Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

Just now, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

Realistic visibility is not "the old bubble", though. I think it has been explained numerous times on the forums.

Practically it is, I have tried it. Have you? I think I know what have been explained.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I have said all along, more hard don't equate to more realistic. That said, this is a game so all the more challenging the better.

However get I an "Amen" that this fatigue affecting bailout need to be turned off ? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LLv24_Zami said:

Practically it is, I have tried it. Have you? I think I know what have been explained.

 

No, I have not run any tests personally, but I have no reason to doubt what the devs are saying about it and I have seen people reporting that the can see beyond "the old bubble" with the new realistic visibility. For me personally even the old bubble was not that big of a problem, when in a fighter (high alt bombing was another matter), but rather losing close contacts over forests etc, which does not seem very realistic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Exactly, time will tell. How anyone can say how it goes at this point?

 

Expert mode is basically old 10km bubble(expert works even worse for me), in fact I wish that devs would have kept it now. It was even to everyone. One thing  amuzes me quite a lot. People have been begging for longer plane spotting range from the beginning of this game. When they have it, they wan`t the old bubble back 😂. There you can say that the lot of work has gone in vain. 

 

 

People, like me, have been begging to have the 10km bubble gone for high altitude, high speed combat because it is totally different thing to low alt combat. And what do you know, devs have listened to us! They even gave us multiple options. I am very happy that this was done, and it opens the door to refine the spotting to be more and more realistic down the road. 

 

But i don't think anyone, ever, mentioned anything about spotting fighter planes from +20km away, baring some exceptions like reflection glint, ever...

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

No, I have not run any tests personally, but I have no reason to doubt what the devs are saying about it and I have seen people reporting that the can see beyond "the old bubble" with the new realistic visibility. For me personally even the old bubble was not that big of a problem, when in a fighter (high alt bombing was another matter), but rather losing close contacts over forests etc, which does not seem very realistic.

Well, try it yourself and make judgments. Depends on the resolution quite a lot btw. To me it´s like old bubble or worse. 

High alt bombing benefits from the building draw distance which is another setting if thats what you mean. Its great feature.

 

2 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

But i don't think anyone, ever, mentioned anything about spotting fighter planes from +20km away, baring some exceptions like reflection glint, ever...

So you like the expert setting? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

 

 

So you like the expert setting? 

 

Why, yes. The bombers are still far more visible in that setting than the pre patch game. Especially if they climb to proper altitude.  Making that accidental contrail can now totally expose your position and just flying at contrail altitude all day erry day without escorts is just asking for it.

 

The days of AFK 1h autolevel depot milkruns are over. 

Share this post


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

 

Why, yes. The bombers are still far more visible in that setting than the pre patch game. Especially if they climb to proper altitude.  Making that accidental contrail can now totally expose your position and just flying at contrail altitude all day erry day without escorts is just asking for it.

 

The days of AFK 1h autolevel depot milkruns are over. 

Not on the 3440x1440 resolution you don`t I bet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Not on the 3440x1440 resolution you don`t I bet

 

What is this resolution thing you speak of.

 

t. VR user :crazy:

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


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

 

What is this resolution think you speak of.

 

t. VR user :crazy:

Totally different

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LLv24_Zami said:

Totally different

 

Oh, you don't even know half of it.

 

You actually get to use your motion sensitive, black and white, peripheral vision for spotting, much much easier than just using your high definition, color sensitive area that get cluttered by everything unrelated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

 

Expert mode is basically old 10km bubble(expert works even worse for me), in fact I wish that devs would have kept it now. It was even to everyone. One thing  amuzes me quite a lot. People have been begging for longer plane spotting range from the beginning of this game. When they have it, they wan`t the old bubble back 😂. There you can say that the lot of work has gone in vain. 

 

My observation, after spending a lot of time in single player, is that the expert mode is certainly NOT a return to the 10k bubble.  As the devs said, it's a lot more light dependent.  It certainly is possible to spot planes at 20km.  The caveat is that (once again completely dependent on light conditions simulation) it's also possible to easily not see a plane that's 5km away from you.  I'd rather have that kind of balance than being able to observe planes on the spawn point from 6km altitude and 30km out. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

 

Oh, you don't even know half of it.

 

You actually get to use your motion sensitive, black and white, peripheral vision for spotting, much much easier than just using your high definition, color sensitive area that get cluttered by everything unrelated. 

In fact I do, I owned Rift S.

3 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

My observation, after spending a lot of time in single player, is that the expert mode is certainly NOT a return to the 10k bubble.  As the devs said, it's a lot more light dependent.  It certainly is possible to spot planes at 20km.  The caveat is that (once again completely dependent on light conditions simulation) it's also possible to easily not see a plane that's 5km away from you.  I'd rather have that kind of balance than being able to observe planes on the spawn point from 6km altitude and 30km out. 

If you have display at 3440x1440 or more resolution and not television size screen, tell me how to spot planes at 20km in expert mode? I`m pleased to take advice

Edited by LLv24_Zami
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LLv24_Zami said:

In fact I do, I owned Rift S.

 

Oh, did it make you sea sick? Why did you get rid of it? 

3 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

In fact I do, I owned Rift S.

If you have display at 3440x1440 or more resolution and not television size screen, tell me how to spot planes at 20km in expert mode? I`m pleased to take advice

 

Lower the rendered resolution to sub monitor, so the smallest pixel displayed get rendered on multiple pixels on your screen... oldest competitive trick in book in competitive games that rely on spotting the pixel...

Share this post


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

 

Oh, did it make you sea sick? Why did you get rid of it? 

I never got sick with it. 

 

In fact I had original Rift couple of years ago and now Rift S. I wanted even a better resolution although S was an nice improvement over plain Rift. 

3 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

Oh, did it make you sea sick? Why did you get rid of it? 

 

Lower the rendered resolution to sub monitor, so the smallest pixel displayed get rendered on multiple pixels on your screen... oldest competitive trick in book in competitive games that rely on spotting the pixel...

I know and I`ve tested it. Improves spotting nicely. But it`s looking horrible, I`d rather not to fly than use that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

In fact I do, I owned Rift S.

If you have display at 3440x1440 or more resolution and not television size screen, tell me how to spot planes at 20km in expert mode? I`m pleased to take advice

 

Yep, you got me there.  1920x1080 50" LED TV.  Totally negates the fact that it's no longer the 10km 'bubble' just because 'user experience' completely proves that it still is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

Yep, you got me there.  1920x1080 50" LED TV.  Totally negates the fact that it's no longer the 10km 'bubble' just because 'user experience' completely proves that it still is....

Well, it`s not on my display. It`s a fact.

 

Edit: Okay, let`s not flood the thread with this, I think. Nighty night

Edited by LLv24_Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Well, it`s not on my display. It`s a fact.

 

It's nice to know that us 1920x1080 been given special treatment and expert visibility setting runs a totally different protocol than the higher resolution players.  I'll take whatever advantage I can get! 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually does give a different result, and it's an issue yet to be solved 😐

I'm afraid that's not something we can do ourselves. People will just keep fighting over it. 

 

Dub it the 1080p wars if you will. 

 

 

If you're supersampling "too high" on a VR headset with AV=off, you indeed cut the visibility range of fighters and get back to a bubble. Be it 12km, or 8km. It's a hard bubble not affected by light or weather or background. This is not related to individual spotting skills, or experience, or inability.

 

There's a reason this discussion appeared with totally different points of view - because the view is different depending on device. 

 

On that 1080p you may see the aircraft, under good conditions, at 20km. On the 4K monitor it may be a tiny pixel a fourth of the size of the 1080p. On a VR headset that supersamples (VR's AA)  over 1.6x it might not appear as a single (sub)pixel at all - the information is simply lost. 

 

This is why people will keep fighting, and won't understand each other. Because the difference seems to be in the smallest size of a fighter at range being a pixel of your rendered resolution.

 

It should be 1 pixel for 1080p, and with a multiplier to 4 pixels on a 4K. Same angular size. Doesn't seem to work right now! And a VR headset rendering at 1600p should have it be 3 pixels. Just scale it up the higher the resolution. 

 

And stop bashing each other's heads in.

 

Has no purpose, leads to nowhere.  

 

Can't convince someone, who has seen something different with his own eyes. There'll be hard fronts and it'll turn into a monkey carussel. 

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

It actually does give a different result, and it's an issue yet to be solved 😐

I'm afraid that's not something we can do ourselves. People will just keep fighting over it. 

 

Dub it the 1080p wars if you will. 

 

 

If you're supersampling "too high" on a VR headset with AV=off, you indeed cut the visibility range of fighters and get back to a bubble. Be it 12km, or 8km. It's a hard bubble not affected by light or weather or background. This is not related to individual spotting skills, or experience, or inability.

 

There's a reason this discussion appeared with totally different points of view - because the view is different depending on device. 

 

On that 1080p you may see the aircraft, under good conditions, at 20km. On the 4K monitor it may be a tiny pixel a fourth of the size of the 1080p. On a VR headset that supersamples (VR's AA)  over 1.6x it might not appear as a single (sub)pixel at all - the information is simply lost. 

 

This is why people will keep fighting, and won't understand each other. Because the difference seems to be in the smallest size of a fighter at range being a pixel of your rendered resolution.

 

It should be 1 pixel for 1080p, and with a multiplier to 4 pixels on a 4K. Same angular size. Doesn't seem to work right now! And a VR headset rendering at 1600p should have it be 3 pixels. Just scale it up the higher the resolution. 

 

And stop bashing each other's heads in.

 

Has no purpose, leads to nowhere.  

 

Can't convince someone, who has seen something different with his own eyes. There'll be hard fronts and it'll turn into a monkey carussel. 

 

Well, if it's truly an 'equalization' issue between rendering modes and resolutions, I'll support that a solution should be looked into.  I will stand by my statement that expert visibility is certainly not a return to the 10km bubble though. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Snip

Yes, that covers it nicely. Something needs to be done and hopefully this will improve. 

5 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

Well, if it's truly an 'equalization' issue between rendering modes and resolutions, I'll support that a solution should be looked into.  I will stand by my statement that expert visibility is certainly not a return to the 10km bubble though. 

Well, it is an issue. I will stand by my statement, it`s back to bubble for me. I think that settles it, lets hope for a solution.

 

Edited by LLv24_Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

It actually does give a different result, and it's an issue yet to be solved 😐

I'm afraid that's not something we can do ourselves. People will just keep fighting over it. 

 

Dub it the 1080p wars if you will. 

 

 

If you're supersampling "too high" on a VR headset with AV=off, you indeed cut the visibility range of fighters and get back to a bubble. Be it 12km, or 8km. It's a hard bubble not affected by light or weather or background. This is not related to individual spotting skills, or experience, or inability.

 

There's a reason this discussion appeared with totally different points of view - because the view is different depending on device. 

 

On that 1080p you may see the aircraft, under good conditions, at 20km. On the 4K monitor it may be a tiny pixel a fourth of the size of the 1080p. On a VR headset that supersamples (VR's AA)  over 1.6x it might not appear as a single (sub)pixel at all - the information is simply lost. 

 

This is why people will keep fighting, and won't understand each other. Because the difference seems to be in the smallest size of a fighter at range being a pixel of your rendered resolution.

 

It should be 1 pixel for 1080p, and with a multiplier to 4 pixels on a 4K. Same angular size. Doesn't seem to work right now! And a VR headset rendering at 1600p should have it be 3 pixels. Just scale it up the higher the resolution. 

 

And stop bashing each other's heads in.

 

Has no purpose, leads to nowhere.  

 

Can't convince someone, who has seen something different with his own eyes. There'll be hard fronts and it'll turn into a monkey carussel. 

Thanks , thats exactly the point.. ;) :) 

.. i personally use Rift s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2019 at 10:13 PM, StG77_HvB said:

If seeing distant aircraft at a larger scale than they would appear at full zoom is what people want, then just turn on the icons.

Well no. The icons are visible from the ~9.5 km distance, but yeah current implementation leaves room for improvement, like capping the visibility 20-25 km.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Learn to level bomb. That way you're not easy prey on the deck. Yeah you'll miss once in a while but it only takes a little work and a little planning to be good at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest deleted@103832
On 10/10/2019 at 4:39 AM, LLv34_Temuri said:

Well no. The icons are visible from the ~9.5 km distance, but yeah current implementation leaves room for improvement, like capping the visibility 20-25 km.

 

If inflating an A-20B to the size of a Goodyear blimp as seen from 30 km is fair and rational, then it is hardly a stretch of logic to extend the icons out to 30 km as well.

21 hours ago, =AVG77=FenderbirdX said:

Learn to level bomb. That way you're not easy prey on the deck. Yeah you'll miss once in a while but it only takes a little work and a little planning to be good at it.

 

I love you Fender but I would rather pull my tonsils out through my ass than spend my time in TAW doing that, and since I've put in at least 100 hours across the past 16 campaigns level bombing, I can say with some authority it is on my fun list just above sitting in the middle seat on a trans-pacific flight with no alcohol and ugly flight attendants. Not to mention, mass level bombing kinda takes the "Tactical" out of TAW. And if they can see you down low under the new spotting, they will sure as hell see you up high.

 

If it comes to that, I'll Learn to Watch Netflix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 часов назад, StG77_HvB сказал:

If it comes to that, I'll Learn to Watch Netflix.

 Please leave old visibility. All we want to see HvB’s video for the new TAW campaign.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

When will TAW not start? 

 

Reverse psychology script activated:

- Attempt to use the reverse psychology script will increase the regular "When will TAW start?" script effect by 2-fold.

 

Damn ... These guys thought about it all Siddy 😕

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2019 at 5:33 AM, II./JG77_motoadve said:

Just did a sortie in WOL with expert visibility, lots more fun, more realistic , and its WOL which I used to dislike, but the Alternate Vis in the other servers makes it so uninteresting , gets boring quick.

Hope TAW gets expert Vis.

wol have alter vis, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2019 at 8:47 AM, WG_Magners said:

 Please leave old visibility. All we want to see HvB’s video for the new TAW campaign.

 

Best video for ever:)

Edited by Norz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, SCG_Riksen said:

 

No. WoL has Expert Visibility.

I want alter vis. Even alter vis is on sometimes I can hardly find enemy on my 15.6in screen 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a big fan of alternative, but for MP where bombing is important it should be switched to expert, purely for the fact that a bombers life is already hard and alternative just makes it harder.

 

In the end it doesn't really matter what you pick, its the same for everyone, but I think expert gives the best balance currently.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

22 minutes ago, 8./JG5_seaflanker819 said:

I want alter vis. Even alter vis is on sometimes I can hardly find enemy on my 15.6in screen 

 

Me too as I've now decided to play the next TAW on my tablet. While you are at it admins, please make sure you increase the contact visibility and bloating of their size 5 to 6 times so my spotting experience is better.

 

Thank you!

  • Haha 6
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to leave some actual TAW specific feedback instead of rambling on about the spotting system.

 

Can this table be updated in the manual for next campaign? It seemed to be horribly out of date. Also a recheck of the manual wouldn't be ridiculous either because a few things seemed to have changed since it was last updated/written.

Spoiler

image.thumb.png.0af826cb59cc43fe5b14c9cc1f6dd4bb.png

Also I hope the mission makers take a look at the planes available in each map so they correspond with the time period. Last campaign La-5FN's and Hs 129 were available from early 1942, while these planes didn't get introduced into combat well into 1943. I think TAW should be focusing on historical accuracy first and balance of the plane set second, time travel isn't a thing. There are plenty of servers out there with completely fictional missions and settings, I'd like TAW to not be one of them and I think a lot of people would agree with me on this.

Edited by ACG_HardeKoning
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 часов назад, ACG_HardeKoning сказал:

Time to leave some actual TAW specific feedback instead of rambling on about the spotting system.

 

Can this table be updated in the manual for next campaign? It seemed to be horribly out of date. Also a recheck of the manual wouldn't be ridiculous either because a few things seemed to have changed since it was last updated/written.

  Показать содержимое

image.thumb.png.0af826cb59cc43fe5b14c9cc1f6dd4bb.png

Also I hope the mission makers take a look at the planes available in each map so they correspond with the time period. Last campaign La-5FN's and Hs 129 were available from early 1942, while these planes didn't get introduced into combat well into 1943. I think TAW should be focusing on historical accuracy first and balance of the plane set second, time travel isn't a thing. There are plenty of servers out there with completely fictional missions and settings, I'd like TAW to not be one of them and I think a lot of people would agree with me on this.

If you want to go full realistic but not balance you should go further. Let Soviet AFs to be almost without AAA at first maps, limited number of lend lease aircrafts, one pilot’s life for the campaign and so on. 
I like TAW balanced and not fully historical (fully historical TAW should be always win by Allies). This semi historical setting still gives much more atmosphere than other servers with “fictional missions” due its more realistic gameplay, but not plane set.

Edited by WG_Magners

Share this post


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

If you want to go full realistic but not balance you should go further. Let Soviet AFs to be almost without AAA at first maps, limited number of lend lease aircrafts, one pilot’s life for the campaign and so on. 
I like TAW balanced and not fully historical (fully historical TAW should be always win by Allies). This semi historical setting still gives much more atmosphere than other servers with “fictional missions” due its more realistic gameplay, but not plane set.

I think the planeset is the most important thing to get historical, that's what sets it apart from other servers. On the other things concessions can be made for gameplay's sake. La5-FN's in early 42 is neither historical nor balanced.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historical Fidelity or Balance, that is a big question, however I do believe TAW is more than a simple server, it is supposed to give us the most authentic eastern front air war on modern flight sims and all this whining over balance takes a lot out of it. I believe people should just suck it up and move on.
The planeset usually generates lots of discussion since every side enjoys arguing the opposing side is superior in everyway which is tiresome. Germany has its pros and cons and so do soviets although I do agree the German planes ARE easier to fly, the solution is to keep the planeset the most historical possible (with the occasional exception eg: Macchi 202 with no 20mm gunpods, since it was the Macchi 200 who saw the most service in Russia); but then some may argue the germans with historical planeset get the advantage, which may aswell be true but can be counter balanced with other TAW mechanics and still maintain historical fidelity and I will list the idea I will use only fighters for the examples:

1941:
Is the start date for TAW however it's over Moscow already, Barbarossa has already reached its peak and the numbers in the air start to pan in favor to the VVS.

3 lives for both axis and soviet pilots however we rebalance the number of planes each pilot has access to, slightly more I16s to the soviets, maybe 3:4 or 2:3 instead of the 3:3 we currently have on map #1, but generally keep it balanced with only this slight advantage

1942:
Now should be Map #3 and more interestign planes join the frey however we have the Macchi with the 20mm gunpod which never saw service and was more of a prototype for the Macchi 205, the total number of fighter planes currently is 4:4 divided amongst various aircraft, increase it to 4:5 or 3:4, with aircraft which flew in that timeframe and not adding planes due to balance but add them for historical fidelity. On subsequent maps we can already start changing the life system, for  3:4 or 2:3 in favor of the reds, that will also probably help with the player balance issues

1943:
Now this is where the campaign gets really messy imo, with Bodenplatte planes all sprinkled in at random for no reason. Keep it eastern front, don't worry about Bodenplatte aircraft unless TAW plans on a Rhineland campaign. The numbers then should imo reflect the results of the last 2 years, if reds have the majority of points then they maintain their advantage, however if the axis won most of the past maps then the numbers are balanced again.

All in all, although not perfect and by far not well described I hope you understand my suggestion and bring it to further discussions, I believe we fly TAW for the immersion and authenticity and the more the TAW devs shift from this, the less interesting it becomes, at least for me; I also take into consideration that if someone thinks balance is the most important thing of all there are plenty of servers who are all about balance while we have not a single one who strives for historical accuracy/authenticity. 
 

Edited by SCG_Faerber
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no bodenplatte planes in last 2 TAW's. La5FN is available on 2 last maps so it's not 1942. 

We are now at developing new campaign on rheinland map which will cover from 2 to 4 maps as a separate campaign probably. If you have any ideas about it post it here. For now we are preparing standard TAW maps with domination by capture cities and airfields but there are ideas about make for example a map where allies have to aerial bomb many depots like rhur region and others in specific X days and destroy X percentage of depots to win map, Germans has to defend it and not let allies to destroy X percentage of depots in specific X days of map to win. and there will be no groud battles like on old eastern front. It could be a prelude to invasion and standard TAW battles. What do you think about it? Early map of aerial bombing of Germany below. Red dots are bombers airfields, orange allied fighter airfields. Black dots axis airfields and blue squares are depots to defend by Germans.  

Screenshot_2019-10-07-16-12-32.jpg

Edited by =LG=Coldman
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 11

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...