Who is going to buy and fly the G-6?

[Dakpilot]

I suppose "many" is relative - 257 aircraft in ETO, out of about 4,000 fighters, according to the USAAF statistics summary, and not operated from any of the airfields likely to be on our map.  It probably qualifies as the least representative plane from the tactical war setting in any of the BoX series so far. 

 

12 folgore on Eastern front...

 

P-40E scarcely used at very end of BoM and one understrength squadron at Stalingrad that lasted two weeks

 

 love them both but they make the P-38 seem positively bountiful   in theatre from 43 until end of the War (1 Fighter wing?) 

 

as for P-39 thread...good grief LOL

 

G6 will be cool

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

[Cpt_Cool]

Well I took the plunge. Cant wait to take if for a spin.

[Wolfram-Harms]

Will the G-6 not be in the "Battle of Kuban" pack?

[Rabitzky]

https://il2sturmovik.com/store/battle-of-kuban/

https://il2sturmovik.com/about/#9

https://il2sturmovik.com/store/collector-planes/

[Finkeren]

So in my defence I was responding to a question on wing loading and I clearly stated the data was from the wiki AND noted it was from a Q model. Wing loading would have been similar to the Q as a point of reference. Before I get dog piled for that - I know armaments changed on the wings and total plane weight changed - the P39 got heavier in later models. Infer from that what you will but I wouldn't call it "BS".

 

von Luck

Sorry, maybe “BS” was too harsh a word. Still I’d call it problematic to use the wingloading of a version of the plane, that we know didn’t weigh the same.

 

Btw: Wasn’t part of the reason for the improved performance of the P-39Q actually a reduction in weight? I think the removed some of the armor protection.

[unreasonable]

12 folgore on Eastern front...

 

P-40E scarcely used at very end of BoM and one understrength squadron at Stalingrad that lasted two weeks

 

 love them both but they make the P-38 seem positively bountiful   in theatre from 43 until end of the War (1 Fighter wing?) 

 

as for P-39 thread...good grief LOL

 

G6 will be cool

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

 

You are right I had forgotten about the Italian job. Should have been a Hurricane for BoM. See the pattern here......

 

With luck what with the Spitfire being a success with the player base, the Mk IX and Tempest to come, people will realize that the British planes are actually quite interesting too and we will get a couple more of them, especially Typhoon and Mosquito. I really want an early war plane set with the Battle and the Defiant...

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Battle of Moscow collector planes should have been P-40C (or Hurricane) and MC.200 (or IAR 80) imho

 

Btw: Wasn’t part of the reason for the improved performance of the P-39Q actually a reduction in weight? I think the removed some of the armor protection.

 

Apparently the P-39Q actually had increased weight in comparison to earlier variants, because of extra armor, extra fuel tanks or both, at least according to this: http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39Q.html

I think most of the P-39 increase in performance across the variants was mostly because of engine upgrades / clearance of higher regimes?

Edited February 1, 2018 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Finkeren]

Okay, I can see what it was I had in mind: The Q-5 version decreased armor but compensated with extra fuel load, so only potentially lighter then.

[Trooper117]

especially Typhoon and Mosquito....

 

Right on the button... I'm with you there!

[CUJO_1970]

Even if what you're saying is correct - and I have no idea either way - I certainly hope, that BoBP will focus on more than just that single day of operations on January 1st. Otherwise the scope of BoBP will be even more limited than the proposed Midway title and essentially offer no lasting value for the SP crowd.

 

I have confidence however, that the title will cover at least 2-3 months of operations with Op. Bodenplatte as its centerpiece.

 

Good to see that now, with the P-38L we no longer want to limit the scope of the sim to rigid time-frames or map titles. Too bad the developers don't release it tomorrow.

 

Then we can finally do away with the silly pretense that some use not to add features to a particular aircraft they don't like.

[Wolfram-Harms]

Thank you, Rabitzki!

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

No, I think it is apples and oranges TBH.

 

Nobody has a problem with the P-38 being somewhat out of its time slot as a collector because its effectiveness was waning compared to the other aircraft in the BP planeset. 

Just my 2¢

Oh if you think the P-38L will be weak think again, it will be by far the most manoeuvrable, fastest climbing of the three US fighters added to the game, due to a combination of fowler flaps, hydraulically powered ailerons, counter rotating engines and very good low speed controllability ( ~60mph power stall with flaps down)

Edited February 2, 2018 by RoflSeal

[Aap]

G6 is not a Kuban product.

It is a separate collector plane.

[Dakpilot]

G6 is not a Kuban product.

It is a separate collector plane.

 

Except they said they were making it for Kuban, quoted earlier in the thread

 

that is why people say it is for Kuban period, same as La-5FN being Kuban period model not later

 

not one person demanding 1944 La-5..go figure

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

[Aap]

Except they said they were making it for Kuban, quoted earlier in the thread

 

Do I need to quote to you again what they say on the G6 pre-sale introduction or are you able to find it yourself? Don't you think that instead of the speech they give there for potential customers they should write something like "This model is to be used strictly on one map for a limited one month period"?

P.S. Did the devs mention which G6 units in Kuban used 30 mm cannons?

P.P.S. If someone from a dev team happened to mention somewhere on the forums that Ju52 fits Battle of Stalingrad time frame, then it means it should not be used on any other map or in any other form of gameplay?

Edited February 2, 2018 by II./JG77_Kemp

[unreasonable]

I am genuinely curious as to why anyone cares about what mods the G-6, the P-38 etc will have as options, in particular why these should be less rather than more. In SP, the campaign/career designer will determine the plane's configuration according to their reading of the history. If you want to make your own campaigns or missions with odd loads - why not?   In MP, I assume the server admins do the same.

 

Why does this cause so much angst?  

Edited February 2, 2018 by unreasonable

[Wolfram-Harms]

G6 is not a Kuban product.

It is a separate collector plane.

 

...which is pretty strange, considering that it was the most built version of the Bf 109.

IMHO it should have been in the package. I could understand when "exotic birds" like the Macchi or the Airacobra would be sold as "Collector's Planes".

But one of THE basic planes in WW2 air combat in Russia - that looks to me like scratching out additional 20,- Euro from the customer.

And that, when the basic package is already at a price of almost 70,- Euro - for a sim, that didn't have to be built totally new?

I don't know...

[unreasonable]

...which is pretty strange, considering that it was the most built version of the Bf 109.

IMHO it should have been in the package. I could understand when "exotic birds" like the Macchi or the Airacobra would be sold as "Collector's Planes".

But one of THE basic planes in WW2 air combat in Russia - that looks to me like scratching out additional 20,- Euro from the customer.

And that, when the basic package is already at a price of almost 70,- Euro - for a sim, that didn't have to be built totally new?

I don't know...

 

Now you are just being a cheapskate. The price is what it is - for a niche product of this quality, remarkably good value compared to maintaining a good looking gf.

 

Where else are you going to get bumps like that for 20 euros.

[Aap]

not one person demanding 1944 La-5..go figure

 

No, nobody is against La-5 or La-5FN having mods that were available for then. Go figure. You were probably alone trying to fight against it, when the devs announced the F-engine mod for La-5.

[Finkeren]

I am genuinely curious as to why anyone cares about what mods the G-6, the P-38 etc will have as options, in particular why these should be less rather than more. In SP, the campaign/career designer will determine the plane's configuration according to their reading of the history. If you want to make your own campaigns or missions with odd loads - why not? In MP, I assume the server admins do the same.

 

Why does this cause so much angst?

I wouldn’t know, I’m certainly not “angsty” about it.

 

However, it does seem to cause some angst in the LW-only community with people already declaring the G6 to be rubbish and calling it “pre-nerfed” for possibly not having a mod that doesn’t fit the timeframe of any map in this sim.

[Aap]

...which is pretty strange, considering that it was the most built version of the Bf 109.

IMHO it should have been in the package. I could understand when "exotic birds" like the Macchi or the Airacobra would be sold as "Collector's Planes".

But one of THE basic planes in WW2 air combat in Russia - that looks to me like scratching out additional 20,- Euro from the customer.

And that, when the basic package is already at a price of almost 70,- Euro - for a sim, that didn't have to be built totally new?

I don't know...

I think many people hoped for G6 instead of G4 for Kuban, but apparently G6 did not fit Kuban well enough - which makes the argument that G6 collector plane is for Kuban only even more silly.

[Finkeren]

No, nobody is against La-5 or La-5FN having mods that were available for then. Go figure. You were probably alone trying to fight against it, when the devs announced the F-engine mod for La-5.

The F-engine fits the BoK timeline perfectly and extends the “lifetime” of the La-5 in SP career. It was a very logical thing to introduce. If they had introduced it back when BoS was first being made, I would have considered it a poor choice.

 

Overall I would have prefered they make a later version La-5F as one of the collector’s planes for BoK in place of the Spitfire and then had the La-5FN as an engine mod for that.

 

They could then have added the Spit Mk. V as a separate collector’s plane. Sales would’ve been yuge!

 

Anyway that’s all water under the bridge now.

[Aap]

I wouldn’t know, I’m certainly not “angsty” about it.

 

However, it does seem to cause some angst in the LW-only community with people already declaring the G6 to be rubbish and calling it “pre-nerfed” for possibly not having a mod that doesn’t fit the timeframe of any map in this sim.

The biggest angst does seem to come from a couple of VVS-only members that try to restrict the most produced, most modded, most widely used and in a way most interesting Bf109 model to a narrow one-month time frame on one map, for whatever made up reasons.

[Finkeren]

The biggest angst does seem to come from a couple of VVS-only members that try to restrict the most produced, most modded, most widely used and in a way most interesting Bf109 model to a narrow one-month time frame on one map, for whatever made up reasons.

We’re not “trying” to restrict anything. We are simply pointing out, that the proposed MW50 mod misses the timeframe of the career mode, maps and plane set for this sim by half a year. That apparent sent some people here into a frenzy.

 

It’s not like we have any sway over the dev’s decisions. If they choose to include the MW50, I’d think it’s an odd choice, but it really won’t matter at all.

[Aap]

The F-engine fits the BoK timeline perfectly and extends the “lifetime” of the La-5 in SP career. It was a very logical thing to introduce. If they had introduced it back when BoS was first being made, I would have considered it a poor choice.

 

I think you missed my point. Did you see players complain when the F-mod was announced? Do you see a crusade against whatever mods the La-5FN might get?

[Aap]

We’re not “trying” to restrict anything. We are simply pointing out, that the proposed MW50 mod misses the timeframe of the career mode, maps and plane set for this sim by half a year. That apparent sent some people here into a frenzy.

 

It’s not like we have any sway over the dev’s decisions. If they choose to include the MW50, I’d think it’s an odd choice, but it really won’t matter at all.

Luftwaffe careers ended in 1943? G6 is the only plane that would fill the gap for a "career mode" between Kuban and Bodenplatte.

Anyway, I don't think that MW50 will be available for G6, but that is a different matter. I am just curious why some people fight so passionately against more (lockable) options in this sim. Even making up completely silly arguments for it.

Edited February 2, 2018 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Finkeren]

I think you missed my point. Did you see players complain when the F-mod was announced? Do you see a crusade against whatever mods the La-5FN might get?

The F-engine mod was announced, when BoK content was already starting to come out, so why would anyone complain? If they make the MW50 for the G6 when BoBP content is starting to come out, I won’t have too much of a problem either (though in that case they really should give it a short radio mast to go along with the mod - the tall one just screams 1943)

 

If it turns out the FN does close to 600km/h on the deck, as it did in 1944, I’d call that out too. Otherwise I don’t see which mods the La-5FN could have that would be anachronistic.

[Aap]

The F-engine mod was announced, when BoK content was already starting to come out, so why would anyone complain? If they make the MW50 for the G6 when BoBP content is starting to come out, I won’t have too much of a problem either (though in that case they really should give it a short radio mast to go along with the mod - the tall one just screams 1943)

 

If it turns out the FN does close to 600km/h on the deck, as it did in 1944, I’d call that out too. Otherwise I don’t see which mods the La-5FN could have that would be anachronistic.

Similar question, why would anyone complain about G6 having lockable mods that were historically available? Nobody was complaining about F-mod, why would say. Nobody is complaining about possible La-5FN mods, why should thay. Yet, some VVS players are fighting against possible G6 mods, why do they? That is the question.

[Wolfram-Harms]

Now you are just being a cheapskate.

 

Maybe I'm just not what your name may suggest for you - I am reasonable about my money.

 

20,- Euro is quite a lot, compared to the price for a complete game or sim.

And if anyone would introduce sims, where you had to buy all planes extra for prices like that, I wouldn't buy them.

[Finkeren]

Similar question, why would anyone complain about G6 having lockable mods that were historically available? Nobody was complaining about F-mod, why would say. Nobody is complaining about possible La-5FN mods, why should thay. Yet, some VVS players are fighting against possible G6 mods, why do they? That is the question.

 

First: What possible FN mods are you talking about?

 

Second: Noone complained about the addition of the F-engine mod (which isn't really completely true either) because it fit the timeframe of BoK, for which content was already coming out at the time. Same thing with the Yak-1b s. 127. The only reason it made sense as a collector's plane is because it fit the timeframe of the upcoming BoK and I would really consider it the first BoK aircraft. Again I won't mind if the G6 gets a MW50 as a mod, and I'll even think it makes sense, if it's released along with some of the early BoBP content (even if I think it looks a bit odd with a 1943 G6 in early 1945 - but I can live with it)

 

What spawned this whole charade was a couple of us pointing out, why the G6 likely won't have a MW50 in response to FenrisWolf saying that it was "standard" on the G6 (which is clearly was not - not even in 1944)

Edited February 2, 2018 by Finkeren

[Aap]

What spawned this whole charade was a couple of us pointing out, why the G6 likely won't have a MW50 in response to FenrisWolf saying that it was "standard" on the G6 (which is clearly was not - not even in 1944)

I don't know what spawned it, but the "charade" is about the silly argument that G6 is meant for Kuban ONLY and should not have any other mods, when the devs are clearly selling it as a separate collector plane (that also happens to fit end of Kuban) and have already announced 30 mm cannon.

About the La-5FN question you are still missing the point. There are no threads fighting against ANY historical La-5FN mods or campaigning for it's as limited use as possible, like you see here against the G6.

Edited February 2, 2018 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Finkeren]

About the La-5FN question you are still missing the point. There are no threads fighting against ANY historical La-5FN mods or campaigning for it's as limited use as possible, like you see here against the G6.

 

But what mods would those be? Maybe there are no such threads, because people can't think of any mods that would make the La-5FN an anachronism for the timeframe? People have been discussing (and complaining about) the anticipated performance of the FN a plenty, but maybe there are simply no mods to discuss?

I don't know what spawned it, but the "charade" is about the silly argument that G6 is meant for Kuban ONLY and should not have any other mods, when the devs are clearly selling it as a separate collector plane (that also happens to fit end of Kuban) and have already announced 30 mm cannon.

 

It's not meant to fit Kuban only. It is meant to fit the overall timeframe of the sim, which was extended with the addition of BoK. 

 

The P-40E-1 and MC.202 made no sense for BoM either (and personally I still thought them to be weird choices for BoM) but they did fit the timeframe of the overall sim at the time of release.

 

When BoBP comes out, a G6 with MW50 will no longer be an anachronism and IMHO would no longer be weird.

[Mac_Messer]

We’re not “trying” to restrict anything. We are simply pointing out, that the proposed MW50 mod misses the timeframe of the career mode, maps and plane set for this sim by half a year. That apparent sent some people here into a frenzy.

That argument is dead since LaGG got its 37mm gun, dude.

[=38=Tatarenko]

I pretty much only fly red but I've still bought it because it's an icon and I will certainly fly it on those occasions where server balance puts me on the blue side. I'm looking forward to it (and the P-39 and A-20 and La-5FN)

[Finkeren]

That argument is dead since LaGG got its 37mm gun, dude.

 

The weapon mods for the LaGG-3 are weird too, no question about that. The 37mm is less off now that we have BoK, but they really oughta come with a pair of slats for the wings at least. The 23mm is a bit of a unicorn, and it would probably be better, if it hadn't been included at all. 

 

Two wrongs don't make a right though.

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Anyway, I don't think that MW50 will be available for G6, but that is a different matter. I am just curious why some people fight so passionately against more (lockable) options in this sim. Even making up completely silly arguments for it.

Because unfortunately even though they are lockable mods, server administrators seem to not take availability of those mods into consideration enough and we end up with inappropriate restrictions and unrealistic match-ups.

 

If server admins do the right thing and restrict the mods, then you get players complaining that their plane is being nerfed with restrictions even though they should be, given the context of the scenario.

 

Almost better to have a G6 and a G6 late as two separate planes. Hopefully if the additional modifications are available the server admins name the planes appropriately, to give the restrictions some context. (Like they do for planes with gunpods etc).

[Aap]

But what mods would those be?

 

Like I said, ANY mod at all. When you see a campaign against ANY historical La-5FN mod, let me know.

 

It's not meant to fit Kuban only.

 

Now, maybe you want to tell that to Dakpilot? I pretty much figured it out already from the beginning. 

Edited February 2, 2018 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Aap]

Because unfortunately even though they are lockable mods, server administrators seem to not take availability of those mods into consideration enough and we end up with inappropriate restrictions and unrealistic match-ups.

 

You have not seen that server admins lock lockable content for planes? I have.

 

If server admins do the right thing and restrict the mods, then you get players complaining that their plane is being nerfed with restrictions even though they should be, given the context of the scenario.

 

Some people will always complain. Some people even complain about possibility of having more options in the game. If mission designers decide to lock certain features, then it is as it is. Plenty of locked content on servers right now, too, but there is less complaining than here about something that has not been even released yet.

Edited February 2, 2018 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Dakpilot]

That argument is dead since LaGG got its 37mm gun, dude.

 

Lagg-3 Squadron with 37mm was quite famous at Stalingrad ..what is the problem?

 

up to servers to limit availability but it is historically correct

 

23mm is from earlier model, also rare and I would fully support it only being available on earlier series 8-11 ? models, pretty sure it was designed with 23mm in first place, but production need went to IL-2's

 

dude 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Finkeren]

Like I said, ANY mod at all. When you see a campaign against ANY historical La-5FN mod, let me know.

 

How can there be, when the La-5FN hardly have any plausible mods at all? Your example is weird. It would make much more sense to ask, where the campaigns against some of the mods for the P-39 are, because apparently there are gonna be a heck of a lot of those.