Aces High 2 Vs WW2 Online Vs IL2.

[LLv34_Camouflage]

If you mean ballistics, at least for me, the "feel" is similar. I dont have much trouble adapting between the two games. Snapshots seem connect equally (poorly ) in both games.

Camo

[moot]

I mean the flight modeling.  The center piece of a flight sim..  You agree with Kweassa on that part?

[jdbecks]

I found it alot easier to shoot down planes on IL2 than AH2, on il2 they seem to take some hits and boom..but that might be becaue ive only ever played IL2 offline 

[Wingnutt]

I tried IL2 online play several years, ago..  perhaps it is more secure now from.. "code manipulation" than it was before, but after running into numerous VTOL IL2s that could take off in 1/4 of the runway and reach 8k in about 10 seconds and cruise at over 500mph I left and never went back.

[Karnak]

Problem I have with IL-2, other than the view system, is that regardless of which aircraft I am flying they all feel like they use the same flight model with different numbers plugged in.  Meaning they may roll at different speeds or be heavier, but there are no distinct differences.  Speed affects them all the same, flaps are all the same.  In AH I know the performance over the speed spectrum of a Spitfire Mk VIII is very different from a Bf109K-4 or a Ki-81-Ia or an F4U-1a and so on.  They don't use the same base performance.

[BnZs]

Problem I have with IL-2, other than the view system, is that regardless of which aircraft I am flying they all feel like they use the same flight model with different numbers plugged in.  Meaning they may roll at different speeds or be heavier, but there are no distinct differences.  Speed affects them all the same, flaps are all the same.  In AH I know the performance over the speed spectrum of a Spitfire Mk VIII is very different from a Bf109K-4 or a Ki-81-Ia or an F4U-1a and so on.  They don't use the same base performance.

I am not a fan Karnak, but speed *does* effect different airplanes in Il2 differently. Control authority differences at different speeds, planes fall apart at different speeds, etc. Now on roll rate, it seems to me in Il2 the differences between best and worst rollers aren't as pronounced as they are in AHII.

[moot]

Barely any differently.  Even Kweassa admits it's a "subtle" difference.

[BnZs]

Barely any differently.  Even Kweassa admits it's a "subtle" difference.

There actually seems to be MORE variation in control stiffness as speed increases...this part I actually like. Some plane still turn well, others still turn like crap.

[moot]

One larger scalar doesn't say anything about the whole FM.  Il2's planes all feel like the same airplane with different parameters.  It's most obvious in stall fights.  And there's still the really obvious flaws here and there... Like the v-stab thing.  A P63 with no v-stab kept up with my scissoring and barrel rolling K-4 like nothing was wrong.  That is pure crap.

[LLv34_Camouflage]

I mean the flight modeling.  The center piece of a flight sim..  You agree with Kweassa on that part?

Pretty much, yep.  Of course, AH2 and IL2 are different in their respective FM's, no doubt about it. In the AH2 MA environment, a good pilot can survive in any plane, even in an early war machine against multiple late war crates.  In IL2 the plane seems to make much more of a difference, the early war plane would have its tail handed on a platter instantly.  I cant really put my finger on why this is happening, maybe due to the graphics, views and ease of losing sight of other planes (in a no-icons environment) and the subsequently worse SA. Possibly differences in energy retention. Or maybe its the thing Kweassa mentioned: maybe I'm just having more trouble adapting to IL2.

As I mentioned, IL2 shines in multiplayer coop missions with a historical setup. With a balanced plane set, the FM's are fairly equal. In IL2 we usually fly in a 1943 setup, for example 109G6/190A6 vs La5/LaGG3/Yak9. All planes have their respective advantages and disadvantages, as you would expect.

In my view, the FMs of both games are good and close enough. When comparing the two games, the other features of each game become more highlighted. From my perspective, AH2 is better in the "dogfight" category with its MA. IL2 is better in the "historical scenario" category with its multiplayer coop missions.  Luckily I dont have to make a choice between the two. I can play both.

Camo

[moot]

I do agree there's something in Il2 that makes it pretty hard to objectively compare the physics.

That coop aspect is really great, but for me it's completely spoiled by the really odd stuff, like that v-stab behavior.  That upsets any attempt I've made at ignoring the way the FM "feels" in stall fights (I don't like it..) so I could enjoy the rest.  The failures of AH's FM are really minor in comparison, imo.  A sluggishness in hammerheads (and any other situation that's comparable, physics wise), and some inaccuracy in acceleration (e.g. the Tempest was historically a slow-poke, relatively), but nothing out-right freaky like being able to maneuver at 80% combat agility with a missing vert stab.  No excellence of immersion in the other aspects will make that negligible...  Just like the heart of a racing sim is to feel the car as if you were there, you can't get that immersion if the car drives like a Mario Kart. No amount of eye and ear candy will bury that.
I find AH, despite its flaws, is closer to reality than Il2, and even on its own in an absolute assessment... It's more coherent than Il2 is.  Il2's planes just aren't as fun to flog.