One of the more prolific map-modders did a test map of the Netherlands and came to the conclusion you did.

The best you could do to build a frame-rate friendly map of the Netherlands is to create a "Netherlands-like" map, with slightly higher elevation than in real-life and drastically lower population density.

Off-limits per DT's agreement with 1C.

Is there a way to make the AI a bit more realistic?

I mean, I must confess I'm getting tired of those stupid unrealistic maneuvers, they never have any G-Locks, they continue to fly with un-flyable aircrafts, etc, etc...

The best is still : OK, I take plane "A", against AI plane "B" : whoa, the plane "B" is much better! Let's switch! Now I take the "B" one and give the AI the "A" one. Whao, the plane "A" is much.. wut wat? wtf?

Especially since I've reinstalled RoF, having such a crappy AI becomes even more visible and annoying.

I'm happy we got finally rid of the snipers gunners, I hope we won't have to wait another decade before having a decent AI.

Thanks.

As I recall there were mods released some time back that were improvements to AI performance.

I don't think they were applied to TD updates. I believe they were included with several of the consolidated mod packages.

Note: You're experiencing placebo effect. When someone told me that they thought that some guns were now more effective than they had been in the past I checked with the guys who work on armament on Team Daidalos. No changes to the any weapon values (outside of the Italian machine guns) at all to the best of their knowledge - they would know.

The .50cals were always effective at dealing with the early Bf109 models... disabling controls and damaging engines were their specialty since whenever the point harmonization was introduced (was that AEP days?). In online scenarios with the P-40 up against the Bf109F-4 I always felt like I had a solid chance on either side of the battle... the 109 was better but it was wise not to get cocky. I suspect you came up against someone who:

1) Knew what they were doing
2) Had fine tuned their convergence settings
3) Could aim

Makes all the difference.

When you know what you are doing you can even defeat Ki-84s in a P-40M.

Indeed.

I bagged a 109 K4 with a P40M a couple years back. He gave up every advantage he had to try and be sporty with me on the deck. I refused to play the scissors game with him. Whenever he dumped flaps and pulled hard enough to pop the slats I gently pulled up and used my roll rate to come down on him and peck away at his wings. After about the third or fourth cycle of this he simply could no longer maintain control because of the damage to his wings and he spun in because he was too low to recover.

It was really nerve wracking to do and I was sweating bullets afterward, but it was so satisfying to beat the uber plane with a Hawk.

You gotta love people who rush to a conclusion over something that they have no clue of. There were no changes to existing aircraft weapons in the 4.10/4.10.1 patches, only fixes to aircraft that were using the wrong weapons (Yak-9UT, MS406/410, ...) - everything is just your imagination!

As to the P-40s, they are all too slow at sealevel, too heavy (by about an average of 250kg) but on the other hand climb way too fast at altitude (RoC actually rising from sea level to FTH which is BS).

And as to the .50CAL it still has an HE round in its belting when there were none of these or at least not in wide spread use - should be replaced with an API round! But then again also the MGFF/M and MG151/20 have incorrectly modelled mine shells (around 11g explosive when it should be 18,7g), same but to an even greater extent for the Mk108/103 (45g vs 72g). Hispano rounds have the least lifetime of all cannon shells (2s which results in their very poor range), MG15 and MG81 missing any kind of round beyond pure AP (no incendiaries), etc...

Well, last 4 times i got shoted by .50 cals happened the things:

1. Hit in a zoon climb by one or two bullets at a range of .6 km shot from a p-40 sitting like a duck. Instead i was climbing i was at 300 km/h. The p-40 stalling. Result: Engine down and it was not a long burst (one or two hits)

2. Hit in a power dive at a range of .5 or more and gaining separation fast. Single burst. Result: Wings off (was not due speed, my speed was around 600 km/h)

3. Hit in good turn rate turning (at 380 km/h) by a P-51 zooming from high altitude. Was not a tracking shot just a snapshot. Result: elevator destroyed. Second pass another snapshot, ailerons e cannon jamed.

4.Hit in a turning power dive, snapshot again. Lethal loss of control.

All the four time killed by a single snapshot. Sorry but the .50 are more effective than cannon. Not a mere coincidence.

p.s.: more than one time i hit ac with 2 108 and she continued to fly. Yesterday i hit a spitfire with 4 20mm. He escaped in a loop and landed in a no active airfield. After 4 20mm the spit makes a loop and land easily?????????? One single .50 snapshot and lethal lost of controls???? Every snapshot a control or weapond damaged? In the other way lets be rightouss, i was hit yesterday by a spitifire with several hits (do not known if hispanos or brownings .303; but at least one or two were hispanos bullet), i continued to fly with some difficult manouvering to frustrate the efforts of my enemy until i was saved by another fighter. conclusion: by my personall experience last weeks this .50 making more damage than the cannos in game.

Maybe i am very unluck.

Are you kidding? .50 then is the perfect weapon, easy to hit and superior damage for each bullet put in the target. No compromises.

I am not sure it is a placebo effect.

I recommend you fly planes armed with .50ies once in a while. That helps to cure wrong perceptions.