Stormbird musings.

[Anaxogoras]

So the 109 pilots that did a neg g pushover against the Spits/Hurris in the BoB, were gaming the game too?

Now, if you had stated it was gamey because they can time it perfectly as so many of them are flying in F3 mode, I would agree with you.

There is nothing wrong with neg G push overs in some cases.

There's a big difference between the maneuver "Neg G pushover" and slamming the stick forward to cause instant redout for yourself and anyone following.

[bongaroo]

There's a big difference between the maneuver "Neg G pushover" and slamming the stick forward to cause instant redout for yourself and anyone following.

Get HTC to do something about stick stirring rolls while your about it...I don't see a problem, they are just delaying the inevitable.

[KG45]

as a full time GVer, even with the up- gunned IL2, i feel my real nemesis is still the A20. i can dodge the cannon rounds or hide behind something, but it's harder to avoid a blast radius.

[Rich46yo]

as a full time GVer, even with the up- gunned IL2, i feel my real nemesis is still the A20. i can dodge the cannon rounds or hide behind something, but it's harder to avoid a blast radius.

Looking at K/Ds I'd say your still correct. In fact looking at stats I dont think anymore GVs are being killed, instead just more are being killed by Storm birds.

I cant tell you how many times Ive seen Lone Rangers suicide in, blow up ords, and then be seen a few minutes later maneuvering in their Tiger setting up for a camp. While the Hurricane was conceivably a decent armor killer there are only very few who are good in it and can use its 30 rounds to good effect. Against the heavier tanks it was never that good, and lets face it, once ords were taken down, and maybe the VH, GVs could pretty much roam at will.

So far this tour the A-20 has a K/D in LWA of 1.35 and Storm birds of 1.09 . 1.09 is not an overly impressive K/D, hell the c-205 has a 1.22. So while the IL-2s are killing twice the number of GVs they were before that graph doesn't tell the full story.

Like I said. "Effective" but not "Dominant". If they were 50 mph faster and could carry 4 500 lb bombs I'd say they were perk level aircraft. As it stands they have a lower K/D then many 20 to 30 eny aircraft.

My favorite ways to fly them? I like to get up tp 1,500' to 2,000' to hunt for GVs. I approach tanks head on in F-3 mode and when the tank is dissapearing under my screen I pop into F1, chop throttle to 1/2, and glide in at a high and tight angle trying to get two 37mm bursts into the tank from 500 to 300 out. I have guns set to 500k but 400 is probably better for GVs. Hitting a heavy tank that close will cause chunks of it to come off.

I limit myself to airbase defense with IL-2s. I figure GV base between GV base fights should be left to GV's, the exception being a spawn camper. I do a lot of spotting for my own GVs and leave the wirbels to them. If I do attack a wirbel its either as a last ditch defense or in a "circle of death" manuever with other Storm birds.

The circle of death is multiple ILs circling a GV/GVs with several attacking at once. 9 out of 10 times, with pilots of equal skill, the wirbel will win a 1 on 1. Luckily its fairly unusual to see tanks and flak working effectively together. Give a tanker anough time and he'll leave his flak cover.

I dont even bother taking bombs up with me. If ords are up I'll take up rockets but I dont like the way the plane handles with its bomb bay filled.

Against fighters I take an IL-2 low and do a lot of turning. Ive noticed a lot of fighter sticks will pass up dives onto IL-2s if other fighters are around. That or they wont want to sacrafice their energy by dropping onto one thats on the deck. And if they do come in fast then they are fairly easy to dodge. I lose most IL-2s to fighters that are ganging and/or when I have little if any friendly fighter support. Most guys, if they have any S/A, are hesitant to put themselves into a poor situation against other fighters in order to attack an IL-2.

Anyway, those are my musings.

[Ack-Ack]

B-25H is just as effective in killing GVs as the IL2 and Havoc are and you can hit them beyond their gun range.  The B-25H is also the best plane to take out a field's ack emplacements without getting a scratch.


ack-ack

[ScatterFire]

Remove icons from GVs when viewed from a plane and everything is balanced.

Right now there is no way to hide with a huge marker telling your enemy exactly where you are and how far away you are.  Might as well have a perfectly flat desert map and have a neon green arrow pointing at every vehicle. 

[BnZs]

Bingo... tanks shouldn't be able to operate independently without aircover against late war rides, and in particular dedicated tank killing aircraft like the Il2.

I can understand the tank driver's frustrations when they get into a huge scrap with other tankers, only to get plucked by an il2 in the area but reality bites.

Ground units shouldn't have to operate in arenas where they are always vastly out-numbered by air forces because that was rarely numerically the case. Unescorted bombers should stand NO chance....we could go on and on with this sort of thing.

The WW allowed ground units to be incredibly annoying to the furball going on under them if they brought a flotilla of WWs. The 37MM Il2 virtually guaranteed that a flotilla of WWs would be brought to all assaults.


Here are the changes we really need to get mudmoving war out of all Il2-vs.-WW-all-the-damn-time-mode.

1. Lightly perk (5) the 37mm package on the Il2.

2. Lightly perk the (5) Wirbelwind.

3. Most importantly, make ords harder to take out, at least on a par with taking out a hangar. This was the annoying loophole that makes the tank-battle-griefer version of the Il2 a neccesity in the first place. Frankly, I'd just as soon you couldn't take them out directly at the airfields at all.

[Delirium]

1. GVs don't have to operate in areas that have many aircraft, either pick a new area or find some tank/flak buddies to go with you.

2. Unescorted bombers have little chance, unless they climb to absurd alts in the MA or the people intercepting them are foolish and enage on their 6 o'clock.

3. Even if they removed the il2, the WW wouldn't go away due to the ease of hitting their target combined with the raw damage output. It makes the Ostie a hanger queen (so to speak) but it is nice for field defense, greatly increasing the danger of vulching.
----

As I said before, each new aircraft/GV in the game changes the MA play a little bit. You should of heard the complaining when many of the aircraft we take as 'run of the mill' were introduced.

As HTC states on the opening page with this version, "Replace one worry with another."

[BnZs]

1. GVs don't have to operate in areas that have many aircraft, either pick a new area or find some tank/flak buddies to go with you.

I was specifically responding to your saying "GVs shouldn't be able to make it without air cover yadda yadda". MA conditions are not comparable to war-time conditions...trying to say that X or Y should be true based on actual WWII conditions is a dangerous path. For instance, you could say that GVs were very vulnerable to a/c, but there are mitigating factors. Specifically, there were often too few aircraft relative ground forces to have a crushing effect either way on the outcome of the ground battle, finding the GVs was often difficult, the average level of shooting/divebombing skill was probably rather low compared to an AHer with hundreds of hours of practice...I could go on and on.


If tanks had been as vulnerable to aircraft as say, cavalry horses were to machine guns, with no mitigating factors, such as the expense of fielding aircraft and trained pilots, they would have ceased manufacturing tanks. However, building a plane, flying it, and training a pilot to kill tanks with it remained more difficult than building an MG and training someone to man the trenches with it so tanks did not go by the wayside.

3. Even if they removed the il2, the WW wouldn't go away due to the ease of hitting their target combined with the raw damage output. It makes the Ostie a hanger queen (so to speak) but it is nice for field defense, greatly increasing the danger of vulching.
----

As I said before, each new aircraft/GV in the game changes the MA play a little bit. You should of heard the complaining when many of the aircraft we take as 'run of the mill' were introduced.

Right, the WW genie is out of the bottle, that is why I suggest perking the thing. Perhaps we need some quad-20mm manned guns a field guns?  But it is a matter of escalation. Annoying WW flotillas coming along with the tanks are now ubiquitous because of the Il2, divebombing GVs falls by the wayside...frankly I don't think the tank-killing gunships were as effective in reality as the Il2 is ingame, every nation would have experimented more extensively with them instead of bomb trucks if that had been the case.

I think the 3 changes I suggested would be closer to the right Air/GV balance and would also bring in more variety of tank killers than what we have right now. The ability to drop ords so easy was always a bad idea, a loophole I'd rather close, since the more rugged tanks can still pretty much defy the Il2s if no bombs are available.

[FireDrgn]

Its not quite rreality......I pay perks for a tank that an il2 can slice right thru is bizzarrr....Thats the same reason that the Firefly was perked cause it slices right thu the tiger...  Its just as gamey as one guy taking up 3 bombers and carpet bombing.ditching out and upping 3 more bombers   rinse and repeat.....thats not any were close to rreality.     It's  bs




<S>

[Delirium]

What do you tanker want? To operate without any worry of ground pounding aircraft?

If you perk the il2's loadout, then the Stuka with the anti-tank guns will also be perked. How silly does perking a Stuka sound?

[BnZs]

What do you tanker want? To operate without any worry of ground pounding aircraft?

If you perk the il2's loadout, then the Stuka with the anti-tank guns will also be perked. How silly does perking a Stuka sound?

I actually have three concerns.

1. I want tank battles to actually go on yes, but,

2. I'd also like anti-tank options OTHER than the Il2 to be used more frequently, and

3. The fact that GVs are now almost ubiquitously accompanied by WWs is annoying to furballs at low altitude.

...You will note that the point of the plan I am most adamant on is making ords porking harder btw. I am actually beginning to wonder if you read far enough to note that point, or the point about the WW  needing a perk.

How silly does perking a Stuka sound?

How silly does perking an F4U-1D sound? Until you stick quad 20MMs in the wing?

All depends on what it can do. The Stuka will of course, carry substantially fewer rounds than the Il2 does, so let us wait and see until the the thing is actually in game and what effect it has before we decide.

[Rich46yo]

Actually I find fighters "annoying" to wirbels when they are flying in low furballs. "You didn't really say that did you"?

No reason tank battles cant still go on. Only now its actually realistic instead of mostly gamy camping. Picture large panzer formations moving in Normandy after the landings. They lived in fear of allied air power since the allies ruled the skies and not the Luftwaffe. So the Panzers mostly moved at night. Columns moving during the day lived in fear of tactical air power.

Now multiply this numerous times to project the same type tactical scenario on the eastern front which was the scene of a far fiercer air superiority and tactical air war. In fact it was the scene of the largest, and fiercest, tactical air war in history and I cant see it ever being surpassed. To think a WW 2 sim should allow Tanks to go off on their own, park, and camp without worry is gamy. To think low alt fighters should be able to dogfight low around enemy air fields, without fear of flak, is also gamy. Gamy in the extreme.

But all this was the reality before the introduction of these vehicles, wirbel and IL-2, "throw in unchecked, prolonged, gamy vulch sessions". Now its more like an actual war sim and less like an electronic game that long time players can manipulate to pad their scores. Vulch long enough and you'll get torched by a very effective flak. Camp your Tiger long enough and the big bad Storm birds will come. Just like they did in real life. In WW-2 a tank that camped out at a spot, and didn't relocate, was inviting air strikes. To think a heavy tank could park off a porked airfield and camp as long as he wanted , with no effective counter, is ridiculous. Thats a problem with this game. We have to many "Queens" who think nobody else should be allowed to interfere in their game or get in the way of their score. And anyone who does is either "skill-less" or in a "skill-less" vehicle.

I actually have three concerns.

1. I want tank battles to actually go on yes, but,

2. I'd also like anti-tank options OTHER than the Il2 to be used more frequently, and

3. The fact that GVs are now almost ubiquitously accompanied by WWs is annoying to furballs at low altitude.

...You will note that the point of the plan I am most adamant on is making ords porking harder btw. I am actually beginning to wonder if you read far enough to note that point, or the point about the WW  needing a perk.

How silly does perking an F4U-1D sound? Until you stick quad 20MMs in the wing?

All depends on what it can do. The Stuka will of course, carry substantially fewer rounds than the Il2 does, so let us wait and see until the the thing is actually in game and what effect it has before we decide.

[BnZs]

And yet, despite the overwhelming materiel superiority the Allies brought to bear by the end of the war, in neither the East nor the West were German ground forces completely destroyed/defeated without engaging on the ground. As I have pointed out before, one of the things that separates AHII from reality, if we wish to make the comparison, is the rather unrealistic fact that flyers will outnumber groundlings at any given time by a ratio of at lest 5 to 1, if not more.

But all this was the reality before the introduction of these vehicles, wirbel and IL-2, "throw in unchecked, prolonged, gamy vulch sessions".

I greatly appreciate the WWs ability for defense as vulch-breaker, that is why I proposed additional field-guns be added if the WW be perked.

To think a heavy tank could park off a porked airfield and camp as long as he wanted , with no effective counter, is ridiculous. Thats a problem with this game.

Apparently you have ignored the many posts where I have lamented the fact that a lone suicide 190 can make a strafing run and disable bombs at a field. THAT is the principal loophole that needs to be close to keep fields from being rendered helpless against being rolled by GV horde missions, that and perhaps a second vehicle hangar. I just think the Il2 is a little TOO effective in that direction, and besides, it might be nice to see a P-47 bombing a Panzer while being shot at by an Ostwind again in the future, instead of the incessant dominance of the Il2 vs. WW.

[newz]

Only because of the incredibly gamey neg-g moves Il-2 pilots are in the habit of doing.

It's more rudder than neg-g.
"incredibly gamey" is a moniker thrown out by those who are miffed they didn't just bag an il-2.

As the OP mentioned the il-2 has excellent flaps. It also has great rudder authority, which feels similar
to a C47 IMO, and good elevator response.

Why shouldn't an il-2 pilot use the full spectrum of the flight model in order to force the overshoot?