Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

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
Just now, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

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".

 

Thank you sir - i will google it up and try it this way - thank you again :good:

Share this post


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

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.

 

I see your point and it has some validity. I would like to know hard numbers of players during the EU prime time (since it's the  only period when server is overcrowded) just to see how many of each side players are actually not connected. You know, to see whether the situation is really so bad because there are more VVS players than LWs unable to join or whether there are (in the 64 vs 20 case you mentioned above) like 2 VVS players unable to join and 10 LWs. Because in such case I would vote against any such slot-cap feature resulting in low population on the server. Moreover, slot-cap feature doesn't solve the imbalance we can often see during non-EU primes. The 30 vs 6 I mentioned above cannot be solved unless you close the server for two thirds of players in particular time zones. Which I hope is not in anyone's mind.

 

Anyway the well balanced campaign (in terms of numbers, planes, capabilities, etc.) results in stalemate. I'm not convinced that anyone would enjoy that.

Share this post


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

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.


 

For the purpose of ground attack on TAW, anything that carries at least a 250Kg bomb and is fast is better.  By far the best tactic is to fly to the rear of a column and slope bomb down the length.  There are planes that can do this better than the Pe-2.  The main benefit of the Pe-2 is that it is tough against early Axis fighters and has good gunners.  

 

With defensive positions, nothing is better than a 190 because they are so fast and can carry a large bomb(or several small ones) for their size.  They drop their bomb and nobody will ever catch them.

 

 

22 minutes ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

Anyway the well balanced campaign (in terms of numbers, planes, capabilities, etc.) results in stalemate. I'm not convinced that anyone would enjoy that.

 

Does balance lead to stalemate on the sporting field?   Balance in competition is not uniformity, it is fairness.

 

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looking numbers, my impressions was true. one of more balanced editions i think . Anyway are some timeframes unbalanced and maybe is possible apply some correction. But seems along the day, numeric advantage move side to side

 

Riksen idea i think is good, especially for prime times like 12_pm to 3 pm ( from picture ) -- server look full and blue advantage is great.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

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.

 

1. Unlike me? How on earth do you wanna know what I fly? Ooh those preconceptions..I have actually flown Allies more then Axis before TaW, but last time I checked, you can't switch sides in TaW. It was a squad decision to fly Axis this time, after my squad flew Allies in the last TaW. Second misconception is that I like to fly on the "stacked" side, actually it's quite the opposite. It's a lot more fun to have a target rich environment as a fighter, compared to being on the stacked side. When I fly casual online server I mostly join the side with lesser players (always when I am alone). So I guess we can stop with the blind accusations here. The statistics pretty obviously show the absurdity of your (and your comrade's) whining. You still don't seem to understand simple statistics - if we take away the prime time numerical superiority of the Axis, Allies will gain a major superiority over the whole day. This would cause disbalance. Your "solution" would cause disbalance. So stop whining already.

 

2. Sign ups are not relevant, active pilots are relevant. There you see it's almost even. Better then you could think of without having an artificial mechanism

 

3. Wrong, see #1

 

4. Coordination might play a small part. There are definitely more fighter lone wolfs on Axis then on Allies. That rather hurts the mission performance of Axis. But that's not the reason Axis looks on the loosing side this round.

 

All in all, after seeing the statistics you and all your fellow comrades can stop whining now, stop with the arrogance of "being Barcelona with Messi" and stop with those personal accusations about "Hartmanning" and co. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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.

Number of new posts here is bigger than my ability to read them all so it takes time.

 

Did you read the manual?

 

You should have changed your pilot's name from Player-13844 to Redich in the "Pilot profile". But you created another account which was automatically locked. 

Now:

1. Change Redich to something else

2. Change Player-13844 to Redich

3. Join the server

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

1. Unlike me? How on earth do you wanna know what I fly? Ooh those preconceptions..I have actually flown Allies more then Axis before TaW, but last time I checked, you can't switch sides in TaW. It was a squad decision to fly Axis this time, after my squad flew Allies in the last TaW. Second misconception is that I like to fly on the "stacked" side, actually it's quite the opposite. It's a lot more fun to have a target rich environment as a fighter, compared to being on the stacked side. When I fly casual online server I mostly join the side with lesser players (always when I am alone). So I guess we can stop with the blind accusations here. The statistics pretty obviously show the absurdity of your (and your comrade's) whining. You still don't seem to understand simple statistics - if we take away the prime time numerical superiority of the Axis, Allies will gain a major superiority over the whole day. This would cause disbalance. Your "solution" would cause disbalance. So stop whining already.

 

2. Sign ups are not relevant, active pilots are relevant. There you see it's almost even. Better then you could think of without having an artificial mechanism

 

3. Wrong, see #1

 

4. Coordination might play a small part. There are definitely more fighter lone wolfs on Axis then on Allies. That rather hurts the mission performance of Axis. But that's not the reason Axis looks on the loosing side this round.

 

All in all, after seeing the statistics you and all your fellow comrades can stop whining now, stop with the arrogance of "being Barcelona with Messi" and stop with those personal accusations about "Hartmanning" and co. 

 

1.  Ok good that you guys fly red as well then my mistake. I just never seen it. But then again, my suggestion does not cause disbalance yours does. You just upset because this means you might not be able to join a balanced scenario when you fly LW.

 

2. True but again it shows my point that the majority will fly LW. Sign up has at least some correlation to the amount of people that are expected to be active players.

 

3. Nope, you are wrong. See my post.

 

4. Coordination plays a huge part in winning along with pilot skill as said earlier. The soccer example is a perfect one to show how a match should allow both sides to field equal numbers of players and I never said anything about Hartmanning you did. I know the only way for you to pretend you have a point is to make false accusations and stuff words in my mouth but I never said anything about that. If you like and enjoy TAW, you would want it to be fair and more competitive and leaving as is makes missions unbalanced during EU and NA prime time.

Share this post


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

 

1.  Ok good that you guys fly red as well then my mistake. I just never seen it. But then again, my suggestion does not cause disbalance yours does. You just upset because this means you might not be able to join a balanced scenario when you fly LW.

 

2. True but again it shows my point that the majority will fly LW. Sign up has at least some correlation to the amount of people that are expected to be active players.

 

3. Nope, you are wrong. See my post.

 

4. Coordination plays a huge part in winning along with pilot skill as said earlier. The soccer example is a perfect one to show how a match should allow both sides to field equal numbers of players and I never said anything about Hartmanning you did. I know the only way for you to pretend you have a point is to make false accusations and stuff words in my mouth but I never said anything about that. If you like and enjoy TAW, you would want it to be fair and more competitive and leaving as is makes missions unbalanced during EU and NA prime time.

 

Are you living in another dimension?! 21 to 20 player on average, what the hell is not balanced currently? Every kid should understand that when you take away the blue superiority at prime time you'll end up with something like 22 to 15 players on average in favour of the Russians. But I guess that's what you would call balance?!

Share this post


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

 

Are you living in another dimension?! 21 to 20 player on average, what the hell is not balanced currently? Every kid should understand that when you take away the blue superiority at prime time you'll end up with something like 22 to 15 players on average in favour of the Russians. But I guess that's what you would call balance?!

 

 

22 to 15 is balanced, obviously not the same amount of players, but it's not something redicoulus like 60v20

Share this post


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

 

Are you living in another dimension?! 21 to 20 player on average, what the hell is not balanced currently? Every kid should understand that when you take away the blue superiority at prime time you'll end up with something like 22 to 15 players on average in favour of the Russians. But I guess that's what you would call balance?!

 

You are either pretending to be stupid or you have not read my post in full. Im suggesting a cap limiter to allow an equal number of players (42 x 42) to be present at one time. That is the balance I'm referring to. Read the post carefully this time.

Edited by SCG_Riksen

Share this post


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

 

Are you living in another dimension?! 21 to 20 player on average, what the hell is not balanced currently? Every kid should understand that when you take away the blue superiority at prime time you'll end up with something like 22 to 15 players on average in favour of the Russians. But I guess that's what you would call balance?!

 

 

22 Soviet vs. 15 Axis is more balanced than I would ever hope for.  55 Axis vs. 25 Soviet is not(nor is the reverse, it's just far more rare) .

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why I joined ACG where they have a private campaign, there's no bitching and arguements on player balance... Everything is controlled and balanced. The only downside of a private campaign is there obviously wont be as many active players, but there's a lot more pros then there are cons. 

 

Dont get me wrong, I love TAW and all, but just the constant bickering  and imbalance in numbers just gets old. Even though you can say in the grand scheme of things its balanced due to European prime time being heavily German sided and NA prime time bring heavily Russian sided and it balances itself out. but its constantly lopsided, ITS VERY rare that a mission is ever balanced 

Share this post


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

You are either pretending to be stupid or you have not read my post in full. Im suggesting a cap limiter to allow an equal number of players (42 x 42) to be present at one time. That is the balance I'm referring to. Read the post carefully this time.

 

20 minutes ago, 7.GShAP/Silas said:

22 Soviet vs. 15 Axis is more balanced than I would ever hope for.  55 Axis vs. 25 Soviet is not(nor is the reverse, it's just far more rare) .

 

Are you guys just ignoring the statistics, the hard data?! It is balanced right now. Now it's getting ridiculous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spikes in total population are the timeframe that needs to get balanced, when the server is capped with 84/84. Every evening I log on (flying red), I've seen roughly 60 blues vs 20 reds. Reds then cannot even connect, it's ridiculous. Riksen's proposal of max 42 per side so far has been the best in my opinion.

 

 

What Manu said before "live in another dimension" and "are you ignoring statistics, the hard data?!" was inappropiate and wrong.

Edited by SCG_Fenris_Wolf

Share this post


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

The spikes in total population are the timeframe that needs to get balanced, when the server is capped with 84/84. Every evening I log on (flying red), I've seen roughly 60 blues vs 20 reds. Reds then cannot even connect, it's ridiculous. Riksen's proposal of max 42 per side so far has been the best in my opinion.

 

 

What Manu said before "live in another dimension" and "are you ignoring statistics, the hard data?!" was inappropiate and wrong.

 

The statistics show that it's within 5% to be even in numbers currently. Now if we balanced it during those "spikes", the overall numbers would not be balanced anymore. That's simple statistics and really not hard to understand?! 

Share this post


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

 

The statistics show that it's within 5% to be even in numbers currently. Now if we balanced it during those "spikes", the overall numbers would not be balanced anymore. That's simple statistics and really not hard to understand?! 

 

You rhetoric is not at all what we are saying. Please re-read the post and the proposal. You keep saying the same thing when I'm not talking about even numbers per se but the limitation on max player. MAX PLAYERS! Read again.

Share this post


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

 

You rhetoric is not at all what we are saying. Please re-read the post and the proposal. You keep saying the same thing when I'm not talking about even numbers per se but the limitation on max player. MAX PLAYERS! Read again.

 

You don't seem to comprehend what your max players cap would cause. It would cause the prime time to be even on both sides. So it would basically nullify the complete time the Axis have a numerical advantage now. At the same time it would not change the time where Allies have the numerical advantage. This would lead to an imbalance in total numbers. It's really not that hard to understand?!?! 

 

Right now Axis and Allies numerical advantages are cancelling each other out, this would no longer be the case if we take one of those away.

Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


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

The spikes in total population are the timeframe that needs to get balanced, when the server is capped with 84/84. Every evening I log on (flying red), I've seen roughly 60 blues vs 20 reds. Reds then cannot even connect, it's ridiculous. Riksen's proposal of max 42 per side so far has been the best in my opinion.

 

 

What Manu said before "live in another dimension" and "are you ignoring statistics, the hard data?!" was inappropiate and wrong.

 

And when the server isn't full?
That's the main argument of many people here.
Trying on a future campaign to add a cap to 42vs42, I would give it a try, maybe it's good, maybe it's not, I don't know.

But if you only cap to 42vs42 when the server is full, what about the hours when the server is NOT full, and there are 30 Soviets against 5 Germans?

You're asking for balance?
Fine.
But then, balance everything, at EVERY HOURS.

Edited by -IRRE-Centx

Share this post


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

 

You don't seem to comprehend what your max players cap would cause. It would cause the prime time to be even on both sides. So it would basically nullify the complete time the Axis have a numerical advantage now. At the same time it would not change the time where Allies have the numerical advantage. This would lead to an imbalance in total numbers. It's really not that hard to understand?!?! 

 

Right now Axis and Allies numerical advantages are cancelling each other out, this would no longer be the case if we take one of those away.

 

So you think 55 Axis vs. 25 Soviet is the same as 20 Soviet vs. 5 Axis?  You can't be serious.

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

It would cause the prime time to be even on both sides

 

Lol ... exactly. Oh my God, it would balance the server???!!!! How crazy is that huh lol...

 

You are right. Having the way it currently is and preventing balance is the way to go! Damn ... I must be from a different dimension like you said ... How dare I suggest something that would balance a mission???!!! How dare have a campaign to be fair to both sides??!!! Yup you are right. I'm sorry for my suggestion. Thank you Manu for making me see that it is great as it is.

 

Damn ... how could I?!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

 

So you think 55 Axis vs. 25 Soviet is the same as 20 Soviet vs. 5 Axis?  You can't be serious.

 

Of course it will have the same effect over the course of a day. If there are similar numbers during the course of the day, they have similar impact (if we expect them to perform on the same level). That's again simple statistics.

1 minute ago, SCG_Riksen said:

Lol ... exactly. Oh my God, it would balance the server???!!!! How crazy is that huh lol...

 

You are right. Having the way it currently is and preventing balance is the way to go! Damn ... I must be from a different dimension like you said ... How dare I suggest something that would balance a mission???!!! How dare have a campaign to be fair to both sides??!!! Yup you are right. I'm sorry for my suggestion. Thank you Manu for making me see that it is great as it is.

 

Damn ... how could I?!

.

I guess that's how someone reacts if he realized that he is wrong but can't admit it. But I understand you. You want the numbers to be balanced when you play. You don't care at all about overall balance. Pretty self-centered tbh

  • Confused 1

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...