adding value to a "worthless" fighter...

[Gump]

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).

Edited January 10, 2016 by Gump

[Gunsmith86]

to supplement your idea.

Kills with inferior planes should rank more points than kills whit very good planes these a Player with one or two Kills with Lagg3 should be above a player whit Yak and 3 Kills.

Whit this way a player that flys inferior planes whould get rewarded more than one player who flys only the best planes.

[Original_Uwe]

I think that's an excellent idea.

It would go a long way toward helping recreate the vvs numerical strength as well.

This too: as a 109 pilot I see a single lagg and think game on, I see three in formation I think I'll wait for friends

Edited January 10, 2016 by 4./JG53_Uwe

[Gump]

I think that's an excellent idea.

It would go a long way toward helping recreate the vvs numerical strength as well.

This too: as a 109 pilot I see a single lagg and think game on, I see three in formation I think I'll wait for friends

.

and imagine flying along with a couple other 109's and seeing 2,3, or even 4 of these flights together! that'd be maybe 6, 9, or even 12 planes to contend with! still nothing is gonna climb with the f4, but man, that f4 had better climb!

[DD_Arthur]

 

.

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.

.

.

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).

 

This is a great idea and it all ready exists in IL2 1946 and Rise of Flight.  Its called coop mode.  Since this is a game mode that already exists in RoF, hopefully it would not take too much extra coding to put it into BoS. 

 

 We need it.

[Sokol1]

Not wanting to spoil your party, but  remember that is not for nothing that AI in MP server is a no go...

[Feathered_IV]

Taking an AI flight with you is a feature that I've wanted to have for a very long time.  Particularly with aircraft like the Il-2 or a flyable Ju-52. 

As much as it would enhance gameplay, its something that this series could not achieve.  Even one or two AI aircraft seem too much for it in MP.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

to supplement your idea.

Kills with inferior planes should rank more points than kills whit very good planes these a Player with one or two Kills with Lagg3 should be above a player whit Yak and 3 Kills.

Whit this way a player that flys inferior planes whould get rewarded more than one player who flys only the best planes.

 

Yeah, can we get something like this:

 

 

[BraveSirRobin]

Even one or two AI aircraft seem too much for it in MP.

AI don't belong in MP.

[StG77_Kondor]

I disagree. This is a simulation. Not War Thunder where it's ALL about stats. 

 

Do I wish more people would fly bombers/'inferior' aircraft as opposed to the F4 & Yakgasm? Of course. Over 90% of my flying is in Stukas or other schlacht planes.

 

'46 had many successful servers that limited available 'uber' planes - mission dependent. Not by giving players bonuses for flying 'inferior' aircraft. 

 

We also have to remember, this game, MP-wise, is still nowhere near to what '46 was/is. Size of the community notwithstanding. 

[jaydee]

Taking an AI flight with you is a feature that I've wanted to have for a very long time.  Particularly with aircraft like the Il-2 or a flyable Ju-52. 

As much as it would enhance gameplay, its something that this series could not achieve.  Even one or two AI aircraft seem too much for it in MP.

unfortunately this seems to be the case 1

[jaydee]

AI don't belong in MP.

Why not  ? What about when the Server is pretty empty ? Also the added Bonus of not  Knowing if you are encountering Human or Ai !  I would much rather a server with 20 Ai and 1 human to a server with Just one human !

[6./ZG26_Custard]

We are told an awful lot on this forum that the VVS aircraft in this sim are over modelled Uber planes and how the 190 sucks (even though it wasn't in theatre) or how fewer folks wish to fly bombers etc. I think mission design and execution in MP have a large part to play in making the online experience more rewarding. 

 

The majority of servers are set up (Dogfighter style) so that you just end up with a massive fur ball  or the VVS rotating the maps in super quick time due to IL2's LaGG's etc pummelling the ground targets. Add to this that the servers are mixing BOS aircraft with BOM aircraft you are effectively flying aircraft that are obsolete. I don't think the P-40 is a worthless aircraft but match it against BOS plane set and is going to struggle more than a little.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

P-40 versus 110 missions could be a lot of fun

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

While the idea of adding a flight to players is great (within hardware/software limitations), I still can't wrap my head around the 'pimping up' of other VVS aircraft with that.

 

The Yak-1 and Bf-109F/G were the mainstay of the Soviet and German Air Forces in 1942, there's no way around it. Most people like it because - for the same reason they were produced in such high numbers - they are easy to master and straightforward, making novice pilots more dangerous. The LaGG-3 however is a very stable plane and once you learn exactly how to do a proper turn to use its instant turn advantage, you get really competitive. In addition to that, it's forgiving in the sense that it's harder to burn or break to pieces, kind of like the Il-2 for the attack crowd. The La-5 itself is like the LaGG-3, but only fast and packs a punch so you need to use it with that in mind.

 

The P-40 is outclassed but one can make good use of it. On the populated 1946 servers people are still flying P-40s, Hurricanes and I-16s against 109s regularly and they get a decent success rate. Plus, it's really fun to play chess with the Messers since you need to have each of your own aircraft in place to prevent them from zoom climbing unpunished. Today a I-16 and a Hurri squared off against an Emil and a Friedrich at 2000m - the Hurri and the 109F collided after a while, leaving me and the Emil kept making passes at each other for 5 minutes until both our propellers stopped from fuel starvation and we glided our separate ways.

 

Not all aircraft need to be present in equal number, particularly fighters. Let people pick what they want, and let those who have an affinity with the less-mainstream models enjoy themselves. Once BoM is properly out and servers use the plane set there, it will bring some of that variety to bear since all BoM fly really differently. Then you'll see people experimenting a little more with the rest

 

On the topic of forming teams, Ioshic posed a very interesting suggestion. Not sure about the specifics of the format but it's good and kind of resembles the old Il-2's coop:

 

Have you ever played Counterstrike or Warthunder?
Well... I was wondering. One of the most annoying and less historical thing there can be in an online environment is to see single planes taking off all the time, cruising all alone towards the enemy lines in complete lonelniess (should I use the word "lone" again?). Teamspeak servers which are often void of english speaking chaps... 
The virtual online servers become a similar show as the one we see everyday while getting to work in our cars: lines of cars with single persons that don't speak with each other and that start their vehicles by themselves, at their preferred time.

Well, why couldn't be possible to create a kind of "timer" for each airfield, which takes notes of how many pilots are selecting their planes and, whenever there are at least 3 planes ready to take off, put them all together side by side in the runway, ready for take off together. A new "kind of Rotte" is born! 
Maybe there could even be a special colored chat box especially for these 3 (or more) planes taking off together. There can even be a designation for each formation taking off , such as "Rotte number XXX of JG27", updating overtime with a new number. Maybe even before starting the mission, there should be a small pop-up window that will tell you Who your flying squad is composed of... by which plane, and even give a suggestion for a target. Or they can even decide, all 3 or more of them, what to do by giving a vote (maybe this is too extreme...). Maybe they can even talk with a microphone between themselves just in this "Rotte", or create special ad-hoc AI communication once they get separated, that tells them where they are, etc..
Pilots in this way feel more "part of a squadron", and they can follow each other more closely. 

At the other side of the front, at about the same time, a similar thing happens. Hopefully in this way the skies will see small groups of planes fighting together and especially flying together.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Lucas_From_Hell

[Sokol1]

Taking an AI flight with you is a feature that I've wanted to have for a very long time.  Particularly with aircraft like the Il-2 or a flyable Ju-52. 

As much as it would enhance gameplay, its something that this series could not achieve.  Even one or two AI aircraft seem too much for it in MP.

 

This was tried on "that" game: (*)

 

 

The AI taxi and take-off OK - a 10 members flight take good 15 minutes... but then don't have where to go and... landing. 

 

Same problem here, one that have opened the BoS ME know that without waypoints the AI goes nowhere...

 

* In early ATAG MP this was a nightmare, the server became crowed with "headless" AI. So now players can create one flight, with ... one plane.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Sokol1

[BraveSirRobin]

 Also the added Bonus of not  Knowing if you are encountering Human or Ai ! 

 

Added bonus?  There is absolutely no added bonus to going into a fight that could be an AI aircraft.  It's just annoying.  And it's infuriating if you get shot down by a human while you're stuck in a fight with AI.  I despise AI.

[AbortedMan]

No one wants to dogfight against AI. That's what quick missions are for.

[BraveSirRobin]

Exactly, if you want to fight AI start up a quick mission.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

A system as you (OP) propose will likely not work. Imagine what was going on with multiple guys flying lets say lagg-3s each having 2-3 wingman next to him on one airfield...it would be a FPS massacre (and that's probably the least thing to worry about).

 

The point system is - like it has always been - "pointless". Why should people fly and fight for points when they get nothing for it in return? To make it short, no, a point multiplier system favouring "weaker" planes won't effect the majority of people at all.

 

This is overall a very difficult question as it interferrs with player wishes (= fly the strongest plane) and crucial gameplay elements. Maybe a spawn counter system similar to WT Enduring Conflicts could work out in MP although it's somewhat gamey and will surely turn some people away.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[URUAker]

On one hand i´m all in for having mp servers with ai flights, it was done in `46 and it really helped to enjoy some good objective based servers that were almost empty while there was a lot of people flying airquake servers, And of course it will be a great almost coop solution.

 

On the other hand I don´t think there is a need to encourage ppl to fly planes that perform worse, if you like the plane just fly it, i always love to fly the underdog from time to time it is a great challenge.

[Gump]

Added bonus?  There is absolutely no added bonus to going into a fight that could be an AI aircraft.  It's just annoying.  And it's infuriating if you get shot down by a human while you're stuck in a fight with AI.  I despise AI.

.

if this were ROF, id agree, as the AI in ROF are so darn easy to kill and unrewarding to dogfight with. however, the ace AI in this game can be a significant foe, ESPECIALLY if you take your eye off of them. BUT, the real value of AI and human disguise is for the defender, not the attacker, and that's the point. the point of this AI "flight" suggestion is to encourage use of the planes that pilots tend to leave in the hangar because they are suicide to fly. camouflage and assistance would be a great encouragement and may put some desire in some pilots to fly these planes who, otherwise, wont touch them with a 10' pole (and there seem to be a lot of those). I think killing an AI should count as a "kill", not as a destruction of light target. some pilots may WANT to see AI to up their kill possibility.

.

honestly, we can talk all day long about how learning to fly one of these outclassed vvs slugs can make you "competitive" but, in practice, it just doesn't pan out. the yaks are the planes to fight a2a with, and even those are not as good as the 109. the other vvs planes are an effort just to survive in (MP) and, while that may be fun sometimes, the majority of players don't seem to be in the mood to be at such a disadvantage all the time. so, in effect, the vvs fighter hangar is a barn full of pigs.

.

I keep hearing how "history" saw the vvs numbers being a factor, not plane superiority. the problem with "numbers" on the game/sim is that it requires coordination, and that is a MAJOR inconvenience/difficulty, accomplished by duty/force IRL, that is just too exclusive to be common in gameplay. if each plane is piloted by a human, that human has to have the time commitment, equipment, desire, and skill.

... how many times do you see a pilot lost from a human flight wait for his teammates to return before beginning again? I know it happens, but it is quite a turnoff to sit and wait at a PC monitor to play a game, especially if you have other opportunities. many pilots will just hop in a plane and take off solo. so the "flight" concept with all human pilots 'might' work for some, for a bit of time, but it begins to thin out the willing crowd and falls apart. this is why I don't think the "timer" idea suggested by lucas' quote would work. sometimes there is a LOT of time that a pilot would be waiting (or more correctly, time heading to another server), and sometimes a pilot doesn't want to be a part of what the other guys want.

.

coordination and "time" allocation is another one of those theoretical things that seem to be all figured out in discussions on forums, but actual gameplay is dominated by the "im here now. im ready now. I don't know about later" kind of time opportunity. also, not all players come in with the idea of "i wonder how the other pilots want me to play today" attitude. rather, its (probably) more of an "i want to hone my dogfight skills today" or "i am going hunting for mrX today, I SWEAR I can get him today" mindset.

.... SO, in other words, the "game" nature is ALWAYS gonna make coordinated strategies and tactics a hard, unusual thing. the coders can 'force' such, but it would likely be a detractor to sales and participation.

...imho, the only way to get "coordinated" tactics is to make it EASIER, and that seems to mean to enable a single person to control it. I was assuming that the AI flight could be commanded by the flight leader (human) - isn't that possible in the campaign? Sokol1 suggests that waypoints are necessary and that the AI don't regard the leader? wasn't this fixed in a late update? if so, this would need a code fix before this suggestion would even be viable. and, like I suggested, leaderless AI would beeline to the closest friendly AF and land, in defensive mode, but be perfectly able to engage attackers. I agree that headless AI wandering all over would be a mess, and would take CPU power that players could use. maybe the mission builder would/could only allow a certain qty of AI, or even planes, in the sky total?

.

I don't know about the AI being not possible on a MP server (post #7). why? is it a technical thing, or a player preference thing?

.

[BraveSirRobin]

Sorry, but no. There is NO benefit to AI.

[Feathered_IV]

AI Ju-52s in MP would be fine. That aircraft is currently a waste of the devs resources until they add a cockpit.

[Gump]

A system as you (OP) propose will likely not work. Imagine what was going on with multiple guys flying lets say lagg-3s each having 2-3 wingman next to him on one airfield...it would be a FPS massacre (and that's probably the least thing to worry about).

 

The point system is - like it has always been - "pointless". Why should people fly and fight for points when they get nothing for it in return? To make it short, no, a point multiplier system favouring "weaker" planes won't effect the majority of people at all.

 

This is overall a very difficult question as it interferrs with player wishes (= fly the strongest plane) and crucial gameplay elements. Maybe a spawn counter system similar to WT Enduring Conflicts could work out in MP although it's somewhat gamey and will surely turn some people away.

.

well, I didn't consider the FPS issue. I considered it rather dangerous to have all the planes at the AF/runway, so I suggested having them meet up with you in the air.

.

I am not suggesting a "point mulitplier" system. the fact that a ">pilot<_team" would get the kill credit would be a sort of "multiplier in itself, as a kill by a team AI counts for the player also.

.

I have seen nothing but negative results from trying to add restrictions to force players into some kind of desired operation/cooperation. gamers/sim'ers tend to look for what they want and turn away from something that isn't. I don't know how many ppl bought this game because they wanted to be forced to participate in some kind of idealistic historic strategy, rather than just buying a state-of-the-art combat flight sim with excellent graphics and FMs, but either of these 'groups' are paying customers and should be valued. so, it seems that removing capabilities, rather than adding them, is the wrong direction for a game.

.

my suggestion is a way to add value to the VVS fighter hangar. historically, I'm not an expert, but I wonder how many lone lagg3's were flying around? I'd think they be in "flights" - true? gamewise, it would be an interesting choice to be able to fly a lone yak or a flight of 3 lagg3's/la5's/p40's. on the one hand (yak) you have a more competitive fighter but, on the other hand (3 laggs), you have the ability to be in 3 places at once. vualah - the VVS hangar has options!

.

of course, you could still opt to fly alone if desired, in any plane. so you could still choose that lagg3 to run out for a "challenge". the difference is that there is an option for other who aren't feeling so "lucky".

[Gump]

Sorry, but no. There is NO benefit to AI.

.

? this whole suggestion outlines a concept that employs AI as a "benefit" to enable more attractive and competitive use of the VVS fighter models. that counts as a "benefit" of using AI (if not in concept al least - I don't know if it would be technically possible at this time).

.

this suggestion isn't saying that it's use MUST be a universal application. it should be an option.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Barely anybody flew sole missions (apart from reconissence maybe) in WW2. But that has not so much to do with weaker planes, there are more than enough lone wolf flying around in Yaks and Freidrichs, too.

 

I know what you're after but I don't think it's realiseable. Group flying only works in a squad or at events like FNBF.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I'm working right now (will try to reply more extensively later) but basically what Stuka said.

 

What you can do however is find someone who's flying alone, get near them and signal your presence, then follow them around until you get bored. It's the most common impromptu partnership on DF servers and it can work surprisingly well if you keep it simple.

[BraveSirRobin]

.

? this whole suggestion outlines a concept that employs AI as a "benefit"

The AI sucks. There is no benefit to adding it to MP missions. Period.

 

The entire frigging point of playing MP is that you're playing against other people. AI ruins that.

Edited January 10, 2016 by BraveSirRobin

[AbortedMan]

-snip-

Automatically/artificially adding more aircraft to a player's wing just shifts the problem of one side being too strong to the other side. Multiple aircraft is much more of an advantage than just being a single superior aircraft...and what will this fix if the German players get together and start using teamwork (as squadron groups often do)? Nothing. That's what.

 

If you want to feel a sense of achievement while using the "inferior" aircraft, try using them to the degree that the game is actually trying to simulate--complete mission objectives, escort, fly CAP over an area, etc--stop just dogfighting. In the grand scheme of things, when EVERYONE is going out and performing a fighter sweep like EVERYONE does it becomes a uselessly redundant task that means nothing and only puts you (and the opponent team) in a never ending horrible situation. Play the game the way it's meant to be played and the performance disparity won't be an issue at all.

[Fidelity]

The easiest thing to do would be to enforce a ratio. Something like only 15% of fighters can be a fw190 for Luftwaffe or 15% can be yaks for VVS. I remember several servers did this in 1946 and it never stopped them from having full player counts.

[Gump]

The AI sucks. There is no benefit to adding it to MP missions. Period.

 

The entire frigging point of playing MP is that you're playing against other people. AI ruins that.

.

its starting to sound like you don't like AI..;>/

.

I can understand, and empathize to some degree. but there are already AI all over the place in MP. the AA/AAA, the convoys, the boats are all AI. ROF employs AI aircraft in the most popular realistic server (wargrounds) with both bomber and fighter squadrons (though they are not lead by a human). destroying them is an "objective", just as much as destroying a factory is. I cant see anything undesirable, or disproportional, with this. it would not be my opinion that the experience is ruined by the AI aircraft in wargrounds (an online MP server). they can be ignored if desired, as would always be the case.

.

AI doesn't REPLACE humans, in this case, they simply enhance a player choosing an inferior fighter. humans will still be all over the place, and these AI would be led by human pilots. they are used to ENHANCE the play, to ADD options, rather than RESTRICT options like others are suggesting. a POSITIVE reason to fly these planes in MP and boost the VVS hangar potential. I am convinced that restrictions and limitations, in attempts to 'force' some kind of "proper" play, will only diminish MP play and turn customers/players away. again, it is suggested as an OPTION, so a server/mission CAN employ it, but isn't forced to.

.

 

.

[Original_Uwe]

The AI sucks. There is no benefit to adding it to MP missions. Period.

The entire frigging point of playing MP is that you're playing against other people. AI ruins that.

A lot of us disagree.

Saying the same thing over and over and over again doesn't make it true.

[Gump]

The easiest thing to do would be to enforce a ratio. Something like only 15% of fighters can be a fw190 for Luftwaffe or 15% can be yaks for VVS. I remember several servers did this in 1946 and it never stopped them from having full player counts.

.

and here is what will happen... as soon as all the yaks are gone, the players will disconnect. bye bye.

[BraveSirRobin]

Saying the same thing over and over and over again doesn't make it true.

 

Right back at ya!  The difference is that you have the option to fight against AI in SP.  Play quick missions if you want to fight AI.  I despise AI.  And that is still true no matter now many times I say it.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Gump, tell me one thing just out of curiosity so I can try to see things from your perspective. On your average mission, what is your 'game plan', from take-off to engagement to landing? The more detail the better of course.

 

For example, my usual lone MP fighter sortie (i.e. no extraneous circumstances like airfield under attack) is usually laden with a bomb or two, planning to make one pass at a target and then pick off any enemies on the way back. To simplify let's suppose the map is a square - the target is in the very middle, the right side is my base and the left side is the enemy base. The first thing I will do right after take-off is climb in a spiral within the radius of the airfield AAA (unless the route is long enough to reach combat altitude before entering the danger zone), stopping at 3 or 4km usually. Once the airspeed stabilises, instead of beelining to the target I'll go around and behind it (if to go around North or South depends on the exact position of the enemy airbase and their most popular transit routes to the front lines). Once I line up the target, with my heading going towards friendly territory, I'll dive, make a pass then egress and climb out towards my lines, all the way back to 4km and speed up. From here on I will clear up any enemy aircraft going towards friendly a) ground units, b) airfields and c) aircraft. Since I'm coming from deep within enemy territory it's possible to surprise a careless pilot, and it to be cautious it's easy to make the pass then floor it. If some groupie sticks to me it's all fair in love and war so I try my best to bring the bastard down before being brought down myself, then land and start again.

 

Comparatively, when I get impatient and beeline to the action area while praying I can climb enough on the way, I am always bounced by a high-flying bandit who smokes me before I can do anything, regardless of the aircraft. Sure, sometimes I can struggle my way out but this way of fighting is dumb by all means and anyone who tries to fly this way will quickly see it is not the aircraft's fault.

[Gump]

wow lucas, that request is rather a difficult one. I fly all kinds of missions, with all kinds of planes, in various servers. sometimes i will fly an evasive route like you mention, but it takes much time to do that. of course, that is a ground attack mission. any type of plane can be used if enemy encounter is expected to be zero or almost zero. actually, the lagg3 and la5 i like better for gnd attack because of the guns. but, for any kind of fighter sweep or bomber cover, the yak is the only possible choice, because it is likely you will encounter 109s and maybe 190s. and usually more than one at a time, especially on WoL and ded beta. the "normal" servers ill leave out because there is NO stealth in one of those. lags and la5s don't last long in those typically.

also, what is normal for these expert servers is for enemy cover (fighters) to be around the targets. it doesn't matter how evasive the route in that case, since once you get there (if you arrive before being spotted) you *might* have one pass before the enemy swoops in on you from up high. whether im alone or with someone else, the la5 is lucky to survive and the lagg3, well, i don't even use that one anymore.

anyways, im undecided on wther its better to take an attack plane or fighter bomber for gnd attack, since the attack plane can have a rear gunner.

dogfights, fighter vs fighter, is the concern regarding the discussion. a fighter's job is to clear the air of enemies. if a fighter is considered to be ineffective at this function, should it be called something different than "fighter"? maybe, but what happens regardless of title is that it will not be utilized.

.... 'discussions' about how the game 'should' be played have gone on for years, but the reality is that many ppl like to dogfight in these sims. it is a valid use of a combat sim and it is the quickest 'mission' to get into and out of - its convenient and exciting.

.. even IRL fighter superiority was something fervently sought after. no arguing about that. "dogfighting" was a strong consideration in fighter capability, and fighters (dogfights) were not viewed as an illegitimate type of combat pursuit.

.

so, take an la5 or lagg3 up into the fighter space to either cover your attackers/bombers or sweep the area and see how long you last against the 109s/190s. you can be as good a pilot as you wish, but you are probably gonna get smoked in a reasonably short period of time. you can increase the odds by finding a team and using TS, but that just isn't available all the time, and it does not equal the odds. you cannot get high enough to avoid these 109s, and flying low isn't much of an offense to any fighter.

.

but the issue is not just me. these planes are just not used much by the majority of the players. they are not supposed to be (historically) "ground attack" airplanes. they are supposed to be fighters. they were used as fighters. in the game, they are not used as fighters.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

so, take an la5 or lagg3 up into the fighter space to either cover your attackers/bombers or sweep the area and see how long you last against the 109s/190s. you can be as good a pilot as you wish, but you are probably gonna get smoked in a reasonably short period of time. you can increase the odds by finding a team and using TS, but that just isn't available all the time, and it does not equal the odds. you cannot get high enough to avoid these 109s, and flying low isn't much of an offense to any fighter.

.

but the issue is not just me. these planes are just not used much by the majority of the players. they are not supposed to be (historically) "ground attack" airplanes. they are supposed to be fighters. they were used as fighters. in the game, they are not used as fighters.

 

Thanks for taking your time to write it But you know, I still don't think the La-5 or the LaGG-3 are in any way as outclassed as you say. They are indeed less straightforward and in many ways less survivable than the Yak-1 in the turn-fight context many people like to fly, and I think that is the real issue. Both of these aircraft were seen as very capable fighters that could contend with the enemy they faced, and the La-5 in particular is often described by the Luftwaffe as the fighter that marked the turning point in the air war on the Eastern Front.

 

The basic Lavochkin design bleeds a lot of speed in sustained turns, which is what most people enjoy doing, and that is why they feel hopeless sometimes. However, if you use the La-5's speed and roll rate wisely, you can send the Luftwaffe packing. Once you get the hang of the weight of these aircraft you'll start seeing good results, but you need to fly them fast so they can shine.

 

Most people don't use them because they take longer to master and indeed aren't as straightforward or forgiving as the Yak-1. In other words, just like the MC.202 they have their crowd, but the majority will still prefer the 109F and that's fine really.

 

Here is a post on these forums by coconut on the La-5:

 

I only have about 60min of flight, against the same two guys, so any advice I give must be taken with a healthy serving of sea salt.

 

I found that rolling would usually take me out of trouble. I don't mean constant rolling, rather initiate a turn with a 90 deg roll, then when you see that your pursuer is closing the angle and stabilising his aim, roll again for another 180deg or so, which will send you turning in the opposite direction. The Bf109 should have a hard time following you, and at this point he has a number of options:

 

• If he keeps his speed up and tries to keep his lead pursuit, he should overshoot you (or stall). There is a short window where he will be able to shoot at you and kill you. Prayer and eyes closed work best in this situation 
• If he keeps his speed and goes straight, you might be able to keep rolling and get behind him. Probably with lower energy, but if you don't try to climb with him, you should get some time to breath and regain energy before he turns around for another attack.
• If he slows down to turn with you, but keeps his lead pursuit, you should be able to outturn him, and below 280kph his plane will have a hard time staying airborne. At least that's what I experienced, but maybe it was just my enemies being clumsy.
• If he slows down to turn with you, but goes into a lag pursuit, I don't know what will happen. 

There is one thing that the La-5 doesn't seem to like, which is pulling hard on the stick. Unexpected rolls work better than constant hard banking.

 

[TheElf]

Added bonus?  There is absolutely no added bonus to going into a fight that could be an AI aircraft.  It's just annoying.  And it's infuriating if you get shot down by a human while you're stuck in a fight with AI.  I despise AI.

 

 

Concur.  Not to mention AI planes Crush server resources.  While the idea might have some merit, execution would not come close to the intent and would ruin the MP experience.

 

The real answer is fly "worthless" fighters with several wingman and use team work to play to their strengths.  Don't try to lone wolf in these planes, you'll just be disappointed.,.,

[Alkyan]

There is actually a surprising amount of players flying laggs. Some of them very successfully, take a look at the player Bender who have been at the top of wing of liberty stat a number of time.

 

And please no IA.