FSO Rule adjustments

[Sled]

A couple of things to understand.

I didn't come up with these rules, by myself, Friday night after a six-pack.

These rules were written with the involvement of many members of the CM Team, most of these people have extensive FSO experience (4 years + each). They was discussed in length for several months. Drafts were started and re-written several times. A lot of time and thought was given to these rule revisions. These were not "knee jerk" reactions.

------------------------

Here are some things we want to avoid.

example: 2 fighters come in and drop a couple of bombs before T+60, then at T+90 a large formation of bombers arrives at the same target and destroys it. After the defending fighter cover has scattered looking for some action, thinking the first 2 heavy fighters is it.

That is why it says: "CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that the main attacks reach their targets by T+60."

This rule in NO WAY prevents an early fighter sweep of a target. It just says that the bomber force has to arrive before T+60. The fighters can go in at any time before or after. If fighters can't get to a target and sweep it before the bombers arrive, there is a problem.

Admin CM's and CiC's have a responsibility to keep these rules in mind and adjust there orders so squads are able to complete their task without breaking the rules.

Example: telling a squad they have to fly 300 miles in bombers to attack a target is not going to work. The orders have to allow for travel time and the T+60 rule.


Something to consider. the T+60 rule has another desired effect, It acts as an altitude cap for Bombers in most cases (except for air starts). Bombers can't get to much more than about 25-28 K before they have to get set for their bomb run. If you dislike fighting bombers at 35K with your 109, this rules helps to reduce that chance.

Clearly I don't (think) anybody would seriously think a lone fighter flashing a base would fullfill the requirement.

Unfortunately in the past they have.

BTW, the rules will stay as written for a while. We will give it a chance.

[Nefarious]

Originally posted by WxMan
In addition, the new rules of specific numbers for all aircraft used is a departure from just limiting uber rides in the past.

Could you elaborate here?

I try to set minimums and maximums depending on the situation. In the upcoming FSO, I decided all aircraft would have a minimum. This aspect of FSO is usually Admin Preference and varies FSO to FSO for playability.

Nef

[TracerX]

Originally posted by WxMan
No I disagree. The more rules and restrictions there are, the less room there is for strategic thinking. Each event will end up mirroring the previous one and I'm afraid that FSO will wind up a shell of what it used to be.

While I'm not yelling foul, I'm voicing my strong disagreement now because I didn't before on rules changes I thought were unecessary. Once a rule or law is implented, it becomes entrenched and rarely is revoked but is frequently added to.

As Sled mentioned, there was considerable discussion on this rule to avoid excessive restrictions, and I think the wording is a little less restrictive than you think.  We did not want to say, at least X number of planes, or try to describe what a main attack would include, except that it should probably be more than a straffing run.  Here is the wording on T+60 rule.

- All targets must be attacked within 60 minutes of the start of the frame. They must be attacked with explosive ordinance, (rockets and bombs) by a full squadron. Feints and diversions prior to a larger strike force do not satisfy the requirements of this rule. Simply strafing a target with fighters does not satisfy the requirements of this rule. CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that the main attacks reach their targets by T+60. Administrator CM's may request copies of orders to evaluate the observance of this rule.  

I think the wording is fairly accurate, without being too specific.  The most significant part of the wording is that the CIC plans for a Main Attack by T+60.  I think most of us understand what a main attack is, if explosive ordinance and Squadron strength are not good descriptors, what would be better?  Maybe we have a misunderstanding on what constitutes a main attack?  I don't think there was any discussion that a main attack does not have to include bombs or rockets at a minimum.

[Valkyrie]

My concern is getting bombers into the air at alt and formed up. During and event several months ago I really had a very difficult time getting bombers to 24k formed and over target in the T+60.

Without air starts it was impossible. The first target was attacked at T+55 but the second one was nearly 10 min late. Its the defenders job to remain on station until told to move on.

Wxmans right this will limit strategic thinking. This will be my only post as the horse is dead, but I want my objection noted.

Vlkyrie1

[Sled]

Originally posted by Valkyrie
My concern is getting bombers into the air at alt and formed up. During and event several months ago I really had a very difficult time getting bombers to 24k formed and over target in the T+60.

Without air starts it was impossible. The first target was attacked at T+55 but the second one was nearly 10 min late. Its the defenders job to remain on station until told to move on.

Wxmans right this will limit strategic thinking. This will be my only post as the horse is dead.......

You make a good point Valkyrie. that is why earlier in this thread I stated.

Admin CM's and CiC's have a responsibility to keep these rules in mind and adjust there orders so squads are able to complete their task without breaking the rules.

If sometime in the future this is not able to be accomplished, for some reason. Then I could see exceptions being made. But I think this will be a rare situation.

........but I want my objection noted.

Noted.


BTW when one of you guys figures out how the CM team can do things without receiving objections............ We would really like to know.

[Stoney74]

Originally posted by Valkyrie
My concern is getting bombers into the air at alt and formed up. During and event several months ago I really had a very difficult time getting bombers to 24k formed and over target in the T+60.

Without air starts it was impossible. The first target was attacked at T+55 but the second one was nearly 10 min late. Its the defenders job to remain on station until told to move on.

Wxmans right this will limit strategic thinking. This will be my only post as the horse is dead, but I want my objection noted.

Vlkyrie1

Another thing to remember is that the ETO U.S. bombers were the only ones dropping from these types of operational altitudes.  German, Japanese, and British bombers (Lanc night time alts were below 20K) typically dropped from less than 20K.  There wasn't a lot of oxygen, relatively speaking, used in PTO until the B-29's showed up, for example.  If Ju-88's are dropping from 24,000 feet, they're way above their historical operational bombing altitudes.

Sorry for the confusing example WxMan.  I should have said "a fighter sweep at T+50 with the bombers 10 minutes behind them."

[WxMan]

The rule: All targets must be attacked within 60 minutes of the start of the frame. They must be attacked with explosive ordinance, (rockets and bombs) by a full squadron. Feints and diversions prior to a larger strike force do not satisfy the requirements of this rule. Simply strafing a target with fighters does not satisfy the requirements of this rule. CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that the main attacks reach their targets by T+60. Administrator CM's may request copies of orders to evaluate the observance of this rule.

Originally posted by SLED

That is why it says: "CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that the main attacks reach their targets by T+60." ............ The fighters can go in at any time before or after. If fighters can't get to a target and sweep it before the bombers arrive, there is a problem.
 

Originally posted by TracerX

I think the wording is fairly accurate, without being too specific. The most significant part of the wording is that the CIC plans for a Main Attack by T+60. I think most of us understand what a main attack is, if explosive ordinance and Squadron strength are not good descriptors, what would be better? Maybe we have a misunderstanding on what constitutes a main attack? I don't think there was any discussion that a main attack does not have to include bombs or rockets at a minimum.
 

Actually I want the rules to be specific. I don't want a judgement to be made on what the rules infered or the intent of the rule.

Without specifity, I think you can make the opposite arguement. Since the ordnance time restriction and term main attack are in the same paragraph and due to how it's worded you can make the inference that the "main attack" has to include mainly ordnance.

I actually have no problem with requiring that ordnance be used on a target. My main complaint is the time restriction.  It limits what I CiC can plan for.

And while we are at it....what constitutes Squadron strength?  A small Squad of 4 to 6, that can legally consist of only 2, or something larger.

Again I would like more specifity.

[Sled]

In my business, we have a contract with our employer. That contract is about 50-60 pages long and grows a little every time it is rewritten.

10-15 lawyers, plus another 10-15 negotiators are used to write this contract, every 4 years or so. And still almost weekly there are things that happen in our work place that require several people to "interpret" that contract, and determine exactly what it says about the subject being discussed.

It has always been this way, and will always be. We will NEVER have a contract that defines every possible situation that might arise and what the proper response is for that situation. But we still pay dozens of people to try.

Point?

We could spend hundreds of hours trying to write a rule platform that would spell out everything in FSO, and leave nothing to interpretation. But it is not going to happen.

And we are not going to try. The CM team (not just me) will make judgment calls from time to time, and we will have to decide if a rule was broken or not. We will do it as a group (the FSO team) and we will be fair and unbiased.

-------------------------

As for squad strength.

4-6 F4u-1's to attack a medium airbase is not (normally) a reasonable attack.

4-6 F4u-1's to attack a convoy........  Is.

[Sled]

Originally posted by WxMan
Without specifity, I think you can make the opposite arguement. Since the ordnance time restriction and term main attack are in the same paragraph and due to how it's worded you can make the inference that the "main attack" has to include mainly ordnance.

That is correct.

I actually have no problem with requiring that ordnance be used on a target. My main complaint is the time restriction.  It limits what I CiC can plan for.

The event is only two hours long. So time limitations are one of the obstacles the CiC has to deal with.

[Valkyrie]

Air Starts for US bombers and I won't complain.


Vlkyrie1

[Husky01]

Originally posted by Valkyrie
Air Starts for US bombers and I won't complain.


Vlkyrie1

Vlkyrie1 I believe that air starts for bombers has more or less to do with whether or not it was built into the maps design not so much a CMs decision..

I could be completely wrong on this though as I am not sure about my facts on this one.

[Sled]

Originally posted by Valkyrie
Air Starts for US bombers and I won't complain.


Vlkyrie1

Well that was easy.

We have had Air Starts for a long time in FSO. They are not used in every event, and are dependant on if they are available in the map that is being used.

Normally when A/S are used there is an altitude restriction of some kind on the bombers.


So.......... No more complaints from you.

[AKKaz]

As I have posted a few times in the past some concerns for rule areas, I'm not goona go through them again.  But I will say by reading this post I get the impression that any questions or other concerns being stated that the responses seemingly a little condesending.

Sled, as you have stated that many of the CM's have been "in the game" for a long period of time, so have all that have voiced their concerns.  Many have been front runners in the FSO's and have put great work into CIC duties as well as other areas.  I have a great appreciation for the entire CM group and their hard work they put into this, but as you have stated, we also didn't just come up with these concerns from sitting with a 6-pack one night as well.

As I do understand not all areas can be written in stone, that some "gray" areas will exist, as not all contigencies can be or should be covered.  But I can say that as some of the rule changes may on the outside look good, from the inside they at times wreak havoc.

Hard clad rules in some areas may seem the way to go, but then to follow up with judgement calls when they aren't met seem to take the extra time and care in mission planning to try and meet the requirements somewhat frustrating.

An example of "what if the strike force gets hit before the target" concern is a double edge sword here.  To meet this requirement in the past, have been on mission where we had to take a direct route without getting good alt just to be wiped out be an enemy force aware of that fact.  Then to penalized (which happened) by not hitting the targets and also give up defensive bonus points added to the effect. Also consider the fact that no restrictions on defense really exist.  Nothing stops them from combining forces by leaving defensive areas to mass together to hit the route of approach knowling due to this restriction.  It has happened numerous times, and with your example of a 4 plane strike finally hitting its target of a medium feild as not sufficiant, it will happen again.

Not complaining or trying to put anyone back, just voicing a concern from many past experiences with FSO's.  But with stating a mandate, but not stating a minimum requirement to meet that mandate just opens a large judgemental gray area up. How do I even know to split group B heading to another target to help cover the loses I received on group A if I don't even know what a minimum is?

[Sled]

No "condescending" tone was intended. AAMOF, I have the utmost respect for what you guys have to say. If I didn't, then I would not have posted replies to your concerns.

[Krusty]

If you can't get your fleet of 290-mph super-gunned B-24s to 30k and bomb the target inside of 60 minutes, fly at 20k and still outpace most of your enemy, out shoot most of them, drop on target, and STILL have time left over for formation and flight planning.

The higher you want to go the more time it takes, it increases geometrically. While it might only take 5 minutes to climb from 0k to 5k, it could take 8 minutes more to climb from 5k to 10k, and by the time you're climbing from 20k to 25k (or more) you're spending 20 minutes for 5,000 feet.


Dude, you can't have it all. Prioritize. Alt, or target. Pick one. My choice is the target.