Crutch like useless or like shoot a few parts off it and laugh while it flops around until it crashes?or like "it's so easy a caveman can do it"
Hmm...it's a toss up between the P-51 and La-7 as in: "....Oh-oh, I'm in a bind. I better hit the deck and run!":headscratch:
the 109 most players all they know how to do is try to rope. once they lose their e then then whine about getting picked.
semp
:headscratch:the 190 is actually a great dog fighter. Not many people know how to really work it to its full ability.
But isn't that the 190's job to run, given its really limited elevation abilities?
At least the 51's and La's have SOME effort to try and turn.
(Thinking from a turnfight POV)
What do you think?
the 190 is actually a great dog fighter. Not many people know how to really work it to its full ability.
Yak 3 is a close fifth place.
For the average player, a combination of speed and firepower and platform stability/good handling makes the best 'crutch'
The fast, big-gun planes will keep you alive, but (other than plucking the unwary as you zoom through a furball) won't help you win a fight as much as the dancers will.
the 190 is actually a great dog fighter. Not many people know how to really work it to its full ability.I need someone like you to teach me how to dogfight the 190. Not Climb, ho and run, but actually dogfight it. Also, the Ki-43 is without a doubt the crutch plane, it out turns anything in the game.
If we're talking crutch as in "easy mode training wheels" my vote goes to the Spit 16 and N1k. You can intentionally screw up in that plane and still be ok.
If we're talking crutch as in "easy to survive in" then the Tempest, La7, 190D or P-51D. Just go really fast and no one can ever catch you.
OM - back in the day the NIK2 used to be a big clutch plane no (to help win a fight) - remember the uproar when it first came out? That machine was something to be feared if you were a USN/USAAF driver, unless you were Laser or Animal.
You and Tilt have said essentially the same thing. I suppose "crutch" can be viewed as a crutch to keep you alive, or, alternatively, as a crutch to help you win a fight. The OP (I think) and I were speaking of the second meaning. The fast, big-gun planes will keep you alive, but (other than plucking the unwary as you zoom through a furball) won't help you win a fight as much as the dancers will.
- oldman
I think the term "crutch plane" is a bit misleading. If someone can beat you 9 out of 10 times (or even 10 out of 10) in any same-plane situation, then what they fly isn't a crutch. Now, if they can't win without it, then yeah, it would qualify as a crutch plane, in my opinion.
Seems to me the term "crutch plane" has more to do with people making excuses for their own subpar performance than it does about what their opponent chooses to fly. I see a lot of players fly "slow, challenging" planes because they decry ez/crutch/trainer planes, and they cry when they get wrecked in them because their opponent flew an easy plane. Seems to me if you were good enough to fly the "non-crutch" plane, you wouldn't have died in the first place.
This argument is nothing more than a disguised excuse for subpar performance against an opponent.
That being said, I find the easiest planes to be all of the Spits (except the 14), especially the Spit 16, Ki-84, LA-7, N1K, F4U's, K-4, and the Tempest.
Planes like the D9 and Pony (even though I don't really like it) I don't consider easy-mode, because while they are fast and can run, they aren't very hard to beat when they choose to fight. It takes a decent amount of skill to get a lot of offensive value out of them 1v1.
While the level and experience do have a lot to add to context of "crutch" some planes are just easier to fly regardless of their turning abilities.
I wouldn't say a spit5 is a noob plane in the MA. You should have seen it 6 years ago before they chopped the plane in half, it was a monster. The Ki84 and F4Us can easily be out ran, while I personally believe the F4U takes a lot of experience to be good in and the Ki84 is mearly the trainer, although you still have to set up kills when attacking high from a base, and in the FSOs its tough vs the high american planes. Planes that cannot dive well in the game are huge degrading factors which is why I don't consider any of the 109s a cruch plane. The K4 is about the easiest one to fly, but you have to set up shots with the plane and that takes an experienced pilot, you cannot just BnZ for easy kills in the K4 and expect to get a lot of kills.
The P51 and 190D can easily run away when they lose advantage. It happened to me about 8 times yesterday. IMO that is a huge crutch. My plane cannot run away sometimes, so I get caught by yaks and 190s in my G2 then have to fight the BnZers and all the others that choose to jump into the fight. Since my plane cannot extend away I may get caught in the gang. Therefore the situation becomes more challenging and I have to use expereinced skills to maybe win the 3 on 1 but many times I don't win when 4 planes jump me. That is the struggle with flying slower planes.
Speed is the biggest crutch in WW2 planes or aviation in general. If you got a fast plane and fly it fast no one can catch you and using E to avoid or rope planes is the essential tactic to these planes.
And Joachim I hate the A6Ms too! Thing can turn and then climb so well! You want to fight them but they are just like Nat's!
A "crutch" aircraft is one that has wings.
Exhibit A.edit: all the giggling in the video you would think someone is having too much fun with a feather........ :noid
Like I said, if a player is using a plane as a crutch, then they should be rather easy to beat 1v1. If they're not, then it's not a crutch. Therein lies the basis of the argument. To claim a player is using any plane as a crutch, when that player could beat their opponent easily same plane vs same plane, does not pass the logic litmus test.
Now, if you're saying that a crutch plane is used to survive multi-plane encounters, that argument is flawed as well. Any two planes, flown correctly (Robert Shaw outlines this very well in his dissimilar aircraft tactics section), will end up in a relatively prolonged engagement. Therefore, to claim that a plane is crutch because a player is using it to survive a 1v2, 1v3, etc. is backwards.
If you're routinely surviving 1v2's and 1v3's, etc., it's not because you're good, it's because your opponents are terrible. You outlined this quite well in your 1v3 video, where all of the opponents tried to turn with you. Had any one of them broken off and built up speed and came back, you'd have likely lost. However, none of them did. You won because their flying was incompetent (not to detract from your own skill whatsoever), not because you necessarily outflew them.
Ergo, the idea of "needing" a crutch plane to survive in a multiples situation is based on the idea that a pilot can take on two equally-skilled opponents and win consistently. That is not only illogical, it contradicts everything learned in ACM.
It all goes back to ACM 101, energy vs angles. If you don't "need" a fast plane to fight multiple opponents, then your competition sucks (sorry, it's the truth). Now, you may think/feel/believe otherwise, but I'd be willing to take you in the DA with me and Kruel and do several 2v1's - you wouldn't stand a chance. And it wouldn't be a reflection of your skill, it's simply ACM tactics. A single opponent cannot win against two competent opponents in similar aircraft (barring the rare one-in-a-million lucky shot scenarios that can occur for any player).
So we're back to my original point - a plane can only be a "crutch" if it's needed to win 1v1. And, truth be told, there are several crutch pilots (ROCKY comes to mind with his runstang). However, it's the pilot that makes the plane a "crutch" plane, not vice-versa. If said opponent can beat someone else in like planes, then the plane isn't a crutch whatsoever.
It all goes back to ACM 101, energy vs angles. If you don't "need" a fast plane to fight multiple opponents, then your competition sucks (sorry, it's the truth).
A "crutch" aircraft is one that has wings.
Exhibit A.edit: all the giggling in the video you would think someone is having too much fun with a feather........ :noid
Speed is the cushion of sloppiness, as Driscoll once said. Admittedly speed also dominates the field, particularly in a scenario environment. However, speed and energy (read advantage) is the quickest way to replace your Ambien for those nights filled with insomnia.
Glzz's Struggle! :rofl :rofl :D
Wings are overrated
Yes Anarchy, I am posting video using the embed feature on the BBS. I like you, did notice that when using my phone to view the BBS I can not see the embedded videos as well... it is just a blank space where something should be.
As Dahmer would say.... <middlefinger> :devil
Like I said, if a player is using a plane as a crutch, then they should be rather easy to beat 1v1. If they're not, then it's not a crutch. Therein lies the basis of the argument. To claim a player is using any plane as a crutch, when that player could beat their opponent easily same plane vs same plane, does not pass the logic litmus test.
Now, if you're saying that a crutch plane is used to survive multi-plane encounters, that argument is flawed as well. Any two planes, flown correctly (Robert Shaw outlines this very well in his dissimilar aircraft tactics section), will end up in a relatively prolonged engagement. Therefore, to claim that a plane is crutch because a player is using it to survive a 1v2, 1v3, etc. is backwards.
If you're routinely surviving 1v2's and 1v3's, etc., it's not because you're good, it's because your opponents are terrible. You outlined this quite well in your 1v3 video, where all of the opponents tried to turn with you. Had any one of them broken off and built up speed and came back, you'd have likely lost. However, none of them did. You won because their flying was incompetent (not to detract from your own skill whatsoever), not because you necessarily outflew them.
Ergo, the idea of "needing" a crutch plane to survive in a multiples situation is based on the idea that a pilot can take on two equally-skilled opponents and win consistently. That is not only illogical, it contradicts everything learned in ACM.
It all goes back to ACM 101, energy vs angles. If you don't "need" a fast plane to fight multiple opponents, then your competition sucks (sorry, it's the truth). Now, you may think/feel/believe otherwise, but I'd be willing to take you in the DA with me and Kruel and do several 2v1's - you wouldn't stand a chance. And it wouldn't be a reflection of your skill, it's simply ACM tactics. A single opponent cannot win against two competent opponents in similar aircraft (barring the rare one-in-a-million lucky shot scenarios that can occur for any player).
So we're back to my original point - a plane can only be a "crutch" if it's needed to win 1v1. And, truth be told, there are several crutch pilots (ROCKY comes to mind with his runstang). However, it's the pilot that makes the plane a "crutch" plane, not vice-versa. If said opponent can beat someone else in like planes, then the plane isn't a crutch whatsoever.
Speed is the cushion of sloppiness, as Driscoll once said. . . .
However, speed and energy (read advantage) is the quickest way to replace your Ambien for those nights filled with insomnia.
I think the Planes that fall at both ends of the spectrum are crutch planes....any caveman can out turn someone in a hurri or Brewster....any cave man can out run someone in a P51 or Dora.
I just fly whatever I want and let the other guy worry about it.
I just fly whatever I want and let the other guy worry about it.
The plane you are best in. Nuff said. :aokI'm with you, but I use a shillelagh to get around also.
the 190 is actually a great dog fighter. Not many people know how to really work it to its full ability.
Spits. They are the original tricycle with training wheels.
Only girly girl women or male transvestites fly spits
To some degree all planes are crutch planes depending on the opponent
I would still say that arguing that slow turn fighters are "crutch" is wrong. Even if its better to fight low and slow with them than with a faster fighter it doesnt mean they are über. When a Ki-43 kills your La-7 in a turn fight it doesnt do it because its über but because u screwed up and put yourself in a position were u gave him a chance to kill u.
But that's why I love the 109, it's incredibly satisfying to shoot somebody down by roping them out, after being stuck down on the deck by them attempting to do the same to you. :D
Catch me if you can Luftwiffle!
The bold part is true for all aircraft. A turnfighter that loses to a fast plane isn't losing because the fast plane is overpowered - it's simply fighting where it's strengths are strongest.
I honestly think the A6M is the "crutch" plane of aces high.:airplane: I can only speak from my perspective as a bomber pilot! The Yak 3 seems to be the hardest for me to kill, as they are fast and SMALL and hard to hit. I can kill all the other interceptors equally or about the same, including the 163.
What do you think?
Yes and no. A slow fighter cant catch a faster one. A fast plane can always choose to not fight. So unlike the fast plane the slower one need atleast one bad decision from the opponent to be able to beat him.
Slow(er) planes such as the Spit 8/9/16 and 109G-14 outclimb most of the planes faster than them. The only way a faster plane will catch them is if they come in co-speed and co-alt, or they start higher than them. They may not be as fast horizontally, but they'll outclimb the reach of a faster opponent quickly. Due to climbing abilities, the quoted statement really isn't truly accurate.Spit IX's climb is really not particularly good in AH.
Slow(er) planes such as the Spit 8/9/16 and 109G-14 outclimb most of the planes faster than them. The only way a faster plane will catch them is if they come in co-speed and co-alt, or they start higher than them. They may not be as fast horizontally, but they'll outclimb the reach of a faster opponent quickly. Due to climbing abilities, the quoted statement really isn't truly accurate.
Spit IX's climb is really not particularly good in AH.Spit 9 is good enough to hang in the vertical with a K4 or KI84.
The others you mention, well, yeah, they're good.
Spit 9 is good enough to hang in the vertical with a K4 or KI84.
I wasnt talking about a spit 9 or G-14. I was talking about something like a Ki-43.
Junky, you know better than this. This is only true if the K4 and 84 drivers have no idea what they're doing. If you fought you in a IX vs a K4 the IX-you wouldn't win one fight.
K4s and 84s lose to IXs because they choose NOT to stay vertical and then the IX destroys them
The 84 completely dominates the Spit IX below 11k, and is on par with it up to ~16k. It isn't even funny how easy-mode it is. If you do an E/M diagram overlay of the Ki-84 against all of the Spits, it's almost a mirror of the Spit-XVI.
I agree on the K-4, however, as it will dominate the Spit IX at any altitude below 20k.
(http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r561/folanjohnp1/1394_zpsjv7k1q5x.gif)
Perhaps, but using an extreme example of poor airspeed and applying it as the rule is relatively disingenuous.
Even then, in the end, the capabilities of the aircraft rely on ACM, which is derived from performance obtained from each aircraft's E/M diagram (I really wish HTC would include these in the game). A slow aircraft has inherent advantages that fast aircraft do not, and vice-versa. Just because fast aircraft can disengage more easily than slower aircraft does not give them an overall advantage in general, it's just a different, single type of advantage.
Junky, you know better than this. This is only true if the K4 and 84 drivers have no idea what they're doing. If you fought you in a IX vs a K4 the IX-you wouldn't win one fight.I'll take you up on that....but your giving yourself a lot of credit....so when I see you on next time, don't back down :aok. I truly believe the K4 and KI84s advantage in climb rate isn't enough to give them an incredible advantage over a Spit 9 in a below 10K fight, the fight will still end up in a position where the KI or K4 have to rope the Spit 9 with a very small E advantage at low speed(Vertical scissors) not many players have great timing there, they pull too early making it an easy shot....or come over too late missing the rope which in turn, normally results in the lower con with a shot opportunity),....spit 5 on the other hand....not as hard to rope.
K4s and 84s lose to IXs because they choose NOT to stay vertical and then the IX destroys them
The 84 completely dominates the Spit IX below 11k, and is on par with it up to ~16k. It isn't even funny how easy-mode it is. If you do an E/M diagram overlay of the Ki-84 against all of the Spits, it's almost a mirror of the Spit-XVI.I would agree that both planes are better rides(he's not good enough in a K4 to kill me in a spit 9) and I'd rather be in each but a spit 9 can hang with either in a 1v1 at normal MA alts.....both can just extend away like a P51 and survive, but the Spit 9 is a killer, just like a 8 or 16(not as much but still is good)
I agree on the K-4, however, as it will dominate the Spit IX at any altitude below 20k.
I'll take you up on that....but your giving yourself a lot of credit....so when I see you on next time, don't back down :aok. I truly believe the K4 and KI84s advantage in climb rate isn't enough to give them an incredible advantage over a Spit 9 in a below 10K fight, the fight will still end up in a position where the KI or K4 have to rope the Spit 9 with a very small E advantage at low speed(Vertical scissors) not many players have great timing there, they pull too early making it an easy shot....or come over too late missing the rope which in turn, normally results in the lower con with a shot opportunity),....spit 5 on the other hand....not as hard to rope.1. You need to read what I typed initially again. If you read me fighting you, you missed it badly. However, you know me much better than that Junky. I go, I don't believe in excuses.
Oh and I know your going to say something about having a huge advantage in the initial...maybe a bit but the zoom climbs of all three of these planes is very similar, and the spit will flat turn at the top better then both, so I will be fine. :aok
I'm sorry but what is an E/M diagram.
Perhaps, but using an extreme example of poor airspeed and applying it as the rule is relatively disingenuous.
Even then, in the end, the capabilities of the aircraft rely on ACM, which is derived from performance obtained from each aircraft's E/M diagram (I really wish HTC would include these in the game). A slow aircraft has inherent advantages that fast aircraft do not, and vice-versa. Just because fast aircraft can disengage more easily than slower aircraft does not give them an overall advantage in general, it's just a different, single type of advantage.
A good analogue to this is human intelligence. We can measure this through various testing and personality/cognitive profiles. We can also measure other individual characteristics, such as emotional quotient (EQ), by testing in a similar manner. The end result is that some people are more intelligent, some are more emotionally capable, etc.
The interesting thing, however, is that no one wants to be the "dumb" (or less-smart) one, as if that matters more than anything else. Many people are fine being more (or less) athletic, delegative, efficient, etc. If you tell them "the guy next to you is more athletic," few people would care. However, show (or tell) someone that they're not as smart as the guy next to them, and typically it's either challenged or met with resistance and/or hostility. However, it's objectively the same as any other measured trait. People tend to overvalue intelligence without understanding it's worthless without the ability to put forth the effort to make use of it, the determination to follow through with it, etc. Alone and by itself, intelligence is useless.
Players in AH (and it seems almost exclusively limited to AH) seem to treat aircraft airspeed in the same manner. It's an inherent trait to every aircraft, it's how the aircraft flies. If you don't like the airspeed advantage another plane has, either fly a similar plane, or learn to deal with it. Complaining about it is akin to complaining that the smart guy in class got a better score than you... followed by mocking his ability because you can't perform at his level (when you could have easily studied yourself... or chosen the same plane).
Typically, this is understood universally by the hardcore/enthusiast sim crowd, as it's the integral part of what makes ACM and WWII air combat varied. For whatever reason, however, the understanding (and acceptance) of this by this community is almost non-existent. Sadly ironic, as it's a major deterrent to anyone considering AH for realistic WWII dogfighting (as evident when compared to the number of players online at any moment across the various IL2 series, DCS, etc.).
None of this was aimed at you, by the way Zimme, it just created a nice segue.
I still don't agree, a better test would be me in a Spit 9 vs Krupnski....then Me in a K4 vs Krup in a K4.
I think the end result will surprise people.
When flying a slow plane u re most of the time starting in a disadvantage position so they are really good for learning how to manage and reverse E. Im no expert either but the average pilot in AH makes so many misstakes in combat that they can be beaten on a regular basis even if u are in a Brewster and meet them 1v1.
But i still claims that speed is the single most important factor - if u know what u are doing. If u dont u die no matter what plane u are flying.
A better test that you vs you? How? You aren't nearly as good as Krup, no offense.
And there's the flaw: flying slow is not in any way an inherent disadvantage. Flying slow is only a disadvantage when the opponent is forcing an energy fight in the vertical (or if you're trying to escape a fight, but that's not really the context here).
The easiest way to kill aircraft that run (such as the P-51, Me 262, D9, etc.) is to get in front of them and allow yourself to be slightly slower.
Again, people say the word "slow/slower" without understanding it's not really a negative attribute. It's only a negative drawback in a specific set of scenarios, much like not being able to turn is a drawback only in very specific scenarios.
I'd rather have an LA-7 or D9 all day long instead of a Me 262, despite the fact that the 262 is faster. Why? Because despite being slower, they're more versatile.
In all fairness, you said you could beat him without him gaining a single kill. You would have to prove this statement first before you'd be able to prove your ability to assess the skills of other pilots. ;)
Please quote where I said that. I think you read it how he did. That's not what I said.
Junky, you know better than this. This is only true if the K4 and 84 drivers have no idea what they're doing. If you fought you in a IX vs a K4 the IX-you wouldn't win one fight.
There were several typos, so it read like you were challenging him. If not, I'm assuming you meant "if you fought yourself" (not you)?
Also, if he fought himself, by definition he would win 100% of the time; so the above quote is false. ;)
Yes, you read it wrong and I accept your apology no matter how indirect it is. :aok :salute
And I forgive you for making a false statement. :P
Edit: and Junky knows he's not better than Krup as does virtually everyone in here that's fought him lol, right? :salute
If that's an implication that Junky is terribly worse than Krup, I'd disagree. I'd give Krup the overall edge, but not by a landslide or anything; especially when not fighting in 109's.
Thing is, Junky still has room to grow. I'd be careful about making absolute statements, they generally come back to bite you in the oscar. ;)
As does putting words in people's mouths eh? Terribly worse is your choice of words, it was never mine. As you're very fond of saying, "winning is all that matters...to what degree matters not"
I wasn't attempting to put words whatsoever in anyone's mouth; I was just getting to the heart of the matter, and allowed you room to rebut it (if you felt I was wrong) with the conditional conjunction "if."
I also wholeheartedly agree with the bolded part, and always have. I was just trying to give you context to their relative skill levels, as your comments to me before our duels compared to your performance during them made evident that you aren't exactly the best judge of skill (ok, that was the obligatory Damned jab at AoM - truth be told you are getting better!). :P
:salute
I understand you were hoping to flame bait with your unsolicitated attempt. It failed, lol.
As you are the winner of our duals, you're entitled to any and all jabs no matter how small they may make you look as you cannot win anymore than you already did. That was my obligatory jab at you ;)
If that's an implication that Junky is terribly worse than Krup, I'd disagree. I'd give Krup the overall edge, but not by a landslide or anything; especially when not fighting in 109's.Krup is better then me and he can definitely get better as well, he doesn't get much practice these days.
Thing is, Junky still has room to grow, whereas Krup is pretty much at the limit of what that style of flight is capable of. Either way, I'd be careful about making absolute statements, they generally come back to bite you in the butt. ;)
Please quote where I said that. I think you read it how he did. That's not what I said.I'm not better then Krup(Think I have said that on here many times....) we actually work very well together as wingmen because I'm good bait :aok. But I'm saying Krup would be the level of K4 stick that would make the fight more even...other names that come to mind Anarchy, SunsFan, ect ect. It's not a low blow to any of them if I said we are pretty close to even in skill(I have DAed all 3 and exchange blows back and forth) also in todays game, I'm one of the better active sticks playing (Not being cocky, but 1v1 there aren't many who give me a hard time). My last 4 KOTHs I participated in Win, Wabbit, Top Killer(Couldn't get into last 2 without a huge disadvantage), and win. I recently surpassed a bit of a plateau in my skill in the last few months which has made me a lot better in the fight (It actually came from watching fights I loss...first time I have ever studied my film and actually tried to learn from it)
Edit: and Junky knows he's not better than Krup as does virtually everyone in here that's fought him lol, right? :salute
Krup is better then me and he can definitely get better as well, he doesn't get much practice these days.
I'm not better then Krup(Think I have said that on here many times....) we actually work very well together as wingmen because I'm good bait :aok. But I'm saying Krup would be the level of K4 stick that would make the fight more even...other names that come to mind Anarchy, SunsFan, ect ect. It's not a low blow to any of them if I said we are pretty close to even in skill(I have DAed all 3 and exchange blows back and forth) also in todays game, I'm one of the better active sticks playing (Not being cocky, but 1v1 there aren't many who give me a hard time). My last 4 KOTHs I participated in Win, Wabbit, Top Killer(Couldn't get into last 2 without a huge disadvantage), and win. I recently surpassed a bit of a plateau in my skill in the last few months which has made me a lot better in the fight (It actually came from watching fights I loss...first time I have ever studied my film and actually tried to learn from it)
The thing is Krup and I have already had fights Spit vs K4 and K4 on K4....I do a lot better when I'm in a Spit even though (Everyone probably knows this) I'm a big fan of luft rides. And before anyone says "which spit" I use only Spit 9s and 5s in the DA unless its 8 on 8 or 16 on 16.
Why is so much brain power being expended on video game discussions? :headscratch:
Because some people can't resist the urge to indulge in sophistry.
The thing is... it's whether or not you chose to accept you've reached a certain plateau, or you chose to believe you can still become better... that decision is entirely up to the player, and the latter is only made improbable by your doubts. For me, I simply log on and hope to not be bored to death, and have a good time. :cheers:i have accepted I hit my peak 2 years ago lol
You guys have only climaxed once... That's unfortunate
Why is so much brain power being expended on video game discussions? :headscratch:
Maybe same reason you post drivel in order to increase your post count.
E/M = Energy Maneuverability Diagram
It's the diagram that you use to get a full understanding of an aircraft's performance limitations. More importantly, however, you can overlay two aircraft's E/M diagrams and derive instantly which tactics can be used at which altitudes to beat it. There's zero guesswork.
We don't have these in AH, just simple line graphs that don't really tell us much except absolute values.
They look something like this:
(http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e215/zulu64/mir200ps.jpg)
The thing is... it's whether or not you chose to accept you've reached a certain plateau, or you chose to believe you can still become better... that decision is entirely up to the player, and the latter is only made improbable by your doubts. For me, I simply log on and hope to not be bored to death, and have a good time. :cheers:Those G2 runs were fun, even though I kept going down....the red is like a light, if I were a bug :cheers:
You're right, careful of those absolute statements, brah. :aok
Why is so much brain power being expended on video game discussions? :headscratch:
E/M = Energy Maneuverability Diagram
It's the diagram that you use to get a full understanding of an aircraft's performance limitations. More importantly, however, you can overlay two aircraft's E/M diagrams and derive instantly which tactics can be used at which altitudes to beat it. There's zero guesswork.
We don't have these in AH, just simple line graphs that don't really tell us much except absolute values.
They look something like this:
(http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e215/zulu64/mir200ps.jpg)
Those G2 runs were fun, even though I kept going down....the red is like a light, if I were a bug :cheers:
If we were on a call of duty forum then yeah we have a problem.
No crutch planes, just players who need a crutch. There are players who can take any of the crutch planes named and win in them without using them as a crutch, as in not running or fighting from a disadvantage.
There are more players out there whose egos are fragile enough that they fly planes that give them a crutch. They justify it with all kinds of reasons but in the end it's just fear of a bruised ego.
Some of the worst examples are players that get shot down in a more or less even contest, but then up a plane with better performance to get the guy that downed them. I've had that happen to me a couple of times. Mosquito vs an LA7, then the same pilot upped a Tempest to get me, for example.I know how you feel. I hate it when you thoroughly smash them, so they take up an LA,K4,4Hog,or Tempest and B-line towards the base your going to RTB at. I can understand upping a plane to match your opponents performance such as an LA when a K4 is in the area, but I've had guys lose to my P40 and come back after me in a LA7.
I know how you feel. I hate it when you thoroughly smash them, so they take up an LA,K4,4Hog,or Tempest and B-line towards the base your going to RTB at. I can understand upping a plane to match your opponents performance such as an LA when a K4 is in the area, but I've had guys lose to my P40 and come back after me in a LA7.
thank you...I like making threads that do that lol
This is turned more into another pissing match.. shocker.
thank you...Good discussion, not pissing match :aok
This is turned more into another pissing match.. shocker.
I know how you feel. I hate it when you thoroughly smash them, so they take up an LA,K4,4Hog,or Tempest and B-line towards the base your going to RTB at. I can understand upping a plane to match your opponents performance such as an LA when a K4 is in the area, but I've had guys lose to my P40 and come back after me in a LA7.
These never ending drama posts reminds me of a Fantasy Con I worked security for the Hotel and Con in 86. Fans of Marion Zimmer Bradley and her brother Edwin Zimmer were in a hall way dressed in role playing costumes with toy weapons arguing which sibling wrote the more realistic sword fighting scenes. Edwin spent 3 months with a martial arts school in South San Francisco, quit, then started writing sword fighting into his stories. And told everyone at Sifi and Fantasy cons he had been trained in Yagu Shikage Ryu Japanese swordsman ship. His sister Marion had spent a few summers in Ireland and Scotland taking from the local legends to spice her sword fighting scenes. Not her, Edwin, or most of their fans had ever been in the military, or had to fight in combat with a sword. Swords like guns cannot fight.
At least back then everyone knew each other in person and took their chances with getting punched in the nose. Like this forum, usually a lot of screeching, posturing and windy noises over things many of you would tell your kids to get over it already.
That is why the P40s were able to beat the nimble a6ms, they could climb higher (advantage one) and dive faster (advantage 2). This caused sorta of the evolution of building the fastest and most powerful planes.A6Ms could climb higher than P-40s or F4Fs. I don't know where this idea that A6Ms couldn't climb high came from, but they are pretty competitive at altitude against 1940/1941 stuff.
A6Ms could climb higher than P-40s or F4Fs. I don't know where this idea that A6Ms couldn't climb high came from, but they are pretty competitive at altitude against 1940/1941 stuff.
Now whether the Japanese took advantage of that or not is another issue, and as you said the A6M could not dive as well which limits altitudes usefulness offensively.
Thats just plain rude. And graceless to boot.
No it's not, it's a game.Do you have a sense of humor?
It's the equivalent of complaining "I brought a knife to a gunfight and he shot me!"
No it's not, it's a game.Id say its more like losing a knife fight and than coming back with a 44. Magnum.
It's the equivalent of complaining "I brought a knife to a gunfight and he shot me!"
Id say its more like losing a knife fight and than coming back with a 44. Magnum
Do you have a sense of humor?
Id say its more like losing a knife fight and than coming back with a 44. Magnum.
You are right though, it is just a video game and your setting yourself up for frustration if you pretend like it won't happen.
No it's not, it's a game.
It's the equivalent of complaining "I brought a knife to a gunfight and he shot me!"
No. It's the equivalent to, "This guy and I were shooting targets at the range. He was out shooting me at 300 yards with his Winchester Model 94. That pissed me off, so I went to the truck and brought out my $6000 Accuracy International and showed him what a real shooter can do."
If there were no rules about what could be used beforehand, there's nothing wrong with it. You're just trying to inject some sort of self-value to the guy who loses because he used older equipment. Hmmm... now where have I heard that argument before? lol
Honestly, the drama queens of this board are the guys who point out the drama....If there is a pissing match going on why even post anything? You add to the "problem" you all are pointing out.
There are people in game who fly high eny planes and people think they are good because they land some kills in them, but when you meet them in that same plane, you find out they aren't that good.
There are people who fly "crutch" planes and have good scores because the plane has characteristics that make I good in the MA. Example Hoagi has 0....0 talent other then the ability to line up a pick and run away....the LA7's characteristics make him able to do that.
People say some Brewster pilots are good, just because they can turn toward HO on a dime and avoid people for a long time, doesn't mean they are good. It's like when you read those "player to plane" threads...I'm just like, no he only looks good because of the plane.
Which brings me to Guppy is technically right, any plane can be flown in an easy mode way. TA152, you can fly at 20K and nobody going to catch you....or you can try turn fighting in it(it doesn't work, look at my K/D)
The a6m could max altitude climb higher than the P40?Yes, by a pretty large margin.
P40F service ceiling was 34,400 feet.How many P-40Fs were facing off against A6Ms?
PlentyP-40F is closer, but still doesn't beat the A6Ms:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/P-40-flightline-201024.jpg/800px-P-40-flightline-201024.jpg)
Plenty
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/P-40-flightline-201024.jpg/800px-P-40-flightline-201024.jpg)
No torque, center mounted guns and you can fly it like a pro with a mouse and keyboard.
I mean two engines, who needs two engines?
P-38G .... now that isnt a crutch , its a full on hoveround scooter for the elderly .
P-38G .... now that isnt a crutch , its a full on hoveround scooter for the elderly .
I got mine with my AARP card...
I got mine with my AARP card...LOL.... Perfect.
So that's why he pmed me saying enjoy my kill in a crutch plane :headscratch:..I was in spit16 :noid ..although I find the spit the be a very fragile plane. ..the wings won't stay on mine. .doesn't take allot of damage to bring it down. .but what do I know I'm mostly in gvs ....I'll be quiet now and let the grown up talk :salute
Spit can avoid damage :aok
Not when it's pilot-induced. *snap*that's why I better stick to my fm2 ...at least I could stay in the fight a Lil longer before I die. .it's a tough bird
lol
that's why I better stick to my fm2 ...at least I could stay in the fight a Lil longer before I die. .it's a tough bird
FM2 is a capable little bird when flown right and a hell of alot of fun to fight in.I like it cause I'm not going to do any chasing or running I just get in there and duke it out. .I don't have the patience or skill to BnZ ..I got the heart of a turn fighter just lack the skill to be a real threat. ..unless you are AFK ..then I'll get ya on the third pass :devil
I used to fly that before I flew the 109F
38s I mean at least they look good but looks don't count.
if they wont add the p63 then i vote for removal of the ta-152 yak3, la5n!,3 Gun La7, P47M
if they wont add the p63 then i vote for removal of the ta-152 yak3, la5n!,3 Gun La7, P47MThat is a weird list you have. I can see how you relate the Ta152, P-47M and 3 gun La-7 to the P-63, but the presence of the Yak-3 and La-5FN breaks the mold. F4U-1C, C.205, Brewster, Ostwind, Wirbelwind, Me163 and, heck, the Spitfire Mk IX fit the mold much better than do the La-5FN and Yak-3. Or glzsqd's Spitfire Mk XVI. Those last three were produced and used in the thousands compared to the low hundreds or less of the others.
That is a weird list you have. I can see how you relate the Ta152, P-47M and 3 gun La-7 to the P-63, but the presence of the Yak-3 and La-5FN breaks the mold. F4U-1C, C.205, Brewster, Ostwind, Wirbelwind, Me163 and, heck, the Spitfire Mk IX fit the mold much better than do the La-5FN and Yak-3. Or glzsqd's Spitfire Mk XVI. Those last three were produced and used in the thousands compared to the low hundreds or less of the others.
I flew it a few times this week and I don't understand how anyone can ever lose while flying it.
Lol, I just hate the Spit16 :D
I flew it a few times this week and I don't understand how anyone can ever lose while flying it.
I look forward to see your stats in "the plane you can't lose in" after flying it for a full tour :devil
Fly it for a tour. Its not a miracle plane and does have weakness just like the other spits. I always thought that people that complain about late war plane "low eny" could always fly mid war or early war. Problem solved and their wouldn't be a need to squeak about being killed because you made a decision to fly a p40e...
Fly it for a tour. Its not a miracle plane and does have weakness just like the other spits. I always thought that people that complain about late war plane "low eny" could always fly mid war or early war. Problem solved and their wouldn't be a need to squeak about being killed because you made a decision to fly a p40e...
Why don't you fly the P-40E for a whole tour, so you can properly compare it with all the "weaknesses" of the Spit XVI?
Back when the spit16 was first introduced, sonic22 and I tested it with duels and use to do 3 full emmilmans from the start as we tangoed. We couldn't believe its performance but those fights were incredibly fun!
WAIT! When did they add the spit16?