Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula88
Single player is for people who are scared of a real fight
|
And those who don't like dealing with inflated egos and people who fly in a non-realistic manner to rack up kills.
Don't take it personally, i don't mean you specifically, it's just harder to set gameplay standards when dealing with a bunch of other players who all want to win.
Single-player usually gives a more realistic depiction of how things were planned and executed, while multiplayer gives a better idea of how it was actually fought in regards to the combat aspect of it (the actual dogfight) because human players fight harder than the AI.
For these reasons i like both single and multi equally (they give the chance to do different things), but due to real-life scheduling issues multi is usually too much trouble for me to set up. I would fly more if i had the time, but for when i want to be able to just press ESC and get off the PC in a hurry i use single player, plus it allows me to set up each scenario exactly like i want to, while it's much harder to get the entire population of a server to play along unless it's a special event.
As for the rest of your post, well, i like the early war planeset because things are reversed compared to late war and it's interesting: the luftwaffe has better performing planes that are harder to operate (not fly, operate) with their manual pitch and what not, while RAF has easier to operate and handle aircraft (automatic boost control, two-stage or constant speed props) but slower ones.
In late war scenarios it's the exact opposite. The US planes are the fastest, highest flying ones but they are a nightmare to fly properly. Forget everything you knew about the pony, the P-47 and the P-38 from IL2:1946, if you want to fly a Jug with the new CEM you'll need 7, yes SEVEN separate engine controls (throttle, prop, mixture, turbo-supercharger, intercoolers, oil coolers, cowl flaps)...double that for twins like the P-38.
Sure, i can leave everyone in the dust with a Jug if i plan ahead but if i don't, a fully automated 190 will be blasting at me while i try to configure my ride from cruise to combat settings...not to mention they have better initial acceleration in general, getting caught with one's pants down is almost certain death or a mandatory disengage maneuver with a long dive that takes you out of the action.
It's not going to be easy and thank god for that, because the simple CEM in the older sim made every performance advantage bigger than it was in reality.
With the more difficult CEM we have now, the planes with the performance advantage are harder to operate (luftwaffe in the early years, allied ones later on) and this makes gameplay more interesting while also being closer to reality. It sure is going to be interesting.
In fact it already is so interesting that i might pick up on aircraft i didn't fly in the older series because i considered them to give too much of an advantage for too little work. For example, i detested the Spit and most of the late war allied hot-rods in IL2:1946 and preferred to fly 190As which, ironically enough, performed better on manual settings than they did on auto.
In the new sim i actually like the Spit because it takes some work to make it perform and i suspect i'm going to like the US warbirds for the same reason, they will have an accurate portrayal of their true complexity in operation...apparently i'm a simulator masochist who only likes to fly the aircraft that are harder to learn
I think the best practice for people who want to fly Ponies and Jugs in a possible future add-on is to fly 109s and 110s in CoD today, just to start getting used to the workload and the required mentality
