Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

Yes, but not directly! 

Once a pilot register in Blue/TAW forum, he will send me or any other admin a pm here with the user name he used over there!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all!

Proposal for setting the weather on the server.

Flying on TAW, I think everyone paid attention to the fact that at least 95% of the time the weather on the maps is million by million. Frankly, there is a feeling that we are flying somewhere in Miami at least, and not in Russia. From the site Memory of the People (Central Archive of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation) collected the Operational Reports of the Air Force Headquarters Zapf in the area of Vyazma, which indicate the weather. Data brought to the table. September 1941, with the exception of 2 days, the weather data is completely available, October and December data are scattered, not all reports are still available.

Sample summary (the section with the weather highlighted by me):

00000047.thumb.jpg.43742354fb5eb82859216a3737e85160.jpg

The archive has two files - Russian and English versions. Files in the .odt format - OpenOffice.

If you look at the data, we will see that for the whole of September only one day was clear, and then, only in the evening, the other days were quite heavy clouds and frequent precipitations. I do not propose to simulate the weather on a server on the server according to the reports, but the number of clear days and with weak clouds should be markedly reduced. Especially on the Moscow map. On Stalingrad and Kuban I will try to find data separately about.

 

I apologize for my English, I use a translator.

 

weather.zip

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salute Temkatt

 

I ask because my knowledge about military operations under bad ( ww2 air ) weather are none.  

 

 

From weather reports we can see along one month only 2 days was clear...   Ok. 

 

What kind of air operations are made on bad weather? operations are the same? If i compare a clear month vs a badly month , in both periods have same missions?

 

I ask , because my  sensations is just the opposite... i doubt under some weather conditions ( i found to many times playing Taw ) on real life pilots do nothing... except crash on runway... but i repeat i dont know ...  

 

The question is, ok to try recreate historical weather if we recreate historical missions under this bad weather... we do this?  really i doubt.  Some times i feel , the bad weather is more a cheat for players than a simulation... 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I did not have enough time to write out the full number of sorties of aviation. But the days when the report reads "because of the bad weather conditions the combat operations did not lead," I noted in the column. There are also quite a few such days — on average, for a month, 2-3 days.
Again, I do not propose to simulate the historical weather, I am in favor of reducing the number of days when the weather is absolutely cloudless. Therefore, the clear sky in Russia in the autumn and winter is a rather rare phenomenon.
In addition, an increase in cloudiness may cause players to descend from space to work on ground targets.
As for the bombers, I think that with certain clouds, it will be easier for them to hide in the clouds from the fighters.
I do not propose to simulate bad weather conditions, I propose to increase the amount of cloudiness and cloudy days.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, for example, I translated one of the reports, combat work was carried out even in severe weather conditions.

00000115.thumb.jpg.3208b00d6c7d64e4ca628644163a4307.jpg

 

OPERATIONAL REPORT OF THE STAFF OF THE AIR FORCE OF THE WESTERN FRONT By 11:00 PM 10/01/1941

First: On the entire front, the enemy did not show activity. Continuing to lead the strengthening of the occupied lines. The air force of the enemy during the day of 10/01/41 conducted reconnaissance activities and bombarded railway sections.

Second: our troops on the right wing of the front were attacking. In the center and on the left wing they continued to consolidate on the occupied lines and conduct intensive reconnaissance of the enemy.

Third: On the night of September 30 to October 01, the air force of the front conducted limited combat operations due to adverse weather conditions. Bombardment of the barracks on the western and southwestern outskirts of Smolensk and the accumulation of enemy troops on the road west of Dukhovshchina.
9 airplanes were launched for bombing.
Bombs dropped: 14 FAB-100, 25 FAB-50, 10 ZAB-50, 24 AO-25, 140 AF-2 with the COP.
Scattered 65.000 flyers
During the day, on 01.10, the enemy forces accumulated bombardment, covered the loading and unloading of troops and military transportation by rail, air hubs and front command posts.
153 sorties were made, of which 27 were for bombardment, 12 for assault operations, 18 for reconnaissance, 87 for cover, 9 for escort.
Bombers produced 35 sorties, fighter aircraft - 118 sorties.
Bombs dropped 4 FAB-100, 24 FAB-50, 48 AO-25, 23 RS.
1550 ShVAK shells, 14,200 ShKAS cartridges, 2,100 BS ammunition were launched.
Weather in the area of hostilities: at night, overcast with a height of 200 meters, fogs, poor visibility; during the day, cloudiness is continuous with a height of 150-600 meters, visibility is 2-6 km, in some places it is drizzling.


And so on. This summary contains three pages. That is, the combat work was carried out in different weather conditions.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm talking about the fact that the sky is too clear most of the time on the maps. Well, on the one hand, this is far from realistic, but on the other hand, orbital wars are ongoing. Again, this is just a suggestion. Somehow absolutely absolutely cloudless sky looks completely unnatural.

lock bombs fighters. Exterminators must do their job. Their attackers. That's when the game will be interesting.
Edited by =2ndSS=KRIS_
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the idea of a bit more bad weather missions. 

 

Quick example: 

40% of missions with good weather (no clouds or few)

40% of missions with various cloud layers (4/8 to 7/8, 1 or 2 clouds layers, etc), with various altitudes (from 500 to 2000m)

20% of mission with bad weather (overcast cloud layer), with various ceiling, just like we have now sometimes. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

I agree with the idea of a bit more bad weather missions. 

 

20% of mission with bad weather (overcast cloud layer), with various ceiling, just like we have now sometimes. 

 

Did you check the number of players for these missions? The server is always empty (<60% at prime time) for that weather. I see no reason to set the rain more than ONCE in 48 hours. We want to play and enjoy, right? Do you know any person who likes this weather in TAW? If you are, than you are a lucky person.

Edited by Norz
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norz, i already answered you in the Russian forum - no one is talking about rain. A proposal to increase the number of cloudy days, and increase the density of cloudiness. Precipitation and clouds are completely different weather settings.
Well, for the sake of justice: those 60% of the players you are talking about are, after all, blue side players, aren't they? ;)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, =2ndSS=temkatt said:

 those 60% of the players you are talking about are, after all, blue side players, aren't they? ;)

 

Not at all. As I said before, no one (at least in our group,  we play both sides) want to play in bad weather. Yes, it is a great experience.. but there are a lot of things in your life where you can get more pain than in this mission. So, if you like pain...why should you lose 2 hours exactly in TAW?

 

 

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Кому - война, кому - мать родна) It is about pain)
Some players have a very selective approach, right? We do not want to play in bad weather! OK. Do the Reds want to play without ShVAK on I-16? Or with locked VYa? Historically? So if we are for history - this is the historical weather. What? 60% will not play? My God.
No one asks for constant rain in missions. On the I-16, by the way, flying in the rain is still a pain. But to remove the absolutely clear sky is necessary. And for this proposal there is a serious rationale: weather reports. No need to make it so bad as in the reports. But the number of days with dense clouds (without precipitation) should be increased, IMHO.
By the way, as for precipitation - the snowfall is quite good.

Edited by =2ndSS=temkatt
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, =2ndSS=temkatt said:

No one asks for constant rain in missions. On the I-16, by the way, flying in the rain is still a pain. 

Just set your settings to Balanced, it will be totally OK.

 

I will skip all missions with the rain or snowfall (or almost all of them).

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voiced my suggestion above. This is just a suggestion, no demand, or even a request.
Our squad has always flown and will continue to fly on TAW, no matter what weather settings will be used. We never went down to the level: if you do that, some% will not play.
  At this point I ended the discussion.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

Just set your settings to Balanced, it will be totally OK.

 

I will skip all missions with the rain or snowfall (or almost all of them).

Let's get that rain going then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/18/2019 at 12:44 PM, Norz said:

Just set your settings to Balanced, it will be totally OK.

 

I will skip all missions with the rain or snowfall (or almost all of them).

Good riddance, [edited] weather diversity

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Way to personal. Respect other members
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historical weather on TAW, one can but dream. It's true that the weather has been highly unrealistic. There are almost never clear skies here and to the east along the Northern European flatlands that reach from Frisia to Moscow, even nowadays. You'll have several cloud layers regularly as well.

 

It certainly would make operations much more interesting (and less Hartmann spacecombat-style too).

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greater use of poor weather could prove to be a better controller of side imbalance than enforced player limits especially when one considered how the blue side can turn the server into a logistics simulator very easily.

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18.04.2019 в 14:44, Norz сказал:

Just set your settings to Balanced, it will be totally OK.

 

I will skip all missions with the rain or snowfall (or almost all of them).

Норз ты уже всех достал.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As asked previously.
Any update on launch of next campaign?

>S<
JG51_Ogg

CO JG51molders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Heavy weather can be a good equalizer indeed. I really enjoyed sorties in the heavy rain, adds a lot of atmosphere. Navigating is especially fun.

Edited by mincer
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think bad weather missions will ever be the equalizer everyone thinks and this is why:

 

Statistically speaking of course, the number of players that will be deterred by bad weather missions will be equally proportional on both the RED and BLUE sides. So in the long run (during the course of of 8 maps) on average, the TAW server imbalance in good weather will remain in bad weather, there will be just fewer players on both sides.

 

The only reason side A would see fewer players in bad weather would be if side B had a distinct advantage in bad weather (i.e. navigation/ friend or foe id/better maneuverability in bad weather). WIthout an inherent advantage of one side over the other, the statement above will hold.

 

Any argument of that suggests one side has more players that dislikes flying in bad weather than the other is highly speculative. However, I do see some validity to the thought.

 

Example: As German aircraft were highly automated when it came to engine management, one could use the logic that the BLUE side (...on average) may have more players participating in the TAW campaign because of easier engine management. Thus, the BLUE side will always have "more" but "less experienced" players than the RED side, because Russian, British and American aircraft engine management we less automated, making them harder to fly. 

 

With this hypotheses, bad weather missions would suggest less BLUE pilots turning out (i.e. only the more experienced BLUE pilots would be joining the mission at this point). For whatever reason, I don't care to speculate.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the weather will be an equalizer because a heavy overcast will bring blue fighters to lower altitudes where their advantage is not as big. You can also hide in the clouds which will add more randomness into fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a Bright little moment .... I know Notting about maps and posibillity ...but 

 

But can map start in sunshine , later  be raining and overcast 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, =2ndSS=KRIS_ said:

Норз ты уже всех достал.

Иваныч, ты поаккуратнее с ним... Чуть-что он сразу админам жалуется и просит забанить... В общем очень по-мужски себя ведет))) 

 

PS: Sorry for the Russian language

Edited by =2ndSS=Lawyer1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

.

 

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/21/2019 at 10:08 AM, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

Иваныч, ты поаккуратнее с ним... Чуть-что он сразу админам жалуется и просит забанить... В общем очень по-мужски себя ведет))) 

 

PS: Sorry for the Russian language

 

Уважаемый, скажите, с чего вы решили, что в мастерстве оскорбления вы заведомо лучше кого то иного?

 

 Человек, который оскорбляет кого то на форуме исходит/не исходит из следующего, за ответное оскорбление его могут забанить. Как я вижу, вы принадлежите ко второй группе людей, которые считают, что можно завуалированно кого то оскорбить и все ваши  приятели дружно с этого посмеются. Что же, у меня есть встречное предложение, откройте мне доступ на ваш форум и мы начнем соревноваться в оскорблениях, завуалированных либо нет, на ваше усмотрение. На этом форуме я предпочту не делать этого.

 

Dear Sir,

would you tell me what makes you think that you are more professional in insulting others as anybody else?

A person who insults somebody in the forum realizes/does not realize that he may be banned in case of the counter-insult. As far as I see, you belong to the second group of people who think that they may implicitly insult somebody and all their friends will have a good laugh together. Well, I suggest the following: provide me with the access to your forum, and we will start competing in insults, implicit or explicit, as you wish. In this forum, I would rather not do it.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 11:12 PM, mincer said:

I think the weather will be an equalizer because a heavy overcast will bring blue fighters to lower altitudes where their advantage is not as big. You can also hide in the clouds which will add more randomness into fighting.

 

In TAW like the actually Eastern Europe Theater, aircraft were used in a CAS (Combat Air Support of the troops on the ground) role mostly. Thus most aerial combat in TAW is already occurring below 5K, where both VVS and Luftwaffe fighter aircraft were almost equally matched (actually, one could argue that VVS fighter aircraft have an ever so slight advantage at these altitudes).

 

Note the data below:

image.thumb.png.4563248efe084e318a02d3924746a7c9.png

 

The Top 10 pilots with the most "Air Kills" are 60% VVS, 40% Luftwaffe. This is with fewer bad weather missions than what is currently proposed for the next campaign.

Now, here as another argument at disproves your hypothesis. If any side indeed had an advantage with fewer bad weather missions, the 60/40 stat would have been more like 80/20 or even 70/30.

 

The two points I have made disputes your argument that more bad weather missions be an "equalizer". Your statement is not supported by any fact.

  • There is currently no advantage the Luftwaffe side has with the few bad weather missions we have in TAW because dogfights already occur at low altitudes.

This means - increasing the probability of bad weather missions will not have any effect other than fewer players on both sides when a bad weather mision is generated. QEF! :thank_you:

Share this post


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

 

In TAW like the actually Eastern Europe Theater, aircraft were used in a CAS (Combat Air Support of the troops on the ground) role mostly. Thus most aerial combat in TAW is already occurring below 5K, where both VVS and Luftwaffe fighter aircraft were almost equally matched (actually, one could argue that VVS fighter aircraft have an ever so slight advantage at these altitudes).

 

Note the data below:

image.thumb.png.4563248efe084e318a02d3924746a7c9.png

 

The Top 10 pilots with the most "Air Kills" are 60% VVS, 40% Luftwaffe. This is with fewer bad weather missions than what is currently proposed for the next campaign.

Now, here as another argument at disproves your hypothesis. If any side indeed had an advantage with fewer bad weather missions, the 60/40 stat would have been more like 80/20 or even 70/30.

 

The two points I have made disputes your argument that more bad weather missions be an "equalizer". Your statement is not supported by any fact.

  • There is currently no advantage the Luftwaffe side has with the few bad weather missions we have in TAW because dogfights already occur at low altitudes.

This means - increasing the probability of bad weather missions will not have any effect other than fewer players on both sides when a bad weather mision is generated. QEF! :thank_you:

 

I certainly don’t have a dog in this fight, since I’ve given up on taw.  But your argument fails to consider the side imbalance.  Yes, more VVS fighters are in top 10 for kills,  but you don’t mention the relationship of kills to opportunity.  Sure is easier to get a kill when you’re outnumbered especially when only comparing fighters ( we all know LW has more fighters in the air than bombers, whereas VVS is a lower %).  Too many variables in my opinion to make the counter-argument you’re making.

 

I will agree however, that increasing poor weather missions just means less on both sides actually flying.  I also don’t like using precipitation in this sim since icing isn’t modeled.  Model freezing levels and we now have a real equalizer lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, =BES=Savage-6 said:

I certainly don’t have a dog in this fight, since I’ve given up on taw.  But your argument fails to consider the side imbalance.  Yes, more VVS fighters are in top 10 for kills,  but you don’t mention the relationship of kills to opportunity.  Sure is easier to get a kill when you’re outnumbered especially when only comparing fighters ( we all know LW has more fighters in the air than bombers, whereas VVS is a lower %).  Too many variables in my opinion to make the counter-argument you’re making.

 

I hear your argument - and I agree (...up to a point). When there is a 3:1 or 2:1 ratio b/w Luftwaffe vs VVS over any target area, it is more than likely the VVS pilot will get shot down. However, it is also my assumption that the VVS pilot will probably take one Luftwaffe pilot with them (...you know all those trains, VVS pilot on 1 plane and 1, 2 or 3 on the VVS pilot's tail). With target fixation another VVS fighter pilot could sneak up on the 1, 2 or 3 Luftwaffe pilots chasing the 1 VVS pilot and snag one before flying off. So imbalance can work for some VVS pilots and not so much for others. So you are correct! There is definitely an imbalance factor to consider.

 

Logic states with imbalance on TAW server, as there are more Luftwaffe pilots on average on the server to shoot down fewer VVS pilots, wouldn't more Luftwaffe pilots will be on the leaderboard? Or, would the VVS pilots make out better in the "Air Kill" departments with more available targets. I don't know the answer with the available information.

 

For the argument regarding bad weather being an "equalizer", is all I was trying to do is disprove it - nothing more, nothing less. The predominate "good weather" has not hurt the leaderboards.

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 11:20 AM, Norz said:

 

Что же, у меня есть встречное предложение, откройте мне доступ на ваш форум и мы начнем соревноваться в оскорблениях, завуалированных либо нет, на ваше усмотрение

Наш форум открыт, зарегистрироваться на нем способен даже первоклассник. 

Милости просим. Мы всегда рады любому общению) 

 

Our forum is open, even a child can register on it. 

Welcome. We are always glad to any communication) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Just now, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

Наш форум открыт, зарегистрироваться на нем способен даже первоклассник. 

Милости просим. Мы всегда рады любому общению

 

Our forum is open, even a child can register on it. 

Welcome. We are always glad to any communication) 

 

Gents, come on!

 

Гентс, веди себя пожалуйста!

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, E69_Hans_Luchs said:

When does the campaign start? it finished one month ago...

 

Salu2

No answer? 😭

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, 615sqn_Buzz said:

No answer? 😭

 

Max(pause) for previous campaigns was about 6 weeks.  If it will be in an usual way, it can be started in 2 weeks.

Edited by Norz

Share this post


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

 

Max(pause) for previous campaigns was about 6 weeks.  If it will be in an usual way, it can be started in 2 weeks.

 

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Id like historical weather on TAW for no other reason that it is... historical. 

I mean, is it no the sole reason we have TAW, to approach historical as much as we can? 

Edited by CptSiddy
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


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

Id like historical weather on TAW for no other reason that it is... historical. 

I mean, is is no the sole reason we have TAW, to approach historical as much as we can? 

 

CaptSiddy - I am with you bro! I too would love historic weather (...which make more sense random bad weather that are very unrealistic).

 

But we have a problem in that we fly static missions that cycle every 2 hours. Thus, weather is always static in TAW.

 

Starting a mission in bad weather is the very unrealistic from the accounts below:

 

Remember this: "Battle of the Bulge: Patton Ordered The Priest to Pray For Clear Weather, The Weather Subsequently Cleared"? The prayer was for GOOD weather to allow CAS. This tells us that no matter how dire things may have been at the front, smart generals were not in the business of launching aircraft that had a low probability of making it to their target or having a marginal degree of mission success.

 

"The War Diary of Hauptmann Helmut Lipfert"

-After reading this book, it is my opinion that German aircraft did not take off unless weather over the combat area was good enough for an effective combat mission. However, there were several instances in his memoirs bad weather flying and how treacherous it was. However, what was interesting is almost always bad weather set in enroute, and they pressed on, or they were already headed back to base after a mission.

 

"Jane's Battles with the Luftwaffe: The Bomber Campaign Against Germany 1942-45"

- Plenty of USAAF bomber missions were scrubbed because weather forecast predicted excessive cloud cover over the target area. It was not until the RAF started flying pathfinder missions with those damn wooden wonders for them! 

 

Unless TAW admin can somehow program the injection of various degrees of random bad weather into the server after it started (...which is no, since we are play static missions) I am not sure how we can have true "historic weather".

Edited by JG7_X-Man
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

5 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

CaptSiddy - I am with you bro! I too would love historic weather (...which make more sense random bad weather that are very unrealistic).

 

But we have a problem in that we fly static missions that cycle every 2 hours. Thus, weather is always static in TAW.

 

Starting a mission in bad weather is the very unrealistic from the accounts below:

 

Remember this: "Battle of the Bulge: Patton Ordered The Priest to Pray For Clear Weather, The Weather Subsequently Cleared"? The prayer was for GOOD weather to allow CAS. This tells us that no matter how dire things may have been at the front, smart generals were not in the business of launching aircraft that had a low probability of making it to their target or having a marginal degree of mission success.

 

"The War Diary of Hauptmann Helmut Lipfert"

-After reading this book, it is my opinion that German aircraft did not take off unless weather over the combat area was good enough for an effective combat mission. However, there were several instances in his memoirs bad weather flying and how treacherous it was. However, what was interesting is almost always bad weather set in enroute, and they pressed on, or they were already headed back to base after a mission.

 

"Jane's Battles with the Luftwaffe: The Bomber Campaign Against Germany 1942-45"

- Plenty of USAAF bomber missions were scrubbed because weather forecast predicted excessive cloud cover over the target area. It was not until the RAF started flying pathfinder missions with those damn wooden wonders for them! 

 

Unless TAW admin can somehow program the injection of various degrees of random bad weather into the server after it started (...which is no, since we are play static missions) I am not sure how we can have true "historic weather".

The bad weather as you call It that we have in taw is not a real bad weather. Its just overvast with light rain , slight fogging (where still you have something like 7-9 km visibility )And unrealistic high cloud base of 1.8 to almost 3 km (You can call It bad weather for armchair pilots). In europe even in summer when the weather is good the base of the good weather clouds (cumulus clouds) is rearly as high as 1.8km . If You want a real bad weather (about which You are quoting Patton)the clouds base should be much much lower (much below 1000m And sometimes even just above the ground)And visibility in rain also shorter. Additionally the icing is not moddeled in il2 which was also hampering the real life missions  quite often during bad weather in winter, early spring etc

Edited by Carl_infar
  • Upvote 5

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...