Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

48 Excellent

1 Follower

About [110]xJammer

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

591 profile views
  1. I have never done so with a fully loaded bomber Even 110 was getting taken apart by the red AAA.
  2. Because the blue AAA is so inept to the point of being just broken. http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=27081&name=red110 1 PE2 attacking an airfield defended by 3 fast flaks. 3 flaks down later I was still flying with full bombload, was able to bring the damage back up to 100% and still had 3 bombs left to drop onto defenses at a different airfield.
  3. Unify flak units across both of the factions - use the best performing versions. Red AAA from my experience is significantly more dangerous than the blue one. Limit attacking depots / airfields if the player numbers are low (keeping in mind that some bombers can set off up to an hour in advance to a target and would be quite upset if it becomes invulnerable). With a bit of historical and current data one could make a decent enough estimate to declare missions as "frontline targets only" from the start so everyone can manage their expectations. (if the game is in "frontline targets only" limit the repair and supply rate of the now invulnerable airfields/depots) Defend your airfields.
  4. It surprised me how inept the blue AAA is in comparison to the red one. It takes it a long time to turn and start firing and it has very limited range. So quite literally a simple dive pass over the airfield will net you a destroyed AAA. And you'll hardly have any return fire on your way out as by the time the AAA turns towards you after the pass you'll be well outside of it's range. Honestly it was more difficult to do the same against red airfields. Blue AF defences are hilariously poor. As I stated before, I (xJammer) fly under bf110 and red110 on TAW currently.
  5. Yup. Those two callsigns are indeed xJammer (i.e. me). Don't think I'll have nearly as much time as I used to last campaign to contribute this time around, but the changes definitely shifted the META. I haven't had the chance to check out the new AAA either. I'm sure it will take a bit until people will figure out the new META for the ruleset. Once I get some time I'll try to figure out if I can collect the stats on the rate of parakills as I expected it to go up. I also wonder if the introduction of life limit will motivate some players to switch sides to be able to continue playing while their "counterpart" account regenerates.
  6. I entirely welcome you to check my results as anyone could make a mistake, especially with initially inconsistent logs (where some sorties begin with player getting killed only to fly on to kill other players). I am also not trying to tell anything about a particular specific topic. I was curious to see how likely of a "fatal shot" does the AAA deal via the best proxy I could think of at the time. I thought some here could find the results interesting. If you have specific statistics that you may want to look at - ask for it or go ahead and run the numbers yourself.
  7. Lets look at the AAA Statistics now. This is over entire TAW campaign, considering player sorties that were only damaged by the specific AAA and did not take any other damage (besides damage that has no cause, such as engine out or self-damage): TRUE == aircraft was shot down Red AAA Blue AAA 52-K Flak 36 61-K Flak 37 72-K Flak 38 GAZ-AA M4 MG-34 AA M4 Sd Kfz 10 Flak 38 ZiS-5 72-K I'll slowly update this post with more relevant AAA stats, such as the most survivable aircraft / etc. (Depending on what is possible given the logs)
  8. Don't take too much insight from HE111 data - look at how few sorties are recorded for 1v1 encounters against HE111. And in terms of kills / hour, 109-e7 gets killed by Pe2 around 4 times per day of Pe2 flight, while I16 only gets killed once per day of He111 flight. In hindsight I should have made the Y axis limits consistent between those charts. sight. Thankfully I don't work for you 😄
  9. Been playing around with the TAW data a little bit, interesting results This is map #1 only for now though. Word of warning: self-damage data can be flawed as during ground collisions / etc player can incur damage to his own aircraft caused by himself. So Mc202 taking down MC202 that frequently is an artefact (at least I hope so) And here is a different view of 1v1 sorties of players (i.e. sorties where some damage was given/taken but only 2 players actively participated in the encounter) BOTH LANDED = either or both of the aircraft took some damage, but neither were "SHOT DOWN" in the log. KILL = Title aircraft shot down the target SHOT DOWN = Title aircraft was shot down by the X-axis aircraft MUTUAL = both aircraft went down This set of data is not super consistent (Pe2 vs 109e-7 should give basically same result) I'll need to look into why this is later. Possibly some sorties aren't counted or the logs themselves aren't consistent. Correction : the data below does not account that the 2nd party may have been involved in more than 1 encounter! Only the 1st party was being checked. I'll post updated charts in a bit <decided to remove this afterall> While the data above is flawed to some extent, the number of pure 1v1 sorties is a lot more limited, thus I will leave up the charts above. Below is correctly filtered 1v1 encounters (that still however do not consider AA/etc damage, only that 2 players and not more were involved) Album with most aircraft: https://imgur.com/a/Qr8qdVt A few examples:
  10. At this point the hilarity of the situation is turning into outright lies from the two overly concerned individuals. To refresh your memory I have simply stated, as always, that I will do w/e is legal to help the blue win. I have also mentioned that I think it would be a waste of my effort to bother with you guys at this point, but considering your misrepresentation I decided to post nevertheless. Take it easy . Especially considering that you already have your answer from Kathon
  11. The issue is that nothing stops 1 sacrificial lamb to join the enemy side to figure out the zones and communicate them to the rest of the team via TS/Discord. (I.e. a guy is about to leave / etc) @56RAF_Roblex Landing at the enemy AF will get you taken apart by the AAA. I believe the change in question only affects active enemy airfields. Not random fields you get on the map (?)
  12. Getting bored was a justification to choose an inferior approach - landing instead of continuing to strafe the spawn as people spawned into the airfield. I was killed on the airfield as a result. There is no connection between a landed aircraft and "killing people before they can spawn exploit". Currently the aircraft appears around 10-30 seconds before the player actually takes control of the said aircraft. This aircraft can be strafed, bombed or shot by the gunner of landed aircraft. So what you call an "exploit" factually applies to every single player who vulches or bombs the ramp. There is also no indication when the aircraft has actually become controllable by the player in question - so even if people wanted to avoid such an "exploit" they wouldn't be able to without letting the aircraft first start its engine. @No_85_Gramps Coconut server actually implemented a rule to auto-kick any landed aircraft that is outside of a friendly airfield within 30 seconds (which is something I proposed at the time). Again, its the same as parachute killing - servers make their choice as to what they are willing to allow, players play by the rules given.
  13. Not sure what you are trying to show there other than my incompetence at completing the set mission? None of those missions were a guaranteed failure and with a better skill and methodology could be perfected to 80-90% survival rate. Here is an example where it worked: http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=50224&amp;name=xJammer http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=50271&amp;name=xJammer http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=50326&amp;name=xJammer The airfield that originally had 11% damage was 100% damaged the next mission. Lol I decided to sort by deaths
  14. Fair enough. I guess there is no point to try to communicate with you, as anything I would say you'd consider either an attempt to defend/justify, or an attempt to avoid being banned.
  • Create New...