PDA

View Full Version : history vs il2 and il2 vs history



Sharpe26
11-07-2005, 02:26 PM
or rather I should ask:

does Il2 give you a chance to experience/relive history? or are you just enjoying it as a flightsim with historical aircraft?

and also: has Il2 ever made you revise what you know of world war 2 history?

For some reason I find myself enjoying the history as depicted in the Il2 series a lot. For a part it has shown me a side to things I never took place.

so how about you guys?

Sharpe26
11-07-2005, 02:26 PM
or rather I should ask:

does Il2 give you a chance to experience/relive history? or are you just enjoying it as a flightsim with historical aircraft?

and also: has Il2 ever made you revise what you know of world war 2 history?

For some reason I find myself enjoying the history as depicted in the Il2 series a lot. For a part it has shown me a side to things I never took place.

so how about you guys?

jds1978
11-07-2005, 02:33 PM
i'll pick "relive history."

as for better understanding history, IL2 has definitely clued me into the tactics of WW2 airwarfare. B4 i had a pretty good grasp on the broad strategic implications but couldn't for the life of me explain how they were implemented on the "sharp end". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Pirschjaeger
11-07-2005, 02:37 PM
IL-2 has been great for teaching history although indirectly. The GD forum is the professor. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fritz

han freak solo
11-07-2005, 04:29 PM
How about a poll??

Kuna15
11-07-2005, 05:02 PM
1.I am enjoying a flightsim with historical aircraft.

2.IL-2 (and forums) filled some black holes in my knowledge, I did not revised my knowledge with IL-2 tho.

MLudner
11-07-2005, 07:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by han freak solo:
How about a poll?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


OH, GOD! NNNNnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooo......

MLudner
11-07-2005, 07:31 PM
ON a more serious note, I enjoy pretending to fly historical WWII Combat aircraft through reasonably accurate campaigns.

While as far as learning history from it goes I cannot say that the game has taught me much, but it has caused me to learn more. An example is that since I build the missions in my campaigns I have to research the operations occuring at each point in the campaign so that my missions would match the actual fighting, at least within reason.

FlatSpinMan
11-07-2005, 07:41 PM
It has definitely taught me more about the Forgotten Battles side of the war (ie anything not in Western Europe, the Pacific or north Africa). Plus I love flying these things and checking out the scenery.

Jetbuff
11-08-2005, 01:43 AM
It depends. If you try to fly historically, in a historical setting with realistic objectives and a healthy obsession with preserving your virtual life, IL-2 can definitely be a darn good approximation. Then again, you could turn off 90% of the difficulty settings and enjoy some airquake. The sim is a tool, our imaginations furnish the rest.

ViktorViktor
11-08-2005, 01:09 PM
I'll tell you what, prior to playing IL-2, I believed that Western Powers (US, UK, Germany) had the best equipped air forces of WWII.

Now after playing IL-2, I see that it is the Soviets who in actuality had the best fighters of WWII, with the Luftwaffe a close second.

How could I ever have thought that the P-51 was a better long-range escort than the mighty Yak-9D or the Yak-9K ?

If the U.S./U.K. air forces had gone toe-to-toe with the USSR after Germany surrendered, IL-2 proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that droves of Mustangs, Thunderbolts, and Spitfires would have been gunned down from the skies.

NorrisMcWhirter
11-08-2005, 02:43 PM
You're certainly right about the VVS having the best aircraft.

As to it being historically accurate....well, the 3D models do look like WW2 aircraft but, in some cases, that's where the similarities end.

Ta,
Norris

Tully__
11-08-2005, 03:24 PM
It taught me that flying fighter aircraft is a lot harder than I'd thought, even though I had some idea it's pretty challenging.

It also confirmed that I know very little detail about WW2, even though I have an interest in that period.

As for the aircraft themselves, while individual aircraft may not match their exact historical performance figures, when flown with the training levels of the pilots of the period and the tactics of the period in mind the results are not much different from what you'd expect most of the time.

crazyivan1970
11-08-2005, 03:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jetbuff:
It depends. If you try to fly historically, in a historical setting with realistic objectives and a healthy obsession with preserving your virtual life, IL-2 can definitely be a darn good approximation. Then again, you could turn off 90% of the difficulty settings and enjoy some airquake. The sim is a tool, our imaginations furnish the rest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said, i have nothing to add.

I know Norris, sometimes it hurts to know that russians can actually build something good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

NorrisMcWhirter
11-09-2005, 02:14 PM
^ You misunderstand me, Ivan.

I fully appreciate Russian ingenuity - after all, they were the first to put a man/woman in space, were first to reach Mars and first land useful automated landers on other worlds....and that's just in terms of space, possibly man's most technically difficult frontier.

However, I also realise that the respect and mental well-being of fellow Russians (or, if you prefer, sales) mean a lot to a Russian developer so you'll forgive me if I think that some of Oleg's 'early year wonders' are a little suspect both in terms of DM and weaponry.

Of course, you're welcome to toe the line - you are a UBI mod, after all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ta,
Norris

Bearcat99
11-09-2005, 09:57 PM
It all depends on what history you are talking about. If you mean the Pacific theater... there are some things.. but there is a lot missing.. nothing that IMO would be a killer.. but there are things missing. For the Eastern front.. or parts of the Western front... yes you can.
The biggest thing for me as far as what I learned was that the Russians not only had an airforce.. but a good one to boot. I grew up on the cold war propaganda.... I learned more about the eastern war as a direct result of this sim.

Pirschjaeger
11-09-2005, 10:05 PM
Before IL-2 I didn't think the 109's had cup holders. Now after four years, I'm less onesided in this debate. I'm somewhere on the fence now, just waiting for the next patch. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The truth is out there,.....somewhere. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Fritz

Genie-
11-10-2005, 01:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I know Norris, sometimes it hurts to know that russians can actually build something good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sometimes they do.

But they don't ask what is the price (in human lives).

MLudner
11-10-2005, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
I'll tell you what, prior to playing IL-2, I believed that Western Powers (US, UK, Germany) had the best equipped air forces of WWII.

Now after playing IL-2, I see that it is the Soviets who in actuality had the best fighters of WWII, with the Luftwaffe a close second.

How could I ever have thought that the P-51 was a better long-range escort than the mighty Yak-9D or the Yak-9K ?

If the U.S./U.K. air forces had gone toe-to-toe with the USSR after Germany surrendered, IL-2 proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that droves of Mustangs, Thunderbolts, and Spitfires would have been gunned down from the skies. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are mistaken. While you are correct that the Russians built several very fine aircraft designs, there is one trump card that would have played its hand in such a fight:

IT'S THE PILOT, NOT THE SHIP.
Period.

VVS pilots received about half the flight training of a late war Luftwaffe pilot, and a late war Luftwaffe pilot was little more than sitting duck because due to fuel problems his training was wholly insufficient. The USAAF and RAF were butchering the Luftwaffe in the air at the end of the war.
The sad truth is that Russians have been screwed by their leadership for centuries, who seem like they could not care less how many of their people died fighting for them, and the Soviet system was worse on this score than even the worst of the Czars. I have always hoped for better for the Russians and I am pleased that they finally have a chance now to improve their lot and I wish them all the best of luck.

BTW: USAAF pilots did fight with VVS pilots on at least two occasions that are known. Both were witnessed by Erich Hartmann - who basically instigated both fights accidentally. In both cases he described seeing VVS fighters virtually raining from the sky behind him as he slipped off as the Mustangs tore into them in the confusion. Actually, it was the VVS that tore into the Mustangs, for in each case they had not seen the Bf-109's that had bounced them, but they did see the USAAF P-51's above them and thought the Yanks had attacked them.

Da_Godfatha
11-10-2005, 01:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
I'll tell you what, prior to playing IL-2, I believed that Western Powers (US, UK, Germany) had the best equipped air forces of WWII.

Now after playing IL-2, I see that it is the Soviets who in actuality had the best fighters of WWII, with the Luftwaffe a close second.

How could I ever have thought that the P-51 was a better long-range escort than the mighty Yak-9D or the Yak-9K ?

If the U.S./U.K. air forces had gone toe-to-toe with the USSR after Germany surrendered, IL-2 proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that droves of Mustangs, Thunderbolts, and Spitfires would have been gunned down from the skies. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are mistaken. While you are correct that the Russians built several very fine aircraft designs, there is one trump card that would have played its hand in such a fight:

IT'S THE PILOT, NOT THE SHIP.
Period.

VVS pilots received about half the flight training of a late war Luftwaffe pilot, and a late war Luftwaffe pilot was little more than sitting duck because due to fuel problems his training was wholly insufficient. The USAAF and RAF were butchering the Luftwaffe in the air at the end of the war.
The sad truth is that Russians have been screwed by their leadership for centuries, who seem like they could not care less how many of their people died fighting for them, and the Soviet system was worse on this score than even the worst of the Czars. I have always hoped for better for the Russians and I am pleased that they finally have a chance now to improve their lot and I wish them all the best of luck.

BTW: USAAF pilots did fight with VVS pilots on at least two occasions that are known. Both were witnessed by Erich Hartmann - who basically instigated both fights accidentally. In both cases he described seeing VVS fighters virtually raining from the sky behind him as he slipped off as the Mustangs tore into them in the confusion. Actually, it was the VVS that tore into the Mustangs, for in each case they had not seen the Bf-109's that had bounced them, but they did see the USAAF P-51's above them and thought the Yanks had attacked them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And were did you get this information?? Hartmanns book does not say anything about that (yes, I have read the original GERMAN version). Over Yugoslavia P-38's ripped a group of late model Yaks a new butt-hole, when they thought they were Germans. The ONLY thing that this game has in common with HISTORY is the eye-candy (graphics).

Why else do we have 30mm cannons with a too high rate of fire and the I-16 that flys like a TIE fighter. Please dude spare me the dribble about the "It's the Pilot not the plane". That does not even work in REAL LIFE. That is why alot of Ace German and Japanese pilots were downed and killed by Rookie to Average pilots as the war progressed.
You can be the best Jockey in the world, but you can not win a race when everyone else is on Arabian's and you are on a Donkey!

MLudner
11-13-2005, 05:38 PM
My version did, maybe you did not read that one. The first was an incident where Hartmann was setting up to attack a formation of Pe2's escorted by Yak's. He ordered his schwarm to attack by rotten, but then looked back and saw a large formation of aircraft in the distance. He immediately noted they were glinting in the sunlight and said he knew immediately that they were Americans, because we were the only ones who did not paint our airplanes. He attacked the VVS flights below and passed through.
The Soviet pilots failed to see the 4 Bf-109's that had passed through their formation and sent several of their aircraft down in flames. What they did see, however, was the USAAF P-51's - or, perhaps, P-38's but I remembered him saying P-51's - above them. Deciding they had attacked the VVS escorts went after the Americans.
The other was on the last day of the war. Hartmann was sent to scout a town and see if it had yet been taken by the Soviets. Upon arriving there he found a Yak doing victory loops over the town and bounced it and shot it down. He then hit the deck and started heading off before he got mobbed. He reported seeing P-51's arrive and saw them engage eachother.
I'll look up the specific pages later.

You have a right to your opinion. But every fighter pilot I've heard on the subject baldly disagrees, including Gabreski. I'll have to take their opinions over yours for now.

polak5
11-14-2005, 01:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by han freak solo:
How about a poll?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


OH, GOD! NNNNnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooo...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> YYYYYeeeeeSSSSSSS~~~~~!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

MLudner
11-14-2005, 10:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
I'll tell you what, prior to playing IL-2, I believed that Western Powers (US, UK, Germany) had the best equipped air forces of WWII.

Now after playing IL-2, I see that it is the Soviets who in actuality had the best fighters of WWII, with the Luftwaffe a close second.

How could I ever have thought that the P-51 was a better long-range escort than the mighty Yak-9D or the Yak-9K ?

If the U.S./U.K. air forces had gone toe-to-toe with the USSR after Germany surrendered, IL-2 proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that droves of Mustangs, Thunderbolts, and Spitfires would have been gunned down from the skies. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are mistaken. While you are correct that the Russians built several very fine aircraft designs, there is one trump card that would have played its hand in such a fight:

IT'S THE PILOT, NOT THE SHIP.
Period.

VVS pilots received about half the flight training of a late war Luftwaffe pilot, and a late war Luftwaffe pilot was little more than sitting duck because due to fuel problems his training was wholly insufficient. The USAAF and RAF were butchering the Luftwaffe in the air at the end of the war.
The sad truth is that Russians have been screwed by their leadership for centuries, who seem like they could not care less how many of their people died fighting for them, and the Soviet system was worse on this score than even the worst of the Czars. I have always hoped for better for the Russians and I am pleased that they finally have a chance now to improve their lot and I wish them all the best of luck.

BTW: USAAF pilots did fight with VVS pilots on at least two occasions that are known. Both were witnessed by Erich Hartmann - who basically instigated both fights accidentally. In both cases he described seeing VVS fighters virtually raining from the sky behind him as he slipped off as the Mustangs tore into them in the confusion. Actually, it was the VVS that tore into the Mustangs, for in each case they had not seen the Bf-109's that had bounced them, but they did see the USAAF P-51's above them and thought the Yanks had attacked them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And were did you get this information?? Hartmanns book does not say anything about that (yes, I have read the original GERMAN version). Over Yugoslavia P-38's ripped a group of late model Yaks a new butt-hole, when they thought they were Germans. The ONLY thing that this game has in common with HISTORY is the eye-candy (graphics).

Why else do we have 30mm cannons with a too high rate of fire and the I-16 that flys like a TIE fighter. Please dude spare me the dribble about the "It's the Pilot not the plane". That does not even work in REAL LIFE. That is why alot of Ace German and Japanese pilots were downed and killed by Rookie to Average pilots as the war progressed.
You can be the best Jockey in the world, but you can not win a race when everyone else is on Arabian's and you are on a Donkey! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, and I-16's could almost fly like tie fighters. They were incredibly agile aircraft, German pilots who fought them reported they could almost turn in place. I love playing Khalkin Gol scenarios, because after you fly USAAF / RAAF / RAF versus Japanese you constantly have to deal with their superior maneuverability. Then I get to get in an I-16 or I-153 and turn circles around Zeros and Oscars and make those a-holes deal my superior maneuverability for once. HAH!

MLudner
11-14-2005, 10:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by polak5:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MLudner:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by han freak solo:
How about a poll?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


OH, GOD! NNNNnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooo...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> YYYYYeeeeeSSSSSSS~~~~~!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Friendly_flyer
11-14-2005, 10:44 AM
Good sim or good fun?

Bout, actually.