Tactical Air War

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

How about simply bringing out a campaign without the killstreaks shown on the website. Instead, the statpages of those with more than 5x kills in one streak could just say "Ace". Would defeat all those streaking off over their Hartmann stats... a pilot can count that for himself.

[Sketch]

55 minutes ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

How about simply bringing out a campaign without the killstreaks shown on the website. Instead, the statpages of those with more than 5x kills in one streak could just say "Ace". Would defeat all those streaking off over their Hartmann stats... a pilot can count that for himself.

 

 

Maybe keep the individual stats of all players, but don't display those stats on the landing page. If a player wants to see their individual stats, they should click "pilot stats". The landing page should show campaign stats.

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

A better approach could be to make flying offensively less punishing.

 

I think we need to rethink the capture mechanic when bailing out. If you bail out 10m behind enemy lines you shouldn't have the same chances of getting captured as when bailing out 100km behind enemy lines. 

 

Then again there is very little information about the capture mechanic of TAW.

[=69.GIAP=Shvak]

14 hours ago, [TWB]Sketch said:

 

 

Maybe keep the individual stats of all players, but don't display those stats on the landing page. If a player wants to see their individual stats, they should click "pilot stats". The landing page should show campaign stats.

I like the stats on the home page. You get to recognize pilots and when you see they are in the air you exercise more caution. Say the guy with only two assists to his credit

[KoN_]

Stats are good but bring in some strange behaviour . On more than one occasion flying blue I noticed that 109s and 190s  did  not engage or help out when pilots needed help . Maybe the odds not in their favour maybe they fear loose that kill streak they have built up . I don't know .

But I'll be  happy to see a stats change .  Besides I don't think the stats are 100% correct . 

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

8 hours ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Stats are good but bring in some strange behaviour . On more than one occasion flying blue I noticed that 109s and 190s  did  not engage or help out when pilots needed help . Maybe the odds not in their favour maybe they fear loose that kill streak they have built up . I don't know .

But I'll be  happy to see a stats change .  Besides I don't think the stats are 100% correct . 

 

maybe they weren't able to help you because you were turning like a madman against yaks

[LLv44_Mprhead]

3 hours ago, Operation_Ivy said:

 

maybe they weren't able to help you because you were turning like a madman against yaks

 

This is actually often the problem.

[FTC_DerSheriff]

Funny how "stats" are presented as the reason why people don't risk things. My main reason is to survive the sorties.
Surviving in a simulator. what naughty thing to do.

I help when I see a opportunity to help. If I need help after that rescue then I did something wrong.
That is my simple ruleset.

Edited June 14, 2018 by DerSheriff

[Cpt_Siddy]

1 hour ago, DerSheriff said:

Funny how "stats" are presented as the reason why people don't risk things. My main reason is to survive the sorties.
Surviving in a simulator. what naughty thing to do.

 I help when I see a opportunity to help. If I need help after that rescue then I did something wrong.
That is my simple ruleset.

 

 

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity...

[HandyNasty]

1 hour ago, CptSiddy said:

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity.

 

are we still talking about a game here? or did I miss something?

 

 

[-SF-Disarray]

1 hour ago, CptSiddy said:

 

 

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity...

 

Nobody told me I might have to risk my life in this war! Why did they leave that out of the brochure?!

Edited June 14, 2018 by Disarray

[Feraphic]

2 hours ago, CptSiddy said:

 

 

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity...

 

This is a video game, fam, not real life. Sure, it's meant to simulate WWII air combat, but it's still a video game nonetheless.

Edited June 14, 2018 by Feraphic

[Aero*Bohemio]

Regarding stats; a good thing ADW had was the possibility to split your planeset lines between bomber+attacker, and fighter; or have two nicknames, one for fighters, another one for bombers+attackers. This was really fair. I don´t know if it is too difficult to implement it in TAW.

 

I prefer those who care about their virtual life in TAW; that's the difference between approaching this as a simulator, or transforming it into Air Quake Arena. But of course...there is a thin line between caring about stats, and flying for stats.

[Cpt_Siddy]

3 hours ago, Feraphic said:

 

This is a video game, fam, not real life. Sure, it's meant to simulate WWII air combat, but it's still a video game nonetheless.

 

Yeah, well, if you want to simulate stat padding in WW2, don't cry when that interferes with your actual mission and loses the maps. 

 

You can have a roster of 50 streak kills and lose the ground war, or help your bombers and attackers and a chance at wining... or at least stop this one sided slaughter. 

This time axis had equal number, still better mounts, better level bombers, ju-88 that is peshka analogue. Only thing you lack is IL-2 but got 110. There is no real reason why axis should be losing maps when axis was outnumbering reds, now that the player counts were somewhat even, axis managed to win one map.

 

If you want to simulate an early war space combat, when luftwaffel had the initiative, trough out the whole campaign you are deluded. That is not being "realistic", thats just you waning to "fly safe".  Because at the end of the war, when reds held the initiative, they did not bother climbing up there in to space. They decimated axis stuff left and right on the ground. But hey, stay in space, fly safe and let your attacker get frustrated and stop caring, a wining strategy, i say! 

 

I am sorry if it sounds harsh, but if i count all the times ive sacrificed my rear to get couple of IL-2's home and how many time ive seen 109's at 4-5 km "covering" the attackers while i could gun two or three of them down before getting engaged... yeah, i would not want to fly any attacker sorties for blues either. 

 

 

2 hours ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

 

 

I prefer those who care about their virtual life in TAW; that's the difference between approaching this as a simulator, or transforming it into Air Quake Arena. But of course...there is a thin line between caring about stats, and flying for stats.

 

 

It is not caring about stats, its caring about mission objective. If you care only for kill marks, that is acceptable flying in early 1940, when there was virtually no risk from opposition either way. But thinking that you can go on fly risk free while doing your job as a airman of luftwaffel... well, there is a reason why so many Luftwaffe airmen did not live to see the end of war (that and the lack of rotation).

At the end of the war, the Luftwaffel airmen life expectancy dropped like an anvil. 

 

 

Right now we are in situation where most talented people on blue side fly all the maps like it is early war free hunting. Where you climb high and just wait and see. This helps the ground war in no way and in my opinion, is considerable part contributing to the current situation.

What makes it worse, is that mediocre pilots imitate the good ones, climb high and jack off there getting done even less. How i know this? Easy, when i go against a good player up on high, i expect to lose because of my myriad handicaps, like VR, and red plane. But the amount of scores I've been getting indicates that there is more and more mediocre pilots in places where they are useless even as a mediocre players. And their reluctance of helping groundpunders because "muh all good players fly high so should i"  attitude just compounds this problem. 

7 hours ago, LLv44_Mprhead said:

 

This is actually often the problem.

 

Why, any 109 can go toe to toe with yak in turn fight. Sure, you wont be getting the advantage of high altitude where yaks lose power. But you are not, by any means, outclassed. 

Having a fur-ball on deck is not elegant, but if it is what it takes to bring the 110's and ju-87's home, then thats what you need to do. Anything less is just going to make TAW really one sided. 

Edited June 14, 2018 by CptSiddy

[KoN_]

16 hours ago, Operation_Ivy said:

 

maybe they weren't able to help you because you were turning like a madman against yaks

Don't think so . Not the only one noticed this behaviour . I'll remember that when your 110 needs help . Joke  ?

Edited June 15, 2018 by II./JG77_Con

[=FSB=Man-Yac]

This forum should have strawmen awards for people like CptSiddy  

[FTC_DerSheriff]

12, 5 minutes of me being selfish and not being in the military.

[Cpt_Siddy]

6 hours ago, =FSB=Man-Yac said:

This forum should have strawmen awards for people like CptSiddy  

 

 

Yes, because your subjective experiences are more valid than anyone else... oh wait. 

 

I am stating my observations, and i am not alone with them. The only real question is how much of an effect they have. Because its either the flight style (assuming the ground war part of the game is balanced, if not, thats whole another can of worms) of teams or russian bias.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 6/14/2018 at 3:07 PM, CptSiddy said:

 

 

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity...

I hate to say it but he has a point. There is no "I solely aim to survive" in the military. There is the mission you fulfill, and if everyone does his part and doesn't chicken out, everyone survives and profits.

 

The point is, if we simulate a war in a videogame, we might want to behave like soldiers. Flying at 6km all time, "Hartmanning" and thinking that makes a good and useful participant, isn't part of that. Videos like the one presented here partly seem to be responsible for that attitude "prouder to make it home alive, than do the job and maybe die in the process". The VVS players somehow have realized that. While I haven't seen 109s escorting a group of attackers at 3km. Most often the reasoning is "the aircraft has no advantage at that altitude", which may be true, but not that relevant, if you have the numerical superiority anyway. It'd be a duckhunt if 50 Germans flew lower at the same altitude and were more eager to engage those 30 Russians on the deck (of which half sit in Peshkas and Stumoviks)...

 

I don't want to step on anyone's toes here. I want that you just give it a thought, and remember the behavior, and things that have been said in these regards.

[Cpt_Siddy]

 

[7.GShAP/Silas]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:07 AM, CptSiddy said:

 

 

There is a thin line between desertion and dereliction of duty and wanting to survive. Its like most of you never served in military in any capacity...

 

Yeah, no kidding.  It's bizarre.

 

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 8:13 AM, Feraphic said:

 

This is a video game, fam, not real life. Sure, it's meant to simulate WWII air combat, but it's still a video game nonetheless.

 

 

It's a simulation game.  Part of participating in a sim is behaving, roughly, in a realistic manner. If you aren't interested in doing that(which means placing the objective above your life or the lives of your comrades, period) then I don't see why you would want to fly on TAW rather than WOL or Berloga getting gudfites. 

 

As you said, it's a game, you're not actually going to die so there's no reason to be pathologically risk-averse even if there is no threat of court-martial.

Edited June 15, 2018 by 7.GShAP/Silas

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Assuming its on even grounds, you won't achieve anything as axis trying to fight for tank columns. Its simply an uphill battle you cannot win. The reason for that is very complex which would probably take 1-2 pages to fully explain.

 

There is generally the attempt to simplify this issue by saying that pilots of one side are simply playing wrong and it's all their fault. A more challenging approach would be to ask why pilots on a certain side behave like they do. Again, generalizing statements like "they just don't want to die" and "they don't care about the objective" are misleading, add nothing to the discussion and are plain wrong. Assuming that one player base is generally different from the other is a very biased view which i can only explain by them never having flown on both sides extensively. 

[7.GShAP/Silas]

3 minutes ago, Operation_Ivy said:

Assuming its on even grounds, you won't achieve anything as axis trying to fight for tank columns. Its simply an uphill battle you cannot win. The reason for that is very complex which would probably take 1-2 pages to fully explain.

 

There is generally the attempt to simplify this issue by saying that pilots of one side are simply playing wrong and it's all their fault. A more challenging approach would be to ask why pilots on a certain side behave like they do. Again, generalizing statements like "they just don't want to die" and "they don't care about the objective" are misleading, add nothing to the discussion and are plain wrong. Assuming that one player base is generally different from the other is a very biased view which i can only explain by them never having flown on both sides extensively. 

 

 

So the Axis can use their bombers to demolish airfields or whatever technique they want to use, the particulars are totally unimportant.

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

14 minutes ago, 7.GShAP/Silas said:

 

 

So the Axis can use their bombers to demolish airfields or whatever technique they want to use, the particulars are totally unimportant.

 

There is a big big difference between ground attacking and level bombing. There is a reason why level bombing airfields is so unpopular even though it would be the best way for axis to achieve victory.

 

Like i said, it is way more complicated than you seem to make it out to be.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Operation_Ivy

[Guest deleted@103832]

52 minutes ago, Operation_Ivy said:

There is a big big difference between ground attacking and level bombing. There is a reason why level bombing airfields is so unpopular even though it would be the best way for axis to achieve victory.

 

+1, but I'm not convinced level bombing is the panacea for Axis woes for the simple fact that most map frames have clouds. I've had targets obscured even under light clouds. Under medium clouds, very good chance there will be accuracy issues. Heavy or worse, forget it.  

[FTC_DerSheriff]

13 minutes ago, StG77_HvB said:

 

+1, but I'm not convinced level bombing is the panacea for Axis woes for the simple fact that most map frames have clouds. I've had targets obscured even under light clouds. Under medium clouds, very good chance there will be accuracy issues. Heavy or worse, forget it.  

while you right that it isnt possible each mission it is possible in most missions. 

Edited June 15, 2018 by DerSheriff

[AKA_Relent]

Here's an idea about stats...

 

Why not track the air/ground kill streaks regardless of if it's "current" or "active".  In other words, show the highest to lowest number of air/bombing/tank kills, period.  Then denote with some symbol if the streak is still active (the current system), and/or if the pilot has never died/been captured (the special award).

 

This way, if someone gets say 50 air kills and then dies/gets captured, it remains stuck at 50 and they remain on the top X list.  There might then be more incentive for that pilot to take more risks on future flights (e.g. help comrades down on the deck :), since their 50 kill streak will still be there until it's surpassed and drops out of the top 5 or whatever.  The way the top 5 stats are now, IMO there is less and less incentive to fly with much risk in the later stages of the campaign, for fear of losing these precious stats/standings.

 

Do I like stats?  Sure, but I don't ever expect to be on the TAW top 5 anyway, so I tend to mix enough risk in my flights as needed to try and hit ground targets, etc., for the team :).  However, it would be great if I somehow did end up on the top 5, that if I died/was captured, that performance/streak that happened a few lives ago might still be enough to be considered a top 5 event. :D.

 

[Cpt_Siddy]

56 minutes ago, AKA_Relent said:

Here's an idea about stats...

 

Why not track the air/ground kill streaks regardless of if it's "current" or "active".  In other words, show the highest to lowest number of air/bombing/tank kills, period.  Then denote with some symbol if the streak is still active (the current system), and/or if the pilot has never died/been captured (the special award).

 

This way, if someone gets say 50 air kills and then dies/gets captured, it remains stuck at 50 and they remain on the top X list.  There might then be more incentive for that pilot to take more risks on future flights (e.g. help comrades down on the deck :), since their 50 kill streak will still be there until it's surpassed and drops out of the top 5 or whatever.  The way the top 5 stats are now, IMO there is less and less incentive to fly with much risk in the later stages of the campaign, for fear of losing these precious stats/standings.

 

Do I like stats?  Sure, but I don't ever expect to be on the TAW top 5 anyway, so I tend to mix enough risk in my flights as needed to try and hit ground targets, etc., for the team :).  However, it would be great if I somehow did end up on the top 5, that if I died/was captured, that performance/streak that happened a few lives ago might still be enough to be considered a top 5 event. :D.

 

 

 

Good idea, and the rewards, if any, can be awarded as "post mortem" for the top streak, if it was interrupted. 

[ACG_Smokejumper]

5 hours ago, CptSiddy said:

 

 

 

Loved that show. Used to watch it with my dad.

 

 

 

On topic, is it ready yet?   

Edited June 16, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[RainbowCorner3]

Adding the perspective of a ground attacker of fairly modest ability.  (In the upper half of the team, often the top quarter, on Wings of Liberty, but I think most folks on this forum will understand that is not a very high bar.  Half the team on any given day seem devoted to making their own team's planes go away.)  I have been trying to work up an Axis ground attacker to fly on that side occasionally, and it is a challenge.

Fw 190 A5/U-17 - Bomb load is a bit light, but as far as I am concerned it is the best ground attacker in the game.  Bomb load is a bit light, but good guns.  You get a tail wheel lock, so easier to get down the runway than the rest of them.  But for many scenarios you don't get this version.  You are also removing an excellent fighter from the fighter inventory.  (Temporarily, if all goes well.)

Ju 88 - Good potential but with snake-bit visibility from the pilot's position and non-locking tail wheel this is one of the most challenging in the game to learn to fly off the runway.  Once in the air, excellent bomb load and decent speed.  Plus you get dive brakes.  I believe having the choice between dive bombing and level bombing is important.

Bf 110 - It was a disappointment to notice that, loaded up, I was not going any faster than a Sturmovik 1943 (in the E-3 anyway).  But faster with the bombs off, and you can see out the back.  And more maneuverable.  (Better than a Sturmovik even with the armored head rest.)  I will probably end up flying this one a lot.

Hs 129 - The Duck is presently a tragedy.  Such great guns with the 30 mm cannon, but with the broken engine management too much of your time is spent juggling throttle and RPM.  Worse than a P-40 at lower altitudes.  And we should get a bit more speed, also.  I would expect to fly this one out from time to time just because I like the plane.

 

The abiding question, in my mind:  When, if ever, did the German bomber/attacker designers realize they were not defending against fighters made of wood and canvas?  One of the Peshka's abiding advantages is the 12.7 mm heavy machine gun with a good field of fire in the dorsal position.  It can actually stop an attacking enemy fighter.  The light MGs in the German planes may tag a radiator or oil cooler, giving you the dubious joy of a posthumous aerial victory from time to time, but the concept just does not work.  The Brits also struggled with this concept, whereas even the early A-20 we get has a .50 cal in the dorsal position.  

[ACG_KaiLae]

The Fw-190A5/U17 has a better known name - the Fw-190F2. Though, the F2 never had the outboard guns mounted. As for rear guns, the Ju-88A5 at some point had the mg81's replaced with a MG131. Also the He-177 had heavy MG's in mounts and sometimes 20mm cannons. So they did upgrade eventually.

 

The Ju-88 should have a option for the Mg131. Perhaps some day it'll be added. 

[SCG_Darbzy]

Soooo... LG Team, do we have a rough ETA for the next campaign yet?

 

I’m trying to be ‘inclusive’ by letting my wife know in advance when she’ll be ignored and marginalized for a few weeks.

 

 

[LLv44_Mprhead]

On 6/14/2018 at 9:22 PM, CptSiddy said:

 

Why, any 109 can go toe to toe with yak in turn fight. Sure, you wont be getting the advantage of high altitude where yaks lose power. But you are not, by any means, outclassed. 

Having a fur-ball on deck is not elegant, but if it is what it takes to bring the 110's and ju-87's home, then thats what you need to do. Anything less is just going to make TAW really one sided. 

 

What I meant by "turning like crazy" being often the problem was that if you are in german fighter in disadvantage and you try to get out of harms way by turning as tight as you can, you make it quite hard for your buddy higher up to help you out. Ofc being on comms helps a lot in this.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Part 1, on pilot behavior:

Only if your buddies refuse to drop their higher energy state. That's the catch. German pilots refuse to stop their yo-yo super high energy attacks.

 

If you have the numerical advantage, or even if it's one plane less, you'll win against randoms as long as you are better coordinated. Even being on the same comms is usually enough. 

 

I'd say that there are people with 20 air kills who have been much more worthwhile to missions in the last campaign than some with >100. 

 

Part 2, on mission behavior:

I remember seeing JG4 guys bombing and capturing Russian airfields in mass Ju52 fly-ins. Very effective, but not blessed with good stats afterwards. Because killing aircraft rewards more points than buildings and tanks - or dropping paratroopers.

 

The stats place them out of top 5. In reality these guys have been the most valuable Luftwaffe squad in the last campaign. By far. And I say this in all honesty, while being dedicated in another that was in the official top 5. It's just true.

 

 

Last but not least, I am still firmly convinced that the kill streak indicator needs to go from the main page and be replaced by total kills, each of planes, targets, tanks. I have a lot of experience in that regard, and what it creates: I played an Elite-like mmo pvp game called JumpGate 15 years ago and I remember I was driven by the statistics there - it defined the way I flew, and I got the world's best kill streak that was never broken in the game. Sure I was proud of that. But did that make for good PvP? I had more fun flying my secondary in a military like squadron (OV @Siddy). Hence, no. It created bad pvp, and didn't achieve anything.

 

Part 3, conclusion:

Kill streak stats will always be detrimental in an environment, in which the end goal is not a counterstrike-like scoreboard, but an actual mission.

Edited June 17, 2018 by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

[=LG/F=Kathon]

Hi, I planned to start next TAW  campaign today but unexpected event forced me to postpone it by a few days.

[Klever]

 

 

1 hour ago, =LG=Kathon said:

Hi, I planned to start next TAW  campaign today but unexpected event forced me to postpone it by a few days.

Thank you for message. Will wait))).

Edited June 17, 2018 by Klever

[JG1_Shadepiece]

Is the pre registration going to be up again?

[ACG_Smokejumper]

5 hours ago, =LG=Kathon said:

Hi, I planned to start next TAW  campaign today but unexpected event forced me to postpone it by a few days.

 

 

Good luck. Look forward to release.

 

I would also like a pre-registration. We like to fly short side or it's boring. A few campaigns back everyone flooded blue after a butt kicking. I want to fly blue next campaign but if there is another exodus of Red to blue I want to wait. GFlying both sides ruined TAW for me. The one before last when I tried to fly both sides for balance I just ghosted out.

[Cpt_Siddy]

On 6/16/2018 at 1:05 AM, Operation_Ivy said:

Assuming its on even grounds, you won't achieve anything as axis trying to fight for tank columns. Its simply an uphill battle you cannot win. The reason for that is very complex which would probably take 1-2 pages to fully explain.

 

There is generally the attempt to simplify this issue by saying that pilots of one side are simply playing wrong and it's all their fault. A more challenging approach would be to ask why pilots on a certain side behave like they do. Again, generalizing statements like "they just don't want to die" and "they don't care about the objective" are misleading, add nothing to the discussion and are plain wrong. Assuming that one player base is generally different from the other is a very biased view which i can only explain by them never having flown on both sides extensively. 

 

 

Soooo, can you like, i don't know, post some arguments to support your assertions? 

 

Because this stinks to me more like "ive red a book of WW2 German ace and i want to fly just like him and make that style of flying the only kosher one". 

 

And if we classify the issue of certain team going for stats instead of objectives, then there is plenty of arguments and evidence that this is happening at least to SOME extent. Where the real discussion needs to take place is if this is actually contributing to the overall suck of the axis ground game or is merely inconsequential phenomena that can be ignored. 

I started my TAW in axis. And i came across an attitude of "if it flies under 2-3 km, i am not touching it". Whenever i went in low, to save 110''s behind, i found myself quickly surrounded by 3-4 reds while there is happy flight of German contrails over the objective. After a while, it got old and i just started to play reds. 

 

Allied attitude in TAW is this: We will fight on the beaches, we will fight in space, we will fight over our tanks or theirs, we shall never surrender. Whatever the cost. 

 

 

While Axis attitude is: if its under 2km, i don't care even if it bombed Berlin. 

Edited June 17, 2018 by CptSiddy

[Norz]

=LG=Kathon,

 

good news... But... How can we share it with WM 2018? Please do not start in the next 2 weeks

 

Ole Ole Ole