Jump to content
blackram

For how long we will tolerate this?

Recommended Posts

Lately..every single night on most servers there is a huge disadvantage to one side (more often VVS side). Its very common to see 47 vs 25 pilots in the mission. The worst thing is that usually some squads are picking teh side with huge advantage in numbers. Like its not enough that they are like 7-12 ppl on one squad and on comms. When the ppl will understand this is a game and your fairness should come before your plane/side preference. This is not fun for ppl who wants to balance the sides, specially solo pilots which are many.

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you want to fly a Fighter it makes most Sense to fly on the smaller Side. Ground Attackers like me enjoy Air Supremacy. I fly whichever Side has more Players, which means Cover for me. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Well, if you want to fly a Fighter it makes most Sense to fly on the smaller Side. Ground Attackers like me enjoy Air Supremacy. I fly whichever Side has more Players, which means Cover for me. 

 

It would make a sense for fighters but with long boost timers. On some planes (La-5, P-40, P-39) you can not commit to prolonged engagements. Once the enemy has drastic numerical advantage you will not survive even if prior engagement was won because the timer will force you to the "flying target drone" mode. What is left are strict hit and run attacks and patrolling at most 30km from friendly AFs.

 

That the 109s/190s have long (30m) and strong (in the game P-39 offers similar performance only for about 5-6m; similarly to not F La-5) combat modes doesn't help when the Axis side enjoys +2x numerical advantage.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately, you can't force anyone to fly a certain side if they don't want to.

 

Hopefully Bodenplatte brings some numerical balance because the Allied aircraft lineup is going to be excellent.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JG13_opcode said:

Hopefully Bodenplatte brings some numerical balance because the Allied aircraft lineup is going to be excellent.

 

Hahaha. :lol:

 

Soon enough under-boosted and boost-timer ridden Jugs and Spits will have to face whole lineup of K4s + Me262s + Dora9s. Don't think for longer than 5 minutes than the Mustang will save the MP and the Tempest is scheduled to be released in 2nd half of year. The Lighting is going to be even later and will be interesting for sure. However, in MP practice the low red-line and mediocre speed at SL is going to be PITA and at altitude (the P-38 strength) you can seldom find a target, already.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JG13_opcode said:

Ultimately, you can't force anyone to fly a certain side if they don't want to.

 

Hopefully Bodenplatte brings some numerical balance because the Allied aircraft lineup is going to be excellent.

 

Even better, who needs thouse players they can always play on other server all alone vs no reds, atleast sides will be more balanced.

TAW implemented solution to it after for years ppl saying nothing can be done, other servers can do the same but they dont wont to.

 

BoBp show its gona be the same, and with recenr D9 and 262 coming and reds having nothing like what they should have, more ppl will just play easy axis airplanes like they do now.

10 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Well, if you want to fly a Fighter it makes most Sense to fly on the smaller Side. Ground Attackers like me enjoy Air Supremacy. I fly whichever Side has more Players, which means Cover for me. 

 

No it dosent make more sence for fighter player to play on side that is outnumbered, you have to have fast airplane to not get gangbanged all the time ( and thats on most missions axis and they are outnumbered every leap year at best) you can start fight and there is great chance as your outnumbered that enemy airlane will see fight and come there then any of your side airplane, so speed will save you then.

And who enjoys geting on enemy 6 and geting rdy to shoot him but then get shoot down by other enemy, no one, or having to fight 3-4 enemys as you cant run from them you have to fight it out. And if your on side that has advantage in numbers same thnking goes for fighter as you  say for bombers, its more safer and comftable to play on it as you know if your in truble there is big chance your side will come to help, and you can just push enemy to their base like it usealy happends and just camp close to them betwen rotes to targets.

If you have fast fighters so you can run away from 3-4 enemys you can play on outnumbered side, but when you have slow airplanes its not same.

 

Also Vaal stats have on botom of each player thing call Ratio, if its below 1 player plays mostly on side with more players, if its abow 1 player plays mostly on side with less players, that way its easy to see who enjoys number advantages most of time 

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are getting it entirely wrong. If the Germans have 50 Players and Russians have 30, the Germans can take 30 Fighters and 20 Ground Attackers, making ti more 1v1 for the Fighters. As a Russian Fighter Pilot your goal must be to defend your Targets. 

Your Targets have Flak that will show you the Location of enemy Planes, and you can sneakily shoot them down. 

 

Just never fly Ground Attack without Air Supremacy, and wait for them at your Targets. Use Tactical Intelligence and concentrate on Destroying their Attackers, because the German Fighters are no good at Protecting them. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

You are getting it entirely wrong. If the Germans have 50 Players and Russians have 30, the Germans can take 30 Fighters and 20 Ground Attackers, making ti more 1v1 for the Fighters. As a Russian Fighter Pilot your goal must be to defend your Targets. 

Your Targets have Flak that will show you the Location of enemy Planes, and you can sneakily shoot them down. 

 

Just never fly Ground Attack without Air Supremacy, and wait for them at your Targets. Use Tactical Intelligence and concentrate on Destroying their Attackers, because the German Fighters are no good at Protecting them. 

Mate....there are squadrons (I will not mention here) who constantly choosing one side only. Not caring about server balance. So if they will see 40 vs 20 on server in favour of germans, they will still pick german side. Not only that but they are 8 ppl on TS, flying just fighters and picking solo players out.

Is this legit? Yes. Is this lame? Yes. Back in the old IL2 days we would split as a squad, to balance the sides.

That time is gone. I hate that. Also this scenario is frustrating for solo pilots (not everyone have time or possiblity to use commms and fly with squads).

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand I enjoy the option to choose on the other hand autoblanancing also has its advantages.

Since the multiplayer (at least for me) is about competition and fun, I don't see any sense in these splits. I can't understand why people go to the stronger side with sometimes 10 (or more) people less on the other side.  Where is the fun? Everyone surely has his advantages and flies (or drives) one plane rather than the other. Nevertheless, you could also simply overcome yourself to play the other side.
After all, it is actually a game and not the reality. This are my thoughts on the topic.

 

best regards Rico

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My squadron almost always plays Red and there are usually between 5 & 7 of us.  We come from several years in Cliffs Of Dover in specific servers where you played campaigns for months on one side and most opposition was at squadron strength so we are organised to fly that way.  We never enjoy the single combat furballs that are more popular here and most servers are not set up for squad based missions but it is a better game otherwise. Of course being Red that means that most of the time we are still outnumbered and we also frequently split into bombers & escorts.  On the rare occasions we join a server that has too many Reds we either move elsewhere or just use the opportunity to do a single long range bomber mission that does not affect the main battles going on, mainly to practice tactics & navigation and feel we have flown a real mission instead of 'Air-Quake' 🙂

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everybody wants to change sides just because it is necessary to maintain equilibrium. Our squad what we do, when we see we are outnumbering them, we just switch to ground attack mode. The reason is that it is not very fun or competitive 10 guys to fight 3. Also the risk of collision is quite big.

 

When we are outnumbered it is quite fun, but only because we fly fast planes, being in the slow plane and if the other team plays tactically it is not fun at all.

 

However there is also another big issue, I discussed recently with a friend of mine. Nowadays there are not many nooby friendly servers. Maybe there are not at all. I mean servers that have numbers of equally qualified pilots. So in those servers if you are not experienced you have still a fighting chance. That was the case of the EU official server 1 year ago. That friend he is flying both sides, and he told me that he sees now unknown pilots, who come, then they get their asses kicked and then they log out for never coming back.

 

Now there are  people who got really good, some of them almost living on the servers. So those guys accumulate tons of nooby kills. So that is a real issue. It was like that in the last days of il 46, you can't expect to find bad and average pilots. Only pilots from expert level and above.

 

So I think you should really consider joining a squad.  

Edited by JG27_Kornezov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

 

However there is also another big issue, I discussed recently with a friend of mine. Nowadays there are not many nooby friendly servers. Maybe there are not at all. I mean servers that have numbers of equally qualified pilots. So in those servers if you are not experienced you have still a fighting chance. That was the case of the EU official server 1 year ago. That friend he is flying both sides, and he told me that he sees now unknown pilots, who come, then they get their asses kicked and then they log out for never coming back.

 

Now there are  people who got really good, some of them almost living on the servers. So those guys accumulate tons of nooby kills. So that is a real issue. It was like that in the last days of il 46, you can't expect to find bad and average pilots. Only pilots from expert level and above.

 

So I think you should really consider joining a squad.  

 

Maybe 1C need to put up a server that doesn't allow you to fly there once you have had more than a certain number of kills, say 20.  Perhaps also have a server that won't let you in unless you accumulated 20 kills on the first server but have not reached 50 kills yet.  It could become a bit of a safe haven for ground attackers and bombers but if you also count ground kills & static aircraft eventually most people will get to 20 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is the one and only reason why i fly only on the red side online blackram ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

Not everybody wants to change sides just because it is necessary to maintain equilibrium. Our squad what we do, when we see we are outnumbering them, we just switch to ground attack mode. The reason is that it is not very fun or competitive 10 guys to fight 3. Also the risk of collision is quite big.

When we are outnumbered it is quite fun, but only because we fly fast planes, being in the slow plane and if the other team plays tactically it is not fun at all.

However there is also another big issue, I discussed recently with a friend of mine. Nowadays there are not many nooby friendly servers. Maybe there are not at all. I mean servers that have numbers of equally qualified pilots. So in those servers if you are not experienced you have still a fighting chance. That was the case of the EU official server 1 year ago. That friend he is flying both sides, and he told me that he sees now unknown pilots, who come, then they get their asses kicked and then they log out for never coming back.

Now there are  people who got really good, some of them almost living on the servers. So those guys accumulate tons of nooby kills. So that is a real issue. It was like that in the last days of il 46, you can't expect to find bad and average pilots. Only pilots from expert level and above.

So I think you should really consider joining a squad.  

Like I said, not everyone is available for squadron and TS. Then again, some squadrons have tought time to team up to numbers. But I get your point. Also MP should be "friendly environment" for solo or new players also. Its a game and a small niche on top of that. I still dont get squads which always pick preferable side even though the odds are heavily on one side. This is nonsense and I dont respect such squads. Whats the fun with less challenge and to make other miserable in unfair fight? Ofcourse its their decision and right but If we gonna neglect that unwritten rule (fair play) then we cant be mad at ppl braking other unwritten rules....

 

14 minutes ago, Swing said:

this is the one and only reason why i fly only on the red side online blackram ;)

Well thats the easy way and still makes ppl who play fair play - an idiots...like myself. First thing I check in MP is the numbers in teams...THIS IS WHAT WE DID IN OLD IL2.

I miss hyperlobby and COOPS. No bull**** and unchivarly there.

Edited by blackram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 year ago on the EU official server it was not possible to join the team which was outnumbering the other team. You had to wait until someone dies to take his place. So when somebody dies he was waiting 15s, so you can  take his place and compete with the others who are waiting for the same side. That is a server option and yes it did prevent unbalanced teams. I was unhappy with that but for you that would be a very welcome solution. Does anybody know any server with this kind of option active now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

1 year ago on the EU official server it was not possible to join the team which was outnumbering the other team. You had to wait until someone dies to take his place. So when somebody dies he was waiting 15s, so you can  take his place and compete with the others who are waiting for the same side. That is a server option and yes it did prevent unbalanced teams. I was unhappy with that but for you that would be a very welcome solution. Does anybody know any server with this kind of option active now?

 

Yes, TAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

However there is also another big issue, I discussed recently with a friend of mine. Nowadays there are not many nooby friendly servers. Maybe there are not at all. I mean servers that have numbers of equally qualified pilots. So in those servers if you are not experienced you have still a fighting chance. That was the case of the EU official server 1 year ago. That friend he is flying both sides, and he told me that he sees now unknown pilots, who come, then they get their asses kicked and then they log out for never coming back.

 

The incoming air-marshal functionality could remedy that a bit... The problem is augmented by sore lack of communications and I mean lack of symbols what's going on the map. IRL there would be kind of ground control, radars, spotters, recon planes - some of it could be done automatically. (of course everything should be configurable)

 

I could use a virtual pencil to draw vectors on the map for others to see or make a function to generate text communication from them.

Perhaps, some limited icons/warnings for inexperienced could have a place too.

 

The very (not only) newbie friendly option would be to have nonstop auto-record to the memory for 10-20s and be able to watch quick-replay after being shot-down. It would help a lot.

Edited by Ehret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something that has to be enforced by server options or admins constantly watching player balance.

 

It's much easier if say the server had the option to say not allow more than 10% 15% player imbalance. Either fly for the team that is under pop or don't allow them to fly on the server at all. If all a certain few amount of players wanna do is fly 109s at 7000m pretending they are Hartmann and base camp. These types of players are of no benefit to the server or multiplayer community anyways.

 

We had to enforce this back in the old Il-2 1946 game on the Uk Dedicated/battle-fields servers with admins because sadly multiplayer options were lacking in forcing the issue. Did it make the multiplayer experience better ? Absolutely. All team play competitive games benefit from team  balancing rules.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

Even better, who needs thouse players they can always play on other server all alone vs no reds, atleast sides will be more balanced.

TAW implemented solution to it after for years ppl saying nothing can be done, other servers can do the same but they dont wont to.

 

I sort of agree, but the tools which server admins can use are very limited. We're already seeing on TAW that Blue side players are sitting as spectators and using up server slots, even if there can be only 45 Blues actually flying at one time. The TAW admins have written a lot of custom scripts to make even today's level of balancing work (sort of).

 

What we *really* need is a little bit of love from the developers to improve game lobby mechanics. It would be nice to be able to tick a box on the server admin screen that says "allow at most 10 aircraft imbalance between sides" and have the server do the balancing. We also need a queuing mechanism for popular servers, rather than the current "connection spam" that everyone needs to do.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MP is currently in a very sad state. With no allied planes on the horizon any time soon, and servers allowing everything being flown, the shift in the balance towards blue pilots needs to be heavily regulated in order to keep it fun for anyone.

 

The cherry on top are comments from blue pilots who throw rocks and stones at you when you point how wrong this is, at the same time trying to find an explanation why this is fun for everyone and is perfectly fine as is.

 

MP in flight sims wasn't born yesterday. And still is in its infancy with this game. Unless something gets done, it will never reach its potential.

Edited by [DBS]TH0R
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ehret said:

 

Hahaha. :lol:

 

Soon enough under-boosted and boost-timer ridden Jugs and Spits will have to face whole lineup of K4s + Me262s + Dora9s. Don't think for longer than 5 minutes than the Mustang will save the MP and the Tempest is scheduled to be released in 2nd half of year. The Lighting is going to be even later and will be interesting for sure. However, in MP practice the low red-line and mediocre speed at SL is going to be PITA and at altitude (the P-38 strength) you can seldom find a target, already.

 

Yeah, because engine models never get adjusted, right?  Geez, there's somthing to be said for the concept of learned helplessness.  Scharfi seems to have no problem wrecking kids in the P-47, even at low altitude.

 

Anyways, part of the reason dogfights are so low is because due to the shitty performance of some game internals, they limit the visibility bubble to 10 km.  Once that gets rectified we can actually bomb from altitude and you'll regularly see He-111's and maybe one day B-24s up at 6 km instead of dive-bombing on the deck.

 

7 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Until we get better allied fighters nothing will ever change.

 

This is the crux of the issue IMHO.

Edited by JG13_opcode

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JG13_opcode said:

Yeah, because engine models never get adjusted, right?  Geez, there's somthing to be said for the concept of learned helplessness.  Scharfi seems to have no problem wrecking kids in the P-47, even at low altitude.

 

I could improve but I will not be the same and many are similar. If you aren't aware I'm a dedicated P-39L fan and (usually) manage K/D over one. I have found various ways around modelling issues including timers (hit and run tactics; patrolling in shallow dives from high alts) and some neat trick for current P-47D, too. Unfortunately, they are ALL WRONG if historical realities are concerned. No one was climbing over critical-alt in the Airacobra just to be able cruise at some speed without eating your boost timer because IRL there was none.

 

2 hours ago, JG13_opcode said:

This is the crux of the issue IMHO.

 

So no learned helplessness but handicapped crates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is so sad that this thread degenerates from server mechanics into discussion of plane and engine performance.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 1:50 PM, blackram said:

Lately..every single night on most servers there is a huge disadvantage to one side (more often VVS side). Its very common to see 47 vs 25 pilots in the mission. The worst thing is that usually some squads are picking teh side with huge advantage in numbers. Like its not enough that they are like 7-12 ppl on one squad and on comms. When the ppl will understand this is a game and your fairness should come before your plane/side preference. This is not fun for ppl who wants to balance the sides, specially solo pilots which are many.

 

A simple solution would be to use CO-OP format because you could set the amount of plane slots each team. If you want balance you could force it that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

It is so sad that this thread degenerates from server mechanics into discussion of plane and engine performance.

 

It is so sad that there are still glaring modelling issues and most planes have artificial handicaps. Those DO affect numerical balance on servers and no server mechanics will be able to resolve them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ehret said:

 

It is so sad that there are still glaring modelling issues and most planes have artificial handicaps. Those DO affect numerical balance on servers and no server mechanics will be able to resolve them.

 

So I was feeling exactly the same when the yak 1 b was introduced. 530 km/h on deck with no limits, while I was not able to maintain those speeds in my 109. 1 m emergency time in the 109 f4, the G2 in the game is never the real G 2 but a castrated version, Later g4 was introduced which has worse aerodinamics than the previous models.
Also a little bit later, G6 vs La5 FN. The la 5 FN was outperforming in speed on deck everything the LW had.

Just a little bit later the FW 190 A8, unfortunately it overheated so fast, that issue was never solved.

Also the Russian planes can accelerate to almost "relativistic speeds" while diving and shallow diving. So if you are just coming from another game and you think you can and feel safe by doing "historical tactics "like diving away it will not work and you were going to have a surprise. The yak is making in a dive 740 km/h and is perfectly maneuverable at those speeds

So yes both parts have their issues. Do not think it is just you having moments of sadness.

Edited by JG27_Kornezov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

So yes both parts have their issues. Do not think it is just you having moments of sadness.

 

I fly only the P-40 and the P-39 now and will continue so. I tried the P-47D but the way it's now it's can be used like a Spitfire but with a radial engine. It feels wrong.

The P-39L has the very similar overheating issue as the A8. On summer maps climbing on just nominal can cook engine. You can get cooler venting even when (!??) temps are firmly in safe range on gauges. Often enough it that's how you engage venting nonstop...

Share this post


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

The P-39L has the very similar overheating issue as the A8. On summer maps climbing on just nominal can cook engine. You can get cooler venting even when (!??) temps are firmly in safe range on gauges. Often enough it that's how you engage venting nonstop

 

I have been flying it recently and find it odd that all the advice tells you that nominal/continuous settings are about 2600 and combat and max settings are 3000  yet the dial is marked at 2400 & 2700.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

I have been flying it recently and find it odd that all the advice tells you that nominal/continuous settings are about 2600 and combat and max settings are 3000  yet the dial is marked at 2400 & 2700.

 

eng_limits.jpg

 

The "2400" is probably for "Econ. Max" on in the sim dial. In the sim the 2600rpm is for max level speed; the 3000rpm is for max acceleration. Why exactly it's done that way in the sim I don't know but the P-47D behaves similarly where max (2700) rpm gives lower max top speed.

Those don't apply when you are over critical-altitude where the more rpm the better. Then you can over-rev by manual pitch control to about 3100rpm without ill effects. For some other reasons the P-40 behaves differently as the Kittyhawk doesn't get higher top level speed by lowering the rpm.

Edited by Ehret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Land lease deliveries of fuel are not reaching you ;). So you are stuck with Russian fuel below fuel octane of 100, so you use from 70 to 74..

That is of course in role playing perpective ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a really interesting topic. 

First of all, I like to state some facts. 
- Most of the "always blue" players are meembers of a squadron. They are experienced enough to fly as a formation, and fight together, for teamplay, better effectiveness in-game.
They fly blue planes because they love those crates. Not because its better, or faster, or turns better, or maybe because of better guns.
- There are more "always blue" squadrons with 5+ members. 
- Yes, there are some brand new players who join for the team with bigger numbers. Most of them just doing donuts after their engine started up, or wreck their planes with the war thunder-ish "engine is on, full power" behavior, so they are just familirazing themselves with this sim. 

Right now, all I can suggest to the "always red" players.
- Advertise your squadron so lone-wolves can join, and they will realize its far better to play within squadrons. This takes a lot of effort for the squadron-leaders, yes. And a lot of learning. 
You must help your newcomers with everything: microphones, graphic settings, joysticks, head-tracking devies, etc.
This means, squadron memebers have to learn how to communicate with each other "loud and clear" during combat too. 

These are just my few cents. 
And yes, I know what it takes to lead a squadron. I'm doing it since years now.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

It is a really interesting topic. 

First of all, I like to state some facts. 
- Most of the "always blue" players are meembers of a squadron. They are experienced enough to fly as a formation, and fight together, for teamplay, better effectiveness in-game.
They fly blue planes because they love those crates. Not because its better, or faster, or turns better, or maybe because of better guns.
- There are more "always blue" squadrons with 5+ members. 
- Yes, there are some brand new players who join for the team with bigger numbers. Most of them just doing donuts after their engine started up, or wreck their planes with the war thunder-ish "engine is on, full power" behavior, so they are just familirazing themselves with this sim. 

Right now, all I can suggest to the "always red" players.
- Advertise your squadron so lone-wolves can join, and they will realize its far better to play within squadrons. This takes a lot of effort for the squadron-leaders, yes. And a lot of learning. 
You must help your newcomers with everything: microphones, graphic settings, joysticks, head-tracking devies, etc.
This means, squadron memebers have to learn how to communicate with each other "loud and clear" during combat too. 

These are just my few cents. 
And yes, I know what it takes to lead a squadron. I'm doing it since years now.

 

You are absolutely right.

We try to gather up lone wolfs and organize the war effort (coconut expert).

The results are very good to excellent.

 

You dont need to be part of a squad, just dont fly alone. 

Dont look for trouble, be the trouble.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

Looks like Land lease deliveries of fuel are not reaching you ;). So you are stuck with Russian fuel below fuel octane of 100, so you use from 70 to 74..

That is of course in role playing perpective ;).

 

I just wanted to answer the question about the "2400" line on dial; there are other charts and rpms are about the same. However, that's is an interesting insight - LL's fuel had to be a hot commodity in Soviets - I wonder how much of it was used in non-LL planes? It could explain few things...

Edited by Ehret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
“If we had flown it [as] the Americans outlined in the aircraft’s specifications, they would have shot us down immediately,” said Golodnikov, a retired major general in the Soviet air force. “This fighter was a dud in its [design] regimes. But we conducted normal combat in ‘our’ regimes.”
Read more at https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/lieutenant-ivan-baranovskys-p-39-41818469/#7kWzw3C3SdQxLRkI.99

Also I found
"
Another defect required a great amount of investigation, the so-called "throwing of rods". This allegedly occurred when because of frequent running at the engine's operating limits (without which, of course, aerial combat was unthinkable) the aforementioned parts broke loose, came through the crankcase and destroyed everything in their path, in particular the control rods. A number of flight and laboratory tests were undertaken which enabled the test engineers to recommend the most favorable operating regimes of the engine to combat pilots, and succeeded in reducing the level of this type of failure. "
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-39/index.htm
Edited by JG27_Kornezov
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Advertise your squadron so lone-wolves can join, and they will realize its far better to play within squadrons. This takes a lot of effort for the squadron-leaders, yes. And a lot of learning. 

 

I am not arguing with you, you are making a lot of sense,  but there is a problem with that in BoX.   The problem we at 56 Squadron/56GvIAP have is that we usually have about 6 squad members at each of our bi-weekly squad nights and sometimes it can be a big problem finding a server with 6 free slots.  Even when we do,  you can find the situation where there are 20 v 20 on the server and whatever side we join will then be unbalanced.   That is an unfortunate circumstance but worse is the fact that most of the servers don't *want* to allow for squadrons joining.   I have asked in a couple of server forums if they can modify their rules to work for squads as well as solo players and I inevitably get a flood of vitriol from solo players for 'trying to change the rules just for my own squadrons benefit'.  For example,  a rule that only allows you to fly from a certain field if you have landed there earlier or only allowed to take a specific type of aircraft from there if you have taken one there earlier causes problems for squads because not everyone has the time to ferry aircraft around before squad night so we end up all having to fly the most basic aircraft available from the rear field every time.   When we flew in CLOD it was possible for members of a registered squadron to ferry aircraft on behalf of the whole squadron so if we want 6 of us to fly Yak-1s from a certain forward field on squad night then one squad member with time can make 6 ferry flights (or two make 4 flights)  and any other member of the squad can then use any of those six,  but not any from the public supply.   I would understand if the server creators said it was too difficult but they just don't accept there is a problem to be fixed and tell us to just fly mixed aircraft from multiple fields.  Yes that is possible but it takes away half the advantages of flying as a co-ordinated squad when some are in spitfires & some are in LA5s and the rest in P40s all spread across the map.

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

The problem we at 56 Squadron/56GvIAP have is that we usually have about 6 squad members at each of our bi-weekly squad nights and sometimes it can be a big problem finding a server with 6 free slots.  Even when we do,  you can find the situation where there are 20 v 20 on the server and whatever side we join will then be unbalanced.   That is an unfortunate circumstance but worse is the fact that most of the servers don't *want* to allow for squadrons joining.   I have asked in a couple of server forums if they can modify their rules to work for squads as well as solo players and I inevitably get a flood of vitriol from solo players for 'trying to change the rules just for my own squadrons benefit'.  For example,  a rule that only allows you to fly from a certain field if you have landed there earlier or only allowed to take a specific type of aircraft from there if you have taken one there earlier causes problems for squads because not everyone has the time to ferry aircraft around before squad night so we end up all having to fly the most basic aircraft available from the rear field every time.

 

I think that's less about "squads or not" and more about server design philosophy. The servers where you have to earn a plane or ferry planes around to make them available are implementing a level of realism/campaign and if you like that kind of thing then that's what you're signing up for on that server. KOTA and Wings are good examples of "single map" servers -- the planes don't have to be earned, you don't really have to ferry anything around although some fields may have a/c limitations, once the map ends one side wins/loses and it's onto the next map, and (if there are enough slots) a whole squadron can join and fly together easily. The other kind of servers are "campaign" servers like Coconut and TAW. Aircraft are not available everywhere, sometimes you need to earn the aircraft, and if you want to fly as a squad you either have to 'immerse' in the campaign and earn/ferry planes, or accept a mixed plane flight, or fly a 'basic' plane that is available from a rear field.

 

That's all server design philosophy stuff, not really due to the mechanics of the game and server software. What times are you flying that you find KOTA and Wings to be full?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG27_Kornezov said:
Also I found
"
Another defect required a great amount of investigation, the so-called "throwing of rods". This allegedly occurred when because of frequent running at the engine's operating limits (without which, of course, aerial combat was unthinkable) the aforementioned parts broke loose, came through the crankcase and destroyed everything in their path, in particular the control rods. A number of flight and laboratory tests were undertaken which enabled the test engineers to recommend the most favorable operating regimes of the engine to combat pilots, and succeeded in reducing the level of this type of failure. "
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-39/index.htm

 

The max permissible diving RPM for the V-1710-63 is stated as 3120. The engine shouldn't be "throwing any rods" at this rev, yet. If that was happening then it could mean that they revved it even higher... how much higher?

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

×