Orrrrr, or.....or. Another interpretation.....the game is fairer than ever before, and the folks with the previous advantage are still unhappy. And yes, it is unsustainable for those who liked things the way they were. They must learn to fly better.....or suffer the consequences.
Two different things. One can agree that Albatros is to maneuvrable now and further tweeking is needed to solve Albatros problem... And also agree that solving Albatros problem would not solve problem kimmy jäger has... one of other two solutions is needed.
As before, you are mixing a genuine problem with a rant, giving undue legitimacy to rant along the way.
You'll have to deal with me ranting about this topic over and over and over and over and over and over again. I'd apologise, just to be polite to you gents, but I'm not sorry in the least.
As much as I've kept pretty quiet in the past about FM problems for the sake of having a peaceful community, I believe now that confronting the players and the developers with the issues at hand is still less damaging to the sim's health in the long run than simply keeping quiet about it.
Now that the Camel / Dr.I status quo is gone (and the Bristol Fighter is almost fixed, if only they would implement g-forces on the gunners), there's simply no way that a single machine on one side should (forgive me the pop culture reference) go sit on the Iron Throne. You know which plane I'm talking about.
What is clear as day to me, is that the patch has polarised the community, both in opinion and in fighting tactics.
You argue that the SE5a is more accurate now because you either need to Boom 'n Zoom or stay home. History says otherwise, but we also have to take McCudden's words with a grain of salt.
That said, if tomorrow I'd be transported back to a fictional 1918, with the planes behaving like they do in Rise of Flight today, but my real actual life at stake, I would thank my lucky stars that the plane I was flying was the SE5a. Heck, even RoF's Nieuport 28, as long as it doesn't shed fabric in a dive or catch fire like the real one did.
Over 99% of my flight time would be spent outside of fights anyway, and the rest of the time would be either running away to safety or attacking with a huge numerical / altitude / energy advantage.
So in terms of simulating how I would personally behave if I were participating in real life WWI combat in an SE5a, Rise of Flight's fictional setting is right on the money. But that's because I'm Bender, a lowly coward, not the great McCudden.
You could say that the discussion ends here, and that asking for anything else is wishing for arcade-style dogfighting, but that is exactly what is wrong right with the community right now. It's this dealing in absolutes and polarising statements like "learn to fly or go to War Thunder" or "all you want is the old Camel / Dr.I status quo back". No, I do not want them back. Yes, no matter how much time I've already spent flying, there's always room to learn. And no, I'm not about to bugger off to War Thunder (only to Kerbal Space Program).
Some planes are easier to fly than others, no doubt. I can't judge kimmy_yeager's fighting style either. Maybe he is trying to turn with his SE5a because he read that McCudden could do it. In that respect, I think kimmy_yeager and McCudden are both wrong. And here it's the great Hellbender who really knows best: reality is more nuanced than fiction.
It's the golden mean between what we had before and what we have now. 777 is so close to getting it right, and that's what's so frustrating about the whole situation. They could literally fix almost everything in one more patch by reducing maneuverability on the Albs. Okay, maybe another patch after that for the g-forces, too.
But I know that the great VonGraff and the great Trupobaw also share my opinion. I don't have a beef with you guys, I'd just hate to see the issue becoming accepted and remaining unfixed forever.