BTW, eddiek sure seems awfully quiet.
Yep, I have been sitting back and letting this one go.....was hoping others would do the same. StSanta posted an inquiry in good faith, and it seems to have gone way off course, and I apologize for my part in that StSanta.
What we have here is a difference in opinions. To some, their is a real passion for a particular plane. Mine is the P-47. Others we have seen here include various models of the 109 and 190, and the Spitfire.
In my opinion, and I speak only for myself, to get the most accurate representation of WWII air combat in the virtual world, you have to look at what the planes were like when they entered combat. Nothing more, nothing less.
From your statements, WMaker, it would appear that the 109/190 series had a multitude of engine/performance enhancements within the same model.....what I read from that is Pyro is correct if he models them with OR without GM-1, MW-50, etc. In another post, a respected AH pilot asked about MW-50 in the 109G6, commenting that he had read that it was available on some of them. I do not doubt for an instant that it was there for some of them. The reasoning for adding the MW-50 to the AH plane was regarding a perceived performance gap in the LW planes for the time period he sees the 109G6 as representing. Point made.
This is all a gray area....both sides have valid points. But I think Ammo stated it better than I ever could when he brought up the fact that as soon as a method to improve performance was discovered, it was applied to planes already in the field.....they did not wait til the new planes arrived, they applied them to the aircraft already in theater. They had to. I
READ that the Jugs were worked over to make them more survivable in combat as soon as they were assigned to a unit/squadron. Why? Because as one person put it, "without them, you wouldn't last 10 minutes in combat." Sound anything like AH? It does to me.
Situation" You enter a combat area in the arena, you are at 25K, see lots of dots ahead, the dar tells you that a good percentage of them are enemy. After closing to within icon range, you see a P47, a Spit, a P51, and a 190. They are all at or near co-alt with you and you have E to spare. Oh, you are in a 109.
You have plenty of friendlies in the area, so you are not outnumbered. Which one are you going to go after first?
From what I have seen and experienced, most will go after the P-47 first....this tends to make me believe that pilots see the P-47 as an easy kill, less respected than the others. Why? Because in it's current state, it is not nearly as lethal as the others. It cannot survive for long in a sustained fight. It's most common "escape" route, the dive advantage, is negated in AH....109's and 190's, Spits, etc, can and will close on a Jug in a dive. Why? Got no idea. Reading pilot accounts, a 109 or 190 pilot, excepting the Dora, would be committing suicide to dive after a Jug, or to attempt to dive away from one. The Jug in RL was reported to be much faster, and would leave them in the dust when chased, or gobble them up when doing the chasing. Can't count how many times I have watched a 109/190 extend away from me in a dive when I was chasing them. I've been flying the Jug since it hit the arena, and I know about and use the "zero G" dive technique. They still leave ya in the dust. Reports of wartime tests of a Jug vs a 190 showed that the 190 pulled away initially, but the Jug not only caught it, but also had a much better pullout alt.
Anyway, back to our little discussion.....to restate myself, based on what you have said, technically, all the 109's and 190's are modeled correctly, as any of several configurations were available and in service. So why add MW-50 or GM-1? To give you a performance boost? Why ask for it if the plane is already correct as Pyro and company have it?
I realize Pyro's situation....he is keeping to "what the factory offered" only. To do different would open a whole can of worms. I am not positive what area the gondolas and such occupy in this topic. My original beliefs were that the LW dealt with many varying situations by offering "field kits" to arm planes for differing roles.....if so, technically, that falls under the category of a field mod and not a factory installation, even if it was designed by factory engineers to be applied to planes in the field.
It's really all kinda weird.......I've been reading/studying WW2 aviation since I was 9 years old, and I am now 35, and I STILL have not learned all there is to know. But does anyone? You can find reference books galore out there, but you have to ask yourself "Is this person being objective, or does he have a thing for a particular plane?" Of more value, IMO, are the biographies and testimonies from the pilots, on both sides. True, you WILL see differing perspectives, as USAAF pilots believed their birds were more than a match for the LW, and LW pilots felt the same about their planes in regards to their opponents. Robert Johnson, in his interview with Widewing, talks about what he saw in combat, and how his plane performed compared to his opponents. I have read accounts from Galland........both were supremely confident in their mounts, both were extremely successful. Opposing opinions are the norm, and will always be there. Just as in AH.
Oh.........FWIW, StSanta, I was able to turn inside a Spit the other nite in a D-11......the Spit pilot was inexperienced you could tell, and I was down to less than 1/4 on my main tank, and it did take some throttle jockeying to get my cornering speed right, but I did get inside and shoot him down.......
Sancho and I talked it over right after it happened.......I think occurences like that are the exception rather than the norm........
To summarize everything I have said in this long, rambling post, let me say this:
Aces High is not perfect, it never will be, but the crew at HTC have given us a wonderful game to play. From where I stand, to make it better, and more "realistic" (man, I hate using that word talking about an online game), they will have to enter the gray area and look at what the planes were like
when they were taken into combat, not just what the factory sent out the doors. IMO, to do less takes away from their attempt to recreate what took place in the skies during the Second World War. Some planes admittedly were deficient in areas as delivered, and they were not sent into battle in that condition, they were made more competitive, and therefore, more survivable, and that is what I would like to see in this game.
PS--Again, my apologies to all for this long post, and above all, my apologies to StSanta. You asked a question, you have an answer.
Ask yourselves this also: Which would make you feel better after scoring a kill....knowing that the plane you killed "flew" like it saw action during WW2, or knowing that it was less than what what the RL plane was, combat-wise?
[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: eddiek ]
