PDA

View Full Version : You want Betty...You Scream "WAH! Where is My Betty?!"



RWetterholt
01-18-2005, 03:54 PM
Hello all...

First off...everyone that has already posted about 3.04 being a flop and 3.04 not promising the added aircraft that are supposedly coming...shut the **** up. I want a Betty. I want a Ki-100. I want a TBF or a Kate bomber. I want all those airplanes that cruise along at 150 miles an hour and go down with a few well placed MG or cannon rounds. Come on people. Here is a little scenario:

We get the Betty. It is modeled correctly...like 99.9% of the aircraft in IL-2 right now. So we get the Betty and all these little bomber peons wring their hands in anitcipation and think...whoa baby apocalypse now...I've got my Betty! Only...when they get online and actually pit their Betty against anything with more than a peashooter for ordanance...they find it will catch fire way to easily, it will not be fast enough, the pieces do not stay glued on well enough. But oh the glory of being able to pilot a Betty to well...the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound. So then...after doing this who knows how many times...they will come back to their good old IL-2 Pacific Fighters forum and post things like "Oleg...Betty Flames to Easily" or "Oleg...Betty FM/DM are in Need of Repair!!"

Ok...so now that they have exhausted their patience with an airplane that is basically paper mache...they move on to bigger and better things that were released in an ADD-ON pack...such as a Ki-100 or some late war plane that had minimal or no effect on the war. They get this baby out and...again wring their hands in anticipation...and go out to do some killin'! Oh look...a squadron of Betties! A couple of 30mm cannon passes and all the Betties go smoking into the sea. This ripple effect:

A)makes more Betty drivers come to the IL-2 forum to complain about Betties being...well...matchsticks
B)makes those same Betty pilots complain about the Ki-100 being too powerful (Oleg It's too Powerful).

The same scenario goes for all of you whiners asking for Kates and Avengers. They will be slow and plod along at their gracious 150 miles per hour and you will all whine that they don't perform correctly or they catch fire to easily and you will come back here whining for an FM tweak in the upcoming patch...along with 50 new aircraft you think should be incorporated.

Wanna solve these problems? Grab a Hellcat.

You see...no matter what you all will end up getting...you are all of the mindset that it just is not good enough. Personally...what more could we ask for from a sim? We have moved from the Russian front to the Pacific and now have a ton of aircraft to fly. Ones that do and don't go up in smoke...ones that actually made a difference...ones that actually had some charecter and some grit to them.

Bottom line...if I were Oleg...I would not respond to so many of your posts either. He so much as says there is no plan in the works for a flyable Kate or a flyable Betty (at the current moment) there are some of you out there that just jump down his throat. So just chill out! Chill out all of you. The stuff will be made for us to download when it is ready for us to download! Give the guy a break...he knows what we want and if he wants any more of our money...he will cater to us in some way shape or form...so you should all just take a huge chill pill. I mean...shoot...this customer support we have already received has been great. We have gotten 4 patches for this game alone so far...and we are still on 3.04. I think when we were running FB...we got up to 1.22? We've got some time. Do not kick all this to the curb yet. There is still a lot of good stuff to come.

We'll see what kind of spark this ignites...

Adios.

RWetterholt
01-18-2005, 03:54 PM
Hello all...

First off...everyone that has already posted about 3.04 being a flop and 3.04 not promising the added aircraft that are supposedly coming...shut the **** up. I want a Betty. I want a Ki-100. I want a TBF or a Kate bomber. I want all those airplanes that cruise along at 150 miles an hour and go down with a few well placed MG or cannon rounds. Come on people. Here is a little scenario:

We get the Betty. It is modeled correctly...like 99.9% of the aircraft in IL-2 right now. So we get the Betty and all these little bomber peons wring their hands in anitcipation and think...whoa baby apocalypse now...I've got my Betty! Only...when they get online and actually pit their Betty against anything with more than a peashooter for ordanance...they find it will catch fire way to easily, it will not be fast enough, the pieces do not stay glued on well enough. But oh the glory of being able to pilot a Betty to well...the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound. So then...after doing this who knows how many times...they will come back to their good old IL-2 Pacific Fighters forum and post things like "Oleg...Betty Flames to Easily" or "Oleg...Betty FM/DM are in Need of Repair!!"

Ok...so now that they have exhausted their patience with an airplane that is basically paper mache...they move on to bigger and better things that were released in an ADD-ON pack...such as a Ki-100 or some late war plane that had minimal or no effect on the war. They get this baby out and...again wring their hands in anticipation...and go out to do some killin'! Oh look...a squadron of Betties! A couple of 30mm cannon passes and all the Betties go smoking into the sea. This ripple effect:

A)makes more Betty drivers come to the IL-2 forum to complain about Betties being...well...matchsticks
B)makes those same Betty pilots complain about the Ki-100 being too powerful (Oleg It's too Powerful).

The same scenario goes for all of you whiners asking for Kates and Avengers. They will be slow and plod along at their gracious 150 miles per hour and you will all whine that they don't perform correctly or they catch fire to easily and you will come back here whining for an FM tweak in the upcoming patch...along with 50 new aircraft you think should be incorporated.

Wanna solve these problems? Grab a Hellcat.

You see...no matter what you all will end up getting...you are all of the mindset that it just is not good enough. Personally...what more could we ask for from a sim? We have moved from the Russian front to the Pacific and now have a ton of aircraft to fly. Ones that do and don't go up in smoke...ones that actually made a difference...ones that actually had some charecter and some grit to them.

Bottom line...if I were Oleg...I would not respond to so many of your posts either. He so much as says there is no plan in the works for a flyable Kate or a flyable Betty (at the current moment) there are some of you out there that just jump down his throat. So just chill out! Chill out all of you. The stuff will be made for us to download when it is ready for us to download! Give the guy a break...he knows what we want and if he wants any more of our money...he will cater to us in some way shape or form...so you should all just take a huge chill pill. I mean...shoot...this customer support we have already received has been great. We have gotten 4 patches for this game alone so far...and we are still on 3.04. I think when we were running FB...we got up to 1.22? We've got some time. Do not kick all this to the curb yet. There is still a lot of good stuff to come.

We'll see what kind of spark this ignites...

Adios.

VW-IceFire
01-18-2005, 04:08 PM
Yeah whats this deal about the Betty. I think people just like being upset about something. Its coming, eventually.

The only problem I have right now is that these patches show up but we never really know whats in them or what the master plan is. I'd love to have a little more of an inside track...something, anything...I was, I admit, disappointed and confused with 3.04. It was "just a patch" and thats fine with me now, but I was surprised to see it in the first place (3.03 was fine) and I was confused because I figured (probably like many others) that this number would be the big one (but way too early in my books, I'm not expecting the addon materials for another month or two).

Anyways, carry on...I'll wait it out, no problem.

WTE_Gog
01-18-2005, 04:22 PM
wetterholt,

You sound like a peanut. You grab your hellcat and come for me in a betty and I will bet anything you like that I put you in Davy Jones locker more times than you put me in Iron bottom sound.
People want the Betty because it should be in the game, they don't care that it burned well, they just want it anyway.

Do you see people here complaining about the 111 or Stuka because Spitfires just pound them into the dirt? No, because that is what they expect to have happen.
Lame, weak and generally poor flyers will avoid the betty because it will be too hard to win a dogfight against Yank fighters...well Duh! People that fly the Betty the way it was intended and utilising it's strengths and not it's weaknesses will sink allied ships and fly home to drink sake. So please, discourage people in flying it, it will just make those people that master it more elite and better pilots than the people that find it all too hard.

Potatodip
01-18-2005, 04:26 PM
this is just a copy of my post postet another place...should explain how is se the stuff acording to the betty

posted Tue January 18 2005 14:48
Hmmm ok......some might jump in a new plane and then leave it just as fast as they got it. But some like me have flown the HE-111 (Japanese)since PF came out. It is proberbly 100 times better than the G4M, takes alot more damedge etc, but it just doent feel right. I can live with it some time more, it is just not funny to know that a Japanese bomber is done and is collecting dust while some more fancy planes are being tuned.

I doent care about KI-100`s or the N1K2 i just want a higly flameble Japanese bomber to die in. No one have to make it, its done......and im waiting. But The 3.04 have helped me out with some graph probs, and that will make the arival of the "lighter" so mucth better.....so i keep fly my "lend and lease" HE-111 and i know that in two weeks it will be here lol....

Small bugs killed will make addon even better
OM take your time...im patient....patient.....patient.....(but also i tiny bit unpatient)

SeminoleX
01-18-2005, 04:27 PM
RWetterholt you seem to forget who works for whom.

When we fork over the coin we purchase the right to gripe.

Now on the day they pay us to fly.....

WTE_Dukayn
01-18-2005, 05:31 PM
The Yanks got a level bomber, why can't the folks that fly Japanese? You didn't have to compensate by using a TB3, why do we have to make do with He111s?


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


Sigh......... I remember when I used Pe8s to simulate B-17s and the closest thing I had to a Pony (in appearance anyway) was a Yak... and I am still here... and now I have almost everything I wanted back then.......

Get over it and enjoy yourselves all you complainers... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

icrash
01-18-2005, 05:58 PM
WTE_Dukayn, have ya seen the IL2T painted up like the IJA "Kate" yet? Pretty good look-a-like, to bad it doesn't have an arrester setup http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif. The Japanese should get a level bomber (good,bad or flaming torch).

Zarathael
01-18-2005, 06:06 PM
I just want more planes just for the sake of variety. I can however, live quite comfortably wit what I've got, and be happy with whatever I get. I must agree with the original poster however, his predictions will undoubtedly be true, the precedent for them has already been set thousand times here. Just for the record, I want new planes, but you will not see me on here griping because my favorite doesn't happen to be the super plane that I thought it was. All I want is that they be as close to real as possible. And close is good enough for my uses.

I will never be a whiner for or against any aircraft...for the record.

Dunkelgrun
01-18-2005, 06:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Only...when they get online <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Here's your spark: there's much, much more to this sim than online furballs. Ever think of that? No, I thought not.

Hendley
01-18-2005, 07:24 PM
Actually, if we do see the Betty, I think it's much more likely that we'll see countless threads by various online Corsair/Hellcat self-styled aces complaining that the plane doesn't instantly combust when a .50-cal bullet strikes its surface, or that the defensive 20-mm cannon are, like, "WAY overmodelled, 'cos they keep shooting me down".

Anyway, the Betty was listed on the box, and for many it was one of the main reasons to buy PF, believe it or not. As has been pointed out above, lots of people LIKE the bigger, slower, harder-to-fly, more vulnerable stuff, offline OR on... Makes us feel superior when we shoot down the fighter jocks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stiglr
01-18-2005, 07:59 PM
RWetterholt wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is modeled correctly...like 99.9% of the aircraft in IL-2 right now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you really believe that, I got some swampland in Florida to sell ya.

p1ngu666
01-18-2005, 08:57 PM
maybe we will get late betty with the self sealing fuel tanks...

tbh in b25, u will die/be crippled by one fighter, so it makes little odds..

actully all aircraft, moreso bombers burned well, due to carrying bombs, lots of fuel, and ammo too

it was on the box too, and it is technicly false advertising or whatever...

Recon_609IAP
01-19-2005, 06:40 AM
why you gripe for $40 on a great sim like this?

You've been given something so good that you are spoiled.

BSS_Goat
01-19-2005, 06:53 AM
The real suprise is Oleg & Co. are gonna give each and every one of us a flyable Betty. They are just having construction problems, an aluminum shortage I think. I also heard low quality av-gas is a problem as they cant fly them over from Russia.
Although, I talked to OLEG this morning and he said my Betty just took off heading for Courtland Virginia and it should arrive in.....errr...... about 2 weeks.

CKY_86
01-19-2005, 06:59 AM
lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

http://img131.exs.cx/img131/8905/bf110sig1yb.jpg

F19_Ob
01-19-2005, 07:26 AM
I Dont know so much about the betty yet but it seems to me that the "burning like a match" is pretty much a myth.

I read an acount of an american fighterpilot who said that he couldnt get Bettys to burn better than any other planes and sometimes not at all and that he also thought that it was only propaganda during the war( on all sides).
(Sadly I cant find the article again or the link to it is faulty.)

also most planes in litterature seemed to burn easily if hit in the right spots.
Hurricanes
spits
he111
p51
b17
yaks
La5
Russian bombers in general
englishbombers in general
German bombers in general

so...

sapre
01-19-2005, 07:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Ob:
I Dont know so much about the betty yet but it seems to me that the "burning like a match" is pretty much a myth.

I read an acount of an american fighterpilot who said that he couldnt get Bettys to burn better than any other planes and sometimes not at all and that he also thought that it was only propaganda during the war( on all sides).
(Sadly I cant find the article again or the link to it is faulty.)

also most planes in litterature seemed to burn easily if hit in the right spots.
Hurricanes
spits
he111
p51
b17
yaks
La5
Russian bombers in general
englishbombers in general
German bombers in general

so... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Still the IJN pilots called the betty "type 1 lighter" and many pilots demand a new model of betty with better protection, so I suppose it was quite vulnerable.
Conclusion would probably be, it's softer then other A/C, but not as soft as the "myth" says.

F19_Olli72
01-19-2005, 08:05 AM
For me Wetterholts post is just a whine about whiners who doesnt exist yet. Ppl like different types of planes. So dont like bombers? Dont fly them, but let them who enjoy them have them without beeing whined on about whines who never were whined about in the first place. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

402Cdn.Valkyrie
01-19-2005, 08:32 AM
Ivan said that this was only a patch and that the addon will come later, so i dont see why you all start rating already. Lets wait with the complaints to the planes arrives!

Other that that i will say that Wetterholts, i think that you jump a little to conclutions but then again i will give you that the people you are talking about have been seen here a couple of times before. But lets give the the benefit of the doubt for now.

Gawwad
01-19-2005, 08:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Olli72:
For me Wetterholts post is just a whine about whiners who doesnt exist yet. Ppl like different types of planes. So dont like bombers? Dont fly them, but let them who enjoy them have them without beeing whined on about whines who never were whined about in the first place. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was just going to post exactly the same thing.
I agree 100%!
I like bombers a lot, but i don't want them to fly like fightres and be invulnerable.
And I do want torpedo bombers (carrier borne), and they are also bombers, not fighters, so they should not fly 600mph with 6 jet engines and on top of that be invulnerable, I want a plane that can carry torpedos from my carrier to the enemys.
Ok, thats about it...

cwojackson
01-19-2005, 05:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Hello all...

First off...everyone that has already posted about 3.04 being a flop and 3.04 not promising the added aircraft that are supposedly coming...shut the **** up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally agree. Just look at what we did get with 3.04.

- Now there are American ships at Pearl Harbor not English.

- Now I can fly an Avenger, one of the most prolific aircraft in the Pacific and a key element of the Pacific Air War.

- Now I can play a meaningful and enjoyable campaign.

Who needs the Betty when we have all that.

RWetterholt
01-19-2005, 06:11 PM
Hello all...

All you "bomber aces"...you got something else coming. I jump in my trusty Hellcat and you jump in your "trusty" Betty bomber and we will see who is at the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound after about 30 seconds...aka...two passes. Chances are...it would not be the Hellcat. Now I am sorry...but don't take this the wrong way?

A) If the Betty was such a good bomber and has the capability to send fighters into the depths of Iron Bottom Sound as some of you proclaim...what language are we communicating in right now?

B) *Scratches Head* How did Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto end up being killed? Oh yeah...by some P-38's that intercepted his shall I say...Betty bomber!

But I guess if your cup of tea is getting mericlessly slaughtered by Allied fighters and then doing it over...and over...and over again...all the while maybe putting some holes in the same attacking fighter that shot you down 27 passes ago...then by all means...scream for that Betty...the world needs targets too.

"There are two types of aircraft. Fighters and targets!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Akira_251_IJN
01-19-2005, 06:22 PM
Gamers never understand that some people actually like doing historic missions. My entire squad enjoys doing them. We, on the other hand get bored pretty quickly doing nothing but lame fighter furballs. Maybe because it's been done in every single combat flight sim since the begining.

RWetterholt
01-19-2005, 06:24 PM
Hey cwojackson...

Where is that Avenger?

p1ngu666
01-19-2005, 06:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recon_609IAP:
why you gripe for $40 on a great sim like this?

You've been given something so good that you are spoiled. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

pf is great, but thats not the issue, selling something saying its got X included when it hasnt, thats my beef

u can say patch but a) it hasnt arrived, b) to a offwhiner it may not ever arrive

theres laws/rules to protect the consumer, so companies dont do this all the time. imagine everything u bought, had something missing, ud get angry when u got no wheels on your car http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
01-19-2005, 06:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Hello all...

All you "bomber aces"...you got something else coming. I jump in my trusty Hellcat and you jump in your "trusty" Betty bomber and we will see who is at the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound after about 30 seconds...aka...two passes. Chances are...it would not be the Hellcat. Now I am sorry...but don't take this the wrong way?

A) If the Betty was such a good bomber and has the capability to send fighters into the depths of Iron Bottom Sound as some of you proclaim...what language are we communicating in right now?

B) *Scratches Head* How did Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto end up being killed? Oh yeah...by some P-38's that intercepted his shall I say...Betty bomber!

But I guess if your cup of tea is getting mericlessly slaughtered by Allied fighters and then doing it over...and over...and over again...all the while maybe putting some holes in the same attacking fighter that shot you down 27 passes ago...then by all means...scream for that Betty...the world needs targets too.

"There are two types of aircraft. Fighters and targets!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

a) dont be a twonk, b) if u where a decent pilot, ud atleast damage severly, any other bomber
c) fighters are merly secondary aircraft, primary aircraft are bombers and recon aircraft, they are the ones that will help the ground forces. fighter jocks are secondary, no primary aircraft to escort/stop, no aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

u can fly around thinking your the hero of the usn, while other aircraft go and do whats needed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

marcocomparato
01-19-2005, 07:22 PM
seams week to me.
http://www.btinternet.com/~lee_mail/Betty.html

GO HERE FOR PLANE DATA (just found it)
http://www.btinternet.com/~lee_mail/

WTE_Dukayn
01-19-2005, 08:52 PM
who cares if it can get shot down by planes 5 years newer than it? Doesn't mean we shouldn't get it in the game. It was an important part of the Pacific War and should be included.

F19_Olli72
01-20-2005, 12:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Hello all...

All you "bomber aces"...you got something else coming. I jump in my trusty Hellcat and you jump in your "trusty" Betty bomber and we will see who is at the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound after about 30 seconds...aka...two passes. Chances are...it would not be the Hellcat. Now I am sorry...but don't take this the wrong way?

A) If the Betty was such a good bomber and has the capability to send fighters into the depths of Iron Bottom Sound as some of you proclaim...what language are we communicating in right now?

B) *Scratches Head* How did Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto end up being killed? Oh yeah...by some P-38's that intercepted his shall I say...Betty bomber!

But I guess if your cup of tea is getting mericlessly slaughtered by Allied fighters and then doing it over...and over...and over again...all the while maybe putting some holes in the same attacking fighter that shot you down 27 passes ago...then by all means...scream for that Betty...the world needs targets too.

"There are two types of aircraft. Fighters and targets!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

a) dont be a twonk, b) if u where a decent pilot, ud atleast damage severly, any other bomber
c) fighters are merly secondary aircraft, primary aircraft are bombers and recon aircraft, they are the ones that will help the ground forces. fighter jocks are secondary, no primary aircraft to escort/stop, no aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

u can fly around thinking your the hero of the usn, while other aircraft go and do whats needed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with Pingu

Once again Wetterholt, bomberjocks generally arent gloryseeking wannabe heroes. They dont need the 'best' or 'latest' planes to have fun. They often use something called teamwork to achieve a goal on a map. Try to broaden your narrow fighterjock mentality and you might enjoy another aspect of this game/sim whatever you wanna call it instead of constantly griping of bomberjocks. I can only assume it will get even worse the first time your windscreen goes black from the first 20 mm hit from a Betty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

As for

a) You fail miserably to understand what the qualities of Betty was in real life. Yes it was vunerable, but it also had a range that put most allied contemporary bombers to shame. Unfortunatly thats not an issue for arcade pilots who wants to fly 30 seconds to nearest furball. Search for "the destruction of force z" , and the sinking of "Prince of Wales" and "Repulse" and who knows...you might learn something new today.

b) Your point is what? That P-38s can shoot down bombers? Well hooooopla i think we all knew that.

RWetterholt
01-20-2005, 03:35 PM
History my friend. Fighters are the key ingredient to any airwar. Battle of Britain. What won that? Spits and Hurricanes. Not Wellingtons and Lancasters. What won the war over Europe in 1943. Lots and lots of P-38's, P-47's and eventually P-51's. Sure there were a lot of B-17's involved, but in early 1943, without the P-51, Spaatz and Eaker were serisously considering abondoning daylight precision raids because of worsening German FIGHTER opposition. So yes...maybe bombers are more important...once the first step of air superiority has been won.

Also...if you are so defensive of the bomber as being the most important tool...why then do you have a signature of a Spitfire?

Just wondering.

DarthBane_
01-20-2005, 04:09 PM
Where is my he177 ??? I dont want betty, crapy bomber.

pacettid
01-20-2005, 04:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akira_251_IJN:
Gamers never understand that some people actually like doing historic missions. My entire squad enjoys doing them. We, on the other hand get bored pretty quickly doing nothing but lame fighter furballs. Maybe because it's been done in every single combat flight sim since the begining. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What he said!

CKY_86
01-20-2005, 07:18 PM
most of the people who are beckoning for the betty, proberlly wont even fly it i'll try put it like this

ive got a phone with a built in radio, im proberlly never gonna use the radio bit but its good to know that ive got it

think about it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Gato__Loco
01-20-2005, 07:49 PM
This thead is dumb. "Whis is more important, fighters or bombers?". Its like "which is better, a microwave oven or a tennis racquet".
About the Betty, I want to have it. Probably I won't fly it much (I don't fly the other bombers a lot) but I will do it ocasionally for variety's sake. I don't fly much the TB-3, but I really had fun with it sometimes and I like the fact that it is there.
In my (humble) opition PF needs a few more planes. Some historically important planes are missing (the same could be said for FB-AEP too!). I know there are some on the making, so I'll wait patiently until the patch comes.

WTE_Gog
01-20-2005, 08:08 PM
CKY-86,

Congratulations on your promotion to Lord of the Dumb people!

I have never heard such a stupid comment from a human being as your work of art located above.

Oh', I'm thinking about it alright, I'm thinking how the hell can this person be allowed access to a computer?

I'll bet that when you bought that phone with it's built in radio and you discovered that the ****ing radio was missing you would have been the first person in line back at the store to get your phone fixed!

'most of the people who are beckoning for the betty, proberlly wont even fly it'

Huh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif what is that all about? That may happen in the schoolyard that you occupy bretween 9 and 3 but not in the real world. Yay! the Betty has arrived.....but I don't wanna fly it....I just like to know it's there if I ever wanted to fly it...which I won't...ever! PS: I am a complete idiott! Yes, that 2 T's for twice the I D I O T!

CKY_86
01-20-2005, 08:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WTE_Gog:
CKY-86,

Congratulations on your promotion to Lord of the Dumb people!

I have never heard such a stupid comment from a human being as your work of art located above.

Oh', I'm thinking about it alright, I'm thinking how the hell can this person be allowed access to a computer?

I'll bet that when you bought that phone with it's built in radio and you discovered that the ****ing radio was missing you would have been the first person in line back at the store to get your phone fixed!

'most of the people who are beckoning for the betty, proberlly wont even fly it'

Huh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif what is that all about? That may happen in the schoolyard that you occupy bretween 9 and 3 but not in the real world. Yay! the Betty has arrived.....but I don't wanna fly it....I just like to know it's there if I ever wanted to fly it...which I won't...ever! PS: I am a complete idiott! Yes, that 2 T's for twice the I D I O T! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i was using the phone as an egsample, oh & why the flame im only stating what will proberlly happen, im not gonig to get into a flame war, with you becos theres no point

thanks for the promo ive been trying to get there for a while http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Akwar
01-20-2005, 09:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:


- Now I can fly an Avenger, one of the most prolific aircraft in the Pacific and a key element of the Pacific Air War.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you been smoking crack?What flyable Avenger?After patching to 3.04m I looked high and low it is still not flayable.LMAO

Krt_Bong
01-20-2005, 09:50 PM
once again OMG...

cwojackson
01-20-2005, 10:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akwar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:


- Now I can fly an Avenger, one of the most prolific aircraft in the Pacific and a key element of the Pacific Air War.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you been smoking crack?What flyable Avenger?After patching to 3.04m I looked high and low it is still not flayable.LMAO <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Stranger things have happened...like the English Navy agreeing to place their battleships at Pearl Harbor in a reverse form of lend-lease. Here you go Yanks, some torpedo catchers for you...oops, I meant bomb catchers since the Japanese forces weren't flying carrier based A-20's at the time of the attack.

Akira_251_IJN
01-20-2005, 10:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
History my friend. Fighters are the key ingredient to any airwar. Battle of Britain. What won that? Spits and Hurricanes. Not Wellingtons and Lancasters. What won the war over Europe in 1943. Lots and lots of P-38's, P-47's and eventually P-51's. Sure there were a lot of B-17's involved, but in early 1943, without the P-51, Spaatz and Eaker were serisously considering abondoning daylight precision raids because of worsening German FIGHTER opposition. So yes...maybe bombers are more important...once the first step of air superiority has been won.

Also...if you are so defensive of the bomber as being the most important tool...why then do you have a signature of a Spitfire?

Just wondering. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhm...I would think it's safe to say that in Europe strategic bombing did more to damage the Germans ability to wage war then any fighter ever did. But you don't seem to get it. Fighters were built for one single purpose as were bombers. Neither plane is particularly good at doing anything other then what it's design intended.

Being proud that you can shoot down a bomber in a fighter one on one is really not something to brag about. In reality bombers never went out and flew one on one against a fighter so your whole concept that fighters were what won the war because they could shoot down bombers is pure gamer fiction. Go up against 30 bombers in defensive formation and see how well you do. Chances are you will be flaiming wreckage long before you have the chance to do any real damage to a single bomber.

One last thing, more bombers went down to AAA then were ever shot down by fighter aircraft. So I guess fighters and bombers both suck, we should all be manning AAA guns. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Akwar
01-20-2005, 10:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akwar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:


- Now I can fly an Avenger, one of the most prolific aircraft in the Pacific and a key element of the Pacific Air War.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you been smoking crack?What flyable Avenger?After patching to 3.04m I looked high and low it is still not flayable.LMAO <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Stranger things have happened...like the English Navy agreeing to place their battleships at Pearl Harbor in a reverse form of lend-lease. Here you go Yanks, some torpedo catchers for you...oops, I meant bomb catchers since the Japanese forces weren't flying carrier based A-20's at the time of the attack. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok I think I see that you were being sarcastic now sorry about my comment,

Yes I must agree though,

Id much rather have an enjoyable campaign experience then more new planes.

cwojackson
01-20-2005, 10:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akwar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akwar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwojackson:


- Now I can fly an Avenger, one of the most prolific aircraft in the Pacific and a key element of the Pacific Air War.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you been smoking crack?What flyable Avenger?After patching to 3.04m I looked high and low it is still not flayable.LMAO <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Stranger things have happened...like the English Navy agreeing to place their battleships at Pearl Harbor in a reverse form of lend-lease. Here you go Yanks, some torpedo catchers for you...oops, I meant bomb catchers since the Japanese forces weren't flying carrier based A-20's at the time of the attack. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok I think I see that you were being sarcastic now sorry about my comment,

Yes I must agree though,

Id much rather have an enjoyable campaign experience then more new planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Sometimes you have to maintain a sense of humor...particularly when you're waiting out two weeks for the patch.

RWetterholt
01-20-2005, 11:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akira_251_IJN:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
History my friend. Fighters are the key ingredient to any airwar. Battle of Britain. What won that? Spits and Hurricanes. Not Wellingtons and Lancasters. What won the war over Europe in 1943. Lots and lots of P-38's, P-47's and eventually P-51's. Sure there were a lot of B-17's involved, but in early 1943, without the P-51, Spaatz and Eaker were serisously considering abondoning daylight precision raids because of worsening German FIGHTER opposition. So yes...maybe bombers are more important...once the first step of air superiority has been won.

Also...if you are so defensive of the bomber as being the most important tool...why then do you have a signature of a Spitfire?

Just wondering. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhm...I would think it's safe to say that in Europe strategic bombing did more to damage the Germans ability to wage war then any fighter ever did. But you don't seem to get it. Fighters were built for one single purpose as were bombers. Neither plane is particularly good at doing anything other then what it's design intended.

Being proud that you can shoot down a bomber in a fighter one on one is really not something to brag about. In reality bombers never went out and flew one on one against a fighter so your whole concept that fighters were what won the war because they could shoot down bombers is pure gamer fiction. Go up against 30 bombers in defensive formation and see how well you do. Chances are you will be flaiming wreckage long before you have the chance to do any real damage to a single bomber.

One last thing, more bombers went down to AAA then were ever shot down by fighter aircraft. So I guess fighters and bombers both suck, we should all be manning AAA guns. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again...the German's ability to cut production of valuable assets such as fuel and ball bearings and even fighter planes was due to the bombing effort...this is correct. But there was in fact a period when the United States B-17's and B-24's were getting mauled over Germany at an almost unbearable rate. The main cause...intense German Luftwaffe fighter attacks. Sure...flack did play a major role in bringing down bombers. But German fighters also played a vital role in demoralizing and almost suspending the daylight bombing missions over Germany. And when did the missions of 1,000+ bombers begin again, when the USAAF had ample P-51's to range out in front of the bombers and intercept the Focke Wulfs and Messerschmitts and their most vulnerable phase...being takeoff/landing and the time during form up.

So you see...the figher was of far greater importance to the air war in Europe than really the bomber ever was. If it were not for fighters like the P-51...USAAF bombers would have continued to suffer horrific losses and would probably have lead to the cancellation of daylight precision raids. So for you to say that bombers are more important is only half the story. In order for the bombers to be important...the fighters had to accomplish a far more important mission so that bombers may operate over German skies and sustain bearable losses.

And as far as me bragging...I do not cinsder myself one to brag. I would be more than happy to fly through a formation of 30 bombers in "defensive" formation. Exactly...a defensive formation. The only proper defense is offense. Well if you have to jump through 2 views to get back to your 20mm cannon in the tail...assuming I have made a head on pass which is most difficult to defend against, your just wasting your time. Only noob pilots would try and sneak up behind a Betty or a Heinkel and attack from dead astern and expect to get only minimal damage. You always improvise on your tactics. "nothing is true in tactics." I always try and improvise. Therefore you get shot down and I fly off in victory.

No...not victory but with another kill under my belt no less.

Adios guys.

F19_Olli72
01-21-2005, 02:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
And as far as me bragging...I do not cinsder myself one to brag. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Im sorry but this sounds a bit like bragging:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
All you "bomber aces"...you got something else coming. I jump in my trusty Hellcat and you jump in your "trusty" Betty bomber and we will see who is at the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound after about 30 seconds...aka...two passes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But it doesnt matter, this thread started by you calling all bomberjocks whiners who would whine about Bettys qualities. Hmm ask yourself what the most whined planes in PF are? Are they axis bombers? Or any bombers for that matter? Or could it be....[SHOCK] [HORROR] allied fighters like the Corsair? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Just search for Corsairs threads and you got lots of material. Also in this thread you have whined most ...particurlarly about whiners...who doesnt exist yet.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Well if you have to jump through 2 views to get back to your 20mm cannon in the tail <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the part when i tell you you dont have to jump through 2 views to get to any gunnerposition. Of course, if you ever flew bombers you wouldve known that.

Fehler
01-21-2005, 03:25 AM
I had a Betty once.. she wasnt that good.

Oh, and RWetterholt, she certainly didnt go down very easily.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Potatodip
01-21-2005, 05:02 AM
Ok fighters vs bombers.....i can live with that especialy when i know that i have my fighter m8`s hanging around to intercept you......escort is not an allied tactic

The betty will proberbly suck if interceptet, but i doent care...im a bomber pilot, i just want a bomber that is from the nationality that i fly for (IJN/IJA) if its a lighter...well then i have to stop smoking....but i will fly it...hopefully as i will fly the HE-111 and the JU-88.....

Trent001
01-21-2005, 07:05 AM
I think some people are missing the point. There's no problem requesting an additional plane or 2, but this idea of 'should have been' in the game is cr@p. Who but the developers of the game are to say what aircraft SHOULD be in the game? The idea that we are owed something is just arrogance at it's worst. I've not so far come across many game developers that will support a game as well as 1C and Maddox with IL2 and PF. Stop complaining and start enjoying what you've got. It could be worse... a tsunami could have wiped out everything you own and everyone you care about... count yourself lucky you can complain about something. Anyway enough *****ing... just cracking open a beer, cheers.
TP, WA

p1ngu666
01-21-2005, 02:15 PM
it said betty was in the game on the box http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

anyways, the fighter is only there to shoot down or protect the bombers and PR aircraft. no bombers no fighters, if fighters carry bombs, or shoot up stuff on the ground, they effectivly become bombers. so a fighter, in a pure form, is a reaction to bombers, it is secondary.

put it like this, your on a sever on your own, there are ground targets, u could fly about at 20,000ft in your fighter, but your doing nothing effectivly. take a bomber or a ga or jabo aircraft, then your doing something.

u can imagine ai tank and ship, &lt;tank&gt;hey look its a enemy fighter up there &lt;ship&gt;ehehehe he dont know we dont have planes! &lt;tank&gt; yep, wonder what hes thinking &lt;ship&gt; "im wasting my time up here" &lt;tank&gt; nuffin todo up there hehehe, oh my fuels arrived, tata mr ship http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

vs say a il2/beufighter

&lt;tank&gt;hello mr ship, i hear there is a il2 around :| &lt;ship&gt; aww man http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif &lt;tank&gt;aww **** here he comes! &lt;il2&gt;a rocket in the face for mr tank, and mr ship, ill skip bomb u in a momment http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

&lt;mrtank, dieing&gt; and my fuel convoy was so close... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif &lt;mr ship, sinking&gt; cheer up, i got a bomb up the backside http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

&lt;convoy&gt; oh well, we wont be cold tonight after that il2 ignited us http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

the fighter is merly there to stop or allow bombers to win the war http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Hendley
01-21-2005, 02:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pacettid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Akira_251_IJN:
Gamers never understand that some people actually like doing historic missions. My entire squad enjoys doing them. We, on the other hand get bored pretty quickly doing nothing but lame fighter furballs. Maybe because it's been done in every single combat flight sim since the begining. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What he said! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What they said! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Guys, is it really so difficult to understand that some folk LIKE flying bombers, or biplanes, or float planes, or whatever? I mean, has anyone ever, ever, complained about the Stuka/SBD-3/TB3 etc FM being porked? No, because anyone who flies those planes can handle the short odds.

Like I said before, the only people who'll complain about the Betty are the fighter jocks who get shot down by it. People flying it will have fun whatever happens...

GonzoX
01-21-2005, 02:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RWetterholt:
Hello all...

First off...everyone that has already posted about 3.04 being a flop and 3.04 not promising the added aircraft that are supposedly coming...shut the **** up. I want a Betty. I want a Ki-100. I want a TBF or a Kate bomber. I want all those airplanes that cruise along at 150 miles an hour and go down with a few well placed MG or cannon rounds. Come on people. Here is a little scenario:

We get the Betty. It is modeled correctly...like 99.9% of the aircraft in IL-2 right now. So we get the Betty and all these little bomber peons wring their hands in anitcipation and think...whoa baby apocalypse now...I've got my Betty! Only...when they get online and actually pit their Betty against anything with more than a peashooter for ordanance...they find it will catch fire way to easily, it will not be fast enough, the pieces do not stay glued on well enough. But oh the glory of being able to pilot a Betty to well...the bottom of Iron Bottom Sound. So then...after doing this who knows how many times...they will come back to their good old IL-2 Pacific Fighters forum and post things like "Oleg...Betty Flames to Easily" or "Oleg...Betty FM/DM are in Need of Repair!!"

Ok...so now that they have exhausted their patience with an airplane that is basically paper mache...they move on to bigger and better things that were released in an ADD-ON pack...such as a Ki-100 or some late war plane that had minimal or no effect on the war. They get this baby out and...again wring their hands in anticipation...and go out to do some killin'! Oh look...a squadron of Betties! A couple of 30mm cannon passes and all the Betties go smoking into the sea. This ripple effect:

A)makes more Betty drivers come to the IL-2 forum to complain about Betties being...well...matchsticks
B)makes those same Betty pilots complain about the Ki-100 being too powerful (Oleg It's too Powerful).

The same scenario goes for all of you whiners asking for Kates and Avengers. They will be slow and plod along at their gracious 150 miles per hour and you will all whine that they don't perform correctly or they catch fire to easily and you will come back here whining for an FM tweak in the upcoming patch...along with 50 new aircraft you think should be incorporated.

Wanna solve these problems? Grab a Hellcat.

You see...no matter what you all will end up getting...you are all of the mindset that it just is not good enough. Personally...what more could we ask for from a sim? We have moved from the Russian front to the Pacific and now have a ton of aircraft to fly. Ones that do and don't go up in smoke...ones that actually made a difference...ones that actually had some charecter and some grit to them.

Bottom line...if I were Oleg...I would not respond to so many of your posts either. He so much as says there is no plan in the works for a flyable Kate or a flyable Betty (at the current moment) there are some of you out there that just jump down his throat. So just chill out! Chill out all of you. The stuff will be made for us to download when it is ready for us to download! Give the guy a break...he knows what we want and if he wants any more of our money...he will cater to us in some way shape or form...so you should all just take a huge chill pill. I mean...shoot...this customer support we have already received has been great. We have gotten 4 patches for this game alone so far...and we are still on 3.04. I think when we were running FB...we got up to 1.22? We've got some time. Do not kick all this to the curb yet. There is still a lot of good stuff to come.

We'll see what kind of spark this ignites...

Adios. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well let me clue you in on some facts that you seem to be missing before you want of on your fanboi crusade.

1)The betty was advertised as being in the game per the box.
2)1C stated that the betty was done but there was not enough room on the CD for it.
3)Now here we are two patches later and it has yet to materialize.

Considering all that I am not surprised that people are a little T'd off about it.

They have a right to be. So who are you to judge them for it? Answer...nobody.

Flame away if it will make you feel better

cwojackson
01-21-2005, 04:11 PM
I like how some people automatically assume that no one wants to fly bombers. Personally, I enjoy the challenge and skill it requires to fly them.

One of the best addons I've ever purchased is Wings of Power for FS2004. In terms of historical accuracy and flight modeling they are unsurpassed. It's always fun to see the reactions of people who are trying to fly a fully loaded B-29 for the first, even in perfect weather. Just the ground handling alone is difficult to master, take off isn't too bad and landings are a real surprise. Throw in historical runways and weather and it becomes a real challenge.

On the flip side, I like a good high performance single engine plane as well. I'm currently enjoying the P-51 just released by the same developers. It has to be the best P-51 model on the market and a joy to fly.

I know it may be difficult for the cyber fighter jocks to understand, but not everyone is interested in playing shoot-em-up.

Atomic_Marten
01-21-2005, 06:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeminoleX:
RWetterholt you seem to forget who works for whom.

When we fork over the coin we purchase the right to gripe.

Now on the day they pay us to fly..... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What this man says. Agreed.

I ain't much of a G4Ms fan, but I can understand the people who says they want to fly it. After all, it has that big gun in tail.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

p1ngu666
01-21-2005, 07:24 PM
i was gonna make a skin, with the fusealarge like a cigar, havent figured out what todo the wings and engines as

F19_Olli72
01-21-2005, 08:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
i was gonna make a skin, with the fusealarge like a cigar, havent figured out what todo the wings and engines as <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Monica Lewinsky? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif oh well....fits the bill (NO pun intended)

fordfan25
01-21-2005, 09:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recon_609IAP:
why you gripe for $40 on a great sim like this?

You've been given something so good that you are spoiled. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i have not been given any thing. i was sold something.

KG30_Adler
01-21-2005, 09:24 PM
pretty amazing thread- some ******* starts it who can't read/and or doesn't bother to read what he bought. Never have seen this *** in HL, but maybe I am just not there at the right times.

The fact is that the Betty was listed as as one of the 'over sixty flyable planes' on the PF packaging. It was not flyable and the readme said that there were flyable planes omitted because the cds wouldn't permit. Okay, so where is the Betty?

Well, the flyable Betty only existed in the dreams of UBI marketing- same thing happened with the B-25 when AEP came out as I recall- listed on box as flyable, nowhere to be found, etc.

You *** UBI *** kissers must be trust fund brats who don't care that you are serial liar victims, most of the rest do.

Mjollnir111675
01-22-2005, 06:48 AM
@ Adler

"The fact is that the Betty was listed as as one of the 'over sixty flyable planes' on the PF packaging."

Where did you buy your copy? Mine states "Over 40 flyables"
I want the same copy you have. I bet amongst "Over 60 flyables" you have the torp planes and the Betty dontcha? And then some!!
Quit holdin out on us and share the wealth Man!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Hey 1-C: PIMP OUR TORP PLANES!! "MOP 'EM UP!!"

StG77_Fritz_X
01-22-2005, 01:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GonzoX:

1)The betty was advertised as being in the game per the box.
2)1C stated that the betty was done but there was not enough room on the CD for it.
3)Now here we are two patches later and it has yet to materialize.

Considering all that I am not surprised that people are a little T'd off about it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Spot on.