Did you understand what I wrote? I didn't compare A6M3 with Spit Vc, because both planes felt much to close. But I can compare A6M2 and A6M3, at least in a rough way. The later feels more potent. That's it.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Did you understand what I wrote? I didn't compare A6M3 with Spit Vc, because both planes felt much to close. But I can compare A6M2 and A6M3, at least in a rough way. The later feels more potent. That's it.Did I mention that I won Waterloo for Napoleon, easy really with a good sim? Honestly, your constant switching between what actually happened and what you do on a computer is rendering the discussion a complete nonsense.
What is flip-flopping?
Of course I wonder, if you ever played this game?
Actually, you could do all that, and since I'm the pilot, I can have all the wrong tendencies. I pull to the right, and sometimes trim against it.
Whatever. 100% accuracy is neither achievable nor necessary to draw some conclusions.
All, cannot, infinite, NEVER, anything - for someone who advises caution, you use a whole lot of big words.
BTW - I judge my internet speed with ping.
Did you understand what I wrote? I didn't compare A6M3 with Spit Vc, because both planes felt much to close. But I can compare A6M2 and A6M3, at least in a rough way. The later feels more potent. That's it.
No your not the pilot. You are sitting on a swivel chair in front of a computer screen, with a cold glass of coke next to you all while sitting on the ground and not at 15,000 ft.
The point people are making is that since you will always walk away, there are no life or death situations and decisions to be made. You can not replicate that, and therefore your decision making will never be the same.
Now cam Sim talk be moved to the gaming threads?
It's much easier to do in real life than in any sim I ever tried.Take two maneuvers
1/ a turn in an aircraft and on a motorbike
2/a roll in an aircraft and braking on a bike.
Holding an aircraft in a tight turn means on the edge of a stall, cornering on a bike means holding the tyres on the edge of letting go, a tyre produces maximum grip when it is slipping about 10%
Agreed. Actually, I don't like sims. On a computer, I'd rather play proper computer games which do not pretend to be reality.I can speak to you about how it feels and what to do but if you cant have the tyres sliding going in and out of every corner you will be in the back half of the field, that is not simulated in a "sim" just as holding a plane on the edge of a stall isnt.
It's not like I'm being treated with velvet gloves here, is it?Your replies of "now what" and "so what" really push my buttons.
I know it's not reality, and I know it's perfectly safe. But what does it change?If sims were real you would have one go at it, spend hours learning all basic maneuvers progress from trainer to advanced trainer to combat aircraft then after about 200 hrs in a corsair or maybe 10 hours on a 1945 zeke you take part in your first combat. Any encounter that you lose or crash means you never ever take part in a sim again.
From what I remember about the stats at one stage about 10% of US aircrew were being killed during training (maybe others can give them, I know questions were asked in congress) Almost all pilots had seen their friends or aquaintances killed long before they ever went into action, their primary motivation was staying alive, the ones without that motivation for whatever reason, quickly got shot down.
Whatever. 100% accuracy is neither achievable nor necessary to draw some conclusions.
Sorry friend, I prefer people who live in the real world. I could write pages but you are wise as a drunk thinks he is sober, there are people posting on this thread who have actually flown some of the aircraft in the discussion and others who have been front line pilots. You argue with them on the basis of what you experience sitting drinking a cola in front of a computer.Agreed. Actually, I don't like sims. On a computer, I'd rather play proper computer games which do not pretend to be reality.
Air WarriorOf course I wonder, if you ever played this game?
Zeke was much tougher nut to crack than people give her credit. How much tougher? I don't know. We never started to actually discuss it here yet.Bakters, suggest you state your position, not in game terms, but what your hypothesis actually is. What is it you believe. Main points. be clear, be simple.
Then we can ask you the basis or support that you have for your position.
How I'm being disrespectful? Just because I do not simply agree with everything I'm being told? I'll agree when I'll read a reasonable argument. Sorry, but "we know better" is not one of those.Thats what people are getting annoyed about. Its very difficult to follow your line of argument, and the raison detre for the positions you are taking look flimsy. People here are passionate about their a/c, and when someone comes jaunting in acting like they know everything and in fact they are in the opposite, it tends to get peoples back up.
You should try to understand that you are taliking with people some of whom have flown some of these birds, for real, others who have Dads or Grandads who flew, others who have read books that are written by real life experts. All these experiences and information sources are far more reliable than a sim. Some respect for people who have been in harms way in service for their countries wouldnt hurt either.
So, are you saying that inaccuracies in my sim make the result invalid? Because if so, I can respond. If not, I don't know if I should.And i can say that because Im a champion player at sims, and once upon a time made a living out of simulating combat theories, in the military . Computer based tactical sims in the open market are generally Horse shite Im afraid.
Allow me to explain the gaming world, if the "sim" was realistic and you were up against an ace you would die or if you were wise you may possibly escape, but the sim makers want to hook you to play it talk about it and get others to play it. That is how "real" your sim is. A newly qualified pilot has almost zero chance of taking down an ace in a one on one combat in any era, if the player always loses then he uses a "better" sim, one where the player has more "success"So, are you saying that inaccuracies in my sim make the result invalid? Because if so, I can respond. If not, I don't know if I should.
The more accurate the model, the more precise conclusions you can draw. With a rough, inaccurate, qualitative model you can only draw rough, inaccurate, qualitative conclusions.So what percentage of accuracy is needed to draw the right conclusions? 99.9%? 59.9%?
I claim no such thing.To claim that a flight sim accurately represents real-life combat is drawing a very long bow.
Interestingly, your arguments work even better against spec-sheet wars, don't they?Why?
1) There is no guarantee that the program accurately depicts all of the flight and performance characteristics, under all conditions encountered in the real environment, of the aircraft being depicted: all the flight simmer has is the developer's claims and the player's perceptions. Read any flight simmer forum and see all the lengthy and often contentious arguments about how the sim is performing and ask yourself who has the final say in how your favourite aircraft will perform.
2) Your aircraft is not subjected to the wear and tear of operational service - every time you take off you are in a brand new, well maintained aircraft that has no problems. How often did this happen in the Pacific, particularly for the Japanese?
3) The computer does all the flying for you: you do not have to heave the aircraft around with your arm and leg muscles; you do not get fatigued and sore through constant high-g manoeuvres; you are not subjected to grey-outs or black-outs, with the attendant physiological effects; you have the option of pausing the game to take time-out for a cup of coffee; you are not going to get killed; you are not going to get burned or mutilated if things go wrong (unless your computer explodes).
4) A flight sim does not change history - like it or not, the Corsair shot down a far larger number of Zeros, using the right tactics of boom and zoom, than Zeros that shot down Corsairs in low-medium speed dogfights. That's all that needs to be said.
As for dismissing that film about the F6F as so much propaganda? No offense, but I'll believe the experiences of real life pilots flying real life operations rather than your vast experience as a sim pilot.
I play against the bot, then switch planes and compare results.Allow me to explain the gaming world, if the "sim" was realistic and you were up against an ace you would die or if you were wise you may possibly escape, but the sim makers want to hook you to play it talk about it and get others to play it. That is how "real" your sim is. A newly qualified pilot has almost zero chance of taking down an ace in a one on one combat in any era, if the player always loses then he uses a "better" sim, one where the player has more "success"
I've been in danger. I think I know what it changes, and I addressed this aspect already.No your not the pilot. You are sitting on a swivel chair in front of a computer screen, with a cold glass of coke next to you all while sitting on the ground and not at 15,000 ft.
The point people are making is that since you will always walk away, there are no life or death situations and decisions to be made. You can not replicate that, and therefore your decision making will never be the same.
How do we compare which parameter on a spec-sheet is of great importance, and which is of minor importance? Without testing?Now cam Sim talk be moved to the gaming threads?
I play against the bot, then switch planes and compare results.
Essentially, I play against myself. I cancel out any hand-holding. It helps me equally in both planes.
.This "debate" is going nowhere and is proving nothing