Oh goodness! You have our complete sympathy. I guess you have no choice at at - you must remove IL2-PF from your hard drive at once and stop flying it. That means you'll be leaving these forums as well.Originally posted by MD_Smoky:
4.02 is the worst patch that came out since the original IL-2... **** Oleg for turning my beloved porsche (bf109) into a friggin Yugo..
We'll miss you.![]()
This is getting close to the heart of the matter.Originally posted by ronnied316:
I completely agree that the whining is over the top and is absolutely pointless; as is the pseudo-cussing out of Oleg. That being said, everytime a new patch comes out and someone has any questions (whether they're trolling or not) that person is told that he/she will "have to re-learn how to fly their favorite plane". That's my only gripe with the patches. I finally got a grip on 4.02 last night, but I'd like to be able to apply a patch and not have to re-learn how to fly a certain plane.
/mini-rant![]()
Yes, the lashing out and bad language of the original post author is over the top. But, it doesn't mean you can't complain about the FM and actually have a point.
If the FM were any good, "patches" to it would not whipsaw the capabilities of planes around like it does in this sim. No other sim EVER has had such wild swings in changes to the flight, damage and other model characteristics. The net effect: it all seems like one wild-a** guess to me. How can you feel there's any accuracy, real, imagined or even desired, when the delta is so wide between versions? Nobody's come up with an answer for that one.
I mean, come ON: one of the biggest fanbois on this website, Tagert, who still bleats on and on about "Got Track?â®" to deflect any criticism of the modeling, did his roll tests and found, surprise, surprise: almost all planes are widely off (compared to NACA data) in roll, both at the low- and high-speed ends of the envelope; in most cases off by between 10% and 20%!!!. And that's just ONE facet of the model. Many of us have always suspected that energy retention and acceleration have been big problem areas too, both of which have dramatic effects on any matchup. With all due respect to Tagert's considerable efforts to quantify all this stuff, you don't need to go that far to intuit that this modeling isn't even CLOSE. (You do need Tagert-style testing to be more exact and perhaps find out by how much 1c has screwed the pooch this time).