Quote:
Originally Posted by horseback
in addition, its in-game weapons are much more effective than the real life performance, and as you might guess, the AI are unaffected by the limitations of little things like a standard convergence.
|
I have to wonder if 0.30 caliber/5.62mm guns aren't overpowered in general in the game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by horseback
If you're flying Japanese aircraft, you will find that in general they are more manageable to fly than the USN fighters; much less trimming, no nose dropping as speed increases, don't overheat as quickly and they will go exactly where you point them if you keep the 'ball' centered--and the instruments are wonderfully clear and correct
|
Strange. I find that the engines on the Zero overheat fairly quickly, although they also cool down fairly quickly, too.
Other than that, the A6M and Ki-43 series are a joy to fly. I assumed that was because both planes were noted for their crisp handling - at least at low speeds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by horseback
IMHO, the Japanese FMs are almost all overoptimistic, period. Away from the carriers and major bases like Rabaul or Saipan, the maintenance was poor to non-existent
|
I can believe this, but do you have data to prove it?
I do know that once the U.S. started hitting the home islands in 1944-45, Japanese airframe and engine quality dropped badly. Likewise, fuel quality was poor. (At least per anecdotes in Saburo Sakai's autobiography)
Two of my big wishes for some future IL2 patch are:
a) The ability to specify 100 or 87 (or whatever) octane fuel for planes.
b) The ability for mission builders or server admins to degrade aircraft performance (maybe using a slider or percentage increment) to simulate battle damage, poor maintenance or overall wear.