Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

Well, since you can’t bomb in the clouds, and the anti-aircraft guns are too aggressive, then of course the server administration will remove the clouds and turn off the anti-aircraft guns for your sake 😁

For example I am a bomber pilot. I drop bombs from the level and dive towards the target. Clouds and anti-aircraft guns almost do not bother me.

You have some kind of shild? 

If so, we would very much like to borrow it 😜

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Loke said:

 

With heavy cloud layer, one of course have to do low level bombing, and we did expect to get hit, and might loose a plane. However, this target and previous targets also result in a 100% loss of entire flight, only due to a utterly extrem heavy and most accuate AA fire. 

 

We use half a hour and more to get to target, only to get blasted out of the sky.

 

On other servers like Knights of the air, we do not get murded by AA like on TAW. 

 

It has nothing to do with how we preform the brun, as we tried in many different ways, with more or less same result. 

 

 

There's always an opening in the clouds, think about secondary targets if you are align and can't see a damn thing, repeat again if you can't see secondary neither and seek for a third one.

Half an hour is the least amount of time a level bomber need to get in to target, It normally takes 40-45 minutes if you make a good route and RTB escape route.

If you get murdered by AAA you are either flying too low or you are the unluckiest guy in TAW, I've been hit only ONCE by a direct heavy AAA hit, most of us get only light damage, loss of fuel by it.

 

Flying a level bomber mission takes some homework before you get in the cockpit, that usually speed up A LOT with experience, time and patience.

 

As our comrade up there said, the most dangerous thing we can encounter is a bandit up high.
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am locked out ?????

 

Hi I amlocked out, my pilot name is xfiles_ I connect for the 2nd time to TAW as gunner after this I waslocked out whats wrong????I have the same name in the il2 account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=se-link

Your TAW name and your IL-2 account name must be the same.  Your TAW account name doesn't have any missions, so it's possible you tried to connect to TAW with any of these "xfiles" names:

http://taw.stg2.de/stats.php?search_name=xfiles_

 

However, you can only have one name per side, which is most likely se-link or one of the original xfiles names you created. Change your IL2 account to match the TAW name, or change the TAW name to match your IL2 account.

 

Additionally, you can not be in any gunner seat except for your own plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet the German Army wish they had a balancing script when they were being overrun by superior numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JG51_Moostafa said:

I bet the German Army wish they had a balancing script when they were being overrun by superior numbers.

Haha - yeah no doubt :).  Of course here in the alternate WW2 history of TAW, it’s the opposite as the German army and Luftwaffe have a secret “soldier and pilot factory” that spits out hundreds of crack shots and aces every day and  is able to overwhelm the overwhelming Russian hordes :D... haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New map, #7 and the difference on fighters are incredible unbalance.

7 fighters for blues/ 6 fighters for reds

 2 BF109G2/1 Lagg3, really. + P39

2 FW190A3 / 1Yak1b

1BF109G4/1 Spit MkV

1 FW190A5/ 1 La5FN

1 BF109G6/ 1Yak 7b

 

This distribution is really a joke against us that play red team.

Give us 2 Yak7b or 2 Yak 1b

 

Edited by 666GIAP_Necathor
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

New map, #7 and the difference on fighters are incredible unbalance.

7 fighters for blues/ 6 fighters for reds

 2 BF109G2/1 Lagg3, really. + P39

2 FW190A3 / 1Yak1b

1BF109G4/1 Spit MkV

1 FW190A5/ 1 La5FN

1 BF109G6/ 1Yak 7b

 

This distribution is really a joke against us that play red team.

Give us 2 Yak7b or 2 Yak 1b

 

 

Earlier campaign was won by reds with similar plane set as now? Or am I wrong...

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LLv24_Veccu said:

 

Earlier campaign was won by reds with similar plane set as now? Or am I wrong...

 

 

Veccu, my complaing is about the un -balance of fighters on this map, don't try to dismiss my point, win a map or a campaing take a lot of other points like quorum, team work, unbalance teams.

When a map is balance, normally the battle ends when one side depplets his resources planes, pilots, tanks.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2019 at 12:38 PM, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

=LG=Kathon,

May I ask to show possible statistics of the game on map No. 3?

 

Tanks are deducted from the limit after the destruction of buildings in warehouses. Is this taken into account in the outcome of the mission?
I definitely saw that the Reds were losing in the total number of tanks destroyed. I would like others to see it/

 

And if the Reds destroy blue tanks so easily, why was the front shifted to the West the day before yesterday?

 

image.png.9af50f77908d5c39484e73009788a0f3.png

 

On 8/24/2019 at 1:37 AM, von_Tom said:

 

Our experience today...

 

Several could spawn and 2 or 3 managed to take off.

 

I had to wait 9 or so minutes though I'm not sure why.  Others had various times between 7 and 8 minutes.  My last flight (on Tuesday) was a Steam VR problem disconnect after 3min but I have no idea if that is connected to this.  On reflection the flight before that I had to disco after landing as I had the escape key bug so you can't get to finish mission.  I cannot find anything that correlates negative points with spawning delays - maybe someone could point me in the right direction.

 

After spawning I had a message saying the Axis side was full and I was in slot 3, then after a while I got kicked.  I spawned back in twice to get the same message, and was kicked twice.  Several others had slots 8 and 9 etc.  They also got kicked

 

We ended up not flying a sortie because most of us couldn't get in the air, so we all went elsewhere.

 

It is a great server when it works, but the barriers to enjoyment seem very high.

 

von Tom

 

The shot time penalty (10min or 15min) please check this change log: 

 

If you get message "You are on position X" then you have to end your sortie and come back to the briefing until you get massage "You are clear to take off". Then you can spawn and take off.

 

On 8/24/2019 at 4:30 AM, 69th_Andy said:

Hello all.

 

@any TAW admin who can help.

 

I created an account on TAW for AndrewZaytsev, but recently joined the 69th, I forgot my password and created a new account for this name (not to cheat! Had every intention of disgarding the first name!) , sadly my second account, 69th_Andy, is locked and I can't log in to fix this on the first account. Would it be at all possible to make this account the active account instead of my old one, AndrewZaytsev?

 

Any help you can give would be MUCH appreciated! Thank you!

 

1. Change locked account (69th_Andy) to something else

2. Change your active account (AndrewZaytsev) to 69th_Andy

 

To change name of the TAW account please log in and click Pilot profile in the top right corner.

 

On 8/26/2019 at 11:50 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

@=LG=Kathon

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=55625&name=JG7_X-Man

 

Not sure what happened here. 

 

I shot down a guy and landed at our airfield. for some reason I don't exit the game. The finally I got kicked for inactivity.

Not sure what you can do - just reporting a bug.

 

Once you land at your airbase - no one should be able to claim a kill.

Not to mention i lost my F-4 too even though  landed successfully per the log.

He didn't get AK because you landed. There is a bug info in your sortie that you had been shot down by him. 

 

On 8/27/2019 at 6:22 PM, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

Why does not the closure of aerodromes work?
Today played 2 against 13 and all airfields were open

 

The script closes airfields after 15min from the mission's start. It also takes into account number of spawned aircraft on the front line airfields. So if some pilots of those 13 spawned from the further airfields then script might have not closed front line airfields.

 

 

On 8/29/2019 at 4:15 PM, WG_Magners said:

TAW manual says depot buildings are counted as tanks in 3:1 ratio. Does it means for the team score they are counted like 9 destroyed buildings = 3 destroyed tanks? 

Yes, but you will not have those tanks in your stats (only more ground kills). Those destroyed tanks will be counted in total tank limit on the current map.

 

On 8/30/2019 at 1:25 AM, 72AG_Obi said:

Here is an example for first/start mission in Cuban and how much it's biased towards Blue team.

If Germans succeed taking out Akhturskaya, Gelendzhik gets cut off of the rest of the Soviet's resources so basically it's like the beginning of the end for Reds.

If Soviets succeed taking out Timashevskaya, Germans are still good to continue as all their AFs are still well within their support lines.

Add to it the lack of red pilot numbers at the beginning of the map to repel Germans attack and you can figure out how bad is the logic to balance the initial start of this map.

I feel like this map is for reds who like and enjoy pain )))

 

map_nr381.jpg

 

If you write about bias by spawned tank convoys then this bias is not by design. Every map in each campaign may start with different tanks positions (it's random).

 

On 8/30/2019 at 10:30 AM, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

Mission 385. The blue tanks were more than 25 kilometers away from the airfield. Why did the airfield close?

2019_8_29__18_19_48.thumb.jpg.9ff3dcb9fbbf0aa5d34f52ef93e95db5.jpg

 

 

Distance to enemy airfield or city is taking into account and city Viselky was closer than 25km.

 

 

On 8/30/2019 at 2:33 PM, STOIKIY said:

 

Yeah.  i agree this.  MiG was there.  Admins u can take one Yak1 and give us MiG.

We will see.

 

On 8/31/2019 at 10:37 AM, 6./ZG26_Loke said:

Can't say this server is very bomber friendly. Thick thick cloud layer, and insane strong AA.

On last nights bombrun on rear factories, all bombers were taken apart with in a minut. 

 

If this shall be a place were bomber pilots also can participate, then we need a fair chance of succes. 

 

S! 

40% of clouds are clear or light so almost half of the mission are friendly for bombers. 

 

On 8/31/2019 at 9:26 PM, Ropalcz said:

Change-My-Mind.jpg.1df2eb9bac5f17281b94cf1f264eb2d2.jpg

I can't ;)

 

I have a solution in my mind to this issue by a cost of the balance. We will test it in the next campaign. 

 

7 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

New map, #7 and the difference on fighters are incredible unbalance.

7 fighters for blues/ 6 fighters for reds

 2 BF109G2/1 Lagg3, really. + P39

2 FW190A3 / 1Yak1b

1BF109G4/1 Spit MkV

1 FW190A5/ 1 La5FN

1 BF109G6/ 1Yak 7b

 

This distribution is really a joke against us that play red team.

Give us 2 Yak7b or 2 Yak 1b

 

On the other hand Allied have more fighters on map #6, but maybe it's a good idea to equalize it.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm surprised that with the new map (Stalingrad) suddenly many red birds fly, mmh a miracle or a happy coincidence?
Or complaining at a high level?
 

😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JG4_Widukind said:
I'm surprised that with the new map (Stalingrad) suddenly many red birds fly, mmh a miracle or a happy coincidence?
Or complaining at a high level?
 

😀

 

Tell the nice officer, where did the La-5FN touch you?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess i will dedicate to attacker aircraft: ju87 and 110 every time i touch a fighter shit happens. Colided with another 109. 

Edited by =BLW=Tales

Share this post


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

 

Tell the nice officer, where did the La-5FN touch you?

Not in '42 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2019 at 12:23 PM, SCG_Limbo said:

 

Assuming the airfield was not damaged more than 75% or under repair, and I cannot find any evidence in the mission logs to suggest that it was, then the tanks being within 25 KM distance range is the only explanation for the field being closed.  28 KM is somewhat close to 25 KM so perhaps the distance algorithm TAW uses was triggered somehow. 

 

In general, the 25 KM value for tanks to close airfields seems a bit extreme to me and the previous value of 15 KM was better in my opinion.

 

Yeah - I have been pondering this for awhile. Figuring loosely, a tanks' main gun at max effective range is 5 KM, so I can't see an infantry units attacking any more than 4 KM ahead, OK loosely - 4.5 KM ahead of the supporting armor at which point they will get hit by friendly fire (...no fire-control system in WWII tanks). So shutting down airfield 25 KM ahead of an assault is not plausible at all! 10 - 15 is more realistic.

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the reason the admins extended the range from 15km, as sometimes the defenders had a huge advantage attacking the tanks before the attacking aircraft could defend.  However, IMO 25km may be a bit much, as it often seems to close down airfields when the attacking tanks first appear (if the town/airfield doing the attacking is relatively close by).

 

Personally, I’d recommend reducing the range to 20km to see if that kept some of the frontline airfields open more often, on the first of three missions that the tanks attack.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

New map, #7 and the difference on fighters are incredible unbalance.

7 fighters for blues/ 6 fighters for reds

 2 BF109G2/1 Lagg3, really. + P39

2 FW190A3 / 1Yak1b

1BF109G4/1 Spit MkV

1 FW190A5/ 1 La5FN

1 BF109G6/ 1Yak 7b

 

This distribution is really a joke against us that play red team.

Give us 2 Yak7b or 2 Yak 1b

 

 I agree - it's only fair.

Share this post


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

 

Yeah - I have been pondering this for awhile. Figuring loosely, a tanks' main gun at max effective range is 5 KM, so I can't see an infantry units attacking any more than 4 KM ahead, OK loosely - 4.5 KM ahead of the supporting armor at which point they will get hit by friendly fire (...no fire-control system in WWII tanks). So shutting down airfield 25 KM ahead of an assault is not plausible at all! 10 - 15 is more realistic.

 

I guess they dont get closed because the AF gets shot to pieces. Rather they evacuate planes and personal as long they are still able to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [_FLAPS_]Grim said:

 

I guess they dont get closed because the AF gets shot to pieces. Rather they evacuate planes and personal as long they are still able to.

Usually the tank division has its own artillery, which allows you to throw shells at 20-25 km.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Will the developers somehow try to solve the problem of almost complete absence of the use of assault aircraft on both sides....?

Currently, the most used are PE-2\Yu-88\BF-110.

Il-2 and Yu-87 are practically not used.

That is not good and historical. Do you think this is a problem and if so, what solutions are you considering....?

Edited by =FPS=Cutlass
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, =FPS=Cutlass said:

Usually the tank division has its own artillery, which allows you to throw shells at 20-25 km.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Will the developers somehow try to solve the problem of almost complete absence of the use of assault aircraft on both sides....?

Currently, the most used are PE-2\Yu-88\BF-110.

Il-2 and Yu-87 are practically not used.

That is not good and historical. Do you think this is a problem and if so, what solutions are you considering....?

 

 

Remove all AI gunners, period, that will solve most dual engine bomber/attacker soloing with impunity. 

 

I don't really care myself for the rear gunners, tho i do man my 6 myself because i am just better shot than most long range AI (its the short range snap shots AI excels at anyhow).

However, i do know that Pe-2 and Ju-88's back gunner give them ability to punch above their weight class in air to air situations. The 110's back gunner has more limited fire arch but still a factor, and if nothing else, an alarm system. 

 

Removing gunners will force bomber pilots to whine, cry and beg for air cover... that will never materialize. And i am fine with that. 

 

 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The jabo 190 is by far the best attack aircraft on TAW during the latter half of the campaign anyway.  Nothing can catch them and they drop a nuke(or a good number of smaller bombs) .

 

Bodenplatte giving this capability to both sides should equalize the advantage and force server devs to find antidotes, if they so desire.

Edited by 7.GShAP/Silas
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =FPS=Cutlass said:

Will the developers somehow try to solve the problem of almost complete absence of the use of assault aircraft on both sides....?

Currently, the most used are PE-2\Yu-88\BF-110.

Il-2 and Yu-87 are practically not used.

That is not good and historical. Do you think this is a problem and if so, what solutions are you considering....?

 

Im not sure is a developers problem Cutlass. 

 

If p2 or ju88 are most used on servers for assault  attack, like TAW i think is because this kind of planes offer most survive posibilities for attacker because the best option for survive is stay minimun time over target....  dive, lot of speed, single pass and continue runing to home. 

 

But for example on my case... on a p2 maybe i can arhive maximun 6 or 7 objectives ... on a Il2 i can archive 12-16 objectives.  bombs, rockets, cannon... but i need many time over objective... 

 

There are 2 posible solutions from my point of view... the most effective is, change objectives distribution ....  tanks and vehicles no travel more on a perfect line along the roads... objectives need stay ditributed on a small zone... but not aligned, maybe on small groups, the idea is end with "carpet" bomb attack and force to "clinical" attack.  The other option, actually avaliable, is creat a air superiority over assault objective.... but this requires a minmun group of players coordinated..

 

;) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The jabo 190 is by far the best attack aircraft on TAW during the latter half of the campaign anyway.  Nothing can catch them and they drop a nuke(or a good number of smaller bombs) .

 

Bodenplatte giving this capability to both sides should equalize the advantage and force server devs to find antidotes, if they so desire.

 

This is why i want the p-47 on last few maps

14 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Tumu said:

 

 

There are 2 posible solutions from my point of view... the most effective is, change objectives distribution ....  tanks and vehicles no travel more on a perfect line along the roads... objectives need stay ditributed on a small zone... but not aligned, maybe on small groups, the idea is end with "carpet" bomb attack and force to "clinical" attack.  The other option, actually avaliable, is creat a air superiority over assault objective.... but this requires a minmun group of players coordinated..

 

;) 

 

 

Yes, this, and scatter the defensive positions a bit more. There is no way any sane commander would group most of his assets in way a single 500kg bomb can take out. 

Tanks in assault formations, so you cant just nuke it up and down of the road all day erry day.

Defense positions in a way that also need more than lobbing biggest possible bombs in the middle of it or across the AT + Tank line. 

 

Rest of the targets like supply convoys, trains and such are fine as they are and more or less make sense... but tanks and defenses do not. 

 

 

The bombing meta is getting stale, same old same old, 600kmh dive across the target and carpetbomb or lob few big ones and scooter home. The only reason people bring single IL-2's out is to mop up the surviving 2-4 tanks that peshkas cant be arsed to finish. 

 

There is no real reason to bring out massed formations of IL-2's, same goes for stukas. Unlike on real front, where massed IL-2 and stukas were an actual commonplace occurrence. 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the suggestions are remove the AI gunners from the Ground Attack aircraft and make the ground targets more difficult to hit; should we rename the server Berloga #2 as well?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

So the suggestions are remove the AI gunners from the Ground Attack aircraft and make the ground targets more difficult to hit; should we rename the server Berloga #2 as well?

 

Don't let them fly un escorted on a prom night.

 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 666GIAP_Tumu said:

 

Im not sure is a developers problem Cutlass. 

 

If p2 or ju88 are most used on servers for assault  attack, like TAW i think is because this kind of planes offer most survive posibilities for attacker because the best option for survive is stay minimun time over target....  dive, lot of speed, single pass and continue runing to home. 

 

But for example on my case... on a p2 maybe i can arhive maximun 6 or 7 objectives ... on a Il2 i can archive 12-16 objectives.  bombs, rockets, cannon... but i need many time over objective... 

 

There are 2 posible solutions from my point of view... the most effective is, change objectives distribution ....  tanks and vehicles no travel more on a perfect line along the roads... objectives need stay ditributed on a small zone... but not aligned, maybe on small groups, the idea is end with "carpet" bomb attack and force to "clinical" attack.  The other option, actually avaliable, is creat a air superiority over assault objective.... but this requires a minmun group of players coordinated..

 

;) 

 

I know all this and fully agree with your description of the reasons for this state of Affairs.

 

But in reality, the Luftwaffe did not have such a number of Yu-88\BF-110, and the red army air force did not have such a number of PE-2.

And both parties had such an amount of heavy ammunition 250-500kg.

All this combined makes the bombers and BF-110's main strike aircraft. I think it makes sense to make the PE-2 more variable, for example He-111 with blocked loads of heavy bombs caliber 250-500kg. In the game, unfortunately, there are no SB-2 aircraft, which were the most massive at the initial stage of the war.

They can emulate a limitation bomb load to one of the PE-2 6-10 FAB-100, for the Ju-88 also to determine the most typical making download of one of the available Ju-88 heavier and the other lighter. The same bombers with restrictions on downloads and no restrictions, you can breed the types of airfields.

From small airfields to allow the rise of only melkimi medium bombs, and large airfields with any bombs.

Edited by =FPS=Cutlass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats,

Axis can't fly because no one wants to fly Allied at this time.  1 Allied 17 Axis logged in on server.  Go to spawn in.......You're in line sit and wait.  
I'm done with this monkey dookie.  Call me when you get the spawns fixed so a player logging into the server can actually use the server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JG51_Ogg said:

Congrats,

Axis can't fly because no one wants to fly Allied at this time.  1 Allied 17 Axis logged in on server.  Go to spawn in.......You're in line sit and wait.  
I'm done with this monkey dookie.  Call me when you get the spawns fixed so a player logging into the server can actually use the server.

 

 

Dear lord, get a grip of yourself, my man. You have been "leaving" this server harder than UK from EU. 

  • Haha 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut the turn rate of VVS since there are no gforces over the pilot, no fatigue, no confusion, nobody need strenght to pull the stick. : ) Ok, it is an idiot solution such as to remove gunners. No reds was complaining about pe-2 sniper shots.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StG77_HvB said:

So the suggestions are remove the AI gunners from the Ground Attack aircraft and make the ground targets more difficult to hit; should we rename the server Berloga #2 as well?


May I humbly suggest: Berloga 2, Tactical Boogaloo?

Though removing the gunners changes nothing in regards to the aircraft of choice for attacks. Even if you removed all the gunners from the Pe-2, it would still be more survivable than an Il-2 over a defended target because of its speed and attack profile. Il-2s are too vulnerable to flak and too slow to escape fighters. If I take an Il-2 I will often take one without a gunner as I have better luck hitting overshooting 109s with my forward-firing armament than having my gunner actually hit anything critical, and the extra speed is worth it to exit the target area faster. If removing the gunners in the Pe-2 gave me more speed I would remove them. Even when my gunners have destroyed enemy aircraft (once or twice in 20 sorties) I end up being shot down anyway, I'd rather live, thanks. 

So removing the gunners does nothing to change the 'meta' people are complaining about IMO. It just makes bombers easier targets, doesn't change the grim mathematics of war.

In the real war pilots would be under orders to do things that involved greater risks to themselves, to make attacks that were nearly suicidal, and they would have to do it. Look at the life expectancy of Il-2 pilots in the real war. If they had a choice, they would have flown a faster aircraft against a safer target too. There's no realistic way to model this on a multiplayer server, since people can just go and play somewhere else less restrictive.

The server is built around valuing your virtual life and your planes.  We can't be surprised when pilots then choose the aircraft that give the best chance of survival.

A lot of guys see bombers and attackers only as targets and it really shows.



 

Edited by RedKestrel
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@=LG=:

 

Was just looking at the map and noticed Kachalinskaya was captured at the end of mission 442.  But the tanks only first appeared in mission 441 - shouldn’t there have been one more mission before the city was captured?  The tanks were not yet that close to the city/airfield as they usually are for the third turn of tank travel.  It does not appear paratroopers we’re used.

Edited by AKA_Relent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2019 at 9:13 PM, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

New map, #7 and the difference on fighters are incredible unbalance.

7 fighters for blues/ 6 fighters for reds

 2 BF109G2/1 Lagg3, really. + P39

2 FW190A3 / 1Yak1b

1BF109G4/1 Spit MkV

1 FW190A5/ 1 La5FN

1 BF109G6/ 1Yak 7b

 

This distribution is really a joke against us that play red team.

Give us 2 Yak7b or 2 Yak 1b

 

 

Also, the Yak1b and the La5FN are premium planes that many of us don’t have

Share this post


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

 

Also, the Yak1b and the La5FN are premium planes that many of us don’t have

 

 

not having the rocket sled...

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...