Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: GlassJaw on January 04, 2010, 05:21:01 PM
-
The guns for the IL2 should not be able to be fired from F3 View (external view) Very gamey.
-
:salute
Honestly, I can't fire from F3................. At least for attacking gv's.
But I do appreciate your idea sir. However I think something like that could be an all or nothing code....... Meaning it would have to be all bombers.
-
My word, I live 'n' learn, I didn't know you could fire a bomber's guns when in F3 view, I've always fired mine from the gunner's seat.
:cool:
-
Yeah folks are flying them like fighters in f3 mode. You can get some pretty crazy under the nose lead shots when you dont have your nose blocking your view in F3 mode. Its really pretty lame.
-
I can do the same thing, but I don't fly in F3...
-
It is not going to give you an advantage that will allow you to win a fight just because you're flying in external view.
ack-ack
-
Yeah folks are flying them like fighters in f3 mode. You can get some pretty crazy under the nose lead shots when you dont have your nose blocking your view in F3 mode. Its really pretty lame.
Solution...don't get closer than 1000 in front of an IL? Most of the time the have those 37mms which are harder to hit people with...
-
First off how do you know the opposing player is firing from F3?
Clearly anyone who has tried it, and I have in practice after reading these threads, realizes its far harder to hit anything using an airplane for a sight then it is using a sight for a sight. Most of all a snipers round like the 37mm of the NS-37 with its slow ROF when compared to other aircraft cannon.
I'm not saying it isn't gamey. I'm saying its entirely inconsequential.
-
:huh not sure how you can say that.
It allows you to see your enemy to aim at them when they are under your nose. I've flown this way and it is a trememdous advantage.
It is not going to give you an advantage that will allow you to win a fight just because you're flying in external view.
ack-ack
-
Oh tell me we are not going down this road again...
-
I dogfight in IL-2s all the time. I don't use F3 in a dogfight, however I will take advantage of it for SA before a fight. As pointed out earlier in this thread, how can you be sure if I'm using F3 or not in a fight? If *I* Can shoot down your 109, spitty, and niki in my IL-2, doesn't that make *YOU* the crappy pilot in the fight?
-
:huh not sure how you can say that.
Easily. Sure, you can see under the nose better but aiming in 3rd person mode (external view) is much harder than cockpit view and you're more likely than not to miss the shot because there are no aiming point to go by. It is not going to be a deciding factor in a fight unless you catch the fighter pilot with his head up his bellybutton or you run into an extremely unskilled or new player.
ack-ack
-
:huh not sure how you can say that.
It allows you to see your enemy to aim at them when they are under your nose. I've flown this way and it is a trememdous advantage.
I have shot down many fighters that were below my nose and out of sight in AH. I did so by doing my best guess as to where they were in a tight turn. You don't need to be able to see the target to hit it, just be able to predict where it will be when they rounds get there.
-
Flying in F3 allows you better visibility both below and above your IL-2. There is one individual I know has admitted to it, who uses F3 to snapshot people to extreme success, as they fly under or over him. Those that attempt to say it has no bearing are incredibly naive. The only thing you can't see in F3 is greater than 200 behind you, without moving your view.
It is incredibly easy to kill others from this view, if they are in close. It's actually kind of hard to miss them.....I mean you're shooting at under D200 every time, with a plan view of your enemy at that.
F3 should be disabled in IL2's.
-
I think the easiest solution for this F3 mode debate is the definition of a bomber aircraft.
If it hasn't got a bombsite it isn't a bomber IMO.
The il2 / A20 / B25H are all ground ATTACK aircraft. What is the reasoning behind having f3 mode? simulating the fact that there is a rear gunner and he can look around?
How about the 110 then ? no F3 mode there....
-
It really doesnt bother me if they use F3 mode. An Il-2 is a flying coffin if you have any kind of skill. Sure sometimes you get shot by one using F3 mode but big deal, get a new plane and learn from your mistakes. Just my opinion.
-
From what I've seen, the external view is only good for SA and not a whole lot else. Frankly, if you're dumb enough to put yourself in front of an Il2's guns (external view or not), expect to get shot down. They are slow, and except for a fairly good instantaneous turn rate for the first turn only, they are complete pigs.
I used to enjoy fighting Goaly's Il2, he'd use it to BnZ from much higher alt and it made for some good times.
get a new plane and learn from your mistakes
Quit making sense, we don't appreciate it. :devil
-
Those that attempt to say it has no bearing are incredibly naive.
no, more like someone trying to find some excuse as to why he's getting shot down by lesser planes than what he flies.
From what I've seen, the external view is only good for SA and not a whole lot else. Frankly, if you're dumb enough to put yourself in front of an Il2's guns (external view or not), expect to get shot down. They are slow, and except for a fairly good instantaneous turn rate for the first turn only, they are complete pigs.
I used to enjoy fighting Goaly's Il2, he'd use it to BnZ from much higher alt and it made for some good times.
Quit making sense, we don't appreciate it. :devil
They get it.
ack-ack
-
The guns for the IL2 should not be able to be fired from F3 View
I agree. This should apply to all bombers not just the IL2.
If I read your stats correctly, you were only shot down once by an IL2
in December. Seems not to have had much of an effect on you.
Are you posting this for a friend or squadie who has an axe to grind
with the IL2?
-
After flying the IL-2, I enjoy it quite a bit. I use F3 for locating ground targets, and to keep track of air cons. when I get to gun solution on either, I swap to F1. F3 is simply not a feasible option for shooting with this bird. The pilots that fly it this way are few and far between. The usual scenario that I have seen is to get the con to overshoot the IL-2, then while in F3 spray and pray at their rear end until they are out of reach. Ghi is quite accomplished at this Xbox type flying. I say changing it will have little or no effect on the game. Simply not worth the effort. :aok
-
The usual scenario that I have seen is to get the con to overshoot the IL-2, then while in F3 spray and pray at their rear end until they are out of reach. Ghi is quite accomplished at this Xbox type flying.
That's the name that comes to mind if someone says the F3 view makes the Il-2 a threat. He has mastered the perfectly timed F3 no-red-out pushover followed by the snap shot when his attacker suffers red-out and cannot follow.
Edit: The Il-2 did fairly well in one of the FSOs we had a little while back. In one frame it had a K/D of .7, iirc. In the frame I flew it, we succeeded through spray-and-pray front quarter shots.
-
:huh not sure how you can say that.
It allows you to see your enemy to aim at them when they are under your nose. I've flown this way and it is a trememdous advantage.
Yeah but you still have to dip your nose to shoot and its still far more accurate shooting with a sight as a sight then with a plane as a sight. F3 might allow you a better 360% SA, "big deal, in an IL-2", but it doesnt let you aim more accurately. I pop into F3 from F1, and back again, too. But I dont actually shoot from F3. Ive tried it after all these dramatic threads in the forum and its still very difficult to hit anything. It would be far easier in a Mossie with all the mose guns then in an IL-2, which has two very slow ROF cannon in the wing roots, with an ammo load that doesnt allow you the luxury of walking a tracer stream into a con. And MGs which really dont matter.
And since IL-2s are easily slaughtered by any fighter jock with even slight skill one really has to wonder what is the motivation behind these, "The world is ending due to the IL-2s killing power and F3 view" threads.
Did someones widdle tank get blowed up?
Anyone really want to try this then go into offline mode and shoot in F3, and then shoot in F1 useing the sight, and tell me which is easier and more accurate.
-
Well how do you know GHI is in F3 shooting when you overshoot?
Course the easiest thing is just dont overshoot. Or, use the vertical afterwards and then the IL-2 is out of the equation. With superior energy in a fighter which also has far superior climb why are you even concerned about overshooting an IL-2?
There is nothing inherent in the IL-2 flight model which allows cheesier stick jerking and overshoots more then any other fighter. The only thing is its so slow that guys overshoot them all the time.
Frankly Im only average in a fighter, almost everyone in this thread is better then I, and still I find IL-2s easy to shoot down and avoid. So again I have to wonder what the real motivation is behind this IL-2 hysteria.
For the record Im all for taking the guns away when in F3 mode. I never shoot in F3 mode so it wouldnt affect me in the slightest.
-
Ghi flies the Il-2 only ever against vulchers. Please don't anyone pretend somehow that hovering over a base to kill essentialy defenceless targets is any less gamey than using the il-2 in either F3 mode or cockpit style. He is also exceptionaly good at defending against vulchers in it. As far as I know, Ghi uses the cockpit view for alot of his kills in it. If he does use the F3 view sometimes then big deal...he is still displaying far bigger kahones than any of the vulchers he is killing.
If the Il-2 with F3 mode is so easy, i wonder why no one ever flies it as an offensive fighter...
This thread is almost certainly the product of vulchers losing thier 10 'kills' to a resourcefull Il-2 vulchee.
-
I think the easiest solution for this F3 mode debate is the definition of a bomber aircraft.
If it hasn't got a bombsite it isn't a bomber IMO.
The il2 / A20 / B25H are all ground ATTACK aircraft. What is the reasoning behind having f3 mode? simulating the fact that there is a rear gunner and he can look around?
How about the 110 then ? no F3 mode there....
Agreed a proper Attack mode should eliminate the F3 view for all such aircraft................ There are a group of ac in AH that should only be classified as attack and never bomber or fighter IMO....none of them should have F3.
110c could be considered as a dual role ac but the 110G is primarily an Attack ac IMO.
-
Ghi flies the Il-2 only ever against vulchers.
Yup, right after his squad sneaks a base in the corner of the map, 100+ miles away from the rest of the action. ;) :bolt:
-
Yup, right after his squad sneaks a base in the corner of the map, 100+ miles away from the rest of the action. ;) :bolt:
GHI is ALWAYS and I mean ALWAYS at the recieving end of the vulchfest! I challenge anyone to NOT find GHI defending a GAYNGED base whenever he is logged on!!
I am convinced without GHI many a tards score would be faaaaar worse :rofl :rofl :rofl
Way to give back to the HAVE-NOTS ! "G" :aok
-
Ahh Ghi, I remember the time I made him cry and scream after shooting down his IL2 twice in a Ju 87.
ack-ack
-
Ahh Ghi, I remember the time I made him cry and scream after shooting down his IL2 twice in a Ju 87.
ack-ack
Have never heard GHI complain, laugh allot --->YES never complain! :aok
-
Have never heard GHI complain, laugh allot --->YES never complain! :aok
Oh, he was complaining a lot that night, too bad early AH2 films are no longer compatible with the film viewer because it is a funny film.
ack-ack
-
For the record my mentioning Ghi in his IL-2 was not a slam, it was simply a stated fact. How do I know that he uses F3? He has bragged about it. I guess that I took him at face value on his statements. It was only an example of flying this bird in F3 Xbox style. If I was incorrect in my example please let me know...
Way
-
After flying the IL-2, I enjoy it quite a bit. I use F3 for locating ground targets, and to keep track of air cons. when I get to gun solution on either, I swap to F1. F3 is simply not a feasible option for shooting with this bird. The pilots that fly it this way are few and far between. The usual scenario that I have seen is to get the con to overshoot the IL-2, then while in F3 spray and pray at their rear end until they are out of reach. Ghi is quite accomplished at this Xbox type flying. I say changing it will have little or no effect on the game. Simply not worth the effort. :aok
When I messed around with it I found shooting in F3 quite easy to adjust to, and some of the snap shots you can create are "mind bottling" F3 is just plane easier all the way around! Now this doesn't make an inferior plane perform better, but it DOES make it competative in ways it should never be!! IMO
-
Agreed a proper Attack mode should eliminate the F3 view for all such aircraft................ There are a group of ac in AH that should only be classified as attack and never bomber or fighter IMO....none of them should have F3.
110c could be considered as a dual role ac but the 110G is primarily an Attack ac IMO.
It seems many of you confuse HTC's scoring system for plane classifications. Attacking ground targets is what BOMBERS do. The IL-2, JU-87, SBD, TBM, D3A and B5N are all examples of single engine aircraft whose primary role was to attack surface targets, making them all BOMBERS. The fact that all but one have forward firing armament does not make them fighters or give them some sort of special classification. They are all BOMBERS.
In contrast, planes like the P-51 , P-38 and and bf-110 were designed and purposed primarily to be air-superiority aircraft, i.e. FIGHTERS. The fact both can carry ordinance does not erase this basic fact. This is the distinction between any of the above BOMBERS (that have F3 view) and the bf-110 (that does not), because the 110 was certainly designed to be and used as an air-superiority FIGHTER.
Planes that were particularly good at both were often referred to as Fighter/Bombers, but make no mistake that these were designed first to win air-to-air engagments. This is not something the single engined bombers were ever expected to do. Rather, their defensive armament was just that -- defensive.
In short, neither IL-2s nor JU-87s nor SBDs nor TBMs nor D3As were ever designed to be sent aloft for the sole purpose of holding off enemy aircraft, because they are BOMBERS, not air-superiority FIGHTERS. Their categorization is correct.
Strangely, I never see anyone complain that JU-87s, SBDs, TBMs, or D3As can also turn fight while in F3 view, and only rarely does anyone even mention the A-20, which is arguably even more capable than the IL-2. One can only conclude therefore that people hold the IL-2 to a special contempt due to it's particularly heavy firepower -- which is purely incidental to it's intended role, and not something that puts it in any kind of special category all of it's own.
-
Strangely, I never see anyone complain that JU-87s, SBDs, TBMs, or D3As can also turn fight while in F3 view, and only rarely does anyone even mention the A-20, which is arguably even more capable than the IL-2. One can only conclude therefore that people hold the IL-2 to a special contempt due to it's particularly heavy firepower -- which is purely incidental to it's intended role, and not something that puts it in any kind of special category all of it's own.
I believe they complain due to the high instantaneous turn rate the IL possesses, coupled with it's extremely high firepower.
When using the IL-2 in F3 mode, you are:
A) able to snap turn without blacking out or redding out in negative G's
and
B)are therefore able to target and to put a single hit kill on anything, when you wouldn't be able to in the cockpit due to redout or blackout.
These are two things that none of the other planes you used as examples can do. The A20 is a much more capable dogfighter, but lacks both of the capabilities I have given. It does not have high instantaneous turn, and does not have a one hit kill probability.
One IL flown in F3 mode held off a capture last night. One.
-
For the record my mentioning Ghi in his IL-2 was not a slam, it was simply a stated fact. How do I know that he uses F3? He has bragged about it. I guess that I took him at face value on his statements. It was only an example of flying this bird in F3 Xbox style. If I was incorrect in my example please let me know...
Way
No it wasn't a slam and was completely correct. He has said it repeatedly that he flies it this way.
-
I believe they complain due to the high instantaneous turn rate the IL possesses, coupled with it's extremely high firepower.
When using the IL-2 in F3 mode, you are:
A) able to snap turn without blacking out or redding out in negative G's
and
B)are therefore able to target and to put a single hit kill on anything, when you wouldn't be able to in the cockpit due to redout or blackout.
These are two things that none of the other planes you used as examples can do. The A20 is a much more capable dogfighter, but lacks both of the capabilities I have given. It does not have high instantaneous turn, and does not have a one hit kill probability.
One IL flown in F3 mode held off a capture last night. One.
LOL -- a pilot in F3 mode blacks out / reds out the same as when he is in the cockpit -- assuming, of course, that the G's exerted on the pilot are sufficient. So bullpucky on A. Since A is clearly bullpucky, your B is also blown out of the water.
To any extent an IL-2 pilot does not seem to black out as readily, it is due to the very slow speeds at which the IL-2 flies. Guess what -- slow speed is no advantage in the MAs.
But thanks. Your post is a good demonstration of how people who complain about the aircraft often don't know what they are complaining about.
-
[snip].....
One IL flown in F3 mode held off a capture last night. One.
Well all that shows is that the attacking team are unable to capture a base when faced by even the slightest opposition. I say good on that IL-2.
-
I dogfight in IL-2s all the time. I don't use F3 in a dogfight, however I will take advantage of it for SA before a fight. As pointed out earlier in this thread, how can you be sure if I'm using F3 or not in a fight? If *I* Can shoot down your 109, spitty, and niki in my IL-2, doesn't that make *YOU* the crappy pilot in the fight?
The man speaks the truth
-
It seems many of you confuse HTC's scoring system for plane classifications. Attacking ground targets is what BOMBERS do. The IL-2, JU-87, SBD, TBM, D3A and B5N are all examples of single engine aircraft whose primary role was to attack surface targets, making them all BOMBERS. The fact that all but one have forward firing armament does not make them fighters or give them some sort of special classification. They are all BOMBERS.
.
Disagree with all of this and the stuff I snipped............
I am not alluding to the scoring system (although this could come into play if wished)
There is a range of aircraft whose purpose was "attack" as HTC defines it. They had many names across many forces Jabo (Germany), Intruder (GB), Attack (US). Shotormovik (Storm bird) was classified as an "Armoured attack aircraft" their design and use was low level ground interdiction either in a battle field role or close support logistic role. The Stuka was purpose built for this role also. AS is the A10 Warthog now.
Within AH we can include IMO the A20, Il2m3, Ju87, as having attack only rolls. It could be argued that had the SBD and the D3A been used in primarily land based operations these too would have been allocated a pure attack status their antishipping role blurrs the edges of classification.
There are of course many aircraft that are designated "Fighter Bombers" where the roll of interceptor/air superiority is the prime focus of design and the bomb carrying roll followed. Actually in AH none of these have F3 anyway.
There are a few "Fighter Bombers" that are actually in "Bomber Fighters". The Mosquito as used in AH is a prime example of an "Intruder" design which originated from a design targetting a high speed long range Bomber. This also has F3 disabled.
It is my contention that no dive bomber should have F3, Further many ac in this class had limited external visibility which is totally gamed in F3 to produce superior SA in a craft that historically sufferred in this respect. I see arguements saying its harder to sight from F3. I disagree but thats my view point. I can certainly maintain better visualisation of a target whether bombing from a Il2m3, Ju87 or A20(off line) than I can from F1.
In summary there is a button on the clip board that enables selection of Attack/Fighter
or in other cases Attack/Bomber.
I would have it do other things than just affect the scoring..............
Certain ac (as listed above) IMO should only have the attack option.........
If Attack is selected (or forced thru lack of choice) then
F3 should be disabled,
Formations should be disabled,
F6 should be disabled (pilot release of bombs only)
Equally ( and drifting off topic)
If Bomber is selected (or forced thru lack of choice as Lancs are now)
F3 is enabled
Formations enabled (by choice)
F6 enabled and forced (bombs can only dropped from F6)
and further (if we really want to get contentious) Should a fighter be loaded with Bombs then the Attack status could be forced rather than being a matter of choice. (but then that is only really a scoring issue IMO)
-
Swtarget, I think moray meant that your view is not obstructed by redout/blackout while viewing from f3, which is true so far as I know.
-
Swtarget, I think moray meant that your view is not obstructed by redout/blackout while viewing from f3, which is true so far as I know.
Interesting and I believe correct. So it does give you an advantage in terms of exceeding the virtual pilots ability to withstand G's. This definitely changes my viewpoint on this. Perhaps some sort of red/black out imposed on the F3 view?
-
Disagree with all of this and the stuff I snipped............
I am not alluding to the scoring system (although this could come into play if wished)
There is a range of aircraft whose purpose was "attack" as HTC defines it. They had many names across many forces Jabo (Germany), Intruder (GB), Attack (US). Shotormovik (Storm bird) was classified as an "Armoured attack aircraft" their design and use was low level ground interdiction either in a battle field role or close support logistic role. The Stuka was purpose built for this role also. AS is the A10 Warthog now.
Within AH we can include IMO the A20, Il2m3, Ju87, as having attack only rolls. It could be argued that had the SBD and the D3A been used in primarily land based operations these too would have been allocated a pure attack status their antishipping role blurrs the edges of classification.
There are of course many aircraft that are designated "Fighter Bombers" where the roll of interceptor/air superiority is the prime focus of design and the bomb carrying roll followed. Actually in AH none of these have F3 anyway.
There are a few "Fighter Bombers" that are actually in "Bomber Fighters". The Mosquito as used in AH is a prime example of an "Intruder" design which originated from a design targetting a high speed long range Bomber. This also has F3 disabled.
It is my contention that no dive bomber should have F3, Further many ac in this class had limited external visibility which is totally gamed in F3 to produce superior SA in a craft that historically sufferred in this respect. I see arguements saying its harder to sight from F3. I disagree but thats my view point. I can certainly maintain better visualisation of a target whether bombing from a Il2m3, Ju87 or A20(off line) than I can from F1.
In summary there is a button on the clip board that enables selection of Attack/Fighter
or in other cases Attack/Bomber.
I would have it do other things than just affect the scoring..............
Certain ac (as listed above) IMO should only have the attack option.........
If Attack is selected (or forced thru lack of choice) then
F3 should be disabled,
Formations should be disabled,
F6 should be disabled (pilot release of bombs only)
Equally ( and drifting off topic)
If Bomber is selected (or forced thru lack of choice as Lancs are now)
F3 is enabled
Formations enabled (by choice)
F6 enabled and forced (bombs can only dropped from F6)
and further (if we really want to get contentious) Should a fighter be loaded with Bombs then the Attack status could be forced rather than being a matter of choice. (but then that is only really a scoring issue IMO)
Maybe a simpler fix would be to not allow any aircraft with "fixed forward" firing guns F3 view, unless in bomber mode with formations on! :bolt:
-
Easily. Sure, you can see under the nose better but aiming in 3rd person mode (external view) is much harder than cockpit view and you're more likely than not to miss the shot because there are no aiming point to go by. It is not going to be a deciding factor in a fight unless you catch the fighter pilot with his head up his bellybutton or you run into an extremely unskilled or new player.
ack-ack
Your are wrong on this one Ack. When i played h2h I always used F3 mode for extreme snapshot kills.
And yes there is a point of aim, when you look forward in F3 the plane is the gunsite, its smack dab in the middle of the screen. Also in F3 you can see the tracers when your turnfighting, and then you adjust wether or not the tracers are behind or ahead of the plane.
I was far more successful in F3 than in cockpit view.
-
To all who are claiming that redout/blackout does not occur in F3 mode
you are in error. Myth busted.
-
To all who are claiming that redout/blackout does not occur in F3 mode
you are in error. Myth busted.
Hey, you're right. I just tried it out. Has it always been this way? I seem to remember things being otherwise.
Don't get too excited though. It would be nice if you fellows could approach the discussion more calmly instead of trying to score rhetorical smack-down points with every post.
-
To all who are claiming that redout/blackout does not occur in F3 mode
you are in error. Myth busted.
Thank you for the correction newz. I guess I never had to push it that far while in F3.
-
Maybe a simpler fix would be to not allow any aircraft with "fixed forward" firing guns F3 view, unless in bomber mode with formations on! :bolt:
I like this :aok
-
Hey, you're right. I just tried it out. Has it always been this way? I seem to remember things being otherwise.
Don't get too excited though. It would be nice if you fellows could approach the discussion more calmly instead of trying to score rhetorical smack-down points with every post.
You're right, it should be approached more calmly . . . but given the hysterics and attempts at outright falsehoods that get spewed about (like no black outs when in F3 view), it is sometimes difficult to refrain from responding in kind.
Yes, the black-out / red-outs have ALWAYS been that way as long as I have been playing. Anyone who has spent a sufficient amount of time in the aircraft would know that. Which, again, makes my point that (in general) those who want F3 removed because it supposedly makes things too easy for the IL-2 have not spent enough time in the aircraft to understand how vulnerable it is despite the supposed "advantage." That isn't an attempt to "score points", but merely an observation.
The thing to remember about the IL-2 is it is agonizingly slow compared to most other aircraft. Since it is a slow aircraft, even in sharp turns the pilot does not always experience enough G's for a blackout to occur. But make no mistake that if you are up to speed and turn sharply, you will get the blackout, and regardless of what view you are in.
-
You're right, it should be approached more calmly . . . but given the hysterics and attempts at outright falsehoods that get spewed about (like no black outs when in F3 view),
OT, you forgot a few.
B-24s never flew at tree top lvls.
B-25h cannon can not kill tigers.
the " I always lose collisions and it's HT's fault.
Cmon you are slacking. :P ;)
-
Disagree with all of this and the stuff I snipped............
. . . their design and use was low level ground interdiction either in a battle field role or close support logistic role. The Stuka was purpose built for this role also. AS is the A10 Warthog now.
A tactical bomber is still a bomber. One doesn't have to bomb in a "strategic" role to be a bomber.
By your definition, one could argue the Bostons, B-25s (especially), B-26s, and JU-88s should also have their F3 view removed. I disagree that this would be a good thing. It also, IMO, makes the edges much more blurry than they are now.
Speaking of blurry edges, I've stated in other threads the the Mossie is the only plane that seems to go against the "hard" rule, and the Mossie was originally an untouchable (high speed) light bomber. The only explanation I have been able to come up with is that the version we have I believe was the night-interceptor version. It seems to be a bit of a hybrid, though, because I assume the interceptor versions didn't carry bombs, and the bomber versions probably didn't carry 4 hispanos . . . but I'd have to do some reading on that.
-
OT, you forgot a few.
B-24s never flew at tree top lvls.
B-25h cannon can not kill tigers.
the " I always lose collisions and it's HT's fault.
Cmon you are slacking. :P ;)
I'm sorry, I'll try to be more diligent in the future . . . :noid
-
It's true... What are you trying to say? :huh
" I always lose collisions and it's HT's fault.
:D
-
Yes, the black-out / red-outs have ALWAYS been that way as long as I have been playing. Anyone who has spent a sufficient amount of time in the aircraft would know that.
I've spent enough time in aircraft with F3 view, but I'm getting confused between the 4 flight sims I have on my HD right now. :o
The thing to remember about the IL-2 is it is agonizingly slow compared to most other aircraft.
I like what stoney said, something like "in a short race with the Stuka to suffer a bird strike from behind."
-
A tactical bomber is still a bomber. One doesn't have to bomb in a "strategic" role to be a bomber.
By your definition, one could argue the Bostons, B-25s (especially), B-26s, and JU-88s should also have their F3 view removed. I disagree that this would be a good thing. It also, IMO, makes the edges much more blurry than they are now.
I use commonly known role references.....we could say they are all "planes" instead we define them and their roles.
and yes I do believe when used as a dive bomber or battle field weapon the "Bostons, B-25s (especially), B-26s, and JU-88s should also have their F3 view (and formations and F6 view) removed" and this can be implemented as stated above by choosing attack..............
Ju88 and indeed even the HE111 was used extensively in battle field attack operations beside the Ju87 (read up on the Stalingrad "cauldron" and the battles preceeding the winter of 42)
Re the Mossie. If you research the use of the Fighter Bomber (Intruder) versions used extensively in the Med out of Sicily and later south Italian bases on intruder raids you will note that it was still primarily a bomber. I find few references to its use close to frontline activity. Indeed even in AH it seems to be used agin field objects rather than vehicles etc. Its night interceptor role to one side I only find it used as a fighter as along range escort to other Mossie bombers (usually over Norway or the Baltic)
-
A tactical bomber is still a bomber. One doesn't have to bomb in a "strategic" role to be a bomber.
Do you know, Yak-9 was a bomber? :lol
(http://okondr.mail333.su/Yak9b.JPG)
Well, not one we have, actually :bolt:
-
Do you know, Yak-9 was a bomber? :lol
(http://okondr.mail333.su/Yak9b.JPG)
Well, not one we have, actually :bolt:
OH OH OH I want one!!!
-
OH OH OH I want one!!!
Only after we get PTAB's...............
-
Only after we get PTAB's...............
Well then OH OH OH I want those too! :x
-
Only after we get PTAB's...............
Processing Tomato Advisory Board's?
-
Processing Tomato Advisory Board's?
Poorly timed and boring............. :P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTAB
jeez I'm using Wiki!
-
Hehe I did a google search and the tomato board was the first that showed. The wiki link was like the 3rd or 4th down the list.
-
The eye-popping usage of neg-Gs or rapid G oscillation with no consequences we are allowed as gun defenses are lame in ANY plane, its that simple. If excessive red-out could blind you for a few seconds and lead to lawn-darting after pushing the stick to the firewall, then it would be better.
Oh, and Bat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I've seen *you* complaining about the use of F3 for impossible deflections shots in the DA lake. Vets like you and I can't/don't use it, because all of our trained visual cues are from inside-the-cockpit view, but the new crop of players who have learned with it is perfectly willing and able to exploit it. I think it is now time for locked cockpits in all aircraft and all arenas, except the TA.
-
I think, if we go back a few months and check that topic out I was complaining that F3 be enabled in the DA for one reason only. That being, that 'important' duels setup to proove a clear victor were marred by the possible F3 usage. Not at all concerned with it in furball lake, just 1 on 1 dueling where under the nose shots can make or break a fight. Perhaps i am wrong, I'm sure that was my issue though. :salute
-
I think, if we go back a few months and check that topic out I was complaining that F3 be enabled in the DA for one reason only. That being, that 'important' duels setup to proove a clear victor were marred by the possible F3 usage. Not at all concerned with it in furball lake, just 1 on 1 dueling where under the nose shots can make or break a fight. Perhaps i am wrong, I'm sure that was my issue though. :salute
Well, if it provides an unfair advantage in a duel, it is still an unfair advantage elsewhere, so... :salute
-
maybe but i was not raising it as an issue for general gameplay, just dueling. Just to counter your question to me.
-
Someone on like page 2 asked why i posted this since I had not been shot down a bunch of times due to IL2's. The reason that I mentioned it is because a squaddie and I were talking about how HiTech and crew had solicited inputs on things that were "gamey" about the game that could be corrected. I guess some of the things they fixed which were long overdue were the launching of a zillion torps from a PT boat and launching a zillion troops from a LVT and the ability to spawn feet dry from an LVT from certain positions. I've certainly abused the hell out of these things... but I'm happy they are gone. In the end they make the game less fun for everyone. The same goes for the Gamey F3 mode for the IL2... same with the A20 for that matter (which I have abused from time to time in mid war). Yes the IL2 is very slow and is otherwise easy target for a disciplined stick... until you add F3. After abusing the hell out of F3 mode in this aircraft, I can tell you that I have made many, many kills with this aircraft.
Take a look at my stats. Like someone said, I was killed once by an IL2 in December while in an Aircraft... because I understand the way this plane is flown, as do many others.
Although I rarely fly the IL2 I got 10 vs plane kills in it in December with only 7 deaths vs planes. 100% of these kills I made were against aircraft with speed and altitude advantages. Check out the names... you might recognize a few decent sticks. F3 mode was responsible for nearly all of these kills. All kills against paying players that should not have been sent back to their base by me, a player who was exploiting this unrealistic function of the game. Like someone said, call it Xbox mode, thats a perfect description. I doubt the adult player base of aces high appreciates this kind of thing.
Bottom line is that this is an advantage when I'm able to fly an IL2 to a better than 1:1 kill to death when taking off from cap'd airfields. If you cant see it, your either not opening your eyes or incredibly naive.
I stand by my original suggestion, simply disable the ability to fire the nose mounted guns in an IL2 (any aircraft actually) from F3 mode. I'm not suggesting eliminating F3 mode, just make it so you cant shoot from it.
-
Hey way to go GlassJaw, you can get kills in F3 Mode! You're must have like, mad skillz or something, I'm so jealous. Why don't you (removed, to be nice and comply with forum rules...)
-
Somehow I think you missed my point. I'm not sure how...
Hey way to go GlassJaw, you can get kills in F3 Mode! You're must have like, mad skillz or something, I'm so jealous. Why don't you (removed, to be nice and comply with forum rules...)
-
Hey way to go GlassJaw, you can get kills in F3 Mode! You're must have like, mad skillz or something, I'm so jealous. Why don't you (removed, to be nice and comply with forum rules...)
What's your gameid?
-
What's your gameid?
EskimoJ
Somehow I think you missed my point. I'm not sure how...
Your point is what? You decided to game the game and got kills? That shows nothing for/about us IL-2 pilots that DON'T game the game, and are able to get just as many kills. I know there are pilots better than me who don't fly F3. I don't fly the IL-2 often, but when I do, I choose to not use F3 view. If F3 is removed for IL-2s, the only thing it will do for me, as well as some others, is take away the ability to have a clear view around the aircraft.
-
Um, I think you just agreed with my main point.
EskimoJ
Your point is what? You decided to game the game and got kills? That shows nothing for/about us IL-2 pilots that DON'T game the game, and are able to get just as many kills. I know there are pilots better than me who don't fly F3. I don't fly the IL-2 often, but when I do, I choose to not use F3 view. If F3 is removed for IL-2s, the only thing it will do for me, as well as some others, is take away the ability to have a clear view around the aircraft.
-
I do note that the majority of those who would retain F3 ( for attack aircraft) apparently claim not to use it anyway.......... :rolleyes:
ergo how would they miss it........... ?
-
I do note that the majority of those who would retain F3 ( for attack aircraft) apparently claim not to use it anyway.......... :rolleyes:
ergo how would they miss it........... ?
Is that kind of like people who claim it is such a problem, yet also claim they personally never have problems dealing with IL-2s?
-
Hahaha, nevermind.
-
I do note that the majority of those who would retain F3 ( for attack aircraft) apparently claim not to use it anyway.......... :rolleyes:
ergo how would they miss it........... ?
We would want F3 back because we use it for SA purposes alone. Have you ever tried flying an IL-2, and looking around the cockpit? There is almost no view of whats going on around the aircraft, which is an extreme disadvantage when trying to evade an enemy, say a spitfire which has far better visibility.
-
We would want F3 back because we use it for SA purposes alone. Have you ever tried flying an IL-2, and looking around the cockpit? There is almost no view of whats going on around the aircraft, which is an extreme disadvantage when trying to evade an enemy, say a spitfire which has far better visibility.
That's the point of having accurate cockpits.
-
I wouldn't mind F3 disabled when the gunner is killed. That's what f3 is suppose to simulate isn't it... the extra set of eyes?
-
I wouldn't mind F3 disabled when the gunner is killed. That's what f3 is suppose to simulate isn't it... the extra set of eyes?
IIRC, yes. I completely agree, but how it would be coded in the game is beyond me. It would seem, to me, rather complicated.
That's the point of having accurate cockpits.
Removing F3 for the IL-2 in certain events, such as FSO or snapshots, sounds completely reasonable to me. However in the MA, removing F3 just makes it horribly unfair and is no fun for me as a pilot. If I want to fly an IL-2 with only an accurate cockpit and no other way to see other than the tail gunner, I will fly snapshots alone. There is no point in taking it away from me if I don't use it to game the game.
-
IIRC, yes. I completely agree, but how it would be coded in the game is beyond me. It would seem, to me, rather complicated.
Complicated??? I think not. It is no more complicated than if a gun is shot out.
-
I wouldn't mind F3 disabled when the gunner is killed. That's what f3 is suppose to simulate isn't it... the extra set of eyes?
That's a good point. But, does the rear gunner being taken out represent the gunner killed, or the gun itself being hit? I ask because you can still switch and view to a "dead" gun position. Would this mean an extra hit object to be coded? Also assume in multi-gunner planes you would need to kill all gunners for this to happen.
-
Would it be safe to assume that the gunner would probably be in rough shape also?
-
Complicated??? I think not. It is no more complicated than if a gun is shot out.
May be so, however I have absolutely no experience with coding whatsoever.
-
My suggestion is to DISABLE THE ABILTY TO SHOOT FROM F3 MODE. I'm not suggesting at this time to completly get rid of F3 mode.
-
My suggestion is to DISABLE THE ABILTY TO SHOOT FROM F3 MODE. I'm not suggesting at this time to completly get rid of F3 mode.
I practiced many hours shooting from the f3 position I can hit the barn door, but i cant hit crap when the gv's are moving. you guys think that most guys will shoot in f3 mode, hardly anybody does, way too hard and waste too many rounds. If i was you, I would ask that every il3 to shoot from the f3, more ammo wasted, less gv's killed. shooting from within the plane on the other hand uses less ammo, more gv's killed. you want to check it out yourselves, get in an il2 and try killing gv's in f3 mode, see how good you do. then switch to within the plane, see if its better or worst on your ammo/kill. dont make something out of nothing :D.
semp
-
My suggestion is to DISABLE THE ABILTY TO SHOOT FROM F3 MODE. I'm not suggesting at this time to completly get rid of F3 mode.
THAT, I can understand, and would be completely fine with me and probably all other decent IL-2 sticks.
-
How quickly does a gunner communicate what he sees? He may tell the pilot there is a bogie there but does the pilot know exactly where it is?
Gamey SA in attack air craft is as much a reason for disabling F3 as being able to gun and dive bomb from F3 IMO. The IL2 (for example) had poor pilot view to much of the rear.
If we want to re create the effect of the rear gunners eyes then we can use the rear gunner view when checking our 6 hit 2 then 1 to return. We will still have a more accurate picture than any pilot IMO.
-
I practiced many hours shooting from the f3 position I can hit the barn door, but i cant hit crap when the gv's are moving. you guys think that most guys will shoot in f3 mode, hardly anybody does, way too hard and waste too many rounds. If i was you, I would ask that every il3 to shoot from the f3, more ammo wasted, less gv's killed. shooting from within the plane on the other hand uses less ammo, more gv's killed. you want to check it out yourselves, get in an il2 and try killing gv's in f3 mode, see how good you do. then switch to within the plane, see if its better or worst on your ammo/kill. dont make something out of nothing :D.
semp
Strange, I found shooting in F3 terribly easy and effective! Hmm, I honestly can't see what is sooooo difficult about shooting in F3 view!
-
However in the MA, removing F3 just makes it horribly unfair and is no fun for me as a pilot.
It's not supposed to be fair, otherwise every plane would have the 6 view of the Yak-9 and the forward view of the P-51B.
-
Strange, I found shooting in F3 terribly easy and effective! Hmm, I honestly can't see what is sooooo difficult about shooting in F3 view!
what's so difficut? there's a big il2 between me and the sight :D. u cant beat accuracy when shooting using the sight.
semp
-
what's so difficut? there's a big il2 between me and the sight :D. u cant beat accuracy when shooting using the sight.
semp
Well if your shooting up GVs then yes the sight is better, but when "geeking" the defence of a base or generaly entering furball with it the F3 shooting even better in many aspects. I don't know anyone who focuses on the sight when taking "snapshot" opportunities! When creating "small window" overshoots, F3 shooting is much better!
-
It's not supposed to be fair, otherwise every plane would have the 6 view of the Yak-9 and the forward view of the P-51B.
True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there? I fly in the Main Arenas for good fights, for fun. If I'm blind, I can't see if the opportunity for a good fight arises, and will most likely end up BnZ'd with no 6 call. What's the point of this, I would ask, and most likely end up spending my 15$ a month on a text based browser game instead.
Ground-Attack is my niche. I don't desire to fight in the furball or win the war, I like hitting tanks while defending bases. Sure, the occasional fighter pilot will try to ruin my fun, but luckily I can currently spot the threat to my fun with the F3 view, and have at least the chance to eliminate the attacking aircraft.
HiTech is trying to (and doing well with) balancing realism vs game. This is merely one of those reality vs fun balances.
-
True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there?
Is this a rhetorical question?
-
True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there? I fly in the Main Arenas for good fights, for fun. If I'm blind, I can't see if the opportunity for a good fight arises, and will most likely end up BnZ'd with no 6 call. What's the point of this, I would ask, and most likely end up spending my 15$ a month on a text based browser game instead.
Ground-Attack is my niche. I don't desire to fight in the furball or win the war, I like hitting tanks while defending bases. Sure, the occasional fighter pilot will try to ruin my fun, but luckily I can currently spot the threat to my fun with the F3 view, and have at least the chance to eliminate the attacking aircraft.
HiTech is trying to (and doing well with) balancing realism vs game. This is merely one of those reality vs fun balances.
It would make more sense to just modify the internal cockpit for increased visibility, The idea that planes such as the il2 get to have "superior" views compared to even the pony is just ridiculous!
-
HTC needs to define the following:
1. What purpose does F3 mode serve?
2. What handicap does the F3 mode accommodate for or attribute does it lend credit to?
3. What individual characteristics of the aircraft in question lend to the F3 mode being available for use.
Once those three issues are defined then I believe the current system of over applying the "bomber" classification as justification for allow the said aircraft the ability to use F3 will obviously inconsistent.
As I see it, the F3 view is supposed to give credit to one thing: Two or more sets of eyes from a single aircraft able to see at almost 360d around the plane at any particular time. That is it.
I suggest HTC abandon its current "all bombers get F3 ability" position and start looking at a universal application of individual aircraft characteristics. Because as it is, the 110G-2 has the same exact pilot/gunner positions as the D3A, Il-2, SBD, etc, and it doesnt get the F3 view. For the record, Im not advocating giving the 110 the F3 view, Im just pointing out the lack of logical application of views.
-
Im just pointing out the lack of logical application of views.
Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.
-
Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.
Classification by stipulation is hardly convincing.
-
Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.
The logic of applying it to a single aircraft classification with a very broad array of attributes is not consistent. Therefore... illogical?
Regardless of who does or who does not like it, the current standard is not applied equally based on the ability of the crew to see or not see view angles. Is it any different than saying all cows have 4 legs?
-
Is this a rhetorical question?
Yes.
It would make more sense to just modify the internal cockpit for increased visibility, The idea that planes such as the il2 get to have "superior" views compared to even the pony is just ridiculous!
That subtracts realism for events such as FSO or Snapshots, or even the AvA.