Jump to content

karlmeyer25

Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About karlmeyer25

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. I'm coming to the discussion a bit late, but I'm at a loss here. Steel Balls IS the WWII DCS airquake server. It has exactly what everyone here is asking for. Short distance between Axis and Allied airfields:check. Bots to spawn in-case server numbers are low: check. AAA for airfield defense to prevent (most) vulching: check. Not sure what else you need. Also BS is only on beta which is unfortunate. But Steel Balls is on stable. I just came off it this morning and thankfully somebody was on. Just show up honestly, and guarantee folks will join. -SLACK
  2. Interesting. Started off in the MiG and have been flying it exclusively for months now. I have a lot of stick time in the DCS Warbirds and I think the MiG easily compares to the BF-109 in terms of flight characteristics. I just got done flying the F-86 for about an hour for the first time and making my way through the manual and Chuck's guide. I can tell you, it easily flies like the P-51 in terms of "feel." The P-51 is a pilot's airplane. Lot of luxury features (3-axis trim controls), responsive and a great roll rate. The F-86 feels that way too. Very responsive, great roll rate, lot
  3. This has been my personal experience in game. I own both and routinely fly both and I've even foolishly followed a 109 or two into the vertical, only to end in defeat for me in my Spit. So the chart I referenced showed the climb rate without MW50? That makes more sense now. I'd love a document that could show the climb rates with MW50 enabled. -SLACK
  4. Hello, Reddit Link: Here I just wanted some help in this discussion on Reddit I was in. Not being a technical expert on either air-frame, I wanted to see if u/Layin-Scunion was correct in stating that the DCS Spitfire Mk. IX LF could out climb the Kurfurst. If true, doesn't that mean that the BF-109 is at a disadvantage in the vertical? I tried using the climb data from the Kurfurst website and data about the Spitfire but I'm not a technical expert in this field. Thanks guys for your help and awesome knowledge. -SLACK
  5. There's a lot of great stuff in your post and I don't disagree with anything you said. I don't mean to say that the P-51D we have in DCS is on parity with the DCS BF-109 K-4 even at altitudes above 23kft. What I mean to say is the match up there is more even (although like I said not, parity) than a fight at 9k ft and below. A Mustang driver has more tools to play with at higher altitude than he does at low altitude. He's still at an overall disadvantage, but I'm sure he'd take the extra options than not. I also want to posit that a downward spiral at max throttle (WEP for the Mustang and M
  6. While technically accurate its a bit misleading to call it under-powered. I'm really not smart enough on the historicity of the aircraft to comment enough about the 67" to 75" difference in regards to which aircraft was more likely to face off against the 109 K-4. I think if the current DCS P-51 and the 109 K-4 were to face off at 27k ft, then you'd have a much more balanced match-up. You could counter the 109's low speed performance and outstanding climb ability with the P-51's faster dive speed and faster turn rate at high speed. The second stage supercharger also helps close some of the
  7. I recently landed and tried to repair during Golden Fall at Novo, but couldn't. I can rearm and re-fuel, but repair didn't work after I had powered down my a/c. Is repair no longer available? Thanks for an amazing server btw. -SLACK
  8. Lot of good points in here. Nobody is asking for parity just for game play's sake. We could all be flying War Thunder for that. I think most just want more options to tweak the online match ups. In the absence of mutliple a/c variants I think minor tweaks could be an effective compromise. If a real world crew chief could pull the center tank, IFF and Detrola, why can't that be an option (however negligible an advantage that would be)? I for one would simply welcome period appropriate G-Suit. While waiting for the new and improved DM, that right there would go a long ways to giving t
  9. I had no idea this was a bug but thought instead this was a design decision! I can't enable the comm menu, so I can't set the desired fuel level I'd like or re-arm. Thanks for looking into this! See you guys soon!! -SLACK
  10. Great times this weekend!! Steel Balls remains my favorite because of the imposter setting, and the addition of AI aircraft. This server has by far the best seat to fight ration of them all! I would love it if you re-enabled airfield re-arming and re-fueling though. Great server and great times!!!!! -SLACK
  11. Not adding anything but incredible thread. Lots of great information in here and I'm glad to see the devs receptive to it. Well done Krupi. -SLACK
  12. I hate to sound like a broken record, but you clearly state what is a fundamental problem in DCS WWII. The planes combined with a numerical disadvantage of players in BS make for miserable experience for Blue. I know you've discounted it in the past, but I'd like to raise the idea of AI aircraft being added to the mix. Is it possible for a formula of AI to player ratio that can boost the number of Blue aircraft to compensate for a structural game disadvantage? The advantages I see on this are several. The P-51D human player relies on surprise as the chief advantage to bringing down a 109
  13. Maybe a poll as to what the BS community would prefer. Labels, Imposters (with the different settings as sub options) and nothing. You could then take the top two options and have a second poll to see what everyone prefers. I also think I speak for everyone when I say that Burning Skies is a great place to play and I really admire your willingness to adapt and try new things on the server to make things fun. Of course I have my own requests (please enable export for Tacview!) but to my earlier point, thanks for creating a great place to play. I can't wait to see what you create once t
  14. To clarify, this means you won't see "eekz took off from Novorosky" but will we still see the updates about the amount of targets remaining at each of the target sites? -SLACK
  15. In theory I agree with you. In practice I disagree. The MP population is simply not there for WWII DCS to ensure a quality experience throughout the many different timezones of the day. Bots are by no means a perfect solution, but there is something to be said about the fun in action when you have 3 to 5 human players and double that in bots. The seat to engagement time is low, which is what at the moment everyone is looking for on the servers. There's really no solid method for scenario play online (even though BS and DoW tries...but there isn't enough incentive for Red), so its safe to s
×
×
  • Create New...