Jump to content

[=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther

Members
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

91 Excellent

About [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Shenzhen, China
  • Interests
    Strategy and Historical Realism or immersion type games.I generally do not play first person games, but i do enjoy the challenge of playing as par of a team in MP. I consider myself a "historian" as I love to research history. I have strong fascination in culture and anthropology as well.

Recent Profile Visitors

736 profile views
  1. Flying into the Sunset Cockpit view at Dusk You should see the other guy 109 in the clouds Casual Flying Fokker Dr.1 If you do not own Flying Circus, then you are fool. These planes are a dream to fly.
  2. I don't think you are too far off. I find that "German" pilots tend to fly the fighters and not the attack or Bomber types of planes, but a topic for another thread. D-5 would be a fine addition.
  3. First, I appreciate the effort put into the career mode, but it kills the immersion when you have to go through all sorts of hoops to get the proper skins for whatever squadron you decide to join. If you are going to provide skins per aircraft it makes to at least have a generic skin for example, III./JG 52. The history lesson that comes with the skins in game is cute, but using them is like wearing another man's clothes, especially with the kill markings I feel like those fake veteran guys. Plus why so hard to change the skins for the squadrons. They already generic why make it so easy to change yours and not the squadron.
  4. I am not sure what the first sentence proves other than the rule limiting what aircraft you can fly is a farce. I supposed anyone can fly around in circles until it is unlock. Then again, I do not have a problem with limiting aircraft as i stated numerous times. Whether you do a historical based campaign or a historical campaign, it "should" be based on relative numbers available. I think it is extreme to have anyone start at "0." Unless, you are a fighter and you want to fly a ground attacker. There, common sense should dictate that you may not have access(really not at all if you identify yourself as a fighter pilot). If the 262 is an unbeatable aircraft then the developers did something wrong. It wasn't unbeatable in real life. I mean in real life a good pilot is going to do well in any aircraft. Also, I stated numerous times the number of possible 262 should be based on relative numbers. Assuming equal numbers, then this is based on 40. How many K4s, G14s, G6s, A8s, D9s etc were flown relative to the number of 262s. If you have just 6 on the server that would represent 15%. I do not have the time nor the patience at this time to research the total number of planes the Luftwaffe operated during the deployment of the Me 262 but I would be surprise if that number was greater than 15%. I was responding to what you had written to me. If I want to elaborate on my own point of view I am free to do so. This is a discussion board, not a debate society. So, relax and continue producing great content on your server. I assure you we all appreciate your time and effort.
  5. 1. I never made any such claim. I said JG 77 used G6 and K4s not G14. Since we were discussing the aircraft used by JG 77 I am not sure why you would go off on that tangent 2. PzG reenact four units; I./KG 51, II./ZG76 & NJG 3, II./JG 26, and III./JG 77. According tot he inventory, II./ JG 26 was flying 190 A-8 and then the 190 D-9 by 1945. III.JG 77 was flying the G-6 and then the K-4. They did have G-14 in their inventory, but it was 6 or less at any one time. Gruppe I was flying the G-14, but they also did not fly the K-4. 3. No clue what you are saying here. 4. I thought you were referring to the units under discussion. it is the only thing relevant to the discussion. 5. As I attemted to explain to you there are limits to what you can do based on the models provided by the game. This is why I illustrated the ACW reenactments. My unit was based in New Orleans, In my time with the unit, we never reenacted an actual battle that the WA 5th Co. was present. (For the ACW people here it is sometimes referred to as Slocomb's Battery). Plus, I explain how we used cannons not used by the unit. We had a wide variety of cannons, 6lb, 12lbs, a heavy bronze original 12 lb, a Weir cannon, and a 3inch etc... Anyway, when specific variants are not available, you take the next best most accurate aircraft. 6. This is a very poor summary of what I stated. If you are going to reenact the battle, then your chief concern is historical accuracy. Game play balance isn't it. If you are creating a historical fiction battle, then by all means create a balance game play. You can't create a specific battle and then change all of the variable so that it s no longer the battle and then still call it the same battle. It is one or the other. It cannot be both. I do not have a problem with a lopsided historical battle. I will still find it fun to fight against the odds to see if we could be more successful then the pilots in history. I am also perfectly fine playing a historical fiction scenario that balance and even. Both have their own attractive qualities. I don't know if this is more clear than the last time. it is no where as harsh as you making out to be in the last quote. On a side note, it would be an interesting experiment to take all of the recognized best pilots of the sim, put them on the German side and everyone else as allies and see if the German's could have pulled it of if the cards were stack in their favor as far as pilot quality/ skill is concern.
  6. This is the source of my information: https://www.ww2.dk/ Are the figures you quoting for group III or the entire wing. Group I according to my link flew the G-14s. I have no idea what you mean by "bias attitude." My focus is on historical immersion. I also come from a former American Civil War Reenactor. In that group we didn't have the exact same cannon types as the actual Washington Artillery 5th Co. Nor did we actually renacted the exact same battles. In fact, most location were only chosen because a minor skirmish took place there if any at all. . According to the inventory within the link provided, I am not wrong. it would be nice if you would have actually provided some source. i thik it is clear i would like to have as accurate information as possible. I think anyone within my squadron would attest my devotion to historical immersion. I do not understand your animosity in your last paragraph. It appears to be rant about something I do not have any knowledge of. For example, what do you mean by my type?I think I made it clear I am fine with flying the G-6 over the G-14. Is the G-6 better than the G-14? I have not read that is the case, but if so, please provide a link to that discussion. I would be interested reading the arguments. Relative to other planes, the 262 were limited in history. With limited number of pilots i doubt there will be a great deal of 262s available. More to your point. The game has a number of features from quick missions and mission editor where you can train yourself to combat the 262. If you know there are 262s on a server and you did not train yourself to combat the 262 then it is your own fault if you gt shot down by one. The whole point of the simulator is to put yourself in the cockpit of a WWII pilot. it is pretty inconsistent to play this sort of game and then whine when it is too real. Historically 262s were limited in number, so in game they should be relatively limited. To artificially reduce them because people do not want to learn to combat them like the real pilots did, then that would be silly given the nature of the game.
  7. Hey, I use the mouse to look around and I find it very convenient to use the mouse wheel for the throttle. However, the problem I have is that I cannot figure out how to get the throttle to go up with smaller increments. It goes for example from 60% to like 66% or 63% to 68% and the next jump is 77 or 75%. This is one click on the mouse wheel. I do not expect a 1% increase, but something smaller, like 2-5% would be better. I tried adjusting the mouse wheel in both windows (going both per page and by line 1- to max) and in sensitivity settings in game, but there wasn't any change in the incremental increase/decrease. I am guessing there is some variable somewhere, but I couldn't find one and I am not changing anything unless I know what it is first.
  8. I do not get the incessant whining about the 262. Allied pilots learn how to deal with the 262 virtual pilots with limitless life and ability to learn from death can certainly do the same. As said, simply jumping into the 262 won't make you invincible. One day i actually listen to a group of guys talking about it. All experience pilots from what i can tell, and only one of the actually flew it and not with huge confidence either. @69th_Mobile_BBQ who wouldn't want to be a tart. They are delicious. And I am very sweet.
  9. You must think I fell off the turnip truck this morning? Is the history lesson for my benefit (I would hope not) or others. Moreover, the most common plane in the inventory was the G-6, not the G-14 according to the inventory. Group I did, however fly the G-14 instead of the K-4. Anyway, the date given is for the second map. When was the offensive? if prior to the use of the K-4, then we will need access to the G-6. I personally only just tarted flying the K-4, since my original unit did not fly the K-4. JG 77 happened to fly it. Regardless of the plane once you are comfortable it doesn't matter. If you think the ratio argument bothers me, it doesn't. As I said, it is what it is. If you want to reenact an historical encounter, it is farce to change the ratio. Sorry, that just what it is. The issue is slightly different if you creating a fictional battle within a historical context. There, you can play a little round, but you shouldn't manipulate the factors to the point is becomes gamy or gimmicky. Anyway there is a great deal more latitude in that scenario Stating that a more skilled pilot needs balance to defeat a less skilled pilot is silly.
  10. I don't know the image shows 0/1 which mean I have zero out of 1 aircraft. m I reading it wrong then. I have 1 K-4. if so, what does the "zero" mean. it is either historical or gamy or ahistorical. Pilots in real life had to deal with the realities of different aircraft. In some cases, they had inferior aircraft. But as so many veteran pilots have said, it is the pilot that matters. As Chuck Yaeger said, "when I first saw a jet, I shot it down. MP servers need to stop pandering to such attitude. Like I tell my own pilot who would rather fly "x" plane, it is what they flew, they dealt with it, and so should you. if this was WOL I wouldn't care, but TAW goes out of its way to be realistic why turn gimmicky now. The presence of the 262 should be the same ratio as that in history. otherwise, TAW is becoming gamey. Balance is a "warcry" of gamers not historical realist. (then is when the gamers will come in about what isn't realistic about the game mechanic red herring argument). You control what you can control. Back to the K-4. There isn't that much of a difference between the K-4 and the G-14.Some would argue that the G-14 is better. In fact, there are pilots in my squadron who would rather fly the G-14, than the K-4. Moreover, the D-9 is considered better than both, and yet that is flyable and the K-4 isn't.
  11. My unit represents for different units. KG 51, ZG 76, JG 26 and JG 77. JG 77 flew the 109 K-4 bu for some reason it is not allowable to fly for "reasons." I noticed the 190 D-9 is, which is fine for JG 26. The approach of the unit is historical. We fly the planes flown at the time of the server regardless if it "considered" better or worse.
  12. I supposed so. In "our flight school, Taxi, take off and and landing is all on the same level. Basic Flight is just turning the aircraft. We do not have anything of that sort. It is not worth removing or moving. If you can''t pass one, then you are still on level one. Generally, when I first fly a plane, I start with it in the air to get a general feel for how it moves. It is after this, that I might either take off and land or I might taxi around the airfield. I personally find taxiing to give you a better since of how to control the plane with the rudder, so when you take off you get a much better feel for how much input. The next step and Formation, engine management and navigation. The Bomber is also basic gunnery skills. Finally we have BFM or BCM. whatever you want to call it. The ground attack is a bonus. Successfully fighting a dogfight would suggest at least basic knowledge and skill. In the end, it is to each hos own. Thanks to @Utopioneer we have a great scheme and as a Modder of Total War games (a a little of Paradox) he piqued my interest in playing with the Mission Editor.
  13. Yeah, I get why you did it that way, but the order I am using is consistent with our flight school set up.
  14. Well, originally, I change the numbering for each of the files, but I also change the number in Info Locale files. There was a number the corresponded the order. I loaded the game up and nothing changed. So, I made a copy of the file, renamed it and then rename it in the info file. Viola! it worked. My order is 1 - Basic Flight 2 - Take off 3 - Landing 4 - Taxi 5 - Formation 6 - Bomber Attack 7 - Ground Attack 8 - Dogfight I also made a G6 and K4 versions as well. I will share, but the naming convention and the order is different.
×
×
  • Create New...