Author Topic: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores  (Read 1121 times)

Offline Nefarious

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15858
Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« on: August 18, 2008, 10:16:30 PM »
Well, Frame 2 scores are not much different except in the fact that both sides increased the number of total points. The Axis clearly walk away with the victory for frame 2, but the Allies did prove that they can be more effective with less losses as in frame 1.

In Frame 1, the Axis won by 446 points, In frame 2 the Axis won by 518 Points. At the same time, both sides increased the number of points they totaled. It looks like the Axis and Allies both improved on there plans, but the Allies failed to turn the tables in Frame 2.

Not much I can add here, except the Allies need to cut down on the losses and make sure there fleets stay afloat if they want to close the gap in Frame 3.

Axis:

Kills: 168 Aircraft

F6F-5:                       111 x 02 = 222 Points
FM2:                         038 x 02 = 076 Points
TBM:                         019 x 02 = 038 Points
Gunner/Observer          002
Friendly Fire:               010

True Successful Landings:    119 x 02 = 238 Points
Ayao Shirane (none)          000 x 00 = 000 Points

1. C74                       300 (CV, CA)
2. C76                       300 (CV, CA)
3. C78                       300 (CA, DD, DD, DD, DD)
4. C80                       000

Axis Total: 1474

Allied:

Kills: 91 Aircraft

A6M5B:                      033 x 02 = 066 Points
Ki-61-I-Tei:                039 x 02 = 078 Points
Ki-67:                         010 x 05 = 050 Points
Ki-84-Ia:                   004 x 02 = 008 Points                     
N1K-2J:                     005 x 02 = 010 Points
Gunner/Observer         000
Friendly Fire:              000

True Successful Landings:   032 x 02 = 064 Points
David McCampbell (50Cals):  002 x 10 = 020 Points (Landed)

1. C79                      300 (CA, DD, DD, DD, DD)
2. A13                      071
3. A22                      071
4. A33                      218

Allied Total: 956
There must also be a flyable computer available for Nefarious to do FSO. So he doesn't keep talking about it for eight and a half hours on Friday night!

Offline Alpo

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1428
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2008, 04:06:34 PM »
Just curious... according to the scoring pages

Naval Targets:

    * Carrier: 200
    * Cruiser: 100
    * Destroyer: 50

Ground Targets:

    * Small Field: 195
    * Medium Field: 266
    * Large Field: 384


What qualifies a side to get all points for a ground target?  All hangers down?

The reason I ask is that it seems pretty obvious that putting all resources to fleet destruction seems to be the easiest road to victory.  Unless of course, fleet hardness is higher than the norm.

Small field = 3 FH + 2 BH = 15000 lbs ord to get 195 points  (guessing about 10 F6Fs if they are lucky)

Carrier (CV) = 8000 lbs ord to get 200 points  (about Axis 5 planes)
Cruiser (CA) = 2000 lbs ord to get 100 points  (2 Axis planes)



SkyKnights Fighter Group -CO-
R.I.P.  SKDenny 02/03/1940 - 02/19/2012

...

Offline Nefarious

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15858
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2008, 07:12:05 PM »
What qualifies a side to get all points for a ground target?  All hangers down?

Everything at the field except the town is scorable. Guns, Barracks, Fuel and Ammo Bunkers, All Hangars.

Quote
Small field = 3 FH + 2 BH = 15000 lbs ord to get 195 points  (guessing about 10 F6Fs if they are lucky)

That's actually (3 FH + 2 BH) for 140 Points, and 13906 lbs. The entire Small field with all objects combined is 19549 lbs. That would take about 10 TBMs (2000lbers Disabled) or about 20 F6Fs (1000lbers Disabled)

The difference in the scoring is the fact that Ships are heavily defended with guns on every ship. Ack is tuned down, but can still cause some damage. Ships also are steerable, which allow them to anticipate bombs and torpedoes. Fields also do not move, the location is known the entire time. Ships have a starting location and must remain in a certain area until T+60, But by T+25 can be anywhere within that sector.

It does seem to me that focusing on the ships seems to be the road to victory, I think this frame Stoney's plan was to find and sink as many ships as possible, they sank 2 Carriers, 3 Cruisers, and 4 Destroyers compared to the Axis performance the week before of 2 Carriers, 1 Cruiser and 1 Destroyer.

Had the Allies managed to completely destroy all of there targets they would have accumulated 1242 Points. Which would have still put them behind by 232 Points.

Axis: 1474
Allied Recalculated: 1242

But of course the Ships and Targets are not the only part of scoring a frame. How many kills and how many successful landings also determines the final score, These are important factors in my scoring.

Lets say the Allies only lost 39 F6F's (The number of Ki61s lost by Axis), we will then take the number not killed (39-111=72) and add that to the number of Allied Successful landings (72+32=104).

Axis Recalculated: 1330
Allied Recalculated: 1164

Had the Allies destroyed all there targets and had managed to only lose 39 F6F's and land the remainder as described above the Allies would have won by a small margin of:

Axis Recalculated: 1330
Allied Recalculated: 1376

We can do the math all we want, and come up with lots of outcomes and what-ifs, but in the end the end result is what you guys make it. I don't hit a button and decide the Allies are going to lose 111 F6F's to Axis fighters or the Axis are going to sink 9 Allied Warships. I try to make the setup and scoring be the equalizer in FSO and sometimes you can't anticipate factors like the aforementioned. 

After everything is finished and the next FSO comes around, I can sit back and look at the numbers over 3 frames and make the adjustments needed to make the event even more balanced for the next time its played. Numerous ideas have already came to me in the past two weeks. I implemented one idea for Frame 3, and that was to increase the number of total targets from 4 to 5.

There must also be a flyable computer available for Nefarious to do FSO. So he doesn't keep talking about it for eight and a half hours on Friday night!

Offline Alpo

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1428
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2008, 08:56:42 PM »

We can do the math all we want, and come up with lots of outcomes and what-ifs, but in the end the end result is what you guys make it. I don't hit a button and decide the Allies are going to lose 111 F6F's to Axis fighters or the Axis are going to sink 9 Allied Warships. I try to make the setup and scoring be the equalizer in FSO and sometimes you can't anticipate factors like the aforementioned. 

After everything is finished and the next FSO comes around, I can sit back and look at the numbers over 3 frames and make the adjustments needed to make the event even more balanced for the next time its played. Numerous ideas have already came to me in the past two weeks. I implemented one idea for Frame 3, and that was to increase the number of total targets from 4 to 5.




Thanks Nefarious.  That's what I was curious about.    :salute
SkyKnights Fighter Group -CO-
R.I.P.  SKDenny 02/03/1940 - 02/19/2012

...

Offline Nefarious

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15858
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2008, 09:03:07 PM »
<S> Your Welcome Alpo.
There must also be a flyable computer available for Nefarious to do FSO. So he doesn't keep talking about it for eight and a half hours on Friday night!

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #5 on: August 20, 2008, 12:55:21 AM »
Just to expound on Nef's comments:

My plan, as it is with any FSO I CIC, is to acheive and maintain Air Superiority first, and attack objectives second, in that order of priority.  I design missions that are light on attackers, and heavy on escorts on purpose.  12 bombers escorted by 24 escorts are greater than 24 bombers escorted by 12 escorts.  Design the plan to achieve and maintain air superiority over each objective area and you'll be succesful.  There are many attacks that destroy a lot of objects, but all the attackers get shot down in the process.  I don't care what the score is, that's an unsuccessful mission because you're giving points that you just earned (from destroying objects) back to the enemy (through your A2A losses).  Better to not even destroy the objects in the first place than to give back all those points.  Maybe you could have added the bomber/attacker aircraft you lost to the escort force, and the remaining bomber/attackers destroy a fraction of the objects, but they all survive and you don't give up points for losing them.

CIC's have to design missions where the participants have a good chance at surviving, for a number of reasons.  Suffice it to say that if you create credible, survivable missions, the score will follow, regardless of whether or not you achieved total destruction of some target, regardless of what it is.

My $.02
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Imoutfishing

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 554
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2008, 03:21:29 AM »
I promised myself I would stay out of this but are you suggesting that a CiC need's to think they way you are thinking to achive victory? 

This will never happen.  No way no how will any CiC be able to read into your mind to figure out "what you ment". 

ROC used to hammer my write up's to no end about providing detail and not assume anything.  When Nef send's out objective's there are so many hole's & gaps in them It's a wonder we even plan our Friday's around the anymore.  I only point out Nef as he was the Admin during the last two FSO frames that I was Admin.  On the other hand Nef does have the sweetest looking objectives in the game but that only last's until the flag drop's on Friday night.

MGD


Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2008, 09:50:22 AM »
I promised myself I would stay out of this but are you suggesting that a CiC need's to think they way you are thinking to achive victory? 

This will never happen.  No way no how will any CiC be able to read into your mind to figure out "what you ment". 
:huh :confused:

This isn't occult mentalism; he was merely explaining strategy.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2008, 10:28:07 AM »
I promised myself I would stay out of this but are you suggesting that a CiC need's to think they way you are thinking to achive victory?

You broke your promise. :)  Of course not.  Its simply that some folks scratch their heads after a side loses a frame, even though they did a lot of damage to the objective targets.  Just attempting to explain that force protection can be just as important as effects on target.  The details I posted above were simply my techniques with which to accomplish that.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Imoutfishing

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 554
Re: Fire in the Philippines Frame 2 Scores
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2008, 02:08:46 AM »
:huh :confused:

This isn't occult mentalism; he was merely explaining strategy.

You nailed on the head sir.  Everyone need's to remember this is a game and we are just try to play it to have fun.  If the fun isn't there what's the point right.

It's a lot more simple then you make it out to be.

MGD