The MOD mentality....

[Treetop64]

Originally Posted by HundertneunGustav

Hmm.
Why that?
I mean, the "becoming sad" part?

I think he's referring to the obnoxiously fascist stance some here have taken in regards to tolerating or respecting (or lack thereof) the opinion of others.

Personally, I'm not a fan of most of the mods, particularly the packaged "mega-mods", and I've experienced that many mods only change something simply for the sake of changing it, without actually making an improvement of some kind, and almost universally at a cost to game performance and reliability. Some mods are fantastic, like the new MiG-3 visual model and some of the maps, a few of which have been incorporated into recent patches.

Many additions in the game going all the way back to v1.10 come from third-party contributors. The user flyable I-16 Types 18 and 24 were originally conceived as mods, albeit policed to an acceptable standard by Maddox Games. So just because something is a mod doesn't mean that's it's evil.

[HundertneunGustav]

well you teach me something new...
loved the 24 for a time... resonably fast, a set of rockets and two cannons.... what else could you want?
but you had to take good care flying that sucker... his shortness made him unstable sometimes. and the engine conk-out made me mkuch more aware of how i fly, and made me antcipate manoevers differently.
Yea, yea... the Rata was a good, if difficult, lesson!

people are what people are. Hope for the best. but expect a ****tload of unpleasant surprises.

[Treetop64]

I'm a fan of the later Mark I-16s. Obscenely simple and antiquated by the time of Barbarossa but could still be very dangerous if handled by an aggressive, competent, and experienced pilot. Especially in the game. The 24 in particular can make a bad day for an Emil or even an F2.

[JG52Karaya]

Well too bad then that our 24 is actually a 28, the real aircraft was just an upengined Type 18, nothing more. Would be interesting to get the (mod) Type 29 into the stock game though!

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Just stepped in. Didn't take part in this discussion (I'm too frightened of the topic). Just have read the last few pages. Lots of good postings there IMHO.
I get the feeling, that things have settled down and going well all together during the last half year.

Wanted to tell Bearcat something...:

Originally Posted by Bearcat

It took TD to FINALLY .. even if quietly fix the Mustangs FM.. because it is definitely more stable now in 4.11 than in any incarnation of the sim, even when it was first introduced. I read where it wasnt touched .. but it is more stable than ever. Low and slow is still a death sentence as it should be but it is much improved.

We only corrected the length, that had a wrong value. Its longer now, which has influence of the calculation of the FM. A bit more stable of course.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Just stepped in. Didn't take part in this discussion (I'm too frightened of the topic). Just have read the last few pages. Lots of good postings there IMHO.
I get the feeling, that things have settled down and going well all together during the last half year.
Wanted to tell Bearcat something...:
We only corrected the length, that had a wrong value. Its longer now, which has influence of the calculation of the FM. A bit more stable of course.

Regardless to what was done the fact remains that you guys fixed it.. the stock aircraft is a much more stable aircraft now than it was before while retaining a lot of the twitchiness that Mustangs are famous for.. and it was obviously a flaw from the beginning that no one investigated until TD took the time to look at the facts as proven by others (thanks to mods) and after all was said and done you guys fixed it .. and for that I am very grateful..