La-5 career at Stalingrad

[KevPBur]

Sometimes the La-5 feels like it is not the worst attempt at creating a fighter plane.

 

Then the career mode sends you on a ground attack mission with 7 wingmen and no cover or a bomber escort way above the effective altitude for the La5 which appears to be about the same as your average tank.

Then you get attacked by ever increasing numbers of 109 G2's. After the first couple of attacks you are alone being chased across the map by 6-8 enemies.

The la-5 can outrun a 109 on the deck for a whiile but with so many they can climb and take it in turns to dive and thus outpace you. Plus eventually you run out of map and have to change course allowing the swarm to close in.

The La-5 can't turn with or attempt to fight even 1  of the G2's unless they let you!

 

You might make it back to home base where maybe a couple might be got by your AA but the other 4-5 will get you.

 

I generally the only tactics are run for friendly territory and bail out before they kill you or give up the moment you see the first enemy plane and run home leaving the rest of your flight as bait.

 

Does anyone have any way to actually survive these missions missions in the La-5 or are you just doomed to a short career?

Should I perhaps ignore the early shages and just start towards the end when the VVS had grown some teeth? Do you get a more even fight numbers wise later on?

 

If a short life is all you can achieve it seems a pretty pointless waste of developemnt time to make a career you just can't see?

There always seems to be an endless supply of more flights of 109's appearing could we perhaps just occassionally have a friendly flight come along to atleast even the numbers up a bit. Perhaps a few more AA guns at locations other than your home field so you could run to other friendly fields which I assume was a done thing.

 

Generally, any assistance greatly appreciated.

 

Yours

 

Frustrated, from Stallingrad

 

[oc2209]

Not to sound flippant, but either fly Yaks or wait until the La-5FN is available.

 

Sorry I don't have anything more useful. I've never tried to use the La-5 in career mode. But I wouldn't be surprised if it's outclassed there.

[Talon_]

What are your difficulty and density settings?

[oc2209]

Here, this should make you feel better:

 

Spoiler

 

 

My first career combat in an La-5.

 

I did check my six before committing to attacking the 109E. I just didn't check it often enough. That, and the La-5's poor rearward view.

 

Funny to see just how quickly the AI sneaks up on me, though. After I was on fire, I thought, 'whatevs', and decided to ensure the 109E's destruction no matter what.

 

I'm not playing ironman, so it doesn't really matter, but I got lucky and landed (in my 'chute) on the river's edge between the treeline and the water itself. No tree or water death for me.

 

This sortie, anyway.

 

By the way, this is on hard difficulty. Like @Talon_ mentioned above, short of flying a different plane, changing the difficulty is your only option. If you're constantly outnumbered, that sounds like hard difficulty. Or at least normal. Might want to ignore your pride for a bit, and turn the diff. down to easy until you can fly either a better plane, or the La-5 with a boosted engine (which comes later in Stalingrad's career).

 

The engine boost still isn't going to make turn fights much easier, but it gives you a little less to worry about.

Edited October 13, 2022 by oc2209

[Bando]

I understand your frustration. The AI following you (the player) in SP is (or can be) absurd.

They follow you deep into enemy territory (to them it's enemy) and even if they are slightly damaged or low on fuel they keep following.

Further more; they know where you're at from large distances.
Even way beyond visual range, and over territory that is not their own they will know where you are.

It's one of the few things in this sim that bother me.
I'd pay for upgraded AI or better logic(?) for mission makers, so this behavior would stop.

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

Unfortunately, after many hours spend in the stock careers, I have to say that they are not playable due to the flaws in mission design connected with how AI works. In fighter careers the fights between aircraft are to death, when the last man standing (usually player) is chased across the map. There is no working disengage logic as far as I ses, AI can see through clouds and you as a player cannot hide from them resulting in frustrating arcade like experience. Partial solution is to set mission difficulty to easy, however then you get insane amount of kills as there is opposition in each of the missions.

 

Ground attack campaign is as bad or even worse. All ground attack missions are always intercepted and on higher difficulties once your escort is wiped out (as it usually is), enemy fighters will destroy your flight and you end again in a tail chase mode up to your base. In easy mode the ground attack career is playable, however you will only get a few AAA at the target, which the flight promptly attacks and destroys, after that it is only a turkey shoot with some 10 minutes of attacking the target in circles until a timer runs out - this timer logic is really strange, under normal circumstances it would be one pass and haul ass tactics. 

 

I will test it more in 5.002 if there are any improvements in strategic AI behavior, if there are none -n PWCG is probably much better alternative for single player experience.

[KevPBur]

4 hours ago, oc2209 said:

Here, this should make you feel better:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

My first career combat in an La-5.

 

I did check my six before committing to attacking the 109E. I just didn't check it often enough. That, and the La-5's poor rearward view.

 

Funny to see just how quickly the AI sneaks up on me, though. After I was on fire, I thought, 'whatevs', and decided to ensure the 109E's destruction no matter what.

 

I'm not playing ironman, so it doesn't really matter, but I got lucky and landed (in my 'chute) on the river's edge between the treeline and the water itself. No tree or water death for me.

 

This sortie, anyway.

 

By the way, this is on hard difficulty. Like @Talon_ mentioned above, short of flying a different plane, changing the difficulty is your only option. If you're constantly outnumbered, that sounds like hard difficulty.

 

 

 

 

That was pretty much me last night. Reflew the same mission 3 times down in flames all 3 times. The last time I tried to lead them around the map whilst 3 of my flight landed back at home base and then tried to twist and turn over my own AA but once had got me I was a sitting duck. Finally finished with a pilot kill as I tried to bail from my dead duck!

 

@Talon_

Yes, I am flying hard with medium density (which I believe only affects enemy ground units)

 

@Rudolph

I can understand why they chase us home in this case as it was only a short hop over Stalingrad between target and home. I usually find in other planes they give up if you can get 5km of seperation from the chasers but not easy in the La5 without reasonable altitude to play with

[RyanR]

 

IIRC, Stalin shot design people over the La-5.

 

Dial back the difficulty to medium if you're getting shredded. The AI flies the 109's much better than it flies the La-5, so your odds will get worse quickly as your comrades go down. 

 

I remember transferring out of the La-5 squadron as quickly as I got into it.

 

-Ryan

[Alexmarine]

8 minutes ago, RyanR said:

 

IIRC, Stalin shot design people over the La-5.

 

No

[RyanR]

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

 

No

Got it. I do not recall correctly.

 

-Ryan

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

Hello. The opposition from the Lutfwaffe during BOS is simply insane. To the very end. I flew the entire BOS campaign in a Yak 1 and trust me it was a nightmare most of the time even in Feb/March 1943.

 

BOS = endless waves of 109's, its ridiculous, like the luftwaffe in its prime x 2. 

 

The La5 itself is not the issue imo. 

[oc2209]

14 hours ago, KevPBur said:

That was pretty much me last night. Reflew the same mission 3 times down in flames all 3 times. The last time I tried to lead them around the map whilst 3 of my flight landed back at home base and then tried to twist and turn over my own AA but once had got me I was a sitting duck. Finally finished with a pilot kill as I tried to bail from my dead duck!

 

Do you start your career as commander? That can help a great deal.

 

If you don't want an awful experience to just keep repeating itself, but you want to string together a sequence of sorties that resembles a career, then you're going to have to cherry-pick the mission types that are more palatable than others.

 

I have always preferred bomber intercepts or, even better, intercept attack planes. These are pure bang for your buck, since 1) there will always be enemies at a specific area at a specific time; and 2) target rich environment, and 3) if you're lucky, the enemy AI will be shooting at stuff other than you.

 

My second choice is troop cover, where you fly for 20 minutes over a friendly target waiting for it to be attacked. These are good because, naturally, you're always over friendly terrain (just like most intercepts). You also get 'radar' around the target you're defending, which is a huge advantage. Downside is, sometimes no enemy shows up at all.

 

Pretty much every other mission type is inferior to the above, for various reasons.

 

Fighter sweeps/free hunts are okay, as you're almost guaranteed some action, but it's usually going to be over enemy territory. So any mistakes will be costly.

 

Here's a quick example of my second career sortie, another attack plane intercept (normally the enemy attackers would be Stukas/Sturmoviks, but in this case as before, it's 109Es):

 

Spoiler

 

 

So, some things to pay attention to. First, I don't trigger a group of 109G escorts to attack me. This is probably related to how I fly (staying low). Even in the last recording where I got bounced, it was by a single 109. Notice in this recording how the enemy AI gangs up on a single target--that's probably how you end up getting hammered.

 

Second, I managed to leave the area without having anybody chase me back to base. Probably related to staying low.

[oc2209]

Here, this is an example of purely defensive flying while also staying low:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Now, I know that some people will just focus on the 109s crashing and say how dumb the (ace level) AI is. Well, that's not my point here. The goal isn't to make an ass of the AI or make it crash. The goal is simply to practice defensive flying.

 

To put yourself in the correct mindset, you need to completely ignore the enemy. Pretend like they're not a factor. Only focus on the terrain; following its contours, etc. I made a game of it, treating trees like an obstacle course.

 

Now, you might wonder what practical value this has. Well, for one thing, instead of simply flying straight back to friendly territory (which will get you shot--flying in a straight line, or nearly so), you can zigzag back. For another, you can cause the enemy to expend all his (cannon) ammo, at which point he will break off usually.

 

And then, finally, you can indeed compel the enemy to crash. All are better options than hoping the friendly AA will shoot them down. I personally would avoid flying around friendly or enemy AA, as friendly can hit you accidentally.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Out of interest, I’ll start a new career and try this. Not sure I have flown the La-5 much if at all. Is it not supposedly something of a pig vs. the G2?

 

From Bergstrom et al, the career should be very difficult but not because of numbers of 109s or their propensity to chase you back across the Volga. Getting your arse handed to you by relative aces, poor ground control support, poor mission coordination and general confusion should be the experience of an La-5 pilot.

 

 

[oc2209]

9 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

Hello. The opposition from the Lutfwaffe during BOS is simply insane. To the very end. I flew the entire BOS campaign in a Yak 1 and trust me it was a nightmare most of the time even in Feb/March 1943.

 

BOS = endless waves of 109's, its ridiculous, like the luftwaffe in its prime x 2. 

 

The La5 itself is not the issue imo. 

 

The La-5 kind of is the issue. I didn't say it was bad, as much as it's outclassed. This is one of the reasons I'd really like to see the Yak-3 and La-7 in the sim--because for the first time, Russian planes will be absolutely superior to German (at low altitude). Sure it takes until 1944-45, but whatever.

 

Every other time period before then, the Russians are playing catch-up to German performance advantages. And it really shows in career.

 

The 109 AI is superb at boom and zooming you to death. An La-5 can't counter this effectively. Any model of Yak will cope better, but it still lacks the acceleration and climb rate needed to punish 109s consistently.

 

Conversely, when you play for the Germans on hard difficulty, you will also be swarmed just as much by enemies. Except, being outnumbered by LaGGs, La-5s, I-16s, and P-40s, isn't nearly as dangerous as being outnumbered by 109s.

 

That's the difference in a nutshell.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Just had a QM in the La-5. It seems awfully slow. Probably my poor use of RPM / boost but I was struggling to get good speed out of her.

 

Stalingrad map now looks der bomb, however. The improvements since the original release are amazing. Wish there were a 'before  Air Corp VIII pounded it' mod for sight-seeing fun.

[KevPBur]

Thank you everyone, it appears I am not as bad as I feared and we are all having the same frustrating experience.

If this is how it really was for the VVS then atleast I can turn of the pc and try again tomorrow. I can't imagine too mean young pilots saw many tomorrows.

 

@oc2209 Thanks for the videos, pretty much the same as I have managed on occassion with some success. It is a little depressing when if you do make it home you are invariably the only man standing in your flight.

I am commander now. I started in Hurricanes, then P40's working up the ranks before the La-5. I try to avoid bomber intercept at all cost as the Germans sensibly fly too high and too fast to get anything more than one diving pass and then run. I'm terrible at such zoom shooting so very rarely hit anything let alone get a kill.

This was part my reason for trying the La-5.

I've tried skipping several missions to try and get some experience in the unit but they still all fall next time I do fly.

 

 

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

4 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

The La-5 kind of is the issue. I didn't say it was bad, as much as it's outclassed. This is one of the reasons I'd really like to see the Yak-3 and La-7 in the sim--because for the first time, Russian planes will be absolutely superior to German (at low altitude). Sure it takes until 1944-45, but whatever.

 

Every other time period before then, the Russians are playing catch-up to German performance advantages. And it really shows in career.

 

The 109 AI is superb at boom and zooming you to death. An La-5 can't counter this effectively. Any model of Yak will cope better, but it still lacks the acceleration and climb rate needed to punish 109s consistently.

 

Conversely, when you play for the Germans on hard difficulty, you will also be swarmed just as much by enemies. Except, being outnumbered by LaGGs, La-5s, I-16s, and P-40s, isn't nearly as dangerous as being outnumbered by 109s.

 

That's the difference in a nutshell.

 

I agree that the campaign is more punishing if you fly russian because the AI is very proficient with the 109 compared to aircrafts like the 190 and La5 among others.

 

However, no matter which russian aircraft you fly at BOS, you'll suffer. Is it worse in the La5 than the Yak 1? Maybe, havent flown the La5 at BOS in years. 

 

If you follow Wolfpack345's russian career on yt....he went through BOM entirely without breaking much of a sweat. Flying the Rata and the MiG3. Now that he is in BOS, he is having a much tougher time in both the Lagg3 and the Yak 1.

 

So I'm sticking with what I said, its more of a campaign balance problem and the AI being especially good with the 109 than the La5 underperforming; no matter what you fly in BOS you'll get swamped by rabid 109's non stop until the last day.

 

If you're saying though that you find it more difficult when flying the La5 than the Lagg3....that's indeed weird because the La5 was better than its Klimov powered counterpart, fact.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Am I being dumb - probably - or are you only offered to fly every 3-4 missions…?

[RyanR]

15 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Do you start your career as commander? That can help a great deal.

 

If you don't want an awful experience to just keep repeating itself, but you want to string together a sequence of sorties that resembles a career, then you're going to have to cherry-pick the mission types that are more palatable than others.

 

 

 

 

I agree wholeheartedly! Starting as commander really helps smooth out the quirks in the career missions. These missions are boiler plate, regardless of what you're flying. "Underdog planes" get short changed if you fly the mission strictly as "planned".

 

-Ryan

[KevPBur]

2 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Am I being dumb - probably - or are you only offered to fly every 3-4 missions…?

 

I'm not infront of the game at the moment but from memory I think that is an option in the career something like "Career Progression" and you have it set to fast.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Cheers, will try that.

[oc2209]

8 hours ago, KevPBur said:

This was part my reason for trying the La-5.

I've tried skipping several missions to try and get some experience in the unit but they still all fall next time I do fly.

 

 

Well, if it's any consolation, the La-5FN is quite a bit more competent than the plain La-5. You're going to have a better plane match up in Kuban overall.

 

6 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

If you're saying though that you find it more difficult when flying the La5 than the Lagg3....that's indeed weird because the La5 was better than its Klimov powered counterpart, fact.

 

I have no idea what gave you that impression, but no, I am most certainly NOT claiming the LaGG is in any way better to fly than the La-5.

 

As I said earlier, this isn't about whether the La-5 is a bad plane or not; it's about the usual enemies it faces.

 

The La-5FN is going to be matched up against 109G-6s a fair bit in Kuban; and in that match up, you have an La-5 with superior performance against a 109 with slightly inferior performance to the earlier Gs.

 

Thus, greater parity.

Edited October 14, 2022 by oc2209

[Aleksander55]

I've been practicing the LA-5 since I got reasonably good with the I-16 (against AI, I have no illusions of my chances against well flown 109s in MP).

 

I have no improvement to show for it after a long time of quick missions.

 

With the I-16, when I started I could barely do more than spin myself into a flat grave. After 1 month I was spending all of my ammo and praying I did enough damage to a single 109E to force it to fly back to his own airfield instead of following me to mine. After 2 months I started doing 1 x 2 109s and having to learn the limits of maneuverability (that I though I had understood) all over again. After 3 months I started 4 x 4 dogfights, then 8 x8. And so on and so forth. Maybe 10% improvement each month. Up to the 5th or so month i was still spinning myself into a flat grave very regularly. Finally, at around the 1 year mark I lord over the AI and find them to be easy prey.

 

With the LA-5, it's been more than a year and I have got maybe 10% better at it from when I started.

 

I knew what to expect as I had watched a few youtuber videos about it. I knew I would have to fly it completely differently than the I-16. It's still much worse than I already expected. An order of magnitude worse. I have to wonder if they didn't swap around the flight models of the LA-5 and the Lagg-3 series in this sim. Literature says the LA-5 had overall much better flying characteristics. In this sim I'd take the Lagg-3 over the LA-5 any day.

 

Maybe they exagerated the energy loss when turning quite a bit? It's incredibly high.

 

I set up, set up, set up my energy advantadge against the extremely weak AI of this sim. It may take 1 to 3 minutes. Finally I have altitude and speed advantadge over the 109. I know I have only 1 pass before my energy goes to hell. I used to think I had 2 or 3 passes, I learned very quickly to dispel such illusions. I dive on the AI preying that it doesn't start to turn tight. If it doesn't turn I still lose my deflection shots more frequently than I hit. (Deflection? Long distance? What are those? Can you eat them? Do they go well with caipirinha?)

 

But if it starts to turn tight there's nothing I can do. I can go from 450 to 250 kms/h with overhelming energy and positioning advantadge in a matter seconds and still I'm not able to turn with the 109, such is the lameness and drag of this pathetic airframe.

 

There has to be something wrong in the flight model, it's ridiculous. It's like I'm flying a 747 that just took off full of fuel and passengers, not a fighter plane with a 1500+ hp engine and 60% fuel which is the number I usually practice with. And that's against the AI. I can only imagine the bloodbath in MP.

 

Your only chance is in furballs, you have to keep your speed up, circling in and around the fight, picking your shots and preying that your deflection shots hit. Also praying that your AI companions last long enough for this tactic to make a difference.

 

So, you're not alone with your disapointment and frustration with this plane.

[Charon]

On 10/12/2022 at 6:28 PM, KevPBur said:

Then the career mode sends you on a ground attack mission with 7 wingmen and no cover or a bomber escort way above the effective altitude for the La5 which appears to be about the same as your average tank.

 

I suspect the game massively exaggerates the frequency of ground attack missions for Soviet fighters. Could La-5's be loaded with bombs? Yes, but this is the *only* photo I can find of it, and I suspect it was quite rare. They had Sturmoviks for that.

 

Apparently Slovakian La-5FNs were frequently used for ground attack during the uprising in late '44 (Jason Moore, Lavochkin fighters of the second world war, p106). There is also a photo of a naval La-5FN with bomb racks. Not much with the earlier La-5s;  I suspect this started happening more in '44/'45 when there were few German fighters about. LaGG-3s were also heavily used in ground attack around Kalinin in late 41 and early 42 (also from Moore's book).

 

Kramarenko flew La-5/5FN/7s from January 1943 until the end of the war; while I've only skimmed his book, I found no mention of him carrying bombs, even on missions where he strafed ground targets.

 

Quote

Then you get attacked by ever increasing numbers of 109 G2's. After the first couple of attacks you are alone being chased across the map by 6-8 enemies.

The la-5 can outrun a 109 on the deck for a whiile but with so many they can climb and take it in turns to dive and thus outpace you.

 

It's been a while since I flew La-5 campaigns, but I don't remember this. The La-5 is fast, and I don't believe I've ever been run down by a 109 unless starting with an energy disadvantage. Are you sure you're flying it right? Mix/rpm/throttle all pinned at 100%, cowl flaps closed as much as possible (you should adjust cowl flaps more than the throttle), hit the boost for up to 5 minutes if needed. As long as you stay fast, you can run with the cowl flaps fully closed for a surprisingly long time, and closing the oil radiator gives you another 5kph or so.

 

I do think it's a plane that's hard to use in singleplayer: the AI fights poorly with it, visibility is poor enough that you really want a wingman that can talk to you and clear your six, and if you try to hit and run you can expect your flight to be wiped out. Flying the La-5 in co-op would be rad, though (Edit: actually, I'm down for that if you are. US West Coast -- PM me).

Edited October 21, 2022 by Charon

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Charon said:

I suspect the game massively exaggerates the frequency of ground attack missions for Soviet fighters. Could La-5's be loaded with bombs? Yes, but this is the *only* photo I can find of it, and I suspect it was quite rare. They had Sturmoviks for that.

 

It depends on the phase of the war. Up to the end of November 1942, you are 9 times more likely to be assigned to air-to-air missions than you are to ground attack missions. From December 1942 to the end of January 1943 (for which I have the actual breakdown of mission types flown by the VVS units at Stalingrad), the emphasis is more on ground attack - about 6 times more likely to be assigned to ground attack missions than air-to-air missions up to the end of December, and then about twice as likely from January 1943 to the end of the battle.

 

Moving to Kuban, the numbers flip back to the original pre-November 1942 probability. This so far jives with what I'm reading in Volume 5 of Black Cross / Red Star, which deals heavily with the April - June air battles over the Kuban bridgehead.

Edited October 21, 2022 by LukeFF

[oc2209]

4 hours ago, Aleksander55 said:

With the LA-5, it's been more than a year and I have got maybe 10% better at it from when I started.

 

I knew what to expect as I had watched a few youtuber videos about it. I knew I would have to fly it completely differently than the I-16. It's still much worse than I already expected. An order of magnitude worse. I have to wonder if they didn't swap around the flight models of the LA-5 and the Lagg-3 series in this sim. Literature says the LA-5 had overall much better flying characteristics. In this sim I'd take the Lagg-3 over the LA-5 any day.

 

Maybe they exagerated the energy loss when turning quite a bit? It's incredibly high.

 

I set up, set up, set up my energy advantadge against the extremely weak AI of this sim. It may take 1 to 3 minutes. Finally I have altitude and speed advantadge over the 109. I know I have only 1 pass before my energy goes to hell. I used to think I had 2 or 3 passes, I learned very quickly to dispel such illusions. I dive on the AI preying that it doesn't start to turn tight. If it doesn't turn I still lose my deflection shots more frequently than I hit. (Deflection? Long distance? What are those? Can you eat them? Do they go well with caipirinha?)

 

But if it starts to turn tight there's nothing I can do. I can go from 450 to 250 kms/h with overhelming energy and positioning advantadge in a matter seconds and still I'm not able to turn with the 109, such is the lameness and drag of this pathetic airframe.

 

 

Just to be clear, are we talking both versions of the La-5, the basic and the FN? Or just the plain, original La-5?

 

Because the FN, in my experience, is quite different. The La-5, even with the improved engine, performs largely as you describe. However, the La-5FN can maintain turns significantly better. I just recorded this:

 

Spoiler

 

 

I'm pretty certain that in a regular La-5, I couldn't follow a G-2 at all. Certainly not for this length of time.

 

The turn times of the La-5 and the FN are something like 23+ seconds and 21 seconds, respectively. But where the FN can turn tightly at least a few times without issue, the La-5 doesn't seem to be able to pull off even a single high-speed turn; its energy bleeds out midway through the first turn, and you're more or less riding a stall at every point thereafter.

[oc2209]

Here's a test I did of a 190A-5 versus a 109G-2. The reason I picked the A-5 is that it has a 23.5s turn time, very close to the La-5's 23.4. And yes, there's instantaneous turn speed versus sustained, etc, but the point is that the La-5 can't do either.

 

Spoiler

 

 

I'm 90% sure I can't repeat these moves in an La-5. In one attempt, I had completely lost energy after the second half-turn.

Edited October 21, 2022 by oc2209

[Charon]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

It depends on the phase of the war. Up to the end of November 1942, you are 9 times more likely to be assigned to air-to-air missions than you are to ground attack missions. From December 1942 to the end of January 1943 (for which I have the actual breakdown of mission types flown by the VVS units at Stalingrad), the emphasis is more on ground attack - about 6 times more likely to be assigned to ground attack missions than air-to-air missions up to the end of December, and then about twice as likely from January 1943 to the end of the battle.

Interesting, I stand corrected.

 

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Moving to Kuban, the numbers flip back to the original pre-November 1942 probability. This so far jives with what I'm reading in Volume 5 of Black Cross / Red Star, which deals heavily with the April - June air battles over the Kuban bridgehead.

I ought to pick up a copy of that one of these days.

[Guster]

On 10/13/2022 at 9:39 AM, Rudolph said:

Unfortunately, after many hours spend in the stock careers, I have to say that they are not playable due to the flaws in mission design connected with how AI works. In fighter careers the fights between aircraft are to death, when the last man standing (usually player) is chased across the map. There is no working disengage logic as far as I ses, AI can see through clouds and you as a player cannot hide from them resulting in frustrating arcade like experience. Partial solution is to set mission difficulty to easy, however then you get insane amount of kills as there is opposition in each of the missions.

 

Ground attack campaign is as bad or even worse. All ground attack missions are always intercepted and on higher difficulties once your escort is wiped out (as it usually is), enemy fighters will destroy your flight and you end again in a tail chase mode up to your base. In easy mode the ground attack career is playable, however you will only get a few AAA at the target, which the flight promptly attacks and destroys, after that it is only a turkey shoot with some 10 minutes of attacking the target in circles until a timer runs out - this timer logic is really strange, under normal circumstances it would be one pass and haul ass tactics. 

 

I will test it more in 5.002 if there are any improvements in strategic AI behavior, if there are none -n PWCG is probably much better alternative for single player experience.

 

I agree this is a mission design issue. I'd prefer the career missions were generated with attack zones for fighters rather than specific targets, or simply waypoints with priority set to low. That's how I build my own missions and the planes disengage very nicely, or at least try to the best they can given the circumstances. You can even sneak up on enemy fighters en route to their waypoint if you're careful, which makes flying inferior planes a lot more enjoyable.

[Aleksander55]

2 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Just to be clear, are we talking both versions of the La-5, the basic and the FN? Or just the plain, original La-5?

 

Because the FN, in my experience, is quite different. The La-5, even with the improved engine, performs largely as you describe. However, the La-5FN can maintain turns significantly better. I just recorded this:

 

I'm pretty certain that in a regular La-5, I couldn't follow a G-2 at all. Certainly not for this length of time.

 

The turn times of the La-5 and the FN are something like 23+ seconds and 21 seconds, respectively. But where the FN can turn tightly at least a few times without issue, the La-5 doesn't seem to be able to pull off even a single high-speed turn; its energy bleeds out midway through the first turn, and you're more or less riding a stall at every point thereafter.

 

The basic version, with or without the improved engine. The LA-5FN is great, it's back to easy picking the AI. It's as you spoke, I expected something a little closer to the FN or FW 190 (although I haven't flown the 190s yet). Sometimes I can't do even a quarter of a circle without it bleeding a ridiculous amount of energy and positioning advantadge (coming in faster - higher - from the hear quarter) in a few seconds and turning into a stalling whale in the sky. It just turns into a flying handbrake the moment you pull even a fraction as hard as a FN.

 

The Lagg-3 as well can hang in a turn with the 109s for a far larger period of time.

[KevPBur]

5 hours ago, Charon said:

 

It's been a while since I flew La-5 campaigns, but I don't remember this. The La-5 is fast, and I don't believe I've ever been run down by a 109 unless starting with an energy disadvantage. Are you sure you're flying it right? Mix/rpm/throttle all pinned at 100%, cowl flaps closed as much as possible (you should adjust cowl flaps more than the throttle), hit the boost for up to 5 minutes if needed. As long as you stay fast, you can run with the cowl flaps fully closed for a surprisingly long time, and closing the oil radiator gives you another 5kph or so.

 

 

You are correct, in a straight race the 109 can't keep up with a La-5 but there are usually at least one up on the perch with a several thousand meter advantage of me running along the deck so although you gain a gap on the first 109 there is often another to take it's place from on high.

I've found repeated reversal of direction and hoping to avoid the headons a few times until they are all down on the deck or going the wrong way can level the field or throw them off. The straight run away invariably fails.

[Aleksander55]

I've tested the 190A-5 against the 109 F-4 and it's similar to the LA-5FN. You can hang on a turn far longer without bleeding as much energy as the basic LA-5 which gives more than enough time for multiple shots. And with 500 rounds of 20mm I can spray so much ?. I have to start a german career just to get to those birds.

 

Also Stalingrad is a slaughterhouse for the russians no matter what fighter you're in. I've just finally managed to complete an ironman I-16 career in BOM and transfered to BOS and it's pretty much the same experience. Hordes of 109s, wave after wave. They're actually easier to shoot down than in Moscow, the initial 109Gs seem to be worse than the 109Fs, and both models carry the gun pods very often which makes it even easier, so I'm getting more kills per mission.

 

But even with that, and even if my wingmen give a good account of themselves it's no use. Between me and my wingmen we can get 10 kills in a escort mission. Great, right? No, as there are 10 more 109s that proceed to massacre my flight, massacre whoever we had to escort and then Benny Hillenmeyer chase me back to my base.

[oc2209]

7 hours ago, Aleksander55 said:

I've tested the 190A-5 against the 109 F-4 and it's similar to the LA-5FN. You can hang on a turn far longer without bleeding as much energy as the basic LA-5 which gives more than enough time for multiple shots. And with 500 rounds of 20mm I can spray so much ?. I have to start a german career just to get to those birds.

 

Yeah, once you fly any plane with that amount of cannon ammo, it's really hard to go back to Yaks/Spitfire Vs/P-38s with their 'blink and it's gone' ammo capacity.

 

Oddly enough though, every time I've started an Eastern Front Fw-190 career, it ends badly. I just can't fly it as well as the 109, even though I theoretically know how I should fly it.