IL-2 puts others to shame. **OPINION ALERT**

[Possi]

Originally posted by SOB:


LOL, it's Richard Ordway!    


SOB

Is this a Pilot from WW2,like this Russian and German Pilots there testing for Oleg´s IL-2?
I never hear from him.

[Toad]

Yeah, SOB. Laughed out loud when I figured out who it was they were talking about.

[DeeZCamp]

I cant wait for IL2's Mupltiplay Servers to come up  

I think we are going to have a new king of MMOPG's

[AKDejaVu]

I can't help but wonder.. The Wobble?

[Staga]

So who is this Richard Ordway ?

[chisel1]

The ORDBOT!

[Kieran]

OMG! You mean we have simmers that haven't heard of Richard Ordway?!

Drop by the newsgroups and you will get to know him very well. He has the "I have stick time in the P51 dual seater, and it is pretty close to the wartime loading blah blah blah blah" macro programmed and uses it on every post.

After you read it a while it all blends together into some kind of psychodelic montage of opinions. Look for the trademark "My sticktime in the dual seat P-51 doesn't corroborate that finding, blah blah blah".

When I left the groups the readers had finally shamed him into posting that macro somewhat less frequently.  

[Tuomio]

Lol, so that 2 seat thing is true..

He also stated, that 180 degree/sec roll rate is impossible due to laws of physics..Hmm, even that BIASED NACA chart (   ) shows, that 190A5 can roll 180deg/sec..
But maybe they didnt have the experience of 2 seated looks-like-warbird passenger?

[ft]

Opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one. But certain people are so full of sh*t that they need to have an opinion on everything, just to get it all out.

I think that describes certain frequent posters in the NGs quite well. Faked air of credibility that convinces newbies but makes everyone who's read a few posts laugh.

Cheers,
  /ft, who once saw an airplane and thus is an expert on everything aeronautical

[CyranoAH]

Well, I'm by no means an expert in nothing related to WW2 airplanes, but here's my opinion:

Graphically, IL2 is stunning, and the only thing I don't particularly like is the looks of the tracers from afar and the dulled terrain.

The FM of the planes seem far too sensitive. I fly in RL some small airplanes (C172 and Robin 200 and 400) and the planes in IL2 remind me more of the F16 in Falcon 4 than a real WW2 bird.

But, as I said, who am I to say anything's wrong? I simply think there's something funny about the FM, it's just a feeling.

Daniel, aka Cyrano

[DeeZCamp]

Cryno.. Planes in reality are sensitive, meaning.. than When giving a force on the stick at X airspeed, reaction occurs.

IL2 reacts the move force(aka limits) that you push onto your stick.

Just like reality.

Aces has atrificially dampend down Feel/Roll/stick imputs to compensate for lag..

THE ONLY THING i dont understand is WHY!

I have been Testing IL2 Multiplay.. and Have tested the ROLL rates... THERE IS NO WARP.

Does IL2 have beeter net code or sumthing??
Idunno.


All i know is that WHen you move your plane to its limits on your FE,  that is what the other guy sees on his in IL2.

[Staga]

Cyrano I think planes made for civil use (no aerobatic) are meant to be stable (and easy to fly) when military/aerobatic planes need to be more able to do fast moves (almost labil/unstable, like modern fighters). IMO of course.

[Pyro]

Originally posted by DeeZCamp:
Aces has atrificially dampend down Feel/Roll/stick imputs to compensate for lag..

THE ONLY THING i dont understand is WHY!

Deez, why don't you tell us why?  You're the one who keeps fabricating false and deragatory statements about our flight model and motives.  Oh wait, you already have told us why.  

Perhaps the reason we model stick forces is because we think it's an important characteristic?  Throw that out and in theory, the Zero would outroll the F6F at 350 mph.  In practice, it did not.  If you think that's a better way to do it, you're entitled to that opinion.  Just don't issue it by making stuff up about what we do and why and then state it as fact.

[Tuomio]

Yes, its just an different approach of simulation. Both ways have their pros and cons.
Deez i think you are little bit overreacting to things right now, time will tell..

Btw Pyro, maybe very experienced Zero pilot could outpull newbie f6f pilot from 350mph dive dont you think? Then, maybe not, but we could think something like p47 vs 109 etc.

Thats what Oleg has been saying, that more or less the compression related crashes in ww2 were due to inexperienced pilot getting in panic. If charts show only 50lbs pulls, then we can only rely on subjective reports of testpilots, when it comes to high speed dives. "cement stick" statement arent after all scientific measurement, so you can get easily far off creating objective models from subjective material.

After all, it is rather simple implementation on the code so that cant be the reason.

<S> for both teams for these marvelous games and this all is just opinion of a humble peasant..

[ft]

Did anyone but me get the impression from the statements by the IL-2 team that they have indeed gone back in time six years or so and coded rudder deflection as a direct function of stick angle? I do hope I'm misunderstanding things but it sure seems like if this could be the case. This sure isn't the way things are in RL. Even in modern aircraft with powered controls, they go through lots of trouble to artifically stiffen the controls at higher airspeeds to provide proper feedback and avoid overcontrolling.

Staga, fighters are built to be more agile. Low/mid wings, less dihedral etc etc. You want them to react fast to control inputs. What you do not want is them jittering all over the place, swaying back and forth etc trying to stabilize since this makes a lousy gun platform (many WWI pilots loved the S.E.5, not since it was agile but since it was stable and made aiming easy). Unfortunately I think I'm seeing quite a bit of jittering in IL-2. The rudder sensitivity definitely has to go down a LOT from the default setting for example, gonna try that next. Oh, and we need a turn coordinator somwhere where we can see it...

Oh well. It's a beta after all and I have high hopes for this one anyway. As it is now, something is wrong IMO.

Cheers,
  /ft