Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

With stationary tank convoys, they really should be dispersed adjacent to the road(this is better from a gameplay perspective and from a realism perspective) .  Just parked is fine, to differentiate them from dug in defensive units.  Being lined up directly on the road just creates a "meta" where by far the most "efficient" method of destroying them is cheesy bomb runs down the length, the pursuit of which has created this whole debate of removing light AA from Soviet columns or rotating vehicles or whatever.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pe-2 s.87 Transport option doesn't appear to work as with the He-111 Transport mentioned above. I've tried with empty ammo Loadout and without any modifications. Everytime it suggests I'm not allowed to use the Pe-2 even though I have 1 Pe-2 Transport available on the record.

 

This is the only other way to gain combat missions and replacement aircraft so it's pretty frustrating that this new implementation appears not to work for many. 

Edited by Lippisch
spelling
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, StG77_Kondor said:

I posted about this a few pages ago, Kathon said he fixed it. Do you not remember?

No, i didn´t see that. But thanks anyway Kondor. Evidently, this wasn't fixed. So, just in case @=LG=Kathon missed it:

Check mission Stalingrad_Center #99:

 

2 blue tanks columns advancing -one to Kacha- and they were both erased.

1 red tank next to Kalach (3km max) column advances to Kalach, tank column alive at the end of mission.

 

BUT next mission #100;

.  the front line advances to Kacha and now is under attack (can´t take off from there) even when tanks were eliminated.

.  Kalach not captured and also no more red tanks advancing to Kalach, still blue

 

Is it a bug? Could you explain this logic please? Cause it doesn't make any sense. Thx.

 

And this kept happening in later missions, with invisible blue tanks capturing sectors and AFs.

So, it seems this TAW edition it doesn't matter what we do, blue tanks advance anyway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

No, i didn´t see that. But thanks anyway Kondor. Evidently, this wasn't fixed. So, just in case @=LG=Kathon missed it:

Check mission Stalingrad_Center #99:

 

2 blue tanks columns advancing -one to Kacha- and they were both erased.

1 red tank next to Kalach (3km max) column advances to Kalach, tank column alive at the end of mission.

 

BUT next mission #100;

.  the front line advances to Kacha and now is under attack (can´t take off from there) even when tanks were eliminated.

.  Kalach not captured and also no more red tanks advancing to Kalach, still blue

 

Is it a bug? Could you explain this logic please? Cause it doesn't make any sense. Thx.

 

And this kept happening in later missions, with invisible blue tanks capturing sectors and AFs.

So, it seems this TAW edition it doesn't matter what we do, blue tanks advance anyway.


I have to chime in on this one and I was not able to understand the progress in some of the missions. Tanks were very effective at times.
In Mission #108. The red team destroyed 13 tanks total. And there was only one column on the map. (and I counted at least 9 actual Tank kills by players) 
Yet the coulumn was able to push further and close the airfield in the next mission and closing down the airfield. A arty was spawned as well.
It is possible that this is how its meant to be, but right now its like putting out bush fires with a fork.

Maybe that is just perceived tho. hence I ask for clearification.
 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t understand how this is working either, does it matter if defence positions are up? I am not sure, but I think at least blue tanks advance even if there is defences up. Or I am totally wrong and missed something? Is that even possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LLv34_adexu said:

Don’t understand how this is working either, does it matter if defence positions are up? I am not sure, but I think at least blue tanks advance even if there is defences up. Or I am totally wrong and missed something? Is that even possible?


Of course. Defense postions should slow down tanks and or stop them. But right now I dont undestand it. Since the tanks seem to approach regardless.

Share this post


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

The Pe-2 s.87 Transport option doesn't appear to work as with the He-111 Transport mentioned above. I've tried with empty ammo Loadout and without any modifications. Everytime it suggests I'm not allowed to use the Pe-2 even though I have 1 Pe-2 Transport available on the record.

 

This is the only other way to gain combat missions and replacement aircraft so it's pretty frustrating that this new implementation appears not to work for many. 

 

Multiple people are having this problem. 

1 hour ago, DerSheriff said:


Of course. Defense postions should slow down tanks and or stop them. But right now I dont undestand it. Since the tanks seem to approach regardless.

 

Quite curious on the last moscow map how after taking out about 1/2 a tank column it was able to push past 3 fully intact defenses. There have been some odd things this campaign. I'll note that I don't think they've changed anything, since nothing really changes being outnumbered 2-1 to 3-1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salutations,

 

I'm curious. What exactly are these defensive positions composed of? Cannons, anti-tank guns or opposing tanks? Other? 😐

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tanks, halftracks, and AT guns. Though it's something of a question what is considered important for destruction purposes and what is fluf?

Share this post


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


Of course. Defense postions should slow down tanks and or stop them. But right now I dont undestand it. Since the tanks seem to approach regardless.

 

We lost our last a/f like this last map. We smashed a fair few tanks and the D points where still up. We still lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, No.615_Kai_Lae said:

Tanks, halftracks, and AT guns. Though it's something of a question what is considered important for destruction purposes and what is fluf?

As a tank mission builder, the AI can be set with different qualities. Perhaps some of them need to be moved up on the quality scale.

 

Note: Halftracks will have very little, if any,  destructive affect on most tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Thad said:

As a tank mission builder, the AI can be set with different qualities. Perhaps some of them need to be moved up on the quality scale.

 

Note: Halftracks will have very little, if any,  destructive affect on most tanks.

 

 

German half track is at least worth of 10 t34 ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right you are. Bring it on comrad. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew before i even started the mission it would be a one way ticket , lol .......AAA deadly even in stormy weather . low level attack fast and still AAA gets you . You cant even see the target but AAA finds you ...lol ..and you going that fast you can't bail. 

Wings just come off and send you into a spin . 

I thought a 110 and ju88 would at least take some damage before a whole wing section comes off but seem just one hit and they fall apart .

And AAA is same as deadly in bad weather .  With low visibility.  🤣🤣

I hate the AAA in this game ...lol ...Now in pfffft off was doing so well until ground attack . 😍

Why did  i do it ... WHY !!!! 

You ground ponders must have a hard life ....lol 

Edited by II./JG77_Con
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't fly straight lines, really. Don't.

 

AA only aims predictive at straight line, if you have even small delta in vector, AA only gets you if you are slow and low.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

Don't fly straight lines, really. Don't.

 

AA only aims predictive at straight line, if you have even small delta in vector, AA only gets you if you are slow and low.  

Yea guess ill stick to fighters in this . 😄

I dont have the knack for it . !!!

Edited by II./JG77_Con

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Yea guess ill stick to fighters in this . 😄

I dont have the knack for it . !!!

 

 

Once you get past never getting an air kill streak again bombing is rather fun. I confess to be a bit of a stat whore. Due to being on the backfoot this campaign getting a kill streak is really doing the team a disservice. Even though I am getting my butt kicked more than I usually do I am having a lot of fun.

 

It would be nice to have a bomber character and one for fighters. This way I can preserve my fighter records but also participate in proper objective team play. Fighters are the smaller part of winning in my opinion.

Edited by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this server is just bugged...

bug !

took of from 1619-8 heading 300° to 1518-6 to cover our position , I met and fought one slow 109 (cause it waited his friend probably) and  i was captured in 2017-3

flight time : 8.13 mn --> average speed (start , take off and fight included) 487 km/h   = I did not know that yak1 was so fast

 

lot of strange server behavior, in my opinion, this campaign is arranged for the victory of the blues

Edited by NN_Oscar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That speed isn't out of the ordinary for the Yak 1. It is about 30 kph over the cruising speed of the plane and if you didn't climb that high this flight could be done. Especially if the fight you got into was a long distance running fight the Germans like to engage in.

Edited by Disarray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Yea guess ill stick to fighters in this . 😄

I dont have the knack for it . !!!

 

You should probably just stick with transport . Looks like you don't have a knack for fighters either .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Disarray said:

That speed isn't out of the ordinary for the Yak 1. It is about 30 kph over the cruising speed of the plane and if you didn't climb that high this flight could be done. Especially if the fight you got into was a long distance running fight the Germans like to engage in.

it was not a long distance run and the 109  was flying very slow with a lot of break turn, i met him close to our position in 1518-6, my speed around 400 km/h and was damaged (motor out) by the second 109 1mn later , this is just not possible to cover a distance of 50 km with the engine broken.

 

i did not care but look at the log : took of 23.15 , captured 23.19 average speed  1050 km/h for 70km theoretical or 750 km/h for 50 km if i went directly to my last position

sorry this server is bugged, blues will win, this blue pilot should have lost his streak, not me

Edited by NN_Oscar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, NN_Oscar said:

it was not a long distance run and the 109  was flying very slow with a lot of break turn, i met him close to our position in 1518-6, my speed around 400 km/h and was damaged (motor out) by the second 109 1mn later , this is just not possible to cover a distance of 50 km with the engine broken.

 

i did not care but look at the log : took of 23.15 , captured 23.19 average speed  1050 km/h for 70km theoretical or 750 km/h for 50 km if i went directly to my last position

sorry this server is bugged, blues will win

 

 

You can go pretty far without an engine if you work the radiators well. I did 8 minutes of glide from a collision to a runway landing.

 

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/sortie/log/3267419/?tour=37

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SCG_Riksen said:

 

You should probably just stick with transport . Looks like you don't have a knack for fighters either .

Joking right .   !!!  😄

They have four engines . I'll be well confused .  

``what goes around comes around . 

Edited by II./JG77_Con

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 8:40 PM, 7.GShAP/Silas said:

With stationary tank convoys, they really should be dispersed adjacent to the road(this is better from a gameplay perspective and from a realism perspective) .  Just parked is fine, to differentiate them from dug in defensive units.  Being lined up directly on the road just creates a "meta" where by far the most "efficient" method of destroying them is cheesy bomb runs down the length, the pursuit of which has created this whole debate of removing light AA from Soviet columns or rotating vehicles or whatever.

 

 


The debate is pertinent because it actually does give Red tank column an AA advantage over Blue, an advantage that is not rooted in realism, ie. T34 vs Panzer IV, etc. So we can all grumble about a specific tactic, but the fact of the matter is that one side has a server setting advantage over the other in terms of AA.

Weren't you guys going to fly Blue and show us how it's done or whatever?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StG77_Kondor said:


The debate is pertinent because it actually does give Red tank column an AA advantage over Blue, an advantage that is not rooted in realism, ie. T34 vs Panzer IV, etc. So we can all grumble about a specific tactic, but the fact of the matter is that one side has a server setting advantage over the other in terms of AA.

 

You're absolutely correct, and dispersing the tank convoys off the side of the road as they would be for a halt in a road march makes sense from a realism perspective and removes any problem of AA guns and their facing forwards or backwards.  It also removes a thoroughly gamey tactic that trivializes tank convoys, reducing it's effectiveness for both sides and promoting actual attackers and attacker tactics.  I don't blame you at all for seeing a weakness and using it, but the cat is out of the bag and it's time for it to go away I think.

 

 

1 hour ago, StG77_Kondor said:

Weren't you guys going to fly Blue and show us how it's done or whatever?

 

We were, and had a great time practicing and training while waiting for this campaign.  And then before it even started it became obvious that the relative balance from the last campaign was gone and our flying Axis would just be a masturbatory curbstomp.  So we went to go play ArmA and think about getting the DCS MiG-21.

 

And you don't need anybody to show you how to take out tank convoys, you have it down to a science as it is currently set up on TAW.

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NN_Oscar said:

this server is just bugged...

bug !

took of from 1619-8 heading 300° to 1518-6 to cover our position , I met and fought one slow 109 (cause it waited his friend probably) and  i was captured in 2017-3

flight time : 8.13 mn --> average speed (start , take off and fight included) 487 km/h   = I did not know that yak1 was so fast

 

lot of strange server behavior, in my opinion, this campaign is arranged for the victory of the blues

 

8 hours ago, NN_Oscar said:

it was not a long distance run and the 109  was flying very slow with a lot of break turn, i met him close to our position in 1518-6, my speed around 400 km/h and was damaged (motor out) by the second 109 1mn later , this is just not possible to cover a distance of 50 km with the engine broken.

 

i did not care but look at the log : took of 23.15 , captured 23.19 average speed  1050 km/h for 70km theoretical or 750 km/h for 50 km if i went directly to my last position

sorry this server is bugged, blues will win, this blue pilot should have lost his streak, not me

 

So you are saying that there are "bugs" in server set by admins that aim to make sure that blue will win?

Maybe you find this useful also:

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, after last 4 or so TAW's going to red or draw, i would not be surprised if the knobs on the server might have been tuned more in the blue favor. 

 

Throwing around pleb tier tinfoil accusations wont make our lived experiences in this current TAW rotation any less valid, mprhead.

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have one question: why defence positions are so ridiciously packed? There are so many guns, bunkers, depots etc. on such a tiny area one fat bomb can more or less whipe out all of them. Only German bombers have an access to big bombs + one bomb and they are all gone.

I didn't see such concentration of force in such small area in my military carrier even one time except barracks :salute:

 

It would be a crime to pack the forces so tight, a court martial for the commander.

 

In i.e. Finnish Virtual it's done correctly and tanks, guns, bunkers, depots etc. are realistically disperced and you need to attack them, not just throw one bomb to finish them all.

Except that and side balance TAW is great.

Edited by sereme1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

yeah, after last 4 or so TAW's going to red or draw, i would not be surprised if the knobs on the server might have been tuned more in the blue favor. 

 

Throwing around pleb tier tinfoil accusations wont make our lived experiences in this current TAW rotation any less valid, mprhead.

 

Feelings are not facts. There are bugs. I just have quite hard time believing that those are implemented in purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 7.GShAP/Silas said:

 

... and think about getting the DCS MiG-21.

 

 

Get it. It's a really fun plane!

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, LLv44_Mprhead said:

 

Feelings are not facts. There are bugs. I just have quite hard time believing that those are implemented in purpose.

 

 

Changes have been made, this much is undeniable, if the purpose was this or not, remains to seen. 

 

Trust me, no one want so play a game mode where VVS must run as hard as they can just to stay still. And this is basically what we have been doing for 3 maps now. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, sereme1 said:

I have one question: why defence positions are so ridiciously packed? There are so many guns, bunkers, depots etc. on such a tiny area one fat bomb can more or less whipe out all of them. Only German bombers have an access to big bombs + one bomb and they are all gone.

I didn't see such concentration of force in such small area in my military carrier even one time except barracks :salute:

 

It would be a crime to pack the forces so tight, a court martial for the commander.

 

In i.e. Finnish Virtual it's done correctly and tanks, guns, bunkers, depots etc. are realistically disperced and you need to attack them, not just throw one bomb to finish them all.

Except that and side balance TAW is great.

 

I also don't know why it's like that. I assume there is because some technical limitations of some kind. Anyway the defence forces should be far more disperced.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, sereme1 said:

I have one question: why defence positions are so ridiciously packed? There are so many guns, bunkers, depots etc. on such a tiny area one fat bomb can more or less whipe out all of them. Only German bombers have an access to big bombs + one bomb and they are all gone.

I didn't see such concentration of force in such small area in my military carrier even one time except barracks :salute:

 

It would be a crime to pack the forces so tight, a court martial for the commander.

 

In i.e. Finnish Virtual it's done correctly and tanks, guns, bunkers, depots etc. are realistically disperced and you need to attack them, not just throw one bomb to finish them all.

Except that and side balance TAW is great.

 

Are you kidding?

 

Just ONE IL2 can destroy almost everything in defense positions. Check rules to decide what should be destroyed first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

Changes have been made, this much is undeniable, if the purpose was this or not, remains to seen. 

 

Trust me, no one want so play a game mode where VVS must run as hard as they can just to stay still. And this is basically what we have been doing for 3 maps now. 

So, let me get this straight.

 

When the red is winning, it`s because of the great teamplay, unselfish sacrifice of the pilots, not Hartmanning at 7k all the time, not minding about stats and kills and this kind of stuff. This is what I`ve been reading on this TAW thread for a long time.

 

When the blue is winning, it`s because of the server bias.

 

😉

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

Changes have been made, this much is undeniable, if the purpose was this or not, remains to seen. 

 

Trust me, no one want so play a game mode where VVS must run as hard as they can just to stay still. And this is basically what we have been doing for 3 maps now. 

 

Komisch.

 

The only reason for the current situation is that the blue team was OUTNUMBERED. There is nothing about map changes or plane set (only 109 F4 on the second map was not correct).

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

So, let me get this straight.

 

When the red is winning, it`s because of the great teamplay, unselfish sacrifice of the pilots, not Hartmanning at 7k all the time, not minding about stats and kills and this kind of stuff. This is what I`ve been reading on this TAW thread for a long time.

 

When the blue is winning, it`s because of the server bias.

 

😉

 

 

Give the VVS side average blue numbers and we can carry out this test. ;)

Share this post


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

 

 

Give the VVS side average blue numbers and we can carry out this test. ;)

That`s one reason why the red side have been losing atm. But nothing to do with server settings :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

Changes have been made, this much is undeniable, if the purpose was this or not, remains to seen. 

 

Trust me, no one want so play a game mode where VVS must run as hard as they can just to stay still. And this is basically what we have been doing for 3 maps now. 

 

If for example tank column behavior is not correct, meaning they can capture airfields when they are not supposed to, it is obviously something that should be looked into and fixed. Oscar there on the other hand was suggesting in his post that server transferred him in purpose behind the enemy lines so that he would get captured. And that sounds like tinfoil hat stuff to me. No offense to him btw I assume his original post was written in "heat of the moment" and not really deliberate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, LLv44_Mprhead said:

r hand was suggesting in his post that server transferred him in purpose behind the enemy lines so that he would get captured. And that sounds like tinfoil hat stuff to me. No offense to him btw I assume his original post was written in "heat of the moment" and not really deliberate.

 

This bug exists. i am sure for 100%.

 

I saw exactly the same issue in my stat month ago. it was something about 100 km between my actual location and the location that was logged in the mission.

 

P.S. Not sure that this bug is easy to fix.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Norz said:

Just ONE IL2 can destroy almost everything in defense positions. Check rules to decide what should be destroyed first.

 

Where? On TAW or on Finnish?

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

×
×
  • Create New...