ATAG Dedicated Server is up!

[Osprey]

Specifically for ACG:

RAF Croydon requires No.1(c) RCAF. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Gravesend requires No.501 County of Gloucester. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Kenley requires No.64. Spitfire Ia (preferably IIa as an option)

I don't understand some of the squadron postings, they are flying the wrong types from the wrong airfields, but I don't care as long as these 3 are set up And No.56, I'm sure they'd like to fly from their historical drome.

thanks

PS. Why is the Spitfire IIa removed? (so I am told) If you are doing this then also put a percentage limit on the E3's and E4's. Every time I fly there are 20 LW and only maybe a single E1 flying, most are E4's. They should be about 40% E1 and 25% E4.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by bw_wolverine

Can someone who edits the mission for ATAG please edit the rear airfields near London to allow the selection of squadron? I've often wanted to take off from Maidstone, but have passed up on this because I can't select my squadron code.

It would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks

They should work now.

Originally Posted by MoGas

was the custom skin use a issue? I cant remember if I had any.....

It didn't used to be as bad as it did. Then the latest official patch came out and made skins terrible online

Originally Posted by Osprey

Specifically for ACG:

RAF Croydon requires No.1(c) RCAF. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Gravesend requires No.501 County of Gloucester. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Kenley requires No.64. Spitfire Ia (preferably IIa as an option)

I don't understand some of the squadron postings, they are flying the wrong types from the wrong airfields, but I don't care as long as these 3 are set up And No.56, I'm sure they'd like to fly from their historical drome.

thanks

PS. Why is the Spitfire IIa removed? (so I am told) If you are doing this then also put a percentage limit on the E3's and E4's. Every time I fly there are 20 LW and only maybe a single E1 flying, most are E4's. They should be about 40% E1 and 25% E4.

It's a different mission all together, even though many of the airfields carry the same plane types. There are no E4's though. There will be a rotation soon (including a revised version of the old map) that will carry the old E4/limited spitIIa planeset. I may limit the E3/fighter variants, depending on the outcome here.

Question - when you do fly on this mission, do you get radar calls if you are in a fighter? The AI bombers remain, but I'm testing something and may have actually figured out what produces the Radar. (a combination of things)

So please let me know if you are in a single seat fighter if you get the normal radar calls or not. If you're in a bomber, getting contacts from your AI gunners is normal - so those don't count.

Thanks.

[JG5_Thijs]

Hello all,

Over the last couple of months I’ve been enjoying flying on the ATAG server, which is really my favourite server for this game. Although there are still some game related issues with launcher crashes and certain flight characteristics of certain planes that are not corresponding with what I’ve read in most recently (let’s say the last 10 years) published memoirs and books regarding planes like the Messerschmitt Bf109 on the German side and the Spitfire and Hurricane it is still good fun flying the game. (I won’t go into what I think should be or shouldn’t changed in this post since there are other treads about that on the forums where people can give their, sometimes poorly based, opinion about this).

I would like to give my two cents regarding limiting the Bf109E-4 on the server and allowing mainly the E-1 to be used. Which, as the table below shows would not be correct. (I also like to state that apart from the, now poorly working, automated pitch on the 109E-4 the only difference is the canopy, which doesn’t have a large impact on flying, the only difference between the two subtypes of the Emil is the armament) The E-4, and the E-3 slightly less so, packs a far greater punch compared to the E-1 in the gun department with the MG17 being replaced by the MG FF (in the E-3) and the MG FF/M (in the E-4) making it a much more effective fighter. This is probably the reason why most people that fly fighters on the German side prefer the E-3/E-4 compared to the E-1.

Of course it annoying to get shot down by one of these cannon armed 109’s and therefore wanting to limit them.(like limiting the number of Spitfire MK II which is annoying to fly against, to say the least, for a German fighter pilot in the game. A good case can be made for limiting the number of Spitfire MK II’s when one looks at historical numbers in the actual Battle of Britain).

If the aim of the server is to give a somewhat historical planeset I don’t think severely limiting the number of cannon armed is a good one. Since a lot of documentation of the Luftwaffe was destroyed it will be impossible to find out what the exact numbers of every subtype of 109E that fought in the Battle of Britain was. There are however a number of Geschwader which documents have survived. I only have the books by Jochen Prien on JG3 (all 3 Gruppen that flew in the Battle of Britain) and JG53 that provide numbers on the losses sustained by these units during the Battle of Britain (Period taken 10 July- 31 October 1940). Both Geschwader operated the 109E in this period.

I made a list of the losses of each Geschwader (In both damaged, written off in France and shot down over England/Channel) in the period stated above per subtype of the 109E.

I./ JG3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 12 (percentage 36 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 2(percentage 6 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 18(percentage 54 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 1(percentage 3 )


II./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 16(percentage 37 )
Bf 109 E-3#A/C lost 1(percentage 2 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 26(percentage 60 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )



III./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 13(percentage 32 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 27(percentage 68 )
Bf 109 E-7 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )


JG53
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 44(percentage 38 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf109 E-4 #A/C lost 69(percentage 59 )
Bf109 E-7 #A/C lost 4(percentage 3 )


As we can see from the tables above it is clear that although the 109E-1 still was a substantial part of the Luftwaffe inventory during the Battle of Britain the majority of planes in use by these units* was the E-4. I therefore have to say that limiting the number of e-4’s, or e-3’s, would not be a good to limit the number of the cannon armed 109’s on ATAG.

*Both JG3 and JG53 were not privileged units in that they received the latest equipment first and can be considered as ‘normal’ units in respect of converting to the latest plane types.

Note in all the books I checked, In October 1940 the E-1 appears in very limited number and has been largely replaced by losses of 109 E-4’s.
It is also safe to assume that lost 109e-1’s were replaced by 109e-4’s since the E-1 was phased out as the Battle of Britain went on.

Maybe someone that has the Jagdfliegerverbande series by Prien or the JG27 and JG77 by the same author could provide numbers of the losses in the Battle of Britain period by these units in the manner I have done above.

Regards

Thijs

[csThor]

Originally Posted by JG5_Thijs

Hello all,

I would like to give my two cents regarding limiting the Bf109E-4 on the server and allowing mainly the E-1 to be used. Which, as the table below shows would not be correct. (I also like to state that apart from the, now poorly working, automated pitch on the 109E-4 the only difference is the canopy, which doesn’t have a large impact on flying, the only difference between the two subtypes of the Emil is the armament) The E-4, and the E-3 slightly less so, packs a far greater punch compared to the E-1 in the gun department with the MG17 being replaced by the MG FF (in the E-3) and the MG FF/M (in the E-4) making it a much more effective fighter. This is probably the reason why most people that fly fighters on the German side prefer the E-3/E-4 compared to the E-1.

Of course it annoying to get shot down by one of these cannon armed 109’s and therefore wanting to limit them.(like limiting the number of Spitfire MK II which is annoying to fly against, to say the least, for a German fighter pilot in the game. A good case can be made for limiting the number of Spitfire MK II’s when one looks at historical numbers in the actual Battle of Britain).

If the aim of the server is to give a somewhat historical planeset I don’t think severely limiting the number of cannon armed is a good one. Since a lot of documentation of the Luftwaffe was destroyed it will be impossible to find out what the exact numbers of every subtype of 109E that fought in the Battle of Britain was. There are however a number of Geschwader which documents have survived. I only have the books by Jochen Prien on JG3 (all 3 Gruppen that flew in the Battle of Britain) and JG53 that provide numbers on the losses sustained by these units during the Battle of Britain (Period taken 10 July- 31 October 1940). Both Geschwader operated the 109E in this period.

I made a list of the losses of each Geschwader (In both damaged, written off in France and shot down over England/Channel) in the period stated above per subtype of the 109E.

I./ JG3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 12 (percentage 36 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 2(percentage 6 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 18(percentage 54 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 1(percentage 3 )


II./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 16(percentage 37 )
Bf 109 E-3#A/C lost 1(percentage 2 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 26(percentage 60 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )



III./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 13(percentage 32 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 27(percentage 68 )
Bf 109 E-7 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )


JG53
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 44(percentage 38 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf109 E-4 #A/C lost 69(percentage 59 )
Bf109 E-7 #A/C lost 4(percentage 3 )


As we can see from the tables above it is clear that although the 109E-1 still was a substantial part of the Luftwaffe inventory during the Battle of Britain the majority of planes in use by these units* was the E-4. I therefore have to say that limiting the number of e-4’s, or e-3’s, would not be a good to limit the number of the cannon armed 109’s on ATAG.

*Both JG3 and JG53 were not privileged units in that they received the latest equipment first and can be considered as ‘normal’ units in respect of converting to the latest plane types.

Note in all the books I checked, In October 1940 the E-1 appears in very limited number and has been largely replaced by losses of 109 E-4’s.
It is also safe to assume that lost 109e-1’s were replaced by 109e-4’s since the E-1 was phased out as the Battle of Britain went on.

Maybe someone that has the Jagdfliegerverbande series by Prien or the JG27 and JG77 by the same author could provide numbers of the losses in the Battle of Britain period by these units in the manner I have done above.

Regards

Thijs

Actually it's not that the E-1 was phased out and replaced by new E-4. The Bf 109 E is unique among the german aircraft as an Emil that was upgraded received a new sub-type number on the Werknummer plate. It was common to rebuild earlier types (such as E-1 and E-3) with the new MG FF/M wing-mounted cannons and turn them into E-4s. It wasn't uncommon for aircraft to be built as E-1s, upgraded to E-4s and finally into E-7s. The german Technikmuseum in Berlin has one such aircraft, an E-7 salvaged from a lake near Murmansk, which was built as E-1, got an upgrade to E-4 and another to E-7, served in the MTO, was refurbished and sent to JG 5 at Petsamo.

[JG5_Thijs]

You are right CsThor, I should have phrased that better, thanks for clarifying this for everyone.

[JG52Krupi]

not happy with the current mission, it seems to have hit my performance massively, too many object on the ground.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

not happy with the current mission, it seems to have hit my performance massively, too many object on the ground.

Huh?

My system copes with it fine (see sig) and I've run exclusively bombing missions so far. I'd've thought yours would be better mate.

The mission itself is a huge improvement IMHO, with achievable objectives for both sides and some strategic thinking required (some very nasty flak though!).

There was an initial hiccup which I fedback to Bliss regarding the wrong 'target destroyed' messages coming up, so that the blue guys were defending a target which had already been destroyed, whilst leaving an untouched target undefended, but I'm assured this is now corrected.

Would like to see variations on this theme become the norm.

[JG5_Thijs]

According to Radinger & Schick (Messerschmitt Bf109A-E Development Testing Production, by Schiffer publishing) on page 97 "In mid- 1940 the units (meaning Jagdgeschwader, note by myself) rejected the E-1 because it was inferior in action, Consequently the remaining E-1s in service were converted into E-4 or E-7s, while the last 175 E-1s were completed as E-7N's"

This, in addition to other sources (like Prien and Prien/Stemmer) on JG3 and JG53 shows that the E-1 was replaced, especially later in the BoB, by E-4’s and E-7’s and that the majority of 109’s were cannon armed.

[jg27_mc]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss

I may limit the E3/fighter variants, depending on the outcome here...

If that's because of the Jabo capabilities (B version) I can understand (not agree ) that regarding other LW options and also because the RAF doesn't have fighters with the ability of carrying bombs, otherwise is nonsense IMHO.

I am not bitching here, cause my main ride already is the E1. Only use E3/B for blowing up stuff.

Regards.

[CaptainDoggles]

It continually mystifies me why there's a pervading fear of cannons amongst Allied pilots.

I can understand it being a holdover from il2 where the DMs were simplified and FW190 aces could de-wing an aircraft in the blink of an eye, but the DMs in clod are much better. Machine guns are still very very effective, and will only become more effective as the silly bugs are fixed (like no fuel tank explosion damage )