Store Page
IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad
All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos News Guides Reviews

IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad

Store Page
Lymark Jul 1, 2016 @ 2:19pm
Is the FW190 worth it?
Thinking about getting it.

How accurate is the FM etc?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 26 comments
Shelby Dog Jul 2, 2016 @ 8:30am 
Personally I would say no. I'm currently working on writing a discussion asking if the FW-190 has been nerfed. Performance is WAY below what's expected, or even documented for this A/C. Because the A/C's engine output is so low, it can become quite unstable to fly while maneuvering. Now here's the real kicker in my opinion. The DLC A/C is the FW-190A3; all my research indicates that only the FW-190A4 were deployed for the openings of Barbarossa, and therefore the A/C should have an additional 100 HP (that's 1700 HP) over the FW-190A3 DLC.
To put things in perspective, for those who play the game, ME-110E2 (one of the easiest A/C to fly IMHO) has only 300 more HP (split between 2 engines) than the FW-190A4, and weights 1850 KGs more. My question to others who read this discussion is, has anyone been able to get their FW-190A3 anywhere near the 630+ Km/Hr that even the game's A/C specifications indicates it gets?
#1
Shelby Dog Jul 2, 2016 @ 9:21am 
Back again ... after posting my commment I thought I'd talk to my Cliffs of Dover friends to see how the FW-190 was handled in that game. Funny thing is, it wasn't even included.
A seldom discussed chapter of WWII history is the "Focke-Wulf" scare in AUG-SEP '41. Suddenly the RAF was up against an A/C that totally outclassed the Spitfire everywhere except for at low altitudes. A situation that wasn't remedied until a year later with the introduction of the Spitfire IX. My guess is that the developers of Cliffs of Dover omitted the FW-190 because it could be a game-breaker.
If the FW-190 outclassed RAF A/C ... you can imagine its impact on thier Soviet counterparts. So my assumption is ... were the devolpers at 777 faced with the dilemma of either nerfing of ommition?
#2
Gubernaut Jul 2, 2016 @ 10:37am 
I'm a noob and I don't got the best equipment but that FW-190 is real tough for me to fly, so easy to send it into a death spiral in turns or certainly trying any loop manuever. I would like to use it but I can't seem to handle it.
#3
It's me Jul 3, 2016 @ 12:58pm 
Like everyone plane from this game, too. Fly the planes right where their advantage are and you will be the best.
#4
Lymark Jul 3, 2016 @ 1:09pm 
I decided to buy it as I wanna try out the plane myself! Any advice on how to fly this bird in order to be compeitive in online? I'm well aware of its flight characteristics of being easily stall and spin etc.
#5
Shelby Dog Jul 3, 2016 @ 2:10pm 
Keep your throttle at 85% and execute a lot of lateral displacement roles. Save your emergency speed for the enviable spin recovery. DON'T fight a level turning battle; you'll breed energy too quickly and drop in a flat spin. Avoid jousting since you're going to be bigger than any of your opponents. Since you don't have the speed you should, once engaged you HAVE to stay in the fight.
#6
Lymark Jul 3, 2016 @ 11:29pm 
Originally posted by Shelby Dog:
Once engaged you HAVE to stay in the fight.

Isn't it better off B&Z instead? It sounds like If I were to go all in engaging an enemy with lag rolls, I'd be spending too much energy and no plan B nor energy/speed to escape, should there be a 2nd enemy joined the fight at my six.
Last edited by Lymark; Jul 3, 2016 @ 11:29pm
#7
It's me Jul 4, 2016 @ 12:22pm 
The first point and the most important part is to see the enemy before the enemy can see you.

Be carefull if you fly the Focke during winter a La-5 is able to catch up because he can close his radiator to gain speed.

The Focke is fast to escape the enemy during a Level Flight. Do not climb or dive down to escape if the enemy is not that close on your six.

Climb is a bad idea to escape from the enemy because the enemy climb much better than you.

A turn to escape from the enemy is a another bad idea. A Yak-1 or the La-5 turn much sharper than you.

Short said: "Attack & run away"
#8
Zapp Brannigan Jul 4, 2016 @ 10:01pm 
Definitely B&Z. I like the Focke because it flies so differently from the 109. Where the 109 is a great turner and dogfighter, the 190 is great at flying into a formation with guns blazing, flying away, climbing, and doing it again. As long as you go fast and don't try to get in turn fights, the 190 is a great gun platform.

Note: I only play SP, so don't know how it stacks up in MP.
#9
Lymark Jul 4, 2016 @ 10:11pm 
Originally posted by Zapp Brannigan:
Note: I only play SP, so don't know how it stacks up in MP.

Speaking of SP, I find it kinda annoying since AI ain't like like real players, you can't sneak kill them, and their only defensive move is to do tight horizontal turns, which is exactly what I shouldn't do in the 190. So, how do you deal with that?
Last edited by Lymark; Jul 4, 2016 @ 10:11pm
#10
Hydra Jul 13, 2016 @ 1:15pm 
Another strategy is that it can be a pretty good support fighter at low alts. Its heavy armament combined with good roll handeling makes it ideal for coming up behind an enemy on the tail of an ally and destroying him before he has time to react. Its an easy way to pick up kills and help out allies at the same time. Plus if for some reason you do miss and it turns into a turn war, the other fighter you rescued makes it so the enemy has to react to both you and them which gives you an edge.
Last edited by Hydra; Jul 13, 2016 @ 1:19pm
#11
SCG_wtornado Jul 13, 2016 @ 5:58pm 
It was a good low level fighter bomber but was lacking performance with the newer generation of midwar Allied fighters.It was fast at low level and could take punishment from flak.

Something had to replace the Stuka and the HE-111's and the JU-88's did not fair well attacking and bombing/strafing at low level.

KG 53 was a testimony as to how twin engine medium bombers did not fair well in that role with high losses.
#12
It's me Jul 14, 2016 @ 9:06am 
Originally posted by Lymark:
How accurate is the FM etc?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QooPjDsu4Bg
#13
Hadji Jul 14, 2016 @ 9:39am 
Originally posted by wtornado:
It was a good low level fighter bomber but was lacking performance with the newer generation of midwar Allied fighters.It was fast at low level and could take punishment from flak.

Something had to replace the Stuka and the HE-111's and the JU-88's did not fair well attacking and bombing/strafing at low level.

KG 53 was a testimony as to how twin engine medium bombers did not fair well in that role with high losses.

The Fw 190 was one of the best fighters of WW II and it sure wasn't designed to replace bombers or ground attack aircraft. The A-3/U3 was specifically designed as a "Jabo" though...

Also the A-3 wasn't a mid-war fighter.
#14
SCG_wtornado Jul 14, 2016 @ 7:16pm 
By mid war the A-3 was surpassed by the Allies fighters.

A Spitfire MK IX would of had it for breakfast.
#15
< >
Showing 1-15 of 26 comments
Per page: 1530 50

IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad > General Discussions > Topic Details
Date Posted: Jul 1, 2016 @ 2:19pm
Posts: 26

Discussions Rules and Guidelines