PDA

View Full Version : what do you think turns better low alt la5fn or 109k4



LeadSpitter_
06-22-2005, 12:28 AM
Just shows they are virtually Identical in turn time low alt.

The 109k4 with 25 fuel and la5fn with 25 fuel both using no combat flaps.

check out the track you judge, you will see the smoke trails are identical.

In reality both of these aircraft should historically stall and tumble into the earth.

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/la5fn109k4.zip

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 01:42 AM
I think all planes turn better now when stalls and spins are toned down. It takes longer before anything serious happen when u pull hard at slow speeds.
It feels like they didn't fix all planes individually after implementing the new FM.
This is my guess since all planes are affected by the gentler stall and spin.
Only Oleg knows the answer for sure.

Takeoffs, landings and the torque anyway makes feel more real than before though.
The only thing to me wich feels out of tuning is this exeptional turning in all planes and the possibility to stallfight without the need of flaps.

But since we are betatesters for the new FM for BoB I guess it's precisely this kind of things we are suppused to find, dont u think. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Badsight.
06-22-2005, 01:46 AM
planes with Slats

Jasko76
06-22-2005, 02:00 AM
AFAIK La-5FN SHOULD outturn Bf 109K at low alt and low speed. So either La-5FN is porked or Bf 109 is ├╝ber.

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
planes with Slats

Yep sure, but many planes dont have'em and they still can perform.


I'm a bit surprized that U guys who I know test often and are experienced with this sim, haven't clearly seen that this is not one or two planes that are affected but all.
My wingie and I noticed this the first day of testing and I have gone through all planes since then with same result.

Why do u, think for example, the p38 is so good in turns now?
If u compare with 3.04 the stall is gentle now and takes time for anything serious to happen.
So in 3.04 it turned almost as good but suffered from a vicious snapstall and spin if pressed.
So we just can keep turns going longer and harder now, thats all.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LeadSpitter_
06-22-2005, 02:50 AM
i zipped it for those having problems dling.

The dora does not have them and it is turning like the la5fn spitfire and 109 varients much better then the mustang low alt.

I just tested with ironman for about an hour many 1vs1s.

The 190a6 with outter cannon removed is turning identical with the p51 but the dora out turns them both with absolute ease.

The p-51d is outurning the a8 a9 f8 pretty easy but they can run and gain a far distance circle around for a headon and explode the p51 easily but dora is turning inside the 51 very easy low speed.

the 190a6 also is climing alot faster then the p51d both using 25 fuel.

Pirschjaeger
06-22-2005, 02:55 AM
I'm no expert or beta tester but considering what I've previously read in this forum in the last three years it would seem to me that any patch or improvement will and does have issues after.

I'm guessing the number one reason, after the fact that this is a program trying to imitate the complex physics of obsolete machinery from more than half a century ago, is the pressure from the community to get the patches released. This is complicated stuff and the developers are working with "cutting edge technology". They don't have books to tell them "how to do it". They must figure it out themselves. They are, in effect, inventors under pressure.

I'm curious about beta testing. Does the development team send a list of issue to be considered and tested to the testers? Or, do the testers just simply receive the beta and told "Here you go, see if something's wrong."

Another thing to consider, being that the beta testers are from all over the globe, do they communicate with each other and if so, how good is that communication? As F-19 pointed out, he and his wingman noticed these "helicopter characteristics" (for lack of a better term) on the first day. Being that F-19's buddy is his wingman they have developed good communication and know each other well. Maybe communication between the beta testers could be improved?

As I said, I'm no expert and know nothing about the beta testing. This was just a few thoughts I had. I would appreciate it if a beta tester could fill me in on the protocals of the actual testing, just for curiosity sake.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
06-22-2005, 04:13 AM
Another question; Was the pilot of the other plane AI or human? I ask this because I have found that the AI can turn a plane to its limit.

It would seem to me that testing the turning capability with another player online is not the best way. The results lose their validity simply due to possible net lag, pilot's ability, and hardware used.

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

BTW, I haven't tried the new patch. Everything I suggested was based on what I've read in this thread and my imagination. Has anyone seen my medication? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Fritz

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 04:16 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:

I'm guessing the number one reason, after the fact that this is a program trying to imitate the complex physics of obsolete machinery from more than half a century ago, is the pressure from the community to get the patches released. This is complicated stuff and the developers are working with "cutting edge technology". They don't have books to tell them "how to do it". They must figure it out themselves. They are, in effect, inventors under pressure.


I belive U're right and I also would be wery interested to know how the betatesters work.
Note that I in no way want to imply that I am unimpressed by their work.

I always post my findings pretty straightforward, staying on course without excessive politeness and just hope the detail makes the info as clear as possible and testable for anyone.

The problem with critisism (even constructive) is that so many kind words infact are needed to avoid that people become offended , wich may force them to say the total opposite or such just because of the feeling that they are in some way attacked and must defend themselves.
I'm pretty sure that Oleg's team sees past such issues though. I can't imagine they would have lasted this long otherwise in such a large and advanced project. I'm sure they had to kill lots of their darlings. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Another question; Was the pilot of the other plane AI or human? I ask this because I have found that the AI can turn a plane to its limit.

It would seem to me that testing the turning capability with another player online is not the best way. The results lose their validity simply due to possible net lag, pilot's ability, and hardware used.

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

BTW, I haven't tried the new patch. Everything I suggested was based on what I've read in this thread and my imagination. Has anyone seen my medication? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Fritz


A way that it's possible to test a thing like this pretty well with two live opponents is to do many flights and then switch planes.
The more times, the better.

The lag may be minimal if the players and servers are close to eachother and have fast connections.

Pirschjaeger
06-22-2005, 04:38 AM
F-19, you brought up a good point. I don't want anyone to take this the wrong way but I do see many threads about possible problems with the patches, only hours after their release. I figure that the vast majority of complaints hold no validity while some do, but very few.

If you and L-Spitter are correct in what you've noticed then I have to ask "why didn't the beta testers find this?" It seems to me that if you guys are right, then this was easily noticable in the testing.

But, on the other hand, and this is what I believe, maybe the list and the issues are to numerous to be addressed before the community reaches it's climax and bursts at the seams. You've seen the threads and how the forum heats up with just a simple delay. Then when they finally get the patch, the forum heats up again with complaints.

I would rather wait an extra two weeks, or two months to get a patch that is finished. I'm for quality versus quantity. When a patch is released and there are issues I can feel confident in blaming the patch-whiners and a large portion of the community, at least the GD paticipants. The word "spoilt" comes to mind.

Maybe a good way would be for the developers and testers to basically lock themselves out of the forum and simply say "we'll be back when it's ready." Possibly the patches would be finished sooner and the results would be better.

As I said, I am no expert and know nothing about the testing protocals but this is just what I see with my limited knowledge.

In summary, I believe the root of the problem is not the developers and testers themselves, but rather the community itself.

Interesting topic me thinks. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
06-22-2005, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by F19_Ob:
A way that it's possible to test a thing like this pretty well with two live opponents is to do many flights and then switch planes.
The more times, the better.

The lag may be minimal if the players and servers are close to eachother and have fast connections.

That's a good point too. Also this same testing would have to be done with various different testers and as you said, the more the better.

The next problem is time and time zones. These people have lives, at least a few of them anyway, and one or two might even have a girlfriend. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Just kidding of course. I shouldn't say anything cause my wife won't let me have a gf. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Then the testers are located all around the world. I like flying with JG/54 Arnie and his squadron but I live in China while they are in Holland. The time zone difference meant we rarely had the chance to fly together. I won't even mention the lag. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif You can call me "Ping". To add, because I was 7 hours into their future I often flew solo and without enemy targets for hours while hoping someone would join their server; many times in vane. So, I'm sure, the testers have the same problems.

This supports my view that the testers don't have enough time nor do they have good communication all the time to meet the community's demands.

We, the community, should concider ourselves the secondary testers and be more patient. I do enjoy reading threads that have accurate facts and figures to back up claims, made by community members. A good one that comes to mind was Arnie's DM testing.

So, now we have a theory that the planes are not turning correctly. Who is going to test this theory and how? I would like to help but 10% of my pc is in the box, 70% is in DHL's hands, and the rest will be bought when I get back home. Also, I haven't flown in 10 months, I probably couldn't turn a B-25 with a dead engine, on the taxi way. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Now it's the secondary testers turn. This is good for the community and game development. I also learn a lot from reading accurate findings. I'm sure Oleg and the developers are thankful to those who make good tests with with accurate results. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fritz

F19_Ob
06-22-2005, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:

If you and L-Spitter are correct in what you've noticed then I have to ask "why didn't the beta testers find this?" It seems to me that if you guys are right, then this was easily noticable in the testing.



If I or anyone else are correct I leave to oleg to decide.
I, juts test and report and let others test and see if they come up with similar results or not.
It's always up to Oleg to determine what to make of it in the end.


I think things could easily be missed if the betatester got specific things to test only.
Then ofcourse betatesters are human too and perhaps work most of the day.
Perhaps every tester didn't go through every plane? and/or compared them against eachother?.
How many years of simming do they have?
How muchreading about the different planes have they done?
I guess there are many small variables that determines the outcome of tests and many that I haven't mentioned here.
Perhaps the stamina to re-test the same thing over and over is critical for succcess?

There is a big difference to test, for example, a spin 10 times on every height from 5000m compared to 20 or 40. It would take a while to go through all planes. and thats just a simple spintest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif
To make a guntest and shoot with single cannonshells 60-100 sorties to determine the average damage it does. That takes a few days and that still is just one plane.

So in a way it can be easier for the community as a group to find the possible errors faster since there may be many hundreds of us who like long tests and think it's fun, and have time.
That dont make everything we come up with actual errors though.


Anyway I'm pretty sure Oleg can sort out reports and posts with less credibility pretty fast.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Pirschjaeger
06-22-2005, 06:41 AM
Agreed.

I've tried to imagine what Oleg must have going through his mind everyday. BoB is in the works and so that must be very limited in testing. Then he's got to consider the latest patch and how that is going. Then there's marketing, business strategies, and so much more. To top it all off, he has to remember to get milk, bread, and butter on the way home, or get flamed by his wife. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

So, with all this in mind, there are many limitations. You are right, it is up to Oleg to make the final decisions and find out what is right and what is wrong. I think that the testing the community has done on their own accord has probably made Oleg's and they developer's lives a little easier.

L-Spitters post is a good one. No complaints, no whining, just simply "Hey, have you noticed this?". That's constructive and the logical way to go. Oleg has been quoted many times but my favorite is "Do you have a track?". This shows me he does listen and is open-minded to what the community has to say.

Many threads, not this one, say "there's a problem, I paid $XX, I want it fixed". A better approach would be "Oleg, we tested and look what we found."

If someone decided to make the tests and show that there may be a problem I'm sure Oleg would be happy to look into it. Best of all, he might not forget the milk and butter on the way home. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

Big_Bad_Wulf
06-22-2005, 08:57 AM
Muahahha, thanks... great entertainment...
For sure the LA5FN will outturn the 109 K4. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I am so sorry that I can`t download the ZIP file(to much traffic?).