PDA

View Full Version : spit vs 109 in B.O.B your Expectations?



fordfan25
03-08-2007, 12:22 PM
rules. no charts ect,no trolling or fanboy mouthing off, please lets keep this friendly. \

seeing as these two fighters are probly going to make up the bulk of online fights in BoB.What are you expecting the advantges to be in BoB conserning these to fighters? thow in the hurrican if you want http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

fordfan25
03-08-2007, 12:22 PM
rules. no charts ect,no trolling or fanboy mouthing off, please lets keep this friendly. \

seeing as these two fighters are probly going to make up the bulk of online fights in BoB.What are you expecting the advantges to be in BoB conserning these to fighters? thow in the hurrican if you want http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

stanford-ukded
03-08-2007, 01:23 PM
Some people will state that the Spitfire will outturn the 109. Others will state that's rubbish and the 109 out turns the Spitfire. They will then proceed for 50 pages to slate each other, producing graphs and any other "credible" source they can get their hands on.

There have been exactly 2043824828482184 threads on relative aircraft performance for IL2 - guess there's always room for one more.

But really - everyone already knows the Spit vs. 109 advantages/disadvanages right? Do we really need to thrash it out again?

DIRTY-MAC
03-08-2007, 01:26 PM
It will be extreemly even betweeen the to fighters. Pilots will be the big factor

msalama
03-08-2007, 01:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Do we really need to thrash it out again? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. We* will however. You just wait http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

* Count me out, though.

Whirlin_merlin
03-08-2007, 01:41 PM
I expect it's going to be damm good fun!
Stuff the whiners!

I'm really looking forward to the Hurricane though, more than the other two. Leave the 109 and spits to fight it out and go for those bombers, Croydon must survive!

P.S There is going to be immense whinning whenever a Hurricane shoots down a 109 so it might be worth having a go.

JtD
03-08-2007, 01:47 PM
I expect the Spit to own the 109.

JG52Karaya-X
03-08-2007, 01:48 PM
I'm looking forward to create heartattacks in Hurricane formations by diving on them with a flight of Bf110C4s. Cant outturn them but easily outrun them and the firepower is just mean.

Whirlin_merlin
03-08-2007, 01:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
I'm looking forward to create heartattacks in Hurricane formations by diving on them with a flight of Bf110C4s. Cant outturn them but easily outrun them and the firepower is just mean. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well that's just mean!

JG53Frankyboy
03-08-2007, 02:06 PM
the 109 pilots in SoW:BoB will have a lot of work with their manual propellers not to overrev the engine - while Spitfire pilots can mantain max revs (pitch) even in a dive, the CSP will handle that (from the pilotsmanual).

and checking fast your engine rpm in front of a PC Screen is not so easy as in a real cockpit .

DKoor
03-08-2007, 02:15 PM
If BoB is created to be "virtual copy of WW2 BoB" then I guess it'll be slaughter.
I mean by the time you reach England coast you'd be on perhaps ~60% fuel. Now throw in in-combat-fuel-consumption, and we all know that those battles aren't 4 vs 4 or 2 vs 2... they are more like 40 vs 50... then I guess that smart Spitfire pilot is always in advantage. Because of fuel.
110 is another story...

Conclusion: it'll be - fuel won the SoW! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BSS_AIJO
03-08-2007, 02:25 PM
hmmm


Turn wise between the spit and 109 I expect that pilot skill will be the difference maker. I expect the early spit to be fun to fly but I also expect that if they push over to follow a 109 in a sudden dive the engine will cut out leaving the spitl pilot scrambeling to restart before getting shot down. I do expect the manual prop in the 109 to be an equivelent pain as well.. I expext that the 109 will do better up high, but in the 109 I will be spending more time being very aware of the fuel gauge.


I expcet that the real winning difference's will be skill, SA, and teamwork


BSS_AIJO

carguy_
03-08-2007, 02:26 PM
I don`t expect much of Olegish super Spitfire project.I can`t find any reason why BoB would not be a 109pwnage fest.

Lack of efficent fuel supply and tactical advantage of the British make Emil`s advantages irrelevant really.

The only hope I have for BoB is to recreate massive engagements,kind of 30vs30 because it REALLY differs from say 4v4 we have in 90% of all coops.


A crappy Emil with 12mm against Oleg SpitfireMKI?Not fun at all.

tigertalon
03-08-2007, 02:56 PM
I expect them to be like 109F4 vs Vb in IL2. Very close. Neg g cutout will be a big handicap for spit.

HayateAce
03-08-2007, 02:58 PM
I suspect Oleg will be forced to make the 109 and Spit equal so that OnWhine interest won't die off before we get into the addons.

VW-IceFire
03-08-2007, 03:00 PM
I think it will be fairly even with the Spitfire having a slight advantage in being turned...mostly because of pilot ability to turn the plane easier in the Spitfire than 109. The actual difference being quite slight but I think the 109 ability in the 109 will be the larger deciding factor than in the Spitfire.

So it'll be like this in comparing relative advantages and pilot skill.

Novice VS Novice = Spitfire Mark I wins
Average VS Average = Spitfire Mark I still wins but with less advantage
Experienced VS Experienced = Bf109E wins

Also of course highly dependent on the situation.

I will predict far more whining coming from the 109 scene than the Spitfire one. Just the nature of the beast.

slipBall
03-08-2007, 03:03 PM
I expect to be doing alot of ditching in the Channel, after fighting for ten minute's...and bucking a 30 knot head wind on the way home to base http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif....it should be great fun though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

MB_Avro_UK
03-08-2007, 04:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:
I expect to be doing alot of ditching in the Channel, after fighting for ten minute's...and bucking a 30 knot head wind on the way home to base http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif....it should be great fun though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi SlipBall,

The prevailing wind is towards France, so you should be ok... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

ElAurens
03-08-2007, 04:15 PM
I just hope the Bf110 is modeled as the piece of junk death trap it really was, and not the uber gun platform with radar tailgunner it is now.

A 110 should be meat on the table for any single engine fighter.

heywooood
03-08-2007, 06:37 PM
Well - if the 109's etc didn't have to cross the channel before engaging and if the RAF radar command/control of their fighters wasn't to be modeled, I'd say it might be fairly even.

But if the Me109's are low on fuel as the Spits and Hurris decend on them from above, as often happened in the Battle well....
It just has to be rigged doesn't it? Not historically accurate but 'balanced' for 'fairness' to appease the online customers.

Or maybe there will be more historical accuracy for players that fly offline and a way to switch the settings for online fair and balanced flying? Who knows.

Bellator_1
03-08-2007, 06:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I think it will be fairly even with the Spitfire having a slight advantage in being turned...mostly because of pilot ability to turn the plane easier in the Spitfire than 109. The actual difference being quite slight but I think the 109 ability in the 109 will be the larger deciding factor than in the Spitfire.

So it'll be like this in comparing relative advantages and pilot skill.

Novice VS Novice = Spitfire Mark I wins
Average VS Average = Spitfire Mark I still wins but with less advantage
Experienced VS Experienced = Bf109E wins

Also of course highly dependent on the situation.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed almost 100%.

The Bf-109 should be be able to generally turn with the Spitfire, outturn it at slow speed and be inferior at high speeds.

RSS-Martin
03-08-2007, 07:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">spit vs 109 in B.O.B your Expectations? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is an easy question, skip the so often brought up western European front and bring out a decent Pacific theatre, not a half hearted one!

horseback
03-08-2007, 07:39 PM
Well, most experts on the subject give the handling advantage to the Spitfire, the Spit's pilot field of vision was generally rated superior to the 109E, horizontal turn goes to the Spitfire (I will add the caveat "in general practice", because a skilled 109 driver could match the average Spit driver in that area), and there was supposedly a very slight top end advantage to the Spit in speeds between 15 and 20 thousand feet, although they were even closer in acceleration.

The 109 had certain advantages in certain maneuvers and inverted flight because of its fuel injected engine, it was better in both climb and dive performance, and it had far superior firepower as long as the cannon rounds lasted. Even without the cannons, though, it would be easier to aim and hit with the cowl mounted 7.9mms than the widely dispersed wing mounted .303 Brownings in either the Spit or Hurricane.

A Spitfire will have to get much closer and shoot longer to get a kill, and that may often turn out to be a major handicap for them, especially if the DMs don't include punctured wing radiators.

As for ElAurens' sentiments about the current model of the Me-110 with the radar gunner, I can only second that emotion. In fact, I would say that if the ai bomber and rear gunners' accuracy is not reduced by several orders of magnitude from the current standard, RAF campaigns in SoW: BoB will be unplayable, and any comparisons of 109s and Spitfire Mk I/IIs will be rendered irrelevent.

cheers

horseback

fordfan25
03-08-2007, 07:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RSS-Martin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">spit vs 109 in B.O.B your Expectations? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is an easy question, skip the so often brought up western European front and bring out a decent Pacific theatre, not a half hearted one! </div></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

carguy_
03-08-2007, 08:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
As for ElAurens' sentiments about the current model of the Me-110 with the radar gunner, I can only second that emotion. In fact, I would say that if the ai bomber and rear gunners' accuracy is not reduced by several orders of magnitude from the current standard, RAF campaigns in SoW: BoB will be unplayable, and any comparisons of 109s and Spitfire Mk I/IIs will be rendered irrelevent. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I take it different.Many folks actually are shocked that they have to put at least few degrees of deflection to shoot down the 110.

It wasn`t a fighter,it wasn`t a P38 but it wasn`t a B25Mitchell either.

Vipez-
03-08-2007, 08:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
I just hope the Bf110 is modeled as the piece of junk death trap it really was, and not the uber gun platform with radar tailgunner it is now.

A 110 should be meat on the table for any single engine fighter. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually BF-110C wasn't really that bad in BOB. It's turn rate was surprisingly good (I have some figures saying 20-21 sec sustained turn rate), it simply did not have that good roll rate, and therefore getting in a furball with 110C is kinda stupid. BF-110C is sligtly slower than Spit I/BF-109E and still faster than the Hurricane. What mostly gave it such a bad reputation during BoB was it's bad tactics. It doesn't mean we have to use same bad tactics in SoW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway, fights should be kinda quick in SoW, as 109E had only 15 min of effective time to combat over England.. 110C has much more time to loiter over there.

Bearcat99
03-08-2007, 09:55 PM
I just hope that it is more realistic than in here... not that I am complaining about what we have here... but I just hope it is more accurate.

FE_pilot
03-08-2007, 10:20 PM
I feel bad for the Hurricane Mk.1 Pilots facing the large formations of enemy He-111's.


Its going to be even worse if u have an Me-109 to deal with.


Personally i think that a Hurricane has no chance against a Me-109E.

The 109 is faster, Climbs better, better armament.

The 109's downfall is low fuel level.

LStarosta
03-08-2007, 10:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FE_pilot:
I feel bad for the Hurricane Mk.1 Pilots facing the large formations of enemy He-111's.


Its going to be even worse if u have an Me-109 to deal with.


Personally i think that a Hurricane has no chance against a Me-109E.

The 109 is faster, Climbs better, better armament.

The 109's downfall is low fuel level. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

WTF??!?!

The Hurricane has eight (8) guns.

The 109 has four (4).

And the Hurricane had a thick wing which let it scoop air better for better climb than the 109.

The 109's wings kept falling apart at the leading edge that's how poor German engineering was at the time. How can you climb if your plane has a big slit in the wing? HOW?

And the Hurricane had a Merlin engin which made it faster than a 109. Merlin was a wizard. Wizards have magic and are fast.


It looks to me like you know nothing about aerocraft of WWII.

FE_pilot
03-08-2007, 10:30 PM
If the Hurricanes were better that the 109s, they would be a match for the 109's during the battle of France and Britain. Instead the 109s shot them down like flies.


Which would explain why the Hurricanes were assigned to bomber intercept during BOB. They let the spits deal with the 109's.

Gumtree
03-08-2007, 10:33 PM
My expectations are that the game will come out and we will love it so much that these forums will shut down due to everybody having nothing to whinge about.

WTE_Ibis
03-09-2007, 12:10 AM
History will be rewritten without doubt.



http://premium1.uploadit.org/Ibissix//ground-crew.JPG

HayateAce
03-09-2007, 12:20 AM
Lorries FTW!

http://www.yorkshireairmuseum.co.uk/collections/vehicles/vehicle_images/chevrolet.jpg

OMG! Mickey Mouse Camo Roxx3rs!!

Whirlin_merlin
03-09-2007, 12:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FE_pilot:
If the Hurricanes were better that the 109s, they would be a match for the 109's during the battle of France and Britain. Instead the 109s shot them down like flies.
. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Check out the stats for no.1 sqn RAF over France, not quite as one sided as you seem to think.

Kurfurst__
03-09-2007, 03:27 AM
I'd except the Spit I to be a 'fun', easy for noobs plane to fly, which's shortcomings will be uncovered when fyling against more experienced pilots, who both use all traits of their planes. It will be a good turner, and being a lighter early Mark (holds true for the 109 as well), stall proof, the eight .303 will be more easy to hit at first in furballs. Later on in the touchy elevator, insufficient killing power of the .303s, and very poor roll rate will become frustrating, as well as the more complex engine control (provided if BoB's CEM will be a step forward from the current 'complex' EM.. I mean seperate boost/rpm managing vs. single lever controls) . It's going to be an upside down pyramid. The 109 will be the opposite. For rookies it will be possibly more difficult the turning battles, altough the plane's is very easy to handle, they have to become good shooters to take advantage of their firepower first, and learn to become patient to utilize the historical energy tactics that worked so well. When they do, however, they will be able to routinely run over adversaries, blow them up with a short burst of cannon fire while being untouchable with dives and zoom climbs.

Ironically, I tend to believe for the given tasks in the battle, both sides would actually benefit from swapping planes, at least in regards of the armament. I'd hope for a all-MG armed E-1 though.

Re : Engine management, CSP props would just begun to be fitted the start of the battle, and the work was more or less finished by mid-August. Until then only a 2-pitch prop was present. Similiarly, the Emil manuals from December 1939 mention already that auto-prop pitch is present on some planes already. In any case, there would be still individual planes during the battle with manual variable pitch and 2-pitch airscrews. The difference between the CSP systems of the RAF and LW is that RAF planes with CSP still required setting the boost and rpm separately by the pilot, and certain rules have to be observed while doing so to prevent over/underboosting and damaging the engine. This is currently missing from our CEM, but I hope it will be implemented. On the Bf 109E with CSP, a single level was operated, which took care of boost, rpm and mixture entirely on it's own.

msalama
03-09-2007, 04:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'm really looking forward to the Hurricane though, more than the other two. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1 vehemently.

ElAurens
03-09-2007, 05:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I just hope that it is more realistic than in here... not that I am complaining about what we have here... but I just hope it is more accurate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It cannot be Bearcat. We are looking back at historical events with perfect 20/20 hindsight.

Will any of the blue flyers use the tactics of 1940? No. They will all be using the BnZ late war flying style.

BoB will be not more "historically accurate" than what we have now because we don't have a bunch of folks with 1940s sensibilities playing it.

This is also why any WW 1 sim is doomed from the start. No one will use historical tactics.

It's a game and we all want to win.

luftluuver
03-09-2007, 06:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Re : Engine management, CSP props would just begun to be fitted the start of the battle, and the work was more or less finished by mid-August. Until then only a 2-pitch prop was present. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Nice try but 11 Group squadrons which did the major fighting would all be equiped with CSP first. Squadrons furthest away from 11 Group would be the last to get CSP props.

Kurfurst__
03-09-2007, 06:36 AM
Interesting. Do you have source for that or just sidetracking/flaming the thread?

tigertalon
03-09-2007, 06:56 AM
If we get DM closer to reality than it is now (loosing coolant, piercing hydrawlics etc etc) I don't find 8 .303s that much weaker than the armament of 109E. With the E it will (should) be harder to hit, but more structurally devastating, while 8 light MGs will cripple vital aircraft systems (prefferably the ones which involve and kind of liquid) in no time and forcing a 109E out of fight.

luftluuver
03-09-2007, 07:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Interesting. Do you have source for that or just sidetracking/flaming the thread? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Nice try at starting a flame Barbi. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif Now I know simple logic is not one of your better attributes Kurfy but common sense says that squadrons with the most need would get them first, since the CSP props gave better performance. The squdrons with the greatest need were those in 11 Group which did the greater portion of the fighting. The squadrons with the least need for a performance increase would be those in N. Ireland and Scotland north where the LW presense was nil or next to nil(bombers only).

Mike Williams should have some documents if you want them.

Kurfurst__
03-09-2007, 07:23 AM
Oh, it's guesswork then.

Zoom2136
03-09-2007, 07:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Oh, it's guesswork then. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope... I'de say logic... what is it call.... an educated guess...

But Kurfurst is not happy unless AXIS plane have all the advantages... what you think ... the RAF were all a bunch of m.o.r.o.n.s...

ploughman
03-09-2007, 07:48 AM
The negative g cutout on the Merlin'll be interesting. Might have to practise using the Rata.

I fully expect to enjoy the 109 more than the Spitty; is there any info on whether or not there'll be an E4 as well as the E3?

Looking forward to the enhanced DMs.

JG53Frankyboy
03-09-2007, 08:01 AM
autopitch system in the 109Es were not so much common during the "high" phase of the Battle............ at least for the JG53

http://www.franky.fliegerhospital.de/AutopitchJG53.jpg

out of Prien's "JG53 History, Volume 1"

for the SoW:BoB "typical" versions i would say, Oleg shoud make:
-Spitfire Mk.I with CSP, 100octan fuel "12lb/sq.in." emergency boost.

-Bf109E-4 , with the MG-FF/M, rear-/headarmour, manual pitch only (that will be hard !).
a "fieldmod rearview mirror" would be nice as an option - that would cost some km/h in topspeed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Manu-6S
03-09-2007, 08:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
-Bf109E-4 , with the MG-FF/M, rear-/headarmour, manual pitch only (that will be hard !).
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but the prop pitch should really influence the engine... not as in Il2.

capt_frank
03-09-2007, 08:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
...We are looking back at historical events with perfect 20/20 hindsight. Will any of the blue flyers use the tactics of 1940? No. They will all be using the BnZ late war flying style. BoB will be not more "historically accurate" than what we have now because we don't have a bunch of folks with 1940s sensibilities playing it...No one will use historical tactics.It's a game and we all want to win. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that pretty well sums it up regardless of who has what or whatever.

Kurfurst__
03-09-2007, 09:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
is there any info on whether or not there'll be an E4 as well as the E3? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not any such indication so far, which is puzzling, why the E-3 is modelled instead of the E-4 - given that most E-3s were modded into E-4 standard, not that much a thing really, the latter had the MG-FF/M cannons, firing Mine shells. As a matter of fact, only recoil elements were changed.

By the time of the BoB, most 109s were either E-1s or E-4s, some E-3s and E-7s being around.