Tue Jan 1 03:02:50 2002
So, I shall instead give you further insight on this newest best-of-breed flight simulator from a 'strategy guide' sort of approach.
One of the things lacking in the document accompanying this game is a good comparison of the aircraft involved. The game includes information about the planes, but nearly every aircraft is described as offering "superior flight performance" :whatever:
In other words, you couldn't possibly get an accurate idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the aircraft with the given information. Sure there are specs on top speed and armament etc, but there is far more information needed in order to consider oneself informed about what strategies to use using one plane versus other planes.
Keep in mind that these are my observations and are prone to updates and addendums as I work through more of the game. So here goes:
LaGG 3:
I may as well use this as a starting point as an aircraft to compare all others against. When you start a Single Player Pilot's career as a fighter pilot for the Russians, this is the fighter you initially start out with.
Disadvantages
For a fighter even in the earlier years of WWII, it's speed is somewhat lacking. The first opposing fighter type you face is a Me109E (I think it was an E). In an LaGG-3 it was difficult to keep the 109E in my sights for too long as it is significantly faster and equally as manueverable. The 109E posseses a greater ability to accellerate as well and can hang on the edge of a stall better. The Me109E is a plainly more aerobatic airplane.
Likewise, escaping a persuing aircraft in a LaGG-3 can be equally daunting, especially against the likes of the 109E which can match your manuvers and overrun you. Your best hope in such a case is to count on your wingman or a flightmember for assistance or use the ground to your advantage (I've had to take advantage of an apparent AI bug by diving for the ground when persued. Sometimes, in the effort to keep you in their sights, the AI will deem it more important to fly through trees than to take it's bead off of you.)
The LaGG's roll rate is also uninspiring as it it's rate of turn at slow speeds. Even the in game documentation mentions it's tendency to bleed momentum in turns. A prolonged dogfight with lots of turns can leave the LaGG low on both speed and altitude (which is bad).
Another annoying tendency is that the airplane's engine overheats if you maintain greater than 85% throttle for more than a few minutes. Consequentially you are left with the decision to either fight with less than full power, or to risk engine damage/explosion by maintaining full power.
Advantages
This plane is very easy to fly and controll. It is possible to put the LaGG-3 into a spin with too abrupt of movement, but it usually isn't difficult to recover if you have at least 800 meters of altitude.
The plane is pretty darn stable as a gun platform and it can be aimed very easily compared to some other craft. It is armed with 2 .30 cal machine guns and a 20mm cannon. It's hard to bring anything down with just those machine guns so you are wise to sight in with the .30's and then blast your target with sever slugs of the 20mm cannon.
The airplane's manuverability is decent and it seems to dive well. But perhaps it's greatest benifit is the LaGG's toughness. I've had my LaGG-3 severely riddled with gun fire quite often without so much as a gas-tank leak. Only once have I been shot down by enemy fire on one of these things (they finally blew my tail off after dozens of hits with machine guns as well as cannon fire)
Comparitively, the Me109 goes down with relatively few 20mm shells and .30 slugs from the LaGG.
Tue Jan 1 04:17:41 2002
The P-39 is a USA made fighter initially designed as a low level ground attack aircraft. This is a plane described ingame as posessing "Superior Flight Performance", yet Fighter Command in the Pacific Theatre eventually banned the P-39 from being commited to the same air as the Japanese Zero due to it's sucktacularity. The other Allies used the P-39 in it's intended roll as a ground attack fighter (where it excelled) yet the Russians used it in this function rather sparingly. Instead they used it as an "Air Superiority" fighter to take on other Axis warplanes.
The P-39 is a single seat single engine fighter than varies from other planes in this class with a few notable differences: The Airplane carries a huge 37mm Cannon and is powered by an engine that sits behind the pilot and powers the airscrew via a shaft passing under the pilot. This design came about in order to house the giant cannon so that it could shoot out of the nose cone of the prop for the sake of accuracy in firing this potent weapon.
Disadvantages
Cutting to the chase, the Aircobra is a plane meant for experianed and patient flyers. It spins very easily and a large portions of those spins go flat if not dealt with carefully. Once in a spin, it is difficult to get out of one. (this is what you get when you have the center of gravity in the middle of the airplane?). to avoid spins, take care to notice the shuddering of the aircraft as you push the envelope. When the airplane shakes, take care not to push the controlls any farther if possible. Also, keep your speed above 240kph and aviod too much rudder with to much aileoron (sp?)
To get out of a spin (especially in a flat spin) get the nose down and add power. Try rocking the nose up and down in the case of a flat spin in order to get the nose down and pick up airspeed.
The P-39's turn rate is nothing special. Especially considering the care you must take when performing sharp manuvers in order to avoid a spin. At low speeds it becomes downright unmanuverable (another insentive to keep the speed up)
I find that the P-39 is a bit hard to controll as far as lining up targets in your gunsight. The tendency is to overcorrect in a somewhat herky-jerky fashion when you make your adjustments in this fighter. This is indeed a plane for experianced pilots.
Furthermore, The Aircobra takes damage too easily. Gunfire from bombers tends to cause fuel tank leaks rather readily. The engine takes damage quite easily as well, not only from behind, but from oncoming fire as well :confused:
Advantages
The Aircobra is one of the faster pistoned engined planes in the game. Against Focke Wulf's and Earlier Messershmidts I was able to evade them by pouring the juice on in order to outdistancing them and then come around for another pass.
the Plane holds it's momentum well in acrobatic manuevers, unlike the LaGG. It's roll rate is rather quick. If caught from behind by slower opposing fighers, go into a roll with a little bit of rudder untill you pick up speed to outdistance your attackers.
The biggest advantage of the Aircobra is of course that huge big freakin'gun. unlike other planes that carry this weapon, the P-39 doesn't suffer from recoil problems associated with firing this weapon. (It was designed for this weapon after all). usually, except for all but the largest bombers, one 37mm shell will cause the tail section to explode off, or will rip off a wing. Along with this cannon, the P-39 is armed with two .50cal machine guns.
Wed Jan 2 01:41:38 2002
Wed Jan 2 05:32:25 2002
Anhwoo, I'm ready to give you a synopsis on another aircraft. This one is the MiG-3, MiG-3u, and MiG-3ud interceptors of the USSR.
This is the second plane you get to fly after several missions in an LaGG-3. It was a refreshing change of pace as the missions got a bit easier (mostly bombers for the first couple missions in the MiG). My first impressions of the MiG was "hey, this is pretty swift for a plane from 1940" and indeed it is a bit swifter than other contemperary aircraft. In addition to being faster than the LaGG, it climbed faster and had a much better roll rate. The MiG can also be outfitted with either additional gun pods on the wings, or 6 rockets that are extremely adept at taking out bombers, often causing them to explode into little bits mid-air. Additionally the roll rate of this aircraft is impressive.
The real problem of this airplane is the fact that it fails to reach it's potential at lower altitudes. Low altitude performance is importand because thats where all the missions have hitherto occured from. Up to this point I don't think I've gone higher than 3000M (approx 9500feet) High altitude is generally in excess of 6000meters in altitude. According to the object file within the game, it sounds like performance improves dramatically at high altitude.
I just got done with a mission where my lone wingman and I were to scout an opposing airfield. Standing in our way was two Bf109's that are probably an updated model compared to what I faced in the LaGG. The battle was not fun. We were simply outmatched at low altitude versus these more nimble craft. Whenever I got on the tail of a Messershmidt, the 109 broke into a sharp turn or pulled a yo-yo manuver allowing me to close into firing range, only to loop out of my range where I could not follow, or broke into a sustained turn and was able to eventually get behind me. My slight speed advantage at this altitude was often trumped by the 109's ability to accellerate well. What made matters worse was my pitifull armament they asked me to face enemy fighers with. Without additional wingpods for guns I was limited to the standard armament of one 7.62mm and one 12.7mm machine guns. No cannon! So in order to down a fighter with such a lame offense would have required me to keep it in my sights for a few solid seconds, which just was not possible. i was able to keep enemy planes in my sights for perhaps long enough to chip the paint on their rudders :( This was a poorly concieved mission.
Durablility is not as good as the LaGG. I wouldn't say that the MiG's durability is a liability but it's ruggedness just isn't up to the LaGG's standards. damaged engines and leaking fuel tanks occur more readily.
I don't mean to sound like I'm bitiching but I feel that the 109's are just better at the altitudes and the situations that I've found myself in. The only thing saving me at this point is that the enemy AI didn't seem as adept as your wingmen, but now that is changing about a dozen or so missions into the game. I'm starting to pine for my P-38 (which doesn't exist in this game). Hopefully, the plane situation improves soon.
Advantages Good speed and rollrate. it climbs well and has some interesting armament options (if they are allowed)
Disadvantates[/] Sluggish at low altitude. without external guns it's armament is lacking. High stall/landing speed
Wed Jan 2 22:02:20 2002
I've never successfully shot down another plane. Except a bomber that I set to have no armament.
Wed Jan 2 22:53:35 2002
I've never successfully shot down another plane. Except a bomber that I set to have no armament.
Practice. This isn't an arcade game. Shooting down an opponent requires a mix of aim, anticipation, luck, and most possibly the most difficult aspect of shooting down aircraof is learning to control your airspeed.
meanwhile, stay tuned for my Yak-1b review.
Wed Jan 2 23:17:12 2002
You have been informed, useless and trollish as the information is.
Wed Jan 2 23:18:03 2002
Practice. This isn't an arcade game.
Well, naturally, but I still suck.
Wed Jan 2 23:29:14 2002
Thu Jan 3 00:35:49 2002
Or, in PC terms, a Northwood 2.2 ghz.
Thu Jan 3 00:56:40 2002
I have the reflexes of a G4 533...Or, in PC terms, a Northwood 2.2 ghz.
Ugh. Don't tell me you buy into this Steve Jobs bullshit. A P4 "Northwood" 2.2GHz is so much faster than a G4/533 that it's not even funny. My guess is the only thing the G4 would win at, as a CPU test, would be RC5.
[color=red][font=arial][size=100]LAME.[/size][/font][/color]
Thu Jan 3 01:03:33 2002
Did my sarcasm not ring through as loud as the goddamn Liberty Bell?
Thu Jan 3 01:14:34 2002
Have I been gone too long?
No.
Did my sarcasm not ring through as loud as the goddamn Liberty Bell?
Sorry. I'm just a bit ticked because this is the season that the Macolytes become their most frenzied and blatant. I can't stand it and any statements like that just set me off. I fucking [color=red]HATE[/color] these people and their fucking ilk and their fucking idol and its fucking propaganda.
Thu Jan 3 01:31:52 2002
Thu Jan 3 01:52:26 2002
The way I took it, it means something like: Idiots will be idiots despite your best efforts. If someone wants to believe something in their platform's best interest despite the monumental facts and evidence against it. Let 'em go and take comfort it the fact that they are indeed idiots.
More reasonable people don't need to defend the facts against morons. Laugh at the idiots instead of working yourself up over their stupidity.
The more we do this, then perhaps the Battlefront won't seem like such a Cesspool of Misery and Dispair (Trademark of IG)
Thu Jan 3 01:55:44 2002
There are about 3, maybe four major posters right now that constantly drive me buggo.
nibs, NuVector, Phorte, and that asshole from that XP stupid 2000 thread?
Those are mine.
Thu Jan 3 02:59:02 2002
There are about 3, maybe four major posters right now that constantly drive me buggo
nibs is the only one I really cannot stomach. At least, he's the only one on ArsTechnica.
Well, besides Yoodabeetch/Sludge Vohaul/Labion Terror Beast/Fester Blatt, etc. etc. etc.
Thu Jan 3 03:14:37 2002
Thu Jan 3 03:48:25 2002
nibs has some really dark humor and though you guys may not realise it, actually does at times post to piss people off (thats my impression). Just as at times PH and PeterB post to piss of mac users.
Same dealio really. The pc zealots bite at the bait that the mac users give them and the mac zealots bite at the bait that the pc users give them. Who's the worse? The comedian or the fool that bites the bait?
If there are people that are bad, its not nibs. Again like I said, some of his posts are in the name of fucking with you guys, just like PH and Peter, which is interesting since you guys worship PH/PB just because they are PC users. nibs, peter, paul all have indepth programming knowledge of their platforms where as none of you guys can even touch what they know.
Again i find it funny that you guys are so blind by your own biases to not see the double standards.
ha ha ha!
I agree with AYB's post though. Why bother with the effort, let alone even giving a second look to people that irk you?
If i'm in the mood i'll fuck with people too, granted i'll fuck with pc users just because pc users out number the mac users.
Meh some of you guys are way to uptight and hold that computer of yours way to close to your heart.
chill doods. this really strong anti-platform-users thingy some of you guys have is equal to ignorance of those that bias against a race because of their skin color. Complete and utter stupidity if it gets to you that much.
edit: i do realise that you guys will ignore my post or what i have to say because it means you have to open your minds to the possiblity that you could be wrong in your attitude. so why do i even bother?
:tongue:
anyway, i'm in a very cheery mood so i don't much care what happens.
yay!
:cheesy:
(Edited by OscarWilde at 10:51 am on Jan. 3, 2002)
Thu Jan 3 03:57:56 2002
which is interesting since you guys worship PH/PB just because they are PC users
I worship no one. I admire and respect PH and PeterB for their acerbic wit and knowledge, but it doesn't go beyond that. It's the same thing for JR at the height of his reign of terror as Lord Baldrick. It was difficult to find people who were as consistently ROFL-level funny and trollish, while still generally disliking the Mac platform and being blunt about that. It was a great time.
If there's anyone I can be accused of worshiping, it's [url=http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=mprf&s=50009562&ignore=&u=648091146]this guy here.[/url] A friend of mine, offline, has chided me about this. But, again, it's an admiration for wit and knowledge.
DeMone's tagnut knowledge = Doubleplus big compared to mine, at the least. Actually, doubleplus doesn't cut it. More like 100,000plus big. That, I respect.
You have been informed.
Thu Jan 3 04:20:21 2002
nibs
He's not one of the three or four I was talking about. I may not agree or buy what he says, but he brings a lot of knowledge to the table and generally knows what he's talking about. The threads about OSX versus NT were a bit of a light at the end of the tunnel amidst the usual mishmash of the tripe a lot of people post in the BF.
Thu Jan 3 04:28:21 2002
Just as at times PH and PeterB post to piss of mac users.
PeterB doesn't do that. I can't remeber a time where he went out of his way to purposely infuriate MacUsers. It used to be he had sharp language, which is what used to bother other people. His posting style is almost purely reactionary; commenting on something someone else had posted in a correctional manner.
Thu Jan 3 04:35:39 2002
but he brings a lot of knowledge to the table and generally knows what he's talking about
He does, but he combines it with so much propaganda that it makes him insufferable (thanks, JR). I would tolerate him much more if he stopped being an unpaid PR rep for Apple.
You also have to understand that I hate Apple as a company so much that I believe it will be a very good day in the computer world when they finally go bankrupt. I despise proprietary platforms; I only use Windows because of certain software. If Linux were a suitable replacement for me I'd ditch Windows in a fucking nanosecond.
Thu Jan 3 05:10:32 2002
I despise proprietary platforms;
???
then what is Wintel? Just because you can put your own pc together doesn't mean its less rigid. There are standards to adhere too. And what of the fact that Microsoft actually has false errors if you use an app that competes with them?
Neither platform is the epitome of good will. Each company will go out of there way to protect their market. Sometimes ethically, sometimes not.
Plus if what you mean by propriety as in tight integration of hardware and software, there as many advantages to it as there is disadvantages.
What if Apple allowed clones once again, but this time took the extra step and actually allowed for complete open market as the pc's have? Would that make a difference to your distaste?
And why would it be a good thing if a competitor goes away. Then you're left with Microsoft not motivated to keep creating new features other then needing a source of revenue. Windows XP is a direct competition to OS X. Microsoft knows that OS X has the potential to unseat Windows. It reflects in the large number of pc users who want OS X but not the mac hardware. You'd be surprised that there are things that OS X surpasses Windows. Ironically, and this cracks me up, a lot of it via the 'terminal'. :biggrin:
Thu Jan 3 05:16:48 2002
from OscarWilde posted at 12:10 am on Jan. 3, 2002I despise proprietary platforms;
And what of the fact that Microsoft actually has false errors if you use an app that competes with them?
Wait, you mean DR-DOS? That gave errors during beta testing? Was that the deal? Or is it something more recent?
And why am I thinking of some issue with Apple roms and Be?
Sometimes ethically, sometimes not.
Don't anthropomorphize companies. Companies can't act ethically or unethically.
Plus if what you mean by propriety as in tight integration of hardware and software, there as many advantages to it as there is disadvantages.
...but I think he means that you can't build your own and thus it'll always be a niche product.
What if Apple allowed clones once again, but this time took the extra step and actually allowed for complete open market as the pc's have? Would that make a difference to your distaste?
I'd consider buying one.
And why would it be a good thing if a competitor goes away. Then you're left with Microsoft not motivated to keep creating new features other then needing a source of revenue.
Why would that happen?
Windows XP is a direct competition to OS X. Microsoft knows that OS X has the potential to unseat Windows.
:rolleyes:
Direct competition my ass. Linux and Windows are direct competitors because they run on the same platform. MacOS only runs on overpriced, proprietary niche hardware.
It reflects in the large number of pc users who want OS X but not the mac hardware. You'd be surprised that there are things that OS X surpasses Windows. Ironically, and this cracks me up, a lot of it via the 'terminal'. :biggrin:
The OS looks like fun and could be decent, but UNTIL it is seperated from the Apple hardware platform, it is relegated to the land of sucking ass.
(Edited by Robocop Q Einstein at 12:17 am on Jan. 3, 2002)
Thu Jan 3 05:19:49 2002
Mercifully, the Soviets seem to have fielded something a bit more competive to the Luftwaffe's 109 starting in the spring of '42. The Yak is very competitive to the Messersmidts in most every regard. They seem to be equally manuverable, maybe a tad bit slower. The Yak handles equally as beautifull in aerobatic manuevers as it's counterpart and is fairly durable when exposed to various types of fire. it is equipped with two machine guns and a cannon for decent weapon lethality. The only complaint I have is that the clip is a little bit short. Because of this I'd rather have the LaGG or the MiG equipt with rockets for interception work (this game is totally bassed ackwards in how they equip you for each mission. They have the assigned planes all wrong!) You really have to dispipline yourself to wait for your shot if you wan't to come home with more than one kill per mission.
It rolls well enough, but may be a little slow in a dive. It's easy to aim and can be horsed around quite a bit until it goes into a spin, which it comes out of readily.
Advantages general excellence in flight characteristics and aerobatic manuvers.
Disadvantages Not enough ammuntion.
Best used as: Escort fighter, fighter on figher engagements.
Thu Jan 3 05:21:14 2002
Thu Jan 3 05:48:42 2002
...but I think he means that you can't build your own and thus it'll always be a niche product.
RQE has hit a homerun. This is exactly what I meant. I want as close to total control over hardware as possible. The Apple (closed) paradigm does not offer this, nor anything resembling it.
Companies can't act ethically or unethically.
Agreed.
Windows XP is a direct competition to OS X. Microsoft knows that OS X has the potential to unseat Windows.
I don't buy this for a nanosecond. I hope you don't seriously buy it either. Microsoft's one competitor on the PC OS front (for now); and it's somewhat disengenuous to call it one, is Linux-in-all-forms. If Linux reaches the so-called "critical mass" of ease-of-use and apps, and general familiarity, Windows is in deep because it's closed, and it's expensive compared to how Linux can be (legally free or damn close to it).
but UNTIL it is seperated from the Apple hardware platform, it is relegated to the land of sucking ass.
I'd say, for me, it's relegated to the land of being nothing more than an expensive curiosity.
Thu Jan 3 05:52:46 2002
from Imitation Gruel posted at 12:48 am on Jan. 3, 2002
I'd say, for me, it's relegated to the land of being nothing more than an expensive curiosity.
Like the really good hookers.
Thu Jan 3 06:23:01 2002
Thu Jan 3 06:32:56 2002
If there are people that are bad, its not nibs. Again like I said, some of his posts are in the name of fucking with you guys, just like PH and Peter, which is interesting since you guys worship PH/PB just because they are PC users. nibs, peter, paul all have indepth programming knowledge of their platforms where as none of you guys can even touch what they know.
I never worshipped PeterB or Paul. PeterB has a lot of tagnutty knowledge and a very biting take-no-prisoners style, whereas Paul has just this amazing sense of humor and delivery style that makes me laugh. Platform choice doesn't really enter into it at all.
nibs does indeed post to piss people off, but in an insufferable style devoid of humor or wit. He tries to post with a humorous style at times, but it's like watching Russian rockers-- they just don't get it.
So it's not really a platform thing. All OSes suck anyway (except Studly-OS) and intimate knowledge of one set of tagnuts over another does not impress me in the least.
I'll continue this later...
Mon Jan 7 07:33:12 2002
Three bugged out and two were destroyed by the mighty guns of AYB's P-39N-1 before AYB ran out of ammo.
AYB then gingerly exited the mission victorious with a total of 3 kills.
consider yourselves informed.
Mon Jan 7 10:18:15 2002
I want an X-Box. Does anyone feel like giving me $300?
Mon Jan 7 18:46:57 2002
Mon Jan 7 23:16:04 2002
from AllYorBaseRBelong2Us posted at 1:46 pm on Jan. 7, 2002
IL2 runs on a PC???
But who wants to play that?
XBOXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
I played Madden 2002 from 5:30 am to 2:30 pm yesterday.
Wed Jan 16 09:17:03 2002
As far as an air supperiority fighter is concerned, *now* we are talking.
The La-5 is a dream to fly. It's fast, faster than any FW or 109 I have faced, climbs as well as the Messershmidt, and can out-turn either plane (but only marginally against the 109)
This thing climbs well, dives well, takes damage well, and has great flight characteristics in level turns and aerobatic manuevers.
It's armed with 2 20mm cannons, but no machine guns. Now this is infinitly better than having two pop-guns with no cannon but cannons don's carry all that much ammo and it is often usefull to waste machine gun rounds to sight in your target. However, in the hands of someone with good aim, the armement is lethal, though these 20mm's have the reputation of having a lower muzzle velocity requiring you to get closer to your target to maximize on damage.
You have the option of loading the plane out with 2 100lb, or 50lb bombs or external wingtanks. Rockets would have been a nice addition for interceptor work but the launch rails would have detracted from performance.
It doesnt' stall readily, and comes out of a stall very naturally and easily. and is a stable gun platform that is almost as easy to aim as the LaGG.
Advantages Outclasses contemporary FW's and Bf109's. Hightly manuverable, rugged, climbs well. Powerfull armament
Disadvantages
Lacks machine gun.
Best Roll(s)
Air superiority, fighter sweeps, escort.
Wed Jan 16 09:48:19 2002
Wed Jan 16 10:34:19 2002
isn't it great!
Wed Jan 16 11:08:34 2002
isn't it great!
Yep.
Wed Jan 16 15:36:03 2002
Fri Jan 18 04:37:03 2002
No.
Wow! I didn't know that "No" means "Indeed" in Aboriginie. :)
Fri Jan 18 04:39:42 2002
Hehe, I crashed into the back of a truck with my 109. What fun!
Mon Jan 28 13:23:57 2002
Me 109 and Bf 109 are the same thing. Note to historically correct pundits on this issue: STFU!
Everyone knows what we are talking about here especially our local Axis member, Riso.
The Me 109 is a solid, decent plane with some quirks.
It climbs very well, is fairly fast and manuverable, and carries a decent armament. It does not develop damage too easily and is probably the best fighter in the air during 1941.
It's nose is a tiny bit hard to aim and it can go into a sort of "Mush" stall at high speed/high G's. This means that your plane will go strait "down" at a 90degree angle to where your nose is pointing. To aleviate this, you will want to add full power at the bottom of dives and loops that finish at low altitudes in order to pull the plane forward. Or else you could put your plane down into the ground.
This problem occurs with all high speed manuevers. in a lot of other airplanes you may want to let off the gas in tight turns, but try to get in the habit of letting the engine pull you through the finish of Hairpin manuevers in the 109.
Thu Jan 31 14:05:32 2002
This plane bugs me.
It tends to snap over during a hard turn at speeds under 200kph and has problems with high-speed stalls above 350kph. So the handling is very finicky.
It's 15mm cannon isn't nearly as potent as the 20mm in other planes.
Thu Jan 31 20:05:34 2002
Nothing like keeping your best designers in prison. :hmmm: After hearing about more actions like this, makes me increasingly believe that they prevailed despite his 'leadership'. </rant> Sorry, not trying to derail the thread...
Thu Jan 31 20:49:59 2002
Thu Jan 31 21:19:41 2002
Stalin was teh suck!
Massive understatement there. I haven't read any recent treatises but at one point it was estimated that he ordered the murder of something upwards of 30 Million of his own people on grounds that they were his 'enemies'.
Thu Jan 31 21:20:37 2002
Thu Jan 31 21:25:58 2002
It is teh win!
Thu Jan 31 21:27:49 2002
Fri Feb 1 03:16:27 2002
But most of my playing time is occupied by Madden 2002 (PC, of course). My conundrum: I have several computers, but only one of meeeeee!
Sun Feb 17 21:30:03 2002
How are you enjoying Civiii Harb:?
Anyway, more to come on the subject of Sturmovics. DO any of you approve of this?
Sun Feb 17 23:55:34 2002
Mon Feb 18 01:25:59 2002
from AllYorBaseRBelong2Us posted at 4:30 pm on Feb. 17, 2002
SO:How are you enjoying Civiii Harb:?
I'm currently not enjoying Civ3. Not that the game isn't involving, but rather that I have no spare time to devote to it. Like I said, I need more of me. One day I'll get around to it, I promise.
I have yet to finish Alice, Giants, C&C2, and the expansion for BG2. Plus, there's supposedly a new expansion for Icewind Dale coming, not to mention the upcoming Dungeon Siege and Neverwinter Nights. Did I mention that I don't have enough time? ;)
Damn, it's too bad I started a contract job in another state. Anyone have a full-time, permanent position for an IT professional with 8 years experience?
Mon Feb 18 03:39:57 2002
The BF109G-2 arrives not a moment too soon, and boy does it rock! In stock form, it presents far less tendencies to snap over in a hard turn than the F model. It feels more manuverable than it's previous model, climbs a little better, and most importantly, it has a significanlty higher top speed.
The plane retains decent durability and it's engine shows good endurance. It doesn't dive any better than the 'F' it seems (which isn't extremely impressive) but this planes shortcomings are few indeed.
One thing that really puts this plane over the edge as far as desirablility is it's armament. Gone is the anemic 15mm nose cannon of the F in favor of a 20mm gun. This armament is much more sufficient for taking out both fighters and bombers. In addition to more punch in the nose you can opt to add an additional 20mm gun below each wing for a total of 2x.30cal and 3x20mm cannon. That's some seriouse firepower.
The drawback of adding these additional cannon underneath the wings is that it introduces some odd flight characteristics that sacrifice both flight stability and manuverability, so you may be inclined to leave the extra firepower off on escort duty were you aren't likely to run into bombers. For intercepting IL-2's they become significant assets and are probably a good idea to take along.
This is my favorite German Plane to fly so far. It handles well, performs competitively with the Yaks it faces and completely wipes the sky with the LaGG and The MIg.
The Yak was a fair chalenge though as both planes performed comparitively in most aspects, though the Yak1b showed better manuverability, I thought the 109G-6 had a little better top-end.
best used as: Escort, interceptor duty.
Mon Feb 18 21:15:50 2002
The new plane they force you to fly is the BF109G-6. It's only a partial model number away from the G-2, but some substantial changes occur to the structure of the plane. The two most notable changes are the two bulbous formations just forward of the cockpit and the lack of retractable tailwheel. These bulbs were built to accomodate the 2 new .30cal machine guns on the fore part of the aircraft which fired through the propeller. No such accomodation was nessessary for the earlier guns in the same place.
The top speed of the G-6 is slightly lower than the G-2. Probably due to the bulbs and the tailwheel. Weird flight characteristics reminicent of the F were also reintroduced.
This plane is not without merit however. The armament configurations are astounding as you can add two 20 or 30mm cannon on the wings, or you can put a 30mm in the nose in place of the 20mm. These additions put an astounding level of firepower on a very small plane and makes the G-6 a very versitile fighter for anything from escort, interception, or tank busting.
However, at this same time the later Yaks and the P-39 are introduced. Lets just say I don't like fighting these in the G-6. The Yaks are constanly outturning me as the tendency to snap over in a hard turn greatly reduced it's manuverability. The P-39's are significantly faster and can out-dive and out-zoom the light Bf109.
Best used as:
Interceptor, Ground attack
Mon Feb 25 02:08:50 2002
After being transferred to another unit, I was put back into the seat of another P39, this time the Q-1 model with is a basic update that is faster and more powerfull than the N. I won't revisit the P39 with an in depth analysis but I was surprised that i didn't endure more than one spin in several missions in the P39 (including several redo's) and was pleasently pleased with the plane overall.
After the P39, i was transferred again into a new plane, the Yak9U which deserves an analysis:
Yak 9U
In a word! w00T!
This thing has no match as far as other piston engined fighters in this game goes. It is farking fast! It climbs like a rocket, can zoom like rocket, dives like a meteor on reentry and can turn very well at any speed. It's just not fair and I refuse to believe this plane isn't overmodelded.
THis plane exibits no odd flight that i can tell
It's hard to tell how durable this plane is as I haven't been even touched by anything other than a Me262 Jet Fighter.
The only difficulty is in fighting planes which are much slower than you, which is anything with a propeller. It's hard to line up targets that you approach so swiftly.
The only other drawback is it's relatively short clip and an only adaquate armament of one 20mm cannon and two machine guns. Otherwise this thing is Zues!
Best used as: Escort/ Air Superiority
Sun Mar 10 03:16:58 2002
Sun Mar 10 03:22:26 2002
I believe you're a bit of an old warbird affuendo like me, have you played IL-2?
Sun Mar 10 15:38:40 2002
There is really nothing NOT to like about IL2. The graphics are amazing, the flight models fantastic, the selection of aircraft, while limited, does give you a massive feel for just about everything the Russians had, and what the Germans were tossing at them.
It is quite a game, and I cannot wait to see what Oleg has to add in the future add-on packs.
Sun Mar 10 17:23:51 2002
1)Online play offers you little team goals in Dogfight play other than just shooting down enemies. I'd like to see something like AWIII where you could capture bases using paratroopsers, after you knocked out AA and so forth.
2)Gameplay stutters after 10-12 planes are present. Having a lot of ram eleviates some of this, but it still has issues in large scale flying.
3)There needs to be some available range adjustments to icons, as well as the ability of a host of a game to limit available aircraft in dogfight mode (especially with the release of the Me262 as flyable approaching)
As for the future of IL2, there will be more flyable planes:
Me262, Ju87, P-40, P-47, Bi-1, I-16, etc are in the works.
Mon Mar 11 17:54:08 2002
Nothing like opening up with 4 30mm cannons on some poor slow bomber's arse, rushing past before the gunners get a bead on you, then turning back to the bomber and going for a head-to-head shot...
Mon Mar 11 19:17:57 2002
MmMMM... Me-262.. I hope both the a1 and a2 versions, at least for now. Maybe even night fighters with early radar?Nothing like opening up with 4 30mm cannons on some poor slow bomber's arse, rushing past before the gunners get a bead on you, then turning back to the bomber and going for a head-to-head shot...
That's what I'm afraid of. Thee will be little point in flying piston fighters online with the release of the 262 and the Soviet Bi-1 as flyable. :(
Mon Mar 11 20:00:20 2002
P-51's ate em for lunch... the Mustangs waited for em to begin rolling down the runway, and then ate them. Also they watched as the Me-262's began to bank away from an attack, came in torwards the center of their turn and ripped the Me-262 to shreds. Hell Yeager himself got a few of the Me-262's that way...
Mon Mar 11 20:09:59 2002
P-51's ate em for lunch... the Mustangs waited for em to begin rolling down the runway, and then ate them. Also they watched as the Me-262's began to bank away from an attack, came in torwards the center of their turn and ripped the Me-262 to shreds. Hell Yeager himself got a few of the Me-262's that way...
Hmm, sounds like those German's tactics were flawed. 262's had the turning radius of a train but were more than a hundred mph faster than the allied fighters it faced. But they weren't too durable, by reputation it didn't take much to light them.
Any plane was vulnerable during takeoff and landing, especially the very poor accelerating Me262.
But at speed it couldn't be touched in a shallow climb or dive
Mon Mar 11 20:27:10 2002
Mon Mar 11 21:55:21 2002
Actually in a dive, the Me-262 could be matched by the P-47D... Plus because of the instant response of the prop/engine in a piston fighter, a P-47D pilot could do a lot more in those dives than just run like hell.
Yes, but not a shallow dive ;)
You know, it is good to have another warbird affuendo in here. It is a very interesting subject
Mon Mar 11 22:56:19 2002
Yeah War Birds are a SERIOUS passion of mine.
My personal favourites:
American: P-51D Mustang, nothing better.
German: Tie between the Ta 152H and the He P.1079B (not necessarily for performance but it just looked BAD ASS)
British: Spitfire Mk. XIV (with the 5 bladed prop)
Japanese: Nakajima Ki-84 (Frank)
Russian: Yak-9U
Tue Mar 12 01:21:05 2002
My personal favourites:American: P-51D Mustang, nothing better.
German: Tie between the Ta 152H and the He P.1079B (not necessarily for performance but it just looked BAD ASS)
British: Spitfire Mk. XIV (with the 5 bladed prop)
Japanese: Nakajima Ki-84 (Frank)
Russian: Yak-9U
Mine: P-38,
to be perfectly honest I think the P51 was a little overrated from a performance standpoint,. It did however fit the bill that early Lightnings, Thunderbolts, and Spits could not fill: Fight at high altitudes over long ranges. Spits and Tbolts of the time didn't have the legs. P38 F's,G's,and H's had significant high altitude problems ranging from engine failure to pilot discomfort.
Still, the 51 was faster than the Fw's and 109's it was facing and had superb high speed characteristics.
Germany, I llike the Me109
Russia, I like the La-5 (possibly a bit overmodeled in the game, but I like the looks of it)
Of course, there isn't a plane that flew that didn't have some sort of merit. I don't know much about all the planes. Mostly I've concentrated on American and Allied fighters.
:)
Tue Mar 12 02:00:52 2002
Spitfire Mk. XIV (with the 5 bladed prop)
Check this out. [url=http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit14pt.html] OUCH![/url]
(Edited by AllYorBaseRBelong2Us at 8:06 pm on Mar. 11, 2002)
Tue Mar 12 02:05:48 2002
American: P-51D Mustang, nothing better.
How about the P-84 Twin Mustang :cheesy:
Tue Mar 12 12:46:20 2002
Thu Mar 14 09:15:16 2002
Thu Mar 14 10:22:45 2002
Besides it's full of a bunch of virtual pilots who think they know it all about flying and air-to-air combat...
Nothing worse than some armchair warrior telling you that you don't do this or that when taking off... especially when I have almost 1600 logged hours of flight time in about 15 different aircraft.
Thu Mar 14 17:12:29 2002
Besides it's full of a bunch of virtual pilots who think they know it all about flying and air-to-air combat...
Kinda like peops who fight in IL-2 with unlimited ammuntition. They think they're hot stuff because they never learned to shoot.
Thu Mar 14 19:23:30 2002
"Make sure the wings FILL the armour on the canopy before opening fire"
IE with .50 machine guns, I am only about 100 yards from the bogie. 20mm cannots I tend to float a bit more out as the damaged aircraft tends to send out large pieces of it all over anyone right behind... =)
ONE quick burst (IE 10-20) rounds is enough to take out MOST fighers, 40-50 rounds of .50 most bombers. You waste more than that you are not fighting the right way.
Thu Mar 14 21:02:37 2002
Meh!
Fri Mar 15 20:07:39 2002
I like to get behind them and just dump a couple of rounds into them. 90% of the time they break to the left in a slight dive to at least try to gain some energy. They then straighten out to look behind them. As soon as I see them breaking left, I break right and climb, keeping them in my padlock (if the game has it), or keep turning enough to keep them in my canopy. When I see them level out I roll over and push towards them, canopy to ground. About 1000 yards out I right myself and head torwards their wing root. At 500 yards they can more than likely tell I am coming in and attempt to turn away yet again, which means tail to my nose. That is about when I open up, I try to get a little above them and dump the cannons into the engine, or if I am feeling especially evil, the cockpit...
Fri Mar 15 22:05:22 2002
Sat Mar 16 02:43:10 2002
I suck on so many new levels it's amazing, I have zero ability to fly, and he keeps insisting that I play with him, yet, I suck.
How can I stop sucking? ( BTW, I suck at flight sims, )
Sat Mar 16 02:55:54 2002
How can I stop sucking? ( BTW, I suck at flight sims, )
Lots of practice. Flight sims are more difficult than most game genres because they're meant to approach reality, much unlike FPSers.
Don't get to discouraged if you do indeed suck in the beginning.
And get rudder pedals or twist stick.
Sat Mar 16 03:13:39 2002
Ok, I'll take your advice and play play play till my eyes, ears and gums bleed. :)
Sat Mar 16 03:17:23 2002
Sat Mar 16 03:32:18 2002
Sun Mar 17 16:49:45 2002
Had two suckers in IL-2's try to gang bang me and my FW-190.
They lost.
Sun Mar 17 19:06:38 2002
Had two suckers in IL-2's try to gang bang me and my FW-190.They lost.
They would have had better luck in Snoopy's Sopwath. :)
Sun Mar 17 19:31:00 2002
Mon Mar 18 04:40:20 2002
FW-190
I enjoy flying this plane, the online Group I fly with called GWR uses this and the 109 exclusively. Personally I think the 190 is one hell of an airplane. It offers better structural integrity than the BF (particularily on the Wings), dives a little better I think, and is a particularily lethal and nasy beasty in the hands of a decent pilot. Or even worse, in the hands of a handfull of decent pilots.
To me, the FW is not the ideal individual weapon. (That would probably be the La-5FN). It isn't the fastest, best climbing, or best turning aircraft. The yaks, 109's, Laggs, and La's are just better in sustained turns. The Yaks, 109's, and Laggs are faster and better climbing. But none of them can put out a wall of lead like the 190 (except perhaps a BF109G with wing cannons, but this configuration introduces some particularily nasty performance penalties making the aircraft very sluggish) This is why I consider it the easiest aircraft to shoot someone down with when your enemy is in your sights, and one of the most challenging to fly.
Mon Mar 18 10:14:13 2002
Mon Mar 18 17:51:34 2002
109 Faster???? I think not.
The 109-G6/AS seems to be, I should clarify
Mon Mar 18 18:06:55 2002
Mon Mar 18 18:21:03 2002
Maybe the first model of the FW-190 released, but some of the later (IE 1944 models) of the FW-190 were some of the fastest piston engined planes in the sky.
True, but I'm talking about the Flyable aircraft. A-4 and A-5 ;)
You are correct, The Germans had some nasty stuff coming down the pipe.
I think our contengency plan was the P-47N and later the P-51N. (They fuskin Scrapped the P-38K idea, ACK!)
Mon Mar 18 18:26:53 2002