Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Operation_Ivy said:

That's exactly where you are mistaken. You can't compare a late F4 to an early F4. Yet in game we only have the late variant of the F4. Comparing introduction dates is therefor misleading.

 

As long as the devs don't add different engines as options (like with the La5 for example) you won't be able to make it more historical.

 

There is no late and early F4. They had the same performance from day 1. It's also not the only aircraft, it is the case for the whole aircraft set from start to finish of the TaW campaign. Ju-88 we have came sooner then Pe2 we have. 190-A5 came sooner then La5F. 109-G2 came at the same time then Yak-1. I could go on like this for ages, because it is the case for most of the aircraft. Just read about the aircraft and you'll see for yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

Unfortunately back in BoM days Devs sort of took the easy way and played this copy&paste technique, bringing Pe-2 ser. 35. That was a little bit disappointing since a lot of guys (me included) were counting on Il-4 as proper horizontal bomber for RED.

Either way, there is no alternative for early Soviet bomber in game right now. If you remove Pe-2 you might as well remove all depots on Map 1 and 2 since Red side wont be able to bust them just with Il-2s. 

And its not like Pe-2 is totally immune, there are 110s available for Blue pilots.

 

That is a valid solution -- to remove the depots and the level bombers (at least on map 1 & 2). Even the name Tactical suggests something different from high altitude bombing of strategic targets deep inside enemy territory...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

There is no late and early F4. They had the same performance from day 1.

 

But they had different ata clearence as far as i know (1.3 ata compared to 1.42 ata later). You might just want to go back a few pages. There is a long discussion about it when the F4 was made available on map#2 and why this wasn't historical. 

Edited by Operation_Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

It seems i can't  write to  =LG=Kathon directly so I try here - need help ty a.s.a.p. plz 

 

Hi,

Since I no longer wanted the stupid generic created player nickname (which could not be changed) that is automatically created for one when you do not have an account at IL2 but would only play through Steam, I have today created an account at IL2 as Redich and now at TAW here too. Could TAW please delete my other account here with TAW?

Previous nick and account were: Player-13844

On my new account here at TAW, it shows I have aircrafts that I can use but on the server are all airplanes with a lock symbol - both on axsis and on red. Maybe this is because I still have the old account active. As I can tell, there was no possibility for me to delete the old profile at TAW.

So now I try it this way around :)

 

I have also send this to https://www.stg2immelmann.de/ on contact page :help:

Edited by Redich

Share this post


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

 

But they had different ata clearence as far as i know. You might just want to go back a few pages. There is a long discussion about it when the F4 was made available on map#2 and why this wasn't historical. 

 

That's right, but the 1min of 1.4 doesn't make a noteworthy difference. And this is not the only aircraft that doesn't fit the historical timeframe.

 

At the time of TaW map#1 the 109-E7 was already outdated and only used for ground attack. Fighters were made up by a mixture of F2 and F4, while Russians mostly had I-16 and even many older models (and no P40s). Germans also had already the Ju-88. Yet in the game it's 109-E7 against I16 - clearly for balance, real life aircraft set would be vastly out of balance and surely no fun for the Russian side.

 

At summer of 42 in Stalingrad German fighters were (still) made up of F4 and G2s were coming in, while the Russians fielded Lagg-3 (which fits in TaW), I16 and older Yaks (not nearly the performance of Yak-1 in game). At the same time Germany also used already the 190-A3 in the Eastern front. This wouldn't be as bad for the Russians as map1, but probably still not too much fun and unbalanced. At Stalingrad winter the Yak-1 and the La5 came in and balanced the playing field for the first time (not entirely, but brought it closer). Shortly after the 190-A5 came out (before the Yak-1 S.127 or the La-5F, who are there in game). I could also keep on like this, bringing other aircraft in. It works both ways, the Kanonenvogel (Stuka with cannons) also came a lot later then in TaW. 

Still I am just writing this to show that TaW has the planesets for balance, and not for historical accuracy.

And let me state again - I am fine with that, otherwise the Russian side would have no fun in the first few missions. 

Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

"... Yet in the game it's 109-E7 against I16 - clearly for balance, real life aircraft set would be vastly out of balance and surely no fun for the Russian side.."

 

Exactly.

 

47 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

... "And let me state again - I am fine with that, otherwise the Russian side would have no fun in the first few missions. "

 

Case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2018 at 7:54 PM, [GCA]T1m270 said:

We did a flight over it to recon, could see NO targets at the map marker ingame. We thought it was a bug or somehow linked to another objective?

 Allied warehouse was generated in the mission #57. Buildings should be visible.

Share this post


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

 

Maybe Pe-2 shouldn't be available before 109 F4, which is older (Combat debut: June 1941 vs July 1941 for ser. 35).


But we don't have the earlier SB-2, DB-3, Su-2...
 

3 hours ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

Unfortunately back in BoM days Devs sort of took the easy way and played this copy&paste technique, bringing Pe-2 ser. 35. That was a little bit disappointing since a lot of guys (me included) were counting on Il-4 as proper horizontal bomber for RED.

 

I think it had more to do with the Battle of Moscow in late 1941 having a prevalence of Pe-2s already as the main daylight bomber? That being said a DB-3F/IL-4 was planned for Moscow and there are some WIP 3D models and cockpit models out there, but it wasn't finished sadly.
 

2 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

That's right, but the 1min of 1.4 doesn't make a noteworthy difference. And this is not the only aircraft that doesn't fit the historical timeframe.

 

At the time of TaW map#1 the 109-E7 was already outdated and only used for ground attack. Fighters were made up by a mixture of F2 and F4, while Russians mostly had I-16 and even many older models (and no P40s). Germans also had already the Ju-88. Yet in the game it's 109-E7 against I16 - clearly for balance, real life aircraft set would be vastly out of balance and surely no fun for the Russian side.

 

At summer of 42 in Stalingrad German fighters were (still) made up of F4 and G2s were coming in, while the Russians fielded Lagg-3 (which fits in TaW), I16 and older Yaks (not nearly the performance of Yak-1 in game). At the same time Germany also used already the 190-A3 in the Eastern front. This wouldn't be as bad for the Russians as map1, but probably still not too much fun and unbalanced. At Stalingrad winter the Yak-1 and the La5 came in and balanced the playing field for the first time (not entirely, but brought it closer). Shortly after the 190-A5 came out (before the Yak-1 S.127 or the La-5F, who are there in game). I could also keep on like this, bringing other aircraft in. It works both ways, the Kanonenvogel (Stuka with cannons) also came a lot later then in TaW. 

Still I am just writing this to show that TaW has the planesets for balance, and not for historical accuracy.

And let me state again - I am fine with that, otherwise the Russian side would have no fun in the first few missions. 

 

In the F-4 you can use intermediate settings, like 1.37 ata which is usable for around 5 mins, and brings similar performance to 1.42 ata.

The first map is a compromise so people can use the early planes which started as a "lets give them this and see if they like it", and people liked it quite a bit, so it stayed. It also gives some love to the P-40E and MC 202 which in their accurate Stalingrad timeframe weren't used that much.
 

Thing is we don't have a Barbarrossa Operation expansion, we have the later Battle of Moscow one, that's why we lack some of the earlier Soviet stuff. And even for Moscow the Soviets don't get early Yak fighters which would be interesting (and usable for the early 1942 period as well).

 

Trying to simulate Barbarossa Operation with this planeset doesn't work all that well for the Soviet side, it works for the German side since most of the planes were the same.


With the planes we have the first map should be Battle of Moscow with MiG-3 and I-16 vs 109 F-2 as fighters basically. Because of the lack of early Soviet planes (mainly bombers and attackers) we can't have a proper Barbarossa Operation map.
 

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

Unfortunately back in BoM days Devs sort of took the easy way and played this copy&paste technique, bringing Pe-2 ser. 35. That was a little bit disappointing since a lot of guys (me included) were counting on Il-4 as proper horizontal bomber for RED.

Either way, there is no alternative for early Soviet bomber in game right now. If you remove Pe-2 you might as well remove all depots on Map 1 and 2 since Red side wont be able to bust them just with Il-2s.

And its not like Pe-2 is totally immune, there are 110s available for Blue pilots.

 

IL-4 is a long-range night bomber, used as a front-line bomber very rarely, in exceptional cases. If you need horizontal bomber, air force, for 1941. SB will be relevant in different modifications, and in the later period can not escape from the in-game PE-2 as the most widespread and universal machines.

 

 

Once again, in all its glory manifested the problem of the lack of the air force of the red army landing aircraft. Just to clarify, server developers are planning to wait for the Li-2 or can balance, planet making available landing Ju 52 for the red army air force....?

 

Wanted to clarify why immediately after the capture of the airfield of the German troops it is available for UPS next mission. After the capture of the airfield red tanks airfield another mission remains unavailable. It's planned..? If Yes..it is possible to clarify the logic...?

Edited by =FPS=Cutlass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 9:30 PM, MentalishMan said:

 

 

Sounds more like a Problem of "Solo German Pilot" Syndrome than anything else. 

 

 

 

Argue more your point? Btw I was not alone.

 

:bye:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

57 x 22 (+5 spectators) and no way to get in to help balance.

Edited by SCG_Riksen

Share this post


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

57 x 22 (+5 spectators) and no way to get in to help balance.

 

No issue here...move along.

 

Edit: Can't believe the irony is lost on some people. So here it is: this was ironic.

Edited by Operation_Ivy
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, SCG_Riksen said:

57 x 22 (+5 spectators) and no way to get in to help balance.

 

All the places are occupied by u-52 with paratroopers .....:lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

There is no irony only an issue. Not being able to join the side in disadvantage is an issue.

 

And now it's absolutely the other way round and stays the same for at least the next 10 hours...nothing to see here.😵 Odd that i have always seen the reds whining about numbers, while more then half of the day the blues are heavily outnumbered. Don't see blues whining around because of that

Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

And now it's absolutely the other way round and stays the same for at least the next 10 hours...nothing to see here.😵 Odd that i have always seen the reds whining about numbers, while more then half of the day the blues are heavily outnumbered. Don't see blues whining around because of that

"Heavily Outnumbered" are we talking about when the Server is jam packed 84/84 or when its like 42/84 or 30/84? I mean I can go back and look at I dunno Missions 95 to 99 Thats like what 8ish Hours of Missions? Now lets look at the Unique number of players that were at least on the server for a hand full of minutes and wow would you look at that 3/4 of them are less than 30ish total Unique players getting on and Mission 95 having around 60. This inst "heavily out numbered" this is "Not a lot of players get on and only a hand full of VSS and Axis Players getting on". If we were "Heavily OutNumbering" y'all during the Night time we would've won this mission ten fold with PE-2 Bombing Runs. Its not like when the Germans have more than 40-50 people on during the EU prime time every single day while the Allied players in the EU prime time get hella shafted with "Heavily Outnumbering" Axis Players. The only days we are able to counter the EU PrimeTime  is when the NA players play on the Weekends. 

Edited by MentalishMan
Editing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 5:47 AM, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

Gunners from that game are extraterrestrial, so counter this by decreasing their level. 

 

 

Guess how I can tell you don't fly bombers.....

On 12/1/2018 at 1:04 PM, F/JG300_Faucon said:

and, yes, there IS a problem with gunners. 

 

 

 

I'm red this round but I'm usually in a 109 as my Staffel tag implies, it's you. Stay out of the PE2 firing arc, easy peesy...... Low six is bad, shallow angle high six is bad. less than 45 degree attack from port or starboard is bad.

 

Belly shots or vertical top down attacks. Go for steep angle belly shots pull them to the deck then work them from high.

 

Turning down the AA or gunners makes the bombers too easy to kill and bombers roll targets too fast for any defense to be thrown up. I'm usually in fighters but have found myself enjoying bombers more and more. Change your fighter tactics and adjust to this being a game. A lot of real life tactics don't work. That said, a lot do too.

 

 

10 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

Nonsense? Apparently you have no idea about history then.

If I were you, i'd do some research when the aircraft became operational in real life. Then you will quickly realize that it has not a lot in common with the in-game plane sets

 

 

This is a little unfair. We have gaps in the plane set.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain what happened here? Lots of "what?" moments in these pictures

 

I know the second wasn't the most accurate, but the 2 bombs left almost no damage on the factories.  I checked my sortie log afterwards and aside from that single burning building (which suffered a direct hit) everything else was unscathed.  

 

Also, in that sortie, one explosion is much smaller than the typical "nuke" you'd see from a 1000kg bomb.  Did the game register my first bomb as a smaller 500kg bomb?

 

Do the buildings in TAW have more health depending on their size?

 

 

2018_12_4__2_47_7.jpg

2018_12_4__2_48_13.jpg

2018_12_4__2_48_34.jpg

Capture.JPG

Edited by =KG76=flyus747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Can someone explain what happened here? Lots of "what?" moments in these pictures

 

I know the second wasn't the most accurate, but the 2 bombs left almost no damage on the factories.  I checked my sortie log afterwards and aside from that single burning building (which suffered a direct hit) everything else was unscathed.  

 

Also, in that sortie, one explosion is much smaller than the typical "nuke" you'd see from a 1000kg bomb.  Did the game register my first bomb as a smaller 500kg bomb?

 

Do the buildings in TAW have more health depending on their size?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its historical accuracy, you see, your forced slave labor replaced the explosive filler with San Francisco Pumpkin Soy Latte. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Can someone explain what happened here? Lots of "what?" moments in these pictures

 

I know the second wasn't the most accurate, but the 2 bombs left almost no damage on the factories.  I checked my sortie log afterwards and aside from that single burning building (which suffered a direct hit) everything else was unscathed.  

 

Also, in that sortie, one explosion is much smaller than the typical "nuke" you'd see from a 1000kg bomb.  Did the game register my first bomb as a smaller 500kg bomb?

 

Do the buildings in TAW have more health depending on their size?

 

 

2018_12_4__2_47_7.jpg

2018_12_4__2_48_13.jpg

2018_12_4__2_48_34.jpg

Capture.JPG

Thats pretty weird, I dont think different buildings have different HP. I can easily take big ones out with a single 100kg hand Grenade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few nights ago I had a glitch that effected pitch and yaw control.  Tonight it was a similar glitch but only effected roll.  Very odd.

 

95723EFB16F8579660ED9D72E315926F9C8DCBCE

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 12:40 PM, Jr_Lt_Tatanov said:

Hello guys, I just did a "successful" long spot-destroy-supply vehicles mission flying a P-40 and landed smooth on a friendly closed airfield due to low fuel. Although it says, in my TAW web profile that i crashed. In the manual it says it would be replenished after 3 missions but there is no sign it will happen and the plane seems to be lost. Any advice? Thanks.

 

EDIT:  It wasn´t a closed airfield. It was a generic friendly airfield. So it seems If you land on one of those airfield, oddly you will lose your plane.

Thanks for the help er.. no one!

 

No, you didn't land on a friendly airfield. Check your sortie details.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

There is no irony only an issue. Not being able to join the side in disadvantage is an issue.

Not being able to connect to the server is a general issue associated with server capacity. Your statement supposes that your rights to join to the server are supreme because you're a part of "minority", to anyone who is at that exact moment part of "majority". That's not the case. Your rights are equal.

 

There's no easy solution to the imbalance issue. You should either kicked someone who joined the server before you (unfair due reason I described above) or you should forbid connecting players of the side, which has majority (again it's unfair providing each and every player has the same right to join). To show how bad balancing approach could be I use the situations I saw few days ago. There were imbalanced numbers like 30:6 and 4:20 (just illustrates both side imbalance). Let's say there would be some kind of artificial limitation to balancing numbers specifying that no new players can join the side with 50 per cent player advantage. In first case the number would be 9:6 with 21 people unable to join,  4:6 in latter case with 14 people forbid to join. In both cases there would be more players refused to play than those playing. The idea of player joining the "minority" is pure chimera. Most of them would join different servers just because they want to fly the plane they like, not the one they are forced to.

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Can someone explain what happened here? Lots of "what?" moments in these pictures

 

I know the second wasn't the most accurate, but the 2 bombs left almost no damage on the factories.  I checked my sortie log afterwards and aside from that single burning building (which suffered a direct hit) everything else was unscathed.  

 

Also, in that sortie, one explosion is much smaller than the typical "nuke" you'd see from a 1000kg bomb.  Did the game register my first bomb as a smaller 500kg bomb?

 

Do the buildings in TAW have more health depending on their size?

 

2018_12_4__2_48_34.jpg

 

 

 

I see that you bombed Zubtsov depot.

I'm sorry for you, but it seems you missed your target

Look here (scroll down a bit to see depot) : http://taw.stg2.de/fra/airfields.php?map=Moscow_South&name=Zubtsov
 

When you plan to bomb a depot/airfield, always check the aerial recon before going there (on the TAW website mainpage, you click on the targeted city in the list, on the left or right of the map depending on your side)

If I match the aerial recon with your bomb screenshots, you obtain this :

 

image.thumb.png.402811fadb3ce59cb76d67a7d414adef.png



 

Regarding your second problem, I have no idea why you first bomb did a smaller explosion :/

Edited by -IRRE-Centx
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 4:20 AM, mincer said:


I've seen a Ju-87 once. It was dogfighting with IL-2s over blue tanks.

Where were the 109s ...lol

Well attacking tanks I just cant tell what is damged or not from cockpit . One or two are very dark that are burnt out but the rest its difficult to spot 😖

Edited by II./JG77_Con

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, =KG76=flyus747 said:

Also, in that sortie, one explosion is much smaller than the typical "nuke" you'd see from a 1000kg bomb.  Did the game register my first bomb as a smaller 500kg bomb?

 

This bug has been in the game for a while. I think it is caused by the bomb hitting the target directly instead of on the ground beside it - maybe check the replay and follow the bomb? 

 

I'm not sure if the damage is smaller because of this or if only the visuals change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

Not being able to connect to the server is a general issue associated with server capacity. Your statement supposes that your rights to join to the server are supreme because you're a part of "minority", to anyone who is at that exact moment part of "majority". That's not the case. Your rights are equal.

 

There's no easy solution to the imbalance issue. You should either kicked someone who joined the server before you (unfair due reason I described above) or you should forbid connecting players of the side, which has majority (again it's unfair providing each and every player has the same right to join). To show how bad balancing approach could be I use the situations I saw few days ago. There were imbalanced numbers like 30:6 and 4:20 (just illustrates both side imbalance). Let's say there would be some kind of artificial limitation to balancing numbers specifying that no new players can join the side with 50 per cent player advantage. In first case the number would be 9:6 with 21 people unable to join,  4:6 in latter case with 14 people forbid to join. In both cases there would be more players refused to play than those playing. The idea of player joining the "minority" is pure chimera. Most of them would join different servers just because they want to fly the plane they like, not the one they are forced to.

 

What a bunch of nonesense. Far...very far away from what he wrote. If you want to prevent 60 vs 20 stacked server, then you have to limit the maximum slots a side can have. You over complicated everything and your example does not apply.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

 

What a bunch of nonesense. Far...very far away from what he wrote. If you want to prevent 60 vs 20 stacked server, then you have to limit the maximum slots a side can have. You over complicated everything and your example does not apply.

 

Wouldn't be a good solution at all. Would just prevent a lot of people flying in prime times, while in "off times" the disbalance would still be there. And tbh, 20 against 60 is a lot better then 4 against 18. In 20 against 60 you can still be effective if you team up and attack one target together in a multilayer, while the other side is scattered over the map. I saw this actually quite often. Not possible in 4 against 20 situations. Either you'd have to find a solution to prevent disbalance at all times, or none.

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

Not being able to connect to the server is a general issue associated with server capacity. Your statement supposes that your rights to join to the server are supreme because you're a part of "minority", to anyone who is at that exact moment part of "majority". That's not the case. Your rights are equal.

 

There's no easy solution to the imbalance issue. You should either kicked someone who joined the server before you (unfair due reason I described above) or you should forbid connecting players of the side, which has majority (again it's unfair providing each and every player has the same right to join). To show how bad balancing approach could be I use the situations I saw few days ago. There were imbalanced numbers like 30:6 and 4:20 (just illustrates both side imbalance). Let's say there would be some kind of artificial limitation to balancing numbers specifying that no new players can join the side with 50 per cent player advantage. In first case the number would be 9:6 with 21 people unable to join,  4:6 in latter case with 14 people forbid to join. In both cases there would be more players refused to play than those playing. The idea of player joining the "minority" is pure chimera. Most of them would join different servers just because they want to fly the plane they like, not the one they are forced to.

 

 

"How the campaign is turning out has a lot to do with pilot coordination and skill on both sides more than anything else. You are using the argument "Hey, they get outnumbered most of the day and are still managing to fight back" as an excuse to justify the issues with balance. It is like saying, "Barcelona has Messi playing for then so the next Champion's League match, his team is only allowed to field 5 players". Cmon man, don't be ridiculous! There is no easy way to fix this issue but there are ways to make it better and this is what most are trying here. Giving excuses like yours do not help the improvements.

 

Facts:

- The vast majority of our IL-2 community flies LW. Don't believe me? Look at WoL (click here and here), Coconut (click here), KOTA (click here), and check all previous TAW campaigns in terms of numbers. The reason vary greatly from trying to be like the German Experten, cool skins, squad rules, etc ... But the greatest, IMHO, is the fact that German have better AC for the time frame we are simulating. You can easily see the latter  when you go into KOTA and see some well-known LW only guys flying the likes of P-47 and such. It always has been like this, since the previous 1946 game. In Spit vs 109 and Aces Over Europe, everyone would jump into the German fighters in Eastern Front missions (especially the early ones) and then go to the Allies for 1944-45 missions. We cannot be naive to think the same thing won't happen here in TAW and try to devise a system to, at least, ameliorate that. I'm totally fine with people flying for one side all the time, but I hate when they join a mission and stack the shit out of it like when it is 30 LW x 20 VVS and 20 LW join in like it is not going to make a change to the mission's balance. So, there needs to be a fair system to, at least, control that. Introducing the following should make it, at least, fair:

                 - Cap limiter: Each side is only allowed to field 42 players. This is a must to the fairness of the campaign. It gives the opportunity for the side with less players to have more players join the server when the other side is full. It is fair because the majority side cannot block the server with all their numbers, they will be always capped to 42. What we current have is ridiculous and we will (and are seeing) situations where, depending on the time zone, there are 62 x 22 players etc. This kind of imbalance destroys the mission being flown and dissuade the minority side from even flying the mission. But what if the side you want to fly is full when you want to join? Well, either create an account for the other side and enjoy the campaign that way or don't join the mission and go do something else for that time being but, at least, the extra players won't disrupt the fairness and balance of the mission. You gotta remember, TAW is not a simple server, training server like WoL, but a competition. You cannot have a competition be unfair and should have rules to ensure the competition feels like a true competition where both sides have the same chances at winning;

                   - Current Spawn limiter: This of course may need some tweaking and all but helps the minority side in situations that the server would reach a 42 x 10 with the cap limiter. The minority side would gain a small bonus (forcing the Majority side to take-off from the far AFs). Of course this system is an annoyance for the majority side but, guess what?!, flying in a stacked server is also an annoyance to the minority side. At least 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 when server is full: This will increase the rotation of the pilots and allow pilots waiting to join the server a chance to fly when the server is full.

 - There are only 84 players allowed in the server: It is problematic that we have a lot more squadrons in certain time zones than the server can accommodate. This is a fact that we cannot currently fix and people will be left out when too many squadrons try to join during, for example, EU prime time. But, here again, at least the ones in the mission are having a balanced experience.

 

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."

 

Perhaps if you two were trying to solve the issue and actually read the previous discussion you would have seen a decent and, at least, more balanced and fair way to have the numbers distributed in the campaign. Perhaps you both chose to ignore it because you know it will affect your ability to fly and stack the LW side as you both ALWAYS do. The proposed solution will affect both sides and prevent the heavy stacking that fluctuates between the sides depending on the timezone as we are seeing in this campaign. I know it may be hard for you to accept because you want to fly your "favorite" aircraft ALL the time but your selfishness ruins the MP experience for everybody else and the competition of the campaign.

 

- "But what if I hit the 42 number and I'm not able to stack the side I always fly?"

Like you said, go fly somewhere else or wait for a slot. Or maybe, just maybe, consider joining the campaign next time to fly for the other side ... I known, I known, the latter is very difficult for you to accept because your "Favorite" aircraft thing. But guess what?! At least you wont be stacking the LW and will give a chance to those trying to join the server for the side in disadvantage to get in and make the mission and campaign balance. The whole issue stems from one thing: Players that always fly for one side regardless of what happens like you both and you both advocate for the system to remain like this because you are afraid to not being able to get in the server during your timezone prime time. Both of you do not care about making the campaign balanced, competitive, or fun for everyone else. You care about one thing only and that is yourself and flying your favorite plane all the time. Perhaps next campaign we should all fly LW with you so we can have 84 LW x 0 VVS. That would be amazing huh?!

12 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

And now it's absolutely the other way round and stays the same for at least the next 10 hours...nothing to see here.😵 Odd that i have always seen the reds whining about numbers, while more then half of the day the blues are heavily outnumbered. Don't see blues whining around because of that

 

Plenty to see ... see above

Edited by SCG_Riksen
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SCG_Riksen I don't understand your whining, most of the times I am flying it's pretty balanced, sometimes more blue, sometimes more red. Last weekend the Reds had the superiority for almost all of the weekend. In European prime time the blues have more people flying in general, in USA prime time the Reds mostly have more people flying. At Asian or Russian prime time there is sometimes 10 reds against 1 blue. In such a situation red can actually do what they want, can absolutely batter the blue ground force (as it happened in map1). It's actually quite balanced as it is. All your so called solutions would just shift the playing field completely to your side, that's apparently plenty enough reason for you to argue for it. 

52 minutes ago, SCG_Riksen said:

The vast majority of our IL-2 community flies LW. Don't believe me? Look at WoL (click here and here), Coconut (click here), KOTA (click here), and check all previous TAW campaigns in terms of numbers. The reason vary greatly from trying to be like the German Experten, cool skins, squad rules, etc ... But the greatest, IMHO, is the fact that German have better AC for the time frame we are simulating. You can easily see the latter  when you go into KOTA and see some well-known LW only guys flying the likes of P-47 and such.

 

The red part is not true. Actually nothing is true, because it's definitely not the "vast majority", but a small majority. The Germans have better fighters. That's why fighter based servers like KOTA and WoL have more on the German side (it's still pretty balanced in KOTA though). 

On the other side the Russians have a lot better ground attack aircraft. And that shows in TaW, where the ground attack is equally important. Doesn't make sense to compare numbers with "fighter only" servers.

Absolute numbers also only tell half the truth. Absolute numerical superiority over one day doesn't mean anything, if the other side has the numerical superiority for 16 hours and the own one only for 8 hours. Like I said, there are times with barely any German online, times where Russian can do what they want. Would absolutely disbalance it, when you'd take away the times where Germans have a good superiority. Then you'd only see Russians having the advantage. But maybe that's exactly what you want.

 

52 minutes ago, SCG_Riksen said:

How the campaign is turning out has a lot to do with pilot coordination and skill on both sides more than anything else

 

So you are saying that the pilots on blue have less skill? That's not only ridiculous, it's also pretty insulting towards all people flying blue. Especially since there are more then 1000 people flying on both sides. As if flying blue would make you a worse pilot. 🙄 I really have nothing more to say if you think that is a valid argument. 

Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


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

 

 

"How the campaign is turning out has a lot to do with pilot coordination and skill on both sides more than anything else. You are using the argument "Hey, they get outnumbered most of the day and are still managing to fight back" as an excuse to justify the issues with balance. It is like saying, "Barcelona has Messi playing for then so the next Champion's League match, his team is only allowed to field 5 players". Cmon man, don't be ridiculous! There is no easy way to fix this issue but there are ways to make it better and this is what most are trying here. Giving excuses like yours do not help the improvements.

 

You totally missed my point. I don't argue for any specific side. In fact I agree with that the LW side is severely affected by "Hartmann's" issue. Trust me I was shocked and mad when I joined the TAW on Friday about one and half hour in mission when LW had absurd numerical advantage of like 40 to 10, just to realized there is still tank column not destroyed, not a single defense point destroyed, train untouched and undiscovered supply column. I was in rage what the hell all these people were doing during the mission. This of course cannot be generalize, there are few squads (such JG4) that try to cooperate as much as possible. But I don't want to start the flame about this. I just argue that each player has the same right to go to the server no matter which side he wants to join. I don't care whether this particular player wants to join LW or VVS.

 

Introducing the limited number of slots for each side doesn't solve the problem. It just allows less players will be able to join the server, unless you suppose the server/game actively prefers LW players. That's not the case. Let's say there are 120 players wanting to join TAW server during EU prime time. 80 out of these player are flying LW while 40 are flying VVS. With the same probability of connecting to server, the numbers will be 56 vs 28. 36 (24 vs 12) of players are not connected. The ratio of connected and not connected players are the same for both sides. Now imagine the 42 slot-cap. All those 36 players want to fly for LW but they can't even though there are free slots on the server. On the other side, all player flying for VVS are connected to the server.

 

Additionally, the unbalanced numbers are usually the early maps issue. It's usually mitigating once the VVS gets Yaks. So the issue seems to be associated with aversion that part of VVS player base feels towards these early setups rather than some overall imbalance in numbers. This of course stands vice versa, part of LW player base dislike late war setups where more competitive VVS planes are introduced.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

@SCG_Riksen I don't understand your whining, most of the times I am flying it's pretty balanced, sometimes more blue, sometimes more red. Last weekend the Reds had the superiority for almost all of the weekend. In European prime time the blues have more people flying in general, in USA prime time the Reds mostly have more people flying. At Asian or Russian prime time there is sometimes 10 reds against 1 blue. In such a situation red can actually do what they want, can absolutely batter the blue ground force (as it happened in map1). It's actually quite balanced as it is. All your so called solutions would just shift the playing field completely to your side, that's apparently plenty enough reason for you to argue for it. 

 

The red part is not true. Actually nothing is true, because it's definitely not the "vast majority", but a small majority. The Germans have better fighters. That's why fighter based servers like KOTA and WoL have more on the German side (it's still pretty balanced in KOTA though). 

On the other side the Russians have a lot better ground attack aircraft. And that shows in TaW, where the ground attack is equally important. Doesn't make sense to compare numbers with "fighter only" servers.

Absolute numbers also only tell half the truth. Absolute numerical superiority over one day doesn't mean anything, if the other side has the numerical superiority for 16 hours and the own one only for 8 hours. Like I said, there are times with barely any German online, times where Russian can do what they want. Would absolutely disbalance it, when you'd take away the times where Germans have a good superiority. Then you'd only see Russians having the advantage. But maybe that's exactly what you want.

 

 

So you are saying that the pilots on blue have less skill? That's not only ridiculous, it's also pretty insulting towards all people flying blue. Especially since there are more then 1000 people flying on both sides. As if flying blue would make you a worse pilot. 🙄 I really have nothing more to say if you think that is a valid argument. 

 

1. It is not whining Sir. It is criticism and suggestion to improve the campaign. You see, unlike you, I fly both sides and have been participating in almost all editions of TAW. My suggestion will not only affect one side but both, making the campaign fair for both sides. You want the campaign to stay like that so you can continue to be a LW stacker and that upsets you. Like I said, very selfish of you. This part is laughable: "All your so called solutions would just shift the playing field completely to your side, that's apparently plenty enough reason for you to argue for it." How is capping 42 x 42 shifting it to my side? The way we have it now, we can end up with 83 x 1 in the server. Please, critical thinking here man.

 

2. "Doesn't make sense to compare numbers with "fighter only" servers." Ok, let's compare to TAW itself. All campaigns had the majority signed up as LW. Not a single one had more VVS players signed up.

 

3. "Absolute numbers also only tell half the truth. Absolute numerical superiority over one day doesn't mean anything, if the other side has the numerical superiority for 16 hours and the own one only for 8 hours. Like I said, there are times with barely any German online, times where Russian can do what they want. Would absolutely disbalance it, when you'd take away the times where Germans have a good superiority. Then you'd only see Russians having the advantage. But maybe that's exactly what you want." Absolute numbers affect a mission and the balance of said mission and hence the campaign." - Again, if you understand my suggestion you will see that limiting 42 x 42 caps BOTH sides and not only LW so the missions being played are at least more fair and balanced than they currently are and would not "disbalance" it like you say. Quite the opposite but again you are afraid of not being able to stack and fly your favorite plane all the time. 

 

4. "So you are saying that the pilots on blue have less skill? That's not only ridiculous, it's also pretty insulting towards all people flying blue. Especially since there are more then 1000 people flying on both sides. As if flying blue would make you a worse pilot. 🙄 I really have nothing more to say if you think that is a valid argument. " - Please read it again, I clearly said coordination AND skill. A team that has Messi in it but play in a disorganized manner will most likely not win a match, same applies here. Trying to justify that is ok to have missions totally unbalanced because the side with less players is winning is just ridiculous. Missions should be balanced or, at least fair, regardless of who is winning or we would have soccer matches iwth Real Madrid playing with 6 players against Getafe with 11.

10 minutes ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

 

Introducing the limited number of slots for each side doesn't solve the problem. It just allows less players will be able to join the server, unless you suppose the server/game actively prefers LW players. That's not the case. Let's say there are 120 players wanting to join TAW server during EU prime time. 80 out of these player are flying LW while 40 are flying VVS. With the same probability of connecting to server, the numbers will be 56 vs 28. 36 (24 vs 12) of players are not connected. The ratio of connected and not connected players are the same for both sides. Now imagine the 42 slot-cap. All those 36 players want to fly for LW but they can't even though there are free slots on the server. On the other side, all player flying for VVS are connected to the server.

 

 

Exactly, you said it yourself. In your example, guess what we would have 42 x 42. The amount of players that did not join will have to wait for openings or join some other server but the MISSION would be balanced! You cannot regard people trying to join as a priority over the balance of the campaign. That is absurd. A physician is not concerned about the treatment of patients he hasn't seen yet, only those he is currently treating during his shift. The cap would make it fair in the sense of allowing equal numbers of players to both sides and never have situations where there are 64 x 20 like it was yesterday. No method is ideal as of now but the cap is much better than what we currently have because it allows the sides to field the same amount of players as the other side.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Redich said:

It seems i can't  write to  =LG=Kathon directly so I try here - need help ty a.s.a.p. plz 

 

Hi,

Since I no longer wanted the stupid generic created player nickname (which could not be changed) that is automatically created for one when you do not have an account at IL2 but would only play through Steam, I have today created an account at IL2 as Redich and now at TAW here too. Could TAW please delete my other account here with TAW?

Previous nick and account were: Player-13844

On my new account here at TAW, it shows I have aircrafts that I can use but on the server are all airplanes with a lock symbol - both on axsis and on red. Maybe this is because I still have the old account active. As I can tell, there was no possibility for me to delete the old profile at TAW.

So now I try it this way around :)

 

I have also send this to https://www.stg2immelmann.de/ on contact page :help:

 

Hello all

Wrote this yesterday and still have not gotten an answer or help on the issue. Is there really no help from anyone here.

Today I could choose a plane and could also log in, but after a minute the server wrote my account is lock and threw me back.

Dear friends, there is not a friendly soul who could help me with this so I can soon get going again.

I would appreciate this and thank you in advance.

Redich.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Hello all

Wrote this yesterday and still have not gotten an answer or help on the issue. Is there really no help from anyone here.

Today I could choose a plane and could also log in, but after a minute the server wrote my account is lock and threw me back.

Dear friends, there is not a friendly soul who could help me with this so I can soon get going again.

I would appreciate this and thank you in advance.

Redich.

 

Most people here have no idea about your issue and the Server admins are not around often. Try to write someone from LG, but not Kathon because his mailbox is full. They will hopefully get back to you

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

Most people here have no idea about your issue and the Server admins are not around often. Try to write someone from LG, but not Kathon because his mailbox is full. They will hopefully get back to you

 

KK i will do that -  thx sir :):clapping:

Share this post


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

 

KK i will do that -  thx sir :):clapping:

 

Another possibility which might be quicker is to go to TaW Discord (you'll find it with google) and write your issue with the tag "@dev".

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...