Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, =AVG77=Garven said:

I was only commenting on the K-4 not being in map 8's plane set.  I don't think I've ever posted anything whining about the plane set other than the I-16 machine-gun only vs E-7 match up.  By the way don't forget about the Spit Vb (western front) in your list.:)

 

Ok, then I misunderstood you, sorry.

Just don't like the constant whining from some people of the Red side, as soon as things are not going their way. There are more then enough factors giving the Reds an advantage, just as the other way round. This leads to a quite balanced match-up so far (I guess I can already say 2:2). I don't see blues whining constantly, when Reds are on top, like the last two maps (well, maybe apart from being upset about their teammates). That's just annoying. I mistakenly thought you are one of them.

You are right, Spit is also an example, there are a lot more on both sides. 

 

I for one am quite sad, that the big bombs are blocked for the German bombers, since they are by far their biggest unique selling points when compared to the very fast and very dangerous Russian bomber (Pe2). And it's that they would not have been used in reality as well. But I am not gonna whine about it just because we are currently on the losing side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, =AVG77=Mobile_BBQ said:

BTW The He-111 is a super fort.  Last night it took the full ammo load of a Yak-1 AND a Pe-2 to take one down and even then the only thing that killed it was putting the Pe-2s tail right up to it's nose and smashing the glass.  I can see 1 Yak dumping into it an getting no joy, but 2 Yaks or, in this case, 1 Yak and a Pe-2 - that's a bit off.

 

If you say that He-111 is a super fort, have you tried to shoot down a Pe-2 or an il-2 since last update? :dry:

 

Last time I met a Pe-2, he survived to the attack of 4 109s (1 of them having gunpods)
All engines white/grey/black, lot of missing ailerons/rudder parts, and he get back to his base, while having a gunner kill on a 109 sniped at >500m.

At least you shot down this 111 :dry:

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically because tired of the constant whining about TAW, I've had little interest to fly it in this campaign. Better to do other things, fly a career for example.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that many people (on either side) cannot see the "overall" balance. They usually select one specific example and then whine all around. The only way of how to achieve perfectly balanced situation is to give both side the exact same plane set. That's impossible if there should be "historical" campaign of Axis vs Allied or more specific Germany vs Soviet Union.

 

There are many imbalances in TAW environment of course. Germans have the paratroopers. Soviets have way better (or rather more user-friendly - really no offence here) CAS  abilities. These two side specific imbalances balancing each other quite well from tactical point of view. The same stands for bombers. Though Pe-2 vs Ju88/He111 are hardly comparable, they seems to be balanced as well. Pros and cons are mostly depending on each pilot preferences. Balancing fighters is the trickiest things of all. It can provide  quite different results depending on what goal should be achieved: e.g. whether the goal is to provide the pilot with highest possible chance to survive or best possible option to achieve local air supremacy.

 

In short, from state of the current TAW campaign it seems that TAW provides us with very well overall balance.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 9:45 PM, I./JG1_Pragr said:

I deeply appologize for next text. But I'm in rage:

 

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=41477&name=I./JG1_Pragr

 

I killed two tanks in fact during that sortie. I even was able to shot down Lagg-3 which overshoot my Hs129! :) Then come three fancy 109 jockies which were not even aware there is another enemy fighter over enemy tanks I was attacking. No, beacuse they're focusing on their most important job: shotting down friendly plane. Please guys go to the hell and learn the aircraft recognition first! It's impossible to win campaign with such ... "ersatz" material.

 

For rest of community: Once again I'm sorry for exhausting my rage publicly. 

They are grounded for 3 days.

 

18 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

Noticed the lagging as well, almost everytime the server is full. I hope that all server admins, together with the Devs, will sort out the current network/server problems. The current situation really shouldn't last 

Are there "Server overloaded...." messages when lagging appears or they exist regardless of those messages? 

 

15 hours ago, AKA_Relent said:

Yet another airfield captured by paratroopers.  I think more paratroopers were used in map #4 by the virtual Germans than all of WW2 by the real Germans :)...

 

Yes, we have to limit it.

 

 

13 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

One thing I noticed is that airfields captured by paratroopers become operational in the next mission? Shouldn't they be offline in repair like it happens when tanks capture them?

I would also think a notification when the 60 paratroopers landed on the airfield is notified (with a reasonable time delay ofc) to the Russian side, so if they fail to stop them at least they know it and don't have to waste any more time of the mission patrolling the airfield, after all the other objectives when they get destroyed by the enemy disappear so you know it's no use to patrol there anymore.

Airfield should be closed. Have to fix this bug.

 

Good point.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

Are there "Server overloaded...." messages when lagging appears or they exist regardless of those messages? 

 

It's worse with the server overload message appearing, but me and my squadmates also had it happen without the message. Sometimes lag, sometimes other planes warping around (too many for user-related reasons like bad ping)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, =LG=Kathon said:

 

Yes, we have to limit it.

 

 

 

Can we also limit the IL2 AT cannons or maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover? IMO paratroopers are fairly balanced with how much better the red CAS is (just look at the anti-tank stats).

  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover?

Maybe I'm reading the manual wrong, but the only plus one Pe-2's are the transport ones which cannot carry bombs.

 

Edited by =AVG77=Garven

Share this post


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

 

 

Can we also limit the IL2 AT cannons or maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover? IMO paratroopers are fairly balanced with how much better the red CAS is (just look at the anti-tank stats).


It is hard to conduct good CAS while flying at 7k.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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


It is hard to conduct good CAS while flying at 7k.

 

I have seen more Migs flying at that altitude then all Germans together

8 minutes ago, =AVG77=Garven said:

Um its a 2-2 tie at the moment.

you misread my statement. It was a "what if" statement (map 2 and 3) and not an assessment of the current situation

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

 

If you say that He-111 is a super fort, have you tried to shoot down a Pe-2 or an il-2 since last update? :dry:

 

Last time I met a Pe-2, he survived to the attack of 4 109s (1 of them having gunpods)
All engines white/grey/black, lot of missing ailerons/rudder parts, and he get back to his base, while having a gunner kill on a 109 sniped at >500m.

At least you shot down this 111 :dry:

 

Yep, and that's why I'm also in the DM Poll thread the devs made trying to support (neutrally, I might add) tweaks to the damage model so planes aren't overly tough or overly squishy but match what was most likely their real world durability for each model.   

Maybe we should self-merge this discussion to that thread and keep TAW stuff here.  My apologies for broaching the subject here in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PSA -> The louder and more often the complaining gets.... the closer we are to achieving this fiction called “balance”.

 

That is all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Just don't like the constant whining from some people of the Red side, 

Funny, but You have nothing against your own whining. I remeber you complaining even on the inflight chat...

 

3 hours ago, xJammer said:

 

 

Can we also limit the IL2 AT cannons or maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover? IMO paratroopers are fairly balanced with how much better the red CAS is (just look at the anti-tank stats).

CAS is better red side because more people are willing to do it instead of crusing in109s.

 

Blues got the ju 88s which can superbly carpet bomb the non moving straight line columns with 2900kg of bombs (4x500kg + 18x50kg), heck even the 110 takes more kgs than Pe2 (2x500 + 4x50) If someone prefers shooting theres the duck , the ju87. later there'll be 110g with 3,7cm, not to mention the fact that all german fighters can take bigger bombs than red fighters ...

Not to mention the blue capabilities of destroying the airfields, trainstations etc.

 

6 hours ago, -IRRE-Centx said:

 

If you say that He-111 is a super fort, have you tried to shoot down a Pe-2 or an il-2 since last update? :dry:

 

Last time I met a Pe-2, he survived to the attack of 4 109s (1 of them having gunpods)
All engines white/grey/black, lot of missing ailerons/rudder parts, and he get back to his base, while having a gunner kill on a 109 sniped at >500m.

At least you shot down this 111 :dry:

 

This only shows the attacking pilots in bad light..

after the update I was killed in pe2 by a lonly 109 F2 in one pass when he made a superb approach from the side (somethink like 45 deg.), on the other hand, I killed 2 109s within around  1 minute while gunning myself  when they made the  6 oclock almost straight line approaches...

 

Anyway I hope the admins will not be steered by the loudest shouting whiners

Edited by Carl_infar
  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


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

CAS is better red side because more people are willing to do it instead of crusing in109s.

 

Blues got the ju 88s which can superbly carpet bomb the non moving straight line columns with 2900kg of bombs (4x500kg + 18x50kg), heck even the 110 takes more kgs than Pe2 (2x500 + 4x50) If someone prefers shooting theres the duck , the ju87. later there'll be 110g with 3,7cm, not to mention the fact that all german fighters can take bigger bombs than red fighters ...

Not to mention the blue capabilities of destroying the airfields, trainstations etc.

Because CAS in a Pe2 is easy mode. In the early maps flying a Pe2 S.37 is the easiest way to rack up points and kills. It's more dangerous then the average enemy fighter. 

It's suicide to do CAS in everything the Germans have without coordinated fighter cover. Only natural that most people don't wanna commit suicide.

In the Pe2, especially in the early maps, it's quite the contrary. Even flying alone you'll survive most of the attack runs, because most Axis pilots won't even attack you, and the ones who do will rarely be able to kill you. It's definitely a lot more rewarding (=easy to be successful) then flying German bombers.

 

If I could choose between all bombers we have, i'd take the Pe2 any time of the day, from start to the end of the campaign, unless I want to carpet bomb and have 5 chaps with me to fly fighter cover.

 

Luckily with the Pe2 S.37 being withdrawn and the German fighters getting more powerful, this huge advantage will shade away (it already started to shade away in map 4)

Share this post


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

 

If I could choose between all bombers we have

Nothing is stopping you.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, =AVG77=Garven said:

Nothing is stopping you.;)

 

My squadron is. They decided to fly Axis. I hope i can persuade them to go for Allies next time.

Share this post


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

 

 

Can we also limit the IL2 AT cannons or maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover? IMO paratroopers are fairly balanced with how much better the red CAS is (just look at the anti-tank stats).

 

 

There are no free combat Pe-2s.  Educate yourself before you "counterattack" to lobby for your side.

 

Don't forget the gift Axis has with Stuka with later-war AT cannons from start of the campaign.

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Map #4 was all day 2:1; and now get's even worse. If admins do nothing and this keeps goin on...i don´t see a bright future for TAW.

 

VDNEBs7.png

 

 

 

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

CAS is better red side because more people are willing to do it instead of crusing in109s.

 

Blues got the ju 88s which can superbly carpet bomb the non moving straight line columns with 2900kg of bombs (4x500kg + 18x50kg), heck even the 110 takes more kgs than Pe2 (2x500 + 4x50) If someone prefers shooting theres the duck , the ju87. later there'll be 110g with 3,7cm, not to mention the fact that all german fighters can take bigger bombs than red fighters ...

You're right that there are more "useless" fighter pilots on blue side than on the red. But I disagree that there is not enough CAS/bomber pilots on blue side.

 

About the CAS abilities. There's nothing as effective against tanks such as VYa canons. I made the testing about one year ago and I used about 13 to 15 direct hits to destroy PzIVg/PzIII/StuGIII (the heaviest armored tanks). That can be "easily" achieved during single pass in Il-2. Bk3,7 can kill T-34 by four direct hits. Scoring them in single pass is possible with some training but not as easy as using of VYa. This canon can kill even the KV-1 but each direct hit is worth of about 15 percent of damage. Thus you can kill single undamaged KV-1 for one ammo load. 30 mm Mk101/103 can kill T-34 by about 20 hits. That means one undamaged T-34 kill by Mk101 (30 rounds) or three (Mk103). These cannons are as easy to use as VYa. But they're mounted on the least user-friendly platform. That brings us to the second the most effective way of tank destruction which are...

 

small bombs. Every single 50 kg bomb can kill even the heavy KV-1. It just needs to hit directly (skip bombing is the best procedure). Ju88 seems very effective in this role (though I've never tried it), using maybe 44xSC50 instead of big bombs. At least I saw a clip where somone was describing the attack run one or two years ago. I can reliably use 109 with 4xSC50 to kill four tanks no matter how heavily armored they are. Of course you need a time since you are limited to one kill per one attack run. From this point of view the fastest way to deal with red tanks is probably Ju88 provided there is no AA in column anymore.

 

 

11 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Map #4 was all day 2:1; and now get's even worse. If admins do nothing and this keeps goin on...i don´t see a bright future for TAW.

 

VDNEBs7.png

 

 

 

 

With all due respect, this figure prooves nothing. Yes, LW player higly overpopulated VVS during Euro prime. But that peak usualy last for one or two hour at best. I've never ever saw you submit  complains during the EU morning hours when the VVS overpopulated LW player by even 25 to 0 or 22 to 1 (as I saw it couple of days ago). The ratio of 5:1 to 10:1 is common for several hours during these period and last for several hours.

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

I've never ever saw you submit  complains during the EU morning hours when the VVS overpopulated LW player by even 25 to 0 or 22 to 1 (as I saw it couple of days ago). The ratio of 5:1 to 10:1 is common for several hours during these period and last for several hours.

 

Then you didn´t read forums enough, i'm the one asking and supporting the idea of having a 45/50 pilots limit per side, and also putting some kind of algorythm to prevent 1.0 damage to map when server is 25-4. 

 

That image proves a lot; when you have one side stacking a server (and flying most maps in a 2:1 difference) there is no competition, but a side having chances to win and the other simply sparring.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

About the CAS abilities. There's nothing as effective against tanks such as VYa canons.

 

On TAW the best ground attack weapons are bombs, that's it.  No amount of testing, efficiency, whatever matters outside the context of routine operations on TAW. The targets don't move and carpet bombing is the best way to have the chance to kill as many targets as possible with as little time spent at the target as possible with as little danger from AA as possible.

 

IL-2s are fun when you have 5 IL-2s and some fighters to drag and destroy AA with no Axis fighter opposition.  Even then some of the IL-2s will kill themselves on trees or crashing into the tanks.  The rest of the time, so 98% of the time, the best thing to do is to take a Ju-88/110 or Pe-2/A-20 and do a sloping dive down the length of the convoy( from the rear if there is AA) .

 

Look at the tank killer list.  Pe-2, 110(bombs), Pe-2, 110/Ju-88, 110.  What more proof do you want?  This myth of the magical VYa cannon is a joke.  Go ahead and remove it from the entire campaign next time and see how nothing changes.

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@I./JG1_Pragr


Since the new tank DM a couple patches ago tank killing has become a lot of guesswork. Overall tanks are easier to "kill" with cannons for the most part because you can break their tracks with a few hits, however you can't really tell from an airplane if they are done. Once this happens in game they count as destroyed, and then in this state they absorb a ton of punishment until they blow up (much more than they would if the tracks aren't damaged) which I think it's some sort of bug or tech limitation. So you can expend half your ammo load in your IL-2 firing at a tank which was already taken out by someone else but looks fine externally from distance before it blows up (smoke is no guarantee anymore because quite some times it just disappears with the tank still there).

So really now the most efficient method is with small bombs hitting them directly, or from carpet bombing. Last TAW (before the new DM) I was for a good amount of time in the top 5 streak tank killers (I was killed/captured just before the end though and couldn't catch up in time) and the big mayority of those kills were with the Bf 110 with 12 x 50 Kg, if you can get the hold to it you can land them pretty accurately and in this regard all the tanks are the same BT, T-34, KV-1.. you just impact them directly and they blow up, one by one you can decimate a column with just a few 110s if they know what they are doing.

In the 72 AG training server, with an IL-2 with 37mm, with 6 impacts (3 salvos) the Pz IV gets detracked, it counts as  destroyed, but without icons other planes or yourself (if you don't monitor the stats count ,which also tend to be a bit delayed) can't tell this. I kept shooting at the tank, it took another 20 salvos (40 rounds) until it disappeared, not even blow up. However once detracked a single bomb seals the deal and blows it up (no kill awarded though). So the cannons in this new TAW "meta" aren't really good, you are most likely wasting your time and ammo shooting at dead tanks. Carpet bombing with Ju 88/Pe-2/A-20 or picking them up one by one in shallow dive bombing with Bf 110 is the most effective way to deal with them and make sure a column is destroyed

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, =LG=Kathon said:

They are grounded for 3 days.

 

There are also other type of cases like, shooting att crash planes that somebody else shot down. It is unbelievable. Risk your plane and your virtual life to shoot down the plane and somebody else is coming to shoot it to take the easy kill. Unmatured. 

Pvt_Ingvaar

 

Me and AsbyFoxtrot dived to the il2, try to shoot it down and avoid the gunner and after 6 successful passes we manage to shot down and when it finally crashed a pilot who was looking not diving decides to shoot it on the ground. 

 

Congrats what can I say. 

 

And believe me it is not the first time that happens!

 

tnx

@Daedalos 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

 

I have no idea of that patch. That explain why I've attacked so many tanks so far with no effect :) Anyway, you guys forced me to make my testing again. I have no idea whether the quick mission uses different tank models than TAW but the result seems to be the same they use to be. Attacking PzIVF1 with Il-2 and VYa is pretty damn easy. After two missions I was able to kill each PzIV during single pass and with some 50 rounds. And my aim was far from the top.

 

If I attack the PzIV from the side it ALWAYS starts to burn. The tank is destroyed once it is hit again while burning. If I pressed my first attack to 300meters or rather 200 meters, the tank was ALWAYS detroyed during that particular run. From fifth mission onward, I killed all three PzIVF1 in quick mission expediting about half of the ammo (150 rounds). Thus I expect that six kills sortie with full AP load shall be normal. Add rockets and bombs. Of course, I'm considering the ideal situation if there is time to six and/or more runs during the sortie.

 

Still I agree that the small bombs carpet bombing is the best option in TAW environment. 

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

 

 

The change was with 3.007 patch, on November 20th

Quote

13. New, more detailed damage modeling is used for simple (AI controlled) vehicles - it is now possible to damage their engines, wheels or tracks, crew and ammo rack;

 

54 minutes ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

If I attack the PzIV from the side it ALWAYS starts to burn. The tank is destroyed once it is hit again while burning. If I pressed my first attack to 300meters or rather 200 meters, the tank was ALWAYS detroyed during that particular run. From fifth mission onward, I killed all three PzIVF1 in quick mission expediting about half of the ammo (150 rounds). Thus I expect that six kills sortie with full AP load shall be normal. Add rockets and bombs. Of course, I'm considering the ideal situation if there is time to six and/or more runs during the sortie.

 


Yep you can still kill it, even easier than before in some cases, but without icons you see a tank column, get 5 or 6 tanks exploded firing all your 23mm ammo and then only be credited with 1 kill for example.

If I could change it I would make having the track destroyed or crew killed not counting as tank kill (after all the tank can be repaired and new crew assigned to it), and make it so it catches fire once officially destroyed (explosion if ammunition or fuel is hit) so it gives more feedback to the players.

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

Share this post


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

 

 

Can we also limit the IL2 AT cannons or maybe remove free PE2 aircraft given out every mission rollover? IMO paratroopers are fairly balanced with how much better the red CAS is (just look at the anti-tank stats).

Ah the Classic XJammer Move, might as well ask them to Remove the P-39's 37mm Cannon so we dont land our planes in front of a tank column and farm easy points or maybe remove Bombers entirely cause we just park our bomber on the runway and just shoot Planes on take off. Its hard to take any of your words from Face when all you want to do is game the system. 

 

The Peshka's are perfectly fine, I mean its pretty fucking hard to RTFM to see that the Peshka is never given out for free unless its the Transport version of the plane. 

Edited by MentalishMan
.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Ah the Classic XJammer Move, might as well ask them to Remove the P-39's 37mm Cannon so we dont land our planes in front of a tank column and farm easy points or maybe remove Bombers entirely cause we just park our bomber on the runway and just shoot Planes on take off. Its hard to take any of your words from Face when all you want to do is game the system. 

 

The Peshka's are perfectly fine, I mean its pretty fucking hard to RTFM to see that the Peshka is never given out for free unless its the Transport version of the plane. 

 

 

Thankfully you don't have to take any of my words. Its up to the TAW admins to determine what they wish to do.

 

Learning how to RTB in a damaged PE2 is straightforward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Map #5 is not even up 24 hours and it looks like LW will kill VVS depots soon and run the map.  I predict a Saturday morning (possibly afternoon) East U.S. time zone victory for LW. 

 

EDIT:  I will be working to prove myself wrong.

Edited by =AVG77=Mobile_BBQ
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The aspect ratio problem can be solved in two ways:

1. increase time ban for downed and captured pilots hand located in most

2. increase the number of combat missions required to recover the lost aircraft for the pilots of the party in the majority. as the development of option № 2 you can reduce policiesto combat missions for vosstanovlenija lost aircraft for pilots side of which is in the vast minority.

 

For example: Luftwaffe exceeds the red army air force 2 times the number of pilots directly in the air ( or for a certain accounting period, say 24 hours).

Accordingly to this mission \the next day to recover the lost pilots of the Luftwaffe aircraft need not 3 but let's say 5-6 combat missions.  

The deceased or captured pilot receives a ban not for 5, but for 10 minutes.

 

On the NULVAR project, this approach allowed to balance to some extent the imbalance of the parties. Those who were in the minority got a real possibility of concerted action to cause considerable damage to protivniku are in the majority, and reduce the number of its sorties. And those who were in the majority were forced to act much more carefully, because a higher penalty for the loss of aircraft and pilots could eventually lead to alignment of forces of the parties due to the availability of available aircraft.

 

I apologize for the automatic translation into English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why invent that kind of complex balancing methods that at the end might not work as intended at all, when there is a simple built-in capability already in the game to cap max player amount per side and/or player ratio?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only good solution for balance if you don't have balanced aircraft is to let people switch sides and not have a community full of selfish jerks.

Edited by BraveSirRobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

But why invent that kind of complex balancing methods that at the end might not work as intended at all, when there is a simple built-in capability already in the game to cap max player amount per side and/or player ratio?

 

I would be very cautious of the "work as intended" statement here. I guess that such feature would significantly decrease the number of players on TAW. I doubt this is what anyone wants to see and what could be called "work as intended". But I could be wrong in both presumptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

But why invent that kind of complex balancing methods that at the end might not work as intended at all, when there is a simple built-in capability already in the game to cap max player amount per side and/or player ratio?

The built-in capability is quite lacking, IMHO.

Share this post


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

 

My squadron is. They decided to fly Axis. I hope i can persuade them to go for Allies next time.

 Join or start a new squad if you want to fly Pe-2's so badly.  

Edited by =AVG77=Garven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, I./JG1_Pragr said:

I would be very cautious of the "work as intended" statement here. I guess that such feature would significantly decrease the number of players on TAW. I doubt this is what anyone wants to see and what could be called "work as intended". But I could be wrong in both presumptions.

 

By this "work as intended" statement I mean that if someone's goal is to have more even number of players on both sides (for example) then doing a more-or-less complex code that changes some parameter about recovering lost planes, based on numbers of past time (like in the previous suggestion) or something similar might or might not have the desired effect. For example, if the last 24h average players amount is within 1-2 players, which is the typical case on TAW (check Pand's logger graph above) would it somehow prevent this 62:22 situation? Or even if there was a more noticeable difference in averages that would mean that for example Axis players would have to fly one more mission for +1 aircraft, how would it prevent this 62:22 situation? So, if someone's goal was to have more balanced amount of players on a server at any time, wouldn't it be more straight forward to balance that number directly, based on present situation? If there was some other goal, for example balance the victory conditions / objectives difficulty, then there could be other approaches, for example shutting down front line airfields etc that has been done, but then we are talking about different things.

 

59 minutes ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

The built-in capability is quite lacking, IMHO.

 

Obviously you know a lot more than me what is possible and what is easy or what is hard to do for missions/servers, I just know from what Coconut said, that there is some kind of built-in functionality in the game, where you could limit the max amount of players for both sides, x:y ratio for sides and at what number of players this limiter becomes active (if I remember correctly). Is not very advanced maybe, but sounds easy and straight forward, if the goal was to force more equal player numbers on the server for both sides. Now, if this type of limiter is a good or bad thing for TAW-like server, where people pick a side and fight until the end to win a campaign, is another discussion. For something like WoL, where the missions are not connected to each other and there is no other objective-balancing coded in (as far as I know), this limiter sounds like a better solution, if there were balance problems otherwise. It seems, though, that WoL has also been relatively well balanced lately.

Edited by II./JG77_Kemp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

Obviously you know a lot more than me what is possible and what is easy or what is hard to do for missions/servers, I just know from what Coconut said, that there is some kind of built-in functionality in the game, where you could limit the max amount of players for both sides, x:y ratio for sides and at what number of players this limiter becomes active (if I remember correctly). Is not very advanced maybe, but sounds easy and straight forward, if the goal was to force more equal player numbers on the server for both sides. Now, if this type of limiter is a good or bad thing for TAW-like server, where people pick a side and fight until the end to win a campaign, is another discussion. For something like WoL, where the missions are not connected to each other and there is no other objective-balancing coded in (as far as I know), this limiter sounds like a better solution, if there were balance problems otherwise. It seems, though, that WoL has also been relatively well balanced lately.

I've seen the limiter in action (I think it was on DED Normal), and it's very clunky. It basically enables/disables all airfield spawns of the team based on the number of players on each team. It would be more usable if the balancing would be done so that you'd need to select the team first, and you couldn't join a team with too many players.

Share this post


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

Still I agree that the small bombs carpet bombing is the best option in TAW environment. 

 

So it seems that reds don´t have an advantage in CAS capabilities thanks to VYa23 then, right? This is what you said previously and you've been proven wrong; being carpet bombing the best option in non moving+aligned columns in TAW. Same thing when you affirmed that i never asked for team balance when server was 25-4 to reds on few ocassions during early USA  time, ignoring the posts where i asked precisely that. So it's always like this, some people jump into wrong conclusions because they ignore things like you; others like xJammer and trolls like him do it on purpouse lobbying for their side asking for stupid things regarding planeset, lying, and gaming the system (like checking target positions by loading the mission in the editor, as he said...just to mention one) -place facepalm here-. 

 

The only thing i asked about planeset -which i think it has an overall balance- is why the VYa 23 are limited for Lagg-3 while better fighters like 109F4 and G2 can have 20mm gunpods, becoming little FWs190 already in map #3 (F4). This is just ridiculous and was accomplished after loud ones crying rivers about it. Think about it, LW has the faster planes, the better climbers, they outdive anything VVS has and have more firepower up to map #7 when it becomes a little ore balanced....and on top of that you add 20mm gunpods to them on early maps AND also remove the only useful thing a mediocre fighter plane like the Lagg-3 has. This is really unbeliaveable. So again, leave those 20mm i don´t care, but also let Lagg-3 have VYa23 with no restrictions...it was removed during the infamous "LW must win edition", even Kathon itself clarified at the forums that LW was given an advantage,  you remember that? It's when Ju-52 showed up+109F4 on map#2+Ju87 with 37mm in early maps+all importance to depots erased by heavy bombers+storm of panzer columns magically showing up and advancing like M1 Abrams...etc, etc. 

 

Anyway, all my recommendations have  always been about the ecuation between team balance/wining conditions. For the last three days (Maps #4 and #5 now) there was a revival of map #1, with LW outnumbering reds almost 24/7 (as i write this during the so called Red Storm US early time, there is a 8-1 difference to LW) reaching peaks of +40 pilots difference and not during 1 hour as you said, but for 2 full map loads, yes 4 hours LW having an average of 35 more pilots, and after those peaks the difference kept an average of 15+ pilots for two more missions. Imagine the ammount of damage those 35 extra pilots can make, the ammount of bombs and cover they can provide. There is no chance to win TAW if there is a continuous and important difference in team numbers map after map. Again, flying as underdogs for a while it can even be fun, but when it is constant, it becomes frustating for those who care about winning the campaign, and people lose interest as we can see now. 


 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

I would be very cautious of the "work as intended" statement here. I guess that such feature would significantly decrease the number of players on TAW. I doubt this is what anyone wants to see and what could be called "work as intended". But I could be wrong in both presumptions.

I think the best would be to set the max players numbers for each side to 42-45 And leave all the other complex triggers, restrictions out , except maybe the closing of front airfields as it is now. 

If one side would be populated to the full (mostly blues i guess) the ones that cant joint could be more inclined to create 2nd account for Red side

 

  • Upvote 1

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...