Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

If wining conditions depends of number of tanks destroyed - yes it doesn't make sense to attack enemy plant which destroyed will reduce number of them on next mission . But this is revelant if - you are gonna be able to destroy them before they reach designed point. This is case as VVS are/was better at this job, but blue team was not. This win condition (tanks destroyed) also must be the one which most frequently give win in the past- not balanced or more prfered/easiest win condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destroying all 900 enemy tanks isn't the ultimate win condition though, right? Your teams tanks sill have to live long enough to push your front line across all of the maps. Or am I missing something here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destroying all 900 enemy tanks isn't the ultimate win condition though, right? Your teams tanks sill have to live long enough to push your front line across all of the maps. Or am I missing something here?

400 tanks. And it may not be the 'ultimate win' like destroying/capturing all red airfields. But it would stop all red advances and it would then become pretty easy for blue to capture the rest of the  AFs without having to spend resources on destroying tanks. Seeing as blue usually outnumbers red pilots 2-1 AND STILL is essentially tied in tank destructions...is a JOKE. So much wasted effort and energy on blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

400 tanks. And it may not be the 'ultimate win' like destroying/capturing all red airfields. But it would stop all red advances and it would then become pretty easy for blue to capture the rest of the  AFs without having to spend resources on destroying tanks. Seeing as blue usually outnumbers red pilots 2-1 AND STILL is essentially tied in tank destructions...is a JOKE. So much wasted effort and energy on blue.

I see. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destroying all 900 enemy tanks isn't the ultimate win condition though, right? Your teams tanks sill have to live long enough to push your front line across all of the maps. Or am I missing something here?

Destroying 400 tanks will win the MAP immediately for the side doing the destruction.

To win the TAW campaign one side must win five maps in total

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destroying 400 tanks will win the MAP immediately for the side doing the destruction.

To win the TAW campaign one side must win five maps in total

 

And sadly most of the time we don't have the chance to hit the last maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And sadly most of the time we don't have the chance to hit the last maps.

The way this is currently playing out, this time will not be any different. Which is unreal considering how uneven the server player list usually is. 

Edited by StG77_Kondor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, i have to say,

It would be nice to play out all the maps 'tug of war' style, with the front moving moving one way or the other right until the last map.

And i also like Haza's idea of no map icons for defense, although i would go a step further and have none at all to start with until the targets are over flown, recon style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

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

 

When I said "issue" I meant there is a big disproportion between German tank-killing options and those available by Soviet side.

Anyway, I know that VYa canon was way superior to the MG151. On the other hand it was not powerful enough to be considered as acceptable for anti-tank purpose. That's why VVS experimented with 37 mm canons. And why RAF result claims it was comparable to Hispano Mk.II. What we see in game is highly questionable since PzIII/IV type tank can be easily destroyed by VYa. But that's the game issue, not the TAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not easily destroyed - there's a special way to do it, and it requires a lot of lead before a panzer goes "boof" -- the III is slightly easier to take out, but the IV is somewhat harder

 

 

anyways, panzers can be blown up by AT rifles if you get them just right, what we're doing with the 23mm's  is really not too different from shooting it with a PTRS-41 -- except a lot faster, and most often from a better angle that ground troops can hope for

 

 

but it's not "easy" -- most red pilots agree that (pun intended) tanks are HARD  :dash:

 

 

 

anyways - I'll take it as a compliment that you find we make it look easier than it really it (it's not optional, even if you didn't meat it that way - too late now :biggrin: )

Edited by 19//Moach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the lobby should make there be no limit on the amount of tanks killed, just like trucks and AA. Same for planes and pilots. The only way to win should be to push the enemy off the map, and if no one advances, well, fronts stagnated in real life, and it is not realistic for and army to be defeated by losing 400 tanks, when in reality they would have many more, and constant replacements. That way, destroying factories could help because the enemy would stop sending tank columns to attack friendly defenses.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

anyways - I'll take it as a compliment that you find we make it look easier than it really it (it's not optional, even if you didn't meat it that way - too late now :biggrin: )

 

My opinion in this case is based on personal experience from Quick Mission. As I wrote early I have zero problem to destroy three moving StuGs/PzIV with half VYa ammo load. Seriously doubt tanks in TAW are different ;) And I speak just about tanks, not say it's easy under the flak cover. Though I still think the Il-2 has higher survivability in TAW flak environment than anything on German side. And that's historical, so I do not complain about it.

 

Anyway I see no reason for change anything yet. 

 

EDIT: What I know VYa was credited with 30 mm / 100 m and 25 mm / 400 m penetration and was considered suitable against light tanks. But not enough to reliably penetrated medium tanks. The side armor of PzIII/IV is 30 mm in general. So it could be possible to penetrated this armor for less than 100 m. It's tough question how much energy VYa round has after the penetration. There were different methodologies of penetration evaluation in WWII era (some countries determine the penetration if 50 percent of round get through the armor, some 25 to 30 percent etc.). It would be long and interesting discussion but totally off the TAW topic  :)

 

If you are interested about gun vs armor effectiveness I recommend Tony Williams page, particularly following article:

 

http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/tankbusters.htm

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning Pilots!

 

Short technical question: Did you observe too that  the ingame stats and the web-page stats are differing by a big amount?

 

Yesterday, I doved with a Stuka on a defense and destroyed 14 units according to the ingame stats. On the webpage it shows 0.

The next sortie in a 110 showed 0 units destroyed at the defense (although I'm 100% sure that I hit the units with 2x 500kg Bombs and saw columns of smoke rising). The Web-Stats show 1 GK.

 

I don't care about stats, since I fly for the mission. But I get more and more puzzled about what counts towards the mission goal?

 

Greetings

 

Emu

Edited by Emuyen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've seen so far both stats differ marginally (yet it can be annoying, particularly in case of tank kill confirmation). But such a big disparity between ingame stats and web page as you describe I haven't seen yet.

 

Anyway I attacked the defense for several times and though it looked like there is number of targets I was usually credited with just one or two even when I used the SC500 bomb. I'm always curious how some pilots are able to achieve 40+ ground kill in single mission but I expect the reason is I'm using 109 and Stuka, not real bombers. And the fact I'm not good enough still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is lots of extra stuff on defense targets that are not actual targets from the mission point of view. So in the game you get messages about buildings or other stuff destroyed that do not count as targets on website. I think there was a description in briefing what you are really supposed to destroy at these targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is lots of extra stuff on defense targets that are not actual targets from the mission point of view. So in the game you get messages about buildings or other stuff destroyed that do not count as targets on website. I think there was a description in briefing what you are really supposed to destroy at these targets.

This would be like the train thing I described in a earlier post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

=LG=Kathonthink about how to prevent constantly change airfield takeoff.

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

Maybe introduce a home base to the server like the old ADW. You have to select your squadrons home base when you start a campaign and only take-off from that one unless you request a transfer to another AF for the next mission. Very immersive feature ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Transfers were usually performed by yourself flying to a different AF. Just force players to take off from where they last landed. I do not like the idea though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe introduce a home base to the server like the old ADW. You have to select your squadrons home base when you start a campaign and only take-off from that one unless you request a transfer to another AF for the next mission. Very immersive feature ...

 

I don't feel like that really adds anything to the gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning Pilots!

 

Short technical question: Did you observe too that the ingame stats and the web-page stats are differing by a big amount?

 

Yesterday, I doved with a Stuka on a defense and destroyed 14 units according to the ingame stats. On the webpage it shows 0.

The next sortie in a 110 showed 0 units destroyed at the defense (although I'm 100% sure that I hit the units with 2x 500kg Bombs and saw columns of smoke rising). The Web-Stats show 1 GK.

 

I don't care about stats, since I fly for the mission. But I get more and more puzzled about what counts towards the mission goal?

 

Greetings

 

Emu

 

In game status and log server from which is devirateed Web status were different since beginning (started in Rise of Flight).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: What I know VYa was credited with 30 mm / 100 m and 25 mm / 400 m penetration and was considered suitable against light tanks. But not enough to reliably penetrated medium tanks. The side armor of PzIII/IV is 30 mm in general. So it could be possible to penetrated this armor for less than 100 m. It's tough question how much energy VYa round has after the penetration. There were different methodologies of penetration evaluation in WWII era (some countries determine the penetration if 50 percent of round get through the armor, some 25 to 30 percent etc.). It would be long and interesting discussion but totally off the TAW topic  :)I

 

Yes, it's a very interesting topic. Just a slight off topic:

 

 

 

 

In WT they use the US system (50% succesful penetration) so they convert from the other countries penetration standards, so overall it's good for comparison, they have some mistakes but it's mostly with late war APCR or Cold War ammo.

 

M2 .50cal:  26mm at 10m, 25mm at 100m, 19mm at 500m (flat armor)

 

Vya-23 AP: 37mm at 10m, 35mm at 100m, 25mm at 500m

 

MK 103 HVAP: 95mm at 10m, 91mm at 500m, 85mm at 500m

 

BK 37mm AP: 65mm at 10m, 64mm at 100m, 52mm at 500m

 

BK 37mm APCR: 147mm at 10m, 142mm at 100m, 91mm at 500m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this campaign is a major improvement over the last.  I do think the LaGG -has- to make an appearance in the first map of the campaign along with 1/1 Pe2 ser 87 or an Il2 1942 without 37mm or rear gunner (its close enough!) just to give the BoS players a chance to play as Russian from the start.  Historical accuracy and gameplay are going to clash and hopefully the gameplay decision pulls through here.  MOAR russkies please.  I finally caved as much as I want to play just German.  Played Russian last campaign and now I don't see a way to stay German since I avoid logging on when it is 29-9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning Pilots!

 

Short technical question: Did you observe too that  the ingame stats and the web-page stats are differing by a big amount?

 

Yesterday, I doved with a Stuka on a defense and destroyed 14 units according to the ingame stats. On the webpage it shows 0.

The next sortie in a 110 showed 0 units destroyed at the defense (although I'm 100% sure that I hit the units with 2x 500kg Bombs and saw columns of smoke rising). The Web-Stats show 1 GK.

 

I don't care about stats, since I fly for the mission. But I get more and more puzzled about what counts towards the mission goal?

 

Greetings

 

Emu

Bug has been found. Dugouts in defense position, wagons and bridges  if destroyed are not counted in pilot's GK. Have to fix it. 

Edited by =LG=Kathon
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this campaign is a major improvement over the last.  I do think the LaGG -has- to make an appearance in the first map of the campaign along with 1/1 Pe2 ser 87 or an Il2 1942 without 37mm or rear gunner (its close enough!) just to give the BoS players a chance to play as Russian from the start.  Historical accuracy and gameplay are going to clash and hopefully the gameplay decision pulls through here.  MOAR russkies please.  I finally caved as much as I want to play just German.  Played Russian last campaign and now I don't see a way to stay German since I avoid logging on when it is 29-9.

 

I was thinking about something similar. There are two German planes from BoS plane set at this moment vs none on Soviet side. How much this affected the player base situation I'm not sure. The Il-2 1942 with rear gunner restriction would be good addition. 37 mm guns are not an issue since they are needless in current game environment. I'm not sure about the Lagg-3. It's not the top fighter but still it would swing the well balanced of Emil vs I-16 to VVS considerably.

 

I have one question for campaign designers. Is it possible to make personal plane lists? What I mean is, let the player choose from two or better three options. Fighter, Bomber or Attacker. Then give him plane pool specific for his selected duty. If this cannot be scripted with current game interface then I'm sorry for stupid question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents,

 

There is a part of me that agrees with the comments above, however, another part of me thinks surely if guys want to play on the BOM map, then surely they need to purchase the BOM aircraft set, as I did and a lot of other guys did, although I appreciate that not every body is able to buy everything they want (I'm married I know that).  

 

If more players bought the BOM set to play here, this I'm sure would certainly help the developers as they would be selling more games, however, swapping and changing aircraft around just to allow BOS aircraft with restrictions to play on BOM maps.  I'm not a fan of to be honest, as I do not think that it is historically accurate, although I'm waiting for the FW190 in BOS brigade to fire up.  

 

Anyway, I think it is admirable that you are trying to ensure that we get more guys playing on the Russian side from the start, however, currently it appears that more Luftwaffe pilots/aircraft and tanks are being killed even if it is by only a few VVS guys (having witnessed a few gain an airbase with relative ease) so perhaps we should leave things the way they are until the end of the campaign and then have a debrief.  I think the current plane set appears to be fairly historically accurate, although if somebody has better information, perhaps this could be given to the TAW guys to perhaps change the plane set.

 

 

Regards

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is just an idea. Personally I doubt there are any significant number of prospective TAW pilots without BoM. But you never know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is  a few that I know of - it'd be very helpful to have some form of alternative to those who don't own both theaters, else they're grounded until the second or third map comes about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is  a few that I know of - it'd be very helpful to have some form of alternative to those who don't own both theaters, else they're grounded until the second or third map comes about

 

Be so kind, and tell us what this alternative should be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is  a few that I know of - it'd be very helpful to have some form of alternative to those who don't own both theaters, else they're grounded until the second or third map comes about

 

Is that not an incentive to buy BOM, if they want to fly Russian from the start?

 

PS.  They are not totally grounded as they can fly Luftwaffe then swap on map 3, (now that you can have 2 accounts).  However, I'm guessing that those who don't own BOM are more likely to fly German anyway or is that making a big assumption!?  However, even owning BOM you are limited with the Luftwaffe aircraft on map 1, so perhaps it all balances out and calm can be restored to the Sim Universe.  

 

Regards

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Even though I bought BoS 2 years ago and BoM a year ago or so, I haven't been flying it much through all this time.

Until last week when I discovered your awesome server!

 

Dynamic campaign in flight sim was a concept I first met in ~2000 in "F-22: Total Air War" game and since then I was always asking myself why nobody created an air sim with similar game mechanics in multiplayer.

 

Then in circa 2008 I joined IL-2 squadron =JFC= (Joint Forces Command).

We were running multiplayer dynamic campaign each weekend, all manually. Commanders were analyzing log file during the week and adjusting manually units on map, then locking it and sending mission file to opposing side for them to adjust their units.

All rules, missions, briefings and objectives were manually created/edited on the forum and campaign file was run on the server for 48hours during weekend.

It required lots of work and effort to run it.

 

It is great to see that you guys managed to put automation into this, creating software that dynamically analyzes log files and creates missions and runs db-driven website for stats and results. It is great to participate in this and finally I have found a place that is closest to my vision of WWII battlefield simulator.

 

Thanks for that!

 

I got few questions though:

  • Lowering graphics to a point where houses/bridges are not visible - is it really necessary for the sake of performance? I wonder how those  supply/tank columns are going to cross invisible bridges on their way? (do ground units just don't care and drive on water?)
  • Decimating an attacking tank column to below 50% of it's original strength would surely force them to at least break the attack and retreat or wait for reinforcements and regroup. Is that the case now that when only 1 tank has survived from the whole column, it will still attempt to attack enemy fortifications? Should this mechanic be adjusted to prevent quite stupid suicidal decisions?
  • It appears to me that ground battles actually never take place on the map. The battles are calculated with some probability variable depending on couple of factors, between missions and their outcome is being presented in next mission. Has this decision been made also based on performance? I think it would be quite awesome flying offensive/defensive CAS over live battlefield and not only trying to kill enemy units on their way to the battlefield.

 

I am a software developer with experience in back and front end technologies so if you guys need some more hands on deck I would gladly help.

 

Thanks again,

Sputnik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sputnik, like you I resumed playing only recently and was very pleasantly surprised by TAW server, which really comes very close to my personal idea of a fun dynamic campaign.

 

I also noticed that ground battles results are just computed from the mission logs, in game all ground units are stationary and no real ground combat takes place on the map. I think that game performance does not allow for live battlefield operations. And yes I have seen tanks in the middle of a river, where a bridge should have been :unsure:

 

AFAIK a live battlefield is partially modeled on the Finnish VirtualPilots - Dynamic War server but performance really takes a hit. In my case fps drops from 100+ in TAW to around 60 on the Finnish server, with some noticeable stutters.

 

Also I believe that there are bugs and various problems in AI pathfinding and general behavior that prevent the use of "active" ground forces, but maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SP campaign has missions where a tank force, sometimes with artillery support, advance on a defense line. The tanks usually win if they are Russian, the Germans have a harder time of it. I do not think it would be very difficult to see what survived in the tank column and then spawn the tank column with orders to attack the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also noticed that ground battles results are just computed from the mission logs, in game all ground units are stationary and no real ground combat takes place on the map. I think that game performance does not allow for live battlefield operations. And yes I have seen tanks in the middle of a river, where a bridge should have been :unsure:

 

AFAIK a live battlefield is partially modeled on the Finnish VirtualPilots - Dynamic War server but performance really takes a hit. In my case fps drops from 100+ in TAW to around 60 on the Finnish server, with some noticeable stutters.

 

Also I believe that there are bugs and various problems in AI pathfinding and general behavior that prevent the use of "active" ground forces, but maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm this.

As an admin of the said server, I can confirm this. We need to be patient, as dserver / ground AI performance improvements were hinted in one of the TS sessions.

 

I don't think there's that much pathfinding behavior improvements to be done, but the collision detection could use an overhaul. Personally I would be happy if ground forces collision detection was something along the lines of:

1. Vehicle driving what is deemed "safe speed".

2. Vehicle hits an obstacle.

3. Vehicle goes "Hmm, obstacle, I won't hit that!"

4. Vehicle is bumped back a bit.

This is actually how to me it looks like it's been done in old Il-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I appreciate that not every body is able to buy everything they want (I'm married I know that).  

 

Tell your spouse to piss off.

 

That's what I do.  Works wonders!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday there were two missions in a row with NO russian tank column target. And now the Russians have an absurd advantage in tank destructions. I guess I understand destroying Russian rear factories reduces the # of tanks in a tank column - but make the columns totally disappear? For two missions? 

Additionally, last night the Russians were left with just two bases. Both bases were damaged over 75%. Shouldn't there be some type of punishment to that team if their field is that badly damaged - and still able to spawn aircraft? Maybe a limited # of total aircraft available at base, limited fuel to limit you to close defense? (h/t to Haza for these ideas ;))

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does destroying trucks in an armored column have any noticeable benefit?

 

I ran three missions yesterday. 2 IL-2s and a Pe-2. I wasn't able to kill a tank and I lost all three aircraft, but I nailed a bunch of trucks and AAA.

 

I'm never on when anyone is in the TS, so all I can really kill on my sorties are the soft targets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of ideas and commends and I'm happy about that but I don't have time to read it all currently.

 

There was a bug in destroying defense position (it wasn't always counted properly) and after this mission I will restart the script so server will be unavailable for a short period of time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday there were two missions in a row with NO russian tank column target. And now the Russians have an absurd advantage in tank destructions. I guess I understand destroying Russian rear factories reduces the # of tanks in a tank column - but make the columns totally disappear? For two missions? 

...

 

I watched the situation on map during EU morning time for couple of days. There's usually five to eight players on Russian side against zero to one on German. Under such circumstances they play coop mission in fact and the are facing AI only. Moreover as I posted before single Il-2 is able to eliminated all tanks in column with just VYas canons  and maybe several small bombs. I checked the stats of one guy who is able to get credit for 12 tanks, including several PzIII/PzIV in single sortie. I know it's achievable in game environment so I'm far from saying it's cheating. Under such circumstances it should be no surprise we are loosing the map for tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh noes. Was that almost like 20 vs 4 in the evenings? 

And I dont see that in those charts here:pilots_taw_7d.png

Edited by TheRedSheriff
  • 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...