Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

198 Excellent

About Johnny-Red

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Народная Республика Южный Йоркшир
  • Interests
    Aviation History, Il-2 Sim Family, RoF, Skin Art, Film Making, Mission Design, LAN Gaming.

Recent Profile Visitors

1308 profile views
  1. I would respectfully disagree. Bombing assist is for bombers and strike aircraft, not tanks. It was an integral part of the Normal Difficulty game before tanks were included. Having bombing assist for pilots on won't stop me from taking a tank. Turning it off will stop many people from bombing. If bombing assist is turned off, the benefits will go to: Tiger players; who face no persistent challenge on the ground. Fighter-only players; who don't want to be rivalled by bomber-players on the stats. In addition, it undermines the server's status as the game's primary Normal Difficulty server. People who play on Normal Difficulty need a place to play the game that they learned. I don't want to see that already fragmented community seperated by needless customisation. _________ These are tank-stats on the OMD Normal Difficulty server: http://ohmydog.mooo.com:8080/en/tankmans/?tour=6&page=1 These are tanker-stats of a Tiger player who agues to disable standard functions: http://ohmydog.mooo.com:8080/en/tankman/211/spiker/?tour=6 _________ I have witnessed hundreds of player-tanks being rammed by player-aircraft over the years. Most were destroyed. Some players would rather end their virtual life than take a tank and show some skill. Sadly, in some quarters it is now a standard tactic. I regard this kind of behaviour as much nastier and less in keeping with the spirit of the game. Pilots need to support and protect their ground forces Tankers need to call on air support and use cover
  2. It was interesting to have the bomb sight off, but for people here who are maxed at normal difficulty, this keeps the game playable. Thank you Rapidus
  3. Nice new artwork on the store I see. That's definately a winner. Dora-9 and Lightning collector planes to become collector planes when the discount ends on the 17th of December?
  4. @buck1ea - Regarding French-speaking pilots, I read this literally yesterday - hence the precise recall. I don't know if there were any independant French Airforce units operating on the Rhineland map, but very many Francophone pilots still served within RAF commands, whether French, French Colonial, Wallonian or Quebecois. May I suggest keeping all tecnical terms in French accented English, and all sentence structure in French? Price, A. Spitfire - A Complete Fighting History (1991) p. 237 "RAF French" in this instance would be like a reversal of modern English; where there roots are clearly Germanic, but most of the sophisticated words are of French origin.
  5. OK, I see what you did there with the so called "reasonable point of view" thing. Sneaky. Very sneaky. My head's going both ways on this: I still think a lot of issues with the the 262 can be remedied through careful mission design. More than any other aircraft in Il-2, the Me262 needs a clear cut mission for every single flight in order to function closer to its historical counterpart. If we end up back at 262's circling player spawns there'll be hell to pay, and this time I'll be happy to stand back and let nature find it's own level.
  6. I hope you're right about that. I'd really like to fly the IIA. It gets me closer to my namesake The IID might be a fun alternative to the Il-2 37mm outfit, albeit with a fraction of the ammo count. According to AIR 22/310 deliveries were as follows: IIA: 218 (22 Lost prior to delivery) IIB: 1884 (278 Lost prior to delivery) IIC: 1182 (46 Lost, 117 Rejected) IID: 60 (14 Rejected) IV: 30 I seem to remember playing Il-2 FB with a Soviet configured Hurricane IIB with all the Browning .303's removed and a single ShVAK and UB in each wing. Also, from the IIB the wings should take either 2x 250lb bombs, or 2x 500lbs (or closest Soviet equivalent).
  7. Circus 81 (aka Operation Leg): https://www.seekanddestroy.info/blog/operation-leg-19-august-1941 15 Squadron of Spitfires (4x MkII's, 11x Mk V's) escorted 6 Blenheims on a leg bombing mission of vital importance...
  8. The massively prolific Yak-1 to 3 lines and Yak-7 to 9 lines rightly deserve some more attention. Good choice. Here's to my first flight in both Yak-9 airframes The Hurricane II is going to be the real star of the show for me though. It was being shipped all over the world while early Spitfires could barely make it out of the factory fast enough to backfill an expanding Fighter Command. It was best the British could make relative to the demands of raising a modern fighter force simultanously on three continents. Consider them all pre-ordered as soon as the store lists them. _______________________ PS: When it's released; can I have mine catapulted off a CAM Ship as a Hurricane I, and get it re-engined to MkIIA standard in Russia?
  9. Yeah, all that stuff you just posted: I think you may have been misinformed or just be behind with the news: From Google Translate: "10/15/2019 at 22:17, Johnny-Red said: Can we ask administrators to try the same? I know this is a U-turn, but maybe I should get out of the trench. I would really like to see Me262 rise to pursue a system of bombers, or defy anti-aircraft guns at the height of trees to hit a bridge or fuel depot. For Me262, you need to edit the spawn so that it is parked and placed at the farthest airfield and limited from 2 to 4." Like I said before, you always assume bad faith, and act accordingly. On the subject of broken morale, it wasn't meant to be back-handed. I just don't like to see the Axis players regularly outnumbered two to one. I don't want to see player numbers decline overall and I don't want to see one faction or the other crash or lose its vitality. It's likely because many American Axis players have now taken up the P51 and P38. Some former LW powergamers can't resist the Spitfire and Tempest and many veteran Axis players who previously relied on the D-9's speed and K-4's speed and climb now find themselves far more exposed. There's no personal triumph for me in that. I'd like to see a vigorous and capable Axis player base. _______________________________ And then there's the server bully. Are the Allies delighted he's flying Spitfires and Mustangs? Do we love him because we are the "bests"? Do you think we believe he's making the skies safe for the "good guys"? lol He's still a troll and a griefer - nothing has changed for me on that subject. His trying to clean up after himself or engage with people he thinks might be useful just further reinforce my original perception. I don't care which side he flies for. He suppresses enjoyment wherever he goes. I don't want to meet Axis fliers, punch drunk from his constant drubbing. I have previously expressed my solidarity with you when you experienced personal griefing. I advised you on how to proceed if you wished to complain. I did that in friendship, not because I'm the big man. I'm sorry you don't recall. Thank you for quoting me when I said "I'm done with it now". Nobody
  10. I can see you've been taking lessons in misrepresentation. It was me. You already know. Everyone does. Don't pretent. It's undignified. I have gone to the Russian forum when people have asked me, and when noone else has spoken up. I have politely requested the addition of the D-9, repairing of the stats page, the restart of the server. I have expressed the thanks of many for the value we place on having a place to play. Why didn't you challenge me on my lack of democratic mandate? Ruthless_Killer may have removed all his posts, including the griefing, the defamation of character and the challenges to stand up to him, but they were well-witnessed. lol Really? Would you like to borrow some butter to help that assurance go all the way in? Yes, we all did. Those with the cheaper plane sets, and those who chose to fly Soviet planes paid more than others. It was putting off regular players. Some Axis pilots also supported this view, and on this forum. That's why I asked on behalf of most of the reasonable people who enjoy this server for it to be taken out. Love that entitlement btw. Goes perfectly with the smarm offensive. I also spoke up during the recent ban war which resulted in many requesting the removal of the Me262. When it started I was still trying to encourage rational debate on the subject. The opinion I gave on the Russian forum was arrived at at the end of a debate you ignored except when you mocked it. Here's your homework: Race back up through this thread, see if you can find any suggestion from anyone about having an open and respectful conversation and maybe edit all your posts accusing red bias: I was polite enough to not address you directly. Was I too obtuse? Deep fake amnesiac. PS: It may amuse you to learn, as your grasp on what has happened in the recent past is so tenuous; I (respectfully) withdrew my personal objection to the Me262 based on the sadly shattered morale of the Axis player base. I had always said I wished to see the Me262 rehabilitated when the time was right. I acted in good faith. As always, you ignored the fact.
  11. The Eagles are coming! The Eagles are coming!
  12. What you describe was tested, almost exactly as you suggest (as part of a bigger mission build test): A mission limit of 2x Me262, parked at a rear field. Within a few minutes our first 262 pilot had reached an air start reserved for Battle of Kuban era aircraft: http://ohmydog.mooo.com:8080/en/sortie/9603/?tour=3 When he was at ~800m he shot down another player (who had just very skillfuly flown a sustained guns-D), almost direcly under the air start. Melting the Spitfire VB's engine in a dive I went down 3000m in seconds. He was pulling away as I levelled out. I finished in flight: http://ohmydog.mooo.com:8080/en/sortie/9612/?tour=3 I have to go with the evidence of my own eyes. I had hoped to rehabilitate the Me262 but holding it back on a more distant field, forcing a full engine start, making it climb and and limiting numbers just don't address the issue of one sided combat. If weapons and armour loadout, fuel load and mods controls were readily available I'd consider having a version loaded out for JaBo or bomber interception, but not this freehunting set up we see whenever its available. I'm done with it for now. I've asked this question to several people today, whilst considering how to respond to CUJO_1970 and RAYEU: how messed up would Il-2 have to be before the 262 became a balancing influence? I want them to be able to fly what they want, but not at any cost.
  13. There is a lot of inconsistency between the different missions, so some will yield points for every single object destroyed, while others won't. Obvious tactical targets like fuel and parked aircraft won't reward a player on some missions while on others they will yield points along with other destructable airfield objects. There are also issues around bomb sizes. Some Luftwaffe munitions are of a strategic nature and don't really have a functional role in our tactical combat simulation. The 1800kg bomb would be a Blockbuster in USAAF parlance, the 2500kg bomb I can't imagine being used outside the context of strategic bombing - ever. This is especially salient. Many objects which yield points for their destruction don't have icons. The very crude principle in tactical warfare is: If the enemy can use it; destroy it. Look out for bunkers, cammo netting, ammo stockpiles, fuel dumps and crates etc. ___ I'm currently working on a multiplayer mission for -DED- Normal in which everything but civilian residences are up for grabs, as I feel that this is in keeping with the type of total war fought between the Axis and Allies: If it's resources, infrastructure or military material, have a crack at it. It will likely be killable and should yield points. It may untimately be the case that the central streets of some villages near the front also become tactical targets if the background suggests enemy forces may be headquarted there. Of course, making everything destructable (and count for scoring) may impact performance so we'll see how it plays out. One consequence is likely to be that the points rating of the missions will need to be raised from 500 to 1000, like on OMD, if not whoever scores fastest will end the mission with nobody else having the chance to score. This currently happens on Kuban where single player can finish the game in about 15-20 minutes and three players can finish the mission with one sortie each. In the long term a review of pre-existing -DED- missions would be a good idea, with a view to rationalising their ground scoring arrangement, but that's some heavy lifting work. I'm 2 weeks behind with the mission I'm on already...
  14. I was writing this when JW commented: We read this devblog and it was by this guy who works in what we may imagine to be the best job in the world, developing a top notch flight sim which we all love. It was a story of travels around the world trying to find the best evidence upon which to base this product, and of the endeavour of many and valued allies. He describes being moved as a child by the alure of this brutish and purposeful foreign fighter. The power and lines of the thing. He describes his ambition to make it fly, to experience it in simulation, and to simulate the most realistic Tempest ever seen as a personal quest. Allied bias confirmed? I don't think so, but I do recognise the devs acting in good faith. I don't get a whif of anything phoney in that. The last DD reads like a revelation of personal pride and good intent. I'm almost there with them. I have some very specific preferences for current and future content, but what's far more important to me is that they just do their best work.
  • Create New...