BOS Red Fighter Planes selectio

[MigSu]

Hello mates.

 I would like to talk about the russian planes selection vs german fighters of BOS, because it doesn't seems too fair.

                                         

 

 

                                      Stalingrad   1942-1943

 

 

LaGG-3 (series 29)

Bf 109 F-4

 Lagg3

 All here knows about what really was this airplane, was good but not like fighter due to its high weight, was used like ground support/attack and not like fighter, etc etc actually was later cancelled its production, were looking for a better fighter then La5 appear etc etc

 

vs

 

 BF-109 F4

 This was the brand new last 109 Fredric's series, and the lightest 109 at that time, all 109 later were heavier than that,  only replaced by G2. (Not mentioning this model is extremely manouberable in this simulator)

 

 ---My point of view:

 There are no comparison point here, is definitely not fair

 

 

 And

 

 

 

Yak-1 (series 69)

Bf 109 G-2

Yak1

 This is a light version of Yak, ok, is more like the F4.

 

vs

 

BF-109 G2

The last 109 G's series in 1942 like high performance plane for lack of FW190 of the elite division of the Luftwaffe. And made huge sensation in the sky of Stalingrad when it appears, stabling new records of speed and other by its great performance. The best at the time.   

 

---My point of view:

  Well, a good Yak1 from model 1941, is not a bad plane, but, the most idoneus in this case to front the G2 from red aviation, i think was the Yak-9

        -It first appear in 1942 in Stalingrad like G2 

        -was the most produced, and adaptable and multipurpose  platform

          Exactly the same than 109's G family 

 

 

Extras

 

La-5 (series 8)  

Fw 190 A-3

 

La5

Was a good plane, but no too, no that version the main first.

 (What about the advantages of that plane at low coat against the 190?)

 

vs

 

FW190 A-3  

Well, a plane designed under the most high german engineering, a real beast, fast and extremely well armed etc etc.

 

---My point of view:

  Well, here i understand that later version of the La5 were on 1943 for the end of the battle, but at least at low coat La have to have advantages, and well 

 

 

 

 Well, that is my vision or point of view about, concluded sure after comparing historical information etc

 

 My intention is not just criticize this great work, i have this and pretend to continue following the project, i just want more balance between the parts.

 

 The latest german models? ok, the latest russian ones available and capable to face them.

 

King regards   

Edited November 5, 2015 by MigSu

[ShamrockOneFive]

It's a good comparison and I think it approaches this from a competitive standpoint but that makes a couple of assumptions that should at least be talked about.

 

The developers did a great job of picking aircraft and models IMHO. The aircraft selected were typical and highly representative of what each side was using during the fall 1942 and early winter 1943. Its not really in balance as it is historically representative and I think that's what a great many of us are after.

 

The LaGG-3 Series 29 was a pretty typical fighter across the front in 1942 and into 1943 for the VVS. It was most certainly used as a fighter and not primarily a ground support aircraft as you mentioned. All Russian fighters flew tactical fighter-bomber and force recon operations but that doesn't make them primarily assigned to attack duties like they may have in the Western air forces.

 

Many pilots have suggested that the Yak-1 is a bit overdone which I cannot say but I do know from extensive reading that the later models of Yak-1 were pretty hot fighters and in-game my experience has been that its the equal of the Bf109F-4. Interestingly, the 109G-2 is a bit hamstrung as the Germans were having trouble with the new engines and so our Bf109G-2 is the latest model but with a detuned engine representing the history of the 109G-2s at Stalingrad. And the La-5s I believe first showed up sometime in September... I remember reading that but I can't recall the IAP that first received them.

 

I don't think its all roses all over. I do think the LaGG-3 is a difficult fighter to fly competitively online which is why so many are flying the Yak-1 and La-5 but those two are both highly effective against the two 109s with very similar performance levels and the FW190 which is contemporary if not geographically accurate for Stalingrad.

[Y-29.Silky]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. Looking at this book.. 

September losses: Luftwaffe - 103 VSS - 520. 

 

I found something mildly interesting looking at the 8 VA.

10th of November, 1942, 8 VA strength.. 

174 IL-2's 

35 La-5's

68 Yak1's 

14 Yak7B's

10 Lagg3's 

6 SB's 

7 SU2's 

8 Pe-2's 

5 R5's 

93 U2's   

 

Yak-9 - Don't think the devs added it because it was in the very last part the battle and fewer than 200 were produced. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[MigSu]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. Looking at this book.. 

 

September losses: Luftwaffe - 103 VSS - 520. 

 

I found something mildly interesting looking at the 8 VA.

10th of November, 1942, 8 VA strength.. 

 

174 IL-2's 

35 La-5's

68 Yak1's 

14 Yak7B's

10 Lagg3's 

6 SB's 

7 SU2's 

8 Pe-2's 

5 R5's 

93 U2's   

 

Yak-9 - Don't think the devs added it because it was in the very last part the battle and fewer than 200 were produced. 

 

 I understand that point, historical one, but, there are some other points to have in consideration, like

 

1- This is a simulation, try to recreate some reality but is not reality, so, (Quality vs Quantity)

    Example: If you make a simulator/game about T34 vs Tiger because was real battle, (but in that battle were about 3 or 4 T to each Tiger, so there were the way to counteract the power of the Tiger, and at the end T just won the war.)

 

2- As simulator this at the end is a product of entertainment, and when you play 1 Tiger vs  1 T34 you will know the result. Sure because there are just one point, Quality for make it more fair have to enter the other point of Quantity or others one. 

 

3- So if you only take the one historical aspect (which is so important, i do not deny it) then you will have an unbalanced game/simulator and, that is not good for users, they will feel bad, and the selling will not go good, of course this is a business is not free, and the companies do not want problems like lack of selling 

 

 So i think is a delicate point some historical aspect (or all ones) vs balance = fair?

 

 I don't know if you can understand me

 

Thanks

[Dave]

I get MigSu's point. In case it was lost in translation I will transliterate:

 

In the historical battle the "balance" was ultimately provided by relative numbers and resource starvation that, as yet, are not modelled in the game.

 

So it can be extremely frustrating to fly as a VVS pilot in BoS/BoM.

But it can also be very rewarding. Considering the relative numbers further, what it also afforded was greater cooperation between larger numbers of VVS fighters. This is how you overcome technical superiority. That and superior tactics. If more online VVS pilots made a greater effort to work together with others on the server most of the advantage the Axis pilots have from their machines would evaporate. This was the story in all theatres to some degree. All allied forces started at a significant technical disadvantage. While there are a couple of VVS aircraft/mods I think could improve our chances without sacrificing historical accuracy, I am glad the development team have opted for the harsh reality over generically "balanced" aircraft or, worse, generic flight models differentiated only by skins.

 

The map makers have a part to play here too don't forget. It is up to them to populate the maps with aircraft types in relative numbers representative of history. It will probably be a long uphill road to the majority seeing things this way, but I think it is the correct way and I hope eventually others will come around to this view.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Dave

[ShamrockOneFive]

 I understand that point, historical one, but, there are some other points to have in consideration, like

 

1- This is a simulation, try to recreate some reality but is not reality, so, (Quality vs Quantity)

    Example: If you make a simulator/game about T34 vs Tiger because was real battle, (but in that battle were about 3 or 4 T to each Tiger, so there were the way to counteract the power of the Tiger, and at the end T just won the war.)

 

2- As simulator this at the end is a product of entertainment, and when you play 1 Tiger vs  1 T34 you will know the result. Sure because there are just one point, Quality for make it more fair have to enter the other point of Quantity or others one. 

 

3- So if you only take the one historical aspect (which is so important, i do not deny it) then you will have an unbalanced game/simulator and, that is not good for users, they will feel bad, and the selling will not go good, of course this is a business is not free, and the companies do not want problems like lack of selling 

 

 So i think is a delicate point some historical aspect (or all ones) vs balance = fair?

 

 I don't know if you can understand me

 

Thanks

You make some good points MigSu and I don't think those points can be denied. It's a constant battle between historical accuracy and ensuring that multiplayer online sessions are fun and engaging for both sides involved with the flying. Multiplayer is one thing but many people play offline and there this matters much less and the history matters more - scenarios can be custom tailored to manage the setting.

 

I don't think the developers made a bad choice here. The only weak point in the lineup is the LaGG-3 and even its not too bad or too far off being competitive. The other two Red fighters match very evenly with their German counterparts.

 

What aircraft would you add on the Red side to compensate? The one that we're missing is the Yak-7B which is maybe a bit slower but it certainly packs more of a punch than the Yak-1 does. The Yak-1B would be another option but its performance is essentially identical to the Series 69 that we have. There isn't much else I would advocate for on the Red team side without overdoing it.

[Wulf]

 I understand that point, historical one, but, there are some other points to have in consideration, like

 

1- This is a simulation, try to recreate some reality but is not reality, so, (Quality vs Quantity)

    Example: If you make a simulator/game about T34 vs Tiger because was real battle, (but in that battle were about 3 or 4 T to each Tiger, so there were the way to counteract the power of the Tiger, and at the end T just won the war.)

 

2- As simulator this at the end is a product of entertainment, and when you play 1 Tiger vs  1 T34 you will know the result. Sure because there are just one point, Quality for make it more fair have to enter the other point of Quantity or others one. 

 

3- So if you only take the one historical aspect (which is so important, i do not deny it) then you will have an unbalanced game/simulator and, that is not good for users, they will feel bad, and the selling will not go good, of course this is a business is not free, and the companies do not want problems like lack of selling 

 

 So i think is a delicate point some historical aspect (or all ones) vs balance = fair?

 

 I don't know if you can understand me

 

Thanks

 

 

Some very good points.  I think the problem (well one of them anyway) that the devs have is that people fly these games for all sorts of reasons.  Some just want kills, others want to be part of a team, some want to try and re-create historical environments etc etc but at the end of the day people will just do their own thing.

 

All the devs can really do in such circumstances is supply the highest fidelity aircraft models they can and then leave it up to the players to do with them as they will.  God forbid that we should ever end up flying generic FMs.  I know you're not suggesting that but when 'fairness' starts becomes a criterion then that is one ugly possibility.  

[Original_Uwe]

Please just forget this fairness thing. It is irrelevant.

[MigSu]

Thanks guys, you are understanding my point.

 

 

What aircraft would you add on the Red side to compensate? The one that we're missing is the Yak-7B which is maybe a bit slower but it certainly packs more of a punch than the Yak-1 does. The Yak-1B would be another option but its performance is essentially identical to the Series 69 that we have. There isn't much else I would advocate for on the Red team side without overdoing it.

 

 

 Well, one reality is that all those three models (mig/lagg/yak) were on services in that battle, and also in Moscow, so. If i have the decision, well.

 

 a) Add one more model for the reds, a model that were in the battles, affecting the just number but not the balance of power. (Lagg3, and two Yaks models, that will do another perspective more realistic, but not superior)

 

or

 

 b) Try to not to put the latest version of the germans ones

 

or

 

c)  Replace that Yak1 for another better just for maintain the level

 

 

 

 But if you see, that was what they did, just

 2 vs 2  fighters  

 1 vs 1  specials

 1 vs 1 attacks  

 1 vs 1 bombers 

 Perfectly coordinated and pair, because is a game 

 

 To make a video game or any kind of game,is so easy, you just have to respect that both sides are in equal power lvls, can you imagine chess game that the Black (for say something) were more powerful than the white ones? Who will play that? 

 

 But in a Simulation is not so easy, because of the real factor, that is what make the difference from a simple video game, but at the same time it continue been a game lol so, "Equilibrium"

 

 

 

Please just forget this fairness thing. It is irrelevant.

 lol Is not so simple. 

 What plane do you fly here?

[LukeFF]

 

 

I would like to talk about the russian planes selection vs german fighters of BOS, because it doesn't seems too fair.

 

Well, unfortunately for you, this discussion is 100% academic at this point, because obviously BoS has been developed, published, and is actively for sale on the market. At this point, either you like the plane set or you don't.

[Finkeren]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate.

 

This is all that needs to be said on the matter.

[LLv24_Zami]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. 

 

+1000. Even the use of word balance should be banned by international law when talking about flight sim .

[No601_Swallow]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. 

 

Weeeeell... It's supposed to be fun.

 

Squadron-based coop-style mission structures, with cooperation and coordination (any other co- words?) guarantee both historical accuracy and fun! Have your cake and eat it too!

 

Edit: "guarantee" is a bit too strong. After all, there are morons in every nook and cranny (he sez, avoiding looking in the mirror). "Foster" would be a better verb. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by No601_Swallow

[Brano]

Planeset is historicaly presenting most used a/c on both sides for BoS

 

Just to correct OP:

Yak-1 s.69 is not 1941 production.It is summer 1942 production (august).

La-5F = no razorback,is spring 1943 production,mass used in battle of Kursk in fact.

 

What could be add for red side is Yak-1 s.89-99 (october to december 42 production) which were first Yak-1b,but still with razorback.But allready changed weapon loadout (1x UBS+1xShVAK),retractable tailwheel and more streamlined aerodynamics that can add up a bit to speed and climb rate.

 

And U-2/Po-2 of course!

To deprive german pilots of sleep during night so they cant fight effectivly next morning

[Dutchvdm]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. Looking at this book..

 

September losses: Luftwaffe - 103 VSS - 520.

 

I found something mildly interesting looking at the 8 VA.

10th of November, 1942, 8 VA strength..

 

174 IL-2's

35 La-5's

68 Yak1's

14 Yak7B's

10 Lagg3's

6 SB's

7 SU2's

8 Pe-2's

5 R5's

93 U2's

 

Yak-9 - Don't think the devs added it because it was in the very last part the battle and fewer than 200 were produced.

Interesting figures!! I thought the Lagg-3 was the main fighter during the battle of stalingrad. Where they shot down by then?...

 

And wasn't the I-16 used in the battle?

 

Grt Martijn

Edited November 6, 2015 by martijnvdm

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I don't know the exacts of it, but there were other Air Armies in Stalingrad besides the 8th in the other Fronts involved (16th, 2nd and 17th Air Armies I believe).

[Brano]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate. Looking at this book.. 

 

September losses: Luftwaffe - 103 VSS - 520. 

 

I found something mildly interesting looking at the 8 VA.

10th of November, 1942, 8 VA strength.. 

 

174 IL-2's 

35 La-5's

68 Yak1's 

14 Yak7B's

10 Lagg3's 

6 SB's 

7 SU2's 

8 Pe-2's 

5 R5's 

93 U2's   

 

Yak-9 - Don't think the devs added it because it was in the very last part the battle and fewer than 200 were produced. 

 

When talking about BoS in its final stage = operation Uranus,many people forget that it was not only the 8.VA VVS fighting there.Supporting pincer attacks from north was 16.VA of Don front and from the south it was 2.VA with 17.VA of South-western front.

[SCG_Vonalba]

migsu, if u think yak is not good plane to combat F-4 u should go on wings of liberty and watch the =FB= group they rack up many kills in misson . One pilot and I don't think I need to mention his name , I've seen get 27 plus kills, so if flown right yak is good.

[Asgar]

...flaps...

[MigSu]

migsu, if u think yak is not good plane to combat F-4 u should go on wings of liberty and watch the =FB= group they rack up many kills in misson . One pilot and I don't think I need to mention his name , I've seen get 27 plus kills, so if flown right yak is good.

No sir, i know. Actually i said, that Yak1 is more like F4 in terms of agility 

[Cloyd]

It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be historically accurate.

Hmmm, how many FW190s took part in the Battle of Stalingrad?

Edited November 6, 2015 by Cloyd

[Finkeren]

...flaps...

Bull. You can do quite well in the Yak without ever using flaps.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

 

 

Squadron-based coop-style mission structures, with cooperation and coordination (any other co- words?) guarantee both historical accuracy and fun!

 

 

 

This is very true.

 

Also things get much harder for the 'OP' 109s when they're tasked with attacking low flying bombers and when there is Yak cover. The 109s can chose to duke it out with the Yaks and keep their altitude advantage (stay safe) but at the detriment of the mission. Alternatively a mission where Yaks have to defend a target against higher flying 111s with 109 cover then puts the ball in the other court. I think co-ops are the way forward for a more 'historical' experience the problem is not many people make them and they're hard to organise.

[Brano]

Talking about BoS as game title,there is this Velikye Luki map,where Fw190 was operated by I/JG51.

[LukeFF]

Hmmm, how many FW190s took part in the Battle of Stalingrad?

You've missed the point about why they've modelled it - the team has stated they want to model planes that are relevant to the Eastern Front but didn't necessarily fly in the battle being depicted. The P-40E is no different.

[LLv24_Zami]

You've missed the point about why they've modelled it - the team has stated they want to model planes that are relevant to the Eastern Front but didn't necessarily fly in the battle being depicted. The P-40E is no different.

Good point.

[MigSu]

You've missed the point about why they've modelled it - the team has stated they want to model planes that are relevant to the Eastern Front but didn't necessarily fly in the battle being depicted. The P-40E is no different.

 

 

Good point.

 

 Wooooowwww, noo, actually is an excellent one!!

 

 

  Then the role in scene of the 190 is similar to the Yak9?  lol  so?

 

 Anyway it will appear, like who like it, because was the most produced series of the most produced brand/company/bureau Russian fighter WWII ever  1942-1945  so, i am ok

[Cloyd]

 

 Wooooowwww, noo, actually is an excellent one!!

 

 

  Then the role in scene of the 190 is similar to the Yak9?  lol  so?

 

 Anyway it will appear, like who like it, because was the most produced series of the most produced brand/company/bureau Russian fighter WWII ever  1942-1945  so, i am ok

 

I agree MigSu

 

LukeFF seems to have missed your original point.

 

Cloyd

[LLv24_Zami]

 

 Wooooowwww, noo, actually is an excellent one!!

 

 

  Then the role in scene of the 190 is similar to the Yak9?  lol  so?

 

 Anyway it will appear, like who like it, because was the most produced series of the most produced brand/company/bureau Russian fighter WWII ever  1942-1945  so, i am ok

 

You are right. In fact no excuse for Mc.202.  

But still my point is valid: Even the use of word balance should be banned by international law when talking about flight sim. It was not the case with those planes. I don`t think anyone can say that those planes are extremely superior to the Soviet ones in BoS.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Zami

[Fishbed64]

It is not only about performances,BF-109 looks like much better plane,but there is other thinks to consider-here is very interesting interview with General Boris Nokolajevic Jerjomin which is Soviet fighter Ace-he tested captured Bf 109 G2 and compared this plane to the Yak 1-here is what he said...i dont like Messersmith that much,there is very little space in the cabin,and view from the cockpit is very bad, its true it is easy aircraft to fly and it has strong armament.But It is little bit heavy during manoeuvring,and less agile than our Yak 1.The only one advantages that BF 109 have was quick acceleration in dive,but it lose energy very quickly once you have to level it up from dive.At the end he add they crash this tested BF during start,because it was very hard aircraft to start and land.      

[Asgar]

don't want to dissapoint you, but i think your ace told what some people expected to hear from him...the rear visibility in the Yak isn't any better than in a 109. and contrary to the belief of some people here in the forum....you can't just stick your head out of the canopy at 450km/h and the 109 is known to be maneuverable even at low speeds because the engine create enough air flow over the control surfaces.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Asgar

[Fishbed64]

don't want to dissapoint you..but if you compare it to real data...he just told the people what the propaganda officers told him to

Yeah not the case(-;...this interview was made in 1992,he just told his opinion nothing more. 

[Asgar]

well..we know how "patriotic" some Russians can be...they like to be best *cough* War Thunder *cough* 

[LLv24_Zami]

It is not only about performances,BF-109 looks like much better plane,but there is other thinks to consider-here is very interesting interview with General Boris Nokolajevic Jerjomin which is Soviet fighter Ace-he tested captured Bf 109 G2 and compared this plane to the Yak 1-here is what he said...i dont like Messersmith that much,there is very little space in the cabin,and view from the cockpit is very bad, its true it is easy aircraft to fly and it has strong armament.But It is little bit heavy during manoeuvring,and less agile than our Yak 1.The only one advantages that BF 109 have was quick acceleration in dive,but it lose energy very quickly once you have to level it up from dive.At the end he add they crash this tested BF during start,because it was very hard aircraft to start and land.      

Well, you always have to take account of the personal abilities and preferences when reading these things. For example there were an Finnish ace called Ilmari Juutilainen, he had 94 confirmed kills and 58 with Bf-109G. In his memoirs he pretty much said he could take on everything with Messerschmitt and he was very succesfull. And that was pretty much common opinion with Finnish pilots. But those are always personal opinions 

Edited November 6, 2015 by Zami

[Fishbed64]

don't want to dissapoint you, but i think your ace told what some people expected to hear from him...the rear visibility in the Yak isn't any better than in a 109. and contrary to the belief of some people here in the forum....you can't just stick your head out of the canopy at 450km/h and the 109 is known to be maneuverable even at low speeds because the engine create enough air flow over the control surfaces.

Well,he fly both aircrafts in real life,so i probably believe him more than you(-;...and further more, the things he said they are actually well represented in the game. 

[Fishbed64]

Well, you always have to take account of the personal abilities and preferences when reading these things. For example there were an Finnish ace called Ilmari Juutilainen, he had 94 confirmed kills and 58 with Bf-109G. In his memoirs he pretty much said he could take on everything with Messerschmitt and he was very succesfull. And that was pretty much common opinion with Finnish pilots. But those are always personal opinions 

yes i agree,he also stated that its much more about pilots ,and German pilots over Stalingrad have very high standard,he said.  

[Asgar]

hmm...like Yak flaps no drag comrade?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

This 'Russian said something, must be propaganduh' gets old really, really quickly.

 

Most successful pilots were 100% confident in their rides. Until they changed aircraft, that is. Then they became 100% confident in the new one.

 

The fact is most good pilots would find out where did their planes excel, then push those advantages to the limit. Boris Safonov was in love with the Hurricane for example, which just about everyone in the Eastern Front  - Soviets and Finns alike - hated or in the best case found OK but outdated. Nikolai Golodnikov thought the P-40 was fair game all the way up to 1943, when most German units were taking the Gustav to battle. Aleksandr Pokryshkin spoke wonders of the MiG-3, and yet his favourite aircraft became the P-39 once he met it. He even kept part of 16 GIAP flying the P-39 all the way to Berlin, even with increasing pressure to convert to La-5s and later La-7s (partially related to Klubov's untimely and unfortunate death, but not only).

 

The Soviets also hated the Spitfire with a passion, and sent just about all of them to PVO and training units, including nearly 1000 Mark IXc they got in 1943-1945, while the Brits loved it very much.

 

This is exactly why pilot testimonials are majorly irrelevant towards measuring the accuracy of a flight simulation or a more technical discussion. Another Soviet pilot flying over Kuban in 1943 (can't remember who) said he had no idea why German pilots did not throw their 109s into turn fights since they had such good turn performance, and went beyond that to state if he had a Messer in his hands he would fly it on the horizontal.

 

Perspective, preference and all that.

[LLv24_Zami]

Perspective, preference and all that.

This. 

yes i agree,he also stated that its much more about pilots ,and German pilots over Stalingrad have very high standard,he said.  

That is correct.

[Finkeren]

hmm...like Yak flaps no drag comrade?

 

Yak-1 flaps cause tons of drag, stop perpetuating this falsehood. Just try flying the Yak flaps down once, and you'll see this is wrong.

 

I honestly believe, that something is wrong with the way the Yaks flaps are modelled, but to say it doesn't cause a ton of drag is asenine.