Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, ECV56_Chimango said:

IMO the planeset issue was obvious on paper before the start:

"Let's remove the Spitfire IX 150oct, it's too overpowered...but hey, let's just leave the Me-262 there. If they complain prior to the start of TAW just tell them it's just a test, If they complain during the edition just tell them they love to cry. Oh BTW, the base fighter on map 1 will be P-47 vs G-14 (starts giggling)...oh yeah, don't worry, they will accept this and still join the server...you'll see." 

 

So this is not new, TAW server gives all possible advantages to LW side in the fighters department, even on the West when historically they didn't have the slightest advantage, they confirm once more this tendency: LW guys in TAW can not tolerate to be in disadvantage even once, even in a test. It's up to you to fly it or not and support this approach guys.

 

Yes.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What % of 262s do we have in TAW? compared to historically the % that were available historically in this period?

At mission start can the 262s be parked outside or in hangars in their airfields, so the allies have a chance to attack them before they even are chosen by a player?

That would make for historically fun air fields attacks, and also German fighter be on the lookout for attackers.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JG4_DonKanaille said:

Planned by Luftwaffe to be the new standard fighter.

 

I think you've answered your own question here. The key word is planned. By all means it's interesting to see the 'what if' this plan grew to fruition, but don't pretend having ubiquitous me262s is not a fantasy scenario.

 

You'd may as well have a fantasy scenario where the Germans ran out of single engine fighters and faced down Mustangs in 110s, but it'd go down about as well with the blue only flyers as the current one does with the red only.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XD

If people say that they want historical setup not ballance, lets do that all the way and not only for the 1 aspect so:

1) Fixed Max number of lw players : 5

2) random engine failures each few sorties. 

3) each few sorties no ability to take off due to lack of fuel avialable on the airfield 

And so on....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 1/JG601_VitalikB said:

Using of ME262 on TAW corresponds the historical facts. You can find it on the link.Use translator, please.

https://www.proza.ru/2015/02/03/881

 

 

 

Also, having a ratio of 10:1 in favor to Allies is also historical fact but do we see that happening here? We should consider balance for better gameplay and the current situation is way off.

 

3 hours ago, Carl_infar said:

XD

If people say that they want historical setup not ballance, lets do that all the way and not only for the 1 aspect so:

1) Fixed Max number of lw players : 5

2) random engine failures each few sorties. 

3) each few sorties no ability to take off due to lack of fuel avialable on the airfield 

And so on....

 

Exactly. Some LW-only guys seem to love historical fact but ONLY THOSE THAT FAVOR THEM. Let's commit to additional historical facts here and limit spots to LW in the server and give each Allied player 10 planes for every 1 of the LW. Why stop there? LW planes can only take-off with 50% fuel to simulate lack of fuel in the front …. All of these are possible scenarios that can be created in game but we actually don't. So LW-only guys, please consider that, sometimes, we need to balance the scenarios for EVERYBODY's enjoyment and not only yours.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2020 at 9:44 PM, Riksen said:

 

Wrong again mate. Do not know about you falling off any truck but you should consider doing some research first. Here comes another one for ya:

- Estimated numbers of delivered G14s for that period is 1835;

- Estimated numbers for the G6s is approximately 686 and most were the AS type not the one we have in game;

- Estimated numbers of G10s were about 2539;

- Estimated number of K4s were around 1600.

 

These numbers are estimates and the real figure is probably lower than that but it helps us understand the most delivered models to the front lines. So, if you leave your bias attitude aside and reasonably look at the data above, you should see that your claim that the G6 models were the most numerous ones is again just plain wrong. In addition, at this point, the most important model of the G6 being produced were the AS and not the early version we have in game so your claim we should have more G6s in this scneario is wrong ... Again ...
 

 

So let me see if I understand your point. You want it to be as historical as possible as long as it does not affect you using superior planes in the game? It's ok to let players use the planes because they were historically there but if we apply historical conditions that affected their availability then it is not ok and consider this as a game? Lol. I'm sorry but you cant fool anyone here. We all know your type. Have fun in TAW Wehraboo.

 

This is the source of my information: https://www.ww2.dk/

Are the figures you quoting for group III or the entire wing. Group I according to my link flew the G-14s. 

I have no idea what you mean by "bias attitude." My focus is on historical immersion. I also come from a former American Civil War Reenactor. In that group we didn't have the exact same cannon types as the actual Washington Artillery 5th Co. Nor did we actually renacted the exact same battles. In fact, most location were only chosen because a minor skirmish took place there if any at all. . 

 

According to the inventory within the link provided, I am not wrong. it would be nice if you would have actually provided some source. i thik it is clear i would like to have as accurate information as possible. I think anyone within my squadron would attest my devotion to historical immersion. 

 

I do not understand your animosity in your last paragraph. It appears to be rant about something I do not have any knowledge of. For example, what do you mean by my type?I think I made it clear I am fine with flying the G-6 over the G-14. Is the G-6 better than the G-14? I have not read that is the case, but if so, please provide a link to that discussion. I would be interested reading the arguments. 

 

On 3/8/2020 at 10:27 PM, Alonzo said:

 

Have you ever actually played TAW? Pilots do, in fact, have limited lives. 262s are not going to be doing any bombing. They'll pair up with regular props, harass opposing fighters draining their SA and forcing them to turn often, and the regular props will mop up. 262s will make an occasional kill, but the effect of needing to look for them and dying if you fail to check six literally every 5-6 seconds will be the major factor. Allied pilots will die, be demoted back to Grunt, lose their streaks, and, if they lose their overall 3 lives that are replenished only 1 life every 20 hours, be done for the night. The server will end up 22 blue (or however many the "no opposition" limiter allows) who will ground pound with impunity and win the map.

 

Combat Box has like 6 total 262s available on some of our missions, with that availability spread out over the course of 2.5 hours and with anyone allowed to take the plane, so you get jokers like me who instantly flame out or lawn dart. And even with that amount of limiting the Allied complaints about the plane are enormous.

 

I love TAW and I think the team are talented and have produced great stuff. I think they'll figure this one out.

 

Relative to other planes, the 262 were limited in history. With limited number of pilots i doubt there will be a great deal of 262s available. 

 

More to your point. The game has a number of features from quick missions and mission editor where you can train yourself to combat the 262. If you know there are 262s on a server and you did not train yourself to combat the 262 then it is your own fault if you gt shot down by one. The whole point of the simulator is to put yourself in the cockpit of a WWII pilot. it is pretty inconsistent to play this sort of game and then whine when it is too real. 

 

Historically 262s were limited in number, so in game they should be relatively limited. To artificially reduce them because people do not want to learn to combat them like the real pilots did, then that would be silly given the nature of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this was my first time on TAW.  Not just the server, but the entire campaign.  The second map is due to end tomorrow, in favor of the axis.  These are things I've noticed, liked, and disliked about TAW.

Good things
1) I love the dynamic system.  The importance of objectives and how they affect aircraft and the front lines is brilliant.  This already makes this server top tier on the Great Battle's server list.  No other server has had a system like this, and is significant enough for me to label it as one of the best servers on the list, and in some ways the best.  This is incredibly engaging, immersive, and adds an element of realism, in that you won't see the exact same mission again and again and again, like on the other servers like WoL and Box, and again objectives have a significance, other than points, and aren't just objects waiting to be destroyed like on these other servers.
2) The website is very useful.

Bad things
1) It starts in the very beginning, with the number of people that signed up on axis side vs the allied side.  At least, likely a bit more than half of the time of the entirety of this campaign, the allied have been outnumbered 2:1, sometimes 3:1.  This is atrocious.  At best axis aircraft should be equal to those who signed up for the allies.   At best.  And that's still a lot, historically.  There needs to be a cap on the number of people who sign up for axis, when it comes to BoBp operations, and that cap has to be the number of people who signed up for allies.  If there are 83 people signed up for allies, then there can only be 83 people signed in for axis at that time.  If someone wants to sign in for axis, but they're already 1:1 allied and axis participants, they'll have to be blocked until something comes up.  Too bad, so sad.  Maybe there are better solutions to this problem, but this is the most direct one I can conjure at the moment.
2) Also, there were issues with the planeset, from the first map and the second map.  First map had the default or main fighter (the one where we get two of) for the allies set to the P-47D.  Meanwhile the axis aircraft's was the 109G-14.  Yes there are individuals that can be particularly good in the 47, but on the average, you'll find that the 47 will get pummeled.  It can be considered one of the weaker aircraft on the allied side of the BoBp planeset.  Meanwhile the axis get a great fighter right out of the gate as their default fighter.  This is utter BS.  I'll say it, but how was this issue not foreseen before testing even started???  The default fighter for the axis side would have been much better fit to be a 190A-8, or perhaps a G-6, even if it's not part of the BoBp planeset.  I'll also add, if you're going to give the axis Me-262s, then give Spitfire's 150 grade fuel.
3) There is no disciplinary action taken against vulching.  I understand that war is war, and anything works if it's effective, but a) this isn't a real war, and b) it's a d*k move.  This also counts as an air kill.  The top ace, JG4_Ammi, looking at his sortie log you can see he spends a lot of time vulching, and in a 262.  This isn't an ace, this isn't even a virtual fighter.  This is someone who won't fight.  And according to the stats, pilots are rewarded for vulching!  I can't go through all of them, but I am positive half of these "air kills" by the axis "aces" is just through strafing aircraft on airfields alone.  Something has to be put in place.  This is still a game, and being a douche is still being a douche here.  And this goes for both Allied and Axis sides, but mostly Axis as they do most of this work.
4) Disconnecting works on TAW.  Earlier today, SCG_geronim0 was shot down by -332FG-Ursus.  His pilot was at over 99% damage.  Geronim0 then disconnected from the server.  While Ursus was rewarded with an air kill, Geronim0 never lost his pilot's life, and his sortie end status was left as "IN FLIGHT."

These issues give TAW lot of flak right now, and it'll be of everyone's benefit if they get fixed or remedied in some way that won't make more problems.

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, -332FG-Magic_Zach said:

4) Disconnecting works on TAW.  Earlier today, SCG_geronim0 was shot down by -332FG-Ursus.  His pilot was at over 99% damage.  Geronim0 then disconnected from the server.  While Ursus was rewarded with an air kill, Geronim0 never lost his pilot's life, and his sortie end status was left as "IN FLIGHT."

I actually have no idea why I wasn't killed on TAW stats here as I never disconnected. After getting jumped by Ursus I stalled out and I assumed my pilot was killed as I went to 3rd person view so I hit esc and clicked finish mission. in the mission results screen Il2 had given me a death as well as in the Il2 stats screenso I have no clue why it wasn't counted on TAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

This is the source of my information: https://www.ww2.dk/

Are the figures you quoting for group III or the entire wing. Group I according to my link flew the G-14s.

 

Read my post again as you clearly did not understand. The numbers provided are for ALL delivered models from Sept 44 to the end of the war and includes all the Luftwaffe! That comment was to refute your claim, quoted below, that the G6 model was the most common 109 model for the period which, as said earlier, is INCORRECT:

 

On 3/8/2020 at 3:01 AM, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

 "… Moreover, the most common plane in the inventory was the G-6, not the G-14 according to the inventory".

 

In addition, as per your own post (see below), your group is representing the 3rd gruppe (III./JG77) and not the I./JG77 as you claim:

 

On 1/27/2020 at 8:07 PM, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

Retrived from:

The organization units consist of : I./KG 54 -  II./ZG 76 - II./JG 26 -  III./JG 77

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The aircraft models flown by the III./JG 27, which is the third gruppe and not the first, was already provided by me earlier but it seems you chose to ignore it for some reason. In case you missed it:

 

On 3/7/2020 at 10:09 PM, Riksen said:

...

1. The III./JG77 only started to use the K-4 around mid-October 1944 and even then, it was a mix of G models and K4s until about December. Make sure you and your squadron, for historical sake, commit exclusively to the G14 before Oct 14 1944 during the campaign;

2. The II./JG26 only started using Doras at end of November 1944 so again, for historical purposes, you should not be using it before this dates. Commit to the Anton series for a bit in the begining;

3. II./ZG76 switched to the Me-410 in July 1944 and remained with that ariframe until Feb 1945 when it was converted into the III./JG54 so make sure you exclude that unit from the campaign so we stick to the historical background.

...

 

It seems you are confusing the designation III./JG77 with 3./JG77. They do not represent the same thing. Perhaps that is the source of your confusion? As you can see from my previous post, I never made the claim the III./JG77 never used the G14 and only used the G6 as you are trying to imply here.

 

22 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

According to the inventory within the link provided, I am not wrong.

 

Since you are confusing the LW designations, I'm afraid that you are indeed wrong (see above).

 

39 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

...

I think anyone within my squadron would attest my devotion to historical immersion. 

...

 

And I'm glad to hear that. So if you are devoted to history, stick to the planes flown by the unit and take into consideration this:

 

On 3/7/2020 at 10:09 PM, Riksen said:

...

4. Despite having the latest models, like the K4, D-9, and the 262, being delivered to the front, their usage was largely limited by the lack of fuel, pilots, and maintenance. Also, remember that most Bf-109s available were not K4s but a mixture of other G models including G-10s and G-14s in a proportion close to 2:1 (2 for non-K4 models). I addition, there is limited data that supports the use of C3 fuel and, therefore, the wide use DC engine in the Luftwaffe with only evidence of one test unit;

5. We should also therefore apply the numbers in terms of balance as you suggested, with some source claiming that the ratio between Allies and Germans was close to 10:1 in favor of the Allies. So perhaps, again, for historical purposes, let's limit the spots in the server to 7 for the Axis and 77 for the Allies. After all, we all want to be historical here right?

...

 

Instead of doing the above, I'm all for balancing the gameplay mechanic with some consideration to history but the gameplay should be the most important factor. You, however, according to your previous post, do not wish to employ mechanics to balance gameplay … Even called it a "warcry" from the red pilots:

 

On 3/7/2020 at 9:40 PM, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

The presence of the 262 should be the same ratio as that in history. otherwise, TAW is becoming gamey. Balance is a "warcry" of gamers not historical realist. (then is when the gamers will come in about what isn't realistic about the game mechanic red herring argument). You control what you can control.

 

Again, if we do not use some mechanics to balance the gameplay and use only the historical approach, the LW would be the one struggling the most (see 4 & 5 above) and guess what?! We can control both of these features in game by capping the amount of LW pilots that connect, controlling the ratio to favor reds in order of 10:1, limiting to 50% their fuel load, and giving more planes to the Allies than the LW. Isnt that historical enough for you? I'm sure most here would find that boring and most LW would not even play. But for the sake of gameplay, such factors are not even taken into consideration most of the time. We cannot relive history in the game but we can try to make it fun for both sides.

Share this post


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

We cannot relive history in the game but we can try to make it fun for both sides.

 

Well, this isn't fun anymore. I was OK with jets and being outnumbered as long as the maps were big. Now that the action has shrunken down to a little corner, there's no targets to sneak to where the jets can't be at a moment's notice. Rear-most red airfields are 7 minutes away from front-line at 700km/h. Flight time ratios when server numbers are low are sometimes close to 3:1 for the blues (http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=174).

 

Hurry up blues and mop this up. I'll either wait on other servers or I'll switch sides and join you to end this mess; look for me following the lead of some of the top blue aces and flying transport missions until I get my vulture. That's how Galland and Hartmann did it yes? I assume you historians with all the letters in front of your handles are simulating their combat history.

 

I'm looking forward to the next TAW with learnings from this experiment put into action.

Edited by WokeUpDead
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Well, this isn't fun anymore. I was OK with jets and being outnumbered as long as the maps were big. Now that the action has shrunken down to a little corner, there's no targets to sneak to where the jets can't be at a moment's notice. Rear-most red airfields are 7 minutes away from front-line at 700km/h. Flight time ratios when server numbers are low are sometimes close to 3:1 for the blues (http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=174).

 

Hurry up blues and mop this up. I'll either wait on other servers or I'll switch sides and join you to end this mess; look for me following the lead of some of the top blue aces and flying transport missions until I get my vulture. That's how Galland and Hartmann did it yes? I assume you historians with all the letters in front of your handles are simulating their combat history.

 

I'm looking forward to the next TAW with learnings from this experiment put into action.

Just my opinion on this. 

 

Like in war, there is a 'tipping point' in these battles, where things can get worse at an exponential rate when one side starts to lose.  Real estate is very important in this case. Lose it, and you start to lose other options.

 

On the last map, you Reds had us cornered, but we kept fighting until the end.

 

Don't ever give up.:salute:

Edited by D-Rock
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, D-Rock said:

Just my opinion on this. 

 

Like in war, there is a 'tipping point' in these battles, where things can get worse at an exponential rate when one side starts to lose.  Real estate is very important in this case. Lose it, and you start to lose other options.

 

On the last map, you Reds had us cornered, but we kept fighting until the end.

 

Don't ever give up.:salute:


Been there, done that, this time it’s different.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

1. Read my post again as you clearly did not understand. The numbers provided are for ALL delivered models from Sept 44 to the end of the war and includes all the Luftwaffe! That comment was to refute your claim, quoted below, that the G6 model was the most common 109 model for the period which, as said earlier, is INCORRECT:

 

 

2. In addition, as per your own post (see below), your group is representing the 3rd gruppe (III./JG77) and not the I./JG77 as you claim:

The aircraft models flown by the III./JG 27, which is the third gruppe and not the first, was already provided by me earlier but it seems you chose to ignore it for some reason. In case you missed it:

 

3. It seems you are confusing the designation III./JG77 with 3./JG77. They do not represent the same thing. Perhaps that is the source of your confusion? As you can see from my previous post, I never made the claim the III./JG77 never used the G14 and only used the G6 as you are trying to imply here.

 

4. Since you are confusing the LW designations, I'm afraid that you are indeed wrong (see above).

 

 

5. And I'm glad to hear that. So if you are devoted to history, stick to the planes flown by the unit and take into consideration this:

 

 

6. Instead of doing the above, I'm all for balancing the gameplay mechanic with some consideration to history but the gameplay should be the most important factor. You, however, according to your previous post, do not wish to employ mechanics to balance gameplay … Even called it a "warcry" from the red pilots:

 

 

Again, if we do not use some mechanics to balance the gameplay and use only the historical approach, the LW would be the one struggling the most (see 4 & 5 above) and guess what?! We can control both of these features in game by capping the amount of LW pilots that connect, controlling the ratio to favor reds in order of 10:1, limiting to 50% their fuel load, and giving more planes to the Allies than the LW. Isnt that historical enough for you? I'm sure most here would find that boring and most LW would not even play. But for the sake of gameplay, such factors are not even taken into consideration most of the time. We cannot relive history in the game but we can try to make it fun for both sides.

1. I never made any such claim. I said JG 77 used G6 and K4s not G14. Since we were discussing the aircraft used by JG 77 I am not sure why you would go off on that tangent 

2. PzG reenact four units; I./KG 51, II./ZG76 & NJG 3, II./JG 26, and III./JG 77. 

According tot he inventory, II./ JG 26 was flying 190 A-8 and then the 190 D-9 by 1945. III.JG 77 was flying the G-6 and then the K-4. They did have G-14 in their inventory, but it was 6 or less at any one time. Gruppe I was flying the G-14, but they also did not fly the K-4. 

3. No clue what you are saying here. 

4. I thought you were referring to the units under discussion. it is the only thing relevant to the discussion. 

5. As I attemted to explain to you there are limits to what you can do based on the models provided by the game. This is why I illustrated the ACW reenactments. My unit was based in New Orleans, In my time with the unit, we never reenacted an actual battle that the WA 5th Co. was present. (For the ACW people here it is sometimes referred to as Slocomb's Battery). Plus, I explain how we used cannons not used by the unit. We had a wide variety of cannons, 6lb, 12lbs, a heavy bronze original 12 lb, a Weir cannon, and a 3inch etc... Anyway, when specific variants are not available, you take the next best most accurate aircraft. 

6. This is a very poor summary of what I stated. If you are going to reenact the battle, then your chief concern is historical accuracy. Game play balance isn't it. If you are creating a historical fiction battle, then by all means create a balance game play. You can't create a specific battle and then change all of the variable so  that it s no longer the battle and then still call it the same battle. It is one or the other. It cannot be both. I do not have a problem with a lopsided historical battle. I will still find it fun to fight against the odds to see if we could be more successful then the pilots in history. I am also perfectly fine playing a historical fiction scenario that balance and even. Both have their own attractive qualities. I don't know if this is more clear than the last time. it is no where as harsh as you making out to be in the last quote. 

 

On a side note, it would be an interesting experiment to take all of the recognized best pilots of the sim, put them on the German side and everyone else as allies and see if the German's could have pulled it of if the cards were stack in their favor as far as pilot quality/ skill is concern. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, WokeUpBlue said:

 

Well, this isn't fun anymore. I was OK with jets and being outnumbered as long as the maps were big. Now that the action has shrunken down to a little corner, there's no targets to sneak to where the jets can't be at a moment's notice. Rear-most red airfields are 7 minutes away from front-line at 700km/h. Flight time ratios when server numbers are low are sometimes close to 3:1 for the blues (http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=174).

 

Hurry up blues and mop this up. I'll either wait on other servers or I'll switch sides and join you to end this mess; look for me following the lead of some of the top blue aces and flying transport missions until I get my vulture. That's how Galland and Hartmann did it yes? I assume you historians with all the letters in front of your handles are simulating their combat history.

 

I'm looking forward to the next TAW with learnings from this experiment put into action.

We weren't flying past Antwerpen/Brussels line. Next time try not to fly unescorted to our targets at low altitude when player numbers are low, the outcome would've been the same if a 262, a K-4 or a D-9 engaged you, only then you can come here complain about your miserable sorties and how 262s are molesting you. Low numbers is partially Reds fault giving up easily , the rest is the planeset. The higher the player population, the harder is to 262s vulch planes (not that it was your case now).

 

In map #1 Reds outnumbered Blues around this time of the day, that didn't stop us flying though.

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=8

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=9

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=80

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, -332FG-Magic_Zach said:

The top ace, JG4_Ammi, looking at his sortie log you can see he spends a lot of time vulching, and in a 262.  This isn't an ace, this isn't even a virtual fighter.  This is someone who won't fight.

 

8f973db62d4db41d3dbba2b385601bb0.jpg

  • Haha 8

Share this post


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

We weren't flying past Antwerpen/Brussels line. Next time try not to fly unescorted to our targets at low altitude when player numbers are low, the outcome would've been the same if a 262, a K-4 or a D-9 engaged you, only then you can come here complain about your miserable sorties and how 262s are molesting you. Low numbers is partially Reds fault giving up easily , the rest is the planeset. The higher the player population, the harder is to 262s vulch planes (not that it was your case now).

 

In map #1 Reds outnumbered Blues around this time of the day, that didn't stop us flying though.

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=8

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=9

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=80

 

You call that outnumbered? The flight time ratios in those missions range from 1.6 : 1 to 1.2 : 1. Oh how I would love to consistently fly being "outnumbered" just by a 1.2 : 1 ratio...

 

You think that the outcome when a piston-engined fighter with one or two cannons that's 100-200km/h faster than me after I dive would be the same as a jet with 3x30mm that only has to stay in my gunners' sights for half a second thanks to his 200-400km/h speed advantage?

 

My sorties when I don't encounter a jet are roughly as miserable as yours when you don't fly one.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TAW is NO historical recreation. Stop no sense justifications.

 

At begins TAW needed be balanced.... reds had a excelent results . TAW  was tweaked and becom more balanced

 

And now, TAW maybe  can taking care about people are "crying" or ignore they
. No matters.

The difference is how many reds you find next edition ,for vulch over enemy bases with yours intouchables m262.... and become a LW legend.... ah and dont foget.... win the war! hahahahaah i hope every day will be less.

 

lets go see.

 

Adms, what plans you have for start old East TAW edition?

 

Thx

 

Share this post


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

We weren't flying past Antwerpen/Brussels line. Next time try not to fly unescorted to our targets at low altitude when player numbers are low, the outcome would've been the same if a 262, a K-4 or a D-9 engaged you, only then you can come here complain about your miserable sorties and how 262s are molesting you. Low numbers is partially Reds fault giving up easily , the rest is the planeset. The higher the player population, the harder is to 262s vulch planes (not that it was your case now).

 

In map #1 Reds outnumbered Blues around this time of the day, that didn't stop us flying though.

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=8

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=9

http://taw-server.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=80

the difference is that no one can touch you if you do that in the 262, if you do that in the K4 or the D9 you will most likely get killed by someone else diving on you, stop pretending to be that stupid to not understand what the point is please.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, if you don't like the planeset, why don't you switch side for the next map? would ALL you be happy if every map has to be played two times? one of each side? complaints will end but... wait, only guys stuck on red/blue side are always complaining about this shit. Instead of changing the game to fits your will, change yourself, that's easier. Reading you is boring, it's tiring, it's always the same.

 

Anyway I came here to congratulate to the people that really care about simulation, that is: organize themselves, plan something and execute it. Don't forget that all it's about teamplay, the rest are excuses. Yesterday we found =GEMINI= squadron with a 10 (maybe more? seemed dozens to me xD) mustang formation after they attacked a blue AF. It was AWESOME to see such a great (and well performed) human formation, they were in tactical disadvantage (and numbers advantage) but from my point of view, the result didn't matter that much. What really matters is that this IS simulation, now I know the feeling of diving into (and through) a big fighters formation, I've seen how they all break the formation, how confusing is the combat after that, and how quick 10 planes can dissapear from sight.

 

So congrats to =GEMINI=, people like you really improve the experience. Keep going and best luck next time.

 

Also congrat the TAW staff for their work and patience. It's by far the best campaign atm. Otherwise we would have NOTHING.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, E69_Soec said:

Guys, if you don't like the planeset, why don't you switch side for the next map? would ALL you be happy if every map has to be played two times? one of each side? complaints will end but... wait, only guys stuck on red/blue side are always complaining about this shit. Instead of changing the game to fits your will, change yourself, that's easier. Reading you is boring, it's tiring, it's always the same.

 

Anyway I came here to congratulate to the people that really care about simulation, that is: organize themselves, plan something and execute it. Don't forget that all it's about teamplay, the rest are excuses. Yesterday we found =GEMINI= squadron with a 10 (maybe more? seemed dozens to me xD) mustang formation after they attacked a blue AF. It was AWESOME to see such a great (and well performed) human formation, they were in tactical disadvantage (and numbers advantage) but from my point of view, the result didn't matter that much. What really matters is that this IS simulation, now I know the feeling of diving into (and through) a big fighters formation, I've seen how they all break the formation, how confusing is the combat after that, and how quick 10 planes can dissapear from sight.

 

So congrats to =GEMINI=, people like you really improve the experience. Keep going and best luck next time.

 

Also congrat the TAW staff for their work and patience. It's by far the best campaign atm. Otherwise we would have NOTHING.

that's not how things work, in an ideal community you will have 50% people flying on both sides even if the unbalance is like that, but in reality, people dont wanna fly the weak side (no discussion about it, 10% of people MAYBE like that challenge, most quit right after few flights) so to have a balanced campaign you need to provide a balanced environment. Keep in mind that people have fun in different ways, and not everyone will have fun where you have fun, just think that there are pilots having fun flying hours over allied fields (moving from one to another)  just looking with max zoom to see if someone take off and then kill him, imagine how many ways to have fun you will find on a community, balance is the key.

Share this post


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

 

You call that outnumbered? The flight time ratios in those missions range from 1.6 : 1 to 1.2 : 1. Oh how I would love to consistently fly being "outnumbered" just by a 1.2 : 1 ratio...

 

You think that the outcome when a piston-engined fighter with one or two cannons that's 100-200km/h faster than me after I dive would be the same as a jet with 3x30mm that only has to stay in my gunners' sights for half a second thanks to his 200-400km/h speed advantage?

 

My sorties when I don't encounter a jet are roughly as miserable as yours when you don't fly one.

Do you know how to count? I think certainly not... Just by that you don't deserve any more answers.

 

You can keep flying your A-20 at 1km alt unersecorted, sure any prop won't ever get you, right? Don't forget that I was watching you while you were getting killed by my squadmate, enjoy your 20h penalty.

 

Maybe 262s are also the reason you died on a Tempest while you were camping Wesel and tried twice engage our bombers and then, overshot my K-4 twice, which made my wingman kills you, maybe you should complain here in the forums about the K-4 outmaneuvering you.https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=25661&name=WokeUpDead

 

The 262 is the least of your problems by looking at your sorties log. You fly poorly, no one should be even be listening to you, once you change your mentality of lonewolf flying and get better scores, you deserve any more attention.https://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=WokeUpDead

 

I'm here for constructive conversations and i want TAW getting improved as much as you do, but I'm not here to be reading some terrible arguments by terrible pilots which have no SA. The 262s are far from the reason you are performing poorly. Good luck next TAW.

1 hour ago, Prancingkiller said:

the difference is that no one can touch you if you do that in the 262, if you do that in the K4 or the D9 you will most likely get killed by someone else diving on you, stop pretending to be that stupid to not understand what the point is please.

I already explained above, some players have no sense of anything. No one was around him, he can't complain in that case. He can't complain at all.

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Do you know how to count? I think certainly not... Just by that you don't deserve any more answers.

 

You can keep flying your A-20 at 1km alt unersecorted, sure any prop won't ever get you, right? Don't forget that I was watching you while you were getting killed by my squadmate, enjoy your 20h penalty.

 

Maybe 262s are also the reason you died on a Tempest while you were camping Wesel and tried twice engage our bombers and then, overshot my K-4 twice, which made my wingman kills you, maybe you should complain here in the forums about the K-4 outmaneuvering you.https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=25661&name=WokeUpDead

 

The 262 is the least of your problems by looking at your sorties log. You fly poorly, no one should be even be listening to you, once you change your mentality of lonewolf flying and get better scores, you deserve any more attention.https://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=WokeUpDead

 

I'm here for constructive conversations and i want TAW getting improved as much as you do, but I'm not here to be reading some terrible arguments by terrible pilots which have no SA. The 262s are far from the reason you are performing poorly. Good luck next TAW.

I already explained above, some players have no sense of anything. No one was around him, he can't complain in that case. He can't complain at all.

that's not a private conversation between him and you, that have been discussed already and we dont need to explain to you how you can do things in all safety in the 262 while you cant on any other plane, and that's the reason why that have to be balanced or you not gonna see people being motivated to fly the side that does not provide the same amount of possibility to have fun. Think easy, like how the "average pilot" in a community would do, i can do transport until i get the 262? then just fly everywhere max speed all the time over enemy fields and kill people taking off/landing? yeah that's what most pilots would try to do then, because it's not balanced, not even talking about realism, it's a game, and people wanna have fun, that's why you fly over enemy fields, to have fun, and everyone wanna have fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Prancingkiller said:

that's not a private conversation between him and you, that have been discussed already and we dont need to explain to you how you can do things in all safety in the 262 while you cant on any other plane, and that's the reason why that have to be balanced or you not gonna see people being motivated to fly the side that does not provide the same amount of possibility to have fun. Think easy, like how the "average pilot" in a community would do, i can do transport until i get the 262? then just fly everywhere max speed all the time over enemy fields and kill people taking off/landing? yeah that's what most pilots would try to do then, because it's not balanced, not even talking about realism, it's a game, and people wanna have fun, that's why you fly over enemy fields, to have fun, and everyone wanna have fun.

Average player that flies the 262 dies quickly, you can see that during the peak times, the 262 isn't as impactful when there are big squadron forming up, flying high and escorting bombers. The currently problem is when Red side has low numbers and LW is outbumbering by a huge margin having also 6 262s in the air. The best solution by far is limiting the 262 availability by how many Allies are in the air, just like CB does. I would like to see those airfields being destroyable, would be interesting how it would play out, only if Axis receives some messages of formations before they are 10km from their targets, as for what is happening to those depot raids, there's simply no prior warnings other than when they are either crossing one of the rear airfields or in the depot flak range. Western Europe is a dense populated region and also heavily guarded back then, I was expecting more Flak for either sides between big cities (where the villages were located).

 

I guess nothing of that is new and has been already discussed, what we can't tolerare are people not even playing assuming things or players writing fallacies and not reasoning the situation. For instance both sides on TAW website have roughly the same numbers of people registered(Allies 1019 vs Axis 1005). The imbalance surely doesn't come from a favorite side right now, but rather a sense of giving up when things get tough (like Reds did last TAW and made the scenario even worse with the number imbalance back then).

  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

Average player that flies the 262 dies quickly, you can see that during the peak times, the 262 isn't as impactful when there are big squadron forming up, flying high and escorting bombers. The currently problem is when Red side has low numbers and LW is outbumbering by a huge margin having also 6 262s in the air. The best solution by far is limiting the 262 availability by how many Allies are in the air, just like CB does. I would like to see those airfields being destroyable, would be interesting how it would play out, only if Axis receives some messages of formations before they are 10km from their targets, as for what is happening to those depot raids, there's simply no prior warnings other than when they are either crossing one of the rear airfields or in the depot flak range. Western Europe is a dense populated region and also heavily guarded back then, I was expecting more Flak for either sides between big cities (where the villages were located).

 

I guess nothing of that is new and has been already discussed, what we can't tolerare are people not even playing assuming things or players writing fallacies and not reasoning the situation. For instance both sides on TAW website have roughly the same numbers of people registered(Allies 1019 vs Axis 1005). The imbalance surely doesn't come from a favorite side right now, but rather a sense of giving up when things get tough (like Reds did last TAW and made the scenario even worse with the number imbalance back then).

the unbalance in terms of numbers does come from favorite side right now, you just need to talk to people to understand what most people think about the 262 state, and yes, i agree with the availability depending on allied numbers, can''t wait for it to be implemented.

Can i suggest a little change in the DISCO RULES, 

the manual say that you lose plane and life if:

 

-disconnection took place less than 5min after last damage

 

what about:

-disconnection took place less than 5min after last damage received OR DEALT to an enemy

 

since one could disco after a fail attempt and DISCO to prevent getting shot.

 

 

Edited by Prancingkiller

Share this post


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

the unbalance in terms of numbers does come from favorite side right now, you just need to talk to people to understand what most people think about the 262 state, and yes, i agree with the availability depending on allied numbers, can''t wait for it to be implemented.

Can i suggest a little change in the DISCO RULES, 

the manual say that you lost plane and life if:

 

-disconnection took place less than 5min after last damage

 

what about:

-disconnection took place less than 5min after last damage received or dealt to an enemy

 

since one could disco after a fail attempt and DISCO to prevent getting shot.

 

 

Axis can't be the favorite when there are less people registered (or roughly the same), again, the imbalance comes from the planeset and the lack of Allies pilots tenacity.

 

And imbalance is to a certain point subjective, as both sides are close to winning. Maybe if whole squadrons haven't left, Reds would win map#2 easier.

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

Axis can't be the favorite when there are less people registered (or roughly the same), again, the imbalance comes from the planeset and the lack of Allies pilots tenacity.

the axis is favorite by the plane set, and people on allied quit because of the 262 unbalance, so the axis is favorite by the setup, that's what i'm saying.

 

red side on map 2 have never been even close to win.

Edited by Prancingkiller

Share this post


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

the lack of Allies pilots tenacity.

 

Might be because people play games because they want to enjoy themselves 🤔

 

I wonder what your "tenacity" would look like when you would be playing on red side. It is always easy to judge when you only fly on one side.

Edited by Operation_Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

More action here than on server lol 😷

 

Planeset favours axis but it can be easily fixed same as 262 and supply flights exploit.

 

Suggestion from someone who flies both sides:

-disable that 262 can be gained by supply flights, instead only by bringing combat/kill points home can grant 262.

 

-on first map instead of glass brick p-47 vs g14 should be spit9, should be low tier fighter not reward plane.

 

-p38 bombload should be limited to match axis bombing capabilities

 

-engine and fuel mods for both sides should be in the same tier

 

No plane should be excluded from campaign, nor 262 nor spit9!

We only have 3 lifes with one life recharging every 20h so having one more plane to pick from planeset wouldn't harm much.

 

About vulch and camping around airfields for unaware pilots, well IMO those pilots are low life and pxxxxxx, on both sides.

But server rules allows it so.......go on!

Vulch justified only if mission objective near airfield or airfield is under bombing😉

 

 

 

Edited by EAF_Ribbon
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 Keep in mind that people have fun in different ways, and not everyone will have fun where you have fun, just think that there are pilots having fun flying hours over allied fields (moving from one to another)  just looking with max zoom to see if someone take off and then kill him, imagine how many ways to have fun you will find on a community, balance is the key.

Of course I understand that. It's totally fair to give feedback to the TAW developers about more balanced planesets, I think we all agree on that, but from a fair perspetive. This endless discussions about planesets and OP planes from fanatics is useless.

 

I understand that people can have fun camping over enemy AFs... I also understand it is fun to climb and protect your AF from campers. What I mean is, ok, feedback is good, but you better focus on having fun the way you like. And if you don't like the way it is, swith side in the next map, or avoid it. You don't like campers? hunt them. You don't like people diving you from 10.000m? climb higher. Organize. Don't worry, if developers see the stats of kills only around AFs with 262 they will definitely change it. You care about balance, but I'm 100% sure they care even more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

the axis is favorite by the plane set, and people on allied quit because of the 262 unbalance, so the axis is favorite by the setup, that's what i'm saying.

 

red side on map 2 have never been even close to win.

I see where you coming from, nevertheless 262s potentializes the above average pilot, 1 or 20 262s available won't change this fact. The top 4 AK scoring pilots accounts, per map, for half of the total kills in the team, either flying a 262 or not*.

 

*During the peak times

 

Check website, red needs a little less than a hundred tanks, as blue needs less than 100 pilot kills/100 planes.

48 minutes ago, Operation_Ivy said:

 

Might be because people play games because they want to enjoy themselves 🤔

 

I wonder what your "tenacity" would look like when you would be playing on red side. It is always easy to judge when you only fly on one side.

Did you check my sorties that I replied above about map#1? I've played being outnumbered by 2 and encircled on Fürstenau, I wouldn't mind being outnumbered by a 3:1 ration either, that's challenge and I'm glad of being challenged, otherwise I wouldn't be playing on TAW.

 

Don't worry, who knows what will happen next TAW, I might be flying Red.

50 minutes ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

More action here than on server lol 😷

 

Planeset favours axis but it can be easily fixed same as 262 and supply flights exploit.

 

Suggestion from someone who flies both sides:

-disable that 262 can be gained by supply flights, instead only by bringing combat/kill points home can grant 262.

 

-on first map instead of glass brick p-47 vs g14 should be spit9, should be low tier fighter not reward plane.

 

-p38 bombload should be limited to match axis bombing capabilities

 

-engine and fuel mods for both sides should be in the same tier

 

No plane should be excluded from campaign, nor 262 nor spit9!

We only have 3 lifes with one life recharging every 20h so having one more plane to pick from planeset wouldn't harm much.

 

About vulch and camping around airfields for unaware pilots, well IMO those pilots are low life and pxxxxxx, on both sides.

But server rules allows it so.......go on!

Vulch justified only if mission objective near airfield or airfield is under bombing😉

 

 

 

As far as I've been told, the lifes system is one of the main reasons of the low population numbers in the recent TAWs, as I've just joined the past one I can't surely assure that, but if so, admins might take a look at it back again. I understand it's there to avoid some suicidal missions and I'm against removing it, but when the server struggles to fill all of its slots during peak times, I think something should be done.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

I still believe that number of "Schwalbe" isnt the biggest problem (even single 262 over allied airfield on fully populated server can do a disaster while being relatively safe), problem is a way, how people fly it, in very unrealistic way. Today, i was chased in P-51 by two Schwalbe on the way home from enemy target, more than 70km, they boom and zoom me just above the ground again and again, till well, they hit me once by the 30mm, after 6 minutes of breaking their attacks... In reality, they will NEVER do that... They will NEVER perform 10 or more consequencial attack on single plane just above the ground level, NEVER! Reason are obvious, why in the game, they can do it while in reality they could not. Also they will NEVER camp around airfield and every 3 minutes try to low pass above runway try to vulch a plane, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, but in game they can.

 

So just think about my proposal to forbid flying Me-262 behind front line, just think about it, how it will impact way how Schwalbes are flown... Think about it and you maybe conclude, that it will be much closer to reality than now...

 

Actually - you are incorrect, this is exactly what you would expect where fuel/ammo/engine reusability were not an issue.

This will always be the issue. I have said it time and time again. We cannot simulate the reasons Luftwaffe lost the war in an online game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The organisation was not there to have 2 or more planers cover back airfields constantly. I think enough people experienced getting blown up as soon as you go wheels up to not find it fun and are waiting for next campaign on red. 

 

Early spit and moving 47 to attacker making the climb to the tempest faster might have helped the balance quite a lot in the second round. 

 

I doubt even patrolling back base 24/7 would have been enough as we had a few where that was the case the last time I flew, yet airfield bounces continued. 

 

Could also think about working a % fuel into the supply mechanic,  give the 262 airfield(s) a smaller fuel supply to effectively ground more and make it more a tactical decision when to fly it. Give the AF big fuel wave with the depot resupply etc. Might get a bit closer to balance and realism, as opposed to the inverse now where 262's are effectively grounding most of the allied air force with complete fuel supply. 

 

Was a fun campaign anyhow. Good flying all. 

Share this post


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

 

We cannot simulate the reasons Luftwaffe lost the war in an online game.

We actually simulate them reasons pretty well - 90% of LW pilots on any server are patrolling at 7 km, while Allied pilots doing their job. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Did you check my sorties that I replied above about map#1? I've played being outnumbered by 2 and encircled on Fürstenau, I wouldn't mind being outnumbered by a 3:1 ration either, that's challenge and I'm glad of being challenged, otherwise I wouldn't be playing on TAW.

 

This just shows how little experience you have flying red. Being outnumbered as blue is a very different story than being outnumbered as red, mainly because reds usually have inferior planes and can't decide when to pick a fight.

Share this post


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

Do you know how to count? I think certainly not... Just by that you don't deserve an answe


I added up the hours flown for each side to get those ratios for the three missions you linked to. Want to see the math? Or you count and tell me what you get.

 

What 20h penalty? I had a fraction of a life left and with it being 9-2 when I died, I still have another fraction left.

 

I remember that Tempest mission: I damaged both your Ju88 and the other one forcing you both to turn back and land at your base. Your wingman got hits on me and then we both maneuvered into the ground. I was happy with what was maybe my fifth time in the Tempest in this game.

 

You want to compare scores? Let’s do it for sorties including piston planes only: per sortie you get three times more air kills than I do but I get three times the ground kills. I die 50% more per sortie than you but that’s the nature of attacking ground targets. Don’t let the jet get to your head, you’re not much better than me, if at all, without it. And it’s irrelevant anyway, you’re not suggesting that only pilots with certain scores can provide feedback here, are you?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

As far as I've been told, the lifes system is one of the main reasons of the low population numbers in the recent TAWs, as I've just joined the past one I can't surely assure that, but if so, admins might take a look at it back again. I understand it's there to avoid some suicidal missions and I'm against removing it, but when the server struggles to fill all of its slots during peak times, I think something should be done.

That wasn't problem in previous campaigns!

Life system is perfect, should stay this way!

 

Problem now seems to be planeset balance.

For example me and my 7-8 friends hate flying that glass brick p47, and going vs g14 in it isn't a choice.

Second map in my case, no Spit...insult...goodbye!

 

Low numbers are usually on allied side and during this second map and that tells something.....262's vulching and camping didn't help....so now have fun axis flying vs very few opponents resulting in cutting off fun for everybody on both sides.

 

As seen from posts above many axis pilots do resupply missions and hop in  262 and go vulch which is sad exploit.

 

262 should be available but make it hard to get, if you complete few combat (not supply) missions bringing points home you'll get it....it would limit and balance number of 262 in the air as well 262 would be in hands of capable and skilled pilot who got balls to engage in dogfight over frontline instead of some vulcher.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

262 should be available but make it hard to get, if you complete few combat (not supply) missions bringing points home you'll get it....it would limit and balance number of 262 in the air as well 262 would be in hands of capable and skilled pilot who got balls to engage in dogfight over frontline instead of some vulcher.

 

 

 


Wings of Liberty tracks the ratio of when you fly on the outnumbered vs the outnumbering side and displays it in pilot stats. It’s good that TAW already employs a similar ratio for lives, maybe use it for Combat Missions too? Gives an incentive to fly outnumbered (“it’s 3 to 10, but I can get 3CM’s in just one sortie!”), and would make it harder to farm transport missions when flying on the numerically superior side.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

That wasn't problem in previous campaigns!

Life system is perfect, should stay this way!

 

Problem now seems to be planeset balance.

For example me and my 7-8 friends hate flying that glass brick p47, and going vs g14 in it isn't a choice.

Second map in my case, no Spit...insult...goodbye!

 

Low numbers are usually on allied side and during this second map and that tells something.....262's vulching and camping didn't help....so now have fun axis flying vs very few opponents resulting in cutting off fun for everybody on both sides.

 

As seen from posts above many axis pilots do resupply missions and hop in  262 and go vulch which is sad exploit.

 

262 should be available but make it hard to get, if you complete few combat (not supply) missions bringing points home you'll get it....it would limit and balance number of 262 in the air as well 262 would be in hands of capable and skilled pilot who got balls to engage in dogfight over frontline instead of some vulcher.

 

 

 

I agree about the planeset, I discussed in the previous pages, just check there.

 

Quite contradictory stating that a skilled 262 would engage a dogfight, if he does, he's not skilled at all. Strategy wouldn't change as much what we are currently seeing during peak times when skilled pilots grab one. What I'm saying is that during peak times it's hard to vulch because there are always someone flying/climbing around the airfield area, of reds quit, 262s will be looking, instead of looking for targets flying towards the objectives, for targets on the ground since they know there will be few trying to intercept them. It turns to a snow ball.

 

I agree that 262 is different kind of plane and needs different set of rules to fly one. It would be good to see the k/d ratio of the 262s, so we could analyze how impactful it is and think what could be changed regarded it's availability, if it should be restricted, let's say 1 or 2 per player flr the whole campaign, etc...

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allies should had the chance to bomb jet fuel depots and jet airports to avoid 262 to spawn... If LW wants jets they have to protect their airfields/stores deep into their lines losing the possibility to protect the front lines. No restrictions but Tactical abilities of each team will balance the battle. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

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...