168

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

  1. joseh-

    joseh- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2008
    Messages:
    250
    Roger that sir!
    Providing data about C.200 and CR.42 Falco (bis?)
    I do agree, C.200 is better than G.50 and Re.2000

    I just insist in the Re.2002 'cause it's Midwar plane and could be great add just by 1942.
     
  2. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    what if japan should fight without germany/italy?

    sounds like cr.42, c.200, g.55, b.239
    or you mean bf 109 e-7, bf 109 g-4, bf 109 g-5, fw 190 a-5, fw 190 a-7, fw 190 a-9?!

    i wish i could take any red plane to handle every situation i meet, like 109/190 can.

    that's correct. we really think how to motivate bombers.
    so, should we cancel 1.68 and go for server tasks instead?

    soviet planes are not priority already, i guess.

    are you referring general interest in the game?

    working on it
     
  3. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    good proposal
    so if we should not need to install atomic propulsion we must swap it to c.r.42?
     
  4. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    flaps unchanged?
    fins/hstab replaced by rear-fuselage?

    your size of rudders and elevators are reasonable, indeed
     
  5. Funtom

    Funtom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,189
    Location:
    opera
    maps-
    in what program (format) are maps made? is possible to try make a new? i still don't know what is the main problem with the old ones, so...
    or maps are only ie's business and you, admins, can do nothing?
     
  6. gil---

    gil--- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,977
    As for me, i would prefer adequate ki-27 and don't need c.r.42 at all :). Because realistic Ki-27 can be good vs I-153 and it will be interesting fight for both.
    C.R.42 should be overmodelled or it will be way worse than I-153 exept max speed at alts these plane never fly at arena.
    But i understand that i'm not the voice of majority in this question :).
     
  7. fas---

    fas--- Дремучий патриархал

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,143
    Location:
    Калуга, Россия
    Only guns size changed now. About elevator, flaps e.t.c ... hm... You want, i'm must make uberplane? And next time, players will be crying - 'p38 - uber, developers - a motherfuckers, remove p38 from RPS (as La5fn now). Yeah?

    Nothing personel, but P38 - it's not best from US aircraft in european sky.
    Especially so as a fighter.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. fas---

    fas--- Дремучий патриархал

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,143
    Location:
    Калуга, Россия
    CR-42bis? Hm... I-153P, or I-153BS - first 2x20ShVAK, second - 4x12,7BS.
    For balance. Golds will be just a make seppuku. :)
     
  9. Funtom

    Funtom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,189
    Location:
    opera
    pls, no more biplanes lol :D
     
  10. gil---

    gil--- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,977
    LoL :) Falco is like take I-153 and add 500 kg of weight leaving everything else about same :). It is way worse in everything exept may be "fast" diving. It can be some fun to pilots who like hard challenge, but it doesn't need at all to improve I-153 to balance its appearance.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2010
  11. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Ok. I'm not demanding anything. "uber"? I'm not wanting to make the P-38 "uberplane". Damage model does not equal performance.

    I appreciate the opportunity to participate in making changes to the aircraft. Given that opportunity, the damage model needs attention, that's all. exec asked for comments or suggestions for the new update. Don't take this the wrong way but, you and exec apparently don't fly the P-38 in combat online very much or at all so you both don't seem to understand the problem and solution I'm presenting. I have never seen an arena dominated by P-38's, have you? You never will. That usually suggests something, like seeing spits/109s dominating the arena.

    As for the whiners? I don't listen to them and neither should you guys. The whiners who cry "uber" are sore losers who complain for their lack of making the right decisions during combat. You'll never hear from me a complaint about an aircraft being "uber". I'm not as good as some pilots of days gone by and of the present like thug/antred but, I'm going to make my opinions known. Like I've always said in the past while in the arena, "it's not the plane dummy, it's the pilot that makes the skill/kill". I've been flying online flight sims for 13 years with many different aircraft and I prefer the P-38 because it's a challenge and has many good traits. I don't fly planes like spits/yaks/109s/190s/ki's etc because in my view, they aren't a challenge and bore me.

    As for the P-38 being the best plane for which theater? Which plane is the P-38 not good against? Who decides that? Do the P-38's bullets bounce off some planes? Planes don't fly themselves. It is the PILOT, NOT the PLANE that performs. I've shot down many many many planes called "uber" so, I'm not falling for the minority opinion. :znaika:

    I appreciate the work you guys are doing but, for once, consider what's being said. I've put up with this damage model for 8 years and with the opportunity to correct it I'm putting my best effort into correcting an obvious problem which is not performance related but, rather damage model related.

    Thanks for reading my lengthy/wordy response and keep up the good work. :kruto: :cheers:
     
  12. Funtom

    Funtom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,189
    Location:
    opera
    1st fact-
    the P-38 had 4:1 kill ratio in the 8th AF
    the P-51 had 2:1

    ("Combat Losses of the 8th AF")


    And look- it was mainly with the "F" version and when krauts were not so easy targets like in the "late war". The biggest problem for P-38 was .... $$$, 2-3x more than P-51 and P-38 needed better pilots (longer practise) too (everything x2 :D )
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2010
  13. fas---

    fas--- Дремучий патриархал

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,143
    Location:
    Калуга, Россия
    Oh, just compatible - 10:1 - F86 vs MiG-15 :)
     
  14. fas---

    fas--- Дремучий патриархал

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,143
    Location:
    Калуга, Россия
    The proposed model of damage you will not be adequate in relation to other models in the game. On this, I asked you - "you want to get uber, which then must be off because of complaints of other players?
    Your model does not contain such a damaged item as "elevator" and "rudder". I see only the horizontal stabilizer and vertical stabilizer. However, these elements are unreasonably small relative to other models. A place where they should be - involved elements of the fuselage (rear, for a game of two types).

    We can get a model similar to the current model of Zero - where you can get a dozen twenty-millimeter shells without noticeable damage.

    In short - you proposed damage model for the lightning completely inadequate for use in the game. I think what you can do to lightning, so that the area of the targeted items in the tail the problem of old, I remember this problem since it came into play, in the 1997th year, even in version 1.11:)

    P.S. It is machine translation, I do not know English so well, that would write such long texts, and be sure that everything is spelled correctly - that is, will understand me correctly.

    Оригинальный текст:

    Предложенная тобой модель повреждений не будет адекватна относительно других моделей в игре. По этому я спросил тебя - "ты хочешь получить убер, который потом надо будет отключать из-за жалоб других игроков"?
    Твоя модель вообще не содержит такого повреждаемого элемента как "руль высоты" и "руль направления". Я вижу только горизонтальный стабилизатор и вертикальный стабилизатор. При этом, эти элементы неоправданно малы относительно других моделей. А то место, где они должны быть - заняты элементами фюзеляжа (задней части, ибо в игре их два типа).

    Мы можем получить модель, схожую с нынешней моделью Зеро - в которую можно попасть десятком двадцати миллиметровых снарядов без заметного ущерба.

    Короче - предложенная тобой модель повреждения для Молнии совершенно неадекватна для применения в игре. Я подумаю, что можно сделать для Молнии, потому, что площадь поражаемых элементов в хвостовом оперении проблема старая, я помню эту проблему с момента своего прихода в игру, в 1997-ом году, еще в версии 1.11 :)

    перевод машинный, я не настолько хорошо знаю английский, что бы писать такие длинные тексты и быть уверенным в том, что все написал правильно - то есть, меня поймут верно.
     
  15. fas---

    fas--- Дремучий патриархал

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,143
    Location:
    Калуга, Россия
    Here's a possible variant of the model for the Lightning damage.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Umm. I don't think you are understanding me. Wish I spoke Russian. :D
    If this change is made, let us wait and see what happens? It can be changed again. ;) And what are the other pilots going to say? Who cares? If they have issue with damage model, let's hear it in the forum! No lazy cowards! :D

    :dunno: zero is a nemesis...:dunno: This is about the P-38 damage model. The P-38 is too fragile in the wrong places. :shuffle:

    However, the old current damage model is extreme and too severe. There are new planes that did not exist in 1997 that are now flying on WBFH. You need to fly the P-38 in combat often to understand. :dark:

    Do not compare the P-38 to other aircraft because they are not the same. I created images to show what I am trying to illustrate.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    The last image is a representation of the actual aircraft and what I'm proposing for the tail section only.
    I do like the new damage model for the guns but, that tail section needs some attention. :shuffle:

    You are doing fine, I understand you. Anyone else here speak Russian that can get what I'm saying?
     
  17. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    Have larger image? Difficult to see details. :)
     
  18. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    i guess he haven't understood you well.
    and he fixed damage map for guns already.
    rudder/elevator on the way.
    so don't be upset, pls.
     
  19. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
    suomi1.trn was made by some weirdo selfmade software... probably even worse than graphic morpher.
    nowadays wb crashes when i try to test suomi1 offline.
    [​IMG]

    i guess we can add
    wbmedrl1(italy-tunisia-egypt-romania)
    wbna1(north-america)
    wbsthpac(thailand-australia)
    wbtrn002(la-manche)
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  20. -ALW-

    -ALW- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,086
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota, USA
    No, I'm not upset. I am anxious though! :cheers: