This modeling is just making me sick- A6m cant turn worth shit, 109e has nothing on i16. Early war is a bitch for golds, the ju87 is the best fighter we have. Considering the red airforce comprised of i16's was basicly dominated by the a6m, i dont understand how its such a hero here "never mind- i do- the modelors". A i16 with rockets still turns better than an a6m 90% of the time. Balance and historicle are just words for "lie" here in FH...It drives me nuts.
Then stop wasting my time posting this shit. You hijack every thread even remotely related to flight models and it always comes down to how bad the gold planes suck. Well, it's you that sucks. The gold planes have come a long way from the flying sandboxes they used to be, but right now they're actually good to fly. I'm really sorry if you can't take off, climb to 5000m in 2seconds and then engage a con that has more E than you'll ever know of. I'm really sorry if your spraying isn't hitting home, I'm really sorry if your turns make you lose energy... If you can't get an edge over an I16 when flying an Emil then that's your problem to deal with. In fact it's fairly easy, just don't start to turn with it, but I guess even that one rule was too much to fly by? <Z>
Fuck off know it all- I16 breaks even simple "rules" that could keep a 109 pilot safe. Even with lack of energy a i16 will catch a 109 in climb, what happened to the 109 having one of the better climb rates of the war? Im tired of others "hijaking" any thread not pretaining to anything remote to flight models and claiming things are not as golds say they are. Flying red was the easiest thing Ive ever had to do. I think pilots are just doomed to the russian flying cock teases like the pe8 and la7. Not to mention the obious warship of the p39. Admins dont acknoladge history- but they dont respect balance either, yet you stand before me and tell me about rules and ways to fly while a plane such as the p39 or spitfire has no "rules" and will fly through anything. Russian ideals are what this game is based on- nothing more, doesnt mean that I cant bitch about it.
I have had long pause in playing WB. After that I started to play golds. I was shot down very often. So I decided to change side to red. Tryied to fly Spitfire: shot down very often. P39 the same. Typhoon: the worst plane I have ever flown. After that experience I no longer think that red are uber. I like my 109, and with little practice I can shoot down red planes and rtb. So allsop, please, stop whinning. If you think that red planes are better, that it is probably true: FOR YOU red planes are better, so fly red planes.
I swear to god anything I say falls on def ears- you take half of what I say and then go off on your own tangent. I dont assume you fly 109e all through the war do you? no, its impossible, and since the 190 is the most frequently flown gold plane I fly 109g14/r6 "or any r6 109". But its not logicle that a fully loaded i16 with rockets can outurn the a6m down in the low and slow. Half of this could be fixed with the DM, but ruining the better qualities of planes leaves them in a low position. Any one remembered where you couldnt out burn an a6m? Or that a p47 actually had more armor than an i15? I dont need to remind people of the great climb rate of the 109 which is now not so great with super spitfires in the arena that dont care much for gravity...... Twist my words and reverse them- its funny what you guys get out of it.
You wrote that i16 is better than 109, and that p39 and Spitfire are super planes that you can fly and shoot cons with no problems. I answered you that IMO if you fly 109 good i16 can`t do nothing, and Spitfire and p39 are not so good as you stated. So, where I twisted your words? And what has turning ability of Zero and i16 to my post and the whole topic? Why you always have to write something irrevelant to discuccion? And why it is always about the same? Then you are surprised than nobody reads your posts carefully? How ofted can you read the same?
P39 has uncanny verticle manoovering ability, and is very effecient with energy, and this just shouldnt be. It had a good center of gravity, but otherwise wanst that special. IMHO You can take any plane and do well- one of my favorites is the machi 202, but I accept that its performance is limited as it was IRL, yet here planes like the spitfire are drasticly more capable than history leads to say they were IRL. Other than your personal feeling of flying here on WBFH, what data supports that a a6m should have to struggle for its life 1on1 with most allied planes? Or how about the data that shows the i16 as a real opponent to early war monoplanes. Cause I cant find it.
allsop, you got to be kidding me, it is early war right now and the A6M and 109's rule as they should for early war. your supposedly porked A6M chewed up every plane i tried, F4F, I-16, I can get kills if the pilot is unsuspecting, but even then your paper plane (A6M) takes alot of .50's to bring down. My problem is F4F 1 single 20mm in vstab/hstab for get it same problem spit had only the spits wings die with 1 20mm. Time for another break, but Thank you guys for removing that boring as hell new guinne map. bullet
Ok... didn't use any scientific tools. But I did do some checks. I think that with the introduced spin behavior the P51 has an increased tendancy to do what it wants. However, this change is really really minimal. I didn't notice anything strange when testing the Pony, the only thing I noticed was that at higher speeds the plane had more difficulty in the pitch axis. Indeed, it almost seemed as if it was sluggish. I must note this behavior wasn't universal, and was almost only if I tried to do a turn in excess of 100° or so. In another light, I think it's the fuel, the plane just feels heavier. You should try to test the pony offline with 50% fuel, and then compare it to a pony with 100% fuel, an entirely different plane indeed. Also, by the time the Pony rids of 50% most a baby can be born and grown up All in all the Pony still seems to be good at energy fighting, in fact, it's dive only improved with this extra fuel weight. Of course, this goes at the cost of the (zoom)climb, but the idea in general is you don't waste E you don't need to waste, ergo: it should be fine, unless you're trying to aim for a target at the end of a steep dive. <Z>
Really bullet- cause I have a contradicting experience that happened today. Flying a6m "both mkii cannon and mgff 20mm suck" but I put 56x7mm 8x20mm in a fellow named "kaktus" and he landed his f4f just fine, all hits were made from d1.5-d2. Only to die on a RTB to 12x7mm 2x12mm lost my whole tail section "last i checked there was no fuel OR ammo back there to blow up".....DM is messed up, but the a6m deserves its place as the turn and burn master.
with a shitty pilot in Zero, the i16 will outturn it. Otherwise Zeke is a real monster in 1940-41 - a perfectly modelled plane IMO. Got 17 streak in it in late 1942, mostly flying furballs against superior odds, a fantastic plane. Also 109's flown well don't need to be worried about spits and other red planes, just a bit of ACM, SA and self discipline and you're out of range all the time. Allsop spend more time on perfecting your skill rather than posting this senseless "red conspiracy" crap of yours in every topic on this forum and you'll do fine.
Well, I'm obviously not an active member of the warbirds community anymore and I don't know what you guys have done to my beloved pony in the meantime but when I last flew it on here (and I flew it a lot) there was nothing wrong at all with the Pony. It's a wonderful airplane, clearly capable of defeating any gold fighter you can think of. By that I don't mean it was way better, just that you certainly stood a reasonable chance of winning any fight if you didn't screw up. Pony == great plane
Its not a conspiricy if everyone knows. Things like useless excuses of "ammo explosions" are as unimaginable in WBFH as modeling of possible prop damage. I keep hearing "but the a6m was made of rice paper- or canvas" what fucking book do you read? The a6m was made of a tempered aluminum- very advanced for the day. But then I hear "but the elevator was canvas" even if this is true on early modles- then how come its easy destruction doesnt cary over to TRUE canvas flyers like the i153? Every excuse I hear here can be contradicted by another observation. I have honed my flying skill to what I consider pritty fair- considering I dont stick jerk, use "crazy/wild/bullshit" manoovers to escape an unavoidable doom. I dont relie on a uber gun like the hispano 20mm to spray my kills from d5+ and know basic forms of smart flying- alot better than some pilots I see whose only skill is a warp/ stick jerk away followed by a hail of spraying and a few buddies to back them up. But I like how personal attacks are used to divert from the real problom- modeling mistakes.
This thread earned me a bad rep. It seems I?m starting to make some good friends here To Zembla: I do accept your world and I?d like to thank you for your answer. (By the way, my grand-grand-father was born in Italy (Veneto)). To the P-51 fans. I never said it is/was porked. It?s a wonderful virtual machine. To the thread hijackers: never mind? See you all around.
Don't worry about it, everyone's getting bad reputation ever since people found out the way to give it If people reacted strongly to your post bear in mind this: plenty of flames going on on these forums. Most of the times the claims are utter nonsense, and some people grew tired of it. Result of this is they're sometimes quick to judge and don't have the patience to read through a whole thread anymore <Z>
