Petition to bring the 190 back from 5.3a!!

FSIC Messageboard

SDOE General

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Petition to bring the 190 back from 5.3a!!
ZooL Pilot	posted 04-25- 03:58 PM 5.3b was fine cept for the 190. who cares if it was the dominating plane in the skies, I'm not that great of a flyer and the plane made online play so much more fun for me (and many others), please change it back, its incredibly slow now and just the other day I took a couple hits (literly, not enough to scratch a fly) and the thing lost air speed like a piano being dropped from the sky! So I making this petition to change it back to the way it was in 5.3a, hopefully everyone will make me happy and agree IP: Logged
Nat Pilot	posted 04-25- 04:30 PM hhmmmm.. I dunno.. this is a question of fun or realism I guess, the 190 is now majorly out done by the Spit, as me, Qualcast, Jetlag and Goth found out in a 2 on 2 siptv190.. it was scarey how quickly them spits are up on your tail now. But even so.. is it realistic, I dunno, never flew them in real life.. but as I said at the start, fun vs realism.. lets see who wins out.. lol ~Nat~ My vote.... I don't really care..ok, I do abit, the 190 is really hard pushed to deal with the spit now, but if thats correct and the way it should be, then I think I'd keep it that way and learn to fly the 190 again.. lol IP: Logged
Werner Molders Pilot	posted 04-25- 04:47 PM I second this motion. I don't know a thing about flight models but I do know the change from 5.3a to 5.3b was soooo drastic that there has to be some inaccuracies still. Over -correction pure and simple. Please don't take this as a mean-spirited criticism of the FM gurus or anything, I wish I had the time to contribute, but the 190 is just about useless now. I flew online the other night, took 1 hit to the engine, and I couldn't get enough airspeed, even at an AoA of -10 degrees, to do a basic bank turn. I don't yank-and-bank, and I can fly other aircraft, including the old 229 and the twitchy mustang just fine. The 190, imho, has had her wings clipped. Werner ------------------ It's coming... The NEW bcatp! Stay tuned for details! IP: Logged
Zurawski Pilot	posted 04-25- 04:55 PM Wondering ... What version of the Spit? ... I've plyed online with Tail and the 190 quite simply trounced the 1a and the Vb ... It wasn't untill I used the XI that I had the complete advantage ... Hate to say it ... your ACM sounds suspect. IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:03 PM Only if you bring back the P-38 from PP5.2 ------------------ Snickers =FC= IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:24 PM I can climb to 10,000 feet in three minutes on a full tank and the top speeds at alt also match the discussions here on the forum Werner. Unless you also tested it then I'd be interested in hearing your results. Or was it complaining pure and simple TS IP: Logged
Nat Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:38 PM to be honest I think it was a 190a4 vs spit VB (I think), but as I said, if this is realistic now, then fine, but our experiences over 4 missions (swapping aircraft after 2) doesn't seem to be the same as your findings, the spit was turing and climbing after our A4 easily, much faster than the A4 could climb away after a pass (spit attacking from 12 high, passing by and turning onto the now climbing A4). I'm easy, I'll go either way, just means I gotta get used to a "new" 190 thats all. Beleive me this isn't a dig, but I agree there's a big difference from the older version, but if it's more realistic, so be it IP: Logged
ZooL Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:45 PM well this is where the realism takes over from the fun factor, werner knows what I'm talking about, the changes were very drastic from the previous version and having to re-learn it but not even be able to do basic manuevers makes it useless. IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:50 PM Spanky here.. I'll admit i havn't done any testing of the sort but the flying i have done online in it has been lack luster. It was my fav plane. Now i take a p38 over it cause it fells so sluggish. Are you saying its top speeds and climb rate are all within specs tail? If so then i say leave it alone and i find a new plane to fly. I guess we were spoiled or somthing. IP: Logged
Yardstick Pilot	posted 04-25- 05:57 PM I haven't flown the 5.3b version of the A-4 (I don't like the idea of an auto installer), but I do know that up to about 20,000ft the A-4 should be on a par with the Spit IX (IX should have better turn performance, speed should be about equal, with the A-4 having better zoom climb and roll abilities). As far as the Spit V is concerned it should not be able to live with the A-4 - the only advantage should be in the flat turn. ------------------ Yardstick painted this IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-25- 06:21 PM I have no trouble trouncing the spit V with the 190a4. I have more trouble against the spit IX but the IX is supposed to climb the same and have the same speed along with a better turn rate so I don't know if I'd call them even. According to the last stats thread on the 190a4 the numbers I have for the spitIX place it faster which doesn't help either TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 04-25-2000).] IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-25- 07:16 PM Yeah spanky, AFAIK climb and speed are to spec. here's the discussion I based it on in case anyone missed it. http://www.fightersquadron.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001263.html IP: Logged
Razer Pilot	posted 04-26- 08:51 AM just stopped in while i take a break from packing the room up. I vote no, The 190 was flying crap before. Very strong flying crap, but never the less, flying crap. From what i was told there was a bug that caused it to have unrealistic performance. I've played with the new one and i like it a lot more then any earlier version. The 190 was mainly a BnZ (Boom and Zoom) fighter anyway. IF you fly the plane like it was suppose to be flown, and this will take some practice to get right, you should have no problems killing spits. ------------------ Tony "Razer" Martin http://www.fshangar.com [This message has been edited by Razer (edited 04-26-2000).] IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 04-26- 09:14 AM Razer just put his finger on it. If the FM is correct (in all planes ... I know this is a constant cycle we go through... but I think we are getting closer...) Anyway, if the FM is correct on all planes, then you need to know how to fly your planes strengths agains the enemy planes weaknesses. Once you do that you will have no problem taking them down. BTW I still havent learned that yet An example? The Japanese zero should have downed more of the Flying Tigers than they did. (Or at least not have died in the numbers they did.) Why? The zero could outclimb the P-40 4:1 The P40 could outdive 2:1. In dogfights the zeros usually tried to dive. Their planes weak spot P40's strong spot. Add the aircraft aromor (P40), and the rest is history... ------------------ Snickers =FC= [This message has been edited by Snickers (edited 04-26-2000).] IP: Logged
juzz Pilot	posted 04-26- 09:25 AM Except the AVG never fought the A6M "Zero", they fought the Ki-43 "Zero". Allied pilots called all Japanese fighters "Zero" at the time which causes some confusion. But it is correct that superior tactics allowed the AVG to get kills for few losses of their own. IP: Logged
Zoycite JAG	posted 04-26- 09:37 AM Earlier versions of the 190 were to uber IMO. It would make the 51 almost unflyable again. The 190 should not be able to dominate a 51 on a regular basis. ------------------ Zoycite 33rd~GS visit The War Paint Factory IP: Logged
Yardstick Pilot	posted 04-26- 09:53 AM Don't worry too much about the A-4, you should only be competetive against Spit Vs, IXs, Tempests and I-16s in a historical context anyway. If you want something to compete against the American iron wait until you get hold of Zur's new FM for the Dora 9 ...... NICE! ------------------ Yardstick painted this IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-26- 10:26 AM Spanky here.... Ok then thats cool, i guess the FW190 wasn't the plane i thought it was. Nor the plane we were lead to belive it was with the FM it has had over the months. K time for a change then. Running out of planes though. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-26- 10:44 AM Try the p51 .. until someone calibrates the climb rate anyways TS IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-26- 10:49 AM There is a 3-minute WEP setting on the 190A4 that is not currently modelled. I calibrated for the 30-minute sustainable combat setting. It sounds like Laika maybe has come up with a way to simulate WEP I hope this can be added to the 190a4. A couple little code changes in the game and we'd have real WEP and superchargers, this is incredibly frustrating TS IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 04-26- 11:29 AM I recently heard an AVG veteran talk. His answer to their high kill ratio was, "We went after bombers mostly, plus there were a lot more Jap planes to shoot down than there were of us, a lot more Jap targets to hit than the other way around". Although he did acknowledge their diving tactics when outnumbered by fighters. He also said they wouldn't have had a chance against the later Zero's. IP: Logged
nealg Pilot	posted 04-26- 11:43 AM While I dislike flying any of the Axis planes, I do have to fly them online a lot. My first trip out in the 3b 190, yeah, it is considerably changed. After further flights, and I admit I was not testing, I find that it is a good match now for most of the Allied planes. Particularly fun and challenging against the Mustang; in fact, I have more kills in the new 190 than in the Mustang ( which I continue to fly as if I were auditioning as 1 of the 3 Stooges!!hehe ). ------------------ nealg=FC= Note: I might add that online we seldom, if ever, use what I call the 'Get Outta Dodge' tactic, or 'Run Away'. This was used quite often, in encounters where planes were mismatched in numbers, performance, or due to damage. We keep fighting even after our plane takes damage ( though we all know the DM needs some tweaking, hehe ) which may not be accurate, and might lead to a thought that one plane is less or more than it should be. Just a thought; I have flown a few 3 on 3 where not everyone on one side was able to take off. If I was outnumbered, I should have called it a day, especially if I was in a Mustang or Spit.. I didn't, and dang if I didn't get my rear handed to me!! [This message has been edited by nealg (edited 04-26-2000).] IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-26- 12:13 PM Spanky here.. Tailslide- Can't stand the p51 either. Too tippy. I can never do a good turn or loop without it droping a wing. And yes i'm going fast enough. I avoid the p51 like the plague. P38s - glass tail. yuck Alot of the planes are stating to get flippy and twitchy and dropping wings. So i guess i will just have to get used to it. And don't even dare blame it on my stick, Its working just fine and i have the sesitivity dropped as low as it will go. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-26- 12:34 PM That's good news.. they should be dropping wings especially when slow or turning really hard. Thats what combat flaps, snap rolls, etc are all about. Combat flaps would be another easy but great addition to the SDOE code TS ------------------ Patch It! TS Aircombat IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-26- 01:30 PM Spanky here.. Yardstick- how did you install SDOE? Win98? ANY peice of software? whats wrong with an installer that does all the work for ya? Yeah tail. IT would be great if we could patch this game or it went open source eh? IP: Logged
slk unregistered	posted 04-26- 03:40 PM My thoughts again, Put them back I liked them better before they got all dicked up. Besides who in here that is concerned with realizm totally knows the dynamics involved. Humidity, octane, and the performance of the individual engines. I been under the hood of some real tricked out cars in my day and all of the above are influences. so what if their tweeked they were funner... Psi IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-26- 05:04 PM Spanky here.. We can't do that if we want to have a good sim experience man. If we do that we can't use the planes advantages against other planes disadvantages. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-26- 05:32 PM Yes.. yardstick made a good point. If you want a plane that is faster and climbs really good try the FW190D or the 109G the later war planes are faster and often climb better. BTW, did the 109K only have 64 cannon rounds in real life? I take it that it was used mostly for intercepting bombers then? TS IP: Logged
Yardstick Pilot	posted 04-26- 06:00 PM Tail, yes the load out is correct, those 30mm MK108 rounds were monsters (although not a big as the high velocity MK103 which some variants apparently carried. The K really was a step too far for the 109 series. The engine was too powerful for the airframe and the extra weight put pay to the already mediocre handling characteristics of Gustav. I'm not sure that the Kurfurst saw much action against heavies but I am sure the 30mm cannon would have been effective against IL-2 on the Eastern Front (which by 1945 wasn't actually very eastern). BTW the MK108 is an optional loadout for the Gustav. ------------------ Yardstick painted this IP: Logged
G-man Pilot	posted 04-26- 06:11 PM While we're on the subject of aircraft and their respective FM's, I agree with Spanky and his comments on the P51. I hate it. This aircraft should be the Ferrari of the sky but it flies like a Sherman. I'm sorry to say but that is wrong. If it's not and the FM is accurate, then the other planes are seriously messed up. I'm not trying to slam anyone, I just feel that there is no consistency between the aircraft. Clearly, the Germans have the Uber airplanes, which shouldn't always be the case. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the real Mustang flew like the one in SDOE, then the air war over Western Europe would have been a little different! G-man IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-26- 07:18 PM In the current plane set, I'd rank the p51 as one of the best planes in the game (maybe a little too good?). I can take anything except a 262 with it.. I find loops and takeoffs pretty challenging though especially if its windy. TS IP: Logged
goth Pilot	posted 04-26- 09:28 PM I can't monitor the board at work any more, so I just now got the chance to add my 2 cents worth. I'll admit it, I mise the Uber-190, but I do like knowing things are realistic. If I get kills in an uber plane, that doesn't mean I was a good flyer. It just means I had a better plane. If the FM guru's tell me the 190 is closer to true, then I want ot that way. I'll miss never shooting anybody down, butif I ever do, at least I'll know I earned it! Unless I shot down a P-38. Its an easy kill because its too fragile. If we were to talk about fixing "one plane", I'd say fix the damage for the 38. Meanwhile....I'd better learn a new way to fight if I want to use the 190. I've learned bad habits. ------------------ goth =FC= IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 04-26- 10:42 PM Spanky here... Yes goth. I agree. I'm not saying changing the 190 is bad. IF thats the way its supposed to be. I guess I just got used to the uber version and didn't know it was uber cause I never did any testing. Also about the P38. YES could we please boost the damage the tail can take a bit? I would seriously say that at the LEAST, 50% of the time that I get shot down in a P38 its the tail breaking or coming off. If its realistic then fine leave it BUT then make all the other tail feathers the same on the other planes cause they should be just as fragile. IP: Logged
Werner Molders Pilot	posted 04-26- 11:36 PM TS - "Unless you also tested it then I'd be interested in hearing your results. Or was it complaining pure and simple " Sorry, I don't have the time to sign up and beta test everything that gets produced around here. I hope you weren't suggesting that unless I was an official beta tester I should shut up and go home. That seems rather contrary to what I thought was an otherwise collaborative atmosphere around here. In any case, if the gurus say the 190 is to spec, that so be it I'll hit the training missions a little harder next time. Werner ------------------ It's coming... The NEW bcatp! Stay tuned for details! IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-27- 12:29 AM I meant that I strive to make the flight models as accurate as possible rather than meet public opinion. IMHO there was nothing to overcompensate for. Sorry if I sounded offended there was alot of research and testing in these changes sometimes I get carried away TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 04-27-2000).] IP: Logged
G-man Pilot	posted 04-27- 02:10 PM Tail, I hope you didn't take my comments about the P-51 FM as a slam. I've flown against you (and lost!) and think you have a great grasp of the aircraft in SDOE. I think your approach of basing the FM's on realism versus opinion is the right approach. But along those lines, don't you think that the aircraft similar to the Mustang, such as the Me109, Spit and FW190, should also fly the way it (P51) does? For example, those planes don't stall as easy or require the use of flaps like the Mustang does. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that there needs to be more consistency between the aircraft. G-man IP: Logged
Zurawski Pilot	posted 04-27- 02:40 PM ... G-Man, Bare in mind ... You can have two different airctaft who's profile-performance is almost identical, yet have drasticly different "departure" neuances ... Though I must admit that the FMs that "I" do have an entirely different "feel" to them than the ones Tail works on. Despite the fact that we both apply the same fanatical attention to detail and utilize roughly the same approach ... I quite honestly wish I could make my FMs feel more like his ... IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 04-27- 05:10 PM G-Man, there is a certain order FM changes have to be done in.. it's pointless for me to calibrate things like level stall speed while I am still working on wing sweep and chord as I will just have to re-do that part once I get these areas finished. Unfortunately, making sure that six different planes all speed, dive, climb, and have the right ceilings compared to all the other planes in the game takes up almost all the time I have to spend on FMs. Zur's right we need some more FM guys. TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 04-27-2000).] IP: Logged
Confusion Pilot	posted 04-28- 11:21 PM Petition to bring the 190 back to FM5.1 ...incert your favorite evil laugh here..... IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center