ORIGINAL: ILCK
If we can night bomb why not stage this many bombers...what isn't it "historically accurate"?
Lordy, lordy, lordy, don't say that. Next thing you know, we'll be hearing from the "if I wanted to play a wargame that was historically accurate, I would have joined the Marines" crowd.
In any event, this is one of many, many discussions that point up a major disappointment of mine with Matrix's post-publication handling of both UV and WitP. Instead of addressing the root problem (here, insufficient limitation on base and air mission sizes), the "solution" has always been, "let's screw one side or the other's combat capabilities and forget it."
I will never forgive whoever it was that cut the bomb loads of B-17s and B-24s by as much as 40 percent in response to the allegation that Allied level bombers were too effective, particularly as you cannot change that in the pathetic little UV scenario editor. By the way, have you ever browsed critically through the bomber aircraft armaments as revealed in that editor? Note sometime, for example, how many defensive weapons have no facing (and, therefore, are ineffective), and how some aircraft (like the B-25) have no rearward-firing guns, in complete defiance of historical reality.
Oops. Sorry. It's hard to avoid invoking historicity while discussing a historical simulation...
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
ORIGINAL: DEB
One wonders why with all these problems, people still get annoyed and complain over "gamey" tactics used by players. I guess it's human nature to gripe, particularly to an individual if given the chance, but the hypocracy is amazing.
Astonishingly, I agree with the first part of your statement wholeheartedly, but remain amazed at your spelling of "hypocrisy."
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
ORIGINAL: DEB
One wonders why with all these problems, people still get annoyed and complain over "gamey" tactics used by players. I guess it's human nature to gripe, particularly to an individual if given the chance, but the hypocracy is amazing.
Astonishingly, I agree with the first part of your statement wholeheartedly, but remain amazed at your spelling of "hypocrisy."
It's late at night, and I'm too lazy to check my spelling.
If we can night bomb why not stage this many bombers...what isn't it "historically accurate"?
Yeah, who ever heard of night bombing in World War 2!?! [8|]
Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.
¨If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.¨ Che Guevara
ORIGINAL: Ike99
Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.
Hey, Dad, looky what I drew in school today. Can I put it up on the fridge?
Attachments
quoit.jpg (17.18 KiB) Viewed 288 times
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
ORIGINAL: Ike99
Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.
Hey, Dad, looky what I drew in school today. Can I put it up on the fridge?
Saldy, there is no way I know of to adjust the values of the planes. I think most poeple that are not "history" people, and are instead game designers, look at the wrong things when putting these games together. Example: the F4U had a great kill ratio, so it must be a better plane hands down. A large part of that was due to poor jap pilots more than anything else, by that state of the war.
Off topic, but what servers or squad to fly in, Ike?
I'm a big IL2 (mostly Pacific) fan myself.
I just fly with the computer. I´m not very good at it. [:(] Still great fun![&o] I always fly with cockpit on and no icons though. Are you a no cockpit person?
My favorite plane would be the KI-43 Oscar, Climbs like a dream, so lightweight!
The way the Zeros engine stalls out under negative G irritates me and is something I just can´t get used to. [:@] One always hear about how the Zero couldn´t out dive a Wildcat because the Wildcat was heavier. Besides that, A Zero under negative G cuts the fuel to the engine and it will quit unless you stop!!
[:@][:@]
Otherwise I would like it the best. Yours? And, what do you think? Think the corsair is too strong in UV? From what I can see in IL2 seems about right to me.
Attachments
85.jpg (37.89 KiB) Viewed 288 times
¨If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.¨ Che Guevara
I fly only with the cockpit on, and no icons as well. Anything else would be like putting quarters in my computer. [;)]
Ki-43 is a lot of fun in the sim. The Zero is a lot of fun to fly in the sim. Although I've never flown any real WW2 plane, a lot of people have respect for IL2's flight model characteristics. All flight models seem to be pretty accurate from what I've read about the planes, although there are a few small issues.
I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes. I can't say that would happen in "IL2" unless circumstances favored the Corsair with almost an infinite number of factors. Then again I can't compare apples and oranges (IL2 and UV).
While flying in the server "Zekes vs Wildcat," which tries to be pretty accurate with their plane sets, the Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.
A patient and skilled Corsair pilot should come out of a fight even if outnumbered due to his speed, but I can't really see a few Corsairs downing over 100 Zekes. Your boom and zoom energy tactics will go on for so long and you'll be forced to extend away.
I can see kills that high if it was the Marianas Turkey Shoot, but that AAR seems to be the story of the 3 Musketeers and Team on steroids. [:D]
The Corsair was a deadly beast in the right hands and the Hellcats downed more Japanese planes than any other US fighter. The Japanese designs were made obsolete by new US designs and their pilot training (poor) sent green replacements to the front as canon fodder.
Saldy, there is no way I know of to adjust the values of the planes. I think most poeple that are not "history" people, and are instead game designers, look at the wrong things when putting these games together. Example: the F4U had a great kill ratio, so it must be a better plane hands down. A large part of that was due to poor jap pilots more than anything else, by that state of the war.
Is it a better plane, yes. WAs the Hellcat, yes. Were they 11-19x better than the Japanese planes? No.
As you point out the declining quality of the pilots likely made up at least half of that kill ratio. The problem, or upside if you are the USA, is that UCV seems to take the total kill ratio including 44-45 into account so the planes mean that literally overnight the USA rules the skies.
The way I see it is Kido Butai and Corsairs are modeled too strong and F4Fs, P-40s too weak. If one plane is adjusted to a better level all should be adjusted.
"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer
I don't know if it's so much a matter of how the individual aircraft are represented as it is the dynamics that allow so many of the friggin' things to be up flying around and engaging in combat.
I remember a lot of discussion on these forums back in the early post-release days about how the game system didn't handle air combat between large forces - and large forces against small ones - at all well. We may be remarking some of that residue, as I don't believe that aspect was addressed to any great degree in the patches.
I do agree with most of what has been said here about the over- and under-valuing of various airframes (Corsairs in particular seem egregious, but P-40s, P-38s, and F4Fs are mighty weak, although pilot experience and lousy leadership explain this to some degree, I think. I have fiddled with this in the editor, and it does show up on testing). I feel that there's more to the solution than just changing airplane performance values.
I hope that CF and AE do a better job. Remember how the "uber LBA" problem was "fixed?" If you check the values in the editor, you find that B-17s lost 1/3 of their bomb load, and B-24s lost 2/5. This is not the solution I wanted to see (and, by the way, you can't change that in the editor. You think you've saved such changes, but you don't. The database defaults back to the hard-coded values). The real problem, as I see it, is the ability to mass so many bombers for strikes (penalizing B-17s and B-24s by imposing additional fatigue and ops damage and loss penalties - as well as making them take forever to be repaired - is more maddening than satisfying, particularly when you see that no other aircraft types are made to suffer from these problems).
Again, it's a matter of having too much and being able to do too much with it. Kido Butai isn't invincible. It just lumps together in one hex and flies a couple hundred Zeroes overhead (with 90-experience pilots led by men who have better leadership ratings than god).
In passing, something I've noted along the way is that your best planes seem to be more susceptible to ops loss. When I hit the summary screen for the start of the next turn, I always mutter under my breath, when I see that I've lost some aircraft to operations, "Well, what is it this time? Some of my P-38s I waited so long to finally get? B-17s? Corsairs? (when I play as the Japanese, it's always Zeroes and Bettys)." I never seem to lose any Wirraways or Petes.
Well, 'nuff said. I used to run these ideas past y'all way back then and got called a horse's patoot (and worse) for my efforts. I hope that maybe some can see now that I wasn't completely full of sh1t - my glass is only half full, you see...
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
The way I see it is Kido Butai and Corsairs are modeled too strong and F4Fs, P-40s too weak. If one plane is adjusted to a better level all should be adjusted.
Agreed, the F4F had a kill ratio of 4:1 by the end of the war but in UCV it is basically chopped liver before the Zeros. All the planes need to tend back towards the middle a bit more. The Zero is better than the F4F but not as much as the game says and the F4U and F6F aren't as superior to the Zero as they get credit for.
I remember a lot of discussion on these forums back in the early post-release days about how the game system didn't handle air combat between large forces - and large forces against small ones - at all well. We may be remarking some of that residue, as I don't believe that aspect was addressed to any great degree in the patches.
Again, it's a matter of having too much and being able to do too much with it. Kido Butai isn't invincible. It just lumps together in one hex and flies a couple hundred Zeroes overhead (with 90-experience pilots led by men who have better leadership ratings than god).
The game does have issues with scaling engagements but I've lived with the 20 planes fight 200 and lose 1 with the "they just ran away" logic.
The thing with the KB is that it isn't the Zero or the pilots but the sheer overhwleming mass of Zeros it puts in the air since the group doesn't operate separately and since the F4F's are undervalued they can blow through any CAP. Still, even with that the carrier on carrier fight always tend to be indecisive since both side are basically gonna burn badly in the exchange.
I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes.
Ahh, I haven´t read those reports. But even how great the Corsair is, ammunition would still be a limiting factor on shoot down number for number of planes engaged.
Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.
It´s a monster for the Zero. It´s faster, climbs better and dives better. Has everything but turning in dominating fasion. The Zero can be ¨boomed and zoomed¨ at will by it. The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision.
Yes, it´s extremely hard to bring down as well for me too. Even with the 20mm cannon you need about every round in close or you may as well forget it. I shoot for the wing roots in 6 oclock. Unless somehow I can get a decent deflection shot and hit the engine with a burst of 20mm cannon.
The Hellcat, hmmm, great Zero pilot could give the Hellcat some trouble I think.
¨If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.¨ Che Guevara
ORIGINAL: ILCK
The game does have issues with scaling engagements but I've lived with the 20 planes fight 200 and lose 1 with the "they just ran away" logic.
Me, too, but what about when they shoot down 40 or so before Sir Robinning?
The thing with the KB is that it isn't the Zero or the pilots but the sheer overhwleming mass of Zeros it puts in the air since the group doesn't operate separately and since the F4F's are undervalued they can blow through any CAP. Still, even with that the carrier on carrier fight always tend to be indecisive since both side are basically gonna burn badly in the exchange.
Concur.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes.
Ahh, I haven´t read those reports. But even how great the Corsair is, ammunition would still be a limiting factor on shoot down number for number of planes engaged.
Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.
It´s a monster for the Zero. It´s faster, climbs better and dives better. Has everything but turning in dominating fasion. The Zero can be ¨boomed and zoomed¨ at will by it. The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision.
Yes, it´s extremely hard to bring down as well for me too. Even with the 20mm cannon you need about every round in close or you may as well forget it. I shoot for the wing roots in 6 oclock. Unless somehow I can get a decent deflection shot and hit the engine with a burst of 20mm cannon.
The Hellcat, hmmm, great Zero pilot could give the Hellcat some trouble I think.
thats very true. there are more then one reports of japanese aces bringing down several hellcats but i know no reports of the same success of japanese pilots against corsairs.
