British FM killing the fun of the game for allied pilots.

[AbortedMan]

Doesn't matter, man. As soon as (if) 1C puts any red plane on a competitive level with 109s, good ol' ATAG will limit them to 3 or 4 per mission. So you won't get to fly them anyway...just like they did with the IIa in the steam release version.

Tell me I'm wrong, go ahead.

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by AbortedMan

Doesn't matter, man. As soon as (if) 1C puts any red plane on a competitive level with 109s, good ol' ATAG will limit them to 3 or 4 per mission. So you won't get to fly them anyway...just like they did with the IIa in the steam release version.

Tell me I'm wrong, go ahead.

Okay your wrong, jesus christ man grow up.

At one time they limited Spit II and BF109 E4's to 5 each side, stop spreading your BS everywhere.

ATAG are not biased to either side, from what I have seen they have a similar number of red and blue pilots.

You should be embarrassed with your behaviour its disgraceful.

[JG52Krupi]

Nitrous, you should have ticked the "show who voted" box.

That way you could see if anyone was trying to mess with the results.

[MB_Avro_UK]

I'm here to enjoy Cliffs of Dover. If Bue performs beter than Red in FM it doesn't bother me. And this Poll, although well meant, won't achieve anything.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[notafinger!]

Originally Posted by Robo.

In my opinion, every reasonable 'blue pilot' should be able to see the difference and if a person cares (or wants) to try to walk in the others guys shoes, his opinion will be much more valuable. That goes for both red and blue, there is no difference to me. It's always easier to judge without trying - like strict blue saying the red tactics is wrong, or the red saying the 109 is doodle to fly. None of that is true actually but you can't explain that to someone who never tried. Just my 0.02 Eurocents

Very well said and I agree completely. Personally, I believe it's fully possible to create flight models that feel correct historically but are balanced in multiplayer. I do not think absolute historic fidelity is possible.

What bothers me in these debates is that the OP starts with a clearly biased statement. Yes, those things listed should be corrected but no mention of the things that are over modeled. Open canopies that induce no drag, flaps that can be dropped at any speed, turn/roll rates that are way over spec, wings that can have massive holes in them without loss of maneuverability, energy retention in high G turns. Problem is I think pilots have become so use to these things that if/when they are ever corrected there will be another wave of forum bitching and 1C conspiracy theorists. However, if these issues are not corrected in tandem with FM improvements then we go right back to the uber Spit IIa.

There are 109 things that need corrected also. Leading edge slats that do nothing, rudder trimmed for too slow a speed, fuel tank that is maybe too vulnerable to rifle caliber hits (that goes for all fuel tanks in the sim) but the set and forget throttle should be corrected too as well as heavier elevators at high speed. I'm sure there are many blue pilots who cruise around at 1.35 ata at all times and will get quite a shock if complex engine management is ever actually made complex.

Anyway, I vote yes because I want to see more Hurricanes.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

I'm here to enjoy Cliffs of Dover. If Bue performs beter than Red in FM it doesn't bother me. And this Poll, although well meant, won't achieve anything.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

Yes, I agree.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

The only thing 'killing' the game is unfounded claims

For example, note that no proof of any of the claims was provided!

Which is not to say the claims are false! Only that no proof was provided!

My point is simple

Based on 20+ years of flight simming.. Most claims of FM errors turn out to be pilot errors! So, unless your collecting real time data while performing these tests, any and all claims will remain unfounded

There are several C# scripts here that will collect test data during flight, FST has one, i.e.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=27552

And klem who made changes to FST's script has one, i.e.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=33661

Now only do this if you want your claims to be taken seriously and if you want to provide useful feedback!

And don't stop there!

Next provide the real world data your using in your claims that such and such is too this or that.. Because without real world data claims of such and such being too this or that is pretty meaningless!

But if all you want to do is stir the RED vs. BLUE pot that please continue to make unfounded claims of FM errors!