Soviet fighters and 4.12

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Z1024

Well yeah, good teamwork wins hands down - no doubt about that. However that is irrelevant in this topic.
La7 in the game is faster than any FW190, including even the MW50 Dora (In il2 compare D9 MW50 is slightly faster @ about 6k)
La7 has better climb ratio
La7 has better turn ratio
the 3 cannon version La7 has more firepower than D9.
The only thing FW is better at is maybe the roll rate.

With all other parameters (E/speed/altitude/pilot skill) being equal FW190 is guaranteed to loose.

Teamwork, using brains, BnZ attacks, dragging the La7 to friendles/AAAs etc - are all just tricks one can use to overcome FWs disadvantages.

All these factors are just noise when evaluating relative aircraft performance.

There are of course late war German planes in the game that can challenge any allied plane of the era - the jets. But you don't see them available on late war maps (online) very often

Why is teamwork not important when it's quintessential to WWII air combat? Effective team tactics are made all the better by types of aircraft that are, in effect, team aircraft. A team of La-7s, in my view, is not as effective as a team of FW190s. The ability to boom and zoom is something that the FW190 has as a capability that the La-7 does not. The La-7 has all of those attributes you mention but dive speed and control along with inferior roll rate to the FW190 makes the FW190 more of a boom and zoom machine than the La-7... thus using that technique in proper team tactics allows a well coordinated FW190 team to out perform a well coordinated La-7 team by using the types of techniques that make it difficult for the enemy to fight you at all.

All too often I think the relative performance is analyzed in isolation.

Now... La-7 actual performance versus what we have in-game I can't make any claim about. I don't have the data either way.... but I do think all too often people throw up their hands in defeat when, in actual fact, the Axis aircraft are extremely capable already. It just requires some different thinking.

[Shardur]

Originally Posted by IceFire

...
All too often I think the relative performance is analyzed in isolation.
...

This thread is not about relative performance to other planes and/or balancing, but about how accurate the rl performance of the Soviet planes is depicted in game.
The current hypothesis is that a lot of the Soviet planes are depicted with a rather poor flight model compared to some of the other nations planes and the performance in game should be reduced to the numbers found in sources from the time since it is seen as too optimistic and sometimes accedes even the documented performance of prototype models.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Shardur

This thread is not about relative performance to other planes and/or balancing, but about how accurate the rl performance of the Soviet planes is depicted in game.
The current hypothesis is that a lot of the Soviet planes are depicted with a rather poor flight model compared to some of the other nations planes and the performance in game should be reduced to the numbers found in sources from the time since it is seen as too optimistic and sometimes accedes even the documented performance of prototype models.

That was the premise of the thread but not the discussion occurring at present. If comparing German versus Russian aircraft in the late war arena and you factor in teamwork, even with what may be exaggerated Russian performance numbers on a couple of aircraft, the Germans still do well. And do well particularly when teamwork is involved. That's my point.

As far as the original discussion... I've never seen any good La-7 data to support what we have in-game but I've not seen any good data to show otherwise either. It's frustrating to find references to non-Western aircraft as the information is rarely as available or detailed.

I personally advocate against any notion of "balance". This is simulation and aircraft should perform at an established level of realism as best is possible. If there are good sources that I haven't seen and they are well sourced and detailed then... hopefully some attention can be given.

[Jumoschwanz]

Poor, poor Gaunt......bored because he is not getting shot down,...... and apparently not smart enough to figure out how to find any entertainment, like jumping into an I-16 on Vinni Puh vs. multiple and smartly flown 109F4s for instance.

[jameson]

That'll be 109f4's with flaps down and the klaxon blaring......

[Herra Tohtori]

I don't know anything about the "historical" values for these planes, but I would just like to submit my opinion that in a mission with a Bf-109 G-2 vs. La-5FN, I would pick the Messerschmitt over the Lavochkin any day of the week, and weekends too.

It's futile to say that the Axis fighters cannot fight Soviet planes, when the Bg-109 G-2 is far superior fighting machine in IL-2 1946. In fact, if the soviet cardboard planes were reduced in performance, then by all rights the Bf-109 G-2 should be given similar treatment as well. From the anecdotal references from Finnish Air Force pilots, their testimony suggests that the Bf-109 G-6 was not as significantly inferior to the G-2 as it is in the game (the difference in flight characteristics and performance is massive between G-2 and G-6). If anything, that has been the most annoying FM discrepancy in my opinion for the entirety of time I've been playing this game.

[CWMV]

Ya Id agree that all the 109's from the G-6 onwards are kinda, well...ya...
But the 109 has pretty much been ignored for a long time.