Author Topic: My thoughts on FSO  (Read 424 times)

Offline JB42

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 558
My thoughts on FSO
« on: February 21, 2006, 07:41:53 PM »
First off, I don't know where the train of thuoght about winning came from. I have scored more points in some frames and have been outscored in many others. However, after scoring more points in a frame, I was never given a medal, plaque or even a gift certificate to a mall store, so I'm unclear what it was I won. Many more FSOs will take place after the last one, so no war was won. When this particular FSO comes up again, I expect the map will not have changed at all, no ground gained or lost since the last time it was played, so not even a battle has been won. So again, tell me whats won, or even better what's been lost?

Now for some ideas about rules for the future:

1) Unit strength - Apply percentages to certain units to simulate the fact that until very late in the war, rarely were there regions equiped with all top of the line equipment. Very often regional commanders were forced to use the equipment on hand, not always what had been currently produced.

2) Point values - I think there needs to MORE emphasis on the protection of potential targets, more so facilities and cities than military installations. While granted the massacre of the Axis force was disasterous, thousands of people would have lost their lives at Leningrad and the economic toll of trying to rebuild it to the minimum would have been equally if not more catastrophic for Russia than the Axis losses. The following is an example of a scoring system, I'm not saying it's the one to use, but it's a matrix to look at:

City = 800 pts. Because it is the livelyhood of a region, it should have the highest value. What ever percentage of a city is destroyed, that is the percentage of the maximum points.

Industrial facility = 500 pts. While it is valuable to the stratigic outcome of any war, it's value is still lower than a population center. What ever percentage of a facility is destroyed, that is the percentage of the maximum points.

Airfields = 300 pts. Crucial to war operations, but easily repaired and/or relocated. Divide it into 4 seperate targets valued at 75 points each. FH, BH, fuel and ammo. Either all of any one target is destroyed or points not awarded. That is to say if 2 out of 3 FHs are destroyed, too bad, airplane operations can still be carried out. Same with fuel and ammo. If one ammo bunker is still up, no points.

Vehicle bases = 100 pts. The most fluid of all targets. Heck, park two tanks under a tree with a gas can each and some ord. stores and you have a impromptu VB. 50 points for VHs and 50 pts. for remaining fuel and ammo.

Notice I left out barracks and radar. FSO does not include base capture, so troops at this level are not that important. Radar is not used, so eh!

3) Targets - Instead of individual targets reported to either CiC, have multiple targets to choose from. Keep them close enough as not to lead to a wild goose chase, but the idea the enemy knows which target to defend is silly. For example, in the BoB map there are many targets along the East coast of England. Allow the Axis CiC the option to chose from say three close installations for which to choose which one to hit. Don't allow enemy forces to hover over targets and wait for the attack.

Just some ideas for now. I really hope people can get on this thread and help figure some things out to keep FSOs fun.
" The only thing upping from the CV are lifejackets." - JB15

" Does this Pony make my butt look fat?" - JB11

" I'd rather shoot down 1 Spit in a 109 than 10 109s in a Spit." - JB42

Offline sqwiglly

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 67
My thoughts on FSO
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2006, 02:12:52 AM »
the idea of winning came frrom a point system.if you scored more you win...etc


i like #3
it should not be so clear where were goin or what were doin,its the whole 10 paces thing
FATE IS WHAT YOU MAKE IT

Offline Dace

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1443
My thoughts on FSO
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2006, 07:13:28 PM »
I've had many of those same thoughts about FSO. Especially #1. Maybe 1 or 2 of the "front line" squadrons would have been equipped with the latest model A/C. Never all of them.

Offline daddog

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15082
      • http://www.332nd.org
My thoughts on FSO
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2006, 02:52:16 PM »
Sorry this took so long to reply to JB42, but it has been one of those weeks. :) I wanted to take the time to respond to this as I did the same in sqwiglly’s post.

Quote
1) Unit strength - Apply percentages to certain units to simulate the fact that until very late in the war, rarely were there regions equiped with all top of the line equipment. Very often regional commanders were forced to use the equipment on hand, not always what had been currently produced.
I think so some degree we do this. Looking back over some past squad ops you will see that some aircraft were limited in their numbers, or even had an attrition rate applied to them. If destroyed they were not replaced.

Quote
2) Point values - I think there needs to MORE emphasis on the protection of potential targets, more so facilities and cities than military installations. While granted the massacre of the Axis force was disasterous, thousands of people would have lost their lives at Leningrad and the economic toll of trying to rebuild it to the minimum would have been equally if not more catastrophic for Russia than the Axis losses. The following is an example of a scoring system, I'm not saying it's the one to use, but it's a matrix to look at:
We have spent a lot of time on Team Speak this week going over the Squad Ops rules. We have made some minor changes and clarified some points. One of the items placed in was that Frame C.O.’s have to protect what is being attacked in the first hour. Prior we just had a rule that said you must attack all targets in the first hour, but nothing about defending your own resources. :)

Quote
City = 800 pts. Because it is the livelyhood of a region, it should have the highest value. What ever percentage of a city is destroyed, that is the percentage of the maximum points.

Industrial facility = 500 pts. While it is valuable to the stratigic outcome of any war, it's value is still lower than a population center. What ever percentage of a facility is destroyed, that is the percentage of the maximum points.

Airfields = 300 pts. Crucial to war operations, but easily repaired and/or relocated. Divide it into 4 seperate targets valued at 75 points each. FH, BH, fuel and ammo. Either all of any one target is destroyed or points not awarded. That is to say if 2 out of 3 FHs are destroyed, too bad, airplane operations can still be carried out. Same with fuel and ammo. If one ammo bunker is still up, no points.

Vehicle bases = 100 pts. The most fluid of all targets. Heck, park two tanks under a tree with a gas can each and some ord. stores and you have a impromptu VB. 50 points for VHs and 50 pts. for remaining fuel and ammo.

Notice I left out barracks and radar. FSO does not include base capture, so troops at this level are not that important. Radar is not used, so eh!
I think the ideas you use here for points would be very applicable to certain write ups. Admin CM’s who design the event could choose to go this route and even use the values of targets you have suggested above. Problem is not all Squad Ops are points. The next one we have that SIM has designed is “Objective” based. Obviously this would not work. Squad Ops have in the past include base capture using troops with C-47’s or M3, but that is something I really frown on and discourage Admin CM’s from doing it. That does not mean they can’t. They do use base capture (and will in this next Squad Ops) in another form. If a field is totally destroyed then for the next frame it could be considered captured if that is in the design of the event. Good stuff with the points though, and I will make sure all Admin CM’s for Squad Ops have looked at what you suggest.

Quote
3) Targets - Instead of individual targets reported to either CiC, have multiple targets to choose from. Keep them close enough as not to lead to a wild goose chase, but the idea the enemy knows which target to defend is silly. For example, in the BoB map there are many targets along the East coast of England. Allow the Axis CiC the option to chose from say three close installations for which to choose which one to hit. Don't allow enemy forces to hover over targets and wait for the attack.

Just some ideas for now. I really hope people can get on this thread and help figure some things out to keep FSOs fun.
Generally when I train Admin CM’s for Squad Ops I tell them it is a good idea to have targets within about 10 to 20 minutes flight time of each other. That allows a CiC to move his squadrons and flow with the blows. Sometime though that does not happen. As for the enemy knowing what targets will be attacked, well that is one of the foundational designs I put in years ago. Many like yourself think it is ridiculous, but we offer enough variables to keep CiC’s on both sides guessing. Yes both sides know what will be attacked but they don’t know:
-   when (within the first hour)
-   how many
-   what alt
-   how many waves
-   what type of aircraft
-   what direction

With all those possibilities players are still able to enjoy Squad Operations, and the CiC’s can enjoy the freedom to keep his opponent guessing. What is more important JB42 and vital to the health of Squad Operations is that every single pilot sees combat. Sure sometimes is it over quick, and ugly, but at least they saw combat. If we did not have the design of knowing what targets were going to be attacked then the frequency of players not seeing acting would be greatly increased. As it is even with that design built it we still on occasion have squads or pilots that don’t see any action. Nothing will kill an event sooner then the lack of participants seeing action.

Now having said all that, we have in the past and still do on occasion, assign targets that are close (within one sector usually) and tell the Frame C.O. that those targets grouped close together will be attacked. Again this just adds to the chances that someone might not see some action, even if the targets are within 5 minutes flight time of each other. I have gone round and round with CM’s and players about this supposed idiocy (as some have told me) of everyone knowing the targets ahead of time, but these are not Scenarios. If the time ever comes that targets are not known to both sides in Squad Ops as they have been since the beginning, you will IMHO begin to see the demise of Squads Operations.

I sure appreciate your feed back on this event. Like I said, I will make sure to point out your suggestions. :)
Noses in the wind since 1997
332nd Flying Mongrels
daddog
Knowing for Sure