Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
I don't either tbh. And about 1946 being 'ruined'. This is what I mean:
Check the data on this page for performance.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the Spitfire outperforms the 109 on the graphs. Now take a look at the same aircraft in IL2 compare UP2.01 (maybe there's a later version, I gave it up). You'll see the 109's outperform the IX Spitfires.
I'm not biased toward the RAF, I've been ground down over the years. I want the FM's and DM's to be correct and let the pieces fall where they may. If the same happens again I've already decided to confront it or the whiners will turn a sim into a game and I'll put it in the bin. |
To digress,
There is a certain irony about the 109's performance vs Spitfires compared to the Fw190's in il21946. Guess the 109 has more louder whiners!
I presume your familiar with the SpitV and Spit IX tests vs the FW. The acceleration part is most illuminating, i can post if you've never seen it.
I do find it frustrating myself where people focus on red or blue, i want them all to be accurate, even if it does mean such as in 1942 the 190 was leap years ahead of the spit. I want to Simulate the Rl experiences, good or bad, the ebb and flow of development. Not just to fly around in the best plane all the time.