PDA

View Full Version : OK, I give up...



Jetbuff
02-27-2005, 03:39 AM
... so maybe all the 190's on the Eastern front were indeed the heavier variety with the extra armour. I'm willing to ignore that this is no longer only an Eastern TO sim and accept the lackluster performance of the 190's. BUT, at least give us the benefit of all that armour eh? If she's gonna fly like she's carrying an extra tonne of armour plating, I'd like that to be reflected in the damage model. Instead we have the mushy wing syndrome, incessant fuel leaks and insta-pilot kills. What's the deal here?

Discuss...

F19_Ob
02-27-2005, 03:50 AM
U should be able to outfly most early allied planes.
Later ones like La5-La7, yak3 and yak9 and latest mig3 and LaGG3 along with spit9 ,p51 and even p47 have enough speed to be able to catch u in 'some' situations or if they have the E advantage.
------------------------
With more info we might be able to help or determine the situation easier.

-What plane did u fight?
-Was he inexperienced or expert?
-are U inexperienced or expert?
-Track?
-1 on 1 or a furball?

Not even the better armour of the il-2 will make u immune to hits. Sometimes a single bullet on the right spot may do the job.
In a spray of bullets and cannonshells its likely to get hurt.

NorrisMcWhirter
02-27-2005, 04:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jetbuff:
... so maybe all the 190's on the Eastern front were indeed the heavier variety with the extra armour. I'm willing to ignore that this is no longer only an Eastern TO sim and accept the lackluster performance of the 190's. BUT, at least give us the benefit of all that armour eh? If she's gonna fly like she's carrying an extra tonne of armour plating, I'd like that to be reflected in the damage model. Instead we have the mushy wing syndrome, incessant fuel leaks and insta-pilot kills. What's the deal here?

Discuss... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bias, I suspect. Oleg has shifted Il-2 to more mass-market appeal following the demise of CFS3 on release. So, we have more bias to increase sales in certain markets. After all, the average Joe is going to expect WW2 aircraft to be like what he sees on the History channel (similar bias) and he'd think something was wrong with Il-2 if it didn't match his (mis)conception(s).

Still, you can hardly blame the developer for wanting to make money.

Cheers,
Norris

Jazz-Man
02-27-2005, 04:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jetbuff:
... so maybe all the 190's on the Eastern front were indeed the heavier variety with the extra armour. I'm willing to ignore that this is no longer only an Eastern TO sim and accept the lackluster performance of the 190's. BUT, at least give us the benefit of all that armour eh? If she's gonna fly like she's carrying an extra tonne of armour plating, I'd like that to be reflected in the damage model. Instead we have the mushy wing syndrome, incessant fuel leaks and insta-pilot kills. What's the deal here?

Discuss... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

S! Pritzl

Mushy wing syndrom is a combination of two things, IMO, the high rate of roll in the FW-190 and it's much higher wingloading. Since the FW-190's wing is so heavilly loaded, when it loses surface area, it is bound to produce more dramatic results. However, the late war Bf-109s have similar wingloading to the mid war FW-190s, and they do not suffer from it nearly as bad, and so I suspect it has to do with the rate of roll in the FM, which shouldn't have anything to do with it at all.

I've never experienced the instant-fuel leak syndrom that many have... I don't have as much stick time in the FW-190 as I do in say the Spitfire, but I have spent a fair share of my time in it when training our pilots against the FW-190. I would say that if a bullet peirces the fuel tank in the FW-190 to a degree with which the tank cannot seal itself again, given that the hole will likely be at the bottom of the tank which is on the bottom of the plane.. I'd say there's a good chance that it would drain rapidly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif As I said however, I've never experienced it in game, so I don't know how rapid we're talking about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Instant pilot kills... well, I don't know what kind of lingering pilot kill you'd prefer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif but I've never seen this either??

As for the "lackluster" performance of the FW-190, I don't agree. It's faster than contemporary fighters, even western fighters, on the deck, it's well armed (MG151 problem not withstanding, the early ones have MG-FFs anyway) and evasive as all hell.

IIRC however, it's not the uprated armor that is dragging the FW-190 down in Forgotten Battles, but that Eastern Front FW-190s ran at 1.35ata instead of the 1.42ata often quoted because the engine manufacturer didn't clear them for 1.42ata until later. IIRC again (I'd need to go look) the A-5 and A-6 run at "proper" boost. The A-4 is the only downrated FW-190.

What model were you flying at the time that inspired this? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

As for the "bias" charge made by Norris, ask Oleg what his favorite plane of WW2 is...

Longjocks
02-27-2005, 05:08 AM
Hmm... no troubles on my end. I admit I don't fly the 190s all that often. But I found a trick to surviving that I'll pass on as a work around until the next patch - try not to get shot. It works well for me but we all have our own style of play and tactics we like to use.

NorrisMcWhirter
02-27-2005, 08:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
As for the "bias" charge made by Norris, ask Oleg what his favorite plane of WW2 is... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What his favourite plane is and what he does to achieve sales are two very different things.

Plus, if you haven't had a fuel leak in the 190 then you haven't been flying it much...

Incidentally, and just for comparison, have you ever had your Spitfire encounter a non-sealing fuel leak which drained away all fuel in under 60s?

Ta,
Norris

FI_Willie
02-27-2005, 09:35 AM
As for fuel tank leaks...

It shouldn't matter if the hole is top or bottom. A hole in the top of the wing is in a very low pressure area and (in the real world ) will siphon a tank dry in no time.

I know this for a fact, because a lineboy didn't get a fuel cap replaced properly on a PA-22 Colt I used to fly. Those planes have top fillers on the wing tanks.

I took off and noticed a VERY high rate of fuel consumption. Made a u-turn and landed and discovered the problem. Should have checked before I flew.. Oh well.

Daiichidoku
02-27-2005, 10:12 AM
i only recently started flying the 190 online, the A9 usually, and while im overjoyed with the guns (one burst kills everytime, instead of what im used to flying the P47 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ), i have experienced the fuel leak loss, and manoman! its almost as ridiculous as the collision modelling, the way it runs out SO fast, unlike any other type, including early zeros, without SS tanks, and I fly the A6M3 a lot, too

Jazz-Man
02-27-2005, 03:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
As for the "bias" charge made by Norris, ask Oleg what his favorite plane of WW2 is... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What his favourite plane is and what he does to achieve sales are two _very_ different things.

Plus, if you haven't had a fuel leak in the 190 then you haven't been flying it much...

Incidentally, and just for comparison, have you ever had your Spitfire encounter a non-sealing fuel leak which drained away all fuel in under 60s?

Ta,
Norris <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed, it makes perfect sense that in order to increase sales he would pull the rug out of the largest and longest running part of this community, Euopean and NA Luftwaffe squadrons... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I've had many fuel leaks in the FW-190, simply never one which drained the whole tank in under 60 seconds. I've never experienced it in any aircraft?

p1ngu666
02-27-2005, 04:25 PM
norris, i think its a stupid suggestion to say lw is toned down to increase sales. by the time joe found out IF it was true, he would have already bought the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

alot of ppl have preconviced ideas about german stuff being better too...

fuel leak is similer to other aircraft ingame. imo its most silly on big bombers, not a iccle fighter plane with 1 or 2 tanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Jetbuff
02-28-2005, 02:21 AM
Thanks Jazz for your informative reply.

What "inspired" this post was the growing realization that getting hit in a 190 essentially meant the end of the battle. One ping almost anywhere and you have to start wondering if you're even going to be able to land it one piece. e.g. a guy in a P51 sprays his .50 cals my way... no sweat I think as I'm clearly too far away for them to be any serious threat to my fockewulf. Catch a single ping in the left wing. Still not concerned as a glance confirms there is no visual damage. Yet, the minute I reduce my speed I find my plane has been reduced to flopping fish out of water. Can't turn, can't roll, can't even keep her level much. The ol' mushy wing strikes again.

In other planes - even the more fragile 109, I rarely face this problem this severely. Your argument about the roll-rate/wing-loading does seem to hold water in that respect. Yet, my concern is how come a handful of .50 cal rounds (possibly even one) from over 600m can damage my wing so severely? Do you know how frustrating it gets to keep RTB'ing after getting barely singed by a light MG? (even .30 cals will do it) Especially when it takes so long to get to altitude and find a plane in the weeds below thanks to FB's crappy visibility.

Instakills isn't about how soon death occurs after getting shot, but about how often I get killed in the 190 with the first burst. Sure there are dead-eyes out there - I've seen Deg in action - but how come there's a 1000% increase in them the minute I hop in a Fw?

Fuel leaks are the new gunsight thingy - remember how catching a bullet anywhere in the 190 used to take out your gunsight? They must have replaced "destroy gunsight" with "pierce fuel tank" in the code! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Then again, every once in a while, the 190 survives an INCREDIBLE amount of damage - sortie earlier tonight, must have soaked up 1000 rounds as 5 different P-51's emptied their ammo loads on my sorry behind. And, although I got the mushy-wing, leaking tank right off the bat, the plane kept flying and I was able to RTB - had to bail though as the mushy wing makes landings pretty much impossible.

Honestly, there is something seriously porked about the 190's DM. I didn't believe all the jive about it being simplified before but I can no longer ignore the possibility in the face of my experiences with it.



Summary:
Almost every other plane:
few hits > little damage, more hits > more damage, x-hits > down

190:
first hit > no more turning/pilot dead/fuel leak, mix and match and take your pick
beyond that, anything can happen

Badsight.
02-28-2005, 02:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jetbuff:
190:
first hit > no more turning/pilot dead/fuel leak, mix and match and take your pick
beyond that, anything can happen <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>while i wouldnt say its as drastic as just one bullet hit , what you said there is noticeable

Jetbuff
02-28-2005, 02:33 AM
Essentially, flying the 190, for me at least, has become a tedious exercise in frustration. It's got everything in the sim going against it and then some - wacky DM, questionable E-bleed, poor acceleration, weak zoom-climb, terrible visibility, you name it. Apart from those 4x20mm the deck is seriously stacked against you in a plane that supposedly prompted the development of the Mk IX and was felt to be easier to fly and fight in than the 109.