Tactical Air War

[Aero*Bohemio]

54 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

For example I can not see balance on map 3 with F4 against yak1 69. Or on Map4 where there are La5 and no Fw, or on map 7 and 8 where there are La5 fns and the faster thing germans have is the A5 and not the better balanced G14. So... I can not see sometimes where is the balancing factor.But is quite contradictory to hear some saying that there were no 190s over stalingrad so we should not put this plane while with other things that were not historical are there because of balance.  

 

What are you talking about? La5 in map #4 is base one, no unlocks, no M82 engine. It's summer, and if you want it not to overheat as soon as you take off you need all rads open, a cripled plane. No FW190A3 but you have 109F4 and G2s, the best fighter planes on that map. As some have already explained to you, non historical nor balance to have 190 there. La5FN? LW has FWs there, fast, tough and unmatched firepower. If there is a slight advantage in speed for the FN, it's not as much as what we have with 109F4s in early maps. So again, an overall balance in TAW atm.

 

So for the million time: is finding the best possible planeset between balance and history; check Norz post if you can not understand mine ? 

[E69_geramos109]

4 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

 

What are you talking about? La5 in map #4 is base one, no unlocks, no M82 engine. It's summer, and if you want it not to overheat as soon as you take off you need all rads open, a cripled plane. No FW190A3 but you have 109F4 and G2s, the best fighter planes on that map. As some have already explained to you, non historical nor balance to have 190 there. La5FN? LW has FWs there, fast, tough and unmatched firepower. If there is a slight advantage in speed for the FN, it's not as much as what we have with 109F4s in early maps. So again, an overall balance in TAW atm.

 

So for the million time: is finding the best possible planeset between balance and history; check Norz post if you can not understand mine ? 

I can understand that what you want is balance over historical accuracy but I think you guys overestimate the 190s I really dont care about 190s because I preffer 109 most of the time but I can not see why is a balance factor. The normal La5 is as fast or even faster than the A3 because of the time limits and it still can out turn and out climb that plane below 4k.

With La5 you can outrun any F4 and you are equal with a G2 on low speed fights. G2 is so close with the Yak speed on the deck you really need to exploit the manual rpm control on the plane to get some extra speed and only for a minute.

Only factor I see on the 190s that can be some advantage is the Jabo Use 

 

With La5 Fns the difference with the A5 is quite big and Fn accelerates much much better than A5. Yes F4 is faster as well on the first maps BUT with the yak at least you can force some turns. What can you do on A5 against La5FNs? You can not run, you can not climb, you can not turn you just can hope to bail on your lines or to use a camper strategy. I even preffer the much Slower G4s and G6s with 60-70 Kph difference just because they can at least scape climbing if you see one Fn far enought on your 6 and you have some chance to dogfight them compared to the 190s. 

 

So I can not see why we are not having the G14s with Fns if balance is what is important. If we want historical planeset yes. There were no G14s on late 43 and reds had there the best plane but then why we need YA 23 on Lagg? 2 Ubs and 1 Svak is still great firepower and maybe with P40 the most powerful plane regarding the weapons just with the 20mm

[Aero*Bohemio]

7 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Delusional snip

Nah.

[todeskvlt]

finally something is happening here

 

[Gustav_Hagel]

Could someone explain me what's up with the 23mm cannon?

2 minutes ago, =L/R=todchenko said:

finally something is happening here

 

Since reds are winning, forum is pretty much dead ?

[Roland_HUNter]

Welcome TAW admins.

Can we have an answer why the HRAF members was systematically banned from TAW, when a new mission started?!?!?!
It happened several times.

Edited April 9, 2020 by -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter

[LLv24_Zami]

1 minute ago, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter said:

Welcome TAW admins.

Can we have an answer why the HRAF members was systematically banned from TAW, when a new mission started?!?!?!
It happened several times.

Me too and one of my squadron mates. 

 

I have 4,47 hours flight time in this taw due to RL restrictions. And that time I have time to fly, I`m patiently waiting the mission to start and are among first to connect. Then select the plane and get kicked and banned ?

 

There are guys who fly all the time and they just sat on the server. Great

[Aero*Bohemio]

5 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Since reds are winning, forum is pretty much dead ?

Since numbers are balanced, and also planeset...people is busy in the virtual sky, and not in the virtual toilet 

[todeskvlt]

2 minutes ago, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter said:

Welcome TAW admins.

Can we have an answer why the HRAF members was systematically banned from TAW, when a new mission started?!?!?!
It happened several times.

 

 

It is in manual

 

I was kick from the server and now I’m banned from TAW on the servers list, why?

There is slot reservation system which is used sometimes by TAW developers StG2 and =LG= squadrons. To prevent from joining the server when no free slots are available players are temporarily banned. As soon as some free slots are available again all players are unbanned. If server has no more free slots then there is a message on the TAW main page above the map “Server is full!”. Please wait a while in that case.

 

 

[LLv24_Zami]

13 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Since reds are winning, forum is pretty much dead ?

Let`s hope they keep winning, I like the forum much better this way.

[Gustav_Hagel]

14 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Since numbers are balanced, and also planeset...people is busy in the virtual sky, and not in the virtual toilet 

Numbers balanced is not a reason, but a consequence of reds winning. Btw, number of players registered seems way lower in this season than the previous 2.

[Jizzo]

1 hour ago, E69_geramos109 said:

2 Ubs and 1 Svak is still great firepower

LaGG 3 only has 1 UBS... at least know the stuff you bring up... ?

[WokeUpDead]

You guys are finding the numbers to be balanced? In American time zones evenings they are very unbalanced, but favouring the reds this time.

Edited April 9, 2020 by WokeUpDead

[E69_geramos109]

39 minutes ago, Jizzo said:

LaGG 3 only has 1 UBS... at least know the stuff you bring up... ?

True, my mistake. But still. Ub is quite deadly compared with 2MG17s or Mc202 guns. So dont know where is the balance or the historical factor there. 

 

And I can not agree with player balance. Yes numbers are more equal but that hapens because most of the important squads changed to red side for balancing. What happens now is that most of the important squads are flying red. Bombers and Fighter. 

Reds have the 666 squad, 72Ag. SCG, LG, 19 fab, AirCombatGroup, Ala13 all this squads fly a lot of hours they have good numbers to set air superiority etc. 

On blue side the first squad by hours is the lv24 on the 4 position and the Jg4 on the 7 position. So yes, total player numbers are equal but coordinated and experienced players and squad not at all. 

 

So the ones who think that this campaing is equal and balanced on the players side are quite mistaken will be an easy win for reds wining most of the maps. I will be so surprised if not. 

Edited April 9, 2020 by E69_geramos109

[Aero*Bohemio]

41 minutes ago, WokeUpDead said:

You guys are finding the numbers to be balanced? In American time zones evenings they are very unbalanced, but favouring the reds this time.

I agree, but in the european morning the same happens in favour of blue side, so the difference with previous edition now is the imbalance is not one sided all campaign long. And the most important: during the day numbers are quite even all day long. 

[=AD=Str1ke]

There is some problem with bombs and cars, bomb blowing near car and car still alive. Is it problem of new patch or server settings?

[=FSB=Man-Yac]

32 minutes ago, -=RedS=-Str1ke said:

There is some problem with bombs and cars, bomb blowing near car and car still alive. Is it problem of new patch or server settings?

Its the new damage model in the update. Bombs do less damage the further they are. I landed a 50 kg bomb in a aaa truck yesterday and it survived. By on i mean it ended up in its engine

 

[Jizzo]

1 hour ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Ub is quite deadly compared with 2MG17s or Mc202 guns.

I don't agree on that, sorry.

I'd say that the 2x12,7 Breda is way better than the 1x 12,7 UB, especially if you compare the ammount of ammo you have too.  2x 475 vs 1x 200.

Breda might have been really crappy in real, but in here they are actually very good.

Edited April 9, 2020 by Jizzo

[=FSB=Man-Yac]

1 minute ago, Jizzo said:

I don't agree on that, sorry.

I'd say that the 2x12,7 Breda is way better than the 1x 12,7 UB, especially if you compare the ammount of ammo you have too.  2x 475 vs 1x 200.

Spaghetti lack velocity 

 

[E69_geramos109]

Just now, Jizzo said:

I don't agree on that, sorry.

I'd say that the 2x12,7 Breda is way better than the 1x 12,7 UB, especially if you compare the ammount of ammo you have too.  2x 475 vs 1x 200.

on the mc you have 2 breda but no canon. On the lagg3 you have just one UB but one 20mm and that is quite better overall than the mc armament. I of course dont consider the truck mods like gunpods. I dont consider historical as well the gun pods on the mc

[Jizzo]

1 minute ago, E69_geramos109 said:

on the mc you have 2 breda but no canon. On the lagg3 you have just one UB but one 20mm and that is quite better overall than the mc armament. I of course dont consider the truck mods like gunpods. I dont consider historical as well the gun pods on the mc

You were talking about the Breda vs UB, Dude...

1 hour ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Ub is quite deadly compared with 2MG17s or Mc202 guns.

...

6 minutes ago, =FSB=Man-Yac said:

Spaghetti lack velocity 

 

Maybe adding a decent ammount of tomtato-sauce would help?

[Cpt_Siddy]

1 hour ago, =FSB=Man-Yac said:

Spaghetti lack velocity 

 

You need to boil it first before you shoot. 

[Giovanni_Giorgio]

It seems that it became much more difficult to destroy buildings and especially dugouts with bombs after the update. What was everybody's experience so far?

[LLv24_Zami]

6 minutes ago, mincer said:

It seems that it became much more difficult to destroy buildings and especially dugouts with bombs after the update. What was everybody's experience so far?

Maybe the hotfix corrected it.

[JG1_Pragr]

Is there any change of bomb effectiveness in TAW/Il-2? I hit Dyatlevo depot (18 % damage) last mission. I scored good hit into the area where all buildings were undamaged (see figure below).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yxwwSmc2M9neOmwNWWqUSAeb7x1dDwZe/view?usp=sharing

 

Still I was not credited by a single destroyed object:

https://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=23486&name=JG1_Pragr

 

The only kill I got was AAA hit by the second SC1000 that missed the target area a bit (still within the damage range of some buildings). Are small bombs better for using these days? I just ask, I don't want to start any bias/flame here.

[E69_geramos109]

2 hours ago, Jizzo said:

You were talking about the Breda vs UB, Dude...

...

 

We are talking about why to use the 23mm on the lagg when this plane already has great firepower compared with the rest of the fighters on the planeset so there is no balancing or historical reason to put this mod on the lagg. 

On the other hand with the same reason the 190 A3 is not there.

So that is what we are discussing Dude...

 

[Aero*Bohemio]

3 hours ago, =FSB=Man-Yac said:

Spaghetti lack velocity 

 

[Norz]

8 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

I would like it to be historical. Talking about balance is a very open thing.

 

For example I can not see balance on map 3 with F4 against yak1 69. Or on Map4 where there are La5 and no Fw, or on map 7 and 8 where there are La5 fns and the faster thing germans have is the A5 and not the better balanced G14. So... I can not see sometimes where is the balancing factor.But is quite contradictory to hear some saying that there were no 190s over stalingrad so we should not put this plane while with other things that were not historical are there because of balance.  

 

If we want balance we would need allways same planes, balances squads for example. Now most of the top squads that plays for winning and that have the most hours, skill etc are on the red side so there is not balance. This Taw edition will be easy win for reds and not because of the planes because of squads playing on each side so...

 

 

Every map one team has small (or not small) advantage, but this team is not always the same. That is the reason why the read team can use La5FN for Maps No7,8 (because of the 109F4, 109G2 on the maps No 3, 4)

 

P.S. I think that the current campaign will be balanced almost perfectly.

 

 

 

 

[Pikestance]

7 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

I would like it to be historical. Talking about balance is a very open thing.

 

For example I can not see balance on map 3 with F4 against yak1 69. Or on Map4 where there are La5 and no Fw, or on map 7 and 8 where there are La5 fns and the faster thing germans have is the A5 and not the better balanced G14. So... I can not see sometimes where is the balancing factor.But is quite contradictory to hear some saying that there were no 190s over stalingrad so we should not put this plane while with other things that were not historical are there because of balance.  

 

If we want balance we would need allways same planes, balances squads for example. Now most of the top squads that plays for winning and that have the most hours, skill etc are on the red side so there is not balance. This Taw edition will be easy win for reds and not because of the planes because of squads playing on each side so...

 

There is no such thing has being historical and Balance. War inherently is always at a state of imbalance. Technology is constantly being improve to give one side (on paper) superiority.  Consequently, the only aspects that is historical is that the game is based on World War II in that it uses technology of that era. The aircraft used sis loosely based on what is historical. However the reality is is some aircraft was continued to be used well after more advance aircraft was introduced which took sometime for production to supply forward units. 

 

Another aspect that make server ahistorical is ironically the fact that it runs 24 hours. It makes winning or losing a ma useless. War itself wasn't exactly 24 hours either as night missions were limited in respect to day mission. Plus, it is not like this is your full time job. Playing for an hour or 2 is meaningless within a 24 hour time span. The only thing you can effect is your own specific missions. If you want something historical, it needs to have a limited time span and limited in scope. Otherwise, forget history. 

 

Then there is the pilots involved. Having an "equal" aircraft does not make all pilots "equal." Some pilots have better visual acuity and better situational awareness than other pilots and it is impossible on a around a clock server to balance this out. Numbers is not balance. Some people naively think putting a poor pilot in a better aircraft would some how balance the tables and it doesn't. it isn't true in real life and so it isn't true in virtual life either. 

 

Conclusion is servers are not historical and whenever someone ries to create a "historical server" it is rarely played on. People want's balance, but that is impossible to achieve. So we have incessant complaints about the lack of balance. The developers are in a place of trying to achieve the impossible. I suspect the "historical" is the buzz word used to demonstrate that balance cannot be achieve. This is not meant as an indictment, but as an observable fact. 

[Antiguo]

Hi .
In this edition of TAW, my squadmates and I are also noticing the ineffectiveness of the bombs on our departures with bomber planes.
It seems that the bombs don't destroy anything, they only give us damaged targets.

To this we must add the poor rendering of the buildings, at altitude they seem intact, then reviewing the recordings show that some were destroyed.
regards

[Giovanni_Giorgio]

IMHO TAW is the best server ever and has nearly perfect trade-off between balance and history. The experience is very immersive and I enjoy it massively despite obvious limitations of the game and the server. Achieving 100% historic accuracy is obviously impossible. What is possible is to create a very immersive environment somehow resembling historic events, which TAW is very good at.

Edited April 10, 2020 by mincer

[SCG_Syn]

7 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

You need to boil it first before you shoot. 

If you boil it, then it lacks penetration! I prefer using Penne noodles on the mig and 109bf2 as they have alot of room for HE filler (tomato sauce). 

On another note I'd just like to just say that the JG 51 guys have been excellent opponents lately. I just had the pleasure to fight Adelmann and he took my wingman and I on a run as we struggled to land shots on him. That was some excellent flying. It's a shame you died but I really appreciated the fight you put up. Please bail out next time or ditch next time! It leaves a sour taste to see a good opponent die!

Edited April 10, 2020 by SCG_Sinerox

[Pikestance]

4 hours ago, mincer said:

IMHO TAW is the best server ever and has nearly perfect trade-off between balance and history. The experience is very immersive and I enjoy it massively despite obvious limitations of the game and the server. Achieving 100% historic accuracy is obviously impossible. What is possible is to create a very immersive environment somehow resembling historic events, which TAW is very good at.

 

I played on many servers and the immersion level is the same. TAW just creates a different gaming experiences by limiting the number of planes you can fly. The map changes, but you have to play for hours to feel that experience. The immersion comes with planning and executing missions which can take place on any server. Most servers have too many objectives thus spreading the participants over a wider area. If the server is less than full it is even worse. Although, I actually read that someone complained that objectives were too close together and they couldn't "sneak and destroy the target." Huh? LOL. That's immersive! 

[=FSB=Man-Yac]

9 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

You need to boil it first before you shoot. 

 

10 hours ago, Jizzo said:

Maybe adding a decent ammount of tomtato-sauce would help?

This is very sound advice guys, I will try it ?

[Chivas_Regal]

The current campaign shows that the planetset and the number of pilots on each side play a role, but the skill of each individual squad is of the utmost importance. On the first two maps, the losses of the pilots on the blue side were greater, although in the past few campaigns the opposite was true. This is the best indicator of
that a number of effective squads are now playing on the red side, which is why the balance has shifted.
It may be worthwhile to keep track of the moment before the start of a new campaign, so that the top 10 or 20 squads from the previous campaign evenly select the parties and do not gather on any one.

[=FSB=Man-Yac]

4 minutes ago, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

The current campaign shows that the planetset and the number of pilots on each side play a role, but the skill of each individual squad is of the utmost importance. On the first two maps, the losses of the pilots on the blue side were greater, although in the past few campaigns the opposite was true. This is the best indicator of
that a number of effective squads are now playing on the red side, which is why the balance has shifted.
It may be worthwhile to keep track of the moment before the start of a new campaign, so that the top 10 or 20 squads from the previous campaign evenly select the parties and do not gather on any one.

I agree with what you are saying but keep in mind that blue side usually loses more pilots. I have seen reds lose twice as much airplanes and have less pilots killed. The russians have p40 and mig3 which gives a lot of pks and they have "stronger airframes". Also they get captured less because of home advantage. Best indicators is to look at top 5 squads. Top 5 bombers and tank killers squads are all russian.

[LLv24_Zami]

36 minutes ago, =2ndSS=Lawyer1 said:

The current campaign shows that the planetset and the number of pilots on each side play a role, but the skill of each individual squad is of the utmost importance. On the first two maps, the losses of the pilots on the blue side were greater, although in the past few campaigns the opposite was true. This is the best indicator of
that a number of effective squads are now playing on the red side, which is why the balance has shifted.
It may be worthwhile to keep track of the moment before the start of a new campaign, so that the top 10 or 20 squads from the previous campaign evenly select the parties and do not gather on any one.

IIRC, the pilot losses balance was caused by the bad and biased modeling of the weapons and DM in the previous campaigns, at least that`s what was told on this thread back then. Apparently this has been changed, that`s good.

 

Also this campaign shows what happens when there are people on either side who fly instead of concentrating on other thing in the forums. That`s very good!

Edited April 10, 2020 by LLv24_Zami

[CSW_Hot_Dog]

Hi, i have question for Admins, =LG= several times happened to me, that i join server during mission in the middle one hour after mission start for instance, blue side was full, my squad mates from TSB_ squad were in the air and I was forbidden to take off in queue on XY place. Is that right, because i should be able to fly, because my squad mates were in the air and we are big squadron (>6 players)? Thanks for the explanation.

Edited April 10, 2020 by TSB_Helmut_Von_Sairait

[JG4_Dugo]

On the current TAW campaign: We noticed the bombs have less damage to what we were used to. In the video you see two attacks. In the first the tank is destroyed as it was a good hit. However trucks that are just 5-10m outside the cater are unharmed. They should get blast damage of 500KG at least!  In the second video you see a 100% hit on installations, but causing no damage at all. 

Correct me if i am wrong, but that was different before. I would kill 6-10 targets with the those bombs. Now i kill 1-2 per attack. 

 

Video: https://youtu.be/IsGvArl26Ss

 

JG4_Dugo

Edited April 10, 2020 by JG4_Dugo

[Chivas_Regal]

46 minutes ago, =FSB=Man-Yac said:

blue side usually loses more pilots.

During the last campaign on the Eastern Front, the picture was reversed. I specifically tracked this ratio. After the introduction of the G-mod, the red side regularly lost more pilots than the blue side, even though it was less likely to be captured.

https://forgotten-taw.tuttovola.org/2019-11/index.html

This link shows that even though many red pilots then stopped participating at the end of that campaign, the losses of the red side pilots are still greater: 202 vs 177.

 

I thought that this was due to the effect of G and aircraft features on each side.
However, the first map of the current campaign took place in exactly the same conditions, and on it the blue side again, as usual, began to lose more pilots, although only the fact that some large and experienced squads switched to the red side changed.
That is why I now believe that neither the G nor the characteristics of aircraft and weapons have a decisive influence on the possibility of dominance of one side over the other, but only the superior number of experienced pilots (squads) on one side.