Nein, keine Simulation simuluert alles perfekt. Das ist ein selten dämlicher gedanke. Das geht schon gar nicht weil unser Verständnis über die welt gar nicht dafür ausreicht. Wissenschaft ist ein induktiver Prozess.
Abgesehen davon, müssen bomber keine simulation sein damit WT eine ist. Wie bereits gesagt müssen systeme und prozesse emuliert werden, nirgends steht dass das für alle Systeme und Prozesse gilt, wäre auch lächerlich weil Dan gäbe es gar keine simulationen.
Du schweifst aber mittlerweile sehr ab. Deine Argument war, dass WT aufgrund der unhistirischen matchuos kein Simulator ist.
Anstatt Strohmänner zu bauen bleib bei exakt dieser aussage, da ich exakt diese Aussage kritisiert habe.
Und meine gegenbeispiele bleiben bestehen, DCS iRacing und co verlieren ja auch nicht ihren simulator status weil sie historisch nicht korrekt sind.
Hör auf mit fadenscheinigen Argumenten und wenn dich jemand auf ein spezifisches Argument direkt anspricht, bleib bei exakt diesem Argument und komm nicht mut was anderen um die ecke was nicht kritisiert wurde. Das ist unehrlich und feige.
It is a pity that the men I witnessed seeing the KOREAN VETERANS in the game and leaving the game are not here.
Or, because they are masochists, they enjoy falling prey to much more useful aircraft that entered service 3 or 4 years later than they did. interesting
Stop spouting nonsense. I have seen German players like yourself quit when there is nothing remotely Korean War related anywhere near you.
The P-51 Mustang is a World War II fighter. It’s service in Korea was strictly limited to being a close air support platform, and the only thing that is different about a Korean War F-51 and World War II P-51 is the changing of the nomenclature and the addition of new radio/IFF equipment.
Now I’m starting to doubt your mind. Really. see a doctor.
My friend, are the D5, D30 and H series models different from each other in the game? yes it is different. Are their performances different from each other? (Let’s give examples since you are understanding impaired, climbing, speed, altitude performance) Yes, they are different. Did they go into production on different dates? Yes, they entered. These are the issues that concern us in the game. People don’t look at the fuel pumping pressure of the plane or anything like that. Are you a brat, are you a joke, are you doing business, are you an order, just ignore this title. Or let’s face it, you are right, yes. There is an expression in Turkish called “talk, crazy”. I guess we need to treat you this way now. well you are right. Ok.
Since you are a graphics fetishist, can you add HIGH SPEED MANEUVER CAPABILITY among these graphics?
That video you made caught my attention. It was obviously made against people who expressed the same problem. But I will not give up and will voice this on every platform.
Also, friends, yesterday, during a small visit to a high school, I looked at the scores. Apparently, the planes from the KOREAN WAR era were flying in the air with high scores. Well, we have to give credit where they go and match the planes of 44-45 with superior planes in every field that entered service in 46, 47, 48, 49 and 50.
Yet another insulting screed by a helpless wehraboo that can’t figure out how to fly his own plane, and someone who abandons the game as soon as it’s not one sided seal clubbing.
There is no good way to graphically model high speed turning characteristics otherwise I already would have. It’s not simply an issue of looking at turn rates at speed because energy loss also has to be taken into account.
The game I saw you in yesterday was capped at 4.7 BR. You left almost as soon as I showed up. I don’t think your skill issue has anything to do with Korean War planes and just comes from you blindly flinging a 109 around and thinking it should be better than everything without giving it a second thought.
If Gaijin really wanted to make things difficult for German mains they would make the engine power settings of Late-War Spitfires historically accurate. Good luck fighting a Griffon Spitfire in any of your Bf.109s.
As I mentioned in the first comment I opened the topic. The main players are always victimized by some people who nest in these forum environments. At this age, the forum environment never changes.
Of course, there would never be a lack of a flatterer right next to them. It was ignorance.
The man made good intentions as if he were joking. Don’t worry, I DO NOT FEED THE SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE AIRPLANES PRODUCED IN THE KOREAN WAR.
So I don’t know. Maybe such people are supported by the producers. However, the scores in the game do not lie. When we look at the whole, the alies side always has the high scores in high level sim wars. Although the producers undoubtedly knew better.
I feel like I’m arguing with an 11 year old. Keep keeping the topic alive. I hope the producers will take steps to correct the injustice.
If you’re wondering how I play, ask your friends, it’s a YouTube thing.
You are not victimized just because you can’t figure out how to play to the strengths of your plane.
You are not afraid of planes because they were made during the Korean War…you are afraid of anyone in your matches that is semi-competent with their planes and doesn’t just blindly turn fight on the deck and set you up for free kills.
Take for instance our most recent match. I showed up around 27 minutes into it and the Allied Team had a total of 6 kills while the Axis Team had a total of 15 kills…practically a 3:1 advantage. This was a 3.7BR - 4.7BR match and of course you are flying the highest BR possible Bf.109 that you can.
As soon as experienced Allied Players like myself and Greek_Air_Force showed up you had decided to quit the game in spite of your team already having a massive advantage with some fairly competitive players. The Fw-190 pilot that was 5-1 at the start was very good.
So instead of helping your team when you had one of the best planes at the battle rating…you pre-emptively quit and left them out to dry. Not because of OP-51…but because you just are not very good at fighting without a massive performance or numbers advantage. Your entire accusation about only fighting amateurs is just your own sense of projection.
Experienced players always have higher scores. Players that are playing in a team in voice chat have higher scores. The relative performance of the planes is secondary to player skill and team work in most cases.
In fact my highest scoring prop games are mostly while flying Axis planes like the Fw-190 A-4 or Bf.109 K-4.
The only US plane that has overwhelmingly superior performance and ability compared to its German counter-parts is the F4U-4B Corsair. Pretty much every other plane that you are complaining about is just a terminal skill deficiency on your part.
On the other hand the Axis/Red side typically has access to all of the best fighters in the US tech tree and at a lower battle rating. Italy gets a P-47 D-30 at 3.7BR. China gets the P-51K, P-38J, and P-38L. Japan gets the P-51C. That isn’t to mention planes like the Ki-84 and J2M2 that climb better, turn better, and are effectively faster than most everything they face.
In my previous comments, I mentioned manual radiator control and complete opening of the flaps. I explained the strategies on how to duel safely against g10.
But you deliberately speak as if I were aware of all this. HOW CAN SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T KNOW THE FLIGHT CHARACTER OF PLANES CAN MENTION THESE DETAILS?
By the way, you can ask Greek Airforce about me :)
You are deliberately making things personal. I apologize for writing in capital letters because I am dealing with a friend who has a comprehension disability.
YOU ARE TRYING TO IGNORE THE GREAT INJUSTICE.
AND YOU ARE OPENLY LIEING ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE OF THE AIRPLANES.
IT IS CLEAR IN THE GRAPHICS YOU POSTED. YOU ACT AS LIKE THE 109 SERIES PERFORM MORE WITH SMALL DIFFERENCES.
Although the K4 series is better than the D30 in some aspects, these advantages on paper are crumpled and thrown away in high speed maneuvers.
After making our explanations to this understanding-impaired friend, let’s go back to our slogan.
FRIENDS, THE GERMAN AIRPLANES THAT ENTERED INTO SERVICE IN 1944-45 HAVE A HIGHER PERFORMANCE IN ALMOST EVERY SENSE. THEY FIGHT AGAINST THE AIRPLANES THAT WERE PLACED INTO SERVICE IN 1946 47 48 49 50 AND REMAIN WEAK.
GERMAN PLAYERS ALWAYS COMPETE AGAINST MODELS THAT ARE SUPERIOR TO THEM AND TRY TO ESTABLISH SUPERIORITY WITH THEIR PILOTING SKILLS.
AGAINST THEIR COMPETITORS WITH SIMILAR PILOTAGES, THEY APPEAR AS IF THEY WERE PLAYING WITH WW1 SERIES AIRPLANES.
You posted a theory that you have completely failed to prove. P-51 D-30 will not out-climb the Bf.109 G-10; it can only run away. If you try give the G-10 your tail in the merge by just flying straight it will just follow you as you try to climb and eventually shoot you down. You will not energy trap the G-10 unless you are running from map border to map border and trying to fight above 7km. It simply will not happen in the confines of the tournament map.
There is no line that the P-51 D-30 can take in the tournament map that allows it to safely defeat a late model Bf.109. If it comes down to a turn rate fight it loses. If it tries to compete vertically it also loses. The only way that it wins is if the Bf.109 pilot is not aggressive enough and gives up too much position in the first turn and cannot fly close to the limits of the plane.
You don’t actually know though. You keep loudly proclaiming that you do but cannot show any proof. Your argument is purely theoretical and its also a theory that I have already tested and there is no way to make it reliably work. The only circumstances where it is possible on EC maps is if the Bf.109 decides to try to follow P-51 D-30 while D-30 shallow climbs above its max speed. This is a 10 minute long process and is completely negated if Bf.109 goes into optimal climb speed. Then the best case scenario for P-51 is that fight starts with head-on at high altitude.
Why would I? Is your name supposed to carry some kind of gravitas with the entire sim community? For some reason I don’t think it does.
You are the one that keeps name calling.
You don’t like the data that I posted so you are now claiming that it is false. My testing data pretty much aligns with everyone else’s testing data with small discrepancies coming from the way that different tests are conducted.
The K-4 climbs better, accelerates better, and has a higher sustained turn rate than the P-51 D-30. Those are facts. The only speed range where the P-51 D-30 turns better than the Bf.109 K-4 are at speeds above 600kph IAS; the only time both of these planes will be in this speed range is after coming out of a dive. The D-30 has a very small window where it actually does turn better than the K-4.
And the high speed turn comes at a huge cost of energy so attempting to utilize is something that a smart Bf.109 player can play around. You can clearly see from duels with HosTavi that initial high speed turn is not an advantage that the P-51 D-30 can reliably utilize against even the Bf.109 G-6; the difference is just not large enough.
How about you actually stop lying? Here is a 3rd party performance chart for the P-51 D-5 and the P-51D-30.
Every single one of the Bf.109s climbs better than both of the P-51s. It is not even a close comparison.
The P-51 D-5 is almost a 1:30 slower to reach 6000m than the same tiered Bf.109. A contemporary Bf.109 will reach 6000m by the time it has reached barely above 4500m.
The only advantage the D-5 has is being only around 10-20kph faster than the Bf.109 G-14 and that is only at some altitudes. It is actually slower than the G.14 at 5000m. And while the top speed is higher…it’s acceleration, climb rate, and sustained turning ability is absolutely abysmal.
The P-51 D-30 compares much more favorable against the late Bf.109s because it has a much better climb rate and acceleration because it is running 75 inches of manifold pressure which is the same manifold pressure setting that was used late in World War II with 150 octane fuel.
If you compare Bf.109 K-4 top speeds to P-51 D-30 top speeds…the only place the P-51 D-30 has a top speed advantage is below 3000m, and it is once again only 10-20 kph. Above 3000m and the Bf.109 K-4 is faster.
So once again we are back to my final point.
The P-51 D-30 is appropriately tiered. It’s performance sits directly between the Bf.109 K-4 and the Bf.109 G-14. It still climbs worse and turns worse than any of the Bf.109s that it can face. The fact that you struggle against it just attests to the skill of some American players, or just attests to your lack of skill. Either way it comes down to a skill issue.
I demand trial by combat!
If the P-51 D30 is so good as you mentioned get in on your P-51 D30 and duel me in Bf 109 G6, G10 G14 or whatever you want!
Kill me once in P-51 as I am in the 109 to prove that P-51 D30 is superior to Bf 109’s :)
Let’s explain it again to our understanding-impaired foot-loving friend.
First of all, there is not only d30 in the game. Corsair series f4u4 and 4b and griffons are also included in this incident. THEIR PRODUCTION DATE IS CLEAR. EXCEPT FOR THE D30, MOST AIRCRAFT DATE UP TO THE 46 47 48 50’S. DO NOT REDUCE THE VAINED CONVERSATION TO THE D30 PLANE. I say again, if P51 notices his enemy and dives, he can easily eliminate the danger with his sudden maneuver due to K4’s locked tail. and because he is fast, he widens the gap. k4 looks after you like a jackal on a road runner.
A professional who uses a p51 would never use his plane just like a spitfire. It fires its salvo and opens the gap with its high speed and mixed climb rate. The moment k4 turns and tries to catch him, he falls into the trap. If p51 personalizes the situation and gets stuck in the tail, then it may lose the fight. If the other side makes good evasive moves.
Here I clearly sense the fear of losing the unfair advantage they have.
Let game makers keep doing this. Whenever I play the game, at high levels, bombers usually play to make money. Frankly, they know. And these loser friends can occasionally hunt amateurs who enter the game and be happy. They can experience orgasm.
But you won’t be able to go beyond personalizing the event. Frankly, I don’t care about the graphics you showed. We have explained many times that it does not work in practice.
Guys… he’s level 88. Has a K/D of 0,6 and almost has 22d in a fighter cockpit. Let’s just leave him to his delusions and move on. Some people have to learn the hard way.
Plus: He clearly does not want to learn, but rather vent his frustrations and ignore all evidence against his opinion based on the aforementioned “experience”. No matter how well you may explain it (which you have btw), he will not believe it.
There is a huge injustice out there. I think this is the same in other game modes. The situation of the tanks against the helicopters is truly deplorable. At least the people there are equivalent to each other.
The introduction of the EBR 1951, designed to serve in a different field against the Panzer4, is a comedy in itself.
These kids don’t actually read what I write. Maybe when these friends went to kindergarten, I was playing this game with a different account. The proof of this is the old Battle of Britain event, the new addition of trees and the monster called yak3p having the same br as 109g2. Older players will probably know.
Also, believe it or not, I often quit the game without landing the planes because I got bored.
If the producers fall for the words of a few brats and fail to see the injustice, then the situation is not good.
Do you actually know the production date of the P-51 D-30?
The P-51 D-30 was produced in 1945, and the D-30 was not quantifiably different than earlier production blocks. The addition dorsal fin in front of the vertical stabilizer was added with the D-20 block. The only other change was adding a metal elevator starting in February 1945. Both of these modifications would also be retrofitted on previous D blocks.
The performance advantage of the P-51 D-30 over the other P-51s is due to the fact that it is running on 75" of manifold pressure. This is a change that was approved in March of 1944 and was used operationally in Europe.
The Bf.109 K-4 did not even enter service until October 1944…5 months after the higher manifold pressure ratings and high octane fuel was approved for use in Allied fighters. The Bf.109 K-4 would not even be approved to run it’s in-game engine setting of 1.98 ATA until February/March 1945…almost a full year after the Mustang was approved to run at the higher engine settings.
The same can be said of the Bf.109 G-14 which didn’t enter service until after D-Day.
The 75 inches manifold pressure P-51 is 100% historically contemporary to the late model Bf.109s. In fact what the US tech tree is missing is a late model P-38 that is running 2000hp per engine instead of the 1550hp that it has in game.
A P-51B with 75 inches manifold pressure would curb stomp the Bf.109 K-4 in basically every performance metric while having a very similar climb rate.
The same thing can be said about the Griffon powered Spitfire variants; they were using 150 octane and 25lb boost settings in 1944 in order to chase V1 Buzz Bombs; the Mk 14 variant that we have in game instead runs its lowest manifold pressure setting instead.
Look, on this page it is mentioned that the d30 entered service in mid-1945. that is, the date of its passing into the hands of the armies.
Guys say that the d30 series does not even go to war.
In short, the main rival of k4 is the d20 25 series.
I may have exaggerated about dogfighting, but a professional pilot using the P51 will not lose his energy in a dogfight with the BF109 series. does not take risks. He hits and runs away. However, it is still a very good aircraft with good turning performance and energy retention. It is the only plane made of other wood that I have ever enjoyed playing with.
In fact, it should face models above k4 against the d30. like k6, k14.
Although the Griffon and MK 18 Spitfire series are always equivalent to the K4, they are at the same level as the G10 and 14. It’s like joke after joke.
God knows when other countries’ planes entered service. It’s hard not to go crazy.
I wish POST-WAR PLANES success against the bombers. No sane person would play fighter against such unfair competition. Even though it’s not playing, there are usually bombers on the axis every time I enter.
Note: This Lf series is an exception, I don’t know why they added it. The monster you know. It’s not a problem, depending on the period in which it was produced, it can be defeated somehow, we defeat it, because it is slow. But still, I think it’s unfair.
Simulated battles need to undergo separate evaluation and regulation. Equivalent games are not really playable. I believe that if it is handled, it will be unrivaled in its field.
The P-38K-1-LO was considered with 2 Merlin engines which would’ve indeed been quite powerful. And it should be the variant you are talking about. But it was never built not even a prototype. The original 1850HP P-38K-1-LO is the one in game. But that was one off, it also used the P-38g airframe, so it does have it’s drawbacks.
Besides that it is weird that some people treat the late war setting G-10 as of it is the introduction version.
