Possible solution for VVS disadvantage?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

One thing that has to be said is that the La-5FN despite first flying in 1943 only started to show up in force across all fronts and regiments in 1944. 240 IAP (I. Kozhedub, K. Yevstigneyev and others) for example was flying the base La-5 until May 1944, when they were refitted with the La-5F (both pilots received specially painted models from the farmer Konev; I believe Yevstigneyev may have received a La-5FN himself but I cannot confirm), with only a handful La-5FNs to go around.

[ShamrockOneFive]

One thing that has to be said is that the La-5FN despite first flying in 1943 only started to show up in force across all fronts and regiments in 1944. 240 IAP (I. Kozhedub, K. Yevstigneyev and others) for example was flying the base La-5 until May 1944, when they were refitted with the La-5F (both pilots received specially painted models from the farmer Konev; I believe Yevstigneyev may have received a La-5FN himself but I cannot confirm), with only a handful La-5FNs to go around.

 

My understanding is that in December 1942 they switched production to the La-5F and then there was a time when production was being completed for both La-5F and La-5FNs in parallel for the rest of 1943 and then in 1944 production was purely for the La-5FN. I don't quite understand the reasoning for the parallel production unless it had to do with stocks of the ASh-82F engine needing to be finished. Any clues?

 

Both the F and FN models are a pretty big step up in performance from the very early Series 8 La-5 model that we do have. Turn times drop by up to 2 seconds, sea level speed goes up by 50kph, loaded weight drops by 100kg or more, etc.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I don't know exactly and my mild internet research skills gave no results back. Will try to scourge Russian sources tomorrow once I have the chance.

 

To thicken the plot a little bit one must remember that the LaGG-3 itself was produced in Taganrog until the summer of 1944! A truly remarkable design by all means, it makes my heart hurt a little when people badmouth it.

Edited January 8, 2016 by Lucas_From_Hell

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

I say boycott the servers until G maneuvers and red out and black out are implemented. I see these 109 190s do such hard turns they don't black out.

 

ailerons and elevators are not coming off 109s, 190s, until way above the recommended speeds. 

 

3 to 6 seconds of lag (ping related) damage, 

 

I have yet to black out in any dive and pull out above 750 Kph. 

Edited January 8, 2016 by 71st_Mastiff

[bivalov]

To thicken the plot a little bit one must remember that the LaGG-3 itself was produced in Taganrog until the summer of 1944!

plant №31 in Tbilisi (currently Georgia).

[LukeFF]

 

 

My understanding is that in December 1942 they switched production to the La-5F and then there was a time when production was being completed for both La-5F and La-5FNs in parallel for the rest of 1943 and then in 1944 production was purely for the La-5FN. I don't quite understand the reasoning for the parallel production unless it had to do with stocks of the ASh-82F engine needing to be finished. Any clues?

 

Production of the La-5F continued alongside the La-5FN, because there was a shortage of M-82FN engines until the fall of 1943.  

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

plant №31 in Tbilisi (currently Georgia).

 

Well, yes, Plant 31 Taganrog evacuated to Tbilisi, you are correct.

 

And thanks for clearing that up Luke.

[Askania]

Production of the La-5F continued alongside the La-5FN, because there was a shortage of M-82FN engines until the fall of 1943.  

 

summer of 1944

Edited January 8, 2016 by Askania

[SR-F_Winger]

Dear Community and Developers team,

 

the situation in MP sessions is often that the number of fighters is balanced on both sides or even in favor of the German side.

This is entirely disappointing for at least one party of the game, mostly the russian planes that are being shot down so easily in this situation.

 

Let's be honest, the most important factor that prevented total slaughter of the VVS airforce is the numerical superiority! The germans couldn't replace their aircraft and pilots in a way the russians could, as well as german tactics were forced more and more into hit and run tactics instead of agressive and risky dogfights to avoid high losses.

 

Until this isn't guaranteed by the Multiplayer mechanics the mp sessions won't be much of a thrill for a F-4 climbing away and a total dissapointment for the Lagg-3 (that was only effective in numerical superiority, if ever ;-) )

 

I would like to suggest the introduction of a respawn delay that is bigger on the Luftwaffe's side. That will make losses much more crippling because of the jamming german resupplies... Finally it would be a punishment for Stuka pilots that rather crash their aircraft or even going suicidal instead of taking the risk and time to return to their airfields!

Just think about supply waves that could be destroyed starting on the ground if no airspace cover is present over the airfield, i would love it!

 

Also, let's consider playing with fixed numerical superiority, that could be a server-maintained ratio of 3/2 in favor of the VVS.

 

It would make organizing fighter escort for german bomber missions crucial - but not always possible :-P

 

Hope I am not the only one to support those gameplay changes... think about the depth of that experience...

youre kidding me - right?

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/de/

http://1cgsnormal.ru:8080/en/

LOL

 

This game is already balanced in VVS favor IMHO. Stop the Luftwhining comrade:P

Edited January 8, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[Dakpilot]

Not sure you understand the accepted meaning of Luftwhiner Winger....but i think your post defines it properly 

 

"This game is already balanced in VVS favor IMHO"

 

I should be allowed to say this today 

 

 

Reputation 666 LoL

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited January 8, 2016 by Dakpilot

[Recon]

I say boycott the servers until G maneuvers and red out and black out are implemented. I see these 109 190s do such hard turns they don't black out.

 

ailerons and elevators are not coming off 109s, 190s, until way above the recommended speeds. 

 

3 to 6 seconds of lag (ping related) damage, 

 

I have yet to black out in any dive and pull out above 750 Kph. 

 

I've blacked out from this in a 190 from this maneuver.  

I've blacked out from this in a 190 from this maneuver.  

 

 

I suggest Allied pilots take advantage of their planeset.   BnZ with Migs up high to force Axis down.   Engage enemy when they have bled their energy.    Don't chase 190's - you are just getting drag -n -bagged.    Be more patient in your attacks, rushing into a battle without realize a good Axis pilot is waiting to B n Z you.

 

Lastly, utilize your attack planes to destroy the enemy and force the fight low.   You need to defend your Il2's ...

[JtD]

... as the Luftwaffe proved one clear morning over the Heligoland Bight in December 1939 ...

Using Bf110 twin engined long range fighters armed with cannon, as opposed to the contemporary Bf109 still armed with 4x7.92mm machine guns.

 

I don't really care if the phrase 'air superiority fighter' was only coined after WW2, it still was exactly what the Bf109 was designed for. Certainly, the term 'interceptor' wasn't used in Germany at that time either. The Luftwaffe simply asked for a new fighter aircraft, fit to shoot at anything airborne the enemy might have. Balloons, bombers, fighters, whatever.

 

We agree in that in the pre war years the means of attack was the bomber, and the means of defence was the fighter - but that certainly doesn't mean that everywhere in the world every fighter designed was solely designed for the interception of bombers.

[Livai]

After some times with Expert Mode searching for the best tactic for me to enjoy this game mode. I notice the best way is to surprise your enemy. Appear there where the enemy never expect you. 

---> Funny to fly close behind 3x Bf-109 all the time and they still not notice me.  

[Sgt_Joch]

On the La-5, quote from E.Rossmann, a LW ace who had scored 93 kills when he was captured in july 1943. At the time of the quote, in fall 42, he was serving with JG52 in the Caucasus:

 

 

"The battle grew stiffer, both in the air and on the ground. The Russians received new and better aircraft, and some of their pilots were quite good. Since there still were relatively few airmen on both sides in the Caucasus by this time, we met the same pilots on several occasions. We even learned to recognize some of their faces. I particularly remember the pilot of a La-5. I learned to recognize his face, and we met in air combat at least six times within a few weeks. He was too good to be shot down. He always countered my attacks by climbing steeply."

 

Black cross, Red star, vol. 3, pp. 179-180

Edited January 8, 2016 by Sgt_Joch

[LukeFF]

summer of 1944

 

Eh, no. I know what I quoted from (Gordon & Khazanov), and it clearly says the autumn of 1943.

Edited January 8, 2016 by LukeFF

[LukeFF]

This game is already balanced in VVS favor IMHO. Stop the Luftwhining comrade:P

 

[Edited]

Edited January 9, 2016 by Bearcat
Personal

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Eh, no. I know what I quoted from (Gordon & Khazanov), and it clearly says the autumn of 1943.

Could it be the shortage itself lasted until the autumn of 1943 but nonetheless there were M-82F aircraft built until 1944 with the engines that were already there? That would make sense considering the Kozhedub case for example where he was gifted a new La-5F in May 1944.

[LukeFF]

Could it be the shortage itself lasted until the autumn of 1943 but nonetheless there were M-82F aircraft built until 1944 with the engines that were already there? That would make sense considering the Kozhedub case for example where he was gifted a new La-5F in May 1944.

 

That's most likely the case, yes. There'd be no sense in letting otherwise perfectly good M-82F engines go to waste. 

[SR-F_Winger]

Move along, the adults are trying to have a discussion here.

[Edited]

Edited January 9, 2016 by Bearcat
Personal

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

That's most likely the case, yes. There'd be no sense in letting otherwise perfectly good M-82F engines go to waste. 

 

Most likely.

 

The logistics of it sound pretty decent if you think about it, from minor to major degrees contemporary LaGG-3 and different La-5 versions have a lot of interchangeable parts, and on the engine side of things factories and mechanics only had to deal with M-105 and M-82 variants and most production lines could move towards improved versions without much disruption, simplifying the whole thing altogether.

[Dakpilot]

By late 43 Soviet factories were getting into full production, which was on a pretty massive scale, and Soviet doctrine was still playing the numbers game, continued production without delays was paramount, having several 100 extra fighters for IL-2 cover was still preferable even if they had the 'old' engine, by 44 weight of numbers made it less of an issue (on 'their' scale of things) with the more modern A/C going to established Guards regiments

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Nocke]

youre kidding me - right?

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/de/

http://1cgsnormal.ru:8080/en/

LOL

 

This game is already balanced in VVS favor IMHO. Stop the Luftwhining comrade:P

In both of your links axis is scoring more air kills than allies. How does that demonstrate VVS is favored ?????

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

This discussion was really interesting and going well, perhaps this one time we can prevent things from going down that old lane of accusations, speculations and so on

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

This discussion was really interesting and going well, perhaps this one time we can prevent things from going down that old lane of accusations, speculations and so on

 

Well this wouldn't be much of an official forum than, would it? 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Tradition is on your side, but then one must remember that for the universe and its balance to be preserved there must be an effort to pacify things. These efforts, in turn, will be the motivation for others to make things go south again. It's a perfect cycle, isn't it? 

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Tradition is on your side, but then one must remember that for the universe and its balance to be preserved there must be an effort to pacify things. These efforts, in turn, will be the motivation for others to make things go south again. It's a perfect cycle, isn't it? 

 

Now all we need is Raaaid and this'll be a real IL-2 Sturmovik Official Forum thread.

[Askania]

Eh, no. I know what I quoted from (Gordon & Khazanov), and it clearly says the autumn of 1943.

 

February 1944

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the La-5F No. 3799062, the plane was built in January 1944.

 

 

March 1944

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the La-5F No. 3811022, the plane was built in February 1944.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Production of the La-5F continued alongside the La-5FN, because there was a shortage of M-82FN engines until the fall of 1943.  

Makes sense!

[Gump]

im certainly not gonna make 'absolute' statements, cuz I only see what is going on around me when and where I play this game (and the majority of euros probably play in my off times).

.

I just don't see many of the 'inferior' planes being flown in the game. players want the best, usually, for the function of their mission. so, is it "historically correct" to see the skies filled with 109's (probably) and yaks (not laggs)? I suspect not. I think the vvs side is probably not even close to "historically correct" in it's in-air fighter-type proportions. my point is, where are the boundaries for the "historically correct" argument/consideration when determining what to employ in a game like this? the lagg3,p40,and even la5 are created for "historical accuracy", an admirable addition and accomplishment, but these planes just are NOT played because they are NOT competitive. gamer pilots don't work like RL pilots. adding the p-40 proves that. cool, but not flown to speak of. of no significant value. the lagg3 may be a historical gem, but its a gaming POJ. why waste time/effort/money making things that will not add value? add competitive fighters and give the gamer a viable competitive choice, otherwise just put the static model of an inferior fighter on the airfield for looks and call it "good". IRL history forced decisions, gamers can decide freely (gamers don't buy forced decisions).

.

.... if the LA5FN doesn't get a spot in this game, where does it? the Russians got caught, historically, with their pants down. hitler surprised stalin. otherwise, Russia may have been a bit more advanced in their plane technology, and the 5FN may very well have been contemporary with the BoS (if that would have even happened). speculation, of course, but it seems that its a shame to just disregard the Russian's effort to 'catch up' and produce something worthy of the fight just because it was a little late. not talking real life - for the game. "what-ifs". why does all BOS capability/possibility have to be hard-locked into that time frame?

.

IMHO, the game has to be played in a different way to cause players to emulate history. more of the "coop" formula and an organized, planned ahead of time effort (like MP campaigns and tournaments). a 'forced' formula of planes, squadrons, missions, etc. Not all players want to play this way, and it is exclusive because of the time requirement, but this is the way to emulate "historical accuracy".

.

.... case in point:  I recall ROF maps/missions where the planeset included the latest/greates fighters (dr1/camel) - it was a popluar map! the camel FM was mod'd to slow it down - many negative reactions and some players left. in other words, players wanted performance. .... a different map was an early war (WWI) map with a historically earlier plane set. these planes just did not perform like the later planes do/did. that map/mission saw much fewer players and had a tendency to empty the server.

.....

..... how about an experiment.... someone build a mission that eliminates Yaks from the VVS opition... put it on a popular server...see what happens.

....

.... and another experiment.... create an LA5FN model, put it in the VVS option, on a popular server. watch what happens. monitor the new customers to see who buys because of it. compare to the P-40.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Gump

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

But these aircraft do add a lot of value, and are by all means competitive Doesn't mean they are absolute superiors and nor does it mean the La-5FN is the only solution. I'm positive they would see a 0 increase in sales and a big drop in players who want things historically reasonable (I.e. no late-1943 designs in mid-1942). Bad idea basically.

 

Even in 1946 everyone would (and still does) fly the latest 109, 190 and the La-5FN when available. But it's the variety that allows I-16s and Hurricanes and MiG-3s for those who want to that made it special. And properly flown these are competitive too, me and a random Russian pilot were hitting hard on a pair of 109F-2s in a Ishak and Hurricane pair.

[Gump]

But these aircraft do add a lot of value, and are by all means competitive Doesn't mean they are absolute superiors and nor does it mean the La-5FN is the only solution. I'm positive they would see a 0 increase in sales and a big drop in players who want things historically reasonable (I.e. no late-1943 designs in mid-1942). Bad idea basically.

 

...

 

I don't think there are many that are agreeing with that. The number of pilots flying these 'lesser' planes speaks for itself. if, historically, the laggs were the majority, then either: 1) gamers are not familiar with history or ; 2) gamers don't care enough about history or; 3) history forced different circumstances than the game. every time, every where I fly MP in this game, Yaks are almost the exclusive fighter in the VVS sky. I see (and fly) a few la5's, but NO lagg3's.

...actually, I just heard a chat comment today from a guy flying an la5 say something like "im going to where I can fly a spitfire. no western planes here. this la5 cannot dogfight. bye." he accompanied me in a pe2, including bombs under his wings, and successfully bombed and destroyed some AA (he was a competent pilot).

.

... anyway, so where Is the "value" you speak of? I know you are a history enthusiast but, other than history, what value do these planes add to the gameplay if they are used such a proportionately tiny amount of time?

.

btw, adding a plane like the L5FN doesn't mean that every mission, every server would be required to use it. it would be interesting, though, to see what kind of response it would get.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Gump

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Did anyone suggest this...the most simple and realistic answer?

 

The LW did have the best aircraft in the BOS but as that battle went on they had far less fighters to field than the VVS....it's fairly simple them the LW should have less 109s (no 190s they weren't there) and the VVS should have a lot more decent fighters....

 

Of course it's never going to happen  on a DF server but...food for thought

[Wulf]

Did anyone suggest this...the most simple and realistic answer?

 

The LW did have the best aircraft in the BOS but as that battle went on they had far less fighters to field than the VVS....it's fairly simple them the LW should have less 109s (no 190s they weren't there) and the VVS should have a lot more decent fighters....

 

Of course it's never going to happen  on a DF server but...food for thought

 

 

Yes, and if people were prepared to embrace the idea it might even work.  But I strongly suspect the LW people would do a no show.  In my experience, people don't like being told what they can and can't fly - particularly when the person doing the telling appears to have a vested interest in the proposed arrangement.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Wulf

[Gump]

Yes, and if people were prepared to embrace the idea it might even work.  But I strongly suspect the LW people would do a no show.  In my experience, people don't like being told what they can and can't fly - particularly when the person doing the telling appears to have a vested interest in the proposed arrangement.

 

or, what about approaching it from the opposite end...hpw about this...

.

 

aka "pretty up the pig".

.

well, the word "worthless" might ruffle some historian and idealist feathers, but it refers to the 'fighter appeal' of certain, especially VVS, underutilized fighter aircraft. ie: Lagg3, LA5, P40.

.

unless there is a place/time that im not seeing, these aircraft are just not flow very much relative to the yak. none of them are competitive with a 109, and only the la5 comes close to being able to survive a 190 fight. im talking about average and relatively equal pilot skills. arguments about this need to show a server/time where these planes are utilized in decent proportion, rather than theoretical "if you know how to fly it right" discussions.

.

Historically, as some like to point out, these planes were flown ubiquitously. but that's just it - there were a lot of them in the air as that's what available, and the pilot did NOT have a choice - he could not just quit and go home. not so in game. making these guys the only option in game, or limiting the yaks would drive away gamers/customers.

.

here's an idea to add value and attract pilots to these planes: do not limit the yaks, make the others more appealing.... how about if a pilot choosing a lagg3, p40, or la5 had an option to have up to 2 commandable ace AI wingmen? so, if you choose a lagg3, you are flying a flight of lagg3's. now you get some respect.

.

-->to prevent/avoid TO/taxi  accidents, having them join you in air would be best.

-->to avoid AI clutter, in the case of you getting destroyed, your AI wingmen would beeline to the nearest friendly AF and land once all enemies have disengaged.

-->kills would be accredited to you as a "team", ie: Gump_Team.

-->Losses would be credited to the enemy, but only your destruction/death counts against you.

-->you get to pick your flight's skins and loadout, whether uniform or individual. fuel will equal yours.

-->your risk of being a sure kill for enemy 109's/190's drops dramatically.

.

.

if server overload is a concern, limit the number of these "flights" (don't limit the yaks) or have some other mechanism to govern the qty of planes in the air.

.

this method allows the history buffs to get more of that 'proper' feel, and makes these planes an actual consideration to fly (friendly) or avoid (enemy).

[LukeFF]

 

 

actually, I just heard a chat comment today from a guy flying an la5 say something like "im going to where I can fly a spitfire. no western planes here. this la5 cannot dogfight. bye."

 

Sounds more to me like someone who doesn't care one bit about Russian planes.

[Wulf]

or, what about approaching it from the opposite end...hpw about this...

.

 

 

Yup; on face value I think that sounds like something worth exploring.

[jaydee]

Now all we need is Raaaid and this'll be a real IL-2 Sturmovik Official Forum thread.

NO a Bannana Forum !

[csThor]

The only thing that would need "fixing" is player attitudes and that damned "e-sports" menthality. This thread proves it. Too bad nobody could bugfix that.

[Livai]

Not sure you understand the accepted meaning of Luftwhiner

 

Not sure if someone missing the last messages that appear if you fly Expert or Normal MP. Luftwhiner talking about why the Devs not reduce or remove the High altitude ability from the Yak-1 because the VVS has now the Mig-3. Really true Luftwhiner, indeed....

 

 

Did anyone suggest this...the most simple and realistic answer?

 

The LW did have the best aircraft in the BOS but as that battle went on they had far less fighters to field than the VVS....it's fairly simple them the LW should have less 109s (no 190s they weren't there) and the VVS should have a lot more decent fighters....

 

Of course it's never going to happen  on a DF server but...food for thought

 

LW better planes? Turn all the time after a Yak or the Rata-Ta-Ta and you will see who will be behind you. The LW had better pilots to be correct. 1943 the VVS start to get better planes. BoS from the plane set you can see the game how the advantage from the LW fade slowly away.....

[kendo]

I don't think there are many that are agreeing with that. The number of pilots flying these 'lesser' planes speaks for itself. if, historically, the laggs were the majority, then either: 1) gamers are not familiar with history or ; 2) gamers don't care enough about history or; 3) history forced different circumstances than the game. every time, every where I fly MP in this game, Yaks are almost the exclusive fighter in the VVS sky. I see (and fly) a few la5's, but NO lagg3's.

...actually, I just heard a chat comment today from a guy flying an la5 say something like "im going to where I can fly a spitfire. no western planes here. this la5 cannot dogfight. bye." he accompanied me in a pe2, including bombs under his wings, and successfully bombed and destroyed some AA (he was a competent pilot).

.

... anyway, so where Is the "value" you speak of? I know you are a history enthusiast but, other than history, what value do these planes add to the gameplay if they are used such a proportionately tiny amount of time?

.

btw, adding a plane like the L5FN doesn't mean that every mission, every server would be required to use it. it would be interesting, though, to see what kind of response it would get.

 

As someone who is predominantly single player offline I have to take issue with your suggestion that the entire plane set should be reduced to only those that are 'competitive' in the online multiplayer arena.

 

For some of us the best part of the sim is investigating and flying these planes and getting an appreciation of them. For us a decent offline campaign is the most important thing that needs to be added.

 

As csThor says, the predominant problem in online play is the wildly ahistorical behaviours (despite the best efforts of the various mission designers) and the absence in most cases of any over-riding historical motivation. And in real life a pilot was posted to a squadron and had no choice in deciding which aircraft they flew. No way to simulate or enforce that in the online arena.

 

Maybe the situation online can be improved BUT I don't want it done at the expense of the enjoyment of the silent majority who rarely find themselves on a server. Online is an important part of this sim, but it's NOT everything, and in my opinion already gets too much of the attention of the devs.

Edited January 10, 2016 by kendo