PDA

View Full Version : All patches are correct but inconsistent.



jugent
12-08-2004, 03:41 PM
Since the days of IL2 there have been discussions about this plane and that plane and all the time Maddox team and hang-arounds have stated that everything is perfectly corresponding to real life.
But
The I-16 in PF isnt the same plane as it was in FB early patches, the Me109G was not good in IL2.
The Hurricane was terrible oponent in FB early versions, it outclimbed everything.
The P-40 celebreated great victories in some other patches.

The Lagg3 could take countless hits and still fly on but today it reacts to enemy fire.
The spitfire has gone better for each patch.
This list could be longer and facts about the matter could be written but enough is enough.

This change in characterisics of the airplane mix things up for me, if they matched their true characteristics in FB early patches, why change them?
And in every patch the plane has been described as correct.

jugent
12-08-2004, 03:41 PM
Since the days of IL2 there have been discussions about this plane and that plane and all the time Maddox team and hang-arounds have stated that everything is perfectly corresponding to real life.
But
The I-16 in PF isnt the same plane as it was in FB early patches, the Me109G was not good in IL2.
The Hurricane was terrible oponent in FB early versions, it outclimbed everything.
The P-40 celebreated great victories in some other patches.

The Lagg3 could take countless hits and still fly on but today it reacts to enemy fire.
The spitfire has gone better for each patch.
This list could be longer and facts about the matter could be written but enough is enough.

This change in characterisics of the airplane mix things up for me, if they matched their true characteristics in FB early patches, why change them?
And in every patch the plane has been described as correct.

StellarRat
12-08-2004, 04:15 PM
Hopefully we are moving closer to truth each time, but the fact is that unless we have flyable planes to do hard scientific testing on we won't ever have exact flight models. The computer simulations and wind tunnels tests simply did not exist in those days and some countries did not have/keep accurate records of the tests they did do.

In regards to terminal ballistic testing (effect of weapons on targets) for the various weapons, this was extremely crude because the computer technology did not exist to model damage. Basically, it was all observational evidence based on firing tests. "Yeah, it can penerate the armor at this range and kill things" type stuff.

BBB_Hyperion
12-08-2004, 04:22 PM
Maybe the planes were just wrong and now are correct. Sounds like you miss some old features.

So far no valid proof that things are incorrect no change .