F3 view for IL2

[waystin2]

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

[shreck]

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.

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

[E25280]

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.

[MORAY37]

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.

[MORAY37]

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.

[E25280]

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.

[mechanic]

[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.

[Plawranc]

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

[Tilt]

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)

[Anaxogoras]

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.

[waystin2]

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?

[shreck]

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!     

[Flipperk]

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.

[newz]

To all who are claiming that redout/blackout does not occur in F3 mode
you are in error. Myth busted.

[Anaxogoras]

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.