Il2 sturmovik original fight model was different?

The game has improved a lot since the beginning and yet there are still a lot of factors that aren't even modeled yet (It would be so nice to get, at least, roll axis inertia which was the reason the 109 had the wing guns removed - and why gunpods hurt it so much *but not in game*). And I still would like to see more realistic stalls across the board (for instance, P-39s with ammo were not difficult to recover from spins within the first three turns, to say nothing of how easy to prevent from spinning in the first place), but stalls are now easily the best they've ever been. The game is in no way a substitute for real flying but it's a heck of a lot cheaper and, regardless of the style of flight termination, one is free to go out to dinner immediately afterword with no thought of deductibles or co-pays.

[K_Freddie]

Well, I've flown a few aircraft since 2001, but nothing compares to a DCS P51.
This is a new ball game altogether..

I was reluctant to 'convert'. but after sampling.... hasta lavista.. baby!!
(and I'm a FW190 fanboy)

Maybe with TD radical changes... I'm open to options ?

[Jumoschwanz]

It certainly has been interesting flying the sim up through all it's patches from the beginning. I still have the original IL2 installed patched up to 1.2, I also have an early version of FB installed (1.21) and a few later versions of IL246. It is fun to periodically fly them all in one sitting and see how they differ. Last I looked someone still had a server up on HL for the original IL2.

If the early IL2 is harder to fly it is just because it is not too good compared with the latest one. The aircraft often fly like they are cars on a roller-coaster track and the weapons, damage and other things are not as sophisticated. It was the best there was though and lots of fun at the time.

A friend I fly with is an old vet who still has a private license, and he says some of the aircraft in IL246 fly like a real aircraft and likes the P-47.

Back to the question, I do not think there is any reason to doubt that the latest patch of IL2 is a much better simulation of a real aircraft than it was ten or twelve years ago.....

[Derda508]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Ahh but that's the beauty of it. Not everyone has to play the same way. Some want the full authentic experience... some want a lighter experience. Both are enthusiasts of WWII air combat but their wants and desires are quite different. I don't think it's too hard to understand why people might want one, the other, or both.

Thank you for this one!
It can get really tiring to read the posts of people who are convinced that their personal way of doing things is the one and only correct way.
There are a multitude of ways to play Il2 and the right one is just the one you have most fun with. And this might just be the reason why Il2 is still alive and as fascinating as ever.

[RPS69]

Originally Posted by JtD

Yes, exactly. It was a rare thing to happen, but happened.

Generally it was easier flying backwards, pulling up vertical and then start a tailslide. I managed to go under a bridge, turn the plane around and continue flying that way, as well as several backwards landings.

Good old days, was a lot of fun. But certainly not realistic.

This was true. Not only flight models were coarse, but gunnery was fantastic. You could hit a bomber with a 45mm form 1Km away on those times easily. Thing are far better as they are right now.

[MaxGunz]

Originally Posted by Bolelas

I was told that the original sturmovik game was much more difficult (regarding the flight model) and that the folowing versions were "softened" to make the game more arcade style in order to atract more begginers. Is it true? The guy that said that to me also said the game had more realistic stalls and spins, trim behavior (reacted more to spedd changes) torque etc. Was it more realistic or just more difficult? If it was more realistic, why dont we get it back again?

LOL!

The original FM was able to run on the average gaming PC in 2001. Later on elements were added or refined as computing power increased.

As to how hard -- In 2001/2002 it was harder for those of us (practically all of us) used to what came before. Reading was harder in 1st grade too.

Some time around 3.2 there was a thread at UBI where many RL pilots, aerobatics pilots and instructors weighed in on the inability to fly a stall and speculations as to why.. some kind of auto-rudder. Following that was announcement that the FM from the upcoming new game (much upgraded IL-2 FM with weight distribution modeled) would be transferred over and then it was.
4.01 knocked a lot of people over. Rudder control was required to fly right, and not just token efforts. But it took until the handling changes of 4.07 where stick data was interpreted a bit differently before it became comfortable, and still those who didn't learn about rudder or slip/skid did not do so well and of course blamed the game as unreal for it.

Sometimes one feature has been dropped to allow others but the only one I feel ambivalent about is when engine destruction went from a drawn-out path to quicker in general. The game is a total system, we gained more with every release than we ever lost and then there were patches and patch fever as adjustments were made to what should have been given more time. Back in those days it was easy enough to understand the public beta test approach -- all you had to do was visit the screaming UBI ZOO to see why.

It is now the best it's ever been. Harder does not define better especially when 'harder' is just 'screwier' misspelled.

[jermin]

It's really delightful to see those self-proclaimed experts talking about the the core of the game as if it was created by them.

Pick any online air-quake flier from HY and I am sure that he would have a better understanding of the game than they do.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by RPS69

This was true. Not only flight models were coarse, but gunnery was fantastic. You could hit a bomber with a 45mm form 1Km away on those times easily. Thing are far better as they are right now.

Yeah, you're right, had forgotten about that. Set convergence to 1km, get the crosshair over that pixel sized bomber and down it went. It was a great way to stay away from the sniper gunners of back then.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by jermin

It's really delightful to see those self-proclaimed experts talking about the the core of the game as if it was created by them.

Pick any online air-quake flier from HY and I am sure that he would have a better understanding of the game than they do.

A friendly advice: you will never get your message across with insults and that kind of attitude. Quite the opposite. Arguments and examples is what does the trick. And I've yet to see one from you.

[jermin]

I'm sorry, but who are you?

Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk 2