4.101 RC - List of fixes

[ImpalerNL]

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

Oh, and your Bf is an unstable gun platform? And it behaves badly at near-stall speed?
Now, i fly the Bf's a lot, you know

Do you know a plane in the game being a bad gun platform?

Whiner? Rafwhiner? You know, I have already been called Luftwhiner, too, some years ago; while flying for the reds. Seems these among us who cannot speak very well, like using this dog's language. It s simpler. That could explain why many cannot write a post without saying 'Whine'.

The 4.10 spitfire behaves badly at near stall speed?
All Il2 aircraft without wing slats do, so why would you want the spitfire to be an exception?

[Gadje]

Hi Tihi long time.

I agree with much that you say, the Spitfires have been dealt a tougher set of cards in 4.10 but perhaps Oleg the dealer favoured them too much in the past.

It reminds me of a class of misbehaving schoolchildren, the new teacher picks on one, a past favourite, not necessarily the worst and gives him a good thrashing. Some of the kids are pleased, others worried if they are next. Lets face it, there are plenty of aircraft candidates in IL2 that could and perhaps should be next.

I know that you fly all planes and have no side per se. The guys giving you a hard time are likely not so evenhanded. Sigs tell a lot Followers of Red vs Blue mentallity can't quite believe that not everyone is like them. For them it's 'Us vs the Enemy', and calls for fairness are a coverup of an agenda .
The longer I fly this sim the less it seems about a battle between red vs blue and more about pilots who fly only one side vs pilots who fly either. Red and Blue only pilots are interchangable to me. Same words, same agenda, different colour.

Lastly the next poster who suggest you're a red 'Spitwhiner' and need to learn to fly, I suggest you invite him to a 'dance' in a blue plane of his choice. I'd like to see that

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

Hello Blackdog,

It would 've certainly been better if you did try the 4.10, then we would both know what has been meant. Nonetheless, you can trust me in my summing the Spit 4.10 FM up as quite instable compared to the probably heavily over-modeled stability of all the rest of game planes.

If you allow my putting words into your mouth, and please correct if am wrong, I have a feeling you would like to say someting like this:
'Tihi, you are steaming here about your Spit being treated unjustly; whoever cared for the FW being treated so unfairly as it has been? Now grit your teeth and take it like we did; if we could, so can you, too; the Spit has been treated a lot more friendly from the developers then the LW types, anyway.'

You cannot know how well I understand your feelings in this post. I cannot find much I do not agree with, either. Can't say a lot about the P47 power-plant behavior, but the in-game Spit's ability to use the WEP indefinitely can be hardly called realistic. In some periods of the war the 5 minute limit has been enforced to the point of completely dismantling the engine for an inspection if pilot reported overstepping it. I wrote about it just a day or two before on another thread here (Spit sabotaged, Goering relieved)

The power-plant behavior of the FW may have been correctly modeled, as you say. You may not know, though, the FW has been seriously under-modeled on a very important point, namely, on the wing's ability to produce lift. The Coefficient of the Maximum Lift value for the whole FW190 series (A to D) has been 1.58. In the game, Anton has been given 1.38 making it even more ponderous in a turn than it really was.
The speed and climb of the plane are ok-it would be too easy to notice if they were not. Turn rate inaccuracies are much more difficult to notice or prove. I suppose you understand now why in the stories about the FM's here the word sabotage comes so naturally to my mind.

The Dora got 1.65, being a rare example of the over-modeling a LW plane in the game - someones goodwill present to the LW public, I suppose-or rather a digestive for their stomachs burdened with the heavily over-modeled La7 and the rest

There are many such examples, but instead of continuing, let me only say that I have been writing about such FM issues for years. It got me heaps of abuse on Ubi forum; among other (rather nastier) things, some called me a Luftie-whiner, too. (I have been flying red, still am) Now someone here names me RAF-whiner. Well... All I can conclude out of this experience, if you tell them the truth, many online fliers ll compare you to a squealing dog. Why, it beats me. The life is strange.
So you can see, I hope, I do not demand fairness only when someone slights my favorite plane. I fly a lot of planes, but 190A really seldom; it is anything but my favorite. When I saw the plane has been unfairly modeled, I said so, loud and clear, earning a heap of names for that, as ever. I almost got used to it.

I think that gives me the right to speak in the same manner about the unfairness to the Spitfire, irrespective of it being one of my favorites, and irrespective of whether you or anyone else concedes me this.
On the other hand, if the question is what did that bring, that loud and clear speaking-by no means mine only-about the FMs; the answer is almost nothing. It has been clear for years that the FM's with heavy differences to the RL values simply represent the developers constant policy.
That means that your teeth-gritting proposal cannot be that far wrong. Anyone suggesting not playing the game at all, as an option gentler to the teeth, would be quite right here, too.

BTW, my other pets are the in the climb heavily overmodeled I16, and almost the only plane in the game to have a heavily underclocked top speed, the Tempest.

If you think i cannot cope with this 410 spit, you are wrong, you know I ve been flying this 9 years -can fly anything. .
But I do not want to fly just anything- anything that can come to someone's mind.

Your suggestion of reducing the difficulty settings just brought an enormous smile to my face- feels good, thank you I fly online exclusively, server sets the settings there, anyway.

This Spit is not that difficult to fly, but it more than halves your hits. If other planes were to receive the stability model of the same realism (or over-realism) you would see more rotten eggs and tomatoes flying around than virtual planes.

And I think you understood by now, this vengeful sentence of yours at the end, about after enjoying unfair advantages for years, the tables now being turned on me - has been addressed to the wrong man. At least, I hope so.

I'm not accusing you of bias. I'm just saying that

a) FM changes swing both ways and they've done so for years

b) it's still a game on a PC and compromises have to be made

c) there are ways you can still enjoy it, plus the problem could be fixed by adjusting the opposition's FM in a future patch instead of making the Spit as it was in 4.09 (maybe they want to make more realistic FMs for other aircraft as well) and finally

d) we'll have a new simulator pretty soon where most of these things will be reworked from the ground up and the board will be completely redrawn due to the new engine management, so everything we knew about how easy or hard it is to fly a certain match-up will have to be reevaluted to take into account the ease or difficulty of managing the aircraft's systems while flying it.

In that sense, i view the further updates of IL2 in this way: if they have references to make things more realistic let them do it, even if they do it in parts instead of all at once and that means disadvantages for certain aircraft from one patch to the next.

You are free to have your own opinion obviously, but i wouldn't expect miracles (maybe a tweak of the FM if there are obvious mistakes to be corrected but not going back to the 4.09 FM), since for most people CoD is around the corner and that's all that currently matters until we see what it can do.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

Since you havent have flown a real spitfire, talking about its FM stability is the last thing you should do. If you feel that the current spitfire is as unstable as a leaf, i strongly suggest you practice more. If you fly a 4.10 spitfire and compare it with the FM stability of a p40,p51,p39 etc., there is nothing to complain about. Flying any aircraft on the edge requires skill, and the spitfire isnt an exception.

I would be repeating myself if I answer- please see my other posts here.

If you cant find any difference in the stability between the planes you mention and the new Spit, than you probably haven't been flying here long enough.

[ImpalerNL]

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

I would be repeating myself if I answer- please see my other posts here.

If you cant find any difference in the stability between the planes you mention and the new Spit, than you probably haven't been flying here long enough.

Because i dont fly enough i cant notice difference between aircraft?
Ive been flying il2 for 5 years. The spitfire already outclimbs and outturns the LW fighters, but you dont agree with a bit more lively FM?

[Hawker17]

I agree with PE_Tihi, the Spit has become a very nervous instable platform, in constant need of elevator trim.

In no way realistic. It was generally only needed to trim elevator during cruise.

I'm sure this will be solved in future. The Sputterfire will be a Spitfire again.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I'm not accusing you of bias. I'm just saying that

a) FM changes swing both ways and they've done so for years

b) it's still a game on a PC and compromises have to be made

c) there are ways you can still enjoy it, plus the problem could be fixed by adjusting the opposition's FM in a future patch instead of making the Spit as it was in 4.09 (maybe they want to make more realistic FMs for other aircraft as well) and finally

d) we'll have a new simulator pretty soon where most of these things will be reworked from the ground up and the board will be completely redrawn due to the new engine management, so everything we knew about how easy or hard it is to fly a certain match-up will have to be reevaluted to take into account the ease or difficulty of managing the aircraft's systems while flying it.

In that sense, i view the further updates of IL2 in this way: if they have references to make things more realistic let them do it, even if they do it in parts instead of all at once and that means disadvantages for certain aircraft from one patch to the next.

You are free to have your own opinion obviously, but i wouldn't expect miracles (maybe a tweak of the FM if there are obvious mistakes to be corrected but not going back to the 4.09 FM), since for most people CoD is around the corner and that's all that currently matters until we see what it can do.

There has certainly been a real lot of changes in FM's in all these years, and in both directions too- but they almost never crossed the neutral line, to go to the other side
What I mean- La7 climbed at some 33m/s, then 30, and at the end it has been 27. The RL value - this neutral line-is 22-23 m/s. has never been touched, not to speak of crossing it. No one ever seen a La7 with 19 m/s max climb, for example.

Similarily, there has once been a german bomber in the game, the Bf 109E4, needing 25 seconds to complete a turn at 1000m height. After receieving belatedly the info the 109 was actually a fighter, the Russians at once enabled the thing do a circle in 23 seconds Real life value has been about 20s. Once again, no Emil turning a second faster than 20s has ever been seen

With all the swinging, the tendencies in the FM's have been stone steady. The german fighters stayed undermodelled in turn; Soviet and Lend-Lease fighters overmodeled in climb and turn, and the Japanese always kept their boosted climb. What did change was the extent only, aberrations mostly getting more moderate in time.

Compromises are always necessary; there are always things difficult or impossible to simulate. A fair aproach where all such compromises do not (by some chance always favorize certain groups-is nonetheless neccessary. The fairness is easy to recognize, and it 's appreciated. When there is one.

I understand the people in the DT too, in a part; this was the last chance to release something that would actually be used. Anything they would release in, say, april would've been a private release, more or less. I do not think anybody ll ever do much more on the game, let alone radicaly rework 250 plane FM's in the game. And even if he does - who ll fly it.

I would be the last one to oppose more realism in the sim. But the 4.10 creates a situation which never existed in life, where the Spit compares very badly with its contemporaries regarding stabillity. This dosesnt bring more realism into the game, on the contrary. Looking at the spit alone, only then you can say: This is, possibly, more realistic. But who flies the Spit alone?

Totaly drunken manner the plane does a Hammerhead makes me think the DT may have overdone things, but can't say for sure, of course. A pilot with experience in flying high-power single engine prop planes would be in a good position to say what feels real there, and what not.

Il2 has a couple of months only before it departs. It makes me a bit nostalgic, I confess. The game stayed with me, or rather I did stay with it, for some 9 years.. a nice chunk of life. Having said this, it would be impossible not to admit the game has been (and still is, what's more)a great one; a brilliant Flight-sim, with all the due respect and thanks to all it's creators headed by Oleg Maddox. I better don't say here what I think about the honesty of his FM's- said enough about that in all these years.
Ten years makes the game a part of one's life experience for it's the players, not to speak about it's creators. It is nice to see the last chapter of this book leading into the new one, too. Let me hope we all learned something from the book still in our hands, to let us write and read the coming one with more ease and less of the bad old mistakes.
The long version history of the game has had more than enough contested novelties, and more than enough things that may well have been felt as unfair. I would think it nice if the game version representing our farewell to Stormovik stays unburdened with such feelings. After all, to many of us it has been a part of life for a decade, and more than just a game.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

Because i dont fly enough i cant notice difference between aircraft?
Ive been flying il2 for 5 years. The spitfire already outclimbs and outturns the LW fighters, but you dont agree with a bit more lively FM?

Well obviously you haven't flown it enough. Try flying some years more, maybe you ll notice it then.

Spit always outturned the LW fighters. Outclimbing LW? Stay away from 25Lbs Servers like I do.

Lively FM? Joker, arent you?

[JtD]

Fly 400 km/h IAS at 1000m alt. Trim the aircraft for level flight. Shortly apply rudder for 15° of slip and release. Try with a Spitfire of your choice, a Fw 190, an F6F and a P-51.

How often does each plane go back and forth before it stops oscillating?
How large is the first amplitude to the other side for each plane?
How much time is needed for each plane to settle back to a steady condition?

Do that and you'll see that the Spitfire is just as stable as other planes, it simply has more effective controls. It is possible to compensate for that with a proper joystick set-up or simply by being less ham-fisted.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by JtD

Fly 400 km/h IAS at 1000m alt. Trim the aircraft for level flight. Shortly apply rudder for 15° of slip and release. Try with a Spitfire of your choice, a Fw 190, an F6F and a P-51.

How often does each plane go back and forth before it stops oscillating?
How large is the first amplitude to the other side for each plane?
How much time is needed for each plane to settle back to a steady condition?

Do that and you'll see that the Spitfire is just as stable as other planes, it simply has more effective controls. It is possible to compensate for that with a proper joystick set-up or simply by being less ham-fisted.

You been testing the thing a bit wrongly, my dear. Wouldn't you expect the damping to be stronger and work faster at high speeds, hmm? So why did you test at 400 km/h, ehh?

Point the planes nose vertically upwards, and wait till the speed drops to about 100 kmh, then and kick the rudder to help the nose start falling down. Then tell me later will it fall. Let the plane climb further (you ll have no other choice, anyway) to zero speed. Then later, if you still feel like it, tell me how did your hammerhead look like? Now try the same with any other plane, or the 409 spit, for a comparison.

Call me ham-fisted, huh? A good pal of mine, called ham, could hit at 700 m almost at will and any deflection His flying was not worse. Well, it is from him that I learned most, so i may even be a bit ham-fisted, too, but I think you wouldnt find it that agreeable, flying for my opponents