Pilot kill after pilot kill. How do they do it??

[Ze-Jamz]

Gawd..were not trying to remove ammo now are we?

blimey

[Flanker35M]

S!

Ze-Jamz..you said it out loud. Just wait for the Purist Battalion and their funny sidekicks to march in and demand it On a more serious note can't the servers restrict loadouts like in IL-2 1946? Would solve these fantasy beltings etc.

[JG52Krupi]

I recall asking this to be added as a server side options and was imediatly jumped on looks like I was correct after all.

P.S. I use a (for the most part) historical belt in my aircraft

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

On a more serious note can't the servers restrict loadouts like in IL-2 1946? Would solve these fantasy beltings etc.

Salute

1. The SmK (H) Tungsten round is clearly causing an ahistorical imbalance, since it makes the E-1's weapons more effective than the E-3's and E-4's, not accurate representation of the real situation.
2. The round was in very short supply, its not even listed in the game as part of the standard E-1 loadout, unlike the Dewilde Inciendary round in the Spitfires and Hurricanes or the M-Geschoss in the E-4.
3. We don't have an accurate determination of exactly how good this round was.

I am not raising an issue about the M-Geschoss, that was clearly part of the battle, and an real indicator of which direction the Luftwaffe was taking its air to air weapons program in 1940, ie. towards 20mm weapons.

I'd be happy to see a server with historical beltings, including restricting the British to limited numbers of DeWilde rounds.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

2. The round was in very short supply, its not even listed in the game as part of the standard E-1 loadout, unlike the Dewilde Inciendary round in the Spitfires and Hurricanes or the M-Geschoss in the E-4.

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Please quote a source that states the round was "in very short supply".

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Please quote a source that states the round was "in very short supply".

Go back and read my posts.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Go back and read my posts.

I did. You seem to be confusing "my source doesn't mention the tungsten ammo" or "the tungsten ammo was less common than the standard ammo" with "the tungsten ammo was in short supply"

If you can't quote it, then I'll accept that you agree.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

I did. You seem to be confusing "my source doesn't mention the tungsten ammo" or "the tungsten ammo was less common than the standard ammo" with "the tungsten ammo was in short supply"

If you can't quote it, then I'll accept that you agree.

Not confused, the ammunition was in short supply, wasn't part of the standard loadout.

Did it exist as part of a Luftwaffe ordinance plan? No idea. Probably, at some point, who knows when?

I actually think its up to advocates for its use to prove it was a part of the battle.

More importantly, like other glitches which affect the game, it is creating an ahistorical enviroment.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.

Just to be pedantic :

In many historical cases, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It's then a matter of degree or probability how strong that evidential gap is with respect to the event proposed.

I think what you mean to say is that absence of evidence is not PROOF of absence.

[AbortedMan]

My dog smiles with his tail.

...am I helping?