Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

325 Excellent

About /SF/Disarray

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

736 profile views
  1. Probably, yes, I haven't been following that thread very carefully and came across this video on the Steam forums. I was supersized that some of the things in that video haven't got more attention. The information about the render range especially. According to this, under the right conditions planes may be visible from up to 100 Km; granted those conditions are clear skies, the sun not being in the way and the plane in question being on fire but still. That seems like a bigger change than some of the other stuff people have been going on and on about. Even from just a technical standpoint. @danielprates Nothing was mentioned about new mission types or any details about the career, other than it coming in October. Not in that video anyway. For whatever reason it cuts off after the prepared remarks but he seems to be preparing to take questions as it cuts.
  2. I saw a video of one of the dev team, Danil Tuseev, talking about the projects they are working on. In that they said the P-51 and 38 will be out in September along with the update to G-effects and the increase to render range, which is sounding very good indeed, and the map for Botenplate. They also said that the career should be done in October along with the Tempest. Though I suspect this may be subject to change were something to come up.
  3. There are some oddities in the DM for lots of planes, it isn't just the Soviets. I've seen 109's handle just fine after losing about a third of the wing area. I've seen 110's get generally beaten up and then set on fire, keep on fighting and go on to kill undamaged planes before finally going down. I've personally shot a Yak 1's whole magazine into JU-88's and watched them shrug off every round of it. And I've seen MG rounds remove wings of PE-2's and P-47's. I've had single rounds take out engines on just about every Soviet plane and the same with a P-47. I could go on pointing out the odd things I've seen in the DM but it won't mean much as I've seen just as much or more that seems to fit expectations. As that picture shows the bomb thing is to be expected. Blast waves dissipate fairly rapidly over distance and that wave is the bulk of your damaging potential against buildings and vics; shrapnel and heat can do damage but usually only against squishy people and animals. And one thing that may be modeled, I'm not really sure, in game is the tendency for these high mass bombs dropped from high up or at high speeds tend to bury themselves and the ground is a fantastic force break. Those big bombs make a hell of a racket and kick up lots of dust but it looks much more impressive than the effect on target would indicate; that might be what is at play with German HE rounds as they do have an impressive puff when they hit home. If you want to have good effect on target use the kinds of bombs they did back in the day when hitting urban and industrial targets, mostly 250-500 kg bombs. The biggest bombs were only used when something needed to be hit really, really, hard like a bunker, a war ship, a bridge or a dam. For every job a tool and so on.
  4. While I largely agree, SeaSerpent, I can't blame people for being concerned here. The way they worded that announcement made it seem like there is quite the problem. In my not inconsiderable time in MP I have only ever seen one person I know for a fact was cheating and only ever been reasonably suspicious of two or three. So I have to wonder what's got the devs all hot and bothered in the MP player base. And with the wiggle room to be found in the EULA an argument for just about anything can be made. Asking for clarity seems reasonable in my opinion.
  5. Obviously it isn't clear enough. If it were clear enough there wouldn't be 4 thread in the last hour asking for clarification, would there? And I can't blame them, really. An announcement that says, essentially, 'we are going to start banning people that are pushing the limits' and having no clear idea what those limits might be. By the definition in the EULA I could argue that all kinds of things are a no-go and have a firm footing to do so. The announcement as worded makes it seem like they feel there is a sizable issue with cheating in the game. I haven't seen it so I'm left wondering what they are seeing, thus the question: What are they intending?
  6. Nothing like vaguely worded pseudo-threats to get a day started...
  7. I saw a pic of a Virpil stick that looked like the kind you would find in a Yak. I don't know if it is new but it would make sense given this info.
  8. The guy that posted it had that green 'I'm a dev' background. It also says rather strait forwardly that those are the planes that they are working on.
  9. I think 9's flew over Stalingrad, towards the middle or end of the fighting there. Not sure about the 9T though.
  10. /SF/Disarray

    $320 us

    Well you are in luck. They have a fix for the bug in the next build, reportedly. And luck you, the update will be free of charge. Isn't that nice for you?
  11. I get why those guys went up in the late war. For one they didn't know the war was just about over. Sure they probably had a feeling that things were coming to an end, but who knows how long that 'coming to an end' process can last? Secondly, and most importantly, that is the way things work. Once you are in service, be you drafted, conscripted or volunteer you don't really get much of a choice but to do the fighting. Well I guess you could say, "No, I won't fly that mission." And then you get either arrested or shot on the spot. For my money, rolling the dice on a combat mission is a lot more appealing than knowing you will be killed for insubordination. I suppose they could have risked trying to land at a hostile base and surrendering the plane but that is a roll of the dice too.
  12. 2 to 1 is manageable. I would not classify it as good, not in any way. Especially when it is so damn common that people, like RedKestrel here, have come to look upon in as favorable. It is like saying getting punched in the chest is preferable to being punched in the throat. I suppose it is true but better isn't good in this case. In any event I'm still waiting for my answers. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.
  13. It really is stupid, those kinds of numbers. The most stupid part of it is that it needn't be this way but for the insistence on the part of some players that it be that way. Why don't people fix it? It did get better though. Is it that Soviet planes appear so much more difficult to operate? Because they aren't really that complex. It can't be entertaining, can it? Flying around with nobody to shoot at and nothing to really stop you from bombing a target? That is fun? I can tell you for certain sure that it isn't very much fun to be with the 3 among the 33. And I know, I know, you paid for the game so you get to do whatever you want, quack quack quack. But I have to ask, along that line of logic: If I paid for the game too why do I have to put up with this near consent imbalance? I'd be interested to know the answers to these questions, but I don't expect I'll find any. None that are satisfactory, anyway. After a while it was only 2 to 1. So I guess there is that.
  14. As a person who doesn't fly TAW, or at least hasn't for a good long while now, I feel I can add to this discussion. To put it simply and directly, I don't fly TAW because I don't see that there is much point in my doing so. When I come online there are significantly more Blue than Red on. I don't want to add to, what I see as, the biggest problem in the multiplayer aspect of the game so I'd end up flying Red; this is not unique to TAW but generally true on all servers most of the time. It is worse on TAW due to the limitations and constraints placed on players in the forms of aircraft and now life limits. Why would I throw myself into a situation where I A) Have limited resources and B) Have little real opportunity to affect the mission situation as there are 3, 4 or sometimes 10 other players opposing me. Further condition B compounds condition A as the only way to effectively generate more planes for my use is to have mission success that is unlikely due to condition B. The most likely scenario I'd find myself in flying on the Red team is a desperate last stand, a kind of Alamo. Desperate last stands can be fun. When it is the norm, though it isn't fun. It is tedious. I can't imagine it is much more fun knowing that the battle is a forgone conclusion, either. That is it. It isn't because I can't 'turn and burn like a WOL noob'. You can do that on TAW. It is because there is no point. It is like a Globetrotters' game and I just can't be asked to play the role of the Washington Generals for the sake of your entertainment. It would seem I'm not alone in that.
  15. In my experience with the plane this is the best answer. I'm no super ace, mind, but this is how I have seen the most success with it. The only word of warning I'd add is, while the P-47 retains energy better than some planes don't become over confident in this ability. You can get caught at inopportune moments if you climb out aggressively; similarly to players in 109's who confuse a better rate of climb for an elevator. Even after the hardest dive and the most gravity assisted climb out you will get beat in a foot race by a bullet and the DM for the 47 isn't what it could be. Plan your attacks, though, and things will go better for you; if you find yourself scrambling and improvising in a P-47 you'd better hope you are better than the other guy or just lucky if you want to make it out alive. One other thing to add is, if you can find one, a wingman in another P-47 can amplify things. Make a 1-2 attack where the first plane dives in and attacks the target while the other hangs out up high and keeps an eye on things. If the first plane in misses or doesn't outright kill the target on their pass, the number two plane rolls in to finish him. This can come in handy if the target plane attempts to counter attack or there is a plane that you missed on initial observation.
  • Create New...