Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 28sweep on January 07, 2003, 12:54:47 PM
-
From the IL2 bbs:
Unfortunately Oleg has made it clear that his research shows that US planes were markedly inferior to both the German and Russian planes and that the US's performance in our inferior planes was only because of the excellent training of our pilots.
Markedly inferior!! I see posts like these bubbling up over-there more and more. I suspect its because FB's release date is approaching and it will include P-47's, P-40's, and P-51's. I have heard a lot of complaining from the LW folks from the day Il2 was released and I've heard many complaints here/ and there about the Uber Russians planes in IL2. They are coming to dominate the sim market with Il2, FB's and even LockOn and I am becoming more suspicious of Oleg and the crew. Hell LockOn will feature like 6 flyable Russian planes and only 2 from NATO. I've heard rumors that the F-15 is very inferior to the Mig29. All I got to say is that the F-15 is like 200-0 in combat
.REAL COMBAT. What's the Mig29's record? I've read that the La-7's would come apart in mid air because of poor construction. Ever drive a Russian built car??? The more I read coming out of Moscow the more I appreciate HT's impartiality (no one is perfect). What are Oleg's sources?? TAS maybe
remember them? Would anyone believe anything coming from official Soviet sources??? Oleg is from a country with a very long heritage of honesty and virtue
.LOL!!!
-
P39 is American built and flies just fine in Il2...
Why not wait until the release of FB to see how it pans out?
-SW
-
And I would add... why worry? Would it be surprising if a company based in Russia biased its aircraft towards Russian birds? It just isn't a big deal IMHO, even if it is true.
-
Its the classic example of using one nation's military data to model aircraft. With a leader that would execute people for performance shortcomings, do you really think there wouldn't be bias? Especially given who was in charge during that period.
The real question would be if whether or not they have the P-39 out-performing the P-51 and P-47.
AKDejaVu
-
The engines of Russian fighters were rated for maximum performance at low levels so that they could support the Red Army's offensives. German fighter engines were rated for maximum performance at higher altitudes. Consequently, Russian fighters were shot down in droves by the Germans. If German fighters got suckered into combat at lower altitudes they paid the price.
If Il-2 does not reflect these facts, then something is wrong with its' programming.
Shuckins
-
Il2's engine degredation as alt increases does not exist.
This is reportedly in FB and supposedly makes a huge difference according to beta testers.
In ~2 months, we shall see.
-SW
-
is this a pre-whine ?
-
No way US planes should be able to handle late war USSR planes in a low altitude furball, which Il-2 is. Anyone thinking the P-51 will be able to handle the La-7 on the deck is in for a nasty surprise. That may be the type of inferiority he's referring to. Long range and good high altitude performance were the hallmarks of the late war US planes, and those characteristics don't translate into good furballing in a sim.
ra
-
Now come now, you don't think ole Oleg's data might have some Cold War Propoganda spiked in there, do ya? ;)
No surprise...really. So he thinks his planes are the best. Fine.
:p
-
Oedipus, that account does nothing to say that P51s will outmanuever Yaks or vice versa... it just says that those Americans jumped the wrong planes.
-SW
-
Scared to have your jug and pony arses badly kicked at medium and low altitudes? :rolleyes:
-
Look to the Korean war for more examples. American pilots (P-51,F4u-4) owned communist pilots flying Yak-9's and Lag-9's. Enough said..........Oleg is trying to rewrite history....
-
Well, if you read Soviet sources, it seems it was the other way around. 28Sweep, you seem just as indoctrinated. Who says US sources are right and all others are wrong ?
Communist pilots ? That makes US pilots imperialist, eh ? What's next ? Nazi 109s ?
AFAIK, Korea was jets, mainly F86 vs MiG 15, right ?
-
Not in the early months before the Chinese became involved. But I agree, nothing wrong with a sim written from a Russian perspective.
-
Originally posted by Hristo
AFAIK, Korea was jets, mainly F86 vs MiG 15, right ?
I distinctly remember reading that the MIG15 to outclimb, out turn the F86, but the F86 had better pilots, and could dive better. (shrugs) US perspective naturally. :)
-
we're talking about a game here right?
-
A sim like this one or Il2 are much more than games....they tell a story. Its disrespectful and wrong to misrepresent history like that and BTW....I talking about early Korean war. Oh, and about the Mig-15. I seem to rember that the Engine was the real Gem of that airplane and it was ripped off directly from a British design.....you don't think those commie's could ever design anything good by themselvs??
-
The Mig-15 and the F-86 were both superb aircraft, but were built to different design specifications. The Sabre weighed about 4,000 pounds more than the Mig, so it wasn't as maneuverable and had a lower combat ceiling.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Hristo
Well, if you read Soviet sources, it seems it was the other way around. 28Sweep, you seem just as indoctrinated. Who says US sources are right and all others are wrong ?
Communist pilots ? That makes US pilots imperialist, eh ? What's next ? Nazi 109s ?
AFAIK, Korea was jets, mainly F86 vs MiG 15, right ?
Hristo, in an earlier thread I pointed out the true test of IL2s FM would be the US planes. There is enough hard data around, and planes still flying, to verify all the facts.
It is quite obvious there are some 'issues' with the LW models. This point of contention has been hard to resolve due to 60 year old flight testing.
If the US models, of which many are still flying, including many in non-US countries, do not perform either to the reported WW2 spec, or even compare with existing flying aircraft, then the LWeenies argument is validated.
FB and the US aircraft will be the acid-test for the LW arguments.
And no, Korea was not mainly jets, lotsa Ponies operated there.
-
Hey Vulcan....+ F4u-4's darn it...BTW he's already failed the test if he has said that "US Planes were Markedly inferior."
-
US planes in Il-2 a true test ? Yes, I tend to agree to a point, actually. A true test on Soviet data on mentioned planes, but not more than that.
So far I've seen Oleg's posts where he states some fairly low airspeeds for P51 (410 mph for short periods, if I remember correctly). Also, he said if you expect the P47 to be great low level dogfighter, you are in for a nasty surprise. However, he said that at high alt P51 is better than 109K (which he seems to qualify as one of the best planes of the war). We'll know more in February.
LW planes have their share of problems, but the thing seems to be blown out of proportion aswell. I'll name few: engine overheats far quicker on LW planes than VVS (recent discussion at UBI shows just how wrong this is), G-6 is unbelieveably poor plane for unknown reason, sometimes Yaks don't get engine damage, 190 compresses much more than in AH. All this is my experience, I might even be wrong, but I know that Il-2 qualities outweigh them (for me). Not much different than AH issues, if you ask me. Still, I can hold my own fairly well in 190 even against cheating AI. I even remember being accused of liking Il-2 because LW planes are uber there (it was on this board ;)). No, I like it because of its accuracy and attention to detail.
What annoys me is the cliche statements of 'propaganda and lies', a sim 'trying to rewrite history', 'communist' etc. So, they made such a great sim, but it is in fact a plot to undermine Western planes and show how good Soviet planes actually were. Now, why would someone do that ? Maybe Oleg is just doing promotion for Russian aircraft industry ? ;)
-
A sim like this one or Il2 are much more than games....they tell a story. Its disrespectful and wrong to misrepresent history like that
Mmmm Hollywood are you listening? :rolleyes:
-
LMFAO Revvin...
Total Ownage.
-
Hristo-
I think you have to put things in context with regards to Oleg or anyone who was raised in a society of disinformation. He may truely believe the information he is using is correct. And if you think that this has changed,, it has not.
-
I'm sotckpiling tissues for ya'll US pileits... :D
-
Hahahah, a good game just got better!
-
But all you get is a pretty expensive turd.
Will FB have power ups?
-
Originally posted by 28sweep
A sim like this one or Il2 are much more than games....they tell a story. Its disrespectful and wrong to misrepresent history like that and BTW....I talking about early Korean war. Oh, and about the Mig-15. I seem to rember that the Engine was the real Gem of that airplane and it was ripped off directly from a British design.....you don't think those commie's could ever design anything good by themselvs??
Neither were designed "By themselves" both had Nazi help.Its ok that the Sabre had a Brit derived engine but the Soviets are stupid if they used it?
And yes the Soviets did design many good things by themselves.
It is convienent to think they were all brain washed fools I guess. But the fact is that at thier design alts the Soviet fighters were mean aircraft. Crude by 1944-45 western standards but very effective.
Oleg had some very uncomplementery brit and US stats on the pony that he posted to support his opinion of it.....Saying he is afraid stalin will get him wont make those go away.
-
I found a page (http://www.maxwell.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/aerial_victory_credits/avc_korean.html) containing US victories in the Korean War, and I could only find 8 F-51vs Yak3/9 kills :confused:
It doesn't state how many were lost, but even if it were non, a 8-0 ratio is hard to justify as "owning" when we are talking about a period of 1 year+.
Anyway in AH I'd much rather be the Yak in a Yak vs. P51 fight. I must be biased. :)
__________________
Ylil. Snefens
Lentolaivue 34 (http://www.muodos.fi/LLv34)
My AH homepage (http://home14.inet.tele.dk/snefens/index2.htm)
(http://home14.inet.tele.dk/snefens/209.gif)
-
Hristo-
If memory serves, the LW planes of the current Il-2 are not the same as the LW planes of the early iteration of Il-2... hasn't there been a fm revision since then? I seem to remember (and it wasn't you) an "Oleg is GOD!" poster who would come here and tell everyone how perfect the Il-2 fm was... and then it was patched.
Anyway, I'm with you, what in the world is the difference even if it does wind up biased? I mean, in the grand scheme of things, I just don't think it will matter to me, anyway.
-
You are correct Kieran, I forget the guy's name too, but after Il2 being out for a year I can honestly say that guy was a butterin baffoon.
The Il2 FM is screwy and has holes... he kept saying "If you want to see how a real 109 flies, get Il2" or some other nonsense like that.
In any event, this past year has proven Il2's deficiencies and made Oleg fix them...
We shall see with FB.
I own Il2, and like it. I will buy FB, and from what I've seen in screenshots (for both the campaign system, new graphics and planes), I will like it even more.
If you are that upset that the American planes ******************MAY***************** be modelled after Russian sources (hey, get a grip... it's a Russian game) and **************MAY************ be modelled differently than American made games, then don't buy the game.
If flown properly, it'll be a moot point... American planes can't do jack toejam against Russian planes in AH in the dirt anyway...
28sweep, you are doing exactly what you are proclaiming Oleg is doing...
-SW
-
Throwing a tantrum for a game that isnt even out.
Think of it this way.
The P-39 is a great plane in IL2
You know how the P-51 and P-47 were even better.
He cant make them worse then the P-39.
-
Hey Revvin...
What you don't believe that Tom Hanks won the European war by himself...How dare U!!!! How about Ben Afflack winning the Pacific by himself??? You don't believe that too???
-
Hehe and all this time I've been playing IL2 cause I thought it was "neat". Guess I missed the point somewhere!
-
Agh, so if I get to lend money...
New CPU/mobo so I can play IL2 (without rudder)
OR
A little choppy AH with new rudders and throttle
Ugh ugh, decisions, decisions.
I need a new graphics card too.
-
I think the game is a blast. Period.
I don't think they'll model the US planes that badly and even if they don't model them 'correclty' (according to 'us') I'll still have a blast playing the game.
If they're modeled to the point of being unflyable (no way that'll happen) then I'll just fly different a/c. Not a biggie.
They're all just games so 'flying' different a/c, or different FM's (than you think they should be), is just a matter of graphics and code.. the plane 'looks' different (shape and skin) and it 'handles' than you think it should (code).
so?
play with a different a/c, game, or genre
-
28sweep, Do you need tampons? What a whiny little....
I wonder if you can tell same thing face to face.
-
Originally posted by Russian
28sweep, Do you need tampons? What a whiny little....
I wonder if you can tell same thing face to face.
are you going to beat him up for insulting Oleg?
-
Isn't it designed by Russians but produced by the French? Or is that LOMAC?
-
Originally posted by Pongo
are you going to beat him up for insulting Oleg?
Either that or he's gonna loan him some tampons.
AKDejaVu
-
BTW, the USAAF irons are (usually) easy meat for the La-5, La-7 and the Yak-9U at medium-low altitudes in AcesHigh as well. Didnt know HTC was a communists' lair :rolleyes:
-
28Sweep, your nose is overmodelled... :D
-
The US planes are inferior below 10k compared to the Yak-9U and La-7 in A ces High, as has been pointed out.
Hitech must be a commie, socialist, liberal, God-hating, anti--American!
-
Witch, BURN HIM! :mad:
-
When I see a title like this : I smell a RAT (Oleg Maddox)
and next a post by Pepe :
Originally posted by Pepe
28Sweep, your nose is overmodelled... :D
I just have to agree :D
running away ... fast ;) (all in good fun mate:p)
-
its a darn commie plot to steal flight sims from the ami capitalist monopoly.
Oleg is a revisionist and is out to overthrow the correct hollywood version of the WW2 airwar. Who ever heard that jugs and p51s werent good "dogfighters"? What BS............
Thats it I quit......................
OH btw do you know what Aces High is referred to quite often?
Allies High..........
-
OH btw do you know what Aces High is referred to quite often?
Allies High..........
By no-life, Luftwhining tards, no doubt.
-
You almost make it sound as if we're a splintered group, Dowding.
But we aren't. So you're being redundant. Sort of like the AH gun-damage-flight model. Allies get total triple redundancy, while the LW planes seem to be hold together by wishful thinking, armed with rocks.
No way a P-51 ca be faster than a 109. Everyone knows the 109 ruled the skies. And a Spit outturning a D9? PLEASE. i've seen thousands of reports were they state that the D9 was a very manuverable plane that easily kicked Spitfires ass.
There.
I shall need to peruse my collection of vintage nazi books now.
-
Mais sur bien, Straffo est toujours vrai. :)
How's that for a bit of bastardized French? :D
But I think he's trying to make the point that it is my opinion that all LW flyers are automatically Luftwhiners. I never said that.
And BTW Santa, I certainly don't believe luftwhiners are nazis.
-
it's just tongue in cheek dowding :)
(did you forgot StSanta inimitable style ?)
your french work enought to be undertandable :)
(better than my spoken english :p)
-
Hey Russian....I'll say anything to your face...I doubt you'll rember it though....your probably drunk on Vodka all of the time anyway.
-
Originally posted by 28sweep
A sim like this one or Il2 are much more than games....they tell a story. Its disrespectful and wrong to misrepresent history like that and BTW....I talking about early Korean war. Oh, and about the Mig-15. I seem to rember that the Engine was the real Gem of that airplane and it was ripped off directly from a British design.....you don't think those commie's could ever design anything good by themselvs??
Sabre and MiG-15 :) Again the money for the fish :)
Yes, RD-45 was a copy of officially licensed Rolls-Royce Nene engine, VK-1 was a development of that design.
MiG-15 climbed better then Sabre, and Sabre was more maneuverable. MiG's service ceiling was higher. Soviet pilots didn't have G-suits, and it really helped yankees.
-
Yankees are a baseball team........
-
Russian Planes Suck!
LA7 is porked in both Il2 and AH.
-
La-7 is not flyable in Il2
-
Puke wrote:
Isn't it [IL-2] designed by Russians but produced by the French? Or is that LOMAC?
Indeed. IL-2 was developed by 1C:Maddox Games of Moscow. Originally it was to be published by Blue Byte Software (a German company), but it was then acquired by Ubi Soft, a French corporation. In the end, this was much better for IL-2 as the product saw a much more comprehensive marketing campaign and boxed sales in North America (whereas Blue Byte had planned only online sales for the region), albeit at the cost of a delayed release date. In the end this was a blessing in disguise, as it allowed for continued development and led to a very clean product out of the box (compared to so many other half-baked flight sims that had been shoved out the door).
To further complicate the issue, Ubi Soft's NA headquarters are located in Montreal, Quebec (Canada). :) Sooo
before you lads ever get to see IL-2 in the USA, it has to get vetted through heavily socialist countries. :p
As for Oleg's bias, there may be, or there may not be one. Every game has its faults, and IL-2 is no exception. People that purport it is perfect are clearly delusional. That said, it has raised the bar without question where boxed flight sims are concerned not only for its sumptuous graphics but also for a close eye to detail. Little things like the fact that no two planes will ever have the same numbering/marking scheme; a detailed mission builder where you can place very cool static objects and zoom in to see the 3D in-game perspective; gorgeous clouds through which icons arent displayed; leading edge slats that open and close. The list goes on and on, and IL-2 was an early adopter of most of these things that have since been repeated by others. The cockpits alone are to die for. Personally I find it very immersive, and that allows me to overlook certain inconsistencies and find it very enjoyable.
The one aspect of IL-2 that I do find missing, however, is a dedicated massively multiplayer online component thats why I fly AH. Flying on a server with hundreds of people, knowing that every single plane you see apart from some bomber formations is controlled by another human being, provides a tension and a sense of satisfaction (if victorious, of course!) that no AI plane can ever match. On the other hand, it also leads to often ridiculous suggestions that something is porked because the loser of an encounter is often going to be unhappy with the result. :) Ahhh, the joys of the bulletin boards.
I'm not an IL-2 apologist, but, all things considered, I consider it an excellent product. What upsets my sense of immersion, however, is not what may destroy another's. In my experience the fact that something isnt exactly spot on in one area doesnt mean that the whole product isnt worthwhile. If we held every flight sim to that standard, absolutely none would be playable.
What I can tell you, is that Oleg is a purist. Ive had dinner and drinks with him a few times, count him as a friend, and Ive never met anyone as generous nor as passionate about flight simming. While some of you may question his perspective or his sources as is your wont youd be misplaced to fault him for deliberately trying to create a product thats not the best he can make it.
He thoroughly believed there was a market for a high end combat flight simulator when every publishing company was dumping them from their inventory and cancelling development plans. As a writer covering interactive entertainment and as a fan of detailed flight sims, I cant tell you how many times Ive had to deal with the PR departments of software companies that had cut a flight sim product or sacked a development team all because they thought that the death knell of the genre had rung. Apart from Microsoft and their FS/CFS franchise, pretty much the only developers still working on dedicated flight sims were small companies offering niche products like Aces High.
Maddox, for his part, never dumbed down IL-2 to pander to any market other than the hard-core flight simmer. As consumers, we should all be pleased to see a product that was made to high flight sim standards, and then was made more accessible (options for see-through cockpit, turning off stalls and spins, padlock, icons, etc.) at the request of a publisher, but not in any way impacting the core of the game. That, my friends, is one of the secrets to a successful flight sim: Make it detailed enough to please the oh-so-vocal puritanical flyers, and then make it accessible to the more casual or neophyte players by having configurable settings.
28Sweep, while I respect your right to wax lyrical (or not) about political issues and differences, you should really be better informed before making accusations without merit. Consider the reason that LO:MAC features more Russian planes than NATO ones is because it is an evolvement from an earlier series of products (Flanker), rather than because Eagle Dynamics is out to belittle NATO, or from the way you make it sound, because they have an axe to grind with Western capitalists. Sure the programmers (as Oleg is) are grads from Soviet aviation institutes, and surely do have a personal fondness for the depiction of Russian aircraft, but we should be happy that there are any Western flyable planes in there at all: Originally it wasnt going to be designed as a survey sim and its only through the whole SSI/TLC/Ubi Soft acquisitions that its scope was broadened. Considering Eagle Dymanics affiliation with The Fighter Collection based in the UK, why dont you see that its a development team with a clear passion for aviation rather than one with a personal plan to jab you in the eye?
Ubi Soft has been a flight sim saviour, not a menace. Blame companies like Rowan, Strategy First, Electronic Arts, and, most recently, iENs boxed efforts, for shoddy flight sim products, not a company thats supporting and publishing solid military simulations that work well right out of the box.
Frankly, if you dont feel you will enjoy the products because they dont have enough of the content you are looking for, dont buy them. Or better yet, read informed opinions once the products have been released, and then decide whether or not they would be to your taste. But enough with your jingoistic conjecture and railing against products that havent even seen the light of day: Its the very attitudes like yours that are one of the reasons why publishers stopped producing flight sims.
Cheers,
phaetn
-
what can you say after that.
me like fly good both.
-
Well said phaetn!
MiniD
-
Yes.
-
nice
-
Well said, Phζton.