I'm surprised the jets are not used more

[akuma]

When I first started playing this game I had the idea in my head that once people unlocked the Me262's then it would be a jet-fest, but thats simply not the case.

Why do you steer clear of the jets?

(p.s. my current favourite plane is the ME-163b)

[Lexandro]

Because they have terrible turning circles, are hard to land due to the high speed aproach, and generaly dont have enough armour to last long in a fight.

[Ancient Seraph]

There's too many :shock:. Every jet is just plain cheating, they have a huge advantage in their speed. This doesn't mean they make more kills per se, but they're quite invincible. This is highly annoying. Therefore, I'm opposed to any jet.

[MorgothNL]

Im glad there arent many jets

I hate them!
If they are on the opposing team, nothing you can do, they just fly away (not that the kill me, but it is just anoying :P)

If they are in my team... it is as if you are with 1 player less, because the cant join the dogfights

[Gazz6666]

There's too many :shock:. Every jet is just plain cheating, they have a huge advantage in their speed. This doesn't mean they make more kills per se, but they're quite invincible. This is highly annoying. Therefore, I'm opposed to any jet.

They're invincible in the right hands, of someone who knows how to Zoom 'N' Boom. However, it's easy to beat them in a turning fight.

Tbh though, if you wanted to fly jets over props, you should really be playing Tom Clancy's HAWX ;)

[akuma]

I avoid turning fights in jets at all costs, I use hit and run tactics, the only problem is I usually miss!

[Gazz6666]

I avoid turning fights in jets at all costs, I use hit and run tactics, the only problem is I usually miss!

It is the only way. The 163 doesn't have the armour (or the firepower to be honest) to engage planes like the Spitfire IX in a turning fight.

However, the 163 is very easy to land ;)

[akuma]

It is the only way. The 163 doesn't have the armour (or the firepower to be honest) to engage planes like the Spitfire IX in a turning fight.

However, the 163 is very easy to land ;)

I find the 163 to be reasonable in turns, while keeping plenty of escape power when it all goes wrong.

Also with its small surface area its a git to hit so lack of armour isn't too much of an issue.

The only down point for me is the lack of firepower, but you cannot have it all!

[mattd27]

Tbh though, if you wanted to fly jets over props, you should really be playing Tom Clancy's HAWX ;)

nooooo, Ace Combat 6!:)

But anyway, I never got the hang of the jets, but I've been killed quite a few times by someone who knows how to use one.

[Gazz6666]

nooooo, Ace Combat 6!:)

But anyway, I never got the hang of the jets, but I've been killed quite a few times by someone who knows how to use one.

Well, AC6 IF you've got an Xbox :D HAWX on PS3

@Akuma: The small area of the 163 does benefit it, I can personally attest to that. I found myself switching to the enemy Spitfire rather than trying to hit the damn thing earlier!

[Ancient Seraph]

HAWX is... I have no idea what it is, I do know however that it's in no way a flight sim... I mean, slipping?? WTF.. press two buttons and you're on someone's six. And if that doesn't work, just turn on the path indicator :shock:. Anyways, jets are lame, and should not be in IL2. They're way out of a piston's league.

[Gazz6666]

HAWX is... I have no idea what it is, I do know however that it's in no way a flight sim... I mean, slipping?? WTF.. press two buttons and you're on someone's six. And if that doesn't work, just turn on the path indicator :shock:. Anyways, jets are lame, and should not be in IL2. They're way out of a piston's league.

The path indicator stuff is crap. On the other hand, all planes in HAWX have virtual cockpits. But I agree, props and jets ends up being boring.

Then again, I could relent if they added some allied jets like the Meteor, Vampire or Airacomet, as all the jets are axis at the moment.

[Wissam24]

I too miss Ace Combat. I played Zero to death, I unlocked every single damn thing you could in that game, and I was most angry when I heard 6 would be 360 exclusive.

[Gazz6666]

I too miss Ace Combat. I played Zero to death, I unlocked every single damn thing you could in that game, and I was most angry when I heard 6 would be 360 exclusive.

Same here. Zero was awesome, I still have it. Unfortunately my original PS3 died several months ago, and I had to buy an 80Gb version which has no PS2 support - epic fail on Sony's part :evil:

[Wissam24]

I still play Zero too! Isn't it just amazing? And 4 was just godlike too

[Lexandro]

AC 6 on Xbox is great, but in all honesty is not as good as BoP. Im a huge AC fan, Ive played it since the original back of PSX. BoP though is much more visceral and skill oriented than AC, which is definately my cup of tea.

[Gazz6666]

AC 6 on Xbox is great, but in all honesty is not as good as BoP. Im a huge AC fan, Ive played it since the original back of PSX. BoP though is much more visceral and skill oriented than AC, which is definately my cup of tea.

Aye, you do have to have some skill to play BoP. Someone I saw earlier obviously didn't, as he was trying to shoot down enemies using his rockets :confused:

[Wissam24]

Hahah. OR, he has standard issue steel balls

[Lexandro]

Aye, you do have to have some skill to play BoP. Someone I saw earlier obviously didn't, as he was trying to shoot down enemies using his rockets :confused:

Actually that works I think. If your in a head-on pass with a guy and you both play chicken at close range you can get off a salvo of rockets and hit the guy. I did that a few days ago vs a guy in a Hurricane. I died in the pass but Im not sure if it was rocket or gunfire that got me.

[Soviet Ace]

I steer clear of the jets because they just don't do what they should. Well actually they do, but their speed is just to much against prop planes. The only German jet I can stand to fly for long, is the He-126 Salamander. It's a fun jet to fly when gunning down B-17s and stuff, and it seems to turn better than the Me-262?

Yak-3 FTW!!!!!

[Ancient Seraph]

I gotta agree with Lexandro, AC is arcade. Not as bad as HAWX, but it's not like IL2, where it's obvious you need skill. Doesn't mean I don't love it though :). Although the achievements and unlocks are very timeconsuming :-?.

[mattd27]

It's well known that AC is arcade, but it's arcade done the right way. It's playable without being too over the top (like hawx can be).

[Dubbedinenglish]

It's well known that AC is arcade, but it's arcade done the right way. It's playable without being too over the top (like hawx can be).

The main difference is Ace Combat still makes it fun to just fly the planes. All of their flaps, the way the missles fall from plane before igniting ( Phoenix missles on the F-14).... Project Aces just knows how to emulate the joy of flight and the little details in the aircraft. It also helps the can craft an amazing story to go with it (save the horrid storyline in 6). AC4, AC5 are still the genre defining games when it comes to console jet games.

HAWX just completely ruined any fun in flying along with a sense of speed.

[akuma]

Tbh though, if you wanted to fly jets over props, you should really be playing Tom Clancy's HAWX ;)

Thats abit of a bold and narrow minded statement.

These jets existed in WW2, so are legit in game.

Can you imagine if our pilots back in the day spat there dummy out and said I'm not playing this game anymore because they are using jets?

[Ancient Seraph]

These jets existed in WW2, so are legit in game.

Can you imagine if our pilots back in the day spat there dummy out and said I'm not playing this game anymore because they are using jets?
This is, as I stated in another thread, a void argument. As you've correctly stated, IL2 is a game, and games need to be balanced in order to be fun to play. If a game is unbalanced, how realistic or historically correct it may be, the fun quickly ends.

[dazz1971]

This is, as I stated in another thread, a void argument. As you've correctly stated, IL2 is a game, and games need to be balanced in order to be fun to play. If a game is unbalanced, how realistic or historically correct it may be, the fun quickly ends.

yes its a game but its a flight sim and flight sim games are unique in the fact that what relates to flying/combat in real life is equally related to the flight sim world ie: many ppl use real life tatics acrobatics in flights sims etc

i think its a case of some ppl dont know how to combat the jets so just start crying unfair its make the game unbalanced etc

funny thou you dont see many threads crying stop using b17s its unfair they are not balancing the game etc....
yet if you play a game of strike and the other team has b17 its pretty much game over before you start

[Gazz6666]

Thats abit of a bold and narrow minded statement.

These jets existed in WW2, so are legit in game.

Can you imagine if our pilots back in the day spat there dummy out and said I'm not playing this game anymore because they are using jets?

I didn't say they weren't legit, I said that if you prefer flying jets instead of props then perhaps you should be playing HAWX or AC6. I personally agree with Seraph, the jets mean other people have to use jets, and then you might as well be playing HAWX or AC.

By the way, did you know that the Me-262 is also a submarine?

[Robotic Pope]

I didn't say they weren't legit, I said that if you prefer flying jets instead of props then perhaps you should be playing HAWX or AC6. I personally agree with Seraph, the jets mean other people have to use jets, and then you might as well be playing HAWX or AC.

By the way, did you know that the Me-262 is also a submarine?

There is a hugh difference between the WWII jets and modern day jets though. Just because you like like flying the Me262 doesn't automaticaly mean that you want to be pulling 9g's in a turn or firing missiles at planes that you can't even see.

If someoone wants to use a jet and Boom'n'Zoom people thats fine by me. You should be able to play a game however you like as long as it isn't cheating other people. And if you are host you can always limit the date to avoid the jets in the first place.

[Gazz6666]

There is a hugh difference between the WWII jets and modern day jets though. Just because you like like flying the Me262 doesn't automaticaly mean that you want to be pulling 9g's in a turn or firing missiles at planes that you can't even see.

If someoone wants to use a jet and Boom'n'Zoom people thats fine by me. You should be able to play a game however you like as long as it isn't cheating other people. And if you are host you can always limit the date to avoid the jets in the first place.

Yes, I fully understand that there is a huge difference between those jets and modern ones, and personally I have no problem with people using them in multiplayer.

The problem I have is that if one person uses a jet, it generally means someone else needs a jet to counter them, and eventually everyone is flying jets and the fun is lost.

[Ancient Seraph]

funny thou you dont see many threads crying stop using b17s its unfair they are not balancing the game etc....
yet if you play a game of strike and the other team has b17 its pretty much game over before you start
I think it's a case of some people not knowing how to combat the B17's so just start crying unfair, it makes the game unbalanced, etc.
The main difference between jets and a B17 is that a B17 actually isn't that hard to take down. Especially with a 109 G-6 it's far from impossible. In Strike, it's not just about taking a bomber and flying to the other side, but also making sure the other team doesn't reach your targets. If someone flies a B17 it takes a while before it reaches it's target, enough time to take him down. If someone flies an Arado it's impossible with a piston, and hard even with a jet because of the short time it takes for the Arado to reach the target.

yes its a game but its a flight sim and flight sim games are unique in the fact that what relates to flying/combat in real life is equally related to the flight sim world ie: many ppl use real life tatics acrobatics in flights sims etc

As soon as there's competitive playing involved, I believe game balance superceeds historical accuracy. I'm not saying flight models should be altered for the sake of balance, but at least keep to planes that can be divided in the same performance category.

Pope's G-comment made me think though, I wonder what's gonna happen with jet pilots when blackouts are re-introduced :rolleyes:.

P.S. People, my AC and HAWX references are just an exaggeration to make a point, don't take them too seriously.

[akuma]

This is, as I stated in another thread, a void argument. As you've correctly stated, IL2 is a game, and games need to be balanced in order to be fun to play. If a game is unbalanced, how realistic or historically correct it may be, the fun quickly ends.

I see what your saying, but to omit the early jets from a WW2 sim would be a huge mistake.

The fact not many people use them (even when I host and use ME163) proves that people have tactics to beat them. I certainly dont think jets unbalance the game though.

[Ancient Seraph]

I think the fact that not a lot of people use jets is because they either realise it's lame, or because they play IL2 to fly the classics.
How would omitting jets be a huge mistake? A bigger mistake then leaving out the Lancaster, or Mosquito? I most certainly don't think so.
I'll explain the problem with jets. For teammates it's troublesome, because most people don't bother trying to keep up with jets (I don't, I know I can't keep up). Because of this, enemies have one 'extra' player (e.g. in 2v2 there would always be 2 enemies hanging around the teammate). So not only is it annoying for the other team, but for your own teammates as well.
For the opposite team, a jet is a random guy that buzzes in every now and then and either hits you twice on an annoying spot without killing you, forcing you to break off of your opponent, or shoots you without you standing a chance (depending on the skill level). The only way to avoid this from happening is to constantly keep an eye on the jet, which is extremely annoying when flying on someone's six.

[Gazz6666]

How would omitting jets be a huge mistake? A bigger mistake then leaving out the Lancaster, or Mosquito? I most certainly don't think so.


I second this statement! :grin:

[Robotic Pope]

I see what your saying, but to omit the early jets from a WW2 sim would be a huge mistake.

The fact not many people use them (even when I host and use ME163) proves that people have tactics to beat them. I certainly dont think jets unbalance the game though.

Well I would say the Arado unbalances Strike games and I see plenty of people flying that. The Jet fighters though I have no problem with. Maybe if the online game was not so turn'n'burn orientated, the jet fighters would then become more of a problem. As it is now they are almost on the outside of a battle always trying to get a look in but never quite managing it. I think that is what Gazz means by saying if one person takes a jet, someone on the other side needs to not because theyre unbalanced but becase they are balanced on a different scale that makes them vulnerable only to other jets but more difficult for the jets to kill a prop.

[Gazz6666]

I think that is what Gazz means by saying if one person takes a jet, someone on the other side needs to not because theyre unbalanced but becase they are balanced on a different scale that makes them vulnerable only to other jets but more difficult for the jets to kill a prop.

Sort of. What I meant is that the mentality of most players (note: most, not all) I play against online goes something like this;

You're in a Team Battle lobby, waiting for the start. A player joins. He immediately selects an Me-262. Chances are, one other player will switch to a jet too, because they feel because there's a jet in the game, they'll need a jet to counter it. And then it's like a dominoe effect, as everyone else goes through the same mentality, untill it's only you flying a prop. It's a case of everyone getting (or trying to get) an edge over their opponents through plane choice, rather than pilot skill.

It's almost the same with strike games. I was playing with my friend earlier, and he was flying the IL-4. As I was working on the 100 109 kills, I was providing cover. Generally two players would join; one in a fighter (normally a Hurricane with rockets or bombs), and someone in a bomber. But the bomber pilot almost immediately switched to a fighter too, obviously looking to score some easy kills, as essentially they thought "ha, two fighters vs one fighter and a bomber - an easy win". Fortunately, these games are much more fun that Jet Vs Jet games, which meant I was either fighting off two fighters in a spiralling dogfight that dropped to less than 50 feet at times, or watching these hapless fighters being owned by the IL-4's rear guns (yes, this was on arcade).

And I have to ask, which one of those sounds better?

Off topic, why the hell has the Spitfire XVI got a cockpit view of it's own when the 109 is much more popular online, and is used in one of the Single Missions?

[Wissam24]

The game needs more Space Shuttles. And X15s. How about an SR-71. Seriously guys. The jets were they, and they had a HUGE impact on the war. To ignore them would be stupid, it would be like ignoring the different marks of Spitfire.

[Ancient Seraph]

The game needs more Space Shuttles. And X15s. How about an SR-71. Seriously guys. The jets were they, and they had a HUGE impact on the war. To ignore them would be stupid, it would be like ignoring the different marks of Spitfire.
Wait.. first you act sarcastic about jets and then you say the should be in there? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Anyways, you claim the jets had a 'HUGE' impact on the war, which is in no way true. They came too late to actually make a difference. I'm sure if they'd been invented one or two years earlier they could've made a huge impact, but since they weren't, they didn't.

[Wissam24]

No, but they didn't just sit in the sidelines either. They were vitally important as they dictated how aviation progressed in the future

[Ancient Seraph]

No, but they didn't just sit in the sidelines either. They were vitally important as they dictated how aviation progressed in the future
The Me-163 probably made no more than 20 kills.
It is doubtful whether, after almost a year in service, the rocket fighter caused the destruction of more than 16 enemy aircraft. Ref: Jeffrey Ethell & Alfred Price, "World War II Fighting Jets". Bernd Barbas, "Planes of the Luftwaffe Fighter Aces", 'only about 20 victories were claimed.'
(Taken from http://www.funtrivia.com/en/subtopics/German-Jets-and-Rocket-Planes-of-WWII-82445.html)
The plane also in no way dictated how aviation progressed.
This is true for the Me-262, and a lot of later jets were based on it, but does that mean that it has to be in the game, when it only makes it unbalanced?

[Wissam24]

And the Me-262 is accounted for over 500 kills. Since when was I talking exclusively about the Me163?

[Ancient Seraph]

Against almost 5,000 for the Mustang. Not that impressive.

[Wissam24]

Yeah, I mean lets face it, all those Aces who only got 5 or 6 kills. They ALL suck compared to Erich Hartmann. Man. Every pilot ever sucks, cause he got all those kills.

Just cause another plane did very well doesn't mean another plane didn't. The Wright Brother's plane only flew 200 odd feet, you going to say that had a negligible impact on aviation?

[Ancient Seraph]

I repeat, why would a plane be in a game if it has such a negative impact on it, just because it was important for later development? I acknowledge the fact that it had a big impact, but only on development after the war.

[akuma]

When I made this thread I didn't realise just how much jet rage there was.

But its a fact that jets were part of WW2, and they did indeed unbalance it, so I dont see why the game makers would ignore such a fact of vital importance. However if you want to cry about balance perhaps we should remove machine guns and assult rifles from WW2 games as they unbalance it and I dont like it??????

As for the ME262 kills, they were introduced much later in the war, most historians agree that had Hilter allowed the 262 to be entered into the war as a fighter, and not held out for a fighter-bomber then things could well have been very, very different.

[Wissam24]

The Blenheim was proven poor pretty quickly, that's still in there. The Po-2 was a trainer and reconnaissance plane, that's in there. The MC202 only fought in Italy! And it was pretty quickly overwhelmed. Why are they all in there? Because they WERE there

[Ancient Seraph]

So was the Tallboy bomb, wanna bet it won't be there if a Lancaster comes available?
None of the planes stated above have any negative impact on the game, thus you argument is void.

[akuma]

So was the Tallboy bomb, wanna bet it won't be there if a Lancaster comes available?
None of the planes stated above have any negative impact on the game, thus you argument is void.

The more the merrier I say. I'd be more than happy to include all the fighters and bombers if it were up to me. But alas its not :(

However to miss out such high profile aircraft would have been a mistake.

[Wissam24]

That wasn't your argument, I had said that to leave them out entirely would be wrong, because they were important in the war. You then said that no, they were useless in the war, to which I pointed out that actually, they weren't ALL useless at all. Whether they have a negative impact on the game is irrelevant as regards what we were arguing about. You seemed to be arguing that because they had hardly any impact on the war, they should be left out.

How they affect the game is something that needs to be dealt with, but is not something to do with history

[Robotic Pope]

oh the Me262 should definitely be in the game. As I believe the Meteor should be. They give the game a link to the modern day an give the player a sense of the incredible advance in technology at that time. It wouldn't be right to have a WWII flight game without jets, thats like denying history. How the game balances them against the other planes is always a problem but it is a problem that must always be solved for a WWII flight sim.

[Ancient Seraph]

Wow, you really care about actually playing a fair game, do you?
I appreciate you want realism, and you play on Simulator, right? And in principle I am not against jets being in the game, I'm against them being in multiplayer as a normal option. In 1946 for example, there were a lot of jets, but the host had the ability to select the planes available in the server. There were hardly any good servers that mixed piston with jet. Practically all of the servers were piston-only, and there were some jet-only servers.
I have no problems with jets whatsoever, as long as they're not in a server I want to play in.

[Wissam24]

But that's a game problem that needs to be dealt with, something for the devs, that's nothing to do with how the planes did in history.

And yes, I play on Sim as much as I can. And hardly anyone takes the jets in Sim, because they're absurdly hard to use in that mode.

[dazz1971]

sorry but at the end of the day the jets are in the game they are a valid choice for ppl to use they dont unbalance the game any more than the b17 does and i dont think they have such a negative effect on the game...
just what are you suggesting? that becuse a few ppl decide to fly a jet everyone is going to stop playing ?? i dont think so

and who are you or anyone else for that matter to tell them they are cheating or spoiling the game by doing so ???

[Ancient Seraph]

I would love an option to turn jets on or off. Simple as that.

[Wissam24]

So what was all that "The Me-163 only got 20 kills" ?

[Ancient Seraph]

Same question I just asked myself :-P. Doesn't mean I don't mean it though. Still think there are some strange aircraft picks.

[Wissam24]

Well, I for one cannot fathom what the Po-2 is doing in there. Considering it has NO forward firing guns, and the bombs it carries are rather the suck, it's pointless.

[Ancient Seraph]

We could almost make a 'Ridiculous plane choices' post :-P. Not sure the devs would appreciate it though :rolleyes:.

[akuma]

I would love an option to turn jets on or off. Simple as that.

I'm sure our pilots in WW2 would have loved to have turned the jets off too, but they couldn't, so they didn't bitch and moan about it and developed tatics to deal with them.

War isn't fair, it never has been, so why would a realistic war sim be any different?

[PantherAttack2]

Well, I for one cannot fathom what the Po-2 is doing in there. Considering it has NO forward firing guns, and the bombs it carries are rather the suck, it's pointless.

It's just there to fool around with. ;)



If you don't want jets change the max year you want aircraft to be from... Otherwise they are perfectly legitimate. I don't mind jets at all, and I personally can't use them very well anyways.

[MorgothNL]

I'm sure our pilots in WW2 would have loved to have turned the jets off too, but they couldn't, so they didn't bitch and moan about it and developed tatics to deal with them.

War isn't fair, it never has been, so why would a realistic war sim be any different?

Bit of a strange argument :confused:, can you image any game at all, that would word with that idea in the back of your head?

the WW2 pilots didnt play for FUN, they fought for and with their lives. We play a game, for fun (or so I think we are). An ace in a jet, against any piston plane, isnt fun.
And no, the WW2 pilots didnt say 'meh, they have jets, Im outa here'. We have a choice, and we can try to get an option of switching jets off.

game - real life
choice/fun - no choice/not funny

^^ you see the difference

a simple option of turning them off wouldnt bother many people. I agree they should be in the game, but I also agree that they ruin a lot of games.
So, is a on/off button so strange to wish for ?

PS. no I dont really mind a jet opponent, I mind them in my own team, because they will give you one less dogfighter. Just a guy who zooms by now and then
As an opponent:
1. he's not an ace -> they have one guy 'less' (a noob in a jet is not even 1/4 as dangerous as a noob in a piston).
^^ this sucks because I dont want an easy victory

2. he's an ace.. and there is NOTHING you can do about it, not even if you are better them him in your piston. If he knows how to fy it, there is no chance you can kill him

so, no, dont mind jets, but also, there is no way they make the game more fun

[akuma]

Bit of a strange argument :confused:, can you image any game at all, that would word with that idea in the back of your head?

the WW2 pilots didnt play for FUN, they fought for and with their lives. We play a game, for fun (or so I think we are). An ace in a jet, against any piston plane, isnt fun.
And no, the WW2 pilots didnt say 'meh, they have jets, Im outa here'. We have a choice, and we can try to get an option of switching jets off.

game - real life
choice/fun - no choice/not funny

^^ you see the difference

a simple option of turning them off wouldnt bother many people. I agree they should be in the game, but I also agree that they ruin a lot of games.
So, is a on/off button so strange to wish for ?

PS. no I dont really mind a jet opponent, I mind them in my own team, because they will give you one less dogfighter. Just a guy who zooms by now and then
As an opponent:
1. he's not an ace -> they have one guy 'less' (a noob in a jet is not even 1/4 as dangerous as a noob in a piston).
^^ this sucks because I dont want an easy victory

2. he's an ace.. and there is NOTHING you can do about it, not even if you are better them him in your piston. If he knows how to fy it, there is no chance you can kill him

so, no, dont mind jets, but also, there is no way they make the game more fun

Again though, turning the jets off because you dont like them would be like turning machine guns off in a FPS because you personally didn't like them. Sure you can do it, but are you better for it, or just proving your lack of skill to play the game you bought by ignoring a major factor because it doesn't suit your own personal play style?

All the games I host (which is pretty much every game I play as I get bored looking for games) is 1946, so if you come to my game, please leave complaints at the door! (not you personally it was an open statement)

[kod30]

And yes, I play on Sim as much as I can. And hardly anyone takes the jets in Sim, because they're absurdly hard to use in that mode.

i vividly remember the 262's engines catching on fire all the time because you throttled up too fast on the PC version.

[Soviet Ace]

Well, I for one cannot fathom what the Po-2 is doing in there. Considering it has NO forward firing guns, and the bombs it carries are rather the suck, it's pointless.

Well seeing that the Po-2 is a bomber/recon plane, and not meant to dogfight. If they did have a forward firing gun, it would just add weight and considering the plane is like a WW1 plane, it would need a really light MG to be placed, not like the WW2 heavy MGs like in many many many, fighters etc.

[Wissam24]

Well..yes. Hence, my point

[PantherAttack2]

Again though, turning the jets off because you dont like them would be like turning machine guns off in a FPS because you personally didn't like them. Sure you can do it, but are you better for it, or just proving your lack of skill to play the game you bought by ignoring a major factor because it doesn't suit your own personal play style?


I agree with you there. Jets are perfectly fine to use. They were put in the game and are legitimate planes... Don't forget that although games are for fun, sometimes the fun is the challenge.

[Gazz6666]

Well seeing that the Po-2 is a bomber/recon plane, and not meant to dogfight. If they did have a forward firing gun, it would just add weight and considering the plane is like a WW1 plane, it would need a really light MG to be placed, not like the WW2 heavy MGs like in many many many, fighters etc.

I think he means in game terms, not reality terms. The bombs, at least in terms of taking out Strike targets, are absolutely pathetic, and since there's no point in an unarmed (or near-unarmed) recon plane in the game, it does seem kind of pointless.

[Wissam24]

Gaz gets me!

[MorgothNL]

Again though, turning the jets off because you dont like them would be like turning machine guns off in a FPS because you personally didn't like them. Sure you can do it, but are you better for it, or just proving your lack of skill to play the game you bought by ignoring a major factor because it doesn't suit your own personal play style?

All the games I host (which is pretty much every game I play as I get bored looking for games) is 1946, so if you come to my game, please leave complaints at the door! (not you personally it was an open statement)

I do agree on that argument ;). And yes, it is because it doesnt suit my playing style, or the style of the game I want to play. (personal opinion is ok right ?;))

and my games are also 1946, because I dont want to lose planes like the LA-7 (not flying it myself). I just hope people dont take a jet. if they do, and I really dont like it at the moment, I will ask them to take another plane. 9/10 times they do, wich is great :). if not, so be it

[Soviet Ace]

What we need, is a squadron set up only to fly He-126 Salamanders! Me-262s and Me-163 Komets just seem to be very broad in most aspects, the He-126, just seems to be more flexable? I dunno.

[Gazz6666]

Gaz gets me!

Woo-hoo! :grin:

I think the important distinction that needs to be made here is this;

Game - for fun
Reality - not for fun

;)

[akuma]

I do agree on that argument ;). And yes, it is because it doesnt suit my playing style, or the style of the game I want to play. (personal opinion is ok right ?;))

and my games are also 1946, because I dont want to lose planes like the LA-7 (not flying it myself). I just hope people dont take a jet. if they do, and I really dont like it at the moment, I will ask them to take another plane. 9/10 times they do, wich is great :). if not, so be it

I'm affraid my current plane of choice is the ME163, so you'll be hard pressed to tempt me out of it. I've tried all the rest, and the 163 best suits my style of play.

Right, I'm off to annoy a few prop lovers by flying the 163 in a few battles! Have fun

[dazz1971]

Again though, turning the jets off because you dont like them would be like turning machine guns off in a FPS because you personally didn't like them. Sure you can do it, but are you better for it, or just proving your lack of skill to play the game you bought by ignoring a major factor because it doesn't suit your own personal play style?

All the games I host (which is pretty much every game I play as I get bored looking for games) is 1946, so if you come to my game, please leave complaints at the door! (not you personally it was an open statement)

wish there were more games like yours mate :)

I agree with you there. Jets are perfectly fine to use. They were put in the game and are legitimate planes... Don't forget that although games are for fun, sometimes the fun is the challenge.
the point i was trying to get across :)

[PantherAttack2]

Game - for fun
Reality - not for fun


Yes, but games are played in reality.