Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, sereme1 said:

 

Where? On TAW or on Finnish?

 

TAW. I mean ...There is no big difference between Ju88 or IL2 for this target at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Finnish with realistically disperced targets ground attacks have it's point. 

On TAW you can do everything with just a level bomber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 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.

 

😉

 

25 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

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

 

I can completely see where you are coming from. I would be the last one to begrudge an honest Blue victory and you can see in my post history that i actually want changes to give blue a fighting chance. However this TAW campaign is not going to be it sadly. Kathon already confirmed that the F-4 on map#2 was added solely for the purpose of giving Blue an advantage. You don't need a tinfoil hat to assume that there were parameters changed to further support this. I.e. the never ending tank spawns and advances. I am not saying that they did it but the possibility is far away from the impossible and the current objective system obviously isn't working out.

 

16 minutes ago, Norz said:

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.

 

I have seen this too however i don't know if it is simply a TAW website bug or if the server actually counts you as somewhere else. 

Share this post


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

On Finnish with realistically disperced targets ground attacks have it's point. 

On TAW you can do everything with just a level bomber.

 

Not sure that He111 is really better than IL2 for the defense position. (Ok, you can use 2x1000 kg to kill almost all AAA, but what about tanks there?)

 

Ju88 is perfect for this target but in this situation you will use it as a dive bomber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But who came up with the idea to place like whole batalion in an area barely bigger then a football pitch :)

It would be possible maybe during some military parade inside the city but on the betlefield?

TAW is the only server i see something like that.

Share this post


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

I am not saying that they did it but the possibility is far away from the impossible and the current objective system obviously isn't working out.

 

Totally wrong. Just check the stats.... (TOP 25 ground targets, almost 2.5x  more for the blue team).

 

Is it possible to lose with these numbers?

 

TAW.png

Edited by Norz

Share this post


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

 

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.

Have witnessed the bug as well, a squadmate landed on a friendly airfield, and stopped regularly (no damage during sortie) - he got a crashed. 

Another one was in wrong position he went to finish the mission on our own runway next to me - ditched.

Share this post


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

But who came up with the idea to place like whole batalion in an area barely bigger then a football pitch

Yeap, it looks like medieval castle. In real live the enemy would just bypass them or obliterate with one artillery strike.

 

It misrepresents WW II ground arrack capabilities when one bomb can smash whole batalion.

Edited by MicEzo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

 

I can completely see where you are coming from. I would be the last one to begrudge an honest Blue victory and you can see in my post history that i actually want changes to give blue a fighting chance. However this TAW campaign is not going to be it sadly. Kathon already confirmed that the F-4 on map#2 was added solely for the purpose of giving Blue an advantage. You don't need a tinfoil hat to assume that there were parameters changed to further support this. I.e. the never ending tank spawns and advances. I am not saying that they did it but the possibility is far away from the impossible and the current objective system obviously isn't working out.

 

The F-4 should have been left out of map#2, no need for it imo. But I didn`t see it very significant in the gameplay. Didn`t even notice it until the end of the map. 

 

As for other things, I`d say there are some bugs in the server until proven otherwise. 

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Totally wrong. Just check the stats.... (TOP 25 ground targets, almost 2.5x  more for the blue team)

 

 

While i'll have to admit that i am not 100% certain, i think this was always the case for the previous campaigns as well. The same goes for tanks destroyed for VVS. 

 

While Blue teamplay might have very well been improved and they are doing better overall, it doesn't explain what we all are experiencing. Especially on Map#4 currently. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LLv44_Mprhead said:

 

 

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:

 

For the server set. I dont know. Just my feeling. But it is not really  a problem 

 

For the bug. It is easy to check. Take off position and time . End mission position and time and you can maybe understand that it was not possible to cover this distance in yak1 without rocket boost.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

For the server set. I dont know. Just my feeling. But it is not really  a problem 

 

For the bug. It is easy to check. Take off position and time . End mission position and time and you can maybe understand that it was not possible to cover this distance in yak1 without rocket boost.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't really doubt that there was a bug and others have reported same kind of behavior. I have also seen strange things my self. But I don't believe it's done by server admins to give blue advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 3:38 PM, 666GIAP_Tumu said:

Salute all.

 

Any knows ¿ what dates exactly concerning to each map?

 

 

thx

 

    map#1: 02.09.1941
    map#2: continuation
    map#3: 05.12.1941 
    map#4: 23.07.1942
    map#5:continuation
    map#6: continuation
    map#7:19.11.1942
    map#8: 28.12.1942  
  

 

On 7/2/2018 at 6:32 PM, ECV56_Chimango said:

Admins please 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.

On mission #100 the new tank convoy was spawn from Peskovatka do Kachalinskaya. The distance between those two cities isn't big so new tanks were close enough to close the airfield on the Kachalinskaya.

 

Red tanks attacked the city Kalach but they lost the battle (they were destroyed by the defense position), so no red tanks near Kalach on mission #100. The airfield Kalach was destroyed to 78% so due to high damage it was closed. 

 

You may check the events from the mission here: http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=99

 

On 7/2/2018 at 8:41 PM, 7./JG26_Smokejumper said:

If logistics routes are destroyed but tanks are not do the tanks still advance?

 

One of the ACG boys directed me to a great Sherman doco. Turns out aircraft didn't kill many tanks. They ruined soft targets though.

 

Another thing I would like to see are defending side having to hit bridges as a high priority. Nothing moves without fuel, shells and bullets. Tanks should be hard as heck to kill and dispersion in the woods or in a field off the road might help add historical accuracy.

 

If trucks in tanks convoy are destroyed the convoy moves but slower. If they capture the city then the new defense in that city is rather weak (more trucks => bigger defense).

 

If tanks are not moved without fuel/ammo (trucks) then they would stay in the same position for a many missions. The oponent don't have to kill them because they only stay in the same position. No movement of the front => boring missions....

 

By generating vehicles on the road we are sure that they will not be generated in the middle of the house or the three. Sometimes there are buildings or forest very close on the two sides of the road. 

 

 

On 7/2/2018 at 10:51 PM, Cpt_Siddy said:

lel again 3 magical tank columns from Hitlers arse right in the middle of map.  closing 2 airfields.  Axis dont even need to fly anymore. 

 

I think i am going to take a break until TAW is more... "historically accurate", You implemented the Stealth tanks but you still need to get the Obelisks of light and SAM sites. 

hqdefault.jpg

 

The color (Axis, Allied) of the tank convoy depends mainly on the depot destruction and number of captured enemy cities. Allied depots are much more destroyed than Axis, so more Axis tanks. 

 

To get more Allied tanks you must protect your depot and attack Axis depot. Simple. 

 

On 7/2/2018 at 11:23 PM, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Either the new objective system is bugged or it needs some serious rethinking...

 

Edit:

 

@=LG=Kathon could you please explain in detail again how the new objective system works (offensive/counter offensive etc.)?

 

 

On the normal map (no offensive or counter-offensive) the probability of spawning Axis and Allied tank convoy is 50%/50%. Those factors may be changed by destroying the enemy depot. In case one side has own depots intact and the other side has depot completely destroyed then factors are 66%/34%. 

 

In case of Offensive or counter-offensive maps the first 9 missions have special factors 78%/22%. Because it's a probability and everything is possible there are others rules like:

 - during those 9 first missions there can't be more enemy tanks convoys on the map. 

 - to prevent from "flooding" if enemy convoy is not on the map for 2 consecutive missions then at least one enemy convoy is spawned on the next map. 

 

So as above: destroy enemy depot. 

 

The first map was bugged and there was almost no red tanks.

 

 

 

On 7/3/2018 at 12:39 AM, Norz said:

@=LG=Kathon

 

Just curious about a capture calculation.

 

6 times bailed/4 times captured (stat page). 

Do we have it like 50% or more currently?

It hasn't been changed for a long time. Please remember that in probability the more samples the more accurate is the result. 

 

 

On 7/3/2018 at 2:40 AM, 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.

 

 

 

As above: reads goes also through forests and villages or cities. What then? Do we want to have a tree in the middle of the tank, or a tank inside a building? We were thinking about it but as you can see it's not so simple. 

 

On 7/3/2018 at 11:54 AM, 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. 

you are right, there is a bug. I will fix it soon.

 

 

21 hours ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

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

Try to destroy blue depot, there will be more red tanks. Remember to defends own depots. 

 

 

20 hours ago, DerSheriff said:


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.
 

After mission #108 11 Axis tanks left in convoy advancing to Abganerovo. This convoy moved slower. 2 tanks were resupplied so in mission #109 there were 13 tanks. The condition to spawn artillery is 10 tanks at least.

 

Maybe artillery should depends on number of trucks in the convoy. No truck => no artillery.

 

19 hours 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?

Tanks advances regardless the defense position. If convoy is attacked then it's pace is slower. 

 

 

17 hours ago, Thad said:

Salutations,

 

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

Tanks, anti-tanks guns, bm-13 or sdkfz and connected dugouts. Those objects should be destroyed.

 

 

12 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

Of course it's bugged but by reporting those bug I try to make it better and better. 

 

If you could only add info about mission number or link to your sortie that would save a lot of my time. 

 

You was captured in 1517.3, The 2017.3 was taken from Moscow map and I don't know why because I thought I fixed it. 

 

3 hours 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.

The first map was bugged (almost no red tanks). F-4 was added on the Map#2, and changed F2 +1 to F4 +1 on some map (I don't remember for my memory)

 

The tanks spawn system has been changed. Tanks color depends on depot destruction. Now Axis depots are destroyed: 8% and 8% where Allied 54% and 24%. On the Moscow maps Allied depots were much more destroyed too.

 

 

3 hours 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.

There are a lot of forests on the Moscow maps and sometimes it was hard to find suitable field to place defense position. We will think about changing the defense position.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, =LG=Kathon said:

There are a lot of forests on the Moscow maps and sometimes it was hard to find suitable field to place defense position. We will think about changing the defense position.

Great idea, the only change defense positions needs is to disperse the units over considerable bigger area, not alowing one big bomb to knock out most of the defense.

Keep the server up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler

 

Thank you very much for long and detailed answer Kathon! Clears up a lot of things. Thank you for your effort!

 

PS. I suck with spoilers and quotes 😐

Edited by LLv34_adexu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, again, thank you for your reply. We all know that you are very busy and trying your best!

 

37 minutes ago, =LG=Kathon said:

On mission #100 the new tank convoy was spawn from Peskovatka do Kachalinskaya. The distance between those two cities isn't big so new tanks were close enough to close the airfield on the Kachalinskaya.

 

This shouldn't be possible in my opinion. Shouldn't be very difficult to change?

 

37 minutes ago, =LG=Kathon said:

The color (Axis, Allied) of the tank convoy depends mainly on the depot destruction and number of captured enemy cities. Allied depots are much more destroyed than Axis, so more Axis tanks. 

 

To get more Allied tanks you must protect your depot and attack Axis depot. Simple. 

 

It is very good that the depots are important. However, as we experience at the moment on map#4, the current system establishes a "point of no return". Once a certain side lost a couple of cities/airfields there is no chance for them to make a comeback. While the way to the Depots is shortened for one side, the other has to fly longer etc etc. 

I am not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. It might be a design choice. However it doesn't add to an exciting experience necessarily.

 

All in all it simply convinces me even further that the only way to make TAW anything but a clear win for one side is to limit/control the player numbers. 

 

Looking at the losses for Map#4 until mission #115:

 

Stalingradnumbers.PNG.db6a99ded39085e6ab582ccf98d951ce.PNG

 

You can see that the numbers are quite balanced. Now this doesn't say all too much. Axis could have focused more on destroying depots for example, but i don't think that these "results" should lead to a steam rolling win for Blue.

 

Edited by Operatsiya_Ivy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

You can see that the numbers are quite balanced. Now this doesn't say all too much. Axis could have focused more on destroying depots for example, but i don't think that these "results" should lead to a steam rolling win for Blue.

 

 

I feel its fair though - if you killed all of the production the enemy has... his single tank is worth 10 of your own tanks. So if we consider depots as "scaling factor" of the units destroyed,  the blue has around 1.5x multiplier. Now considering the equivalent numbers, that would be fair to say that blues got 50% more ground targets killed, and thus that is a fair steamroll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree!

 

that's why i was looking at the depot damage in this time frame and the tank spawns:

Big underlined numbers are tank spawns that immediately shut down the enemy airfield.

 

tankspawns.PNG.9bf6674689bc97ab09e51f4c7a69d612.PNG

 

This is on an Axis offensive Map. So Axis tank spawns are higher to begin with. It might be too difficult to win this as the defending side. Also i strongly dislike the current "mechanic" of tanks spawns directly disabling airfields. As you can see it happened 6 times in 22 missions. In my opinion it also had a huge outcome for the map, same as depots did even though only 2 times it lead to an actual capture of the Airfield.

 

Additionally I think it is a good idea to give Depots a better defense in terms of the possibility of spotting incoming enemy Bombers. Currently its difficult to catch a single bomber en route to the depot before he manages to drop his bombs. In reality the ground personal would have identified the location of the Bombers over friendly territory and send this information to the fighter pilots. Now i don't want a radar system which tracks every movement of the Bombers but a tighter network in front of Depots that calls out positions like we already have in game right now would improve the gameplay a lot. It would stop/making it more difficult to do solo "suicide" attack runs against depots and it would promote teamplay (escorts/teaming up to attack) on both sides.

 

Either way. Player numbers need to get regulated in the future. 

 

Edited by Operatsiya_Ivy

Share this post


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

I

This is on an Axis offensive Map. So Axis tank spawns are higher to begin with. It might be too difficult to win this as the defending side. Also i strongly dislike the current "mechanic" of tanks spawns directly disabling airfields. As you can see it happened 6 times in 22 missions. In my opinion it also had a huge outcome for the map, same as depots did even though only 2 times it lead to an actual capture of the Airfield.

 

Additionally I think it is a good idea to give Depots a better defense in terms of the possibility of spotting incoming enemy Bombers. Currently its difficult to catch a single bomber en route to the depot before he manages to drop his bombs. In reality the ground personal would have identified the location of the Bombers over friendly territory and send this information to the fighter pilots. Now i don't want a radar system which tracks every movement of the Bombers but a tighter network in front of Depots that calls out positions like we already have in game right now would improve the gameplay a lot. It would stop/making it more difficult to do solo "suicide" attack runs against depots and it would promote teamplay (escorts/teaming up to attack) on both sides.

 

Either way. Player numbers need to get regulated in the future. 

 

 

As expected on Stalingrad map (when the BOS planes and map arrived) the numbers of each team are quite even :

image.png.3d4e18451b0d1a7d85f3e5c642649e19.png

 

anyway I also think that the max numbers of players  of each side should be limited. Curently its max 84 players on server so i think something like 50 - 55 players max for each side would be good (i know its not the half but if there are empty places and the other side is not joining a bit more than half should be allowed) .

 

There is ample time currently as for depot warning (i've flown both sides - the bombers attacking and the fighters defending depots (blue and red)) and with proper patrolling pattern its enough the chellenge for the fighter  (lone) and at least a small chance for bomber to drop bombs (i'm not speaking for flying home which is anyway close to impossible if the lone fighter is not completly blind). Any further info for the fighter would be just fun spoiler for him.Iif there are 2 and more fighters patrolling with good pattern there's no chance in any but overcast weather for bomber to slip past and bomb the return flight is impossible anyway.

 

Some posts back You wanted a mechanic which would promote the level bombing for germans (as oposed to il2 via 23mm guns) and now when its there you dont like it ….

You are a hard to please one...

 

As for offensive map for blue - there is same number  of offensive map both for blue and red. So now blue has advantage but further down the line the red will have advantage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

There is ample time currently as for depot warning (i've flown both sides - the bombers attacking and the fighters defending depots (blue and red)) and with proper patrolling pattern its enough the chellenge for the fighter  (lone) and at least a small chance for bomber to drop bombs (i'm not speaking for flying home which is anyway close to impossible if the lone fighter is not completly blind). Any further info for the fighter would be just fun spoiler for him.Iif there are 2 and more fighters patrolling with good pattern there's no chance in any but overcast weather for bomber to slip past and bomb the return flight is impossible anyway.

 

I guess we just disagree on this point then. You have roughly 90-120 seconds time between the warning and the bomb drop depending on altitude and speed of course. In this time frame the defender has to spot the target in a big space. They could approach the Depot on all altitudes..i even saw Stukas dive bomb it from low alt and peshkas as well of course. Shooting down Bombers is not difficult at all. Preventing them from dropping their Bomb load however is a completely different topic.

You bring up a good point by mistake. "The return flight is impossible". This is certainly true because Bombers nearly always attack the Depot alone without escort. That's exactly what my proposition would prevent or at least punish. 

Bombers are prey alone and that's what they should be. There was a reason why Bomber losses were unacceptable in reality when there was no escort available. In TAW you see lone wolves all the time flying for Depots. 

 

As for offensive map for blue - there is same number  of offensive map both for blue and red. So now blue has advantage but further down the line the red will have advantage.

 

You seem to be under the misconception that i am advocating for VVS to have an easier time when i am actually talking about the general concept of this system for both sides?

 

2 hours ago, Carl_infar said:

Some posts back You wanted a mechanic which would promote the level bombing for germans (as oposed to il2 via 23mm guns) and now when its there you dont like it ….

You are a hard to please one...

 

I don't know what you are trying to implicate here?

It was always there and i like it. Like you correctly pointed out, i like promoting level bombing with an rewarding result and impact on the mission. However this does not mean that suicide runs should be encouraged like it is currently the case with depots.

 

 

 

Edited by Operatsiya_Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree here with Ivy. The Bomber pilots life is dangerous enough. No reason to make the depots a fighters pilots buffet.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the double standards when it comes to historical accuracy. 

 

On one hand people advocate for it when it comes to plane sets, accurate flight and damage models. On the other hand they want to fly their bombers alone without escort.

Its also not about killing/surviving but about dropping their bombs. A few more flak positions like we have in place already wouldn't change the survival rate of the bombers. It might even increase it considering that fighters wouldn't simply hug the depot but actively try to hunt for the incoming Bombers to prevent a Bomb drop. Why is this unpopular right now? because the chance that a Bomber is sneaking passed is high. That's why people don't do it and rather take the likely bomb drop on their depot. 

The reasoning behind survival is wrong and misleading. Bomber pilots don't die because the mission is too dangerous but rather because they fly solo. That's why depots are a fighter pilots buffet. However, like i said. It won't change the survival rate but give fighters a better chance to prevent a bomb drop.

 

This is admittedly a quite complex approach to solve the issue and unlikely to get implemented. A more simple approach, which will be unpopular as well i assume, is to further limit the availability of Bombers so that they are valued more.

 

Either way. It might not be an obvious issue for the majority right now but i think that with the the more detailed information about how depots work, we will see an increase. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I don't understand the double standards when it comes to historical accuracy. 

 

On one hand people advocate for it when it comes to plane sets, accurate flight and damage models. On the other hand they want to fly their bombers alone without escort.

Its also not about killing/surviving but about dropping their bombs. A few more flak positions like we have in place already wouldn't change the survival rate of the bombers. It might even increase it considering that fighters wouldn't simply hug the depot but actively try to hunt for the incoming Bombers to prevent a Bomb drop. Why is this unpopular right now? because the chance that a Bomber is sneaking passed is high. That's why people don't do it and rather take the likely bomb drop on their depot. 

The reasoning behind survival is wrong and misleading. Bomber pilots don't die because the mission is too dangerous but rather because they fly solo. That's why depots are a fighter pilots buffet. However, like i said. It won't change the survival rate but give fighters a better chance to prevent a bomb drop.

 

This is admittedly a quite complex approach to solve the issue and unlikely to get implemented. A more simple approach, which will be unpopular as well i assume, is to further limit the availability of Bombers so that they are valued more.

 

Either way. It might not be an obvious issue for the majority right now but i think that with the the more detailed information about how depots work, we will see an increase. 

what You propose is to make the fighters even more lasy then now. Instead of patrolling the aproaches and dividing between them the sectors and looking for the enemy they will just wait for advance warning.

 

Anyway I didnt see You flying bombers and yet You have a lot to say how they should be flown…

 

Edited by Carl_infar
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must have some form of bias against me, otherwise i fail to see how you come to these conclusions. 

 

What we have now is lazy for fighters. Simply wait for Bombers at the Depot. How can anything be more lazy than that? Did you ever ask yourself why fighters aren't doing what you suggest? It is absolutely impracticable. My changes would do the exact opposite! it would encourage to be more active and try to predict flight patterns based on the intel you get. In the end its about how you implement it in detail but like i said i am not talking about a flightradar24 type of thing.

 

Just because i don't fly bombers doesn't mean i am not involved in it as a fighter. You always seem to try to divide people by claiming they are either one or the other. You suggest changes where red would benefit from? you must be only flying red! you suggest changes to bombers? you must want to have an easier time as a fighter pilot! 

 

We are all playing the same game and some are trying to improve the general gameplay for both sides. Try remembering that sometimes.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

You must have some form of bias against me, otherwise i fail to see how you come to these conclusions. 

 

What we have now is lazy for fighters. Simply wait for Bombers at the Depot. How can anything be more lazy than that? Did you ever ask yourself why fighters aren't doing what you suggest? It is absolutely impracticable. My changes would do the exact opposite! it would encourage to be more active and try to predict flight patterns based on the intel you get. In the end its about how you implement it in detail but like i said i am not talking about a flightradar24 type of thing.

 

Just because i don't fly bombers doesn't mean i am not involved in it as a fighter. You always seem to try to divide people by claiming they are either one or the other. You suggest changes where red would benefit from? you must be only flying red! you suggest changes to bombers? you must want to have an easier time as a fighter pilot! 

 

We are all playing the same game and some are trying to improve the general gameplay for both sides. Try remembering that sometimes.

 

 

The facts are as follows : now if they wait above depot (and are too lazy to patrol the approaches) the bomber will drop the bombs before going down. if there will be a detailed early warning net they will just sit at the depot and fly in direction form which the warning comes without the need to do much thinking etc.

 

Anyway when I'm on depot def mission I always patrol the most probable approach routes which sometimes is succesfull and sometimes not which is as it should be. With detailed info there is just no fun in it. Difference is like between hunting a deer in woods and going to slaughter house...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Carl_infar

Share this post


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

Said the guy who while playing red this campaign was ridiculing when people were writing that the team work improved on blue side (i guess to improve the game play)

 

Not quite true. I was making a light hearted joke about it while at the same time i was actually agreeing that it indeed has improved. 

 

19 minutes ago, Carl_infar said:

The facts are as follows : now if they wait above depot (and are too lazy to patrol the approaches) the bomber will drop the bombs before going down. if there will be a detailed early warning net they will just sit at the depot and fly in direction form which the warning comes without the need to do much thinking etc.

 

That's why it comes down to the detail on how something similar to this can be implemented. I particularly said several times that i am not proposing a detailed early warning system. If they would fly simply to the called out position they can easily be fooled by not taking the direct path to the depot. This would actually increase the survival changes of bombers and would give a bit more historical accuracy, but like i said, ..double standards.

 

I think we can at least agree on that the Depot gameplay is extremely dull for both sides. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An early warning system isn't without historic precedence on the Eastern Front either though not as sophisticated as the British radar net. Telephone and radio nets were set up along the front to pass information. Some of that information included aircraft spotting reports. These reports would be simple, rough position and direction when spotted and maybe altitude. Some times these reports were very vague, along the lines of, 'we are at this location and hear a plane probably going that way.' This would then be passed down the line and if practicable planes would be dispatched to attempt an intercept. In some cases where radio equipped planes were available and in the area they could be directed to attempt an intercept. Even with two of the parts of a report a lone bomber, or even a small group, would be hard to find. Unless the report came in while you were within visual range of the target already.

Share this post


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

 

 

I think we can at least agree on that the Depot gameplay is extremely dull for both sides. 

 

 

 

 

I have actually spotted people "botting" the depots. 

 

Put on auto level, have a set speed and heading. Go make food, come back at right time, drop bombs and set heading back. Come back after set time and land. 

I followed 109 (the +1 plane) doing this, shot a bit at him (missed, bounced back up and noticed no reaction from him so i got curious), then started to do aerobatic in front of him because he was totally unresponsive... over the target, he dropped bomb, 180 degree turn and auto level. Did not even take the time to look around and see me (some times they just disconnect, too). Playing like a total sleepwalker. And he was also flying the whole time just above 500 meters. 

 

Talk about autolevel shenanigans getting even worse in MP.... 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't flying in vicinity of enemy airfields trigger a text alert for the enemy side? I always stay way clear of all airfields not to trigger it, as well as not to be seen by anyone taking off there. Flying on auto level directly to the target should get you exposed, unless enemy is not paying any attention. Also not sure how you navigate to target this way - sure, dead reckoning works with constant speed, and you can get AFK for the first half of your flight, but then you still need to pinpoint yourself on the map well in advance of flying over the target. I have another explanation - they guy was flying in sight mode with view angle at 70% and was tracking his position as he approached the target. When I fly Ju88, I do this as soon as I set my plane on the combat course to the target. I guess a lot of bomber pilots would prefer to approach the target either into the wind or with the wind to minimize the impact of changing the wind correction setting as they change the course while aiming - this gives the defenders two most probable sectors of approach, and the one offering the shortest distance from the bomber's airfield will be the one most likely used (bomber pilots are also lazy :). Finally, unless AAA is destroyed, approaching a depot from a 0.5km altitude should be a suicide - I'm surprised the guy managed to get over the target without being shredded to pieces by AAA.

Share this post


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

An early warning system isn't without historic precedence on the Eastern Front either though not as sophisticated as the British radar net. Telephone and radio nets were set up along the front to pass information. Some of that information included aircraft spotting reports. These reports would be simple, rough position and direction when spotted and maybe altitude. Some times these reports were very vague, along the lines of, 'we are at this location and hear a plane probably going that way.' This would then be passed down the line and if practicable planes would be dispatched to attempt an intercept. In some cases where radio equipped planes were available and in the area they could be directed to attempt an intercept. Even with two of the parts of a report a lone bomber, or even a small group, would be hard to find. Unless the report came in while you were within visual range of the target already.

You have the network already in place in TAW.

Along the moving frontline there are units which position is unknown to enemy and which report enemy planes flying within some miles from them (irrespective of the weather...)

 

In my opinion any further additional info will make the live of the bombers which is now miserable even worse

 

Anyway as a bomber to get  ground kills you must each time enter the enemy territory and suffer flack and fighters (unlike fighters who when they want to score kills and points, can stay all day on friendly territory... )

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LLv34_adexu said:

Server down!

 

Sorry guys, our server provider did maintenance work tonight.

 

Kathon will start the Dserver soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StG2_Raven said:

 

Sorry guys, our server provider did maintenance work tonight.

 

Kathon will start the Dserver soon.

I was doing about 1h trip on 88. Would get combat mission, server went down 10 km till the enemy depot. I demand 2 CM for myself as wind conditions were 0 m/s :)

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Carl_infar said:

In my opinion any further additional info will make the live of the bombers which is now miserable even worse

 

Anyway as a bomber to get  ground kills you must each time enter the enemy territory and suffer flack and fighters (unlike fighters who when they want to score kills and points, can stay all day on friendly territory... )

 

I feel sorry for you because you seem to never get any fighter escort ;)

Share this post


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

 

I feel sorry for you because you seem to never get any fighter escort ;)

 

It's actually quite hard to get useful fighter escort... 😐 Seriously escorting medium bombers is not necessary that easy and it to be effective you would need 3 groups (forward sweep, close escort and high cover). If bombing from a bit higher altitude like from 5000m or so flak is not normally really a problem anymore but if enemy fighters spot you and have half a idea what they are doing, you are pretty much done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in a perfect scenario you fly with 3 groups maybe but flying with just 1 escort who goes ahead to the depot and engages fighters will already increase your survival rate by a lot. Especially because on high altitudes there is not a lot the VVS can do to stop a 109. 

 

We aren't on the same side but otherwise i would have gladly done the escort duty for you ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one thing considering stats that I don't quite understand. Why the (ground)kills you get are not added to your total sum if you are killed or something during the mission? This doesn't make sense to me, since the targets you destroyed before you were killed are still destroyed and you still did it regardless what happens you afterwards.

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...