Tactical Air War

[Axeeey]

=LG=Kathon, can you please unlock me from the server? I don't know what happened. I just got kicked.

[MeoW.Scharfi]

Since i got friendly fired by 190 once again in my 110 i just have to post it. EDIT: I got friendly fired above my own airfield.

 

 

Add this as loading Screen for IL2 BoS, please.

Edited March 18, 2017 by MeoW.Scharfi

[L3Pl4K]

 

 

Since i got friendly fired by 190 once again in my 110 i just have to post it. EDIT: I got friendly fired above my own airfield. Add this as loading Screen for IL2 BoS, please.

  Amen

[Willy__]

Since i got friendly fired by 190 once again in my 110 i just have to post it. EDIT: I got friendly fired above my own airfield.

 

Its not only 110 that have problems, when I fly the Macchi I fear more 109/190s than the reds.  

Edited March 19, 2017 by JAGER_Staiger

[Scojo]

Things got better this afternoon as more Reds got in and stayed in TS.

 

Hopefully we can get that going next campaign and it will give the designers a firm foundation on what changes will actually make the server more fun.

 

As we fly more campaigns, Kathon will be able to better reign in what changes can really make an impact, and I'm ok with the time that will take

[=FIR=houba]

today unplayable 15v2 - 18v5 and LW killing at airfield. Weird gameplay.

[Monostripezebra]

Things got better this afternoon as more Reds got in and stayed in TS.

 

Hopefully we can get that going next campaign and it will give the designers a firm foundation on what changes will actually make the server more fun.

 

As we fly more campaigns, Kathon will be able to better reign in what changes can really make an impact, and I'm ok with the time that will take

 

only temporary. In the end, gameplay will allways be based on three pilars: a) what the game brings, b) what the mission design makes out of that and c) what the player comunity makes out of those first two things.  In the end, C is where it´s at.

 

today unplayable 15v2 - 18v5 and LW killing at airfield. Weird gameplay.

 

yeah, it can be onesided.. just look at it with some humour and bombs:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CbwBxkVoDY

[[.ID]Rio-06]

Since i got friendly fired by 190 once again in my 110 i just have to post it. EDIT: I got friendly fired above my own airfield.

 

 

Its not 110 that have problems, when I fly the Macchi I fear more 109/190s than the reds.  

 

Just happened to me. Got in a head on merge, when i finally id that it was a LA-5, i evade, but he pulled the trigger and split my plane in two. ID before shoot please, or should the server give penalty to friendly fire? Like when landed, the offender lost the current plane or something. 

[GOA_Walter_Nowotny]

today unplayable 15v2 - 18v5 and LW killing at airfield. Weird gameplay.

Tactical map 6 too 37 / 15, take off and down with 3  LW near AF. Pfff. Table set very decorated for the taste of the LW.

[FTC_Etherlight]

Yeah, it's a shitshow. Just wait for the next campaign and hope that Kathon can and will enforce some kind of balance.

[Lusekofte]

 

 

All the political high horse posturing just makes me laugh

 

Not political, mate, and not because of the fiddling with prop pitch. I know a lot of US people from old IL 2, they are (most of them) not interested in Russian planes, they read all their lives about Pasific and western air war during WW2. Quite easy to understand they choose LW. It might change a bit with the upcoming Spit, it dod not with the P 40 

 

 

Since i got friendly fired by 190 once again in my 110 i just have to post it. EDIT: I got friendly fired above my own airfield.

 

Well that even the odds a bit  

 

 

Yeah, it's a shitshow. Just wait for the next campaign and hope that Kathon can and will enforce some kind of balance.

Balance will not help, people will not be enforced to fly something they will not fly, it is years of experience behind this statement. But there should be a boundary in terms of how many from one team can join, in a 84 slot server maybe max 50 on one side. Because there have been times LW had 58 , and red the rest, with no chance of even it out because the server was full 

[Original_Uwe]

Not political, mate, and not because of the fiddling with prop pitch. I know a lot of US people from old IL 2, they are (most of them) not interested in Russian planes, they read all their lives about Pasific and western air war during WW2. Quite easy to understand they choose LW. It might change a bit with the upcoming Spit, it dod not with the P 40 

 

 

Well that even the odds a bit  

 

Balance will not help, people will not be enforced to fly something they will not fly, it is years of experience behind this statement. But there should be a boundary in terms of how many from one team can join, in a 84 slot server maybe max 50 on one side. Because there have been times LW had 58 , and red the rest, with no chance of even it out because the server was full

 

Too true.

There was a lot of hope in the P-40, everyone I know was dying to take her for a ride even with those dreadful red stars on her.

What we got was to say the very least disappointing. Hopefully an FM revision will bring her around.

 

There's a lot of US pilots looking forward to the P-39 as well, but I know many that are skeptical about the performance given how the P-40 was portrayed in this game.

[FTC_Etherlight]

Balance will not help, people will not be enforced to fly something they will not fly, it is years of experience behind this statement. But there should be a boundary in terms of how many from one team can join, in a 84 slot server maybe max 50 on one side. Because there have been times LW had 58 , and red the rest, with no chance of even it out because the server was full 

 

I want it to be twofold: 1. It should not be possible for a team to use more than half of the slots available. 2. It should not be possible for one team to be more than twice the number of players of the other team.

 

That's it. I don't want to force people to fly VVS, but if they won't do it, at least I don't want them screwing up the campaign for everbody else by flying 60 vs 12. That nonsense just needs to stop. Ideally it would be even more balanced than a 2:1 ratio, but I'm not greedy and a 2:1 ratio can be dealt with ingame.

[JaffaCake]

Ignoring the 1-2 elephants in the room - or on one particular team:

 

Its honestly a bit silly how VVS team complains about the removal of the tank limit - it was the easiest way to win for the VVS and they could outright ignore the LW team while doing it. Fly on the deck, il2 can tank whatever AAA tanks came with and it was even COUNTER productive for the VVS team to destroy factories as they then get fewer tanks to kill!

 

Mopping up every 1-2 tank columns every game meant that LW team had at most ~30-40 "active" games to achieve anything.

 

Now that the limit was removed the VVS team threw their hands up and gave up on trying to kill the tanks and defend theirs - like as if the only purpose of killing tanks is to bring that counter to the victory mark. Completely forgetting that tanks still capture airfields and did so multiple times this season.

 

If the tank limit is ever returned, please do not make it a victory condition. Just stop spawning tanks on the side that ran out of them. Either side will still have transport planes to capture airfields with. Please also make the destruction of the factory have an impact on the destroyed tank limit! If a factory reduces the number of tanks by 30% for 3 missions - make it count as if those 30% of the tanks for 3 missions were already killed on the counter.

 

Please also add AAA positions around the tank columns as the current mix of high calibre that takes half an hour to start firing and the peashooters that do no damage to IL2 are too weak to stop 2 il2s from taking the column apart in minutes. This is especially problematic when the teams are small and 2 dedicated players can repeatedly take out columns unharassed.

 

I hated to win on the VVS side with the dull tank killing last season. I hate how VVS now just flies circles most of the time without the organisation that we had last time - because everyone suddenly thought they had no chance to win in a normal way!

[Scojo]

Ignoring the 1-2 elephants in the room - or on one particular team:

 

Its honestly a bit silly how VVS team complains about the removal of the tank limit - it was the easiest way to win for the VVS and they could outright ignore the LW team while doing it. Fly on the deck, il2 can tank whatever AAA tanks came with and it was even COUNTER productive for the VVS team to destroy factories as they then get fewer tanks to kill!

 

Mopping up every 1-2 tank columns every game meant that LW team had at most ~30-40 "active" games to achieve anything.

 

Now that the limit was removed the VVS team threw their hands up and gave up on trying to kill the tanks and defend theirs - like as if the only purpose of killing tanks is to bring that counter to the victory mark. Completely forgetting that tanks still capture airfields and did so multiple times this season.

 

If the tank limit is ever returned, please do not make it a victory condition. Just stop spawning tanks on the side that ran out of them. Either side will still have transport planes to capture airfields with. Please also make the destruction of the factory have an impact on the destroyed tank limit! If a factory reduces the number of tanks by 30% for 3 missions - make it count as if those 30% of the tanks for 3 missions were already killed on the counter.

 

Please also add AAA positions around the tank columns as the current mix of high calibre that takes half an hour to start firing and the peashooters that do no damage to IL2 are too weak to stop 2 il2s from taking the column apart in minutes. This is especially problematic when the teams are small and 2 dedicated players can repeatedly take out columns unharassed.

 

I hated to win on the VVS side with the dull tank killing last season. I hate how VVS now just flies circles most of the time without the organisation that we had last time - because everyone suddenly thought they had no chance to win in a normal way!

Giving up isn't the full problem. Flying VVS this weekend showed me that while that is likely part of it for some people, that's not the only or even the majority of the problem.

 

Now as far as the tank situation is concerned, without the tank limit the VVS can still eliminate tank columns, however if they can't also eliminate the enemy defenses the line wont move in their favor. What I saw this weekend, with the largest VVS population I've seen on NA time, was that the LW still took out a good number of tanks, if not all, and also had such higher numbers that they were able to keep the VVS from fully completing any objectives. Based on what I saw, I don't think the VVS could win even if they did annihilate tanks like they used to.

 

Granted, VVS are badly disorganized right now, so this all could change if people were to make flying together a point from the get go. The difficult thing for me on this server is I would have to spend a lot of time flying alone as VVS, which is entirely fruitless, before someone will eventually join me. Then by the time they do, I usually have to go or take a break. This creates a situation where my time is much better spent just flying SP or other MP servers. At least it's not as bad as when Quorum was a thing lol

 

As I'm able to fly more, I'll come to have a more solid opinion on the matter, but that's my 2 cents right now.

Edited March 20, 2017 by 71st_AH_Scojo

[JaffaCake]

Giving up isn't the full problem. Flying VVS this weekend showed me that while that is likely part of it for some people, that's not the only or even the majority of the problem.

 

Now as far as the tank situation is concerned, without the tank limit the VVS can still eliminate tank columns, however if they can't also eliminate the enemy defenses the line wont move in their favor. What I saw this weekend, with the largest VVS population I've seen on NA time, was that the LW still took out a good number of tanks, if not all, and also had such higher numbers that they were able to keep the VVS from fully completing any objectives. Based on what I saw, I don't think the VVS could win even if they did annihilate tanks like they used to.

 

Granted, VVS are badly disorganized right now, so this all could change if people were to make flying together a point from the get go. The difficult thing for me on this server is I would have to spend a lot of time flying alone as VVS, which is entirely fruitless, before someone will eventually join me. Then by the time they do, I usually have to go or take a break. This creates a situation where my time is much better spent just flying SP or other MP servers. At least it's not as bad as when Quorum was a thing lol

 

As I'm able to fly more, I'll come to have a more solid opinion on the matter, but that's my 2 cents right now.

 

 

 

Taking out defences is even easier than taking out the tank columns! Defences are covered by 2 burst AAA and 3 low altitude AAA. A pair of aircraft - one distracting while the other one takes out the AAA neutralises the defence in under 1 minute. Proceed to take out the soft targets such as AT guns and trucks in a few strafing runs and the defence is done - you can ignore the ammo dumps or anything else that cannot be killed by the VYA cannons it actually does not matter and the defence will not re-spawn after mission rolls over.

 

Tank limit used to be a win-button for VVS team in the past as they did not have to learn to perform the roles they were not so great at - bombing. While LW was pressed to compete as VVS did not have equivalent limits on factories / ground targets / defence targets destroyed.

 

Last season was basically "kill all tanks" for the VVS team on a day-to-day basis. You could ignore any other target and focus o defending your own after you took out the columns. That really took out a lot of the strategy from the game for me

Edited March 20, 2017 by JaffaCake

[1PL-Shoki-2Esk]

+1

[FTC_Etherlight]

The intricacies of tactics don't really matter when there are 5-10 109's circling every objective in a 4:1 situation, though. Before that does not change, there's not much to gain out of planning. I've spent the last campaign in attackers and bombers for the most part, although I'm a fighter-pilot for the most part. I did that, because it was actually fun completing these objectives in a winnable situation of being outnumbered 1:2 at most.

 

There is no point and no fun in flying an IL-2 to an objective just to be swarmed and slaughtered immediately, so I won't. That feeling seems to be shared by quite a number of VVS pilots, if you take a look at the statistics. Only 5 of the 25 people on the first page of ground kills are VVS. True, partly due to the fact that the numbers are as ridiculous as they are, but those cannot explain the extremity of that outcome. Can't blame my fellow VVSlers for giving up ground attack under these circumstances, I did, too.

 

Get the balance right and you'll get a meaningful campaign again, it's that simply in my opinion.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Traitor

[JaffaCake]

The intricacies of tactics don't really matter when there are 5-10 109's circling every objective in a 4:1 situation, though. Before that does not change, there's not much to gain out of planning.

 

 

you would think that LW would circle the tanks last season and just win game after game, but it did not happen! But I keep ignoring the elephants here, so yeah....

[Scojo]

Proceed to take out the soft targets such as AT guns and trucks in a few strafing runs and the defence is done - you can ignore the ammo dumps or anything else that cannot be killed by the VYA cannons it actually does not matter and the defence will not re-spawn after mission rolls over.

I didn't know this, so thank you for letting me know. I'll give it a try next time I'm on.

 

Are the trucks necessary? If you don't need to kill the ammo stockpiles or the control towers, then shouldn't you be able to just kill the AT guns or armored vehicles/Destroyers?

Edited March 20, 2017 by 71st_AH_Scojo

[JaffaCake]

I didn't know this, so thank you for letting me know. I'll give it a try next time I'm on.

 

 

My theory is that the bomb-only targets constitute ~33% of the total targets at the defences. As sometimes after taking all 3 out only 1 would respawn in the next mission - finishing the soft targets at that one would then leave the target defenceless. Considering the amount of effort required to take out the bomb-only targets at the defences it is simply easier to focus on soft and move on to the other targets.

 

 

This is actually impossible to do for the LW side as as far as I have seen VVS defences have tanks as well as soft AT guns / trucks. VYA can take out the PZIIIs of the LW defences though. So for LW you have to bring either the bombs or BK3.7 - limiting your strafing capability. IL2 can do everything in a single ammo load.

Edited March 20, 2017 by JaffaCake

[Willy__]

Taking out defences is even easier than taking out the tank columns! Defences are covered by 2 burst AAA and 3 low altitude AAA. A pair of aircraft - one distracting while the other one takes out the AAA neutralises the defence in under 1 minute. Proceed to take out the soft targets such as AT guns and trucks in a few strafing runs and the defence is done - you can ignore the ammo dumps or anything else that cannot be killed by the VYA cannons it actually does not matter and the defence will not re-spawn after mission rolls over.

 

Tank limit used to be a win-button for VVS team in the past as they did not have to learn to perform the roles they were not so great at - bombing. While LW was pressed to compete as VVS did not have equivalent limits on factories / ground targets / defence targets destroyed.

 

Last season was basically "kill all tanks" for the VVS team on a day-to-day basis. You could ignore any other target and focus o defending your own after you took out the columns. That really took out a lot of the strategy from the game for me

 

 

I didn't know this, so thank you for letting me know. I'll give it a try next time I'm on.

 

Are the trucks necessary? If you don't need to kill the ammo stockpiles or the control towers, then shouldn't you be able to just kill the AT guns or armored vehicles/Destroyers?

 

I didnt know about the dugout/ammo stockpies/whatever, but the defenses do have tanks! And they need to be destroyed or the target remain active!

[Scojo]

I didnt know about the dugout/ammo stockpies/whatever, but the defenses do have tanks! And they need to be destroyed or the target remain active!

 

So is it safe to assume that removing the offensive armament is all that's really needed?

[ACG_pezman]

Ignoring the 1-2 elephants in the room - or on one particular team:

 

Its honestly a bit silly how VVS team complains about the removal of the tank limit - it was the easiest way to win for the VVS and they could outright ignore the LW team while doing it. Fly on the deck, il2 can tank whatever AAA tanks came with and it was even COUNTER productive for the VVS team to destroy factories as they then get fewer tanks to kill!

 

Mopping up every 1-2 tank columns every game meant that LW team had at most ~30-40 "active" games to achieve anything.

 

Now that the limit was removed the VVS team threw their hands up and gave up on trying to kill the tanks and defend theirs - like as if the only purpose of killing tanks is to bring that counter to the victory mark. Completely forgetting that tanks still capture airfields and did so multiple times this season.

 

If the tank limit is ever returned, please do not make it a victory condition. Just stop spawning tanks on the side that ran out of them. Either side will still have transport planes to capture airfields with. Please also make the destruction of the factory have an impact on the destroyed tank limit! If a factory reduces the number of tanks by 30% for 3 missions - make it count as if those 30% of the tanks for 3 missions were already killed on the counter.

 

Please also add AAA positions around the tank columns as the current mix of high calibre that takes half an hour to start firing and the peashooters that do no damage to IL2 are too weak to stop 2 il2s from taking the column apart in minutes. This is especially problematic when the teams are small and 2 dedicated players can repeatedly take out columns unharassed.

 

I hated to win on the VVS side with the dull tank killing last season. I hate how VVS now just flies circles most of the time without the organisation that we had last time - because everyone suddenly thought they had no chance to win in a normal way!

 

Wow. 

 

Well the Luftwaffe has a win button now called level bombing.  They don't even have to attempt to defend their tanks, let alone attack ours anymore, because they just level bomb our airfields and shut them down.  So now we have to fly from farther away just to stop tanks that don't help our team win, yet we still have to do it.  Meanwhile if we attempt to level bomb their airfields, it takes two Pe-2's to equal one Ju-88, and it takes at minimum three Ju-88's to knock out an airfield... so roughly six Pe-2's to do the same. 

 

Yeah, you can destroy defenses, but it will take a couple (or a few) friendly aircraft working together.  The LW just needs one bomber (Ju-88) with two large bombs to level bomb our defenses from 4.5-5km and they are dead.  It takes multiple IL-2, Pe-2, P-40, or LaGG's to do the same job.  Considering the amount of players on each side, how should these VVS hero's divide their time up?  Two attack the enemy tanks while two defend the airfield?

 

As far as I'm concerned, TAW is broken and will be dead until fixed, and all the whiners did it. 

[=FEW=N3cRoo]

Giving the Ju-88s SC1000s doesnt seem appropiate, literally makes the He-111 obsolete aside from looks and the better view.

 

Having SC1000s available on Fieldstrip that are potatoefields just without the potatoes, thats double standards when restricting 23mms to proper airfields on Il2 while every laquered-guaranteed-grave-3 from map#3 onwards will only use 23mm bec they can (meh deal with tze bias). I'd even go so far and remove anything bigger than SC250s from Fieldstrips. If the LW has player leaving bec of that thats fine, we saw what happened if players from VVS stopped playing.

 

I Know not having the Tank limit pissed off some of the VVS squadron who did the dirty work on the deck, it became a nonfactor this campagin from being a key factor...

Make the tanks a soft victory factor by making them limited in availability and production. 

An idea would also be have supply convoys to the frontline that affect the advance in that particular region

 

About the balance: reserve 50% of total playerslots for VVS and lock the server for the LW when balance exceeds a factor of sth like 2x-2.5x. Having more VVS than LW would actually be so much fun for both sides... 

 

I hope LG waits for the next Campaign until next patch with the IL2 mod1943 and potetnially even the Spit MK.V to offset the number of new toys for the Axis

 

<--- next campaign will be flying for papa stalin

Edited March 20, 2017 by =FEW=N3croo

[=LG/F=Kathon]

One thing about possibility of changing the side during campaign. There are 508 pilots with more than 5 sorties, and only 15 of them changed the side so in my opinion it's not a big problem. 

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

One thing about possibility of changing the side during campaign. There are 508 pilots with more than 5 sorties, and only 15 of them changed the side so in my opinion it's not a big problem. 

 

Thanks Kathlon.

[Slawinski]

Thoughts on the campaign:

 

Map victory conditions:

• Map should only be won through occupation by ground forces (both LW victory via AF shutdown and VVS victory by hitting tank kill cap not realistic)
• Stalemate possible both for if neither side achieves victory before running out of resources

Tanks and airplanes:

• Limited total number per map - once exceeded, no more generated (realistic owing to wartime limitations of raw materials/trained personnel)

Airfields:

• Can be rendered inoperable by air raids but can only be captured by advancing ground forces
• Limited number of airplanes per mission per base (based on the supply level)
• Differentiated front-line and rearward airfield supply and defenses - less on front-line, more in the rear (due to realistic supply limitations)
• Advancement/withdraw mechanics needed - if AF is closed, rearward airfields get extra supply/AAA (retreating troops + less bases to distribute resources between); vice-versa if capturing (moving resources forward)
• Previous point should result in the last remaining airfield to become immune to closing down (all supplies directed to it, even 100% damage should be repaired sufficiently to keep it operational in the next mission) and very heavily defended by AAA (imaging if all AAA that is normally re-supplied to all airfields
• goes to a single airfield)  

Attacks on enemy infrastructure:

• Damaging airfields should contribute towards the total plane losses limit (planes destroyed on the ground)
• Damaging factories should contribute towards the total tank losses limit (tanks in production and assembly materials destroyed)

Paratroopers:

• Can sabotage airfields to reduce plane supply and reduce remaining plane resources (but cannot capture airfields without advancing ground forces)
• Can sabotage factories to reduce tank supply and reduce remaining tank resource
• Can attack city defenses from the rear to assist advancing tanks

Expected changes in gameplay:

• Both sides can achieve victory using a variety of tactics (CAS, bombing, air supremacy etc.)
• Both sides can win only if their ground forces capture the map (much more realistic vs tank kill cap or airfield shutdown)
• Both VVS and LW can reduce the enemy tank force by playing its strong sides - VVS by direct assault, LW by bombing tank production (and contributing to the overall tank limit as described above)
• Attacking, defending and adding to (by flying transports) supply lines is critical for staying on the offensive (flying from rearward airfields due to lack of supply reduces  no. of sorties per mission)
• Advancing side cannot stage large-scale attacks from newly captured airfields due to limited supply, hence improving the balance (think of all German offenses that started as a true blitz but ground to a halt due to supply problems)
• Overpowered side can still achieve stalemate, hence improving the balance (think of the end of BoS campaign part 1 - Soviets pretty much driven back behind Volga but German army also stalled in the city).

[Max_Damage]

I think the recent red advantage was only due to ace red players.

 

Blues kept whining their way to victory and then the devs kept nerfing reds until 

 

Bug fixed: fixed a bug where red could win a map.

 

Red pilots have realised that enough is enough and fled from this server because the server is nerf air war. the devs nerfed red players and made their play time miserable. I think the server has gotten a bad reputation.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Max_Damage

[=FEW=N3cRoo]

Bug fixed: fixed a bug where red could win a map.   Red pilots have realised that enough is enough and fled from this server because the server is nerf air war. the devs nerfed red players and made their play time miserable. I think the server has gotten a bad reputation.

 

 

thanks for the productive discussion

Edited March 20, 2017 by =FEW=N3croo

[FTC_DerSheriff]

I think the recent red advantage was only due to ace red players.

 

Blues kept whining their way to victory and then the devs kept nerfing reds until 

 

Bug fixed: fixed a bug where red could win a map.

 

Red pilots have realised that enough is enough and fled from this server because the server is nerf air war. the devs nerfed red players and made their play time miserable. I think the server has gotten a bad reputation.

So having a much better planeset for the reds now, is "nerfing", The last campaign was won basically with stick and stones. Switching next campain back to red. Looking forward to it.

[-SF-Disarray]

 

Thoughts on the campaign:

 

Map victory conditions:

• Map should only be won through occupation by ground forces (both LW victory via AF shutdown and VVS victory by hitting tank kill cap not realistic)
• Stalemate possible both for if neither side achieves victory before running out of resources

Tanks and airplanes:

• Limited total number per map - once exceeded, no more generated (realistic owing to wartime limitations of raw materials/trained personnel)

Airfields:

• Can be rendered inoperable by air raids but can only be captured by advancing ground forces
• Limited number of airplanes per mission per base (based on the supply level)
• Differentiated front-line and rearward airfield supply and defenses - less on front-line, more in the rear (due to realistic supply limitations)
• Advancement/withdraw mechanics needed - if AF is closed, rearward airfields get extra supply/AAA (retreating troops + less bases to distribute resources between); vice-versa if capturing (moving resources forward)
• Previous point should result in the last remaining airfield to become immune to closing down (all supplies directed to it, even 100% damage should be repaired sufficiently to keep it operational in the next mission) and very heavily defended by AAA (imaging if all AAA that is normally re-supplied to all airfields
• goes to a single airfield)  

Attacks on enemy infrastructure:

• Damaging airfields should contribute towards the total plane losses limit (planes destroyed on the ground)
• Damaging factories should contribute towards the total tank losses limit (tanks in production and assembly materials destroyed)

Paratroopers:

• Can sabotage airfields to reduce plane supply and reduce remaining plane resources (but cannot capture airfields without advancing ground forces)
• Can sabotage factories to reduce tank supply and reduce remaining tank resource
• Can attack city defenses from the rear to assist advancing tanks

Expected changes in gameplay:

• Both sides can achieve victory using a variety of tactics (CAS, bombing, air supremacy etc.)
• Both sides can win only if their ground forces capture the map (much more realistic vs tank kill cap or airfield shutdown)
• Both VVS and LW can reduce the enemy tank force by playing its strong sides - VVS by direct assault, LW by bombing tank production (and contributing to the overall tank limit as described above)
• Attacking, defending and adding to (by flying transports) supply lines is critical for staying on the offensive (flying from rearward airfields due to lack of supply reduces  no. of sorties per mission)
• Advancing side cannot stage large-scale attacks from newly captured airfields due to limited supply, hence improving the balance (think of all German offenses that started as a true blitz but ground to a halt due to supply problems)
• Overpowered side can still achieve stalemate, hence improving the balance (think of the end of BoS campaign part 1 - Soviets pretty much driven back behind Volga but German army also stalled in the city).

 

 

This seems like it could work, supposing that it can be implemented. 

[Feathered_IV]

I joined TAW last night and decided to try flying for the Luftwaffe.  Every single aircraft I chose from the He-111 right down to the Bf-109F2 produced a message warning me that I would be kicked immediately if I didn't change to another aircraft.  It was very weird.  I couldn't see a Panzer III option to try that, so ended up leaving.  That was pretty much my entire flight sim experience for the evening.

[FTC_Etherlight]

I joined TAW last night and decided to try flying for the Luftwaffe.  Every single aircraft I chose from the He-111 right down to the Bf-109F2 produced a message warning me that I would be kicked immediately if I didn't change to another aircraft.  It was very weird.  I couldn't see a Panzer III option to try that, so ended up leaving.  That was pretty much my entire flight sim experience for the evening.

 

Like my father always used to say: "RTFM - Read the f'ckin manual!" ^^

 

http://taw.stg2.de/manual.php

[A_radek]

Like my father always used to say: "RTFM - Read the f'ckin manual!" ^^

 

http://taw.stg2.de/manual.php

I did read the manual and still see feathered' problem as weird. Perhaps you selected a red base first when entering? This would make you a red player unable to fly Blue Ac's.

[SCG_happy_meal]

According to the homepage so is Feathered_IV a red pilot since 13.03.2017.

 

http://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=Feathered_IV

Edited March 21, 2017 by 5./ZG1_happy_meal

[A_radek]

According to the homepage so is Feathered_IV a ruskie pilot.

 

http://taw.stg2.de/pilot.php?name=Feathered_IV

Problem solved

 

Welcome to red feathered! papa Stalin gives you 100 grams a day.

[JaffaCake]

 

Thoughts on the campaign:

 

-------

 

 

 

That is how I see it could work as well. Just stacking up flak on the airfields is a pretty bad decision though IMO.

 

Instead we already have randomly placed AAA encampments that are not marked on the map - leave the number of them the same throughout the campaign, so when one side starts to get pushed they would actually be inclined to deal with these unmarked AAA positions as otherwise bombers would have a hard time getting to their targets alltogether.

 

Vya cannon abuse on IL2 and lagg3 will need to be severely limited if the equivalent limits on the 1t/500k bombs come into effect on the german bombers as otherwise we will see the repetition of the previous campaign.

 

In any case all of the above is not going to solve the two main issues that prevent "balance" - the elephants and the AAA focusing down a single player while the other player can strafe safely.

[Scojo]

 the AAA focusing down a single player while the other player can strafe safely.

 

That's not a mission issue. That's an issue with the AAA logic.

 

We started a thread a while back to see if we could bring the developer's attention to it, but no one seemed to care enough to support asking for a fix

[JaffaCake]

That's not a mission issue. That's an issue with the AAA logic.

 

We started a thread a while back to see if we could bring the developer's attention to it, but no one seemed to care enough to support asking for a fix

 

 

Never said it was a mission issue - I said it is a main issue Which is unfortunately not under the control of the server admins.