|
|
#31
09-26-2013, 08:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I an official report about Galland stated in April 1944 (my translation): "The numerical relation for fights during daylight is now about 1:7. The quality of training of Americans is extraordinarily high. The (German) fighter force has lost much more than 1000 pilots during the last four months, amongst them the best of our squadron commanders and wing leaders. These gaps cannot be filled. We loose with every intrusion (of American bombers) about 50 fighters."
A little later Jochen Prien wrote in the chronicle of JG 53 about the time of the invasion (my translation): ...we never achieved a better relation in the air than approx. 1 : 25; notably it was never achieved to concentrate the intended number of 800 fighters for the defence against the invasion in France - on 10th of June 1944 all in all 475 Bf 109 and Fw 150 were available in France, only 290 of which were clear to be used." At this time the fighter pilot training had gone down to about 110-120 hours of flight training (approx. 2 hours in a glider, 50 hours basic training in piston engine Trainers, 40 hours in a fighter pilot school and 20 hours in an "Ergänzungsgruppe"). The "Windhund" (Greyhound) - programme tried to turn bomber-pilots into fighter-pilots with 20 hours of training. During late ´44 and ´45 the fighter training became constantly worse, Erich Hartman complained that pilots were sent to him with less than 60 hours of flight training. As far as I know more rookies where killed while trying to land than because of combat. The majority of pilots trained in 1944 did not survive their first ten missions. The "aces" of the Luftwaffe were those who were trained before the war or during its first years and were experienced and lucky enough to survive for some time. Many of them had to fly more than 1000 or even 1500 missions. All these things are facts, as hard a the performance data of any given aircraft and they certainly played a similarly important role in the outcome of the war. And NO I am not romanticizing anything, because I don´t see any romance in sending helpless boys of any nation to certain death, and I am not revisionist, because I am damned glad that the Nazis lost the war, so I could grow up in freedom. But all this was reality. Il-2 is a game. It tries, in my opinion very successfully to recreate some aspects of aerial fighting in WWII. But there are very obviously some extremely important things that cannot be simulated. We do not scream in panic and we do not **** ourselves in terror as real life fighter pilots did, because we run no risk. We feel no pain when a message appears "player heavily bleeding" and when the screen turns black, we just repeat the mission. Strange as it is, we do it for fun. Now how much fun would it be for a virtual P-51 pilot to fly hours and hours escort duty and never see an enemy, because they are all grounded due to lack of fuel? How much fun would it be to finally find some rookie and shoot him down, while he is desperately trying to land his crate? All this would be realistic, but it would make a very poor game. Online it is even less realistic, because there are guys on both sides with experience and practise in "flying" and shooting, any ace of WWII could only dream of. But that IS the fun: the challenge. And even for a bad pilot as me, rookie AI is no challenge. A game like IL-2 will never be realistic, but I think the original developers did a great job in getting as close to realism as was possible at the time. And Team Daidalos is since then improving the game in an astonishing way. With every new patch the whining starts that this or that plane, whether red r blue got "nerved" and naturally this is because the developers or the TD guys have some dislikes or prejudices of even a secret agenda ... Just learn to fly and you will be able to shoot down "superior" planes (of any side), because you are the better pilot. And this IS realistic. Last edited by KG26_Alpha; 09-26-2013 at 09:20 AM. 
|
|
#32
09-26-2013, 06:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Every developer of every combat flight sim has been accused to taking sides and porking or neutering planes, usually on all sides.
The odds vary when you count fighters vs fighters or all planes vs fighters and local ratios vs total sortied.
|
|
#34
09-28-2013, 08:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
On the other hand, if you want to emulate some of the experiences of a 1944-era P-51 pilot, you expect those sorts of missions as part of the campaign, try to take away something new from an otherwise boring mission, or just set your plane on autopilot and accelerate the time to get through them. Maybe not as fun as constant turn-and-burn dogfighting, but still "fun" for some folks. And, if you're not having fun, it also speaks to a lack of imagination, not just by mission builders, but also by the player. If there are no planes in the air, go down and strafe. If there's nothing to strafe, practice your acrobatics, combat maneuvers or formation flying. And, if none of that appeals, there's always the option to exit the mission as soon as the campaign allows and try something new. IMO, "fun" is a game that models reality as closely as possible while giving as many options as possible, then steps out of the way to allow mission and campaign builders to create scenarios which appeal to all sorts of different people. Intense constant dogfighting is a very popular way to have fun, but it's not the only one.
|
|
#35
09-28-2013, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fun" is flying 109F-2's against I-16's and LaGG-3's then crying later on when the situation favors the other side by a lesser amount. But I think that in 1944 to the end there was such consternation in the home of the master race that what they saw was unmistakably not what was supposed to be.
|
|
#37
09-29-2013, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This shoud be done not for cater any lack of skill but this should be made just to take in consideration all work of test and criticism by all people in the community addressed HERE about A.i. wrong behaviour that are still present into the game after years.. But TD seem at the contrary more interested to emphatize all this wrong aspects: - A.I. now kill you with a single head-on pass (...) - Firing to any A.I. result in an -immediate- salvo into your tail from another A.I. just only to tell FEW of most evident -cheat-A.I.-behaviours- that are becoming worse and worse after any pach released by TD. Last edited by X-Raptor; 09-29-2013 at 10:32 PM.
|
|
#38
09-30-2013, 12:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The AI has been given a huge makeover and is so much better than it used to be. It can deflection shoot, it takes shots and guesses in a more realistic way, it can't see through itself like it used to... this is considered more cheating?
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
|
|
#39
09-30-2013, 11:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#40
09-30-2013, 01:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
And AI can hit you at 600 to 700m, yes. But usually they use up a lot of ammo to get that hit -and if you do not fly straight and level it does not happen that often. This is no cheat IMHO, because I can do it, too -though I will usually not do that -waste of ammo. As for AI insta killing you in every head on, that does not happen to me. Though I usually avoid head-on passes, because it gives the enemy a low deflection shot at critical areas of my plane. There are certain situations where it is almost unavoidable to go into head-on passes if you want to shoot at the enemy at all (e.g. faster, less manuverable plane with worse climb, Bf110 vs. AI Hurricane). If I open up fire before the enemy does it most of the times discourages AI to fire at you - so one short burst in the general direction, and another trying to hit. And by now I have shot down hundreds of AI planes without beeing shot down near instantly by its wingmen. If you engage the enemy, ALWAYS have an idea how you will get out of the fight, if you don't you may well get out of the fight at a parachute. It is easy if you have the faster plane and an altitude advantage -you can engage and disengage at will. But do not let the AI team kill you -while one drags you down the others keep thier alt and if you fall for it you are at a disadvantage. If you have the faster plane and less altitude, judgement call, if you think you can waste the enemys initial advantge, go for it, else turn, climb, come back If you only have the altitude advantage, you need to make the most of it. Leave the fight before you use up your advantage. And AI is quite good at team tactics here, so you need to disengage before one of them (usually not the on in front of you) gains an advantage. If you have neither alt advantage nor the faster plane, you are where you should not be and in trouble, and you have made mistakes to get there. You can still make some of it, if you can outturn or outroll the enemy, do so. But vs. multiple AI you are near helpless, and again the AI will work together and while you try to defend vs. one of them the other will get in a good position and you need to defend against that and so on. But basically if YOU get shot down, then YOU made a mistake.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
