View Single Post
  #2  
Old 04-24-2012, 07:33 PM
bw_wolverine's Avatar
bw_wolverine bw_wolverine is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
Do you have test data that contradicts what B6 posted in his graph? If not, you need to find some.
I'm not talking about data. I'm talking about how the sentiment on these FMs seems to change interestingly whenever we get new FM updates.

The biggest anomaly for me is the IIa. So many people said "It's the only accurately modelled plane in the sim" and now it's being reduced and people are all saying "Well, of course! It's so grossly overmodelled!"

I have no stats or anything to tell the devs how to make these planes. I am not an engineer. I do not have a degree in avionics or aerodynamics or whatever. I am not qualified to have that argument.

What I do feel qualified to talk about is how odd this whole saga has been and continues to be.

There is nothing impartial about ANY of the player discussions about these aircraft, I think. On the Blue or Red side.

Not until I see a Blue player crusading for the increase in Red plane performance, or a Red player vehemently arguing that the 109 is too slow will I suggest that anyone here is really being anything more than self-serving with respect to the FMs.
__________________
Pilot #1 (9:40 hours flying time, 3/0/1 Fighters, 7/2/0 Bombers). RIP

No.401 Squadron Forum


Using ReconNZ's Pilot Log Book
Reply With Quote