Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Tanks were attacked with cannon armed aircraft throughout the war. Il-2s used cannons to attack tanks all the time. So did cannon-armed Ju-87s, cannon-armed Hurricanes....the actual RL impact is debatable, but then the real life ability of bombs or rockets to reliably kill tanks are in question too. 

Show me a sortie where an Il-2 actually takes out a tank column solo. Maybe its possible but with how vulnerable they are to fighters and AA I'm skeptical that it's a viable approach. Even after AA has been taken out a single Il-2 would be hard pressed to wipe an entire tank column...with the cannons that are able to kill tanks multiple hits are needed on each tank, and the ammo count is not very high.

The planes that hit the tank columns hardest are level bombers with 100kg bombs, dropping in a straight line along the column - which is less historical than IL-2s attacking tank columns, for certain. If a bunch of guys want to risk their virtual lives to hammer a tank column in  Il-2s, good for them. People always complain we don't see enough Il-2s and that people fly too many Pe-2s. 

There were entire Jabo specialized squadrons on the eastern front with the FW-190. Soviet fighters were pressed into service as ground attackers fairly frequently, especially early in the war. If we're looking at it historically, there's no reason to limit the use of fighter-bombers. 

 

I agree. Tanks movings on roads should diperse from roads and do defensive driving at iminence of Air attack. The attackers should go to pin point bombs or high calliber Guns.

41 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Tanks were attacked with cannon armed aircraft throughout the war. Il-2s used cannons to attack tanks all the time. So did cannon-armed Ju-87s, cannon-armed Hurricanes....the actual RL impact is debatable, but then the real life ability of bombs or rockets to reliably kill tanks are in question too. 

Show me a sortie where an Il-2 actually takes out a tank column solo. Maybe its possible but with how vulnerable they are to fighters and AA I'm skeptical that it's a viable approach. Even after AA has been taken out a single Il-2 would be hard pressed to wipe an entire tank column...with the cannons that are able to kill tanks multiple hits are needed on each tank, and the ammo count is not very high.

The planes that hit the tank columns hardest are level bombers with 100kg bombs, dropping in a straight line along the column - which is less historical than IL-2s attacking tank columns, for certain. If a bunch of guys want to risk their virtual lives to hammer a tank column in  Il-2s, good for them. People always complain we don't see enough Il-2s and that people fly too many Pe-2s. 

There were entire Jabo specialized squadrons on the eastern front with the FW-190. Soviet fighters were pressed into service as ground attackers fairly frequently, especially early in the war. If we're looking at it historically, there's no reason to limit the use of fighter-bombers. 

 

I agree. Tanks movings on roads should diperse from roads and do defensive driving at iminence of Air attack. The attackers should go to pin point bombs or high calliber Guns. Why not allow to create separate fighter, Bomber and attacker account. Give a single life for fighter, and two or three for attacker/bombers. Guys shotdown on fighters so have to jump on bombers/attacker.

41 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Tanks were attacked with cannon armed aircraft throughout the war. Il-2s used cannons to attack tanks all the time. So did cannon-armed Ju-87s, cannon-armed Hurricanes....the actual RL impact is debatable, but then the real life ability of bombs or rockets to reliably kill tanks are in question too. 

Show me a sortie where an Il-2 actually takes out a tank column solo. Maybe its possible but with how vulnerable they are to fighters and AA I'm skeptical that it's a viable approach. Even after AA has been taken out a single Il-2 would be hard pressed to wipe an entire tank column...with the cannons that are able to kill tanks multiple hits are needed on each tank, and the ammo count is not very high.

The planes that hit the tank columns hardest are level bombers with 100kg bombs, dropping in a straight line along the column - which is less historical than IL-2s attacking tank columns, for certain. If a bunch of guys want to risk their virtual lives to hammer a tank column in  Il-2s, good for them. People always complain we don't see enough Il-2s and that people fly too many Pe-2s. 

There were entire Jabo specialized squadrons on the eastern front with the FW-190. Soviet fighters were pressed into service as ground attackers fairly frequently, especially early in the war. If we're looking at it historically, there's no reason to limit the use of fighter-bombers. 

 

I agree. Tanks movings on roads should diperse from roads and do defensive driving at iminence of Air attack. The attackers should go to pin point bombs or high calliber Guns. Why not allow to create separate fighter, Bomber and attacker account. Give a single life for fighter, and two or three for attacker/bombers. Guys shotdown on fighters so have to jump on bombers/attacker.

Is possible to give prize to a successfull cover. You should get cover typing a command chat within certain range of enemy bomber or flaring. On ancient il2.org.ru bomber should deploy smoke followed by a fighter. Think a way to give best prizes to fighters that effectively do cap or barcap.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, III./SG77-G_Boelcke said:

 

I agree. Tanks movings on roads should diperse from roads and do defensive driving at iminence of Air attack. The attackers should go to pin point bombs or high calliber Guns. Why not allow to create separate fighter, Bomber and attacker account. Give a single life for fighter, and two or three for attacker/bombers. Guys shotdown on fighters so have to jump on bombers/attacker.

Is possible to give prize to a successfull cover. You should get cover typing a command chat within certain range of enemy bomber or flaring. On ancient il2.org.ru bomber should deploy smoke followed by a fighter. Think a way to give best prizes to fighters that effectively do cap or barcap.

Switching back and forth from different accounts seems clunky. Probably just easier to have separate "Attacker Lives" and "Fighter lives" counters since the game can detect when you use a fighter, bomber or attacker for sortie count purposes. Kind of falls apart when using fighter-bombers though.IMO its too complicated to have two sets of lives, its already pretty complex. And my mortality rate was actually higher when flying fighters...

 

5 minutes ago, J5_Spyboy said:

Would human gunners help with the ai sniper problem?

Maybe. AI gunners can get the sniper shots but they also seem prone to miss stupidly. Human players, maybe not. Some human players are absolute menaces on the gunner positions.

But it introduces a whole host of problems. In the past people have hopped into gunner positions and intentionally shot their own aircraft. They would take up spaces in the server which would be an issue at peak times. Its not even clear to me if the admins can even remove the AI gunners if they want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SCG_Limbo said:

 

 

 

What makes you believe that exactly for the tanks?  Sources please?  Historically, bombs were notoriously bad for killing tanks and basically required direct hits as the energy in the explosive radius dissipates quickly.  For a good read on the topic, try: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26512-a-quick-look-at-bomb-effectiveness-vs-armor/?fromsearch=1

 and following Finkeren's link to the technical study.  There are many treatease discussing that tank busting from planes was vastly exaggerated during the war (e.g., https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/myth-of-combat-aircraft-destroying-tanks.27496/). I'd be willing to bet that Ruddel's actual tank kill count was vastly exaggerated.

 

I think you misunderstood my point.

In real life, most of the bombs fell way further away than in TAW, here, you can actually drop bombs within 5 meters of any target, being dropped at high altitude, or buzzing touching treetops.

You are mixing HIT stats with the OUTCOME of a hit, in real life, anything around a 50 kg bomb would get a PZ4/t34 landing on the side at least, if not belly up, the only thing is that in real life hitting something was 1000000% more difficult than in a game, and people mostly missed a lot, look for "last year of the luftwaffe" if I can recall correctly, you could read about many pilots trying to hit a bridge (big one, very big) and they missed, by far, that's why the send lots and lots of planes to assure the task is complete.

 

RAF showed that a Jabo could have a 50% the chance of dropping a bomb within 65 meters of the target, contrary to this game were you can actually put a bomb right next to it, or in front, or behind  almost every time.

There's plenty of pics on the internet of tanks upside down due to a near miss of a bomb, or a navy shell, which carries less HE than a SC500 or 1000lb bomb.

I love this sim, but flying in real life was waaaaayyyyy more dangerous and difficult than here, you'll get shot at from everywhere, AAA, small arms, machine guns, anything, so you were thinking more in coming back than in hitting that bloody pixel that moves down there.

Level bombing, that is another history, my squadron can actually obliterate a Depot in a sortie, in real life, many pilots would drop their payload somewhere else.

 

 

Many, many years ago I watched a BBC documentary (I believe it was BBC) called something with Blitz, or blitz bombing, can't remember, were they where testing the damage produced by german bombs, starting with a SC50 (around 25kg of TNT) and ending with the big ones.

 

 



 

Share this post


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

Unbalanced teams during off-hours would make significantly less damage and it would take a lot more effort to move the front line.

To do this, you just need to close the airfields began to work not with 10 players, but with 5

1 hour ago, J5_Spyboy said:

Would human gunners help with the ai sniper problem?

I have no such problems

Share this post


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

Tanks were attacked with cannon armed aircraft throughout the war. Il-2s used cannons to attack tanks all the time. So did cannon-armed Ju-87s, cannon-armed Hurricanes....the actual RL impact is debatable, but then the real life ability of bombs or rockets to reliably kill tanks are in question too. 

Show me a sortie where an Il-2 actually takes out a tank column solo. Maybe its possible but with how vulnerable they are to fighters and AA I'm skeptical that it's a viable approach. Even after AA has been taken out a single Il-2 would be hard pressed to wipe an entire tank column...with the cannons that are able to kill tanks multiple hits are needed on each tank, and the ammo count is not very high.

The planes that hit the tank columns hardest are level bombers with 100kg bombs, dropping in a straight line along the column - which is less historical than IL-2s attacking tank columns, for certain. If a bunch of guys want to risk their virtual lives to hammer a tank column in  Il-2s, good for them. People always complain we don't see enough Il-2s and that people fly too many Pe-2s. 

There were entire Jabo specialized squadrons on the eastern front with the FW-190. Soviet fighters were pressed into service as ground attackers fairly frequently, especially early in the war. If we're looking at it historically, there's no reason to limit the use of fighter-bombers. 

 

 

Dude, I said no mods. Didn't said anti-tank cannons didn't existed -- they did. Didn't say JagdBomber didn't existied -- they did. All I said is to use the most common equipment and the game developers already have determined it so that we don't have to start endless debates on every single piece of equipment for every aircraft with all kinds of book quotes, flight manuals and other endless bullshit about what is "historical".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, III./SG77-G_Boelcke said:

Is possible to give prize to a successfull cover. You should get cover typing a command chat within certain range of enemy bomber or flaring. On ancient il2.org.ru bomber should deploy smoke followed by a fighter. Think a way to give best prizes to fighters that effectively do cap or barcap.

 

I remember this, I thought it was a great system. A bomber would briefly turn on his smoke and a chat message would appear "WokeUpDead is requesting cover in 0971.2." You would then have to fly to within a couple km of the bomber, briefly turn on smoke yourself, and a chat message would appear "Boelcke is covering WokeUpDead." If the bomber then made some ground kills and successfully returned to base, the covering fighter would get a few points.

 

Some people said that this system made it too easy for bombers to navigate as they could automatically figure out their position by turning smoke on and off and looking at the chat message, but I say that bombers had dedicated crew and equipment for navigating and would be less likely to get lost than single-seat fighters anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SCG_OpticFlow said:

I have a simple idea that would make the TAW experience more historical, more hardcore and more balanced for both sides.

 

The game developers already researched which were the typical weapons and equipment on each aircraft during the given time frame and set the less common ones as lockable modifications. My idea is to follow through and enable the locks on everything.

 

No mods would mean:

 

Fighters would be fighters only. No more JaBo. No extra cannons/heavy MGs.

 

Attacking tanks would be done with bombs and rockets, like it was in the war. One-man-airforce IL-2s taking out single-handedly an entire tank column would stop (I hope).

 

No more nuking the site from orbit. 110, 88 and Pe-2 get up to 250kg bombs, 111 up to 500kg. Stuka remains the only heavy bomb platform (up to 1000kg), but is slow and lacks the bombing sight.

 

Unbalanced teams during off-hours would make significantly less damage and it would take a lot more effort to move the front line.


Not necessarily the mods represent the uncommon types used by the planes, sometimes standard equipment is in mod categories like some rockets, the 23mm in the IL-2 1942/1943, the 30mm cannon in the Hs 129, outer wing 20mm in Fw 190s, the factory built Jabo configurations, etc etc.

The strafing tank with cannons isn't that meta anymore... since a tank can be considered destroyed by having it's track damaged you can spend plenty of ammo in an already dead tank without noticing it (pretty hard to see the track condition from the cockpit). The most effective way nowadays is just carpet bomb with multiple small bombs in the Ju 88/Pe-2/A-20, since tanks hit directly by bombs explode then you can tell which ones are left. Then you return to the column and single bomb the remaining tanks until it is gone.

In regards to the mods I think different plane configurations should be made available representing the proportions used in reality. Say if 40% of X plane used Y mod. Then make 4 planes with Y config and then 6 planes without it, etc. Maybe even represent this in the personal hangar. There are some cases of very limited use (say the Shpitalny 37mm in the LaGG and IL-2 1942 Stalingrad combat trials), those could be represented by having just a few of these planes in a particular airbase in only one map, then it wouldn't be available for the rest of the campaign.

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

Share this post


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

 

Dude, I said no mods. Didn't said anti-tank cannons didn't existed -- they did. Didn't say JagdBomber didn't existied -- they did. All I said is to use the most common equipment and the game developers already have determined it so that we don't have to start endless debates on every single piece of equipment for every aircraft with all kinds of book quotes, flight manuals and other endless bullshit about what is "historical".

 

 

 Yeah, I know what you said. I’m just saying a lot of the mods were very common and the historical argument doesn’t really make sense. FW190s were used extremely commonly as Jabos on the eastern front so the mods that enable that are actually more relevant than people flying them as pure fighters, just as an example. And I’m still waiting for a sortie record where an Il 2 wiped a tank column by itself, even with 37mm mods. I dont think it happens with any frequency. 

 

I just don’t feel that removing a lot of mods that make things more interesting is going to have the impact you think it will on actual outcomes.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ala13_elchinodecai said:

 

I think you misunderstood my point.

In real life, most of the bombs fell way further away than in TAW, here, you can actually drop bombs within 5 meters of any target, being dropped at high altitude, or buzzing touching treetops.

You are mixing HIT stats with the OUTCOME of a hit, in real life, anything around a 50 kg bomb would get a PZ4/t34 landing on the side at least, if not belly up, the only thing is that in real life hitting something was 1000000% more difficult than in a game, and people mostly missed a lot, look for "last year of the luftwaffe" if I can recall correctly, you could read about many pilots trying to hit a bridge (big one, very big) and they missed, by far, that's why the send lots and lots of planes to assure the task is complete.

 

RAF showed that a Jabo could have a 50% the chance of dropping a bomb within 65 meters of the target, contrary to this game were you can actually put a bomb right next to it, or in front, or behind  almost every time.

There's plenty of pics on the internet of tanks upside down due to a near miss of a bomb, or a navy shell, which carries less HE than a SC500 or 1000lb bomb.

I love this sim, but flying in real life was waaaaayyyyy more dangerous and difficult than here, you'll get shot at from everywhere, AAA, small arms, machine guns, anything, so you were thinking more in coming back than in hitting that bloody pixel that moves down there.

Level bombing, that is another history, my squadron can actually obliterate a Depot in a sortie, in real life, many pilots would drop their payload somewhere else.

 

 

Many, many years ago I watched a BBC documentary (I believe it was BBC) called something with Blitz, or blitz bombing, can't remember, were they where testing the damage produced by german bombs, starting with a SC50 (around 25kg of TNT) and ending with the big ones.

 

 



 

Sorry that's wrong...the test big Bombs on tanks yes,but the ending with AB 250

or AB500 and the same on the Russian Side.cannons and big Bombs was not effective enough 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


Not necessarily the mods represent the uncommon types used by the planes, sometimes standard equipment is in mod categories like some rockets, the 23mm in the IL-2 1942/1943, the 30mm cannon in the Hs 129, outer wing 20mm in Fw 190s, the factory built Jabo configurations, etc etc.

The strafing tank with cannons isn't that meta anymore... since a tank can be considered destroyed by having it's track damaged you can spend plenty of ammo in an already dead tank without noticing it (pretty hard to see the track condition from the cockpit). The most effective way nowadays is just carpet bomb with multiple small bombs in the Ju 88/Pe-2/A-20, since tanks hit directly by bombs explode then you can tell which ones are left. Then you return to the column and single bomb the remaining tanks until it is gone.

In regards to the mods I think different plane configurations should be made available representing the proportions used in reality. Say if 40% of X plane used Y mod. Then make 4 planes with Y config and then 6 planes without it, etc. Maybe even represent this in the personal hangar. There are some cases of very limited use (say the Shpitalny 37mm in the LaGG and IL-2 1942 Stalingrad combat trials), those could be represented by having just a few of these planes in a particular airbase in only one map, then it wouldn't be available for the rest of the campaign.

 

I spent 46 hours in the last TAW campaign and almost all of them I was attacking the tank columns. The carpet bombing in Ju-88 happened rarely, because it is extremely hard to align the bombs properly to get actual results with tanks. The 50 kg ones need almost a direct hit to destroy a tank, even 2 meters away don't kill it. The vast majority of tank killing was done from 110 with 2x500 kg bombs. Also, after dropping the bombs the 110 has a chance to survive encounter with enemy fighters. Returning to the column for a second pass is what gets you killed most of the time even with friendly fighters present around (my experience is during European evening hours).

 

Your suggestion for proportional usage sounds good but the problem is that we don't have agreed numbers on "reality" and people would start to pick selectively any data or opinions that serve their goal. This forum is full of such behavior. 

Share this post


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

The carpet bombing in Ju-88 happened rarely, because it is extremely hard to align the bombs properly to get actual results with tanks.

Not just that. Flak gets you killed on the first pass if the tank column is untouched.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this was already answered/explained at some other point, but couldn't find it:

TL;DR:

Why do I always get a 24h penalty once I got shot down (-> usually leading to a crash and not a mid-air pilot kill) in a BF-110?

Does maybe the death of the gunner in a BF-110 count as friendly fire, credited to the pilot?

 

Full story:

I am a dedicated high level bomber pilot, my joy in flight sims is primarily navigation and system management. Fighter stuff and dogfights I enjoyed 20y ago, nowadays I prefer the technical side of things. (...and I totally suck at spotting planes)

When joining the server, I usually make one low level (below tree tops) attack run on my next bombing target to scout it out for a proper planned bombing run for the next flight.But when the I get shot down in my beloved BF110, in 9/10 cases my account has a 24h time penalty afterwards.So my question is: What am I doing wrong? Where does this penalty come from? How to avoid it?

It is slightly frustrating, especially since I ALWAYS plan out any flight with a full flight plan and stick to the air rules and everything.

Edited by Ragor

Share this post


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

I guess this was already answered/explained at some other point, but couldn't find it:

TL;DR:

Why do I always get a 24h penalty once I got shot down (-> usually leading to a crash and not a mid-air pilot kill) in a BF-110?

Does maybe the death of the gunner in a BF-110 count as friendly fire, credited to the pilot?

 

Full story:

I am a dedicated high level bomber pilot, my joy in flight sims is primarily navigation and system management. Fighter stuff and dogfights I enjoyed 20y ago, nowadays I prefer the technical side of things. (...and I totally suck at spotting planes)

When joining the server, I usually make one low level (below tree tops) attack run on my next bombing target to scout it out for a proper planned bombing run for the next flight.But when the I get shot down in my beloved BF110, in 9/10 cases my account has a 24h time penalty afterwards.So my question is: What am I doing wrong? Where does this penalty come from? How to avoid it?

It is slightly frustrating, especially since I ALWAYS plan out any flight with a full flight plan and stick to the air rules and everything.

 

If you bail over enemy territory, you're counted as dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SCG_OpticFlow said:

 

If you bail over enemy territory, you're counted as dead.

Mmmm not quite...  

 

If you bail over enemy territory you have a percentage chance of escaping (not sure of the current percentage, but escaping capture is in the "ballpark" of 50/50, but it's slightly different percentages for Russian vs German).  If you are considered captured, then you get the same point penalty as death (i.e. -300), and you get a life subtracted (1.0 or fraction thereof depending on the ratio of friendly to enemy team numbers at that time) and 20 hours spawn delay if your # lives fell to 0 or less).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is amazing how fast time goes by...

It would seem that the adventure with TAW has just begun, but the 19th season has just passed.
First edition started in the middle of year 2016, so it was about 3 years ago.
Since then, the number of pilots and squadrons has been systematically growing. Some of you have been with us from the very beginning, some have just started their adventure with the campaign.
We are happy to see all of you, because it shows the growing popularity of our server. Really thank you for your presence, we wouldn`t be without you.
We will try to keep the level as professionally as possible.
Soon the XX season will appear on the horizon. It is a large and obliging number. In the meantime there will be many changes in the game itself and we hope that we will also be able to introduce many new things. What exactly will they be - time will tell.
For now, time for relax has come.

Here are your statues and diplomas,
Congratulations!

 


CUPS AND STATUES

 


70833829_2459582421019731_25361052382684

70556580_2459582481019725_47880016543581

 

70765326_2459582434353063_67604979795529
 

BEST FIGHTERS

 


71014839_2459583297686310_34317950440743

 

71345039_2459583337686306_61855000888155

 

70909169_2459583331019640_83666034308436

 

71513838_2459583437686296_32507860225013

 

71214452_2459583471019626_27931796596620
 

BEST BOMBERS

 

 


70715655_2459584034352903_86396222483086

 

70597083_2459584074352899_68278732388994

 

70889213_2459584004352906_51219840364865

 

71113122_2459584111019562_25828564211419

 

70794752_2459584137686226_47340104537037
 

 

BEST TANK KILLERS

 


71494933_2459584574352849_14933866244724

 

70591941_2459584631019510_37822608149001

 

71351311_2459584614352845_83016766851079

 

71260212_2459584681019505_42678409010337

 
 

 

70559791_2459584737686166_63130415177872

BEST FIGHTER SQUADS

 

 


71934830_2459585144352792_16792081268358

 

70936070_2459585127686127_77743608985204

 

71017306_2459585101019463_27403191435080

 

70719544_2459585201019453_39645275489262

 

70589900_2459585274352779_64201756802348
 

 

BEST BOMBER SQUADS

 

 


70676127_2459585711019402_47469477584877

 

70536245_2459585694352737_56336890428821

 

71076475_2459585664352740_69343187634707

 

70595445_2459585747686065_23403977176220

 

70713597_2459585794352727_54266909422727
 

 

BEST TANK KILLER SQUADS

 

 


71082857_2459586421019331_83912709913926

 

70872512_2459586361019337_87711684035713

 

70883474_2459586424352664_37266579664226

 

70716860_2459586464352660_20255049490009

 

70689229_2459586497685990_89380954213816
 

 

Edited by =LG=Piciu
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Bodenplatte around the corner I would like a TAW "West" Edition. The Bodenplatte map has enough space for dunno multiple TAW Maps.

Or of course just sd a extension (map 9-12 would be in the west then), but going from east to west would be kinda weird.

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


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

With Bodenplatte around the corner I would like a TAW "West" Edition. The Bodenplatte map has enough space for dunno multiple TAW Maps.

Or of course just sd a extension (map 9-12 would be in the west then), but going from east to west would be kinda weird.

 

I second this idea :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

With Bodenplatte around the corner I would like a TAW "West" Edition. The Bodenplatte map has enough space for dunno multiple TAW Maps.

Or of course just sd a extension (map 9-12 would be in the west then), but going from east to west would be kinda weird.

 

Maybe the west edition would bring lot more players to the Allied team during US prime hours...

Share this post


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

With Bodenplatte around the corner I would like a TAW "West" Edition. The Bodenplatte map has enough space for dunno multiple TAW Maps.

Or of course just sd a extension (map 9-12 would be in the west then), but going from east to west would be kinda weird.

 

Yeah, please... West edition is the best idea, extension second best😎

Share this post


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

With Bodenplatte around the corner I would like a TAW "West" Edition. The Bodenplatte map has enough space for dunno multiple TAW Maps.

Or of course just sd a extension (map 9-12 would be in the west then), but going from east to west would be kinda weird.

Agreed! This would be awesome to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful. You wouldn't want to split TAW numbers even lower especially during NA times. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Be careful. You wouldn't want to split TAW numbers even lower especially during NA times. 

I think thats were are the new players coming from...

Edited by DerSheriff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2019 at 10:47 AM, JG4_Widukind said:

Sorry that's wrong...the test big Bombs on tanks yes,but the ending with AB 250

or AB500 and the same on the Russian Side.cannons and big Bombs was not effective enough 

Still misunderstanding concepts.

Hit probabilities or effectiveness of air attacks with any payload and outcome of a hit by certain ordinance.

Some Sides, tops and rear of most german tanks were vulnerable to any AP caliber bigger than 12.7 mm, that includes 20, 23, 30mm, that's for the cannons.

any bomb carrying over 25 kgs of explosives within 5 meters would damage anything around, I'm not saying hollywood style, I'm saying damaging and most of the time disabling a vehicle, imaging 250kgs.

You don't need to destroy a tank or penetrate its armour killing its crew, you need to disable it, and that's way easier than we think.

It happens I've got a relative who used to be a leopard 2 commander, and he said that to me, you twist something in the tracks and you become an armored 120mm cannon pillbox, no need of braking the track, but just twist it, and that happens when there's an explosion near by, a bomb crater that you don't see and step in not the proper way, getting over a big boulder or many, many things.
He also mention about damaging the cannon, things that doesn't kill the crew, doesn't destroy the tank, but disable it for combat.

Then you need to take it to fix it and in combat zone that takes more than you think.

 

This is a game, so you either destroy it or not, and that's my point, if you need to completely destroy for the sake of the game, that's ok.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an extension with the west would be the best way, it allows to ramp up to the better aircraft sequentially. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello everyone
There are proposals for the next company (such an offer was already possible)
1 mission for 2 hours = 1 life
captivity, death = rest until the next mission
what do you think?

 

and what to do with those who do not have a BBOP?

 

sry for google trans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 174driver said:

 

and what to do with those who do not have a BBOP?

 

Same as with those, who dont have BoK or BoM or BoS...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 12:32 PM, Ala13_elchinodecai said:

I think you misunderstood my point. In real life, most of the bombs fell way further away than in TAW, here, you can actually drop bombs within 5 meters of any target, being dropped at high altitude, or buzzing touching treetops.  You are mixing HIT stats with the OUTCOME of a hit, in real life, anything around a 50 kg bomb would get a PZ4/t34 landing on the side at least, if not belly up, the only thing is that in real life hitting something was 1000000% more difficult than in a game, and people mostly missed a lot, look for "last year of the luftwaffe" if I can recall correctly, you could read about many pilots trying to hit a bridge (big one, very big) and they missed, by far, that's why the send lots and lots of planes to assure the task is complete.

 

There is absolutely no misunderstanding of your point.  I am not confusing (1) the often low hit probability or bomb drop accuracy  in real life with (2) the effectiveness of high explosive blast damage on a tank.  We specifically disagree on the effectiveness of  high explosive blast damage.  I'm just going to quote Finker on this issue below which I'm sure you will disagree with.  If you which to convince me that blast damage was more effective then I need to see some hard data and not merely anecdotal accounts from your friends.

-------

 

Tanks are extremely resilient to blast damage and are very hard to kill through an indirect hit with HE weapons, even heavy bombs. It seems illogical, that a tank and its crew would survive the blast from a 500kg bomb at a distance of just 10m or so, but it really will often do exactly that. The human body is surprisingly resistant to shockwaves like those produced by an explosion. The greatest threat comes in the form of shrapnel or getting trapped in a collapsed building (houses on the other hand are lousy at surviving a blast). Provided he isn't hit by shrapnel or debris a person can survive a blast that will completely flatten a wooden building and escape with a pair of ruptured eardrums.  A human inside a tank is completely protected from shrapnel and from most of the shockwave as well. And the tank itself is not easily damaged by high explosive either, unless it's a direct hit (which can cause spalling that can damage vital systems and kill crew)

 

Don't believe me? Take a look at this: http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA329188 .It's a report done by the Army Research Lab in 1997 about the lethality of HE-bombs. It's an interesting read by itself, but the thing you want to look are the charts on p. 31 and 32. It's "kill probability" charts depicting the probability of a vehicle being "killed" (either disabled or crew incapacitated) by different types of HE weapons, the heaviest being a 1000lbs air dropped bomb.  The last of the charts show the effect of the HE blast on a tank, and you'll notice, that even for the 1000lbs bomb the "kill probability" drops to zero at a distance of just 18 feet (just under 6m), meaning that if a 1000lbs bomb goes off just 6m from a tank, there is essentially NO chance of killing the crew or disabling the tank (though the crew will probably be deafened)

 

Ok, so this report is from 1997, surely a tank from '97 is way tougher than a tank from '42? Sure, but take a look at the chart above: That's the kill probability of the same bombs against a soft target, a truck. Here the kill probability of the 1000lbs bomb falls to zero at just 47 feet distance (around 15m). Miss a soft target like a truck by just 15m with a 1000lbs HE bomb, and there is pretty much no chance of disabling it. It's safe to assume, that the survivability of a WW2 tank lies somewhere between a 1997 tank and a truck, probably closer to the first. That means that if you miss a T-34 with a 500kg bomb by something like 10m, there is pretty much no chance at all to kill it.

 

Seems crazy, right? I thought so too, but apparently HE weapons are just not that good at killing tanks or even unarmoured troops. They are however great at getting buildings to collapse.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2019 at 2:09 AM, JG51_Moostafa said:

 

How about instead of hitting the side with superior number with a stick we give the side with lower numbers a carrot?

 

 

 

Good post. I think your ideas have merit. Not sure if any of it can be implemented as you also acknowledge but I do like your reasoned post.

Share this post


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

I think thats were are the new players coming from...

To make a new TAW for Western front would not replace those you would lose from splitting part of the TAW playerbase into two servers. If you look at steam charts alone you can see that even when they released the 47 and spitfire, their wasn't much player retention. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

There is absolutely no misunderstanding of your point.  I am not confusing (1) the often low hit probability or bomb drop accuracy  in real life with (2) the effectiveness of high explosive blast damage on a tank.  We specifically disagree on the effectiveness of  high explosive blast damage.  I'm just going to quote Finker on this issue below which I'm sure you will disagree with.  If you which to convince me that blast damage was more effective then I need to see some hard data and not merely anecdotal accounts from your friends.

-------

 

Tanks are extremely resilient to blast damage and are very hard to kill through an indirect hit with HE weapons, even heavy bombs. It seems illogical, that a tank and its crew would survive the blast from a 500kg bomb at a distance of just 10m or so, but it really will often do exactly that. The human body is surprisingly resistant to shockwaves like those produced by an explosion. The greatest threat comes in the form of shrapnel or getting trapped in a collapsed building (houses on the other hand are lousy at surviving a blast). Provided he isn't hit by shrapnel or debris a person can survive a blast that will completely flatten a wooden building and escape with a pair of ruptured eardrums.  A human inside a tank is completely protected from shrapnel and from most of the shockwave as well. And the tank itself is not easily damaged by high explosive either, unless it's a direct hit (which can cause spalling that can damage vital systems and kill crew)

 

Don't believe me? Take a look at this: http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA329188 .It's a report done by the Army Research Lab in 1997 about the lethality of HE-bombs. It's an interesting read by itself, but the thing you want to look are the charts on p. 31 and 32. It's "kill probability" charts depicting the probability of a vehicle being "killed" (either disabled or crew incapacitated) by different types of HE weapons, the heaviest being a 1000lbs air dropped bomb.  The last of the charts show the effect of the HE blast on a tank, and you'll notice, that even for the 1000lbs bomb the "kill probability" drops to zero at a distance of just 18 feet (just under 6m), meaning that if a 1000lbs bomb goes off just 6m from a tank, there is essentially NO chance of killing the crew or disabling the tank (though the crew will probably be deafened)

 

Ok, so this report is from 1997, surely a tank from '97 is way tougher than a tank from '42? Sure, but take a look at the chart above: That's the kill probability of the same bombs against a soft target, a truck. Here the kill probability of the 1000lbs bomb falls to zero at just 47 feet distance (around 15m). Miss a soft target like a truck by just 15m with a 1000lbs HE bomb, and there is pretty much no chance of disabling it. It's safe to assume, that the survivability of a WW2 tank lies somewhere between a 1997 tank and a truck, probably closer to the first. That means that if you miss a T-34 with a 500kg bomb by something like 10m, there is pretty much no chance at all to kill it.

 

Seems crazy, right? I thought so too, but apparently HE weapons are just not that good at killing tanks or even unarmoured troops. They are however great at getting buildings to collapse.

 

A bit off-topic, but I couldn't resist... Centurion tank vs 9kt bomb https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-atomic-tank-survived-a-nuclear-test-then-went-to-w-1542451635

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

To make a new TAW for Western front would not replace those you would lose from splitting part of the TAW playerbase into two servers. If you look at steam charts alone you can see that even when they released the 47 and spitfire, their wasn't much player retention. 

I could see a "Western TAW" of  3 or 4 maps and then a longer "Eastern TAW with the full 8 maps a few weeks apart. But I think an extension by a few maps might be more viable. That being said, with teh campaign as long as it was last time there was definitely some fatigue going on near the end as people got burned out a bit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

there was definitely some fatigue going on near the end as people got burned out a bit.

If you are not able to withstand the stress of the struggle, then you lose and that’s right.

 

This is not only a war of planes. This is a war of personal skill and strength of character

 

I would suggest making the first map based on Bodenplatte, but with World War I planes from the Flying Circus 😊

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

If you are not able to withstand the stress of the struggle, then you lose and that’s right.

 

This is not only a war of planes. This is a war of personal skill and strength of character

 

I would suggest making the first map based on Bodenplatte, but with World War I planes from the Flying Circus 😊

I was more thinking that player numbers might drop off a bit if the campaign drags on for a while. I, of course, made of sterner stuff than the average man by virtue of my incredible fighting spirit and general studliness, would power through to the end!

Share this post


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

I was more thinking that player numbers might drop off a bit if the campaign drags on for a while. I, of course, made of sterner stuff than the average man by virtue of my incredible fighting spirit and general studliness, would power through to the end!

I was ready to fight on. It’s a pity that the last map ended before my desire to win disappeared)

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...