Ok Im convinced: The IL-2 is WAY too over spec.

[mattmanB182]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

You sir need to take some stress management classes and get a sense of humour. It was a JOKE, thats why I laughed at the end.

I asked you a simple question. I am not stressed at all. I have provided sources to back my point and all you have provided is a little anecdote from your personal battles on this game.

I have every right to discuss faults in the game with the hope that they may be one day corrected. If you bothered to read all of the posts you would see that I am not the only person with this trouble.

[Lexandro]

Originally Posted by mattmanB182

I asked you a simple question. I am not stressed at all. I have provided sources to back my point and all you have provided is a little anecdote from your personal battles on this game.

I have every right to discuss faults in the game with the hope that they may be one day corrected. If you bothered to read all of the posts you would see that I am not the only person with this trouble.

You did not ask a simple question, you made a personal attack on my character because I made a quip. I have no problems with your intention of discussing aspects of the game.

All you have done is make a point about the real aircraft not having any rear gunner armouring. How is this actually relevant to your point that the aircraft is OP in BoP? Your stating that because someone you played was winning in the IL2 that somehow it was to good? Or that because in RL rear gunners had the life expectancy of a mayfly that in the game, the aircraft should stop shooting you?

You have done nothing yourself other than provide anecdotal evidence of an issue with the aircraft. And my point is that I find it completely contrary to what you describe. The simple fact is that no matter how good you are your not the best, neither am I. You simply got outplayed by a better gamer, pure and simple yet refuse to accept it and move on, and instead blame the aircraft for your failure.

[mattmanB182]

Its not about winning or losing. I was just frustrated because I got many hits on the aircraft and it did not go down. My team mates did also.

Why would facts about the actual aircraft not matter? Is this not a sim?

There are a few posters here having the same trouble as me, yet only you saying you have no trouble.

So just because You have no trouble with IL-2 in the game, it doesnt need to be fixed.

[Lexandro]

Originally Posted by mattmanB182

Its not about winning or losing. I was just frustrated because I got many hits on the aircraft and it did not go down. My team mates did also.

Why would facts about the actual aircraft not matter? Is this not a sim?

There are a few posters here having the same trouble as me, yet only you saying you have no trouble.

So just because You have no trouble with IL-2 in the game, it doesnt need to be fixed.

No what Im suggesting is that people like yourself having the trouble are not targetting the IL2 in the correct fashion. Facts about the aircraft do matter but I rather think the devs would be more clued up on the IL series of aircraft than you are ( no offence), and therefor the flight and damage model would be as close to correct as physically possible in the game.

If your constantly sitting in an aircrafts 6 when it has a rear turret firing at you, then you deserve to loose its that simple. Anyone who plays the game in an IL can figure out its lines of attack and adjust accordingly.

The example I gave about BnZ attacks shows the correct way to target and take out these aircraft. You couple that with a wingman who flank attacks or hits it in the belly and its good night vienna.

[mattmanB182]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

No what Im suggesting is that people like yourself having the trouble are not targetting the IL2 in the correct fashion. Facts about the aircraft do matter but I rather think the devs would be more clued up on the IL series of aircraft than you are ( no offence), and therefor the flight and damage model would be as close to correct as physically possible in the game.

If your constantly sitting in an aircrafts 6 when it has a rear turret firing at you, then you deserve to loose its that simple. Anyone who plays the game in an IL can figure out its lines of attack and adjust accordingly.

The example I gave about BnZ attacks shows the correct way to target and take out these aircraft. You couple that with a wingman who flank attacks or hits it in the belly and its good night vienna.

I understand your point. And I do think your correct, but I still believe the plane has got to be fixed.

It can be taken down and you have proven that, but it still obsorbs way more damage then it should. Coupled with the fact that rear guns do not over-heat in the game, this plane dominates more often then not.

[Lexandro]

Originally Posted by mattmanB182

I understand your point. And I do think your correct, but I still believe the plane has got to be fixed.

It can be taken down and you have proven that, but it still obsorbs way more damage then it should. Coupled with the fact that rear guns do not over-heat in the game, this plane dominates more often then not.

NOW I believe you have hit the crux of the issue here, namely no overheat on turret guns. The planes damage model I believe is correct and fine, but this point that you now raise does indeed constitute an issue with the aircraft.

So the point is rather more simpler now, if these guns DID overheat wouldnt that be a much more balanced aspect of the combat? And would this alone alieviate the difficulty that some people have when fighting them?

[King Jareth]

Does the BoP damage model account for death of crew (besides the pilot)?

p.s. you 2 need to get a room and work out these tensions

[beaker126]

[QUOTE=Lexandro;105713]NOW I believe you have hit the crux of the issue here, namely no overheat on turret guns. The planes damage model I believe is correct and fine, but this point that you now raise does indeed constitute an issue with the aircraft.

So the point is rather more simpler now, if these guns DID overheat wouldnt that be a much more balanced aspect of the combat? And would this alone alieviate the difficulty that some people have when fighting them?[/QUOTE

I've mentioned this a time or two as well, the turret guns should have some limiter on the like a planes main guns. Especially when you consider in real life, some planes had ammo boxes for the guns that held only 100-250 rounds. That's not a lot of firing time. The flex guns on German planes were particularly bad about this, holding only 75 rounds. I'm really hoping for a patch. But the best defense is still don't stay on a bombers ass for more than a second or two.