Starting Infos

6S.Maraz · Post by **6S.Maraz** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:12 am

Tanker wrote:
6S.Maraz wrote:Notice about wind: admins have thought that carrier operations would have been too difficult/dangerous in presence of wind. So in this campaign there will be no wind.

Maraz
Maraz, will you be able to take planes with ordnance and drop tanks off from the CVE carriers with no wind?

Planners will have to keep the carriers moving when launching/recovering planes (as it was in real life).

Wind could introduce a crosswind component (unless planners move the carriers always toward winds, that would be tactically limiting) that could make things very difficult.

Maraz

=VARP=Gec · Post by **=VARP=Gec** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:41 am

what's wrong with difficult? i know i like it

some wind will produce higher unit loss but that was also in the real life.

Tanker · Post by **Tanker** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:41 am

6S.Maraz wrote:
Tanker wrote:
6S.Maraz wrote:Notice about wind: admins have thought that carrier operations would have been too difficult/dangerous in presence of wind. So in this campaign there will be no wind.

Maraz
Maraz, will you be able to take planes with ordnance and drop tanks off from the CVE carriers with no wind?
Planners will have to keep the carriers moving when launching/recovering planes (as it was in real life).

Wind could introduce a crosswind component (unless planners move the carriers always toward winds, that would be tactically limiting) that could make things very difficult.

Maraz

It would affect both sides equally.

To maintain position of the carriers the planner would just need to ensure that it was headed into the wind during the first and last 5 or 10% of the mission.
The rest of the mission the TF could head any direction desired.

In IL2 ships can do abrupt 180 degree turns so that no multiple waypoint turns would be needed.

LLv34_Untamo · Post by **LLv34_Untamo** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:04 am

S!

Don't know if the campaign rules file contained this info (can't open .rar files on this work computer), but what will be the server IP?

22GCT_Gross · Post by **22GCT_Gross** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:55 am

89.163.173.82:21000

IAF.ViFF · Post by **IAF.ViFF** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:03 am

Thanks Gross.

Another question: have you allocated space on 22GCT Teamspeak server for the Allies?

102nd-YU-Uross · Post by **102nd-YU-Uross** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:07 am

We can use 102nd TS if thats not a problem?

22GCT_Gross · Post by **22GCT_Gross** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:10 am

ITA TS is available; you can choose any other TS of course.

=VARP=Vjeran · Post by **=VARP=Vjeran** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:25 am

102nd-YU-Uross wrote:We can use 102nd TS if thats not a problem?

I think 102nd would be the best as we had the meeting there and I can say it can "hold" large amount of users.. S!

Classic EAF19 · Post by **Classic EAF19** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:28 am

May I put my name forward to fly in this campaign on monday nights?

102nd-YU-Uross · Post by **102nd-YU-Uross** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:47 pm

Hi Classic, if you do not mind being in non-English environment, I can try to find you a place in 102nd flights. You are more then welcome to join 102nd but I can't promise anything for sure

IAF.ViFF · Post by **IAF.ViFF** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:49 pm

Classic you are also welcome in the IAF...

Cheers,

ViFF

22GCT_Gross · Post by **22GCT_Gross** » Sat Feb 04, 2012 9:06 am

Air playability is now set at 36 flights for both side (previous value: 32)

Classic EAF19 · Post by **Classic EAF19** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:02 am

Thankyou Uross and Viff, I officially pledge my allegiance to the allied side and will fly for the US Navy. May I have access to the appropriate forums please.

*{64s}Takeshi_I · Post by *{64s}Takeshi_I » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:08 pm

Hi all,
is it possible for 64 sentai to join the campaign ?

Siam pronti alla morte
Tojo chiamo
Si !