Banning Planes

[Pubestien13]

There needs to be a ban on the I-16 and the I-153!!!!!!!!!! They were hardly used in WW2 and have an overwhelmingly unfair advatage in any dogfight regardless of skill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The option to limit what kind of planes are allowed by year is to broad of an option for the host player. It needs to be changed to allow what planes are and aren't allowed.

[Soviet Ace]

Wrong. Both the I-16 and I-153 were both used extensively in WW2. In 1941-Early 1943, the I-16 and I-153 were both used in many GIAP and less rewarded units. (GIAP is a Air Unit who has been awarded Guard Status, which was a huge honor. Your unit was only allowed guard status after doing something heroic or something beyond the call of duty sorta stuff.)

[xX-SiLeNcE-Xx]

=| They're not "too" hard to take out, plus you can outrun them. Every plane has advantages and disadvantages.

[Robotic Pope]

No way. They are fun little planes to fly and if someone tries to fight either of them in a turn, its their own fault they end up dead.

[ontheborderland]

Yeah I came up against one and it got me twice before I changed tactic. Then I got him a good few times. Just switch to a boom 'n' zoom style, even if you're not flying a plane designed to do it (I was in a Spit).

[juz1]

on realistic I've found these planes quite easy to bag...
________
Bmw 003

[Marchochias]

Originally Posted by Pubestien13

There needs to be a ban on the I-16 and the I-153!!!!!!!!!! They were hardly used in WW2 and have an overwhelmingly unfair advatage in any dogfight regardless of skill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The option to limit what kind of planes are allowed by year is to broad of an option for the host player. It needs to be changed to allow what planes are and aren't allowed.

Clearly you didn't use enough exclamation marks.

The I-16 is easy to shoot down for any more modern aircraft, it's so slow you can go for endless hit and run attacks while it plods along.

[Lexandro]

While the ops post is not exactly very well constructed or written, he does actually make a valid point. What he is essentially asking for is a way to discriminate aircraft in a more robust fashion rather than the simple " up to Year XX" system we currently have. I have a few thoughts on how this might be accomplished in a simple and effective manner.

1.) Allow the starting year to change (eg "YEARS ~1942-1944")
2.) Allow an option for "piston only" which also leads to;
3.) Allow an option for "non-piston only" (eg; jet and rocket powered craft)
4.) Faction specific options (eg; RAF or Luftwaffe)
5.) Type specific matches (eg Boom N zoom only / TnB only games)
6.) Last but not least allow the option of wing type only games (eg Monoplane/Biplane only games)

[VolksJager13]

I was flying the I-153 last night with good results. Sure its maneuverable but its slow, not that well armed and wont take heaps of damage but like all planes its give and take. I fly it and dont expect to win, just enjoy it.

[zg26]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

While the ops post is not exactly very well constructed or written, he does actually make a valid point. What he is essentially asking for is a way to discriminate aircraft in a more robust fashion rather than the simple " up to Year XX" system we currently have. I have a few thoughts on how this might be accomplished in a simple and effective manner.

1.) Allow the starting year to change (eg "YEARS ~1942-1944")
2.) Allow an option for "piston only" which also leads to;
3.) Allow an option for "non-piston only" (eg; jet and rocket powered craft)
4.) Faction specific options (eg; RAF or Luftwaffe)
5.) Type specific matches (eg Boom N zoom only / TnB only games)
6.) Last but not least allow the option of wing type only games (eg Monoplane/Biplane only games)

Agree with 1 and 4 but no on the rest. I'd prefer more historical match ups and if that means 262's against Mustangs then so be it.