PDA

View Full Version : Maybe German planes were better...........



Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 03:41 PM
OK ill probably get slammed and crash and burn for this post but...............

Ok so there is alot of whining and posting about the US planes being flying sleds and the like and German planes being about to skywrite in Chinese and 30,000ft*.
In every book you read about US air battles it appears if the US always won and it was a pushover, maybe the german planes WERE better but they had poorly trained pilots and fewer numbers. Maybe the US planes like the P-47, P-51 and the P-38 are moddeled correctly in this game but in real life they had better pilots than the Germans and had many more aircraft.



* Credits to Leadspitter for that quote in HL http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

danjama
02-18-2006, 03:44 PM
Your about 60 years too late

Hurricane_320
02-18-2006, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Your 60 years too late

Actually 61-66 years too late!

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Your about 60 years too late

My brain functions at an abby normal slow rate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FluffyDucks
02-18-2006, 04:20 PM
Comfy chair.....CHECK
BEER............CHECK
Doritos.........CHECK


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

IBTL

Hristo_
02-18-2006, 04:20 PM
Yes, they were. Especially the big DoDo, which kicks some serious a@@ on dogfight servers.

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 04:24 PM
Do Do bird is Danjama on a bad night..............
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Tator_Totts
02-18-2006, 05:29 PM
Germans for sure were highly advance in science and technologies. Yes they can produce a high quality fighters. Also I never said Allied planes were the best in all things. Even though I like to fly American planes I recognized that German planes are good too. Just that each plane has good and bad qualities and were designed for a certain purpose.
Just because someone points out something about a plane does not mean he thinks that plane is the uber. I know a 109 should outclimb a Mustang, Also a Mustang should high speed outturn a 109.

Basically wasnt a 109 at first of war went against turners, Spits and Yaks. Towards the End of War it went against Mustangs that were designed to go fast up high escorting, hince the high speed turning.

So I do not think my Mustang is the Uber duber.
Just a good plane in a particular role.

I like the 109 easy to fly. Climbs good and hard to stall. Definatly a great plane. 190 also a great plane. 190 rolls to fast for my taste.

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 05:42 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HellToupee
02-18-2006, 05:48 PM
look at comments from german fliers since the 25lbs boost spitfire showed up, they make it sound like german planes suck :P

Tator_Totts
02-18-2006, 05:49 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I very much respect the German guns on my six. very nasty. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

fordfan25
02-18-2006, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
OK ill probably get slammed and crash and burn for this post but...............

Ok so there is alot of whining and posting about the US planes being flying sleds and the like and German planes being about to skywrite in Chinese and 30,000ft*.
In every book you read about US air battles it appears if the US always won and it was a pushover, maybe the german planes WERE better but they had poorly trained pilots and fewer numbers. Maybe the US planes like the P-47, P-51 and the P-38 are moddeled correctly in this game but in real life they had better pilots than the Germans and had many more aircraft.



* Credits to Leadspitter for that quote in HL http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


and maby monkeys with red hats will fly out of your *** and bring about world peace

danjama
02-18-2006, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Do Do bird is Danjama on a bad night..............
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

you are only being this cocky caus HL is down, wait, ill kick ur *** all night

p1ngu666
02-18-2006, 06:06 PM
http://static.flickr.com/24/56733884_8a9876603c.jpg

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-18-2006, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
in real life they had better pilots than the Germans and had many more aircraft.


This part at least shouldn't come as news to anyone http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 06:23 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Do Do bird is Danjama on a bad night..............
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

you are only being this cocky caus HL is down, wait, ill kick ur *** all night </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


i dont want another hole from you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 06:24 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
http://static.flickr.com/24/56733884_8a9876603c.jpg

****** .50cal Barrett sniper rifle*
he was a good friend of mine

RiP birdy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Akronnick
02-18-2006, 06:52 PM
Ooogh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif , that's a dead owl

Unknown-Pilot
02-18-2006, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Ok so there is alot of whining and posting about the US planes being flying sleds and the like and German planes being about to skywrite in Chinese and 30,000ft*.

That was funny as hell, and I had a good laugh about it until I saw that pic pingu posted.

What the hell is wrong with you Pingu? That pic is fecked up. I hope whoever made it gets hit by a bus. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif



Moving back on-topic... History is written by the winners. And all the kids on this forum who are constantly red-whining (and regardless of their chronological age, that's an accurate description of them) conveniently forget this and scream bloody murder because they think since we won, we had the best everything, and that's all there was to it, and by god they'll find anecdotal evidence to support that, even if they have to spin it.

Let's look back, if we could, to 1917. The Germans were outnumbered (severely) and short on good metals (sound familiar?), so their engines were lagging behind a bit. Yet, with less power available for designers, they managed to produce 3 of the best fighters of the era. One of them scared the allies so much that it was specifically cited and confiscated after the armistice. The last, didn't come soon enough, but got the last kill of the war, and out ran, out climbed, and was about equal in turn, with the most famous allied plane of the war.

They *knew* what they were doing, in regards to both, making, and flying, combat planes.

Post war, the seeds were sewn to almost guarentee a rematch, and Germany was stripped of everything. But research and pilot training continued as gliding became a national past time. Studies of jet propulsion, and bleeding-edge aerodynamics were continuing virtually without a break.

Naturally, they weren't the only ones doing this, and I don't feel that they "did everything better" or anything like that. I'm only stressing that they had the knowledge necessary to make combat aircraft that were on par with the best from anywhere else.

When one looks around this forum and sees all the things the blinded fanbois who can only see red, clamp on to and continually harp on, it begs the question - could it *really* have made that much of a difference, given that the knowledge was there to improve it if need be. If it persisted, then the only logical conclusion that can be draw is that it really wasn't that big a deal. (take your pick - lack of gear doors on the 109, lack of trim on the 109, protrusions on the 109, lack of streamlined spinner on the 190 (which was worked on during prototype trials but shown to offer little benefit while causing cooling problems), no flush mounted riveting on the 190, etc, etc, etc)

If their planes were as bad as people here would have everyone believe, it would not have taken the combined might of the 3 largest nations on the planet to take them down. Nor would it have taken as long as it did.

They lost, not because of their pilot quality, not because of their pilot quantity, or fuel problems, or because they had poor weapons, they lost because they had horrible leadership that was on a course to self destruction, and because they were fighting a war on 3 fronts.

As far as this sim is concerned, it's the most accurate it's ever been. Period. Energy fighters are still blatantly disadvantaged, and that will never change, but beyond that, it's not only as good as it gets, it's damn good in absolute terms and better than it's ever been.

Everyone had top notch pilots and n00bs. Everyone had good planes. Our advantage was numbers, industrial might, and severely better strategic capabilities.

Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 06:58 PM
ty for that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
now i see the big picture thanks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bearcat99
02-18-2006, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That is the biggest crock I have ever heard in here.. well one of them anyway. As if Americans in this community were so stupid or arrogant as to think that thier planes or equipment was the best at everything.... that is not the case.. but in this sim many American planes have deficiencies that are fairly obvious to anyone who is willing to look objectively at them.

No one thinks that German planes were not good machines.... infact the fact of the quality of German engineering is obvious to anyone who knows anything about machines built in the 20th century. However when Mustangs dive away from 109s and get caught..... Or when they cant catch a 109 in a dive..... or barely in level flight for that matter.. even though they are supposed to be able to do that..... or when you stall ot down low.. more often than not.. even if you are at a reasonbale speed.... regardless to how much fuel you have...

I cant speak for anyone else here but my dissatisfaction with any American plane is not because they are not "better" than German planes... or any other... but that many of them dont perform as the historic records.. from pilot accounts and test reports say they did. The DMs on the P-47s are not as sturdy as they should be... the acceleration on the Mustangs is not as good as it should be... neither is the climb.. The 50s are debateable.... While there have been imporvements some things are still not as they should be. I wont get into a few other planes....


I dont expect them to be "better" just good enough to be competitive.. which they were and in some respects even in this sim they are.. but there are deficiencies...

This sim is good no doubt... and for me there is no place else to fly regardless to it's shortcomings...... AFAIC it is what it is.. and I just deal with it...

danjama
02-18-2006, 07:42 PM
Ditto!

In fact a HUGE DITTO!

BM357_Sniper
02-18-2006, 08:00 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 Siwarrior:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That is the biggest crock I have ever heard in here.. well one of them anyway. As if Americans in this community were so stupid or arrogant as to think that thier planes or equipment was the best at everything.... that is not the case.. but in this sim many American planes have deficiencies that are fairly obvious to anyone who is willing to look objectively at them.

No one thinks that German planes were not good machines.... infact the fact of the quality of German engineering is obvious to anyone who knows anything about machines built in the 20th century. However when Mustangs dive away from 109s and get caught..... Or when they cant catch a 109 in a dive..... or barely in level flight for that matter.. even though they are supposed to be able to do that..... or when you stall ot down low.. more often than not.. even if you are at a reasonbale speed.... regardless to how much fuel you have...

I cant speak for anyone else here but my dissatisfaction with any American plane is not because they are not "better" than German planes... or any other... but that many of them dont perform as the historic records.. from pilot accounts and test reports say they did. The DMs on the P-47s are not as sturdy as they should be... the acceleration on the Mustangs is not as good as it should be... neither is the climb.. The 50s are debateable.... While there have been imporvements some things are still not as they should be. I wont get into a few other planes....


I dont expect them to be "better" just good enough to be competitive.. which they were and in some respects even in this sim they are.. but there are deficiencies...

This sim is good no doubt... and for me there is no place else to fly regardless to it's shortcomings...... AFAIC it is what it is.. and I just deal with it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Thank you! I couldn't have said it better. S~

Siwarrior
02-18-2006, 08:04 PM
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Cobra-84
02-18-2006, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
They *knew* what they were doing, in regards to both, making, and flying, combat planes.

Swap flying for driving and combat planes for cars and you have yourself BMW commercial. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif



If their planes were as bad as people here would have everyone believe, it would not have taken the combined might of the 3 largest nations on the planet to take them down. Nor would it have taken as long as it did.

No one here is saying they should be bad planes. All arguments were start based on in game comparisons. I personally thing the balance of the planes is broken. The Russians are far to good (La-7 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif), Germans are fine to me honestly, the Americans suck (far too many flight and damage model quirks), Planes from the same period were fairly competitive. Small errors can have disastrous effect on a plane in game. Adding 600 pound to the LaGG-3 made it come back to reality. It doesn't take much for a plane to become an overused "ufo" or piece of **** that will never be seen in an online game.


As far as this sim is concerned, it's the most accurate it's ever been. Period. Energy fighters are still blatantly disadvantaged, and that will never change, but beyond that, it's not only as good as it gets, it's damn good in absolute terms and better than it's ever been.

That isn't saying much. It may be more realistic than it once was, but its hardly realistic. Considering most of the planes are energy fighters, having little to no energy fighting really kills any "simulation".


Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so.

Key word there "par". As long as the allies would win, there wasn't too much need for new and improved designs. The goal of war is to win, once you've done that, is there anything else to do?


Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Just imagine P-80s or Meteors in larger numbers. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

There were plenty of allied advanced prop fighters that were canceled because they weren't needed and would have been a complete waste of money only to be replaced by jets in a few years. If they were needed, they would have been produced.

More jets + P-82 + XP-72 + B-29 + ? > Bf-109K proper parts.

Sintubin
02-18-2006, 08:26 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 Siwarrior:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That is the biggest crock I have ever heard in here.. well one of them anyway. As if Americans in this community were so stupid or arrogant as to think that thier planes or equipment was the best at everything.... that is not the case.. but in this sim many American planes have deficiencies that are fairly obvious to anyone who is willing to look objectively at them.

No one thinks that German planes were not good machines.... infact the fact of the quality of German engineering is obvious to anyone who knows anything about machines built in the 20th century. However when Mustangs dive away from 109s and get caught..... Or when they cant catch a 109 in a dive..... or barely in level flight for that matter.. even though they are supposed to be able to do that..... or when you stall ot down low.. more often than not.. even if you are at a reasonbale speed.... regardless to how much fuel you have...

I cant speak for anyone else here but my dissatisfaction with any American plane is not because they are not "better" than German planes... or any other... but that many of them dont perform as the historic records.. from pilot accounts and test reports say they did. The DMs on the P-47s are not as sturdy as they should be... the acceleration on the Mustangs is not as good as it should be... neither is the climb.. The 50s are debateable.... While there have been imporvements some things are still not as they should be. I wont get into a few other planes....


I dont expect them to be "better" just good enough to be competitive.. which they were and in some respects even in this sim they are.. but there are deficiencies...

This sim is good no doubt... and for me there is no place else to fly regardless to it's shortcomings...... AFAIC it is what it is.. and I just deal with it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm yes i forgot you where there in WWII http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Unknown-Pilot
02-18-2006, 08:34 PM
Ah, a red-whiner took exception, but tries to couch it in reason. Why am I not surprised? lol

Maybe if you're an evil POS like stalin the goal might be to win and nothing else. But we like to keep our boys safe. It was said that someone (I used to know how, but don't remember now) asked Truman what he would say at this impeachment when it got out that he had the bomb, and could have used it to save millions of American lives but didn't use it - when he was considering if it should be used. And, it was....

But no, you're absolutely right. We all decided to "play fair" the whole way through and choose to withold our advanced stuff so as to not cheat the Germans, because afterall, we were "doing just fine". Who cares about executing a safe(er) war? Fair play is TOP priority.

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


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif If you think it's not a simulation, there's always Crimson Skies or Quake or WoW for you to play. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Oh, and btw - you can energy fight in this series. I do it 90% of the time (occasional hops in TnBers or **** planes though). If you believe this "Considering most of the planes are energy fighters, having little to no energy fighting really kills any "simulation"" to be true, I'd recommend more stick time. And maybe less forum time in the meantime. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Cobra-84
02-18-2006, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Ah, a red-whiner took exception, but tries to couch it in reason. Why am I not surprised? lol

With people like you on it, its no suprise this forum is so hated.


Maybe if you're an evil POS like stalin the goal might be to win and nothing else. But we like to keep our boys safe. It was said that someone (I used to know how, but don't remember now) asked Truman what he would say at this impeachment when it got out that he had the bomb, and could have used it to save millions of American lives but didn't use it - when he was considering if it should be used. And, it was....

But no, you're absolutely right. We all decided to "play fair" the whole way through and choose to withold our advanced stuff so as to not cheat the Germans, because afterall, we were "doing just fine". Who cares about executing a safe(er) war? Fair play is TOP priority.


You are streching what I said a little too far and I said nothing about "fair play". Spending millions on new planes and have to train the pilots, ship them across the Atlantic, only to use for 6 months only to have to throw them away afterwords to fight a minimal threat is stupid.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif If you think it's not a simulation, there's always Crimson Skies or Quake or WoW for you to play. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Simulation:
Reproduction or representation.
An imitation; a sham.

Currently its somewhere between the two, a few positive changes would move it far closer to #1.


Oh, and btw - you can energy fight in this series. I do it 90% of the time (occasional hops in TnBers or **** planes though). If you believe this "Considering most of the planes are energy fighters, having little to no energy fighting really kills any "simulation"" to be true, I'd recommend more stick time. And maybe less forum time in the meantime. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I phrased my response wrongly, I meant that planes that are energy fighters about equal to thse that aren't. The difference between a P-47 and Spitfire is far to small in an energy fight, but the differences are a significant in turn fights.

horseback
02-18-2006, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback

Bearcat99
02-18-2006, 09:53 PM
Originally posted by Sintubin:
Hmm yes i forgot you where there in WWII http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

No.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I wasnt.... but I do know that the things I mentioned are, even if they arent as far off as I think.. they arent quite right. I just am, not going to cry and whine about it like some people have been doing on other issues.

Keep in mind who the "original" whiners, the ones who earned the distinction of coining the phrase so to speak are http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif ... The ones who set the standard for all the whiners after. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

ReligiousZealot
02-18-2006, 10:42 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 Siwarrior:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
The German planes must be given respect and I think that some peopled don't fly the Mustang properly and they have the *american planes are best* stuck in theer head and they try to fly it like a spitfire or yak and end up dieing.
Each plane has its own area to fly in in which it will do well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That is the biggest crock I have ever heard in here.. well one of them anyway. As if Americans in this community were so stupid or arrogant as to think that thier planes or equipment was the best at everything.... that is not the case.. but in this sim many American planes have deficiencies that are fairly obvious to anyone who is willing to look objectively at them.

No one thinks that German planes were not good machines.... infact the fact of the quality of German engineering is obvious to anyone who knows anything about machines built in the 20th century. However when Mustangs dive away from 109s and get caught..... Or when they cant catch a 109 in a dive..... or barely in level flight for that matter.. even though they are supposed to be able to do that..... or when you stall ot down low.. more often than not.. even if you are at a reasonbale speed.... regardless to how much fuel you have...

I cant speak for anyone else here but my dissatisfaction with any American plane is not because they are not "better" than German planes... or any other... but that many of them dont perform as the historic records.. from pilot accounts and test reports say they did. The DMs on the P-47s are not as sturdy as they should be... the acceleration on the Mustangs is not as good as it should be... neither is the climb.. The 50s are debateable.... While there have been imporvements some things are still not as they should be. I wont get into a few other planes....


I dont expect them to be "better" just good enough to be competitive.. which they were and in some respects even in this sim they are.. but there are deficiencies...

This sim is good no doubt... and for me there is no place else to fly regardless to it's shortcomings...... AFAIC it is what it is.. and I just deal with it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

Well said! I couldn't have said it any better (in fact, it probably would've ended up sounding like a whine, haha).

Siwarrior
02-19-2006, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif ok so am i wrong?

AH_Gonzo
02-19-2006, 03:04 AM
Comfy chair.....CHECK
BEER............CHECK
Doritos.........CHECK

Save me a seat!!!

robban75
02-19-2006, 03:34 AM
However when Mustangs dive away from 109s and get caught..... Or when they cant catch a 109 in a dive..... or barely in level flight for that matter.. even though they are supposed to be able to do that..... or when you stall ot down low.. more often than not.. even if you are at a reasonbale speed.... regardless to how much fuel you have...


In-game.

In the early and middle stages of a dive, the 109 will catch a Fw 190, including the D-9. And the Mustang can catch the D-9 in a dive.

And I rarely stall the Mustang down low. But then I've flown the Fw 190 for more than 4 years.

On this forum the Mustang always gets compared to the Bf 109 for some reason, and very seldom to the 190. Why is that?

Siwarrior
02-19-2006, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by AH_Gonzo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Comfy chair.....CHECK
BEER............CHECK
Doritos.........CHECK

Save me a seat!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


all is over my friend http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

WOLFMondo
02-19-2006, 04:04 AM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:


Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

While I agree to a point, look at the engine capacity of a DB or Jumo compared with a Merlin, what the Merlin or Allison could do on 26 litres the Germans could only muster on 35+ litres. The SabreIIB could produce 2460 HP on 11lbs boost and thats a 36 litre engine. Imagine if the allies had there backs against the wall, engines like the Sabre VA and Griffons would have been pushed which were the same capacity as the DB605 but could produce ridiculous amounts of power.

I think though the FW190D's were more like a modern fighter jet than any allied plane was, less head in cockpit time with all that engine automation, not needing trim, reclined seat, selectable gun combinations etc.

WOLFMondo
02-19-2006, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by robban75:

On this forum the Mustang always gets compared to the Bf 109 for some reason, and very seldom to the 190. Why is that?


Cause thats what kills all the Mustang drivers turning and burning on the deck? Same way BF109 drivers complain about the Spit, cause thats what kills them turning and burning on the deck!

Targ
02-19-2006, 04:17 AM
It's the man, not the machine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I say Booo! to all the poor sports on these boards. This is a game first ment to be fun and second a competition of sorts and to those of you who get shot down and rather than say "good show" you come here to try and convince us all that it was the plane and had nothing to do with the cry baby in the cockpit!
BOOOO! BOOOO!

Kurfurst__
02-19-2006, 04:33 AM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Some comments...

Yes 1,98ata is a lot less boost than +25, however keep in mind the endpressure is very similiar, as the Brits and German engine manufacturers used different way. The former increased boost mightily, the latter increased both the boost and compression ratio. The former method was perhaps simplier way of improving power, but on the long term, it become increasingly difficult since it required bigger (heavier and take away more power from engine) superchargers, intercoolers to be installed, and fuel consumption would be high (range!). Increasing CR otoh yielded less power increase, but made the engine more effiecient, and was particularly good way for altitude performance since it increased power at all altitudes... advs and disadvs, as usual.

Actually you have 1,98ata boost AND 8,5:1 compression ratio on those late 605s, vs. +25lbs but only 6:1 compression ratio on the late Merlins. The fuel used, 'C-3' and '150rade' was very comparable in resisting knocking, ie. for high output capacity.

As for flushrivting - it was used on the 109 from the start, any close-up pic should reveal that, and wheel well doors were added to the 109K as well (they were intended for the 109G already but only a few Gustav got it).

In the end, while the development path was different, the results were pretty much the same.

alert_1
02-19-2006, 04:42 AM
Ok checking:
1940 - Me109E4, He100D0 - what was better?
1941 - Me109F4, Fw190A2 - the best? - you bet!
1942 - well Me109G2, Fw190A3 - again, the best
1943 - Fw190A5,A6 - well P51B,C, La5FN are there but hardly catching
1944 - Me262 - the most advaced fighter
1945 - He162, Do335 - allies were catching but still lacking behind
1946 - http://www.luft46.com .... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Mr_Nakajima
02-19-2006, 04:53 AM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Moving back on-topic... History is written by the winners.

I see this often, but for aviation I think its more often written by people with a genuine interest in the subject and no particular axe to grind.

All sides in WWII produced some poor, some good and some excellent designs. These designs differed according to a particular country's operational needs and industrial base, but all aircraft were designed by the same species (homo sapiens) and had to fit in with the same laws of physics regardless of place of origin.

P-51? Excellent aircraft. Fw-190? Another excellent one, just emphasising different aspects of performance.

geetarman
02-19-2006, 05:03 AM
Originally posted by Siwarrior:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif ok so am i wrong? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes - very good - to answer you directly, you were wrong.

joeap
02-19-2006, 05:08 AM
Originally posted by Sintubin:


Hmm yes i forgot you where there in WWII http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Were you? What's wrong with what BC said? He didn't say anything that could be interpreted as saying he was there and knows better. He just has some questions about discrepancies he sees (like we all do, Blue and Red) between his knowledge and what's in the game. FW-190 fuel bug for example?

Pirschjaeger
02-19-2006, 05:09 AM
Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif ok so am i wrong? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes - very good - to answer you directly, you were wrong. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong in assuming himself wrong, or was he right about being wrong? If he assumes himself wrong when really he was right, then he is both wrong and right. If he was both wrong and right, but you assumed he was right when he said he was wrong, that means you are wrong.

Dude you are confusing the issue. Am I right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

triggerhappyfin
02-19-2006, 05:59 AM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Ok so there is alot of whining and posting about the US planes being flying sleds and the like and German planes being about to skywrite in Chinese and 30,000ft*.

That was funny as hell, and I had a good laugh about it until I saw that pic pingu posted.

What the hell is wrong with you Pingu? That pic is fecked up. I hope whoever made it gets hit by a bus. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif



Moving back on-topic... History is written by the winners. And all the kids on this forum who are constantly red-whining (and regardless of their chronological age, that's an accurate description of them) conveniently forget this and scream bloody murder because they think since we won, we had the best everything, and that's all there was to it, and by god they'll find anecdotal evidence to support that, even if they have to spin it.

Let's look back, if we could, to 1917. The Germans were outnumbered (severely) and short on good metals (sound familiar?), so their engines were lagging behind a bit. Yet, with less power available for designers, they managed to produce 3 of the best fighters of the era. One of them scared the allies so much that it was specifically cited and confiscated after the armistice. The last, didn't come soon enough, but got the last kill of the war, and out ran, out climbed, and was about equal in turn, with the most famous allied plane of the war.

They *knew* what they were doing, in regards to both, making, and flying, combat planes.

Post war, the seeds were sewn to almost guarentee a rematch, and Germany was stripped of everything. But research and pilot training continued as gliding became a national past time. Studies of jet propulsion, and bleeding-edge aerodynamics were continuing virtually without a break.

Naturally, they weren't the only ones doing this, and I don't feel that they "did everything better" or anything like that. I'm only stressing that they had the knowledge necessary to make combat aircraft that were on par with the best from anywhere else.

When one looks around this forum and sees all the things the blinded fanbois who can only see red, clamp on to and continually harp on, it begs the question - could it *really* have made that much of a difference, given that the knowledge was there to improve it if need be. If it persisted, then the only logical conclusion that can be draw is that it really wasn't that big a deal. (take your pick - lack of gear doors on the 109, lack of trim on the 109, protrusions on the 109, lack of streamlined spinner on the 190 (which was worked on during prototype trials but shown to offer little benefit while causing cooling problems), no flush mounted riveting on the 190, etc, etc, etc)

If their planes were as bad as people here would have everyone believe, it would not have taken the combined might of the 3 largest nations on the planet to take them down. Nor would it have taken as long as it did.

They lost, not because of their pilot quality, not because of their pilot quantity, or fuel problems, or because they had poor weapons, they lost because they had horrible leadership that was on a course to self destruction, and because they were fighting a war on 3 fronts.

As far as this sim is concerned, it's the most accurate it's ever been. Period. Energy fighters are still blatantly disadvantaged, and that will never change, but beyond that, it's not only as good as it gets, it's damn good in absolute terms and better than it's ever been.

Everyone had top notch pilots and n00bs. Everyone had good planes. Our advantage was numbers, industrial might, and severely better strategic capabilities.

Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let´s not forget the political descisions taken prior to US getting involved in the war.

Polititians in US made early a descision about the need of fighter pilots and pilots in general for the years to come. In early days the USAF began building up its numbers of flight trainees to feed the future need of combatpilots along with a great buildup of US armed forces whitch werent the biggest and most qualified prior to WW2.

Hitler on other hand from start stated the need of pilots would be temporary. The quality of German pilots was great in the beginning of the war( using the most modern tactics that allied had to learn the hard way) but as no sufficient means to fill the gaps of KIA pilots were made the losses sooner or later would affect the state of the Luftwaffe in a negative way. Hitler didnt have the proper insight of how the increased conflict would affect the Germans ability to wage war. Add to this the fact of danger to make the dictator aware of his owne shortcomings.
It make me wonder,if the German leader had been a more intelligent man, what had happened and how hard would the allies been forced to fight before Germany had been beaten?

OldMan____
02-19-2006, 06:17 AM
There is special issue with US planes. That is modern mithology. US was on the winning side and had the betrter position after war, and started a cold war againt URSS. Presenting to its own people their equipment as the best one was really important at that time. So there were much more stories about US planes and pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.

Stafroty
02-19-2006, 07:01 AM
pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.


im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT. its not the others they betray that way, but themself, and i count the politicians themselfs to be victims of this very same system, they have grown in to it. Its well known. that there is someones, who see thru this and uses peoples feelings for their "advantage"

many would believe that when you get something what greedness makes you want, they get happy. is not so. dunno how long if ever, can people understand this.

OldMan____
02-19-2006, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by Stafroty:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.


im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT. its not the others they betray that way, but themself, and i count the politicians themselfs to be victims of this very same system, they have grown in to it. Its well known. that there is someones, who see thru this and uses peoples feelings for their "advantage"

many would believe that when you get something what greedness makes you want, they get happy. is not so. dunno how long if ever, can people understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but the propaganda from the winner survives and spreads. The propaganda of the looser dies...

JG5_UnKle
02-19-2006, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by OldMan____:
There is special issue with US planes. That is modern mithology. US was on the winning side and had the betrter position after war, and started a cold war againt URSS. Presenting to its own people their equipment as the best one was really important at that time. So there were much more stories about US planes and pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.

Agree 100%

COOP Pilots do it with their eyes open http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

But seriously, I still think that a lot of people have unrealistic expectations of what is realistic in a sim http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-19-2006, 07:50 AM
Originally posted by Stafroty:

im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT.


Of course, why do you think Tom Clancy novels are so popular? (hint - it's not the derivative storylines, the one dimensional characters or the battle narratives that read like an accountant's wet dream) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

OldMan____
02-19-2006, 07:56 AM
Originally posted by SnapdLikeAMutha:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stafroty:

im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT.


Of course, why do you think Tom Clancy novels are so popular? (hint - it's not the derivative storylines, the one dimensional characters or the battle narratives that read like an accountant's wet dream) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeap. I always "loved" how he describes extremly short range of all Russian Fighters like Su 27 and Mig31 (when in fact they are quite good).

geetarman
02-19-2006, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif ok so am i wrong? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes - very good - to answer you directly, you were wrong. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong in assuming himself wrong, or was he right about being wrong? If he assumes himself wrong when really he was right, then he is both wrong and right. If he was both wrong and right, but you assumed he was right when he said he was wrong, that means you are wrong.

Dude you are confusing the issue. Am I right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude you make less sense than him.

JG52Karaya-X
02-19-2006, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Amen brother http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Only few realize that German planes reached similar or even superior performance as their allied contemporaries while running at FAR lower boost and on inferior fuel - the Bf109 running at 87 octane B4 fuel most of the war with some exceptions (DB601N, high boost DB605ASC/DC, etc.) and FW190 at 90 octane C3 fuel

geetarman
02-19-2006, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by OldMan____:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stafroty:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.


im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT. its not the others they betray that way, but themself, and i count the politicians themselfs to be victims of this very same system, they have grown in to it. Its well known. that there is someones, who see thru this and uses peoples feelings for their "advantage"

many would believe that when you get something what greedness makes you want, they get happy. is not so. dunno how long if ever, can people understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but the propaganda from the winner survives and spreads. The propaganda of the looser dies... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Propaganda? You ever read an American periodical, newspaper or watch the majority of
TV news outlets? You ever a session of Congress in action? The US is the most self-critical country around today. Some of you people don't know your a$$ from your elbow about the US or Americans. I can count on one hand the amount of times I've read US posters here pretend to "instruct" us all on how other people of the world are.

OldMan____
02-19-2006, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OldMan____:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stafroty:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.


im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT. its not the others they betray that way, but themself, and i count the politicians themselfs to be victims of this very same system, they have grown in to it. Its well known. that there is someones, who see thru this and uses peoples feelings for their "advantage"

many would believe that when you get something what greedness makes you want, they get happy. is not so. dunno how long if ever, can people understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but the propaganda from the winner survives and spreads. The propaganda of the looser dies... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Propaganda? You ever read an American periodical, newspaper or watch the majority of
TV news outlets? You ever a session of Congress in action? The US is the most self-critical country around today. Some of you people don't know your a$$ from your elbow about the US or Americans. I can count on one hand the amount of times I've read US posters here pretend to "instruct" us all on how other people of the world are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes I wacthed and I watched other countries too and exaclty because of that I say PROPAGANDA!

Like when US overtrown Brazilian democratic government to put a dictator in power long time ago. And on US news the dictator was removed and a democratic government was put in place... Tell that to som many brazilians that lost theirs lives with that.

Don´t even start with this subject. Or this will become a flame war.

idonno
02-19-2006, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by Targ: This is a game first ment to be fun...

This is a combat flight simulation, and it is as fun as its FM's are accurate. The formula is simple really;

Less accurate FM = Less fun.

If you don't agree, then you might find that you€d have even more fun playing something along the lines of Crimson Skies.


Originally posted by Targ:€¦those of you who get shot down and rather than say "good show" you come here to try and convince us all that it was the plane and had nothing to do with the cry baby in the cockpit!

If I get shot down in an F4U trying to turn with a Zeke, you dang sure won€t see me in here complaining that the F4U is porked or the Zeke is uber, but if, for example, Zeke€s were routinely chasing down my Corsair at 30,000€ then I€m certainly going to have something to say. Not because I got shot down, heck I get shot down virtually every day that I fly, but because it€s simply not right. That doesn€t make me a cry baby. It makes me somebody interested in correct FM€s. Now obviously my example is extreme, but the point is there€s nothing at all wrong with people pointing out real errors in the FM€s.

BTW, if I routinely shot down Zeke€s in turn fights with an F4U, I would certainly be here making noise about the porked Zeke as well. I don€t care if it€s an Axis ride or an Allied ride that€s hosed. Hosed is hosed is hosed, and it should be fixed. If getting it right doesn't matter then why did they ever try to in the first place?

You guys who insult, and complain about, the people that are trying to make the FM€s right, really might just be playing the wrong game.

id

UCLANUPE
02-19-2006, 09:07 AM
Maybe they were. However, as has been stated "that" is "not" the issue at hand. The issue is the poor performance of several allied planes that has truly effected the quality of gameplay as presented in this sim. Getting those aspects corrected is the aim, as it was when the original FB P-47 was worst than most bombers in the game.

While extremely stubborn about the reality of the issue, Oleg did come around to except his mistake and took steps to correct it. The current issues raised by Bearcat and others are in that same vain. The current attempt to "change" the topic is nothing more than a backhanded attempt to minimize the valitity of the "true" issue at hand and is seen as such. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

bodaw
02-19-2006, 09:30 AM
- If my opponent shoots me down, his/her plane is grossly over modeled.

- If my plane does not fly like the way I have fantasised, then my plane is porked.

- If even one of the shells from my guns hits the bandit but fails to bring it down instantly, my guns are porked.

- If however, the bandit saddles on my six and pours a ton lead into my plane and brings it down, then his/her guns are over modelled.

- I will dig up old hear says and exaggerated stories to back up my whines while totally ignoring the contradicting facts. Heck, I'll even make some up for your pleasure.

I believe I have all the neccessary qualities to become a moderator on this forum, would any one care to vote?

UCLANUPE
02-19-2006, 09:41 AM
Bodaw-I vote no. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

Stafroty
02-19-2006, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OldMan____:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stafroty:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">pilots, and all you know all stories from any side only get bigger and bigger with time.

So there are a few people that expect mithycal performance. And expect pathetic VVS performance because the post WWii porpaganda said that.

The true is that correct documenation point that most powers were mroe or less evenly matched.


One example is the complains about P51 acceleration. Everyone say its too low. But if you take the few numbers you get about its acceleration (in feet/second^2) and test in game, you will see it in fact accelerates MORE than it should.


Also 90% of people forget that exception of VVS planes, no plane in War was made to be used as we use them on DF servers.


im member of "panzer quild" in Finland, they had in one number interview of the old East Germany tank crew member, he told, that they were teached to believe in their system to be best there is, that they were teached for every situation there would be in way of the war. Not only loser sides or winners were those who were victims of propaganda for own system.. We all still are. well, those who believe things what is said, without slighters hesitation. wihtout thinkin it any more deeple, acceptin it as Truth and FACT. its not the others they betray that way, but themself, and i count the politicians themselfs to be victims of this very same system, they have grown in to it. Its well known. that there is someones, who see thru this and uses peoples feelings for their "advantage"

many would believe that when you get something what greedness makes you want, they get happy. is not so. dunno how long if ever, can people understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but the propaganda from the winner survives and spreads. The propaganda of the looser dies... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Propaganda? You ever read an American periodical, newspaper or watch the majority of
TV news outlets? You ever a session of Congress in action? The US is the most self-critical country around today. Some of you people don't know your a$$ from your elbow about the US or Americans. I can count on one hand the amount of times I've read US posters here pretend to "instruct" us all on how other people of the world are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


WELL SAID!!!

"I can count on one hand the amount of times I've read US posters here pretend to "instruct" us all on how other people of the world are."

Should i add, or how others should be and believe how things should be, we all know what opposition is handled, like it always been, behind public eyes.

horseback
02-19-2006, 11:05 AM
In regards to Western 'propaganda' about VVS fighters' performance: it was more IGNORANCE than wilful underestimation. Stalin gave us no examples of his aircraft, not even test results or general performance figures. He simply demanded more Lend Lease support, and we eventually gave him what he asked for, and reciprocated his example in terms of air technology; i.e., we withheld further examples of our best planes.

Postwar, the Soviets viewed any information about the second World War as a Propaganda opportunity to claim as much credit as possible for winning that war while maintaining a closed society. Any complaints about US behavior during WWII and the subsequent Cold War has to be considered in the light of those life and death struggles.

We had to support a number of dispicable thugs in order to maintain (or at least deny to the Soviets) their countries' positions in the 'Free' world. It was a war, we were trying to survive, and preserve as much democracy as we could. Our first priority had to be our own ability to survive and prosper.

Your country would not have done any better, and probably done far worse. Deal with it.

cheers

horseback

Targ
02-19-2006, 11:06 AM
This is a combat flight simulation, and it is as fun as its FM's are accurate. The formula is simple really;

Less accurate FM = Less fun.

If you don't agree, then you might find that you€d have even more fun playing something along the lines of Crimson Skies.

Weak and lame arguement, so I I disagree with you I am wrong and need to go fly crimson skies? Haha what a joke Who's "right FM" are we going to use? Sorry, this is a game! The interesting side effect of this game is the passion many people have about this game and how they approch it. Some people role play this game and take it rather serious, but it is still a game.
Play ther cards you get dealt with the best you can and my the best man win!

OldMan____
02-19-2006, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by horseback:
In regards to Western 'propaganda' about VVS fighters' performance: it was more IGNORANCE than wilful underestimation. Stalin gave us no examples of his aircraft, not even test results or general performance figures. He simply demanded more Lend Lease support, and we eventually gave him what he asked for, and reciprocated his example in terms of air technology; i.e., we withheld further examples of our best planes.

Postwar, the Soviets viewed any information about the second World War as a Propaganda opportunity to claim as much credit as possible for winning that war while maintaining a closed society. Any complaints about US behavior during WWII and the subsequent Cold War has to be considered in the light of those life and death struggles.

We had to support a number of dispicable thugs in order to maintain (or at least deny to the Soviets) their countries' positions in the 'Free' world. It was a war, we were trying to survive, and preserve as much democracy as we could. Our first priority had to be our own ability to survive and prosper.

Your country would not have done any better, and probably done far worse. Deal with it.

cheers

horseback

Who are you to say that? Can you predict future?

We were pretty fine without any intervention. No one complain about any strugle US had with SU, but when if gets into others lifes, there is no excuse!

Targ
02-19-2006, 11:18 AM
Let's get back on topic, "why teh German planes are da bomb!" and US plans suxzor/Oleg hates me arguement.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

idonno
02-19-2006, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Targ:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This is a combat flight simulation, and it is as fun as its FM's are accurate. The formula is simple really;

Less accurate FM = Less fun.

If you don't agree, then you might find that you€d have even more fun playing something along the lines of Crimson Skies.

Weak and lame arguement, so I I disagree with you I am wrong and need to go fly crimson skies? Haha what a joke Who's "right FM" are we going to use? Sorry, this is a game! The interesting side effect of this game is the passion many people have about this game and how they approch it. Some people role play this game and take it rather serious, but it is still a game.
Play ther cards you get dealt with the best you can and my the best man win! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then why should Oleg and company make any effort at all to get the FM's even close to right? If getting it right doesn't matter then they should just stop trying to give us accurate representations of real life aircraft and just do like the creators of Crimson Skies did, which is make up fictional airplanes. Then there would be nothing to debate. If that were the case, then I would agree with you when you say "Play the cards you get dealt with the best you can and may the best man win" because then it would truly be just a game, but as long as they're going call them Zeke's or Hellcats, or 109's, then they need to make them fly like Zeke's and Hellcat's and 109's.

And as far as "Who's "right FM" are we going to use?" not my right FM, or your right FM, or Oleg's right FM, but THE right FM, and there is enough information out there to make that happen.


id

JG4_Helofly
02-19-2006, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Targ:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This is a combat flight simulation, and it is as fun as its FM's are accurate. The formula is simple really;

Less accurate FM = Less fun.

If you don't agree, then you might find that you€d have even more fun playing something along the lines of Crimson Skies.

Weak and lame arguement, so I I disagree with you I am wrong and need to go fly crimson skies? Haha what a joke Who's "right FM" are we going to use? Sorry, this is a game! The interesting side effect of this game is the passion many people have about this game and how they approch it. Some people role play this game and take it rather serious, but it is still a game.
Play ther cards you get dealt with the best you can and my the best man win! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then why should Oleg and company make any effort at all to get the FM's even close to right? If getting it right doesn't matter then they should just stop trying to give us accurate representations of real life aircraft and just do like the creators of Crimson Skies did, which is make up fictional airplanes. Then there would be nothing to debate. If that were the case, then I would agree with you when you say "Play the cards you get dealt with the best you can and may the best man win" because then it would truly be just a game, but as long as they're going call them Zeke's or Hellcats, or 109's, then they need to make them fly like Zeke's and Hellcat's and 109's.

And as far as "Who's "right FM" are we going to use?" not my right FM, or your right FM, or Oleg's right FM, but THE right FM, and there is enough information out there to make that happen.


id </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% agree.

Why are you playing a wwII aircombat programm if the performances are not right? Do you want such a game in what a fw 190 can turn like a bf 109 but is as slow as a hurrican?

Why are we playing a SIMULATION? Because we want an accurat simulation of RL performances.
The same for sh3. You can play a game in which you can fire 50 tropedos in 10 seconds but that's not the aim.

If you want fun you can play a space combat simulation with space shuttles which are called xuutwe438904 .

Real sim player want to refly warbirds like there were in RL, to refly the battles and see how it was in RL.

For what is realisme if we only want a game for a fast dogfight with a maximum of kills?

Targ
02-19-2006, 12:50 PM
I hate to break the news to you but this game no matter how good it gets will never be like the real thing. Gameplay and balence are a factor in this game.
I would say Oleg has given us his best try on a good FM and tweaks it here and there trying new things.
I love this game and never get excited about tweaks in the fm, I fly the aircraft in this game to there strengths and weakness as they are in the game! Not how I think or feel they should. Teamwork is importent as well, something many of you ignore or do not understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Stafroty
02-20-2006, 02:49 AM
well, flight sims doesnt feel anymor flightsims, but mathematical code we are using, with graphical glitches. Some of us want to make it biases without themselfs understantd their own actions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HellToupee
02-20-2006, 03:25 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Amen brother http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Only few realize that German planes reached similar or even superior performance as their allied contemporaries while running at FAR lower boost and on inferior fuel - the Bf109 running at 87 octane B4 fuel most of the war with some exceptions (DB601N, high boost DB605ASC/DC, etc.) and FW190 at 90 octane C3 fuel </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

far lower boost? and fuel wasnt german octane measurement differnt, and i wouldnt call MW50 a low boost.

OldMan____
02-20-2006, 03:33 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
Here's some interesting food for thought - what if the Germans didn't have their backs against the wall for production time, and had the same quality fuel we did? The 109 and 190 remained on par with our aircraft throughout the war, using poor fuel and low boost. 1.98ATA is basically 2 atmospheres, or about +14lbs of boost (roughly). We have a Spitfire running +25lbs, and all have read about Mustangs running at 70" or so, and P-38s at 75" or so. Just imagine a flushmount riveted, polished 109K running at +25lbs or more. Scary thought when you really sit down and think about it.

Amen brother http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Only few realize that German planes reached similar or even superior performance as their allied contemporaries while running at FAR lower boost and on inferior fuel - the Bf109 running at 87 octane B4 fuel most of the war with some exceptions (DB601N, high boost DB605ASC/DC, etc.) and FW190 at 90 octane C3 fuel </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

far lower boost? and fuel wasnt german octane measurement differnt, and i wouldnt call MW50 a low boost. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

HE is not talking about this kind of boost. MW50 did not increased boost pressure. Was only a way to increase temperature difference on the termal machine, and keep it cooler. So you COULD also use a higher boost. But even using such help the boost was inferior to allied ones.

but as has been already discussed, this is irrelevant since German engines used higher compression ratio.

Siwarrior
02-20-2006, 03:51 AM
Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by geetarman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Siwarrior:
Im not saying all the American flyers believe their planes are best but some people do and they whine and cry becuase their planes cant do what they think they should do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif The problem with the expression "some people" is that it invariably is expanded to include anyone who disagrees with you, regardless of their reasons or arguements.

It is clear that there are some serious deficiencies in the modelling of the primary fighters of the Western Allies. The Mustang, the Spitfire(s), the Thunderbolt and the Lightning FMs & DMs all have non-historical qualities that handicap them in this sim (the jury is still out on the Tempest--the Mosquito's screwy DM is already discovered), and in the three years now that Forgotten Battles has been out, there has been a constant struggle to get the more glaring errors corrected.

Oleg has been as receptive to this as he has been to fixing the Focke Wulf's forward view and the Anton's performance.

On the other hand, there has also been an ongoing campaign to counter these corrections. It amazes me that there are people who have been on these boards for years who will maintain with absolute seriousness that the 109 and 190 as modelled in this game, are harder to fly than the Mustang, Spitfire, Lightning or Thunderbolt as they are modelled, simply because they were in real life.

These are MY "some people".

MY "some people" believe that the Spitfire, for all its sterling flying qualities, shook like a leaf in a hurricane the moment you touched the trigger.

MY "some people" believe that the Mustang needed an elevator or rudder trim adjustment every time the speed varied 3 miles per hour, that it stalled at the slightest movement of the stick at speeds below 300mph Indicated, the wings popped off at any high speed change of direction, and that the engine stopped at a harsh word.

MY "some people" believe that the Thunderbolt was a slug that took hours to reach its top speed (which was grossly exaggerated), that a 2 second burst from its eight .50s would barely dent anything unfortunate to be in front of them, and that its engine was, if anything, more fragile than the Mustang's.

MY "some people" believe that the USAAF arrived in Great Britain in mid-1942 with three thousand bombers and two thousand fighters with trained aircrew for all these aircraft, and just waited around taking casualties until early 1944 to overwhelm the remaining untrained Germans AFTER the Soviets thoughfully killed off all the experten.

MY "some people" believe that heavy machine guns were only marginally effective, and if wing mounted, caused the aircraft to shake like a dog just in out of the rain.

MY "some people" believe that German fighters were for all intents and purposes, bullet proof from a dead six; a cannon or two was necessary to take them out decisively.

MY "some people" believe that the gunners in bombers and attack aircraft aimed with a mouse, were bulletproof and could make a first burst kill 90% of the time from 600m or more.

MY "some people" believe that all the world's ills are directly attributable to how the Americans and British conducted WWII (in the apparent absence of their own countries' governments) and set things up solely for their own benefit post-war.

'Some people,' indeed...

cheers

horseback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif ok so am i wrong? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes - very good - to answer you directly, you were wrong. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong in assuming himself wrong, or was he right about being wrong? If he assumes himself wrong when really he was right, then he is both wrong and right. If he was both wrong and right, but you assumed he was right when he said he was wrong, that means you are wrong.

Dude you are confusing the issue. Am I right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude you make less sense than him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok so i am totally mislead about WW2 by looking at my opening post?

Siwarrior
02-20-2006, 03:53 AM
Originally posted by Targ:
I hate to break the news to you but this game no matter how good it gets will never be like the real thing. Gameplay and balence are a factor in this game.
I would say Oleg has given us his best try on a good FM and tweaks it here and there trying new things.
I love this game and never get excited about tweaks in the fm, I fly the aircraft in this game to there strengths and weakness as they are in the game! Not how I think or feel they should. Teamwork is importent as well, something many of you ignore or do not understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

yay now i understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

idonno
02-20-2006, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Targ:
I hate to break the news to you but this game no matter how good it gets will never be like the real thing. Gameplay and balence are a factor in this game.
I would say Oleg has given us his best try on a good FM and tweaks it here and there trying new things.
I love this game and never get excited about tweaks in the fm, I fly the aircraft in this game to there strengths and weakness as they are in the game! Not how I think or feel they should. Teamwork is importent as well, something many of you ignore or do not understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If everyone had your attitude, I€d say Oleg absolutely wasted an enormous amount of time, energy, and money on the FM€s in the first place. Maybe he should forget about BoB. Maybe his next project should just be an air combat game with fictitious aircraft. Can I have a plane that could turn inside a Zeke at 1,000 mph please, with ten 80mm cannons!? =)

Id

idonno
02-20-2006, 04:48 AM
Originally posted by Targ:
Teamwork is importent as well, something many of you ignore or do not understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And isn't this lovely? If you want accurate FM's that must mean you're an idiot. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

WOLFMondo
02-20-2006, 05:03 AM
Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:


Real sim player want to refly warbirds like there were in RL, to refly the battles and see how it was in RL.


100% Agree! Too bad most of the community that plays online have ruined large parts of this sim with thier Red vs blue ****.