Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, =FEW=N3croo said:

You exclusively fly Blue and blue won, still we see ammothreads and 23mm discussion from LW as the looser when nobody bothers to fly red in the first few maps :clapping:

 

 

 

I quoted a thread to a guy who was claiming that red boolets do nothing to blue aircraft. If you consider that whining then I no longer see a reason to continue discussing this topic with you.

 

Keep in mind that I am attempting to provide some sort of solution that doesn't involve knee-jerk reaction that TAW has done for quite a few campaigns. Balancing via available equipment in a historical-eesh simulator is dumb.

 

Curious to see if there is correlation between the side LG flies and the changes in available aircraft / weapons :P

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't say you where the offender with the Ammo :-P

But I'm getting tired from blues attitude and stockpiling and making historical campaigns also needed historical objectives and circumstances, like the LW not outnumbering the VVS when they fly F4s vs Migs and ishaks to stop german tanks^^. 

 

Not having the 20mm canons at all on the Ishak is really making it hugely ineffective and certainly takes out any stopping power while map#1 pretty much always tend to be LW strongest playercount

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =FEW=N3croo said:

How many LaGG-3s are being used with the 23mm and 37mm to what effect?

Show me those AT LaGG-3 being used in sortie logs that get more than 2 tanks. Its way more efficient to use a bomber and carpet bomb 

 

You know very much that the problem is not the AT capabilities of the 23mm, which btw is a bit too much on the positive side. If you enable the 23mm for the lagg everybody and their dog, grandma and aunt will be using it for air-to-air, and unlike the gunpods for the F4(or 202 aswell), you dont get heavy performance penalties, and you end up basically with a figther with a weapon that can one-shot anything in the sky and blow up tanks on the ground when theres no one around. And I didnt even mention that the lagg3 we have is one of the late series and you could count on your hand how many (prototype) lagg3 were fitted with that laser cannon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Access to 23mm by rank captain-major-lieutenant-colonel should solve the problem.
Lugg-3-23mm will not be too much, they will be protected, the enemy will try to destroy them. There is an additional intrigue.
I would suggest that all unlockers be tied to ranks, that people would more value their virtual life.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

I agree.  If people want balance, then it (mostly) can't be historical, and vice versa.  The Axis started out WWII with an immense advantage in the baby-seal-clubbing department, only to have the tables turned by the Allies - who not only were able to produce some superior-performing aircraft, also had manufacturing capabilities the Axis couldn't attack.

 

The LaGG-3 while being a "not bad" aircraft, was historically not on-par with German fighters of the time.  ***Whether or not the 23mm is accurately modeled, I cannot say.***  I do know a 1-2 second burst from a 109 F4's guns will pulverize a plane, and every time I've shot a 109 or 190 with the LaGG's guns it kept flying with negligible damage.  ***User experience may vary,*** I suppose... 

 

OK, xJammer I'm going to put *** around key points of my original post.  I think you misunderstood.  I haven't had the experiences with the LaGG-3 23mm being the "uber gun" everybody talks about but, I have made ZERO claims that my experiences with it are the only ones to gather data from.  I'm not claiming to be right.  I originally claimed that I really didn't know, and here's my view whenever I use it.  I wasn't talking about anybody else or what they experience when they use it. 

 

However, if I and/or others can attest to instances where the 23mm doesn't perform like an "uber gun", then maybe the model is more correct than one might think.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you cant tame a Lagg-3 with 23mm in your yber F-4, then i am afraid you should strongly consider whether it is suitable for you to fly in fighters. Perhaps you should stick to supply runs? 

5 hours ago, xJammer said:

The issue is that every time a side gets beaten you get this very whine-fest from the side that lost.

 

 

Literally no one from VVS whines now. 

 

We all acknowledged that VVS under estimated the importance of depots and the numbers were not that bad and that's pretty much it.

 

There was slight surprise fro F-4 being in map 2, but no one really cares because most VVS pilots can fight any Axis thing in Mig-3. We are just that used to that. 

 

Only **cri cri, miau miau, whine whine** i hear still going on is the some butthurt hartmanns getting their streaks cut short by lucky burst from Lagg-3, and they don't even know if it was 20mm or 23mm. 

 

Also, considering that the VYas 23mm was necked down 30mm, and a basis for VERY successful Soviet AA 23 in later models like shilka, that shot down many salty US pilots, like Senator McCain, over Hanoi, i don't see any problem them preforming as they do. 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Resorting to ad hominems is usually sign of running out of more reasonable arguments.

 

If historical accuracy is wanted then 23 mm and 37 mm guns on the LaGG need to go. Mk 108 on the 109 G-6 needs to go too, should last map be around mid 1943 on the timeline.

 

One major problem I believe with the depots is in the AAA: most efficient and quickest way to reach 100 % damage is to destroy AAA with fighters and/or 110s/il-2s and then bomb and strafe the buildings too. It would be nice if jaboing wasnt the best and quickest way to destroy every kind of target. Maybe give them a lot more and quicker respawning light AAA or something else to encourage level bombing. If that is done properly then there is no need to reduce the effects of depot damage.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

 

If historical accuracy is wanted then 23 mm and 37 mm guns on the LaGG need to go. Mk 108 on the 109 G-6 needs to go too, should last map be around mid 1943 on the timeline.

 

 

Sure, right after we get VVS pilots to historical numbers.  :^) 

 

TAW is about as historically accurate as much as the Battlefield V is, women participation in front lines... with prosthetics. 

 

Please, if you go for historical accuracy, at least address the biggest offenders first, like the numbers of participation. Perhaps fly red next TAW? 

 

And stop bombing depots without fighter escort :^) 

 

 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


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

 

Sure, right after we get VVS pilots to historical numbers.  :^) 

 

 

 

It's okay, in Fall Blau until something like December 1942 Luftwaffe's Luftlotte 4 had more or around similar number aircraft available compared to the V-VS. I demand much high number of Il-2 but less Peshkas though. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with arguing from a 'historical' standpoint is there are key planes missing from the game, at least on the Soviet side. Yak 9's should be fielded as well as the bombers medium mentioned. I'm sure there should be some other planes for the Germans too, but for the most part the major players in the various battles are represented. If we can't get all the planes that were in the battles to start with how can we have historical balance?

 

Erkki, the LaGG did fly with 23 and 37 mm guns though. How many 23 mm gun LaGGs were produced is unknowable, they didn't serialize them differently from the standard 20 mm planes and the guns themselves were only fitted when there weren't IL-2's that needed them. As I understand it the 37 mm LaGG was a later addition to the model, after it was outmoded by newer Soviet models and the LaGG 3, which couldn't compete with the German fighters fielded was re-tasked for tank busting. For the Mk 108, I don't know if it should show up in the East or not. As I understand it, the gun was mostly slated for strategic bomber intercept and there wasn't much in the way of strategic bombing employed in the East by the Soviets so it wouldn't be needed. But again, are historical settings for individual planes pertinent when we have an inherently unhistorical setting?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

It's okay, in Fall Blau until something like December 1942 Luftwaffe's Luftlotte 4 had more or around similar number aircraft available compared to the V-VS. I demand much high number of Il-2 but less Peshkas though. ;) 

 

Hey, i am more than happy for even numbers, most of the time VVS fight outnumbered. Irregardless of won or lost TAW's, VVS is always outnumbered. 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


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

The problem with arguing from a 'historical' standpoint is there are key planes missing from the game, at least on the Soviet side. Yak 9's should be fielded as well as the bombers medium mentioned. I'm sure there should be some other planes for the Germans too, but for the most part the major players in the various battles are represented. If we can't get all the planes that were in the battles to start with how can we have historical balance?

 

This is very true, V-VS only has the Pe-2 and A-20 for medium bombers. DB-3 and Il-4, among many less important types, are missing(I'm not sure how welcome those two would be to the more competitive red virtual pilots...). Yak-1B at least provides performance that is in many ways close to the Yak-9.

 

There were less than 7000 NS-37 cannons produced and around 3500 Il-2s that carried them. I can be horribly mistaken but there must not have been more many LaGG-3 ITs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

This is very true, V-VS only has the Pe-2 and A-20 for medium bombers. DB-3 and Il-4, among many less important types, are missing(I'm not sure how welcome those two would be to the more competitive red virtual pilots...). Yak-1B at least provides performance that is in many ways close to the Yak-9.

 

There were less than 7000 NS-37 cannons produced and around 3500 Il-2s that carried them. I can be horribly mistaken but there must not have been more many LaGG-3 ITs.

 

Many of the non serial Lagg-3 mods were made in field, according to necessities. If Il-2 gets banged up and cant fly, i see no reason why Ivan, the field mechanic, cant swap the gun of Lagg-3 for more potent one if it can be made fit. 

 

I mean, you prolly know the shenanigans Finnish air force did during the war, all sorts of unorthodox mods dictated by necessity. 

 

 

But on the subject of the rare weapons, how about we have a seat and talk about the 1000kg bombs. thumb_why-dont-you-have-seat-over-there-memes-com-17996623.png.df0462a3809c43f5853e977c5c260de2.png

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, xJammer said:

 

109 with gunpods is a non-compete against any competent pilot. Vya on a lag enables you to strafe tanks while also carrying a bomb load and still be capable as a dogfighter. Vya simply doesn't compare to gunpods on a 109 its that much more impactful. Also lagg is hardly a bad aircraft and you won't need Vya to kill most of the blues - just take the 20mm or take the 37mm if you plan to hunt for bombers.

 

IMO the entire "balance" argument is going to spiral down a huge rabbit hole very quickly at this point. Some amount of historical pretence for lineups should remain as a reference point as otherwise we might just as well enable all aircraft on all sides so we get a symmetrical game.

 

OTOH I am hoping with the new tank crew release the blues will finally get tigers in the tank columns. Dealing with 3-5 KV1s in a column is quite painful.

You are wrong, 109 with gunpods turn all most the same as without, same speed except acceleration. You can see 2 BF with gunpods killing a entyre column of cars, 2 Laggs cant do that.

And if you are think on historical issues, gunpods where reserve for fighters to protect Germany against air rides of bombers.

In a dive one 109 with gunpods is more stable than a Lagg and dives at mayor speed.

I cant undestand why you are soo afraid of the 23mm, by the way we have only 2 Lagg3 on map #5, the rest of the maps we have only 1.

 

 

Share this post


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

But on the subject of the rare weapons, how about we have a seat and talk about the 1000kg bombs. 

 

SC1000 bombs were actually fairly standard, typical loads were SC1000 + SC500 and 1000+250. Mountains of them fell into Soviet hands after the war. I think one was recently found in London too.

 

Spoiler

Color-photo-Junkers-Ju-88A-FAF-LeLv44-JK-256-Onttola-1944-01.jpg

 

Edited by LeLv76_Erkki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ECV56_Necathor said:

You are wrong, 109 with gunpods turn all most the same as without, same speed except acceleration. You can see 2 BF with gunpods killing a entyre column of cars, 2 Laggs cant do that.

And if you are think on historical issues, gunpods where reserve for fighters to protect Germany against air rides of bombers.

In a dive one 109 with gunpods is more stable than a Lagg and dives at mayor speed.

I cant undestand why you are soo afraid of the 23mm, by the way we have only 2 Lagg3 on map #5, the rest of the maps we have only 1.

 

 

Poor choice of word "afraid", but its just a matter of tactical viability. In any case, as I said before, I'd like to see the "rare" stuff be dedicated to the "rare" pilots. Gives motivation to live, stops the nonsense argument about the things that are available and aren't.

 

Its just laughable how both sides are at their necks coming up with excuses why something is super OP while the other thing is super rare. No, 109 with gunpods is not the same speed, you need around 10% throttle at level travel @3km to have equal speed between 109 and 109+pods. The pods weigh around 120kg, which is approx 40% fuel load of the 109. But even then I don't argue that blues should have them.

 

Again, let everyone have every mod. Hide the rare / unfair / etc mods behind rank requirement. Ivan won't swap you the shiny 23mm if you are just going to die in the field in the next hour - Ivan instead will keep the 23mm until the il2 gets repaired. Fix the AAA at depots and alter the campaign to account for the fact that people don't like getting beaten (as Ciddy has so splendidly shown) - i.e. if one side has better planeset (blues early on, reds later on) make the other side have better campaign position, more depots, more supply, maybe even number of CMs to get new aircraft? But please stop with the tit-for-tat shitfest that is happening right now. Maybe we should start locking the headrest removal on the 109s and turn the server into another WOL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

35 minutes ago, xJammer said:

 

 

Poor choice of word "afraid", but its just a matter of tactical viability. In any case, as I said before, I'd like to see the "rare" stuff be dedicated to the "rare" pilots. Gives motivation to live, stops the nonsense argument about the things that are available and aren't.

 

Piloting Lagg-3 is not considered to be reward, the 23mm just makes it more bearable. If you miss your first pass, you rarely get another. 

 

 

Also, hiding the mods behind the rank is just going to make problem of  "unfair mods" worse. Using your logic, it is still the pilots and not the equipment that matter, so the good pilots will just snowball on and the mediocre crowd will be about as effective withe the non "op" mods. 

 

 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


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

Piloting Lagg-3 is not considered to be reward, the 23mm just makes it more bearable. If you miss your first pass, you rarely get another. 

 

 

If everything is so awful on the red side, how do people manage to be aces and win? You should consider driving a peshka - AI rear gunner should get you the pilot kill with just the UBS, doesn't even need the 23mm. I detect elevated levels of salt though, relaxation baths and water intake recommended!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, xJammer said:

 

 

If everything is so awful on the red side, how do people manage to be aces and win? You should consider driving a peshka - AI rear gunner should get you the pilot kill with just the UBS, doesn't even need the 23mm. I detect elevated levels of salt though, relaxation baths and water intake recommended!

 

I cant marry a man who cant tame PE-2 back gunner.

 

*runs away, crying, in to the sunset*

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, xJammer said:

You should consider driving a peshka - AI rear gunner should get you the pilot kill with just the UBS, doesn't even need the 23mm.

 

Now this is laughable :).  Obviously you haven't flown the Pe-2 much... in all the iterations of TAW I've flown in (mostly as Russian, once as German), my Pe-2 AI gunner has PK'd an attacking enemy fighter (109) once.  Way more often than not (~80%+), the enemy fighter damages me without any signs of damage themselves.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Now this is laughable :).  Obviously you haven't flown the Pe-2 much... in all the iterations of TAW I've flown in (mostly as Russian, once as German), my Pe-2 AI gunner has PK'd an attacking enemy fighter (109) once.  Way more often than not (~80%+), the enemy fighter damages me without any signs of damage themselves.

 

Same here. 

 

Considering that the Pe-2's options for attack are very similar to a Ju-88 (but Pe-2 is slower), I'm surprised that Axis pilots park at its tail at all to attack. 

 

But.... My enemy isn't aiding me in expediting his death and my victory.  It's obviously a wrong system that needs to be nerfed. :nea:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness, there are significant differences between the PE-2 and the JU-88. The guns for a start. The PE-2 gets a single gun while the 88 has 2 guns. The PE's gun is a 12.7 mm gun so there is that. Also the PE-2 while being slower also caries significantly less payload, only 1000 Kg in total while the 88 caries something like 2000 Kg. Also the 88 is a much better sight while on fire, but that might just be my opinion.

Share this post


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

In fairness, there are significant differences between the PE-2 and the JU-88. The guns for a start. The PE-2 gets a single gun while the 88 has 2 guns. The PE's gun is a 12.7 mm gun so there is that. Also the PE-2 while being slower also caries significantly less payload, only 1000 Kg in total while the 88 caries something like 2000 Kg. Also the 88 is a much better sight while on fire, but that might just be my opinion.

 

I think I may have mis-worded what I meant to say.  I meant the options a fighter has to attack either of these planes and not expose themselves to defensive fire is similar. 

Taking the time to set up on Ju-88 and Pe-2 for frontal attacks at the 10 o'clock or 2 o'clock position, then watching your flight path after the attack pass greatly increase chances of survival.  Instead attackers park on the tail and make it 50/50 odds. Or, worse they choose attack/exit angles that offer a larger profile sight picture to the gunners.  Sure, offset frontal attacks offer less target window and take more time to set up, but if one hasn't given themselves the most chance to succeed, then they shouldn't complain about failing.

  

Edited by Mobile_BBQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any unbiased participant of TAW will agree that adding F4s with gunpods in 2nd map while at the same time removing VYa23mm till map 4 (and even there very rare to find it available); was a bit too much. All the rest it's pure "bla bla" to justify the unjustifiable.

 

PS. please not again the typical RB!WC statement about OP Pe2 gunners crap. We can show you many tracks of LW bombers with gunners producing critical damage to fighters from impossible angles and speeds. The gunners issue is equal for LW and VVS.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

We can show you many tracks of LW bombers with gunners producing critical damage to fighters from impossible angles and speeds. The gunners issue is equal for LW and VVS.

 

Please do, I'm interested on a statistical point of view, so please, share the videos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

Considering that the Pe-2's options for attack are very similar to a Ju-88 (but Pe-2 is slower), I'm surprised that Axis pilots park at its tail at all to attack.

 

Do we play the same game? Pe-2 is faster, and the gunners have significantly better guns and larger fields of fire. It is much more difficult/riskier for a fighter to attack. If there are several unescorted Ju 88s you can take down them all(23 mm or shvak, doesnt matter) but out of a formation of Peshkas a average 109 is likely to be able to shoot down just one before suffering damage enough to need to abort.

 

This discussion started when someone wanted more 23 mm and gunpods away from 109s for balance, but I doubt the available guns for the bomber interceptors had anything to do with depot damage as they tended to be jaboed to 100 % on lowish server population times.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no such thing as gunner issue.

 

Generally all bombers are pretty defencless and if attacker knows what he is doing and doesnt get overexcited (which i must admit I'm also sometimes guilty of) and flyes to close to bomber  or sits on bomber six, bombers are dead without inflicting any significant damage on the attacking fighters.

 

Unfortunatelly time after time I see (as i'm Like in Rise of Flight gunning myself and see it ech time)many people making poor attack runs on the bombers (not in all cases but at least 60%-70%). They are coming form dead six or high/low six positions within very short distance to the bombers and its really hard not to hit them, heck. i even shoot down a yak1 while gunning form ju52 single gun this campaign...

And those people each time shout murder, those op gunners, while the blame is unfortunately entirely on their side.

 

If you dont belive me, check the sherriffs vids form previous campaign, he didnt loose even one plane to the pe2 gunners, while he was following few simple rules.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

Do we play the same game? Pe-2 is faster, and the gunners have significantly better guns and larger fields of fire. It is much more difficult/riskier for a fighter to attack. If there are several unescorted Ju 88s you can take down them all(23 mm or shvak, doesnt matter) but out of a formation of Peshkas a average 109 is likely to be able to shoot down just one before suffering damage enough to need to abort.

 

This discussion started when someone wanted more 23 mm and gunpods away from 109s for balance, but I doubt the available guns for the bomber interceptors had anything to do with depot damage as they tended to be jaboed to 100 % on lowish server population times.

 

Maybe I'm wrong about the speed I'll have to look into the 88's performance.  What I do know is that the Pe2 has a top un-laden level speed of ~450kph and a shallow/safe dive speed just above 500kph - more if you're willing to risk lawn darting.  Besides the direct 12 o'clock (pilot's gun) the Pe2 has zero frontal gun coverage.  The 88 however, has rear upper and lower guns plus a frontal gunner's position making attacking from 10 or 2 a bit less forgiving. 

 

Also, though 109's were certainly used to attack bomber formations, they weren't exactly known to be able to take a hit in the engine.  190's had a much better reputation in that department.  Perhaps I'm giving good advice to Axis pilots when I tell them to attack Peshkas from the front.  You can thank me later.  :dance:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

Maybe I'm wrong about the speed I'll have to look into the 88's performance.  What I do know is that the Pe2 has a top un-laden level speed of ~450kph and a shallow/safe dive speed just above 500kph - more if you're willing to risk lawn darting.  Besides the direct 12 o'clock (pilot's gun) the Pe2 has zero frontal gun coverage.  The 88 however, has rear upper and lower guns plus a frontal gunner's position making attacking from 10 or 2 a bit less forgiving. 

 

Also, though 109's were certainly used to attack bomber formations, they weren't exactly known to be able to take a hit in the engine.  190's had a much better reputation in that department.  Perhaps I'm giving good advice to Axis pilots when I tell them to attack Peshkas from the front.  You can thank me later.  :dance:

 

The rear guns are not only pretty weak(being just 8mm MGs) but have very limited fields of fire and the so called front gun is worthless, mainly because its field of fire is also very limited. It was so bad that it was often removed in real life.

 

I advice everyone to try all planes in the game and test what they can do. There is a significant difference between attacking a Ju 88 or He 111 and attacking a Pe-2. But as I say for I think 3rd time I dont think its very relevant when it comes of depot attacks, as all level bombers are very difficult to intercept before they get to drop their bombs(just attack head on, piece of cake, hurr durr) and would be even if game's draw range was 16 km like in the old game. So difference is mainly in the poor bomber's ability to survive back home.

Share this post


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

 

Maybe I'm wrong about the speed I'll have to look into the 88's performance.  What I do know is that the Pe2 has a top un-laden level speed of ~450kph and a shallow/safe dive speed just above 500kph - more if you're willing to risk lawn darting.  Besides the direct 12 o'clock (pilot's gun) the Pe2 has zero frontal gun coverage.  The 88 however, has rear upper and lower guns plus a frontal gunner's position making attacking from 10 or 2 a bit less forgiving. 

 

Also, though 109's were certainly used to attack bomber formations, they weren't exactly known to be able to take a hit in the engine.  190's had a much better reputation in that department.  Perhaps I'm giving good advice to Axis pilots when I tell them to attack Peshkas from the front.  You can thank me later.  :dance:

I tried all the german fighters (during last TAW and taw i think XII which were the only camps i've flown blue)  and for bombers hunting my favourite german plane is ME 110. Didnt loose even 1 me 110 while shooting down the PE2s. Of course the G variant is better with those add guns, but E is also quite good. The FW190 especially a5 of course can pack more punch and its faster but with 110 you can make those noobe six o'clock approach (110 flies superb on one engine which one cant say about pe2...

 

10 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

The rear guns are not only pretty weak(being just 8mm MGs) but have very limited fields of fire and the so called front gun is worthless, mainly because its field of fire is also very limited. It was so bad that it was often removed in real life.

 

I advice everyone to try all planes in the game and test what they can do. There is a significant difference between attacking a Ju 88 or He 111 and attacking a Pe-2. But as I say for I think 3rd time I dont think its very relevant when it comes of depot attacks, as all level bombers are very difficult to intercept before they get to drop their bombs(just attack head on, piece of cake, hurr durr) and would be even if game's draw range was 16 km like in the old game. So difference is mainly in the poor bomber's ability to survive back home.

 Personally i dont see real difference between attacking PE2 ser 35 and ju88 or pe2 ser 87 and he111 h16. (only the he111 h6 & a20 with those small magzines for def guns are really bad).

 

And i think the most dangerous for attacking fighter is the he111h16 because its diffcu;t not to fly very close to him during the attack.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

 

 ....as all level bombers are very difficult to intercept before they get to drop their bombs(just attack head on, piece of cake, hurr durr) and would be even if game's draw range was 16 km like in the old game. So difference is mainly in the poor bomber's ability to survive back home.

 

Ya' know, you could always patrol along expected points of ingress and intercept them on the way instead of just circling the target to be defended.  I know. I know.  It's boring, prevents insta-glory from running headlong into battle, and doesn't always yield results but, if you're in a 109 or 190 tooling around at 7k (like Axis seems to do) it might be worth a shot - especially if you're coordinating with others patrolling all possible ingress routes.  You'd be surprised how few pilots you would need to cover the bases.  I know. I know. Draw distance and whatnot...

 

While (in-game) one can only see other planes for a radius of 10km, but if you look out the left and right windows, up and down as well, the math adds up to quite a lot of area you can look upon.  Not to mention a well planned patrol route increases the area one can survey.

 

I recall one instance where myself and a few others were attacking a depot and the opponents DID post up mid-way along our expected route. Needless to say, that sortie did not have an acceptable success rate.  (try some strategy, piece of cake, hurr durr). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler
11 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

Ya' know, you could always patrol along expected points of ingress and intercept them on the way instead of just circling the target to be defended.  I know. I know.  It's boring, prevents insta-glory from running headlong into battle, and doesn't always yield results but, if you're in a 109 or 190 tooling around at 7k (like Axis seems to do) it might be worth a shot - especially if you're coordinating with others patrolling all possible ingress routes.  You'd be surprised how few pilots you would need to cover the bases.  I know. I know. Draw distance and whatnot... 

 

While (in-game) one can only see other planes for a radius of 10km, but if you look out the left and right windows, up and down as well, the math adds up to quite a lot of area you can look upon.  Not to mention a well planned patrol route increases the area one can survey.

 

I recall one instance where myself and a few others were attacking a depot and the opponents DID post up mid-way along our expected route. Needless to say, that sortie did not have an acceptable success rate.  (try some strategy, piece of cake, hurr durr). 

 

 

I believe this has been discussed before, at some point. Multiple fighters patrolling far enough from the target are needed to have chance of interception. Doesnt matter what side one flies, 23 mm LaGG, 190, whatever. Not worthwhile to patrol with 2-4 fighters and even still have only a chance of early interception, when those fighters could instead be bombers attacking and doing damage themselves, or doing something completely unrelated to depots. With GCI/radar/early warning of any kind things would be very different. Even if bomber gets shot down, if he scores hits(he likely will) he will earn a new plane anyway. This means that in the end both defensive CAP and escorting bombers are not very useful, unless if one wants to role play somewhat. I and many others do...

 

I have shot down A-20s and Pe-2s something like 50 km from our depots but that was just me being lucky - as I never was even looking for them - and them not being careful enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

Ya' know, you could always patrol along expected points of ingress and intercept them on the way instead of just circling the target to be defended.

 

Like discussed before, it is simply not possible to effectively intercept bombers. There are too many variables to account for which makes it a pure guessing game which route the enemy Bomber takes and on what altitude. Even if you are lucky and patrol the right area, you still have to spot that single bomber which is not easy to begin with.

 

I am not intending to do some sort of gatekeeping here and every opinion should be valued but sometimes it makes sense to get more experience before jumping into complex gameplay discussions. I think this was your first TAW campaign?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:
  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

I believe this has been discussed before, at some point. Multiple fighters patrolling far enough from the target are needed to have chance of interception. Doesnt matter what side one flies, 23 mm LaGG, 190, whatever. Not worthwhile to patrol with 2-4 fighters and even still have only a chance of early interception, when those fighters could instead be bombers attacking and doing damage themselves, or doing something completely unrelated to depots. With GCI/radar/early warning of any kind things would be very different. Even if bomber gets shot down, if he scores hits(he likely will) he will earn a new plane anyway. This means that in the end both defensive CAP and escorting bombers are not very useful, unless if one wants to role play somewhat. I and many others do...

 

I have shot down A-20s and Pe-2s something like 50 km from our depots but that was just me being lucky - as I never was even looking for them - and them not being careful enough.

The bomber pilot will not get the new plane if he will be killed or captured which quite often is the case.

 

Anyway i'm against GCI/radar as some fighter only players are now strongly sugessting to have it, (i know that they want a even easier life as they have now, without the need to use their brains, or get bored ;)) 

The bombers/attackers life is already heavy as they are pushing the offensive and each time must cross the border into enemy territiory and take flack and fighters attacks. The attack planes and bombers are winning the taw campaigns and not fighters. 

 

Staying in fighter at 3 to 9  k and attacking only if you have numbers advantage (at the same time screaming murder each time they got hit by the gunners while attacing from six o'clock) is not wining the maps as some would like to have , in other words they would like not to risk their precious streaks and at the same time win the map ;) 

 

Anyway as for depots its alwasy the case of resources, and team decisions, either You want to spend several fighters flight time on defending them  or  you want to Focus other targets.

 

The approach vectors are very predictable and taking in account the speed of the fighters its easy to cover quite a distance within Short time.

 

Personally during current taw i intrcepted at least 3  bombers before they bombed the depos and similar number over the depos,  although most of the time i was flying  bombers and only limited time i spend in fighters, and even less on this task so more or less 50/50 succes rate in intercepting before the depo was bombed during that limited time i spend on this task. With several fighters and dividing of the sectors between them this can easyly be increased.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I dont necessarily want CGI/radar, just saying that no matter what weapons fighters get they cant efficiently stop bombers from bombing. Probably everyone wants more diversity and many different types of planes to be useful and not pure suicide to fly, level bombers included.

 

That said I dont think the issue with defending depots ever was about level bombers level bombing, but about how the AAA(that is probably too weak) can be killed, it mostly stays dead, and then attackers can strafe and bomb the buildings one by one. That isnt done by Ju 88s.

Share this post


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

Anyway i'm against GCI/radar as some fighter only players are now strongly sugessting to have it, (i know that they want a even easier life as they have now, without the need to use their brains, or get bored ;)) 

The bombers/attackers life is already heavy as they are pushing the offensive and each time must cross the border into enemy territiory and take flack and fighters attacks. The attack planes and bombers are winning the taw campaigns and not fighters. 

 

I honestly don't know what your deal is. You are either completely failing at comprehending the discussion or you are deliberately trying to push your agenda by obscuring the argumentation.

 

Let me be very clear. Nobody (as far as i know) suggested a radar function. In fact, i especially said that this is not what i have in mind. So stop pulling this out of thin air. 

 

Again you are trying to segregate Fighter Pilots from Bomber Pilots and you are accusing them for only flying for their kill streak without having any example or proof to speak of. Like i said to you before, we are all playing the same game. Fighter Pilots are not your enemy. Quite the contrary. The whole narrative of "fighter pilots are useless" is something certain individuals are trying to push without realizing that it is in fact hurting their agenda. 

 

You are trying to put yourself on a pedestal for being the true cause of deciding the campaign by saying that fighter pilots aren't influencing the campaign outcome. Yet, when people are arguing that this is indeed true and that fighters need a better chance to intercept enemy Bombers to prevent a Bomb drop i.e. having an impact on the campaign outcome, you are absolutely against it and ridiculing the idea. 

 

33 minutes ago, Carl_infar said:

Anyway as for depots its alwasy the case of resources, and team decisions, either You want to spend several fighters flight time on defending them  or  you want to Focus other targets.

 

 

You aren't even trying to engage in a discussion on it. You are simply repeating your statements without even considering strong arguments against your views i.g. that it is absolutely ignorant to think that a outnumbered side can spare a significantly bigger group of players to defend a Depot. 

 

38 minutes ago, Carl_infar said:

The approach vectors are very predictable and taking in account the speed of the fighters its easy to cover quite a distance within Short time.

 

Personally during current taw i intrcepted at least 3  bombers before they bombed the depos and similar number over the depos,  although most of the time i was flying  bombers and only limited time i spend in fighters, and even less on this task so more or less 50/50 succes rate in intercepting before the depo was bombed during that limited time i spend on this task. With several fighters and dividing of the sectors between them this can easyly be increased.

 

This is simply misleading. Your personal experience results out of less than 10 hours flown as a fighter which is very low considering that you have flown 173 sorties. On top of it you are talking about the last map, where the depots on your side (Blue of course) are less then 20km apart which makes it very easy to cover. Especially because you probably only had to defend one depot at the time. Its a obscured view that can't hold as an example for how the depot gameplay works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting debate.

 

Many things.

 

About AAA on depots and airfields.  I always say is practically innefective. I read  here , sometimes fighters destroy it.... totally unnecessary risk ... i cover lot of attacks, and maybe try intercept more ... only few times enemys bomber, slow on level fly ( 4k to 6k ), was damaged. An maybe 5% was shot down... i no care how real is it , many things on TAW are totally unreal if we are honest.  The question is, on TAW no have quorum limits... farming is a legal posibility... the real threat for a bombers is be intercepted by enemy fighter... we discurss here ,it is hard to do ... but sometimes with no enemy this threat disapears, will be nice if depots and airfields have some kind of real level of autodefence . 

 

Edit for agre i got your point erkki.. if you want bomb one to one, need eliminate AAA . On my patrols i dont see this kind of situation ( fighters attacking AAA and bombers wasting time bombing one to one on depots i mean ) ... but last campaing... red side no have enought resources for defend all objectives ... i imagine blues have the time for elaborate attacks. :) 

 

 

 

Edited by 666GIAP_Tumu

Share this post


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

 

I honestly don't know what your deal is. You are either completely failing at comprehending the discussion or you are deliberately trying to push your agenda by obscuring the argumentation.

 

Let me be very clear. Nobody (as far as i know) suggested a radar function. In fact, i especially said that this is not what i have in mind. So stop pulling this out of thin air. 

 

Again you are trying to segregate Fighter Pilots from Bomber Pilots and you are accusing them for only flying for their kill streak without having any example or proof to speak of. Like i said to you before, we are all playing the same game. Fighter Pilots are not your enemy. Quite the contrary. The whole narrative of "fighter pilots are useless" is something certain individuals are trying to push without realizing that it is in fact hurting their agenda. 

 

You are trying to put yourself on a pedestal for being the true cause of deciding the campaign by saying that fighter pilots aren't influencing the campaign outcome. Yet, when people are arguing that this is indeed true and that fighters need a better chance to intercept enemy Bombers to prevent a Bomb drop i.e. having an impact on the campaign outcome, you are absolutely against it and ridiculing the idea. 

 

 

You aren't even trying to engage in a discussion on it. You are simply repeating your statements without even considering strong arguments against your views i.g. that it is absolutely ignorant to think that a outnumbered side can spare a significantly bigger group of players to defend a Depot. 

 

 

This is simply misleading. Your personal experience results out of less than 10 hours flown as a fighter which is very low considering that you have flown 173 sorties. On top of it you are talking about the last map, where the depots on your side (Blue of course) are less then 20km apart which makes it very easy to cover. Especially because you probably only had to defend one depot at the time. Its a obscured view that can't hold as an example for how the depot gameplay works. 

Hehe I didnt have any one particular in mind and i wasnt pulling any names and look who showed up.

There has to something to it if you are feeling so hurt ;)

 

I dont segregate fighter pilots form bomber ones, and the fighters, ast he bombers and attackers are friends.

 

I only segregate the whining, never satisfied and ever complaining ones form all others in fiutal hope that they will once grow up.

 

I find myself a rather medicore player, thats why i'm quoting sheriff who is a way way better shoot than i'm. I would quote also others if i knew ones who post TAW on Youtube.

If i quote my own experience is to show that in case of attacking bombers even medicore shot as i'm can easyly hit the attcking fighter if  the fighter comes form six o'clock (low,high,dead six no difference), so to show that complaining about ai gunners instead of changing ones attack pattens on bombers is just stupid .

 

In case of depots its same situation, even I on my 15 inch laptop screen with simple patrol pattern a can intercept with high chance the bombers prior their bombdrop, so it might be boring for some, but is easyly achivable

 

By the way i was flying those depot defence mission not only on last map but on most of the other maps and you have to add to fighter hours the attacker hours as the 110 is in taw terminology (and hours count) a strike not fighter plane (by the way when i fly red its around 50/50 for fighter/bomber flight time, on blue side more people fly fighters so for the sake of the team i fly more bomber missions (both level and dive bomb)). 

 

I also have the points/streaks etc deep in my back side and fly only for fun and my current team win (exactly in that order)

Edited by Carl_infar

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...