Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, JG4_Kruger said:

4.5. Coldstart should be turned back on. It could prevent at least some people from always using the Front-Airfields... and if you aren't able to start up the Aircraft.... Just learn it!
I think it is not much to ask for to set the Throttle between 10-20% on take-off (no Aircraft would start-up at Idle-Cut off!)

 

Here's a minute and a half-long argument why reviving cold start is a bad idea, a lesson easily remembered by any Red ground attacker during the TAW "Cold War Period."    0:00 - 1:35

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, StG77_HvB said:

 

Here's a minute and a half-long argument why reviving cold start is a bad idea, a lesson easily remembered by any Red ground attacker during the TAW "Cold War Period."    0:00 - 1:35

 

 

 

I tested the this especially because of this Video and had no problem with the start-up when setting the Throttle to 20 % :)

 

same Problems appeared for the German-side ;)

Edited by JG4_Kruger
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, ITAF_LG965 said:

Admins, Thank you for this great Campaign!!!

...and also this time there is the memory for the taw.

https://forgotten-taw.tuttovola.org/

 

Very good idea!!!

 

I have some forgotten wars too but only as images!😉

👇👇👇

 

divsquads.jpg

final_front.jpg

Immagine5.jpg

squads_points.jpg

Edited by 335th_GRSwaty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SYN_Repent said:

 

 

Wasn’t you just bragging about knowing what a LAMP server is?? 

 

Not bragging, stating a fact! There is a difference. 

 

I did not post callsigns of the IL-2 community that played TAW but don't know what a LAMP Server is (...without knowing for sure who knows and who doesn't know what a LAMP Server is), that would be idiotic. I stated  "...or maybe" meaning may or may not. Literally 100% of the population that participated in TAW will fall into the category of "maybe". 

 

I know English is a very hard language - it maybe what you call an adverb or a noun. (FYI, that is still not bragging, maybe  a dig :joy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JG4_Kruger said:

I tested the this especially because of this Video and had no problem with the start-up when setting the Throttle to 20 % :)

Ah ok I didn't understand the 10-20% throttle at takeoff thing in your original post. So alright, 10-20% throttle when starting engines, good to know. Thing is, I figured out pretty quick how to get past any delays imposed by cold starts by starting takeoff at 85% ATA and 85% RPM in the JU 88 and Pe-2. Normally they heat up halfway down the runway and you can then boost to 100% for takeoff.

 

My other objection is when you're flying several back-to-back missions with less than a minute between spawn out/in, your engine wouldn't get cold. So 1st mission cold start would be fine, but not after that. But that's probably not easily coded right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funning thing about forced TAW campaign balancing (...it sounds too much like socialism to me)!

 

The only way to balance sides is to make TAW CO-OP style. X slots 1/2X RED 1/2X BLUE and only launch when server is full (...thus no AI). That I am OK with.

As long as TAW is dogfight serve based, and without server balancing - it's not going to happen. Some people will always fly one side or another and not both. Not to mention the bigger issue, people will join whenever they want to join.

 

No one will mandate that I have to fly RED to fly TAW.  Which would mean I have to buy additional VVS collector-planes to have access to all the allotment of VVS fighters at my disposal (... that sounds like a dictatorship now). :rtfm:

 

I disagree with any notion of such bigoted mindset. :angry:

 

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 часа назад, JG4_Kruger сказал:

 

Just to at:

4.5. Coldstart should be turned back on. It could prevent at least some people from always using the Front-Airfields... and if you aren't able to start up the Aircraft.... Just learn it!
I think it is not much to ask for to set the Throttle between 10-20% on start-up (no Aircraft would start-up at Idle-Cut off!)

I think the ability to start fast is important to prevent any AF attacks or to avoid being attacked by those who love to kill planes during their spawn/take off time. Front line AF should always be on alert and planes should be ready to take off immediately.

What really pissing me off how easily people exploited another flaw when you can land your plane without landing gears, literally damaging the craft but getting away with no penalty for that. I know the answer from those, the server's rules don't say anything so why not...

Edited by 72AGs_Obi
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, StG77_HvB said:

Ah ok I didn't understand the 10-20% throttle at takeoff thing in your original post. So alright, 10-20% throttle when starting engines, good to know. Thing is, I figured out pretty quick how to get past any delays imposed by cold starts by starting takeoff at 85% ATA and 85% RPM in the JU 88 and Pe-2. Normally they heat up halfway down the runway and you can then boost to 100% for takeoff.

 

My other objection is when you're flying several back-to-back missions with less than a minute between spawn out/in, your engine wouldn't get cold. So 1st mission cold start would be fine, but not after that. But that's probably not easily coded right now.

 

Just corrected that (sorry my fouled)

This is easy with IL-2: BoX, the Pe-2 is starting up at 10% Throttle (if you check the Tech-Chat while start-up). The position you need to have is the "Choke-Position" when its cold (like on every cold Engine, Idle-Cut off-Position is only used for operation-ready-temperature).

This is also the reason why the Bf 110 G2 turns away while start-up if you not hit the breaks. So every Engine must be set to Choke before Start-up and the Game even tell you what the Choke-Position is for every Aircraft while start-up process- if you don't know it at this moment.

The Problem with warm-start-up is that there are some aircraft with bad Radiators in "slow-situation". That means on Summermaps if you need to taxi the engines are already overheated when you reach the Runway, especially problematic when you have unexperienced People or bigger Groups that need to be coordinated.

 

Greedings Kruger

 

PS.: we are all waiting for the best part of every campaign... your video after it HvB... where is it ?:D

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JG4_Kruger said:

 

PS.: we are all waiting for the best part of every campaign... your video after it HvB... where is it ?:D

Sorry, man. The patch destroyed half my footage, Kondor lost interest because of the negative issues that continue to be debated ad nauseum in here, and Jeeves and I switched to Red the last 2 maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, StG77_HvB said:

Sorry, man. The patch destroyed half my footage, Kondor lost interest because of the negative issues that continue to be debated ad nauseum in here, and Jeeves and I switched to Red the last 2 maps.

 

Ok, than... something only with the girls? 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JG4_Kruger said:

Ok, than... something only with the girls? 😛

 

rrjbjp.jpg

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about just include more P-40s, P-39s, and Spitfires for the red side? Instead of making it very hard to get those and having them completely unavailable often in maps.

 

They are certainly historical. 

 

THAT ought to help the balance issue. 

Not everyone likes to fly Yaks, La5s, or Laggs.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riken if you and Ivy teach me to fly VVS, I might change my position for next Campaign. :help:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Been playing around with the TAW data a little bit, interesting results :)  This is map #1 only for now though.

 

Word of warning: self-damage data can be flawed as during ground collisions / etc player can incur damage to his own aircraft caused by himself. So Mc202 taking down MC202 that frequently is an artefact (at least I hope so)

 

 

hC7ffxN.png

 

 

And here is a different view of 1v1 sorties of players (i.e. sorties where some damage was given/taken but only 2 players actively participated in the encounter)

 

BOTH LANDED = either or both of the aircraft took some damage, but neither were "SHOT DOWN" in the log.

KILL = Title aircraft shot down the target

SHOT DOWN = Title aircraft was shot down by the X-axis aircraft

MUTUAL = both aircraft went down

 

This set of data is not super consistent (Pe2 vs 109e-7 should give basically same result) I'll need to look into why this is later. Possibly some sorties aren't counted or the logs themselves aren't consistent.

 

Correction : the data below does not account that the 2nd party may have been involved in more than 1 encounter! Only the 1st party was being checked. I'll post updated charts in a bit

 

<decided to remove this afterall>

 

While the data above is flawed to some extent, the number of pure 1v1 sorties is a lot more limited, thus I will leave up the charts above. Below is correctly filtered 1v1 encounters (that still however do not consider AA/etc damage, only that 2 players and not more were involved)

 

Album with most aircraft:

https://imgur.com/a/Qr8qdVt

 

A few examples:

09QpuWz.pngrYxZDB5.png

keEgTam.png

K1RST7b.png

 

 

Edited by xJammer
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2019 at 6:40 AM, JG4_Kruger said:

Hey Admins, Thank you for this great Campaign!!!

 

Since the last two Campaigns Me and some Squadmembers of JG4 where thinking about changes on the Campaign to prevent Suicidemission, also some of the =LG= Members already heared of them. So here is the result of 4 Month of thinking and discussions within the JG4-Squadron:

 

At first some Points of Understanding:
My understanding is that the Tactical Air War Campaign should have a more "Hardcore-Historical" approach to some degree in comparison other servers in this Game, so with this in mind getting killed or captured shout have a massive impact and to be a real pain for the individual Pilot. I will try to give a Concept to achive this on a "moderate" way that not completely demoralizes people with approaches from other campaigns i flow in, but try to get every one a reason to rethink about every flight before they even take-off.

The Server has the "+1 System" so everyone can fly at least something, this is a good Thing that I will come back later on this. There are Players how fly often an some who can and will not, this must be noted. Also must be noted that some are better Pilots and some are not. There are Bomberpilots and Fighterpilots that face very different Risks on there flights. Also some Pilots doing Operational Tasks within there Squadron and will therefore not be able to constantly shoot down stuff. There are also Pilots who care about the Stats, the XP system and Pilots that do totally not.

All this and possibly a lot more needs to be considered when developing such a change in a given System.

 

The Way you get Aircraft is good in the System that you have and it should not be changed at all, but somehow the gears must be shifted... so which gear will be the right one. I think it should be the Aircrafts you lose not the one you get and I will work with this and the +1 System.

 

The Idea:

1. If a Player gets Killed or Captured, he should lose everything because he is "not there anymore" or "the new guy on the front again". So at first: the People looking at the Stats and XP... all the XP should be completely gone. If you get killed or captured on the last Map with 10000 XP you are at 0!

 

The Pilot already lost all its XP but some of them wont care, so how to be painful to them?

2. The Player was killed or captured, he loses ALL! his aircraft. Sounds hard right?... good. Because he is the new guy, take this old thing and come with us 😄 . A good Pilot is a good Pilot because of his skills, not his Aircraft so he will be soon back up again in his La-5 or Bf 109 G4... what ever he prefers.

When I say ALL I really mean ALL of them so for the maximum next two Hours he is out of the Game by definition... Not even Supply because it can be a Gamechanger to some Point. Time to rethink his actions and what was going wrong, especially what he did wrong.

Bad side-effect: Some People will possibly get more encouraged to Chute-shooting, but they will always do it as long as it is possible!

 

No XP, no Aircrafts... Is he out for the rest of the Campaign?... How should he fly again with no Aircraft left?

3. This is where I come back to the "+1 System": On the Next Mission (after those maximum two hours) he will get his +1 Aircrafts. This means he has after some Time to think at least something to fly with. It is not the best Material but we have Supplymissions for that ;) . But as I sad: it is not the Aircraft, it will always be the Pilot on the Stick. Aaaaaaaaaaaaand he is the new guy at the Unit ;)

 

With all this People need to Fly more "awake" and think about there actions and plans! flying alone is dangerous! flying head over heals is dangerous!

 

4. AAA at the Airfields and Depots should be back at the next Mission is also a good Idea i think

 

 

At the end I have some extras but I did not evaluated there impact, or if its even possible:

5. Squadron-Hangars: If one is constantly loosing Aircrafts it gets a problem for everyone.

 

6. Textinfos of enemy aircrafts are late and that is okey to give them all a chance (even a Po-2 :D), but they should have a Course and Altitude Info (even Altitude alone would be nice), if this is possible somehow

 

Just my thoughts...

Be aware: People with skill will always adapt to the situation they find them self in and not complain about it. (Should also be a good hint for some mostly annoying People in this threat!)

 

 

Thank you again for the GREATEST IL-2: BoX CAMPAIGN!!!

JG4_Kruger

 

PS.: lol, my first Post in this Forum ... sorry for some bad english😄

I'd like to chime in on this one.
From the standpoint of time available on server.  This map was closed on mission map 445.  At 2 hours per map this puts total time of server at 890 hours.  
From the standpoint of Time available for me to play 37 hours.  37 hours of 890 available time spread through 8 maps averages 4 hours and 40 minutes per map set.
What you propose in section 1 would penalize me for not having the ability to play 150 to 200 hours over the campaign.
What you propose in section 2 would penalize me for being bounced by an enemy that, and I now I'm not alone, wasn't in visual range 3 seconds ago.
What you ask in proposal 3 you would be asking for a concept brought about in BLITZ by a server there.  Bring your own supply.  Could work but with only 2 hour maps what happens if overnight your airfield becomes an enemy airfield?
Proposal 4 asks too much for the fliers who run iron hand getting the targets softened up for bomber runs.  I could support a 25% rebuild of AAA at strategic areas but not a complete rebuild.
Proposal 5 could become detrimental to moral of squads leading to in fighting and removal of some "Not great" fliers.  We fly in 10 G6 aircraft and one flier comes and flies them to their doom over the week because they have time to fly while others don't penalizes those "with a life" and not those gamer gamers.

And as for proposal 6 there's a reason tags are off, GPS is off, and radar is off.  Simply put you don't see the pilots of WW2 pulling out a map and going "Hey the enemy planes are over here at this altitude".  Meetings on this server are random as they should be.

 

If TAW was to incorporate all of the proposals you have asked about you would be the only person flying the server because it would alienate those like myself who like the concept of this server as it stands.  I work hard to gain a 109G6.  If I am flying with my wingman in a 110E2 and he fails to see you, because you happen to be in a window spar, when he looked back to clear the 6 while I am navigating the route I should not be punitively wiped out. 

If that were the case there would be 8 Allied fliers who would be angry that they lost their LA5FN to my lowly 110E2 if they lost every aircraft that is a bonus during that campaign.  Another point in case one of my kills came with the 109F4 and the player that I killed did a YAK7B/36 stall that I couldn't get away from where I collided with him.  He laughed about how I lost my F4.  I though to myself so what you died and I bailed out in friendly territory.  I checked his stats the next day and found that after I had killed him instead of flying a "Lesser" aircraft he went and flew 3 transport missions of 15 minutes and regained his YAK7B/36.  I had to fly combat missions to get mine back because I don't know how to transport and I don't have a JU52 in my inventory.  Should he be forced to spend  75 minutes per aircraft to regain the YAK7B/36 because he lost a fight (a good fight), to another player.  He would have had to fly 24 missions (6 hours of 15 minute transports) ( to return him to the YAK7B/36 at the time.  I would have had to fly 12 missions (5 hours of minimum combat missions) to return me to my F4.  Now going back to my 37 complete hours of available flight time, you're asking me to fly more than my average per map (4h40m) to get back my original F4.

The concept they have for aircraft management is good and should NOT be changed in my opinion.  How many people have lost an aircraft to the nasty P2 tail gunners or even "the lowly 110e2 tail gunners".  Do they deserve to be cut out of the game because the AI limits are set to smash??  I've been shot down before I have been within shooting range, for me, of a PE2.  I haven't even reached convergence and I'm going to lose my bird.

Leave the aircraft limits as they are.  TAW knows and has made the penalties for dying sever enough for those, like myself, that take rank seriously. I may have only made it to Lieutenant status twice this campaign but damn I was happy when I did and was mad when I lost it all to a stupid mistake.  One mistake I wouldn't have made if my enemy were more readily seen, instead of appearing and becoming clear, what type of aircraft before they started shooting at me.  You may have the ultimate UBER gaming rig and you can see me from 20Km away but I'm lucky if I see you before you are already attacking me.  Until the day comes when everyone can see everyone then please don't ask anyone to punish anyone for having the lesser of two machines.  It's already hard enough for the casual fliers to work in the Server.  Don't ask to punish those with little time for Rest and Relaxation.

 

I hope you understand what I mean in my rebuttal.

 

>S<

JG51_OGG

CO  JG51 Molders

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all LG team for this TAW.

 

I have some issues with this edition.

For my one of the worst due the unbalance, map problems and people taking advantage of exploits(cheaters for me).

TAW need more balance on air planes sets and fast AAA on AF and depots most be terrible as hell, that make team work for heavy bombers can reach the target and not only 1-4 fighters can destroy all.

So many like historical, well you can read a lot of pages from many pilots about how terrible was attack an AF or fabric, and not many survive from that, well I saw on this taw 1 fighter take off all AAA from and active AF, if you don´t believe I have a video of that.

Well see you on next one.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thank you =LG= team for providing another round of TAW.  Always a challenge and rewarding when I can actually do something productive and survive :).

 

A couple suggestions:

 

- Airfield and depot AAA:  IMO if not invulnerable (which I can see may be a bit extreme), I suggest that after each 2 hour round that ALL AAA at airfields and depots be respawned 100%.  There was NO WAY a few fighters could have wiped out all AAA at a major airfield, none would survive - and their superior officers wouldn't have kept sending them on suicide missions to continue the attacks.  I've read enough about how deadly airfield anti-aircraft defenses were.  Was doing some research to try and get some examples - from http://www.ww2.dk/Airfields - France.pdf

 

Abbeville-Drucat:  Defenses: by 1 Oct 43, the airfield was protected by a 6-gun and two 4-gun heavy Flak positions together with 21 light Flak positions, all of these within 3 km of the center of the field.   A system of defense trenches with numerous machine gun positions surrounded the airfield.

 

Bordeaux-Merignac: Defenses:  there were 6 heavy Flak batteries (four with 6 guns and two with 4 guns) within 3.25 km of the airfield, and 21 light Flak positions around the perimeter, of which at least 11 were emplaced in a number of Flak towers. 

 

Come on (more a general statement, not directed at anyone in particular), tell me 1-4 fighters flying low and repeatedly attempting to strafe each and every heavy/light flak/MG positions would be successful in wiping out all AAA at a German airfield (I would imagine something similar at a US/British/Russian airfield). Since we can't put that many AAA at an airfield due to performance, lets at least mimic the difficulty somewhat by maintaining full AAA strength at the START of each mission.

 

- Please disperse the armored columns at their LAST position closest to their target.  While it makes sense to have armor on the roads in line formation (although maybe space them a little farther apart?  To avoid the easy kills from rippling 20-40 100kg bombs across their length) when far from their target, as they get close, they should be spread apart more in staggered line abreast or combat formation.

 

- Until BOTH sides can have paratroopers (or something that emulates their functionality), please limit the number of towns/airfields that paratroopers can capture in a given map (i.e. #1 through #8) - I believe Kathon/someone from =LG= had suggested 2 per map.  On a similar note, IMO if the side with paratroopers outnumbers the opposing side by a great margin (whatever number makes sense, 3-1 ratio or something), the ability to capture/damage an airfield should be suspended during that time.  It's just not fair for one side to be able to control the ability to capture an airfield AND be able to take advantage of the other side not having enough participants to prevent it.
 

Edited by AKA_Relent
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, AKA_Relent said:

Please disperse the armored columns at their LAST position closest to their target.  While it makes sense to have armor on the roads in line formation (although maybe space them a little farther apart?  To avoid the easy kills from rippling 20-40 100kg bombs across their length) when far from their target, as they get close, they should be spread apart more in staggered line abreast or combat formation.
 

 

Yes! Same thing goes for city defended, I find them way too clustered. I played on a campaign server in the IL-2 1946 game where the ground targets were much more spread out, it made ground attacks harder without needing to add more AA.

Share this post


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

Been playing around with the TAW data a little bit, interesting results :)  This is map #1 only for now though.

 

Word of warning: self-damage data can be flawed as during ground collisions / etc player can incur damage to his own aircraft caused by himself. So Mc202 taking down MC202 that frequently is an artefact (at least I hope so)

 

 

hC7ffxN.png

 

 

And here is a different view of 1v1 sorties of players (i.e. sorties where some damage was given/taken but only 2 players actively participated in the encounter)

 

BOTH LANDED = either or both of the aircraft took some damage, but neither were "SHOT DOWN" in the log.

KILL = Title aircraft shot down the target

SHOT DOWN = Title aircraft was shot down by the X-axis aircraft

MUTUAL = both aircraft went down

 

This set of data is not super consistent (Pe2 vs 109e-7 should give basically same result) I'll need to look into why this is later. Possibly some sorties aren't counted or the logs themselves aren't consistent.

 

Correction : the data below does not account that the 2nd party may have been involved in more than 1 encounter! Only the 1st party was being checked. I'll post updated charts in a bit

 

CnGUvmN.png

 

While the data above is flawed to some extent, the number of pure 1v1 sorties is a lot more limited, thus I will leave up the charts above. Below is correctly filtered 1v1 encounters (that still however do not consider AA/etc damage, only that 2 players and not more were involved)

 

Album with most aircraft:

https://imgur.com/a/Qr8qdVt

 

A few examples:

09QpuWz.pngrYxZDB5.png

keEgTam.png

K1RST7b.png

 

 

 

Like I tell my people at work - This is great but what is the data telling us? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

Like I tell my people at work - This is great but what is the data telling us? 

 

This is what I’m reading from this data:

 

- The Pe2 gets shot down by the 109 at about the same rate than the He-111 is by the similarly armed (two cannons, two light mgs) I-16. Combine this info with the lack of success the Pe2 has against the Mc202 and I don’t see any support for the “the Pe-2 gunner is too deadly” theory here.

 

- The He-111 is helpless against the P-40. Is it because the P-40 is faster than the I-16 and can get safer shooting angles. Does it hit that much harder? 

 

- The P-40 is an even match to the E7 and deadly against bombers and attackers. So at least on that first map it’s definitely not the dog that many say it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The P-40e should be at least the equal of the 109e7, equal to the 109f2, and dangerous but inferior to the f4-g6 series. It seems that the data bears that out. However I would also say that pilot quality is higher on the P-40 side than the Emil pilots, certainly are braver and better technically, I might be biased though. :)

Share this post


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

Abbeville-Drucat:  Defenses: by 1 Oct 43, the airfield was protected by a 6-gun and two 4-gun heavy Flak positions together with 21 light Flak positions, all of these within 3 km of the center of the field.   A system of defense trenches with numerous machine gun positions surrounded the airfield.

 

Bordeaux-Merignac: Defenses:  there were 6 heavy Flak batteries (four with 6 guns and two with 4 guns) within 3.25 km of the airfield, and 21 light Flak positions around the perimeter, of which at least 11 were emplaced in a number of Flak towers. 

 

I think this might be an important detail.

 

The main reason why airfield/depot aa (and aa in general) is as bad as it is, is because of how it works in general. It is easily exploitable when they are all at one place, fixating on one target. Without having done any testing myself, it could be a lot more difficult to attack when aa position are more spread out but still in range to support each other when under attack. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

This is what I’m reading from this data:

 

- The Pe2 gets shot down by the 109 at about the same rate than the He-111 is by the similarly armed (two cannons, two light mgs) I-16. Combine this info with the lack of success the Pe2 has against the Mc202 and I don’t see any support for the “the Pe-2 gunner is too deadly” theory here.

 

Don't take too much insight from HE111 data - look at how few sorties are recorded for 1v1 encounters against HE111.

 

And in terms of kills / hour, 109-e7 gets killed by Pe2 around 4 times per day of Pe2 flight, while I16 only gets killed once per day of He111 flight. In hindsight I should have made the Y axis limits consistent between those charts. sight.

 

 

58 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

Like I tell my people at work - This is great but what is the data telling us? 

 

Thankfully I don't work for you 😄 

Edited by xJammer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

2 Admins:

 

is it possible to track in the log that the navi lights were switched on/off (or the aerobatics traces) ?

 

In old Il2 it was possible (traces) and was used for the recon missions.

 

In this case we can use Po2 in the same way as Ju52.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Lets look at the AAA Statistics now. This is over entire TAW campaign, considering player sorties that were only damaged by the specific AAA and did not take any other damage (besides damage that has no cause, such as engine out or self-damage):

 

TRUE == aircraft was shot down

 

Red AAA Blue AAA
52-K Flak 36
61-K Flak 37
72-K Flak 38
GAZ-AA M4 MG-34 AA
M4 Sd Kfz 10 Flak 38
ZiS-5 72-K  

 

cfVdSCm.png

 

I'll slowly update this post with more relevant AAA stats, such as the most survivable aircraft / etc. (Depending on what is possible given the logs)

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


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

Lets look at the AAA Statistics now. This is over entire TAW campaign, considering player sorties that were only damaged by the specific AAA and did not take any other damage (besides damage that has no cause, such as engine out or self-damage):

 

TRUE == aircraft was shot down

 

Red AAA Blue AAA
52-K Flak 36
61-K Flak 37
72-K Flak 38
GAZ-AA M4 MG-34 AA
M4 Sd Kfz 10 Flak 38
ZiS-5 72-K  

 

cfVdSCm.png

 

I'll slowly update this post with more relevant AAA stats, such as the most survivable aircraft / etc. (Depending on what is possible given the logs)

That info don´t tell us anything about the discussion about the AAA on AF and depots because this charts took all AAA not only on AF or depots.

By the way where you took this info? It is trust one or you take advantage like you do on AF and depots killing all AAA.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@ITAF_LG965

 Thank you!!

I had lost this bookmark! I wish it would be possible to have the stats from all the major online wars!

 

Edited by 335th_GRSwaty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ECV56_Necathor said:

That info don´t tell us anything about the discussion about the AAA on AF and depots because this charts took all AAA not only on AF or depots.

By the way where you took this info? It is trust one or you take advantage like you do on AF and depots killing all AAA.

  

Also, it doesn’t tell us under what conditions the attacking aircraft were in when they were being fired upon.  How high were the aircraft, how fast were the aircraft, were they diving, climbing or fairly level in flight, were they directly over the offending AAA or were they off to the side... too many variables to consider to know how effective AAA (of all kinds) were against enemy aircraft.

 

For example, if 10 aircraft all dive to the deck (over the target) before dropping bombs, vs 10 that released at 1500 meters  (over the target) and were on the deck a fair distance away, you will probably find that more were hit/lost from AAA in the former group than the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, AKA_Relent said:

Also, it doesn’t tell us under what conditions the attacking aircraft were in when they were being fired upon.  How high were the aircraft, how fast were the aircraft, were they diving, climbing or fairly level in flight, were they directly over the offending AAA or were they off to the side... too many variables to consider to know how effective AAA (of all kinds) were against enemy aircraft.

 

For example, if 10 aircraft all dive to the deck (over the target) before dropping bombs, vs 10 that released at 1500 meters  (over the target) and were on the deck a fair distance away, you will probably find that more were hit/lost from AAA in the former group than the latter.

Eh, the conditions of the aircraft are not strictly necessary depending on what information you want out of the analysis. If you want data on effectiveness of AA against aircraft in certain flight regimes, yes, this is useless (e.g. how effective is AA against different types of aircraft when they are level bombing?).

But this data lets you know the average effectiveness of AA against aircraft in their average flight regime; It essentially says what aircraft are more vulnerable to AA in general given the way they are usually used. It's a combination Airframe + typical use evaluation.

It would allow you to compare aircraft of similar role to each other (i.e. 109s vs. Yaks, Pe-2s vs. Ju-88s) because they are used in similar flight regimes. If some planes show up as more vulnerable because they are typically flown in ways that risk more AA, that doesn't really refute the point, since aircraft role forces a certain amount of exposure to AA to an extent. An Il-2, for example, by necessity takes more risk from AA attacking defended targets than a Pe-2, which has more options in how to attack. So you can't compare the Il-2 to a He-111, but you can compare an Il-2 to an HS-129 since they fulfill a similar role (anti-tank capable attack aircraft, with multiple passes on target being a  typical flight/attack regime). 

I hope I'm making sense here.

Share this post


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

Eh, the conditions of the aircraft are not strictly necessary depending on what information you want out of the analysis. If you want data on effectiveness of AA against aircraft in certain flight regimes, yes, this is useless (e.g. how effective is AA against different types of aircraft when they are level bombing?).

But this data lets you know the average effectiveness of AA against aircraft in their average flight regime; It essentially says what aircraft are more vulnerable to AA in general given the way they are usually used. It's a combination Airframe + typical use evaluation.

It would allow you to compare aircraft of similar role to each other (i.e. 109s vs. Yaks, Pe-2s vs. Ju-88s) because they are used in similar flight regimes. If some planes show up as more vulnerable because they are typically flown in ways that risk more AA, that doesn't really refute the point, since aircraft role forces a certain amount of exposure to AA to an extent. An Il-2, for example, by necessity takes more risk from AA attacking defended targets than a Pe-2, which has more options in how to attack. So you can't compare the Il-2 to a He-111, but you can compare an Il-2 to an HS-129 since they fulfill a similar role (anti-tank capable attack aircraft, with multiple passes on target being a  typical flight/attack regime). 

I hope I'm making sense here.

Sure, you make sense, but let’s agree to disagree then :).

 

The point you make about comparing the Il-2 vs the Hs129 against the aircraft defenses (due to similar attack tactics) is an example that you also can’t get from these stats as they are now - it shows sorties and not the type of aircraft flown.  Yet another variable that adds to the mix as to how these stats don’t tell you enough about the conditions/tactics of the aircraft flown to be of any real use (at least IMO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ECV56_Necathor said:

That info don´t tell us anything about the discussion about the AAA on AF and depots because this charts took all AAA not only on AF or depots.

By the way where you took this info? It is trust one or you take advantage like you do on AF and depots killing all AAA.

  

 

I entirely welcome you to check my results as anyone could make a mistake, especially with initially inconsistent logs (where some sorties begin with player getting killed only to fly on to kill other players).

 

I am also not trying to tell anything about a particular specific topic. I was curious to see how likely of a "fatal shot" does the AAA deal via the best proxy I could think of at the time. I thought some here could find the results interesting. If you have specific statistics that you may want to look at - ask for it or go ahead and run the numbers yourself. 

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The one thing we can all agree on is that the 38mm shell, regardless of the platform - sucks!

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello. Have you ever thought about turning off technical messages and a compass? The flight atmosphere will increase significantly.
 In my opinion, this will improve the quality of pilots on the server and waging war will become more interesting.
Such actions will eliminate newcomers and inexperienced pilots, which in turn will relieve the load on the server at prime time, and the vacant places will allow squads to work in large groups.
 Are there pilots who share my interests?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, II./JG51Grasser said:

Hello. Have you ever thought about turning off technical messages and a compass? The flight atmosphere will increase significantly.
 In my opinion, this will improve the quality of pilots on the server and waging war will become more interesting.
Such actions will eliminate newcomers and inexperienced pilots, which in turn will relieve the load on the server at prime time, and the vacant places will allow squads to work in large groups.
 Are there pilots who share my interests?

 

Not me. [edited]

 

EDIT - just to be clear - The Admin edited this for the Reason "Personal". It wasnt. I used a a fairly common word to describe what making a server less accessible to a newcomer or inexperienced pilot was and didnt attack or insult anyone personally. 

Edited by SCG_BOO
Personal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, II./JG51Grasser said:

Hello. Have you ever thought about turning off technical messages and a compass? The flight atmosphere will increase significantly.
 In my opinion, this will improve the quality of pilots on the server and waging war will become more interesting.
Such actions will eliminate newcomers and inexperienced pilots, which in turn will relieve the load on the server at prime time, and the vacant places will allow squads to work in large groups.
 Are there pilots who share my interests?

 

How will inexperienced pilots be able to become experienced ones, when there is no place for them to gather meaningful experience in a TAW like environment? WoL is hardly the place to look at.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./JG51Grasser said:

Hello. Have you ever thought about turning off technical messages and a compass? The flight atmosphere will increase significantly.
 In my opinion, this will improve the quality of pilots on the server and waging war will become more interesting.
Such actions will eliminate newcomers and inexperienced pilots, which in turn will relieve the load on the server at prime time, and the vacant places will allow squads to work in large groups.
 Are there pilots who share my interests?

 

 

This will not work out because not everything is animated especially for bombers and attackers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2019 at 3:40 PM, JG4_Kruger said:

Please check you Stats and think about the reason why you got killed or captured.

 

Until i had la5 . every time i was surprised by enemy  i cant run to safe zone for not be caputred. Thats my pricipal reasson for be captured.    when i fly la5 , i try keep some altitude and if i was  under suprise attack, i dive, run and still alive.... is clear like i read befor... aircraft limitations are a fact.

 

But i agree with you on your post. I no doubt more level of coordination  will help a lot  and aircraft limitations can be managed better

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye!
The awards for last campaign has arrived!
Congratulations for best pilots and best squadrons.
We are very grateful that you participate so much in our event and we encourage you, to participate in the next campaign, which will come for sure (but remember the unwritten +week rule;-).
I hope that despite many bugs (a big thanks for Kathon for mastering the situation) that appeared during this season, we will also meet, in such quantity, in the forthcoming 18th season.
See you in the skies!

 

CUPS and STATUES

 

 


55776343_2316260268685281_65713742786991

55557319_2316260228685285_23271534601154

55776395_2316260242018617_14195986783052

55910073_2316260332018608_51220811456970
 

 

BEST FIGHETRS

 

 


55861171_2316262282018413_17192601614548

55916193_2316262322018409_66559620103264

55644681_2316262302018411_56399138893080

55783777_2316262358685072_73893878400202

55944948_2316262382018403_20877326427986
 

 

BEST BOMBERS

 

 


56315653_2316262722018369_39977111405650

56171670_2316262738685034_46167421613024

55653402_2316262702018371_19034481374317

56398376_2316262765351698_64866712100200

56237506_2316262792018362_56531980900106
 

 

BEST TANK KILLERS

 

 


56344403_2316263112018330_59550585749409

55686706_2316263138684994_26963413369817

55807303_2316263152018326_27262245340163

55849238_2316263188684989_32021897388574

56232197_2316263258684982_27681776757794
 

 

BEST FIGHTER SQUADS

 

 


55853658_2316265425351432_77615803858126

56247756_2316265458684762_68593375078850

55947561_2316265468684761_17917805639887

56174928_2316265555351419_52901773867493

56208324_2316265605351414_35669144875732
 

 

BEST BOMBER SQUADS

 

 


56226021_2316266035351371_71242608488679

56157362_2316266068684701_28562756025733

56328648_2316266075351367_28308029847644

55845411_2316266105351364_54283409012041

56119773_2316266135351361_55173005058118
 

 

BEST TANK KILLER SQUADS

 

 


55840615_2316266582017983_12729742328961

55865080_2316266615351313_76409901767259

56184226_2316266595351315_47944041406314

56201123_2316266645351310_53374900378124

55698727_2316266668684641_31256017789559
 

 

 

Edited by =LG=Piciu
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
  • Upvote 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...