109 advice needed (climb)

[jg27_mc]

Originally Posted by Robo.

What I was asking was: what has 1946 to do with CoD? Why are you even bringing anything that you think was wrong with Spitfires and 109s in Il-2 1946 into this thread I don't care what you think about my opinion, my opinion does not matter at all. Every Il-2 player flying both (blue and red) sides equally will see how biased and ridiculous these kinds of comments are anyway.



No, I very much enjoy that CoD is more game and less arcade (compared to 1946). I actually wish they would make it as hardcore as possible. Your opinion of 109 vs Spitfires in 1946 is irrelevant and unimportant. It's just your frustration fighting them on the blue side. Fair enough



I still fly 1946 a lot and since 4.09m, the Spitfires Mk.V and Mk.IX (e.g. the ones in the stock game) were overhauled by Team Daidalos and they did a very good job imho - just FYI

I do remember though how they used to perform in 4.08 and never had any problem with them flying Blue (which was 60+ percent of the time). Very capable plane as it should be.



Last note on 1946 - you're wrong as every single late war Bf 109 is able to outclimb Spitfire and excell on the vertical if used right. (except that 25lbs. beast obviously)

----------------------------

As for the actual topic - as it is, Bf 109 is certainly able to outclimb any Mk.I RAF fighter as it should. FM need some fine tuning, there is a patch coming out soon so why don't we simply wait, try it and THEN comment.

You're coming here with your opinions from an different sim (which you don't fly anymore) and comment on stuff that has not even happened yet. Why? (that was my question)

My recommendation to any orthodox blue or red pilots - try flying the other side for a month or two

Your one of those guys that... Well I am done with you. Take the bicycle home.

PS: (I should really be killing you instead of wasting my time here)

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by jg27_mc

Your one of those guys that... Well I am done with you. Take the bicycle home.

PS: (I should really be killing you instead of wasting my time here)

Not sure what you're on about here with the bicycle and stuff, but that little 'fight' of ours on ATAG was rather interesting, wasn't it?

Honestly, I hope the devs will keep improving the sim FM-wise - I believe the main FM problems are well known and documented and I am looking forward for the upcoming patches.

[jg27_mc]

Originally Posted by Robo.

Not sure what you're on about here with the bicycle and stuff, but that little 'fight' of ours on ATAG was rather interesting, wasn't it?

Honestly, I hope the devs will keep improving the sim FM-wise - I believe the main FM problems are well known and documented and I am looking forward for the upcoming patches.

It sure was (I really mean it). Hopefully this is a computer game and I live to fight another day.
Regards.

[AKA_Tenn]

so why couldn't they just let the physical model do it? give different parts of the plane weight, give the air weight, then let the physics engine do the work instead of giving the planes flying attributes absolute values... so there's no flight model at all...

since this game is really graphically intensive and hardly uses any CPU at all really... but i guess we still have a ways to go for that?

i was just thinking that because it doesn't matter weather its a machine gun or a sack of potatos if they weigh the same, they'll effect the characteristics of the airplane very similarly... so that way you wouldn't need to know the flying characteristics of the plane, just the thrust, shape and weight distribution

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by AKA_Tenn

so why couldn't they just let the physical model do it? give different parts of the plane weight, give the air weight, then let the physics engine do the work instead of giving the planes flying attributes absolute values... so there's no flight model at all...

A 6DOF flight model is a physics model!! Calculated on the fly (pun intended) in real time

Originally Posted by AKA_Tenn

since this game is really graphically intensive and hardly uses any CPU at all really... but i guess we still have a ways to go for that?

Nope! 6DOF flight models have been in use on PCs for some years now.. First I know of was PACIFIC AIR WAR 1942 by Microprose.. Back than it used fixed point math, but it was a 6DOF FM. As you noted, the modern CPUs have no problem what so ever running a floating point 6DOF FM. Prior to that PC flight models were, what was commonly known as TABLE BASED (read lookup) flight models that had very little physics to them (SWOTL, RB, AOTP, AOE, etc)

[AKA_Tenn]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

A 6DOF flight model is a physics model!! Calculated on the fly (pun intended) in real time


Nope! 6DOF flight models have been in use on PCs for some years now.. First I know of was PACIFIC AIR WAR 1942 by Microprose.. Back than it used fixed point math, but it was a 6DOF FM. As you noted, the modern CPUs have no problem what so ever running a floating point 6DOF FM. Prior to that PC flight models were, what was commonly known as TABLE BASED (read lookup) flight models that had very little physics to them (SWOTL, RB, AOTP, AOE, etc)

if thats's the case why do people complain about flight models here? seems to me these guys just need to learn their plane instead of insist everything bends to their will...

[CaptainDoggles]

Guys the flight models are an approximation. Even the best gaming PC money can buy could not model the exact equations behind flight fast enough to run at playable speeds.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by AKA_Tenn

if thats's the case why do people complain about flight models here? seems to me these guys just need to learn their plane instead of insist everything bends to their will...

There is a lot of truth in that

The problem is typically two fold, one the sim pilot does not know what the value should be, and two they preformed the test wrong. Which is why it is so important to record a track file of any so called 'test'

Which is not to say there can not be an error in the FM! Just that typically it is in the sim pilot!

The FM, like any program, follows the rule of garbage in garbage out

With that said know that the 'math' of the FM is the same for all planes (subtle differences for say single vs. twin, etc). What makes a P51 fly like a P51 is when the P51 parameters are used as inputs to the FM. For a simple example say the 'math' of the FM was as follows

y = CL*x

Where

y is the output (result)
x is the input
CD is the 'drag' parameter (coefficient)

Say

x = 3
CD = 5 for a P51
CD = 5.5 for a Bf109

Than the output y would be for the given x input

y = 15 for a P51
y = 16.5 for a Bf109

Lets assume that the value of CD is not 'known' for the WWII plane we want to simulate.. In such a case you could just pick a value of CD based on other know values of similar planes (happens a lot in RL) or maybe they calculate it offline using another another program (say simulated wind tunnel) that uses some 3D model to calculate CD

In either case, a sanity check of the value you pick can be check by comparing some of the simulation results to real world results.. In this case say top speed.

Problem with most sim pilots is they don't even know what value they should obtain during a test! Let alone able to record 'all' the values that can affect your speed. For example, to test for top speed you have to be able to hold your alt within around +/-100ft.. Most sim pilots 'think' they can do this no problem.. I can tell you how many sim pilots were amazed at how much the alt varied during their flight! Which I was able to show them by using DeviceLink to record the values of altitude and speed and plot them.. And sure enough.. Most of the guys who said the plane was too fast, where actually loosing alt (shallow dive) when the obtained that max speed, and visa versa, sure enough the guys who said the plane was too slow, where actually gaining alt (shallow climb( when the obtained that max speed.

[drewpee]

After flying mostly 109s I have found on-line Reds have improved their tactics. Most of my loses have been due to pilot error and loosing track of EA in attempt to retain E. Most of my kills are from surprise 6 o'clock attacks.( It's getting harder to make a living in the Luftwaffe.)

I'm now trying to fly red when teams are uneven and I've had to go back to basics. My kill rate is way down, but I seem to be surviving more. Looking after the AC and E. If the flight model changes for better or worse ,I will have come out with better skills.

The fact that as a sim COD is still just a game. With allot of people if they can't rule the sky and rack up kills like in SP then blame the game/plane. Thing is, this game is less forgiving to those of us who refuse to adapt and learn. You are only going to get frustrated and angry at the game and others.
I'm still learning after too many years playing and that's just the way I like it. I'll leave the easy win games for my kids.

LONG LIVE COD

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by drewpee

After flying mostly 109s I have found on-line Reds have improved their tactics. Most of my loses have been due to pilot error and loosing track of EA in attempt to retain E. Most of my kills are from surprise 6 o'clock attacks.( It's getting harder to make a living in the Luftwaffe.)

Funny.. but while reading this I was struck with how much it sounded like an actual WWII account.. Which to me says the FMs are not as bad as some would have us belive! Long story short, you fly it like it is real and chances are you will get a real feeling experience! Fly it like it is a game where you are not worried about dying, thus you jump into a fight that a real pilot would not, and chances are you will NOT get a real feeling experience!

Originally Posted by drewpee

The fact that as a sim COD is still just a game. With allot of people if they can't rule the sky and rack up kills like in SP then blame the game/plane.

Bingo!

As my sig suggest! Most sim pilots are missing one key component in their personality that real WWII pilots had in spades.. The ability to look in the mirror and realize the source of the mistake!

Originally Posted by drewpee

Thing is, this game is less forgiving to those of us who refuse to adapt and learn. You are only going to get frustrated and angry at the game and others.
I'm still learning after too many years playing and that's just the way I like it. I'll leave the easy win games for my kids

Agreed 100%