IL2 Better Than AH2?

[Anaxogoras]

With or without opening up the radiator or cowl flaps?  I've noticed that makes a big difference, as well as what kind of throttle setting I've been running at before entering WEP, or if I was in a sustained climb, etc.

[moot]

The FM in Il2 is fubar.  So is the 50 cal recoil modeling.

[mensa180]

HiTech has made taking off and landing unrealistically easy.  I think it was because if it wasn't, we would never get off the ground, and then never have any fun.  I personally sort of want to try the "real" way and see how I do .

[Anaxogoras]

Now this is funny.  Someone at the Il-2 forums has linked the same topic and is asking his buddies for help:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8461032877
http://www.overclock.net/video-game-news/549167-txb-il-2-sturmovik-birds-prey-2.html#post6827729

The internet is filled with ideologues no matter where you go.

[Saxman]

With or without opening up the radiator or cowl flaps?  I've noticed that makes a big difference, as well as what kind of throttle setting I've been running at before entering WEP, or if I was in a sustained climb, etc.

Cowl/radiator full open, setting to auto where available, entering combat under lower power settings if not using air spawns where the engine is cold outright, etc.

The one place I've never had problems with engine overheat is at very high-altitude fights (over 15-20,000ft).

moot,

The most recent patches more or less fixed the Ma Deuce recoil. At the very least you can fire wing-mounted guns without the nose kicking all over the place.

[Wotan]

Agreed wholeheartedly. Some engines can't be run at maximum combat power more than a minute or two before blowing up in your face. Overheats are just LUDICROUSLY overdone.

First, no engine in Il-2 will "blow up" if overheated for over a minute. Some aircraft in Il-2 will never overheat. Some overheat a bit easier. It's not all that complicated or difficult to deal with "overheat".

Second, in the AH main arenas aircraft fuel consumption is manipulated "as a game play device". In certain planes in Il-2 overheat discourages players from taking off and flying around for ever on full power. That is the same justification Hitech gave for the high fuel multiplier in the AH mains. In Il-2 there are a couple of different things that effect overheat. One import thing is the "atmosphere" of the map you are flying on. Map builders can set the "atmosphere" however they like. This is why on some maps overheat is more pronounced. In addition there is a separate setting within the FM of each aircraft. My squad mate Howlin is one of the few that understand every line of FM data in Il-2. He helped build the Fw 190 A-3 as an example and has worked on FMs for many other aircraft.

Anyway, games are just that - games. There is nothing "real" about either game. Nitpicking at one game play device while ignoring another is silly. Fly the game you like but there is no reason to make things up or pretend the warts on one game are uglier then the warts on the another. AH has plenty of warts as well.

Wotan

[Anaxogoras]

Cowl/radiator full open, setting to auto where available, entering combat under lower power settings if not using air spawns where the engine is cold outright, etc.

The one place I've never had problems with engine overheat is at very high-altitude fights (over 15-20,000ft).

I just tried to bust the F4U-1A engine with the cowl flaps closed on the Okinawa map, and couldn't do it.  After about 2.5 minutes the overheat message appeared, and at almost 9 minutes I was still going with WEP and got bored.

Wotan indicates that player made maps might be changing atmospheric conditions to induce overheats more easily.

[Wotan]

Wotan indicates that player made maps might be changing atmospheric conditions to induce overheats more easily.

That's not what I said at all. I simply pointed out that there are different variables that impact overheat. It is the same way for Oleg's stock maps. Overheat is different on each map. Oleg said that folks interested in testing aircraft do so on the stock Crimea map. That is the map IC uses to test and verify aircraft in house.

Wotan

[pervert]

Now this is funny.  Someone at the Il-2 forums has linked the same topic and is asking his buddies for help:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8461032877
http://www.overclock.net/video-game-news/549167-txb-il-2-sturmovik-birds-prey-2.html#post6827729

The internet is filled with ideologues no matter where you go.

This one from Hitech pretty much sums up the whole 'realism' thing

Ok do not mind me, my credentials are only limited.

I only have about 20 hours total of real ACM.

I only have 1bout 600 total hours flying time.

I only have about 200 hours aerobatic.

The only planes I have done dog fights in, are T-6, P51ds, La7s, Marchietties, and RV8's.

Ok and never mind my credentials of very close to 20 years flight sim design.

So lets talk about your so called realism, that you are completely clueless about.


    * Combat trim
You seem to believe combat trim some how is unrealistic, but obviously since you have spent so little time flying real planes, you are clueless how trim actually is used by a pilot. You  seem to believe that flying a perfectly trimed plane gives some sort of advantage in a fight.l It is not, when flying hard manuvers the only time trim comes into play at all is when doing very large changes in air speed. When going from 160 to 360 the forces will become heavy in pitch, and with out ever thinking about it a pilot roll's in a little trim. Now the deal is, in most planes it is done with out ever moving your head out of the cockpit. Tell me how many players in a fight could find the correct key on a key board with out looking to roll in some trim?

2nd Tell me how they can feel the trim on the stick like you do in a real plane, Computer joy sticks work nothing like the real thing. You have zero feel for the forces acting on the stick, and it is much much harder to fly a sim as precesisly as a real plane. Combat trim is a compromise between how the real planes handle and the hardware that is available. It is an attempt at providing a much more realistic flying experience than what you believe it is.

    * Aileron trim for aircraft that did not have it, e.g. a lot of Spitfire marks, 109, etc.
Aileron trim that exists on real planes is only there so that a pilot can trim his planes hands off for long flights. In my RV8 I do this by balancing fuel between the wing tanks, as I am fairly sure most pilots do who can control fuel from each tank. There is no advantage what so ever to have Aileron trim in a dog fight, it is only there to lower the work load for long cruises. Why do you think the P51 had it when other planes did not? SO can I assume because you wish to change aileron trim, you wish to also want to fly 6 - 8 hours missions. And if you do not have this time available you are not permited to take a sortie?

    * Ammunition counters
We have a game  where it is best for people to be able to fly many planes. In the real world pilots put in many hours learning the speciefices of each plane. They knew before they flew how man secs of ammo there plane had. In the world of AH we do not require pilots to have 10 hours of instructions before put into combat in a new plane. Do you really wish the same amout of instructions before you are allowed to fly any given plane type? Or are you once again only taughting makeing somthing more difficult than it was in the real world in the name of BS realism.

    * No mixture controls
Mixture control has one purpose in life, to conserve fuel. When it is time to engage it is not even thought about to shove 3 levers ahead at the same time. Exactly how many people have 3 levers all  beside each other like most real planes have? How easy is it to tak your right hand and push all head to max performance like most fighters were capable of?
    * No supercharger controls
This one could be debated, but the real fact is do you really want to have to learn each planes critical altitudes just so you can do nothing more complicated than pushing one button? Because that is all you are asking for. Push 1 key when your altitude reaches one point. This sounds great fun to me, I tell you what since you believe it is so necessary to a good flight sim, I will write it, and you can come to my office and do nothing but watch the altitidude and press that so important button at the correct time.
    * No radiator/cowl flap controls for engine cooling
Once again, these really have very little to do with dog fights, they have much more to do with engine life.

    * No engine overheats
See above, exactly how high can you run your engine? Or would you wrather just have a randomize control your destiny.
    * Weak engine torque
Engine torque is 100% accurate. We do take one liberty with how the tail wheel operates, but with out those liberties very very very few people including you could get in the air. Do you know a gentleman name Bob Shaw? You know the guy who wrote books, flew fantoms, did carrier landings and such? Well he was tail wheel endorced. The scariest moment I have had in a plane was the first time he flew mine, and on take off he proceeded to bend my airplane enough that it required 3 months of repair.

    * 360 degree head swivel
In reality you have better than 360 deg field of view do to head and eye movement. Tracking an airplane in real life requires no thought as with a joy stick hat. Even with the 360 degree turning, tracking a plane in a sime is many many times more difficult than real life. So it is an atempt to bring things closer to reality. Not less as you seem to state.

    * Flaps auto retract when airspeed increases
Once again choices on how to implement realism, Putting the book spec with auto retract flaps puts more not less realism into the game. It simply forces you to fly as real pilots did. Show me data where the real flaps broke, how they were bent, what happen to all the different type. This data does not exist in any form I have seen.
So the options are make flaps break at the speed the book sais, or make them retract. If we made them work like landing gear and break, we would just put a loud noise before the would break, once again all you are asking for is another key press that is more difficult than real life.

    * No weather
Tell you what, Ill suspend your account 3 out of 7 days a week, because the simple matter is, with bad weather the planes did not fly.

    * Automatic bomb sight calibration
This is now the way it is simply because of the lack of precision of joy sticks. The point is that a pilot must be in the bomb sight, and must be maintaining constant speed and headings before the drop, just as in real life.

    * GPS clipboard map
Once again you are clueless about real life flying. 40 mile vis is not all that uncommon and 20 mile vis is very common. The detail of maps and compture screen do not even approach what real life is like. The volume of land marks you have in real life vs the sim do not compare. Before any long flight I spend a good 30 mins planing my flight path. Now if you wish to be forced to be on the ground for 30 mins before every flight, we could implement what you want, but I have a feeling you once again only what what YOUR brand of realism is, which really is nothing to do with reality.

The simple fact is in real life, people would not be in any of the planes we fly with out at least 100 hours of training. So tell you what, you send me 6 months of money in advance, and in 6 months I let you fly any of the planes we have. And in another 100 hours I will let you fly your first real sortie.

Because what you believe is realism, is nothing of the sort, you just wish to inflate your own ego on flying something that you perceive is more real when in fact it is much less realistic.

The fact is , AH is meant to simulate air combat.Learning this task alone is a never ending task. It is not meant to simulate all the boring pieces of flying that any one who has spent 20 hours of real life flying wishes they did not have to deal with.

HiTech

People argue about anything these days on the internet the orginal starter of this threads comments on that forum where a bit your right I'm wrong why was he surprised when he got an argument, certainely thats not the way to try and 'win' people away from their game.

[Anaxogoras]

That's not what I said at all. I simply pointed out that there are different variables that impact overheat. It is the same way for Oleg's stock maps. Overheat is different on each map. Oleg said that folks interested in testing aircraft do so on the stock Crimea map. That is the map IC uses to test and verify aircraft in house.

Wotan

My bad if I misinterpreted you.

[palef]

This is what happens when people argue religion. No one's right, no one listens to anyone else, and eventually people start behaving badly.

If you feel that passionately about the differences in two games that appeal to people for different reasons, then maybe it's time to step away from the keyboard permanently.

[Kweassa]

I usually think your posts are spot on kweassa, but this time you are wrong to compare Il-2 to a point-and-shoot arcade game, especially because gunnery is significantly more difficult in the game vs AH, engine management is more difficult, taking hits to your wing degrades its performance, etc.  If anything, the AH arenas are far closer to an arcade game than anything that Il-2 has to offer (except for some of the really bad hyperlobby servers), but what makes AH shine is the massive-mulitplayer aspect and FSO.  Sure, the flight model may be a little better than Il-2, but it's a matter of degree and not even close to something decisive.

I enjoy Il-2 and AH for different reasons.  This puts me into a strange category of flight sim fan that can see what's good in both sims, as opposed to most of you who are just as rabidly committed to AH as the Il-2 fans are devoted to theirs.

Actually, I was thinking more of something along the lines of Fighter Ace series and stuff. I've always given IL-2 great respect.