Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

 

 

I agree, but partially. When difference is 1.5:1 and even a bit more, it goes OK. When it constantly goes beyond 2:1 it gets really difficult to win, you can hold on for a while...but not win. 

 

Situations like this, were very common during this edition

 

And I partially agree with you. Yes, it is very difficult for a team to do anything important or much less win a mission if teams are highly lopsided. But, I disagree with the idea that this campaign was for the majority of the time or at decisive times, that imbalanced.  Maybe at sporadic times or when a map is pretty much lost (ie- now) teams got fairly ugly, but it didn’t seem like an overall issue VVS couldn’t deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the enemy has 10-15 every night and you have 8 (typical) the problem is way more than the numbers. The problem is that somehow in that environment you have to take out at least 1, and frequently 2 full tank columns. This means really in order to do that everyone must shoot tanks, which is why in some cases the aircraft losses are so high. You can't have high cover or there's not enough people. You need to get in, make an attack, hope you get out and then do it all over again. 

 

It's easy to tell if a campaign is unbalanced, you just look at the stats. Numbers of tanks destroyed? Aircraft and pilot losses? Number of maps won? Notice that this time all of those have been consistently held by a german margin, in some cases quite large. Another telling sign is the maps where Russians are supposed to have an advantage, but still get steamrolled. A competitive campaign tends to swing back and forth either way, which is nothing close to what we have now. It's important as if it's totally lopsided no one wins, because as a game, it's not very fun playing on a side that gets consistently run over. Players start doing something else, and then it gets boring on the other side and they stop logging in. Everyone loses. I don't know what the answer is for this because it's not the fault of LG admins. I've learned that the registration site is also useless as it has no relationship to what the actual numbers in game will be. Consistently it'll show large german advantages but they don't show up. For me it's frustrating that sides can't be balanced more effectively or even predicted, because I feel that in order to make it more fair I need to join the short side. Russian always looks short so I always end up russian, even though I'd like to do german/russian 50/50 split. 

 

In short, this is a severe problem and I honestly don't know what to do about it, short of having a campaign set up rather like our sunday campaign where the sides are intentionally matched at least somewhat evenly. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

I've seen:

.Damaged Russians still dog fighting, not even thinking about RTBing,

 

 

 

This is very true. A major contribute is the fighting style due to performance. It's hard to run away in a P-40, Lagg, Mig or Yak1. We get a loooooot of those before we get a more even match in performance. Even then it's a bit of a hike to get an LA5 where as 109s are 109s. This is a big reason I enjoy the early war stuff so much. There is a more natural balance between opposition. The E7 - P40 match is fun, even an F2. In Cliffs of Dover being 1940 there is a more natural technological balance too which I enjoyed.

 

Against an F4 the gap becomes quite the interesting challenge. It's arguably the peak 109 model but the G2 is a bit faster. Against the early lineup it's a bit of a cakewalk to pilot an F4 vs any pairing. The F4 is competitive across a larger portion of the war compared to a Mig or Lagg. It's a fight between 1941 vs 1930's aircraft right on the edge of obsolete for the first 4 maps. Even in map 5 now it is a slog of three aircraft before you get a Yak1. For arguments sake if I wanted to pad some stats and this was my bag selection: 1xMig3 - 2xLagg - 1xYak1 < 2xF2 - 2xF4 - 1XG2

 

If it's historical I don't mind.

 

Edited by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

All those posts that this campaign is so super heavy unballanced as for players numbers …

 

I see that people have very short memory,

 

 With exception of the previous TAW campaign (TAW 12?) where due to all those new planes there were more red players, on all other campaigns there were signifcantly more blue players than red.

 

Current campaign is quite good balanced  as for players numbers with as shown on graphs which i posted earlier. (like always there are lot of people who are just blind for hard facts)

 

Only in previous campaign  the red side was constantly winning  the maps trough conquering the territory. in all other previous TAW campaigns that i took part in (mostly red side - taw 11 which ended in draw and current taw 13 are the only campaigns that i fly blue) blue side was pushing the front but was loosing each time due too attrition of tanks, planes or pilots. 

 

The reasons for current blue steam roll are :

1) the long requested by blue side impact of strategic bombing as to equal the 23mm guns of red side was finally introduced - and its being properly followed by blues who now correctly heavily bomb airfields and depots in addition to front line targets and at the same time are covering their own depots 

2) the blue fly significantly more organized than before (squadrons or not)

 

And again the current  red to blue player ratio is much more ballanced  than the previous taw campaigns (Except TAW12) and its not a game changing factor in current outcome, because this variable (red to blue player ratio) didn't changed for worse but for better (except taw12), opposed to other things that changed

 

Funny thing now when the atrition is equal or even grater on red side, no one speaks about the biased red planes and fragile blue ones (as it was constantly the case during previous taw caps  when the red side was winning by attrition of blue side assets...)

 

 

 just to add my 2cents

 

 

Edited by Carl_infar
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, HenHawk said:

But, I disagree with the idea that this campaign was for the majority of the time or at decisive times, that imbalanced.  Maybe at sporadic times or when a map is pretty much lost (ie- now) teams got fairly ugly, but it didn’t seem like an overall issue VVS couldn’t deal with.

Then we will never agree on this. During map #2 i wrote here that with these conditions and specially if the current team quorums keep like this, blue side will finally win this TAW; was i wrong? Also when i saw the team lineup inmediately after previous TAW edition just started (map #1) i said to my team: "this will be a walk through for the red team"; and it was. See? I'm always right  :biggrin:
 

Now seriousy, with current TAW conditions -that "slight advantage" given to LW according to Kathon's words- numbers were really important, and it just required a couple of map loads to put red side to the defensive reaching that point of not return mentioned by many already. We didn´t have the numbers to do all or at least most important tasks; defend depots, defend airfields, look for Ju-52s; kill hordes of blue tank columns; bomb enemy depots... too many things, all important, we didn´t have the numbers. It only required a couple of 3:1 -and even more- imbalanced map loads like those we had during the first 4 maps (being #4 the only kind of "balanced") to have LW doing a lot of damage where we could not recover from even if teams were more "balanced" afterwards. Again, with consistent 36-7, or 50-15, or that kind of numbers we had it was practically impossible to win a map under current TAW conditions. As it has been said, this edition red side lacked of large organized groups like blue side had. If you add to that the good use LW did of their bombers...well, you have this outcome: 5-0 due to three factors:
 

.Important team imbalance
.Winning conditions in favour of blue side

.Lack of large organized groups on red side; opposite to blues who did really well and flew more organized
 

Anyway, TAW already over, so congrats to blue side for winning it. You did a good use of your advantage and flew really well!.
 

For next TAW @=LG=Kathon would be nice to have something in between the middle regarding winning conditions; i think @HR_Eldamar idea es really good:

"But the existence of that point of no return that Dersheriff mentions can end up making the maps stop having interest once it is evident that it has been surpassed.
Maybe it could be compensated by making the columns on both sides advance less the further away the supplies have, that is, the depots, which on the other hand is strictly historical."

 

 

Edited by ECV56_Chimango
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few of my observations:
Blue players are more spread among various time zones and due to that have a constant presence on the server. So it's easy to get 7:1 or 10:3 situations, while in prime time numbers are close to equal.
A lot of Russian players for whatever reason are on the blue side, which also expurgates the afore mentioned situation. This is clearly evident in the afternoon hours Moscow time. Especially if there are "easy to hit" red ground targets - blue team suddenly becomes stacked to absurd levels.
A lot of red players seem demoralized by the blue steamroller and simply don't play. Even on the Russian part of the forum there are such outcries and that means a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it rather amusing that some are calling one team having a near constant numerical advantage 'good balance.' Go back and look at that histograph and you will see that the blue line is almost always above the red lines. Perhaps I'm deranged but when one side has that kind of advantage the balance isn't good. There are other factors at play here, sure, but you can't honestly say this isn't a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, HR_Eldamar said:

In any case: the difference in the number of pilots is something that changes in each campaign and is not worrisome. But the existence of that point of no return that Derseriff mentions can end up making the maps stop having interest once it is evident that it has been surpassed.
Maybe it could be compensated by making the columns on both sides advance less the further away the supplies have, that is, the deptots, which on the other hand is strictly historical.

 

This is a good suggestion, actually. Although the "winning" side still can wreak havoc with bombing raids, at least they won't automatically steamroll absolutely everything with their tanks. Looking at it realistically this is a dumb thing of course, because advancing 50 - 100 km when on an "attack" map means the supply lines barely even come into play, but for gameplay this'd make a world of difference. Would let the team losing ground at least standa a chance to make a comeback with tank, plane and pilot kills, even if that chance isn't fantastic. Far better than nothing.

 

 

17 hours ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

The thing though is that most people are doing something when they play on the server. They usually can't just drop everything and go to escort you because of their fuel or need to go back to base without having a combat sortie. I often see people ask for cover when they are 1-2 minutes out, giving escort fighters who aren't by chance in the area not enough time to react. 

 

This. Ask us 10-15 minutes ahead of the raid. We might be 50 km away from the nearest airfield and it's not like we can drop everything immediately and come assist. And especially at the start of a round it can be more important to make a rapid first strike on a closer target, as well as denying the enemy a good first strike option, so for the first 15-30 minutes many players will be "taken".

 

 

9 hours ago, No.615_Kai_Lae said:

When the enemy has 10-15 every night and you have 8 (typical) the problem is way more than the numbers. The problem is that somehow in that environment you have to take out at least 1, and frequently 2 full tank columns. This means really in order to do that everyone must shoot tanks, which is why in some cases the aircraft losses are so high. You can't have high cover or there's not enough people. You need to get in, make an attack, hope you get out and then do it all over again. 

 

Yeah, this is the constant issue. Heck, doesn't even matter when during EU mornings the reds often outnumber the blues. What can 10 reds vs 3 blues do, when 10 players barely are enough to halt the advance of the blue tanks? We may destroy a tank column. Maybe even two. But we can't help our own tanks advance because there's no time to actually destroy any defenses, so our tank columns will automatically lose, and the next round it's the same all over again: Two new blue tank columns that need to be destroyed, so at best we can try to maintain the status quo.

 

Then more blue players come online, and all possibilities for the reds to even maintain said status quo goes out of the window, because now it's no longer possible to spare enough players for ground attack.

 

Actually sparing people to attack supply depots then is basically doomed, because who can afford to have half the team (5 guys) away for an hour on a depot strike when they are needed immediately near the own airfields not to lose them in an instant?

Edited by Inkoslav
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

deleted - I got to try the 110g with add guns today:)

Edited by Carl_infar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

Then we will never agree on this. During map #2 i wrote here that with these conditions and specially if the current team quorums keep like this, blue side will finally win this TAW; was i wrong? Also when i saw the team lineup inmediately after previous TAW edition just started (map #1) i said to my team: "this will be a walk through for the red team"; and it was. See? I'm always right  :biggrin:
 

Now seriousy, with current TAW conditions -that "slight advantage" given to LW according to Kathon's words- numbers were really important, and it just required a couple of map loads to put red side to the defensive reaching that point of not return mentioned by many already. We didn´t have the numbers to do all or at least most important tasks; defend depots, defend airfields, look for Ju-52s; kill hordes of blue tank columns; bomb enemy depots... too many things, all important, we didn´t have the numbers. It only required a couple of 3:1 -and even more- imbalanced map loads like those we had during the first 4 maps (being #4 the only kind of "balanced") to have LW doing a lot of damage where we could not recover from even if teams were more "balanced" afterwards. Again, with consistent 36-7, or 50-15, or that kind of numbers we had it was practically impossible to win a map under current TAW conditions. As it has been said, this edition red side lacked of large organized groups like blue side had. If you add to that the good use LW did of their bombers...well, you have this outcome: 5-0 due to three factors:
 

.Important team imbalance
.Winning conditions in favour of blue side

.Lack of large organized groups on red side; opposite to blues who did really well and flew more organized
 

Anyway, TAW already over, so congrats to blue side for winning it. You did a good use of your advantage and flew really well!.
 

For next TAW @=LG=Kathon would be nice to have something in between the middle regarding winning conditions; i think @HR_Eldamar idea es really good:

"But the existence of that point of no return that Dersheriff mentions can end up making the maps stop having interest once it is evident that it has been surpassed.
Maybe it could be compensated by making the columns on both sides advance less the further away the supplies have, that is, the depots, which on the other hand is strictly historical."

 

 

 

I really don’t think we’re that far apart in opinions. I’d just encourage you to put aside your specific experiences with team numbers and look at the overall server trends posted in this thread. Heck, I think I saw you on the server yesterday when I flew a sortie or two and VVS were outnumbering LW at that point.

 

I agree it must be difficult covering the normal multiple targets + possible paradrops.  Keep in mind in past campaigns I’ve seen hordes of red tank columns and LW airfields immediately shutdown by a close column, too. Minus paradrops, game dynamics are the same for both sides, but I get it is always going to be tougher when outnumbered.

 

Balance should always be examined to keep things fun, I think the TAW crew does a great and highly considerate job of doing that after each campaign. Maybe things were tipped too far this time in favor LW and your suggestions seem reasonable to look at.

 

But, what I hope isn’t taken away from is how well many LW pilots performed and worked together this campaign to (finally) achieve a win. In many past campaigns there were some pretty lopsided advantages for the VVS, but the virtual pilots for the Russians still have to be said to have earned every win in the end. This is because, regardless of variables, TAW is still arguably the highest level of competition Il2 has to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be too early to ask this..

Any plans on having Bodenplatte seasons? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Carl_infar said:

http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=34811&amp;name=JG4_RuckZuck

 

Please ground the above player for few days for friendly fire so he'll remeber to id the targets

I am very sorry for my mistake. I apologized right after that. You flew with your BF-110 at the clouds underneath where Pe-2 reported
has been. As I said, I'm sorry.

Edited by JG4_RuckZuck
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, HenHawk said:

 

 

 

But, what I hope isn’t taken away from is how well many LW pilots performed and worked together this campaign to (finally) achieve a win. In many past campaigns there were some pretty lopsided advantages for the VVS, but the virtual pilots for the Russians still have to be said to have earned every win in the end. This is because, regardless of variables, TAW is still arguably the highest level of competition Il2 has to offer.

 

Of course nobody doubts the good work of the blue team in this TAW, in other campaigns they have flown in red and they have done it just as well.
The work of the developers is not criticized either, and we are more than grateful to them for offering us the opportunity to compete.
There are simply a number of factors that have come together to make the campaign less exciting than the previous ones.
the numerical advantage, the concurrence of squadrons organized in the blue team, the capacity of the blue strategic bombers, and those advantages that, as Kathon said, the blue team has in this edition have added up to unbalance the balance too much.
I, for my part, will continue to do my bit for the victory of the red team, although I don't like Kuban's maps very much.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, HenHawk said:

Balance should always be examined to keep things fun, I think the TAW crew does a great and highly considerate job of doing that after each campaign. Maybe things were tipped too far this time in favor LW and your suggestions seem reasonable to look at.

 

5 minutes ago, HR_Eldamar said:

The work of the developers is not criticized either, and we are more than grateful to them for offering us the opportunity to compete.

 

Honestly, without taking away any credit that the TAW admins rightfully deserve, i feel like there is a lot of work piled up when it comes to balance currently. The people responsible for it apparently don't have enough time to deal with it, which is completely understandable considering that this is not their job and they probably don't even get enough donations to cover their expenses. You can criticize someone without being ungrateful. (Historical) balancing is a very demanding and ever changing factor which demands a lot of attention to get it done right. The steamroll wins for either side sadly make up for the majority of the TAW campaigns as far as i can remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

 

Honestly, without taking away any credit that the TAW admins rightfully deserve, i feel like there is a lot of work piled up when it comes to balance currently. The people responsible for it apparently don't have enough time to deal with it, which is completely understandable considering that this is not their job and they probably don't even get enough donations to cover their expenses. You can criticize someone without being ungrateful. (Historical) balancing is a very demanding and ever changing factor which demands a lot of attention to get it done right. The steamroll wins for either side sadly make up for the majority of the TAW campaigns as far as i can remember. 

In my country we say," It never rains to everyone's taste". We each contribute our own suggestions and our own point of view, and I think I'm not mistaken in saying that the purpose of all of us is to make the campaign more interesting.
We may not agree on many things, but what is undeniable is that this is the most immersive campaign that can be flown today.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HR_Eldamar said:

In my country we say," It never rains to everyone's taste".

 

It has little to do with taste when nearly all campaigns are lopsided. Nobody is questioning that TAW is the best server out there, but that doesn't mean it can't get any better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

It has little to do with taste when nearly all campaigns are lopsided. Nobody is questioning that TAW is the best server out there, but that doesn't mean it can't get any better. 

Obviously, but it is more than likely that the changes you like are not to the liking of others, which for you is an improvement for others will be a step backwards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

BTW, Carl_Infar you were wrong about TAW 11th edition, i've just checked just in case, but i remembered it well cause it was my first participation. TAW 11th was a RED victory 4-3 with a draw on final map, the most balanced TAW so far IMO.

So, just in case anyone is interested:

 

TAW 11 - RED VICTORY (ended Dec 2017)

TAW 12 - DRAW (ended Feb 2018) => BOK planes introduced
TAW 13 - RED VICTORY (ended May 2018)
TAW 14 - BLUE VICTORY (current)

 

It would be nice if admins have TAW history from previous editions add it to main page like ADW had. But of course, it's work, and it's easier to ask it than to do it...so just a suggestion, sorry.

 

***
PS. @HenHawk yes, we agree almost in everything; but not regarding team balance, and that graph shown is irrelevant really. If you entered yesterday when reds outnumbered blue, it was by a little margin and it was one of those very sporadic scenarios during this edition; also was while map was already doomed, and even if we were let's say 15-8 in our favour is not enough, 15 pilots is too little on this edition,  to kill all tanks, stop enemy bombers, protect our defenses, etc. This has been explained before.

 

 

Edited by ECV56_Chimango

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Map#1 in a nutshell:



 

 

I think I watched that video a dozen times and I laughed on everysingle one :lol::lol::lol:

 

Only wish the russians would go down that easily ingame.... still funny though lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red lost this because most of the people that were keen on bombing depots flew Blue this round, nothing more and nothing less. 

 

The usual crew that i flew with and bombed depots flew on Blue. This paired with the better equipment in blue to bomb depots with and the outcome is just inevitability. 

Nothing to do with player numbers, as the numbers were, as many pointed out, better than in other TAW's, and those TAW's were not so lopsided. 

 

The importance of depots with their impact on the rest of the map has been cranked to 11, once the depots is nuked, it takes, 15 missions to re spawn, partially, and nuked to the dust in a mission or two. This created scenario where rest of the VVS team had to run as fast as they could just to stay still. Killing as much as three blue tank columns in one map only to have new tanks spawns next map just instantly closing the airfields. While the Axis side could do all the thing they wanted now that depots were done. 

 

I inflicted single handed , alone, without any escort  somewhere around 40% of total damage on northern depot last round. Yet i could not for the life of me convince anyone else flying at the same time to go do a depots run (there were few exceptions from the US crew), even after i cleared all AAA from northern one. This can be attributed to perhaps a large ignorance of the importance of depots among many current TAW people flying on VVS. 

 

Defending the depots, instead of attacking them, is always a losing strategy. Even if you managed to intercept one bomber, there will be always someone who slips trough. And most of the time flying a patrol means you are not actually doing anything for good hour, as you have no concrete information if anyone is actually going to depot or at what altitude. 

 

Offense >>>>> defense in every conceivable way. Only reason i see to hang around depots is to pad your kill statistics. As defending depot instead of attacking one is futile.You will achieve more impact for your team by dropping one 250kg bomb on enemy depot than stopping one bomber from returning after he dropped his load. 

 

This, paired with the fact that 5 people with some dedication and elbow grease can kill a whole depot in 2-3 missions on a low pop times. The VVS has really no one but themselves  and their ignorance of new META to blame. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Carl_infar said:

 

Funny thing now when the atrition is equal or even grater on red side, no one speaks about the biased red planes and fragile blue ones (as it was constantly the case during previous taw caps  when the red side was winning by attrition of blue side assets...)

 

 

 just to add my 2cents

 

 

 

 

We've been complaining about side stacks for a good while now. Nothing funny about it. Those of us who are willing to balance sides due to numbers stack get screwed over by those who never swap no matter the stack. It is a valid complaint. I really don't care if it's a persons favorite aircraft. I'd love to see sign up sheets by side and region.

 

It won't happen though. Fortunately TAW is just a fun campaign. For historical and balanced team play join the Air Combat Group. Our campaign leaves the white Cliffs of Dover soon. We do our campaign on Sunday so it does not interfere with other campaign fun like TAW.   :)

 

https://www.aircombatgroup.co.uk/

 

 

14 hours ago, Furt said:

expurgates

 

 

Had to google that. Damn it. Foreigners knowing my one language better than me is embarrassing. Good post, thanks.

 

 

6 hours ago, HR_Eldamar said:


We may not agree on many things, but what is undeniable is that this is the most immersive campaign that can be flown today.

 

 

 

TAW is great but there is a more immersive option. We are so anal about immersion we have a paperwork simulator.... Some after action reports are hilarious.

We also have strict and historic claiming rules. If no one saw it, unconfirmed kill.

 

 

https://www.aircombatgroup.co.uk/acg-pam/

 

As the pilots back then, ACG-Pilots are required to write an After Action Report after each campaign mission, where they claim victories and describe the course of events of their mission. The reports are written, submitted and presented via these pages. Information from the reports is used to create pilot- and squadron profiles and various other statistics.

There are currently 173 active pilots flying for ACG. The whole group consists of 7 Royal Air Force squadrons and 9 Luftwaffe Staffeln. There are 13504 after action reports stored in this database, each representing a mission flown by one of our members during a campaign night.

 

 

Edited by 7./JG26_Smokejumper
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JohanLoton said:

Might be too early to ask this..

Any plans on having Bodenplatte seasons? 

 

I'd bet when we get the map, we'll get a map using all the planes released up to that time on TAW.

4 hours ago, 7./JG26_Smokejumper said:

 

 

 

TAW is great but there is a more immersive option. We are so anal about immersion we have a paperwork simulator.... Some after action reports are hilarious.

We also have strict and historic claiming rules. If no one saw it, unconfirmed kill.

 

 

https://www.aircombatgroup.co.uk/acg-pam/

 

As the pilots back then, ACG-Pilots are required to write an After Action Report after each campaign mission, where they claim victories and describe the course of events of their mission. The reports are written, submitted and presented via these pages. Information from the reports is used to create pilot- and squadron profiles and various other statistics.

There are currently 173 active pilots flying for ACG. The whole group consists of 7 Royal Air Force squadrons and 9 Luftwaffe Staffeln. There are 13504 after action reports stored in this database, each representing a mission flown by one of our members during a campaign night.

 

 

 

Pretty typical: https://www.aircombatgroup.co.uk/acg-pam/reportRAF.php?r_id=13339

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Inkoslav said:

 

 

Yeah, this is the constant issue. Heck, doesn't even matter when during EU mornings the reds often outnumber the blues. What can 10 reds vs 3 blues do, when 10 players barely are enough to halt the advance of the blue tanks? We may destroy a tank column. Maybe even two. But we can't help our own tanks advance because there's no time to actually destroy any defenses, so our tank columns will automatically lose, and the next round it's the same all over again: Two new blue tank columns that need to be destroyed, so at best we can try to maintain the status quo.

 

Then more blue players come online, and all possibilities for the reds to even maintain said status quo goes out of the window, because now it's no longer possible to spare enough players for ground attack.

 

Actually sparing people to attack supply depots then is basically doomed, because who can afford to have half the team (5 guys) away for an hour on a depot strike when they are needed immediately near the own airfields not to lose them in an instant?

 

There are right now, 3 enemy tank columns on the map, with zero russian ones. There are 7 russian players to stop them. I wonder how often this is happening.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During this night (European time zone) a non-existent column when it stopped flying at about 7 pm has advanced by itself more than 120 km reaching the depots of the south and this time the depots were more even. It's not that there are more columns, it's that the blue ones are advancing at breakneck speed, whether they have opposition or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange... I dont recall Katon talking about any changes on the columns.... perhaps theres a unintended bug in the script ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 7./JG26_Smokejumper said:

Had to google that. Damn it. Foreigners knowing my one language better than me is embarrassing. Good post, thanks.

The funny thing is - while typing, my grammar and spelling check thingy suggested it as a "better word". I was like "Wow this sounds so sophisticated - I'll use it!" :biggrin:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@=LG=Kathon 
My Suggestion for the next TAW Campaign:
Extend the Registration Phase before the actual start of the Campaign. Not just a day ahead, make it a week or an even longer time frame. Give players the chance to register early and let them pick a side. Show those numbers on the TAW-Startpage, so that everybody can see how balanced (or unbalanced) the  Teams are during the Registration Phase. As long as this Pre-Campaign-Phase is running, registered players should still be able to change sides.  Maybe we would get a more balanced campaign this way. 
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎7‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 5:26 PM, JG4_RuckZuck said:

I am very sorry for my mistake. I apologized right after that. You flew with your BF-110 at the clouds underneath where Pe-2 reported
has been. As I said, I'm sorry.

No hard feelings - I deleted the above request.

 

anyway we've seen each other around 1 minute before you shoot me at the same hight and roughly 150m separated while you were in slow left hand turn in my direction, over southern target. When I noticed you i decided to cover north target so both could be defended and flew north ( I must say that it crossed my mind that you will not be that stupid or blind to attack… ). Shortly later the enemy was reported so it was impossible for him to be at the place where you attacked me. Apart for the obvious differences in the 110 and pe2  apreance, like the engines hanging below the wings on pe2, the wider cabin etc the gunner was not shooting at you, wasnt it suprising...

 

And the last thing, sometimes I'm more on duty sometimes less and  yesterday i had only roughly 1 hour off, for my entertiment which now is TAW. While flying blue i mostly fly bombers and ju52 paradrops in order to help the ground war because there's already enough hartmans, ( when i fly red is more 50/50) but sometimes i take also a fighter for a spin. Yesterday due to new map and the 110g being avialable for the first time i wanted to try it out with the add guns. So at the end of that hour which i had free and short of trying out the guns as the enemy was closing I got shot by a friendly who didnt bother to check the target even after he seen a friendly 2win engine shortly eralier...

Now I also cant check the 110 becasue i must earn some cms to get it back…

 

 

Edited by Carl_infar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From my observations the biggest impact this round is the increased number of attacking tank columns.  I’ve seen multiple times during the US evening times where there were 3 German tank columns attacking and no Russian tank columns attacking.  Looking at the mission history I can see this happening the other way as well, I assume based on which side is on the offensive.

 

The problem with this set up is that, while in certain time zones (e.g. Europe late afternoon for 6+ hours), the server is likely more full, and there are enough pilots to possibly deal with three tank columns and other duties, much of the rest of the times the server is not as full.  In some cases (at least in my time zone, Pacific time/US west coast), I usually see anywhere from 5 to 15 pilots on each side (varies, sometimes more German, sometimes more Russian).

 

With these few numbers, it becomes increasingly difficult to destroy one - let alone three - tank columns in addition to doing anything else like defending defensive positions, airfields, depots or attacking the same on the enemy side.

 

I would recommend that the admins consider what an “average” server population might look like, then adjust the number of tank columns accordingly for future maps.  If the max number of tank columns attacking at one time were reduced from 3 to 2, it would probably have a huge impact during those less populated times, and reduce the steamroller effect.

Edited by AKA_Relent
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/12/2018 at 9:01 PM, AKA_Relent said:

From my observations the biggest impact this round is the increased number of attacking tank columns.  I’ve seen multiple times during the US evening times where there were 3 German tank columns attacking and no Russian tank columns attacking.  Looking at the mission history I can see this happening the other way as well, I assume based on which side is on the offensive.

 

The problem with this set up is that, while in certain time zones (e.g. Europe late afternoon for 6+ hours), the server is likely more full, and there are enough pilots to possibly deal with three tank columns and other duties, much of the rest of the times the server is not as full.  In some cases (at least in my time zone, Pacific time/US west coast), I usually see anywhere from 5 to 15 pilots on each side (varies, sometimes more German, sometimes more Russian).

 

With these few numbers, it becomes increasingly difficult to destroy one - let alone three - tank columns in addition to doing anything else like defending defensive positions, airfields, depots or attacking the same on the enemy side.

 

I would recommend that the admins consider what an “average” server population might look like, then adjust the number of tank columns accordingly for future maps.  If the max number of tank columns attacking at one time were reduced from 3 to 2, it would probably have a huge impact during those less populated times, and reduce the steamroller effect.

Why you take so much care about tank colums? 

Spend this time to kill trucks in the column and then go and destroy depots. Columns is tactical target and depots is a strategy target. If you don’t have enough forces to attack just defense and do strategy targets. 2 pe2 and 2 fighter enough to destroy 20-30% depot for only 1 flight. If you will take il2 there then more. Just cooperate and do this.

Edited by =KK=Des_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Haha! This is so funny! I see the music has changed and the RED side is now the cry baby!

 

Thank you TAW admin for changing things a bit!

 

#1, Taking out Depots are now more important that killing tanks! This means He 111s now have a purpose.

#2, Just killing tanks will not win a map anymore so the IL-2 is no longer a super weapon. There is a option B now, see above #1

#3, RED airbases are far from the front (...maybe too far), but this was one of the major issues for the BLUE side in the prior TAW campaigns. This is way sometimes you see few RED tanks attacking, because they are so close to the front, they are usually destroyed by the tail end of map's rotation. Combined with #1, it's easy to see how BLUE is winning.

#4, Better logic to handle aircraft loss! THANKS ADMIN! Thus, you don't run out of aircraft so fast - this is after all just a  game...

 

With regards to side # balancing, yeah - I fly only for the BLUE side. Some people switch - and that to each their own. Some fly only RED, so logic would mean if RED team is still shooting down more BLUE aircraft, it means that all the BLUE pilots are flying attack correct? Or spectating LOL

 

I would love to speculate on how the RED team could flip this again - but I'll let you guys figure it out.

 

 

Edited by SCG_X-Man
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, SCG_X-Man said:

I see the music has changed and the RED side is now the cry baby!


Yes. because structural critism is crying. Did you know that the depot mechanics are there for ages?

At least there were there as the blues got hammered last campaign were the numbers were ok.

Edited by DerSheriff
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DerSheriff said:


Yes. because structural critism is crying. Did you know that the depot mechanics are there for ages?
 

 

No way! Et tu, DerSheriff? 😞

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DerSheriff said:


Yes. because structural critism is crying. Did you know that the depot mechanics are there for ages?

At least there were there as the blues got hammered last campaign were the numbers were ok.

 

 

Last time i checked we said some structural criticism, but we get called Luft Whiners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I thought the German side out smarted the Reds by a margin, I don't know enough about the system behind the TAW, but it seems the German side got it right when it comes to hitting targets, true blitzkrieg without the interference of a jumped up Corporal.

 

Well done the Blue side.👍

 

 

Ardmore

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =FI=Ardmore said:

I don't know enough about the system behind the TAW

Exactly!

Otherwise you wouldn't reach the conclusion that a victory is achieved by only one factor. LW did well using their strategic bombers, but a victory in this kind of campaigns have to do with a mix of factors; and some guys seem willing to ignore other decisive issues that contributed to their victory this edition. "Outsmarting" the other side, surely wasn't the most relevant. It's like capturing an airfield in Ju52's when you have 40 guys on your side, and 8 on the other, it's not smart nor brilliantly team worked, but just an easy walk in the park due to huge team imbalance...no matter how many nice propaganda videos you make afterwards ;)

 

BTW:  if someone really has to be explained the difference between whining and constructive criticism, then there's no point in even trying, they won´t get it anyway...or don't want to get it.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Chimango, Blue did it last night with Ju52’s even though they were outnumbered at the time, something like 10-4 at one point when I was flying.  Have to hand it to them, brilliant - 4 guys took Ju-52’s from Timo... to Viselky and dropped paratroopers nearby, when most/all Reds we’re off attacking other areas.  The base was not captured, but it was damaged to 95% which closed it, and made it much easier to capture in a subsequent round, plus it forced Red to fly much farther to attack/defend.

 

I’m in agreement with those that have voiced their opinions that this is an unfair advantage for one side to have.

 

For the admins -  would it be possible to use the Pe-2 in a similar fashion?  Obviously there are no paratroopers, but what about landing Pe-2’s with 100% fuel and no bombs/rockets at a nearby unused field or even a road (e.g. within xxx? km from the enemy airbase trying to be captured/damaged).  This can simulate dropping supplies to friendly troops or partisans behind the lines, maybe another way to at least damage enemy airfields in a similar fashion that paratroopers can now with Ju-52’s.

 

Thanks for your consideration.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AKA_Relent said:

what about landing Pe-2’s with 100% fuel and no bombs/rockets at a nearby unused field or even a road (e.g. within xxx? km from the enemy airbase trying to be captured/damaged).

or on a nearby, straight stretch of frozen river on snow maps...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×