FSO Rules Revised

[Sled]

It has been in need of revising for some time now. I would appreciate if all of you would read through it. Please post any questions in this post.




New FSO rules



Thanks to all on the CM Team who helped.

[AKKaz]

I noticed that in the penalty writeup, great emphasis was made about going over the maximum pilot count and hitting targets within the first hour.

I can understand due to the scenerio objective points being listed for each one at the start of that scenerio. Should the 2 penalty areas you so strongly emphasized be left so open to subjectivity?  Any thoughts on a standard point penalty on these 2 items?

They seem to be listed very cut and dry as to be penalty item, wouldn't making a standard for breaking those 2 end any possible future controversy? These are the only 2 items in the penalty area that directly effects scoring, the others cover entrance, conduct and expulsion from the events.

Just a thought.

[Sled]

Originally posted by AKKaz
Should the 2 penalty areas you so strongly emphasized be left so open to subjectivity?  Any thoughts on a standard point penalty on these 2 items?

Short answer, Yes they will be handled on a case by case basis.


FSO is not a "Black and White" event. There are so many "shades of grey" in FSO it is ridiculous to say, "No matter what the reason, if this rule is not followed then there will be a penalty." If we were to take such a hard line approach to the rules, it would be possible for the opposing side to take actions that would almost certainly result in his opponent "breaking a rule". In that case is it fair to penalize them?

An example........

The Allies are to attack a target deep inside enemy territory. The Axis commander has decided on a tricky plan. He knows the general direction that the Allies are going to take, based on the T+60 rule. He orders 2 squads to fly a CAP over the Allied target. He then orders 2 other squads to fly into Allied territory to find the Allied group. They will attack and destroy it long before it ever gets to it's target. He will then complain that the Allies never attacked their target, and 2 of his squads that were flying CAP didn't see action in T+60. Seeing as penalties have to be given without exception. Not only do the Axis get the points for destroying the Allied attack group, but they are also awarded points because the Allied didn't attack their target in time.

This is an extreme example, but this has come close to happening before.

We don't want a game that is burdened down by rules, that is why we only have a few. And they are subject to review and discussion by the CM Team

It's kind of like NASCAR. I believe there is a rule that says "You can not purposely ram another car, with the intention of putting it out of the race." (or something like that) But yet cars hit each other all the time, and there is rarely a penalty for it. That is because the judges in NASCAR review each situation as necessary and assign penalties if they are warranted on a case by case basis.

One thing for all of you to remember. I do not make the decision on penalties by myself. It is usually discussed by many members of the CM Team. I am only responsible for the final decision. which is normally the same as the majority of the CM Team.

[Dantoo]

- Frame CiC’s may not split smaller squads (7-10 or smaller).

I just simply cannot protest this rule strongly enough.  It practically precludes smaller squads being given a share of limited rides eg.. 262 scouting roles.  It is a hideous rule that has thankfully been disregarded broadly and continuously since its introduction.  It does nought, zero, nada positive for the event.

When there is a limited number of particular rides available, even in larger numbers it prevents you sharing them with smaller squads.  Say you have a limited number of X-fighters available, let's use 20.  You can't assign them to a medium sized squad and one or two smaller squads and use the old phrase "Take no more than 6 X-fighters and patrol east of the target".  If they have 7 players roll up that day you either have an over-use or a squad split penalty.  Worse still, you could condemn a player to log or sit in the tower.  Good luck on getting increased participation in that squad for future rounds.

I've had an explanation??? that this rule somehow stops CICs putting everyone into the same aircraft type.  Well, no it doesn't.  If you want a rule that prevents that then write one.  This isn't it.

Using a requirement that a minimum or maximum number of particular aircraft types must be used will always prevent blatant abuse.  You could even say in the writeup by way of a more complex example: "Four of the Six aircraft types must be used in a frame, each type at medium squad strength.  Two smaller squads, or more than half of a large squad, being assigned will fulfill this requirement".  Personally, of course, I think it's easier just to say, "You gotta use 10 Kates at least, like it or not, for balance and flavour, so suck it up"


ps.  The rule written above this particular one in the sequence one uses the word "spilt"  twice not split.  Typo.

[Sled]

The reason this rule came about, as I remember, is we wanted to make sure that squads would be flying together in the same aircraft. Obviously with the larger squads this is not always possible. This adds to unity in the medium and small squads, as it is easier for a squad stay united if it is in the same plane. Plus in real life squads normally did fly the same AC.

Your point about the 262 in the scouting role is well taken. But in most cases smaller squads get their fair share of limited rides. At least they CAN if the CiC's take the time to give them to them.

We might do some talking about this rule in the future. The rules have been adjusted in the past and they may be again some time.


Thanks for the heads up on the typos.

[Dantoo]

   The reason this rule came about, as I remember, is we wanted to make sure that squads would be flying together in the same aircraft. Obviously with the larger squads this is not always possible. This adds to unity in the medium and small squads, as it is easier for squad stay united if it is in the same plane. Plus in real life squads normally did fly the same AC.

This whole para makes my argument stronger IMHO.

Any time you have a limited planeset (most scenarios we get in FSO), they will not be apportioned so that they can be neatly packaged into squad sizes.

Planesets are restricted usually because they are the "hotter" ride.  A CIC will always try to keep the balance that the creator envisaged and use all of the best tools he has been given.  This rule says he cannot take a chance and hand out say 12 tempests to 2 small squads.  What if they both go one over and 14 players roll up?  He has immediately broken either one rule or another.  He can't reasonably hand the same planes to a medium squad 7-10 because that means he might end up with less than all of them being used.   Perhaps as few as half? (Same if they're dud rides applies of course).

Now this is the most extraordinary part of this rule, he is properly entitled to assign these "top" rides to a squad of 11-15 who might be reasonably expected to have 13 or 14 roll up?  What then?  How are the one or two "leftovers" that land different rides in that case, any different to the one or two "leftovers" from a small squad, a medium squad or even a larger squad in the same circumstance?

It can happen and will happen.  I can see no valid reason to punish small and medium sized squads in this way.  If you leave this unnecessary rule in place you have to deal with an outcome that means:

1.  "Plum" rides have to be handed over to only the largest squads.
or
2. That we continue to ignore the silly rule the same way we have for the last 12 months.

[Nefarious]

Personally I think no squads should be split.

[WxMan]

I can only speak for myself, however being a CiC many times over the past few years. I have always done my best to assign rides requested by a squadron, and have split and allocated the "hot rides" among smaller squads several times, particularly in scouting roles (262's).

I assign these aircraft based on the maximum allowable attendance of each squad. If there are some unused afterwards...so be it.

The key here is for all CiC's to get the ride requests out early and for the Squad CO's to respond in a timely basis.  We all know who the CiC's will be and the aircraft involved weeks beforehand. There is no reason to wait until the ojectives are sent to send the ride requests, and there is absolutely no excuse to wait until Wednesday night to respond to them.

[Squire]

CM designs dont have to be written in stone... if there is a design that say, needs the Me262, the CM could simply add:

Special Rules: Me262s can be assigned to a 190 or 109 Squad as a flight of (4). CiCs discretion.

But for the most part, squads should fly the same a/c type, and they should be operated in minimum 7-10 sizes.  This is supposed to be FSO, not the MA.

[daddog]

I put in my 2 cents on the CM board.

It is a rule that does have its shortcomings. Exceptions need to be made as squire pointed out.