Jump to content

II./JG77_Kemp

Members
  • Content Count

    869
  • Joined

Community Reputation

463 Excellent

About II./JG77_Kemp

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

562 profile views
  1. Off topic, but did you know that there is democracy in North Korea? It is in their name.
  2. The point being, this structure existed, instead of "no higher resources distribution structure at all". And again, even this point is secondary, as well as the discussion if this or that part should have been more centrally planned or market driven, state owned or privately run etc, when we look at the achieved production results and have someone call it just a random dumpster fire. Indeed, that I can agree on.
  3. Not fully sure what you mean by that, but Germany actually even had special ministry about war production. Albert Speer had very close relationship with Hitler himself, so you can't get mush "higher" in structure in that sense. Of course mistakes were also made and there are many myths and misconceptions out there, but there was a structure and it was getting results. On that note also, "higher distribution structure" or central planning is not necessarily the best way to handle resources and capacity. Anyway, all this is secondary to just looking at results. German economy was in ruins in the beginning of the 30's. They had had heavy restrictions on all kinds of war related development, especially on air force and armor. They had less access to many important natural resources than other major powers. Yet, about half a decade later they had military and air force not only to challenge the strongest European nations, but to actually beat them. And once Germany was already way in over their heads by the beginning of 1942, being at war against the strongest industrial powers in the world, they still managed to draw it out for over three years and increase war production year by year, despite having heavy bombing campaign targeted specifically against their industry. If someone calls that a dumpster fire, he must be a comedian.
  4. Showmen often want to say something fancy or ground breaking, but I just wonder how could anybody take this guy seriously after he said something like that. Maybe he is a comedian, though, and does not want to be taken seriously.
  5. Sorry, but it is not very logical. If "90% of players are SP" and if the game has the same price for MP and SP players, then where does the money come from? Mostly from single players. Like Reddog said, if money comes from SP, then one would also expect that resources would be put towards pleasing primarily that audience and that way getting more money from this major customer base. The "10% MP" crowd would be a nice add-on, of course. Also, during my time with flight sims, I have never-ever heard anybody say that he wants stupid or underdeveloped AI. People might want different skill levels from AI, maybe easy AI, but have never heard anybody want AI that is not done well, to feel good about themselves. "Stupid AI" can also be very hard - let's imagine AI with perfect eyesight through the clouds, superhuman reaction times and sniper level accuracy from 2000 meters - but the main point about good AI is not how hard it is to fight against it - but more about how well it can imitate humans. The preference about the skill level of these "artificial" humans is a different matter.
  6. I hope that this Air Mashal mode is more WWII compatible than some kind futuristic system that outclasses even modern datalinks or other super fancy communication.
  7. Most people are not crying or demanding anything, really. For most, CloD is a dead game already, so they don't care. If it pissed of TFS that some people still show interest in this game for whatever reason and ask for updates, then they should not hint about things like TF 6.0 that depends on TF 5.0 sales or even have a section for CloD development on these forums. Even when the devs were asked, long time ago, when Tobruk would be ready, then the legend-worthy answer "Sooner than you think" (it sounds actually cooler than Oleg's "two weeks") went unnoticed, because people just did not care any more. And that was long time ago.
  8. Well, if BoX could do AI bombers with IL2 1946 -level flight and damage models, with updated graphics, though, it would be a big step towards creating something that was a major part of air war in the west.
  9. If your criteria is that it has to be German and requires least engine management, then it is: 1. Fighter with bombs. Everything about engine management is automated (besides Bf109 E7, where rads are manual), so you only need to use throttle. 2. Bf110. Radiators are manual, but engine management is automated, just like fighters. 3. Ju-87, Ju88 and He-111 all have Jumo-211 engines, so same amount of engine management. Not difficult either, only have to control RPM separately. Ju-87 has only one engine, so I guess that means less management 😀 4. Hs-129, I don't have, but I understand that it's engine management has some peculiarities.
  10. I think Wags said a long time ago already that DCS WWII modules are quite popular and that level of interest vs cost of production of these more simple planes makes it interesting (profitable) for ED. Second, even if their current player base was not that interested in WWII, that does not mean that ED should or would not want to expand their player base. Lots of people in general are interested in WWII aviation and the planes are also a lot easier to learn, so it is easier for a more casual gamer to jump in, too, compared to modern planes, where you really have to spend time to learn them properly. Their biggest problem currently is that there is not really much to do with these WWII planes, once you have learned them.
  11. There are no WWII ground pounders available in DCS. That fact alone makes BoX gameplay deeper in that area. When thinking of ground-pounding with fighters - still can't see DCS anywhere close to BoX in gameplay.
  12. The main thing it does better is obviously modeling the entire aircraft, with (almost) all of it's systems. So, if you are interested in learning and operating a WWII plane, DCS is better. From WWII gameplay point of view BoX is ahead of DCS in every imaginable way. P.S. Not WWII related, but DCS maps are also more lively than BoX. They have civilian cars, buses, trains, sailing boats etc doing their daily business. The other day I noticed on Nevada map that there was actually a NASCAR race going on, when I flew over the motor speedway there.
  13. There is an app of digital historical maps covering Estonia (and a bit of Russia) available here. For example, this link shows the 1:50 000 map from 1939, then if you zoom in on it, it turns into 1:25 000 map from 1948. If you keep zooming in, it will turn into 1:10 000 scale map, but that map is from the 80's.
  14. Hey, @TeufelHunden , since you openly called me a liar and being full of sh** on the server, when I was wondering if something was wrong with server connection, because I got disconnected twice in about half an hour (I normally do not get disconnects very often), because "you saw" that I was vulching and was hit three times by AAA before disconnecting. So, let's look at the mission logs, like mentioned in the server chat. About being disconnected twice in half an hour: http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/sorties/7560/II./JG77_Kemp/?tour=47 First disconnect in a mission that started at 20:08, shortly after takeoff. Second disconnect in a mission that started at 20:30. Now this second mission log, where "you saw" me vulching your airfield and being hit by AAA three times: http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/sortie/log/4274680/?tour=47 Takeoff at 20:31:25 First hits on enemy A20 at 20:39:47 Last hits on enemy A20 at 20:40:54 After which I was disconnected, with no hits from enemy AAA or any other enemy fire or any damage to my plane. The enemy A20 that I hit had been flying over 10 minutes before I hit him, shortly after he had dropped his bombs. Was that what you called vulching? So, after taking into account what "you saw" and what the mission logs show, maybe you want to re-evaluate which one of us was full of sh** and a liar?
  15. And that clearly is a bad thing. Why would you ever want to lose the ability to trim your plane separately and also make your life harder by having a slower-responding trim wheel move your nose up or down by itself still several seconds after you have stopped moving your stick? How is that? Let's say I want to do max pull up - how is it possible much harder, if the controls are on the same axis, compared to putting two separate axis to max up? It just takes away the possibility to have these axis on different settings, which can be useful.
×
×
  • Create New...