Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Corsair performance?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Corsair performance? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Corsair performance? - 6/21/2008 8:18:55 AM   
daveja vu

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 11/29/2007
Status: offline
Were the Corsairs as historically effective against Japanese fighters as the game depicts? It seems that in the game, Corsairs (and Hellcats, to a slightly lesser extent) absolutely rule the sky over Japanese fighters. And even though the Corsair historically was a large, fast, high performance fighter with marked superiority over Japanese models, I've always believed it was a tricky plane to fly which took skill and experience for a pilot to be able to maximize it's strong points vs. determined fighter opposition. At one point it was known as the "Ensign Eliminator" due to the number of fatal accidents by inexperienced flier. And it took time for the pilots to become proficient enough with their machines to best the Japanese.
Post #: 1
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/21/2008 3:45:46 PM   
tocaff


Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline
The Corsair was a deadly beast in the right hands and the Hellcats downed more Japanese planes than any other US fighter.  The Japanese designs were made obsolete by new US designs and their pilot training (poor) sent green replacements to the front as canon fodder.

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to daveja vu)
Post #: 2
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/21/2008 4:08:29 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2353
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
I assumed the Corsair had a better record but a 11-1 kill ratio was still very ,very good. It could outclimb, out dive and out turn the A6m as long as it stayed out of the low speed turning fight they had their lunch. The Corsair with it's huge Pratt and Whitney engine could take serious damage and still make it home. It had a long and distinguished record and for me is one of the great fighter designs of all time.

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 3
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/21/2008 9:07:26 PM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

Were the Corsairs as historically effective against Japanese fighters as the game depicts? It seems that in the game, Corsairs (and Hellcats, to a slightly lesser extent) absolutely rule the sky over Japanese fighters.


Yes, I think it´s pretty close. Corsair and Hellcats did rule the sky beyond question. These planes are just too fast with too much horsepower to weight for the Japanese fighters to do much with.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 6/21/2008 9:13:52 PM >

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 4
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 7:21:03 AM   
Hornblower


Posts: 1361
Joined: 9/10/2003
From: New York'er relocated to Chicago
Status: offline
On a kill ratio the  Hellcats were the best, but personally the corsair was better.. reason why they were in production into the korean war..

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 5
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 7:45:43 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
Actually the Corsair outlived its contemporaries because, unlike the Thunderbolt or Mustang, it was a carrier capable fighter-bomber, which came in handy off the Korean penninsula.

But look at these ridiculous combat air results from my game w/Todd:

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/20/43

Weather: Rain

... Air attack on TF, near Tulagi at 38,39

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 23
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 31
Ki-49 Helen x 6

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3 Zero x 4 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 9 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen x 2 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen x 4 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair x 1 damaged

1LT I.Hickman of VMF-121 is credited with kill number 8

COL D.Nishihata of 1st Sentai bails out and is CAPTURED

... Air attack on TF, near Tulagi at 38,39

Japanese aircraft
A6M3 Zero x 18
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 19
Ki-49 Helen x 5

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 3 destroyed
Ki-49 Helen x 1 destroyed


CPT K. Walsh of VMF-121 is credited with kill number 5


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF, near Tulagi at 38,39

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 5
G4M1 Betty x 6

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty x 2 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Counting only the fighters, the IJN's first sortie had 5:1 odds vs. a handful of Corsairs, and then 4:1, and look at the ridiculous results; the last sortie just added insult to injury, and the IJ pilots were not novices, either.

Apparently I was up against TV's Robert Conrad and his "Black Sheep" squadron; this is worse than a Western when a cowboy fires his six-shooter once and then 6 Indians go down in the dirt!


< Message edited by Joe D. -- 6/22/2008 10:31:36 PM >


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Hornblower)
Post #: 6
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 8:36:34 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2353
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
Corsair pilots were good but those numbers considering the escorts are extreme.

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 7
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 8:49:32 PM   
RGIJN


Posts: 1057
Joined: 11/24/2006
From: far away from battlefield :-(
Status: offline
You think this is extreme? I can contribute more of this ridicoulous stuff. Real after action reports from my PBEM with Ken. Real pain as you can imagine

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/22/43

Air attack on TF at 43,43

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 27
D4Y Judy x 3
B5N Kate x 14
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 6
Ki-48 Lily x 9

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 6
P-38G Lightning x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 23 destroyed
D4Y Judy x 3 destroyed
B5N Kate x 12 destroyed
B5N Kate x 3 damaged
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 2 destroyed
Ki-48 Lily x 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-38G Lightning x 1 destroyed
P-38G Lightning x 1 damaged

1LT A. Jensen of VMF-214 is credited with kill number 13

Allied Ships
BB Indiana, Bomb hits 1
CL St. Louis


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air attack on TF at 43,43

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 54
A6M3 Zero x 32

D4Y Judy x 11
B5N Kate x 26
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 21
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 10
Ki-48 Lily x 6

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 3
P-38G Lightning x 12


Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 27 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 2 damaged
A6M3 Zero x 16 destroyed
D4Y Judy x 1 destroyed
D4Y Judy x 3 damaged
B5N Kate x 6 destroyed
B5N Kate x 17 damaged
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 2 destroyed
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 7 damaged
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 6 destroyed
Ki-48 Lily x 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair x 1 destroyed
F4U-1 Corsair x 1 damaged
P-38G Lightning x 15 destroyed
P-38G Lightning x 7 damaged

1LT A. Jensen of VMF-214 is credited with kill number 15

MAJ F. Tomkins of 432nd FS bails out and is CAPTURED

Allied Ships
DD Warramunga, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CL St. Louis, Torpedo hits 1
CL Honolulu, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
BB Washington
BB Indiana
DMS Zane, Torpedo hits 1, on fire

Attacking Level Bombers:
4 x Ki-48 Lily at 6000 feet
2 x Ki-48 Lily at 6000 feet

Though the Lightnings joined the slaughter, the Corsairs did the main job.
Look what THREE of them can kill!

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 8
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 9:03:45 PM   
RGIJN


Posts: 1057
Joined: 11/24/2006
From: far away from battlefield :-(
Status: offline
another one... 133 (!) escorts died like flies against 24 CAP fighters. Despite I am well aware of the true capabilities of the allied fighters this seems indeed a bit unrealistic. Sheer numbers should have made some impact in this particular dogfight too as I suppose. Or am I wrong??


Air attack on TF, near Nevea at 50,43

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 88
A6M3 Zero x 20
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 25

Ki-21 Sally x 15

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 10
P-38G Lightning x 14



Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 35 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 6 destroyed

Ki-21 Sally x 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
P-38G Lightning x 2 destroyed
P-38G Lightning x 2 damaged

2LT K. Walsh of VMF-121 is credited with kill number 8

LCDR P.Kawamura of EI-1 Daitai is KILLED

(in reply to RGIJN)
Post #: 9
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 9:54:31 PM   
tocaff


Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline
The Corsair pilots in question were good, well rested, had high morale and were on steroids.  The amount of kills could only be attributed to 1 of 2 things:
The game code highly over rates the Corsair.
The Japanese pilots ran themselves into the ground trying to escape.

I'll opt for door #1. 

The combat, while great for me as my P-38s were no where to be found, was ridiculous.


_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to RGIJN)
Post #: 10
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/22/2008 10:14:52 PM   
Stele


Posts: 85
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline
What about altitude? Altitude should be taken into consideration. If high enough, the Corsair can maintain a good level of energy over the Zekes for numerous passes especially at high altitudes.

A few times I've had my Corsairs at a low altitude, because I simply forgot to set them at a high altitude, and they came out either damaged or destroyed.

(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 11
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 12:05:21 AM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline
The actual kill ratio for the F4U was 11:1 and the Hellcat was 19:1 so you are looking at HUGE differences in effectiveness BUT a lot of those ratios were built in 44-45 when the Japs were tossing up pilots who were lunchmeat. I'd think the ratios would be lower in 43 but still you'll get some horrible kill figures.

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 12
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 12:08:50 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
yes, the F4U was good, but much of that was due not only to the quality of the plane against tha tof the zero, but also how poor Japan's pilotswere becomming. In the game, that does not seem to matter. The B-17 has the nickname of a superweapon in this game, but the true killer is the F4U

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 13
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 12:48:03 AM   
DrewGator


Posts: 30
Joined: 10/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RGIJN
1LT A. Jensen of VMF-214 is credited with kill number 13
1LT A. Jensen of VMF-214 is credited with kill number 15


It looks like you actually did run into Pappy Boyington's Blacksheep squadron (VMF-214)!

_____________________________

DrewGator
Union Army of Occupation
Florida

(in reply to RGIJN)
Post #: 14
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 1:06:12 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: _Stele

What about altitude? Altitude should be taken into consideration. If high enough, the Corsair can maintain a good level of energy over the Zekes for numerous passes especially at high altitudes ...


I seem to recall that escorts would fly an altitude just above the bombers they escorted, and my bombers w/their torps were set at 6,000; so I bumped them all up to 11,000, the bombers then dropped to 200 ft to release their fish while my escort fighters did much better, i.e., they held their own.

Apparently any appreciable altitude disadvantage against a Corsair is deadly for IJ.


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 15
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 1:13:06 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

What about altitude? Altitude should be taken into consideration. If high enough, the Corsair can maintain a good level of energy over the Zekes for numerous passes especially at high altitudes.

A few times I've had my Corsairs at a low altitude, because I simply forgot to set them at a high altitude, and they came out either damaged or destroyed.


I would also ask what the Japanese pilots squadrons experience were in the fights. There are many variables that can come into this. It not enough to list a loss rate.

Because historic the Japanese had used up their elite pilots by 44´ and then suffered huge losses doesn´t mean a Japanese game player can´t run through his elite pilots in the game by mid 43´ or even earlier and suffer horrendous losses in the time frame of UV.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 6/23/2008 1:14:00 AM >

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 16
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 8:49:25 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99
Because historic the Japanese had used up their elite pilots by 44´ and then suffered huge losses doesn´t mean a Japanese game player can´t run through his elite pilots in the game by mid 43´ or even earlier and suffer horrendous losses in the time frame of UV.

Well said.

The problem is, though, that UV is very poor at modeling so many things that it all becomes ridiculous. In the early going, Zeroes are too good (as are Oscar Is, for that matter). F4Fs are grossly under-valued. P-40s and P-39Ds are useless in air superiority roles. Corsairs are so good, it's silly, but look at the numbers of aircraft on both sides that can fly missions - and coordinated missions, at that. A couple of hundred B-17s and B-24s escorted by dozens and dozens of fighters originating from two or three different bases? Please. 80 Bettys and 120 Zeros all together in one strike ... 450 planes based at - and effectively supported from - one South Pacific airfield in 1942? Come, now.

It's not just aircraft values. Too many aircraft can fly too many missions in too great numbers in too short a time. The first time 100+ Zeroes showed up over Port Moresby flying escort for 12 Bettys, I said, "You've got to be sh1tting me." This game has sh1tted me so many times, I probably overflowed at least half a dozen sewage treatment plants by now.

But, don't get me started. B-17s flying anti-shipping missions and hitting anything other than water? No B-17 replacements until September 1, 1942? Fix the "uber" bombing by screwing B-17s and B-24s out of 1/3 to 2/5 of their bomb load (instead of addressing the real problem)?

I hope for better - much better - from Carrier Force.

I ain't holding my breath. Gimme a good editor, at least. That thing in UV is worthless.

< Message edited by pasternakski -- 6/23/2008 8:17:21 PM >


_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 17
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/23/2008 6:01:54 PM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

... 450 planes based at - and effectively supported from - one South Pacific airfield in 1942? Come, now.


Yeah, there needs to be basing restrictions on the numbers of aircraft for airfields determined by base size, not just bombing penalties from operating heavy bombers at small airstrips. Can anyone see 125 B-17s based at say...Tulagi? Or any other unsuitable location.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 6/23/2008 6:04:41 PM >

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 18
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 1:26:30 AM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99

quote:

... 450 planes based at - and effectively supported from - one South Pacific airfield in 1942? Come, now.


Yeah, there needs to be basing restrictions on the numbers of aircraft for airfields determined by base size, not just bombing penalties from operating heavy bombers at small airstrips. Can anyone see 125 B-17s based at say...Tulagi? Or any other unsuitable location.



If we can night bomb why not stage this many bombers...what isn't it "historically accurate"? ;)

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 19
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 3:12:17 AM   
DEB


Posts: 687
Joined: 1/29/2005
From: Bristol , England
Status: offline
This subject raises many matters that would be "gamey" if done by a player, yet these are down to the AI choices.
( One wonders why with all these problems, people still get annoyed and complain over "gamey" tactics used by players. I guess it's human nature to gripe, particularly to an individual if given the chance, but the hypocracy is amazing. )
Anyway, what would help ( here as well as elsewhere ) is some input from a designer ( comments please Mr Billings ), to give us a better insight re the game design on the points raised.

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 20
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 3:21:36 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ILCK
If we can night bomb why not stage this many bombers...what isn't it "historically accurate"? ;)

Lordy, lordy, lordy, don't say that. Next thing you know, we'll be hearing from the "if I wanted to play a wargame that was historically accurate, I would have joined the Marines" crowd.

In any event, this is one of many, many discussions that point up a major disappointment of mine with Matrix's post-publication handling of both UV and WitP. Instead of addressing the root problem (here, insufficient limitation on base and air mission sizes), the "solution" has always been, "let's screw one side or the other's combat capabilities and forget it."

I will never forgive whoever it was that cut the bomb loads of B-17s and B-24s by as much as 40 percent in response to the allegation that Allied level bombers were too effective, particularly as you cannot change that in the pathetic little UV scenario editor. By the way, have you ever browsed critically through the bomber aircraft armaments as revealed in that editor? Note sometime, for example, how many defensive weapons have no facing (and, therefore, are ineffective), and how some aircraft (like the B-25) have no rearward-firing guns, in complete defiance of historical reality.

Oops. Sorry. It's hard to avoid invoking historicity while discussing a historical simulation...

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 21
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 3:24:26 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DEB
One wonders why with all these problems, people still get annoyed and complain over "gamey" tactics used by players. I guess it's human nature to gripe, particularly to an individual if given the chance, but the hypocracy is amazing.

Astonishingly, I agree with the first part of your statement wholeheartedly, but remain amazed at your spelling of "hypocrisy."

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to DEB)
Post #: 22
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 3:36:02 AM   
DEB


Posts: 687
Joined: 1/29/2005
From: Bristol , England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski


quote:

ORIGINAL: DEB
One wonders why with all these problems, people still get annoyed and complain over "gamey" tactics used by players. I guess it's human nature to gripe, particularly to an individual if given the chance, but the hypocracy is amazing.

Astonishingly, I agree with the first part of your statement wholeheartedly, but remain amazed at your spelling of "hypocrisy."


It's late at night, and I'm too lazy to check my spelling.

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 23
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 6:53:05 PM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

If we can night bomb why not stage this many bombers...what isn't it "historically accurate"? ;)


Yeah, who ever heard of night bombing in World War 2!?!

Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 24
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/24/2008 7:39:17 PM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99
Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.

Hey, Dad, looky what I drew in school today. Can I put it up on the fridge?





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 25
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/27/2008 1:04:55 AM   
DEB


Posts: 687
Joined: 1/29/2005
From: Bristol , England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99
Your comments make no meaning! Can you put 5 square pins in 3 holes?!
Now come back and reply when you get something of a rational and logical thought. Or one even worth reading.

Hey, Dad, looky what I drew in school today. Can I put it up on the fridge?






Bit smart for Pre-school ain't it?

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 26
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/29/2008 10:50:51 PM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
Saldy, there is no way I know of to adjust the values of the planes. I think most poeple that are not "history" people, and are instead game designers, look at the wrong things when putting these games together. Example: the F4U had a great kill ratio, so it must be a better plane hands down. A large part of that was due to poor jap pilots more than anything else, by that state of the war.

(in reply to DEB)
Post #: 27
RE: Corsair performance? - 6/30/2008 12:24:26 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

Saldy, there is no way I know of to adjust the values of the planes.


Go to the editor and take a couple of machine guns off of it.

quote:

Example: the F4U had a great kill ratio, so it must be a better plane hands down.


The Corsair was a much better plane than those Japanese planes in UV.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 7/1/2008 2:22:24 AM >

(in reply to borner)
Post #: 28
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/1/2008 8:14:35 AM   
Stele


Posts: 85
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline
Off topic, but what servers or squad to fly in, Ike?

I'm a big IL2 (mostly Pacific) fan myself.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 29
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 2:10:33 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

Off topic, but what servers or squad to fly in, Ike?

I'm a big IL2 (mostly Pacific) fan myself.


I just fly with the computer. I´m not very good at it. Still great fun! I always fly with cockpit on and no icons though. Are you a no cockpit person?

My favorite plane would be the KI-43 Oscar, Climbs like a dream, so lightweight!

The way the Zeros engine stalls out under negative G irritates me and is something I just can´t get used to. One always hear about how the Zero couldn´t out dive a Wildcat because the Wildcat was heavier. Besides that, A Zero under negative G cuts the fuel to the engine and it will quit unless you stop!!






Otherwise I would like it the best. Yours? And, what do you think? Think the corsair is too strong in UV? From what I can see in IL2 seems about right to me.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 7/2/2008 3:02:39 AM >

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Corsair performance? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.322