S! all and have a nice Friday, too.
Now we've heard the whines, seen the threads gone bad, seen the ban hammer swing, etc. but why is it that us ground attack jocks never complain that much - we don't, do we???
Well I don't at any rate![]()
And here's why:
* The overall quality of this sim is indeed great for me. Heck, the AA is dangerous, the ground equipment plentiful, and the action quotient high - you don't believe me just take up an IL-2 or a Stuka and experience it yourself, provided that the map / the mission is good!
* I'm not _that_ interested in whether this or that fighter is a wee bit overmodelled, because they will _still_ always be much faster / more manouverable than me anyway. No - what I rely on instead is them not finding me at all whenever possible. This is not to say that I don't fight back if I get bounced, but it still kind of gets me out of the ultra-competetive loop you fighter guys are in - and that loop, mind you, is precisely what causes many of those modelling wars to start in the first place, isn't it?
* Ain't no way this sim is perfect, nor will it be. Thus there're some credible modelling wars going on, too, but why should I care? I've always felt that the IL-2, f.ex., is modelled pretty well, and corresponds accurately enough with what I've read about it so far.
So in conclusion I'd say that us ground pounders have it pretty good all told IMHOWhat's your opinion?
Honestly... it could be better.
It is the scaling which KILLS immersion for me...
in WW2OL buildings in particular, and trees, and roads are sized well and as such is pretty dang immersive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=op3Q3...elated&search=
This video demonstrates what Im talkin about
Everyone is a human btw, including the AAA
Not perfect by any means.. but good.
Amen, Brother! Bombs away!Originally posted by msalama:
S! all and have a nice Friday, too.
Now we've heard the whines, seen the threads gone bad, seen the ban hammer swing, etc. but why is it that us ground attack jocks never complain that much - we don't, do we???
Well I don't at any rate![]()
And here's why:
* The overall quality of this sim is indeed great for me. Heck, the AA is dangerous, the ground equipment plentiful, and the action quotient high - you don't believe me just take up an IL-2 or a Stuka and experience it yourself, provided that the map / the mission is good!
* I'm not _that_ interested in whether this or that fighter is a wee bit overmodelled, because they will _still_ always be much faster / more manouverable than me anyway. No - what I rely on instead is them not finding me at all whenever possible. This is not to say that I don't fight back if I get bounced, but it still kind of gets me out of the ultra-competetive loop you fighter guys are in - and that loop, mind you, is precisely what causes many of those modelling wars to start in the first place, isn't it?
* Ain't no way this sim is perfect, nor will it be. Thus there're some credible modelling wars going on, too, but why should I care? I've always felt that the IL-2, f.ex., is modelled pretty well, and corresponds accurately enough with what I've read about it so far.
So in conclusion I'd say that us ground pounders have it pretty good all told IMHOWhat's your opinion?
S!
Actually, I disagree. As a dedicated bomber jock I have to say I am pretty dissapointed by the options given to us. The very same bombsight for almost all bombers is a beginning, and goes on over the lack of bomb interval modes towards the lack of any of the the electronical assitances usually available (Radar, the german "Leitstrahl", etc)Originally posted by msalama:
S! all and have a nice Friday, too.
Now we've heard the whines, seen the threads gone bad, seen the ban hammer swing, etc. but why is it that us ground attack jocks never complain that much - we don't, do we???
Well I don't at any rate![]()
And here's why:
* The overall quality of this sim is indeed great for me. Heck, the AA is dangerous, the ground equipment plentiful, and the action quotient high - you don't believe me just take up an IL-2 or a Stuka and experience it yourself, provided that the map / the mission is good!
* I'm not _that_ interested in whether this or that fighter is a wee bit overmodelled, because they will _still_ always be much faster / more manouverable than me anyway. No - what I rely on instead is them not finding me at all whenever possible. This is not to say that I don't fight back if I get bounced, but it still kind of gets me out of the ultra-competetive loop you fighter guys are in - and that loop, mind you, is precisely what causes many of those modelling wars to start in the first place, isn't it?
* Ain't no way this sim is perfect, nor will it be. Thus there're some credible modelling wars going on, too, but why should I care? I've always felt that the IL-2, f.ex., is modelled pretty well, and corresponds accurately enough with what I've read about it so far.
So in conclusion I'd say that us ground pounders have it pretty good all told IMHOWhat's your opinion?
There are also way too few commands for your AI bombers, their behaviour odd at best at times.
I personally feel bombers beeing greatly neglated compared to their fighter cousins and their inclusion only improvised.