Yak-3 or Yak-9 or... something able to have a chance dogfighting vs the LW ?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Numbers don't lie. You are trying to look away from them, interpret them in a way that would fit your view. Do it if that makes you feel better.

 

-snip-

 

Let me guess... That isn't exactly what you're trying to do here..?

[Turban]

Let me guess... That isn't exactly what you're trying to do here..?

 

How ? 

[Monostripezebra]

(...) Nothing actually happened like Zeebra mentionned. (..)

 

Worse case scenario after your high risk pass on my IL2 I praised your skill and courage   

 

memories apparently differ here..

[Gambit21]

I'm not being condescending since I am answering to someone who said "stick to tomb raider duh" ... 

 

 

It's still my best advice for you all things considered.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Arguments against it: there is virtually no space within the 4+1 x 4+1 framework to bring an early-series Yak-9; the performance difference between the early Yak-9 and the current late-series Yak-1 is not a game changer nor a 'relief'; the Yak-9 was only there in field testing capacity, much like the La-5FN in Kursk.

 

The Fw-190 was not in Stalingrad but it did appear over Velikiye Luki in proper operational numbers, and it brings more variety to the playing field than the Yak-9 would factually speaking. Also, the Axis forces over Stalingrad did not operate any other fighters in proper numbers except for the Bf-109F-4 and Bf-109G-2. There were IAR.80s, IAR.81s, C.200 and C.202 in small numbers, but that was it. Also, as Andrey (dev) pointed out back in 2014, people just love the Fw-190 so they found a way to put it there due to popular demand.

 

Exactly right Lucas. And as has been said many times... it won't change the game so significantly to make up a difference. I'm very much looking forward to future iterations where 1CGS lets us fly the Yak-9 and the Yak-3 but those are set at later dates (especially the Yak-3 ) during the war and it seems much more appropriate for them to fit it in there.

 

Again... considering its a 4+1 arrangement per side. If sky was the limit.... Well then I'd like to have every prototype and obscure liason aircraft possible. In the face of reality then I think the devs chose very wisely on what to represent.

[Gambit21]

I'm reminded of flying Wildcats against Zekes in the old IL2.

Even though the Zeke was my favorite plane, often enough I took off in a Wildcat in CoOps just for that extra challenge as the Wildcat was hugely outclassed by

the Zeke, even more so than in real life.

 

Many times in CoOps I had to satisfy myself with one high speed pass, then make a high speed run for home on the deck. Sometimes I sawed the wings off a Zeke

doing that, other times I went home empty handed. Landing at base though meant a successful mission in either case which I found very satisfying.

 

I think most of use here, Turban excepting can relate to this mind-set. Fly like your actual life is on the line, and honor the airplanes limitations and 

advantages and you'll do fine. There are times when, as pointed out above, you're just stuck because you're escorting, or moving mud and you

can't help but be at a disadvantage. Well then you might die, just like real pilots did when faced with those same conditions.

Even though I normally get annoyed by the over-used "it is what it is" - it's seems apropos in this case.

 

In the typical room we have these days, I take off in the Yak-1, spiral climb over my base until I have some decent alt, I might even have a bomb

with me. Then I fly over the lines and keep my head on a swivel. I don't even enter a fair fight, but when I see my moment I take it. Sometimes that just

means dropping my bomb on the enemy base. I'm more concerned with living (just for realism's sake) than ego these days.

Sometimes I end up landing back at base without ever engaging. There's a satisfying feeling though having stalked around in enemy airspace for a while, maybe

having a few snapshot engagements, landing and shutting the engine off. If there was a kill so much the better.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/12-suggestions/

 

Looking forward to your constructive and analytic suggestion for adding the Yak-9 to the BoS planeset.

 

Until than Zebras post and the mess you created for the last 2 pages tell everything. Hope this is a closed case soon (fell sry for Go_Pre and Lucas for their actually helpfull contribution on a more constructive matter in this overall destructive thread).

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

To make this thing feel a little purposeful again...

 

An attack diagram.

 

 

Attack from behind

 

Notes:

 

1. You are faced with an unsuspecting enemy. The course of action depends on your position.

2.1. If you are above, initiate your attack from 1000m with the sun behind you.

• Dive onto the enemy.
• Make it quick to benefit from the element of surprise: level out from your dive on the enemy's tail and well-within guns range. In fact, at rivet-counting range to decrease your stay in the danger zone.
• Fire decisively.
• Climb up at once to deny a reaction and position yourself for a further attack or to leave the area, as the situation dictates.

2.2. If you are level or below the enemy, initiate your attack from the enemy's blind spots. While this depends on the enemy aircraft type and their manoeuvring pattern, 6 o'clock low usually (not always) works.

• Start a shallow climb towards the enemy.
• Get close for maximum effect, and open fire.
• Should anything happen proceed with the fight - you are now flying at the same altitude and speed, work it from there.

This sequence works against pairs as well. Be aggressive in your attacks and make them count - approaching an unaware enemy is the easiest way to kill them, don't let this opportunity go to waste.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Lucas_From_Hell

[unlikely_spider]

Does approaching from behind work on the AI? I.e., do they magically detect you or do they have blind spots like a normal human would?

[Turban]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/12-suggestions/

 

Looking forward to your constructive and analytic suggestion for adding the Yak-9 to the BoS planeset.

 

Until than Zebras post and the mess you created for the last 2 pages tell everything. Hope this is a closed case soon (fell sry for Go_Pre and Lucas for their actually helpfull contribution on a more constructive matter in this overall destructive thread).

 

Stop accusing me of creating a mess, I answered someone who was quoting me directly, and you came along trying to stur it up a bit. You seem to like to do that, especially when a discussion doesn't go your way and you have no argument. Then hoping the thread is closed.

 

You're not a white knight, stop acting like one.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[Turban]

Exactly right Lucas. And as has been said many times... it won't change the game so significantly to make up a difference. I'm very much looking forward to future iterations where 1CGS lets us fly the Yak-9 and the Yak-3 but those are set at later dates (especially the Yak-3 ) during the war and it seems much more appropriate for them to fit it in there.

 

Again... considering its a 4+1 arrangement per side. If sky was the limit.... Well then I'd like to have every prototype and obscure liason aircraft possible. In the face of reality then I think the devs chose very wisely on what to represent.

 

It's funny how people pretend the Yak 9 would be "out of context" but find the A3 totally fine... it's... it's really weird....

 

 

And again... but I guess people don't read and just go with the popular opinion... it's not about significantly changing the game it's about bringing a little something more to the table.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

It's funny how people pretend the Yak 9 would be "out of context" but find the A3 totally fine... it's... it's really weird....

 

 

And again... but I guess people don't read and just go with the popular opinion... it's not about significantly changing the game it's about bringing a little something more to the table.

Whilst FW-190A-3 is not appropriate for the Stalingrad map, it is absolutely appropiate for other BOS map Velikie Luki.

Edited March 16, 2016 by RoflSeal

[Turban]

I'm reminded of flying Wildcats against Zekes in the old IL2.

Even though the Zeke was my favorite plane, often enough I took off in a Wildcat in CoOps just for that extra challenge as the Wildcat was hugely outclassed by

the Zeke, even more so than in real life.

 

Many times in CoOps I had to satisfy myself with one high speed pass, then make a high speed run for home on the deck. Sometimes I sawed the wings off a Zeke

doing that, other times I went home empty handed. Landing at base though meant a successful mission in either case which I found very satisfying.

 

I think most of use here, Turban excepting can relate to this mind-set. Fly like your actual life is on the line, and honor the airplanes limitations and 

advantages and you'll do fine. There are times when, as pointed out above, you're just stuck because you're escorting, or moving mud and you

can't help but be at a disadvantage. Well then you might die, just like real pilots did when faced with those same conditions.

Even though I normally get annoyed by the over-used "it is what it is" - it's seems apropos in this case.

 

In the typical room we have these days, I take off in the Yak-1, spiral climb over my base until I have some decent alt, I might even have a bomb

with me. Then I fly over the lines and keep my head on a swivel. I don't even enter a fair fight, but when I see my moment I take it. Sometimes that just

means dropping my bomb on the enemy base. I'm more concerned with living (just for realism's sake) than ego these days.

Sometimes I end up landing back at base without ever engaging. There's a satisfying feeling though having stalked around in enemy airspace for a while, maybe

having a few snapshot engagements, landing and shutting the engine off. If there was a kill so much the better.

 

You show that you didn't follow the discussion. The argument with which I disagreed was that the russian planes were not as competitive as the german planes.

You argue about the need to fly safe to leverage the russian planes weakness. Not only does it go in the direction of saying that the russians planes aren't as competitive as german planes (what I said), but the way to play wasn't the point anyway.

 

Your comment on how I should stick to Tomb Raider has no place here, same with what you think my mindset is. You just came here because you felt like lecturing someone.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[Gambit21]

Let me also steer you toward the Arkham games - a good little romp if you don't feel like thinking.

 

In all seriousness, the word "competitive" is relevant in the context of how it was layed out above.

If you want head to head air quake parity then realistic flight simulations are not your bag.

Or you can keep telling me how I don't follow this stuff or understand it...if that works better for you.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Gambit21

[jaydee]

You show that you didn't follow the discussion. The argument with which I disagreed was that the russian planes were not as competitive as the german planes.

You argue about the need to fly safe to leverage the russian planes weakness. Not only does it go in the direction of saying that the russians planes aren't as competitive as german planes (what I said), but the way to play wasn't the point anyway.

 

Your comment on how I should stick to Tomb Raider has no place here, same with what you think my mindset is. You just came here because you felt like lecturing someone.

 

Hi Turban. I understand your frustration Online with un-even teams the "Feeling" of being  "outclassed by Better German fighters". I get that.

 But playing Online, you don't know what your up against...You could have two Novice pilots engaging you... But if they are on TS together it gets tougher and you wont know it ! (as an example).

Turban, I feel a couple of people here could have used better words to reply to you....Telling a player to go to another Game Doesn't Help BOS.

Turban, I find this to be a great thread. I have learned so much from it !... And I am am asking you to Let this Go..Lets get back on topic and we are all learning !... ~S~ Turban

PS I woulnd say no to a Yak 9 !

[Asgar]

Whilst FW-190A-3 is not appropriate for the Stalingrad map, it is absolutely appropiate for other BOS map Velikie Luki.

don't worry, that was stated multiple times. he will just ignore this so he can pretend he's right.

Edited March 16, 2016 by I./JG3_Asgar

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

You seem to like to do that, especially when a discussion doesn't go your way and you have no argument. Then hoping the thread is closed.

If all you can contribute to this thread for the last 2 pages is calling people "biased" and disregarding opinions of well expirienced online pilots that beg to differ, yes, I'm happy if it's getting closed.

 

Just another example of how you dump helpfull advice and turn it into flaming. Oh well I tried.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Turban]

Let me also steer you toward the Arkham games - a good little romp if you don't feel like thinking.

 

In all seriousness, the word "competitive" is relevant in the context of how it was layed out above.

If you want head to head air quake parity then realistic flight simulations are not your bag.

Or you can keep telling me how I don't follow this stuff or understand it...if that works better for you.

 

 

Where did I say I want "air quake party" ? Again, you don't care about what's being said, you just come here and hope to get a shot at someone. That won't work.

If all you can contribute to this thread for the last 2 pages is calling people "biased" and disregarding opinions of well expirienced online pilots that beg to differ, yes, I'm happy if it's getting closed.

 

Just another example of how you dump helpfull advice and turn it into flaming. Oh well I tried.

 

 

Again, and again, I was answering someone quoting me directly. How come you don't go after the guy who comes here tand troll me ? Yes, I call that bias and I'd do it again.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[Turban]

don't worry, that was stated multiple times. he will just ignore this so he can pretend he's right.

 

lol. It's just not an argument. "Oh , the A3 wasn't on Stalingrad, but it was at Velikie Luki" .

 

Ok... still, it's over Stalingrad now. So why should a new Yak bother anyone?

 

And regarding Velikie Luki, you think russian only had Yak 1 ? Nope. They had at least yak 7.  So that's still the german side being 1 gen ahead.

 

I have never seen people fight so hard against bringing some equity into things.

 

 

[Asgar]

they're not one Generation ahead. the Fw 190 simply was at a different section of the Front at the time 

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

I fly mostly VVS and I would seriously like to see Yak-7, earlier series of Yak-1 or Lagg-3 in the sim. 

[Turban]

they're not one Generation ahead. the Fw 190 simply was at a different section of the Front at the time 

 

 

You're telling me the A3 is the same generation as the Yak 1 we have in game?

 

It was indeed on a different section of the front, but that section also featured newer Yak.

 

All and all there is really no way to say that any new Yak, either the 7 or 9, would be out of place.

[Jade_Monkey]

 

Do you want a screenshot of the chat aswell?

Hahaha

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Our Yak-1 is a top-of-the-line model though, a far cry from its 1941 counterpart and contemporary to the Fw-190A-3

[Asgar]

^this

[BlitzPig_EL]

The 9's more modern canopy, with it's better rear visibility would be a benefit though...

 

That said I have always had a soft spot for the Yak 7b.  I flew it a lot in the original series.

[Turban]

Our Yak-1 is a top-of-the-line model though, a far cry from its 1941 counterpart and contemporary to the Fw-190A-3

 

 

The Yak1 ver 69 we have while not being the worst isn't the top-of-the-line version. It's actually the middle-of-the-line.  It has the better engine that the original but that's it. 

 

The Ver 69 was on the front line in May 42 afaik. The FW 190 A3 arrived in little number when ? December ? You call that contemporary in the WWII time scale?

 

This is crazy. Someone say it'd be great to get a newer yak, especially one with a bubble canopy, and people lose it, tell us to learn to fly, go play tomb raider, the yaks  7-9 don't belong to the time frame, all that stuff.

 

It that the level to be expected from this forum?

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[II./JG77_Manu*]

The Yak1 ver 69 we have while not being the worst isn't the top-of-the-line version. It's actually the middle-of-the-line.  It has the better engine that the original but that's it. 

 

The Ver 69 was on the front line in May 42 afaik. The FW 190 A3 arrived in little number when ? December ? You call that contemporary in the WWII time scale?

 

This is crazy. Someone say it'd be great to get a newer yak, especially one with a bubble canopy, and people lose it, tell us to learn to fly, go play tomb raider, the yaks  7-9 don't belong to the time frame, all that stuff.

 

It that the level to be expected from this forum?

 

190-A3 entered combat in March 42, Yak1-s69 in May 42, two month later. It's the second newest fighter in game. The La5 is even newer. The Russians have more modern aircraft in the BoS setup then the Germans. Stop throwing wrong facts around. The Yak7 is older then the Yak1-s69. Seems you have no idea about Yaks in the first place.

Edit: only other "better" fighter which would make sense is the Yak1b, which had the same performance like the one we have in game, but better vis.

Edited March 16, 2016 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Turban]

190-A3 entered combat in March 42, Yak1-s69 in May 42, two month later. It's the second newest fighter in game. The La5 is even newer. The Russians have more modern aircraft in the BoS setup then the Germans. Stop throwing wrong facts around. The Yak7 is older then the Yak1-s69. Seems you have no idea about Yaks in the first place.

Edit: only other "better" fighter which would make sense is the Yak1b, which had the same performance like the one we have in game, but better vis.

 

 

Are you really trying to ignore the fact that we are talking about the eastern front ?  Yes, I am absolutely unaware about the A3 being on the eastern front especially the Stalingrad region in March 42. Please provide references to educate me on that .

 

When did I say the Yak 7 was newer ?  The original came about the same time as the Yak 1. One version that would interest us woulb be the Yak 7B with the PF engine, which arrived afaik at about the same time as the Yak1 ver 69.

Never said we wanted the original Yak 7, or are you really that mislead just because I didn't put a B at the end? We were mentioning the bubble canopy the whole time, and the original Yak 7 didn't have it.

When refering to newer yak it was the Yak9 I've been talking all along, don't mash up what i said.

 

You tell me not to throw wrong fact around, I didn't, but you try to slip one in, the Yak 1B was better than the Yak 1 ver 69 we have. 

Edit: Before someone come and nitpick, the Yab 1B wasn't two times better. not even 1.5 time better. But it was better.

Edit2 : We didn't even ask for the 1B since it came after the Yak7B/9 . or did it? Not sure.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Everyone needs to chill. Turban, I'm all for the Yak 9. It would be the first Russian crate to get me to fly for that side. She is interesting and attractive.

 

That being said, your defensive approach to argument makes you appear immature and a bit, "yelly." Mis-stating your online exploits has seriously undermined your credibility. (Remember, there are cameras everywhere ) This is not a personal attack but an observation of your debate style.

 

Your case has been stated. Let it go. The Devs are not going to make a decision based upon this thread anyway. In fact, they have not made any official decisions on plane sets or expansions at all. (Though I suspect they have a gameplan. Wouldn't make much business sense not to.)

Edited March 16, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Turban]

Everyone needs to chill. Turban, I'm all for the Yak 9. It would be the first Russian crate to get me to fly for that side. She is interesting and attractive.

 

That being said, your defensive approach to argument makes you appear immature and a bit, "yelly." Mis-stating your online exploits has seriously undermined your credibility. (Remember, there are cameras everywhere ) This is not a personal attack but an observation of your debate style.

 

Your case has been stated. Let it go. The Devs are not going to make a decision based upon this thread anyway. In fact, they have not made any official decisions on plane sets or expansions at all. (Though I suspect they have a gameplan. Wouldn't make much business sense not to.)

 

I appreciate you keeping it civilized;)

However for the sake of it I wonder how does being defensive when someone tells me to "stick to Tomb Raider" and other petty comments makes me appear immature? If not letting someone try to bully me makes me look immature, then fine, I'll take it.

 

How did I mis-state my online exploits? I was in an IL2. Yes. Ok. But I didn't say what people said I did. What's more important? Me mis-stating my plane or people putting wrong words in my mouth ? I'll let you decide whose mis-statement is the bigger deal.

 

In the end I despise this kind of forum stuff but there are a few people in this thread who thought they can shut someone up by using stupid personnal attacks and that's just wrong and that won't work on me.

 

In the end again my point was just to go with the OP and say  "hey yeah, that'd be great to have one of those slightly better Yak to ease our pain ".  Then people started a war over this. Who's immature really?

 

I know devs have their plan regardless of this thread and that's fine by me, this thread was never more than a forum thread to me, didn't expect anything more. I'm excited to see what's coming next whatever it is.

 

Cheers.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[Vade]

who thought they can shut someone up by using stupid personnal attacks

 

 

 

Look, the very first personal attack...

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

And there we have it

[Asgar]

oh i remember that match. we captured the airfield in 2 Panzer III. (please don't start ranting about how underpowered the T-34 is and that the Russians need the KW-1 or a T34-85) 

[Turban]

Look, the very first personal attack...

 

 

How's that relevant to this thread?  How does it justify you coming here and tell me my opinion isn't valid regarding the original discussion of this thread?

 Where did I talk about fw engine management in that match ? That's what Zeebra prentend I said.  Don't act as if you're a white knight because you take a cynical comment I made ingame that has zero thing to do with this current discussion here, twist it, and come derail the thread because someone you think I deserved to be shut up.

I'm being called immature but what I see is a bt-the-book derailling of this thread.

 

 

oh i remember that match. we captured the airfield in 2 Panzer III. (please don't start ranting about how underpowered the T-34 is and that the Russians need the KW-1 or a T34-85) 

 

That particular match I left after being shot down so I really don't see why I'd care and what it has to do with this thread. What is the point of your post? Trolling?

Edited March 16, 2016 by Turban

[Jade_Monkey]

This thread is pure gold.

 

Here is some unsolicited advice for everyone feeling all the rage: walk away from the post/forum for a couple of days. It's not worth all the stress if a single discussion is gonna make you so angry.

[Vade]

Don't act as if you're a white knight because you take a cynical comment I made ingame

 

 

 

You're right,you did tell the truth. i like how passionate you are about this game!

 

 

This thread is pure gold.

 

It is!

[Turban]

 

You're right,you did tell the truth. i like how passionate you are about this game!

 

 

 

 

It is!

 

So ?  Where do I talk about engine management? Still waiting. And what does it have to do with this thread? Still waiting for that too. 

You've been derailling the thread into a personnal attack, period.

[ACG_pezman]

Let me just say this:  It would be nice to have better rear visibility in Soviet (minding the difference Lucas  ) aircraft and it does get very frustrating flying Soviet aircraft against the superior German aircraft.  I know, I fly Soviet pretty much exclusively unless the Luftwaffe is low on players, which is usually never. 

 

We will have newer Soviet aircraft at some point, but probably not in this expansion, and we just have to deal with it.  I share Turban's frustration and understand where he is coming from. 

 

You do have some options though Turban, as do all of us Soviet drivers.  First off I would recommend that you get PWGC and use it to thwart the uneven team balance on MP servers by playing that when it gets unfair.  It is nearly impossible to get our LW counterparts to fly Soviet aircraft, there are a few people who predominantly fly LW that will brave it (Manu is one I have noticed) and I appreciate them because they are doing more to increase the appeal of the game for everyone by keeping it, dare I say, fun?  The other is when teams are that unbalanced, join the heavy team and pile on.  It's boring for everyone and there will be a few stubborn holdouts on the allies, but it usually works after a bit and teams will even.

 

I think, as a mostly an allied player now, that even teams would go a long way in stamping out frustration.  It's one thing to be out preformed aircraft to aircraft, but another whole different thing when you are outnumbered 5:1 or 6:1 and out preformed.  Then I start to wonder if the Axis pilots even feel bad as they all swarm me to the point where it's fun to make them collide before one of them shoots me down.

 

TL;DR - we have no choice but to suck it up until something competitive at equal energy comes along.  Until then we either don't partake in MP (which is hard) or we have to take the time to give ourselves as much of an advantage as possible.

 

Just my two cents, no everyone pile on and flame me for defending my poor allied pilot brother who experiences the same crap we all do 

 

And sooner or later, we all snap.  I know I have. 

[LukeFF]

And regarding Velikie Luki, you think russian only had Yak 1 ? Nope. They had at least yak 7.  So that's still the german side being 1 gen ahead.

 

The Yak-7 was part of a separate line of planes that culminated in the Yak-9. The higher number doesn't mean it was necessarily "better" than the Yak-1.

Edited March 16, 2016 by LukeFF