Did the Yak-1 really perform like this?

[=LD=4brkfast]

I don't think I'm alone with the conclusion the Yak-1 is over performing and probably the G-2 is greatly under performing. But I am not an expert on the eastern front, but have a general grasp of the air war progression through the years. If the Yak-1 was really performing like this wouldn't the war have ended a couple years earlier? In fact, I have yet to see an advantage the 109 has over the Yak currently.

 

It was the Yak-9 and more to the point, the La series that gave VVS pilots the ability to fight the 109 and 190 on even terms. It's unfortunate, but this seems like a bias and hurts the overall fun of the game for me. When I fly a Yak-1 I don't have any issues or fears fighting any 109 because I know it's flaps(this in particular), stability, climb and energy retention over performing.

 

Without fail, if I draw a Yak into a dive to perform a split S into a barrel roll to create a scissor fight the Yak will(what seems every time) undercut the roll through it's initial dive to get a gun solution. Maybe this has to do with the distinct lack of G-forces to induce a black out? Could be part of it. The G-2 also seems to tip stall and wobble a lot more than the Yak does and is much easier to recover.

 

Right now I would compare the Yak-1 to a A6M or Spitfire with it's ability to sharply turn and cut the angle of any 109 maneuver at any speed. For the sake of fun and playability I hope this is addressed.

 

I rarely see La-5's flying, I see more Lagg-3's than La's in fact, 95% of the VVS fighters are Yak's right now. I have to remind myself this is supposed to be a Yak-1. It sure doesn't seem like it, it wasn't much better than the Yak-7, was it? And was another reason why the Soviets were eager to get their hands on the Lend Lease aircraft and any other Western Allies fighter. They were happy to take P-39's for goodness sake! The Americans couldn't give them away any faster. Take them, please! :D

 

It was a taboo subject for VVS pilots to even mention that the VVS fighters were being out classed by the Luftwaffe fighters, some form of denial I guess. Didn't the VVS have vastly greater numbers too? If the Yak really was this good, wouldn't the air war have been incredibly one sided?

 

This is an example of something that hurts this game overall, we're talking about the Yak-1 for goodness sake! haha! It would be a lot more fun if the Yak-1 and 109G-2 was at least an even fight. The older IL-2 games had it right, the Yak-1 was very much out-classed, why doesn't BoS have it the same way? 

 

I would like the opinion of people within the community that know more about the Eastern front though, this estimation and assessment is based on my general understanding of the air war and fighter progression through the years.

Edited August 29, 2015 by =LD=4brkfast

[StG2_Juuti]

Talking into account the given status quo Yak1 vs 109G2, what will we get at 1944 scenario? Yak9U vs overweighted 109G6 an 190A8. This becomes to LW clay pigeons shooting

[Bullets]

Why are Laggs more favourable than the La5?? Doesn't the La5 turn & climb better and is faster overall?  Also I think everyone knows something is wrong with the Yak's performance and why something has not been done about it is crazy. Reminds me of the FM issues within ROF which the devs took years to fix..  (Alb5 being too slow and camel/dr1 being too quick.) 

[=LD=4brkfast]

Is there a developer or community manager that will please answer these issues?

 

At this point it isn't that I feel I'm being ignored.

 

I AM being ignored. Me and the whole community.

 

Money and a larger player base is being left on the table and nothing has changed in regards to icons and now, there is a clear VVS bias and frankly speaking, silliness with the flight models. The fact a Lagg-3, with tweaks to the radiators, rpm, prop pitch, etc, it can actually out pace a 109 and 190. This is not only unhistorical it's unrealistic and very bad for the game.

 

I'm about on the verge to ask for a refund for my purchase of Battle of Moscow. Instead of making more stuff, why not fix the issues at hand and show the players that the developers and owners actually care about what their customers think?

 

It makes me wonder, will the P-40 also fly like crap? Will it be super over modeled? If I take how the 190 and 109 performs, it does not give me much confidence it will be modeled properly, historically or at least with some historical character to make the dog fighting fun. Not that it even matters, it's too difficult to spot, it's unrealistic, it's no fun.

 

Is there anybody out there? Does this company care about their customers? Where is the community manager? Where is the effort to show somebody is listening and cares?

 

With all of these obvious issues, over performance of some planes and under performance of others - once again, I only need one simple argument.

 

There are no players here. Perhaps I was mistaken a bit, maybe this is a bit of a broken game? After a while, once realizing the Yak-1 is superior to the 109 series in almost every way, I'm beginning to see why more and more, reason after reason, why there are no players.

 

The worst part is there are players here, the few that actually play, that think all is okay. It's not okay. There's potentially 90% or more that are not playing this game.

I need some feedback. I'm beginning to see why the people at simhq are boycotting this game and company. And I don't care about cultural differences, I don't care if this all seems rude or impolite, I'm here because I want to help and want to see the game become something better than it is.

 

And trust me, I know what it's like to be saturated with work within a small flight model/developer team. Dhyran, Stache and I spent no less than 4-8 hours a day, AFTER our real life job, spending over a year with a full time job and stacked with dozens of aircraft to flight model and over time the results of my work began to suffer because of tunnel vision and being burnt out.

 

I need a response from a CM or developer here. I need to know these issues are known and will be addressed - or, not going to be addressed - I need an answer. Ignoring this topic and post is going to drive me away again. I'm a founder of this game, I spent 150 dollars on BoS and another hundred on BoM to help support the game. I need to see that my point of view is valued and understood. I need to hear from somebody that it's known the Yak-1 is unhistorical in it's performance against the 109 and 190, or, that the 109 and 190 are under performing in some aspects.

 

The Yak-1 was not superior to any of the Luftwaffe fighters, if it was, the air war would have been finished in months, not years, it wouldn't have been a Battle of Stalingrad in 1942, it would have been a Battle of Berlin in 1942.

And this isn't arrogance talking - I'm a seasoned sim veteran. What I'm suggesting WILL help. What I'm afraid of is that it might be too late to bring some players in or bring them back. Too much pride and ego on the side of the company.

Please, developers, community managers, the CEO and owner, show me that you guys actually care and that you guys are actual simmers. Because right now? I'm beginning to doubt anybody involved in this project are simmers. The icons wouldn't be the way that they are and the dog fighting would at least be even and fun. All of this tells me that they either don't care or don't know any better.

 

Once again, I don't have permission to edit this post so I'm forced to repost it.

[mb339pan]

I have the impression that mingles a little 'too much the quality of the planes with the' TRAINING OF PILOTS

yak1 was a good plane, as the LA 5 was not a bin, is overperforming in BoS? maybe yes like other Russian planes, but this does not mean that we see a lot of wrong tactics by pilots LW, see FW end bf maneuvering with a yak in tail is ridiculous and stupid

 

with the summer we will see what will happen to the performance of the airplanes

Edited August 30, 2015 by 150GCT_Pan

[Sunde]

I don't think I'm alone with the conclusion the Yak-1 is over performing and probably the G-2 is greatly under performing. But I am not an expert on the eastern front, but have a general grasp of the air war progression through the years. If the Yak-1 was really performing like this wouldn't the war have ended a couple years earlier? In fact, I have yet to see an advantage the 109 has over the Yak currently.

 

If you truely belive what you are writing here, i suggest you go back into the game and fly the yak, the 109 will handely outperform it in a climb -level flight speed - dive. It will not perform as well in a turn and burn fight, however even here it can hold its own against the yak. In a 1v1 the 109 regins supreme, as it should.   

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Devs are on vacation, wait until September 15 at least and perhaps Han or Viktor will answer.

[Sunde]

Actually, even better if your up for it, we can jump onto the duel server, i'd love to show you what a 109 can do versus a yak in a 1v1. 

[Dakpilot]

Not sure that Lagg-3 's outperforming 109's and 190's is a common complaint...

 

Expecting a reply to a very generalised claim in one day over a weekend seems a little demanding LoL

 

suggest reading rule 18 and then start an appropriate thread in FM section, saying that there would have been a Battle of Berlin in 1942 does not really help in identifying issues

 

Was BoS ever $150 and BoM $100? I don't think I ever spent that much in EA for either titles

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bearcat]

 

I need a response from a CM or developer here. I need to know these issues are known and will be addressed - or, not going to be addressed - I need an answer. Ignoring this topic and post is going to drive me away again. I'm a founder of this game, I spent 150 dollars on BoS and another hundred on BoM to help support the game. I need to see that my point of view is valued and understood. I need to hear from somebody that it's known the Yak-1 is unhistorical in it's performance against the 109 and 190, or, that the 109 and 190 are under performing in some aspects.

 

 

There is a way to address this issue and this is not it nor is this the correct forum.. . if you feel that the FMs are wrong then present your facts in the manner prescribed. Consider rule 18 as well. FWIW.. Unless you bought multiple copies I do not see how the $250 foir Bos/BoM adds up...

 

I will move this thread to the FM forum and leave it open but I cannot guarantee a developer will respond since as I said there has been a prescribed method of handling these concerns and this is not it.

 

I have also deleted your other post that was duplicated and added to.

[SYN_Ricky]

 

The Yak-1 was not superior to any of the Luftwaffe fighters, if it was, the air war would have been finished in months, not years, it wouldn't have been a Battle of Stalingrad in 1942, it would have been a Battle of Berlin in 1942.

 

There was much more to the war and Eastern front than Yak-1 vs. 109 single duels....

 

Not saying that there's nothing wrong with the current Yak-1, but unless people start flying and fighting like real pilots back then and in the same conditions, you can't expect to have historical results.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

There so many things wrong with russian planes it's already difficult to start with an issue. Engines can't overrev, Yaks energy rentention + flaps state, Lavotshkins total lack of roll inertia and roll rate, ect...

 

Some tests also confirm that the F-4 is overperforming a good bit and that the G-2 is basicly "spot on" while suffering from facing slightly overperforming competitors. Even though I can't proof that being accurate it basicly was also my impression when just flying the aircraft ingame for the first time (also though G-2 was underperforming before tests showed up).

 

The Yak flap issue is already handled in another topic and probably has been send to devs already.

Edited August 31, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[MK_RED13]

........The Yak flap issue is already handled in another topic and probably has been send to devs already.

... more then 5 topics.. but without developers feedback.. it is not good for this game.. 

[LukeFF]

...and here we go again, into off-topic and developer-bashing land.

[Willy__]

 

 

There so many things wrong with russian planes it's already difficult to start with an issue. Engines can't overrev, Yaks energy rentention + flaps state, Lavotshkins total lack of roll inertia and roll rate, ect...

 

 

+1

[=FI=Rambo]

There so many things wrong with russian planes it's already difficult to start with an issue. Engines can't overrev.

 

 

 

Lagg-3 can definitely over rev its engine 

[Finkeren]

...and here we go again, into off-topic and developer-bashing land.

If you look at the OPs posts it could really only go this way.

 

Not everything he says is wrong, but he's just so over-the-top in his sense of entitlement and ridiculous exaggerations, that it feeds right into the narrative, that BoS/BoM is just horrendously broken/biased/arcade/boring/etc. that's so pervasive in the darker corners of the forum.

 

It's a shame really, because some of the points he raises are valid and have repeatedly been subject to legitimate discussion, but have yet to be properly adressed by the devs.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Lagg-3 can definitely over rev its engine 

If you describe your test conditions I'll check that again. Last time I did only the La-5 showed overreving shortly before Vne. Even 109s overreved earlier than both Klimov powered fighters.

[ROSS_BW_Kuznechik]

Рекомендую  автору темы изучить эти материалы https://cloud.mail.ru/public/6PDf/EBEo2TDbH

 

http://www.litmir.co/br/?b=184003

 

I recommend to the author of a subject to study these materials

Edited September 1, 2015 by =BW=Kuznechik

[=LD=4brkfast]

A squaddie of mine went into some one vs one duels, being so far removed from regular air combat as there aren't really any good sims to fly, we got into it for a while and very quickly, like riding a bike, a lot of it came back. I am a seasoned veteran of air combat and will be happy to demonstrate my ability to anybody here, I never played Il-2 but I am a skilled fighter pilot and have a reasonable grasp of the air war across World War 2.

 

In fact, I challenge anybody here. We alternate. 109F vs Yak, Yak vs 109F, Again and again in a friendly duel, it'll be fun! And maybe after we can write up a proper AA report after, like was the original intention here.

 

And this is what I concluded.

 

In many lead turns on the opening merge the Yak is able to turn very strongly and sharply, sometimes when it would appear it had no business doing so(this is a Yak-1 after all and should feel underpowered especially in a left hand lead turn, pulling high G's and burning a lot of E), 180 degrees or more while in a vertical left hand(against the torque) lead turn and while retaining quite a lot of energy, often enough to hang and get a gun solution with a touch of luck, much to my surprise in fact. And in many of my half split S turns which rolled into a scissor game, basically, turning a potential disadvantage into an even fight, the Yak nearly every time was able to sharply undercut my high roll over with ease where I would otherwise be expecting the Yak to fly through, fighting gravity and an excess amount of energy, without risk of blackout and apparently without risk of compression factors that would or should have this aircraft overshoot enough to make it at least an even fight. This is Yak-1 vs 109F(not the G2, this craft flies a lot heavier), the 109F was among all of the 109's regarded as the purest fighter of them all and if any of them would be able to fight a Yak on even terms in this kind of fight it would be this one. When I was flying the Yak I found I had no issue staying behind my opponent, especially with the use of the flaps, following any maneuver the 109F could do. It was a case of rust why I didn't destroy my opponent every time, and generally speaking, a lack of desire to play the game in it's current state. There is more to this than just flight models though, in the end. They are modeled very nicely, most of them feel really nice and fly great. But some are unhistorical in their aircraft vs aircraft fights.

 

The yak, also, has tremendous flap command, that is to say, popping them give you a lot of low speed handling ability and makes riding the stall edge far easier than expected. Are these not landing flaps? And without risk of getting them jammed. But again, I am not Yak expert, maybe they could use them, it wouldn't have been the only example in the war of a fighter craft using it's deemed 'landing' flaps in combat.

 

If the Yak really performed like this, meanwhile, the La-5 being a touch unstable and have a stronger tendency to tip stall more than the Yak, than the air war would have been over much more quickly than it was. This Yak performs more like a Yak9 would in a aircraft vs aircraft perspective. It's 1942. It's the beginning stages of when the air war became more even, not when the VVS aircraft had a distinct advantage. The 109G2 should still enjoy a distinct performance advantage in acceleration, climb and speed and it simply does not currently.

 

I have a point here. The Yak-1 was not a superior fighter to the 109F or G2.

 

And as far as Dev bashing? On the contrary, I have and retain high hopes, high enough to bother posting here, high enough to purchase BoM, high enough to come back and bother reading the poo pooing I expected to get. I'm trying to get their attention. I want players here.

 

All of this chit chat really means nothing, in the end, the only argument I need is the numbers, or lack of numbers. I'm trying to push the game in a direction that will get more people here. Read what you like into this, frankly, I don't care, I'm a customer like everybody else and it's incredibly frustrating to find that very little has changed and there is an apparent VVS bias. I'm a prop nose guy, I have a thousand dollars or more in a flight setup, I went as far as to move my HD tv in place of my 250 dollar monitor to help spotting, with SweetFX, with the terrain.cfg tweak and anything else I could try to make the game more playable.

 

I'm here for a long haul, I'm not on simhq(but it's clear that a big part of the sim community has not forgiven what has happened in Cliffs of Dover) and I don't care about the politics involved. I just want to see on a Friday evening more than 30 players playing online... 30 players? Do I need to say anything else? Something has to change.

 

Don't mistake anger, entitlement or whatever else for ridiculous frustration. This is truly baffling to me. This is a case of actually seeing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and everybody else along for the trek blatantly ignoring it. It doesn't have to be this way. Despite this game being apparently geared toward a niche within a niche, there could be a lot more players. It could be flying very historically and could have some of these classic fighter duels(La-5/Yak-1 vs 109F/G-2 was a classic!! No different than Spit vs 109, or P51 vs 109, name it! These are classic fighter matchups and just don't feel like it at all) so much fun that I personally would be willing to ignore the questionable spotting because of the fun factor. 

 

And I still am here for the haul, that hasn't changed and isn't going to, Bos/Bom, whatever, still has the potential to be the next great flight sim game that brings in thousands of daily players, to bring in player-made larger number scenarios, weekly snapshots, historical weekly snapshots, anything and anything the community can come up with for fun. I'll still be coming back when the P40 rolls in, or when the autumn and summer maps roll in, I will be here and will hope something positive was taken from these efforts to push the game to get more players. There's more to this than unhistorical performance, after all, there's an entire market of players that, frankly speaking, want to play with simple, helpful icons that will let them fly with squadmates, call sixes and keep tabs on wingmen where otherwise the technology, however pretty, is not going to allow what the human eye is and would be capable of or because the players have no interest in keeping track of pixels that don't stick out from the background as moving objects(where the human eye would be able to spot and keep track of clear as day). The pot of gold is right there.

 

This game has no business rocking empty servers, it's too well made, it's too pretty, it has way too much potential and obviously the developers have put too much passion, effort and skill into it. I want jam packed servers and this will help get it.

Edited September 3, 2015 by =LD=4brkfast

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The sad fact is many players here don't care about historical or physical correctness anymore. Most complain about "Much stronger" german aircraft and defend any benefiting issue of soviet fighters to the bitter end no matter how glaring it appears.

The FM development is also very slow and usually (even if stated otherwise) not comunity feedback friendly. My last report about the Fw 190 tailwheel for example has been denied with a simple "You are wrong ". Strange enought, after some more pressure rising on the forum it was patched a few weeks later, more or less in the direction I intendet it.

 

For this change me and other supporters of the report had to fight bashers and flamers calling us "Luftwhiners" telling us to "stop crying and train more" and later accused devs for "dumbing their sim down".

Unlike in some other game (cough) theres no clear player faction dedicated to FM testing here. The only way to report sth and hopefully get a reply is to PM a dev and wait a good month.

 

Anybody who's ever tried to fight the Yak on energy knows just how fishy this plane is. Had another occasion on Tuesday where a Yak just avoided tip stall during my rope a' dope by deploying full flaps and climbturned with 120km/h while shooting me to bits.

 

It is striking for how long this and many other FM issues have been present ingame. I understand the pressure of time and ressources this team are dealing with but I'm disappointed so little attention has been given to FM improvement yet.

Edited September 3, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[JtD]

It is striking for how long this and many other FM issues have been present ingame. I understand the pressure of time and ressources this team are dealing with but I'm disappointed so little attention has been given to FM improvement yet.

Well, you sell copies by producing a lot of shiny stuff, new aircraft, maps etc. Half a year for a new aircraft, instantly sell 5000 copies 20$ each, and you've got 100k. Work half a year at improving FM's, instantly sell 10 more complete games 100$ each, and you've got 1000$. Easy to see what you want or even have to do. That approach may hurt sales in the long term, but that's really hard to verify.

 

Bottom line, once you've successfully sold a fubar FM, there's little commercial incentive to change it. Sad but true.

[LLv24_Zami]

The sad fact is many players here don't care about historical or physical correctness anymore. Most complain about "Much stronger" german aircraft and defend any benefiting issue of soviet fighters to the bitter end no matter how glaring it appears.

 

I care and I think many others too. I am not an expert on FM matters but I have read these discussions and I agree, there are things that needs to be addressed by devs. I`m glad that community has competent people who test and understand these things much more deeper than me. I can understand the frustration in MP with the Yak flaps for example. But the point is people do care

 

It is very important for the sim like this to have historically correct FM`s. As close as possible at least.

[Dakpilot]

I think 99.9% of people want historically correct FM's, including the Dev's, (which they have stated many times) errors will always crop up and many have been fixed, however the often made claim that this happens because of 'political/national' bias totally detracts from any argument and is almost guaranteed likely to be ignored.

 

If some genuinely believe that the Dev's are lying, and intentionally 'bork' certain aircraft then there is not much point staying with the game, no amount of arguing will change this

 

However if you can assume it is a calculation/oversight/mistake, then decent bug reports will get the issues fixed better than accusations, insults and rhetoric

 

not aimed at anyone just a generalised observation

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Yea Dak keep telling that. I have reports nearly an year old that have not been touched with a stick yet despite me repeating them several times. The hard trouth is that FM work, even if it's only a small issue, is unprofitable and time consuming and thus kept at a min. in most games. There's nothing wrong with reporting trivial bugs like the Ju-87 weird engine reving at take off power or not overreving Klimov engines without tons of materials and calculations worth a bachelor of aeronautic engineering.

 

Likewise not all issues that have not been fixed were reported inadequatly. Infact we had for example several similar performance tests under ICAO settings a few months ago showing up general issues with overall plane performances all together, though not much attention seems to have been given to that.

Edited September 3, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[LukeFF]

 

 

Yea Dak keep telling that. I have reports nearly an year old that have not been touched with a stick yet despite me repeating them several times. The hard trouth is that FM work, even if it's only a small issue, is unprofitable and time consuming and thus kept at a min. in most games. There's nothing wrong with reporting trivial bugs like the Ju-87 weird engine reving at take off power or not overreving Klimov engines without tons of materials and calculations worth a bachelor of aeronautic engineering.

 

You are failing to remember there is a grand total of 2 guys working on the flight modeling for all these planes. You cannot realistically expect these guys to be able to analyze all of these complaints when they are trying to work on programming the flight models for the next batch of 10 planes. Do try to keep that in mind.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I'm talking about bug reports I made back when BoS was Alpha/Beta. I'm not failing at anything here, thx.

 

Anyway just wanted to make clear that a proper bug report does not mean it will be fixed instantly. And yes that's quite a sad truth not everybody likes to accept.

 

I know a couple of other examples I could add to this debate but I fear it's going offtopic already. The last 2 bugs I know of fixed as result of player feedback were the pylon drag on the 190 reported by Hairy and it's tailwheel stiffness reported by me. That was quite some time ago.

[Dakpilot]

And the more factual bug reports that get filed, even about the same topic, the more likely it is that attention will be given, I don't really get what is meant by "Yea Dak Keep telling that" are you advocating that flamewars and insults are a better way of getting results?

 

'hearsay' argument threads more than likely, will not be read by the flight modelling guys

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[DD_Kev83]

You are failing to remember there is a grand total of 2 guys working on the flight modeling for all these planes. You cannot realistically expect these guys to be able to analyze all of these complaints when they are trying to work on programming the flight models for the next batch of 10 planes. Do try to keep that in mind.

why didn't they just make them right in the first place then, we all have access to the internet so all the facts about these plains are easily available, and sorry but to hell with balance i fly a hurricane in clod for ACG's 501st and the 109 out dose it in everything apart from turning and thats how it was so i except that

 

its ovi that the fm is wrong everyone is saying it most of ACG wont touch this game with a barge poll because on how the German planes fly. dcs is supposed to have the most realistic fm going and its by far easier to shot suff down in the 109 and 190 then in this why are the 109 and 190 just a bouncy mess ?? please just sort it out is it really so hard         

[Finkeren]

why didn't they just make them right in the first place then, we all have access to the internet so all the facts about these plains are easily available,

 

That's just about the most arrogant and ignorant statement I've ever read on this forum. Aside from the fact, that all flight sims ever made have had screwy FMs in one area or another (DCS too and ClOD especially), the 'facts' are not 'easily available'. For some planes there are loads of test data pointing in different directions, which do you follow? For other planes we have very limited data or none at all in certain parameters, this goes for the La-5 s.8 where we have no reliable data to build its maneuverability on (which, incedently, is why there's such a huge debate over its roll rate, because the devs partly modelled the La-5 on test data from a later series) Building advanced flight sims is pretty damn hard, especially when you're trying to model planes where no airworthy examples exist and where there's insufficient test data. There is no way you can expect a developer to 'just make it right the first time'.

 

 

and sorry but to hell with balance i fly a hurricane in clod for ACG's 501st and the 109 out dose it in everything apart from turning and thats how it was so i except that

 

I agree. Historical accuracy takes priority over game balance, which is why I think the German teams on expert servers should be limited to 2/3 the number of players on the VVS side to simulate realistic numbers.

 

 

its ovi that the fm is wrong everyone is saying it most of ACG wont touch this game with a barge poll because on how the German planes fly.

 

Yep, trust those guys to have an unbiased oppinion

 

 

 dcs is supposed to have the most realistic fm going and its by far easier to shot suff down in the 109 and 190 then in this why are the 109 and 190 just a bouncy mess ??

 

DCS models are genrally well made and obviously far more detailed, but if you ask the oppinion of many of the guys here who fly both sims (and those who are pilots in real life) I think you'll find, that a majority of them thinks that BoS has a superior physics engine and an overall more realistic portrayal of flight. As for DCS being 'easier': Who sold you the idea, that WW2 air combat was going to be easy? If you find the German birds in BoS to be 'too bouncy', I suggest you train a little harder, because it sounds like you're just rough handling the aircraft. I can shoot way more accurate in the German fighters than I can in the Soviet ones, even though I fly VVS most of the time, because the German flighters are soooo damn smooth in their flying (as they should be).

 

 please just sort it out is it really so hard         

 

If you think this is easy and simple to do, I suggest you go build your own advanced combat flight sim to show us all how it's done. Until then, you might want to show just a little appreciation for the fact, that just a couple of guys have done all the physics work in BoS in just a couple of years.

[DD_Kev83]

i am not the only person saying it thou almost everyone is apart from a small number of die hard players JG4_Karaya said its like flying in jelly instead of air  

[coconut]

I think it's worth pointing out that finding inaccuracies in the output of the model is relatively easy: you simply compare the performance of the plane in the game with the performance you think it should have. Now, when you find something is not right, how do you fix it? The input to the model consist of a number of curves and coefficients that go through complex calculations. Reversing these complex calculations to find the value of parameters that will give you the desired effect is not easy.

 

I have some experience designing a go-kart simulator (a hobby software project), and I was happy enough to settle for "fun to drive, feels like a go-kart". Whenever you change a parameter to correct something that's wrong, chances are you will also break 10 things that you did not intend to change.

asking a bit much from the devs, who must be pretty busy building new flight models for the upcoming BOM planes.

[Finkeren]

i am not the only person saying it thou almost everyone is apart from a small number of die hard players JG4_Karaya said its like flying in jelly instead of air  

'Almost everyone'? Ehm... no.

 

I know there are some detractors from this sim (as there are from any sim out there) as well as die-hard fans, who will defend the sim against all reason (don't count me among them, I criticise BoS/BoM for a lot of things)

 

In the case of BoS criticism has mainly come from a certain group of very experienced simmers, most of which are well respected and rational people (I have a lot of respect for Chuck, Ze_Hairy and as you mentioned Karaya) I respect their input and hope they'll continue to criticise to help make the sim better.

 

What I don't have respect for are people whining about a bias that doesn't exist or accuse the devs for being lazy/incompetent/malicious because their favoured aircraft doesn't live up to expectations.

[Sokol1]

...and probably the G-2 is greatly under performing.

 

 

 

 

If want check (again):

 

"So, to customize the LTH Messers(chimit) used the following documents:

 

F4

- Data sheet of the flown performances of the Bf 109 F-4s, Messerschmitt, 29.11.1941.

- Data sheet of the calculated performances of the Bf 109 F-4s, Messerschmitt, 01.07.1942.

 

G2

- Rechlin E`Stelle Erprobungsnummer 1586 1943.

- Research Institute of the Air Force Test Report trophy aircraft Me-109 G2 №13903 and №14513, 25.06.1943.

Edited September 5, 2015 by Sokol1

[DD_Kev83]

'Almost everyone'? Ehm... no.

 

I know there are some detractors from this sim (as there are from any sim out there) as well as die-hard fans, who will defend the sim against all reason (don't count me among them, I criticise BoS/BoM for a lot of things)

 

In the case of BoS criticism has mainly come from a certain group of very experienced simmers, most of which are well respected and rational people (I have a lot of respect for Chuck, Ze_Hairy and as you mentioned Karaya) I respect their input and hope they'll continue to criticise to help make the sim better.

 

What I don't have respect for are people whining about a bias that doesn't exist or accuse the devs for being lazy/incompetent/malicious because their favoured aircraft doesn't live up to expectations.

i havent accused the devs of anything and yes almost every one look at the steam reviews the meta critic reviews just talk to the simmer community a lot of people are saying the same things about this game 

[Finkeren]

i havent accused the devs of anything and yes almost every one look at the steam reviews the meta critic reviews just talk to the simmer community a lot of people are saying the same things about this game 

 

I'll excuse you for propably not knowing the history of why those reviews exist. Suffice to say, most of them were the result of a concious effort to trash the sim right around the time it was released officially. There were a lot of people (myself included) who were seriously disappointed by the campaign system, and it kinda set off an avalance of negativity, which the sim still struggles with. Some of this was actually of the devs own doing, at the time they did not handle their PR well. Still, you should definately not take the Steam and Metacritic reviews as an indication of the overall quality of the sim.

 

As for the 'simmer community', what is that anyway? I see loads of people praising BoS on social media, SimHQ, here and other places, and I see it trashed to no end on the ATAG forum and the Steam community (but really, the Steam Commmunity consists mostly of negativity regardless of which game we're talking about, that's just how Steam works)

Edited September 5, 2015 by Finkeren

[DD_Kev83]

i want to love BOS i am trying really hard but it dose deserve the hate it gets for the campaign system and the hole flaps thing and some matey said there's no ai in mp (yes i havent even played mp yet waiting to join a group as think flying in mp on my own is stupid) plus the hole vr thing as well the unlock thing and i am guessing these things aren't to hard to change so i dont get why they haven't been sorted thats all 

[Finkeren]

i want to love BOS i am trying really hard but it dose deserve the hate it gets for the campaign system and the hole flaps thing and some matey said there's no ai in mp (yes i havent even played mp yet waiting to join a group as think flying in mp on my own is stupid) plus the hole vr thing as well the unlock thing and i am guessing these things aren't to hard to change so i dont get why they haven't been sorted thats all

That's a whole lot of different topics you bring up, which has nothing to do with one another, and not all of which is something that needs to be 'sorted out'. Some like the campaign system and the unlocks are design choices, which you can agree with or not (I personally don't really like either, though I've warmed a bit to the campaign) but it's not something that needs 'fixing' cause it's not broken.

 

The reason there is a severe limit on AI in MP is that BoS actually uses the full FM for AI planes. This makes AI more interesting and fun to fly against (and is infinitely better than the horrible AI in for instance ClOD) but this advanced AI is very demanding on the processor which is why it's so hard to put a lot of AI on a server.

 

The flaps-down issue with the Yak is real. It has been well documented and should definately get fixed in the future, though as I said, it's not as straightforward and easy as you might think.

 

As for VR support there's a long story behind why the devs gave up on OR. I advice you to do a forum search and find Jasons explanation for why they gave up on it. It might give you a different perspective.

[Dakpilot]

I would think that the amount of time it took for CloD to be created with DX10 and the issues Maddox had updating from DX9 and the many years that DCS has had to wait for an update to DX11 give a hint at how easy it is....

 

At the end of the day it is just a matter of time and money, and dev time = money, something that WWII sims are short of especially after the recent history

 

In a perfect world I am sure 1CGS would have loved to have created BoS in DX11/12,  commercial realities are different

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[DD_Kev83]

well lets hope they do it some time in the future then i may be one of only a small amount of people but i dont mind paying for it i have spent 500 on star citizen and a good 300 on dcs so i dont see why things cant be funded by us but i would want to see vr support being it a up grade to dx 11 or something else i am not going to stop flying any time soon and i want to see BoS succeed    

Edited September 5, 2015 by SONSXVISONofHORUS