Author Topic: Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era  (Read 134 times)

Offline fats

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 210
Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era
« on: November 10, 1999, 10:35:00 AM »
I've been flying the Spitfire Mk.IX most of the beta, so my observations are based only on that.

FM:
The flight model overall feels better than WB. No I don't mean it feels more real, cause all my flying has been as a passenger of airliners so I can't comment on that. I mean it feels easier - less twitchy, but yet you can get into some nasty spins.

Gunnery - ballistics:
Kind of nice, even with the more stable FM I don't seem to have been pinged by 1000yds shots. Nor have I hit past the 600yds mark. Up close though, 300yds and under it's easy.

Gunnery - lethality:
I kind of like the lethality settings right now, if you hit someone he is dead. By hitting I mean a real burst not just a snap shot.

Fuel Burn Rate
This one I don't like at all. Right now if I want to use all ammo on Spitfire Mk.IX, I have to load 100% internal fuel and a DT. Then I have to fight the first three fights with the DT still attached when it usually runs out after the third. And even then I might not be able to use all of the ammo before I run out of fuel. Last night I had 10 kills in Spitfire Mk.IX and still ammo left, but run out of fuel.

You can't claim I just fly in far away places waiting for someone to surprise and that's why run out of fuel. My Kills per Time is one of the highest, if not highest, of those people who fly regularily. IMO the fuel burn rate is simply too high.

I guess the fuel burn rate is set high so that disabling someone's fuel at a field is more important than with normal fuel burn rate, perhaps you have succeded. You have succeeded if your intention was to make me just log off, if none of the forward fields can give me 100% + DT cause I know I won't have enough fuel to use all ammo.

I might add that my _only_ interest is air-to-air. I couldn't care less if someone captures a field, I could be happy if it brings the fights closer, or bombs a bottle cap factory to pieces.

Map:
I like the raised fields on top of the hills. That way if someone goes to dogfite too low near fields the next one taking off will have an alt advantage on the attacker. Makes the vulchers less aggressive and thus easier to avoid.

To give some help defending one's land, make forward fields sit on flat land and then the next nearest field on a hill. That way it gets harder to capture the second field, cause the defenders will get an alt bonus compared to the attackers taking off from the just captured forward field. It's like this with F8 and then the field just south of it, F4.

//fats


Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 1999, 11:11:00 AM »
I had assumed that the high fuel burn rate of the spitfire was a deliberate setting to highlight the one true weakness the spit had in RL, it's lack of range.



------------------
eagl <squealing Pigs> BYA
Oink Oink To War!!!
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline DoctorYO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 696
Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 1999, 12:50:00 PM »
Try the 109 then tell me if  you think you got it  rough in that spitfire..

My  fuel consumption  is like 1/4  tank per 25 miles below 15k.. I was wondering if engine rpm  has  to  do  with fuel burn rate...  Is it modeled?? I was flying  at  about  18k  and brought my throttle down to like   60% basic cruise  and I noticed no  difference in fuel rate at  level   flight.

Historically the  Me109  is known for having  a small gas tank... Hence the main reason stukas  and me110's had such poor return rates to germany(No prolonged  escort...)

I'll  try  to  do  some   fuel tests that are  a  little more scientific...  and post the results...


My 2 coppers

DoctorYO

TT

  • Guest
Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 1999, 02:50:00 PM »
Fats. I think you have a point with the fuel bombing. There are a couple of sims comeing out that are going to be more bomber oriented. (WW11 online, B1711). For all the c omments about realisem, AW WB and AH are at there heart furball arenas. I think in the end the haard core bomber fans are going to wined up in one of the new ones. And hard core fighter jocks are going to stay with the big three. I dont know what AH has planned, but I dont see how they can compeat whith the others as a bomber sim. IMHO AH should start heading in a more fighter oriented direction.

Offline fats

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 210
Feedback from pre-Fw 190 era
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 1999, 07:51:00 PM »
Tonight flew the Fw 190A-8: 7 kills, ~230 rounds of cannnon left and run outta fuel. And yes I started with DT and 100%, but had to dump the DT at 40 clicks as a 51 got to jump me as the first fight so some TnB was needed.

Could something be done about to high fuel burn multi?


//fats


//fats