Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo.
In my opinion, every reasonable 'blue pilot' should be able to see the difference and if a person cares (or wants) to try to walk in the others guys shoes, his opinion will be much more valuable. That goes for both red and blue, there is no difference to me. It's always easier to judge without trying - like strict blue saying the red tactics is wrong, or the red saying the 109 is doodle to fly. None of that is true actually but you can't explain that to someone who never tried. Just my 0.02 Eurocents  |
Very well said and I agree completely. Personally, I believe it's fully possible to create flight models that feel correct historically but are balanced in multiplayer. I do not think absolute historic fidelity is possible.
What bothers me in these debates is that the OP starts with a clearly biased statement. Yes, those things listed should be corrected but no mention of the things that are over modeled. Open canopies that induce no drag, flaps that can be dropped at any speed, turn/roll rates that are way over spec, wings that can have massive holes in them without loss of maneuverability, energy retention in high G turns. Problem is I think pilots have become so use to these things that if/when they are ever corrected there will be another wave of forum bitching and 1C conspiracy theorists. However, if these issues are not corrected in tandem with FM improvements then we go right back to the uber Spit IIa.
There are 109 things that need corrected also. Leading edge slats that do nothing, rudder trimmed for too slow a speed, fuel tank that is maybe too vulnerable to rifle caliber hits (that goes for all fuel tanks in the sim) but the set and forget throttle should be corrected too as well as heavier elevators at high speed. I'm sure there are many blue pilots who cruise around at 1.35 ata at all times and will get quite a shock if complex engine management is ever actually made complex.
Anyway, I vote yes because I want to see more Hurricanes.
