Jump to content

Is the Yak 9 actually worth it?


Bjorrrrn

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, ShadowStalker887 said:

Is it though? From what I've heard it's fairly inline with reality; nothing I've seen them do is outside of what it could do IRL.

Last I read and experienced it, its 'prop hanging' and in general stall recovery is unbelievable. I haven't touched it since the new Pilot physiology update but before that, it could do a 180 and be on your tail in minus seconds. I absolutely hate that thing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
CountZero
3 minutes ago, Bjorrrrn said:

Last I read and experienced it, its 'prop hanging' and in general stall recovery is unbelievable. I haven't touched it since the new Pilot physiology update but before that, it could do a 180 and be on your tail in minus seconds. I absolutely hate that thing. 

LOL have you ever play 109F4 in this game, if you think spit9 is that bad what do you think about helecopter F4.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BlitzPig_EL

I would have you fly the aircraft for a week or so, then get back to us on your feelings, as that is all they are, feelings.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
=621=Samikatz

The good acceleration means it's very good at punishing peoples mistakes, perhaps sometimes before you realise you've made them

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

Last I read and experienced it, its 'prop hanging' and in general stall recovery is unbelievable. I haven't touched it since the new Pilot physiology update but before that, it could do a 180 and be on your tail in minus seconds. I absolutely hate that thing. 

With the Pilot Physiology the Spitfire has effectively been neutered. The Speeds at which the Dogfights happen in BOOB the Spitfire is adversely effected by it's Neutral Stability and unless you want to find yourself unconscious for most Fights, you have to play by the Rules of the 190s and 109s.

Unless you get to engage below 350km/h or slow down the Fight considerably (which is difficult with amount of Power of most Planes) you are a Sitting Duck.

 

Pilot Physiology has changed the Way Dogfights play out now, and the BnZers now make more Sense than ever before, simply because the Turnfighters can't do 11g Turns anymore and pull the faster Planes into a Stall at 600km/h.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CountZero said:

LOL have you ever play 109F4 in this game, if you think spit9 is that bad what do you think about helecopter F4.

I haven't used the F4 so I cant comment.

11 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

With the Pilot Physiology the Spitfire has effectively been neutered. The Speeds at which the Dogfights happen in BOOB the Spitfire is adversely effected by it's Neutral Stability and unless you want to find yourself unconscious for most Fights, you have to play by the Rules of the 190s and 109s.

Unless you get to engage below 350km/h or slow down the Fight considerably (which is difficult with amount of Power of most Planes) you are a Sitting Duck.

 

Pilot Physiology has changed the Way Dogfights play out now, and the BnZers now make more Sense than ever before, simply because the Turnfighters can't do 11g Turns anymore and pull the faster Planes into a Stall at 600km/h.

Yes that why I mentioned the update. I'm glad it's been fixed because I honestly hated that plane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Finkeren
On 2/5/2020 at 10:02 PM, Kataphrakt said:

I have a question for you about this (if you have an answer). When you say that they were only standardized within the factory do you mean that the a turret from factory A would probably only work on a hull from factory A? Or was it such that they were made as replaceable parts, but just had different features outside of that? 

 

From what i understand of WWII most of the tanks were manufactured with the rough concept of "replaceable parts" kept in mind; however, parts often needed to be hand-fit onto the vehicle to make it work. So sometimes even a part from factory A that fits on one tank might not fit on another tank from the same factory since the tolerances they could hold were not great. The mechanics would then have to file off a little bit to make it fit then the parts worked fine. 

 

Generally speaking parts would be interchangeable (though often not identical), but in reality it was not always the case. Production quality was rough and tolerances loose. Focus was on producing things that worked right out of the factor, and less attention was given to making sure that each factory produced to the exact same standards. 

 

A famous example of this is the PPSh-41 sub-machinegun. It had a 71-round drum magazine that was more or less copied from the Finnish KP-31 and proved notoriously problematic. It could be very reliable and work flawlessly, if it was paired with a gun that fit just right, otherwise it was prone to all sorts of failures. Collectors to this day sometimes meet up in groups to exchange drums and find one that is just right for their PPSh. In the end the Soviets ended up phasing out production of the drums and shift to simpler 35-round stick mags - and eventually move on to the PPS-43, which was even simpler, with even looser tolerancens and ended up as probably the best sub-gun of WW2. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
danielprates
4 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

A famous example of this is the PPSh-41 sub-machinegun. It had a 71-round drum magazine that was more or less copied from the Finnish KP-31 and proved notoriously problematic. It could be very reliable and work flawlessly, if it was paired with a gun that fit just right, otherwise it was prone to all sorts of failures. Collectors to this day sometimes meet up in groups to exchange drums and find one that is just right for their PPSh. In the end the Soviets ended up phasing out production of the drums and shift to simpler 35-round stick mags - and eventually move on to the PPS-43, which was even simpler, with even looser tolerancens and ended up as probably the best sub-gun of WW2.

 

"Forgotten Weapons" has a great video about this very subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2020 at 12:47 PM, Diggun said:

@6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann, good information, but your, err, unique approach to capitalisation ways leaves me feeling like I've just read some scientific tract from about 1690...😂

 

Technically, one needs to also list every synonym that the author knows for key words (& terms & expressions & appellations) and have long run-on sentences without punctuation other than the occasional Capitalisation for Emphasis... and write all of one's 's' letters in a way that causes the modern reader to perceive them as being like an 'f' and thus causes at least some of us to imagine everyone in that era had a lisp...

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/action/doSearch?sortBy=Latest&SeriesKey=rstl

 

It is nice to see that at least some of these traditions exist still in sister languages... and probably good to see that others have largely disappeared!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
[=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther

I am still reading through this thread and it is a fascinating read for someone new to WW2 aviation. I got into this game through RoF mainly because I loved the romanticism of flight at that time. I decided to give BOS a shot and I have been playing catch- up. Originally, I was more interested in Soviet Union and the Yak. By chance I go into the German side (flew  Germany) in RoF). I feel the difference between each 109 even being fairly new to this era of flight. I do not mind that there are so many variants to fly. I wouldn't mind more even if the variant is only a slight difference. If you can feel a difference, it is a difference. Anyway, If I flew Yaks, I would be all over these planes. The developers are a little selective so I don't think they would choose a plane that would not be a joy or different to fly in some way. Then again, I like to fly planes based on the history of the unit I am portraying. I guess it depends entirely on the angle (reasons) for playing the game. If you want immersions, you won't get enough variants. If you only want to fly the best planes from each "era" during the war, then you probably won't buy them. 

 

Anyway, I will sit back and get an education. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_KaiLae
On 2/6/2020 at 11:19 AM, danielprates said:

 

"Forgotten Weapons" has a great video about this very subject.

Hail gun jesus, our lord and firepower savior

 

jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
On 2/2/2020 at 8:09 AM, Finkeren said:

@OP: To me the Yak-9 is worth it, simply because of how important and iconic it is. A plane that was produced in those insane numbers, and served for such a long time pretty much unchanged, is a must-have. 

 

On 2/2/2020 at 5:34 PM, mattebubben said:

For me it will depend on the Modifications.

If the Yak9 only models the base Yak 9 (Late 42-Early43 model) i will probably pass as it was produced in pretty small numbers (460 or so i think)

but if it includes modifications that turns it into additional models (Yak 9D for example) then i would be more likely to get it.

 

Otherwise i would probably wait for the Yak9T that saw use in larger numbers.

 

I'm afraid our Yak-9 is going to be a very early 1943 variant, I noticed the wip 3D model has the same type of oil radiator shutter as the Yak-7B, which I thought was changed by the time the "Yak-9" name was adopted, but Gavrick told me its correct and intended to be like that. So other modifications such as D, DD, etc wouldnt be suitable since these are late 1943/1944 production variants with other changes including the later style oil radiator (similar to Yak-1B).

 

So it looks like its going to be of the rather limited initial production, with a few hundreds made, similar oil cooling problems as the current Yak-7B, and suitable for Battle of Kuban / Prokhorovka scenarios, not much of a La-5FN 1944 companion for MP. 

 

I wish we could get later variants as mods though, but kinda hard at this point, unless they choose to mix and match early and late features. 

 

 

On 2/6/2020 at 11:03 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bremspropeller
6 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

I wish we could get later variants as mods though, but kinda hard at this point, unless they choose to mix and match early and late features. 

 

I think we'll see them at a later timeframe, depicting Bagration or the jump accross the Oder.

I'd hazard a guess those two scenarios are pretty much assured down the line - unless something else prevents the developers from making them real.

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

Bagration

 

The issue with Bagration is the size of the operation. I think the approach to Warsaw at the end of the operation/middle of Konev's drive from the norther Ukraine (name of the offensive escapes me), when the Germans were flying from hardened airdromes and were able to contest the air will be made sooner.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
[=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther

I might be in the minority here, but I would like to see more maps created for the plane sets already created. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
CountZero
53 minutes ago, [JG.77]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

I might be in the minority here, but I would like to see more maps created for the plane sets already created. 

 

Would be nice if they make collectable maps like they do with airplanes, sell map and SP campaign for it where you can use airplanes already in DLCs, and for MP its free like other maps in game now (if MP is only 5% then no problem making them free to use in MP). There is planty of map areas with good air battles over them that cant be in game if 5x5dlcs are only option.

 

Hope Leningrad map is finished succesfuly by Finland players making it now, maybe that opens doors for more maps outside DLC ones.

Edited by CountZero
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, CountZero said:

and for MP its free like other maps in game now (if MP is only 5% then no problem making them free to use in MP).

 

Oh mate, be careful with such presumptions - you might drive some people into a corner, especially those understating MP...

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ww2fighter20
3 hours ago, cardboard_killer said:

 

The issue with Bagration is the size of the operation. I think the approach to Warsaw at the end of the operation/middle of Konev's drive from the norther Ukraine (name of the offensive escapes me), when the Germans were flying from hardened airdromes and were able to contest the air will be made sooner.

Agreed, another problem is lack of new aircraft for an 5x5 planeset which the devs have mentioned is the most profitable for them.

 

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

 

Would be nice if they make collectable maps like they do with airplanes, sell map and SP campaign for it where you can use airplanes already in DLCs, and for MP its free like other maps in game now (if MP is only 5% then no problem making them free to use in MP). There is planty of map areas with good air battles over them that cant be in game if 5x5dlcs are only option.

 

Hope Leningrad map is finished succesfuly by Finland players making it now, maybe that opens doors for more maps outside DLC ones.

Considering how much time it takes to make maps compared to aircraft I can only see extra maps coming from outside sources like the Leningrad map you mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cardboard_killer
1 hour ago, ww2fighter20 said:

Agreed, another problem is lack of new aircraft for an 5x5 planeset which the devs have mentioned is the most profitable for them.

 

I would pay for a plane set without a map, something on one of the existing maps maybe (e.g. Battle of Belgium/France/Netherlands on the BoBp map). But I expect there would be a lot of complaints from others about cost without a new map.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2020 at 1:38 PM, 76IAP-Black said:

I'm expecting following planes

Yak-9
Yak-9B
Yak-9T
Yak-9K

and here is a nice video with eng subs

 

Do you have any other versions? Im going to look.  The subtitles are very poor - the ratio seems to be 1 translated sentence per 10 spoken 😕

Edited by Sublime
Link to post
Share on other sites
CountZero

Translation looks correct, i just hope new DM changes make 37mm again worth having, how its now it takes 2-3 direct hits on 109 to even scrach it, 12.7mm are better to have then slow 37mm on P-39 or Lagg3s

3 hours ago, cardboard_killer said:

 

I would pay for a plane set without a map, something on one of the existing maps maybe (e.g. Battle of Belgium/France/Netherlands on the BoBp map). But I expect there would be a lot of complaints from others about cost without a new map.

You would have to have new map just to have correct airbases for SP campaign for new 5x5 airplanes for same map but 1940 or 41 if thats aim.

4 hours ago, ww2fighter20 said:

...

 

Considering how much time it takes to make maps compared to aircraft I can only see extra maps coming from outside sources like the Leningrad map you mentioned.

 

For my taste they are making maps to mutch detailed so it takes longer then i would like, so yes that would be problem, they can make airplane in few months but map takes year or two.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
-SF-Disarray
2 hours ago, Sublime said:

Do you have any other versions? Im going to look.  The subtitles are very poor - the ratio seems to be 1 translated sentence per 10 spoken 😕

I specialize in translation from Russian to English and those subtitles are fine. The issue stems from English being, generally, less wordy than Russian; though sometimes Russian is less wordy than English. It is kind of an odd dynamic in translation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2020 at 1:38 PM, 76IAP-Black said:

I'm expecting following planes

Yak-9
Yak-9B
Yak-9T
Yak-9K

 

Honestly, I wouldn't expect more variants (other than field mods for different gun sights, maybe mirrors etc.)

 

The basic Yak-9 (early) is an important enough plane, produced in enough numbers, to be worth modelling on its own. A Yak-9D might be possible (as it just involves adding additional fuel tanks)... but a Yak-9B is more complicated to model. Similarly the Yak-9K might be a later production run or from a different factory? It might not be easy.

 

That said - if they did model a Yak-9B I would buy it! It is the most attractive Yak-9 to me... and I ascribe this to my having very poor judgment and taste! 😄 But, it is generally felt it wasn't a product of good judgment in the first place - so it is totally appropriate I would get it for that reason!

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

You would have to have new map just to have correct airbases for SP campaign for new 5x5 airplanes for same map but 1940 or 41 if thats aim.

 

Yes, but I expect adding and subtracting airfields is much much less time consuming than making completely new maps. Something along the order of 2% of the work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ACG_KaiLae

I think some of the people above have unrealistic expectations. Early Yak-9 and late yak-9 are like P-51B to P-51D which are different aircraft in game. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, -SF-Disarray said:

I specialize in translation from Russian to English and those subtitles are fine. The issue stems from English being, generally, less wordy than Russian; though sometimes Russian is less wordy than English. It is kind of an odd dynamic in translation.

Idk man I watch lots of stuff translated. I get number of words doesnt translate exactly but I definitely noted parts where whole things were being skipped or didnt make any sense. 

Otoh right now Im watching an episode of Star Medias Soviet Storm and it reads fine

Link to post
Share on other sites
-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
On 2/12/2020 at 6:57 AM, Bremspropeller said:

 

I think we'll see them at a later timeframe, depicting Bagration or the jump accross the Oder.

I'd hazard a guess those two scenarios are pretty much assured down the line - unless something else prevents the developers from making them real.

 

With Bagration you dont have German fighters to include. Currently the only ones left would be basically 109 G-10 and 190 A-9, and those are from a later timeframe. We should have a 1945 eastern front expansion to make the best use of both German and Russian plane lists. 

 

On 2/12/2020 at 6:04 PM, Avimimus said:

 

 

The basic Yak-9 (early) is an important enough plane, produced in enough numbers, to be worth modelling on its own. A Yak-9D might be possible (as it just involves adding additional fuel tanks)... but a Yak-9B is more complicated to model. Similarly the Yak-9K might be a later production run or from a different factory? It might not be easy.

 

😄

 

Yak-9D is not just extra fuel tanks, as I posted earlier there were changes in the design such as the oil radiator, and I dont think they would implement that as a mod. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
PatrickAWlson
18 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

With Bagration you dont have German fighters to include. Currently the only ones left would be basically 109 G-10 and 190 A-9, and those are from a later timeframe. We should have a 1945 eastern front expansion to make the best use of both German and Russian plane lists. 

 

The problem 1C is facing is that their model is drying up if they stick precisely to the formula.  I don't mind the idea of a different plane set.  Every option that I can think of would involve throwing in a German plane or two (Me 109 G6 and FW190 A8?) from other packs as freebees for the new product.

 

Options:

Build more Russian planes than German.

Keep it 5/5 but add German planes that are not necessarily fighters.

Build 5 Russian planes, a couple of German, and toss in some wester allied stuff that might be missing.

Keep it 5/5 but add German planes that are not appropriate for the time period (1C is already doing this with Normandy).

 

As plane options continue to dry up maybe a map pack.

 

So 10 new planes but toss in some of the critical models for the Germans to ensure that Germans can still play a campaign or otherwise match up appropriately with the Russian plane set and battle time period.  Anybody who buys it will probably already have purchased those other battle packs, so the giveaway is minimal.  

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
BlitzPig_EL

Planes needed across the board, all flyable:

 

I-153

HS 123

A20 G

Do 17/217

Macchi-Castoldi 200

Bristol Beaufighter

P39N or Q

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CountZero
26 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

The problem 1C is facing is that their model is drying up if they stick precisely to the formula.  I don't mind the idea of a different plane set.  Every option that I can think of would involve throwing in a German plane or two (Me 109 G6 and FW190 A8?) from other packs as freebees for the new product.

 

Options:

Build more Russian planes than German.

Keep it 5/5 but add German planes that are not necessarily fighters.

Build 5 Russian planes, a couple of German, and toss in some wester allied stuff that might be missing.

Keep it 5/5 but add German planes that are not appropriate for the time period (1C is already doing this with Normandy).

 

As plane options continue to dry up maybe a map pack.

 

So 10 new planes but toss in some of the critical models for the Germans to ensure that Germans can still play a campaign or otherwise match up appropriately with the Russian plane set and battle time period.  Anybody who buys it will probably already have purchased those other battle packs, so the giveaway is minimal.  

 

 

The way it looks they dont have to worry about it for long time, BoN early acces time , then they can easy fined 5x5 for late east front, then Italy in 1943 can have 5x5, and thats 5-6 years from now where you run out of options for 5x5 ww2 without going to PTO or KTO.

 

14 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Planes needed across the board, all flyable:

 

I-153

HS 123

A20 G

Do 17/217

Macchi-Castoldi 200

Bristol Beaufighter

P39N or Q

 

 

 

 

If only they went for i-153 insted u-2, but exept 2 biplanes you can get rest with late east front and italy dlc in future

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
BlitzPig_EL

I have a soft spot in my heart for the late biplanes, I have to admit.  Toss in the Gladiator, CR.42, Grumman F3F, and Curtiss Hawk III, and I'd be in heaven.

 

Curtiss_Model_68_Hawk_III.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bremspropeller
22 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Planes needed across the board, all flyable:

 

I-153

HS 123

A-20G

Do 17/217

Macchi-Castoldi 200

Bristol Beaufighter

P39N or Q

 

 

 

 

QFT!

Link to post
Share on other sites
=621=Samikatz
28 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Planes needed across the board, all flyable:

 

I-153

A20 G

Bristol Beaufighter

 

 

Yesyesyesyesyesyesyesyes

Link to post
Share on other sites
FarflungWanderer

I was thinking about the "map pack" idea a few days ago. I would be perfectly happy to spend money to buy new terrains to fly on that come complete with career mode extensions/new battles/etc.

 

I understand that this is far from an efficient option for 1C, as map-making takes a very long time. Still, though, I'm willing to buy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Yak-9D is not just extra fuel tanks, as I posted earlier there were changes in the design such as the oil radiator, and I dont think they would implement that as a mod. 

 

Thanks. It actually occurred to me after I posted that production line differences (even from different months etc.) would require building the models almost from scratch if one were aiming for the level of detail/accuracy in the BoX series...

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

We should have a 1945 eastern front expansion to make the best use of both German and Russian plane lists.

 

1945 Eastern Front also has the advantage of offering a number of interesting scenarios, like Kurland or Hungary. Throw in the Fw 190 A9, a late 109, plus some bombers, and we are fine. Of course, there are many Soviet planes to choose from.

 

 

2 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

The way it looks they dont have to worry about it for long time, BoN early acces time , then they can easy fined 5x5 for late east front, then Italy in 1943 can have 5x5, and thats 5-6 years from now where you run out of options for 5x5 ww2 without going to PTO or KTO.

 

Perhaps even Manchuria for planes like the P-63 King Cobra, which I would love to see.

(I don't know if the Yak-3U was ready for that offensive).

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

Perhaps even Manchuria for planes like the P-63 King Cobra, which I would love to see.

(I don't know if the Yak-3U was ready for that offensive).

 

No, the Yak-3U didn't enter production until after the war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe. Not sure what planes were used in Manchuria by the Soviets other than the King Cobra. The Soviets should have enough late war planes for both, a 1945 Eastern Front module and a Manchuria module, I guess. Of course, Manchuria might not be the Far East scenario people want...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...