I for myself don`t think that it is good to implement such thing as fatigue. If you simulate that, you then also have to simulate adrenalin, like GOZR said. Last weekend I and a few other guys from JG4 and JG5 had the chance to talk to Schäufele and Schuck. And on the question about fatigue Schuck only answered that you were in such an rush of adrenalin, you couldn`t be tired. Then how do you want to simulate that? Each person is different, the next thing that will be then afterwards is the discussion, that the Spit pilot can resist more then the 109 pilot and so on. Don`t forgett thous pilots were flying for their lives, if you fail you are dead (adrenalin in such situation).

@ BlitzPig I like to fly nearly all planes except the Spit. And I enter a turnfight whenever I get the chance, of course if there is a possability to win :wink:
I would never enter a turnfight with a 109E vs Rata

I'm certainly not against it by no means... just quite curious how it can be implemented fairly... I'm an engineer by education (and not for computer or software)... not a programmer. :lol: I truly have NO clue as to style or type I prefer... especially since I have no idea as to what would be available or a viable options. :wink: But I would certainly like to see other areas much more improved upon over implementing something such as fatigue.... though I think it is a very interesting concept!! :)

why? I don't think you "have to" simulate adrenalin...The idea is to model the effect of fatigue due to pulling "high G's". I think that everyone would agree that in "RL" if a pilot was performing high G maneuver, after high G maneuver (while being chased) that after a while he would get tired (and weaker). This could be simulated (in game) by reducing the "play" (movement) of the joystick's effective range. This would manifest itself in "game play" as the pilot being "weaker" and not being able to "pull" the joystick as hard (and fast).

The idea (IMO) is to model the basic dynamics of "real" combat so that we have a "simulation" of the experience...


:) :) :)

Yes but Adrenalin would block out, pain and boost your sences and your strength for a while. You could simulate adrenalin by taking the fatigue longer till it kicks in. But I personaly don't think simulating fatigue is a good idea anyway...
It would lead to a point where good old fashioned curve fighting would totaly be abandoned and everybody would be flying z&b. If you only have one sort of Pilot that is, Hartmann wrote that you allways could see the curve fighting pilots "Kurvenkaempfer", becouse of there bizeps. Just like you could pic out Liberator Pilots from B17 Pilots, becouse there muscels where bigger! Hartmann for instance wasn't what one would call a strong man, and therefor tried to avoid being tangled up in a curvefight. James Edgar Johnson for example was a pretty strong guy, and fought in a totaly different way.

Adrelanile simulation? Well, i think i do release adrenaline while playing... fell fear with yak's on my tail, mi heart beats acelerates in dogfight... :lol:

Concentrate in simulating the pilot fatigue. Stop pilots making +6 -6G's for ten minutes without not even a problem. 4G's is already a painful punch on the stomach.

Only professional acrobatic pilots can take +9G -9G's and only for seconds... I like watching the acrobatic sports on EuroSport and they talk a lot about pilot fatige and G's.

It's all for naught if the AI can still fly their aircraft to just below the structural breaking point withount any ill effects, like they do now.

The AI are the key to this whole discussion.

This thread seems to have died, and many ignored my question, so I decided to take the time and re-scan the thread and take a head count.

Looking at definite stances, either for or against, I also marked down what their flying techniques were, either from comments here, or if I know them from other places.

The results are interesting -

Of the 14 counted, 10 are FOR pilot fatigue, 4 are AGAINST it.

People love "democracy" so much, so if we go by that, it looks like we should get it. ;)

But the most interesting, and indeed telling, picture, is that ALL 4 of the people who are AGAINST pilot fatigue are turn fighters.

8 of the 10 people who are FOR pilot fatigue are E-Fighters.

1 of the 10 people FOR it gave no indication of plane, side, or style preference at all so not even a guess could be made.

And only 1 single person who was FOR pilot fatigue was a turn fighter by preference.


In fact, those results are summed up rather well by 76.IAP Männis -
"It would lead to a point where good old fashioned curve fighting would totaly be abandoned and everybody would be flying z&b."

Which is funny, because that's exactly what happened in real life, and it actually started around 1917 (the seeds were planted then at least).


Something else I noted, but couldn't turn into numbers, is that people arguing FOR it were making more well thought out points, backed up with examples and reason, while people who were AGAINST it were generally pouting and raving. The best counter argument offered was that it would be a can of worms to do as people are so different, and how would it be done and what sorts of arguments would it touch off. However, that point was itself countered and nullified by 3 things -
1) That's not enough reason to not simulate something in a simulator
2) Picking a new to lightly experienced pilot would be most accurate given that (as stated) 99.999999% of everyone here has been virutally killed more times than they can count so most would be new to lightly experienced
3) 1 single pilot, much like that above, is already modeled and it's not really a problem


It would seem that the only reasonable thing for a simulator to do would be to simulate the effects on a pilot from prolonged G exposure in a single mission, altitude, and wounds (as BP_Jagger pointed out).

Taht would definately make you wanna stay alive longer.

Nice statistics Blitz. It's not surprising that people who are used to turnfight don't like the pilot fatigue system. And it's not suprising that boom and zoom pilots are pro pilot fatigue.

But independently of your fighting style you should ask yourself what is more realistic. Extrem 6 G fighting for hours or a (off course simplified) fatigue model which is the same for all players and which does not allow such x-fighter dogfights.
Now, the only limit we have is the plane, but in RL the pilot fitness was even a bigger restriction. And that's also the reason why people are whining about a speed difference of 5 km/h or a climb rate difference of 1m/s in IL2. The perfromance is much more important than it should be. In RL the pilot was not able to fly to the limits during more than a few minutes and therefore things like higher position over the enemy were much more important.
More than once, I read german pilot accounts saying that some hurricanes dived to escape. In this game you will never see this happen.
But you will see many dogfights at low level in which spits and other turnfighters are pulling always maximum G to follow the enemy or simply to be safe against enemys who can't turn that tight. If you fly with b&z planes you have to learn deflection shooting because that's the only way to hit the turing enemy.

And once again: Don't fear simplification, all key features ( DM, FM,... ) are greatly simplified.

EDIT: IMO of course ;)

I'm a turnfighter by nature, but an energy fighter by necessity, I don't fear the inclusion of fatigue, as such. It is the implementation that is the sticking point.

And I think it will be a wash when the game is finally released.

There will be no overwhelming advantage for either side. Just problems that will need to be overcome for both.