Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

223 Excellent

About WokeUpDead

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

719 profile views
  1. Also, how low were you? I think you have to get down to 1500m, maybe 1000m and the convoy will appear on the map right away, no need to return to base for it to show, if it's the enemy convoy.
  2. Ah, I see you're cos-playing the famous German lack of feel for humour and irony, well done. My argument is: feedback shouldn't stop just because you find it annoying. The game is constantly changing, LG is constantly trying out new things on TAW, players are trying out new tactics and sometimes discovering new loopholes - all those things create fun new opportunities but also challenges that should be pointed out. It would be odd having your direct bomb hit be worth 100% damage one sortie, but the same bomb worth 50% next sortie when half your opponents leave. Also, it wouldn't fix the issue of flying frustrated and/or bored when there's a severe imbalance.
  3. Hark! Another white knight here to defend the poor developer damsels from the mean, mean TAW players! But seriously, it’s good to hear that you decreed that NOW is the time for changes to stop, and that TAW had reached its ultimate stage of perfection. We needed a firm voice from a user with a firm and very serious looking man in his avatar to tell us this. Thank you.
  4. Yes, this is the crux of the issue. The way TAW is designed, if it’s very uneven then it’s boring; more so than on any other server. When flying red at a big disadvantage sometimes I’m ok with limiting myself to a specific type of sortie: maybe hitting the depot towards the end of the map, maybe doing a quick hit and run on attackers near a red air base. But many other times I simply think “forget this, it’s 12v12 on Finnish Virtual now.”
  5. Is that the problem that needs fixing though? A lot of the recent discussion here is the result of safe flying: the blob raids are relatively safe, flying fighters up high rather than attackers down low is safe. Also, safe can be boring. What’s needed instead is a way to encourage some risky behaviour while minimizing the impact such behaviour would have on the map.
  6. I agree, it doesn’t need to be rocket science. Maybe it doesn’t even need to be a Google doc, this forum might be enough. Start with the biggest squads announcing here which side they will fly and how many pilots. Then the next biggest squads can make their own preliminary commitments while keeping an eye on what the balance is looking like. If it looks like an imbalance is going to happen then a squad or two can commit to reversing its decision before registration starts.
  7. 2 weeks plus an extra day for every time some noob asks “when is the next campaign?” So now it’s 2 weeks plus one day.
  8. I’d like to be able to see the present strength of friendly and maybe also enemy ground targets via chat command, like on Finnish Virtual Pilots. This would let defenders see which targets are getting hit, which ones are still worth protecting and which ones are pretty much dead. This would increase the likelihood of meeting enemies over a target.
  9. Was it a target? Rear airfields aren't valid targets, they need to have "Attack!" written under them on the map.
  10. TLDR: Larry tried to throw a pie at Moe’s face but Moe slipped on a banana peel, fell, and Larry’s pie hit Curly instead. Curly then swung a big kick at Larry but Moe got up at just that moment and received the kick in his crotch.
  11. How far away are you there? Looks like 300-400m? Those low-caliber non-explosive MGs are not effective from dead six at that distance, the German ones too. Either get closer or create an angle.
  12. I’m not sure about that, during the times I fly (and I’ve seen you there at the same time a couple times) we get a mix of Spanish, Russian, and English speakers with an occasional French speaker too. I don’t get the sense that the reds have any sort of organizational advantage, it looks about the same to me.
  13. Oh yeah, sure, I’ll grow dramatically 8 minutes at a time.
  14. I don’t need to fly every plane, and I don’t, but mastery of the I-16 is useless after two maps. I could start flying the P40 right away but that plane disappears after 4 maps and on map #1 I’d first need to collect CMs in other planes to get it. The LaGG is only available on four maps, the Spitfire and P39 for three. The La-5 and Yak families have the most continuity with availability across five maps, but not the first three. The red plane set forces us to fly on a minimum of three very different fighter families if we want to fly fighters on all 8 maps. Sorry I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make with VR but I understand this: since in VR technochat is less available/visible than in 2D, you will miss it less than non-VR users. Technochat isn’t a huge issue either way, more experienced players will adapt. But being on the Canadian west coast where evening numbers are low for all servers, and where red numbers on TAW can be particularly low, I’m usually on the side of the argument that makes TAW a little more accessible as long as the main features of the server remain; objectives, combat missions, limited planes and lives, big maps, etc.
  15. It is harder for red players though, more planes to learn through the campaign. On the eastern front the blues have two fighter types, two ground attacker types, two bomber types through the campaign and just a couple odd ducks: the Macchi and the HS. The reds have 8 different fighter types (more soon if we get the P47 and Hurricane out east), one ground attacker and one bomber, though the two Pe2 versions are quite different in the cockpit and controls. And a lot less automation. So having technochat on is a disadvantage to VR players, since they can only see it while looking straight ahead while players in 2D can see it all the time?
  • Create New...