Updated RAF FMs in 1.07.18301

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

Well, guys, I can tell you one thing: give us the earlier "Über Sissyfire IIa" and it will be the Red pilots telling the Blue pilots: "Learn the tools of the trade and you will succeed.". And yes, the Red pilots will be quoting Chuck Yeager to the Blue pilots, too!

I remember that LW pilots were really worried about that plane, above all because of the superior service ceiling ("faster and higher", those were the requested features in a new plane).

Have I to fly in an inferior plane? I will not fly alone... teamwork can do amazing things (but here we should begin to talk about another limit of this sim...)

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

I remember that LW pilots were really worried about that plane, above all because of the superior service ceiling ("faster and higher", those were the requested features in a new plane).

Have I to fly in an inferior plane? I will not fly alone... teamwork can do amazing things (but here we should begin to talk about another limit of this sim...)

Yes, and they were right to be worried. Actually, that IIa was modelled very closely to the Real Life Spit Ia -- it was the 109's that 1C should have modelled faster with better altitude performance to match and, actually, EXCEED it!

But the LW pilots would've been infuriated to be told, "Never mind the Über IIa's, fly better and smarter and stop making excuses."

[Flanker35M]

S!

Well, all above just confirms the game has flaws that need to be sorted out Be it FM/DM/CEM. Fix them and rest is up to us pilots. So far been quite able to hold my own, even my best flying days are long gone

I rarely dogfight these days, rather plan my routes according to the radio contacts and all that to get the job done So yes, I am in that Bf109E-4B or Bf110C-7 dropping eggs on good old RAF I find it more fun to really plan the mission, navigate and use the good range and decent speed in the Bf110C-7 to accomplish what the briefing says on ATAG. It is thrilling to see if the plan works out or someone spots me going for the target

I would also like to ask how many of you use historical fuel loads aka 100% on missions? I bet less than 20% of people do, mostly used load is 20-50% fuel and off they go. I use always 100% on the Bf109E, 70% or more on Bf110C as that is more than enough for long range missions. IRL Spitfire suffered from same as Bf109E, short legs = big fuel consumption accompanied with a rather small fuel load.

[WTE_Galway]

meh .... its politics really.

If it were just a game people would choose whatever aircraft suits there flying style. In addition noobs would choose the better performing aircraft and experienced flyers would go for something more challenging.

Instead people seem obsessed with reliving the war (or perhaps in some cases Hollywood movies) choose a side based on political or national biases and then try and get that side as much advantage as they can, all the while polling the net for any evidence they can find to support their views.

There is absolutely no interest in historical accuracy unless that historical evidence just happens to advantage the particular persons preferred aircraft - and that applies to both red and blue sides. Its all very childish really.

[camber]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

meh .... its politics really.
Instead people seem obsessed with reliving the war (or perhaps in some cases Hollywood movies) choose a side based on political or national biases and then try and get that side as much advantage as they can, all the while polling the net for any evidence they can find to support their views.

There is absolutely no interest in historical accuracy unless that historical evidence just happens to advantage the particular persons preferred aircraft - and that applies to both red and blue sides. Its all very childish really.

Well, so anyone investigating historical performance, trying to form a balanced view then seeing how that performance matches the actual game....is childish and partisan?! Sure, there is always some of that kind of content on the fringes. I wouldn't take seriously posts along the lines of: "I red a buk once that said that Spitfires went ultraasonic on those 109 noobs" But seriously, partisan posts with research done badly or in bad faith rather out themselves, don't you think?

I return your meh with capitalisation. Meh

[Flanker35M]

S!

I think Galway tried to say in an exaggerated way that some players might have an agenda for their favorite plane/gun/ship/car or whatever and do not stop pushing it as the only "accuracy" is the one that suits them. Can be found in many games but luckily it is the minority, most want accuracy for all which makes the games/sims a challenge, not another "shoot fish in a barrel" thingy

[=AN=Felipe]

guys take a look

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...089#post442089