168

Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by Funtom, Jul 1, 2010.

  1. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    Great music for "combat li2 otw " :D

    "Kikimora" great for squad name:turret:
     
  2. miniks

    miniks Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    Messages:
    12
    Location:
    Serbia
    :)
     

    Attached Files:

  3. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    With transition from 1.66 to 1.67, Fw a8r8 was changed and now official name is A8R2. I was wondering if its current (improved) state is more realistic than it was in older version of fh?
    Without any serious testing, everyone noticed great difference in performance, and without serious testing I "have a feeling" its exactly performing as basic A8 model, or if not same, then very similar. I remember old model , wep was of short time, and I believe plane was heavier in flight, mb even had additional armor in Fh modelling.
    Since Im not the best educated person when it comes to ww2 airwarfare here on this forum , I was wondering if old version A8R8 was more realistic, and since it sounds very logic to me that it was, can this model be reversed back to older version?
    With same range of guns now ( tnx to admins:@prayer: ), I think we dont need plane with such firepower to be so good in performance. I think this is very important plane , as it reflects german aircraft-building strategy, but I would prefer it in old way , with all that heaviness...
    In the end I must mention something I believe I heard that Fas is planning to do ... I believe its removal of all 109 r6 versions....If he doesnt plan anything like that , ok.. But if its true, I must oppose strongly , and I must explain to Fas and reds, why golds need planes like 109 R6 , or 110 with 30mm etc..
    Every side in war had some preference in aircraft building , whether its coming from its need to do specific task , like killing enemy fighters, killing buffs or something else, or just because of experience in different situations.
    While Usaf prefered 50 cal , big hvy fighters, Russians made lighter aircrafts with shvak as primary weapon. On the other hand Germans had different direction of progress, making big guns, good armor planes. All planes like R6 versions, all with 30mm models, I believe are essential to this game , to reflect German strategy. When i was visiting airpages.ru , I was surprised to see report of testing "g2" versus russian fighters, because what they called "g2" was actually g2r6 model ...It must have been significant aircraft when they tested it :)
     
  4. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    The difference between the /R2 and the /R8 was the cockpit armor. Besides, IMHO, a few hundred pounds isn't really going to change the performance of the Fw-190 all that much. ;)

    I don't think Fas meant to remove the /R6 loadouts, just remove the plane slots that are taken up by redundant systems (e.g. Bf-109G-2 has loadout available for /R6, and there's a plane slot used up by the original /R6 loadout. The same thing goes for MiG-3 (5 guns) and MiG-3 with loadout of 2 x ShKAS and 3 x UBS).
     
  5. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    IRL/r8 is armour of IRL/r7 with cannons of IRL/r2
    that time 30mmsprayers already annoyed so developers decided to make 30mm carrier less agile.
    however, as far as i know, damage model did not counted more armour for FHL/r8.
    and currently we are not sure whether /r8 was modelled correctly.
    FHLa-8 is reported by fas as being quite accurate in speed and climb
    and weight of mk108 in consoles is roughly comparable to saved weight of mg151/20 removed from consoles.

    even more, FHLf-8 did not scored heavier armour as well, being as heavy as /r8.
    since early IRLf-8 has extra armour and late IRLf-8 has not (being virtually equal to g-8 and a-8), we decided to free two slots: unclear authenticness(fuck english, btw) f-8, unclear authenticness a-8/r8 by means of merging a-8, a-8/jabo einstatz, g-8 and late f-8 (including 115 f-8/pb1) into one slot of a-8.
     
  6. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,087
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA

    btw, should say "due to uncertain authentication". That would be more appropriate. :)
     
  7. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    So we've freed up a few plane slots for new models, or have the slots that were freed been taken up by new loadouts for other planes?
     
  8. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    I believe that means different loads for plane do not take slot ...
    You can see that attempt in current duplicated versions, 109g2r as separate plane, and 1 more in g2 slot. Or, just check how many 110 gs we have now :)
     
  9. bimbom

    bimbom FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,431
    Location:
    Moscow, Russia
    weight Bf109xx and Bf109xx/Ryy is significantly different
    Bf110 same.
     
  10. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    You are not following us Bim. We talk about slots.That was just example I used.
     
  11. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    WTG boa. :rolleyes:
     
  12. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    to limit agility of g/r6 weapon kit, it has a ballast named gunpod. separate g/r6 airplane has agility decreased by fm parameters thmselves
     
  13. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    Since that ballast looks like bomb, in Yak-T it is possible to drop it .
     
  14. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    Yak-9T gunpod drop is just model error IMO.
     
  15. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    it was a feature for beta: to feel how agile yak-9t is with and without ballast in the same flight.
    sounds like weight of gun is not modelled correctly in fm: FHyak-9 switched from 20mm to 37mm does not loose in agility as much as lost IRLyak-9 switched from 20mm to 37mm.

    probably weight of gun should be just doubled or tripled, so we can make g/r6/r4, il-2/37mm, yak-9/37mm without ballasts.

    gonna discuss that with fas.
     
  16. boa

    boa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    277
    Tnx for response .
    Btw , I see you are starting to like English, pls keep talking, one day you will exchange general forum for international and become one of us;)

    Yes, Please do so , and as our manager try to control him,please.
    People already hate Yak enough , I think every new minut spent on developing yak , they will consider as irritation. On top of that , every "serious" yak lover will start to hate it sooner or later as our yaks are planes for LaMeRs:deal:
     
  17. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    I think people hate the Yakovlev because it's about the only plane that performs like it should (trusting the work of fas here :D). Lavochkins are better now, but have warp roll problem IMHO. I pursue the La-5 and later models (haven't met a LaGG yet :( ) then lose them as soon as they roll. I need to fly red again to see if 190 still has this problem or not.

    Another thing that annoys me are stick stirring morons. :joystick: Is there anything that can be done to fix that? I understand jinking as a defensive maneuver, but when nobody is even shooting at them and I can mimic their movements by pushing stick forward left and pulling back right ad nauseum it is ridiculous. It would not be so bad if this type of operation (I refuse to call that flying) did not induce warps as well. Or better still is to maybe try and create a function that reduces control inputs significantly if the player tries to operate an aircraft in that manner (stick stirring).
     
  18. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,087
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Evasive maneuvers are at the limit of each aircraft. I just wait for them to stop wiggling and then shoot. Creating a feature that inhibits aircraft function due to the dislike of other players behaviors isn't gonna work.
     
  19. mumble

    mumble Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    in a bar
    Issue isn't A/C limitations. Issue is evasive maneuver knowing full well the particular maneuver causes warp, making you harder to kill for a bullshit reason.
     
  20. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,087
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Never heard or seen that before. :dunno: Have a film to show it?