Tactical Air War

[StG77_Kondor]

If blue doesn't find a way to kill more tanks, fast...it's over. 

[Scojo]

If blue doesn't find a way to kill more tanks, fast...it's over. 

They don't necessarily need to kill tanks.

 

They can instead protect their tanks and defensive positions and destroy the enemy defensive positions

 

Which is very possible given their numbers right now

 

The difficulty will come in attacking the enemy defensive positions. I feel like anything less than extreme high altitude bombing as LW is probably suicide

 

I can just barely hang on through AAA in my IL-2. I couldn't imagine trying to low level or dive bomb in a Stuka or 110

 

One positive though is the VVS currently don't have a good option for attacking high altitude bombers, so better get those runs in before they move past the I-16

[JG1_Pragr]

...

The difficulty will come in attacking the enemy defensive positions. I feel like anything less than extreme high altitude bombing as LW is probably suicide

 

I can just barely hang on through AAA in my IL-2. I couldn't imagine trying to low level or dive bomb in a Stuka or 110

...

 

Heh, I can confirm that. We tried to attack the bridge last evening with 2 Stukas. I was hit by heavy AAA some 3 km maybe 5 km away of target at 3.5 km of altitude about 10 seconds after we entered their range. Squad mate of mine was able to dive but got heavy hits into his wing. How fast were these AI gunners able to correct their aims on plane diving at about 550 km/h I'm still curious.

 

Just in the next mission I saw Il-2 circling in German AF flak and attacking that airfield seemingly like nothing happends. I said bye to my safety and tried to shot him down when our AA gunners performed so bad. In two seconds I was aligned behind that Il-2 I was hit by FlaK38, flamed and exploded in another three seconds 

Edited February 14, 2017 by I./JG1_Pragr

[Scojo]

 

Heh, I can confirm that. We tried to attack the bridge last evening with 2 Stukas. I was hit by heavy AAA some 3 km maybe 5 km away of target at 3.5 km of altitude about 10 seconds after we entered their range. Squad mate of mine was able to dive but got heavy hits into his wing. How fast were these AI gunners able to correct their aims on plane diving at about 550 km/h I'm still curious.

 

Just in the next mission I saw Il-2 circling in German AF flak and attacking that airfield seemingly like nothing happends. I said bye to my safety and tried to shot him down when our AA gunners performed so bad. In two seconds I was aligned behind that Il-2 I was hit by FlaK38, flamed and exploded in another three seconds 

 

What I find is best is have one person draw fire for the other. This means the aircraft wanting to avoid fire will have to hang back for a while out of range before going in.

 

The decoy then should circle the flak constantly climbing and diving, and he can't just climb and dive mindlessly, he has to watch the tracers and actually dodge them by climbing and diving while circling.

 

If anyone else has any tips, I'd like to hear them.

 

I haven't tried having the decoy plane fly high over the target. Maybe the AAA AI would have a harder time with that.

 

Does the expert AAA AI prioritize the closest enemy aircraft?

[FTC_DerSheriff]

 

Sorry you lost me! 

As others already pointed out, in a situation where u are outnumbered (and yesterday it was like 30 vs 10ish) the main goal shifts from attacking (or a balance of both) to defending. First goal is survival and second is to slow the progress of the enemy.

 

With staying over ur own targets we got good escape routes and an early warning system. (Flak, airfields red).

In those moments attacking is under normal circumstances very hard, as the enemy has even with a balanced tactic(uses same ressources for attacking and defending) more fighters on its defensive installations than my team can even field.

 

So defending is in order!

 

[Scojo]

As others already pointed out, in a situation where u are outnumbered (and yesterday it was like 30 vs 10ish) the main goal shifts from attacking (or a balance of both) to defending. First goal is survival and second is to slow the progress of the enemy.

 

With staying over ur own targets we got good escape routes and an early warning system. (Flak, airfields red).

In those moments attacking is under normal circumstances very hard, as the enemy has even with a balanced tactic(uses same ressources for attacking and defending) more fighters on its defensive installations than my team can even field.

 

So defending is in order!

 

Not to mention without enemy fighter coverage, attacking into AAA here is already difficult.

 

One enemy fighter hanging out in that AAA just threatening attack planes could be enough to really put a wrench in even a large enemy sortie

[=LG/F=Kathon]

I'm fairly new on this fantastic server. First let me thank the server-admins for their fantastic work.

I'm still on the learning curve regarding rules and tactics on this great server.

 

One point which is not fully understood from me is how plane replenishment really works.

Yesterday I've shredded all two of my beloved Bf110-E2.

To recover from that situation I was flying supply to damaged airfields with the Ju52.

In my statistics I can see that I have been credited with four sucessful  missions.

The info column shows "+1CM" for each of this sorties.

My hope was that after three missions one of the Bf110 would be replenished but the counter is still locked to zero.

Could please somebody explain what I'm missing or what went wrong on my side to get back that Bf110?

 

Thank you in advance!

 

/Axel

It depends on what you set in preferred planes. Fighters will replenish fighters first. Bombers will replenish bomber first. Selecting both will replenish plane depending on the lowest quantity. Bf110 is defined as "attacker" so you should select both options in Preferred planes.

[Haza]

If blue doesn't find a way to kill more tanks, fast...it's over. 

 

Kondor,

 

Even after my tongue and cheek response earlier, I totally agree with you. I think the majority of maps, if not all maps that have ever been won since this server started have been won by the number of tanks destroyed.  Therefore, the tanks are usually the first targets that are attacked.  However, as we both experienced the other night, taking a tank column out required at least 3 sorties of 3 x 110s, 3 x JU87, 3x He111.  As I stated before, perhaps we have to many players who believe that the way to win is to fly fighters, although tanks win games.

 

As others already pointed out, in a situation where u are outnumbered (and yesterday it was like 30 vs 10ish) the main goal shifts from attacking (or a balance of both) to defending. First goal is survival and second is to slow the progress of the enemy.

 

With staying over ur own targets we got good escape routes and an early warning system. (Flak, airfields red).

In those moments attacking is under normal circumstances very hard, as the enemy has even with a balanced tactic(uses same ressources for attacking and defending) more fighters on its defensive installations than my team can even field.

 

So defending is in order!

 

 

TheRedSheriff,

 

Mate, my reply was tongue and cheek, as from my experience, no matter what the numbers are, players will always have an excuse to justify what they are doing.  The thing that this game lacks is mass co-ordination.  If you want to defend because you believe that your team is outnumbered then fine, it is your game, but most players care only about their stats and perhaps care little about trying to win.  Last night with only 5 players on either side, I played a JU52 para drop and was bounced by an I-16 with another approaching.  Conversely, my side had 4 fighter guys with none wanting to provide cover.  When all the Blues left, the reds all jumped into bombers and their number increased to 7.  At that stage I lost interest and left as it was no longer enjoyable for me and pointless, as thankfully it is a game and not a real war.

 

I have long gone past having any interest in trying to get others to co-ordinate attacks and will resign myself to the fact that I now will only log on if I see guys who are usually willing to form up and try co-ordinated attacks, otherwise it is pointless.  I still believe that the dynamics of the game would change if the other side's objectives were not revealed on the map (similar to Storm Of War in CLOD, if I recall correctly), as this would perhaps prevent those from just camping under the cover of defending with all the other excuses that follow to justify their actions.    

 

Anyway, no matter what the TAW guys do to try and sort the maps out, we still appear to have the same type of issues as we still have the same mind-set of players who will play their game rather than a team game.  I just hope that we do not see the majority of players leaving the server to go else where as happened during the last campaign.  I still believe however, that mass co-ordination is the key to winning these maps.

 

In addition, I think that it is funny that the top fighter and bomber group is MK with only 5 players, yet even if you believe that the Germans are defending when they should be attacking, the stats reflect that perhaps they are correct to defend, but hey, I'm no longer interested, as perhaps this might demonstrate that even a small number of co-ordinated guys can rule a map, even when using the I-16 as a ground attack aircraft.  

 

Regards

 

Note:  Of the current 11 guys playing Blue, 9 have only ever flown the 109.

Edited February 14, 2017 by Haza

[Roo5ter]

Projection:  Allies map 1 by pilot kills.

[FTC_DerSheriff]

Projection:  Allies map 1 by pilot kills.

percentage at the moment says victory axis by tanks. The reds lost 44% of their amount of tanks witch is higher than the 29% Pilot losses of the axis.

 

So it maybe makes sense after all to attack the tanks first. At least to force a victory by tanks

 

 

[=IL2AU=chappyj]

Hazas points are valid but at the end of the day that is the nature of online gaming... if the campaign is won because one side or subset of one side is better organised and motivated then that is the logical reason for the victory and is appropriate.

 

On your comment about everyone leaving the blue side at the time you were flying the JU52, or just after it, I do have a different perspective on maybe why everyone left the server and I've alluded to it before about known individuals. That is up to the admins to decide if there is a problem there but I hope they (the admins) have been fairly warned. So in my opinion it is no surprise or coincidence that the whole blue side left at that particular time. If I had been flying axis at the time I would have logged off too.  We had 4 guys on at the time too and were flying allies because the day before they had been chronically underpop. Seems we can't win in that regard so maybe we will go back axis again tonight. We logged off TAW about 15 minutes later because the axis side was sitting at 0 so didn't think it was worthy of 1 sided bombing runs.

[Roo5ter]

percentage at the moment says victory axis by tanks. The reds lost 44% of their amount of tanks witch is higher than the 29% Pilot losses of the axis.

 

So it maybe makes sense after all to attack the tanks first. At least to force a victory by tanks

 

 

What you say is obvious but also obviously missed by me.

 

Anyways, off to attack some tanks I am!

[Haza]

Hazas points are valid but at the end of the day that is the nature of online gaming... if the campaign is won because one side or subset of one side is better organised and motivated then that is the logical reason for the victory and is appropriate.

 

On your comment about everyone leaving the blue side at the time you were flying the JU52, or just after it, I do have a different perspective on maybe why everyone left the server and I've alluded to it before about known individuals. That is up to the admins to decide if there is a problem there but I hope they (the admins) have been fairly warned. So in my opinion it is no surprise or coincidence that the whole blue side left at that particular time. If I had been flying axis at the time I would have logged off too.  We had 4 guys on at the time too and were flying allies because the day before they had been chronically underpop. Seems we can't win in that regard so maybe we will go back axis again tonight. We logged off TAW about 15 minutes later because the axis side was sitting at 0 so didn't think it was worthy of 1 sided bombing runs.

 

=WFPK=Chappyj,

 

Mate, I know exactly what you are referring to and why I also believe players left.  Whether it was for the reason or not, it is a shame.  I think that it is great that we still have guys/teams that are willing to swap sides, as thankfully TAW has now allowed this, having listened to the masses.  The fact still remains that we need a combination of fighter/bombers to be co-ordinated.  Currently owing to the JU52 being allowed in the server, I decided to just stick with the Blue team, but if I catch you guys flying blue I will try and form up with you as working as a group is a lot more fun and satisfying. 

 

I too logged back on and saw that you guys had all left, leaving just the usual 2.

 

Regards

Edited February 14, 2017 by Haza

[19//Moach]

the reason players leave (why I do, at least, and some others I know) is just that when you're outnumbered, you're much more likely do better for yourself and your team if you remain absent from the server

 

 

when you takeoff in a defensive situation, against 3x1 odds - you don't necessarily expect to come back in one piece... unfortunately, TAW punishes such heroics by removing your capability to further resist in any outcome besides coming back mostly unscathed 

 

if we would get replenished more easily, such as including ditches/bail-out over friendly ground as valid CMs -  or at least had the infinite fallback planes make a comeback - then it'd be a different matter, and resistance would be a more attractive proposition

 

 

it's not just frustrating to be on the weak side of TAW - it is also useless, nay, worse to even try - as you're adding pilot and plane losses to the already severe punishment, whereas AAA can hurt the enemy with relative impunity (there's always new guns on the next map, but not planes)

 

 

team switching has no incentive to it - in fact, it'll punish you with 10 mins in the naughty corner for doing so... what unlikely thought process drives a player to choose this is nothing short of true heroism (and/or severe masochism)

 

 

so, teams are probably unwilling to self balance - and balancing by brute force (not allowing players to join the stronger side) is a very crude approach which will aggravate more than it soothes

 

therefore, again I urge TAW devs to look over my previously posted mathematical balancing method, which I (as a professional game designer with a university degree on the matter) believe to be a more elegant and far less intrusive possible solution

 

 

otherwise, it'll remain a strange game....

 

 

Edited February 14, 2017 by 19//Moach

[StG77_Kondor]

The E7 has the ability to carry a 250kg bomb and - once it's dropped still be at 95% of 'clean' set up. I'm surprised (lol j/k) more fighter pilots don't consider it. Even if they only kill 1 tank or 1 AA from a column on every attack, it helps. A 250kg bomb will kill the lighter tanks much easier than the T34s.

Edited February 15, 2017 by StG77_Kondor

[JG1_Pragr]

In fact, the SC50 is able to kill even the KV-1. You have to be damn accurate and usually it's not the hit and run option but it's possible. Personally I prefer four SC50 under the E-7 since it allows me to spread damage over several targets and it's good for anti-flak support of bigger guys. On the other hand I understand why the SC250 is more attractive solution.

 

Side note: I didn't fly a single mission during this campaign with 109 "clean" fighter setup but I'm dedicated JaBo pilot   And definitely it isn't the best way how to achieve an staggering streak. Particularly due the flak environment in TAW.

[Haza]

Hazas points are valid but at the end of the day that is the nature of online gaming... if the campaign is won because one side or subset of one side is better organised and motivated then that is the logical reason for the victory and is appropriate.

 

On your comment about everyone leaving the blue side at the time you were flying the JU52, or just after it, I do have a different perspective on maybe why everyone left the server and I've alluded to it before about known individuals. That is up to the admins to decide if there is a problem there but I hope they (the admins) have been fairly warned. So in my opinion it is no surprise or coincidence that the whole blue side left at that particular time. If I had been flying axis at the time I would have logged off too.  We had 4 guys on at the time too and were flying allies because the day before they had been chronically underpop. Seems we can't win in that regard so maybe we will go back axis again tonight. We logged off TAW about 15 minutes later because the axis side was sitting at 0 so didn't think it was worthy of 1 sided bombing runs.

 

=WFPK=chappyj,

 

I see what you mean.  I have just joined the game and watched an individual with limited blues playing end up shooting 4 Blue guys down, 2 within a space of a few seconds and I watched as they all left the server.  I was half way to my supply drop, needless to say I turned around landed and left.  I'm not lucky enough to even see 4 of my own side on the server with so few on!  

 

Gents,

 

It would appear that in my time zone most players are now leaving TAW on mass to play on other servers, (15 Berloga, 30 WOL and only 3 on TAW).  How can we turn this around in my time zone?

 

 

Haza

Edited February 15, 2017 by Haza

[Aap]

In fact, the SC50 is able to kill even the KV-1. You have to be damn accurate and usually it's not the hit and run option but it's possible.

 

Are you sure of that? I have seen a table from devs that indicated otherwise, but if you have been able to do that, then it must have changed afterwards.

Edited February 15, 2017 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Scojo]

So destroying enemy defensive positions and protecting your own tanks doesn't help you win the war? Only killing enemy tanks?

 

I thought the concept was that at the end of the map, front line moves based on number of left over tanks vs number of left over guns in enemy defensive positions...

 

and other destroyed objectives affecting tank and AT gun numbers on the next mission?

[FTC_DerSheriff]

So destroying enemy defensive positions and protecting your own tanks doesn't help you win the war? Only killing enemy tanks?

 

I thought the concept was that at the end of the map, front line moves based on number of left over tanks vs number of left over guns in enemy defensive positions...

 

and other destroyed objectives affecting tank and AT gun numbers on the next mission?

There is more than one wining condition. The main goal is to capture all airfields. This is done by destroying airfields, destroying defenses and by protecting your tanks. The tanks will push the front forward.

But your team has only 900 tanks in total to achieve that, only 1300 Aircraft and only 900 pilots.

 

So better use them wisely. Are one of them depleted you lose a map

[Scojo]

There is more than one wining condition. The main goal is to capture all airfields. This is done by destroying airfields, destroying defenses and by protecting your tanks. The tanks will push the front forward.

But your team has only 900 tanks in total to achieve that, only 1300 Aircraft and only 900 pilots.

 

So better use them wisely. Are one of them depleted you lose a map

Very good to know. Thank you!

 

There's no numbers on defensive guns? And I thought the factories produced more tanks? What happens when a factory is destroyed?

[=FEW=ayamoth89]

I think that this server has the best features available on BOX's multiplayer but developed in a very bad way:

-Requires only team play just to survive: a lot of players can't/don't want to fly in squads for a lot reasons

-Very tactical and with a lot of targets to hit: really hard to destroy completely something in 1 map time.

-Currently unbalanced, requires some adjustaments about

-AAA expecially cannons are far way too accurate and that causes impossibility to attack ground targets in less than 3-4 planes which leads us again to my point 1

-Convoy are huge to destroy expecially for LW planes. Server is also almost 50% total amount of player and that reduces the possibility to do anything

 

So it is realistic (except AAA), accurate, lovely but with these roots would be impossible to play. Needs adjustments immediately

Edited February 15, 2017 by =FEW=ayamoth89

[JG1_Pragr]

Are you sure of that? I have seen a table from devs that indicated otherwise, but if you have been able to do that, then it must have changed afterwards.

 

I'm sure. At least it's possible in Quick Mission. I tested it several times during last week. I even can support that claim by track and screen shots evidence 

 

Anyway though I tested it in quick mission environment I have to drop the bomb in front of the moving KV-1 so the tank would be right over the bomb two seconds later when the fuze was activated. I don't know whether the KV-1 destruction is caused by the fact that the bomb exploded right underneath it and if the same can be achieved in case of non-moving target. I have no idea how to force these tanks to stay still in quick mission.

 

To RedSheriff: I think the tanks pool number is 400 not 900.

[hames123]

Maybe you should make it so that 1/5 of the losing team is killed and 2/5s of them are captured, to represent the chaos of an enemy breakthrough. Maybe then the 109 pilots will try and attack tanks, to save their precious streaks.

[=AD=Str1ke]

Hello! I have a question we destroed all tgt on a trainstation but train we had no found,an tgt was'nt close, that is a bug or we are doing smth wrong?

[StG77_Kondor]

Correct, tank pool is just 400. And it looks like the Russians have caught up with blue on this front. Looking at the stats - of the top 15 blue ground attackers - only TWO have 10 or more tank kills. Compared to on the Russian side where the tank kills are more evenly spread out among their top 25 ground killers. 

[JG1_Pragr]

I think that this server has the best features available on BOX's multiplayer but developed in a very bad way:

-Requires only team play just to survive: a lot of players can't/don't want to fly in squads for a lot reasons

-Very tactical and with a lot of targets to hit: really hard to destroy completely something in 1 map time.

-Currently unbalanced, requires some adjustaments about

-AAA expecially cannons are far way too accurate and that causes impossibility to attack ground targets in less than 3-4 planes which leads us again to my point 1

-Convoy are huge to destroy expecially for LW planes. Server is also almost 50% total amount of player and that reduces the possibility to do anything

 

So it is realistic (except AAA), accurate, lovely but with these roots would be impossible to play. Needs adjustments immediately

 

I disagree with you in some points:

 

1) You can participate in the campaign even as a lonely wolf. I am in squad but most of the time I play solo 'cause my squadmates are not very active. Of course I'm limited in target selection and if the situation is not in my favor I avoid the obvious focus points. 

 

2) There are tons of target on the map. But you don't need to destroy them all. Most of these target are of secondary importance such bridges, supply columns, trains etc. This is associated with my point number 1. TAW offers many options for lone wolfs.

 

3) Current light AA fire is hot but OK. Where I would agree with you is the heavy AA case. How quick and accurate these guns are is incredible. Not mentioned their rate of fire.

 

4) The column size is quite OK too in my opinion. Additionally trucks and tanks are non-moving thus they are dead meal once their AA defense is destroyed. There is a huge advantage for VVS regarding the Il-2 ability to kill any German tanks with its VYa canon without problem but that's the game "issue" not the mission makers. Right now I can't imagine how mission/campaign designers could deal with it in any feasible way.

Edited February 15, 2017 by I./JG1_Pragr

[DeP]

=LG=Kathon, think about how to prevent constantly change airfield takeoff.

We have a war, squadron, regiments or gypsy camp?

[JG1_Pragr]

Correct, tank pool is just 400. And it looks like the Russians have caught up with blue on this front. Looking at the stats - of the top 15 blue ground attackers - only TWO have 10 or more tank kills. Compared to on the Russian side where the tank kills are more evenly spread out among their top 25 ground killers. 

 

This would be a hot discussion.

 

As I wrote in previous post, VVS enjoys huge advantage regarding the tank destruction measures. When I had tested it, I was able to kill three moving StuGs with about half of VYa canons ammo load in quick mission in second time I've ever sit in Il-2. That doesn't mean it's easy mode. That just mean it's possible and I know there are plenty better Il-2's pilot than me. So Il-2 with VYa canon is real tank killer and still is very capable in air to air combat.

 

When you try to do something like this in LW you have on reasonable option only. Ju87 with 3.7 cm canons. I know I can kill three T-34 and one KV-1 under the ideal circumstances (I did it few times on RE server). But still the Stuka is way more dependent on the other players since you need someone for AA defense suppression and few other for fighter cover. Once Stuka with Bk 3.7 is attacked by enemy enemy fighter or even attack plane it's game over. Additionally there is no way how any number of escorting fighters could prevent dedicated enemy fighter to attack bomber/attacker in the no fear of dead situation. 

 

All these issues slip the tank situation on map clearly on the VVS side. But that's something inherited from the game design and hardly can be addressed by mission/campaign designers. 

[Scojo]

Correct, tank pool is just 400. And it looks like the Russians have caught up with blue on this front. Looking at the stats - of the top 15 blue ground attackers - only TWO have 10 or more tank kills. Compared to on the Russian side where the tank kills are more evenly spread out among their top 25 ground killers. 

Sorry for all the questions... What about the AAA trucks or halftracks in a tank column? I'm guessing they're not counted in any way?

 There is a huge advantage for VVS regarding the Il-2 ability to kill any German tanks with its VYa canon without problem but that's the game "issue" not the mission makers. Right now I can't imagine how mission/campaign designers could deal with it in any feasible way.

This isn't an issue at all... That's historically accurate.

 

The only thing that could be up for debate there is number of IL-2s available

Edited February 15, 2017 by 71st_AH_Scojo

[StG77_Kondor]

Sorry for all the questions... What about the AAA trucks or halftracks in a tank column? I'm guessing they're not counted in any way?

I would imagine they count as AAA and trucks. Armored cars like the Ba-64 AFAIK do not count as tanks. 

 

Only the actual tracked tanks, count as tanks. 

[Scojo]

 

=LG=Kathon, think about how to prevent constantly change airfield takeoff.

We have a war, squadron, regiments or gypsy camp?

 

What do you mean? At least in the case of VVS, airfields changed a good bit for various reasons. I think the bigger issue is that all airfields have a permanent feel yet move. A lot of the early war airfield movement involved the moving of makeshift airfields to support IL-2s

[FTC_DerSheriff]

Very good to know. Thank you!

 

There's no numbers on defensive guns? And I thought the factories produced more tanks? What happens when a factory is destroyed?

Nope, defensive guns are unlimited.Destroying the factories will reduce the number of tanks the enemy has in the column.

 

Which gives me a interesting thought. Because the entire Factory/tanks/ Win by tanks/-thing could be a big loophole in the server mechanics, as destroying the factories results in less tanks at the front. That means that u can't destroy the tanks which aren't there, which means if destroying tanks is likeliest possibility to win the map, attacking the factories/depots makes no sense and even makes victorie less likely.

 

Damn thats deep

 

Maybe add a script which adds the nonpresent tanks to the destroyed tanks? or is there a mechanic in place?

[Scojo]

Nope, defensive guns are unlimited.Destroying the factories will reduce the number of tanks the enemy has in the column.

 

Which gives me a interesting thought. Because the entire Factory/tanks/ Win by tanks/-thing could be a big loophole in the server mechanics, as destroying the factories results in less tanks at the front. That means that u can't destroy the tanks which aren't there, which means if destroying tanks is likeliest possibility to win the map, attacking the factories/depots makes no sense and even makes victorie less likely.

 

Damn thats deep

 

Maybe add a script which adds the nonpresent tanks to the destroyed tanks? or is there a mechanic in place?

See I thought destroying a factory also "destroyed" the tanks that were removed from the map because of it.

 

It's good to know that isn't the case.

 

However, if there are less tanks on the map, doesn't that mean the enemy is less likely to move the line given that the tank numbers will be lower at the end of the map?

 

That could mean it's still advantageous. If you can't destroy the tanks, then destroying the factories would still be helpful in that case. Long term though, I see your point

[FTC_DerSheriff]

See I thought destroying a factory also "destroyed" the tanks that were removed from the map because of it.

 

It's good to know that isn't the case.

 

However, if there are less tanks on the map, doesn't that mean the enemy is less likely to move the line given that the tank numbers will be lower at the end of the map?

 

That could mean it's still advantageous. If you can't destroy the tanks, then destroying the factories would still be helpful in that case. Long term though, I see your point

again I dont know for sure Kathon has to comment on that.

 

And yes less tanks can be exploited, but only then if u are able to push through the entire map without running out of tanks, pilots or aircraft!

Edited February 15, 2017 by TheRedSheriff

[StG77_Kondor]

Nope, defensive guns are unlimited.Destroying the factories will reduce the number of tanks the enemy has in the column.

 

Which gives me a interesting thought. Because the entire Factory/tanks/ Win by tanks/-thing could be a big loophole in the server mechanics, as destroying the factories results in less tanks at the front. That means that u can't destroy the tanks which aren't there, which means if destroying tanks is likeliest possibility to win the map, attacking the factories/depots makes no sense and even makes victorie less likely.

 

Damn thats deep

 

Maybe add a script which adds the nonpresent tanks to the destroyed tanks? or is there a mechanic in place?

I didn't quite want to word it that way - but you're 100% correct. As the 'war' is currently set up, hitting factories is a waste of flight time IMO. You don't really see the benefit of destroying such factories until further down the map cycle. If you want to level bomb, level bomb enemy AFs to knock them out. Outside of that it should be tanks tanks tanks tanks. 

Edited February 15, 2017 by StG77_Kondor

[Scojo]

I didn't quite want to word it that way - but you're 100% correct. As the 'war' is currently set up, hitting factories is a waste of flight time IMO. You don't really see the benefit of destroying such factories until further down the map cycle. If you want to level bomb, level bomb enemy AFs to knock them out. Outside of that it should be tanks tanks tanks tanks. 

Also, tanks don't move. You could level bomb those too lol

[StG77_Kondor]

Also, tanks don't move. You could level bomb those too lol

You could - but it takes an advanced level bomber to do so. Determined level bombers should instead focus on the Russian AFs. Especially in this map rotation with the lack of proper Russian high alt fighters.

[DeP]

What do you mean? At least in the case of VVS, airfields changed a good bit for various reasons. I think the bigger issue is that all airfields have a permanent feel yet move. A lot of the early war airfield movement involved the moving of makeshift airfields to support IL-2s

I'm flying to the south, brought down the enemy. He jumped to the north.

The war is over! We sat down in the south, have soared in the north brought down again and again, the enemy fled to the south.

 

It is necessary to impose a ban on take-off from another airport after landing or falling.

[Scojo]

 

I'm flying to the south, brought down the enemy. He jumped to the north.

The war is over! We sat down in the south, have soared in the north brought down again and again, the enemy fled to the south.

 

It is necessary to impose a ban on take-off from another airport after landing or falling.

 

oh you mean pilots switching airfields to spawn at?