PDA

View Full Version : Level of realism in IL-2



Mike8686
06-28-2004, 01:19 AM
Hey guys, I'm considering purchasing this sim however I thought it wise to post this first. How realistic is this flight sim, more specifically, the flight dynamics. Usually when I purchase a flight sim I end up upset at the lack of realism in the flight dynamics, especially when they make the process of flying each aircraft almost the same, does this sim bring out the advantages and diadvantages of each aircrafts flight model, (example: Does the Me-109 have horrible turning radius, but beautiful climbing power and momentum retainment, do the early spitfires have excellent turning but bad momentum retainment and climbing power, etc.

Mike8686
06-28-2004, 01:19 AM
Hey guys, I'm considering purchasing this sim however I thought it wise to post this first. How realistic is this flight sim, more specifically, the flight dynamics. Usually when I purchase a flight sim I end up upset at the lack of realism in the flight dynamics, especially when they make the process of flying each aircraft almost the same, does this sim bring out the advantages and diadvantages of each aircrafts flight model, (example: Does the Me-109 have horrible turning radius, but beautiful climbing power and momentum retainment, do the early spitfires have excellent turning but bad momentum retainment and climbing power, etc.

Fehler
06-28-2004, 01:28 AM
You will love the sim, I promise. Hands down, the best out there.

The flight model seems spot on in most cases. I assure you that graphically, none can touch it.

If the sim has anyhting to be desired it is the sound, particularly engine sounds. But with everything else going on, you wont notice that too much.

It is worth the cash, I promise you.

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/FehlerSig.gif
http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/9JG54.html

WTE_Galway
06-28-2004, 01:50 AM
the sim is slightly more arcady now than it use to be - basically due to popular demand

things like incipient spins are much rarer and inverted flat spins are very rare compared to the first game

but its still vastly more realistic than cfs3

its the only sim that actually improved my real time landings rather than made them worse for example

S 8
06-28-2004, 02:04 AM
Did the 109 really have "horrible" turning radius?.

WWMaxGunz
06-28-2004, 02:17 AM
Mike, it depends on who you talk to and what you expect.
Perfect, it is not. There is one person who posts and visited my squads' forum
who is from a competition aerobatics team. He finds the sim worth flying where
before none were.
You can't ride out a stall without a wing dipping at least one patch back. For
a combat sim that is not a big deal but for some people, the world ended for a
whole day or two at least. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
All the performance numbers don't match to less than 5%. A serious crime? To
tell the truth, it seems as if some things get worse as those numbers or
comparative performances are forced in the sim, or it is changed because too
many players can't do what they read could be done.
But if you are looking for combat, flight dynamics, gunnery and damage as pure
matters of approach to realism then it don't get better than this, nothing else
is really close. It's just not as good as real in every way. You want to fly a
sim, any sim, you are already departed from and less than real. Combat sims are
that much more removed as they have to do much more than a sim with flying only.
On that standard, this sim rates very high indeed.


Neal

Maj_Death
06-28-2004, 02:18 AM
Compaired to a Spit or Yak yes but not compaired to the heavier American stuff (or heavier british stuff for that matter). And yes this sim is worth getting. It certainly isn't a hardcore sim but it is reasonably realistic. It is by far the most realistic WW2 sim availible at the moment but it is also the only WW2 sim availible at the moment. Games such as CFS3 are so unrealistic that calling them sims is a bit of an insult to real flight sims.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, I/JG1_Death at HL

I build COOPs and DF maps. If you would like some of them you can get them atmy COOP page (http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm)

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VWF and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

BennyMoore
06-28-2004, 03:21 AM
And there's your answer. It's not that realistic in many aspects, and it is very realistic in others, but the fact remains that it is the only simulator that makes a good attempt at being realistic.

Oh, and I laugh at the wenches who play on ***** mode and still want to be called men.

SeaFireLIV
06-28-2004, 03:48 AM
Mike8686

You`re probably getting a good idea of the sim`s realism level. To me it`s the most realistic, but I`m not an aeronautical engineer, I`ve never piloted a civilian aircraft let alone a combat one so I just do not really know.

I`ve seen some whine bitterly about the aircraft`s stalling slightly wrong, or not having a high enough ceiling, G tolerences, or not having enough torque, even propeller prop spin not looking exactly correct!

All I can say is look at the level of complaints, when they come, are usually of a higher quality and somewhat technical. Surely that must mean something of the level of realism compared to lower quality flight sims...

But one thing for sure, you can`t just grab a plane and throw it around the sky. They take time and skill to fly at their best.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Yakgirlgo.jpg
Time to Escape!

Want to see more? go here: http://seafire.dreyermachine.com/
(Fantasy sections for mature viewers only).

LW_lcarp
06-28-2004, 04:14 AM
Its a fun game with its good point and bad

"If winning isnt everything why do they keep score"
Vince Lombardi

LeadSpitter_
06-28-2004, 04:26 AM
its the best wwii combat flight sim out there but by no means realistic, planes fishflop around like cfs2 stalls only we can instantly recover at any time in less then a second better then todays aerobatic aircraft that are 800hp and 1200lbs with huge control surfaces. We dont have realistic dive accelaration among alot of other things i dont care to mention.


check out FB and AEP, you can buy them both in FB gold. Also if you enjoy offline play more then online play check out the BOE battle over europe addon which is not bad. All the rest dont even bother with

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

Mike8686
06-28-2004, 07:38 AM
Thanks guys, I think I've pretty much got an idea of what the realism level in the game is like, and I believe its enough for me, I'll likely be getting it today

Bearcat99
06-28-2004, 09:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
its the best wwii combat flight sim out there but by no means realistic, planes fishflop around like cfs2 stalls only we can instantly recover at any time in less then a second better then todays aerobatic aircraft that are 800hp and 1200lbs with huge control surfaces. We dont have realistic dive accelaration among alot of other things i dont care to mention.
check out FB and AEP, you can buy them both in FB gold. Also if you enjoy offline play more then online play check out the BOE battle over europe addon which is not bad. All the rest dont even bother with
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SACRELEDGE!!!!!! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif
To mention Fb in a similar context to any CFS product is BS. This sim isnt perfect.. but you know what Mike..... it is as real as it gets on a desktop computer.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | Sturmovik Essentials (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=51910959) | MUDMOVERS (http://magnum-pc.netfirms.com/mudmovers/index.htm)

IMMERSION BABY!!

[This message was edited by Bearcat99 on Mon June 28 2004 at 08:52 AM.]

horseback
06-28-2004, 10:05 AM
You will have to learn to fly each aircraft in the the complex engine management format. A lot of people assume that they 'know' how a given aircraft would fly, when they forget that it was mostly flown successfully at certain altitudes and speeds.

That said, once you get over the difficulties of mastering your aircraft, it's a hoot.

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

F19_Ob
06-28-2004, 10:11 AM
I'll stick with this sim until something more realistic in ww2 style comes along....Ok.... I guess I'll have to wait then.

Chuck_Older
06-28-2004, 10:32 AM
Lead's always a little upfront about FB's shortcomings http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And somebody should be. It's great, but how can we expect improvements if we don't mention what needs improvement?

I don't think anyone mentioned it, but for even more realism, there are fantastic skins for planes out there, try www.il2skins.com (http://www.il2skins.com) and take a look at what some of the skinners are doing. Just stunning work, and not just for planes, for pilots and awards, too.

*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash

XyZspineZyX
06-28-2004, 11:00 AM
I'd say it's a fun GAME that gives certain "hints" that it might be realistic.

Graphically, you won't find anything better anywhere. That being said, some of the problems with the graphics system make flying it highly frustrating (the fact that flying no-icon, in an attempt to get higher realism, means you sometimes can't see ******, when you should be able to).

The physics just miss the mark. Planes pivot on their center of gravity during turns, stalls and spins are just done wrong, certain planes benefit from nearly inexhaustible energy reserves, the AI is "allowed to cheat" (for lack of any clearer explanation), and the flight modeling gets worse the further up you go.

It can be fun to play on any given day, but the gaping holes in the system, and the lack of attention to detail where it really counts is frustrating. The final nail in the coffin for a serious, historically minded player is the lack of structure, so that, outside of a few online wars, it's hard to find any kind of action that even remotely resembles WWII.

Still, I'd say it is worth the money you'd pay for it. There are worse sims you could get for the same price.

LeadSpitter_
06-28-2004, 11:12 AM
DOnt get me wrong I really enjoy the game, but there are some basics of flight that are not there. A very important one missing is accurate dive accelaration in this game. Reduced opposite roll coefficient. But you guys been here so long you know this already.

cfs3 has many great things this sim doesnt, so does janes wwii fighters and EAW and il2fb has alot of great things the others dont have.

I dont want to start any flame wars or nothing, but just want to say no other sim try to stop online cheating like il2fb. For that alone makes this game better then the rest.

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

crazyivan1970
06-28-2004, 11:18 AM
don`t mind Leadspitter, he just can`t stand being shot down http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

DeBaer.534
06-28-2004, 11:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:

the fact that flying no-icon, in an attempt to get higher realism, means you sometimes can't see ******, when you should be able to).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess its your problem. I fly icon-off always, and have no problems in identifying the aircraft around me. no problem in spotting them (only if they fly over a forest and/or in clouds, but thats realistic).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stiglr:

the AI is "allowed to cheat" (for lack of any clearer explanation)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

because your pc couldnt handle the AI if it has to fly with full physics.

Its a great game, and a good compromise between realism and fun.
probably the most realistic ww2 game out there.

If it was sim only it would be no fun at all. there was a reason for the long training period of fighter pilots...

LeadSpitter_
06-28-2004, 11:41 AM
True Ivan http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, it happens to you so often your use to it whhooo

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

HH Quazi
06-28-2004, 12:08 PM
Go ahead and get it. Get FB gold. But be warned! It is addicting. And pretty soon, you'll be asking what it takes to make it run with super high frame rates. Unless you already have the top of the line vid card. I run it with a GeForce4 420MX for along time and got smooth gameplay. But since then, I've been spoiled by perfect landscape settings and have spent several hundred $ for a 9800XT. I guess it is a personal preference thing. Also, 512MB ram runs it ok, although you will still be having to access the page file. I suggest at least 768MB memory to run smooth. Again, I started playing this sim with 256MB ram and got by decently, but my computer had to be kept up and cleaned out. But you will not be disappointed with the sim as a whole. It's the best out there imho.

http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/nightschpanker/QuasiPOWsmall.jpg
Undercover as a Sgt.

Groundbait
06-28-2004, 02:06 PM
I've got a stack of hardly used sims on my shelf but this one will lose u your girlfriend and mates. Guaranteed http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

"To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child" - Cicero

BennyMoore
06-28-2004, 09:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DeBaer.534:
I guess its your problem. I fly icon-off always, and have no problems in identifying the aircraft around me. no problem in spotting them (only if they fly over a forest and/or in clouds, but thats realistic).

If it was sim only it would be no fun at all. there was a reason for the long training period of fighter pilots...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not true. If it was exactly like a real dogfight, it would have many times the fun level of this game or any other out there. The reason that there were long training periods for pilots in real life is that in real life, there is no refly button. In a game, however, we learn as we die, and even learn by dying.

Also, have you ever flown an aircraft in real life and tried comparing real life vision to IL-2 vision? It's a plain and simple fact; you see a lot better in real life. Don't make me get out the anatomy books to prove it. Anyway, it'd take something drastic to get me to believe something contrary to what I've seen with my own eyes.

For an example, in real life I can pick out individual cars from the air at five thousand feet. In IL-2 (and any flight simulator, due to technology limitations), vehicles don't even show up on your screen at that distance or altitude.

WTE_Galway
06-28-2004, 10:11 PM
As far as aircraft ID goes .. i read somewhere a RAF report from WWII that specified untrained observers could reliably identify aircraft up to 400 yards and trained and experienced observers could reliably identify aircraft up to 700 yards ..

in real life i have been in circuit in a 172 and totally lost track of a DH Dash-8, an aircraft the size of a he-111 at least, on a clear day and didnt get visual on him again until he touched down and was clearing the runway

tttiger
06-28-2004, 11:12 PM
Mike8686,

I'd say this is definitely your game.

You're already an ace troller (trollist?) and you haven't even bought the software yet http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ttt

"I want the one that kills the best with the least amount of risk to me"

-- Chuck Yeager describing "The Best Airplane."

BennyMoore
06-29-2004, 10:25 PM
That's "identify," not "locate." Identifying something means being able to tell what it is, not just that it's there. Anyone can see a Spitfire from a mile away, but no one would be able to tell what it was. An experienced observer would be able to tell that it was a Spitfire at seven hundred yards, though.

Anyway, regardless of which of us is correct on that point, you are right about aircraft being sort of random in their visibility in real life - I think that much of this has to do with atmosphere effect or something, as well as the sun's reflection. I experience the same thing that you did at every air show I go to. However, every time I've spotted an aircraft against the ground in real life, it has been insanely easy to keep track of it. Unlike aircraft in the game, real life aircraft are actually easier to see against the ground than against the sky.

But the fact is that in IL-2 (and all computer games), five hundred planes flying in box formation would not show up on the monitor at a certain distance because of graphical limitations, even though at the same distance in real life, you couldn't possibly miss them as a mass even if you couldn't see the individual planes. Remember what I said about picking out cars? That's what I mean; it's not that they are rendered in the game so that they are impossible to see, it's that they are not rendered at all at that distance. So if the ground in IL-2 were covered in bright red cars, you would not see any red until you descended to a certain altitude. Then you would start to notice that the ground seems to be colored bright red today.

Again, this isn't a gripe about IL-2; all games have this problem because of hardware limitations. But, full realism snobs say that their way is the most realistic way. It's not. While padlock and externals aren't really realistic (actually, internal padlock is), they do make up for the huge disadvantage that I have described in this post, in addition to the disadvantage of not being able to move your head naturally like you can in real life and the disadvantage of not being able to move your head at all aside from turning it (you know, you can't move it sideways or forwards and backwards as opposed to turning it).