PDA

View Full Version : Oleg PLease Fix the mistakes.



Aprince14
07-02-2007, 08:54 AM
Oleg, Please fix the mistakes that have been made in the IL2 series. I have played the IL2 series since it started and I can hardly take it anymore. The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what. Oh everybody says that it was a high alt fighter, Yes it was but it was also low alt and a fighter bomber. In europe during WWII it destroyed a little over 5000 enemy planes. Thats in the air and Ground, but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it. In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes. The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it. The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.
Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. also 6 50s with Exploding rounds as well as Phosphorus rounds and was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it, but not in this sim. I for one understand that this type of sim is extremly hard to program and that it takes hours, day, weeks, and months to work on but if your going to do all this work then I really don't understand what the prob with showing the planes for what they really were. Just fix it. Be honest and just fix it.

ElSjonnie
07-02-2007, 09:06 AM
Perhaps making a more coherent post would do a better job of communicating your exact problems. It seems you're very upset, and when you're very upset you shouldn't be clicking "Post Now". Maybe you can make a list of your problems.

mynameisroland
07-02-2007, 09:14 AM
What a load of rubbish. Thank **** you only post something every once in a blue moon Aprince14.

neural_dream
07-02-2007, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes.
I heard Mustang .50 cals were killing tigers. Even lions sometimes.

Haigotron
07-02-2007, 09:27 AM
Im so enlightened, Im going to go make a new simulator game that will hopefully outdo Oleg's and ensure that it delivers what you need, check back with me in oh...say 20 years?...

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:29 AM
Not upset at all. Gents. Just a little frustrated that as long as these planes have been in the sim they haven't been fixed. They are not a accurate representation of there real life counterparts. The Handling and armament of the P-51D is really off, It loses it's energy to easily. Also the Hellcat is not accurate. The armament is off as well as it's engine The plane in a dive is easily caught by zeros.

Blutarski2004
07-02-2007, 09:31 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Not upset at all. Gents. Just a little frustrated that as long as these planes have been in the sim they haven't been fixed. They are not a accurate representation of there real life counterparts. The Handling and armament of the P-51D is really off, It loses it's energy to easily. Also the Hellcat is not accurate. The armament is off as well as it's engine The plane in a dive is easily caught by zeros.


..... Are you flying on-line or off-line?

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:33 AM
LOL I love it when people don't agree they just throw out verbal jabs at a person instead of explaining why they don't agree. Please let me know what I said was not accurate.

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:36 AM
Flying online as well as off line. Been playing IL2 since it came out with a few breaks in between. Also a Licensed pilot that have flown in P-51s in my time and would love to hear why you feel Im wrong. But please do not bash me, give me your reasons. Getting a reply like Rolands shows me the true intelligence of some people.

FritzGryphon
07-02-2007, 09:41 AM
LOL I love it when people don't agree they just throw out verbal jabs at a person instead of explaining why they don't agree. Please let me know what I said was not accurate.

If people don't agree with baseless statements, they are not obliged to provide evidence.

That's like saying I'm obliged to disprove the existence of god.

You haven't provided a single thing that suggests your arguments have merit. You are apparently too new to the forum to be making such claims, when they are continually brought up and disproven. Use the search function and educate yourself.

Bearcat99
07-02-2007, 09:42 AM
The 51 flies better with 50% or less fuel.... The 50s are not bad.. you just have to hit at convergence or very close. I don't think the 50s on the 51 are any different from the 50s on any other plane.. I just think that the platform is not quite as stable as say a P-40. The 51 is very quick on the stick... For some reason it does seem that the plane is more stall prone down low.. even when going fast... but it handles better faster... high or low. As for the wings... I have gotten a P-51 up over 500.... but you just cant make any turns at that speed.. You have to do shallow turns. The bottom line is.. it is what it is.... I think it still has some issues.. but it is certainly a competitive plane if flown properly. I also think that thus far the 4.08m 51 is the best one thus far.

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:43 AM
Ok I respect you reply. How is what Iv'e said baseless? Where am I wrong?

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:47 AM
Thank You very much Bearcat for your reply. I agree with you that the 4.08 is better then the past patches. The armament is still not up to par though. It just doesn't have the stopping power it should. The same as the Hellcat. I set my Convergence to 229/150

FritzGryphon
07-02-2007, 09:48 AM
The P-51 is heavier than the Spitfire, with higher wing loading, and a laminar flow wing more suited to long range efficiency than stall avoidance. It's a common fallacy that the P-51 has good sustained turning qualities, and it comes up often. In other games, the P-51 is shamelessly overmodeled, reinforcing this expectation.

The M2 machine guns have been tested to be about 1/3 as effective as a Hispano cannon (requiring about 4 hits to the Hispanos 1). This agrees with figures from the game. Also, the number of hits to kill each airplane generally agrees with historical data (as few as 7 hits on average for a plane like a Zero, or as many as 30 for a plane like a FW-190).

The Hellcat does easily outdive Zeros. However, the effect is not magical, and will not overcome initial speed or altitude disadvantages (unlike popular media which would have you believe that the P-51/P-47/F6F/F4U etc will jump to light speed while the Zero stands still). You can easily test this yourself. Do not test against AI planes, because the AI cheats.

Do you have any more questions?

Skunk_438RCAF
07-02-2007, 09:50 AM
Lets be scientific shall we. Your post is just pure fishing and whining.

P-51 did have the same engine as the Spit, but the Mustang was also 3000 lbs heavier on take off.

The Zero will light up like a roman candle when shot at by .50's and so will a properly shot up 109, so I dont know what you're complaining about. .50's shouldnt have "stopping power", they should have penetrating power. Only suggestion I can make is try to learn to shoot better.

And the "the Hellcat could turn with the Zero" is bull. Show me a valid source of info that says that the Hellcat could outturn a Zeke and I'll believe you. Until then your post is just whining because you cant fly.

neural_dream
07-02-2007, 09:52 AM
Ok then. Let's see where I believe you are wrong.


The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what. Oh everybody says that it was a high alt fighter, Yes it was but it was also low alt and a fighter bomber. In europe during WWII it destroyed a little over 5000 enemy planes. Thats in the air and Ground, but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it. In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes.

Unless you are referring to the Mustang MkIII, the P51s were far from impressive at low altitudes, which is below 20,000ft. The lower the worse. When they were used in ground attack the Allies had already full air superiority, they could have used even B17s in ground attack if they wanted.
In-game the speed of the P51Ds is about 605km/h at sea level which is excellent and 700km/h at 7900m which seems abour right and is more than what you expected (427mph is less than 690km/h). You probably don't see these speeds because unless you use wonderwoman view (Ctrl-F1) then you dont see the true airspeed, only the indicated one, which is way off at high altitudes and only a bit off at low altitudes.


The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it.
I haven't noticed that.


The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.
Not everybody. Only Americans who heard one too many stories about the Mustang when they were young. It was a fantastic High-altitude (obviously) Bomber escort. Possibly the best ever created and that was exactly what it was needed for. The rest are just anecdotal stories, luck and pure skill of specific pilots. The dead pilots would have very different things to say about its qualities at low altitude and against non severely outnumbered enemies.


Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. also 6 50s with Exploding rounds as well as Phosphorus rounds and was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it, but not in this sim.
Well, that's what I see in this sim. At least online the Hellcats pwn the Zeros of the same year.

R_Target
07-02-2007, 09:52 AM
You're correct about the loadout for F6F. It's been wrong for almost three years. As for the dive, well I can tell you that the F6F breaks up at a higher speed than the Zero in IL2, and that that speed for the Hellcat is just slightly under the limit listed in the pilot's handbook-430 knots. I've made it to 440 without any damage, but that's very rare. Either way, a Zero cannot catch you at and above 370 knots.

The only major problem with the Hellcat is that it's too slow.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2007, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Ok I respect you reply. How is what Iv'e said baseless? Where am I wrong?
You haven't really shown where you're right. This isn't the first time we've had someone come on here and tell everyone that the simulator is wrong and that it should be "fixed". Often times it turns out the problem is that the pilot is the one that needs to be fixed. No disrespect intended but lets face it that everyone starts out new and doesn't really know all the intricacies of WWII air combat. I thought I did when I started having had a long interest but it turns out I had just scratched the surface.

So lets get down to it...pretty much every plane in the sim is not 100% accurate or perfect. Such perfection is impossible. It will never be perfect. What we do strive for and what we do often find out is that the simulation is very close to being accurate and much more so than you think so right now. But when you look at the actual numbers and do all of the testing (of which you seemingly haven't done and haven't posted a single number in your thread) then you'll see things are pretty much right where they should be.

The Spitfire and the Mustang are two completely different aircraft with different attributes and performance levels. Flying a Spitfire is not like flying a Mustang and no matter how many general history books you've read about how amazing the Mustang was...it will never live up to those legends. You need to fly the Mustang like its pilots flew it...with technique and experience. Then you'll see how incredible the Mustang is and how its untouchable against many opponents and a tough customer against the others.

If you want to learn some techniques...just ask...there are dozens of people on this forum and others who have played the game for a long time and some who are actual pilots who know even more about getting the most out of your plane. I've learned allot and found out that it was often I who was wrong and not the simulation.

Finally...a common mistake regarding weapon effectiveness...particularly using with mounted machine guns. Convergence makes the difference between ripping a target plane to shreds and making allot of noise and not allot of effect. Convergence in game is default at 500m which is fine if you're flying a Yak or a 109 with nose mounted guns. Its no good for US aircraft...change the value to something like 250m or even 200m (USN standard was roughly 290 meters, USAAF had a variety of different settings)...hold your fire until you're in range and watch as your target aircraft is ripped to shreds, lit on fire, and generally destroyed. On the P-47 you can really up the ante because the cannon/machine gun values apply to the inner and outer guns and you can create a zone of death between two values where the target is absolutely shredded by a tight concentration of 8 guns. Just one technique to make your experience better and more realistic.

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 09:58 AM
The Hellcat Used 6 50s.. As well as 4 50s and pair of Hispano 20 mm (0.79 in.) cannon carrying a minimum effective load of 220 rounds each

VW-IceFire
07-02-2007, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
The Hellcat Used 6 50s.. As well as 4 50s and pair of Hispano 20 mm (0.79 in.) cannon carrying a minimum effective load of 220 rounds each
That was a pretty rare loadout...I believe most of those were F6F-5N/E models. Which would be cool to have...but sadly no radar modeling just yet.

JG52Karaya-X
07-02-2007, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
What a load of rubbish. Thank **** you only post something every once in a blue moon Aprince14.

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

1) Why is it you get outrun by Spits in your P51!?

Maybe you forgot to retract flaps and gear? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

2) Why do you think the Spit retains energy better?

Because it turns tighter? Think again. The P51 holds and picks up speed very fast in ths sim.

3) Yes the P51 does have a problem with over-G at high speeds.

But thats just because wh1ners like you have urged Oleg to put an uber-effective elevator onto the Mustang, pat your own shoulder bud!

4) The P51 doesnt have a 427mph topspeed in IL2?

Got track?

The P51D reaches 715km/h at 7,5km altitude (thats 444mph for you), the B&C even 10km/h more (450mph). Is that enough for you!?

5) "Everybody" knows the P51 is completely undermodelled

Really? Who is this "everybody"... seems like its just you

6) P51 turning with a Zero

Think again, certainly not at slow speeds. The Zero at its normal takeoff weight weights about half as much as a normally laden P51. Now common sense tells us which plane should turn tighter!?

High speeds are another thing, try to turn a Zero at 450km/h and higher, then try the P51. Feel a difference?


You dont seem to have a single clue of what you're talking about. I never thought I'd actually take to use this phrase but "Learn to fly" seems perfectly appropriate here!

Btw, you only get a 4- on trolling...

XyZspineZyX
07-02-2007, 10:05 AM
I could go on about combat weight P-51s versus P-51 flying civvie, and I could point out that fuel distribution isn't modelled, only weight, and I could mention that te planes are known to be modelled to only within "5%", which nobody seems to understand can have a cumulative effect

But I won't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Instead I will point out that Oleg <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">IS</span> working on correcting the errors of Il2. It's called Storm of War:Battle of Britain

This sim is OLD. Oleg Maddox is not going to upgrade, improve, correct and tweak this sim ad infinitum

To think otherwise is unrealistic

The new sim is in the works. Oleg, nor any of his team, can split themselves in two and devote full time to SoW:BoB AND fix this sim

Can't be done

One suggestion, though aprince14:

Don't fly the Il2 P-51 as if it were a real P-51. I think that might be your major issue

thefruitbat
07-02-2007, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:


One suggestion, though aprince14:

Don't fly the Il2 P-51 as if it were a real P-51. I think that might be your major issue

What, high, fast and with wingman? Works well for me, you can nearly alwasys dissingage if you need to, and that is priceless.

cheers fruitbat

R_Target
07-02-2007, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
That was a pretty rare loadout...I believe most of those were F6F-5N/E models. Which would be cool to have...but sadly no radar modeling just yet.

AFAIK (which is always subject to change) you are correct. Only night fighters used them in combat. 2x20mm+4x.50 and 4x20mm were tested on day fighters though.

PBNA-Boosher
07-02-2007, 10:20 AM
Aprince, do an experiment for me. Set your convergence to 100 and in the QMB, set up one friendly Bf-109. Turn icons on. When you get 100 meters behind him (the icon should say .1) stick there and open fire. The hits you register on him, should you be a good shot, will be devastating. Try this in any plane and you'll see it works well.

Another great one - online, try the same setup, but put yourself in the Bf-109. Fly straight and level and have a friend test the P-51 convergence for you. if a .5 to 1 second burst doesn't murder you, then you guys need to work on your aim. I only once had trouble with the .50's before in this game... then I learned how to shoot with wing guns. It takes time and practice, like a lot does with IL2. All I'm asking is that you try it.

MEGILE
07-02-2007, 10:21 AM
FIX THE P-51 ITs NEerfED ZOMFffffffg2111111

Aprince14
07-02-2007, 10:21 AM
Gentlemen I am by no means a Noob here or with the IL2 series and can hold my own with pretty much anybody. I in no means am here to disrepect a single person here. I am pointing out issues with the handling and armament of two planes. Thats all. I am not attacking anybody here individually. I am more then aware of the P-51s ability. I understand the issues with the fuel tanks that caused the instability of the plane. In this sim this plane is made to be more of a B & Z plane. Which is not accurate. Maybe the prob is that to many people just bottom feed instead of high alt. Either way The PLane was more powerfull then it is given credit. And my only prob with the Hellcat is that the guns need to be improved in the sim. The plane had a Pratt & Whitney R-2800-10W which had 2000 Horsepower, but in a dogfight it just losses its energy way to easy which isn't accurate.
Then we post from people like JG52Karaya-X Who thinks Im talking about a P-51 Vs a Zero. Which just shows some peoples ignorance. JG52Karaya Please go back to sleep. Ok Gents my platoon is moving out soon so I won't be back on for a while. ~S~ to all.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2007, 10:33 AM
P-51 was generally a boom and zoom plane IRL too...I fail to see the problem. Still no numbers...

faustnik
07-02-2007, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
In this sim this plane is made to be more of a B & Z plane. Which is not accurate.

?

The P-51 was optimized for maximum speed performance. It's airframe was the most efficient, low drag design of its day.

crazyivan1970
07-02-2007, 10:49 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Hawgdog
07-02-2007, 10:49 AM
Did I get here before the lockdown?

well, hello then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Crash_Moses
07-02-2007, 10:53 AM
I'm sure Oleg did the best he could with the resources and time given...

I'd rather he focus on NOT making the same mistakes in BoB.

S!

WOLFMondo
07-02-2007, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Ok I respect you reply. How is what Iv'e said baseless? Where am I wrong?

Because you've brought absolutely no documentation or proof with you and your argument other than subjective opinion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bearcat99
07-02-2007, 10:59 AM
What I would like to know is why when someone comes in here with a post that is their opinion.. even if it is not correct or well stated.... that people responding to the post have to come back with all kinds of insults and simulated profanity, putdowns and the like?

OK.. so the guy stated his case about the 51.. but is it really necessary to insult him and make comments that contribute nothing towards possibly schooling the guy on how to get the most out of the bird? I don't think so..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


The 51 was a good all around plane and it is in the sim.... as fort acceleration.. that is done optimally with a fine balance between trim, prop pitch and throttle..(AoA, manifold pressure & RPM)..... none of these planes are perfect... but for me I found that when I stopped comparing real world stats and just flew the plane to try to get the best out of it.. whatever version it is... the better off I have been.

SeaFireLIV
07-02-2007, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:

Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. .


Ahh, I`ve not seen one of these posts in a long while. They used to fill the forums. Most of this kind of posts isn`t really fishing just young kids who don`t really understand real life yet. i`m not going into detail cos I`m late anyway and most every one has said it.

I only wanted to respond to the quote above: just because a certain plane in WWII had a certain high kill rate that doesn`t mean that any kid should just jump into a simulation of the plane then expect the instant same kill rate. You must remember the REAL pilots were skilled Aces in most cases and knew their aircraft. Also, they were NOT independent John Waynes as most who complain like this tend to be. They worked as part of a TEAM to bring down the foe.

If you hope to jump online (or even offline) and routinely do the same as your real life counterpart without any effort in learning then don`t expect that ratio- ever.

BigKahuna_GS
07-02-2007, 11:22 AM
Karaya--6) P51 turning with a Zero

Think again, certainly not at slow speeds. The Zero at its normal takeoff weight weights about half as much as a normally laden P51. Now common sense tells us which plane should turn tighter!?



Hya Karaya,

I think he was referring to the Hellcat turning with a Zero. We have a real US Navy Hellcat pilot
on our virtual squad and he said that Hellcat pilots were known to mix it it up with Zeros at speeds above 250mpnIAS. As speed increased above 250mph IAS would mean a greater increase of turning advantage for the Hellcat over the Zero as it's elevators and control surfaces would continually get heavier.

I think what needs to be pointed out is that several of the major US fighters are under performing by 5% or more in several performances areas. While this does not seem all that bad, if you take into consideration that many of the axis fighters these planes are facing are over performing by more than 5% and have the most optomistic modeling late war modeling possible.

An overall 10%+ performance disadvantage entering into the dogfight does not bode well for the pilot of that virtual fighter.

To give a true picture of a late war P51D in the ETO it should be at least modeled with 75" MAP on 150 grade fuel or similar to the RAF Mustang Mark IV (not 67" MAP). In the PTO Iwo Jima P51s were running at 81" MAP on 145grade fuel the same as RAF Mustang Mark III & IV models. The higher MAP settings increased acceleration, V-max, rate of climb, and powerloading. The P51D was known to have a 20% better wing loading value over that of a 190D-9 but it seems the IL2 P51D stall is much worse than a D9s, especially at slow speeds where both fighters should suffer stall difficulties during high AoA manuevers along with high engine torque problems.

To get some relative performance ideas look at Tagert's climb tests for several allied & axis fighters.

Both the Hellcat (Mid alts) & Corsair (sea level)are not hitting correct v-max speed values, more so the Hellcat. The ammo load outs need to be corrected also. For example the Corsair started out with the correct sea level speed of 366mph in Pacific Fighters, then it was reduced (why ?) to 357-358mph while the Ki84 had it's sea level speed increased from the mid 350mph to 362mph (in game view finder) but actual testing shows the Ki84 hitting 366mph without even comming close to overheat.

To get a true perspective of late war Corsairs before the F4U-4 showed up would be a Corsair overboosted to at least 65" Map on grade 145 fuel with a sea level speed of 377mph and hitting around 435mph at 18,000ft. This was done routinely for kamikazes intercepts. With higher MAP values comes increases in acceleration, RoC, V-max, and power loading.

So you have these 2 fighters (Corsair & Ki84) swapping sea level v-maxes which is incorrect plus the Ki84s acceleration borders on the incredible. The Ki84 will retain FTH v-max past 28,000ft without engine power loss. That is well past 8,000ft for the Ki84s best FTH range of 20,000ft and that is with a single stage SC which makes no sense. You cannot appreciate the 5% + or - modeling issue without comparing aircraft on both sides.

Unfortunately these same problems have been going on for years.

_

JG52Karaya-X
07-02-2007, 11:30 AM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Then we post from people like JG52Karaya-X Who thinks Im talking about a P-51 Vs a Zero. Which just shows some peoples ignorance.

My mistake, still the same holds truth as with the P51. The Hellcat is still twice as heavy as a fully laden Zero and while it might outturn the Zero at high speeds due to its lighter control forces and elevator authority, the Zero will make circles around it at slow speeds as this is what it was designed for - close in dogfighting! This happened IRL and it also happens in this sim. Anyway the point in the Hellcat is not to knife fight the more agile Zero but to boom and zoom it using superior speed and altitude and only turn after the Zeke in order to get a quick gun solution, more than 90? of turning is usually a waste of energy unless the other guy hasnt noticed you yet.

And as Boosher already pointed out, hitting a Zero with 6x.50s at convergence will either result in it catching fire instantly or a shower of aluminium parts. There really is nothing Japanese which cant be taken care of with a short burst of .50CAL

JG52Karaya-X
07-02-2007, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
We have a real US Navy Hellcat pilot
on our virtual squad and he said that Hellcat pilots were known to mix it it up with Zeros at speeds above 250mpnIAS. As speed increased above 250mph IAS would mean a greater increase of turning advantage for the Hellcat over the Zero as it's elevators and control surfaces would continually get heavier.

... is what I'm saying! The faster you go the better for you (when in a Hellcat) but slow down and die a horrible death.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2007, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
What I would like to know is why when someone comes in here with a post that is their opinion.. even if it is not correct or well stated.... that people responding to the post have to come back with all kinds of insults and simulated profanity, putdowns and the like?

OK.. so the guy stated his case about the 51.. but is it really necessary to insult him and make comments that contribute nothing towards possibly schooling the guy on how to get the most out of the bird? I don't think so..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Not to excuse the behavior but when someone comes in and makes what amounts to accusations or unfounded statements that put onus on someone (dev team, Oleg, whatever) then they already set the tone of the whole discussion.

They aren't interested in learning anything at all...try as some of us might to help them out (I try...I usually fail...they often don't listen)...they have an axe to grind and I'm sure you know better than I that these threads quickly devolve from there. But the tone of the original post definitely sets the whole thing up. Perceived or written.

carguy_
07-02-2007, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Oleg, Please fix the mistakes that have been made in the IL2 series. I have played the IL2 series since it started and I can hardly take it anymore.


Then give yourself a little break from the game.When I feel like you I do a two week break and the game`s fantastic everytime I make a return.



The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what.

The Spitfire is a completely different design.No comparement possible.



Oh everybody says that it was a high alt fighter, Yes it was but it was also low alt and a fighter bomber.

A fighter bomber?You mean the general order to strafe anything unknown going across France?
Low altitude...hmmm....that`s pretty prepostrous.When you meet a 109 pilot in the game,he won`t be carrying the gunpods for the most time.



In europe during WWII it destroyed a little over 5000 enemy planes.


Please lookup Bf/Me109 victory numbers and conclude accordingly.




Thats in the air and Ground, but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it.

IL2 does have problems with dive characteristics.Corsairs being catched by Zekes...FW190 being caught by Spits..that sort of stuff is well known.
Other than that,I make my attacks with the P51 at speeds exceeding 870km/h and I stopped ripping wings off since release of v4.07.




In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes.


What do you expect?Ingame fifties are armor piercing,they cause heavy internal damage to almost anything hit.Strange that the AI can easily cut you in half with those guns.
Do not expect effects of big calibre weapons.But the convergance has been changed by the devs to the point convergence instead of box conv. that is why you rarely hit anything.Lookup how many hits you had,most of the time it`ll be under 3% hit rate.
The FW190 really can take alot of them in the cockpit area but I think Oleg just armored it too much.




The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it. The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.

The plane`s fine.It has fuel tank problems but it doesn`t necessarily hurt it more than any other planes like say the FW190,Corsair or the P47.In fact most of all typical B&Z planes have big problems in this game but you see only the American planes being hurt.



Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. also 6 50s with Exploding rounds as well as Phosphorus rounds and was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it, but not in this sim.

Lookup the P47,pretty much the same problems.P47 was one of the top 3 safest fighter-bombers in Normandy operations but it doesn`t pwnoRz every friggin thing in IL2.




I for one understand that this type of sim is extremly hard to program and that it takes hours, day, weeks, and months to work on but if your going to do all this work then I really don't understand what the prob with showing the planes for what they really were. Just fix it. Be honest and just fix it.

As much as I`m not 100% sure of Oleg`s honesty of FM modelling,I`m pretty sure he did a huge effort to please as much people as possible.Almost all planes with big problems:109,FW190,P47,P51,Corsair have been tuned over the YEARS to resemble as much their real chracteristics as possible.But it works both ways.Those planes also resemble their soft spots when it comes to handling.Fact is,the sim is over 5 years old and it still has to meet it`s slayer.


People are picking on you because it`s easy.Nowadays,on this forum if anybody pops up with a post like yours is nominally considered to be a troll because nobody real ever posts so much BS in here forums anymore.

BigKahuna_GS
07-02-2007, 12:10 PM
Karaya--My mistake, still the same holds truth as with the P51. The Hellcat is still twice as heavy as a fully laden Zero and while it might outturn the Zero at high speeds due to its lighter control forces and elevator authority, the Zero will make circles around it at slow speeds as this is what it was designed for - close in dogfighting! This happened IRL and it also happens in this sim. Anyway the point in the Hellcat is not to knife fight the more agile Zero but to boom and zoom it using superior speed and altitude and only turn after the Zeke in order to get a quick gun solution, more than 90? of turning is usually a waste of energy unless the other guy hasnt noticed you yet.



Hi Karaya,

While boom n zoom is the perferred method of attack with any fighter vs fighter encounter this is not the only way Hellcat pilots took on Zeros.
They did knife fight Zeros but at higher speeds and while the Hellcat was a heavy plane it had a large wing area with relatively low wing loading for it's size and a docile stall.

Zero pilots that were interviewed also stated that Hellcat pilots would turn fight with them but at higher speeds where the Zero had control difficulties.

_

Blutarski2004
07-02-2007, 12:13 PM
The 50cal lethality and accuracy model has gone through cosiderable evolution since IL2 1.0. During that time, I did a LOT of research on all aspects fo 50cal performance as an air-to-air weapon, which included analysis of a couple of hundred ETO after-action pilot reports and kill claims.

The IL2 model is producing correct deadly/effective ranges, correct overall ammunition consumption per kill (allowing for the difference between flying a PC and flying a real combat a/c), correct influence of convergence and correct damage effects. The current IL2 model IMO is spot on in all respects except, perhaps, for the absence of API ammunition late-war.

The 50cal will rarely produce a dramatic explosion or radical airframe disassembly when firing upon German fighter targets. The typical observed damage in such cases was heavy smoke, coolant leaks, loss of a/c control from Pk or control loss, engine fire or failure. If firing upon early war Japanese a/c [ basically flying non-self-sealing fuel tanks ], you should expect to frequently (not always) obtain a very satisfying explosion and consequent non-maintenance related airframe disassembly..

Jaws2002
07-02-2007, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Oleg, Please fix the mistakes that have been made in the IL2 series. I have played the IL2 series since it started and I can hardly take it anymore. The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what. Oh everybody says that it was a high alt fighter, Yes it was but it was also low alt and a fighter bomber. In europe during WWII it destroyed a little over 5000 enemy planes. Thats in the air and Ground, but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it. In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes. The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it. The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.
Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. also 6 50s with Exploding rounds as well as Phosphorus rounds and was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it, but not in this sim. I for one understand that this type of sim is extremly hard to program and that it takes hours, day, weeks, and months to work on but if your going to do all this work then I really don't understand what the prob with showing the planes for what they really were. Just fix it. Be honest and just fix it.


Yeah Oleg what were you thinking? Didn't you read the history?
Teh mighty Mustang won the war single handed be sure!!!101!!

The proof is everywhere:



While still in prototype stage it ended the ww1 with a PK on the Red Baron:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony1.jpg


It won the Battle of Britain:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony2.jpg


Won the African campainn!!!!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony4.jpg



Beat the nazis back at Stalingrad!!!111!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony6.jpg


At Iwo Jima it shot all the japanese inside the Mount Suribachi using the mighty API-API-API-API formula !101!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony5.jpg


Ended the war in Europe !!!101!!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony3.jpg


And are still doing Homeland Security today:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/pony7.jpg



Come on Oleg, everyone that saw a decent Tom Cruise or Ben Affleck movie knows this... Be sure!!!



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

K_Freddie
07-02-2007, 12:46 PM
Well, at least if you talk balderdash on this forum, people have the decency to tell you off. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
And there is nothing wrong with that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Maybe prince charming should re-evaluate his flying skills, as he seems to base his story from flying only a few types of planes, from the one 'team'.
He should try the 'other teams' planes as well, to get a real understanding of what a great job Oleg & Devs have done with this sim.

BrotherVoodoo
07-02-2007, 12:50 PM
LMAO Shark, nice!!!

MaxMhz
07-02-2007, 12:54 PM
as long as these planes have been in the sim they haven't been fixed.

OMG you mean they will multiply?

FIX 'EM http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

M_Gunz
07-02-2007, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what.

At what speeds are you talking? Mudhen slow to maybe 400kph if that?

Same engine you say, one plane lighter than the other and IIRC differences in how set up.
Merlin came in different models with different superchargers, there was no LF Mustang.

Check the weight differences in the planes, look at the lowspeed acceleration and then
check your reality version as it might need an upgrade.

zugfuhrer
07-02-2007, 01:21 PM
How many other a/c have you flown for a long time in this game?

The P-51 was used as ground attack a/c because there where almost not any LW-a/c left, but some wehrmacht units where still fighting.

Some allied pilots where so eager to be heroes that they sometimes attack friendly a/c.
There where many incidents where USAF attacked VVS fighters and bombers, not to mention friendly ground units and vice versa.

" Apart from these 62 victories, Ivan Kozhedub also was forced to shoot down two U.S. P-51 Mustangs that mistakenly attacked his La-7 on one occasion. Both these P-51 losses have been verified by USAAF sources."



I think that the 0.50 is very effective. It gives a lot of round in a burst and the trajectory is flat in this game.
When I shoot with the 0.50 I am surprised that I hit and when I fly the FW-190 I am surprised that I miss.

I think that it is because the rate of fire.
Personally I feel safe in a P-51 Hellcat or P-47.

I think that everyone got an favourite a/c and have read about it or seen a movie with this a/c.
Then we expect that we shall be able to do the same thing in this game as our hero did in the book/movie.

Because of where the biggest market is, some a/c:s are better than they should be.
Long time ago I flew the game USAF? online and the allied missiles where very much more effective than the russian ones.
I dont think that this game was popular in Russia.

Bearcat99
07-02-2007, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:

Not to excuse the behavior but when someone comes in and makes what amounts to accusations or unfounded statements that put onus on someone (dev team, Oleg, whatever) then they already set the tone of the whole discussion.

They aren't interested in learning anything at all...try as some of us might to help them out (I try...I usually fail...they often don't listen)...they have an axe to grind and I'm sure you know better than I that these threads quickly devolve from there. But the tone of the original post definitely sets the whole thing up. Perceived or written.

While all that may be true... my motto is ... dont feed it and it wont grow.

VMF-214_HaVoK
07-02-2007, 02:52 PM
P-51 is modeled as close to RL as your going to get. What is your proof other then you just do not do well in it? The Hellcat is a little slow but acceptable as it outruns Zekes and Tonys with ease. The Brownings work extremely well. Most likely you are not firing within your convergence and your aim is off. Go in a scripted server and shoot at some planes and then check your gunstat. I bet you will be amazed at how low it is. In ZvW server I average about 8-10% with the .50cals and I destroy planes.

The planes you mentioned are modeled as good as any other plane in the sim as its been proven time and time again. So the problem is not the plane, but rather you!

S!

berg417448
07-02-2007, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
H

Some allied pilots where so eager to be heroes that they sometimes attack friendly a/c.
There where many incidents where USAF attacked VVS fighters and bombers, not to mention friendly ground units and vice versa.




This so called "friendly fire" was quite common on the Luftwaffe side as well. There are many incidents on record of Germans shooting down their own planes, sinking their own ships and bombing their own troops. It is part of the ugly reality of modern warfare.

R_Target
07-02-2007, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
Both these P-51 losses have been verified by USAAF sources.

Which "USAAF sources" were those?

MrMojok
07-02-2007, 06:33 PM
I'm not going to add much.. except to say it's like anything else in this game.

Spend the time to learn what it can and cannot do... fly it offline on an empty map, check speeds, practice maneuvers. Check dive speeds where the wings break. Fly it offline against the cheating AI. Check your convergence.. refine your aim. Fly it online in **PIT-ON SERVERS**, no externals. Learn what it can do, and it will be kind to you.

You say you have been playing the game since it came out. But it doesn't sound to me like you have done some of the above stuff.

I don't fly Pacific stuff much, unfortunately. But the 4.08 Mustang is pretty sweet if you use it the way it works best. Just my opinion.


Oh--- and also I want to add, Jaws, the BoB picture with the Spitfire X'd out is a scream http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

DKoor
07-02-2007, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by Aprince14:
Oleg, Please fix the mistakes that have been made in the IL2 series. I have played the IL2 series since it started and I can hardly take it anymore. The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what. Oh everybody says that it was a high alt fighter, Yes it was but it was also low alt and a fighter bomber. In europe during WWII it destroyed a little over 5000 enemy planes. Thats in the air and Ground, but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it. In real life it had a top speed of 427 mph also it was loaded with 6 50. cal guns which were armor Piercing as well as exploding rounds to kill Ground targets as well as enemy air targets but in the Sim they sound like a bb guns with rounds bouncing off planes. The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it. The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.
Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific. Its guns were very deadly. also 6 50s with Exploding rounds as well as Phosphorus rounds and was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it, but not in this sim. I for one understand that this type of sim is extremly hard to program and that it takes hours, day, weeks, and months to work on but if your going to do all this work then I really don't understand what the prob with showing the planes for what they really were. Just fix it. Be honest and just fix it. For a starters..... the P-51.

And for the whole deal - the 51.

Thing is this isn't about mistakes this is about the 51 which isn't modeled properly all right, but mostly in regard that you can't select wing tanks, so ac stability suffers.
Other than that........ well..... other acs suffer also a great deal.... but 51 is actually a great airplane to fly.

For instance check out my pacific P-51 track I made vs ace Japan Ai fighters:
51 vs Ai JPN (http://www.esnips.com/doc/edce8046-80a2-4a49-8920-da3427c0b5c0/DKoor51D-vs-6xJPN-408)
Also check out this track too.......
Brain51D vs 190s (http://www.esnips.com/doc/3da0781e-4835-44fd-9183-094bd0ec9f9c/Brain32P51D-2xEA-WC-402)

If you're n00b to this game feel free to ignore some of the harsh treating posts here.... thing is we have this little subculture here to attack everything that doesn't fit into our "dead horse" issues. One of these is the P-51.
Sure thing, here and there some thread about it appears but it's very specific and generally of the different kind than yours.

Also... some of the stuff you wrote simply is not true in game.... some of the stuff you have probably concluded while in combat vs Ai.
Ai in this game cheats heavily so a feel of "lesser 51 performance" may occur.

Once when you combat human manned oppos you'll start to appreciate high speed maneuverability and what is most important - excellent speed that 51 can offer to his driver.

AFJ_rsm
07-02-2007, 08:42 PM
o man o man!!!

i've always wanted to do this!

Ok here it goes

take a deep breath
...



....



Pooooor Nancy



and btw. ZOMG Jaws, post of the millenium ROFLCOPTER

Crash_Moses
07-02-2007, 08:56 PM
.... thing is we have this little subculture here to attack everything that doesn't fit into our "dead horse" issues.

I believe "dead horse" is the operative phrase here. Lemme check...

Yup...still dead.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2007, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:

Not to excuse the behavior but when someone comes in and makes what amounts to accusations or unfounded statements that put onus on someone (dev team, Oleg, whatever) then they already set the tone of the whole discussion.

They aren't interested in learning anything at all...try as some of us might to help them out (I try...I usually fail...they often don't listen)...they have an axe to grind and I'm sure you know better than I that these threads quickly devolve from there. But the tone of the original post definitely sets the whole thing up. Perceived or written.

While all that may be true... my motto is ... dont feed it and it wont grow. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Its a good motto and I should follow it more often! I'm probably wasting words anyways.

@Jaws: Brilliant...I was laughing through the whole thing. My family thinks I'm nuts again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

-HH-Quazi
07-02-2007, 11:25 PM
I don't know. Sometimes you guys take things a bit to personal. His initial post wasn't attacking anyone personally. Sadly this wasn't the place to be posting his opinion about those two aircraft. The ORR would have been a better place to start this thread. Although it wouldn't have done him any better as I don't think Oleg has had the time to frequent the ORR like he used to. He would have been better off sending an email to Oleg. He would have stood a better chance of Oleg at least seeing it. Not sure if he would have taken the time to read it after reading the first sentence though. But why take it as a personal attack? I am not saying all of you that replied took it that way. But it seemed there were a few that did. I have never understood that.

ImMoreBetter
07-03-2007, 12:12 AM
The P-51D for starters is so far off. It had the same engine as the spit, yet the spit flys past it and keeps it energy no matter what.

There is a lot more to E fighting than just engine power. You also have to take into account airframe design, weight and additional differences.


but try and dive bomb with it you have to throttle down to practically zero just so the wings dont rip off and then a P-11 can catch it.

I've had the exact opposite experience. So far, the only kills I've gotten with a 51 were because of dive speed advantage. The faster it goes, the better the all around performance goes up.


The Plane handles like Garbage unless you put 100% fuel in it. The Modeling of this plane It is a true Smack in the face and please don't tell me to send tracks of my testing. Stop. Everybody knows this plane is completly undermodeled for whatever reason you have.

Perhaps the p51 wasn't great in the turning, but the pilots using it knew how to use the advantages the plane DOES have and could select the best tactics for the best situation.

I've never read of a low altitude dogfight where the p51 out turned it's enemy. The pilot had superior tactics.


Next the Hellcat. The plane historically had a 17-1 Kill ratio in the Pacific....was faster then the zero and was more then cable of turning with it and in the dive the zero couldn't touch it.

The hellcats did not try to turn with the zero. The zero was a better turner. Instead the hellcats used their speed and power to beat the zeros in the vertical.

You can not depend ONLY on technical data of a machine to determine which is better. A real dogfight wasn't a 6g turnfest, a dogfight is about using what you have to it's best.

M_Gunz
07-03-2007, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
Don't fly the Il2 P-51 as if it were a real P-51. I think that might be your major issue

Cute. "Real P-51" now means the one in your dreams. The one you think of after reading and
hearing what you picture for yourself without really knowing more than part of the whole.

Korolov1986
07-03-2007, 02:32 AM
I was about to post a long-winded post of my exploits using P-51 and the strategies I used with it, but realized it'd be a waste of forum space.

Draw your own conclusions about the game; if you think the P-51 is inaccurate, then that's your right.

SeaFireLIV
07-03-2007, 04:57 AM
He says he`s flown IL2 from the beginning, but the impression I get is that he`s only flown it a month or so. Btw, Jaws post is rather funny.

drose01
07-03-2007, 06:07 AM
For what it's worth, I have grown to appreciate and really love the Il2 P-51, but it took a long time to figure it out.

It is a plane that requires alot of discipline and strategic awareness to fly to its strengths-speed, and maneuverability at speed. (Note the fact that you are able to pop the wings off by maneuvering is actually a reflection of the strength of your elevator, not the weakness of the wing!)

It is especially challenging flying the P51 against the La7/SpitIX/Ki84/I185 crowd if you choose to jump into the online melees. Whether those guys are relatively "overmodelled" is another question.

I think that is why people with not much Il2 sticktime come away hating it.

I still have some questions about the Il2 P51- why does the P39/P63 have so much more "charisma" compared to it, when the opposite was true in real life? (I mean instant likeability, and winnability, when getting behind the stick for the first few times)

And why does the nose wobble so much? This contributes to making the weapons seem less effective- because you are missing more.

But back to my original point- I have learned to love and appreciate flying the Il2 P51. It took time.

PS-Wouldn't a "boosted" P51D Late help ease the frustration of P51D flyers who struggle against relatively rare, late war opposition fighters that are on so many servers? I know we have the Mustang III, but alot of people choose the P51D for sentimental reasons.