Oh My Friedrich Gustav... ! (Allies "main" tries Bf.109 for first time)

[DakkaDakkaDakka]

So I've owned IL-2:GB since the beginning of BoS, but I've almost exclusively focused on the Allies and Entente aircraft for the whole time. Besides some QMB one-offs, I don't think until this weekend I'd ever even flown a Bf 109 or Fw 190 in multiplayer.

 

Anyways I spent the better part of the weekend dabbling with the Bf.109 in Berloga and oh wow... what a machine! The speed... the climb performance... the cannons(!!)... the "flying into the ground at warp speed because lol no stabilizer authority." I experienced it all, to be sure ?

 

The TLDR is that this is a super fun machine, easy to fly, hard to master... I am so glad I finally sampled it. It makes me realize how many cool experiences still await me in this sim...

[BlitzPig_EL]

I've been flying the 109s more of late myself.  It's a pleasant break to hit the easy button for a change, especially in early time frames.

[ITAF_Rani]

I love G6 !!

[354thFG_Panda_]

If you get a chance to pick up Bodenplatte, try the K4. It's an absolute rocket ship and very beastly. 

[Jade_Monkey]

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

[BladeMeister]

It is just so hard to come over to the Dark side. I have dabbled in the K4 in GBS and DCS and I do agree that when flown correctly that kite can be a beast. I need to jump in the 190s but I have a really hard time fighting in it as I am not a very good boom and zoom deflection shooter, but yes the Dark side can be fun and it has a varied selection of challenging planes. Gotta love it.

 

S!Blade<><

[BlitzPig_EL]

I agree with you both, It's good to try all the planes.  Even if you don't like some, flying them can give you insights on how to counter them, or point out deficiencies in your own technique.  That said I still cannot come to grips with the 190s.  Sure, bagging A20s or PE2s, or IL2s is fun, but engaging other fighters is another matter.  Their flying style is so one dimensional, and limiting to me.

[DakkaDakkaDakka]

1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

 

I can only speak for myself, but: I came from RoF, where I'd spent literal years getting to know the various planes, learn BFM and gunnery, etc. Each plane there has a very unique personality, and can take a good deal of time to master (or at least become middling with).

 

So on one level, it makes sense that people stick not only with a single faction, but sometimes even just one or two aircraft; once you develop a reasonable level of skill and confidence with something, it can be hard not to feel like you're nerfing yourself when you switch to something new.

 

Considering how much is going on with the Allied planes in terms of engine management, etc, it makes even more sense, from that perspective. However, the Bf 109 is super low workload by comparison; you just need to make sure you have stabilator trim setup and you're good to go ?

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by DakkaDakkaDakka

[NanashiAnjin]

2 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

I agree, its like, not following the art of war! 

 

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

 

 

[Rjel]

2 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

Honestly, it’s more a lack of time than anything. Going back to the original Il2, I’ve probably logged more hours in the 109 than anything else. But now that more western aircraft are available, that’s my focus. I still see plenty of time with the 109s and 190s. It’s just from the outside. Chasing and being chased. 

[Jaws2002]

8 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I agree with you both, It's good to try all the planes.  Even if you don't like some, flying them can give you insights on how to counter them, or point out deficiencies in your own technique.  That said I still cannot come to grips with the 190s.  Sure, bagging A20s or PE2s, or IL2s is fun, but engaging other fighters is another matter.  Their flying style is so one dimensional, and limiting to me.

 

 

It depends what 190 you fly. Some are a bit more "brick' then others. The A3 is a freaking dogfighting monster.  D9 and A5 are not bad either.

 

 You are missing a lot by flying just one side. I think in the last two weeks I flown the Hurricane and Typhoon for the Brits. P38, mustang and A20 for the Yanks, FW-190 A3, 5, BF-109E7, F4, G2, Ju88 for the Germans. And I flew Yak1B, 9T, La5Fn, Il2-41/42,43 for the Russians. I also messed around in Panther and Nieup28. 

 

They are all fun.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Jaws2002

[Irishratticus72]

I came into IL2 with the sole intention of flying mainly IL2s, and P38s, but I have to confess that I've fallen in love with the G6, especially the late variant. It just feels, good to fly, a tricky bitch, but very rewarding. Anyway, that's all I've got for today, go away now.... ?

[[TWB]80hd]

Wait till you give the 190 a whirl, it's really nice and the cockpit isn't like the truth or dare closet you kissed the fat girl in back in 6th grade like the 109, it has room for your magazines and a cupholder, real slick. 

 

This sim really stands apart in terms of what it offers from the ground up... you can't fake a good flight sim engine, because all the planes will feel similar in one way shape or form... in IL2BoX you can truly feel a difference as soon as you turn the engine over in a given aircraft, the nuances (or outright quirks) in taxxing are amazing, and of course once you go wheels up you can really feel the difference.

 

The damage model is really good too, I've not played everything out there and I cannot speak for the tank game, but the airframe damage modeling is very nice.

 

I think the individually most important hallmark of a grand flight sim is the handling of energy retention in relation to the airframe vs. maneuvers... you can get some speed up in a shallow dive in an IL-2 and really surprise 109/190s who aren't experienced, as they go nose high and eat 23mm from 300+ meters behind them.  That's an exquisite experience you can't find anywhere else.

 

<S>

Edited December 6, 2021 by 80hd

[oc2209]

I've always flown every plane available since the original Sturm was released nearly 2 decades ago. I've always come to the same conclusions: I like nose guns; I like slower firing guns more than faster firing guns; I like turning more than boom and zoom. Said proclivities have always steered me towards either German or Russian planes, with the former obviously being far more user-friendly for a variety of reasons (chiefly engine control and ammo amounts).

 

I've never seen German planes as the Dark Side, because I see a piece of engineering as a machine and nothing else. The cause that it fights for, and the men that operate it, are irrelevant to me; including the use of slave labor in its manufacture.

 

Much the same way that people who visit and admire the Pyramids of Egypt, the Great Wall of China, or the city of St. Petersburg, Russia, don't stop to shed a tear about the suffering and deaths of forced laborers that went into the construction of all the above. Human history is so full of injustice and brutality, I'm not about to laser-focus on one part of it to limit myself in a gaming, fictionalized experience.

 

Forgive the tangent. But, you know, it's always something lurking just under the surface whenever anything WWII German is brought up. Political reasons are the only reasons I can think of why people would adamantly refuse to fly a given faction (be it German, Russian, or American--I exclude the British, because everyone loves them).

 

Just looking at it from a purely engineering and design perspective, there is no major combatant in WWII that made universally bad planes. All planes have some design feature(s) to appreciate and respect.

[DakkaDakkaDakka]

5 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Forgive the tangent. But, you know, it's always something lurking just under the surface whenever anything WWII German is brought up. Political reasons are the only reasons I can think of why people would adamantly refuse to fly a given faction (be it German, Russian, or American--I exclude the British, because everyone loves them).

 

Just looking at it from a purely engineering and design perspective, there is no major combatant in WWII that made universally bad planes. All planes have some design feature(s) to appreciate and respect.

 

I can definitely relate to the subject you're bringing up here. It's definitely something that's been on my mind before, for sure.

 

With that said, I also do tabletop gaming, and especially love tabletop dogfight games like Wings of War / Wings of Glory. These games use miniature planes in the 1/144 - 1/285 scale to simulate air combat, and while it's a bit 2 dimensional compared to the real thing (or even compared to a sim of the real thing), it's still really quite fun.

 

In those games, I'm happy to "fly" whatever plane, because they look cool on the table and, if you're trying to do a historically-inspired scenario, it doesn't make a lot of sense to do Spitfires vs Spitfires or whatever (although weirder things have happened IRL - see the Soccer War, etc.), meaning someone has to "Be the Baddies" (I'll leave open to each reader whatever that label means, since the one thing you learn from games like these, as well as flight sims, is that it's very much a matter of perspective).

 

In any event, thinking of the plane set in a sim like this as a collection of cool digital game pieces, and not necessarily as any sort of endorsement of historical politics or groups, helps really refocus on the core idea: all of these warbirds were feats of engineering in their day, and remain some of the most potent propeller driven aircraft ever created. We're fortunate to have literal dozens of them at our disposal via this sim, and on a personal level, it's cool to start experiencing more of them.

[oc2209]

10 hours ago, DakkaDakkaDakka said:

In any event, thinking of the plane set in a sim like this as a collection of cool digital game pieces, and not necessarily as any sort of endorsement of historical politics or groups, helps really refocus on the core idea: all of these warbirds were feats of engineering in their day, and remain some of the most potent propeller driven aircraft ever created. We're fortunate to have literal dozens of them at our disposal via this sim, and on a personal level, it's cool to start experiencing more of them.

 

Yup, I completely agree.

 

Speaking of tabletop gaming, I've always liked MechWarrior/BattleTech. In the video game spinoffs (MechWarrior 5, MechWarrior Online, etc), I always prefer light and medium 'mechs to heavy and assault. Trying to avoid getting hit, to me, is more fun than being able to absorb damage by having more armor and moving commensurately slower.

 

While we mostly think of armor and weight in tank designs (of which the battlemech is an obvious analog), it does apply to planes as well. American planes are the ultimate heavy/assault designs, while the Japanese would be at the opposite end of the spectrum. British and German are variable but mostly veer towards medium/light, while Russian are very similar to the Japanese design ethos of maximizing agility and minimizing weight.

 

I take that preference for agility into any game I play. Be it a Dungeons and Dragons type RPG, etc. If we can stand another gaming analogy, I see the 109 with a 30mm as like a nuker/mage class in an RPG; almost a literal glass cannon. Yaks and Zeros are rogue classes. P-47s and Typhoons are tank/warrior classes. I never play tanks in RPGs; always mages or rogues.

 

That said, I do still like to fly heavy planes like the P-47 and P-38 just to mix things up and as a challenge. But it definitely goes against my grain, and most of my flight time is in lightweights.

[jollyjack]

On 12/6/2021 at 1:18 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

 

Well, one for sure is that a lot older guys like me have nasty family histories in relation to the local ww2 resistance when we grew up,

thanks them nazi bastards, especially for my wife and me.

My alas now passed away neighbor was a naval officer on a Dutch frigate sunk by the Japanese in the Java Sea.

 

But their planes in IL2 are worth while, alas i always hesitate to shoot down any Brittish, USA, Russian or other allied plane. Call me biassed.

Edited December 14, 2021 by SYN_Haashashin

[Irishratticus72]

2 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Yup, I completely agree.

 

Speaking of tabletop gaming, I've always liked MechWarrior/BattleTech. In the video game spinoffs (MechWarrior 5, MechWarrior Online, etc), I always prefer light and medium 'mechs to heavy and assault. Trying to avoid getting hit, to me, is more fun than being able to absorb damage by having more armor and moving commensurately slower.

 

While we mostly think of armor and weight in tank designs (of which the battlemech is an obvious analog), it does apply to planes as well. American planes are the ultimate heavy/assault designs, while the Japanese would be at the opposite end of the spectrum. British and German are variable but mostly veer towards medium/light, while Russian are very similar to the Japanese design ethos of maximizing agility and minimizing weight.

 

I take that preference for agility into any game I play. Be it a Dungeons and Dragons type RPG, etc. If we can stand another gaming analogy, I see the 109 with a 30mm as like a nuker/mage class in an RPG; almost a literal glass cannon. Yaks and Zeros are rogue classes. P-47s and Typhoons are tank/warrior classes. I never play tanks in RPGs; always mages or rogues.

 

That said, I do still like to fly heavy planes like the P-47 and P-38 just to mix things up and as a challenge. But it definitely goes against my grain, and most of my flight time is in lightweights.

Urbie for the win! 

[BladeMeister]

8 hours ago, jollyjack said:

 

Well, one for sure is that a lot older guys like me have nasty family histories in relation to the local ww2 resistance when we grew up,

thanks them nazi bastards.

 

But their planes in IL2 are worth while, alas i always hesitate to shoot down any Brittish, USA, Russian or other allied plane. Call me biassed.

This. I don't have the family history, but I find it hard to fly the axis planes even though I respect there engineering and performance aspects. I am not saying I never do but I tend to fly any allied side plane 90% of the time. It just bothers me to shoot down any allied plane knowing of all of the lives sacrificed to preserve freedom. I know that may seem strange to some and that this is only a flight simulator, but that is the honest truth as to why I predominantly fly allied. To each there own.

 

S!Blade<><

[jollyjack]

Posted this else where too, can make you feel a little less frustrated:

 

Beat the Meatboys Bf109F4 and G4 Missions:

 

Just curious about the new Advanced mission generator and the Bf109-F4 i created a few Intercept Bomber types. Analyzed  them a little in the ME;

I am sure it's a great add on, but with still some flaws maybe.

 

So i edited one a wee bit, but there are Eyetalian Mc202s involved over Stalingrad in 1942 put there by the AQMB. Left them be, especially if that's not correct LoL. Edited some dead stuff out, and some new stuff in, but it's a great mission if you like Bf109-f4s with cannons and chase for migs, Laggs, La5s, and Pe-2s up high.

 

I also added some non historical Bf109 F4 and G4 skins, grouped as KaiserFlight:

they're on Haluter's, Bf109F4, G4 and K4 to put them in the mission. No swastikas or fake ones ...

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/uploads/monthly_2021_12/767260492_4xKaiserFlightBf109-F4.jpg.0456c9c06fa5d27b877f77d3685e3d75.jpg

 

REVAMPED the missions for game version 4.701:

 

 

Bf109F4 beat the Meatboys_4-701.zip Bf109-G4 beat the Meatboys_4-701.zip

Edited December 9, 2021 by jollyjack

[oc2209]

11 hours ago, jollyjack said:

Well, one for sure is that a lot older guys like me have nasty family histories in relation to the local ww2 resistance when we grew up,

thanks them nazi bastards, especially for my wife and me.

My alas now passed away neighbor was a naval officer on a Dutch frigate sunk by the Japs in the Java Sea.

 

But their planes in IL2 are worth while, alas i always hesitate to shoot down any Brittish, USA, Russian or other allied plane. Call me biassed.

 

You have every right to be biased, naturally.

 

I'm speaking for myself as a young-ish person in his 30s. My only direct family connection to WWII is through my great uncle who served with the 10th Mountain Division in Italy. I heard some of his war stories from a very young age. He himself grew up in a German-speaking household (though he was born and raised in America), and even though he had to kill Germans, I never got the impression he had any strong feelings on it one way or the other. It was his duty to fight for his country, just as many other German-Americans did without hesitation. 

 

I view it in a similar light to the American Civil War. Accident of birthplace demanded that you serve one side or the other; but it doesn't necessarily mean that every southerner was a hardcore racist who dreamt of owning and beating slaves someday, while every northerner was an idealist and a firm believer in emancipation and the equality of men. Nor does it follow that every German soldier, sailor, and airman was a fanatical SS lining up civilians to be shot in front of a ditch. The Nazi regime clearly encouraged evil acts, but it couldn't turn good men into evil men; rather, it gave an outlet for already evil men to act out their evil on a large scale. Many German soldiers were fundamentally decent men who were fighting for an indecent regime. I know that's easy for me to say, of course, far removed from it as I am.  

 

Nevertheless, but for a few decades time span, my great uncle could've been born in Germany, and done his duty for the Nazis instead of America. The same man, but different circumstances. Sometimes we are victims of circumstance.

[oc2209]

14 hours ago, Irishratticus72 said:

Urbie for the win! 

 

I wanted to leave a sufficient amount of time between posts so this didn't merge with the above post. Rather disparate subject material, after all...

 

Anywho, gah, no, I feel slow going the standard heavy's 64 KPH. 32 is just masochistic for me. The worst thing about the Urbanmech to me is the slow acceleration precludes shoot and scoot tactics even in a dense urban area where it should really shine.

 

I find Urbanmechs are annoying to kill because of the 360 rotation, but beyond that they have no tricks left up their sleeves. Even jump jets don't help much.

 

My favorites are the hero versions of the Locust, Spider, and Raven. With upgrades, they have top speeds of ~180, 150, and 150 KPH respectively. I like to use all of those to do solo raids when I can't trust my AI lancemates to not get shot; it's also really good for multi-missions since only one 'mech gets damaged.

 

Back when I played MWO, the Raven was my go-to light 'mech. Just run circles around heavies and assaults with dual SRM-6s, firing essentially a shotgun spread of missiles into their torso at close range. I find that AI enemies (veteran and elite, anyway) are actually a little better shots than humans in many instances. A simple zig-zag running pattern will throw off most human opponents.

 

Something that's fun to do against both humans and AI is to simply shoot a heavy/assault in the back while your lancemates are nearby. It presents an unwinnable situation in which they turn to face you, then get blasted by 3 other 'mechs in the back, or they ignore you and you go to town on their weakest armor with machine guns and/or SRMs at point-blank range.

[LukeFF]

You guys sure know how to take a lighthearted topic and turn it into a mundane discussion. ?

Edited December 8, 2021 by LukeFF

[BladeMeister]

4 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

You have every right to be biased, naturally.

 

1. He himself grew up in a German-speaking household (though he was born and raised in America), and even though he had to kill Germans, I never got the impression he had any strong feelings on it one way or the other. It was his duty to fight for his country, just as many other German-Americans did without hesitation. 

 

2. The Nazi regime clearly encouraged evil acts, but it couldn't turn good men into evil men; rather, it gave an outlet for already evil men to act out their evil on a large scale. Many German soldiers were fundamentally decent men who were fighting for an indecent regime. I know that's easy for me to say, of course, far removed from it as I am.  

 

3. Nevertheless, but for a few decades time span, my great uncle could've been born in Germany, and done his duty for the Nazis instead of America. The same man, but different circumstances. Sometimes we are victims of circumstance.

1. I bet he had some pretty strong feelings(hatred) when he was in Italy and his friends were being killed around him. 60, 70, 80 years after his involvement, I bet you are correct in that he does not have strong feelings displayed about that war or the German or Italian people anymore. He probably realized that if he carried those feelings (that hatred) with him throughout his life that it would consume any sense of happiness or of living a normal life that he might want to have.

 

2. IMHO, the Nazi regime turned many good German people into evil people to carry out its' vision. Those German people still had a choice, and in the end committed many evil acts by choosing to join the regime's vision(armies) of world domination and attempted to carry it out, which cost the Allied nations of the world many millions of lives.

 

3. The German people heeded the call to join their armies to exert world domination on anyone who opposed them, there was no duty as they were not being attacked but they were the aggressors, while the people of the United States(primarily) volunteered(after Germany declared war on the US) to fight for Freedom of the world in the country's of Europe which are not even a part of the US homeland. IMHO, I don't believe the German Nazi party nor armies were victims of circumstance, again they were the aggressors.

 

No offense but I disagree somewhat with what you are saying, but I am not trying to start a fight, but merely presenting my thoughts on what you stated. We can simply agree to disagree and move on though.

 

Before anyone gets in a huff, I was just replying to the OP's post. All of the Allied and Axis armies and civilian populations paid a horrible price and I am not naive enough to not understand that, but again I was addressing the OP about the German and US roles in this post.

 

LukeFF, you are right, but it is what it is sometimes and sometimes you just have to say what is on your heart and then let it be.

 

S!Blade<><

[Eisenfaustus]

With our knowledge today separating Wehrmacht ‚victims‘ from Waffen-SS ‚fanatics‘ doesn’t make sense anymore - it was done in the 40‘s to allow the integration of Wehrmacht veterans into a western democratic society. The Wehrmacht as an organisation was a very willing servant not only in an ideological crusade but also in racist mass murder. 
 

Yet for the individual soldier it has to be judged by his deeds. And I personally think that obeying compulsory enlistment is not enough to become an evil person. From my reading and experience as an active soldier: the vast majority of soldiers is never as political as their country wishes. If I look at my country - the Kaiser wanted obedient Monarchist subjects yet after the war the same man fought to preserve the young Weimar Republic. The military of Weimar wanted apolitical patriotic professionals and was the only German military to ever get what it wanted in that regard. Hitler wanted to turn that force into fanatical Nazis and failed. (As long as you were competent you could make a good career in the Wehrmacht even if you openly disliked the party) The very same men volunteered in the 50‘ to defend western democracy. And the German army that made the greatest effort to indoctrinate its soldiers - the East German national peoples army - also tried to become part of the imperialist Bundeswehr. And today the federal republic wants the citizens in uniform filled with democratic ideals and yet what I witnessed were mostly young men joining for money or adventure and staying for the comradeship. 
 

From what I read the (wrong) view on the war from the common German people was largely this: „Poland mistreated its German minority, diplomacy failed so war is inevitable. The Western Powers declared war on Germany- no one wanted a war with them but now it is there and you have to do your duty.“

 

So it washardly seen as a quest for world domination 

[Robli]

5 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

2. IMHO, the Nazi regime turned many good German people into evil people to carry out its' vision.

 

I don't want to make the thread more political that it has already become, but dehumanizing the enemy was, has been before and probably still is a common way of motivating people to kill other people. Nazis obviously did it, but also the "German people turned into evil people" or "Germans were Nazis and Fascists" and things like that are also by-product on the same approach. While it is also true that big part of German population were supporting Nazis in the 30's (otherwise they would have not been elected to power), it is better to try to understand why things like that happen, the causes and effects, rather than just concluding that "Germans were evil". In general, hatred is the seed that can be manipulated to turn Anakin Skywalker into Darth Vader, so to speak.

 

5 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

3. The German people heeded the call to join their armies to exert world domination on anyone who opposed them, there was no duty as they were not being attacked but they were the aggressors, while the people of the United States(primarily) volunteered (after Germany declared war on the US) to fight for Freedom of the world in the country's of Europe which are not even a part of the US homeland.

 

Let me start by saying that there is no doubt that democracies were the "good guys" in WWII and democracy was and is the right ideology, but other than that:

1. There definitely was duty for German men to join the armed forces. At the end of the war even people older and younger of normal service age were forced to join the military. No doubt that there were also volunteers, but let's not make it appear how "The German people" decided to go to war against everybody. Do you consider "American people" bad, because they volunteered to go to war in Korea or Vietnam or Iraq or many other places that never attacked them in America?

2. About world domination, I have heard a lot about how Nazis wanted to dominate the world or even conquer the world, but in reality their goal was to get "living space" from east (not justifying that in any way). What comes to world domination, USA is dominating the world right now. British Empire and to some extent France dominated the world before WWII. Comintern had even officially stated the goal of world communism, controlled by the Soviet Union. Yet, we are mostly seeing documentaries how the bad Nazis wanted to dominate the world and even claims how they wanted to conquer the world. 

 

Let me conclude by saying that indeed, democracies were the "good guys" in WWII, but the causes, things that happened and outcomes were not as simple as bad guys attacked good guys and did lots of bad deeds, while good guys did lots of good deeds and eventually the good guys won. 

Anyway, it is probably better to steer away from these political discussion and concentrate on the sim and planes in it and anybody can fly or not fly whatever plane he chooses for whatever reasons.

[Eisenfaustus]

6 hours ago, LukeFF said:

You guys sure know how to take a lighthearted topic and turn it into a mundane discussion. ?

You’re right but it’s hard not to participate in such discussions

 

trying to get back to topic: The 109 is my guilty pleasure. Spits, tempests and yaks encourage bad habits as well as they also allow to get away with turn and burn although they also benefit from energy fighting. Yet the 109 adds super smooth stall and next to no engine management to the mix (except for the Emil) - so it always is a very joyful ride. Although I try to fly more 190 and mustang to enforce better tactics from myself.

 

Maybe I should go the next step and concentrate on 110 and p38 next…

 

La5 and p47 - although I appreciate these machines technically- I just don’t enjoy to fly, not sure why. 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

I've personally never liked any of the 109s minus the F-2 and F-4. I really am not a fan of planes that are heavy on the controls. I love the p-40, but hate the IL-2 version. I spend most of my time in the Hurricane Mk. II, Spit Vb, and IXe and do very well in those on Finnish. Whenever I fly German, my survivability on FvP is much worse because I like to TnB, rather than BnZ. The p-51 is another favorite and I've been spending time much more time in the p-47 as of late after finally getting over the engine management. I love the variety of planes and theaters in IL-2 and how you can jump from say a p-38 to a p-47 and get a taste of two very different planes. The completeness of the IL-2 GB series is why I prefer it to the hodgepodge that is DCS, despite FM and DM flaws.

Edited December 8, 2021 by -332FG-drewm3i-VR

[Reggie_Mental]

On 12/6/2021 at 9:10 AM, LR.Super_Marine said:

If you get a chance to pick up Bodenplatte, try the K4. It's an absolute rocket ship and very beastly. 

Burns the benzene like a rocket ship too. I love it but I often run out of fuel and have glided in to my home airfield on a few occasions

[Jaws2002]

It must be nice to still look at history with rose tinted glasses, specially with everything that's happening right now. 

 

 

[[CPT]Crunch]

Geezus guys, you ain't playing against nazi's but school kids from around the world for the most part.  Lighten up Francis, it ain't a real 109, certainly not built by slaves.

[=621=Samikatz]

The Emil is the only 109 I truly enjoy. It's scrappy and sporty and kills feel like a greater reward, the MGFFs are an interesting challenge to overcome, and of course it has so many diverse skins compared to the drab repetitive grey of later 109s

[DakkaDakkaDakka]

One of the really interesting things for me about the 109, and which I think makes it pretty unique within the planeset, is the relatively good turning capability. Many of the other boom and zoomers really shouldn't be turned at all, and the 109 probably not either, but if/when you do get into a turn fight, you've actually got some surprisingly good performance and relatively easy handling.

 

I've mainly been flying the F4 as my intro, as it seems like a decent place to start, and I've been very impressed by how generous and forgiving the low speed handling is. I still routinely get myself killed on Berloga as I learn the ins and outs of the plane (read: I try to turnfight instead of BnZ, a bad habit I've always had since back to my SPAD days in RoF ? ), but I do find it a very welcoming experience overall - much less punishing of piloting errors than many of the other planes.

 

Combined with the easy engine management, I do think this qualifies the 109 as something akin to the Fokker DVII from WWI - very deadly if flown well, and enough of a generalist to not be completely pigeonholed into purely a BnZ or TnB role (though I'm learning that, in a "target rich" environment like Berloga, if you get sucked into a turnfight and fail to kill quickly, you will yourself become the victim in short order!)

[oc2209]

18 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

1. I bet he had some pretty strong feelings(hatred) when he was in Italy and his friends were being killed around him. 60, 70, 80 years after his involvement, I bet you are correct in that he does not have strong feelings displayed about that war or the German or Italian people anymore. He probably realized that if he carried those feelings (that hatred) with him throughout his life that it would consume any sense of happiness or of living a normal life that he might want to have.

 

I wouldn't presume to know his feelings at the time. For the record, I heard his stories roughly 45 years after the fact.

 

I would, however, advise against oversimplification of any issue. I brought up the American Civil War for a reason. When you're a German-American fighting Germans, and you speak their language, and look exactly like them, and still share many cultural aspects despite being born on separate continents, you're obviously not going to feel the same level of hatred that you would for a totally alien and foreign enemy like the Japanese, with whom you have nothing in common with.

 

American racist sentiment against the Japanese was very well known in WWII. While there was some anti-German sentiment, it was not on the same level. Not least of which because a large number of our own soldiers were of relatively recent German extraction. On a side note, I always find it ironic that the designer of the P-51 was a recent German immigrant.

 

Point being, German heritage was so thoroughly enmeshed in America, that anti-German sentiment could never reach the same level as anti-Japanese.

 

Again, I mention the American Civil War because, while German-Americans versus Nazi Germans wasn't 'brother against brother' like the Civil War, it could certainly be called 'cousin against cousin.'

 

Any time there is such a close cultural and ethnic proximity in the people fighting, there must be some level of ambivalence. Obviously you're going to hate your enemy some days, but other days you might think: 'damn, it's too bad we have to kill these dumb sons-a-bitches because they've got a nutcase for a leader.'

 

18 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

2. IMHO, the Nazi regime turned many good German people into evil people to carry out its' vision. Those German people still had a choice, and in the end committed many evil acts by choosing to join the regime's vision(armies) of world domination and attempted to carry it out, which cost the Allied nations of the world many millions of lives.

 

They had a choice, yes. The Nazi party never (legitimately--that is, before they began to completely take over with propaganda and manipulation) won more than 50% of the popular vote.

 

So roughly 50% of the population dragged the other 50% into WWII.

 

They had the choice of starting a civil war with each other if they resisted the rise of the Nazis, or they had a choice of starting a war with the world if they didn't resist. Kind of a non-choice.

 

18 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

3. The German people heeded the call to join their armies to exert world domination on anyone who opposed them, there was no duty as they were not being attacked but they were the aggressors, while the people of the United States(primarily) volunteered(after Germany declared war on the US) to fight for Freedom of the world in the country's of Europe which are not even a part of the US homeland. IMHO, I don't believe the German Nazi party nor armies were victims of circumstance, again they were the aggressors.

 

The British Empire took over much of the world at one point. The Spanish Empire took over most of the New World before that. You don't take over large portions of the world without bloodshed and the threat of ever more of it. America's policy of Manifest Destiny was the removal of natives to make way for Europeans. If the natives refused to be placed in reservations (i.e, ghettos), they were killed. When Stalin caused the deaths of millions of his subjects, he obviously didn't do it alone; he had the complicity of large amounts of the population to do so.

 

In all of the above cases, the people in these nations had a choice between doing something bad, and not doing something bad. In each case, they picked doing something bad. Or, not resisting the bad people among them who wanted to do bad things.

 

So, I ask, who is culpable for these vast crimes in history? Who is held responsible? I don't see anyone being beaten over the head with shame, into perpetuity.

 

So then, why is it that the German people of the 1930s are expected to have done what no other nation before them did? That is to say, when presented with making a monumentally immoral choice, to do everything in their power to instead do the right thing?

 

Everyone else gets a free pass to do great evil and indulge in greed and power plays at some time in their history, but the German people, they must forever be branded and shamed, and daily reminded of it.

 

That's the real core of the issue here.

[LukeFF]

So, about that 109.. 

[percydanvers]

On 12/6/2021 at 7:18 AM, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

I mostly fly German planes myself because whenever I fly allied I just immediately get bored having nothing but 109s and 190s to go up against. In a 109 you can fight Yaks, Laggs, Las, Migs, Ishaks, Spitfires, hurricanes, mustangs, thunderbolts, lightnings, aircobras, tempests, typhoons... and that's just the fighters. It's kind of fun having a common baseline aircraft and testing it against a huge variety of opponents. 

[Freycinet]

On 12/6/2021 at 2:18 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

Mind boggling how people just fly one side and don't touch the rest of the content. Nothing wrong with it, i just cannot comprehend it.

 

Nevertheless it seems that it was pretty widespread in WWII.

[StankFaust]

Weird thread, I'll jump in on the plane side of the discussion

 

What I find most fascinating is the juxtaposition of plane design/capability between nations.  

 

As an example, just take the throttle quadrant / engine management aspect of flying compared between German and American fighters.

 

The american fighters look like their throttle quadrants were designed by john deere and take considerably more time and experience to use effectively while the germans have created a working system that is quite simple, reducing training time and overall workload on the pilot.

 

Also, german armament was just flat out superior to 6, wing mounted .50's.  I wonder how many holes we just poked in axis planes for want of an HE round?

 

to that end I fly mostly german planes, peferring the FW 190 A8, but I like the G14 too

 

Finally, I have fairly direct family involvement in the war.  A relative of mine was shot down (flak) in his P-47 over Villers- Bocage, France in late June.

War is he!!

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

IBTL……

 

[DBFlyguy]

I typically fly the Spit V, Spit IX, P-51D (hopefully the B soon too..), Typhoon and Tempest for the allies and the G6, G6 Late, K4 for the axis.  I want to start using some of the 190s a bit more, just haven't gotten around to it yet....

 

I have no desire whatsoever to fly soviet aircraft. I bought the collector (Yak9..Yak9T...La-5... etc) but have flown them maybe a grand total of 5 times combined, just not where my interests are.  To each their own.

Edited December 9, 2021 by DBFlyguy