Jump to content
=LG=Blakhart

Tactical Air War planeset and limitations.

Tactical Air War planeset and limitations  

101 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like the idea of collecting new planes during the campaign

    • Yes.
      84
    • No.
      17
  2. 2. What you think about the AK/GK limits?

    • They are fair and balanced.
      15
    • They are too low. My proposition is ( describe in post )
      3
    • They are too high.My proposition is ( describe in post )
      8
    • Hard to say now, we will see during the campaign.
      75
  3. 3. Do you like the full real settings on TAW server?

    • Yes. Beginners should play on easier servers.
      90
    • No. I would like to have GPS icon because I`m too lazy to navigate.
      11


Recommended Posts

Hello guys!

 

This is a proposition of planeset for Stalingrad 1942 campaign.

 

Feel free to leave a comment below the poll.

 

Critic with arguments welcome, sensless whining not. If you think that something is wrong pleas share your solution or idea.

 

S!


OZPvg0m.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Blakhart, i just wanted to point out that i completely know and understand what you guys are trying to achieve for this server and im mostly on board with most things! 

 

:biggrin: 

 

but i do have a recommendation, please take it as friendly advice since that is how its intended.

 

When youre doing and investigation and youre using Polls to collect data, you should make sure that the answers to your questions have the available options that people would like to answer, aaaaandd.... make sure your answer options arent Biased like " Yes. Because I am a mature person" perhaps the reason why that particular person answered "yes" is not because "he feels mature". IDK if i'm being clear, just trying to help...

 

 

On the other hand, would you mind explaining me the how the plane collecting mechanics work? i cant seem to get the full picture

 

Thanks man :salute:

 

 

P.D i was going to PM this but your tray seems to be full  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall the system is good, but here are my two major suggestions:

 

1. Don't remove all aircraft when a pilot is killed. You can remove all of a specific type, but removing the whole hangar feels wrong.

2. While the amount of results needed to get more aircraft is OK, the value is very low. I believe it would be perfect if you'd unlock new aircraft in the same values as they are right now (i.e. five bombers, three fighters instead of one or two of each).

 

The air kill requirement feels unfair to patrol and escort pilots. I believe I can say I do a decent job escorting for example but I rarely ever get kills because of that. Personally it doesn't bother me because I fly the LaGG-3 regularly, but it kind of benefits wannabe Mavericks to require 15 kills for a plane or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAG 

Thx for comment. I`m not ofended at all.

I forgot to use smile emoticons :D

I couldnt add more questions :( So definitly when this one will have around 50 answers I will set another more precised.

 

 

About your question.

 

By starting a campaign, you start a WWII virtual pilot career. 

 

Regular aviator at war usually didnt had too much options to choose on what type he will fly.

He was assigned to unit and flew on planes used by his squadron. End. Some of them lived long enough to transfer to new versions or new types. But you still had to survive more than year on front.

Lets think how was looking the typical career of WWII flyer.

 

If he was good enough he was flying on fighters, medium, on bombers, transport planes and so on. Of course we could find plenty of different histories about very good bomber/transport pilots but I`m just saying how it was usually done.

 

So we normally could assign some pilots ONLY to one type of plane and maybe change their aircraft 2-3 times per whole war. So here we give something more atractive than they had in real.

Here you can prove your skill to your HQ and transfer from different type of planes and fly on the best available on your side.

 

But still. This is not an MMORPG. This is not War Thunder type of hangar and we dont even üse such word like "tier" :)

 

Here you are "promoted"for better planes during your virtual life so you have to stay alive to keep the planes.

I know it sounds really hard. But that how was looking the real conflict.

You flew your plane responsibly or got erased from the pilots list on the blackboard at evening by the C/O.

Everyone got drunk and flew another mission next day.

 

On the other hand if you would crash plane after plane your C/O would definitly move you to IL-2 or Ju87 suicide-squadron or even sign some paper to degrade you for service in ground units.

 

So here you just have to feel the realistic side of the front life. You are caerfull or got killed and all your effort is wasted.

 

SAG I flew my first virtual front mission in 2006. 

I had only 1 plane and 1 life to waste. 

I still remember what happened there.

Still remember hands sweating on the stick and blood pumping in vains.

Still remember the fear of being virtually killed in that mission.

 

Until you try to fly in realistic conditions you will never understand how cool and addictive it is.

Belive me. 
It works.

Its annoying.

Its hard as hell.

It makes you crazy.

But you want more and more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big fan of the limits on planes and loadouts based on individual performance. I'm OK with it to the extent that you don't give the best newest technology to a rookie that can't land properly. I like the idea of team-wide logistics better: Destroy a factory, a supply convoy and you remove a type of ammunition or even plane for a round or a couple of rounds. Maybe don't remove it entirely, in which case only the best pilots would have access to certain equipment. I can see it being difficult to implement. People can easily be confused as to what they are allowed to use or not. But that's a problem with your proposed system too.

 

About ground kills: Are you counting a tank kill and a static truck the same way? One is much harder to kill, requiring skill and a certain equipment, whereas the other one almost melts if it stays out too long in the sun :biggrin: . I think they need to be weighted accordingly.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the death penalty: It's going to annoy people a lot when they die "unfairly", e.g. get rammed (something you experience now and then, Blakhart ;) ) or just because the game decided you should die. Yesterday I ejected from my P40 at low altitude. The parachute opened, and I descended gently towards the ground. Then when I touched the ground I died. Had I lost all my planes because of that I would be pretty annoyed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About tanks.

Yes you are right. If only script allow us to implement this we will treat tank kill with same or similar value like an airkill.

 

About the death penalty.

It should be like 1 life per 1 mission. So people would learn to respect their planes and virtual life in game.

Unfourtunately its senseless because at now we dont have so many active online players so we would loose the popularity with such rough rules.

 

Some side is gaining the advantage by eliminating oposite team to gain the air domination to allow the bombers do the job in sector and what happens?

Without penalty stubborn-undead cyborgs are resurecting all the time and finaly manage to kill some poor attackers.

 

At least with 5-15mins of penalty you have some advantage when you killed the enemy pilots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

About the death penalty.

It should be like 1 life per 1 mission. So people would learn to respect their planes and virtual life in game.

Unfourtunately its senseless because at now we dont have so many active online players so we would loose the popularity with such rough rules.

 

 

 

i think you should keep the game as it is now, you start with a roster of several planes but you lose them if you die or damage the plane a lot and need to get points AK/GK to be able to use them again...

 

About IT being senseless.... you dont have many active players at the moment because people already think that your server is too hard. how many of the people that you made into regular flyers will leave once you turn the difficulty dial all the way up?

 

in my opinion, its all about compromises and right now it seems you dont want to stray too far from your original idea. which would probably hurt the server more than anything else, just keep on taking feedback like youre doing rught now but also try to listen to the feedback regarding penalties for DEATH.

 

 

SAG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for feedback SAG :)

 

Like you see I`m open for compromise and discussion, but the main idea of that online war has to be saved.

Here you have to sacrifice your time and effort to get something, otherwise you will never have enough respect to this.

Thats how human mind works. 

You have something for free, you dont care about it.

 

5 minutes penalty is the minimal value for now.

 

Cheers! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for feedback SAG :)

 

Like you see I`m open for compromise and discussion, but the main idea of that online war has to be saved.

Here you have to sacrifice your time and effort to get something, otherwise you will never have enough respect to this.

Thats how human mind works. 

You have something for free, you dont care about it.

 

5 minutes penalty is the minimal value for now.

 

Cheers! :)

 

 

Oh blackheart yes, the 5 min death penalty is completely fine with me. in fact, think its a good mechanic. when i said "death penalty" i meant eliminationg all the available aircraft for your pilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say keep it 3 units for fighters and 5 for bombers for whatever you get, while also using your current framework. Unit upgrades would be good to have as well, since it would be hard to fly if Pilot A only has LaGG-3s while Pilots B, C and D are going out in La-5s.

 

Rammjager has a point with the gunpods vs. bombs. A fighter with bombs is a fighter-bomber, not a fighter, and in the current format you will have people taking off, dropping the eggs and moving on.

 

In general I think there is a problem with determining the value of each aircraft because it's very subjective. For example, within 55 IAP I think the La-5 is amazingly capable, while another pilot swears by the MiG-3 as the best aircraft to counter the Bf-109F-4. Nobody thinks the Yak-1 is the best aircraft by any means. On the other side, I feel the Bf-109G-2 is the best Bf-109 out there while you prefer the Bf-109F-4, and there is a poll somewhere in here that shows mixed results. I could go on for long, but you get the idea. I do not have an alternative to propose though so I'm of little help here :biggrin:

 

Either way, I think the most important thing is that you guys at LG are involving the people in the creation of this and are acting on both feedback and results you see on your end. If something works you can keep it, and if it doesn't you can do away with it. Whatever the case I'm interested in the project, and good luck!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Ramm idea.

( btw I know why he wants the gunpods, if I would fly on 109 I would also prefer the gunpods for fast and clean kills :) )

 

Planeset has to be balanced. No matter if 1 of 10 players will come and say that he doesnt care about techincal adv, still there is 9 of other ppl who will be frustrated about the unfair situation.

 

The basic planes has to balanced as much as they can, because they will be definitly mostly used during the campaign.

 

Unfourtunately the basic planes of Stalingrad 1942, Yak-1 & 109 F-4 are the superiors in the game. Its a fact, there is no point to discuss about it.

So obviously we cant set most used planes in conflict as a basic planes.

 

The 109 G-2 is far better than LaGG-3 s.29 because you can easily outclimb or outrun the soviet plane. 

In manouver combat the 109 is also better, especially in vertical. 
LaGG can gain some bonus from using flaps but still it will slow him down and in total conclusion only really experienced pilot can win against 109 in combat.

The only advantage of LaGG-3 is the 23mm gun power and balistic and quite stable shooting platform.

But still in WWII type combat where prop planes fight the crucial factor is the energy, so the 109 can get more altitude so shortly in combat can transform it in to initiative and position advantage.

 

In conclusion, LaGG-3 vs 109 G-2 is definitly a big plus for 109 user.

 

So to balance the planes we have to somehow decrease the speed and/or climbing abilities of 109.

Thats why there is a 4xSC50 as a "must have" equipemnt in 109 and armoured head rest. At least we will give the LaGG pilots chance to use the sneaky attack from behind :).

 

All in all 109 wont have such high difference in top speed vs LaGG-3.

 

Gunpods fixedly mounted on 109 means - no bombs, so no tanks killing ability.

Also it slows down the plane and change the G-2 in to a flying brick so 109 pilots will rather stay high with gunpods and dont engage in manouver combat.

Plus

LaGG-3 doesnt "exist" above the 2000 compare to 109 G-2 so, the 109 driver will always have the energy adv.

So with g-pods it gives the 109 ability to B&Z, spray and pray, kill or heavily damage in 1 pass and then disengage easily.
 

Well explained & fair enough ?

 

Another thing...

The very good oponent to G-2 ( no g-pods) is La-5 ser.8. ( with regular ammo ).

109 have better climbing abilities but La-5 is faster.

109 is better at vertical combat, but La-5 is very agile on flaps and have boost.

 

But giving the La-5 as a basic plane would cause a lot of complaines and if we would give a La-5 vs 109 G-2 what would be a match to FW-190 ??? :D

 

I was sitting on this planeset few hours, thinking, testing, fighting against friends in simulated combats. 

And belive me guys... I`m not red nor blue.

Flying actually on red side with rest of LG, but we do it only to even the teams.

In future we plan to switch the sides from time to time so we really dont have reasons to boost any of the parts of the conflict.

 

We still need to test how it will work in game, then maybe change something which doesnt work propertly.

If anyone wants to talk about the planes and their advantages or disadvantages we can discuss it on TS3 this sunday around 18.00 UTC on LG TS3.

We can also simulate some combats or make tests on training servers. 

Well explained & fair enough ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Ramm idea.

( btw I know why he wants the gunpods, if I would fly on 109 I would also prefer the gunpods for fast and clean kills :) )

 

Planeset has to be balanced. No matter if 1 of 10 players will come and say that he doesnt care about techincal adv, still there is 9 of other ppl who will be frustrated about the unfair situation.

 

The basic planes has to balanced as much as they can, because they will be definitly mostly used during the campaign.

 

Unfourtunately the basic planes of Stalingrad 1942, Yak-1 & 109 F-4 are the superiors in the game. Its a fact, there is no point to discuss about it.

So obviously we cant set most used planes in conflict as a basic planes.

 

The 109 G-2 is far better than LaGG-3 s.29 because you can easily outclimb or outrun the soviet plane. 

In manouver combat the 109 is also better, especially in vertical. 

LaGG can gain some bonus from using flaps but still it will slow him down and in total conclusion only really experienced pilot can win against 109 in combat.

The only advantage of LaGG-3 is the 23mm gun power and balistic and quite stable shooting platform.

But still in WWII type combat where prop planes fight the crucial factor is the energy, so the 109 can get more altitude so shortly in combat can transform it in to initiative and position advantage.

 

In conclusion, LaGG-3 vs 109 G-2 is definitly a big plus for 109 user.

 

So to balance the planes we have to somehow decrease the speed and/or climbing abilities of 109.

Thats why there is a 4xSC50 as a "must have" equipemnt in 109 and armoured head rest. At least we will give the LaGG pilots chance to use the sneaky attack from behind :).

 

All in all 109 wont have such high difference in top speed vs LaGG-3.

 

Gunpods fixedly mounted on 109 means - no bombs, so no tanks killing ability.

Also it slows down the plane and change the G-2 in to a flying brick so 109 pilots will rather stay high with gunpods and dont engage in manouver combat.

Plus

LaGG-3 doesnt "exist" above the 2000 compare to 109 G-2 so, the 109 driver will always have the energy adv.

So with g-pods it gives the 109 ability to B&Z, spray and pray, kill or heavily damage in 1 pass and then disengage easily.

 

It's not our fault that ŁaGG was a crap plane :P 

But I was killed so many times by that "crap" plane even sitting in "superiror" Fw190. ŁaGG is quite fast and has a good firepower. If red pilot knows his best points - ŁaGG is deadly oponent. Especially in "axis" style fighting b&z.

 

In my opinion any axis pilot shouldn't turn in fight.

In old days (old IL) early wersion of 109 (F2, F4, G2) and Fw90 (A5, A6) can enter a turn fighting for while.

When I enter a WOL server a few months ago - I get killed constantly trying to fight in old IL style.

Now I'm trying to fly only straight.

Going to the point - any axis pilot don't need gunpods to archieve kill flying in that way. Single nose mounted MG151/20 is enough to wreck every single fighter in our game with short burst. Pods are needed to kill Pe-2 or IL.

If I have to fly with 4xSC50 - first thing after take off will be drop bombs near af, to make ilusion for Pe-2 pilot that af was being atacked :P

And with bombs off I will get flighty reduced speed. So I will get up, and trying b&z. As always ;)

 

We are talking about fighters job.

But what can say bomber pilots who are forced to fly Ju-87 against IL ?

Personally for me IL in that game is some kind of "holy graal" - multirole fighter :P

I saw three ils on 4k fghting with 109. And wining :biggrin:

 

Blak - as You perfectly know - bunch IL's low with two or three ŁaGG's can wipe out groud target and a cap fighters in a few minutes ;) 

 

It's a game based on historical data.

Allied flying low for ground targets, Axis trying to destroy them, before red reach the target.

I know that You are trying to find a "fair balance" for everybody - but that balance can't be found.

Every side know his strong and weak points. Ppl are trying to fly on what they got as good as they can.

 

About counting planes.

After thinking a bit about it I think what we got right now is good solution.

At start every pilot have full hangar. Maybe should be less numbers of planes (1xF190 and 1xYak, 2xG2 and 2 x La5 and so on). If You loose You "extra" planes - then You have to fly G2/LaGG or E7/Rata. And to get extra planes back - You have to get ak or gk.

 

Ramm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramm you got killed because you are flying alone. You know that.

 

About IL-2. 

Thats why it has no rear gunner, no rockets, 23 or 37mm cannons in basic plane. Only bombs and basic arnament.

LaGGs are worst than 109`s, but IL-2 is better than Ju87.

Here we have the key to balance the basic planeset.

 

About the rest.

Guys, I strongly invite for a discussion.

Lets meet .

 

Sunday 18.00 UTC.

 

LG TS3

178.217.190.57:6420  no:pw

Edited by =LG=Blakhart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About IL-2. 

Thats why it has no rear gunner, no rockets, 23 or 37mm cannons in basic plane. Only bombs and basic arnament.

LaGGs are worst than 109`s, but IL-2 is better than Ju87.

Here we have the key to balance the basic planeset.

 

Every single creator of online war based on il2 series since first Bellum War created by Dutertrue had the same problem.

How to equal the power of IL-2 with some plane on axis side ;)

 

You can't compare Il-2 with Stuka. It's impossible.

Il can be used as a fighter in close and dynamic low dogfight. Ju-87 can't.

That balance You created gives allied pilots huge advantage in destroying groud target.

And tanks and convoys can't be bombed from high alt using Ju-88 or He-111 where axis have slighty adantage.

Pods in G2 are needed to destroy il or diving Pe not for fighters.

 

Whatever You decided - let's fly :biggrin:

Most crucial  thing will shows up during missions ;)

 

Ramm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salute blakhart...

 

i think i understand the idea... i preffer genuine ADW sistem. dont focus all merits on a one lonly  pilot,  the relevant its the squad work and pilot have planes avaliable for a squad . I have the impression , on TAW miss the old concept and focus all on individual merits... maybe i am wrong. 

 

Excuse my english. thx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all who miss exactly the same system which was in ADW or just want to have team based point system.

 

If you know how to connect it to www site and our script, please contact us.

 

Im serious, maybe some of you have skills, know PEARL, etc. Any kind of help is welcome.

Just contact Kathon via pm.

At now its impossible to set the same point system like in adw, we dont have technical abilities to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sorry:

 

sorry man, i cant help. 

 

TAW its growing.... some day will have required tecnhical abilities , now its a excelent server.

 

Thx for your work, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all who miss exactly the same system which was in ADW or just want to have team based point system.

 

If you know how to connect it to www site and our script, please contact us.

 

Im serious, maybe some of you have skills, know PEARL, etc. Any kind of help is welcome.

Just contact Kathon via pm.

At now its impossible to set the same point system like in adw, we dont have technical abilities to do it.

Perhaps you can ask for support from dev team. Your server is what this game deserve and, IMHO, team point is very important, like in 72AG server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Blackheart, i was wondering about a middle ground between the people who want GPS on and the ones that dont...

 

What is the possibility of implementing homing beacons such as RPK on the server??

 

ive seen servers with working RPKs

 

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..its almost impossible to get lost on those maps objectives are 6-10 minutes from airfields  :o: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Blackheart, i was wondering about a middle ground between the people who want GPS on and the ones that dont...

 

What is the possibility of implementing homing beacons such as RPK on the server??

 

ive seen servers with working RPKs

 

What do you think?

 

I think its a great idea.

Come to LG TS3 and tell us how you want to implement that feature in to our campaign map and how it will work.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for all the work on this server, LG guys (& whoever else is contributing).  Enjoyed flying with several of you this weekend too.

 

Great discussion here.  Blackheart it's obvious you're putting lots of time & thought into refining it, despite some technical limitations that constrain you for now; your passion for this project is obvious and much appreciated.  It's already very good.  Many good points above, including the near impossible task of "balancing" what is really 2 very unique plane sets, each with their own strengths and weaknesses.  Not really sure a true balance is possible, but I applaud your efforts & maybe you'll find a solution in time.  Meanwhile, why not try 2 or 3 of the ideas put forth during this early trial period - yours or others - and see how they work out?  Just a thought.

 

Overall right now I think I agree one of Ramm's conclusions/suggestions:  things are great as they are now, maybe just reduce the numbers for some of the 'higher value' planes in our hangar, so we have to earn them back flying more "workhorse" missions in less capable planes.  Also think you should be able to earn a plane back with AK or GK.  Maybe a ratio of 1 AK = 7 GK or something like that.  (Too bad tank kills can't be higher value as they should be - maybe that ability will come one day.)

 

Finally, totally agree on navigation.  Distances are really short & it's just not that hard, though easier for some than others.  We were all new at it once, but half the fun is learning in simulations.  If anyone wants some solid basic nav skills feel free to PM me.  Happy to meet on TS sometime & teach.  :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work so far. :)

One thing to concider:

Maybe setting for fighter planes not x airkills AND y groundkills. Instead you should concider to take OR. The reason for me is: I am not a very skilled fighter pilot, while my bombing skills are decent. But for reason, I also like to fly fighters sometimes as well as fighterbomber mission. If you now say, you have to get air kills, too, I already know, after I loose the both planes, I will never can flight fighter(bomber) anymore.

 

Speaking of the limit of planes: I vote for keeping the actual limits at all. They are balanced and fine in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for warm words Blue2 and good point Zulu354.

 

About all those ideas, concepts, etc.

Kathon is actually working on that, but...

If you guys can help him and pay like 2000 Euro per day he will definitly quit from job and start to work only on TAW :D

Otherwise we need to wait ;( I would like to have all of it right now, but its impossible.

 

Please give him some time.

He is the god of TAW. But also have own job, family and duties.

 

About the GK & AK.

 

I think if the script will allow we might set such point system:

XX ground kills ( trucks, artillery, aaa, etc. ) + XX airkills/tank kills, means 1 airkill = 1 tank kill. 

 

I think its a not even a golden, but platinum solution and bow in to the side of fighters with less experience.

People will still have to attack the targets, but it will be a lot easier to earn the extra planes.

 

What you think guys ?

( replacing AK to GK is impossible, all pilots must have motivation to fulfill the tasks and take vital part with ALL of the elements of the campaign,  this part we just cant change )

Edited by =LG=Blakhart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a great idea.

Come to LG TS3 and tell us how you want to implement that feature in to our campaign map and how it will work.

 

 

Hey Blakhart, i joined the TS as soon as i read this but no one is there but im subscribed to this thread now so ill get a message whenever somebody replies now :D

 

 

you inbox is still full isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not full mate, was checking that today. Plz join LG TS3 around 18.00-19.00 UTC and leave your profile on our channel, so we can poke you when we arrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your attention to count the destruction of a tank as an equvialence to a AK is good solution for less fighter affine pilots. So, they can get back their lost fighters by pushing the ground action on TAW.

 

signatur_100.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a great idea.

Come to LG TS3 and tell us how you want to implement that feature in to our campaign map and how it will work.

 

 

Check this OP 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/20434-radio-beacon-and-afn-2

 

Ive never personally used the mission builder but from what i read i think its a pretty easy thing to do  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting server. Once I get my stick (after Holliday) I will be sure to join.

 

I have a few questions however:

 

I think the equivalence of ground and air kills is a must so that pilots will be willing to escort. This made me think that missions where bombers are used (like the Ju-88 or Heinkel for sausage side) there could be penalties for the team that lost them? So you are highly encouraged to escort the bombers with fighters in clean configuration and the enemy team is highly encouraged to stop them. Also, adding a few AI level bombers would be nice since those planes will be rare (heck, maybe open up level bombing "free" slots once in a while to represent the beggining of a new offensive or something like that) and they can have a large impact on the situation at the front.

 

Also, why do you guys feel the F4 is the best fighter in game? The most forgiving sure but not sure if it is the best.

Also, the G2 is way better than the MC202 by quite a margin. Wouldn't a better matchup be the MC202 with the lagg3? The MC202 has better climb but worse turning and diving and shoots BBs instead of bullets :)

Edited by mAIOR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...