Rakinroll, I wouldn't say that's so much a result of bias as damage modeling not being as advanced on the earlier aircraft. You don't *see* so much damage on the 190, but that doesn't mean you haven't received it because it seems like there are only two stages of damage on the 190 wing, mildly peppered and *gone*.
The effects of wing damage on the 190 are likely to be more noticeable to the pilot because it has such a high wing loading - a lot higher than the P-39 or La-5. Although I agree that this does seem a tad exaggerated in the game. What I definitely agree with is that the 190 seems to receive a *much* larger penalty to speed with damage than nearly any other aircraft. But then this inconsistency in the DM of planes is not blue or red specific - see the P-40's porcelain engine, for example. Now there's a plane that got a raw deal in the sim, an ugly model means that the opening of the chin radiator is nearly twice as large as it should be, becoming an utter single-bullet engine-failure magnet. Go anywhere near a rear gunner and you may as well turn back to base. And you can't even look good doing it because it has twice the dihedral it should do.
Then there's the F6F-5's majorly gimped speed, and the F4U's crazy pendulum-like wobbling behaviour even after coordinated control inputs. There are lots of things people like to point out as "bias" in this game, but in truth, they're a collection of fairly evenly distributed inaccuracies and mistakes across both "sides".
12-31-2010, 04:30 PM
Threaded Mode