Author Topic: How did you guys like......  (Read 1035 times)

Offline Sled

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3595
      • Friday Squad Operations
How did you guys like......
« on: October 06, 2007, 02:04:12 PM »
The mystery base to be attacked In this event?

Sounds like it worked out pretty well, did anyone suffer no action from this design in the event?

If you guys liked it........ it was my idea.

If you hated it......... I told Nomde not to do it.


:D




Actually, It was his Idea, and I thought it sounded great. A lot of us have always wanted to add a bit of "unknown" to FSO. If done correctly I think this is something that can be done, and people still have a good time in FSO.
~Sled~                 Aces High Special Events
USMC/71sqn
      XO               What Aces High is really all about.

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
      • http://www.9giap.com
How did you guys like......
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2007, 06:02:47 PM »
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline Sled

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3595
      • Friday Squad Operations
How did you guys like......
« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2007, 06:55:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dantoo
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


:lol


The Allies had 4 bases to defend, but only 3 of them were to be attacked by the Axis. The Allies did not know what 3 at the start of the frame. Also, the Axis did not know what base the Allies were defending as the forth base.

The same but opposite for the Axis.
~Sled~                 Aces High Special Events
USMC/71sqn
      XO               What Aces High is really all about.

Offline Virage

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1097
How did you guys like......
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2007, 07:52:45 PM »
I am in a 'wait and see' mode, not wanting to jump to a quick judgment.  But it contradicts the 'All bases must be defended/attacked by T+60' rule.

It also has the effect of diluting the defensive forces, giving an edge to the attacking squads.  And since this event is loosely based on the Allied Offensive of the same name,  I can see why a certain 47 Squad Skipper would like that. :p

What I am sure of is that I don't want any squad to not see action.  This new twist puts pressure on the CIC to make sure that doesn't happen.

I am all for supporting new ideas and I think we should give it a shot and see how it flies.

From JG11's limited perspective, we hit A41 with very little opposition. ( I saw 2 51's )

Maybe we can hear from the CIC's and the squads that were assigned to defend the decoys.  Their reaction is what matters.
JG11

Vater

Offline Sled

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3595
      • Friday Squad Operations
How did you guys like......
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2007, 08:15:01 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Virage
 But it contradicts the 'All bases must be defended/attacked by T+60' rule.


I was ready for this one.

Not really, All bases that the Axis were given as targets, were attacked by T+60. Same with the Allies.

You are correct it is possible for this concept to back fire on us.

I don't see this becoming a standard thing in all FSO events, but I do see it remaining as an option, especially in this newly created event, "Operation Strangle".

Thanks for your comments Virage, well said. :aok
~Sled~                 Aces High Special Events
USMC/71sqn
      XO               What Aces High is really all about.

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
How did you guys like......
« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2007, 01:54:41 AM »
I thought it diluted the defense.  Gives the offense a bit too much initiative possibly.

Offline Easyscor

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10908
How did you guys like......
« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2007, 06:41:54 AM »
I also go with the previous two posters comments. It diluted the defense too much, at least on the Axis side.
Easy in-game again.
Since Tour 19 - 2001

Offline SpiveyCH

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 118
      • http://www.chawks.org
How did you guys like......
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2007, 03:09:38 PM »
The one problem that I was foreseeing did not happen.  If the allied had picked the 2 bases and CV, but left the HQ alone, I thought it may hurt the HQ defenders chances of seeing action.  They had a little longer flight to scramble back.  As it turned out, I think they all saw some action.    

     I think if the bases are really spread out, this is a bad idea.  If they are close, it's a good addition to the strategy of the map.  It worked out good on this map.  The every-so-often use of this would be o.k. with me.  It will just need to be used in the right way.
SpiveyCH
The 364th C-HAWKS Fighter Group

Offline Valkyrie

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 172
How did you guys like......
« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2007, 11:15:23 PM »
Might counter with a radar controller in the future.


Vlkyrie1

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
How did you guys like......
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2007, 11:36:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Stoney74
I thought it diluted the defense.  Gives the offense a bit too much initiative possibly.


Well, and let me expound on this.  The defenders at A32 and A34 were separated by almost two sectors.  First, the other squad that was assigned to help us defend A32 didn't show, so we were already shorthanded.  Once either A32 or A34 was attacked, the defenders over the clear base was to collapse back and help out the other.  Once the attack came in we were quickly dispatched and the help arrived later on--they still saw action, but after the fact, so to speak.

Perhaps the CAP for both bases could have been combined into a CAP Station half-way between the bases, but reaction time would have been approximately 5 minutes to either base.

Another contributing factor was the fact that many of the targets on both sides were along the coast, with nothing but water east or west respectively.  This meant that there were no base-flashing to help orient the defenders, nor were there gaps between bases through which potential avenues of approach could be covered.

I believe without some sort of "coast watchers" or radar assist, this type of configuration will deal the defense a handicap.  They already suffer from a lack of initiative, as the attacker picks the route, altitude, timing, etc.  

Of course, had we had more even odds against the attackers at A32 and been able to manage a more credible defense, my opinion may have been different.

Offline WxMan

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
      • Arabian Knights
How did you guys like......
« Reply #10 on: October 10, 2007, 05:20:11 AM »
I thought the purpose of the T+60 attack rules was that all defenders would see action.  

This rule was enacted when CiC's chose not to attack targets for whatever reason and the ensuing outcry from the player base forced the CM's to institute a correction.  I see no difference in having the design CM choose a base not to attack. There still will be some players  seeing no action for at least 60 minutes.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2007, 05:25:21 AM by WxMan »
AKWxMan
Arabian Knights

"The money you payed earns you nothing. You paid for many hours of entertainment you received, and nothing more." - HiTech

Offline daddog

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15082
      • http://www.332nd.org
How did you guys like......
« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2007, 02:56:40 PM »
Quote
I thought the purpose of the T+60 attack rules was that all defenders  would see action.
The purpose was to in sure that "everyone", not just defenders see action. Not much fun attacking a field just to get damaged or shot down by ack then RTB without engaging any enemy AC.
Noses in the wind since 1997
332nd Flying Mongrels
daddog
Knowing for Sure

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
      • http://www.9giap.com
How did you guys like......
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2007, 03:41:32 PM »
Quote
Not much fun attacking a field just to get damaged or shot down by ack then RTB without engaging any enemy AC


I couldn't disagree more.  Plenty of times that's exactly what I strive to do.  Usually it's because of the job I am given and the tools I am given to do it with require just that outcome to gain any satisfaction at all.  

The absolute least fun you can have in squad ops is to be handed over as cheap cannon fodder.  Flying the Kate and Ju87 are classics.  If you don't avoid the opposition it's zero fun.  You can add to that quite a number of other rides. In squad ops over the years I have been given plenty of tasks where I preferred not to engage the enemy.  Once I was given an M3 to attack a vbase defended by panzers.   We have even had C47s as rides.

Quote
The purpose was to in sure that "everyone", not just defenders see action.


I remember somewhat differently.  I believe the rule was brought in to prevent a CIC from holding off all his strikes until the last fraction of the game.  There are a number of negatives in play when that happens, not just a lack of action.  The one hour rule does force the CIC to develop strategies to be effective.  The downside is that some see its only requirement is to provide meat on the table at points on the map without requiring thought beyond that.

The most appalling squad ops are those that are effectively over in 10 minutes.  The most appealing squad ops are those where a large number from both sides land safely after 2 hours of mental and physical clashes, where you have been deeply immersed in the virtual world and drowning in real world sweat.
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
How did you guys like......
« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2007, 07:23:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dantoo
The absolute least fun you can have in squad ops is to be handed over as cheap cannon fodder.  Flying the Kate and Ju87 are classics...The most appalling squad ops are those that are effectively over in 10 minutes.  The most appealing squad ops are those where a large number from both sides land safely after 2 hours of mental and physical clashes, where you have been deeply immersed in the virtual world and drowning in real world sweat.


As an FSO admin-in-training, any recommendations on how to achieve that, in say an early war setup where the Ju-87, Val, SBD, Kate, etc. are the logical attack plane for a chosen time period?  You can reply by PM since its a bit off-topic.

Offline daddog

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15082
      • http://www.332nd.org
How did you guys like......
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2007, 06:02:08 PM »
Quote
I couldn't disagree more. Plenty of times that's exactly what I strive to do. Usually it's because of the job I am given and the tools I am given to do it with require just that outcome to gain any satisfaction at all.

The absolute least fun you can have in squad ops is to be handed over as cheap cannon fodder. Flying the Kate and Ju87 are classics. If you don't avoid the opposition it's zero fun. You can add to that quite a number of other rides. In squad ops over the years I have been given plenty of tasks where I preferred not to engage the enemy. Once I was given an M3 to attack a vbase defended by panzers. We have even had C47s as rides.


Dantoo your view may come from looking at FSO from a Scenario perspective. I don't know for sure. I understand your desire to have a plan that will allow your side to attack their targets and RTB without any losses. We all plan for that, or at least to afflict the enemy with the most losses while we suffer the least. Ask yourself how much fun would everyone have if we all flew around for two hours, successfully attacked our targets and RTB without any action. It is fun once, but would quickly be a bore. If this was to happen every time FSO would be dead in 3 months. Players want action. They want to engage the enemy. The best and most exciting AAR’s are “always” about engagements with the enemy. Not flying in empty skies. Read over AAR’s posted in the last 7 years by players that have had a blast in FSO. Always, always it is when they engaged the enemy. You and many others may disagree with me on this point but I know I am right. FSO has been successful since is conception because players almost always engage the enemy with sufficient unknown variables to make it exciting.This is true of FSO, despite CiC’s efforts to do just the opposite. Get in and get out with little or no losses. That is the gem of FSO. An event design that allows CiC’s to do what is right for their side. Plan for the fewest losses. Avoid the enemy when possible and strive for success offensively and defensively.

Yes your quite right no one wants to fly a Kate or Ju87 and be cannon fodder. Yes it is exciting to fly those get into your target and actually make it home and land it. It is exciting once or twice, but if you did that every frame you would quickly become bored.
Noses in the wind since 1997
332nd Flying Mongrels
daddog
Knowing for Sure