PDA

View Full Version : What's wrong with picking LA7s (and sometimes Yaks)?



neural_dream
07-02-2005, 09:28 AM
Some facts:
* I am a rookie in online FB+AEP+PF (7 days)
* My survivability increases by >400% when flying LA7s comparing to BFs, FWs etc etc
* LA7s are considered rookcraft and sometimes lame.
* 97% of the online battles are at under 3000m, where LA7s are good.

Obviously, my knowledge on the capabilities of the various aircraft are limited ("Spitfire good for turn&burn", "FW for boom&zoom" and stuff like that). Now tell me someone, what's wrong with picking La7s, which under 3000m, even under my rookish control, seem to outperform most contemporary aircraft. And to summarize, my questions are the following:


* La7s are good for me just because i am rookie?If i spend, let's say something realistic, 100hrs to learn FW190s or BF109s to a decent degree would i beat my imaginary self riding LA7s with equal time of training?



I love this game and i would happily spend hours and hours to learn new things. But i need you guys for directions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I would prefer to get replies by online players and especially those who have shot me down this week (a lot) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif.

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 09:28 AM
Some facts:
* I am a rookie in online FB+AEP+PF (7 days)
* My survivability increases by >400% when flying LA7s comparing to BFs, FWs etc etc
* LA7s are considered rookcraft and sometimes lame.
* 97% of the online battles are at under 3000m, where LA7s are good.

Obviously, my knowledge on the capabilities of the various aircraft are limited ("Spitfire good for turn&burn", "FW for boom&zoom" and stuff like that). Now tell me someone, what's wrong with picking La7s, which under 3000m, even under my rookish control, seem to outperform most contemporary aircraft. And to summarize, my questions are the following:


* La7s are good for me just because i am rookie?If i spend, let's say something realistic, 100hrs to learn FW190s or BF109s to a decent degree would i beat my imaginary self riding LA7s with equal time of training?



I love this game and i would happily spend hours and hours to learn new things. But i need you guys for directions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I would prefer to get replies by online players and especially those who have shot me down this week (a lot) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif.

new-fherathras
07-02-2005, 09:32 AM
who says its wrong to choose la-7`s?


fly what you want to, and kick *** doing it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 09:38 AM
Let's assume that i shouldn't use La7s. I know there are many possible reasons. So, i would like to listen to the views of people who believe that La7s are rookcraft or that they underperform comparing to more difficult aircraft when you become more experienced to the game.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-02-2005, 10:32 AM
I can explain.

Neural actually sums it up in his post: he says he's a rookie and that choosing an La7 increases his survivability 400%. Even with such a hyperbolic figure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif you can see that it's the qualities of that plane that are propping him up. If he's four times as likely to survive in an La7, he must be completely helpless in a 1941, or 42 or even '43 plane, and maybe only half as likely to survive in a '44 non-ueber plane. Not a knock on him, it's just the way it is for a newbie. There are a lot of hard lessons to learn, and it takes time... and hundreds if not thousands of defeats and deaths to pound these lessons through our thick heads (which gives you a huge dose of perspective, considering how the real WWII pilots got one life, or maybe one life and one really miraculous escape, to learn the same lessons, or die for REAL). Now while it may increase his "fun level", what it's actually doing is impeding his learning process. The plane is so optimized that its performance and its weaponry makes up for neural's rookie errors: he doesn't have to pay the price for his mistakes (or, even realize he's making them) nearly as often as with an "average WWII plane". In the long run, neural has to ask himself if he wants to just "blow sh*t up in a game" or if he wants to learn anything about combat flight tactics. Sure, either choice is a valid one, but I'd argue that the latter is a better, more rewarding one over time. And, you can always do silly, fun stuff on occasion, too. (My beef with the community is that they go for the "stupid fun" option a vast majority of the time, and miss out on a great opportunity to really get an appreciation for these planes and this time period).

The other dynamic of this is that ueberplanes shrink the planeset. If "everyone" has to fly an La7/Yak3/Ki-84/laser-cannon Corsair, no other planes are really competitive against them, so effectively, a very large percentage of the planeset can't be used. Sure, you can beat your head against the wall like I do sometimes, and still fly a Bf109G2... but really, the only people you can beat are the real newbies and the clueless: I've seen time and again how it's nearly impossible to rob an La7 of energy and dive on it, which is a Bf109 driver's stock in trade. The ueber Lavochkin will just stand on its nose, make up several hundred meters of alt disadvantage in about 3 seconds and still have enough energy to outturn you and blast you with a 1/4 second burst of laser accuracy cannon as you try to disengage from it. Almost any other plane would wallow at the apex of that ill-considered climb and you could hammerhead down and kill him.

Brain32
07-02-2005, 11:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> 97% of the online battles are at under 3000m, where LA7s are good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, and that is the main reason why LA-7, Spitfire and some others are considered to be newbie planes. That's how luftwhiners are born...

But, some versions of ME-109(with ki-84 on the Japaneese(spelling???) side) are quite good at theese low altitudes. That's how allied-whiners are born.

That's why I don't like any of them, if you don't want to take time to learn how to fly,shoot and all strengths and weaknesses of your favourite plane, then just switch all(most) realism settings and enjoy.

Neural-dream, it's not wrong or lame to fly ANY plane in this game, the only thing that is lame is to blame everything you can think of before thinking about how did you use your plane in combat.

You can find great info and tactics on flying almost every plane on this forum; try searching(if it works) there are great post about it...

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 11:23 AM
Alright, so to sum up, you say that La7 IS a uberplane and if you want to SHOOT MORE planes you should go for it. If, on the other hand, you want to acquire a broader perspective of the air warfare of ww2 you should use them all.

Personally, the plane which gives me the highest immersion and which i love flying most is the BF109 (all models). However, although offline i've flown it hundreds of hours, online i will die 5 times more than with a La7 (which i don't like and with which i haven't played a lot). I didn't exaggerate before with the 400% figure. With a La7 in servers like WarcloudsWF, Ukdedicated, 334thdedidacted etc, i die every 9 or 10 sorties and score 6-7 kills in the meantime. With a Bf i die twice every three sorties and score similarly with the La. The only reason i sometimes may go well with a BF is that BLUE teams usually cooperate better than the RED.

and to move that point a little further, it seems to me that RED planes are better than the BLUE, in the sense that for equal performance characteristics they are more forgiving. However, BLUE players are better (the majority of squadrons play only blue) obviously by having practiced on more difficult planes. So, my question is why don't good players fly LAs? Because they think that they haven't improved enough yet to pause their learning process by using easy planes?

I know i sound confusing but that is exactly how i see the whole issue.

Brain32
07-02-2005, 11:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Personally, the plane which gives me the highest immersion and which i love flying most is the BF109 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of my favourite choices too, especially the G2 version

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> However, although offline i've flown it hundreds of hours, online i will die 5 times more than with a La7 (which i don't like and with which i haven't played a lot). I didn't exaggerate before with the 400% figure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know you are not exaggerating, the same thing happened to me for a long time, but under what conditions, what altitude, what was your energy status during combat, who had the altitude advantage,how expirienced are you with evading in bf109, with the la-7 you can simply break and you can tell an unexpirience bf109 flyer if he tries to follow you, he won't be able to turn as tigh as la7, he will eventually lose energy and la7 pilot will have a great advantage over him...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> and to move that point a little further, it seems to me that RED planes are better than the BLUE </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I really can't agree with that opinion I think like I said before that if flown properly all planes can find a very close match.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> So, my question is why don't good players fly LAs? Because they think that they haven't improved enough yet to pause their learning process by using easy planes? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you know that? I've been in this game for 2 years and I still can't judge about other pilots, besides like you said over 90% of online battles occur at low altitudes where especially LA7 has a nice amount of advantage...

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 11:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I really can't agree with that opinion I think like I said before that if flown properly all planes can find a very close match. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what i was hoping someone to tell me. Thank you Brain32.

Still, i am not sure about the answer to what i asked in the first place:

Do La7s underperform comparing to more difficult aircraft when you become more experienced to the game, or is it up to the individual? I would like someone to convince me with rational arguments and not safe and general statements.

But i should stop monopolising my own topic if i hope to get answers to my questions.

ElAurens
07-02-2005, 12:58 PM
Fly what you like sir. It's as simple as that.
I have flown this series since late December 2001, and have flown all the aircraft many times. Pick one or two youlike and get good at them. It does not matter if it's an La7 or a P39, you can be successful in any of them. And don't listen to those that would have you fly what they think is best.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Atomic_Marten
07-02-2005, 01:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I really can't agree with that opinion I think like I said before that if flown properly all planes can find a very close match. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what i was hoping someone to tell me. Thank you Brain32.

Still, i am not sure about the answer to what i asked in the first place:

Do La7s underperform comparing to more difficult aircraft when you become more experienced to the game, or is it up to the individual? I would like someone to convince me with rational arguments and not safe and general statements.

But i should stop monopolising my own topic if i hope to get answers to my questions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LA-7 will not perform the same once when you get more experience. And become better player.

For instance, who is stopping you to fly it like FW190? Executing BnZ attacks from above? Generally, once when you use Spitfire 8/9 or LA-7 like FW190 you are closest to unbeatable status as you can ever be.
Inflicting as much damage as you can in split of a second, with low to none risk to yourself.

So you see, answer to your question is no. LA-7 in expert hands is monster plane.

With maybe one small question; I don't know how 4.01 LA-7 performs now..

You can educate yourself in three way, basically;

-flying
-gunnery
-tactic

Of that three, toughest is gunnery, than tactic than flying. You will learn flying quickly.
Tactic is, once when you understand it, a matter of discipline.
Gunnery is the toughest part (it vary depending on aircraft type). You will train gunnery untill the moment you quit the game.

AerialTarget
07-02-2005, 02:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
it seems to me that RED planes are better than the BLUE, in the sense that for equal performance characteristics they are more forgiving. However, BLUE players are better </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's obvious that you fly Russian aircraft and not American ones. Excepting the Russians, blue aircraft are far superior to red aircraft. Any time I want to double my own success, I just hop into an Me-109. I have a very long track which demonstrates this repeatedly, if you don't mind wading through various subjects (including footage of a deliberate friendly fire kill which I must remember to send to Sparx). In the track, it shows several sorties in a P-38 Lightning and several in an Me-109. You'll see the difference.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2005, 04:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
Some facts:
* I am a rookie in online FB+AEP+PF (7 days)
* My survivability increases by &gt;400% when flying LA7s comparing to BFs, FWs etc etc
* LA7s are considered rookcraft and sometimes lame.
* 97% of the online battles are at under 3000m, where LA7s are good.

Obviously, my knowledge on the capabilities of the various aircraft are limited ("Spitfire good for turn&burn", "FW for boom&zoom" and stuff like that). Now tell me someone, what's wrong with picking La7s, which under 3000m, even under my rookish control, seem to outperform most contemporary aircraft. And to summarize, my questions are the following:


* La7s are good for me just because i am rookie?If i spend, let's say something realistic, 100hrs to learn FW190s or BF109s to a decent degree would i beat my imaginary self riding LA7s with equal time of training?



I love this game and i would happily spend hours and hours to learn new things. But i need you guys for directions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I would prefer to get replies by online players and especially those who have shot me down this week (a lot) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Most of those guys berating you for flying the La-7 probably also cut their teeth on this plane.

It was my first plane online as well. I was new, inexperienced, still learning the ropes and the finer details and the La-7 is the best possible offering and always has been.

At present, the La-7 is just challenging enough with the new FM to ensure that new pilots cannot pull otherwise impossible moves but it is very forgiving and very high performance. In general, this is what the Russians also experienced as they had lots of new pilots who needed simple and easy to fly aircraft - the Russian aircraft are the perfect choice for beginner pilots.

You can graduate onto harder things later.

Reasons why the La-7 is beneficial to new pilots under 4.01 (and previously):
1) Very fast
2) Very agile
3) Well armed but requiring precise aim (good practice)
4) Good torque level - enough to train pilots to counter it and use trim

Overall it allows new pilots to at least be competitive.

After flying the La-7...I think the next plane to go to is the Yak-3. Slightly harder to fly but just as competitive...forces you to be very precise on aim and use guns sparingly as the capacity is low.

Then you can go and fly whatever you want. The Spitfire, the 109, the Zero...all of these are accessible with some practice.

I still from time to time will fly the La-7 or Yak-3. Good planes.

VW-IceFire
07-02-2005, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I really can't agree with that opinion I think like I said before that if flown properly all planes can find a very close match. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what i was hoping someone to tell me. Thank you Brain32.

Still, i am not sure about the answer to what i asked in the first place:

Do La7s underperform comparing to more difficult aircraft when you become more experienced to the game, or is it up to the individual? I would like someone to convince me with rational arguments and not safe and general statements.

But i should stop monopolising my own topic if i hope to get answers to my questions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LA-7 will not perform the same once when you get more experience. And become better player.

For instance, who is stopping you to fly it like FW190? Executing BnZ attacks from above? Generally, once when you use Spitfire 8/9 or LA-7 like FW190 you are closest to unbeatable status as you can ever be.
Inflicting as much damage as you can in split of a second, with low to none risk to yourself.

So you see, answer to your question is no. LA-7 in expert hands is monster plane.

With maybe one small question; I don't know how 4.01 LA-7 performs now..

You can educate yourself in three way, basically;

-flying
-gunnery
-tactic

Of that three, toughest is gunnery, than tactic than flying. You will learn flying quickly.
Tactic is, once when you understand it, a matter of discipline.
Gunnery is the toughest part (it vary depending on aircraft type). You will train gunnery untill the moment you quit the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thing is Atomic that the La-7 doesn't quite have the firepower or the high speed control that the FW190 or P-47 have that let you conduct your amazing BNZ passes. The La-7 is about as good as the Spitfire in that regard...its a sort of hybrid energy/angle fight that you can use which is very powerful but not quite the same.

The La-7 simply can't compete up above 6000m as well...so any really dedicated P-47 or FW190D flyer would win for highground energy tactics.

Atomic_Marten
07-02-2005, 05:48 PM
Ice, you are right but only as far as alt is concerned. IMO. LA-7 capabilities are weaker on high altitudes. but anyway most of online combat is below 5000m. On that alts LA-7s are competitive.

His adversaries, Bf109 and FW190 have better diving endurance on low alts, tho.

LA-7 is not underarmed if we compare it to FW190D and Bf109. LA73xB20 have in fact stronger armament than FW190D. Anton outguns just about everything in the sim except for Me262A1. Jug is also better armed than LA-7.

About Spitfire, it's armament (2x.50cal and 2x20mm) are also suficient for BnZing, if you ask me.

But anyway, I was reffering to BnZ as general style in which player attempts to enter fight on alt higher than plane he attacks. Something that large percentage of online LA-7 fliers are (easily) giving up.
You know as well as I that if that occurs, winner is in most cases attacking player (the one with more e).
When I was playing online, I can't remember last time when I wasn't trying to use BnZ tactic.
Plane type is irrelevant. I always try to play with e advantage on my side. Thing is, that with LA-7 you can play it either TnB or BnZ..

I remember particularly LA-7 vs. Ki84 matchups on UK_dedicated.. I had success in playing BnZ in LA-7 versus Ki84. In fact I can't remember that they shot me, not once, when I had e advantage over them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 06:49 PM
Thank you all for the very clear and informative replies. It was Atomic_Marten that gave the exact answer to my question:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> So you see, answer to your question is no. LA-7 in expert hands is monster plane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On the other hand, as VW-IceFire said, <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> the La-7 doesn't quite have the firepower or the high speed control that the FW190 or P-47 have that let you conduct your amazing BNZ passes </div></BLOCKQUOTE>, which i sort of noticed.

AerialTarget, could i have this track? Do you have it available anywhere online?

Too bad noone said anything particularly good for my loving BFs. But maybe that's their beauty, they are not very good at anything, but weak at nothing. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Or no?

Bearcat99
07-02-2005, 07:00 PM
The simplest answer is absolutely nothing. You bought the sim.... fly what makes you comfortable.

VMF-214_HaVoK
07-02-2005, 07:18 PM
Nothing at all. LW planes are by far superior, too everything for that matter in the sim now in 4.01. So no need to feel ashamed anymore for flying LAs or Yaks...be sure.

Badsight.
07-02-2005, 07:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
a complete load of rubbish. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>easy to fly plane teach you more about how to work E for A than harder to fly planes

once you understand the methods to gain Angles THEN you can apply that to a harder-to-control planes

easy to fly planes help to learn , not hinder

your attitude is not only elitist , its also plain wrong Stigler , the LA's are nothing like what they used to be in E retention

you need to actually fly them to know Stigler - because talking from only fighting them in your case is really bad advice , getting yourself shot up is easy for you regardless of plane

Badsight.
07-02-2005, 08:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Nothing at all. LW planes are by far superior, too everything for that matter in the sim now in 4.01 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>id like to see you beat a LA with a G-109 in a turn fight

or any Spitfire

only would happen in the allied user makes a mistake

neural_dream
07-02-2005, 08:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The simplest answer is absolutely nothing. You bought the sim.... fly what makes you comfortable </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately BF that i like most does not make me feel confortable at all, especially at medium to low altitudes when i see a La in front of me.

Say i have a La coming from the opposite direction, around 3kms away. Speed 400 both, same altitude 2000m. What am i supposed to do. In turn fights i will eventually lose, while if i choose to go for a vertical climb-dive-climb-dive fight, i will make mistakes mainly due to the poor visibility of the BF's cockpit and the La with its impressive ability to keep its energy will beat me.

Until now the solution that i have found is to pick a La (although i don't particularly like it). I am sure that you have some better suggestion.

Atomic_Marten
07-02-2005, 09:06 PM
You are supposed to do (I'm assuming you are in Bf109G) counter-tactic to his tactic. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
That is why is generally a good idea to always have eye contact with plane you engaged.
It is too risky to implement tactic that you have in mind before fight, and to force it regardless of what LA-7 will do.

I have imagined this scenario -- he passed by you and turned (horizontally) immediatelly with idea to end up on your tail (that would majority of LA-7 fliers do). You have in the meantime engaged MW50 and zoomed up.
Now, it is a matter of energy. If he catches you in gun range you are finished. You can hope that he executed sharp turn with combat or take off flaps, so he had burned his energy a bit. But take note that to catch you and shot you down in vertical chase, he must be close and with good energy status (better is to say greater on speed than you), otherwise his plane wont listen him very long.
If you survive his attack from below, or he give up chase in the process, quickly dive and do "hammerhead" on him.

Also you can do a head on pass on him - but head on passes are pure luck if both of you attempt to do it. However, in some cases it may be worth to try since a lot of players (especially in so called TnB planes) will not go in head on, but they will try to outturn you.

But there is a lot of possibilities.. all you can have is some general advice for that sort of question, because no one can predict what the next aerial fight will be, since they are always different.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-02-2005, 10:35 PM
You zoom up after a merge and the La *will* catch you. You're assuming it will lose energy doing whatever it does, and it won't. It will be able to do a 180 sharply and still climb right up your keyster. And even if the situation devolves into a series of those "Yeltsin loops" you can't win that either.

You're also dead wrong about the proclivity of "uebernoobs" to go for the HO. Especially if the server allows the WonderWoman view. They habitiually force and press HOs, especially with the wonder Berezin cannon that demolish entire planes with the quickest snapshot.

Atomic_Marten
07-02-2005, 10:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
You zoom up after a merge and the La *will* catch you. You're assuming it will lose energy doing whatever it does, and it won't. It will be able to do a 180 sharply and still climb right up your keyster. And even if the situation devolves into a series of those "Yeltsin loops" you can't win that either.

You're also dead wrong about the proclivity of "uebernoobs" to go for the HO. Especially if the server allows the WonderWoman view. They habitiually force and press HOs, especially with the wonder Berezin cannon that demolish entire planes with the quickest snapshot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I guess you are right. I tend to idealize things. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 06:14 AM
You mean i have no luck in a BF unless the opponent La is a noob ?

Brain32
07-03-2005, 06:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> You mean i have no luck in a BF unless the opponent La is a noob ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well here is my advice: Go head on(it's 50/50) , after that if both of you survive he will most certanly try to turn, just climb mildly and turn very mildly with him keeping your eye on him and speed above atleast 400KM/h and cut his path. It requires one hell of a good gunnery but that way is your best chance; in my opinion at least...

BBB_Hyperion
07-03-2005, 07:58 AM
BF gets better with increased alt above 3500 m you should gain .

Atomic_Marten
07-03-2005, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
.. and cut his path. It requires one hell of a good gunnery but that way is your best chance; in my opinion at least... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On that I agree. It is highly unlikely that you will get oportunity for a good old fashion burst from six on Lavochkin.(although I have experienced that online http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)
What you must be expert in; is gunnery. Like I already said. There is no good in any manoeuvre that will outsmart you oppo, if you can't put a proper portion of lead in him.
Bf109 is particularly good plane at those tough snap-bursts.
So I'd say you have your edge there..

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 08:35 AM
Gunnery is something i don't worry about (a lot of offline practice); rarely less than 12-13% on target even with unstable gun platforms like the Bf's, but i find it terribly difficult to get in a position to shoot. And not only against La. It appears i am very bad at 3d orientation. Manoeuvres is what i need people to tell me about. I suggest the bf (you) vs la (enemy) scenario because it is very common and the way i see it very difficult too.

Atomic_Marten
07-03-2005, 10:35 AM
If you get 12-13% gunnery accuracy on aerial target you are hardly a rookie. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Go ahead, check it out on stats page of your fav server -- I bet you are among top 10 pilots..

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 10:53 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I didn't know i could actually check that. Thx for the tip. I went to those servers and checked my percentages, and yes, as you may have suspected, i was wrong. My averages vary from 4.5 to 10%. Anyway, as i said, i don't worry about that. I worry about the only thing there is no forum talk about: The maneuvres. E.g. how can you pull off a hammerhead against a La? What's a very effective way to evade the bnz of a FW? Such things i am trying to find, but noone talks about them. If i can do those things even against only rooks, then gunnery will be important. But those things are difficult to explain and need years of training. Until then i guess i will continue being killed in my puny BF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 10:55 AM
If you're willing to go HO with a gun sporting 3 x 20mm cannon with almost straight trajectory, then you truly ARE a fool.

It almost doesn't matter what the matchup is: you do NOT go for a HO when you have ANY other option. It is simply too chancy, and it's stupid to give up a shot to take a shot.

exceptions are:

1) It's you vs. two or three or more: there, you'll be lucky to get ANY shot at all to improve your outnumbered situation. Take what you can get.

2) Fighter vs. bomber: often safer than a behind-the-wingline shot

3) You *know* his guns are really weak, and yours are really strong (ex: you're in a La7 3x 20 and he's in a Fiat CR42 biplane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif )

This sim, through the WonderWoman view, has emboldened many to press low %, risky HO attacks; often as the only tactic these idiots know. And you KNOW they wouldn't do that if it were really THEIR **** on the line.

Do the WORK, get behind a guy and EARN your right to hose away at him.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 11:06 AM
Neural,

To answer your questions, people DO talk about these things all the time, but you'd have to be an old veteran here to have noticed. In time, you'll see. But, in general, I will say that these ueberplanes have a tendency to render many tactics that *should* work, ineffective; such as your question about hammerheading an La7; good luck getting that plane down to an Energy State so low that you can manage to hammerhead down on it. If you're a Bf109 driver, many more will be the times when you spend your chute time wondering how in hell he managed to get his nose up and blast you when you carefully worked his energy down to what should have been nothing.

First off: if you REALLY want to learn about proper maneuvering, welcome. It's not a short course, but it will make your time playing this and other sims many times more rewarding than it is for the guys who only turn in circles until they burn.

Step one: some "light reading" (muahahahahhah)

Fighter Combat Tactics and Maneuvering (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0870210599/qid=1120410213/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-7375048-4969609?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) by Mouse Shaw. This is currently the bible on ACM theory. Hard, thick reading, but the lessons in it are valuable, and work in a majority of situations.

Luftwaffe Fighter Aces (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0804116962/qid=1120410213/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i3_xgl14/002-7375048-4969609?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) by Mike Spick. Not as detaled as Shaw, but it goes to some lengths to better describe some tactics, and why/how they work.

After these books, study two key concepts: Energy Management and Situational Awareness. It's all down to that, whether your preferred style is T&B, B&Z, or a mixture. It all comes down to how you use your energy and how you manage your Situational Awareness (knowing the state of your plane and all other threats around you at all times).

ElAurens
07-03-2005, 11:12 AM
Stigler, if you fly wonder woman view servers, then you are the n00b.

Be sure.

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 11:32 AM
Try not flaming plz. I asked for advice and that's what Stigler gave me. I think i'll do that reading on situational awareness which is by far my weakest point. My interest is not to imitate the Hartmanns, only to be useful in a server like WarClouds while flying a plane i like and return safely home even without kills (especially when badly damaged http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif; that's where i find joy).

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 12:58 PM
Well, ElAurens, in a way, I agree with you.

But often I'm forced to pick between different facets of servers that are unsavory.

For example, I can try a "full switch" server where there is no WW View... and no icons, so you can't see anything...

Or, another server might have a good icon setup, yet they allow the WW View, too. I won't use it myself*, but I have to concede that "advantage" to the other pilots (which gives them an advantage in those HOs and such).

If those are my choices, I'll probably go with the latter. I don't LIKE it, but them's my choices.

*And don't even bother challenging that notion; you can believe me or not when I say, I NEVER, under ANY circumstance, use WWView. I don't even know what the command is for it.

Atomic_Marten
07-03-2005, 01:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
Try not flaming plz. I asked for advice and that's what Stigler gave me. I think i'll do that reading on situational awareness which is by far my weakest point. My interest is not to imitate the Hartmanns, only to be useful in a server like WarClouds while flying a plane i like and return safely home even without kills (especially when badly damaged http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif; that's where i find joy). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You will find that you can not hold your situation awareness for extensive period of time on the same level. It is VERY demanding, not to mention exhausting.(nervous looking in all directions all the time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)
That is why flying on pit on server without formation (or at least wingman) is 'failure' mission on the long run, IMHO.

About tactic, you can find *few* suggestions in your IL-2 root folder in manual.pdf
About specific manoeuvres in Bf109G
against LA7, you can try http://www.airwarfare.com/tactics/images/image007.jpg , and some other manoeuvres as well.
picture from Airwarfare.com fighter tactics section


Be sure to check links http://www.airwarfare.com/tactics/tactics_fighter.htm
http://www.airwarfare.com/tactics/tactics_bfm.htmBasic manoeuvres

Those are about every basic manoeuvre one can execute with aeroplane.

Brain32
07-03-2005, 01:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Do the WORK, get behind a guy and EARN your right to hose away at him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Believe me doing what I described above IS very hard work and I think most will agree that a player which gets kill like that definitely earned it(does anybody remember 3.04 mg151/20?).

Wonder woman view is a joke and I would rather go offline or find a good quake3 deathmatch server http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

About HO, I simply like it and since there are players that will try to evade, there is a good chance they will make a mistake and loose too much energy...

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 01:39 PM
Alright, thx for the tips. I will definitely look at those airwarfare.com links. About the manoeuvre you suggested in the pic above, it needs 2 aircraft, which is a luxury http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif and it was conceived by the americans because the wild/hellcats were faster than the zeros (says Discovery Channel). Are you sure it would work against the superior speed La? In any case, it needs two aircraft, not very useful unless you have a wingman you are able to communicate/cooperate with http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 03:22 PM
That tactic was the Thach Weave, and it was conceived because the Wildcats were *tougher*, but much less maneuverable than the Zeros; speeds for those two planes were roughly equal.

The idea was, Thach knew nothing was going to outmaneuver the Zero at the time. So, when a F4F pilot got a Zero on his tail, he would turn towards his wingman, who would then be charged with scraping the Zero off him with a high angle off deflection shot. They didn't know yet that the Zero was much less susceptible to damage, which is the main reason this works like a charm. You only need a small amount of damage to brew up a Zero, or wreck an aileron or flight control surface. Thus, this maneuver works really well.

Less so against a hardier plane; in that case you'd want your clearing wingman to get a good stable gunpass from behind the enemy plane, so the original guy being attacked would want to set up a different kind of "drag".

ElAurens
07-03-2005, 03:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:

*And don't even bother challenging that notion; you can believe me or not when I say, I NEVER, under ANY circumstance, use WWView. I don't even know what the command is for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Understood sir. I have flown on them before and stayed in cockpit. Made the kills so much sweeter.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Atomic_Marten
07-03-2005, 04:06 PM
Well that's only the general idea.. you don't really need two planes to make it work (but it would be nice to have 'em). The path of the aircraft is what counts.
My intention was to show that the only real chance you *might* get in entire fight is one or two such shots on Lavochkin. After that he will outturn you for good and there is no thing you can do about it.

The pic clearly displays what kind of gunnery is required..

BTW this tactic *works* when you are in Bf109G. Idea is, to run slower than LA-7, so the nose of your aircraft is on line that cuts his path, and after that land 1-2 MK108s on target, afterwards everything should go smoothly. For you. Since I have often executed it succesfully, you should not have problem with it either. It is true that this tactic favours more manouverable fighter, but be sure when such finesses are in question, winner is often more skilled pilot.

On the other hand everything depends on how the situation will unfold. This is not, by any means some unbeatable tactic or something. Just one option more. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 04:19 PM
I see. It seems that evasion tactics (i am sure there is a better name for them http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif) have become a little easier with the 4.01 patch, because slowing down is now faster. Probably the only move that i usually succeed in when trying to evade that plane from behind is to go to 0% throttle, go a little up-down, takeoff flaps for just a sec or two, left-right, to avoid the initial cannons and then a sudden move to one direction and 100%+any boosts+raised flaps. Almost all rookies miss me and if i am not very far from my base i will probably get away. Non-rooks though will either drop me with the first accurate cannon or go up for a hammerhead or something you non-rooks know http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif and i can't even understand.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 07:17 PM
@El Aurens and Brain32:

I agree that WW View is a joke, but you can take the high road and fly on such a server without resorting to such a "cheat". You have to concede the advantage of easier gunnery, typically in HO and tight maneuvering situations (like extended scissors); thus you have to get and keep that much more advantage. And you suffer a lot of "bullsh*t deaths" that you *know* were made possible by use of such an exploit.

But, as I also said it beats not even being able to see who or what you're fighting (which is the case on several maps).

drose01
07-03-2005, 07:40 PM
I am definitely with Stigler here (getting slightly off the original topic)- I too will sometimes play on WW servers, although personally I too always leave my cockpit on because the cockpit off view is too cheesy.

Most of the time most of the hyperlobby servers are WW servers, and the ones that arent are "full real" on dark maps where you spend huge chunks of time squinting for black specks and then holding fire to avoid a friendly kill.

So you end up on a WW server, with your cockpit on.

My questions are threefold:

1) How much of a disadvantage is it to play with cockpit on and others have it off?

2) Why do so many servers have the "cockpit off" option?

3) If cockpit must be off, why do those "enemy indicator" radar arrows always have to be present?

VW-IceFire
07-03-2005, 07:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by drose01:
I am definitely with Stigler here (getting slightly off the original topic)- I too will sometimes play on WW servers, although personally I too always leave my cockpit on because the cockpit off view is too cheesy.

Most of the time most of the hyperlobby servers are WW servers, and the ones that arent are "full real" on dark maps where you spend huge chunks of time squinting for black specks and then holding fire to avoid a friendly kill.

So you end up on a WW server, with your cockpit on.

My questions are threefold:

1) How much of a disadvantage is it to play with cockpit on and others have it off?

2) Why do so many servers have the "cockpit off" option?

3) If cockpit must be off, why do those "enemy indicator" radar arrows always have to be present? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
1) Its a disadvantage if you make it a disadvantage. I never really had any problem. When I'm inside the cockpit, I want to see the cockpit and see through a real gunsight. I use the WW view for TAS and then jump right back

2) Not sure. I like to see a variety of settings and there are a variety of servers. Some have WW views, some have full cockpit on. I prefer a mix of settings...I don't always prefer the hardest method. I like to fly what makes me happy given the time that I have.

3) I wish we could turn those off.

VF-29_Sandman
07-03-2005, 08:39 PM
1 plane that does seem to require precise gunnery (besides fw's) is p-38's. if u can hit a tiny la-7 in a p-38, ur closing in on sniper status since u'd only get 1 chance most likely. the guns are accurate, but seems slower moving than the la's guns.

neural_dream
07-03-2005, 10:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I too always leave my cockpit on because the cockpit off view is too cheesy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can't agree more with that.

Speaking of the P38, how does it compare to design-wise conventional fighters like the Las, Bfs, FWs, Spitfires? It seems faster and with quite strong guns but less manoeuvrable. Is it something like a strange-looking P47 or i am totally wrong there? However, people use it a lot online, which i find surprising.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-03-2005, 11:05 PM
The major advantage of the WonderWoman view is in gunnery. Simply put, with no nose, front panel, body of the aircraft, etc., a pilot can set up and prosecute gunnery passes he could not otherwise make. Also, HO defenses are much less effective because you can't get to the "cold side" of a WonderWoman-piloted plane.

As a historical anecdote, consider H. J. Marseille, considered by some to be even greater than Hartmann. The Star of Afrika, as he was called, was famed for having a "sixth sense" for the below the nose shot, and an economy with bullets that was unworldly. On one sortie where he scored in excess of five kills, the armorers counted his shells upon his return and found he'd expended an average of some 7 *shells* per kill. That is a mere tap on the trigger PER kill. But that kind of marksmanship, that kind of ability to "see under the nose" was extremely uncommon.

The WonderWoman view allows any clown to do it.

Now, why do so many server hosts allow this view? Very simple: because the (historical) restricted view from a WWII era plane is inconvenient for them, so they pretend it wasn't a factor. Some will argue that because our virtual heads are fixed in place, we get a more restricted view than a real pilot who could make minor adjustments in head position to see around canopy bars and such. Also, the sim doesn't take into account binocular vision, by which you'd be able to see better, or almost not notice the canopy bars. Now, I'll concede the fact that this is true to a certain extent. But to pretend that the canopy bars were NO factor at all, and then to go even further and remove the entire body of the plane as a viewing consideration... and then add in some cheesy arrows that point the way to the nearest enemy, well, that goes WELL too far. Fact is, if you can use a hat switch (which isn't rocket science) and have a little Situational Awareness, you can see out of almost any plane well enough to fight. Even some of the ones that have had their views artificially butchered (the FW190 being Exhibit A).

VF-29_Sandman
07-04-2005, 12:23 AM
p-38's has concentrated firepower all in the nose like the la-7 with the 3x20mm's. with all guns, a close in snapshot would be on par with an la-7.

stalking and zoom and boom is the usual p-38's m.o.d's. at slow speed, u wont have much of a roll rate with just airleons...it's the rudder that kicks this big ship around alot quicker. la-7's make setting up and scoring too easy. for a real challenge, stay high in this ship and pick off the 1's that tend to always do a vertical loop-over; most wont see u coming, and those that do will have no energy to escape.

in qmb, i can score concentrated hits as far as 750 meters with just the 50's, and a small la-7 will blow apart from concentrated fire in a hurry. historically, this ship would put 4x50 cal and 1 20mm fire all in a 30" circle. in a head-on, if u are accurate, those that try to take a 38 head on wont try that again.

btw, wonderwoman view wont help u learn the finer points of gunnery. an actual pilot had to use the gunsite. learning how to use the gunsite is critical.

zombiewolf92553
07-04-2005, 01:44 AM
fly the buffaloe it turns on a dime now .
just flip the buzz and zoomers off and let them come down to the deck where you are. then kill the SUCKERS!

Doug_Thompson
07-04-2005, 02:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
The simplest answer is absolutely nothing. You bought the sim.... fly what makes you comfortable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely.

The La-7 is my favorite. I suspect your choice is being bad-mouthed and you're getting peer pressure because you're no longer an easy kill when you fly it.

AFJ_Skyghost
07-04-2005, 03:01 AM
Neural, you bought the game, right? So fly whatever plane you like, whatever settings you prefer because you have the right to do it.
About the noob or the veterans plane, belive me, I ve been around on the online sims since 1998, and it's ALWAYS the pilot, not the plane that makes the diference.
I'm not an ace, very far from that, but let me tell you something that happened to me a few days ago.
I was on a server with a small group of friends, flying just for fun, using the planes that usually are banned in all other servers, so I was Flying a Ki84 lc, others were flying the 109Z, etc.
A guy flying a 190 A8 attacked me, I evaded, turned the table and shoot him down.
He started whinning about me flying a noob plane, if he was flying a noob plane like me I would never be able to shoot him down. I told him ok, so he took a 84 lc and I took another. 10 seconds later he was down. He took a 109Z, 20 seconds later he was down. He got another lc and I took a Spit.... guess what, he went down again and he left the server.
It was the pilot, not the plane that was making the diference. It happened to me that day and it's ALWAYS like that.
So fly whatever plane you like, pratice a lot, become good, and forget all that noob or no noob BS.
Have fun, that is what you buy this sim for
S!!

S.taibanzai
07-04-2005, 04:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
it seems to me that RED planes are better than the BLUE, in the sense that for equal performance characteristics they are more forgiving. However, BLUE players are better </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's obvious that you fly Russian aircraft and not American ones. Excepting the Russians, blue aircraft are far superior to red aircraft. Any time I want to double my own success, I just hop into an Me-109. I have a very long track which demonstrates this repeatedly, if you don't mind wading through various subjects (including footage of a deliberate friendly fire kill which I must remember to send to Sparx). In the track, it shows several sorties in a P-38 Lightning and several in an Me-109. You'll see the difference. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Lol you stil believe in your self dont you ?

talking about noob

S.taibanzai
07-04-2005, 04:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Nothing at all. LW planes are by far superior, too everything for that matter in the sim now in 4.01. So no need to feel ashamed anymore for flying LAs or Yaks...be sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ah man like i asyed before

Ful of Amish red whiners here

Who thinks that al red planes undermodelled and al bleu overmoddled


i wil say it again

LEARN YOUR HISTORY ON WW2 PLANE PERFORMANCE

you guys make's me sick

anyway try the Lagg3 series ))))

if you want to fly russian aircraft


MANNY HERE THINKS ITS FLYS IN GAME LIKE IT WAS IN IRL ))))

Atomic_Marten
07-04-2005, 05:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Doug_Thompson:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
The simplest answer is absolutely nothing. You bought the sim.... fly what makes you comfortable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely.

The La-7 is my favorite. I suspect your choice is being bad-mouthed and you're getting peer pressure because you're no longer an easy kill when you fly it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is the only real true behind all frustrated elitist "you must do that and that to be real flyer online" BS.
Before, I have never particularly liked the LA-7; but eventually I have started to like LA-7 just because of such "n00b craft" remarks. Plane is good and it kick eis + it has cool look. Why not use it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

neural_dream
07-04-2005, 05:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The La-7 is my favorite. I suspect your choice is being bad-mouthed and you're getting peer pressure because you're no longer an easy kill when you fly it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, not really. It is just that i am repeatedly told that on a La simply i won't learn. Compared to all other online games i have played this is a very well-behaving community and apart from the fact you die a lot it is fun being a noob.

But returning to the topic, i couldn't really understand what is wrong (in the long term) with practicing on a La7, and whether La7s are weaker than the less forgiving aircraft when flown by experienced players. I got satisfactory answers for both of them.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-04-2005, 10:55 AM
I'll just add this one comment:

If you don't want to admit that the La7 is propping you up, I suggest you see how you do in earlier planes against their contemporaries. By and large, you should do about the same or better, if plane choice isn't a factor. If not, it's because you haven't really had to deal with the various factors of plane performance that are prevalent in early and mid war mounts...because the La7 does all that FOR you. That's why I'm saying this plane will stunt your learning curve, if that is indeed your intention.

I was reacting to your 400% better chance of survival in an La7 comment at the top of this thread.

And, this community's love of the ueber is completely true, observable (and lamentable). Why is it that the "Corsair fans" ignore the workhorse '43 and even the '44 version, and only fly the cannon armed '45 version? Why don't Lavochkin "fans" ever fly a LaGG (the genesis of the La7)? Or hardly even the La5, La5F and La5FN? (but, of course they might have a few versions ago, when it was modelled similarly to the La7, with no vices and UFO energy status). What Bf109 fan would be caught dead in a 109Z? Where are all the legions of Airacobra fans, now that the P-39 is a bit more realistically modelled? Either absent or flying P-63s, another johnny-come-lately. It goes on and on, and the answer is obvious: it's pure ease and convenience at the expense of history and flying the versions that *mattered* and that truly decided the war.

VMF-214_HaVoK
07-04-2005, 11:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Nothing at all. LW planes are by far superior, too everything for that matter in the sim now in 4.01 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>id like to see you beat a LA with a G-109 in a turn fight

or any Spitfire

only would happen in the allied user makes a mistake </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now you know as well as I do that just because a plane has a better sustained turn does not make it superior. If that was the case we could say the I-16 is superior to the P-47, when it is clearly not. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

RedDeth
07-04-2005, 12:26 PM
neural dream. first off most of everything in here is junk.

the LA-7 isnt a noob plane. its actually a weak plane. i wont fly it most of the time as it limits me.

its a horrible high alt plane.
it cant climb with a P-38L Late,
it cant really turn with a spitfire, well sort of but itll get in trouble.
it cant dive with most american planes. its wings will rip off.

the LA-7 is fun to fly but it gets torched by most american and german planes. once you learn those planes you will understand this.

the LA-7s best ability is its long range shots you can make with the cannons. if lucky you can kill planes out to .95 and easily out to .7 no problem.

people have already discussed the benefits of LA-7 BUT if your new to the game and your not using and adjusting fuel mix and supercharger levels in the LA7 then your not maximizing the plane.

even in the hands of an ace online pilot the LA7 is NOT a monster plane. its just a target that can evade well for american and german planes.

if you take an LA7 and mix it up with spitfires and such on the deck it will die. if you try to hold E over the spits which you can and can extend from them the american or german energy fighters will notice you and target you.

it all depends on your energy state and whether your bogey is co alt with you when you engage or not

ive been flying online since 1998 in multiple sims.i fly fullreal and i fly arcade, i B an Z, and i T an B. and i can tell you the plane has less to do with the battle than the pilot. if you know your plane you can at least stay alive till wingmen come even if its a weaker plane. fly to the planes strengths.

the benefit of this game is there is something like 100 planes flyable. i fly all german, american, british, russian, and japanese planes in this sim. fly em all and if someone complains about your choice give em one of these ,,l,,

In the old days of janes WWII Fighters you had 8 planes flyable and that was all. just american and german.

on one map.

so what am i saying?......



DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE


p.s. everything stigler said is wrong. hes just another joker staring at a monitor thinking hes better than the other guys for flying pit on and flying his preferred plane which is morally more correct than the other guys plane. he is holier than thou. but then he goes out in his jetta, gets a speeding ticket, cuts off ten people and runs a biker out of his lane on the way to work, and flips off some kid as he takes the kids parking spot.

but at least he got a ticket.....

neural_dream
07-04-2005, 01:02 PM
I am obviously noob enough not to know what you mean by <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> using and adjusting fuel mix and supercharger levels in the LA7 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>. And i am all ears http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and also if you could point me to how i should maximise my Bf's performance i would be grateful.

VW-IceFire
07-04-2005, 02:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
I am obviously noob enough not to know what you mean by <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> using and adjusting fuel mix and supercharger levels in the LA7 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>. And i am all ears http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and also if you could point me to how i should maximise my Bf's performance i would be grateful. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well lets start with fuel mix. You may need to bind keys for it...I forget but mine for reference are:

Alt Numpad + (Increase Fuel Mix)
Alt Numpad - (Decrease Fuel Mix)

General rule in FB is that as your altitude increases you decrease the fuel mix. At 3000m you may want to consider decreasing the mix...by 5000m there will be a thick black streak of smoke coming from either exhaust port on your engine - plus the engine will loose lots of power by that point so you'll realy notice it.

Secondly, we have the supercharger. The La-7 has a two stage supercharger. Stage 1 is for lower altitude. Its designed to operate with the higher air density at lower altitudes and ram enough air into the engine to make it work properly. At high altitude, that method works but it provides decreased power as the air gets thinner. Stage 2 is designed for lower air density and gives the engine enough air density to operate as if it were at low alt.

My keys for reference are:
Home (Decrease Supercharger stage)
Page Up (Increase Superchager stage)
Note: I have a MS natural keyboard, my keys are arranged differently than most and this may not work well for you.

Basically you want to switch to Stage 2 around 3000m (I can't remember exactly) and up and Stage 1 at 3000m and below. Keep in mind that the La-7 still tops out around 6000m and is generally slower than contemporary aircraft at 5000m and more. Also, as the La-7 cannot dive well, it cannot execute a high speed dive escape like a FW190 or P-47 can. If you follow someone who tries to escape...you're like to loose a wing or at best an aileron or an elevator.

I suggest testing this offline to get a real sense of when you're plane breaks up.

I've actually defeated some very smug La-7 pilots by diving from 6000m in a FW190D-9 at full power. At the bottom I pulled out doing nearly 900kph...somewhere along the line between our start at 500kph and the dive they lost both wings and plummeted into the ground. So beware...know your planes strengths and weaknesses.

RedDeth
07-04-2005, 02:15 PM
the LA-7 is not a beginners plane as others would like to imply. to fly this plane you need to set keys for superchargers. to go up and down from level 1 to level 3 on some russian planes...like the I 185. (la7 has level 1 and 2 superchargers and you need to switch to level 2 at about 3500 meters altitude.)

you also need to set keys for fuel mix and adjust fuel mix % to a lower level the higher you go. if your flying at 5000 meters you shouldnt be at 100% fuel mix.

there are tons of variables. also some russian planes also have forzah or similar to WEP... and superchargers....and fuel mix adjustment so you need to hit the W key to turn on forzah then set supercharger then set fuel mix on deck at probably 120%.

russian planes arent noob planes if your a green pea at this game cuz you have to learn TONS of buttons.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-04-2005, 02:23 PM
Just the fact that you can say you can "dive in a Dora from 6km at full power" suggests only a proclivity to game the game. These planes simply couldn't do that and remain controllable. Even for a moderate dive, it's necessary to throttle back.

BaronUnderpants
07-04-2005, 04:30 PM
Wonder Woman wiew?......is that a new clever nickname or has it been arround for long? First time iv seen it anyways.

What differens does it make...when everyone have the same possibility to use it, kind of the same thing if everyone could only use cockpit wiew no?

If there is a joke in there somewhere it would be "Full real".....lol, ya right, if "real live pilot" had that kind of "real wiew" u wouldnt get them up in the air even if u killed their intire family.

When it comes to situational awerness WW combined with icons is a hell of lot closer to "Full real" then NO icons and cockpit only...seriosly, give me a brake.

Maby the WW remark came about because with that option for the enemy u need to think a step further...UFOing at 5000 and sneeking up on your target doesnt cut it anymore...u would actually have to be able to use all the fancy stuff...and not just talk about it and then scream your lungs of because the book said "it" would work, and its the games fault for not doing so.

As for the orginal question, La7 is an exelent aircraft and very good at theaching u ( as someone said before ) the 2 most inportant things, gunnery and tactics, the first one for getting kills and the second one to stay alive.

VMF-214_HaVoK
07-04-2005, 08:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by S.taibanzai:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Nothing at all. LW planes are by far superior, too everything for that matter in the sim now in 4.01. So no need to feel ashamed anymore for flying LAs or Yaks...be sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ah man like i asyed before

Ful of Amish red whiners here

Who thinks that al red planes undermodelled and al bleu overmoddled


i wil say it again

LEARN YOUR HISTORY ON WW2 PLANE PERFORMANCE

you guys make's me sick

anyway try the Lagg3 series ))))

if you want to fly russian aircraft


MANNY HERE THINKS ITS FLYS IN GAME LIKE IT WAS IN IRL )))) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read before you type. I never said I feel red planes are undermodeled. Acutally I dont believe they are. I did not even state that blue is overmodeled. And lets leave the Amish out of this, they have done nothing to you. Besides if Im not mistaken the Amish are of German decent. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

BTW...nice grammer.
P.S. Your sig is too large. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

VW-IceFire
07-04-2005, 08:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Just the fact that you can say you can "dive in a Dora from 6km at full power" suggests only a proclivity to game the game. These planes simply couldn't do that and remain controllable. Even for a moderate dive, it's necessary to throttle back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you for raining a nice shower on my slightly embelished story. Please...feel free to send in the icestorm.

I almost always throttle back so as to not pick up too much speed and crash myself. Course this was a while ago and I remember the outcome, not the variables.

Yeeesh. Course I wasn't expecting too many rays of sunshine...*sigh*

Let the poor man fly this danged La7 and leave him alone. We're educating http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
07-04-2005, 08:32 PM
Baron, you can't seriously argue that being able to see through the nose of the aircraft is more realistic than not?

I will fully agree that some use of icons is more realistic than not, because the sim's graphics do such a poor job of simulating what a pilot can see from a plane... but WonderWoman view is for arcadists. It's without any basis in physical or historical fact and only exists to make virtual pilots better than they would normally be, purely for convenience. The same thing can be said about turning off stalls and spins, torque, any number of effects: "it's too hard *simper*, it's too much of a challenge, so I'll just pretend it doesn't exist, isn't a factor".

By the way that term, WonderWoman is about as old as this series.

http://www.naysayers.com/9jg52/wonderwoman.gif

RedDeth
07-04-2005, 08:38 PM
i fly in 152s and have flown ww2 t6 texans.

pit off is closer to real than pit on. thats a fact. i fly in real planes and you can see frickin everything clear as day. and i can look down and see cows walking in fields 5000 feet below me. try that in IL2.

you have no idea how easy the view is in a real plane stigler.

pit on with icons is about 10% of what you see flying a real plane. if that....

and any planes flying around when your in the air stick out like a sore thumb 90% of time. the motion and movement are like magnets automatically drawing your attention. your eyes move right to the motion. just like when a hot chick walks by and even with your girlfriend holding your hand your eyes just gravitate in that direction without thought.

yes sometimes you dont see and are surprised but that is the exception not the norm.

Atomic_Marten
07-04-2005, 09:43 PM
lol where was I put that track where one Spitfire jumped me (FW190A5) and my buddy (Bf109G6_LATE). Alt was approx. 3000m.
He was BnZing us for at least 4-5 mins, and we couldn't do anything about it. He shot down Bf109 and damaged me so I fled home somehow.

That was one memorable fight..(3.04) point is that I have *never* saw anyone to fly Spit in that manner. He knew that he would not burn too much energy even if he turn a bit to correct aim, but still he ain't turning much.
Just like driving FW190.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

neural_dream
07-05-2005, 02:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedDeth:
pit off is closer to real than pit on. thats a fact. i fly in real planes and you can see frickin everything clear as day. and i can look down and see cows walking in fields 5000 feet below me. try that in IL2.

you have no idea how easy the view is in a real plane stigler.

pit on with icons is about 10% of what you see flying a real plane. if that....

and any planes flying around when your in the air stick out like a sore thumb 90% of time. the motion and movement are like magnets automatically drawing your attention. your eyes move right to the motion. just like when a hot chick walks by and even with your girlfriend holding your hand your eyes just gravitate in that direction without thought.

yes sometimes you dont see and are surprised but that is the exception not the norm. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

RedDeth, i may not have your experience with ww2 fighters, i've flown only once and that was in a Robin Dr400, but still my impression was, as you said, that the view of the pilot is not as bad as in Il-2. And now that i've started playing online in full real servers, the lack of icons is killing me. Mainly because i don't have any decent communication with the others and because my 15inch monitor is not the best, i frequently decide to lose some altitude to follow a plane which proves to be friendly. Other times i lose a plane out of my sight just because of the forest in the background.
Anyway, what i would like to know is what settings you would suggest for an enjoyable "close to realistic" il2 experience and which e.g. hyperlobby servers do provide something like that.

Badsight.
07-05-2005, 03:54 AM
you BADLY need a larger monitor

a 15 inch monitor is a Big strangle on S/A

Brain32
07-05-2005, 04:53 AM
Well I have 17" Samsung CRT and I play at 1024x768, cockpit on, icons off, and I have no problems with spotting planes in the air and I can tell the which one is friendly way before firing range. I don't know at which range planes are visible in a real plane but this is quite enough for me.
BTW: I don't know about the cows, but I can spot a tank at 2000m; did you guys tried to use a little bit of Anistropic filtering, it really clears things for me...

AFJ_Skyghost
07-05-2005, 04:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
lol where was I put that track where one Spitfire jumped me (FW190A5) and my buddy (Bf109G6_LATE). Alt was approx. 3000m.
He was BnZing us for at least 4-5 mins, and we couldn't do anything about it. He shot down Bf109 and damaged me so I fled home somehow.

That was one memorable fight..(3.04) point is that I have *never* saw anyone to fly Spit in that manner. He knew that he would not burn too much energy even if he turn a bit to correct aim, but still he ain't turning much.
Just like driving FW190.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I drive my spit like that since we got MkIX in the game

VW-IceFire
07-05-2005, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
lol where was I put that track where one Spitfire jumped me (FW190A5) and my buddy (Bf109G6_LATE). Alt was approx. 3000m.
He was BnZing us for at least 4-5 mins, and we couldn't do anything about it. He shot down Bf109 and damaged me so I fled home somehow.

That was one memorable fight..(3.04) point is that I have *never* saw anyone to fly Spit in that manner. He knew that he would not burn too much energy even if he turn a bit to correct aim, but still he ain't turning much.
Just like driving FW190.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Was it me? I fly all planes like a FW190 now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 08:25 AM
Red Deth, i have also sat in aircraft, and flown once (a T6 Texan), and while, admittedly, that's not much in the area of stick time, I have had occasion to do a lot of viewing FROM aircraft.

Now... in the case of the T6 Texan, strapped in as I was, with a big bulky chute, and with the various canopy bars and such, the view was VERY restricted, similar to what we get in IL-2, although binocular vision took care of a lot of it. I felt the 4:00 and 8:00 views we get are actually rather generous. It was NOT easy to see back there. The lack of seeing 'dots' or icons, if those are the settings you use, don't enter into a discussion of what areas you can see from the pit. I'll bet in all your time flying, you never ONCE took a gunnery pass at anything. So, your opinion's worth the same as mine in determining how much the nose of the plane affects this (it most certainly does, from all accounts I [and you] have read]. It quite simply is and was a factor. You tell the P-51 community they didn't care about going from Cs with P-40 style pits to bubble canopy Ds. Similar with P-47 pilots; sure they liked that extra big prop and engine power...but they also loved finally being able to see out of that big crate.

Going further, you are likely imagining the "closure" effect our wonderful brains have: in planes, cars, etc., where there are structures "impeding" our view, our brain, over time, tunes them out, so in our mind's eye, we see the road ahead, and stop noticing the hood of the car. We WOULD notice how things that go under the car disappear from view if some gravel became the focus of our attention; and suddenly you notice the front panel if we need to watch our speed as we go by a cycle cop.

It's the same in IL-2; when I remember my best dogfights, I recall in my mind's eye the enemy plane and the sky, but I don't recall every time the canopy got in the way of a shot, or caused me to bank or turn to remove the obstruction. My brain tunes that out. But in the real event, the structure of the aircraft did play some small role in how the combat progressed.

Same effect here.

VW-IceFire
07-05-2005, 08:28 AM
Binocular vision...never heard it called that...you mean stereoscopic vision?

Atomic_Marten
07-05-2005, 09:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">VW-IceFire wrote:
Was it me? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eh.. no. I would remember you.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Wasn't SkyGhost either. His name was like some English knight or something.. maybe Lancelot and something. Couldn't tell since it was some time ago.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 11:00 AM
Steigler:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Baron, you can't seriously argue that being able to see through the nose of the aircraft is more realistic than not? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, didnt mean WW in perticular...more that all the factors in Full real contra No cockpit/icons combined.....WW is of course not realistic, but taking into consideration the things u mentioned such as poore grafics (not poore as such), and poor all arround wiew makes No cockpit/icon more realistic in terms of situational awerness/wider field of wiew...i mean that with cockpit on and no icons u just dont get the field of wiew that u normaly have...wich i think is something like 180 degrees, without turning your head or moving your eyes..... in game u only have say 60 degree wiew at any given time (hat swich doesnt matter, still only 60 degrees). thats a serious handicap.....and not "Real" in any way.

At the same time im convinced there is a golden middleway somewhere...in my oppinion Zekes vs Wildcats is closest so far, relativly small maps ( important ) and icons ( only wiseble from a surtain distans....1km? )

There is pros and cons to either ways.....its just the elitist labeling that gets old after a while....only flying Full real doesnt make u a better pilot or a better stratigic thinker than the DF pilot it really doesnt...it makes u better at Full real, thats it....if a dedicated FR pilot would pay a wisit to a DF server im sure he would get flamed more times than he cares to admitt, same thing the other way arround.

Im for one are aiming to become equally good at both....why limit myselfe to playing this game only one way?

Have a nice day.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 11:21 AM
P.S.

I dont think i ever seen yet alone flown on a server with stalls, spins, blackouts and what not turned off, only cockpit off/icon on....anything else is for noobs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Have however flown on a server with unlimited ammo, that was, hmmm.........intresting http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 11:26 AM
Well, I have to reply on a number of fronts:

First of all, since this is supposed to be a simulation, I feel that discussion of the proper combination of features to get the best overall simulation of aerial combat is something we should all relish. Instead, many like to turn it into a €œgamer vs. simmer€ class argument, with the idea that the poor gamers are set upon by any challenges to their easy play habits. This, I think, pretty much proves that their motives are pure €œconvenience€ and €œfun€ rather than any kind of simulation. I certainly don€t see many credible arguments in here on how flying in the gamer modes is more realistic; only that it€s a €œpreference€ or makes the game more fun (hardly any basis for any argument on simulation or realism). The case for WonderWoman view is the closest yet, and it€s a pretty weak one, as I believe I€ve expounded.

As for the €œfull real argument€, I don€t even feel the type of settings commonly applied by this community to €œfull real€ actually produce this result (I feel the term €œfull switch€ is a more accurate one; €œoverly difficult€ might be another accurate descriptor). On this, I believe we agree. Flying with no icons so that you can barely see anything at all does not create a very realistic environment, and it even eliminates a historically valid method of hunting: that of having a good bit of altitude under your wings and selecting targets and moments of attack below from the relative safety of the perch.

However: if we could come to some agreement of which settings do create the most realistic environment that IL-2 can create, I will argue forever that flying in such a €œmost real€ environment WILL make one a better virtual pilot than flying with more of the arcade features enabled. €œMore real€ pilots are more comfortable dealing with more of the real life challenges (torque, spins, stalls, confined cockpit spaces, energy management, situational awareness, etc., etc.) than the gamers who fly with €˜pit off, unlimited ammo, relaxed physics, etc.

This is not an €œelitist€ stance, it€s simply a correct one. And rather obvious, I might add.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 11:43 AM
Yes...turning of cockpit and use WW is making it easier for yourselfe......and for your enemy i might add...a hell of alot harder getting someone of your 6 in that mode..and im not talking about slowing yourselfe down to a stall wipping arround like a blender just to confuse your opponent and so making him overshoot u, im talking about well planed out manouvers and tricks.

BTW...thank u for giving "Full real" a propper name..."Overly difficoult", thats all i ask for.

Still doesnt make a FR pilot a better pilot than a DF one.

How can a FR pilot become better than a DF pilot when he doesnt even have to worry about half of the things a DF pilot does.....Being wisseble from great distance for one, only differance between the 2 server mods we are talking about is as u said "confined cockpit space". thats all, everything else is the same.

Brain32
07-05-2005, 12:30 PM
Nobody can tell me that no cockpit view is more realistic than true cockpit view. You can't argue that with visiblity distance as it remains the same.
Let me just count what can you see with no cockpit view: through your engine,cockpit and cockpit floor!!!; through your wings;you have totally unobscured rear view.
You won't have that kind of view even in f-15.

Having icons ON is OK(but without them showing distance), speedbar is ok as the real pilot could check his instruments with way less hassle than we can(POV), but anything else, especially the no-cockpit view is totally unrealistic...
Please note that I'm not saying that nobody should use no cockpit view, as I'm not trying to flame or offend anybody. You bought the game, you enjoy it anyway you like it...

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 12:31 PM
I suppose I have to qualify that statement by saying that, provided the conditions are realistic, the "realistic" pilot will be a better pilot than the "gamer" pilot.

Both can be very good in a low-fi environment, but when you add in the realism factors, the gamer pilot won't be able to deal with it. And, all his "game the game" tricks, with which he does physically impossible maneuvers and enjoys uncanny gunnery (aided by WW view) won't be in his trick bag.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 12:53 PM
Futile argument...seeing that both "sides" are right...and wrong, depending on how u look at it.

I would agree that a dedicated FR pilot would be more "aware" in any given situation..(in a FR server) than a DF pilot..(in a FR server).

If that makes a FR pilot over all better....i dont know, and i wouldnt bet on i

In my opinion a pilot flying regularly on both types of servers would be the best over all. (Me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)

neural_dream
07-05-2005, 01:10 PM
From all that i think i'll keep points such as:

* cockpit always on and not showing the actual distance but only the red/blue icon for the aircraft is fairly good settings to have fun quite realistic settings without having to lose your eyesight.

* The "zeke vs wildcat" server has balanced difficulty settings.

* The FW190D9 can reach 900Kphh without disintegrating http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif (i never even dared to try that!!) and learning to ride FWs seems to be a good way to become a better virtual pilot.

BaronUnderpants
07-05-2005, 01:33 PM
Starting to get to grips with the Bf 109, usally K mod.(no comment http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif) without gunpods...dont know if its just me or if the new pach leveled out the playingfield when it comes to FM....K doesnt seem that difficoult anymore, maby its the no gunpods thing that makes it more flyable? 109 G2 vs early Spits/La`s/Migs/Yaks is great fun to.

Fw`s never appeled to me....flown them lots of times in airracing, and strikes me as a extremly nervous airplane.

A good Fw pilot scares me a he** of alot more than a good Bf pilot. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 02:43 PM
neural dream wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">* Cockpit always on and not showing the actual distance but only the red/blue icon for the aircraft is fairly good settings to have fun quite realistic settings without having to lose your eyesight. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if you've gotten that much out of this discussion, I'll take that as a job well done. I myself favor NOT using any "digital rangefinder" for enemy icons, just type. That's all you need to get around the "Oleg specks" problems. I also allow them to appear at shorter distances than for friends. Friendly icons I give range and type (and name, if you toggle that on), to simulate training, command control, familiarity, etc.

My favored settings:
Foes: 3km, TYPE only
Friends: 5km, TYPE, NAME & RANGE

I've toyed with using "neutral icons", but they appear in a dark grey/black, which is just as invisible against forests, water and in reduced visibility weather as the specks they're meant to illuminate. If we had the ability to customize icon colors, I'd explore that a bit more. There is something appealing to the idea of seeing an icon/dot in the distance and not being able to determine IFF until somewhat closer.

For all icons, my chief concern is simple physical visibility of the aircraft itself, rather than range finding or "identity" of the pilot. Contrary to what some think, you most definitely CAN use stealth with icons on. People who don't check around them won't see you if you attack from above and behind... and you can miss icons while doing fast, lazy searches. But usually, not during careful, determined sector searches. Which is exactly what the situation is in real life. If you carefully scan an area, relative motion will betray all but the most "in the weeds" aircraft a majority of the time.

RedDeth
07-05-2005, 09:40 PM
stigler your almost last reply stating that your opinion is correct is just that. its an opinion. and your idea that it is correct is still just an opinion.

ill tell you when i flew in the T6 Texan as you have i did not have a restricted view. i was able to look directly down by arching my neck and look all about.

when your landing in fullreal you dont get the full view you do in real life either. even though you cant see under the nose your mind fills in the blanks to give you a full picture on landing as in passing other planes at an airport. your mind fills in the blanks if there are any.

you cant do this with a monitor. ive got a 21 inch and its still nothing like real flying

to answer neural dreams question of WHAT would be similar to real life i have three answers...

first answer is not possible in game now. that would be pit on with most of cockpit transparent. from shoulders up. ie bars etc transparent. and no more dots etc but to show planes larger than they are now...ie more visible.

thats not in the game so i would say second place would be pit off with no external views and no icons would be close. the problem with this view if youve tried it is you dont have any frame of reference to do manuevers. ie no external views and no wings to look at. its very disorienting.so it doesnt really work well.

third choice and the easiest to implement in game would be pit on with LONG RANGE ICONS. no externals. thats closest to real as planes cant sneak up on you as easy and it relates to wartime comms and wartime radar giving vectors on bogeys for you to intercept.


so again. pit on....no externals.... LONG RANGE icons. longer than normal vision. to make up for the lack of vision in game.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-05-2005, 10:38 PM
You doubtless must know that a large majority of the planes shot down in WWII never saw it coming. And that many of these were in formation, with dozens of eyes supposedly on the lookout.

There is a lot to be said for visuals in this genre, namely that it was easy NOT to see other aircraft, because you were not actively searching for them. Either through not searching at all, watching your wingman too closely instead of for threats, or scanning areas too quickly and cursorily.

As for flying on a PC not being anything like flying; well, we'd all have to agree that we don't get a lot of visceral sensation that would give us all kinds of cues (and in the case of blind flying, misinformation!); but there's not much we can do about not being able to smell that glycol leak, or feel the Gs or the lift of wings, or the subtle onset of a stall.

I certainly can't agree that long range icons and fully transparent canopy bars are the way to go. As I said before, you're channeling your brain's closure abilities; and these effects actually happen on your monitor, if you think about it. I too was able to see great from a Texan, once I banked the plane a bit to look over the side. I certainly recall seeing VERY clearly a small plane taking off from an airstrip almost directly below. My first instinct was to dive on it: then I remembered I wasn't a "real pilot" and decided to squelch that impulse, hehehhe. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

That being said, I know of one sim that uses semi transparent canopy bars (through which icons will still show, yet while not totally destroying the suspension of disbelief and the illusion that you're in a cockpit). This actually works pretty well, but takes some getting used to. In that sim, right now icons display a bit too far and are too large, but at least it's all configurable, so that can be fixed.

I also can't concur on "longer icons than normal vision". What is that about??? Your monitor should show you what your eyes would see if you were actually looking through your own eyes. That's what icons do: they give you a glint of color and motion to make up for the fact that one of Oleg's "pencil specks" is actually invisible as displayed to scale on your monitor. There's no reason to give us more than that.

As for my opinion being just that, duh. That's why we're here. To express our opinions. But some of the things I base my opinions on are facts (such as, the cockpit of the plane IS there and is a factor in vision). I trust most of us are intelligent enough to know the difference.

RedDeth
07-06-2005, 01:13 AM
your point is valid about large formations not noticing plain to see enemy fighters....

but thats after being in the air for six hours straight trying to stay awake.

if your going to make a point you have to include all factors in a bounce.

yes i know...im introducing logic...sorry for that

Atomic_Marten
07-06-2005, 01:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedDeth:
your point is valid about large formations not noticing plain to see enemy fighters....

but thats after being in the air for six hours straight trying to stay awake. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is crossed my mind also and is completely true IMO.. after so many hours, even if you know that you will encounter them *for sure*, you can not possibly hold high level of awareness all the time during flight.

Badsight.
07-06-2005, 02:00 AM
RL view , you can see for miles & in minute detail

1.1 Mb pic ~~&gt; http://xs36.xs.to/pics/05273/RLview.jpg

of course the thread is about whether its ok to fly easy planes , but yet again Stigler has to bring up what his pet hates are about FB-PF in yet another off-topic thread wreck

neural_dream
07-06-2005, 02:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52 :
This actually works pretty well, but takes some getting used to. In that sim, right now icons display a bit too far and are too large, but at least it's all configurable, so that can be fixed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How can you configure all those things (apart from the switch on/off options in the difficulty settings)? Are there such console commands for e.g. qmb missions and the campaigns or you are talking only about setting up a server? Because the only times i see customised distances and choice of color for the icons it's when i play in a hyperlobby server. Oh i see, there must be some lines to add in the conf.ini.
Well, anyway, instead of letting me speculate, can someone tell me how to customise those things?

btw, parallely to learning the FW i decided to be a good Stuka pilot. It seems that you have more fun in this sim when you do not belong to the masses http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Atomic_Marten
07-06-2005, 03:06 AM
Bring up the console and type help and press enter. You will get list of available commands.

You can modify icons to your liking then.

More info
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/49310655/m/8201.../820105821#820105821 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/49310655/m/820105821/r/820105821#820105821)

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/50910533/m/3811.../r/38110733#38110733 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/50910533/m/38110733/r/38110733#38110733)

this is good info from airwarfare.com http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (http://www.airwarfare.com/guides/config_guide.htm)(conf.ini tweaks + icon management..)

neural_dream
07-06-2005, 03:46 AM
perfect http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif, cheers.

Stigler_9_JG52
07-06-2005, 10:04 AM
Need some Stuka tips? (http://www.naysayers.com/9jg52/9jg52.html)

You'll find some on my old squad site, in the Tactics section. Some of the data is v3, so you might have to modify it a tad, but the basic concepts are there...

Atomic_Marten
07-09-2005, 05:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
You zoom up after a merge and the La *will* catch you. You're assuming it will lose energy doing whatever it does, and it won't. It will be able to do a 180 sharply and still climb right up your keyster. And even if the situation devolves into a series of those "Yeltsin loops" you can't win that either.

You're also dead wrong about the proclivity of "uebernoobs" to go for the HO. Especially if the server allows the WonderWoman view. They habitiually force and press HOs, especially with the wonder Berezin cannon that demolish entire planes with the quickest snapshot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I guess you are right. I tend to idealize things. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just checked some 4.01 climbing odds. Bf-109G-10 should eat LA-7 in climb. So I guess that climbing away from LA-7 is now an valid option after all. Especially if Bf-109 engage LA-7 on 3000m+ alt. The only chance LA-7 have is if the fight take place up to 2000m.
RedDeth is right.. LA-7 ain't the plane it used to be.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif