Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, MentalishMan said:

Oh I know, Im hella surprised we're clawing this land back. I know we will get BTFO'd in the morning by JG/4 pushing us back to our starting lines. We just need people running on VOIP comms and working Together instead of having Headless Pilots running in Solo and getting show down by a 20mm. 

I've been getting into TAW TeamSpeak when I play, but it's not been too often.  Minor health issues have had me able to check the TAW page but without energy to push a long session.

I agree that coordinated efforts are needed.  I will say that I've had a few solo flights where I was able to identify targets the opponents were unlikely to be covering and came out alive.  

I have enough experience (I'd like to believe) to be counted in the 'intermediate skill' ranks of players and (probably more importantly) I can read a map.  Going solo with weak navigation skills is guaranteed death.  

In solo flights I took I knew I could either quickly run home to friendly AA cover or take a longer route and use the cover of near-blind weather to hit and run.  Needless to say, friendly AA cover isn't always easy to get to and near-blind weather is not a regular occurrence.  So...umm...yeah... Teaming up is 99% of the time ALOT better. 

Share this post


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

4. It is better to stop that discussion, talk more why our bombs are not having the same effect as they use to and how we can solve actual problems. Jesus the reds will win the map with so many imbalances..... - Discussion is a way to listen to individuals opinions and improve something. Without discussions, our society would be even worse than what it is. The reason you don't like to discuss this is because you fear changes may put in a position uncomfortable regarding your AC/side preference.

 

5. Jesus the reds will win the map with so many imbalances..... -  Winning and balance are not necessarily connected. A soccer team with 11 players with 8 that suck facing one with 5 players at Messi skill level might lose but that does not mean its is balanced.

 

I think you and many others have misunderstood me. Probably due to my bad English. Excuse me for that, you see English are not my mother language, not even the third.

As I understand you have answer yourself the question you asked. There is a big difference between the numerical equilibrium and the balance in a game, sport, life, war etc.

What you are pointing to so intensively is the numerical equilibrium if I understand you correctly, when I do not care. If I have a Mesi on my team I don’t care if the other team has 10 Schmeichel. If I have a Pepe, I don’t care if you are Mourinho.

You are expressing in numbers, me in weight. You see I learn exactly as you said. Number not always count. Quality does, most of times.

There are some respectful squads in the game, yours included, that make the difference. You are compering champion’s league with the B league and you want to put it all in the same sack. It does not go that way. 

Most of the ''numerical more'' squads simply follow.  If you think that is so important to drive out them from the game (because that will happent if you are going to Point to them sides), it is ok. But this is called elitism and it has nothing to do with balance. It has to do with other perspectives, which I am sure nobody wants to analyze here.

I said to stop discussing that topic, not discuss at all, because I saw it coming.

Please don’t misunderstand me. It’s not personal.

 

Tnx

@Daedalos

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Yeah but it's fun in a more novelty way and when your opponent has the Bf 109 it's not as amusing 

 

So what do you want to face in your I-16?
Only Stukas? :dry:

 

If you're having trouble facing Emils, I have really bad news for you regarding next maps...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -IRRE-Centx said:

 

So what do you want to face in your I-16?
Only Stukas? :dry:

 

If you're having trouble facing Emils, I have really bad news for you regarding next maps...

 

 

I don't want to face anything in an I-16, and neither does he I think.  More honor to those who do it and succeed I suppose.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Talon_ said:
~Gif~

We're doing what we can Red :salute:

 

 

Wow!

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas

Share this post


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

 

We're doing what we can Red :salute:

There were impressive raids indeed! The second one not as scaled as the first one, but still, very impressive. I was defending the second depot and I was nearly shot down by the furious Pe’s. 

 

Very nice job! Congrats!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, -IRRE-Centx said:

 

Actually it is really confusing.

This morning, I was above a tank column, spotted an intact KV-1. Dropped a 500kg bomb on him, his engine started smoking black after my run, so I let him and go back to base.


Checked the log after my sortie, no damage written at all.
That's weird, I don't know if it's the stat page who didn't count anything, or if it was looking intact but was actually already destroyed.

 

Since I recorded this sortie, I checked the replay, it didn't look damaged at all before my bomb run, and was clearly badly hit after my bomb.

Looks like the stats are bugged . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Looks like the stats are bugged . 

Tank was probably destroyed already. You can't say that fresh looking tank is alive or not after patch 😕

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, =LG=Coldman said:

Tank was probably destroyed already. You can't say that fresh looking tank is alive or not after patch 😕

 

I Think, It happens with the trains also. We had the same problem with a train yesterday. I flew over our train that was reported bombed and I could not see the difference of a destroyed wagon from a healthy.

 

And artilery depot. We bombed a lot of them but no mission credits, when at the same time the fighters reported that everything was burning.

 

 :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive hit tanks with bombs and BK3.7 and they look undamaged with no smoke . Ive landed and seen in stat that tank was destroyed but in TAW stat page no kill awarded . The states are bugged as seeing here people are shooting down enemy yet have no stat reported . The last two patches have upset the multiplayer system . There is a big list of bugs for multiplayer .

I enjoy TAW and the hard work that goes into this campaign by the Guys ``but this game should be stable by now so that we can build on it .

 

Edited by II./JG77_Con

Share this post


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

Yeah but it's fun in a more novelty way and when your opponent has the Bf 109 it's not as amusing 

 

I wonder if the P-40 was made 0/2 on map 1 if it would improve attractiveness for Red pilots. Today once you earn a P-40 it's extremely precious and you have no backup plane. The I16, I'm sorry, is almost useless against 109s. I've heard many of our pilots mentioning over comms how reluctant they are to 'risk' their P-40, and there are many missions where if they don't have a P-40 they cannot fly fighter cover for a deep bomber strike -- the I16 just doesn't have the range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man those little i16's are like gnats when a 109 comes around, had some good fun this morning busting that tank column up with a few other i16's and a il2. Got a p-40 finally and now I am scared to do anything with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 1:31 PM, SCG_Riksen said:

                 - Cap limiter: Each side is only allowed to field 42 players.

                 - Current Spawn limiter: ... this system still allow the sticking team to fly and it is not as rigorous as kicking players on the majority side to balance the mission or forcing anyone to fly planes they don't want;

                   - Kicking people [if they die] when server is full

 

Like I said, there are no easy or perfect solution to fix the issue but, at least this way, IMHO, TAW remains fair which is a MUST in a server that strives to be a competition.

 

Sorry for the wall of text.

 

Riksen,

Nice wall of text - no apologies needed.  :biggrin:   I haven't had enough sim time available lately to make flying TAW worthwhile, but I flew some in several of the early ones, and plan to join up again by mid December, if I can keep brushing up my skills until then.  I really think these are good suggestions & hope they can be implemented at some point.  Believe they would really enhance what TAW is all about, so thanks for the post.

 

A few words on that 2nd point.  I'm one of the [probably many] people who fly red almost all the time, for the sake of helping keep things reasonably even.  (Your comments about blue/red pilot numbers are obviously true.)  Sure, I & others like me could fly 'what I want to, all the time,' but my parents taught me you're supposed to outgrow that level of self-centeredness soon after puberty if not before, for the most part anyway.  ;)  If we all had that mindset, the numbers would be even more one-sided than they already are.  Personally I enjoy the challenge of being the 'underdog' (unless it's massively imbalanced), and I always prefer it over being on the side with over-dominant numbers (seriously, how is that any fun??).  I'll keep doing what I do & enjoying it, flying for the other side once in a while when it makes sense & I suspect many others will do the same.  I'm not complaining about it either.  I just want to point out that a spawn limiter that prevents people from joining on the majority side is not what would keep them from joining the match & flying.  It is their choice to fly one side only that prevents them from joining & flying at that point.  They can't blame the spawn limiter since a decision to be a little more flexible would allow them to join.

 

On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 12:39 PM, StG77_Kondor said:


Correct. It's not being consistently applied. It's not automatic that a wrecked track = dead tank. I've been testing in QMB against both blue and red tanks and it is the same. A busted track does not always mean the game gives you credit for its' destruction. And the only way to know is to have icons on or keep smashing TAB. Both of which, IMO are far less realistic than just having each tank blow up when they're dead.

 

"Far less realistic"???   Sorry, totally disagree.  I'd say it makes the ground targets far less 'gamey,' and adds much more realistic 'fog of war' to the ground attack scenario - and this is coming from someone who flies a lot more ground attack than fighters in IL-2.  For example I'm sure you realize that de-tracking alone only immobilizes a real tank, temporarily; it can still fight if it's crew stays in it.  We know for a fact that 1942 Sturmovik or Stuka pilots had very little idea how many vehicles they truly destroyed as they flew back home, because records reveal huge overclaims were rampant on all sides, especially tank claims.  Sure, the new damage modeling changes the game & adds a lot more uncertainty.  It means that now you're best bet is to attack in a larger group that is communicating, so you can ensure all targets are hit, and hit hard enough to raise the odds that they're destroyed or badly damaged. If you must go in pairs or singles, it's now imperative to communicate with the rest of your team & learn whether your target was already hit or not, and which part(s) of it might be less damaged & need your bombs.  Now I love the satisfaction of the always-exploding tank as much as anyone, but like it or not, I think this change brought a lot more realism to this aspect of the game than it had up to now.  My hat's off to the devs on this change, for sure.

Edited by =FI=Blue2
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, =FI=Blue2 said:

"Far less realistic"???   Sorry, totally disagree.  I'd say it makes the ground targets far less 'gamey,' and adds much more realistic 'fog of war' to the ground attack scenario - and this is coming from someone who flies a lot more ground attack than fighters in IL-2.  For example I'm sure you realize that de-tracking alone only immobilizes a real tank, temporarily; it can still fight if it's crew stays in it.  We know for a fact that 1942 Sturmovik or Stuka pilots had very little idea how many vehicles they truly destroyed as they flew back home, because records reveal huge overclaims were rampant on all sides, especially tank claims.  Sure, the new damage modeling changes the game & adds a lot more uncertainty.  It means that now you're best bet is to attack in a larger group that is communicating, so you can ensure all targets are hit, and hit hard enough to raise the odds that they're destroyed or badly damaged. If you must go in pairs or singles, it's now imperative to communicate with the rest of your team & learn whether your target was already hit or not, and which part(s) of it might be less damaged & need your bombs.  Now I love the satisfaction of the always-exploding tank as much as anyone, but like it or not, I think this change brought a lot more realism to this aspect of the game than it had up to now.  My hat's off to the devs on this change, for sure.


My 'far less realistic' was about hitting TAB or having icons on in order to see which tanks are dead or alive, after each strafing/bomb/rocket attack. It is impossible to tell while flying in a plane going 300kph if the left or right track in that Panzer III or T-34 is busted.

We play a game. A real simulation would require at a minimum a full cabin capable of mimicking real life G's etc etc. Does the game simulate as best it can with technology available to the masses? Absolutely. But this is a game. Furthermore, in a hyper-competitive environment like TAW where the best of the best fly, as a ground pounder it is demoralizing. Why spend the time mapping out the perfect flight plan with your friends only to bomb a tank that looked totally fine but someone had thrown a rock at it and busted its' track? You not only wasted your time, you've also wasted your friends and escorts time. All that effort would've been better applied flying transport missions instead. If I wanted to do that, I'd fly a Flight Sim - not a Combat one. 

7 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

I just logged in for the first time today.  I received a 15 minute ban after being logged in for 5 seconds.  :huh:


RTFM :)

 

 

· I was kick from the server and now I’m banned from TAW on the servers list, why?

There is slot reservation system which is used sometimes by TAW developers StG2 and =LG= squadrons. To prevent from joining the server when no free slots are available players are temporarily banned. As soon as some free slots are available again all players are unbanned. If server has no more free slots then there is a message on the TAW main page above the map “Server is full!”. Please wait a while in that case.

 

Source: http://taw.stg2.de/manual.php

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, StG77_Kondor said:


RTFM :)

 

 

· I was kick from the server and now I’m banned from TAW on the servers list, why?

There is slot reservation system which is used sometimes by TAW developers StG2 and =LG= squadrons. To prevent from joining the server when no free slots are available players are temporarily banned. As soon as some free slots are available again all players are unbanned. If server has no more free slots then there is a message on the TAW main page above the map “Server is full!”. Please wait a while in that case.

 

Source: http://taw.stg2.de/manual.php

 

83/84 slots available when I joined.  Apparently, it let me and another in at the same time, then favored them.  Maybe someday devs will add a viable queue system for joining busy servers....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =FI=Blue2 said:

Far less realistic"???   Sorry, totally disagree.  I'd say it makes the ground targets far less 'gamey,' and adds much more realistic 'fog of war' to the ground attack scenario - and this is coming from someone who flies a lot more ground attack than fighters in IL-2.  For example I'm sure you realize that de-tracking alone only immobilizes a real tank, temporarily; it can still fight if it's crew stays in it.  We know for a fact that 1942 Sturmovik or Stuka pilots had very little idea how many vehicles they truly destroyed as they flew back home, because records reveal huge overclaims were rampant on all sides, especially tank claims.  Sure, the new damage modeling changes the game & adds a lot more uncertainty.  It means that now you're best bet is to attack in a larger group that is communicating, so you can ensure all targets are hit, and hit hard enough to raise the odds that they're destroyed or badly damaged. If you must go in pairs or singles, it's now imperative to communicate with the rest of your team & learn whether your target was already hit or not, and which part(s) of it might be less damaged & need your bombs.  Now I love the satisfaction of the always-exploding tank as much as anyone, but like it or not, I think this change brought a lot more realism to this aspect of the game than it had up to now.  My hat's off to the devs on this change, for sure.

 

See Kondor? I told you somebody would say that.  How about when you shoot down an enemy aircraft you only get credit if you were flying with a witness who has to fill out a form and send it to Kathon?  How would that "fog of war" realism go down with the TAW community? How about a 24-hour disciplinary ban for landing the wrong runway direction? How about your campaign's done when you get killed or captured? Plenty of "gamey" stuff in TAW - because it's a game. Thing is, when you cherry-pick historical realism in a simulation,  you can't use the "realism" argument unless EVERY unrealistic aspect is up for debate.

 

If it were up to me to fix this I'd give a guy a "damaged" credit for knocking off a track, and a "kill" to the guy who blows it up.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

I wonder if the P-40 was made 0/2 on map 1 if it would improve attractiveness for Red pilots. Today once you earn a P-40 it's extremely precious and you have no backup plane. The I16, I'm sorry, is almost useless against 109s. I've heard many of our pilots mentioning over comms how reluctant they are to 'risk' their P-40, and there are many missions where if they don't have a P-40 they cannot fly fighter cover for a deep bomber strike -- the I16 just doesn't have the range.

 

Totally disagree , you need to learn how to fly a i-16 to its strengths, and exploit the 109s weaknesses.

The 109e7 may control the engagement if he has more energy, if equal or less the i-16 has the advantage.

and any plane operating at low energy is in real trouble against the 1-16. It rolls like a fw and turns like a spitfire throughout its speed range .

It does not lockup like a 109 either when faster. You also need to learn engine management if u want more range from i-16...(RPM and mixture, it has a big operating range on both)

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =FI=Blue2 said:

 

"Far less realistic"???   Sorry, totally disagree.  I'd say it makes the ground targets far less 'gamey,' and adds much more realistic 'fog of war' to the ground attack scenario - and this is coming from someone who flies a lot more ground attack than fighters in IL-2.  For example I'm sure you realize that de-tracking alone only immobilizes a real tank, temporarily; it can still fight if it's crew stays in it.  We know for a fact that 1942 Sturmovik or Stuka pilots had very little idea how many vehicles they truly destroyed as they flew back home, because records reveal huge overclaims were rampant on all sides, especially tank claims.  Sure, the new damage modeling changes the game & adds a lot more uncertainty.  It means that now you're best bet is to attack in a larger group that is communicating, so you can ensure all targets are hit, and hit hard enough to raise the odds that they're destroyed or badly damaged. If you must go in pairs or singles, it's now imperative to communicate with the rest of your team & learn whether your target was already hit or not, and which part(s) of it might be less damaged & need your bombs.  Now I love the satisfaction of the always-exploding tank as much as anyone, but like it or not, I think this change brought a lot more realism to this aspect of the game than it had up to now.  My hat's off to the devs on this change, for sure.


The problem I see with the current tank DM and TAW mechanics is that since a de-tracked tank usually counts as destroyed, you could have a wiped out column with all well-looking tanks (and probably combat capable the next day or so). Also I noticed it was really hard to get a tank exploding via ammo explosion even after hitting with plenty 37mm ammo (both German and Russian) at the hull below the turrets. I'm not saying tanks should be one-shot by 37mm, but I think ammo/fuel fires should be more common after some penetrations

I think the de-tracked tanks shouldn't count as destroyed, same for the tanks with all crew lost (if it's inside their lines/forces), they would be combat ineffective, but the next mission they could be back.

 

17 minutes ago, StG77_HvB said:

If it were up to me to fix this I'd give a guy a "damaged" credit for knocking off a track, and a "kill" to the guy who blows it up.

 

yeah, the stats didn't follow the more detailed DM, they should be more detailed as well.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

250kg bombs not exploding tanks like they should I feel.

 

I get the impression that a tank when tracked cannot be damaged any further but does not count as a kill.

Edited by Talon_
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


The problem I see with the current tank DM and TAW mechanics is that since a de-tracked tank usually counts as destroyed, you could have a wiped out column with all well-looking tanks (and probably combat capable the next day or so). Also I noticed it was really hard to get a tank exploding via ammo explosion even after hitting with plenty 37mm ammo (both German and Russian) at the hull below the turrets. I'm not saying tanks should be one-shot by 37mm, but I think ammo/fuel fires should be more common after some penetrations

I think the de-tracked tanks shouldn't count as destroyed, same for the tanks with all crew lost (if it's inside their lines/forces), they would be combat ineffective, but the next mission they could be back.

 

 

yeah, the stats didn't follow the more detailed DM, they should be more detailed as well. (look at the sortie log for flight shows damage, don't need a stat)

 

 

 A detracked tank is repairable, so it's not destroyed.  To be destroyed a vehicle needs to suffer critical unrepairable damage (that's how it should be done). No different whether ground or air. Trying to award a part kill (damaged) its really not practical , just over complicates it.

 

If you look at the mission editor mechanics, there are quite a number of events possible around damage and kills and its up to the mission designer to decide how they use it.

 

Eg. (this may be incorrect now with 3.007 patch...

Spoiler

 

image.png.c740e01951501435ae0210b06f230729.png

 

image.png.06932955930c6917e9b9d95b98ee905d.png

image.png.5f323756a05cebb10c91018a13561d62.png

 

 

These apply to planes and tanks. The latest update has also changed some of the kill mechanics, but I'm still not clear how this works in relation to the MCU (control commands) in the editor , which is used to create missions.

 

The devs publish changes with a patch , but don't detail exactly  how its actually implemented in game....As a mission designers, we are often guessing how it now works...

 

 

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2018 at 3:02 PM, Tincannavy said:

PLEASE give Russian pilots at least the P40 right from the start during the early war maps NO ONE wants to fly I-16 especially when the Germans have the Bf109 E It's not even close to fair or more importantly fun!

 

On 11/27/2018 at 5:49 PM, 7./JG26_Smokejumper said:

 

Untrue. The I16 is my favorite aircraft to fly in game. I have a lot of fun in it. It can climb with an E7 and outroll it. It can't catch it in a flat run nor out turn it. A few tweaks to the way it's flown and it is a very competitive fighter.

I know others enjoy the I16 a lot too.

On 11/27/2018 at 7:25 PM, F/JG300_Faucon said:

E7 can out-turn it, quite easily. 

😂 P40 is a far worse dog fighter (the worst??) than i-16 (only better in a dive) and its guns (maybe) if not using  cannons on I-16

 

🤣

I-16 is a fantastic plane, people justdon't know it.... good for me....  and 7./JG26_Smokejumper

E7 is a great plane too, you just fly it different to the I-16 , or u are toast. Good matchup.

 

Problem is with pilot not plane: I agree with 7./JG26_Smokejumper and can back it with stats.

 I-16 rolls better, at all speeds it can do. An doesn't lockup like a 109 when faster. It also has far better visibility to e7 (arguably the best in the game)

 

The 109e7 advantage is it retains energy better and its faster speed. On equal energy the I-16 is better.

The i-16 also has a better climb on deck and similar rate higher.


EDIT:

I did some asking around and apparently the E7 can out turn the i-16 in a sustained turn, which will be its better energy retention I think.
Paper stats are not all apparently, but they are still a good matchup , better than p40.

 

Stats Compared:

Spoiler

I-16

Maximum performance turn at sea level: 19.0 s, at 230 km/h IAS.

Maximum performance turn at 3000 m: 25.3 s, at 230 km/h IAS.

 

Climb rate at sea level: 16.7 m/s

Climb rate at 3000 m: 13.8 m/s

Climb rate at 6000 m: 8.8 m/s

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Boosted: 448 km/h
Maximum true air speed at 1800 m, engine mode - Nominal: 460 km/h
Maximum true air speed at 4500 m, engine mode - Nominal: 490 km/h

 

E7

Maximum performance turn at sea level: 20.5 s, at 270 km/h IAS.

Maximum performance turn at 3000 m: 25.5 s, at 270 km/h IAS.

 

Climb rate at sea level: 14 m/s

Climb rate at 3000 m: 13.3 m/s

Climb rate at 6000 m: 7 m/s

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Emergency: 477 km/h
Maximum true air speed at 2000 m, engine mode - Emergency: 520 km/h
Maximum true air speed at 5000 m, engine mode - Emergency: 564 km/h

 

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Talon_ said:
250kg bombs not exploding tanks like they should I feel.

 

I get the impression that a tank when tracked cannot be damaged any further but does not count as a kill.

 

Try for yourself in QMB. Once a tank is 'tracked' and you get a kill credit, it takes a LOT more hits/damage for it to blow up like they used to. Go with like a Stuka with unlimited ammo to see, after you track it with 1-2 hits, take note of how many more hits that tank will take. Preferably it is a lighter tank like a BT-7 or T70 for you to see how many more hits even that light tank can take. 

Edited by StG77_Kondor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, StG77_Kondor said:

 

Try for yourself in QMB. Once a tank is 'tracked' and you get a kill credit, it takes a LOT more hits/damage for it to blow up like they used to. Go with like a Stuka with unlimited ammo to see, after you track it with 1-2 hits, take note of how many more hits that tank will take. Preferably it is a lighter tank like a BT-7 or T70 for you to see how many more hits even that light tank can take. 

 

I suspect QMB has some problems registering kills right now , I've seen the green kills message show a plane I shot is down , but nothing shows in stats. i suspect it due to latest 3.007 patch changes, breaking mission code, probably because they did not update quick mission with the new mechanics... Kills can also depend on how mission designers code them.

 

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stix, the turning stats of the I16 don't help you if you're outnumbered 5:1 in the fighter department (European evening, 55vs25, most Russians in Peshkas and IL2s, most Germans love their E7 and the 110). You'll tease a hornet nest - can't outrun them, but also cannot out turn superior numbers. 

Good thing that jumping out is almost instant in I16! 

 

The P40 can at least run away, and works better as an underdog fighter because of this (and its high alpha strike damage). 

 

You also get the Tiger camo. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, =FSB=HandyNasty said:

I'd like to send PM to Kathon (or other TAW admin), but I apparently cannot send Kathon a PM through the forum??

Any help?

 

Gents,

 

Please send PM to another pilot from =LG= team when Kathon mail box is full.

Kathon is a "God" here, we know that, but sometimes he need our help and time to do everything well. 

Please respect this and be patient ;)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now you can belly-land the aircraft at 600kph and as long as the wing doesn't come off it is ready to be flown again as soon as you despawn.

 

Can we change that any damage whatsoever to an aircraft would put it on a 1-mission "ditched" cooldown but at the same time still count for CM+1 missions if landed back at the friendly airfield? This will at least encourage some people (including me) to deploy gear before attempting to land. I'd bet mechanics take longer than 15 seconds to repaint the bottom and fit a new prop to the aircraft.

Edited by xJammer
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Stix, the turning stats of the I16 don't help you if you're outnumbered 5:1 in the fighter department (European evening, 55vs25, most Russians in Peshkas and IL2s, most Germans love their E7 and the 110). You'll tease a hornet nest - can't outrun them, but also cannot out turn superior numbers. 

Good thing that jumping out is almost instant in I16! 

 

The P40 can at least run away, and works better as an underdog fighter because of this (and its high alpha strike damage). 

 

You also get the Tiger camo. 

 

 

 

Ya for sure i just got shot down by the swarm (4 on 1), because ppl keep flying ground attackers, likely because they underrate the i-16 (sadly).

 

 

Ya I give you that p40 can run....  but I don't want to run.... :-), but its totally outclassed by 109e7 in a dogfight unless it has height.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allies own 75% of the map, but only has 10 planes left. 

I think that this may be the greatest symptom of BOTH sides employing the "time zone buff" along with the strengths of their plane sets in a server that's still working out how to balance teams.  

Anyway... Well played, Axis. :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember the last time I got addicted to a game like that, flying all the way until late nights. Probably 10 years ago or so. I am pretty sure I will see axis tank convoys advancing to Lotoshino in my nightmares at some point...

Share this post


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

Allies own 75% of the map, but only has 10 planes left. 

I think that this may be the greatest symptom of BOTH sides employing the "time zone buff" along with the strengths of their plane sets in a server that's still working out how to balance teams.  

Anyway... Well played, Axis. :salute:

 

Actually on Axis side the word was spread few days ago to adopt a more defensive strategy and destroy as many planes as possible before VVS side wins the map :happy:

It was really close, with maybe 1 or 2 days more VVS would have win!

 

Really fun map#1, hope Reds will stay as combative on next ones :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO once blues had three airfields only, we should had wiped them out instead of doing close air support as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mincer said:

IMHO once blues had three airfields only, we should had wiped them out instead of doing close air support as usual.

 

Thats VVS in a nutshell for you. They tend to lose already won maps by not focusing on bombing the last airfields. Last campaign red lost a map with only 1 enemy airfield left iirc.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

 

Thats VVS in a nutshell for you. They tend to lose already won maps by not focusing on bombing the last airfields. Last campaign red lost a map with only 1 enemy airfield left iirc.

 

Another night and we probably could have pulled it off. My group alone bombed out Simonkovo field on Sunday night, Lukovnikovo depot on Wednesday night and Sychevka depot on Thursday night. Considering Simonkovo was basically untouched when we arrived and we didn't even need all our bombs I feel confident we could have got at least 2 fields tonight if we still had enough planes 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, [GCA]T1m270 said:

How is it that the Axis side has a larger plane pool? From the warehouse marked on the map?

 

No it depends on maps, map #1 corresponds to the German offensive on Moscow.
VVS will have a bigger pool than Axis later in the campaign.

 

Quoted from TAW manual :

"Different maps may have different number of limits at the beginning for each side. In Axis offensive map Axis have more limits and for the first several missions they mainly attack by tanks convoy. Similarly in Allied counteroffensive map Allied have advantage in limits and tanks convoys at the beginning."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...