Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It's clear that red side needs an alternative to combat the Para drops. However I feel that it should not be taken away from axis .  There must be some type of mission for the U2. 

Maybe Flak guns set up along front lines to give early warning of approaching enemy Or read outs of low flying ju52 .

I'm no map maker or campaigns , it's far too complicated for me on here . But some thing needs tobe done . IMHO . 

Edited by Con

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Con said:

It's clear that red side needs an alternative to combat the Para drops. However I feel that it should not be taken away from axis .  There must be some type of mission for the U2. 

Maybe Flak guns set up along front lines to give early warning of approaching enemy Or read outs of low flying ju52 .

I'm no map maker or campaigns , it's far too complicated for me on here . But some thing needs tobe done . IMHO . 

 

Just one question. How many para drops did you finish?

 

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

TAW_map8.thumb.jpg.cf2554d8f2d21b5c4c44f5fe732252b7.jpg

 

This really needs to be addressed. Krasnodar is at 94% damaged and closed. Despite there is only 1 red vs 9 blues, here is simple question: what kind of logic can create such a suicidal tank attack to Steblievskaya. I don't think I need any extra explanation on this. Taw devs... please make the script logic more sophisticated.

Edited by 72AGs_Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

TAW_map8.thumb.jpg.cf2554d8f2d21b5c4c44f5fe732252b7.jpg

 

This really needs to be addressed. Krasnodar is at 94% damaged and closed. Despite there is only 1 red vs 9 blues, here is simple question: what kind of logic can create such a suicidal tank attack to Steblievskaya. I don't think I need any extra explanation on this. Taw devs... please make the script logic more sophisticated.

 

Are you asking why the ground troops are still fighting when the nearest airfield is badly damaged?    Is there a connection, eg did Soviet tanks only operate if they had air support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 4:51 PM, =LG=Kathon said:

quote "For next campaign to balance the Ju52 paradrops could we have something similar with PO2?

For example if You dont want to go with landing on the roads, you could use the same mechanic/script which is used with finding of the enemy supply columns, but you would set a partisan/guerilla camps which had to be located to trigger the attack. Due to the fact that po2 is half as "fast" as Ju52, You could set up 3 or 4 camps (areas) of partisans to be found around airfield so to simulate the dropping of dispatches with order to attack the airfield by the guerillas." unquote

 

The problem with Po-2 is that only one aircraft can trigger all 3-4 areas during one sortie. So one player could "quickly" capture the enemy city.

 

Maybe it's better to limit max number of captured cities by Ju52 to 2 cities per map. 

It's a soft limitation if more than 2000 trucks are destroyed then supply convoys are twice smaller.

 

I'm not so sure if it would take longer than 5 flights of Ju52, if You would have to start with po2 from back airfield, fly at its speed of 130 -140 kph and look trough those several areas  around enemy airfield (you can make even 5 of them around it). It would be more difficult than to find trucks, because the camps wouldn't be on the roads.

 

I think its really needed to give the reds a possibility to capture airfields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the campaign coming to an end, i want to say thanks to the devs for their continuous effort to improve TAW. Sadly this was the worst campaign i have took part in yet and i am looking worried into the future...

 

With certain people around it really makes you wonder if "organised" campaigns like ACGs are the future.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look guys - I know this is a game but seriously! There is what I call minor cheating (...I fly with dual monitors and a static map with TAW map in IL-2 map planner with my route drawn so I don't get lost is always on my secondary screen). Then there is major cheating like below.

 

I make tracks around the battle area to review, In reviewing this particular track, there was a Fw 190A-8 showing up as a Fw 190D-9. My guess is the person hacked the game so their Fw 190D-9 would have the 3D model of the Fw 190 A Wurger. 

 

I won't saw who it was - but let's just say I have enough proof to correctly identify who it is.

 

Not cool dude!

 

2019_3_23__15_14_58.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again, this xJammer going to attempt to finish the map in a couple of days. Does one sleep?  lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

With certain people around it really makes you wonder if "organised" campaigns like ACGs are the future.

Wenn need more red players, that is the issue.

 

P.S. You want to play your way, that is fine, Just stop to accuse *certain* people who will play different way.

Share this post


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

With the campaign coming to an end, i want to say thanks to the devs for their continuous effort to improve TAW. Sadly this was the worst campaign i have took part in yet and i am looking worried into the future...

 

With certain people around it really makes you wonder if "organised" campaigns like ACGs are the future.

 

When you open anything to the public, you will get both like-minded and unlike minded people. That's just life (virtual reality is still reality, only with less governing rules (...like death)). This is the drawback of setting up a campaign on an semi-open dogfight server. Semi because the only barrier to flying is registering - nothing more.

 

=LG= and StG2 wanted this format for a reason - it suited their needs. We are just long for the ride. That said, they have always welcomed suggestions and that is awesome on their part. However, if you want them to redesign their concept to suite what you are looking for out of an online campaign - you are going to have to create one yourself.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Norz said:

P.S. You want to play your way, that is fine, Just stop to accuse *certain* people who will play different way.

 

Stop trying to reduce the issue at hand to simply having different play styles.

 

You and the people you associate with repeatedly said that the devs could simply say that your "way of playing" is not intended and you would stop. Yet you are still at it.

 

Anyway, the devs are painfully aware of this little group of players and next campaign will probably get a major overhaul.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

Stop trying to reduce the issue at hand to simply having different play styles.

 

You and the people you associate with repeatedly said that the devs could simply say that your "way of playing" is not intended and you would stop. Yet you are still at it.

 

Anyway, the devs are painfully aware of this little group of players and next campaign will probably get a major overhaul.

 

I hope the devs understand it much better than you. You are so proud of your activity on the TAW... Do you know that your 100..200 kills will not change the final score, don't you?

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 час назад, Norz сказал:

Wenn need more red players, that is the issue.

 

P.S. You want to play your way, that is fine, Just stop to accuse *certain* people who will play different way.

Already said many times, shooting AAAs and being able to destroy buildings in AFs with small guns is not a feature, it's a bug that was introduced by the setup of the campaign, and devs can't fix it quick.

This bug was exploited by xJammer and obviously KKs squad and some other players try to follow him from time to time.

As guys like xJammer wants to win by exploiting it, well, technically yes and devs can't ban him for it. Great example was map #7. xJammer didn't play it and that was the great map that lasted long and was interested till the very end. He came in again in map #8 and here we go... arcade stupid play style is what we see again. xJammer got killed and captured many times, but kept trying the same idiotic style. 42 deaths and 14 captures... jiz, I think this is the record that virtual pilot should be ashamed of no matter you win or lose in this type of game.

Should Reds follow the same way and turn this game into arcade style: who destroys AFs faster and finish the game first? Well, the answer is obvious, we are not that type of people, we want to play, enjoy the simulation and immersion of the real war, and I like the fact that most of the players share my vision, and that's what differs TAW from other servers.

I join those who thank TAW devs for keeping and making this server better each campaign.

Edited by 72AGs_Obi
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

Should Reds follow the same way and turn this game into arcade style: who destroys AFs faster and finish the game first? Well, the answer is obvious, we are not that type of people, we want to play, enjoy the simulation and immersion of the real war, and I like the fact that most of the players share my vision, and that's what differs TAW from other servers.

 

What ? WE?

 

How long do you play TAW?

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 минуты назад, Norz сказал:

 

What ? WE?

 

How lond do you play TAW?

That's my 4th TAW campaign. Didn't get your first WE? Is it a question or just simple trolling?

Norz, please if you can't say anything useful or logical, trolling is not a good option to continue.

Next time I will just ignore your message.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Norz said:

 

I hope the devs understand it much better than you. You are so proud of your activity on the TAW... Do you know that your 100..200 kills will not change the final score, don't you?

 

No need to get petty 🤔

 

The devs already identified the issue and stated their intentions to a degree. I can already tell you that your "play style" won't work in the future.

 

Edit: @Norz well i guess it makes no sense to keep arguing with you because as someone who is part of the problem you are clearly blind to the issues it causes. 

Edited by Operatsiya_Ivy
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

That's my 4th TAW campaign. Didn't get your first WE? Is it a question or just simple trolling?

Norz, please if you can't say anything useful or logical, trolling is not a good option to continue.

Next time I will just ignore your message.

 

Ok. Just to be clear. There are about 100 red players who play almost every day. So, my question is, are you the voice of these players? Because i played 2 last campaign on the red side and my point of view is different from yours.

7 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

No need to get petty 🤔

 

The devs already identified the issue and stated their intentions to a degree. I can already tell you that your "play style" won't work in the future.

 

Yes, i can see the feature. Your every 50 kills pro map will set automatically the victory for your team.

7 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

Edit: @Norz well i guess it makes no sense to keep arguing with you because as someone who is part of the problem you are clearly blind to the issues it causes. 

 

I can't see your nickmane on this page:

 

http://taw.stg2.de/admins.php

 

Please let the admins clarify what the problem is and how to fix it.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 минуту назад, Norz сказал:

 

Ok. Just to be clear. There are about 100 red players who play almost every day. So, my question is, are you the voice of these players? Because i played 2 last campaign on the red side and my point of view is different from yours.

Yours is different and it's clear, I got it long time ago. My squad, some other red squads share my point, that's at least the majority of long time virtual pilots. And let's be honest, you can stand your ground as long as you want, but Ivy just mentioned it again, it was acknowledged by TAW devs, it's a bug that was not found during the testing or after updated the server's setup/settings.

You want to win by exploiting the bug that screws the balance and turns the game into arcade style, and protect those who do it??!! FINE.

We, and new pilots especially, who came to this game, need to be aware of what's going on and who are real heroes, what they did and why this campaign ends so fast and why reds are loosing this campaign so quickly. They need to understand that's not because the server is bad, or game, or the number of reds pilots... NO, the real reason was clearly spoken and articulated accurately.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

need to be aware of what's going on and who are real heroes, what they did and why this campaign ends so fast and why reds are loosing this campaign so quickly. They need to understand that's not because the server is bad, or game, or the number of reds pilots... NO, the real reason was clearly spoken and articulated accurately.  

 

For sure... The true hero are you and Ivy, 36 ground kills for 8 maps. Is it a new record for a MINIMAL result?

 

Again, it is war on the ground. Strange that it is not clear for you.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 часов назад, 56RAF_Roblex сказал:

 

Are you asking why the ground troops are still fighting when the nearest airfield is badly damaged?    Is there a connection, eg did Soviet tanks only operate if they had air support?

Yep, attacking with no air support and surrounded by at least 2 blue AFs is suicidal mission and just an easy and risk free target for blues.

Red pilots can't support nor defend our tanks. There is no reason for this attack at all.

8 минут назад, Norz сказал:

 

IFor sure... The true hero are you and Ivy, 36 ground kills for 8 maps. Is it a new record for a MINIMAL result?

 

Again, it is war on the ground. Strange that it is not clear for you.

I am a fighter, I protect our strongholds from blue bombers and I protect red bombers and win the air superiority. That's my job. We have bombers who can do their job much better but they need cover. You have a problem with that? It's nonsense you said such a dumb thing.

If you can't get it yourself then at least I hope you can figure out yourself who you are after such comments. BUT I am not gonna continue commenting your messages, just waste of time.  

Edited by 72AGs_Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

Already said many times, shooting AAAs and being able to destroy buildings in AFs with small guns is not a feature, it's a bug that was introduced by the setup of the campaign...

 

Maybe I don't understand? Are you saying that a 20mm or an equivalent round shell should not be able to destroy a non-steel reinforced building or a AAA gun sight?

 

Back in the days of my military service, I have taken a .50 cal (with a butterfly trigger) and destroyed a bunch of thing up at the range (including center block walls and light armored vehicles). I will tell you 1st hand and anyone else that has fired a high power weapon that they can do damage to most things than not. 

 

A .50 cal packs less punch that a 20 mm round so the damage would be greater. Think about it - both are made of metal (buttle and AAA)  but the AAA machinery is stationary, where the round has velocity. Thus - basic physics F=Mass x Acceleration.

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 72AGs_Obi said:

That's my job.

 

You can do what you want. Only one thing that i say again and again, do not say us how to play. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 часа назад, JG7_X-Man сказал:

 

Maybe I don't understand? Are you saying that a 20mm or an equivalent round shell should not be able to destroy a non-steel reinforced building or a AAA gun sight?

 

Back in the days of my military service, I have taken a .50 cal (with a butterfly trigger) and destroyed a bunch of thing up at the range (including center block walls and light armored vehicles). I will tell you 1st hand and anyone else that has fired a high power weapon that they can do damage to most things than not. 

 

A .50 cal packs less punch that a 20 mm round so the damage would be greater. Think about it - both are made of metal (buttle and AAA)  but the AAA machinery is stationary, where the round has velocity. Thus - basic physics F=Mass x Acceleration.

I served the military too and well understand what these guns are capable of.  So what's your point?  Should we accept the fact that the whole AF can be wiped out by fighter planes with small guns like that? Or you want to share your military experience? Please read the whole discussion about it. It's a bug how it was implemented in the server and I consider it as a cheating how some people exploited this bug in the game.

Both sides can use this bug, there is nothing special or geniusly unique about it, and turn this game into the clear shit arcade style small berloga fights over AFs basically killing this server and the idea of replicating the air war/ground experience.

Edited by 72AGs_Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Look guys - I know this is a game but seriously! There is what I call minor cheating (...I fly with dual monitors and a static map with TAW map in IL-2 map planner with my route drawn so I don't get lost is always on my secondary screen). Then there is major cheating like below.

 

I make tracks around the battle area to review, In reviewing this particular track, there was a Fw 190A-8 showing up as a Fw 190D-9. My guess is the person hacked the game so their Fw 190D-9 would have the 3D model of the Fw 190 A Wurger. 

 

I won't saw who it was - but let's just say I have enough proof to correctly identify who it is.

 

Not cool dude!

 

2019_3_23__15_14_58.jpg

Why do You think that it is D9 in A8 skin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 часа назад, Operatsiya_Ivy сказал:

 

No need to get petty 🤔

 

The devs already identified the issue and stated their intentions to a degree. I can already tell you that your "play style" won't work in the future.

 

Edit: @Norz well i guess it makes no sense to keep arguing with you because as someone who is part of the problem you are clearly blind to the issues it causes. 

I would say even more to this. Because of this issue and the guys who use it all the time and definitely will use it again, I have a strong feeling that next campaign will not be available soon due to efforts and resources that TAW devs should take to fix it properly and probably to attempt to identify other possible exploits as well. And that would be sad news for all pilots. 

Edited by 72AGs_Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Norz said:

As i know it is not under attack. To get it only one way is possible, Akhtyrskaya .

 

Yeah it got damaged when Akhtyrskaya was captured for a short while, thanks for fact checking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Something odd about the map - currently mission #421... Maikop is not marked "Defend", yet there are still hangars and other buildings and parked aircraft and such (landed there).  Shouldn't this airfield be safe from attack since there are no adjacent enemy territories (e.g. Ust-Labinskaya is back to Russian control), and of course there is no "Defend" on the map for the airfield as mentioned?  Obviously, the depot is just south, and that has a "Defend", but I didn't think this applied to the nearby airfield.  Also, there was a German aircraft there, as the attack emblem came up (knife, with the blue aircraft icon below), but the AAA did not spawn.

 

@=LG= can you check this out?

 

Thanks!

Edited by AKA_Relent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to implement some kind of a mechanic where it's not just "limited # of planes" but more specifically, a limited number of types of planes?

 

I.e.

Fights 0/600

Attackers 0/400

Bombers 0/200

 

NOT

 

Planes 0/1300

 

I only thought about this as a means to increase the realism factor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi there guys. I want to ask you if you have the same problem but the other day I was making cover to our Jabos and the trucks just did not render unless you are just near them or flying tree altitude just over them. There were some tanks as well on the field outside the road and they just did not render if not with zoom.

Edited by E69_geramos109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, =LG=Coldman said:

Why do You think that it is D9 in A8 skin?

 

 Seriously - I am not a snitch so I will not say. Until I see the person do it again.  Also I will not say how because they will just find a workaround.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

 Seriously - I am not a snitch so I will not say. Until I see the person do it again.  Also I will not say how because they will just find a workaround.

Ok i thought your screenshot was the evidence/proof that why I asked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 минут назад, Cookie-Monster сказал:

Map 7 was the only map played to the fullest. Shame how one guy  can ruin the experience for everyone. Back to FPS games I guess, game was fun while the nostalgia lasted.

Agree, I can only guess once they see they can't win in a fair play, they switched immediately back to continue to exploit the bug saying all same bullshit as an excuse again and again)

We can't reason with these guys, TAW devs and their fix is the only way that can work.

Edited by 72AGs_Obi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Hi there guys. I want to ask you if you have the same problem but the other day I was making cover to our Jabos and the trucks just did not render unless you are just near them or flying tree altitude just over them. There were some tanks as well on the field outside the road and they just did not render if not with zoom.

Correct, Idk if this is some TAW mechanic but the AA trucks and regular trucks do not render until you are very close. 

 

From up above, convoys often look sparse and unlike their actual conditions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

I would like to understand why I've just been caputured, if I had an emergency landing in my zone, allied side of the map. I mean I was flying a spitfire and I landed inside the russian zone of the map (1533.1  at Kuban #432).

 

942893161_TAWFlyingspitfireandCapturedinAlliedzone.thumb.JPG.47585521c6d611a9d4611af83586488f.JPG1311311360_TAWFlyingspitfireandCapturedafteremergencylandinginAlliedzone.thumb.JPG.eaf5e7731d6b85a4ff1e1c44876fcb46.JPG

20190325_01121_MAP_1_2_.thumb.jpg.6c8fcb593f621e81da90f7ae542b10a1.jpg

 

Kind regards,

             Ala13_Knightcrow

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2019 at 2:47 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

I think this is so funny. I brought this up earlier and got yelled at. So I will try this again:

 

If the Red side (VVS) was given a Li-2 (license-built DC-3) - Paratrooper drop issue solved right?

If the Red side (VVS) was given the Hurricane II A and Bs (2,000+ UK Lead lease) - Early war mismatch problem solved right?

If the Red side (VVS) was given the Pe-8 - Heavy bomber mismatch solved - Correct?

If the Red side (VVS) was given the TB-3 even - Paratrooper drop issue would be solved.

 

Is that not short sightedness of the developers? =LG= cannot solve this issue.

 

Frankly - the developers were not thinking about balancing an online war when these decisions were made.

 

They were thinking "let's give them somethings to shoot at!" Period!

 

 

I want every single one of those babies in my hangar. Hurricane, yes please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Another issue with the script logic I believe. Drop zone is located in blue's territory, protected by blue defense. How reds are supposed to 1.Find such a zone with slow U2 before it's got killed by defense. 2. Prevent the drop. 3. Why even the drop zone is located in the blue's territory, and not in red's zone, a square away from the field! Easy and risk free target for blues. All reds tank columns don't make much sense if blues can get the AF so easily. 

Looks like another "Mission impossible" for reds lol

post-10719-0-27089000-1553447926.jpg

 

 

Edited by 72AGs_Obi
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

 Seriously - I am not a snitch so I will not say. Until I see the person do it again.  Also I will not say how because they will just find a workaround.

 

this isnt a bank heist, you wont get shanked for snitching, grow up ffs, if you have information on a cheater then please tell someone, let it be known who it was, even if it is to tell the il2 devs!

Edited by SYN_Repent
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Regarding the Ju52. I absolutely love to fly it and I hope it is not removed from the TAW server. It is great for a noob pilot like myself to start navigating and help the team, quietly learn the tricks of engine management and go up through the ranks. Both historically and in game this is valuable work. They also work (or should) as food for the enemy fighters and be a beacon of action in the game as they need protection, specially on the paratropper missions.

 

Having said that, I agree that it is an important source of unbalance between the two sides. The ideal solution would of course be to introduce the planes for the VVS that are missing (heavy bombers and transports). That doesn’t depend on any of us so let’s move on. The idea of allowing VVS to use Ju52 with different skins (let’s call them pre-war ir captured) would be a good gap solution if the game engine allows it, which I am not sure it does. 

 

My solution for now would be the following:

 

1. Increase the number of planes needed (from 60 troopers to 100 or more). Possibly more than one drop around the AF to be mandatory for it to be successful. This would force a much bigger operation and/or multiple sorties. 

 

2. Allow the defending side to be warned that paras have been dropped and where. This way they will be able to react and attack the second wave, do a turkey shooting or patrol the area for the next ones. That means thatbthe Ju52 would start to really need cover, which currently doesn’t really happens.

 

Hope this contributes for the discussion. Cheers!

Edited by antpaisvieira
  • 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...