DCS WWII: Pacific Marine Question

Yup, its just a matter of them wanting to do them, I hope in the future...

If there will be enough hope ... and enough interested someone will pick it. After all its about money :)

And passion if you ask me ;)

I think it will happen, that is what my gut tells me, but time will tell.

Well, until then an interest can be raised more and more.

When we are talking about DCS, there are many factors, most important are how people play the sim, do they communicate, do they work as a team? There is quality of the missions, and then there is pilot skills... so many things come into play.

 

But at the end of they day, if you are striving for balance, your are striving to lose, air combat is all about having an advantage or using the ones you were given, its no different in DCS.

 

The fun of flight sims to me is being put in a historical mission, being the underdog, and seeing what you can do to change history.

Achieving balance is not equal to always entering the fight at the same altitude and speed with a cold merge. There is a degree of actions that you can take to switch the fight in your favour. Example P-51D vs Fw190D9. This is a rather fair match.(it would be very well balanced if P-51 had 150 grade fuel) Both planes are similar, P-51 turns better and Dora is a little bit faster at low alt. Both of them are B&Z type of planes that fight on rather equal terms, thus it is the pilot and his knowledge of the plane that makes the difference.

Now having Bf109G14 would also be great, because P-51 would be better at speed and G14 would be more maneuvrable at low speeds. But with Bf109K4... we run into some troubles. K4 is faster, more maneuvrable and better turning than P-51D making the "beeing a better pilot" a requirement for P-51 players. If we gave F4 to Germans instead of K4 it would also be highly uneven as the difference in performance is so great that even with superior turning ability the F4 has almost no chance to get into a firing position against the P-51. It sill would be a better match because both planes have some strenghts (F4 beeing more maneuvrable 51 beeing faster) but it would be far from recreating most of the combat that happened in 1944. That is not how it was IRL. Yes K4 fought against P-51D but if Allies were afraid that Luftwaffe was capable of battling them they would have introduced P-51H to the party which is from roughly the same time period as K4. P-51D was mostly fighting against Bf109G6.

I can't change your mind. I want competetive fights that represent history, not some "change the history" stuff, that never should have place. As I said, I like to be underdog some times, but not all at times. I have so many years of experience that I think I know what I am saying. It seems that none of sim games can be balanced and not because of the inability to do so due to nature of the conflict, but just because devs don't want to. A shame.

Also, DCS gives a big advantage to better turning planes, due to bad LOD, mipmaping and overall visiblity. Thus rendering usless positioning for attack as you cannot see the enemy unless you go into a tunel vision and forgett that something may be behind you. That is why B&Z is almost non-existand and everybody flies at 100m above ground.

To be exact it is nearly impossible to jump on a target and procede with a zoom-climb while keeping track of enemy ariplane. It is just bad.

Also, have you even tried to listen to those aces that videos I've linked? Doesn't that make any impact on you?

I'll be honest, I didnt read most of this.

 

I listed that balance isnt important to me, as war isnt about balance. So not sure why you are trying to explain balance to me. Anyways, this is going off topic now at any rate...

The problem is that the set we have is not representing standard encounters of 1944 europe and especially 1944 Normandy campaign that map we will get. During D-Day the K4 was not even in production. So it is not the "war" I know from history books.

If balance is not your concern, then maybe history is.

I'll be honest, I didnt read most of this.

 

I listed that balance isnt important to me, as war isnt about balance. So not sure why you are trying to explain balance to me. Anyways, this is going off topic now at any rate...

As a dev working on alot of WW2 aircraft I can completely agree and understand. Once an aircraft has been picked the focus is then on replicating that aircraft as accurately as possible.

My goal for DCS is to move away from the deathmatch 1:1 , 2:2 scenario and move into a more immersive scenario where you might have 5:2 or the like where yes there are aircraft that are obviously superior but there are other forces to make the sim interesting

Pman

History, read Ilya's reasons for these models... That's the only history that matters right now when it comes to what we have.

Where can I find answer to that what you said? There is nothing about it in DCS WW2 FAQ.:huh:

Here is the original kickstarter page.

Some of the answers are scattered around in the updates.

The bottom line is that 'it is what it is' for the time being and everyone will just have to wait and see how it develops over time.

Both are possible. For Zeros ... its really not that hard. Considering there is no existing K-4 and yet we got one in really nice quality I am all positive as there is a bunch of existing Zeros and some are still flying.

 

There is also one Oscar III flying in Australia I think ->

 

BTW. Here is part two of that nice animation of George 21

Not forgetting the Ki-43 I that was restored in NZ back in the 1990s...now part of the Flying Heritage Collection but not currently flying.

or this Hayabusa...

And here's Chino's A6M5 with a genuine Sakae; presumably the A6M2 thru A6M3 series, with their single exhaust stubs, sounded slightly different.

Oh yeah, I forgot Ki-43-I. The other one ... well, maniacs ...

I know the Planes of Fame A6M5. Had some contact with PoF museum, those are really good and passionate guys.

And I dont think sound would be much of a difference, the feeling described by pilots was a stream of a hot air blown straight into face if someone kept cockpit open. Single exhaust pipes provided additional thrust and gave a slight speed increase.

Anyway, here is best video if one wants to see or hear the most known flying Zeros ->

http://youtu.be/LM1nWi3t3N4

As a dev working on alot of WW2 aircraft I can completely agree and understand. Once an aircraft has been picked the focus is then on replicating that aircraft as accurately as possible.

 

My goal for DCS is to move away from the deathmatch 1:1 , 2:2 scenario and move into a more immersive scenario where you might have 5:2 or the like where yes there are aircraft that are obviously superior but there are other forces to make the sim interesting

 

Pman

Well said! To me personally the most fun I get out of these WW2 aircraft is akin to visiting a museum. I get to learn and get hands on experiance to aircraft that I otherwise would have never had the opportunity to so.

Thanks for this photo, they are very nice.

These guys live close to me ;)

 

So that's where New Zealand's Ki-43-I got to! Dang it, first they grabbed the Ki-43, then they took the brand new NZ restored Mosquito: I say they should gift NZ their Fw 190D-13 and B-25J as a fair swap.

These guys live close to me ;)

 

 

 

 

Is it the Heaven? I want to visit this place.

This is hell of a nice A6M3 model 22.

But I'm personally a bigger fan of Blayd A6M2

Zero and Ki-43 are so beautiful little things... Much more "sports cars" than fighers, but still... :) Always had a sweet spot for both.

Rather interesting Scud launcher too...

Zero and Ki-43 are so beautiful little things... Much more "sports cars" than fighers, but still... :)

Considering how many planes both types shot down I think they were hell of a fighters. Particularly Hayabusa, despite considered as weak armament made of single 7.7 mm and single 12.7 mm machine guns or eventually two 12.7 mm machine guns in nose it was still the most effective Japanese fighter - Ki-43 shot down more allied planes than any other type for both Navy and Army.

I'm a bigger fan of A6M but still those were much more than "sports cars" :pilotfly:

To me they are nothing like sports cars. They are agille but not particularly fast. They are living the idea of ww1 dog fighter but with monoplane looks. They are dueling weapons that want you to meet them in 1v1 classic dogfight but they have a problem when somebody denies that. They are the best dogfighters that prove that this concept is just old and energy fighting, speed, altitude and teamwork matter the most.