Tactical Air War

[Gora_]

Thx Blakhart but can't find any PM from you at the moment. Your server has TacView option ON so you can see everyone during mission on your "radar". Is it OK or is it an abuse? 

Edited January 17, 2021 by RavN_Gora

[Giovanni_Giorgio]

I like the 3hr missions. If missions are short, a small but very skillful and motivated group of players can massively move the front line in a short time window if they face no opposition. Right now this effect is not as dramatic, though still present (I think it is fine).

 

With regards to the fragile airfields, I guess there are a few options:

1) Make AFs more difficult to destroy

2) Make them repair faster, especially if they are supplied frequently

3) Add more airfields

I'd personally prefer #3, but #1 and #2 are easier to implement.

[Chivas_Regal]

I like the long distance and mission time of 3 hours. There are a lot of good things here, unless of course you go to the server to "just shoot for half an hour."
There are many other servers where the flight to the target takes only 5 or 10 minutes

[=AD=Denisik_FL]

The anti-aircraft cover of airfields is very weak at the moment.

Their number has not changed since the last war, but they have become worse to shoot.

Now you can safely bomb an airfield from a dive, even in small groups, while they are not afraid of anti-aircraft guns.

 

In the previous campaign, the anti-aircraft cover was much stronger.

[Norz]

A current field location is too complicated for small groups of players (or for single).But if someone plays with friends, it makes fun. 

 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Norz

[FTC_DerSheriff]

Just my few cents. Imho TAW should add more targets across the map, behind the lines. But get rid of attackable airfields. At least those where people can spawn. You could add static airfields, like there are on WoL and CB, with static planes to attack. Imho the objectives of TAW have to get more rich and unique. more trains, more transports, more and smaller depots.

Also make the map a bit smaller, so you still find enemies. 

I see that its super difficult to find a balance there and I really appreciate LGs effort, but recently the gameplay isnt that engaging anymore. Maybe I played too much in recent years on taw and got bored, but I feel something has to change to ingnite that spark again. I remember checking my smartphone regularly on how the war is going, today its much more casual for me and disconnected. No disrespect for the devs, really not, just my take.

 

And on high alt combat:

We flew lower initially this campaign but got repeatedly attacked from a high alt. Ur airfields also got level bombed a couple of times from higher alt. In the first instances we were to low to counter that.
So we switched tactics and few high, exploiting the excellent performance of the 51 and 47 there, and got results. Most kills of the few we have we all around our or the enemy airfields when raids happened.

Not all combat high up is useless. It binds fighters and poses a thread. But of course someone has to fly low to exploit that.

 

 

[Giovanni_Giorgio]

Allied squads, come on, you have to pull your weight in the ground attack efforts.

[=LG/F=Kathon]

Hi,

The repair system of the airfields has been changed. In general they are repaired faster now. If damage level of AF after the mission is more than 75% then AF is destroyed and closed for one or two missions (the more destroyed the more likely are two missions). After that it's fast repaired and should be open again, but have some level of damage. Remember to keep supply level high. Also destruction of a single object on the AF doesn't hold repair for next 2 mission as it was before. Now you have to destroy more than 20% of all objects (hangars/planes/fuels/building) during current mission to hold repair for one next mission.

 

Tanks change: if enemy city has no defense at all then attacking tanks move much faster between missions (they don't have to fight with defense positions) so capturing enemy city should be easier now. 

 

Regarding the AA: maybe it's broken again after some patch or was changed by the devs. We will have to carry out some test and check it. 

 

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

22 minutes ago, ACG_DerSheriff said:

Just my few cents. Imho TAW should add more targets across the map, behind the lines. But get rid of attackable airfields. At least those where people can spawn. You could add static airfields, like there are on WoL and CB, with static planes to attack. Imho the objectives of TAW have to get more rich and unique. more trains, more transports, more and smaller depots.

 

More objectives means more performance issues for the server. I don't know if this is possible. It also misses the core problem concerning action. Even if you double the objectives, most of them will get ignored.

 

I am going to be the broken record here...we need a way to realistically defend against big raids by getting some form of intel to at least make an educated guess where the attack is going to hit. TAW has become boring because the organization has improved a lot. This is great and what i always wanted and encouraged, however it concentrates a big part of the players on the server in a very small area, draining the rest of the map of action. In earlier editions of TAW you had small groups attacking all over the map. Now it can happen that you defend an important tank column and you won't see an enemy for 3 hours.

 

@-=RedS=-Str1ke The map duration was increased to balance out timezones that are heavily unbalanced. Less map rolls = less steam roll.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Operation_Antifa

[[GCA]T1m270]

Hopefully when we finally get marshal mode, Taw will really come into a new light.

 

Having a commander place the forward observer unit spawns, directing airgroups, maybe choosing which airfield tanks attack will be huge. 

[WokeUpDead]

6 hours ago, Operation_Antifa said:

 

More objectives means more performance issues for the server. I don't know if this is possible. It also misses the core problem concerning action. Even if you double the objectives, most of them will get ignored.

 

True, but I think that TAW is far from that problem. I see performance issues on Combat Box which has a ton of ground objects on a big and busy map, but I rarely see those issues on Finnish Virtual, which has fewer objects than CB but more than TAW. Seems there is room for more objects without a performance hit.

 

 

6 hours ago, Operation_Antifa said:

 

 In earlier editions of TAW you had small groups attacking all over the map. Now it can happen that you defend an important tank column and you won't see an enemy for 3 hours.

 

If we get more objectives then the big groups will fracture. Too often right now there is only one, maybe two logical places for attackers to go, so everyone goes there.

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

Would it be possible to re-register me?  I keep getting kicked but I am registered under the exact same name.

[=LG/F=Kathon]

1 hour ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

Would it be possible to re-register me?  I keep getting kicked but I am registered under the exact same name.

 

There is no =IRFC=SmokinHole. 

[FTC_DerSheriff]

1 hour ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

Would it be possible to re-register me?  I keep getting kicked but I am registered under the exact same name.

"exact same name" 

IRFC_SmokinHole
=IRFC=SmokinHol

Yeah. Almost the same. cant tell the difference

Edited January 18, 2021 by ACG_DerSheriff

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

4 hours ago, WokeUpDead said:

 

True, but I think that TAW is far from that problem. I see performance issues on Combat Box which has a ton of ground objects on a big and busy map, but I rarely see those issues on Finnish Virtual, which has fewer objects than CB but more than TAW. Seems there is room for more objects without a performance hit.

 

 

Maybe but Finnish is also infamous for having issues with invisible planes which some people assume is correlated to the many objectives.

 

4 hours ago, WokeUpDead said:

 

If we get more objectives then the big groups will fracture. Too often right now there is only one, maybe two logical places for attackers to go, so everyone goes there.

 

Honestly i don't think so. The big groups are flying together because they want to fly together, which is great! communication and organization should always get rewarded. They won't split up because there are more objectives.

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

“SmokinHole” was before the squad asked that I include “IRFC” in my callsign. “IRFC_SmokinHole” was my mistaken way of doing that (I did not know about tags). The important thing is that I changed the first (“SmokinHole”) within the TAW profile edit yesterday. And since, all of my unsuccessful server joins have been under “=IRFC=SmokinHole” and the server message is “=IRFC=SmokinHole, you must register at TAW...” followed by “=IRFC=SmokinHole has been kicked!”. When I log into TAW the account is "SmokinHole" and the tag is "=IRFC=".  Should I just ditch the tag?  How do those with squadron prefixes keep the prefixes and still match names with the IL2 login callsign?

Edited January 19, 2021 by =IRFC=SmokinHole

[WokeUpDead]

2 hours ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

“SmokinHole” was before the squad asked that I include “IRFC” in my callsign. “IRFC_SmokinHole” was my mistaken way of doing that (I did not know about tags). The important thing is that I changed the first (“SmokinHole”) within the TAW profile edit yesterday. And since, all of my unsuccessful server joins have been under “=IRFC=SmokinHole” and the server message is “=IRFC=SmokinHole, you must register at TAW...” followed by “=IRFC=SmokinHole has been kicked!”. When I log into TAW the account is "SmokinHole" and the tag is "=IRFC=".  Should I just ditch the tag?  How do those with squadron prefixes keep the prefixes and still match names with the IL2 login callsign?

 

This post and a few posts above and below it explain how to match your in-game name to your TAW name: 

 

[150GCT_Veltro]

Sincerely, i don't understand the complain about "long time" flights considering we are in TAW, a dynamic campaign even if is correct the statement about Spitfire & 109 fuel limitation (we need the external fuel tank in this IL2), so we need the classic compromise, and this is fine, but at the same time we need to avoid that TAW could became an arena dogfight.

 

This campaign is perfect (if not dedicate to) for organized Virtual Squadron, so not really a rushed bomb run just to destroy something in a few time, but first of all a well planned mission with your squadron mates, with briefing ecc. ecc., so we don't need to reduce the time of each mission because this would be a nonsense for this type of game.

 

However, now it seems very difficult to play in TAW because of the balancing slots limitation (OVERLIMIT), first of all for the Squadrons with more than 3, 4 pilots.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 19, 2021 by 150GCT_Veltro

[=KK=Des_]

On 1/18/2021 at 2:55 PM, =LG=Kathon said:

Hi,

The repair system of the airfields has been changed. In general they are repaired faster now. If damage level of AF after the mission is more than 75% then AF is destroyed and closed for one or two missions (the more destroyed the more likely are two missions). After that it's fast repaired and should be open again, but have some level of damage. Remember to keep supply level high. Also destruction of a single object on the AF doesn't hold repair for next 2 mission as it was before. Now you have to destroy more than 20% of all objects (hangars/planes/fuels/building) during current mission to hold repair for one next mission.

 

Tanks change: if enemy city has no defense at all then attacking tanks move much faster between missions (they don't have to fight with defense positions) so capturing enemy city should be easier now. 

 

Regarding the AA: maybe it's broken again after some patch or was changed by the devs. We will have to carry out some test and check it. 

 

After this changes we lost map in 12 hours.

It's no chance to save the map any more. We were hardworking all evening and night. And now we do not have anything!

We can't fly 24 hours per day! Think how do not move frontline so fast when there less then 10 pilots from each side.

Edited January 19, 2021 by =KK=Des_

[FTC_Riksen]

2 hours ago, 150GCT_Veltro said:

Sincerely, i don't understand the complain about "long time" flights considering we are in TAW, a dynamic campaign even if is correct the statement about Spitfire & 109 fuel limitation (we need the external fuel tank in this IL2), so we need the classic compromise, and this is fine, but at the same time we need to avoid that TAW could became an arena dogfight.

 

This campaign is perfect (if not dedicate to) for organized Virtual Squadron, so not really a rushed bomb run just to destroy something in a few time, but first of all a well planned mission with your squadron mates, with briefing ecc. ecc., so we don't need to reduce the time of each mission because this would be a nonsense for this type of game.

 

You are correct. The longer mission time is a positive thing IMHO. It gives more time to plan and organize on the ground. The lack of airfields is a hindrance for short range fighters though ... but I guess that is not so easy to fix as there is a road system associated with troop movement in TAW so they must have some sort of connection as far as I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

2 hours ago, 150GCT_Veltro said:

 

However, now it seems very difficult to play in TAW because of the balancing slots limitation (OVERLIMIT), first of all for the Squadrons with more than 3, 4 pilots.

 

You can always take-off from less used airfields or play for the side with less players/outnumbered to overcome that limitation but for the overall scheme of things the Overlimit system is beneficial to the outnumbered side and, at least, gives them s chance to approach the target without being surrounded by a huge amount of opposition.

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

@WokeUpDead On my phone the link you posted is just page 1 of 506 pages of this thread. There’s nothing that I could find that clarifies how the TAW server handles names and tags. 
 

I think I just need to have both “SmokinHole” and “IRFC_SmokinHole” removed from TAW by an admin. After that I’ll try again. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by =IRFC=SmokinHole

[JG4_Widukind]

On 1/18/2021 at 12:55 PM, =LG=Kathon said:

Hi,

The repair system of the airfields has been changed. In general they are repaired faster now. If damage level of AF after the mission is more than 75% then AF is destroyed and closed for one or two missions (the more destroyed the more likely are two missions). After that it's fast repaired and should be open again, but have some level of damage. Remember to keep supply level high. Also destruction of a single object on the AF doesn't hold repair for next 2 mission as it was before. Now you have to destroy more than 20% of all objects (hangars/planes/fuels/building) during current mission to hold repair for one next mission.

 

Tanks change: if enemy city has no defense at all then attacking tanks move much faster between missions (they don't have to fight with defense positions) so capturing enemy city should be easier now. 

 

Regarding the AA: maybe it's broken again after some patch or was changed by the devs. We will have to carry out some test and check it. 

 

 

I found this Map very balanced before this change came! We were happy to accept the long journeys. The mission times have become significantly longer and they have been better organized. The map actually lasted a very long time and it was always forward and backward, which speaks for the old ones Changes were really ok. Unfortunately, I do not understand that you can be so quickly influenced.

Edited January 19, 2021 by JG4_Widukind

[FTC_Riksen]

13 hours ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

“SmokinHole” was before the squad asked that I include “IRFC” in my callsign. “IRFC_SmokinHole” was my mistaken way of doing that (I did not know about tags). The important thing is that I changed the first (“SmokinHole”) within the TAW profile edit yesterday. And since, all of my unsuccessful server joins have been under “=IRFC=SmokinHole” and the server message is “=IRFC=SmokinHole, you must register at TAW...” followed by “=IRFC=SmokinHole has been kicked!”. When I log into TAW the account is "SmokinHole" and the tag is "=IRFC=".  Should I just ditch the tag?  How do those with squadron prefixes keep the prefixes and still match names with the IL2 login callsign?

 

To fix it, if you still remember your password, do the following:

1 - Login into your "IRFC_SmokinHole" TAW account

2 - Click in Edit profile and change the name to "=IRFC=SmokinHole". I think that will fix your issue.

 

Good luck

[Blakhart]

Blue team! 

Calling you to last stand!

 

The emperor PROTECTS!!!

 

Waiting for the Experten at SRS and TS!

 

 

[[GCA]T1m270]

That means getting out of bed :s

[KOHAH]

AFs repairing too fast now. Its almost useless to attack air fields. it may be worth it to adjust the speed of repair is slower?

[Blakhart]

59 minutes ago, KOHAH said:

AFs repairing too fast now. Its almost useless to attack air fields. it may be worth it to adjust the speed of repair is slower?

 

No. Watch the topic, check what other players think. 

This is not an kill the airbase game

 

http://taw.stg2.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=70

 

Salute to the heroes!

Thanks for all who helped!!!

[WokeUpDead]

5 hours ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

@WokeUpDead On my phone the link you posted is just page 1 of 506 pages of this thread. There’s nothing that I could find that clarifies how the TAW server handles names and tags. 
 

I think I just need to have both “SmokinHole” and “IRFC_SmokinHole” removed from TAW by an admin. After that I’ll try again. 

 

Hmm, try navigating to page 413 of this thread, I think you'll find the answer there.

[=KK=Des_]

think how to slow down frontline moovement when server is empty

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

3 hours ago, WokeUpDead said:

Hmm, try navigating to page 413 of this thread, I think you'll find the answer there.

 

I will and thanks.  But my account is now locked so it's probably pointless.  Have fun!

[JG5_Schuck]

For me the extended server time/3hr missions is fine, especially as the map is so big.

The flight to the target area is as is would have been, but we drastically need droptanks ( not LG's fault!!). Dev's are you listening!!!

If i had to change anything, it would be more static targets of opportunity, we've all seen the gun camera footage of trains and boats etc being attacked,

and it will put a smile on the faces of the P47/P38 and A8 pilots...

But, i'm up for trying anything else to help improve TAW, and if it doesn't work, we can always change it back!

I would like to see maybe munitions being limited a lot more due to damaged depots, ie, the larger bombs, extra ammo,  etc

maybe field mods being limited due to airfield damage, and MW50 and 150 octane fuel due to supply columns being destroyed..

then your individual effort would have more impact on the game.

 

Keep up the good work....

 

[=LG/F=Kathon]

16 minutes ago, =IRFC=SmokinHole said:

 

I will and thanks.  But my account is now locked so it's probably pointless.  Have fun!

Because you have changed the name of the locked account. Here are some simple steps to do for you:

1. Login as =IRFC=SmokinHole and change it to something else.

2. Login as IRFC_SmokinHole (active account) and change it to =IRFC=SmokinHole.

3. Join the server and have fun!

 

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

We need time to find the sweet spot after the last change. During the EU night with very low players on the server there will be only one tank convoy (seldom two). This should somehow prevent form capturing many cities and moving the frontline far into hinterland.

[72AG_SerWolf]

May be Im wrong.

But my personal opinion, that SCG and OPFOR break all gameplay of TAW.

This squads fly with minimal resistance (I mean blue pilots at this moment and red side in last war, AAA isnt resistance), and capture airfields

For example http://taw.stg2.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=74 or http://taw.stg2.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=65 or .. (u can find in yourself)

So TAW now became uninteresting for me, because Allied capture all cities, when all Europe sleep or works... One gate plays..

Whats point fly at attack, if OPFOR fly at my morning and move the frontline back for 100-150 km?

[Giovanni_Giorgio]

It seems that the only way to keep it competitive in 24hr setting is to make everything very slow: long missions, long commute times, targets hard to destroy. This way even if a timezone is lopsided, the damage to the overall balance will be small. 

 

But honestly, I don't like the 24hr format. What makes the server interesting for a lot of folks is the ability to affect the course of the campaign. But to do so, one has to spend a lot of time on the server, which is not sustainable since most of the folks here are adults with jobs and families etc. On one hand, a TAW is a great joy play, but on the other hand it can place a huge strain on one's life due to sheer amount of time one has to invest to stay relevant in the campaign. 

 

I wish the campaign would be have been run as a series of mini-events instead, with time slots allocated for different time zones. This way the server can be populated more, skilful pilots with busy lives can stay relevant and have an impact on the course of the campaign. 

 

[Blakhart]

17 minutes ago, 72AG_SerWolf said:

May be Im wrong.

But my personal opinion, that SCG and OPFOR break all gameplay of TAW.

This squads fly with minimal resistance (I mean blue pilots at this moment and red side in last war, AAA isnt resistance), and capture airfields

For example http://taw.stg2.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=74 or http://taw.stg2.de/pilots_mission.php?mission_id=65 or .. (u can find in yourself)

So TAW now became uninteresting for me, because Allied capture all cities, when all Europe sleep or works... One gate plays..

Whats point fly at attack, if OPFOR fly at my morning and move the frontline back for 100-150 km?

 

Its not their fault they live in different timezone.

 

Please check Kathon posts about fixes. He found a initial solution for that. We test how it goes also we were discussing the problem, both with airfields attack and night shift issue.

 

If you have any solution which other players can accept please leave a comment

[JGr8_Leopard]

Ha ha ha

[Blakhart]

Hello friends !!!

Please visit and vote!

 

Share the info at RUS speaking forum plz!

 

 

[72AG_SerWolf]

32 минуты назад, =LG=Blakhart сказал:

 

Its not their fault they live in different timezone.

 

Please check Kathon posts about fixes. He found a initial solution for that. We test how it goes also we were discussing the problem, both with airfields attack and night shift issue.

 

If you have any solution which other players can accept please leave a comment

If you told about one tank convoy - this is do not prevent for attack depots, for example... Destroyed depots reduce tanks convoys, trains, defence...

[Blakhart]

2 minutes ago, 72AG_SerWolf said:

If you told about one tank convoy - this is do not prevent for attack depots, for example... Destroyed depots reduce tanks convoys, trains, defence...

 

I understand and also see the problem.

 

No sense to fight the war and waste time, energy and effort on missions when wining is not a matter of skill and tactic.

 

What you suggest ?

 

[=GEMINI=IngegnerTommy]

hi All!

 

Thanks to LG team for listening to the community and trying to further improve the TAW experience. I think the solution you propose for the timezone issue is interesting and curios to see if it can be implemented successfully.  I was a bit surprised to see the poll question on the AAA (and the answers), let me explain:

 

As you might know, GEMINI squadron is quite active in the EU evening time zone and I think most people that know us know we like to conduct big ground strike operations, lately we consistently put 8-10 planes in the air between attackers and escort. Now from what I've capture from the comments in the chat and SRS, most people that meets our typical strike formation in the game is pleased to join us (friendly) or intercept us (enemies), because engaging a big group is always fun. And that comes my question, how come is that not something happening more often? There are many group as big as our and yet it's still quite rare to see big coordinated strikes.

 

I think as many says before there are a lot of factors in the games that push people to fly fighter over attackers, and even though I don't disagree that the pure dogfight is probably, for many, the nicest part of the flight sim experience, I believe seeing more people flying ground-attack missions, in particular in big groups, would be beneficial to the experience. With that in mind, I would recommend TAW developers to do all that is possible to INCREASE the incentive to fly jabo/attacker/bomber, and increasing the flak (which in some cases at low altitude is so deadly, especially on tank columns) does not seem to go in that direction.  High altitude flak is always a bit weak, instead, but i think that's a game issue mostly.

 

So to summarize, I would not recommend to further increase (low altitude) AAA, and i would on the contrary try to incentivize people to attack ground targets, e.g. (if possible) making a death / ditch with an attacker less punitive that a fighter one, or something like that. And I am still referring to the "prime time", not for the time of the days when the map is half empty when, i agree, the steamrolling should be prevented.

 

My two cents !

 

+ bonus pic from one of ours A-20 level bombing strike