4.11 realism

[JG52Uther]

Well if you don't agree with realism Kendo no need to trash the thread.Don't quite understand why you put in that last quote,from another thread? I admit I can't skip bomb now,whats the problem? Hopefully TD will make it an option,if not,someone else doubless will.
Is it a problem to request realism options here?
Pretty sure Oleg will incorporate a lot of this in SoW,so if DT can't/won't do it for il2 thats fine,we don't have long to wait.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by JG52Uther

Well if you don't agree with realism Kendo no need to trash the thread.Is it a problem to request realism options here?
Pretty sure Oleg will incorporate a lot of this in SoW,so if DT can't/won't do it for il2 thats fine,we don't have long to wait.

So your proposal for fighters is due to your strong and selfless desire for realism is it? Nice try, but it's obvious to anyone who has read your comments either in this thread or the quote from the fusing thread that it's got more to do with you throwing a strop about the game being changed in a way you don't like.

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

Updated:responding to your reply here so as not to deflect the thread any further from its true purpose

So regarding:"This is about fighters AND bombers.", I'd just direct people to read your comments on Page 1 in sequence and then make a judgement on whose reading of your motivation is likely to be more accurate?:

Ok. That's me finished in this thread and on the forum for a while. I've noticed I'm in danger of turning into one of the petty, point-scoring whingers that I used to laugh at when I first came here. After too much exposure to some of the posts here I can see just how easy it is to 'go rogue'. Cheers

May God grant Oleg and Team TD the infinite patience needed.

[JG52Uther]

Wrong.Not in a strop at all.I don't like the way the fuse has been changed for il2,but as many seem to like it as don't like it,even though it has been shown to be incorrect.If we want to go the realism route,lets go for it.Sorry if you don't want the fighters changed,I bet there are many that do.
Again,you are trying to take the thread O/T.This is about fighters AND bombers.They suffered engine problems as well you know.

[MD_Titus]

sugar in petrol tanks from partisan action?

[JG52Uther]

Read a few LW pilot acounts of taking off in a new fighter,only to have oil spew out everywhere,because the engine block had been drilled at the factory!
Would be a brave saboteur to pour sugar in a tank on an operational airfield!
Anyway,sugar was probably unobtainable in the occupied countries later in the war.

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by JG52Uther

Read a few LW pilot acounts of taking off in a new fighter,only to have oil spew out everywhere,because the engine block had been drilled at the factory!
Would be a brave saboteur to pour sugar in a tank on an operational airfield!
Anyway,sugar was probably unobtainable in the occupied countries later in the war.

true about the sugar tbf.

although the joy of having a brand new aircraft turn into an oil splattered ornament on rotation would be awesome.

[yellonet]

The chances of mishaps should just be set according to where, when, and type of aircraft, I'm sure there's a lot of material out there to build a good statistically correct failure model after. Some theaters and aircraft would not suffer that many breakdowns or failures at all, while others would suffer plenty. It's all part of the challenge as I see it.
Sure, from the point of view of a single player it might be frustrating to fly along and suddenly suffer some sort of failure that makes him have to ditch the plane or what not, but battles are fought with more than one aircraft and the battles should be considered on a greater scale than your own single aircraft, it's the whole that counts.
And as such a statistically realistic failure system would therefore add to the challenge between two adversarial forces.

For instance: Can the late war Luftwaffe with their experienced pilots but aircraft plagued by high failure rates be a match for the allied air power?

As it is now we have arcadish battles in the sense that they are always fought between equal forces with all aircraft in perfect condition, that surely almost never happened.

So, I guess the question is this: do we want a simulation of single out-of-the-factory aircraft that can participate in fantasy battles, or do we want the best WWII air war simulation that money can buy?

[JG52Uther]

I agree yellonet.Early war Eastern front,the Russian planes should probably have low serviceability compared to LW,yet in the late war period it was the LW that was in trouble,with poor quality fuel,sabotage,and lack of safe areas to service aircraft.
American and British aircraft would probably be pretty reliable in this period as well.
As for the early period of the western front ,I'm not sure,I would guess about equal servicability?

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by yellonet

The chances of mishaps should just be set according to where, when, and type of aircraft, I'm sure there's a lot of material out there to build a good statistically correct failure model after. Some theaters and aircraft would not suffer that many breakdowns or failures at all, while others would suffer plenty. It's all part of the challenge as I see it.
Sure, from the point of view of a single player it might be frustrating to fly along and suddenly suffer some sort of failure that makes him have to ditch the plane or what not, but battles are fought with more than one aircraft and the battles should be considered on a greater scale than your own single aircraft, it's the whole that counts.
And as such a statistically realistic failure system would therefore add to the challenge between two adversarial forces.

For instance: Can the late war Luftwaffe with their experienced pilots but aircraft plagued by high failure rates be a match for the allied air power?

As it is now we have arcadish battles in the sense that they are always fought between equal forces with all aircraft in perfect condition, that surely almost never happened.

So, I guess the question is this: do we want a simulation of single out-of-the-factory aircraft that can participate in fantasy battles, or do we want the best WWII air war simulation that money can buy?

and consequently feel that crushing sense of the inevitable and the frustrations that hapless, outnumbered and ill-equipped pilots experienced at various parts of the war...

rather than the sense of fun we get from sitting at our desks and going "pew pew" at each other

[Novotny]

I'm warming to this idea. We could put a ban on the D-day maps from the blue perspective, as they didn't actually show up at the beaches. And if you do fly for the Luftwaffe say at any point from mid 44 onward, and you have an engine failure or any other technical problem, the game could lock up for a week until the repairs are actually done - should be simple to implement the game phoning home to a 1C server and preventing the blue planes from flying on your installation for say a week or two of real time. I like the thinking behind this thread.