Suddenly Spit IIa on all the servers?

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

TC I don't understand any of that mate apart from what you were in and what you fought...please explain again?

Are you saying the Spit doesn't feel like a plane or something like that?

~S~

Yes. It seems to be to a lesser extent than in the old Il2 but it still have very debatable E losses. Hence the tight turn and so on.

In a few word If you love the historical Spitfire, ban the thing we hve in game !

If CoD devs wants that we have an easy mount for young players, none here wld be against that idea (my guess) but they hve to call it a NoobFire or a paint it in a special color (Light green - a GreenFire ?) that we don't feel lost or disappointed by what is alrdy a remarkable game.

[Jugdriver]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

In a few word If you love the historical Spitfire, ban the thing we hve in game !

If CoD devs wants that we have an easy mount for young players, none here wld be against that idea (my guess) but they hve to call it a NoobFire or a paint it in a special color (Light green - a GreenFire ?) that we don't feel lost or disappointed by what is alrdy a remarkable game.

What a load of BS.

JD
AKA_MattE

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

If CoD devs wants that we have an easy mount for young players, none here wld be against that idea (my guess) but they hve to call it a NoobFire or a paint it in a special color (Light green - a GreenFire ?) that we don't feel lost or disappointed by what is alrdy a remarkable game.

We had two in il2:1946 one called the la7 and another the spit mk9 +25lb

[Talisman]

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Some interesting gen at the above link. Some will have already seen, but it is food for thought me thinks.

Happy landings,

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Talisman

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Some interesting gen at the above link. Some will have already seen, but it is food for thought me thinks.

Happy landings,

Lol you guys are getting rusty. I would hve though those tables wld hve come much before.

Pls if you are serious enough take some time to read the SPit&Blabla.com curves. It does not depict anything serious (especially those ones).

Thx in advance

[Madfish]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Yes. It seems to be to a lesser extent than in the old Il2 but it still have very debatable E losses. Hence the tight turn and so on.

In a few word If you love the historical Spitfire, ban the thing we hve in game !

If CoD devs wants that we have an easy mount for young players, none here wld be against that idea (my guess) but they hve to call it a NoobFire or a paint it in a special color (Light green - a GreenFire ?) that we don't feel lost or disappointed by what is alrdy a remarkable game.

Not sure about that. I haven't flown a spitfire and even if you do you'd probably not go all out like in a fight that may cost you your life. So we can only rely on some basic numbers.

Regarding the balance issue there is no solution though. There is NO balance. That was the point of the war. I listed all the variables (at least a good amount of them) and all of these aren't anything we could fix in the game.

So for true dogfighting on even ground add support for flying in the same planes against each other. And by support I mean don't take out all the planes or screw the FM but actually give dogfighters a way to fly against an equal opponent - aside from their own skill.

For co-op and all the other realism servers you can just add the planes the server admins want. Also the community can eventually come up with some great dynamic campaign stuff that either:
- goes the route of realism and does that
- or a little fiction and fairness and actually gives the "losing" side opportunities to fly with better planes / ammo to make the game more fun


And seeing how this thread progressed that far I seriously think it's time to think about solutions to the underlying problem. And tuning the FM is NOT a solution I believe.

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Madfish

Not sure about that. I haven't flown a spitfire and even if you do you'd probably not go all out like in a fight that may cost you your life. So we can only rely on some basic numbers.

Regarding the balance issue there is no solution though. There is NO balance. That was the point of the war. I listed all the variables (at least a good amount of them) and all of these aren't anything we could fix in the game.

So for true dogfighting on even ground add support for flying in the same planes against each other. And by support I mean don't take out all the planes or screw the FM but actually give dogfighters a way to fly against an equal opponent - aside from their own skill.

For co-op and all the other realism servers you can just add the planes the server admins want. Also the community can eventually come up with some great dynamic campaign stuff that either:
- goes the route of realism and does that
- or a little fiction and fairness and actually gives the "losing" side opportunities to fly with better planes / ammo to make the game more fun


And seeing how this thread progressed that far I seriously think it's time to think about solutions to the underlying problem. And tuning the FM is NOT a solution I believe.

I am sure you have good intention but if you think that the Spit won the BoB take some time to read the sorties ratio and the kill ratio (it was a galvanizing symbol for the ppl of UK) . Then hev a look at the aggressive campaign fought by the RAF with real MkIIa/b in the late 40/ early 41 period, and come back to us.

[Madfish]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

I am sure you have good intention but if you think that the Spit won the BoB take some time to read the sorties ratio and the kill ratio (it was a galvanizing symbol for the ppl of UK) . Then hev a look at the aggressive campaign fought by the RAF with real MkIIa/b in the late 40/ early 41 period, and come back to us.

No mate, read my post again please.

What I am saying is that ALL discussions about compared performance are close to useless. Warplanes were not meant to be balanced and as such you will ALWAYS find people bickering about the in game performance.

Now, what I said was they need to fix the FM if it's flawed (and yes it feels weird but not just on the spit) but that has nothing to do with the core issue here. Which is people complaining about getting their butt set on fire by imbalanced planes.

The only way to fix that issue is to give dogfight servers a way of having pilots fly the same plane against each other. That way they can't blame it on the plane or the FM but only on their skills. This is the only way to solve this ongoing discussion.

And please don't say the spitfire sucked so much after göring's stupid order that the 109s had to fly in formation with bombers e.g. Most opposed that stupidity and many 109s were lost and couldn't do a thing. I don't really care for the numbers to be honest since, and then again, I mentioned this in my post, I already said it depends on so many variables:
-For example the service status of the planes
-combat experience of the pilots
-formation they had to fly in (e.g. line formation for the brits)
-stupid orders they were under, like görings bomber escort insanity
-the fact that the germans had to fly over to the UK and only had about 10minutes fuel for combat
-the fear of getting shot down over enemy territory or the channel
-being rested or not
-being stationed far from home
-having good food or not
-etc.
There are SO many factors that contribute to the war - we shouldn't mix up the results of the war with flying characteristics.

Fact is also that home pilots are:
-rested
-well fed
-have no fear of dieing
-always have a respawn button
-know all the performance stats
-know all the weaknesses of their enemies
-get unlimited training hours
-have perfect equiment at home
-got years to practice tactics
-etc.

We CANNOT simply come up with numbers of the war. We also cannot expect to neglect all the psychological effects the war did that affected the numbers. We can only try to come up with great flight models and let the dog fighters fight on equal footings and adjust co-op scenarios WITHOUT taking them too serious.

It's pointless to try and re-create the war. It will never work, never be balanced, ever. Machine performance wasn't the only thing that decided it. Maybe I'm totally wrong and just a complete tard but that's what I wanted to say in fact I don't give a damn what plane is better if they have a decent FM that I can enjoy. For those who cry about imbalanced planes there won't ever be a real solution. In my opinion at least.

Just make up a server with the proposed planeset and see if ppl will like it or not.

I for my part see two kinds of people writing here in this thread:

- Those who don't want to have the things changed either because they are happy that all planes except the Spit 2a are underpowered. They are in favour of having the Spit 2a everywhere where it is like a 1942 plane in a 1940 year war. My guess is, Madfish, that you belong to this group, or you did not read the thread or you just don't have a clue what the thread is about.

- Those who recognize that the FMs are flawed creating an unhistoric imbalance. Madfish: Take note: unhistoric imbalance. Because in case you might have missed it the thread is not about historic imbalance.

The cause for this thread is because all planes except the Spit 2a are underpowered considering historic values. There is nothing to discuss here.

So just fix the FM to give all planes historic performance and basta.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

Those who recognize that the FMs are flawed creating an unhistoric imbalance. Madfish:

The cause for this thread is because all planes except the Spit 2a are underpowered considering historic values. There is nothing to discuss here.

So just fix the FM to give all planes historic performance and basta.

My disagreement is with the SpitMk1 v The Hurricane as currently modelled. Their relative performce and specs are reversed for the time period, Im in the group above but think it merits discussion.

Leave the Mk2 out by all means but at least have the performance of the remaining Allied fighters suited to their roles and corrected relative to the BFs as currently modelled! In other words - fix the two that are wrong initially.