, and what do I see ?

Nothing has changed. From version to version, from patch to patch, Luftwaffe rules the virtual skies, why Red horde cries foul this foul that.

Keep crying, Red whiners, and cya up there http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 01:41 PM
"When Herr Hristo says, 'Ve own der vorld und space,' ve 'HEIL! HEIL!' right in Herr Hristo's face."

http://65.165.174.4/%7Ejfoulk/otr5/spike_jones_derfuhrer(otrcat.com).mp3

Copy and paste.

MEGILE
06-26-2005, 01:52 PM
Blue has the best planes.. what's new?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 08:28 PM
That's new, that's what's new! It's certainly not the same old story, because it didn't used to be like that.

Oh, I mean in the war, not in previous patches! Ha, ha! It's always been like this, if you mean in the game!

geetarman
06-26-2005, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by StellarRat:
This argument is a waste of time. The stats will always favor the Germans until someone can force the battle to over 6000m where the "real" fighting took place. Allied planes were built for high altitude performance not for fighting at less than 3000m. Unfortunately, since we have no flyable full cockpit four engine bombers (B17s) and no scenarios that require
high altitude bombing we can't make anyone fly at those altitudes.


Bingo!

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 09:00 PM
That's simply not true. Many American aircraft were better down low than they were up high. Just because the P-51 was bad down low and good up high doesn't mean that most American planes were like that!

Lixma
06-26-2005, 09:23 PM
Until the blue side is dominated by noobs who are tasked with climbing into and engaging a very large US bomber stream while well trained and frequently rotated P-51/47 pilots dive down on them from above every day then expecting kill ratios in a DF server to bear any relation to real life statistics is plain ol' stoopid.

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 10:22 PM
What is stupid is that statement. That was not how things were! By the time the bombers and escorts were over the target, the Germans were well above them. The Germans attacked, as a rule, from above. And the whole time the P-38s were under orders to stay with the bombers, at the speed of the bombers. And yet they prevailed, in the Fifteenth! Can you imagine what it must be like to be bounced while flying in formation with bombers?

JG27_Stacko
06-26-2005, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
What is stupid is that statement...

Please do not attack people who are trying (against the odds) to have an inelligent debate. His point of view is just as valid as yours. Just because you disagree dont go around calling peoples remarks stupid. Thats never going to help.

JG27_Stacko
06-26-2005, 11:20 PM
And to the people who claim there is a bug with the FW190 DM... the only possible bug is the lack of Fuel tank leak, and given that we spent over 12 months with a fueltank that was leaking empty in seconds from the lightest scratch, I think its only fair that we spend the next 12 months with one that doesn't leak at all. The rest of the DM is just fine, so please stop your whining. If you spent the time on practicing your gunnery that you did whining you might have less problems shooting them down.

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 11:21 PM
I've had it with those who seek to elevate the Nazi airplanes over the United States ones.

AerialTarget
06-26-2005, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by JG27_Stacko:
And to the people who claim there is a bug with the FW190 DM... the only possible bug is the lack of Fuel tank leak [...] The rest of the DM is just fine, so please stop your whining.

Stupid! (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/1791038033)

Fehler
06-26-2005, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
I've had it with those who seek to elevate the Nazi airplanes over the United States ones.

As I am sick of people who wish to label a person's political views by the type of aircraft he/she enjoys flying (In a computer generated game... GAME get it?)

Hristo_
06-27-2005, 12:57 AM
It seems, once again, that I've created a monster http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
06-27-2005, 01:02 AM
And no end in sight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

AerialTarget
06-27-2005, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
As I am sick of people who wish to label a person's political views by the type of aircraft he/she enjoys flying

The term had the intended effect, but the target was to be Hristo and not you. Please excuse my period correct terminology and rest assured that it is leveled neither at you nor any other decent Axis players.

Hristo_
06-27-2005, 02:26 AM
Personally, I prefer Flieger sind Sieger

Wir jagen durch die L├╝fte
Wie Wotans wildes Heer.
Wir schaun die Wolkenkl├╝fte
Und brausen ├╝bers Meer.
Wo tragen uns die Schwingen,
Wohl ├╝ber Berg und Tal,
Wenn die Propeller singen,
Im ersten Morgenstrahl.

Flieger sind Sieger,
Sind alle Zeit bereit.
Flieger sind Sieger
F├╝r Deutschlands Herrlichkeit.


http://ingeb.org/Lieder/wirjagen.html

It goes well with Fw 190 superiority.

bolillo_loco
06-27-2005, 06:02 AM
hristo is proof that John Wayne Flew for the fuhrer :O I really do amuse myself, but one day I am frightened that I shall hurt myself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

MEGILE
06-27-2005, 06:13 AM
Focke Wulf is an explosive topic, it seems...
you either love it, or you hate it.

Anton will remain king as long as the fight stays under 6,000FT... as soon as it goes over that, we'll all be in TA-152s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Cragger
06-27-2005, 08:22 AM
My personal take aside from damage model issues is that blue pilots trained themselves to fight and succeed with a very limited set of advantages. Now with 4.01 something has changed with the aircraft giving blue more advantages then before and lessening red's. The blue pilots are reaping the rewards of their dedication to niche aircraft now that are more versatile then before.

Something has changed with the aircraft that has on the basic level shifted them towards blue on a AI basic level and is amplifing long term 'blue' pilots persistance to succeed with them before.

That and Warclouds is late war biased to blue. Flat out plain and simple and it doesn't have so much to do with Sparx. Its just what is available in game, every late war blue plane comes with a Mk108 or as a loadout option something that wasn't in reality a choice for the pilot they flew what they where assigned. The G-14 isn't even the one the Germans used, its the one that that Hungarian's fielded.

Sparx is limited to what is available in game and there are no true Western Europe 'red' 1944/45 planes in the game. And since there is no way to restrict loadouts then there is nothing that can be done to prevent 95% of 'blue' toting around the Mk108 or two or four...

Also since there is no practical way to limit availability of aircraft if there is the K4 available or the D9 then thats going to be the majority of the aircraft you face regardless of their historical numbers.

I really hope that oleg's next game will allow greater flexibility in this area and my private dream is that there will be a way to make constantly respawning AI bomber streams for Dogfight server maps to give everyone a real goal.

Also the ability to join a coop in progress and take control of any still airborne flyable aircraft currently under control of AI would be a nice addition, and the ability to switch to another plane when your shot down.

Jaws2002
06-27-2005, 08:57 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cragger:
QUOTE]

Great post. So true. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Lixma
06-27-2005, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by Cragger:
My personal take aside from damage model issues is that blue pilots trained themselves to fight and succeed with a very limited set of advantages. Now with 4.01 something has changed with the aircraft giving blue more advantages then before and lessening red's. The blue pilots are reaping the rewards of their dedication to niche aircraft now that are more versatile then before.

1 "something"


Something has changed with the aircraft that has on the basic level shifted them towards blue on a AI basic level and is amplifing long term 'blue' pilots persistance to succeed with them before.

2 "something"s

Bugs notwithstanding the only significant change to Blue side has been a more realistic MG151/20. Blue has had MK108s since day one.

What is this mysterious "something" you speak of ?

StellarRat
06-27-2005, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
That's simply not true. Many American aircraft were better down low than they were up high. Just because the P-51 was bad down low and good up high doesn't mean that most American planes were like that! Really? The "the big three" in ETO (47, 51, 38) were/are all better comparatively at high altitudes. I'd rather get bounced by high Germans at 6000 or 7000m then they to fight them down low anyday. They'll only get one or two tries at high altitude. Plus in "real life" they were working on the bombers not the American fighters. OOPS! I forgot, we don't have any in cockpit American heavy bombers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cragger
06-27-2005, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by Lixma:
Bugs notwithstanding the only significant change to Blue side has been a more realistic MG151/20. Blue has had MK108s since day one.

What is this mysterious "something" you speak of ?

Last time I checked Webster's that fits the definition of a 'something' very nicely. Other things I can think of are the practically docile torque of the 109 compared to other much lower power aircraft. Another is the over effectiveness of slats on aircraft with them, which is intresting on the LA series, makes them unspinnable without using rudder in my experience.

And before you go spout off that this is an advantage to both red and blue let me point out we are talking about the Western Europe theatre that warclouds depicts, not alot of slat equipped Allied aircraft over there hmm?

JG7_Rall
06-27-2005, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by Cragger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lixma:
Bugs notwithstanding the only significant change to Blue side has been a more realistic MG151/20. Blue has had MK108s since day one.

What is this mysterious "something" you speak of ?

Last time I checked Webster's that fits the definition of a 'something' very nicely. Other things I can think of are the practically docile torque of the 109 compared to other much lower power aircraft. Another is the over effectiveness of slats on aircraft with them, which is intresting on the LA series, makes them unspinnable without using rudder in my experience.

And before you go spout off that this is an advantage to both red and blue let me point out we are talking about the Western Europe theatre that warclouds depicts, not alot of slat equipped Allied aircraft over there hmm? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

New FM also benefits the FW a lot and takes away from the advantage of turn n burn fighters

AerialTarget
06-27-2005, 10:34 AM
So that's why I've not observed a One Oh Nine spin since the patch.


Originally posted by Hristo_:
It goes well with Fw 190 superiority.

I think you mean, "It would have gone well with Focke Wulf One Ninety superiority if the Focke Wulf One Nintey had been superior."

Well, if we're talking about preference in German military marches now, I am very fond of Parademarsch der Legion Condor (http://ingeb.org/Lieder/wirzogeu.html). Why? Because the melody is that of an ancient Nordic folk song! And, as everyone knows, vikings are cool.

geetarman
06-27-2005, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Ankanor:
@ Kahuna, Yes, the Germans started with an energy advantage. What happened then? They dove, then pulled up hard and started turning. Does this sound like an energy conserving maneuver? Not to me. This is not a FW-190, this is a Me109 and we all know it's not good at high speed handling. they attempt turning at high speed, trying to gain on the Mustangs when the reasonable thing to do would be go back up above them.

About the 1vs1 fight, the german and Anderson were initially at par(they were gainning on the Me109s, but let's say they slowed down to finish the third). The German actually does the right thing, saving his wingman's life by engaging the Mustangs, thus giving him time to dive for home. on the fight:
The german turns hard, trying to fool the Mustangs to chase. Anderson is tempted, but he knows he won't be able to turn and "And in a dogfight you don't want to surrender your airspeed". Energy conservation. He goes up. The german then reverses, sudden change in maneuver=loss of energy(plus, he's turning, not climbing) and starts chasing the Anderson's wingmnan. After the German pulls up, he turns hard again and then follows Bud Anderson up. For me from this moment on, the German is clearly at energy disadvantage. Yet, Anderson is lucky the enemy pilot could't make his gun to bear.
After the hammerhead Anderson decides he could sacrifice some of his energy and deploys flaps and turns. the Mustang is better in high speed handling and doesn't bleed so much energy. so, once his scare tactics work and the German makes a maneuver he is definitely worse at, he was done for, Anderson brought his Brownings to bear.

I say again, I am making those conclusions from my limited knowledge about energy fighting. The above doesn't diminish the achievement of Bud Anderson. On the contrary. OK, maybe he exaggerated a bit his opponents skills(IMHO) and based on the time period(Early 1944) he was facing Me109 G-6 , which was slower than his P-51 B or C. But we have a prime example of a pilot who is completely at home with his ride, knows how to fiddle with it and flies it to its limits, exploiting the strengths.

Excellent post. As a Mustang fan, I would say that your analysis matches mine. The German tried to turn and fight, almost got Bud once, but blew his chance. Bud had him after that. The plane was probably a G6. The P-51C was a GREAT high altitude fighter (much better than a G6 - even in the sim) and Bud was a true ace and knew his plane well.

The German made at least two, maybe three, mistakes that cost him his life. He seemed to be a pro though from the account. He did try to turn the tables twice and not simply head for home after one of his buddies were downed.

faustnik
06-27-2005, 11:00 AM
"It would have gone well with Focke Wulf One Ninety superiority if the Focke Wulf One Nintey had been superior."

Speaking of something you know nothing about again AerialTarget? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

geetarman
06-27-2005, 11:46 AM
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 AerialTarget:
That's simply not true. Many American aircraft were better down low than they were up high. Just because the P-51 was bad down low and good up high doesn't mean that most American planes were like that! Really? The "the big three" in ETO (47, 51, 38) were/are all better comparatively at high altitudes. I'd rather get bounced by high Germans at 6000 or 7000m then they to fight them down low anyday. They'll only get one or two tries at high altitude. Plus in "real life" they were working on the bombers not the American fighters. OOPS! I forgot, we don't have any in cockpit American heavy bombers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He shoots, he scores! He's on a roll.

AerialTarget
06-27-2005, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Speaking of something you know nothing about again AerialTarget?

No, I am not. I resent your implication that I have in the past.

faustnik
06-27-2005, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Speaking of something you know nothing about again AerialTarget?

No, I am not. I resent your implication that I have in the past. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then don't speak about the Fw190.

Vipez-
06-27-2005, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
What is stupid is that statement. That was not how things were! By the time the bombers and escorts were over the target, the Germans were well above them. The Germans attacked, as a rule, from above. And the whole time the P-38s were under orders to stay with the bombers, at the speed of the bombers. And yet they prevailed, in the Fifteenth! Can you imagine what it must be like to be bounced while flying in formation with bombers?

same happened for the germans during BoB, when G├┬Âring gave the famous same order for 109s to stick close formation with the bombers all the way to target loosing all the advantages as escorting fighters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
06-27-2005, 04:05 PM
Thanks Rall (Prefontaine).

Cragger wrote:

"That and Warclouds is late war biased to blue. Flat out plain and simple"

The Eastern front P-63C is a '45 aircraft that is a match for any prop-driven fighter. The inclusion of the P-63C is, if anything, contrary to what you are suggesting. Not to mention the new Mustang III is simply incredible. And why is warclouds biased to blue because of MK-108? Any server would then be considered biased to blue.

As for loadout options I agree, I wish we could exclude certain loadout options for aircraft, namely the MK-108. Unfortunately the sad state of the previous 151/20 didn't help.

You also wrote:

"Also since there is no practical way to limit availability of aircraft if there is the K4 available or the D9 then thats going to be the majority of the aircraft you face regardless of their historical numbers."

Which is exactly why I love historical planesets, and the reason I almost never fly the Ta-152. Personally I would like to see the '45 planes eliminated. As for the Dora, its main opponent in the west was the P-51D, Tempest, Spitfire IX, and Spitfire XIV. I believe the P-63C was possibly included to address the fact that we don't have two of those. Still the Dora belongs in a late '44 planeset and you have to consider that Germany had lost the war and its production numbers are obviously going to be lower at that late date. Also, the Dora was produced in comparable numbers to the planes I mentioned previously (Tempest and Spitfire XIV). Still, if blue really wanted a challenge they would lobby for an early '44 planeset. Here 190 flyers are limited to A-6 and A-8, and 109 flyers are limited to G-6 Late (and possibly G-14?).

AerialTarget
06-27-2005, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Then don't speak about the Fw190.

I will continue to counter Hristo's unfounded claims that the Focke Wulf was superior to the P-38 Lightning until one of us dies. I fail to see why that warrants an attack by you on me.

BigKahuna_GS
06-27-2005, 07:47 PM
S!

__________________________________________________ _______________________
quote:
Originally posted by Fehler:
I find it funny that when the 190 had the insta-leak bug or the -40 KPH from a single HMG round bug, or the gunsight bug, or the flame-out with any light mg hit bug, no red guys whined then...
Yes...odd that, isn't it? Still, if something fits with what you've been indoctrinated with, you are less likely to complain
Ta
Norris
__________________________________________________ ______________________



Look let's be real here. How many blue flyers posted that the original P38L & P47D-27 was porked in oh so many ways ?

How many blue flyers are interested in seeing the current porked P47D-27 get fixed or the P47M added to the sim, little if any.

Every group whether it be red or blue leave it up to the people flying the plane in question to submit to Oleg the correct data to get it fixed.

Don't try to equate past wrongs in F/Ms and D/Ms to be able fly around currently overmodeled F/Ms (109-manual prop pitch exploit) or over done damage modeling in 190's as Stacko suggests. I think all fair minded people do not want to see anybodys plane over or under done in any reguard.

If past wrongs are justification for over done damage modeling or flight models then the P47 should fly like the F-22 Raptor. After 2 years of errors it is still is messed up.


____

VFS-22_SPaRX
06-27-2005, 09:30 PM
With the newest version of IL2 Server Commander, we now have the ability to restrict Loadouts and Planes. How it is implemented is the problem though. Here is how it works.


We restrict Planes and Weapon loadouts via the map files. So say we restrict the Ta152 to 10. This means that at the beginning of the map, only 10 Ta's are avaible to fly. Now say 10 players at the start of the map choose Ta's. No other players can choose them now. If they do, they get warning points. This is where the problem starts. Until you are airborn, You will get warning points at a rate of every 2/3 seconds. So, now lets look at this problem. Start of map 15 people select Ta's. All of these players will be getting warning points until 10 of them are airborn. Then those 10 will no longer get warning points. I hope this makes sense. Its just not implemented very well yet. I have been trying to come up with a suggestion for them on how to change it, but i have not found a good idea as of yet.

What also happens is this. If there are 10 to start and someone gets shot down in the Ta, then there are now only 9 left. If 10 Tas are lost on the map. Then no one can choose them.

I honestly dont think people will pay enough attention to this and we will have a lot of players getting banned for exceeding their warnings.

Hopefullyl something will come of this and it will work better.

S~

SPaRX

Hunde_3.JG51
06-27-2005, 09:36 PM
Sounds awesome Sparx. That would obviously work for restricting planes if it gets worked out, but would it also be able to restrict loadouts as you said, meaning 2x MK-108? Thanks and good luck.

P.S., yes I am still flying the girly FW-190 and not a manly plane like the P-51 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.

Atomic_Marten
06-27-2005, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
With the newest version of IL2 Server Commander, we now have the ability to restrict Loadouts and Planes. How it is implemented is the problem though. Here is how it works.


We restrict Planes and Weapon loadouts via the map files. So say we restrict the Ta152 to 10. This means that at the beginning of the map, only 10 Ta's are avaible to fly. Now say 10 players at the start of the map choose Ta's. No other players can choose them now. If they do, they get warning points. This is where the problem starts. Until you are airborn, You will get warning points at a rate of every 2/3 seconds. So, now lets look at this problem. Start of map 15 people select Ta's. All of these players will be getting warning points until 10 of them are airborn. Then those 10 will no longer get warning points. I hope this makes sense. Its just not implemented very well yet. I have been trying to come up with a suggestion for them on how to change it, but i have not found a good idea as of yet.

What also happens is this. If there are 10 to start and someone gets shot down in the Ta, then there are now only 9 left. If 10 Tas are lost on the map. Then no one can choose them.

I honestly dont think people will pay enough attention to this and we will have a lot of players getting banned for exceeding their warnings.

Hopefullyl something will come of this and it will work better.

S~

SPaRX

This is indeed excellent news.
Maybe it can be implemented that when 10 TA152s are selected, TA152 simply do not exist in other players plane select screen.

Or maybe it can be time related; the game counts time (server time), and when 10 TA152s are selected game 'remembers'/counts them and every other player that selects TA152 after that is getting penalty, regardless if grounded or airborne, simply because he occupies TA152 seat as 11th, 12.. or so -- time related (it can be clearly viewed in eventlog.lst). I think maybe something like this could work, but I'm really a n00b for these kind of things so.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
06-28-2005, 06:27 AM
The old problem remains you can only kick the guys
out of the game not forcing em to change.

Armer_Ritter
06-28-2005, 06:42 AM
"if blue really wanted a challenge they would lobby for an early '44 planeset. Here 190 flyers are limited to A-6 and A-8, and 109 flyers are limited to G-6 Late (and possibly G-14?)."

Look what was going on Spit vs. 109 earlier when there only was the g6.. Red lost... they dont have the abilitys to win ;-) its undermodelled....

JG27_Stacko
06-28-2005, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
With the newest version of IL2 Server Commander, we now have the ability to restrict Loadouts and Planes. How it is implemented is the problem though. Here is how it works.


We restrict Planes and Weapon loadouts via the map files. So say we restrict the Ta152 to 10. This means that at the beginning of the map, only 10 Ta's are avaible to fly. Now say 10 players at the start of the map choose Ta's. No other players can choose them now. If they do, they get warning points. This is where the problem starts. Until you are airborn, You will get warning points at a rate of every 2/3 seconds. So, now lets look at this problem. Start of map 15 people select Ta's. All of these players will be getting warning points until 10 of them are airborn. Then those 10 will no longer get warning points. I hope this makes sense. Its just not implemented very well yet. I have been trying to come up with a suggestion for them on how to change it, but i have not found a good idea as of yet.

What also happens is this. If there are 10 to start and someone gets shot down in the Ta, then there are now only 9 left. If 10 Tas are lost on the map. Then no one can choose them.

I honestly dont think people will pay enough attention to this and we will have a lot of players getting banned for exceeding their warnings.

Hopefullyl something will come of this and it will work better.

S~

SPaRX

Now go through this post and everytime you see the word Ta-152, replace it with Mk108. S! Sparx, still, its a good idea

JG54_Arnie
06-28-2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
With the newest version of IL2 Server Commander, we now have the ability to restrict Loadouts and Planes. How it is implemented is the problem though. Here is how it works.


We restrict Planes and Weapon loadouts via the map files. So say we restrict the Ta152 to 10. This means that at the beginning of the map, only 10 Ta's are avaible to fly. Now say 10 players at the start of the map choose Ta's. No other players can choose them now. If they do, they get warning points. This is where the problem starts. Until you are airborn, You will get warning points at a rate of every 2/3 seconds. So, now lets look at this problem. Start of map 15 people select Ta's. All of these players will be getting warning points until 10 of them are airborn. Then those 10 will no longer get warning points. I hope this makes sense. Its just not implemented very well yet. I have been trying to come up with a suggestion for them on how to change it, but i have not found a good idea as of yet.

What also happens is this. If there are 10 to start and someone gets shot down in the Ta, then there are now only 9 left. If 10 Tas are lost on the map. Then no one can choose them.

I honestly dont think people will pay enough attention to this and we will have a lot of players getting banned for exceeding their warnings.

Hopefullyl something will come of this and it will work better.

S~

SPaRX

Nice idea and the idea is needed for online dogfights. Badly even.

But this way will not work, practically, this is a way too complicated workaround, not pleasant for the player either, you wont know if you are flying something you are supposed to fly or not untill airborne.

Why dont we gather hosts and everyone who wants to see this feature in the game and ask Oleg to implement a check for online play. Both for loadouts and planes chosen. Might be a bit of work for him, but once he has it down he can use it for Bob, for the many new possiblities it delivers its probably even not that much work. He can hardcode these options in, the hosts/missionmaker simply sets what he wants.

Maybe have a poll and then email Oleg? Or email Oleg all together. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Or ask Ivan to ask Oleg about this, its very important for online play in my opinion. If you want more realistic online play its a must!

JG7_Rall
06-28-2005, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by JG54_Arnie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
With the newest version of IL2 Server Commander, we now have the ability to restrict Loadouts and Planes. How it is implemented is the problem though. Here is how it works.


We restrict Planes and Weapon loadouts via the map files. So say we restrict the Ta152 to 10. This means that at the beginning of the map, only 10 Ta's are avaible to fly. Now say 10 players at the start of the map choose Ta's. No other players can choose them now. If they do, they get warning points. This is where the problem starts. Until you are airborn, You will get warning points at a rate of every 2/3 seconds. So, now lets look at this problem. Start of map 15 people select Ta's. All of these players will be getting warning points until 10 of them are airborn. Then those 10 will no longer get warning points. I hope this makes sense. Its just not implemented very well yet. I have been trying to come up with a suggestion for them on how to change it, but i have not found a good idea as of yet.

What also happens is this. If there are 10 to start and someone gets shot down in the Ta, then there are now only 9 left. If 10 Tas are lost on the map. Then no one can choose them.

I honestly dont think people will pay enough attention to this and we will have a lot of players getting banned for exceeding their warnings.

Hopefullyl something will come of this and it will work better.

S~

SPaRX

Nice idea and the idea is needed for online dogfights. Badly even.

But this way will not work, practically, this is a way too complicated workaround, not pleasant for the player either, you wont know if you are flying something you are supposed to fly or not untill airborne.

Why dont we gather hosts and everyone who wants to see this feature in the game and ask Oleg to implement a check for online play. Both for loadouts and planes chosen. Might be a bit of work for him, but once he has it down he can use it for Bob, for the many new possiblities it delivers its probably even not that much work. He can hardcode these options in, the hosts/missionmaker simply sets what he wants.

Maybe have a poll and then email Oleg? Or email Oleg all together. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Or ask Ivan to ask Oleg about this, its very important for online play in my opinion. If you want more realistic online play its a must! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What he said http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

JG54_Arnie
06-28-2005, 04:36 PM
Wow, such massive support. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AerialTarget
06-28-2005, 05:00 PM
There had better not be any such restrictions on the P-38 L "Late." All L models made, all three thousand plus, had that engine, not just two thousand "late" ones.

Even if you disagree with that and go by Oleg's figures, two thousand of them, they were still more of them produced than any other type of Lightning, including the "early" L (which, as I said, didn't exist, except for some of the modified J models which retained the J designation and did not count toward the three thousand L models produced).

Fehler
06-29-2005, 12:38 AM
AerialTarget... I think we alread shot down over 3000 of those two-engined abominations on WC already... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

So come and fly the 190 Luke... Use the power of the dark side to hit your target! (Mechanical breathing sounds) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

AerialTarget
06-29-2005, 01:36 AM
AHAAAAAAAAAAA HAVE AT YOU!