Insult.

[gbtstr]

I agree to a certain extent with the sentiments of the OP (not the law suit part).

They should have a Spit Mk Ia and a Hurricane Mk I in the game to be adversaries of the Bf-109E. And likewise, the Germans should have at least a 109E-4 since that variant was in use with the Luftwaffe at the beginning of the BoB. Also, and I think I've said this before - I know others have - but, performance of the German aircraft seems to be lacking versus the Allied aircraft. From what I know, the Spit and 109 were relatively comparable in most respects, the 109 having the climb rate advantage and the Spit having the leg-up on speed. Hurricanes should be able to out-turn 109s. It should be more of a toss-up with the 109 and Spit. Also, the negative-g cutout on the Merlins of the early Spits and Hurricanes doesn't come into play in the game, as it stands - leaving a primary tactic of Luftwaffe pilots unable to be exploited.

With that said, I find life in the E-3 okay. It could be better, but it ain't bad. In fact I think it has a bit of an advantage against late-war planes, if you can keep your six clear. You're much slower, so people tend to overshoot. You have a competitive roll rate. In some matches, people tend to ignore you and go for the "more dangerous" opponents (G-6, Spit IX, etc.), until they get a wing blown off by your cannons.

For the time being, us 109 pilots will have to soldier on with the gear we've got. All we really need is for the flaps to work in realistic - that'd even the score a bit. And cockpits for better orientation.

[BadByte]

Originally Posted by Werner Molders

SORT IT OUT MADDOX. THIS PLANE SET A JOKE FOR SPITFIRE FANS TO LAUGH ABOUT.

Reasonably sure Maddox have little to do with BoP's plane selection, think Anton said they simply licensed the IL2 engine from Maddox (too lazy to find and point to the post).

[Marchochias]

Is this guy actually threatening to sue a company, in capital letters, no less, over some stupidly technical difference between aircraft variants?

It doesn't get any more pathetic than this.

[mattmanB182]

Originally Posted by Marchochias

Is this guy actually threatening to sue a company, in capital letters, no less, over some stupidly technical difference between aircraft variants?

It doesn't get any more pathetic than this.

Rudeness aside, I do agree with the OP for the most part.

I LOVE the game, but the Spit and 109 should be more even as far as handeling. The 109 COULD turn with the spit but most of the lesser experienced pilots did not push the airframe to its limits.

Also the 109 could actually handle MORE G's than the vaunted Spit because of the fuel injected engine. No worries about it cutting off for lack of fuel.

To be honest, I think the DB 600 series engines are better than the Merlin, they just dont get credit because they were on the losing team. I fear there will always be this bias as far as WW2 flight sims go.

[dazz1971]

Right thats it ive checked and checked but there is no p38 in this game !!!!
where is my lawyers phone number ? im gonna sue the crap out of em !!!


lmao op is a joke does he really think he can sue a company becuse they didnt put his fav plane in a game ??? k...jockey

[nudger1964]

but fill me in here then...im no expert on spit verses hurricane...but even i know the hurricane got far more kills that the spitfire in the Battle of britain. ~But, i was under the impression that the hurricane was primarily used to attack bombers, and the spitfire went for the fighters. is that not true? therefore, how would a hurricane fair against a 109 relative to a spitfire?
the only thing ive heard in favour of the hurricane over the spitfire, from veterans, was visabilty for landing, and its abiliity to take damage.

What i remember hearing, again from spitfire veterans, was that the spit was the better aircraft in a dog fight if the pilot was experiance enough to recognise what the aircraft was "saying" to him. that allowed the pilot to push a turn harder and to the absolute limit...knowing that he could read the vibration warnings of imminent stalls, which apparently the 109 just didnt have.

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by nudger1964

but fill me in here then...im no expert on spit verses hurricane...but even i know the hurricane got far more kills that the spitfire in the Battle of britain. ~But, i was under the impression that the hurricane was primarily used to attack bombers, and the spitfire went for the fighters. is that not true? therefore, how would a hurricane fair against a 109 relative to a spitfire?
the only thing ive heard in favour of the hurricane over the spitfire, from veterans, was visabilty for landing, and its abiliity to take damage.

What i remember hearing, again from spitfire veterans, was that the spit was the better aircraft in a dog fight if the pilot was experiance enough to recognise what the aircraft was "saying" to him. that allowed the pilot to push a turn harder and to the absolute limit...knowing that he could read the vibration warnings of imminent stalls, which apparently the 109 just didnt have.

The idea was for the hurricanes to attack bombers, but with all the choas that ensues in air combat it was every man for himself. hurricanes and spitfires were shooting anything and everything. The hurricane did alot better against the 109E than many people give it credit for. To cut a long story short... it could dogfight with a 109E during the battle of britain with relative ease. BUT... this wasnt because the 109 was bad, but because it had to protect bombers and stay close by.

The hurricane was liked by pilots because it was a far more stable gun platform than the spitfire due it its thicker wing and the guns being closer together and not spread oout throughout the wing. Also because it as you say could take a lot of battle damage. But also because it was very forgiving to rookie pilots. Due to the wider landing gear it was much easier to land than the spitfire.

All in all in many people eyes, in 1940 the hurricane was just as good as the spitfire at taking down bombers and fighting with the 109E.

Following the battle of britain, it didnt fair as well in a dogfight but did an outstanding job in other roles such as anti tank duties and night intruder

[nudger1964]

so do the stats reflect that?....must say i thought that the spitfire did get a much higher proportion of fighter kills relative to their numbers....but i could easily be wrong. the stats will tell the story im sure

and the 109s styaing close to bombers...that wasnt the case earlier on in the battle though was it? And yes, i did get that mainly from the movie (battle of britain)...but i do hear that 95% of the movie can be taken as historical record. and its a great movie to boot

[trk29]

If you read the manual that came with the game alot of the devs that worked on the original and 1946 are mentioned in the manual, including Oleg.

[King Jareth]

Originally Posted by trk29

If you read the manual that came with the game alot of the devs that worked on the original and 1946 are mentioned in the manual, including Oleg.

but isn't that because the original IL2 team made the source code so they should rightfully be listed in the credits?

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

We are not busy with Birds of Prey project. It is third party project under control of 1C. We just gave them full source code and did neccessary consultations.

Oleg Maddox post here