Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

is only the 1st day of the new campaign: many players have to register yet and to change the balance itself.... You are all complaining about numbers unbalance... Well we destroyed LW last campaign with the same numbers. Actually many  good squadrons are playing for the LW... and germans are winning....Don't you think that the key factor is the players flying each side? Anyway flying germans I can now assure that we have a lot of rookies playing in: I saw  a lot of 110s and stukas crashing into the ground attacking vehicles and targets. And I didn't see any reds really attacking our own tanks which are quite easy to destroy for VVS planes. THOSE TANKS ARE ADVANCING AND CAPTURING YOUR AFs!!! Also I see that LF is coordinating a lot on TS and with all of this combined causes, we are currently winning (finally)

Edited by =FEW=ayamoth89
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Don't you think that the key factor is the players fling each side?

 

No way,  that would mean the germans don't have a plane-problem and thats the reason they loose every TAW? According to this thread earlier....

 

Sorry I couldnt resist. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No way,  that would mean the germans don't have a plane-problem and thats the reason they loose every TAW? According to this thread earlier....  
 

 

Nobody said it was ever a plane-set problem....

 

Sry, couldnt resis aswell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 or 4 hits? I frequently tank bust in using these and 3 or 4 isn't possible even with the larger cannons. Can you please post a video?

 

The lowest I've killed a tank with is about 5-7 volleys, so that puts it at 10-14 rounds total.

I'm off the PC for couple of days now. But I'm gonna make some video about strafing attacks lately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as i like to see TAW back, i'm worried about it's future.

Besides very limited personal hangar and high value of virtual life (do like it both), one of the main features of TAW... it always has been about supporting ground forces. Protecting friendly, attempts to weaken enemy... Cause it's ground forces that wins wars, not planes. Airforces is just the support. TAW was exactly about it. But from this edition - it's not anymore. 

 

Sequence of changes in rules is very disappointing. LG, don't take it personal, please. I do appreciate all of your work, and do believe TAW still can be the best war-project, created by BoS/M/K community. 

All the following is addressed to LW-side in general. Side, which has been pushing and lobbying all of those changes.

 

Guys, I've seen almost every TAW campaign so far. Let's take a look back and revise main changes from start to start.

- One of the first campaigns. Limit for pilot deaths was 400 (as far as i remember). More than enough i would say. But careless Ju-87 drivers and some 109's -"i_m_gonna_turnfight_you_on_deck" managed to reach the goal. Result: Now we have 900 pilot for side limit... Impossible to loose so much. Can be deleted from map restrictions as well.

- Next one campaign (third?) Score 2:2 by map wins. Fifth map (3 wins was campaign win condition). Red side is pressed to the shore of Volga river (it was only Stalingrad map in rotation). Last 3 red airfields... And Red's won due the LW side managed to loose 900 aircrafts during the map! (Sketch, you probably can remember this last evening ;) ) A lot of airframes actually... huge amount! And what's next? Now we have limit of 1300 airframes per map ) Can be crossed out from real_2_achieve limitations.

- Do i need to remind what happened with tank limits? Now we don't have it at all... 

 

Last campaign was finished in 2 weeks. And everyone was complaining it's too fast. This one should be won by LW in one week. Recepy is easier than ever: Just few organised bomb raids. Disable and Close airfield. Paradrop it. Due to lowered damage % and simplified mechanic of paradrop-capturing, even under-average LW pilot would be able to do it. Repeat.  

24 hours for capturing all red airfields on map should be more than enough. 7 map campaign * 24 hour per map = 1 week. Congratulations!

 

You don't need to attack red columns or defence positions. Actually you don't even need to cap your own ground forces - they  don't matter anymore, thanks to your whines... Just bomb. drop. repeat. 1 week. And if you wouldn't achieve that having Ju88 from first map and F4 (the best plane in game so far) from second...  Well. Then probably you should ask about forbidding to fly red-side on this server for good. 

 

But question is, would you enjoy it?

 

All this - imho. 

 

=AD=B777R

 

Some very interesting points and some very critical statements aimed at the Blues whiners, as you put it.

 

I for one believe that any changes that TAW have undertaken have been taken after careful consideration based on facts and not on listening to Blue whiners, so I'm not sure why Kathon or TAW wouldn't take your comments personally. 

 

Just out of interest, how many games have you played blue to experience any of these issues on TAW?  Owing to the fact that you are worried about TAW and its future "I'm worried about it's future", I thought that perhaps your post would have something constructive to contribute to ensure the continued success of TAW rather than it appearing to be a Red whine about blue whiners.

 

Therefore, I would be interested to hear from you what you believe should be done rather than what has been done that shouldn't have been done, to ensure the future of TAW, for both red and blue players!?

 

Just a thought IMHO.

 

Respectively!

 

Haza

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is really interesting, VVS win last campaign although LW (sorry, but if i read this topic, i can think of only marking for pilots LW - Lazy Whiners) have in most maps superiority and still lose the maps ... This says something about the quality of pilots ... And solutions? Thanks to blue whiners we have planets set and victory conditions change and locking some modification for our aircraft ! , this campaign will be really short .... Really gj, now it's the worst campaign I've ever played. Sorry but last campaing was 1000% better.

 

(And yeah i like LW pilots heroism to shooting on already crash landed aircraft and trying kill the pilot)

 

The best solution would be to give all changes back + add pilot balance on server, is not really fun flying vs 3:1... many people want historical correct plane set but in historical case there were more VVS pilots than LW...

 

Next interesting fact in my bomber history - flying in LW is really frustrated, you write in the chat for help and nothing (all wants to be Hartmann in stratosphere), but in VVS i do not write and fighter cover come themselves :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You need to do RATIO - that's the whole balance! Of course this is only a proposal, to decide the administration.

RATIO is the best balancer of all time!

 

translate

Edited by SDV_Fin_19
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

=AD=B777R

<...>

Therefore, I would be interested to here from you what you believe should be done rather than what has been done that shouldn't have been done, to ensure the future of TAW, for both red and blue players!?

 

Just a thought IMHO.

 

Respectively!

 

Haza

 

Haza,

I really like nice conversations and the way you approaching it  :) So let's do it.

I can almost agree with your opinion: 

 

I for one believe that any changes that TAW have undertake have been taken after careful consideration based on facts and not on listening to Blue whiners

Why almost? This time TAW started, it looks like an exception from the rule. All previous restarts were made after a huge work had been done. A lot of coding, attempting to implement new ideas, developing new planesets etc. It always needs time. Weeks usually - exactly how it has been.  
This start though looks a bit hasty. Hurried by a lot of complains, Devs decided to bring server up after 10 days from last campaign had finished. Not sure if it was enough time to reconsider all the options. More like LG tired of all this thankless work and took a break. Or may be it was done on purpose - to show people how fragile the balance can be... If it's true - with hope i wait next edition  :)

 

Owing to the fact that you are worried about TAW and its future "I'm worried about it's future", I thought that perhaps your post would have something constructive to contribute to ensure the continued success of TAW rather than it appearing to be a Red whine about blue whiners.

Fair shot.  I had to do it in the first place. But... better later, than never?  ;)
Let it be a draft this time. Just raw idea, that could be cutted later (it's a bit hard to me to explain complicated things in english, since it's not my first language).
 
What is the main feature of TAW? I would say, it's the importance of ground forces (GF) and their influence on the movement of the frontline.  And i'm ok if it's not real-time but just turn based movement (reminds me of ADW  :) ) 
This importance of GF and their existence itself, create unique tasks for air-forces. Providing cover, escort, patrol, ground support, bomb raiding etc... Sure i can role play all of it even on WoL. But there it would be just for fun, and here it really matters. Cause cooperation and teamwork is the only way to succeed. That's the difference between TAW and any other project in Bo(X).
 
The idea... finally )
Advantages and disadvantages of LW and Red planes assumes that different ways to approach the win should be existed.
Il-2 is better attacker plane than Ju87? (actually, it's debatable... not to mention there are 110-s...) it means that ground-support missions is more suitable way to win for reds.
He-111 and  ju-88 are much better than pe-2 in level bombing? - disabling field and capturing them is preferable way for blues...
I won't say much about fighters... but let's not forget that f4 still is the best fighter in game   :)
 
And now just imagine... tank limit stands as it was. Disabling (% of damage) and capturing field via transports/troopers become easier (as it is now).  Add to this some more industrial targets on red side (i.e. factories and warehouses. red side only). And more complex relationship between their destruction and numbers of available airframes on red frontline airfileds...
 
Here comes two different main strategies for LW and Reds to achieve the main goal - win the map.
LW: Organised bomb raid to destroy industries to lower resources of reds => Disabling and subsequent capturing fields one by one. At the same time - providing cover to own GF, cause wiped off GF means losing the war (pretty much realistic ;) )
 
Reds: Organised ground-support (i.e. attackers missions) - attempt to eliminate requested number of opposing ground forces. And at the same time - necessity of covering own bases and industry, or there would be nowhere and nothing to take off.
 
Sure, both this strategies require teamwork and cooperation. If half the team goes rogue and flying just for personal stats... it wouldn't help to win. But this is already depends on each one participant. Here comes the theme about mentality of those who flying both sides... but let's not bring here this holy war )
 

Just out of interest, how many games have you played blue to experience any of these issues on TAW?  

You caught me :)

I don't fly LW in Bo(X) online at all. The reason for that... Let's just say i don't find it enough challenging for myself. As the result - i've never took of on TAW on blue side. But even if i were flying blues, i would never take off it here, due the red side is constantly outnumbered and i don't like this odds. 

Anticipating your next argument :) I do know what it is - to participate in organised bomb raid with proper multilevel fighter cover and how to organise it. Used to fly a lot on Storm of War as you can remember. And there i was flying LW side.

 

Respectively!

=AD=B777R

 

P.S.: Just in case... Please excuse me for possible misspellings, mistakes and wrong tenses... English is still not my native )

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm off the PC for couple of days now. But I'm gonna make some video about strafing attacks lately. 

Ok, thanks. I'll be looking forward to it. I need to know what I'm doing wrong lol 

 

Why almost? This time TAW started, it looks like an exception from the rule. All previous restarts were made after a huge work had been done. A lot of coding, attempting to implement new ideas, developing new planesets etc. It always needs time. Weeks usually - exactly how it has been.  
This start though looks a bit hasty. Hurried by a lot of complains, Devs decided to bring server up after 10 days from last campaign had finished. Not sure if it was enough time to reconsider all the options. More like LG tired of all this thankless work and took a break. Or may be it was done on purpose - to show people how fragile the balance can be... If it's true - with hope i wait next edition  :)

 

In a post of his further up the line, he said he doesn't have the time right now. He can only do quick changes such as limits and other numerical changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

=AD=B777R

 

Some very interesting points and some very critical statements aimed at the Blues whiners, as you put it.

 

I for one believe that any changes that TAW have undertaken have been taken after careful consideration based on facts and not on listening to Blue whiners, so I'm not sure why Kathon or TAW wouldn't take your comments personally.

 

Just out of interest, how many games have you played blue to experience any of these issues on TAW? Owing to the fact that you are worried about TAW and its future "I'm worried about it's future", I thought that perhaps your post would have something constructive to contribute to ensure the continued success of TAW rather than it appearing to be a Red whine about blue whiners.

 

Therefore, I would be interested to hear from you what you believe should be done rather than what has been done that shouldn't have been done, to ensure the future of TAW, for both red and blue players!?

 

Just a thought IMHO.

 

Respectively!

 

Haza

Haza. I hear you, lot's of criticism from both sides without presenting solutions.

 

I asume B777r was only trying to sum up all those changes to show from a broader perspective where these changes are going.

 

I think the problem lies with the way il2 the game itself looks today, rather than a server/rule issue. The unbalanced teams is not an issue only on Taw. And I don't blame the dedicated Jg guys, there is no lack of skill on axis side either. Of course you choose a 109 or 190 when playing with a few mates. It's good fun hunting reds in those. Choosing an underpowered lagg and go out hunting f4's or 190's while outnumbered 3:1 is not an equally good recipe for fun with your friends.

 

That the VVS players generally tend to bomb more (thus win despite fewer pilots) and do less fighter hunting, is just a consequence of the above.

 

In my humble opinion I believe there is no server side fix to this. Perhaps things will get better once we have more planes in-game or maybe even the spitfire is iconic enough to persuade some squads into joining the red side. But I do agree with b777r those server changes have been addressing the wrong problem.

 

Cheers

Radek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You caught me :)

I don't fly LW in Bo(X) online at all. The reason for that... Let's just say i don't find it enough challenging for myself.

 

 

You should really try it, it's not as "easy-mode" as you think it is.

 

Also the planeset in use this campaign is pretty well-researched - it is not the result of whining.  Just look at StG77_HvB's video again about why the LW consistently lose, where in there is he whining?  Read through his posts in here, none of them are whining, all are researched suggestions trying to improve the quality of the server for both sides.

 

Just by reading the number of people posting the demise of this server at the start of each campaign, you'd think the whole thing would be over by now.

 

Last night we had some really great sorties with a small number of people.  While we outnumbered the VVS, had they been working together they would have easily killed a good chunk of our attack.  Instead our opposition was a single I-16 who had tunnel-vision on an already-wounded Heinkel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

Wow .. blue won a map ... what's going on ??? next will be a sun eclipse on north pole ?? No .... just one squad changed side :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:

 

I'm always laughing a lot when reading about historical balance. Everyone here had a huge knowledge about german or russian fighter/bomber units and on what they are flied over frontline in time of II war. But, all that knowing in totally useless here. 
I've flied almost all online wars since 2002 and on every war forum were discussion about planeset, Historical or not Admins can't satisfy all players. Why ? Cuz it's a game, and we had planes given us from Devs.
 

 

 

Let's just say i don't find it enough challenging for myself. As the result - i've never took of on TAW on blue side. But even if i were flying blues, i would never take off it here, due the red side is constantly outnumbered and i don't like this odds. 

 

 

Great to hear that. I've remember first two TAW where reds were forced to fly on LaGG against A3 and F4.

I do not remember You fighting there, but I do remember RedEye and few spanish and other players who fought. And I do not saw here on forum complaing about planeset/tanksset wrote by them.

I flew for Blue for the same reason as You for Red. Never complained, just take off and fly. Sadly to say, I do not have such amount of time to fly like in ADW times.

Resuming. It's Your decision to fly or not. LG or Devs have nothing to od with it.

 

Ramm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nostradamus =AD= AB777r  !!!

 

Your predictions was true!!!

 

Red lost first map on 2 Days,,,,, now what we have to do?????  

 

The old balance gone..... reds are better on ground atack ( tank and AT ) like said AB  this was one way to win..... Blues are better on Raids, bombers, drop cargo etc....this was another way to win..... 

 

Blue dont try defend tanks, dont try seriously tactics for atack columns... only complain about what easy is for reds..... solution.... close this way! 

Now the factible way for win are ; Raids, Level bombs and big bombers..... ,, reds have must complain about this ( this way without quorum rule is dangerous, because columns have some sistem of autoprotetion via AAA, but airfields with 88 flak only..... are easy targets for H-111 and Ju88 )

 

What have to do now? 
 
- please back to old settings ( new planetset ok )
- let to reds the way via killing tanks for win maps --  blues must have to  defend and attack tanks if want use this way.
- let blues the way,  heavy  bombers for airfield attack  -- reds must have to defend bases and organize bomb runs if want stop blue way or use  this way.
 
looking for " balance" is not bad idea.... but  the ausence of auto criticism and fear to challengers , especially from blue side, for me break this TAW edition.
 
In the other hand, i allways fly on red side,  I assume i be outnumbered by blue team ...  last editions , red team win all editions ( i think ) , this fact isnt good for gameplay, encourage blue its good. But actual situation i think dont push the right key for best gameplay.
 
Sry for my bad english.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thx Ramm for your words, RedEye , HR, ECV and some red Squads are " fanatic fighters" , we have some masochist ADN.

Allways try do the best, no care about start situacion. No care about end results. Only fight!

 

But this disposition is not for all , for this reason community allways try find "balance".

 

My principal complain is this TAW duration maybe will be too short

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to fix the unbalanced teams is for the war to be set up like old school IOW or VEF. 8v8, 16v16, 24v24, whatever the future 'coop' mode presents. The host goes to the TAW website, generates a mission depending on current front line condition. After 5 or 10 missions are completed and all the data compiled - the date moves forward and the line moves. It will take longer to go from Step 1 to in your cockpit - but it will guarantee an even match up every time. 

With different time zones, player differentials up and down, uneven numbers should be expected. 

Edited by StG77_Kondor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I was criticizing the previous campaign conditions I feel the need to react to some statements in previous posts.

 

 

 

That the VVS players generally tend to bomb more (thus win despite fewer pilots) and do less fighter hunting, is just a consequence of the above. 

 

This is not true. According to the last campaign stats, the blue had like 8 out of top 10 squads in ground kills. The fighter table looked quite opposite. And that's even though the campaign itself was almost strictly CAS oriented with big VVS advantage. 

 

 

 

Blue dont try defend tanks, dont try seriously tactics for atack columns... only complain about what easy is for reds..... solution.... close this way! 

 

Not even this is true. I personally joined several coordinated attacks against airfields and tank columns on LW side which incorporated eight plus planes. I'm far of to say that there's no chance for LW to kill tanks. I'm well aware (and can support that claim with evidence) that even single SC 50 can destroy any tank in the game. But I stand on my point that destruction of tanks is way easier or better say "user friendly" by VVS measures particularly by Il-2 with VYa. And moreover that this Il-2 setup is well suited even for air combat in early war maps designed the way the last campaign was.

 

Regarding the plane set:

 

I consider the last campaign plane setup as well designed. I pointed out that the E-7 vs I-16 Type 24 is like late 1940 on the one side but early 1942 on the other. But still I consider it as fair match and always defended that as well balanced from playebility point of view.

 

Regarding the general conditions to win a map:

 

I'm trying to demonstrate two main ideas. First, that VVS has huge advantage in CAS and tank killing ability in particular. Which is more or less historical. And this aspect needs to be sustained. But that under the same circumstances we need an option for LW how to win the map through its superior medium bombers which are not designed to direct support but should be focusing on "areal" targets like depots, storage, supply chains etc where the bigger bomb load matters. 

Second, that under so heavily CAS oriented environment, the even number of player on both side is bad idea. Since achieving the win the LW needs more sorties for column destruction not speaking of the "manual" AF capturing by five or more Ju52 planes you either have to numerical advantage or you force one side to achieve the same goal with significantly more effort (more sorties per pilot in given time).

 

I don't welcome the removing of the tank limitation. I would like to see it active. With some "resource" limitation like amount of "fuel" in example which would be destructible via building in storage/factories/trains in example. This way both sides would hold their upper hand in different areas and game could be balanced freely by two different objectives.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pointed out that the E-7 vs I-16 Type 24 is like late 1940 on the one side but early 1942 on the other.

 

The I-16 type 24 was produced in 1940, all of the I-16 versions (including our 20mm variant which would be Type 28 and the last version Type 29, not in game, armament 2 ShKAS and 1 UBS in the nose), were already produced or in production by 1941 and were in service at the time of the German invasion.

 

Maybe you mistook it with the ShVAK equipped MiG-3? That one is indeed a 1942 variant consisted of a few dozen of planes.

Edited by SuperEtendard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Entire Russian team 
71 Air Kills.

Two German players

51 Air Kills.

We are finding the inverse of the last campaign, but everyone can keep blaming it on raw numbers and all of these other issues instead of the most gloriously skilled champions to ever grace the virtual skies of IL2 having so much more skill than the rest of us mere mortals could ever hope to conjure up in our worthless existence.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The I-16 type 24 was produced in 1940, all of the I-16 versions (including our 20mm variant which would be Type 28 and the last version Type 29, not in game, armament 2 ShKAS and 1 UBS in the nose), were already produced or in production by 1941 and were in service at the time of the German invasion.

 

Maybe you mistook it with the ShVAK equipped MiG-3? That one is indeed a 1942 variant consisted of a few dozen of planes.

Nope, butI was talking of the planes being in frontline unit based on VVS OOB. There were many units equiped with Type 18 or even I-153. The number of ShVAK armed I-16s is qeustionable regarding the Pokryshkin's memoirs where he mentioned how even the weak MiG-3 armament was decreased by removing of UB gun because of lack armament for new pruduced planes. And this was official order not the unit field specification! No way I demand something like this but I just want to show that the plane set is not LW biased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is not true. According to the last campaign stats, the blue had like 8 out of top 10 squads in ground kills. The fighter table looked quite opposite. And that's even though the campaign itself was almost strictly CAS oriented with big VVS advantage.

 

 

Not even this is true. I personally joined several..

Pragr your welcome to prove me wrong or to just disagree without any proof whatsoever. And I promise to admit being wrong. But surely you can't say I'm mistaken (in that the VVS was more busy ground pounding than axis was) because majority of top 5 or 10 bomber squads were axis.

 

Admittedly my view of things is hardly scientific. It's based on that every time I spawned there was il2 beside me starting up. A peshka taking of and some lagg covering it. While from axis I saw endless waves of 109 and very rarely anything else.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pragr your welcome to prove me wrong or to just disagree without any proof whatsoever. And I promise to admit being wrong. But surely you can't say I'm mistaken (in that the VVS was more busy ground pounding than axis was) because majority of top 5 or 10 bomber squads were axis.

 

Admittedly my view of things is hardly scientific. It's based on that every time I spawned there was il2 beside me starting up. A peshka taking of and some lagg covering it. While from axis I saw endless waves of 109 and very rarely anything else.

My situation on blue last campaign surprised me how many people were doing ground attack.  My hardly scientific but experience based view is there was simply a large disconnect between the people that wanted to go wolfpack as 109's and those that were doing ground attack.  Rarely got appropriate escort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, butI was talking of the planes being in frontline unit based on VVS OOB. There were many units equiped with Type 18 or even I-153. The number of ShVAK armed I-16s is qeustionable regarding the Pokryshkin's memoirs where he mentioned how even the weak MiG-3 armament was decreased by removing of UB gun because of lack armament for new pruduced planes. And this was official order not the unit field specification! No way I demand something like this but I just want to show that the plane set is not LW biased.

 

There were even older planes in first line service, I-16 Type 5 and I-15bis from ~1937, same variants which served in the Spanish Civil War and China Air Force. It was a mixed bag really. And yes the cannon I-16s were less than the common ones... from what I could find it was more or less a relation of 1:3 between the cannon and their respective machine gun variant numbers. But being the most produced variant in 1940 without a doubt you could find Type 24s and 28s in first line service. At the time of the German invasion there weren't IL-2 or Pe-2 in any significant numbers either. The bomber force were moslty SBs and the attackers planes like Su-2 and R-5s.

 

Yes it isn't realistic having 99% of the ppl taking the cannons in the I-16.. but it's the consequence of the online environment: people looking for the best. Similar to the Vya in the IL-2, or the big bombs in the German planes.

 

My point is: I agree with you that the LW plane set isn't biased. It could be much worse with F-4 right from the beggining! But that doesn't make having Type 24 and Type 28 a 1942 lineup. In fact by 1942 there were few of these fighters left, around 240 I-16 in total IIRC, almost all of them were destroyed in 1941. A 1940 vs 1942 lineup would be having E-7 vs Yak-1 with PF engine, and that isn't the case.

Edited by SuperEtendard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20-1 on the server right now. Lol! Needless to say, I went right over to WoL, which is a problem....

 

The poor soul flying VVS alone deserves a medal.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 5 LW to 1 VVS odds during the day, something like 55 to 10.  Tonight was 10 to 1 odds.  Balancing has been an ongoing issue for almost every campaign.  If one chooses to fly against such high odds, more than likely the result will be loss of most of one's aircraft.  So the choices are; to fly and lose planes and wait for the 1 plane replacement after the mission rolls, or to wait until the map rolls and a new plane set is available, or not to fly at all until semi-balance is available.  Not really enticing options.

 

The problem is obvious.  So, it would appear, is the solution, although it will go against the grain.  Until such time one can switch sides for balance, there will be an ongoing issue with this.  Other full real and not so real servers have fairly balanced sides because switching is allowed.  This may allow re-establishment of some of the restraints that were altered, like total pilot deaths or planes destroyed, or taken out altogether, such as total tank kills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really understand why people fly in such unbalanced conditions on the side with all the numbers. Seriously, what is the point of flying in a combat flight sim if you have little to no chance of finding an enemy to combat? As I'm typing this there are 4 players on the server, all of them Germans. Why? Where is the fun? I know the AA on this server is a bit tougher than on others but it isn't exactly hard to work around it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the register rule should add limit.When one side have 20 player(or more) more than the other,player can not regist the more player side until the gap below the limit.Or the server limit the gap.Sometimes huge player numbers gap make game a little boring.And sometimes only ai.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The numbers imbalance was NOT a problem last campaign.  Outnumbered 2-1 the Allies were able to 5-0.  The plane set went through different matchups through all five maps and still the Luftwaffe was unable to pull a single victory.

I already noted what changed in an earlier post and that is the single greatest problem that balance faces in TAW.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the register rule should add limit.When one side have 20 player(or more) more than the other,player can not regist the more player side until the gap below the limit.Or the server limit the gap.Sometimes huge player numbers gap make game a little boring.And sometimes only ai.

 
Why should I be forced to fly? For example, I am red, but there are already many red, my train left? :o:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the last war, the Reds flied in small numbers, too, and did not cry like some. They even won!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pilots_taw_3d.png

 

There is just nothing left to say, I fear. ^^ What I personally wish would be possible is a thing the developers would probably have to provide: a live balancing tool. You cannot really work with registration balancing, because it's possible to create two accounts, one for each side. Even right now, people are easily able to just join VVS if they so wish to. So the problem is not that people could not balance out the numbers, the problem is that they simply refuse to do it. I find that to be very disappointing, I think especially the bigger squadrons could alleviate this problem pretty effectively.

 

What I would like to see is a server tool, that allows the server admins to set 2 things:

1. A max number of slots for one side. If, for example, a server has 74 slots, I see no reason one side should be allowed to have more than 37 players. 37 players on LW? K, side is full, buddy. Join VVS or wait.

2. A maximum number of relative imbalance to each other. Let's be generous and say 2:1 is the maximum amount of allowed imbalance. Since this could be a problem with extremely low player counts, maybe even use a total number of 10, whatever. Something that can be used to force some kind of balance. I don't necessarily like systems like these, but everything is better than bloody 58:11. I personally hoped that we as a relatively fringe community with an older customer base would be capable of handling this in a gentlemen's agreement, but apparently that is not the case. ^^

 

I'm not sure, but I think something like this is not possible, yet. Maybe it would be worth to propose something like this to the devs, since the performance gap for VVS vs LW will only grow with BoK, which might make this even worse, I fear.

Edited by JG4_Etherlight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A max number of slots for one side. If, for example, a server has 74 slots, I see no reason one side should be allowed to have more than 37 players. 37 players on LW? K, side is full, buddy. Join VVS or wait.

 

I think that's already possible. CBalancer.cfg in data/LuaScripts should allow to do that. I don't know if that file is actually used, but it's worth a shot.

[Planes]
MinActivePlayers = 2
PowerDiff = 2.0
PowerRatio = 1.25

// lock coalitions, that matches
// for ( char c = (C_NEUTRAL+1); c <= C_LAST_COALITION; ++c )
//  if ( activePlayers[ c ] > m_iMinActivePlayers )
//   if ( (cPower[c] - MinCoalitionPower > m_fPowerDiff) || ( cPower[c] / (MinCoalitionPower+1.0f) > m_fPowerRatio ) )
//    lockedCoalitions[c] = true;
// MinActivePlayers - minimal amount of aircraft and tank players in a coalition for spawn lock to occur
// PowerDiff - absolute difference between my coalition and minimal power coalition for spawn lock for my coalition to occur
// PowerRatio - ratio between two coalition powers for spawn lock for my coalition to occur
// Power of a coalition is a sum of all aircraft and tanks coefficients active at any given moment

So, basically set MinActivePlayers to 37, and... well, I have no idea how to set PowerDiff and PowerRatio. Maybe set PowerRatio to something very small.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The numbers imbalance was NOT a problem last campaign.  Outnumbered 2-1 the Allies were able to 5-0.  The plane set went through different matchups through all five maps and still the Luftwaffe was unable to pull a single victory.

 

I already noted what changed in an earlier post and that is the single greatest problem that balance faces in TAW.

Your probably right, and I was patting myself on the back thinking main reason was red being such busy self-sacrificing-for-the-greater-cause groundpounders. Though not much to do about those out of this world skills.

 

 I personally hoped that we as a relatively fringe community with an older customer base would be capable of handling this in a gentlemen's agreement, but apparently that is not the case. ^^

 

I'm not sure, but I think something like this is not possible, yet. Maybe it would be worth to propose something like this to the devs, since the performance gap for VVS vs LW will only grow with BoK, which might make this even worse, I fear.

 

Worth a shot to propose that, it's in their interest to keep multiplayer community happy as that is what sells copies in the long run. 

 

I'm joining red for the very little it's worth.

Edited by a_radek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's already possible. CBalancer.cfg in data/LuaScripts should allow to do that. I don't know if that file is actually used, but it's worth a shot.

[Planes]
MinActivePlayers = 2
PowerDiff = 2.0
PowerRatio = 1.25

// lock coalitions, that matches
// for ( char c = (C_NEUTRAL+1); c <= C_LAST_COALITION; ++c )
//  if ( activePlayers[ c ] > m_iMinActivePlayers )
//   if ( (cPower[c] - MinCoalitionPower > m_fPowerDiff) || ( cPower[c] / (MinCoalitionPower+1.0f) > m_fPowerRatio ) )
//    lockedCoalitions[c] = true;
// MinActivePlayers - minimal amount of aircraft and tank players in a coalition for spawn lock to occur
// PowerDiff - absolute difference between my coalition and minimal power coalition for spawn lock for my coalition to occur
// PowerRatio - ratio between two coalition powers for spawn lock for my coalition to occur
// Power of a coalition is a sum of all aircraft and tanks coefficients active at any given moment

So, basically set MinActivePlayers to 37, and... well, I have no idea how to set PowerDiff and PowerRatio. Maybe set PowerRatio to something very small.

 

 

Wow, nice to know, thanks for somebody with hosting experience to chime in. :D I don't know if Kathon has time to look into that, but if another hoster guy would be able to confirm that it's working: Awesomesauce. If so, I would STRONGLY suggest implementing that ASAP on TAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know :unsure: We had a lot of fun yesterday kicking LW asses while outnumbered 12 to 50 :biggrin:

 

It is a community problem right now that most of guys wants to fly blue side. And I don't know why. I personally love 109s but I have much more fun flying red sied. Definitely we will discuss balance restrictions.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

My point is: I agree with you that the LW plane set isn't biased. It could be much worse with F-4 right from the beggining! But that doesn't make having Type 24 and Type 28 a 1942 lineup. In fact by 1942 there were few of these fighters left, around 240 I-16 in total IIRC, almost all of them were destroyed in 1941. A 1940 vs 1942 lineup would be having E-7 vs Yak-1 with PF engine, and that isn't the case.

 

I'd really like to know the exact numbers of VVS RKKA during various periods of WWII. The only detailed OOB I've seen so far was published in Christer Bergstrom's "Stalingrad - The Air Battle: 1942 through January 1943" regarding the begin of Uranus operation.

 

So the only "reliable" source available to me at this moment is OKL Fighter Claims archive. This issued some 1950 claims of fighters of all types between January 1st 1942 and July 31 1942. 575 out of them are I-16 making 30 per cent of all claims. This doesn't correspond with the 204 operational at the beginning of 1942. The other claims included some 450 MiG-1s or -3s, 400 LaGGs, 280 Yaks of all versions, 75 Hurricanes and 150 P-40s. I don't say the game has to look like this. I try to say that the I-16 was considerably common fighter in operational use even during first half of 1942 and that the VVS was far from being fully equipped by modern planes.

 

Anyway this is general discussion with limited relation to the campaign. I just try to get as much information as possible.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the last war, the Reds flied in small numbers, too, and did not cry like some. They even won!

So the fact that nobody complained means that the problem didn't exist? Interesting line of thought. I understand where you're coming from, but Reds are complaining now because they aren't winning. Yes, I'm agreeing with that. But, most didn't complain last campaign because complaining while winning generally falls on deaf ears, or worse, gets dismissed and chided.

 

The simple fact is - whether you choose to believe it or not - that most Reds see 20-1 odds and would rather head to WoL. Yes, this server is better, more realistic, etc., but the imbalance leads to less fun to a degree. I for one, have about 1-1.5hrs per night to fly. I'm not going to waste it on getting into a dogfight solo against 4 f4's, when I can jump over to WoL where it's damn near even odds 24/7.

 

The solution isn't a server problem, it's a people problem. And good luck changing people....

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...