requested Erhöhte Notleistung

[MrExplosion]

3 hours ago, ÆsirHunter said:

Before the release of the Mosquito I asked in discord about bug fixing and they said that they would look for bugs after release of mosquito early acess, they fixed some of them but there are more that need to be fixed and things to be completed, we have the "radio wip" label after nearly 2 years of of EA, now we need to wait until mosquito will be out of EA?

https://stormofwar.info/fw190a8bugs.php

That comment from Nick is 6 months old. He said: "We are finishing work on Mossie in the coming weeks and will dedicate some horse power to the Anton and other WWII bugs thereafter." (Source: first comment at youtube.com/watch?v=vLyoMxRGVmE)

So, I dont know if the few fixes that we got already mean they are done with bug fixing.  

[Slice313]

We have to be very patient. Bug fixing is far. very far from finished.

[ButcherBiird]

I love seeing that this topic is gaining some traction in some ways. We may have to keep hoping and being patient for a while but it'll come.

[EnvyC]

[Slice313]

The sooner the better, we don't want to wait 6 years

[ButcherBiird]

On 2/18/2022 at 8:19 PM, EnvyC said:

Probably the best thing to come to this thread in a while lol

[ButcherBiird]

Still here, still waiting for the improved and accurate engine performance. Thanks for the meme I stole @EnvyC

[Ricefields]

+1

[CharlyBraun]

+1

[Simps.NL]

+1

[ITA_WVoss]

+1

[Magic Zach]

Where boost?  ED, where boost

[EnvyC]

 

NineLine pls

[Fortinero]

Really many of us expect some love for the Anton, even the cockpit don't get the care that is present in other modules.

[Slice313]

When the cow stops giving milk, you butcher it. Ty ED

[Magic Zach]

ED stands for Extended Delays

[gordonvembu]

good one Zach,,,ED should hire you to do their ww2 warbird bug fixes.

then i would be confident of accurate progress materializing in a timely fashion.

[Slice313]

They have a tendency for starting new projects before finishing the old. Problem is that we already paid full.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Slice313

[Blackbird12]

I can see I'm not the only disappointed with the A-8, sadly no changes will be braught in the near future... It's clearly a half baked module... Any fans of the Anton would be surprised (disappointed) to see all the missing features : kit R2, R8, removal of wing canons, boost, bubble canopy like D9 maybe (not the most important in my opinion) it's like making a F-18 without AGM65 or AIM7... and it's even more frustrating because I know DCS is capable of doing these little details and it's what made DCS incredible, the details... But it's the WWII problem and will problably remain the same 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Guys, you can go for that fancy stuff to any other arcade out there. This simulator never was, and I hope it keeps not being, that kind of transformer travesti thing were you can select every tiny stupid detail available even when it's absolutely unnecessary and useless, or unhistorical.

Whenever people ask things like that I always think if we follow that path the day we got an Emil the Galland ashtray and telescope seen in one and single aircraft once should be available to everyone just because without that the aircraft couldn't fly or shot down a thing. Yeah, sure mates… it's a shame we don't have that kind of options which makes the aircraft flyable, right now it's not like it does fly at all .

 

Do you realize A-8 even with that MP setting will keep being what it is now which is what it was historically, right? P-51 will keep being out of your reach, Spitfire will keep turning tighter, and P-47 will keep being… well, a P-47D-28/30/40 beast. That tiny MP boost won't change that. If you want a more powerful Fw you have to go Dora. Hence, it's probably coming some day (as well as F-8 I hope) but despite the fancy 5 minutes 1.58/1.65 Ata it'll be mostly the same you have now. Just saying.

[Blackbird12]

Yeah of course the wing 30mm was useless and unnecessary that's probably why something like near 30 % of the A-8 had them... same for the boost all factory newly made aircraft had it since july 1944 until the end. GM-1 for exemple is a fancy detail, probably never used operationnaly or at very low number and not very important objectively. Nothing from what I said is "fancy" (apart from bubble canopy) and IS historical. It's like if they make a 109 G-6 and make it without gunpods or MW50... Again if they give the boost for the A-8 then 

1) It should be removable in mission editor like MW50 for the dora

2) Spitfire and P-51 and P-47 (maybe mosquito ?) should have their "boost" too with 150 octane and maybe other options lacking I'm not aware of 

I'm just saying if they make a module then they must make it right we all have our favourite planes, planes we know better than others and it's just frustrating to see a plane we love not getting historical options and objectively fun/important/cool ones. 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

R2 was for intercepting bombers, here aircraft is used in all sort of roles, it's not like you're not downing P-51s because you lack R2, right? It'll make the aircraft also heavier and worse behaved…

GM-1 was for F-8 only, and it should come with it if finally we get it. Of course, but it's not an A-8 thing despite people asking for it.

And yes, for date changing purposes, if we get EN boost it should be ME removable, definitely. But still, a small temporary boost which won't change what people already think of the aircraft if you got my previous point. Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have historical options available, but sometimes some people think of some of them as magical items which will make them better pilots just because, and that's not gonna happen. Just, manage your expectations guys, it's not the magical solution to all your A-8 "problems".

Edited November 23, 2022 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Blackbird12]

GM-1 make literaly no sense for F-8,  F-8 used the real C3 injection for boosting up to something like 2000m, GM-1 is for high altitude from 8000m or you know something I would be really interested in.

Personnally I have no problems downing 51, spitfire or 47, the A-8 is beast, many people will tell you it's a bad fighter, for me it's the best, you need discipline to fight in it but I agree that many people think the boost will change something, spoiler alert : it will change nothing if you don't fly it correctly and I agree on the fact that it isn't the magical solution, the boost came 1 month after 150 octane so it came juste to compensate it. 

I wish the boost because it's a feature that should be in the sim and is a missing part of the A-8 (and other things mentioned) and many people (me included) are disappointed about lack of caring on some WWII stuff and it begins with the lack of rather "basic" features 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

It was already discussed when the module first came out, or even before it came out when the artist and some modellers asked for some help right here on the forums. I know GM-1 was theoretically intended for high altitude, in some cases, but apparently F-8 used it, I can't recall the reason why, together with the C3 fuel. Yes, at low altitude, hence they told when F-8 was to be release should use those options. Can't recall all the detail, but it was something like that. The topic should be somewhere around if you're interested.

 

1 hour ago, Blackbird12 said:

Personnally I have no problems downing 51, spitfire or 47, the A-8 is beast, many people will tell you it's a bad fighter, for me it's the best, you need discipline to fight in it but I agree that many people think the boost will change something, spoiler alert : it will change nothing if you don't fly it correctly and I agree on the fact that it isn't the magical solution, the boost came 1 month after 150 octane so it came juste to compensate it.

Yep, my point exactly . There's a topic right here at A-8 forums about that alleged "bad performance" with a title not far from that you wrote there .

[Blackbird12]

I saw that thread (or a antoher one ?) and I looked a lot for GM-1 on A-8 and there is a performance chart and mention of the potential supply of the system before introduction of the A-8 and in the FM it's writed "The fitting of GM1 unit is basically feasible but in A-8 serie is not normally done" and from what I saw, that's it.

I would really be interested if the system was used operationnaly but I doubt it a lot, and even more for the F-8, a lot of book seems to have used the same source and say that MW50 or GM-1 was used on A-8, that's why I'm looking only on historical documents for this. It seems there is the same issue with S-serie of Ju-88 : books mentions GM-1 for S-1 and S-3 but from what I researched, only the S-1 used it operationnaly. I researched a lot about the GM-1 and it seems the system wasn't used that much because of logistic issues (it was quite dangerous because of very low temperature and had to be contained in compressed tank if I recall correcty) and not very useful below 8 km and was very explosive if hit.