Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

475 Excellent

About F/JG300_Gruber

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

760 profile views
  1. F/JG300_Gruber

    The new fad of flying on tank servers

    Considering the mass difference between the two, IRL the T34 crew would most likely fell unconscious way before the german crew. Unless they put some sekrit compound in their vodka. It's the same as destroying a KV1 by ramming it with an empty Bf109. It works in game because of improper collision mechanism. IRL, no way. On a side note, I'm even a bit surprised that they didn't came with some crazy idea in that flavor, like a long rod with a huge shape charge at the front for ramming heavy panzers Roman style ! On a BT5 or 7, it could have done wonders together with an expendable crew ! After the failure of homing dog landmines, this doesn't sound like a bad idea
  2. F/JG300_Gruber

    New FAA Alphabet, very important and anticipated Update

    The whole website is a fake in itself I which we could keep "Jalapeño" though. ATC conversation would be even more entertaining with chinese crew !
  3. F/JG300_Gruber

    The new fad of flying on tank servers

    CAS was part of warfare, yes, but I bet tankers more often fought without any airplanes nearby. Especially in small engagements, aviation wasn't omnipresent at all. There was never more than 700 Stukas available to the LW at any given time during the war, with a serviceability of 60% that equals to roughly 400 planes able to get airborne, and split between CAS, dive bombing, anti shipping mission through the whole eastern front. So the image one can have to see Rudel and his panzerknacker geschwader appear in the sky anytime when a T34 was pulled out of it's shelter is nohing but unrealistic. We fly/drive what we like at the moment I agree, but this shouldn't prevent anybody to have fun. This is the same issues as regular TAW/WoL/KOTA side stacking : one part of the player base can't enjoy flying because they get crushed by the sheer number on the other side flying what they want to. As I said above, there are too many issues and limitations with the IA (too dumb, very little autonomous behavior, can see through walls and terrain, cannot be set as "wingmen" when human player is spawning) for this to be a viable solution. Likewise, players also don't have any available AA vehicule to counter the airplane threat themselves. So in the meantime, limiting availability of planes altogether is IMO the preferred way to get an enjoyable experience on tank oriented servers, along with setting realistic flight time to and from the frontline. There are too many pilots only interested in their own fun and statistics to let an "open" map and hope that they will hold themselves for the sake of balance.
  4. F/JG300_Gruber

    The new fad of flying on tank servers

    Nobody said that it wasn't fun, the issue is that currently for every tank spawning on the ground you have 3 to 5 pilots looking for a "more diverse experience", and if planes are not drastically limited by mission design, any tank sortie quickly end in a collective air rape, or in Berloga#2 when numbers piles up on both sides and you have 15+ planes dogfighting above the battlefield, while a handful of tankers are trying to fight a war underneath. I started playing on tank servers as a pilot for a few weeks and found this was much fun indeed, then I started getting interested in ground battle, and found how unfair and painful the experience could be. What you may not realise here is that even if from your perspective the few hits you are getting seems to "do nothing" because you don't see smoke or anything, that doesn't mean that the tank isn't loosing his gunner/driver or get one of it's tracks damaged. From the tanker perspective, it doesn't really matter : he is out of action and has to get an new tank and drive 10min to the frontline again. There is no "field repair" or get a new crew member option like in Warthunder. When you have a spam of Hs129 or IL2s carrying a second amendment worth of AP ammunition, this quickly turns into an unplayable situation if you are on the ground. Even if a bad pilot just crashes into you, your tank unrealistically blows up. @stupor-mundi I don't see why KOTA-like flight distances would be an issue, you usually have 10+ min of driving and positionning when you are in the tanks, so I don't see why planes shouldn't have at least 40km or more to fly to stand on an equal ground. Just a reminder : a WW2 heavy howitzer had a firing range exceeding 15km, setting the airfield super close from the frontline like on most popular servers IS what looks pretty weird. No mentaly sane commander ever had a will to bring his planes in such an exposed situation, where any breech of your defenses would generally mean you and your planes being shelled within an hour (not even speaking of the high probability of a night sabotage action). You can find some examples in history where planes had to operate very close to the enemy (Rudel had a few stories), but that was always the result of a unforeseen, uncontained massive thrust of the enemy moving the frontline backwards by a few dozens of km.
  5. F/JG300_Gruber

    Your Tiger I costs too much dude.

    Panther FTW !!! (With an opel truck of spare parts !)
  6. F/JG300_Gruber

    The new fad of flying on tank servers

    @Thad : Because TC isn't very far in the development process doesn't mean that people shouldn't have ways of enjoying the limited content already released. It's not very difficult to modify a map to drastically limit the number of airplanes that can be airborne at any given time. And limit the available types and loadouts to keep things a bit fair for people playing on ground. Now that the Po2 has been released, it would be a good candidate (for both sides since unfortunately we don't have a storch) for creating game mechanism where aviation is only here to play a support role (spotting only). At least until some proper AA vehicules are released. Or limit planes at 1 or 2 attackers (Ju87 or IL2), at the beginning of the mission. Once it is broken that's the end. You are only getting a new one when your team on the ground captures an objective. This is the only intelligent way to avoid spoiling the fun for the tankers. I know hunting human controlled tanks with a plane is fun and challenging because you can expect dodging maneuvers and retaliation fire, which makes your job harder. But on the other hand getting constantly vulched by 10+ IL2s and LaGGs when you are just trying to reach the frontline is just infuriating, especially since the only thing you can currently do is Alt+F4. Expert server doesn't change anything, it's really easy to spot a tank from above with the big trails of dust every time you move around. Not even speaking of the huge muzzle blast whenever you fire. When you already have to deal with all the problems related to features waiting to be implemented (bushes blocking shells, IA that can spot through the trees and buildings, invisible walls in dense forests...) you don't wan't to add another layer of fun killer.
  7. F/JG300_Gruber

    TFS Developer Update – December 2018

    I love how the hangar crumbles ! Thanks for the firework and Merry Christmas to all TF members !
  8. F/JG300_Gruber


    Not before it is officially released. Can't remember if there was a date announced but I'd say roughly between 6 and 12 month from now.
  9. F/JG300_Gruber

    Cause & effect of various types of tank ammo.

    Well, 3.009 just released, it sems the HE ammo bug has been corrected
  10. F/JG300_Gruber

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    In my he111, I can still rip the entire tailfin straight off by shooting a few bursts at the very top centimeter of it with the defensive 13mm MG I can also still cleanly saw the whole rear fuselage in half just by aiming at the base of the tailfin and firing continuously until the gun overheats Visual damage model by shooting at the tail fin root with the dorsal MG still goes all the way up to the cockpit, engine nacelles and inner section of the wings. I've had even on some rare occasions while doing such testings damaged the aileron trim rod... So, as far as the new damage model goes, I don't see any difference in what really bugged me in the previous version, at least for the planes that I'm interested in.
  11. F/JG300_Gruber

    Introducing the VPC MongoosT-50 Throttle

    Unfortunately I don't see any option in the current software do do such thing. it looks like it is possible to use the same rotary to pilot 2 axis at the same time (and have different parameters for each axis, like response curve and so on), but I don't see any input from the mode selector switch anywhere in the axis, setup or calibration screen. One thing to note is that the firmware in it's current form is not as not as generous as a Vjoy or equivalent. And the basic principle of how it handles the mode selector is a limitation in itself. I've never used the Target software or any such programs, so correct me if I'm wrong, but from what people say it looks to me that these are working by editing a full profile for each selector mode like : Profile 1 Throttle axis > axis X Button B1 > logical B1 T1 up > logical B2 T2 down > logical B3 Profile 2 Throttle axis > axis Y Button B1 > logical B2 T1 up > logical B4 T2 down > logical B5 If this is true, then what people might be confused about is that the VPC software is working the other way around : X axis > use throttle axis logical B1 > use B1 (all modes) logical B2 > use T1 up in mode 1 logical B3 > use T1 down in mode 1 logical B4 > use T1 up in mode 2 logical B5 > use T2 in mode 2 So each logical button will only have one single activation condition Here the maximum outputs you can get from the software by default are : 8 Logical Axis 96 logical buttons one 8-way POV hat And So in all cases, you could only have a couple extra Axis. Probably not enough for your need. That is also why you can't have 5 full profiles, there are around 50 physical buttons on the throttle but you can't set up more than 96 logical one in the profile. For the buttons I don't know if they could be a way to increase that number, maybe by changing bytes or matrix rows and columns in the button page, but that is just a guess, it might just mess up everything and make the device not working at all.
  12. F/JG300_Gruber

    Introducing the VPC MongoosT-50 Throttle

    Well, I've not touched to anything like the target software, and virpil software didn't felt especially bad for me (I found the VKB software to be much worse !) Maybe you have too much habits with Target (just joking here ) I'm not at home so sorry for the screenshots, these are screenshots of the screenshots of the Virpil manual (Any person making an inception joke will is exposing himself to lawsuit) On the Button page : You have that big white table on the left : This is what you are looking for. In the columns you have : - Logical button : This is what will come out of the throttle (what IL2 will read when you assign a command). - Physical Button : This one is the actual, physical button on the throttle assigned to the logical button. Press your big yellow B9 button and you will see square 50 illuminated in red in the table just left. This means the yellow button is the n°50 physical button. - Mode : This allow you to change how the logical button will react. (Normal, Inversed, switch, encoder...) - Shift : Shift is what you are looking for here, it tells in which "shift state" (mode selector position) the logical button will react. If it displays "--" it means that the button is active in all 5 modes - Delay : Various responses depending on the mode selected, I won't detail that here. Leave it on "nothing" So lets say that you want to make your T1 toggle switch working with the mode selector switch : 1) Actuate the switch to figure out what are the physical button for the up and down positions (I can't test it right now, so let's say that you read 20 for UP and 21 for DOWN) 2) Look for the numbers you just got in the "Phys button" column, and double click on the corresponding lines Let's say that for the UP (Phys. 20) you found it within the line of logical button 24 You should see this menu opening : First thing to do is unticking the "Autobind" box if it is ticked (or else the phys button will be stuck on 55 or so, because the mode selector input is always active) You may notice a difference : in the "shift" box you will have 0, which means that the button will work in all 5 mode selector position Now change the value to "1" and click on the save button. You will see that on the white table, on the Logical button 24 line, number 1 now appears in the shift column. Now do the same thing for the DOWN position, which should be the previous or next line. You should end up with something looking like this : Now onto the next step : 3) Create a new logical button that will be activated by the T1 switch, but only with the mode selector in position 2 Scroll down the white table to around Button 50 or 60, you should see a lot of free button that don't have an assignment yet. Repeat the process in step 2, but now you will have to fill everything : phys button (20 for T1 UP, and 21 for T1 DOWN in my example), mode normal, and shift : "2", leave delay on 0 and save for each button. The finished stuff looks like this : (Again, the numbers will be different on your own, and the lines wont be together like this) If I was to upload this into the throttle, what I would get is : With mode selector on 1, T1 UP would activate button 24 and T1 DOWN would activate Button 25 With mode selector on 2, T1 UP would activate button 26 and T1 DOWN would activate Button 27 With mode selector on 3, 4 or 5 nothing would happen because no logical buttons are assigned. I hope this is clear enough to get you started with the process. Once you've done it a few time, it should get fairly intuitive. After you get the basics, you can make a few experiments with the modes (normal, reversed, switch...) and the delay to see how the button will then react, maybe it can give you some ideas for specific uses. However, just forget about the encoders, sadly I can't get them working with the mode selector. I don't know if this is currently possible or not.
  13. F/JG300_Gruber

    USB Hubs

    Flight gear in general are rather power hungry in my experience. I've had a lot of troubles with unpowered USB hub and saitek gear in the past. I'm confident one joystick and one throttle on your 3.0 HUB will do just fine, but expect to have issues if you want to plug more things on it (rudder pedals and so on...) Powered USB hub arent much more expensive, you can get a good one for around 20€ wich is very cheap considering the price of what you are going to plug on it.
  14. Hi DragonDaddy, here's my suggestion : Zoom: Go into the settings, and the "camera" menu. Here you can tweak the zoom speed. I don't remember exactly what slider does what, it is probably under the name of FOV change speed and FOV change inertia. Put all the sliders at either 0 or 100% and see what happens. I adjusted my zoom speed there, but it was a few years back so I don't recall all the details. Adjust Gunsight: You have in the key binding section the "Pilot head control" and down the list there are a few commands named move pilot head forward/backward/left/right.... can't recall the default bindings (you may want to change this for something you remember, mines are on Ctrl+numpad keys). DON'T Forget to turn your TrackIR OFF beforehand, or this will not work. Tweak the head position to your liking and use the save with F10. It will also save in the zoom level, so you can zoom out fully before saving the view. I also HIGHLY recommend that in the same menu, you look for the line Save current corrections in head snap position (F10 by default) and change it for ctrl+F10 or some not-easy-to-reach combination, because if you accidentaly press it, it will ruin your default head position. Mouse Views: Same pilot head control section, delete the bow pilot head horizontally/verically assignment Cheers !