Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Luftschiff said:

When a new allied fighter is introduced people afraid of it are accused of being Blue Only Whiners. When a new German fighter is being introduced the people NOT calling it overpowered and broken beyond belief are accused of being Blue Only Whiners. Can't we accuse and throw slurs in both directions like gentlemen? Or preferably not at all? There are so many old tropes about the other side floating around these forums that aren't true anymore, and mudfights do us no good. Frankly, it's tiring. 

This happen every single time a plane is introduced, regardless of side, and yet people remain spread across the teams and spread across the planes once that two-week honeymoon is over. Some people fly only blue, some people fly only red. Most, I suspect, play the outnumbered side, and the aces of whatever nationality will ruin your day regardless of plane. Have no fear, Commisers, when I get my hands on the 262 you will have no shortage of jet kills on your score list. 

 

True enough, except for "Most, I suspect, play the outnumbered side,".....  Think about it.

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

The lack of heavy bombers and 20x1 ratio will expose western fighters weakness.

 

Luftwaffe will reign supreme the skies over BOBP :ph34r:   

In a MP semi historically or historically  planeset in the next BoBp ,Me 262 will be in a very restricted number ..so don t think to be abraid so mutch

Edited by ITAF_Rani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it quite funny that now all the people get out of their holes, complaining about overrepresented aircraft on the German side, but when the Russians had overrepresented aircraft in all other theatres, they didn't care a dime, quite the opposite. Same goes for the servers.

 

K4 and 262 were "rare" during BoBp timeframe? Well if you count 20% of all combat effective aircraft rare....

 

I can give you some more example of "rare" aircraft.

 

The Mig-3 was a "rare" aircraft during BoM timeframe, amounting of less then 10% of the Russian aircraft. The Mig-3 late we have in game was even more rare.

The Yak-1 with PF engine, the Lagg-3 with PF engine and the La5 were "rare" aircraft during BoS timeframe..most aircraft by that time (apart from very late in 1942) have been earlier Yaks with P and PA engine, and earlier Laggs and I-16.

As for late Kuban scenarios, there is not even proof that the La5-FN has ever been there, and yet it is by far the most used fighter on the Russian side online (e.g. late Kuban in KOTA or WoL).

 

I wonder why all those people complaining about the K4 and the 262 were silent in those other cases? Seems pretty much like double standards, but we know nothing less from this forum....

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would just be nice if we had Allied aircraft present that also feature their most powerful settings too. And it is perfectly fine if we get all that fancy stuff from the Kraut section. The more, the merrier. It allows more variation in mission design on servers. And that is what the fun is all about.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

The Yak-1 with PF engine, the Lagg-3 with PF engine and the La5 were "rare" aircraft during BoS timeframe..most aircraft by that time (apart from very late in 1942) have been earlier Yaks with P and PA engine.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. PF-engined Yaks and LaGGs were very common during the time of Stalingrad, and the La-5 was present in several regiments in August 1942. As for the I-16, there were very, very, very few of them at Stalingrad at the same time, all in PVO units.

 

EDIT: in all of 102 IAD / PVO on September 5th, there were 8 I-16s. At the same time, the entire 287 IAD was equipped with La-5s. :)

Edited by LukeFF
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, the opening line of the subtitles suggests...a certain perspective on the part of the director.

 

Really looking forward to the Me-262 (but more to the map).  For MP there are a lot of possibilities, including locking numbers.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

I find it quite funny that now all the people get out of their holes, complaining about overrepresented aircraft on the German side, but when the Russians had overrepresented aircraft in all other theatres, they didn't care a dime, quite the opposite. Same goes for the servers.

 

K4 and 262 were "rare" during BoBp timeframe? Well if you count 20% of all combat effective aircraft rare....

 

I can give you some more example of "rare" aircraft.

 

The Mig-3 was a "rare" aircraft during BoM timeframe, amounting of less then 10% of the Russian aircraft. The Mig-3 late we have in game was even more rare.

The Yak-1 with PF engine, the Lagg-3 with PF engine and the La5 were "rare" aircraft during BoS timeframe..most aircraft by that time (apart from very late in 1942) have been earlier Yaks with P and PA engine, and earlier Laggs and I-16.

As for late Kuban scenarios, there is not even proof that the La5-FN has ever been there, and yet it is by far the most used fighter on the Russian side online (e.g. late Kuban in KOTA or WoL).

 

I wonder why all those people complaining about the K4 and the 262 were silent in those other cases? Seems pretty much like double standards, but we know nothing less from this forum....

LOL 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

I find it quite funny that now all the people get out of their holes, complaining about overrepresented aircraft on the German side, but when the Russians had overrepresented aircraft in all other theatres, they didn't care a dime, quite the opposite. Same goes for the servers

 

 

True, when talking about server realism the fantasy unicorn armament lagg3 never posed a problem to the same people, yet now it’s all about historical accuracy? Lmao

dont get me wrong you can have all the fantasy planes you want and I do think servers should be balanced to make them fun. But the historical accuracy argument is is only used when it suits the needs of some.

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. PF-engined Yaks and LaGGs were very common during the time of Stalingrad, and the La-5 was present in several regiments in August 1942. As for the I-16, there were very, very, very few of them at Stalingrad at the same time, all in PVO units.

 

EDIT: in all of 102 IAD / PVO on September 5th, there were 8 I-16s. At the same time, the entire 287 IAD was equipped with La-5s. :)

 

Apparently you didn't understand my whole post and why I wrote the "rare" in inverted comma. They were about as common as the K4 or the 262 in winter 44 in relative numbers

Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

True, when talking about server realism the fantasy unicorn armament lagg3 never posed a problem to the same people, yet now it’s all about historical accuracy? Lmao

dont get me wrong you can have all the fantasy planes you want and I do think servers should be balanced to make them fun. But the historical accuracy argument is is only used when it suits the needs of some.

LoL comparing advantages that lagg23 gives you in fight vs 190s or 109s with what only jet airplane like 262 would give one side, or unlimited rocket 1.98K4 advantages now vs red airplanes is redicalus.
If you get shoot down in fly by wire helecopter that is 109 in this game by lagg23 its all your falt its not because 23mm he had, he needs to get in position to shoot with that 23mm first and you alowed him that :P ,in 109 your faster, more nimble, better climber, better rear view, better turn, more ammo, better dive... and you enjoy numbers advantage most of time over reds so you can owerwhelm them with no problems. 
But thats the axis mentality showing, if enemy airplane has one or two advantage over their airplane and they have all other advantages, then that airplane is uber but their airplane is so poor, oh poor axis had it so hard vs vvs all this years, all thouse + on their airplanes but if enemy airplane has one thing better then them its not fair.

 

PS

Oh and Lagg3 is limited in numbers on every mission and limited in numbers with 23mm modification alowed, and also not alowed on more then few moscow maps, its not that they are unlimited and uncontroled in numbers :) so like i say all airplanes should be limited, unlimited numbers or mods is just fantasy scenarious.

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Confused 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

LoL comparing advantages that lagg23 gives you in fight vs 190s or 109s with what only jet airplane like 262 would give one side, or unlimited rocket 1.98K4 advantages now vs red airplanes is redicalus.
If you get shoot down in fly by wire helecopter that is 109 in this game by lagg23 its all your falt its not because 23mm he had, he needs to get in position to shoot with that 23mm first and you alowed him that :P ,in 109 your faster, more nimble, better climber, better rear view, better turn, more ammo, better dive... and you enjoy numbers advantage most of time over reds so you can owerwhelm them with no problems. 
But thats the axis mentality showing, if enemy airplane has one or two advantage over their airplane and they have all other advantages, then that airplane is uber but their airplane is so poor, oh poor axis had it so hard vs vvs all this years, all thouse + on their airplanes but if enemy airplane has one thing better then them its not fair.

 

PS

Oh and Lagg3 is limited in numbers on every mission and limited in numbers with 23mm modification alowed, and also not alowed on more then few moscow maps, its not that they are unlimited and uncontroled in numbers :) so like i say all airplanes should be limited, unlimited numbers or mods is just fantasy scenarious.

 

You really don’t seem to understand my point. A 109 really doesn’t have a problem against the unicorn lagg. I never said it did and it is ok. But if you want historical accuracy your fantasy lagg should not be on the map at all and not just be „limited“.

Having a „limited“ amount of fantasy laggs is not historical, yet you seem to want to have it totally historical when it comes to K4s and 262s. You basically just confirmed my point with your rant, that you have double standards when it comes to historical accuracy.

Like I said you can keep your fantasy lagg, just don’t come arguing with historical accuracy when all you want is balance. You can say it that way and then we actually agree!

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

Like I said you can keep your fantasy lagg, just don’t come arguing with historical accuracy when all you want is balance. You can say it that way and then we actually agree!

 

The great part about extreme limits on the uber German aircraft is that you get both balance and historical accuracy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The great part about extreme limits on the uber German aircraft is that you get both balance and historical accuracy.  

Yes, but some dont understand that or pretend they dont it seams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 12:09 AM, Legioneod said:

 

On actual mission focused servers I expect the D9 and K4 to be limited simple as that. G-14 and A8 are good aircraft and they can do well if the pilot is competent. How would you feel if the allied side had P-47M or Spitfire XIV in unlimited numbers? Wouldn't be very realistic and would be poor game-play.

 

I don't feel like fighting late war aircraft in unlimited numbers when the allies don't even get late war power settings. K-4s and D-9s were a rarity so I expect them to be the same way online.

 

Agreed.

 

And even then, that is not creating any kind of "semi-historical accuracy"... because that would only be achieved by limiting the number of axis pilots available (and fuel), to enforce the complete air superiority the allies had achieved at the time. 

 

Obviously, that's not a viable solution, since we want both sides to have fun and not be completely dominated (within the appropriate context of the map/scenario represented as much as possible, at least). Given that, limiting the numbers of the Doras and K4s (and 262s) make perfect sense: it provides an incentive for players to pick the G14 and A8s, and follows the model that we CURRENTLY find in existing servers that try and provide more meaningful scenarios (TAW, Coconut's, even WoL), where the more "advanced" aircraft tend to be limited. 

 

In BoP, we can expect the Kurfursts, Doras, and 262s to be more limited than the A8s and G14s, while on the allied side the Tempest will likely be limited (as would, say, the Spit XIV be if we ever got it as a collector's aircraft). And the 262 is likely the most limited aircraft of them all.

 

On 2/10/2019 at 3:06 AM, 77.CountZero said:

 

 

yes, its like ppl dont play MP, you will have 2-1 min advantage on Axis side, all uber airplanes available in unlimited mods and numbers, and ppl expect red side will vulch me262s LOL, in MP how its now what you know from WW2 dosent mather in how its played. Before P-47 come out i could see same naive thinking, oh P-47 will change the game , nothing can tuch it up high lol ...unlimited K4 1.98s... and reds rather play with slow spit9 then P-47 how its modeled with its weard engine limits.

 

Devs should make Meteor, there was few of them in europe in january 1945, so we can then have unlimited numbers of them fighting on MP also, i see that would be ok also, why limit them they were there, im sure axis would understand that.

"On 20 January 1945, four Gloster Meteor F.3 jets from 616 Squadron were moved to Melsbroek in Belgium and attached to the Second Tactical Air Force.
In March, the entire squadron was moved to Gilze-Rijen and, then in April, to Nijmegen. "

 

Most of the more popular servers tend to have limits on the # of aircraft.

 

That said, vulching 262s is not a thing that will happen any more than it does today. The reason the 262s were nullified by vulching in RL was due to the complete air dominance the allied enjoyed. Obviously, this won't be the case in the sim, so I expect plenty of 262s to enter the fray at their proper altitude and speed. That said, their numbers will certainly be limited on the servers that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure the balance would be found, there should not be any worry about that. But historical accuracy has its place in the Single player Campaign not in the multiplayer LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

The lack of heavy bombers and 20x1 ratio will expose western fighters weakness.

 

Luftwaffe will reign supreme the skies over BOBP :ph34r:   

 

To be fair, that very ratio is what made rushing better airframes into service less necessary for the allies. By the time the allied had crushed the Luftwaffe, they didn't NEED to even bother to beat the performance of the K4s or the Doras (and even the 262s, for that matter). 

 

Indeed, it is the Allies' dominance that spurred the LW to constantly push for superior performance (and wonder weapons, of course), as they knew they couldn't win based on numbers (or even pilot quality, at that point). Of course it's all academic now, but I imagine the allies' inventory would have been substantially weighted towards higher performance (more Spit XIVs, P-51H, what have you) if there had still been parity between the allies and the Luftwaffe.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a good thing about SEOW: you has a mixture but as a/c were lost you might end up with more of the older types (as people tended to fly the newer ones first) until a re-supply point was reached. Then another batch of the newer versions arrived and so on.

 

If handled well, it meant a mixture of a/c but over the course of a campaign the ratio would slowly favour the newer types (to a roughly accurate degree). It also meant that taking a higher-performing model carried a degree or responsibility so that these were not wasted.

 

So if you got some G-14s (for example) and everyone crashes them, the next mission you would be back in G-6s until a new G-14 batch arrived. However, over time the G-6s would be lost without replacement, so the available a/c would become mostly G-14s.

 

Similar mechanics can also work for DF-oriented servers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

As for late Kuban scenarios, there is not even proof that the La5-FN has ever been there, and yet it is by far the most used fighter on the Russian side online (e.g. late Kuban in KOTA or WoL).

 

KOTA is a fantasy server with no limits, so it is not relevant in this discussion. I'm sure teh 262 will be unlimited on it as well.

 

On most relevant servers, however, the FN is _Extremely_ limited. On those few maps the FN is available on WoL, most of the time there is less than 20 available, and those naturally go fast. I don't even bother to fly it, as I'd rather leave it to more competent pilots.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Having a „limited“ amount of fantasy laggs is not historical, yet you seem to want to have it totally historical when it comes to K4s and 262s. You basically just confirmed my point with your rant, that you have double standards when it comes to historical accuracy.

 

To be fair, if total historical accuracy was what was demanded, the servers should demand 10 to 1 player advantage to the allies, massive fuel limitations on the axis side, and simulating the poor build quality of late war LW aircrafts. :)

 

(Of course, on that last point, if we were to go THERE we'd have to simulate poor build quality of mid-war soviet aircraft... so best to gloss over that minor details :P )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The great part about extreme limits on the uber German aircraft is that you get both balance and historical accuracy.  

 

Im fine with that and if historical accuracy is your thing, I’m looking forward to your future passionate posts against the yaks on Moscow maps and the lagg3s with with unicorn armament.

 

20 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

To be fair, if total historical accuracy was what was demanded, the servers should demand 10 to 1 player advantage to the allies, massive fuel limitations on the axis side, and simulating the poor build quality of late war LW aircrafts.

 

Or poor build of Russian aircraft...

Exactly, if we were fair. But that is exactly my point. There are some people here that suddenly place a lot of importance on  historical „accuracy“ when it comes to numbers of 262s and K4s but couldn’t care less when it concerns anything else. So they are clearly people with an agenda. To say it again, I am not pro historical accuracy. If you want a server like that ok just don’t use the historical accuracy arguent whenever it suits you and shove  it aside when not.

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

Im fine with that and if historical accuracy is your thing

 

It’s not.  But in this particular case we get both.  

 

BTW, even with Yaks over Moscow and LaGGs armed with unicorns we still usually have the sides stacked in favor of the Germans.  You do understand why that’s a problem online, right?

 

I’d be very much in favor of historical accuracy if the [edited] would fly VVS to even the sides and let me fly German occasionally.  But they won’t.  So bring on the unicorns!!

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Do not use those terms
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point that you guys are circling is that, while restricting or not restricting unusual types on all sides is an equal approach, the impact / output is highly unequal.

 

A very capable a/c (K4) with unrestricted rarer types (1.98 ata, exacerbating its advanatges) has a far stronger impact on any engagement than a relative poor a/c (Lagg-3) with unrestricted rarer type (23mm cannon, making very little difference to its performance).

 

A rare model that adds greater speed and climb to an aircraft already blessed with both is - for purposes of MP mission utility - a somewhat different prospect to a rare model that adds a very small firepower bonus to a fairly poor fighter.

 

Or to put it another way, restricting the Spit  IXs (slightly random) RP option and the K4 1.98 engine mod do not have the same impact on the way a server plays. So they are viewed differently: one reinforces an advantage, the other adds a small variety but changes very little. But both could be classified as ‘rare’.

 

Anyway, looking forward to the 262 😎

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Or poor build of Russian aircraft...

Exactly, if we were fair. But that is exactly my point. There are some people here that suddenly place a lot of importance on  historical „accuracy“ when it comes to numbers of 262s and K4s but couldn’t care less when it concerns anything else. So they are clearly people with an agenda. To say it again, I am not pro historical accuracy. If you want a server like that ok just don’t use the historical accuracy arguent whenever it suits you and shove  it aside when not.

 

And that's why the sim doens't try to maintain 100% accuracy, especially things like poor build quality. It's just not fun to have to bail out due to poor build quality or sabotage by slave labor.  This is also why the sim does not enforce historically accurate logistics and numerical superiority. Absolute realism would not be fun for the VVS in the early war, just like it would be terrible for the LW in 1944 and onwards.

 

BUT there still needs to be some level of balancing done in order to make a fun scenario, and in those instances looking at historical sources if a good place to start. Making a type of aircraft rarer, or limiting some of the mods to reflect historical uses is a perfectly acceptable solution, and is a win-win if it not only balances the sides and also creates a more realistic scenario.

 

So, on WoL just like the Yak-1b and the La-5FN is limited in scenarios or not available at all, it makes sense that this design is extended to the BoBp scenarios, where the K4, Doras, and 262s are limited (much like the Tempest could be, and the Spit XIV if we ever get it). 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the point is ‘why’ are they limited: frequency of operation or because they add significant advantage?

 

The latter point is the real crux of the debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

But the point is ‘why’ are they limited: frequency of operation or because they add significant advantage?

 

The latter point is the real crux of the debate.

In the end, what's the difference? The motivation is either to:
-Promote more historical matchups by limiting numbers, which makes things more satisfying for many users and keeps player numbers up OR
-limiting higher-performance planes so that lower-performing planes still have a chance, which makes things more satisfying for many users and keeps player numbers up

The rationale for limiting (or not limiting) will be up to the server admins. But the end result will either be a limited environment or an unlimited environment. The only pro to an unlimited environment is the ability to fly whatever plane you like whenever you like. The cons are numerous to be honest.

Really, if a server puts no limits on plane numbers, everyone will be flying K4s, D9s and 262s on the Luftwaffe side, and everyone will be flying P51s and Tempests on the Allied side. Any server that neglects putting some common sense limits on late-war super-planes is going to see a stagnant plane set and continued (or exacerbated) number balancing issues. 

Obviously there will be some people who just fly whatever they like and don't mind being outmatched performance wise, but most people won't show up to be seal-clubbed every night and will migrate to servers that limit numbers. Likewise, those who want a more historic feel will gravitate that way too. I don't think you'll see many servers with no limits, at least not for very long.

So yeah, the 'why' is irrelevant, and we can spend all day arguing about other approaches. But if we have servers where unlimited fleets of K4s, D9s and 262s face off against P47s and Spits, no one will be happy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, that was a rhetorical question which referenced exactly what you then said. You have just repeated my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with a jet in the BOBP isn't about that it's much faster or performance but... endurance time at boost. Allied props are harshly handicapped by boost timer - because some papers had printed "5m recommendation" you are out of WEP, shortly. (in the manual "limits" were disregarded in practice; there are pilot encounters notes which confirm)

At BOBP velocities and altitudes 5m is not much - everything is stretched due to G-loads. It takes time to position yourself to gain a gun solution; that's true in K4 vs P-47D matches, already. You can bet that the "in the sim" 262 will not have fragile engines, either.

 

How would you feel having mandatory 5m of fuel for your whole engagement per sortie? Because that's what it is in the practice as any Allied plane is just a target drone once on the forced nominal power setting when faced with K4s, D9s and jets.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Ehret said:

...

You can bet that the "in the sim" 262 will not have fragile engines, either.

 

 

When all is said and done it would be a shame if you could yank a throttle back and forth on the 262 and not flame out or spit out metal parts.  We have that modeled for piston engines so I can't imagine it being overlooked on the 262.  Sure, there won't be intermittent failures "just because", but if you abuse the engine I expect you will pay the price.  

 

Same goes for the P-38.  Its engines would become very unhappy if proper procedures were not followed, and I would expect to see some aspect of that modeled in the sim.  Not random failures, but failures brought on by poor engine management.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ehret said:

ow would you feel having mandatory 5m of fuel for your whole engagement per sortie? Because that's what it is in the practice as any Allied plane is just a target drone once on the forced nominal power setting when faced with K4s, D9s and jets.

 

You mean that same feel as getting only 1 minute of WEP in the 109 as it has been the entire time?

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

When all is said and done it would be a shame if you could yank a throttle back and forth on the 262 and not flame out or spit out metal parts.  We have that modeled for piston engines

 

This is modeled?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ITAF_Rani said:

Only to increase the PANIC !!!😂

 



What a nasty bit of pro-Nazi propaganda 

23 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

 

This is modeled?


I think it is if you manually control the turbo in the P-47 and leave it on high while yanking the throttle back to idle. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

You mean that same feel as getting only 1 minute of WEP in the 109 as it has been the entire time?

109 WEP doesn't eat at your combat power time as well, leaving you with only 5 minutes of combat power instead of 15.

It also recharges on combat power. US/RAF WEP needs to be on continuous power to recharge WEP.

Edited by =362nd_FS=RoflSeal
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

You mean that same feel as getting only 1 minute of WEP in the 109 as it has been the entire time?

 

No. The 30m of combat power in 109s is more like lowered WEP (good for about 5-6m) in the P-39. You are still (at least) competitive using only combat power in the 109. The 15m combat power in Allied planes is much weaker than that and lasts only half long. So, no; it's not the same.

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Same goes for the P-38.  Its engines would become very unhappy if proper procedures were not followed, and I would expect to see some aspect of that modeled in the sim.  Not random failures, but failures brought on by poor engine management.

 

There are no various turbo failures (like pulsation and collapse) modeled for the P-47D as now. I have a bad feeling that it's going to be the same for the 262 and the P-38...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 5:07 PM, ZachariasX said:

In the end, the Allies beat them at literally everything.

 

Not sure what you're really saying here, but I'm assuming it's not litterally what those words say because then you're definitely wrong.

 

There were quite a few fields in which the Germans were well ahead by wars end. Operation paperclip is famous for a reason.

 

The main thing to remember is that Germany lost the war due to attrition, biting off way more than it could chew both in terms of manpower & production. In terms of technology they were mostly (not always ofc) either on par or ahead throughout the war, which is one of the reasons the war lasted for as long as it did. The whole thing was ofcourse sped up by the criminal government, careless command in many cases as well as the breaking of the enigma, the latter allowing the Allies to prepare for every move made by the Germans whilst at the same time decieve them in regards to their own intentions, which alone is calculated to have shortened the war by 2 years. But all in all it was never going to be a win for Germany, it was simply too small to take on three (initially 4) major powers and their allies basically by itself (Italy wasn't much help), and the A-bomb would've been the final word.

 

But what has always made WW2 the most tragic & disturbing is that a civilized country so advanced could be decieved & siezed like so by a criminal government, a very important lesson in human history & nature which we must not forget.

Edited by Panthera
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Panthera said:

But what has always made WW2 the most tragic & disturbing is that a civilized country so advanced could be decieved & siezed like so by a criminal government, a very important lesson in human history & nature which we must not forget.

 

Oh so true!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would take some research but a percentage ratio of a/c types on servers could be set for each month of BoBp for a guide line for historical scenarios.

 

For example, Jan '45:

 

For the Bf109s:

K-4: 20% and 3% would be 1.98ata (total 23% K-4s)

G-10: 13% (as there is no G-10, yet, this percentage could be rolled into the standard K-4)

G-14: 35%

G-14/AS: 30%

 

For the Me262: no more than 5% of the total Axis force

 

For the Fw190:

A-8: 75%

D-9: 25%

 

The percentage of Bf109s to Fw190s for the Axis force could also be established. (example: 60% Bf109s, 40% Fw190s)

 

The same would be done for the Allied types.

 

 The historical disparity in numbers on each side would be ignored

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milo, where's the A-9 in these figures? There were plenty around before January 45 and they cannot all have been lost.

 

Imho, the G-14/AS could also be rolled into standard K-4's, given the improved high altitude performance over the standard version.

 

Thanks for the figures, couldn't find them when I wanted to post them a page ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flicking through Price’s Last Year of the Luftwaffe he gives 262 figures for 10th Jan:

- 60 in non-fighter units

- 150 in either operational fighter units or working up (JG7, KG/J54 and EJG2)

- 30 with test units

- 150 lost, many through accidents

- 200 ready for delivery but held up by logistical / infrastructure difficulties (mostly a result of slow rail transport for the airframes and major systems)

 

Amiunts to somewhere around 200 nominally in service but obviously actual availability would be far lower. Only KG/J54 and some recce a/c would be operating in the BoBp map, so that is a small number around the Ardennes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

I think the point that you guys are circling is that, while restricting or not restricting unusual types on all sides is an equal approach, the impact / output is highly unequal.

 

A very capable a/c (K4) with unrestricted rarer types (1.98 ata, exacerbating its advanatges) has a far stronger impact on any engagement than a relative poor a/c (Lagg-3) with unrestricted rarer type (23mm cannon, making very little difference to its performance).

 

A rare model that adds greater speed and climb to an aircraft already blessed with both is - for purposes of MP mission utility - a somewhat different prospect to a rare model that adds a very small firepower bonus to a fairly poor fighter.

 

Or to put it another way, restricting the Spit  IXs (slightly random) RP option and the K4 1.98 engine mod do not have the same impact on the way a server plays. So they are viewed differently: one reinforces an advantage, the other adds a small variety but changes very little. But both could be classified as ‘rare’.

 

Anyway, looking forward to the 262 😎

 exactly, axis onlys comparing impact of lagg23 to what unlimited 1.98k4 ( 3% of them available of all bobp axis airplanes) or unlimited 262 ( 5%)  does on server mission is just comical at best. 3% of all axis fighters in BoBp were rocket 1.98K4s but on servers they are almost only things you see, but no need for limitations as red get of lagg23s on other missions, so all is ok LOL

 

17 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

It’s not.  But in this particular case we get both.  

 

BTW, even with Yaks over Moscow and LaGGs armed with unicorns we still usually have the sides stacked in favor of the Germans.  You do understand why that’s a problem online, right?

 

I’d be very much in favor of historical accuracy if the [edited] would fly VVS to even the sides and let me fly German occasionally.  But they won’t.  So bring on the unicorns!!

 

good luck trying to explain impact of constantly playing on side that is outnumbered, thats not in vocabulary of axis player in this game, but that slow unmanuverable airplane has big gun, its just not fair...how can they deal with it :P

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Panthera said:

Not sure what you're really saying here, but I'm assuming it's not litterally what those words say because then you're definitely wrong.

I was said that in the context of being capable to conduct a war successfully. Here in these fora, we have a very narrow view on individual items and make use of them in a very sporty manner, clearly not representing the actual situation back then at given points in time.

 

Concerning actual weapons, it is fair to say that most hands on items were on par to a level where only crew training made a difference when using "fair" matchups something that in principle can be done. This was not the case at the beginning of the hostilities, where Germany had considerable advantage in terms of material (and doctrine).

 

The point I was making is about force projection. Air, land, sea, intelligence, production, supply, maintenance. You only have an aircraft up in the air doing something useful (for your purposes) because all of the underlying and connecting departments do their job. In case of the Germans, everything that was in place providing a weapon was not up to the task. Initially, it was sufficient, but then it never improved really. In case of the Allies, they had inferior weapons and a subpar "back office", but they cleaned their stable and that worked out for them and eventually provided weapons of the performance in the numbers required. They also improved their tactics by even copying German tactics. 2TAF was run almost like Germany operated their squadrons in 1940. Germany failed that same thing at almost every level. They never scaled in that way. They only did so occasionally at the cost of something else. That they in fact ran a pirate business fueled by looting obscured that fact a fair bit, at least as long as they could invade. As soon as their tanks were driving in reverse gear, total output collapsed (total industry output that is: “Kanonen statt Butter!”) Yes, they had many of certain types, but only of that and not much else anymore.

 

It was not that the Allies "just had more", they were capable of making more as well as denying the Germans to make more than the little they could do themselves. All those material didn't just come from nowhere, they had to be made. You had to think of that and you had to spend resources for that. The Germans didn‘t do that and it screwed them.

 

They were beaten at sea, where almost everything German, sub or not, was sunk. They were beaten in the air. They were beaten on the ground. They were beaten in intelligence. Great Britain was a closed book to them. Imagine, the Allies could prepare D-Day without the Germans getting a good idea about that. That's just crazy. On the other hand, the Allies always had very good intel about Germany, and it was not just from Enigma. Enigma provided just further important pieces to the puzzle. They were beaten in weapons as well. There is only one weapon that in itself can change the course of war, and this is the nuke. The Germans were never even in a remote position for obtaining one.

 

While individual tech was nice, like the A4 rocket, the Fi-103 cruise missile etc., this was interesting, but merely a consequence of anything of value behind the front on the Allied side being out of reach for Germany. Having to invest in such tech is a sign just illustrates how bad the situation already was in 1944. If you are conducting a war, the only thing that matters is force projection and you can be agnostic to how this is achieved. If an Allied General could point his finger anywhere on the map of Germany and this target is then flattened by the end of the week, then you have what you need to win. The Allies had that. Germany needed the fancy tech as a remote hope achieve that as well (they didn't).

 

To paraphrase, it is like comparing two department stores. A good one and a bad one. It might well be that the bad one has the best brioche and the prettiest pillow. It is just not enough to keep the business afloat if your sales reps are villains and the other store beats you at ops in every possible way. Receivers are not good business men. If you expose them to open competition, they fail, because what they really do and are good at is far from running a real shop.

 

What is most important to us in order to win a WoL map is really only borderline significant in the entire requirements to win a real war. Having the theoretical best the Germans could do is a poor representation of the actual situation then. In no instance have “the reds” ever beaten “the blue” on WoL as the “the blue” were trashed from 1944 onwards. If we were to make such a matchup, you’d have plenty rage quitters on the blue side. (Vice versa for 1941 scenarios in the east.) And that we don’t want, so we “balance” sides in mission design.

 

For our purposes, it is just grand that the toys were very similar in performance, giving us ample possibilities to set up fair matches. But that is the game, not war. War is not fun. Our game is.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×