Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

Before eliminate reds at all, I think it's better if reds play one edition flying empty ( no ammo ) , hahahahhahhaha. , now seriosly number of pilots and possibilities to be captured will be next point to change for the "balance", or maybe I'm wrong. Let's go play Sixth edition!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Kathon.
 
What about eliminate numer of pilots ?? if pilots will be next key for win a map.... kill pilots on parachute will be a olympic sport.
 
In other editions... blue team  allways lost more pilots than red  tream( due % posibilities be captured ), and this can be considerated a unbalanced situation.
 
thx

 

 

I think this is not a good idea. The special feeling of TAW is that the life of a pilot and his plane has value.

 

As a LW pilot it is not reccommended to do a deep behind the line strike on a airfield. If life doesn't matter anymore, there will be much voulchering "just because they can" without any penalty.

Let's not forget that the purpose of TAW is to provide a "as realistic as possible" feeling. Turning every challenge off brings TAW nearer to a WOL experience. 

 

(Concerning WOL: I love WOL. It's great to play, the missions are good and you can have almost instantly actions in the terms of a sim game. But WOL is WOL and TAW should remain TAW for the sake of diversity)

 

Fly safe

 

Emu o7

Edited by ReDmuyen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is not a good idea. The special feeling of TAW is that the life of a pilot and his plane has value.

 

As a LW pilot it is not reccommended to do a deep behind the line strike on a airfield. If life doesn't matter anymore, there will be much voulchering "just because they can" without any penalty.

Let's not forget that the purpose of TAW is to provide a "as realistic as possible" feeling. Turning every challenge off brings TAW nearer to a WOL experience. 

 

(Concerning WOL: I love WOL. It's great to play, the missions are good and you can have almost instantly actions in the terms of a sim game. But WOL is WOL and TAW should remain TAW for the sake of diversity)

 

Fly safe

 

Emu o7

U will still lose your plane and your pilot. (streak and stuff)

 

I doubt that the pilot limit had a measurable effect on player behavior and risk acceptance. The risk to lose the plane and a streak had an impact however.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U will still lose your plane and your pilot. (streak and stuff)

 

I doubt that the pilot limit had a measurable effect on player behavior and risk acceptance. The risk to lose the plane and a streak had an impact however.

You mean just like Wings of Liberty?

What sets TAW apart from WoL isn't stats and streaks it's the loss of planes in your hangar

I also think that it is better to remove the pilot limit also. Aircraft limitation is enough.

Early war, Russians had an extreme lack of aircraft and an abundance of pilots. Late war that changed, obviously, but to what degree, I don't know. I also don't know anything about LW pilot and plane numbers, though I imagine both declined considerably

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think there is relatively easy "solution" to the issue. Just forbid the VYa canons for every plane since their tank-killing capabilities are without doubt beyond any real life hard data. I know there could be some dispute about this action but big SC bombs are forbidden too though their impact on campaign under current conditions is way less significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simplest solution is to have the Germans get all their planes and ordnance while the VVS only gets tanks. :o:

But would that not help the VVS?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simplest solution is to have the Germans get all their planes and ordnance while the VVS only gets tanks. :o:

Wouldn't work - Russians from World of Tanks will come and win the campaign...:)
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forbidding the VYa because it is used differently ingame than IRL is not a good idea imho. You will need to be fairly close to the tank for the 23mm rounds to pierce through the weakest spots on a tanks armor. In real life a pilot would likely pull up a lot earlier and virtual pilots don't face fear of death when going down on an enemy column. Thats why the VYa can be used more efficiently ingame. Aditionally the VYa was the standard armament for the Il-2. Going for historical accuracy and then forbidding the historically accurate weapon does not make sense. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use 350 meters convergence and pull up of the strafing run at about 100 meters most of the time. Still the full AP load works quite well against PzIII/PzIV. At that ranges I'm even able to destroy Pz38 frontally with three to four hits. This can't be supported by any real data or evidence. I know the VYa canons were standard late in the war but the problem is that their ingame performance is absolutelly inaccurate. It´s the same like we would have 500 kg bombs destroying heavy tanks by exploding 100 meters off the point blank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Forbidding the VYa because it is used differently ingame than IRL is not a good idea imho. You will need to be fairly close to the tank for the 23mm rounds to pierce through the weakest spots on a tanks armor. In real life a pilot would likely pull up a lot earlier and virtual pilots don't face fear of death when going down on an enemy column. Thats why the VYa can be used more efficiently ingame. Aditionally the VYa was the standard armament for the Il-2. Going for historical accuracy and then forbidding the historically accurate weapon does not make sense.
 

 

Virtual pilots flying their aircraft in a way that was never done IRL is a historical inaccuracy in itself, is it not? Your assumption may be correct. Unfortunately, I've yet to see evidence to back it up, but I am still investigating the issue. The other possibilities are that the simulated VYa gun or AP shell is over powered, the impact angles of shell on armor are not accurately represented in-game, or the Axis armor thickness in the simulation is not representative of the historical reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use 350 meters convergence and pull up of the strafing run at about 100 meters most of the time. Still the full AP load works quite well against PzIII/PzIV. At that ranges I'm even able to destroy Pz38 frontally with three to four hits. This can't be supported by any real data or evidence. I know the VYa canons were standard late in the war but the problem is that their ingame performance is absolutelly inaccurate. It´s the same like we would have 500 kg bombs destroying heavy tanks by exploding 100 meters off the point blank.

3 or 4 hits? I frequently tank bust in using these and 3 or 4 isn't possible even with the larger cannons. Can you please post a video?

 

The lowest I've killed a tank with is about 5-7 volleys, so that puts it at 10-14 rounds total.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban VYA + 37mm Stuka/110 until ~1943 planeset? Also ban all SC 1000 and larger bombs?

Not sure if I'd be a big fan of this, but hey - darts on a board. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban VYA + 37mm Stuka/110 until ~1943 planeset? Also ban all SC 1000 and larger bombs?

 

Not sure if I'd be a big fan of this, but hey - darts on a board. 

 

I don't agree with big bombs restrictions: LW have enough problems in winning a map. If you'll desable their bigger payloads, they won't have a chance. Same for the stuka 37mms.

I agree in increase the pilots kills number or disable it completely. Increase also vehicles and aircrafts number.

I also suggest to make harder to achieve the best planes each map. So doing this we will maybe find some macchis and p-40s flying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that the tank limit is gone I think the issue with the 23mm is less severe. And from what I read in the early IL-2 production there were different factories, one(s) producing it with ShVAK and the other(s) producing it with the Vya-23.

 

I use 350 meters convergence and pull up of the strafing run at about 100 meters most of the time. Still the full AP load works quite well against PzIII/PzIV. At that ranges I'm even able to destroy Pz38 frontally with three to four hits. This can't be supported by any real data or evidence.

 

The early-mid Panzer 38 (t) variants had 25mm of frontal armor, the later E and F variants got it's armor updated to medium tank standards (50mm in the front, 30mm in the sides). Which is the version we have in IL-2?

 

 

This whole topic about the Vya-23 is interesting indeed so I will see if I can get some calculations from which distance (and angles) the AP round would be able to penetrate 30, 20,15 and 10mm German armor plates

Edited by SuperEtendard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other possibilities are that the simulated VYa gun or AP shell is over powered

 

I think both are the case. I know its other gun, but take an La5 with full AP then compared to full HE belt, on the HE there will be a lot more sparkles. Meanwhile with the Vya gun every plane is simply blown up with 1 or 2 rounds, with either AP or HE. Even with the 37mm which is supposed to do more damage than 23mm you wont see the kinda damage you can reliable do with the Vya guns.

 

The AP explanation also contributes as to why german cannons seems lackluster in terms of damage performance, since they carry more HE in their belt compared to the russians.

Edited by JAGER_Staiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Even with the 37mm which is supposed to do more damage than 23mm you wont see the kinda damage you can reliable do with the Vya guns.

 

This is just not true. As I long time VYa user I can tell you that. Btw: A VYa round weights ~ 200 gramms, travels at 900m/s and the VYa sends out 600s of those per minute. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to point out the JU87G -> 1943 suggestion is historical.  Would really put me in a pickle for destroying tanks since that is my go to when we have CM+1 Stuka, but if we are going to try and move to a historical plane set it is worth considering or push to 1942 to meet in the middle for 1 campaign.

 

Edited by Roo5ter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New TAW campaign starts 12.03.2017 on Sunday morning. 

 

 

Changes and new features:

  • New map "Moscow_South"
  • Campaign last 7 maps
  • No tanks limit
  • 74 slots for players
  • Airfield is closed (only closed) when is damaged more than 75%. When airfield is damaged more then 85% then it's destroyed completely (no AA and buildings) and is ready to be captured in the next mission.
  • New simple probability to capture enemy airfield by paratroops: probability % = airfield damage % 
  • To destroy bridge objective no need to destroy dugout (only bridge destruction is needed)
  • Level of supply by trains is now depended also by level of depot's destruction. (reduction up to 30% when depot destroyed)
  • New plane set proposed by StG77_HvB:

planeset_v1_4_5.jpg

* VYa23 and Sh37 for IL-2 may be unavailable on some airfields.

 

 

 

Registration is open.

 

GOOD LUCK!

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • New plane set proposed by StG77_HvB:

Why do you deprive players of the opportunity to fly on early aircraft?

Many people want to fly on Emil, MC202 against I-16. All these Yak-1, 109F4 are already fed up on other servers, now you are adapting to them and already on the second card give the opportunity to take them, why? At least 2 cards let fly in pleasure. Why do you need MC.202 on the second map? Sense, if you already have 109F4?

 

Correct the number of planes on the first card until the war began, please.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very bad that there is no possibility of flying on early aircraft (I16 vs E7). It was one of the chips of the TAW

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all the implemented changes from my predominantly VVS perspective, actually. It's a bit of a shame that there is no pure E-7 vs I-16 environment, but then again, it's extremely annoying to deal with Pe-2s in that environment, so I get it. Very much looking forward to the new campaign, I'll change sides like always and play German tho. :) Thank god for not adding the 190 A-5, that thing is OP as all hell right now. :D

 

Thank you very much for all your efforts, despite having less time on your hands, Kathon. Keep up the good work.

Edited by JG4_Etherlight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why do you deprive players of the opportunity to fly on early aircraft?
Many people want to fly on Emil, MC202 against I-16. All these Yak-1, 109F4 are already fed up on other servers, now you are adapting to them and already on the second card give the opportunity to take them, why? At least 2 cards let fly in pleasure. Why do you need MC.202 on the second map? Sense, if you already have 109F4?
 
Correct the number of planes on the first card until the war began, please.

 

The Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov LaGG-3 (Лавочкин-Горбунов-Гудков ЛаГГ-3) was a Soviet fighter aircraft of World War II. It was a refinement of the earlier LaGG-1, and was one of the most modern aircraft available to the Soviet Air Force at the time of Germany's invasion in 1941.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov_LaGG-3

 

Looks like it was fixed to me.  Surely it won't make things any easier for the Luftwaffe but the team did state they wanted to move towards a more historical engagement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov LaGG-3 (Лавочкин-Горбунов-Гудков ЛаГГ-3) was a Soviet fighter aircraft of World War II. It was a refinement of the earlier LaGG-1, and was one of the most modern aircraft available to the Soviet Air Force at the time of Germany's invasion in 1941.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov_LaGG-3

 

Looks like it was fixed to me.  Surely it won't make things any easier for the Luftwaffe but the team did state they wanted to move towards a more historical engagement.

 

 

TIL World War II was a thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There comes the argument between not having it at all or having a somewhat improved variant.

The Ju87D3 was really late in 1941 I think.  Maybe early 42 but I need to try and find a source.  Restricting the 20mm on the LaGG is pretty close and the best solution imo since it keeps some variety in the plane set and isn't far from reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There comes the argument between not having it at all or having a somewhat improved variant.

 

 LIES

 

 

Why do you deprive players of the opportunity to fly on early aircraft?
Many people want to fly on Emil, MC202 against I-16. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friends, dont be care about historical facts,  historicity isn´t the objective for planetset, objective is provide some balance and playability.

 

)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Why do you deprive players of the opportunity to fly on early aircraft?
 

LaGG-3 29 ser. and Yak-1 69 ser. were made in second part of 1942

 

 

There comes the argument between not having it at all or having a somewhat improved variant....   ....Restricting the 20mm on the LaGG is pretty close and the best solution imo since it keeps some variety in the plane set and isn't far from reality.

I should have said restricting 'to the' but the point still stands. 

 

Friends, dont be care about historical facts,  historicity isn´t the objective for planetset, objective is provide some balance and playability.

 

)

In response to this, obviously Kathon's intent is to move to a more historical plane set since he specifically referenced HvBs post - https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21029-tactical-air-war/page-75?do=findComment&comment=442131

Edited by StG77_Roo5ter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very bad that there is no possibility of flying on early aircraft (I16 vs E7). It was one of the chips of the TAW

Absolute agreed - it was one of the advantages of TAW overall the others that one could fly a historical plane set and not these some what childish "uber fighter vs. the rest" hustle... Would be bad if TAW goes this way as well...

 

A good (and historical correct) thing is that the JU 88 is available from the first map on...

Edited by Geleitzug

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

×