Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

96 Excellent

About SCG_Faerber

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

658 profile views
  1. lol this forum is just so fun, pe2 pilots defending their gunners to the last, even adding players to the ignore list holy shit can't make this up
  2. I believe less but more complex objectives, more airfields (also further away from the frontline) would help in mission design. Also some objectives (like industries) being located far behind enemy lines, so mostly level bombers AI or not would be able to strike it efficiently.
  3. Macchi 200 saw lots of action on the eastern front, it racked up a total of 81 russian planes destroyed to 13 Macchi 200 lost, it also could be a fun plane to fly, kinda like an I-16 for the Axis. I would also love the IAR 81, awesome plane.
  4. yeah, I thought that was the general assumption
  5. Bomb load is only relevant to big targets such as depots/concentrated factories (overall strategic targets), to tactical targets such as tank column or TAW defenses it actually pays to bring smaller bombs in big quantity. On the Western front where the allied objective is strategic and the axis one is defensive/airfield raids, the P38 bomb load could render high altitude bombing useless since the P38 could do the job on its own taking away the core feeling for the campaign which is its historical authenticity.
  6. I quite like the idea of separate campaigns. The air war was really different on the Western Front from the Eastern Front so assembling them into one would make all really game-y, well done guys!
  7. Hi! With new collector planes getting close of being announced and based on the almost confirmed possibility of one of them being a Hurricane, I come here to ask that the Macchi 200 be put into consideration. The Macchi 200 was THE plane of the Corpo Di Spedizione Italiano in Russia (CSIR) or the Italian Expeditionary Corps in Russia and had a very interesting tour of duty participating in both air-to-air combat and air-to-ground, it faced I16s, MiGs in Russia and Hurricanes in Malta, so the Macchi would pair well with the Hurricane. It ended its service with a interesting ratio of around 80 air victories to 15 aircraft lost. It would also prove to be an interesting aircraft to fly as it was really maneuverable with a low stall speed and had interesting "field mods" for example: pilots would remove the canopy so they would see better; The aircraft would bring more life to the early war scenarios in IL-2 and more choices for the Career mode. I do believe the Italian community would rush to buy it as soon as its announced, plus a few more of early war fans, so I do not, in my limited knowledge, think it would be a "bad business move". I just hope someone actually reads this and takes it into consideration. I love that you guys made the Macchi 202 and I am grateful because it is the best modeled Italian WW2 aircraft ever made on any simulation and I never stopped flying it. Thank you!
  8. Historical Fidelity or Balance, that is a big question, however I do believe TAW is more than a simple server, it is supposed to give us the most authentic eastern front air war on modern flight sims and all this whining over balance takes a lot out of it. I believe people should just suck it up and move on.The planeset usually generates lots of discussion since every side enjoys arguing the opposing side is superior in everyway which is tiresome. Germany has its pros and cons and so do soviets although I do agree the German planes ARE easier to fly, the solution is to keep the planeset the most historical possible (with the occasional exception eg: Macchi 202 with no 20mm gunpods, since it was the Macchi 200 who saw the most service in Russia); but then some may argue the germans with historical planeset get the advantage, which may aswell be true but can be counter balanced with other TAW mechanics and still maintain historical fidelity and I will list the idea I will use only fighters for the examples: 1941: Is the start date for TAW however it's over Moscow already, Barbarossa has already reached its peak and the numbers in the air start to pan in favor to the VVS. 3 lives for both axis and soviet pilots however we rebalance the number of planes each pilot has access to, slightly more I16s to the soviets, maybe 3:4 or 2:3 instead of the 3:3 we currently have on map #1, but generally keep it balanced with only this slight advantage 1942: Now should be Map #3 and more interestign planes join the frey however we have the Macchi with the 20mm gunpod which never saw service and was more of a prototype for the Macchi 205, the total number of fighter planes currently is 4:4 divided amongst various aircraft, increase it to 4:5 or 3:4, with aircraft which flew in that timeframe and not adding planes due to balance but add them for historical fidelity. On subsequent maps we can already start changing the life system, for 3:4 or 2:3 in favor of the reds, that will also probably help with the player balance issues 1943: Now this is where the campaign gets really messy imo, with Bodenplatte planes all sprinkled in at random for no reason. Keep it eastern front, don't worry about Bodenplatte aircraft unless TAW plans on a Rhineland campaign. The numbers then should imo reflect the results of the last 2 years, if reds have the majority of points then they maintain their advantage, however if the axis won most of the past maps then the numbers are balanced again. All in all, although not perfect and by far not well described I hope you understand my suggestion and bring it to further discussions, I believe we fly TAW for the immersion and authenticity and the more the TAW devs shift from this, the less interesting it becomes, at least for me; I also take into consideration that if someone thinks balance is the most important thing of all there are plenty of servers who are all about balance while we have not a single one who strives for historical accuracy/authenticity.
  9. I spotted way beyond 10km on a 1080p monitor, granted it was a B25 but I could see it well up to 25km
  10. What about with Alt Vis unchecked? It's a mess, devs should have just allowed for one spotting system and thats it. Having 2 fractures the community really hard, must be pretty tough for you guys over CB and KOTA... trying to make everything work...
  11. Just did a test with alt vis on and off (will do a similar explanation of my settings than that of hrafnkolbrandr up there) Ultra 1920x1080 Max shadows Complex mirrors blurred landscape 150km draw distance high grass High clouds 60 fps target Dynamic res factor Full Antialias 4 Gamma 0.8 Fullscreen Vsync No sharpen 4k text the test was made on a B25, big plane so I could keep up with it a longer distances. With it on I could see him pretty well from 10km, that's fine. Could see it from 20km up to 30km but he was actually reallty big specially when it turned. With it off I could also see him pretty well from 10km, and could see it up to 25+km although he was really small and the moment I looked away to change position I lost it which is fairly accurate representation I guess. I don't know how that would fare in a combat situation but I don't know where did people started saying that Alt Vis off reverts spotting back to pre-bodenplatte spotting. It most certainly does not.
  • Create New...