Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 06-26-2011, 11:15 AM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos View Post
I can not stand the stupid non-centered gunsight mode with free head movement).
~S~
Hi Grathos,

Did you try the center wheel + right click to initiate side head movement by the mouse and align your self with the gun sight.

I hve no TiR and hve used it since the trick was given on the forum and it works fine for me.

~S!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-26-2011, 12:58 PM
335th_GRAthos 335th_GRAthos is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
Did you try the center wheel + right click to initiate side head movement by the mouse and align your self with the gun sight.
Hi Tomcat, yes this works, unfortunately I use TRACKIR (I can not fly without it) but, my TRACKIR is without 6DOF.

The solution you mentioned I tried already, unfortunately as soon as I activate TRACKIR, everything is centered the wrong way again
ROF has a better soution, I was told, you do as you mentioned above, then press a key and the game uses your current view as the future "centered" view, a solution much more flexible and forward-thinking than what CoD has to offer today.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven
You're taking a perspective from inside the game not reality.
....
History tells us that it was quite an effective tactic ( Downing 6 of them that way can hardly be luck ), and there are more quotes I can dig up which state the same.
Look Sven, the day you find me the quote that says that the Bf109 was an "angles-fighter" than an "energy-fighter", give me the name of that guy who wrote it and I will send him a list of some good psychiatrists I know of... enough said.

Your comments remind me of that famous story of the P-47 pilot who out-turned a Bf109 yes he did but this does not prove that the P-47 was turning better than the Bf109.
You can always turn better than another fighter; if your guns damage the other plane enough to give you advantage for what will follow subsequently you are fine; if not you are dead.

After all, what are discussing about?
The fact that the Bf109 turned better than the Spit as you claim was short lived and it was because "This advantage to the Bf 109 soon changed when improved Spitfires were delivered." Since the Spitfire did not really change form I presume he means that the Spits with better engine performance (engine or propeller) came???
I do not know what Leykauf is trying to make as point, the Bf was not a better turner than the Spit, he was entering the fight at the best turning speed (for tightest turn) and full throttle, losing his whole energy within seconds, easing the stick to gain some speed and pulled the max turn once more.
Unless he was flying a JU-87, he would have turned better against any plane turning at its constant rate of turn...
Like this, you can outurn a Zero flying a Wildcat; for how long, don't ask

~S~

Last edited by 335th_GRAthos; 06-26-2011 at 08:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-26-2011, 04:47 PM
Widowmaker214 Widowmaker214 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 43
Default

I really dont recall reading anything credible, that ever pointed to the 109 at being a good turning fighter.

For instance, this R.A.E. performance evaluation from Sept. 1940.
http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_tri...ls/Morgan.html

Being a bad turn fighter, does not make it a bad aircraft. The P51 was not a turner either. (by the time the P51 was really in the mix, the Luftwaffe had lost a large portion of its seasoned pilots)
You can do most anything against green pilots, but if you want to live, you have to fly to the aircraft you are in...and against.

Im actually impressed with the FM vs 1946.

You just have to learn to fly it as it is.. not what you thought it would be.

109s can be quite a pain to fly effectively.

So far I havnt been shot down by a 109 yet. Mainly because they insist on trying to turn with me. If you go further than 180.. to 270.. you're done.

I'll bait them into it. let them Dive... and see if I can sucker them into coming around. IF they are smart, they try for a quick burst then use their speed to climb .. or dive and escape.

Its even better if they try to climb UP to me. Death sentence.

Even with the new patch, things are as I would actually expect them to be. I can't out climb them, or run away/catch them.

If you get jumped by a pair of 109s that know what they are doing. You're done. You cant escape, and if they are working together, you're quickly toast.

If you fight it right, it works great. If you try and make it what its not, you're dead.

Corsairs cant turn fight Zeros.. but Ive seen plenty try.
its almost the same thing.. the corsair bieng a 109.. the zero being a spit.
109 is more an energy fighter... the spit is the turner.

Altitude also plays a big factor. I dont know how the altitude model is in clod yet. It sucked in 1946. For instance, the P51 really needed to be around 25/30 k feet to shine. But in 1946 we were left fighting below 20.
I imagine the 109 would preform better at much higher altitudes (just my thought).. but right now.. engagements online are between 6k and the deck.
Terrible place for a 109.

I do expect flight models to be much better in clod. You simply have to adjust to the characteristics of the aircraft you are in.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-26-2011, 05:45 PM
Sven Sven is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Netherlands, Zeeland
Posts: 787
Default

Quote:
Altitude also plays a big factor. I dont know how the altitude model is in clod yet. It sucked in 1946. For instance, the P51 really needed to be around 25/30 k feet to shine. But in 1946 we were left fighting below 20.
I imagine the 109 would preform better at much higher altitudes (just my thought).. but right now.. engagements online are between 6k and the deck.
Terrible place for a 109.
Well that's not really 1946's fault, it's a mission related thing. Sure the 109 gets better up above but the P51 gets much more power when going up, therefore it's best for the 109 to drag the Americans down to ground and once there finish them off, that's how I do it at least. Since 4.101 the P51 has become a very stable plane which can turn really well and put up a vicious fight even at very low altitude.

I have to say that I've now been playing HSFX 5.01 for a while and those new 109 FMs from Aaken are IMO spot on.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-26-2011, 06:06 PM
Widowmaker214 Widowmaker214 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
Well that's not really 1946's fault, it's a mission related thing. Sure the 109 gets better up above but the P51 gets much more power when going up, therefore it's best for the 109 to drag the Americans down to ground and once there finish them off, that's how I do it at least. Since 4.101 the P51 has become a very stable plane which can turn really well and put up a vicious fight even at very low altitude.

I have to say that I've now been playing HSFX 5.01 for a while and those new 109 FMs from Aaken are IMO spot on.
In IL2.. the flight models were totally fubared above 20k. Its a known issue. Oleg admitted it... as the game was originally designed around the IL2. They didnt pay much attention to FM above 20k So yeah, its an IL2/1946 problem.

ANd yes, you are right about the 109 vs Mustang. Thats the smartest thing to do. though a smart mustang driver wouldn't follow.
Like I said.. you need to know the strengths of your aircraft, against the weakness of your opponent. trying to turn fight a 109 against a spit, is not good tactics.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-26-2011, 07:13 PM
6S.Manu 6S.Manu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven View Post
I miss the 6K + fights with P47 and P51 in 1946.
Oh Sven, you'd like the seow campaign that we're playing in these months... large human bomber's formations at 9km with escort at 10km/11km... my 190 can't reach more than 9km and every american plane at that altitude flies like the old Oleg's Spit.
We decided to not engage them and focus on the bombers.

Anyway talking about CloD: at start I was one of the greatest supporter but now I have enough of it. You can have very detailed DM and FM (on paper) but the management it's been so bad that I can't trust their numbers. Now I'm going to have doubts about every plane's performance, every little damage, every ammo's model.

I'll be sticked to HSFX for long time.
__________________

A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.

Last edited by 6S.Manu; 06-26-2011 at 07:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-27-2011, 05:48 AM
ZaltysZ's Avatar
ZaltysZ ZaltysZ is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 426
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos View Post
Flew a Bf109 on the REPKA Server after a long time...

It appeared somewhat strange to me (compared to the Spitfire Ia I usualy fly), when the water cooler was damaged engine vibrations started.
Something else was damaged too. Sometimes you can get no damage message, but plane will feel damaged anyway. I think damage messages have threshold, which is not the same for effects like vibrations.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-27-2011, 04:54 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6S.Manu View Post
Oh Sven, you'd like the seow campaign that we're playing in these months... large human bomber's formations at 9km with escort at 10km/11km... my 190 can't reach more than 9km and every american plane at that altitude flies like the old Oleg's Spit.
We decided to not engage them and focus on the bombers.

Anyway talking about CloD: at start I was one of the greatest supporter but now I have enough of it. You can have very detailed DM and FM (on paper) but the management it's been so bad that I can't trust their numbers. Now I'm going to have doubts about every plane's performance, every little damage, every ammo's model.

I'll be sticked to HSFX for long time.
Pls Manu don't give up; That's what the soon-to-be jobless modders precisely want you to do.

Stand up like a fighter or CoD might be the last reality oriented sim for very long !
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-31-2011, 02:23 PM
Stealth_Eagle Stealth_Eagle is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: In a world alone.
Posts: 147
Default

Something worth mentioning in my personal experiences:
I was flying a Hurricane up at altitude (perhaps 10,000 feet or greater (I can get the Hurricane up to well over 25,000 ft in full real)) and I noticed a pesky little 109 trying to chase me in the syndicate server. The main way that I ID the 109 was its bright yellow nose which over time became smaller and smaller which pleased me. Then I ran into some 110s (I think AI) which I started above and they never got onto my tail. Pretty much I like the new Hurricane FMs better then the original version.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-01-2011, 04:37 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
9km with escort at 10km/11km
Just a note...

That is hardly realistic. Nobody flew at 36,000 feet operationally for any length of time during WWII. United States Oxygen systems during the war would be hard pressed to keep a pilot conscious for any long term exposure and fighting would be very problematic.

From the USAAF study on the physiological effects of altitude exposure on USAAF crews during the bombing campaign:

Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.