Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-13-2012, 06:57 PM
Hooves Hooves is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 131
Default

I'm sorry but you have it absolutely backwards. In historical context the RAF actually had an advantage as the LW were ordered to stay with the bombers negating their boom and zoom advantage. In a video game with unrestricted
ROE the 109's make mints meat of the RAF birds as they can do whatever they want to. In an online game arena with no orders. Realism falls on it's face, with one side constantly getting beat for the sake of historical flight model. So tell ya what I'll continue to try to get a height advantage if you 109 drivers never stray from your bombers. After all we are being "realistic" aren't we?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:09 PM
5./JG27.Farber 5./JG27.Farber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooves View Post
I'm sorry but you have it absolutely backwards. In historical context the RAF actually had an advantage as the LW were ordered to stay with the bombers...
Not for the entire battle, that order was mid to late BoB - I cant remember when or find the date, Im assuming late August.

However from the most unreliable of sources, heres this from wiki:

"By September, standard tactics for raids had become an amalgam of techniques. A Freie Jagd would precede the main attack formations. The bombers would fly in at altitudes between 16,000 feet (4,900 m) and 20,000 feet (6,100 m), closely escorted by fighters. Escorts were divided into two parts (usually Gruppen), some operating in close contact with the bombers, and others a few hundred yards away and a little above."


O how I loathe wikipedia.


It is, through non rose tinted glasses, widely acknowlegded that the most superior fighter, by a margin, in 1940 was the 109. Later in the war the arms race sees the spit and 109 leap frogging each other however many many other factors must be taken into consideration. Its simply NOT who had the best plane won. As you mentioned - orders for one hampered the 109 driver late in BoB.

I have a huge respect for Hurricane pilots, they were the back bone of the BoB and many other theatres where the Spitfire was largely abscent for some time. Sadly the 109 WAS better than the Hurri and the pilots where often better also. However its not just the kite - Its largley the pilot. That brings us to another factor, we as virtual pilots NEVER DIE. We learn from our mistakes, we all have more than 5 Victories (an ace) and more than 10 (Experte )... We live to fly another day! We have the knowledge of the best tactics that those who did this for real did not. So its not all down to the plane, which in this Sim - should be as historic as possible and the rest is up to us.

Last edited by 5./JG27.Farber; 04-13-2012 at 07:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:17 PM
Bewolf's Avatar
Bewolf Bewolf is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 745
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooves View Post
I'm sorry but you have it absolutely backwards. In historical context the RAF actually had an advantage as the LW were ordered to stay with the bombers negating their boom and zoom advantage. In a video game with unrestricted
ROE the 109's make mints meat of the RAF birds as they can do whatever they want to. In an online game arena with no orders. Realism falls on it's face, with one side constantly getting beat for the sake of historical flight model. So tell ya what I'll continue to try to get a height advantage if you 109 drivers never stray from your bombers. After all we are being "realistic" aren't we?
Depends a bit on the time frame, eh? Only the later stages of the BoB were the 109s tied to the bombers. Then, however, I agree.

Looking forward to the patch, I have an itch in my finger.
__________________
Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:48 PM
BigC208 BigC208 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooves View Post
I'm sorry but you have it absolutely backwards. In historical context the RAF actually had an advantage as the LW were ordered to stay with the bombers negating their boom and zoom advantage. In a video game with unrestricted
ROE the 109's make mints meat of the RAF birds as they can do whatever they want to. In an online game arena with no orders. Realism falls on it's face, with one side constantly getting beat for the sake of historical flight model. So tell ya what I'll continue to try to get a height advantage if you 109 drivers never stray from your bombers. After all we are being "realistic" aren't we?
Don't be sorry, you're right. I dont play a whole lot online. Especially not in historical scenario's. The 109's hands were tied by Goerings orders but the BoB was not lost because of this tactical oversight.
I've read many accounts of RAF Squadrons being jumped by 109's because they arrived thousands of feet below the Germans, despite radar. 109's closely escorting bombers are still going to mess you up if you show up 4000 ft too low. This happend so often that Squadrons would add 5-6 thousand feet to their assigned altitude when being vectored or adjust course for better positioning. What I tried to convey was that "IF" the scenarios and tactics online where followed historically, the 109 would be superior(as it is now and will be even more so after the patch). What Joe sixpack actually does online I have no say over. Most of these things turn into airquake and have, indeed, nothing to do with what happened in the summer and fall of 1940.

What I'm worried about is if you try to balance the planesets performance for game balance sake you cannot ever create a realistic scenario. At some point historical scenario's will be part of the online game by mission design and the real weak and strong points will come out and be utilised. Realistic tactics worked pretty good in the old air warrior days where efforts where made by participating squads to keep it real. If you were asigned to protect your bombers, that's whay you did. They tried to lure us down where they performed better or got the bombers uncovered but we stayed high or B&Z'd and fought on our own terms. Worked well in 40 or 44 scenario's. Maybe a pipedream but I keep my hopes up that the airquake mentality lessens when more squads come over to Il2CoD from Il2 when the game is patched.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:00 PM
Insuber Insuber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Paris - France
Posts: 1,406
Default

Hi Luthier

- have you fixed the sound radar? Approaching a red fighter from behind unnoticed is quite impossible today.
- Also, has the mirror of Spit/Hurri been fixed ?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:15 PM
VO101_Tom's Avatar
VO101_Tom VO101_Tom is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 799
Default

We should wait the patch, before cut each other's throats. The fact that the IIa will be worse, does not mean that it will be worse than the 109! They have huge advantage now, and if the devs not touched the agility, turning ability, the IIa still have the great advantage of the same energy 1v1 air combat.

(The pre-fight tactics, situation awareness and the teamwork is already independent of the machine's performance... )
__________________
| AFBs of CloD 2[/URL] |www.pumaszallas.hu

i7 7700K 4.8GHz, 32GB Ram 3GHz, MSI GTX 1070 8GB, 27' 1920x1080, W10/64, TrackIR 4Pro, G940
Cliffs of Dover Bugtracker site: share and vote issues here
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:17 PM
furbs's Avatar
furbs furbs is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,039
Default

Good news on what IS coming, though Luthier is a little unsure on the online CTD, he says they have a internal server on which they test, is that the same as us playing online?
If that is not fixed then the will be a lynching.

Still the AI improvements are welcome, though unless they fix the "superman maneuvers and non engaging AI" then its not really going to get anyone playing offline.

What is very disappointing is the lack of news of other fixes and improvements for CLOD, so i guess no COOP's
__________________
Furbs, Tree and Falstaff...The COD killers...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:25 PM
Tree_UK
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The patch is good news even though it signals the impending death of CLOD, maybe as a good will gesture all of us that purchased it within the first month will get a discount on the release of BOM. Food for thought.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:30 PM
taildraggernut taildraggernut is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tree_UK View Post
The patch is good news even though it signals the impending death of CLOD, maybe as a good will gesture all of us that purchased it within the first month will get a discount on the release of BOM. Food for thought.
when you are trying so hard to cause that much damage to the game surely you should be paying twice the cost at least.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:40 PM
Tree_UK
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taildraggernut View Post
when you are trying so hard to cause that much damage to the game surely you should be paying twice the cost at least.
Not at all I have never damaged the game in any way shape or form, I had absoloutley nothing to do with its development.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.