Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

Congratulations to the "Glorious" VVS. Same shit that happend the last two campaigns...it's 2am in Europe and it's 20 Allies flying alone on the server, no Axis. and their turning the map that was up until now clearly a win for the Germans. That's the next TAW campaign i'm not gonna play. Until you find a way stop prevent that bullshit from happening this server is pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations to the "Glorious" VVS. Same shit that happend the last two campaigns...it's 2am in Europe and it's 20 Allies flying alone on the server, no Axis. and their turning the map that was up until now clearly a win for the Germans. That's the next TAW campaign i'm not gonna play. Until you find a way stop prevent that bullshit from happening this server is pointless.

at the moment I see 2 players each side, in the evenings the axis has the advantage of 2 or 3 times the players. Over the day the axis has on average the numbers.

 

 

pilots_taw_1d.png

 

 

 

As u can see the last couple of hours the axis had at least a 2:1 advantage. 

Edited by TheRedSheriff
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today, only a see, and why just cried all? At other times, I also see this but on the contrary - one blue side without resistance.

 

We tried quorum - but it was a mistake. I propose the best solution is your ratio (As in the server Nullwar).


For example, if your ratio 2:1



- the party which is more than 2 times - is to destroy 2 times more targets

- the side of which is less than 2 times - is to destroy 2 times smaller goals

- if 2 times the minority brought down the plane - you get points like 2 aircraft

....

 

translate

Edited by SDV_Fin_19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you provide me minimum start time of the mission and maximum end time of the mission for each month then I will introduce it.

 

 

look up the file daytime.cfg in your game's data folder -- it has that exact information as used by the simulation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations to the "Glorious" VVS. Same shit that happend the last two campaigns...it's 2am in Europe and it's 20 Allies flying alone on the server, no Axis. and their turning the map that was up until now clearly a win for the Germans. That's the next TAW campaign i'm not gonna play. Until you find a way stop prevent that bullshit from happening this server is pointless.

What-Meme-13.jpg

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asgar,

 

I thought I would give this new map another go, however, having just been taken out in a Ju52 by an I-16 that appeared to hone in on me whilst I was at tree top level and he was about 5k away at 1km in height and was able to head towards me without any deviation (I could not even see him when zoomed in through the canopy), I think I will be giving TAW a miss as well. With 3 blue against 7 reds, it is becoming pointless to even try to make a difference on this server and I will also vote with my feet and will no longer bother.  Perhaps I might be accused of whining or crying (how old is that saying by the way), but in a server that is either empty or has players that appear to have AIM9 seeker abilities, I can no longer be bothered to waste my time.

 

 

Regards

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the reds won another map. 2-0 and counting.  :)

 

I doubt the campaign will take longer than a week or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Defense position in Evseev was destroyed and advancing tanks convoy captured the city of Evseev. All events are in the mission briefing. 

If you provide me minimum start time of the mission and maximum end time of the mission for each month then I will introduce it.

Got it. Thank you!

Reds have a well-established actions, so win! :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 has players that appear to have AIM9 seeker abilities

 

 

to point out the pink elephant in the middle of the room - there are very controversial, previously banned player(s) who have been allowed to play,  and the statistical abnormality they create denounces a supernatural capability to produce enemy casualties which cannot be easily overlooked

 

allow me to make a point based on statistics and probability theory here:

 

 

we can approximate the distribution of player skills across the entire TAW player base with a "bell curve" - this is called Gaussian Distribution, and is very common in probability theory

 

so we can see the graph of player skills variation from the "average pilot" should be something like this:

325px-Standard_deviation_diagram.svg.png

 

clearly - you'd expect the "player(s) in question" (henceforth referred to as "the subject") would fit in the rightmost part of the curve - this making for a gradually thinning minority of the higher skilled

 

this is not what you see, given the recorded results - as the "subject" sits alone, apart from the end of the curve, astride a very noticeable gap in numbers from his runner-ups

 

in other words, if one could simply "get that good", and our "subject" is simply "the best player in the world" - then you'd find a gradually thinning number of other players coming close to his results, with him at the far end of the skill spectrum

 

our subject, however, lies OUTSIDE the continuum of the skill spectrum - clearly indicative of one who is in possession of a unique set of advantages, which is unavailable to others

 

 

statistically, the subject is guaranteed to be either a savant or a cheater

 

while it is impossible to prove with absolute certainty that unsportsmanlike conduct is truly the case with the information that can be had from (many) witness accounts and various track recordings featuring suspiciously convenient and ever-present* effects often disputed as "lag" -- the numbers suggest an abnormality which to neglect is irresponsibly naive and/or an act of blatant denial of an undesirable possibility

 

* I have made 5 recordings of myself being shot down by the "subject" - the five of which consistently feature strange, aberrant "stunts" which one could only safely dismiss as "lag" or "glitches" if they were a one-time occasion. however, 100% of the sample group features such abnormalities, always working very conveniently in favour of the subject - also curious, once my decision to always record all engagements whenever the subject is online was made known to him, I was never again attacked by that same player. this corroborates another player's account where he became certain of being personally targeted by the subject, in a manner that belied the ability to locate and identify individual players beyond visual range in a server that has that feature disabled

 

 

while in a (north american) court of law, the burden of proof lie with the accuser - we must also remember that this is a situation in which there is no actual reason for that rationale to apply - and this suspicion is shared by a very large number of players, and thus cannot be simply ignored, lest that be to the detriment of the server and community as a whole

 

also, to apply the burden of proof rationale here is to inevitably enable all possible offenders to remain unchallenged, due to our ultimate inability to obtain further proof (which a court could otherwise forcefully acquire with a warrant) - this reasoning thus acquits ALL cheaters in all online games, since without obtaining the user's computer for examination, it is extremely unlikely that the same standards of reasonable doubt can ever be held up outside an actual court of law -- thus, every anti-cheat system must resort to harsher measures based on consensus, probability, and often even assumptions, leaving the proof of innocence up to anyone who appeals such a decision

 

 

let it also be made clear that the subject has already faced a ban, issued by the developers on grounds which are unclear, but easily guessed at - the ban itself has been confirmed by the subject himself on a confrontation which ensued after a vote-ban was initiated by a disgruntled team mate on one occasion -- so the history is there to back up the statistical aberration which the subject represents

 

 

I cannot, nor do I wish to, tell you what to believe -- only the server admin is in a position to make a decision as to how to handle the situation at hand in a way that most benefits the community

Edited by 19//Moach
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let it also be made clear that the subject has already faced a ban, issued by the developers on grounds which are unclear, but easily guessed at - the ban itself has been confirmed by the subject himself on a confrontation which ensued after a vote-ban was initiated by a disgruntled team mate on one occasion -- so the history is there to back up the statistical aberration which the subject represents

Who are you talking about? Many letters and no specifics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are you talking about? Many letters and no specifics.

 

 

the admin knows whom this is - I cannot be specific lest the thread gets locked (this has happened before) - the subject can easily be identified atop the statistics page, largely ahead of anyone else by an absurd margin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the admin knows whom this is - I cannot be specific lest the thread gets locked (this has happened before) 

Аdmin knows, and you do not.
You do not know anything! Your arguments simply a disgrace to you. :mda:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do very well know whom this is - and I resent your tone, which I honestly hope stems from a language barrier

 

many of us know this player by name, though it is against the forum rules to openly accuse others - as is to verbally attack them in such a way as you have that last comment phrased

 

 

my point was to deliberately obfuscate any individual accusations also, so that we can cross-compare our suspicions in a way similar to a blind trial - this cannot be done if I should openly name names

Edited by 19//Moach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to say this, but there is simply a problem of the Axis team not knowing what to do in many cases. Yesterday I fought in a 1:2 disadvantage situation in terms of player numbers and I was able to take out 2 1/2 defense positions with 2 other guys as cover in an IL-2, almost by myself, without us being properly challenged. We actually gained ground and 2 airfields in a situation of severe disadvantage by bombing one airfield to hell and capturing and taking out defenses at the other while our tanks that were just in front of that airfield remained basically untouched.

Yes, the VVS has an advantage in terms of tank killing potential, but that alone cannot explain these results.

And even then: If you have the numerical advantage and are not able to kill tanks, just use your superior bomber capabilities and bomb the airfields to hell and capture them manually. I see so many large squadrons on the Axis side that could basically close 2 Russian airfields in one round and capture them by transport planes in the next. We've done so in prior campaigns, too, it's actually not that hard. Especially now that the JU-88 is available, you can even do precision high-speed divebombing. Use that potential, guys. :D

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do very well know whom this is - and I resent your tone, which I honestly hope stems from a language barrier

I did not mean to offend you, but all your graphics and the reasoning just an empty space without evidence. But evidence never will, so forget about it and do not pay attention to the top of the statistics. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not mean to offend you, but all your graphics and the reasoning just an empty space without evidence. But evidence never will, so forget about it and do not pay attention to the top of the statistics. ;)

Nice defence strategy. Can I call you MK.Mr.Rall33?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Defense position in Evseev was destroyed and advancing tanks convoy captured the city of Evseev. All events are in the mission briefing. 

If you provide me minimum start time of the mission and maximum end time of the mission for each month then I will introduce it.

 

Yes, here's a website where you can find exact sunrise and sunset time each day in Moscow zone:

 

http://www.sunrise-and-sunset.com/en/sun/russia/moscow

 

and here for Stalingrad (Volgograd)

 

http://www.sunrise-and-sunset.com/en/sun/russia/volgograd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well said Moach

this is patently clear to pretty much every player that plays in the relevant servers and timezones with this (these) individuals.

Previous history is extensive and not limited to BOS also.

I have the same anecdotal experience of abnormal behaviours that point to ease of locating targets and knowing which target is whom

Statistics don't lie and behavioural evidence only serves to back it up.

Edited by =WFPK=chappyj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to say this, but there is simply a problem of the Axis team not knowing what to do in many cases. Yesterday I fought in a 1:2 disadvantage situation in terms of player numbers and I was able to take out 2 1/2 defense positions with 2 other guys as cover in an IL-2, almost by myself, without us being properly challenged. We actually gained ground and 2 airfields in a situation of severe disadvantage by bombing one airfield to hell and capturing and taking out defenses at the other while our tanks that were just in front of that airfield remained basically untouched.

Yes, the VVS has an advantage in terms of tank killing potential, but that alone cannot explain these results.

And even then: If you have the numerical advantage and are not able to kill tanks, just use your superior bomber capabilities and bomb the airfields to hell and capture them manually. I see so many large squadrons on the Axis side that could basically close 2 Russian airfields in one round and capture them by transport planes in the next. We've done so in prior campaigns, too, it's actually not that hard. Especially now that the JU-88 is available, you can even do precision high-speed divebombing. Use that potential, guys. :D

If you were able to eliminate two defense position with just one Il-2 and two fighters in single sortie then there have to be something terribly wrong. I focus on the defense position attacks for most of my missions in this campaign, mostly with Stuka and 109. Less often with 110. Even during coordinated attacks with my squatmates I'm hit by AI AA like one in four sorties at best. Hell I was hit by single alive heavy AA gun over defensive position during dive with Stuka from 3.5 km at least three times so far.

Another feature is that there is a mix of target in defense position. Tanks cannot be destroyed by strafing like in Il-2 case. Take Stuka/110 or Ju88 now with two fighters and show me how you do the same think you described. I bet you won't succeed.

 

Still I think the LW has to focus on winning the map by something different than focusing on close support since VVS clearly dominate this part. But because I'm new to the TAW I have no idea now. We tried (as squad) to capturing the AF with p[ara drops like two times, but we need 5 Ju52 for job to be done and it's hard to get enough people.

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about getting into multiplayer. This server peaks my interest. I think its what I'm looking for. I have a few questions.

 

I think I got the basics down from looking at your rules page. The squared cities with no airfields.  What are their purpose in the game? Is there any benefit from attacking them?

 

Supply depots what do they look like? How far behind the lines are they? Is it worth attacking them? Are they on the map? I didn't see them on the web page map.

 

Thanks guys 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Step away for a weekend and WOW. 

First of all, congrats to you Red pilots once again. It looks like Map #3 is on it's way to being another runaway victory for you. :)

1. The SC1000 is not the end all be all 'tank' killer that some have made it out to be. A tank column is on the road. The majority of the blast of a SC250, SC500 or SC1000 bomb is wasted going to the side. Even a perfectly dropped SC1000 bomb on top of a tank will kill that tank, and the cars in front and behind. It will not kill two tanks. There is enough spacing between the tanks in the column that a multiple tank kill with one drop will not happen (unless those surrounding tanks were previously damaged). Now, if you're complaining about it's destruction on AFs and rear factories - there you may have a point. Personally I don't care for the bomb. It was rarely used even on level bombers - I have no problem with it being limited or even eliminated. 

2. I have absolutely no problem with allowing the IL-2's to use their historical and available armament. Map #1 had stukas with available 37mm cannon which obviously were not used in 1941. I also have no problem with the composition of Red and Blue tank columns. My advice would be to increase the amount of tank kills required to 'win' the map. Or if someone else has any other ideas? 

The server has great settings, with no GPS. There is little lag and the different plane sets help the maps stay fresh. I do not know if it needs more balancing or other measures in order to increase the competitiveness. Because right now, even when usually outnumbered, Red will continue to win - and it's not even close. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The server has great settings, with no GPS. There is little lag and the different plane sets help the maps stay fresh. I do not know if it needs more balancing or other measures in order to increase the competitiveness. Because right now, even when usually outnumbered, Red will continue to win - and it's not even close. 
 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO it simply needs two things to get the campaign more balanced:

 

- remove the map winning condition "number of destroyed tanks" (a map win should only be achievable by getting all enemy airfields captured and under control)

- change the strength of the totally overperforming AAA to a much less accurate aiming capability

Edited by Geleitzug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a bug on Stalingrad_South map and bridges, train stations are not generated. Drop zones have been fixed. 

 

If server is not visible on the server's list please wait a while. I have to shout it down to fix bugs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the server so much, and that is the reason I am so sad that IF the blues dont manage to win at least one map we will not even see a Yak1 on this server. No fw ether, not the yak1B, not the 110G2.

Personally I would like if the Admins could consider in their scripts that the war can be over after 5 Maps and to design the planeset around it.
Furthermore I would - like I hinted before - like it if we could introduce the planes by the date they went out to the squadrons.

So effectively start in 1941, and add planes along the way.
You can calculate how many days/weeks you have to skip per mission to introduce all planes within a average duration of one TAW campain.

22 June 1941(start barbarossa) - 09 October 1943(End of the Kuban Bridgehead) are 839 days for a 60 day TAW campain you have to skip 14 days a real day.
I know its work and I probably can't see how much work that is, but thats the way I would like to play TAW.

The planesets currently are feeling forced. At least in my opinion.

Edited by TheRedSheriff
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only went and joined the Russians because there was to many Germans on the sever and the i16 is not tge best fighter in the game but still the Germans arnt playing the ground attack game its all got to be 109s looking for fights in my opinion unless the mind set off some people change then the sever will fale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was playing the ground attack game until my JU88 got rammed by a LaGG straight behind wing to wing and the LaGG flew off like nothing happened yet the JU88 was just ended.

Great stuff.  Had to go back and look at the recording to believe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were able to eliminate two defense position with just one Il-2 and two fighters in single sortie then there have to be something terribly wrong.

Strange you. If you can not, then all can not?

2 BF-109 with a bomb can destroy artillery during one flight is very simple!

 

 Because right now, even when usually outnumbered, Red will continue to win - and it's not even close. 

Because the blue team is not an action. Most of the blue pilots are not able to take advantage of their equipment and weapons. With such planeset red obliged to lose the war.
 
Hopefully in the next round will be the same schedule of planes, which will have to defeat the blue team. It is interesting later read this forum. 
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Strange you. If you can not, then all can not?

2 BF-109 with a bomb can destroy artillery during one flight is very simple!

 

Because the blue team is not an action. Most of the blue pilots are not able to take advantage of their equipment and weapons. With such planeset red obliged to lose the war.
 
Hopefully in the next round will be the same schedule of planes, which will have to defeat the blue team. It is interesting later read this forum. 

 

 

Rall33,

 

I was wondering just for my own clarification, what name do you fly under in either TAW or WOL?  Owing to the fact that you have 10 posts and have been a member since 12 Jun 15 (and appear to be very knowledgeable and offer advice) I just couldn't find your stats no matter how far back I looked to see how you are able to so convincingly put everybody else down and dismiss their views and speak with such authority,

yet appear to have not played.

 

In addition, at post 3146 you complained about tanks disappearing on Stalingrad_center #77 and mentioned that it happens all of the time, so you must be playing on the server, but under what name?  

 

Regards

Edited by Haza
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with AAA..

 

I had little to no issues with dive bombing in that AAA/Flak in the 111 at around 500kph..

did a few runs like this ok.

This is not how the He-111 should be flown. More often than not, the flak will kill you, but by all means continue to get kills to add to your signature :P.

 

 

 

Strange you. If you can not, then all can not?

2 BF-109 with a bomb can destroy artillery during one flight is very simple!

 

Because the blue team is not an action. Most of the blue pilots are not able to take advantage of their equipment and weapons. With such planeset red obliged to lose the war.
 

? 2xE7's can not destroy a fully healthy defensive position by themselves. The bombs would have to be perfectly dropped for one - against the tanks there. Good luck getting 'easy' kills on a T34 with that. And this isn't even mentioning the AA. 

 

"Because blue team is not an action"? On any given day, when blue outnumbers red, out of 20 blue pilots at least half are flying stuka/heinkel/110. Maybe now less attackers (like me) are playing because why? Why spend hours and hours trying to win when there really is no chance? I'd rather just fly in other servers and at least still have fun without having to worry about death timers, # of planes I have left, how many combat missions do I have? 

 

I DESPERATELY want to love this server. But as it stands, it's going to remain a mini-hartman (for red too) streak-fest. Ground attack pilots - that like to hit tanks/front line positions need not apply. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the defense position. I though (and I could be wrong in this point) that even dugouts have to be destroyed so the position would be considered as eliminated. They are credited in the sortie log so it seems logical to me. If dugout are just "fake" targets and there are just two t-34 then it's possible. Theoretically. Anyway I can't see your nick in TAW statistics. If you use a different one then identify yourself please so I can check your stats to be able to verify your statement.

 

Thank you.

 

EDIT: I checked the TAW manual and dugouts are there mentioned as targets need to be destroyed to eliminating position. I've never tried guns against them. I do not expect strafing do anything to them. Thus the two E-7 theory is almost surely BS 

Edited by I./JG1_Pragr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

? 2xE7's can not destroy a fully healthy defensive position by themselves. The bombs would have to be perfectly dropped for one - against the tanks there. Good luck getting 'easy' kills on a T34 with that. And this isn't even mentioning the AA. 

If you can not destroy the artillery in two BF-109, take one of BF-109 and BF-110. 

 

"Because blue team is not an action"? On any given day, when blue outnumbers red, out of 20 blue pilots at least half are flying stuka/heinkel/110. Maybe now less attackers (like me) are playing because why? 

That is why many blue pilots to do what is  not needed.  They are trying to destroy very insignificant target, wasting time in empty. Not understanding the tactics of war, this leads to defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what would happen, if all "only VVS" Player who create so much controversy would switch to LW and the majority of LW-Pilots would switch to VVS.

 

 

@Kathon: Thank you very much for removing the bug with the defense positions! Keep up the good work! And don't let you discourage. Any discussions in this thread happens because people DO care. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not edit the moderation.

 

Last serious warning.

 

Your original post:

Why do people side step and be so careful about calling "them" hackers/exploiters/cheats

Re: [edited]

Dont need video or photo evidence to prove anything
Stats alone are proof
(just like in a court of law for sports doping they dont need a positive blood test, just statistical evidence that was was done is humanly impossible or highly improbable.)

same in FPS games i have played where monthly the top 1# of players are banned
Eg, 250,000 players @ 2.5 KD Ratio then under 10 players and 7.5 KDR (they get banned automatically as the hacking is obvious without proof)

 

Rules you broke:

 

7. Comments containing profanity, personal insults, accusations of cheating, excessive rudeness, vulgarity, drug propaganda, political and religious discussion and propaganda, all manifestations of Nazism and racist statements, calls to overthrow governments by force, inciting ethnic hatred, humiliation of persons of a particular gender, sexual orientation or religion are not allowed and will result in a ban.
Violations of this rule will result in the following:
 
First offense - 3 days ban on entry

 

17. Spreading false or harmful information about the product is prohibited and will be deleted by forum administration. Claiming ignorance of the subject to justify harmful or obviously untrue info will not be tolerated.
Violations of this rule will result in the following:
 
First offense - 1 days ban on entry

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
added the broken rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello every one. 

Iam just flew few misions on that server. Befor played warthunder sim. 

This is what i looking for. 

I´d like to thanks to every one ho managing this server and let us play it.

 

(Iam from czech republic. Sorry about my english )

Edited by kmonicekm
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people side step and be so careful about calling "them" hackers/exploiters/cheats

 

Re: [edited]

 

Dont need video or photo evidence to prove anything

Stats alone are proof

(just like in a court of law for sports doping they dont need a positive blood test, just statistical evidence that was was done is humanly impossible or highly improbable.)

 

same in FPS games i have played where monthly the top 1# of players are banned

Eg, 250,000 players @ 2.5 KD Ratio then under 10 players and 7.5 KDR (they get banned automatically as the hacking is obvious without proof)

If you want to be a good server host/admin, you need to have more mature mind.

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why do people side step and be so careful about calling "them" hackers/exploiters/cheats

Because accusations without proof are just against the principles of common justice. In addition to that, they are also against the rules of this forum (Rule 7). 

 

just like in a court of law for sports doping they dont need a positive blood test, just statistical evidence that was was done is humanly impossible or highly improbable

Any reference to such laws? Preferably from a real country, not from "Hunger Games" or any other sci-fi.

Edited by II./JG77_Kemp
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...