air realistic is not realistic at all.
Just stop trying to legitimize toxic behaviour by citing real life events.
Orders stay as they are counter for toxic players, like you, who try to troll and want to waste everyone time
It is toxic to use a P-47, P-51, hellcat and wildcat as they were meant to be used: Masters of speed and dictating engagements rather than handing out free kills to the slow and anemic zero.
1 Like
Stop this intelectual dishonesty, please.
It is toxic to
And thats my final word, as you are clearly try to troll here
You are literally rejecting REAL LIFE EXAMPLES of using STEALTH and INITIATIVE to either SURVIVE or WIN battles against aircraft with SUPERIOR DOGFIGHT PERFORMANCE (either innate or as a consequence of damage).
Air realistic should rely on using REALISTIC TACTICS and TECHNIQUES to win your match-ups.
Air realistic is supposed to give you an experience of a Simcade without needing advanced control familiarity - a more casual way to get the same dogfight experience as air sim for when you’re not in the mood or have the energy to deal with cockpit view and full-real controls.
You’re literally claiming it’s OK for the REALISTIC mode to sabotage REALISTIC strategies because your turnfighter might lose its advantage. “Come on, dogfight my zero in your P-51 coward! Stop throwing a tantrum and gaining energy and position on me!”
1 Like
Again, this is not real life, it is a GAME that IS NOT REALISTIC.
AND YET IT DOES NOT
yet it does not give such experience
Another intelectual dishonesty here
Where? Quote it? Or is this another example of your dishonesty?
You literally call using speed and stealth cowardice and throwing a tantrum.
It used to when we had 60 minute matches back in 2015.
We need to bring that back.
Blame the GRB CAS grinders who lawnmow and refuse to climb and suicide into furballs.
Also blame people reducing match max length from 60 minutes and the introduction of 16v16 over 12v12.
The flight models, damage models more than enable the use of such tactics and in fact seriously encourage them.
Try and beat an A6M2/M3/M5 with a P-47 or P-51 in a turnfight. The zero wins without effort.
Now fight the same A6M2/M3/M5 in your P-47/P-51 while keeping the fight fast and maintaining separation & altitude and using stealth to its fullest power. The Zero cannot do anything except pray you get greedy and don’t reset with enough discipline.
(Sparse and scattered clouds are awesome - they give tactical decision making opportunities. The bad clouds are the continuous ones without enough breaks that simply separate high/low altitudes without interesting choices.
1 Like
Quote it please, i want to see it. Things you quote literally does not match what you claiming
10 years ago, yeah, i also live in the past
You should never blame players for poor game design
Why are you keep talking about those planes? I never mentioned them, yet you keep going and going about them
SIMPLE FACT: IF you WOULD NOT hide at map corners YOU WOULD NOT be spotted by orders. Simple as
Oh look, more real life tactics that rely on stealth and first-strike:
In 1967, however, the MiGs adopted new tactics. The MiG-17s tried to lure the F-4s into slow-speed, turning fights by employing circling formations at low altitudes over the likely routes of U.S. strike forces. The MiG-21s, guided by ground controllers, approached U.S. attack formations at low altitudes to avoid radar. They gained positions behind the formations, then climbed rapidly and made a single high-speed pass, often catching U.S. pilots unaware.
Adapting to Disruption: Aerial Combat over North Vietnam > National Defense University Press > News Article View
Those awful soviets, throwing tantrums hiding in radar shadows…
Obviously if they weren’t hiding, they wouldn’t have been spotted by the magic eye of sauron! Cowards, truly!
1 Like
Ain’t gonna bother with that, because this game is not realistic at all, and it does NOT have anny connection with this game.
Better show me real life tactics where airfield mechanics can glue ripped wing back to airplane in 30 seconds to make it fully operational
Anyway, as i am getting tired of this:
I am not gonna waste 10minutes of my time, when i could be playing next battle looking for a dot on sky, just because some sore looser dude is having his realistic pilot moment and is “GaiNiNG pOsiTiOn FoR AmBuSh”, i am popping order and finishing it and move on
The aircraft fly according to realistic physics. Maybe not 1:1 to the aircraft in real life, but a close approximation and exhibit much of the relevant physical characteristics.
If aircraft fly according to realistic physics, then they are meant to be used with realistic tactics appropriate to their physical reality.
The instructor in ARB does give you some unrealistic advantages: Perfect pinpoint stabilized accuracy even near stall speeds and no risk of entering spins when abusing your aircraft. Markers and third person view remove per-plane ergonomics issues about rear visibility and seeing under you. However, these don’t make any of the tactics invalid beyond greatly complicating defensive flying (much longer effective gun range, far greater situational awareness to land high aspect deflection shots, prop hang snipes) and ambushes (cannot sneak up on someone’s low six).
2 Likes
Lmao, who told you that?
Let’s see:
- All left-turning tendencies exist (Torque, Spiralling slipstream, P-factor) and must be compensated
- Some aircraft naturally compensate for left-turning tendencies (assymetric wing, frise ailerons)
- Side-slip and skid exist. If you skid too much while turning, you enter a flat spin. If you slip too much while turning, your wing drops and you stall but can recover easily.
- Side slip and Forward slip introduces significant drag, allowing for more advanced landing techniques and require appropriate rudder input for normal cruise (or trim).
- Propellers have drag and thrust efficiency that can be abused/misused depending on prop pitch% and throttle. This is very visible on planes with small propellers causing situations where the wrong pitch setting causes WEP to have no tangible effect.
- Gyroscopic Precession exists when you pitch up/down at high torque/mass propellers.
- Additional thrust from certain radiator designs exists and a consideration to be made when managing radiator%.
- Throttle settings affect left-turning tendencies and can be exploited to keep a damaged plane stable absent trim
- The way your guns are installed impacts your flight. Some aircraft, upon squeezing the trigger, experience a pitching motion that must be learnt and predicted to land hits with.
- The amount of speed your airframe experiences introduces a shift in center of lift and therefore pitch stability which must be compensated for appropriately lest you get into deadly oscillations or worse.
- Propellers show greater efficiency at low speed regimes.
- Propeller pitch affects acceleration and maximum speed
- Super/turbocharger gearswitches are a function of density altitude (temperature AND altitude).
Now, a lot of these are automatically compensated for by the instructor but they exist as part of the Semi-realistic and full-realistic gameplay modes.
Game has far better near-stall/edge of envelope modelling than MSFS without mods.
It has far better propeller dynamics than MSFS2020 without mods. Flying a prop in MSFS2020 feels like flying an underpowered jet.
Notably, warthunder lacks ground effect and wind. Wind is significant, but ground effect is mostly irrelevant to our primary activities. It’d be great for jets and heavier aircraft to exist though for more reasonable take-off runs and landing speeds.
More notably, Warthunder was almost indistinguishable from IL-2 birds of prey outside of significantly simplified engine operation and ability to use instructor.
1 Like
Yeah, i am not gonna bother with readding that essay
You can live in your delusional world all you want
Tell me what flight dynamics are missing from warthunder, or stop acting like a child.
1 Like
You could in fact stop acting like a child, because throwing a tantrum for half a day, because blind hunt and avenger does not allow you to troll in game is childish.
i am done with you, thanks for proving me that orders are needed in game to counter toxic players like you
take care.
btw, i will not be responding here anymore, you can continue your tantrum on PM if you like
:)
Upon being given real life examples of using stealth, you cry “doesn’t matter.”
Upon being given direct, testable and objective measures of the game’s flight model/dynamics, you refuse to engage knowing full well you have nothing to bring to the table.
2 Likes
You have not responded to me once this thread. I’ll assume you have no counter and therefore have no argument.
Gyroscopic Precession:
Instructional video:
My in-game testing:
Expecting: Pitch up cause nose right turning tendency - CORRECT - Slip indicator moves LEFT indicating need for LEFT rudder
Expecting: Pitch down causes nose LEFT turning tendency - CORRECT - Slip indicator moves RIGHT indicating need for RIGHT rudder.
Forward slip causes increased drag and can be used for landing at high speeds and high glide slopes without overspeeding.:
In-game testing (i made a instructional video after being annoyed at people landing using guns):
In level flight, your plane experiences left turning tendencies due to a multitude of reasons (Torque, slipstream, P factor):
Left-turning tendencies demonstrated:
In-flight changes of throttle causing the plane to start spinning without sufficient counter-rudder or aileron:
While taking off, plane requires significant rudder input to not flip upside down or veer into a building (watch my feet):
We can also observe how left-turning tendecies become less pronounced at higher airspeeds as I ease off on the pedals as we pick up speed.
Aircraft require appropriate rudder “step on the ball” to avoid entering slip stalls. Too much rudder causes skids
Instructional video:
In-game testing:
No rudder input (increasing slip with increasing angle of attack).
Expectation: Increasing AoA causes increasing nose-right as I turn left, eventually blanking and stalling my right wing and cause me to safely level out.
Too much rudder input (I stomp left rudder moment I notice side slip) into a skid.
Expectation: Too much rudder compared to adverse yaw makes my nose drop below the horizon, blank my left wing and put me into a dangerous flat spin.
Bonus: Demonstration of PARE spin recovery.
Providing precise and objective demonstrations of propeller thrust, drag, pitch and all that is beyond my testing skills, however literally any MEC guide will stand as my proof.
google doc guide to MEC
A Comprehensive Guide to Engine Controls in War Thunder - Google Documenten
So tell me.
Where is Warthunder unrealistic? Is it perfect 1:1 replica to SPECIFIC aircraft? No. Does it have the important flight dynamics of propeller aircraft flight except for wind? Yes!
What important flight dynamic is it missing from providing a proper, early 2000s quality simulation of propeller air operations?
1 Like
Sorry, i have you in ingored, that’s why your messages are hidden unless i specifically click to show hidden messages and i do not read anything you said in this topic
i’ve simply checked what was this hidden message out of curiosity