Jump to content

=FSB=HandyNasty

Members
  • Content Count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by =FSB=HandyNasty

  1. Since we saw WiP pictures of the P-47, next step I'd like to see is an explanation of how the turbocharger works and how this will be implemented in game
  2. Hey all, I'm finding myself in a love-hate relationship with the Airacobra. On one side I like the plane's behavior, the way it flies, its armament and its strength and weaknesses. One thing i can't get around is just its horrendous visibility. The blind spots, or rather blind fields, acquiring and maintaining good SA just impossible . The time I require to check my surroundings and cover any blind spot, to make sure i'm clear, is 10-ish seconds. That's time I don't have in a fight. Getting in a fight equals losing all SA, with all its consequences. The mirror is also of little help... I understand why the visibility is lackluster : i look at my screen as if from one eye, thus it is as if i were in the cockpit looking around with only 1 eye. Thus my question : how is the rearward/general visibility in the P-39 in VR (aka : looking with 2 eyes)? Are there still blind fields or are they hugely diminished? Is it possible to keep up SA to the same level as in other planes?
  3. I already bent my prop when flying through a chute. Don't quite know whether it is the shute itself or the body of the pilot (might have hit that one too) that bent my prop. Needless to say, I felt like a complete moron.
  4. I'd like to see a detailed explanation of (all) the features that they'd like to implement in Tank Crew. Currently I am doubting to buy Tank Crew because I don't quite know what to expect. I have no doubt about the fidelity of the modelling, about the graphics, but don't know what to expect from just gaming point of view. I mean, it has to be fun after all. I'd like some clarifications about following : - types of missions (really, I have no clue what type of missions and what types of objectives those missions will be around will be implemented... Please not just 'capture random zone') - damage model (penetration calculation and damage to internal structures if penetration occurs) and what happens if 1 or several crew member(s) dies - repair in the field (i feel this is a tricky one in a tank sim... one of your tracks blew on a mine, can you repair it in the field? What about more serious damage like barrel destroyed, ....) - availability of several tanks (I mean, can't have 6 tigers and 1 PzIV against 7 T-34's, as IRL there were but few Tigers compared to other tank types) - manual gear shift (YT video's i currently saw had an automatic gear shifting, no?), and killing your engine if you drive like a monkey (in Otto Carius' book 'tigers in the mud" he mentions somewhere that the Tiger's driver had to be very good with gear shifting to fully exploit the tiger's mobility ) - System requirements (more or same as BoX?) I have a lot of questions, and probably I missed out on a bunch. I just feel that 1CGS's communication of Tank Crew has been rather eeeeh .... shallow. Apart from the map, the ability to knock trees, and he fact we'l get combined arms, there hasn't that much info about it (or did i miss some informative thread somewhere?).
  5. more explanation on amelioration and/or implementation of various things, like - explanation on amelioration of netcode (teaser in 3.005 discussion thread) - complex fuel sytsem - how is jet technology implemented in the engine - explanation of damage mechanics for tanks - ...
  6. What Ehret means with "you can push things a little", or at least what I understand what he means, is that the 190 has a dip in performance from 2000m-3000m due to it switching supercharger gear. My tests give me level speeds without overheat (aka, rads not at 0%) in TAS, with error margin of a few kph : altitude P-39 ingame without 0.30 cals (combat / emergency / boosted) Fw190A-5 (combat / boosted) Considering only boosted engine modes : Up until 3k the P-39L is roughly as fast as the 190. Note that at 3000m, the P-39 is actually ~15kph TAS faster than the 190. Note also that at 3000m, setting 100% throttle and 100% pitch with the P-39 does not reach 60 inches of MP. This explains why, at 3000m, emergency power for the P39 gives same speed as boosted power. As such at 3000m, one cannot reach boosted mode and only reach emergency mode, and this can be held for 5 minutes. AKA : at 3k alt, P39's top speed is ~15kph faster than A-5's, using an engine mode that can be held longer (5 minutes) compared to the engine mode of the A-5 (3 minutes) Now, I know combat isn't given by level speeds, but by plenty other things too. I am just posting this to show that, in a P39, if you have to combat a 190, do so around 3000m. Engine power comparison is optimal at those altitudes for the Cobra.
  7. That's why I want Sicily to be done after BoBp (or any Western front 1943, Sicily seems most appropriate), so we could have an evolution 1943-1944. Ideally I would have liked to see North Africa 1942, so we would have an evolution 1942-1944 for the western front, but with CoD going to North Africa, I don't think we're likely to see this
  8. I did some tests about level speeds at combat, emergency and boosted power for P39 with wing guns removed ingame, compared to the G-4 (note : speeds in TAS, with some kph's error margin, engine not overheating, full fuel) altitude P-39 (combat / emergency / boosted) G-4 (combat / emergency) So for level flights, the P39 in emergency (5 minutes) power is faster than the G-4 in boosted mode up to ~ 3500m. Keep in mind that in acceleration, the G-4 outperforms the Cobra drastically.
  9. Oh boy, maybe I'm the only one who is of this opinion, but THIS LAST MAP ROCKS! - I [edited] like the matchup - Great job from the LW to come back from 2 bases back to 5 (at a certain point) - this weekend (21 - 22 July), we had overal great balance in numbers I really need TAW to stop, I need my social life back. I really need my real life back. I really need my life ... I really need ... [edited], TAW IS LOVE TAW IS LIFE WOOOOOOOT!!!
  10. I had an instance where a 109 starting leaking oil for 10 seconds, then stopped, then restarted to leak and then it restopped leaking etc. Was kinda mad because I thought "his engine is dead, i can focus the other guy" while he was in fact in perfect shape
  11. The F-4 that took to the skies above Moscow didn't have clearance for 1.42 ata. The F-4 we have in game has engine clearance of July 1942. Hence the post of Operation_Ivy : Since yaks (in early forms) were present over Moscow, VVS should have access to yak1. The F4's presence isn't the issue I think. What is the issue is the discrepancy in player numbers in the early maps - map 1 especially. I think it's due to people's perception/opinion on the VVS planeset for these maps (mostly ishaks and P-40's, arguably hard planes to fly). The presence of the F-4 might discourage VVS pilots to effectively take part in map 2 leading to less VVS pilots for map 2 than expected, just a hypothese though. I predict that, once the mig comes available in numbers, the lagg and yak are available too, the numbers will equal out more, and VVS will once again start winning the maps through objectives.
  12. using the following site http://www.newbyte.co.il/calc.html to convert CAS to TAS, I get for example for your 6000m 464 / 480 --> 620 / 641 (compared to the 635 it's says ingame for combat power) Note : not 100% sure the site is perfectly right, I use it as an indicator for CAS to TAS
  13. With Jason's recent answer in the thread about the Po-2, I thought about its use in TAW. It's coming and looks awesome! You'll see it soon. Not to worry. Jason 2 scenario's have sprung to my mind: A) the release of the Po-2 comes together with specific missions it can perform in multiplayer* (arty spotting, searching for bailed-out crew behind enemy lines,... and plenty of other stuff). Then I'd much like those implemented in some way in TAW (obviously) B) the release of the Po-2 doesn't come with specific mission types in multiplayer*. The question arising from scenario B would be : "how can the Po-2 be integrated into the TAW campaign as a fun, interactive and meaningful way?". Fun and interactive go hand in hand I'd say, else very very few people would fly it. Meaningful ofcourse, else people would fly it to have fun but it would be completely useless and be a dead weight to their team. The only thing/suggestion I thought of would be "a Po-2 takes off from damaged airfield to a non-damaged one, mimicking an ambulance Po-2 taking wounded personnel from the front to the back. This would count as a supply mission repairing the damaged airfield". * I presume that when the Po-2 comes out, 1CGS will also release some type of Single Player missions especially designed for the Po-2. like night bombing, or arty spotting, or some close air recon on tactical level, but these will maybe not be implemented in multiplayer environment
  14. I've always felt that the Germans need communication more than the russians in TAW (both, of course, benefit from comms) For example, 1) lets assume a hypothetical situation 40vs40, with noone on any comms whatsoever. Then, in my opinion, the vvs has the advantage* (ground war wise, but also less planes and pilots losses - see most missions of last campaign). 2) if it were 20 squads of 2 pilots against 20 squads of 2 pilots, with the squads typing in-game some info to each other, then I wouldn't really know who has the advantage 3) Gradually, as the level of communication (and thus organization) increases, the LW gets more advantages compared to VVS 4) if somehow there were 40 germans simultaneous on same comms* against 40 russians themselves on same comms*, the Gerries would wipe the floor *"same comms" would be something like air marshall : I think that when/if Air Marshall ever comes (and gets included in TAW) and somehow people listen to the Marshall, then the germans will be able to consistently mount massive bomber raids, say 10*ju88 + 10 escort and wipe 2 airfields per mission.
  15. No need for a new plane per patch. There weren't any new planes in 3.002 either. Just fixes, improvements (and extra mission types for campaign?). So, I guess 3.004 could have additional fixes, improvements (steam) and additional polishments.
  16. are we still talking about a game here? or did I miss something?
  17. I guess the content will be like 3.002 : fixes, improvements, polishments, maybe extra mission types for career. Not a new plane (mind, I would be very pleasantly surprised)
  18. There will always be a small error. Devs have stated it multiple times. If you get 470 kph for example, it is within stated error margin. Also, I don't know at which rad settings the speed is ought to be achieved. Optimal temps? Fully closed rads? Maximum allowed temps? The difference I get, for the E-7, between fully closed rads and fully open rads is a) 431kph-465kph for combat power (and 461kph for rads which make the engine not overheat but run very hot ~ roughly about 10% for oil and water) b) 454kph-488kph for boosted power (and 484kph for rads which make the engine not overheat but run very hot ~ roughly about 10% for oil and water) didn't try fully closed and fully open rads for emergency power, only the ~10% rads for which i got 477 at deck. (tests done on kuban autumn map, boosted is 100% throttle, combat is 76% throttle (Which, I mentioned before, the technochat considers as combat power ))
  19. wait, where/how did you extract the data from?
  20. You think a dogfight (aka close quarter fight) lasts 10 minutes? If it is a more prolonged fight with disengagements, what makes you think both the FN and G14 would boost continuously ?
  21. In the announcement of BOBP, there was mentioned "Jet engine technology and associated physics of higher Mach numbers" I am quite curious at an explanation of the technology required to model a jet engine, and how the team is progressing on it.
  22. On deck, kuban autumn map, with the E7 in combat/emergency/boosted i get : 461/477/484 kph note : for distinction between combat/emergency/boosted, i used the technochat and not the ata indicator (aka : my emergency test might very well have been at 1.30 ata oa1.31 ata or 1.32 ata)
  23. Also pin a grenade under your chair which is set to detonate when your plane crashes on the ground in a huge fireball
×
×
  • Create New...