Friday Update, April 13, 2012

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by zapatista

you've missed the point on how to grade the value of "first hand" pilot information somewhere between high skool and your first year of college. you'r locked into the false perception that "he-said" "she-said" has any meaning here.

in most sciences that is graded as anecdotal information, and basically meaningless to counter either expert opinion or objective factual evidence of any properly conducted scientific evaluation. hence i countered the previous posters quotes with an expert who's value both sides of the argument could respect, and quoted a broad statement from him on the matter. its easy enough to give quotes from brittish pilots stating the exact opposite of the german pilots he quoted (and they are easily available, and several already quoted in this thread), but has less value.

on the other hand, if you can come up with some german or allied comparisons of both of these aircraft, then this would have meaning (and both german and allied comparison of the same aircraft can be compared)

Agreed 100%

Something I have been saying for years.. Only not as well as you just said it!

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

That the planes were fairly even and that the better pilot could out turn a worse pilot irrespective of whether they were flying a spit or a 109.......

but the presumption for us virtual pilots has to be that we also start out by using the correct historical equipment that recreates their respective strength and weakness. once that is the case, then you can start adding in pilots kill level, degree of surprise, and a whole host of other variables

my argument is that we need to be given open and accurate information from luthier and Co as to what they have modeled, so we can compare it with the factual historical information people here can obtain themselves (and thrash out issues by debating t with others who have done the same). in 2012 it is not acceptable to "just pretend your plane is right" and whatever happens "he/she was just a better pilot".

[F19_Klunk]

Originally Posted by mazex

Mmm, I've been waiting for the day when the main fighting is about the Spitfire vs 109 performance in the game versus tons of obscure references instead of performance and bugs in the game A good sign!

agree

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by zapatista

you are demonstrating a failure here to rationally compute simple facts

first we want to know what the actual BoB era performance was for these 3 planes. even if there will be slightly different perspectives on german or allied evaluations done, there will be some genral common ground.
second you can then look at how an experienced, expert, or novice pilot might handle that aircraft
third, you then asses how accurately these competing planes are modeled in CoD, to confirm/reject that what we have in the sim actually allows us to replicate the ww2 pilots experience as close as possible
fourth, and this is where you oddly seem to start off from and completely overlook the previous 3 points, you then want to see how we as armchair virtual pilots can master a specific plane with all its idiosyncrasies, so we have a change to use it strength correctly, and compete against other aircraft with a varied level of skilled pilots.

does that sequence ring any bells with you ?

if you still dont compute, the purpose of this discussion was to deal with step 1 and 2

i really dont care what side was "better" at this or that, we all know what the eventual outcome of the conflict was what i do care about, is being able to use historical tactics and maneuvers in this sim and be able to rely on the aircraft i am (virtually) flying being able to execute it. that is for me (and many others here) the "fun factor" of this sim, and why we keep pushing for it to be better and more accurate.

you are demonstrating a total failure of charisma, it really doesn't hurt to be polite.

[=AN=Apache]

After all, which of the two aircraft actually had a better performance? Analyzing the Dogfight itself and say that both acrfts also flown by experienced pilots.


Bf 109 or Spit? which was more shot down?

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

you are demonstrating a total failure of charisma, it really doesn't hurt to be polite.

just re-read your previous post and the context it was in (applauding manu's meaningless comment), my reply was tailored to the combined level of intellectual effort demonstrated

i promise to be gentle and bring flowers next time

[=AN=Apache]

Originally Posted by Jaws2002

I think you guys need to cool down a bit. You get it bloody wrong. First, we don't know exactly how the planes are going to stack up against eachother in game. The Mk2 spit WAS too fast. So was the rotol hurri at some alts. This are going to be toned down a bit. The mk1 Spit on the other hand will be better, so, online you'll have much more close to real world behaviour. Most people preffered the Hurri over the Spit online, wich was wrong. This will be fixed now.
I'd say let's just wait for the patch, test it and then talk about this please.

You have Reason ... Better wait for the patch to be able to cry (mimi)

lol

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by zapatista

you've missed the point on how to grade the value of "first hand" pilot information somewhere between high skool and your first year of college. you'r locked into the false perception that "he-said" "she-said" has any meaning here.

in most sciences that is graded as anecdotal information, and basically meaningless to counter either expert opinion or objective factual evidence of any properly conducted scientific evaluation. hence i countered the previous posters quotes with an expert who's value both sides of the argument could respect, and quoted a broad statement from him on the matter. its easy enough to give quotes from brittish pilots stating the exact opposite of the german pilots he quoted (and they are easily available, and several already quoted in this thread), but has less value.

on the other hand, if you can come up with some german or allied comparisons of both of these aircraft, then this would have meaning (and both german and allied comparison of the same aircraft can be compared)

I totally missed your point there. My fault!

I'm so pissed of that Galland's quote that's usually used as proof...

Originally Posted by zapatista

lol, so the sumtotal of your contribution in a debate exchanging information on 109 and spitfire performance is, "the brave one wins", "'cause you and your bestest friend did it that way" ?

your in the wrong department here, maybe google "fairytale forum" to go post that nonsense in

In a turn there are limits the pilot has to be aware of: blackouts, accelerated stalls... he can pull the stick and go near that limit, but not too much.

This "too much" is relative to the pilot own bravery/experience.

Because of that I think its useless to make comparision of turn capabilities using pilots' quote. There are too many variables in that fight that are not provided to us.

Anyway I think you are belittling the importance of our simulators: they are many things far from from the reality but flying in the correct way (the "stay alive" attitude) you can feel some of the emotions that the real pilots were feeling at that time.

Turning near at plane's limits IMO is a matter of bravery, but in real life and in the sim. Personally I hate turning (infact I don't like the fightings we have in ROF, while I love the simulator itself) so everyone can outturn me...

In that gaming session I realized that I could pull the stick hard and my plane won't stall only after 4 crashes... since I was "already dead" I was no more afraid to die again and I started to outturn my teammate.

But I could't in real life.

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by zapatista

just re-read your previous post and the context it was in (applauding manu's meaningless comment), my reply was tailored to the combined level of intellectual effort shown

i promise to bring be gentle and bring flowers next time

if it was a mindless applause I would have just said '+1' which seems so popular here, instead I gave a reason why I agreed with Manu, and made no attempt to ridicule you.

if you think it's all about the machine then you are a classic case of the 'bad workman', and if you think a simulation will suffice in recreating 'all' the variables in real life then it's pretty clear whose oppinions are worthless here.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by zapatista

just re-read your previous post and the context it was in (applauding manu's meaningless comment), my reply was tailored to the combined level of intellectual effort demonstrated

i promise to be gentle and bring flowers next time

Your reply was incredibly rude Zapatista. Whether you did this because your grasp of English is poor or if you are socially inept I do not know. In future perhaps you would do well to think whether you would be prepared to say that to him in person before you post, that may keep your manners in check.