Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Rich46yo on January 26, 2009, 11:58:39 AM
-
Comments on the IL-2 update now that its been fleshed out for some months.
My take is its really changed the game, but in a good way. And its brought balance back into the GV wars. Its "effective" but not "dominant" and just has to be planned for. With effective flak and air cover, and comms, it can be dealt with. But taking a base, after hitting ords and VHs, isnt a gimmee anymore. And spawn campers beware.
Most dont know the airplane has high speed flaps and is the best plane in the game to force over-shoots in. Then again many dont know how to fight it while in a small and nimble fighter, which btw "should" make short work of one.
This is a "great" airplane. And even tho its doubled its kills since the update I believe the Stormbird isn't used enough. :salute
-
It's an interesting change. I can't remember another time when a simple armament update changed so dramatically an entire aspect of gameplay. I'm still undecided about it, would be nice if we had the perked ord system and that tank busting package could use bomber perks.
-
Most dont know the airplane has high speed flaps and is the best plane in the game to force over-shoots in.
Only because of the incredibly gamey neg-g moves Il-2 pilots are in the habit of doing.
-
I don't think it has brought the "balance back" to GV wars. The previous balance was somewhat changed with the introduction of the Wirbelwind, but the new Il-2 isn't better at killing wirbels than the old one, or any other plane at all. It did change the survivability of all other tanks in AH2. It has made killing tanks easy like cutting butter with a hot knife. And it has considerably reduced diversity, both in planes being used for anti armor work as well as tactics empoyed by the GV guys during battles.
I'm not a great friend of perking at all, but if a perked ords system ever comes (which I do wish for), the 37mm gun option would be the first I would like to see perked.
-
I'm not a great friend of perking at all, but if a perked ords system ever comes (which I do wish for), the 37mm gun option would be the first I would like to see perked.
Easy fix: split the aircraft into two planes, one with 37mm and one with 23mm.
I'm not going to let you guys forget that I was excoriated when I first said the new Il-2 was perk-worthy. These days it's said as if it were common sense.
-
Excoriated? I dont remember anyone wanting it to be perked at all. Tho that seems to come up whenever some cry baby gets shot down by something. Immediately they want to perk it. Or they whine about gamey this or that.
I have something "gamey" for you. Ride your favorite tank out to a cartoon spawn and sit there and wait for the little cartoon tanks to pop into view and then gun the poor schmucks down. Theres "tank wars" for ya and pretty much what we had before we had an effective airplane, with an effective gun, in the game. Many times Ive seen a guy pull a suicide into a bases ords and then settle down for a prolonged camp, eventually towering out with 24 GV kills as if they accomplished something. No strategy, no teamwork, and not much skill. Just gamey.
Now you actually have to use squad tactics and teamwork to survive against IL-2s. By the same token IL-2s have to use teamwork to take out flak. Either with other IL-2s or with their own armor.
Before the update I didn't GV much or mess with GVs much. Between the spawn camping and the retards dropping 1,000lb bombs from dive bombing Lancs I thought the entire scene was a bad joke. "Gamey" didn't begin to describe it. :lol
The K/Ds since the update hasn't changed much at all. In fact its probably gone down, as in more "deaths". So the IL-2 isn't really more dominant. Its just more involved. So far this LW tour the IL-2 has 15554 kills to its 14325 deaths posting a K/D of 1.09. Last August, the last full tour "103" before the update, in LW it had 8411 kills to 7483 deaths posting a K/D of 1.12 . The statistics simply dont back a perk penalty. So far this month the Tiger has a K/D of 3.70 compared to a 3.48 before the 37mm's. The Sherman a 2.45 compared to a tour 103 2.25. Even the Panzer is posting a tour 106 of 0.80 compared to a pre-37mm K/D of 0.82. So close it could be considered a statistical anomaly. And its the Panzer lV thats really taking a beating from the 37mm's.
The reality of the IL-2 update simply does not support a perk price.
-
i shot two down the other day with the HVAP ammo in my t-34/75 :lol
-
(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/4109/tankkillersej0.jpg)
-
I don't think it has brought the "balance back" to GV wars. The previous balance was somewhat changed with the introduction of the Wirbelwind, but the new Il-2 isn't better at killing wirbels than the old one, or any other plane at all. It did change the survivability of all other tanks in AH2. It has made killing tanks easy like cutting butter with a hot knife. And it has considerably reduced diversity, both in planes being used for anti armor work as well as tactics empoyed by the GV guys during battles.
I'm not a great friend of perking at all, but if a perked ords system ever comes (which I do wish for), the 37mm gun option would be the first I would like to see perked.
Going to perk the WW with it?
-
Going to perk the WW with it?
No.
Lower ENY, yes.
-
I don't think it has brought the "balance back" to GV wars. The previous balance was somewhat changed with the introduction of the Wirbelwind, but the new Il-2 isn't better at killing wirbels than the old one, or any other plane at all. It did change the survivability of all other tanks in AH2. It has made killing tanks easy like cutting butter with a hot knife. And it has considerably reduced diversity, both in planes being used for anti armor work as well as tactics empoyed by the GV guys during battles.
I'm not a great friend of perking at all, but if a perked ords system ever comes (which I do wish for), the 37mm gun option would be the first I would like to see perked.
Indeed. this argument goes both ways in my opinion. I remember when the 25 first came out everyone was screaming to perk the 75mm. After they figured out they could up a Flak and shoot the big blob in the air, the whines stopped. The IL2 is powerful now, and I've seen plenty of guys ditch at the first sight of one. If you're in a tank, you're dead meat.
-
Yeah if your in a tank with no air cover and no flak, heading into an enemy base, your pretty much dead meat.
Of course the actual war was rife with accounts of lone tanks, or small groups, making it into enemy air bases, porking with ease, and otherwise being nuisances. Free from danger as long as the base had been stripped of ords first. :huh
Tanks in the war lived in fear of air power. Most of all on the eastern front and its just silly to think they should be able to move in the game out of any danger as long as ords are porked and a VH is bombed. That was not "balance". That was "unbalance", tho it was perfect for the camp/score crowd. Now theres a new Sheriff in town with a really big pair of guns and no tank is safe unless they operate in something close to historical operations.
I just came from a combined arms shoot out. It was touch and go, enemy tanks operating with skilled air cover and flak gave me quite a problem. We saved the base but both the Stormbirds and tanks took a beating together. Just like what happened in the war. Both Bish and Rook used team tactics but they fell about 3 troops to short. It was a heckuva fight. The way it was meant to be.
-
rich i agree with you
also on another note
IMHO allot of il2 pilots and tankers are misinformed or too ignorant to the strengths and weaknesses of each
for example the il2 has big guns but not huge guns
i hardly ever see il2 attacking with good angles
many a time an il2's have wasted all is ammo on ricochets on the sloped amour of the t34 etc
and not high attack angles to target the engine decks, turret lids, cupolas etc which what you need because they can only penetrate a certain amount
and on the other hand the weakness of the il2
its speed and agility or lack thereof it is suprisingly easy to bust and il2 with gv main gun @ D800 where the il2's cannons are throwing fruit at you rather than high velocity AP rounds
i have read many cases of this happening to the il2.
it suprised the germans aswell how well they could drop them when flown incorrectly
which is one of the main reasons i prefer the Hurri D
sure it has less ammo and vunerable to flak but it penetrates better and is far more agile to get those ideal converged hits on soft spot with and impact angle of 90 degrees or to evade an IB BnZer
there is nothing better than getting a converged hit on the drivers hatch on a tiger real tricky but satisfying
ill probally get flamed for this but its just my opinion
/.salute
-
Only because of the incredibly gamey neg-g moves Il-2 pilots are in the habit of doing.
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.
-
Yeah if your in a tank with no air cover and no flak, heading into an enemy base, your pretty much dead meat.
Of course the actual war was rife with accounts of lone tanks, or small groups, making it into enemy air bases, porking with ease, and otherwise being nuisances. Free from danger as long as the base had been stripped of ords first. :huh
Tanks in the war lived in fear of air power. Most of all on the eastern front and its just silly to think they should be able to move in the game out of any danger as long as ords are porked and a VH is bombed. That was not "balance". That was "unbalance", tho it was perfect for the camp/score crowd. Now theres a new Sheriff in town with a really big pair of guns and no tank is safe unless they operate in something close to historical operations.
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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."
-
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.
-
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>
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
Why shouldn't an il-2 pilot use the full spectrum of the flight model in order to force the overshoot?
Because it would have forced the pilots eyeballs out of his head ;)
-
Because it would have forced the pilots eyeballs out of his head ;)
Then the flight model should reflect that as blacking out/redding out.
I have no real world experience of violently ruddering back and forth
with a slight addition of opposite aileron to produce skids as i do in this game.
If the flight model is incorrect then by all means, please change it.
As a cartoon pilot who frequently ups against overwhelming odds in the il-2 ive got 2 choices
when someone is barreling up my six (and there's usually about 3 or 4 right behind him)......
1 - Be gentle on the stick and die.
2 - Drop flaps , cut throttle , and when he's just the right distance out begin "overshoot manuver"
and maybe survive long enough to bag 1 more of the NOE 110s and nikis.
Here's some film.
Is that "eyeball popping"?
http://www.415thsquad.com/media/ovrsht2.wmv
-
If you're in a bomber without fighter support, you're playing with fire and are bound to get shot down by an enemy fighter.
If you're in a tank alone or group of tanks without AA cover then you deserve to get ripped up by an IL-2.
If you're in a wirby/osty without tank support, your playing Rusky roulette in how long it will be before an enemy tank will have you in his sights.
If you're in a fighter and your gutsy enough to attack a wirby without ords or allied tanks on the ground, then you deserve to get torn up.
Etc etc....
It seems that without exception, if you dare try to perform a certain task without a lateral supporting arms back-up, so to speak, you're bound to get spanked. The IL-2 gets wooped if it doesnt get support by allied fighters or it goes toe to toe with a wirby. It is a one dimensional buttkicker, but yet can get it's butt handed right back to it in many more ways.
-
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.
Difficult to destroy a properly configured GV column ins Aces High too. At least ones covered with flak. The real issue here is that you almost never see GV columns working together. Yesterday I saw a single wirbel stay between two tanks and give effective support. It was one of the few times I ever saw that. For the most part you have single players dribbling along without supporting each other in GVs, at least to the level we do when in fighters.
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.
BnZ your simply stunning me here. I'll remember this thread when your calling for the field-guns to be perked.
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.
Yesterday the Nits shot my IL-2s so fulla holes trying to protect 155 in LWO I ran out of bubblgum trying to keep them airborne, "and I was thinking about this thread as I was spiraling down". On a good flight maybe I was looking at only a 3 to 1 disadvantage. I must have been shot on the runway 3 times, shot by tank guns another 3 "fighters forced me low and flat". If you have any kind of advantage in the fight the chances are your going to be able to keep the Storm birds down. Oh, and if your in a fighter? If you have an advantage? The chances are you'll be able to survive. The IL-2 is simply not a "dominating" airplane.
If however, your in a tank with no air or friendly flak around? The odds are your not going to make it. All perking the IL-2 would accomplish anyways is cut down on upping them during base defense. Unlike real life you mostly run into AH Storm birds while they are defending. Taking bases with horde tactics is so easy already. Why make it easier?
-
If you're in a fighter and your gutsy enough to attack a wirby without ords or allied tanks on the ground, then you deserve to get torn up.
Do you know how easy it is to disable a WW with a fighter? All you do is dive straight down at it and shoot. You'll knock out the turret in one pass, rendering the WW useless and can then take your time to kill it.
ack-ack
-
BnZ your simply stunning me here. I'll remember this thread when your calling for the field-guns to be perked.
WTF? When WWs first came out I was dead set against perking them because I saw they would make the "sport" of shooting airplanes on the runway less viable. Now that they are an ubiquitous town-dropping and mobile ack-dragging option that has made hangar queens out of the Ostwind and M-16, I'm not quite so sure I was right. But the fact remains that I like what they accomplish DEFENSIVELY and thus if they were perked to balance perking the 37MM Il2 package, I'd like numerous field guns of similar ease of use installed at bases.
Yesterday the Nits shot my IL-2s so fulla holes trying to protect 155 in LWO I ran out of bubblgum trying to keep them airborne, "and I was thinking about this thread as I was spiraling down". On a good flight maybe I was looking at only a 3 to 1 disadvantage. I must have been shot on the runway 3 times, shot by tank guns another 3 "fighters forced me low and flat". If you have any kind of advantage in the fight the chances are your going to be able to keep the Storm birds down. Oh, and if your in a fighter? If you have an advantage? The chances are you'll be able to survive. The IL-2 is simply not a "dominating" airplane.
And this war story is relevant how? I never said the Il-2 is a fighter, just incredibly dominant in its a2g mission relative other options.
The fact also remains that if there is any fighter opposition at all, friendly air units usually cannot be bothered to make themselves vulnerable by getting low and slow enough to kill the incredibly tough and half-way nimble Il-2s.
If however, your in a tank with no air or friendly flak around? The odds are your not going to make it. All perking the IL-2 would accomplish anyways is cut down on upping them during base defense. Unlike real life you mostly run into AH Storm birds while they are defending. Taking bases with horde tactics is so easy already. Why make it easier?
I up 5 point Shermans into situations where I ain't gonna make it all the time. In fact I ditch the things rather than drive a long way quite a bit. So yeah, they'd still see SOME base defense use.
I will say this again, since you are not comprehending...the a2g war almost consists of Il2 vs. WW at this point. I think perhaps a little more variety would be preferable. I don't know why you mention base taking or horde tactics since I support numerous *substantive* options to make it less easy to horde-capture a base, note the dozen or so times I've mentioned in this thread how asinine it is that one suicide 190 can easily disable bombs for an entire base. I also think DAR bars should reach to the ground to defuse incessant NOE sneaks, hangars should be hard enough that a single jabo can't easily take them out, perhaps a second VH hangar should be added, and I think fields could use more powerful and durable manned guns useful against enemy heavy armor.
-
I've had to deal with large gaggles of armor, with Wirbles mixed in.
Primary Rule: Suppress the tripleA. Kill or disable the Wirbles.
How to accomplish rule 1: A mix of IL-2 and A-20s is a good start. Get the IL-2s to draw fire, blast them with the A-20s. When bombs are gone, A-20s draw fire, IL-2 strafe.
Do it right and you will get the opportunity to kill the tanks and you'll push most of the enemy into Wirbles. At that point, friendly armor will be able to handle those guys.
Rearm you A-20s and IL-2s. Repeat as required.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Do you know how easy it is to disable a WW with a fighter? All you do is dive straight down at it and shoot. You'll knock out the turret in one pass, rendering the WW useless and can then take your time to kill it.
ack-ack
Yeap. I've disabled a few wirbys that way. ;) I try not to get any closer than I have to if I dont have ord or the wirby isnt distracted by another plane.
-
Its kinda funny when people here portray Tigers as helpless thing that IL-2s just slice right thru. A Tiger is a very tough tank to kill with an IL-2, so is a T-34. And a Sherman can take multiple passes as well. Its really only the Panzers which are fairly easy to kill, and the M-8s of course. When there are enemy fighters around its difficult to get the high angle passes on armor because your always dodging fighters, or, streams of 20mm. And just in case my bullets are rubber, or I aint that good, I watched some good players dive into Tigers today. A Tiger is a difficult tank to kill with an IL-2. A-20s with bombs are far more effective.
"Incredibly dominant" is a description that just borders on the silly. You can still take bases with armor. However porking the ords and the VH doesn't automatically guarantee you a victory now. Now you have to fight. And maybe lose your precious cartoon, perked tank before you can tower with your 27 kills from your camping trip. :huh
You see a lot less of that nonsense now dontya? Someone went and gave the baby seals a few big guns. :P
-
"Incredibly dominant" is a description that just borders on the silly. You can still take bases with armor. However porking the ords and the VH doesn't automatically guarantee you a victory now. Now you have to fight. And maybe lose your precious cartoon, perked tank before you can tower with your 27 kills from your camping trip. :huh
Cripes, its as if I haven't said a damn thing in regards to what I think of the ease of porking/toolshedding a base into semi-helplessness and what should be done about it...
Read slowly: I think it ought to be much harder to drop ords so you will have some *bombs* to drop on that Tiger trying to steamroll your base.
-
I think the best anti-aircraft vehicle is the Sherman.
-
BnZ this must be a tribal thing. Regarding understanding. You dont know what I'm talking about and I sure as hell have no idea what your talking about. It sounds to me like your double talking. The thread topic isn't "ordinance musings". You have 3 kills in IL-2s of tanks this tour, none the tour before, 5 panzers the tour before that, 4 panzers before that in tour 104, and I cant find one instance of you getting killed while in a Tiger by an IL-2. So one has to wonder exactly why you are in this thread calling the remodeled IL-2......
And this war story is relevant how? I never said the Il-2 is a fighter, just incredibly dominant in its a2g mission relative other options.
The fact also remains that if there is any fighter opposition at all, friendly air units usually cannot be bothered to make themselves vulnerable by getting low and slow enough to kill the incredibly tough and half-way nimble Il-2s.
I can only find record of you killing one perked tank in it. A T-34/85 in tour 105. So far this tour you killed 2 M-26s and an M-3. :lol
Let me rephrase, you have practically zero experience in being in either the receiving end or shooting end so why are you here making these statements about it?
-
To sum up, my point is that the a2g game seems to have mostly turned into Il2 vs. WW. I think some more variety might be preferable.
It is true that the Il2 mostly turret tanks other than Panzers rather than killing them outright, but if you cripple an enemy tank for friendly ground units to finish off, it has the same result does it not?
The fact that Il2s don't have much luck killing Tigers is another good reason to make the ordinance bunker harder. This is a solution that should have been implemented long ago. I favor a wide spectrum of solutions to encourage quagmires and carnage around bases instead of capture. :)
You have cleverly not used your game I.D. as a forum name so I cannot look up your stats and mock you on some trivial basis. Not too sporting that. :devil For instance, if I saw you had relatively few 262 kills this tour, I could have said you have no right to say the 262 is fast and has heavy firepower on the grounds of your inexperience. :lol But since I can't look any numbers, thats just a stab in the dark, alas. :frown: :D
-
My game name is "bombrich". Your total lack of personal experience is not "trivial" and it points to you, at best, simply spreading rumors. Or, simply making things up. I kinda knew what I was going to find anyways after reading some of your statements.
Go fly the IL-2 for a month, and/or GV in places where you will encounter them, and then come back and talk.
but if you cripple an enemy tank for friendly ground units to finish off, it has the same result does it not?
Only if you track them. Many times damaged Gvs will just look for supplies after you damage/turret them.
IL-2s vs WWs is simplistic. You actually have to be careful with all ground vehicles. If you come in low and flat tanks will clobber you too. A 0.50 on an m-3 can take an IL-2 our, or, damage it. If your oil gets hit while in one, a common occurance, then you have to turn directly for the field because you only have a few minutes to land it.
-
Tour 104, 105, and 106. I'll admit I can get tired of a new toy rather quickly, particularly when it doesn't do anything I find particularly fun. Fight with a plane vs. plane-possibly fun. Shootout with a tank vs. tanks...possibly fun. Strafing tanks with an Il2...almost as much fun as strafing a random section of ground after a while. Strafing WWs with an Il2...almost as much fun as running headfirst into a wall after a while. The boredom of providing flak cover for tanks or the annoyance of being shot at/ack dragged in a low alt furball by the flotilla of WWs they bring after they get angry because someone Il2'ed their tank...usually not so fun.
For your next trick, claim I have no experience with the Fw-190 A5 because I haven't registered many kills with it......lately.
Clearly something we need more than the new Il2 gun package in an unlimited fashion, and have needed for a long time to prevent GV horde-rolling, is to make ords porking (and possibly hangar banging) much, much harder. Dive-bombers represent a good air/ground effectiveness balance ingame because they can take out ANY vehicle potentially, yet the vehicles can defend themselves pretty well through mobility, the number of "shots" a divebomber has is quite limited, and it requires grabbing at least a little alt.
My game name is "bombrich". Your total lack of personal experience is not "trivial" and it points to you, at best, simply spreading rumors. Or, simply making things up. I kinda knew what I was going to find anyways after reading some of your statements.
Go fly the IL-2 for a month, and/or GV in places where you will encounter them, and then come back and talk.
Only if you track them. Many times damaged Gvs will just look for supplies after you damage/turret them.
IL-2s vs WWs is simplistic. You actually have to be careful with all ground vehicles. If you come in low and flat tanks will clobber you too. A 0.50 on an m-3 can take an IL-2 our, or, damage it. If your oil gets hit while in one, a common occurance, then you have to turn directly for the field because you only have a few minutes to land it.
-
Now your babbling complete nonsense, compared to "mostly nonsense". You never flew the IL-2 enough to tire of anything. And now your trying to change the subject. This is done with.
Tour 104, 105, and 106. I'll admit I can get tired of a new toy rather quickly, particularly when it doesn't do anything I find particularly fun. Fight with a plane vs. plane-possibly fun. Shootout with a tank vs. tanks...possibly fun. Strafing tanks with an Il2...almost as much fun as strafing a random section of ground after a while. Strafing WWs with an Il2...almost as much fun as running headfirst into a wall after a while. The boredom of providing flak cover for tanks or the annoyance of being shot at/ack dragged in a low alt furball by the flotilla of WWs they bring after they get angry because someone Il2'ed their tank...usually not so fun.
For your next trick, claim I have no experience with the Fw-190 A5 because I haven't registered many kills with it......lately.
Clearly something we need more than the new Il2 gun package in an unlimited fashion, and have needed for a long time to prevent GV horde-rolling, is to make ords porking (and possibly hangar banging) much, much harder. Dive-bombers represent a good air/ground effectiveness balance ingame because they can take out ANY vehicle potentially, yet the vehicles can defend themselves pretty well through mobility, the number of "shots" a divebomber has is quite limited, and it requires grabbing at least a little alt.
-
I said the Il2 w/37MMs is perhaps a powerful enough anti-vehicle tool to be perked lightly. In all fairness, I've decided the wirble is perhaps powerful enough in its role relative other AA vehicles to deserve a light perk too.
You (and perhaps others) have argued with sentiments along the lines "But we need unperked Il2s to defend against GV hordes who attempt to roll us after porking the ords and destroying the VH with a couple of suicide jabos." Which is in fact a good point.
I suggest that in that case perhaps what we need is actually to make the porking harder/impossible.
Not that hard a progression for anyone to follow, unless one is being willfully difficult.
Then we get four pages where you decide to ignore what I'm actually saying and accuse me of having a vested interest in vulching/spawncamping/hording/satanism because you disagree with me about how to balance the game.