Thank you for the feedback. I almost never play flight sims so tactics like these are new to me. Thanks for helping me improve

Reading your comment reminded me of how good it felt when I first figured this out in IL2 (the game)! To add to your point, chasing someone's tail is much about aspect angle, your plane's directional axis against the prey's axis, having higher aspect angle by leading the prey means bullets not ricocheting off their armor and better chance of hitting the engine or the pilot, but too much will make you overshoot which sometimes could turn into a beautiful back-and-forth dogfight or being reversed and shot down some other times. However low aspect angle helps you put safe distance or enough distance for the enemy to be right at your guns' conversion point :)

Yes! That or birds of steam, can’t remember which. I was thinking the exact same thing.

First thing i thought of as well.

One of the best games ever made

Yep

Exactly what it reminded me of, except in 3D.

Thanks, helpful!

What if I told you that it was? And that you can find it on KZfaq courtesy of FranK11?

@@mikkim-mh9bc Awesome, thank you!

i was gonna say achtung spitfire as well lol

They could do negative g manoeuvres (the engine would just 'cough' briefly, but not do prolonged negative g. Neg g is very wearing for pilots.

Recent research has found official German loss records to be very dubious and fragmented, so I think loss rates from 41-43 were much more even than what most online sources say.

@@JohnyG29 You are entitled to your opinion. Getting pulverised by bombing campaigns does cause holes in records, but there are a lot of records you can cross-check with. You cannot lose more planes than you have + what you produce - what you still have afterwards, for example. And the number of planes you can have would for example be limited by the number of engines available; and most new planes would get a new engine as well. And you do need pilots for planes, giving you an upper limit for the number of planes able to be in the air at a given time. And which "recent research" are you talking about? A (re-assemblable, thank you, KZfaq URL policies) URL would be much appreciated.

You may not know that but Germany was leading in radar development. What they got from the Dieppe raid was nothing new to them, they more marvelled at the crudeness of the equipment. Germany failed developing anything like a cavity magnetron (something Japan actually had invented, but were dead sure Germany already knew all about, seeing that they were a very junior partner in the technology exchange). That, and the following belief that there could not be centimetric radar (due to the way too low power that could be radiated) really hurt their technological radar development, caused the decimetric wave radar detectors to not be expanded for centimetric waves --- causing many submarines to have real trouble --- and so did the story one shot down airman spun "we simply turn off our radar and just follow the radiation from their radar detectors" (and indeed, the ones used at the time radiated quite a nice amount of power, so that could have been completely true), so they chased that white hare down the warrens, designing several new versions that radiated less and less. The Germans even used Chain Home against the Brits, using the signal radiated from these installations: Planes crossing the channel would reflect the signal downward and forward, to receptors on the ground on the other side of the channel. The planes even had huge wing areas to improve the reflected signal! The prop direction and rotation --- consider that the prop has RPMs in the 2000+ range, that is 33+ rotations per second. I do not think that you rolling the plane ever so hard will make a real difference. Beside, we are usually talking constant speed propellers (at least with the Luftwaffe) which will use centrifugal forces and thus be invariant to the rotation of the engine and/or plane. It would work with a rotary engine. The p-factor is more important.

_except 3d of course_ Why "of course"? Just because you haven't seen it done, does not mean it hasn't been done. May I introduce you to "Birds of Prey" (which is alas jet fighter based, not WWII prop planes) by "Ad Astra Games"? Full 3D, and they have honed their 3D board game skills on "Attack Vector: Tactical" and "Squadron Strike" as well as a few spin-offs from those.

Steambird?

Dawn Patrol. I think there are tournaments for hard core players.

Much better than it just letting you get easy kills on it, makes the game more interesting and in some ways more realistic

@@WilkyTheFlyingScotsman what I mean by that is it *does* make getting kills easy. It makes it simple to force the ai into over-stressing and crashing.

@@stablegun314 they do lack proper G management, thats for sure, but I did saw some defensive flying from AI when I played, which tbf is a rare sight even in proper air sims

@@stablegun314 yeah i get that but also a real pilot would push their plane to the limits just to get on your tail rather than just defensive flying - the best defence is offense - in the world of air combat, although some management of f force and knowing their altitude and limits of the plane could be better for more fun and interesting fights and i do sort of agree with you

@@stablegun314 That is assuming all the possible settings of the AI(s) are not understanding their G limits. I would not be surprised if some AIs (or settings of 'the' AI) will be less or more aggressive, less or more limiting their G exposure, less or more reckless, e.g. trying a split S at a probably too low altitude ... After all, pilots were humans, more or less experienced, more or less scared, more or less willing to take the bullets versus crazy manoeuvres that could get them killed ...

But the AI then decides to do something different with _the exact same control inputs from the previous turn._ The enemy plane is not flown by another human ... so what gives?

Sunday/today

I'm sure I did. Flying tactics are not my forte.

@@Stealth17Gaming Tbh I'm not a guy who knew about anything around military stuff but um got into too much KZfaq and the game called war thunder Hope you can do better next time ❤️