Tactical Air War

[Nightrise]

Oh great the Germans get the f4 on map 2 cause if thats one thing the Germans need it an f4 on map 2 ?

[Willy__]

4 hours ago, HR_Eldamar said:

In the first place I do not see very right that the red team has to wait for the fourth map to have a lagg3 with cannons

 

Lies.

The Lagg3 comes by default with 20mm cannon and a single .50cal which was by far the most common loadout for the lagg3. Saying that the lagg3 comes without a cannon is simply not true. The 23mm cannon was so rare on lagg3's that you could count the number of planes fitted with it in a single hand but in game everyone and their dog uses it; and the 37mm only comes on the late series, but I guess you reds forgot about that.... 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Willy__

[SCG_ItsDrifter]

Lol, i love how people were abdicating for a more historical lineup, and when the TAW team does it, everyone complains

 

Give them a break guys, they did what YOU asked, the f4 WAS present in the battle of moscow. 

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Just because the F-4 was present doesn't mean that this is a correct way to put it into map 2. 

 

As it is now you will see as many F4s in the air as F2s which is far from reality because very few units were equipped with them. Of course you can argue that this justifies it putting it on 0/1 but in my opinion this is a slippery slope because it would/should be the case for other aircrafts as well. 

[Nightrise]

18 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Just because the F-4 was present doesn't mean that this is a correct way to put it into map 2. 

 

As it is now you will see as many F4s in the air as F2s which is far from reality because very few units were equipped with them. Of course you can argue that this justifies it putting it on 0/1 but in my opinion this is a slippery slope because it would/should be the case for other aircrafts as well. 

Especially cause the Russians don't even get an extra mig to compensate. 

[ACG_Smokejumper]

6 hours ago, =FEW=nightrise said:

Especially cause the Russians don't even get an extra mig to compensate. 

You meant P40 right?

 

 

Admin awake yet? I want to shoot stuff.

Edited June 24, 2018 by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

[LLv44_Mprhead]

11 hours ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

The current plane set is neither historical nor balanced.

 

this is a sim game. Balance has no place in it. 

 

True. In historical plane set we would have Ju 88 from the start. 

[=69.GIAP=Shvak]

You can make some of the people happy all of the time, but none happy all the time. I am just glad it is kicking off. For at least a few maps the reds are slightly at a disadvantage, especially with the F4 but that seems historically accurate in a broader sense of the actually war, not plane set

[Cpt_Siddy]

29 minutes ago, =69.GIAP=Shvak said:

You can make some of the people happy all of the time, but none happy all the time.

And when no one is happy, you know you have reached a compromise ?

[Blakhart]

Rocco is always happy...

 

Nasty...nasty...open your eyes...nasty... nasty

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

7 hours ago, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

Lol, i love how people were abdicating for a more historical lineup, and when the TAW team does it, everyone complains

 

Give them a break guys, they did what YOU asked, the f4 WAS present in the battle of moscow. 

 

7 hours ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Just because the F-4 was present doesn't mean that this is a correct way to put it into map 2. 

 

As it is now you will see as many F4s in the air as F2s which is far from reality because very few units were equipped with them. Of course you can argue that this justifies it putting it on 0/1 but in my opinion this is a slippery slope because it would/should be the case for other aircrafts as well. 

 

And the 1941 F-4 would be limited to 1.3 ata as well IIRC.

@StG77_Kondor imho considering the most competitive way of dealing with tank columns for both sides is carpet bombing with 50 and 100 Kg bombs I don't consider the IL-2's 23mm a big issue, it's effectiveness is also decreased by crosswinds and low level turbulence which tends to be common in TAW missions.
 For what I could test the 23mm needs 20 impacts to destroy a Panzer IV in the side (15 to set it smoking), the 30mm needs 8-9 hits to destroy a T-34 in comparison (7 to set it smoking). So the 30mm is more powerful, but the IL-2 has two cannons and they have higher rate of fire which makes a one pass kill possible. If there was an Me 410 with twin MK 103s in the nose killing T-34s in one pass would be possible and maybe even easier than with the IL-2, seeing it would be a shorter burst and from center mounted guns.

[Guest deleted@103832]

1 minute ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

@StG77_Kondor imho considering the most competitive way of dealing with tank columns for both sides is carpet bombing with 50 and 100 Kg bombs I don't consider the IL-2's 23mm a big issue, it's effectiveness is also decreased by crosswinds and low level turbulence which tends to be common in TAW missions.

don't wanna make a thing out of this, but fact is the Ju 88, Pe-2, and A20B are also significantly impacted by crosswinds and turbulence when hitting tank columns. if I had a buck for every time I've been knocked 20m off the road one second before drop, I could gift every game in the Great Battles inventory.

[=69.GIAP=Shvak]

Okay, morning has broken across the entire Europe... I am assuming it was a heavy night celebrating for =LG=Kathon 

[Cpt_Siddy]

 

[LLv34_adexu]

Why no 109-G14 in first map?? :(

 

Server is down, almost mid day in Finland!

[Norz]

1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

 

 

And the 1941 F-4 would be limited to 1.3 ata as well IIRC.

 

The problem is that F-4 with 1.3 ata is much better than F2.

[=TF=Kaiza]

Server is up, but seems all options are available on a/c?

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by Kaiza

[LLv34_adexu]

35 minutes ago, Kaiza said:

Server is up, but seems all options are available on a/c?

 

Seems so, like 2500 kg bomb on He-111 and so on.

[JG4_Raven]

3 minutes ago, LLv34_adexu said:

Seems so, like 2500 kg bomb on He-111 and so on.

 

is a bug, kathon fixed soon

[LLv34_adexu]

Just now, StG2_Raven said:

 

is a bug, kathon fixed soon

take off fast with 2500 kgs! ?

[HR_Tofolo]

@Norz I don't see how will affect how many times I've flown the ju-52 to the fact that red cannot air capture any bases so please don't step into personal issues if you don't have any real argument. What I'm trying to expose is that I don't mind flying or escorting transports to air-capture AFs, I'd just like to have a counterpart on the red side. And while we don't get one it's completely unfair.

 

@StG77_Kondor ask the finns how many AFs did they conquer on the last edition... and I'm sure a lot of people played their part on the air-captures.

 

and regarding the planeset, I did not enter into detail, we fight with what we have, but it shocks some of us the fact that we are not getting any shvaks in the first missions nor VYas but there are plenty of Bk-37s and gunpods for the blue side (except italian 20mm gunpods *only* on the first map). Fine.

 

Anyway, check out the pilot's ratio: the war is ours comrades!

 

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by HR_Tofolo

[HR_Tumu]

First  red airfield captured in 2 missions , i think via ju52

 

 

 

Well played blue team .

 

Will be nice if reds can do the same i think.  

 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by RedEye_Tumu

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

3 minutes ago, RedEye_Tumu said:

First  red airfield captured in 2 missions , i think via ju52

 

.  

 

 

 

 

 

No, tanks got it.

[HR_Tumu]

my fault then 

sry

[ECV56_Necathor]

17 hours ago, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

Lol, i love how people were abdicating for a more historical lineup, and when the TAW team does it, everyone complains

 

Give them a break guys, they did what YOU asked, the f4 WAS present in the battle of moscow. 

Well give us the 20mm on the i16, if you are not afraid to die.

By the way Yaks and Migs also were present in the battle of Moscow

Edited June 24, 2018 by ECV56_Necathor

[KoN_]

Stay historical its the way the server is meant to be from  the start.  

Reds have won most campaigns anyhow .So things not that bad for red. 

[ECV56_Necathor]

5 minutes ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Stay historical its the way the server is meant to be from  the start.  

Reds have won most campaigns anyhow .So things not that bad for red. 

Well in this case stop talking about Historical, things are set unbalance until blues win.

[Willy__]

2 hours ago, ECV56_Necathor said:

By the way Yaks and Migs also were present in the battle of Moscow

 

We dont have the early Yak that was present on the battle of Moscow ingame.

 

 

I guess blues arent allowed to win or have any type of advantage huh ? Any minor change that makes the life of blue players a tiny bit easier is met with strong disagreement from reds every single time

Edited June 24, 2018 by Willy__
typo

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

4 minutes ago, Willy__ said:

 

We dont have the early Yak that was present on the battle of Moscow ingame.

 

 

I guess blues arent allowed to win or have any type of advantage huh ? Any minor change that makes the life of blue players a tiny bit easier is met with strong disagreement from reds every single time

 

Stop being ridiculous.

 

We neither have the early F-4 in the game. I am all for Blue winning once but saying that they don't have an advantage, especially in the fighter department, is just plain ignorant. The F-2 is already outperforming the MiG in every aspect except for flaps deployment speed.

[CamusB455]

 

 

We all know the Yak and Mig, while present in siege of Moscow, was far too powerful to make for a fair fight for the Luftwaffe. Yes, having anything but Rattas seriously puts Hans at a great disadvantage.  Therefore, on the grounds of balance and realism, it should not be present in TAW. 

[Willy__]

1 minute ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

We neither have the early F-4 in the game. I am all for Blue winning once but saying that they don't have an advantage, especially in the fighter department, is just plain ignorant.

 

I never said that the germans didnt have an advantage on the figther department, stop putting words into my mouth.

If the F4 is so much better then remove it from the map 2 and make it available only from map 3 onwards, its the first time we have the F4 on the second map and I wasnt the one who gave the idea.

[Norz]

5 hours ago, HR_Tofolo said:

@Norz I don't see how will affect how many times I've flown the ju-52 to the fact that red cannot air capture any bases so please don't step into personal issues if you don't have any real argument.

 Is it a real argument enough?

 

The mission with Ju52 is almost all the time a suicidal mission.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Norz

[Trobadin]

You loose your streak if you suffer a disconnect now? This seems a bit harsh if your computer happens to crash or internet connection drops out (as mine just did).

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

1 hour ago, Willy__ said:

I guess blues arent allowed to win or have any type of advantage huh ?

 

58 minutes ago, Willy__ said:

I never said that the germans didnt have an advantage on the figther department, stop putting words into my mouth.

 

Ok mate...

[SCG_ItsDrifter]

What makes you think we don't have the right F4 for the battle of Moscow? Some evidence would be great..

[Inkophile]

Just now, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

What makes you think we don't have the right F4 for the battle of Moscow? Some evidence would be great..

 

The problem is not to have a F-4, but that the one we have has 1.42 ata although that shouldn't be available for Moscow.

[SCG_ItsDrifter]

1 minute ago, Inkoslav said:

 

The problem is not to have a F-4, but that the one we have has 1.42 ata although that shouldn't be available for Moscow.

 

Im confused? Why shouldn't it be available? I've never heard of such information, i'm not doubting you but i've just never heard that before, like i said some evidence would be great.

[Inkophile]

23 minutes ago, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

 

Im confused? Why shouldn't it be available? I've never heard of such information, i'm not doubting you but i've just never heard that before, like i said some evidence would be great.

 

I'll reference you to this one: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/262160-time-to-change-engine-settings-on-the-bf-109s/

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

12 hours ago, Norz said:

 

The problem is that F-4 with 1.3 ata is much better than F2.

 

At low altitudes it's similar to the F-2 at 1.35 ata, at higher altitudes it's better, approaching F-2 at 1.42 ata performance.   1.42 ata F-4 is much better than both of those anyway though, and it can use intermediate power settings like 1.37 which is a good compromise between endurance and power.

 

 

20 minutes ago, SCG_DR1FT3R said:

 

Im confused? Why shouldn't it be available? I've never heard of such information, i'm not doubting you but i've just never heard that before, like i said some evidence would be great.

 

http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109F4_Datenblatts/109F4_dblatt_calculated.html
 

Quote

Another noteworthy point of interest is that this more recent calculated datasheet, reproduced below, dating from July 1942 no longer notes the banning of the Start und Notleistungs power for the DB 601 E engine as opposed to the previous datasheet from the end of November 1941, points to that the full power has been cleared for the engine.

This clearance is in fact also supported by the February 1942 release of the Bf 109F Flugzeughandbuch, which no longer notes any limitation in regards to the DB 601 E. The new Hanbuch part 7 (Powerplant) was likely to have been re-issued because of this clearance.

 

[StG77_Kondor]

18 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

@StG77_Kondor imho considering the most competitive way of dealing with tank columns for both sides is carpet bombing with 50 and 100 Kg bombs I don't consider the IL-2's 23mm a big issue, it's effectiveness is also decreased by crosswinds and low level turbulence which tends to be common in TAW missions.
 For what I could test the 23mm needs 20 impacts to destroy a Panzer IV in the side (15 to set it smoking), the 30mm needs 8-9 hits to destroy a T-34 in comparison (7 to set it smoking). So the 30mm is more powerful, but the IL-2 has two cannons and they have higher rate of fire which makes a one pass kill possible. If there was an Me 410 with twin MK 103s in the nose killing T-34s in one pass would be possible and maybe even easier than with the IL-2, seeing it would be a shorter burst and from center mounted guns.

Saludos compadre

I agree with you that the 88/A20 are the best tank killers as tank columns are currently set up. And as HVB said, the 88s/A20s also deal with crosswind, and for them it's actually worse because they only have one chance at it. IL-2/Ju-87 can always turn around and do another run. But maybe check your convergence with the VYa 23mm. It shouldn't need more than 5-6 hits (~10 rounds) to get the Panzer IV smoking. The 23mm is faster firing and if convergence is set right is better than BK 3.7 and both Hs-129 30mms. The IL-2 can kill them in one pass, same with 3.7 but with less ammo and room for error, it's not as effective overall in my opinion. And you have to think, the Panzer IV is very rare, until maybe the later maps. Most tanks are light tanks that will take 2-4 hits total before they smoke. But again just my opinion  

 

Buena suerte en la campaña!

12 hours ago, HR_Tofolo said:

 

@StG77_Kondor ask the finns how many AFs did they conquer on the last edition... and I'm sure a lot of people played their part on the air-captures.

 

What was the score of the last TAW campaign again?