Frame 1 Bougainville Privateers Score

[lowZX14]

Yeah, I can tell you that whoever planned out the Axis orders did a fine job in getting the zekes down to A11 & A12 very quickly.  We were still on the climbout in P-39's when the largest formation of zekes I have ever seen came screaming in and tore us to pieces.  We had split the squad for patrolling the defensive CAP area and were murdered.  We got a few of them, but all in all they hurt is bad which let the destruction of ground targets commence with little resistance.

[Saxman]

Not only down there quickly, but at a significant altitude advantage as well.

I wonder if maybe the Axis was allowed too many A6M5s, which aren't really that comparable to the A6M3, especially in rate of climb (the A6M5 climbs MUCH better).

[fudgums]

theyre just zero's they cant catch me

[Nefarious]

I had trouble catching the B-25s in my A6M2 at C49. Defensive fire got me and I ended up burning and was forced to bail.

I did get one's engine and fuel.

[Ponyace]

I had trouble catching the B-25s in my A6M2 at C49. Defensive fire got me and I ended up burning and was forced to bail.

I did get one's engine and fuel.

Shoulda been at A9
We were able to vulch some B-25s landing there with no escorts. Ill try to get some pictures.

[Becinhu]

<S> to the allies defending a40. They refused to give up the fight even when the were overwhelmed. Unfortunately the kept engaging my squads A6M5s with their P-40s and P-39s in ones and twos. This of course allowed them to be singled out and dealt with.  Their was a lone F4U there that kept barreling through our group guns blazing and then running clear out of icon range.  We eventually just evaded and then ignored him until he came back.  One or two allied pilots tried to rearm while there was a dogfight going on less than 2k from a40 and got popped on the rearm pad.  Overall a valiant defense.   

[SmokinLoon]

The thing that gets me is that this campaign should be almost an entirely DEFENSIVE campaign for the Japs.  But instead this scenario did what most others do: set things up fo the two side meet in the middle and duke it out.

If one were to read up on the history of the Bougainville campaign, not only did the allies have almost free reign in the air but the Japs didnt ever really did go to it on the offensive not at least with any merit.  NOTE: I am not calling for an obvious allied superiority, but damn. 

Im not going to sit here an critisize the event planners to the point of being negative, but a big question I have is just how in depth did the research go on flight numbers, aircraft ratios, etc, and just how much of a blind eye was turned so the numbers would be "mroe even".

Maybe instead of "who gets the most points", perhaps it needs to be a certain side needs to perform to a certian level in order to win.  Perhaps the scoring needs to be "X number of OBJ destroyed" and/or "X number of aircraft destroyed.  Still use teh poitns system, but dont make it so same same.

Also, maybe in the Bougainville campaign the Japs shouldnt be able to up ALL fo their planes from the call of "GO", perhaps a time delay, pehaps a restriction until their radar ring flashes, enemy sightings, etc.  This "get ready, get set, GO!" for both sides is questionable, imo.

It simply shouldnt be a "meet in the middle and duke it out" type thing.  Not for either side. 

[TheBug]

Design one and submit it.  I'm sure they would take a look at it and I myself would be interested to see what you come up with because I agree with what you're saying.

[Saxman]

The thing that gets me is that this campaign should be almost an entirely DEFENSIVE campaign for the Japs.  But instead this scenario did what most others do: set things up fo the two side meet in the middle and duke it out.

If one were to read up on the history of the Bougainville campaign, not only did the allies have almost free reign in the air but the Japs didnt ever really did go to it on the offensive not at least with any merit.  NOTE: I am not calling for an obvious allied superiority, but damn. 

Im not going to sit here an critisize the event planners to the point of being negative, but a big question I have is just how in depth did the research go on flight numbers, aircraft ratios, etc, and just how much of a blind eye was turned so the numbers would be "mroe even".

Maybe instead of "who gets the most points", perhaps it needs to be a certain side needs to perform to a certian level in order to win.  Perhaps the scoring needs to be "X number of OBJ destroyed" and/or "X number of aircraft destroyed.  Still use teh poitns system, but dont make it so same same.

Also, maybe in the Bougainville campaign the Japs shouldnt be able to up ALL fo their planes from the call of "GO", perhaps a time delay, pehaps a restriction until their radar ring flashes, enemy sightings, etc.  This "get ready, get set, GO!" for both sides is questionable, imo.

It simply shouldnt be a "meet in the middle and duke it out" type thing.  Not for either side. 

I agree that it should have been a defensive setup for the Axis. Some of the other changes might be a little more difficult to implement, but we already have seen the offense vs. defense work in the past. I AM a bit curious why the "meet in the middle" setup was used instead.

[Squire]

A few things.

The Japanese in the Solomons were not completely defensive in 1943, nor did the Allies have "free reign". There are numerous accounts of Japanese level and dive bombers operating in the Solomons at this time, including attacks made against targets as far away as Guadalcanal. Add to that not every FSO is going to follow exactly how a campaign may have been fought historically in any case. You can look at any number of other SEA events to see that, including many, if not most FSOs. If you do that, you quickly end up just carbon copying designs that have been done already. In "A Long December" the side split was 50/50. Great FSO as it was, imho, it was hardly representative of the historic air power situation in the Western ETO in late Dec 1944.

The map in use is exactly where the lines were in September 1943. I dont really get the "meet in the middle" stuff. The terrain is what it was. Its an island chain and thats where the lines of demarcation were, I didn't make them up. The airfields are also accurate, for the most part. The plane set is also accurate for the time frame, save the Ki-67, which as I already said, is a stand in for a/c like the Ki-49-II and others.  Yes, I wish we had a G4M, we dont yet, I hope we do soon.

You could do many different variations of this setup, and they would all be played out differently. Could you do a more defensive Japanese posture? yes, of course. Do you need to do that every time? I would say I hope not.

There are also many factors that have to be taken into account, the map size and the terrain it includes, and doesn't, the 2hr time frame, and playability issues, such as expected attendance of both sides rosters, ect.

Scoring, is completely subjective. You have to quantify it somehow. If you don't use points, then you would use some other, just as artificial method. There were no "points" or "frames" in WW2, its a game function. At the end of the day you have to have a quantifiable way to say "this is how you did", because its a game, and players want a tally, and so, we give them one.

Hope that clarifies a few things. Im not going to get into some lengthy debate here, but I thought a few points were warranted.

[ELD66]

<S> to the allies defending a40. They refused to give up the fight even when the were overwhelmed. Unfortunately the kept engaging my squads A6M5s with their P-40s and P-39s in ones and twos. This of course allowed them to be singled out and dealt with.  Their was a lone F4U there that kept barreling through our group guns blazing and then running clear out of icon range.  We eventually just evaded and then ignored him until he came back.  One or two allied pilots tried to rearm while there was a dogfight going on less than 2k from a40 and got popped on the rearm pad.  Overall a valiant defense.   

That was one of mine. We had 9 but ran into 880sqn and about 30 more A6M5's 4 of us got killed then the rest dove out to 40. Then the rest attacked KI67s a few more got killed. Then the last 3 got into a fight with a6ms 2 died there and then the last went back to 40 and defended to the end. But 613th did get 2 in Top Pilot:Kills allied and on Top Squad:Kills list both squad firsts for us.

[SmokinLoon]

A few things.

The Japanese in the Solomons were not completely defensive in 1943, nor did the Allies have "free reign". There are numerous accounts of Japanese level and dive bombers operating in the Solomons at this time, including attacks made against targets as far away as Guadalcanal. Add to that not every FSO is going to follow exactly how a campaign may have been fought historically in any case. You can look at any number of other SEA events to see that, including many, if not most FSOs. If you do that, you quickly end up just carbon copying designs that have been done already. In "A Long December" the side split was 50/50. Great FSO as it was, imho, it was hardly representative of the historic air power situation in the Western ETO in late Dec 1944.

The map in use is exactly where the lines were in September 1943. I dont really get the "meet in the middle" stuff. The terrain is what it was. Its an island chain and thats where the lines of demarcation were, I didn't make them up. The airfields are also accurate, for the most part. The plane set is also accurate for the time frame, save the Ki-67, which as I already said, is a stand in for a/c like the Ki-49-II and others.  Yes, I wish we had a G4M, we dont yet, I hope we do soon.

You could do many different variations of this setup, and they would all be played out differently. Could you do a more defensive Japanese posture? yes, of course. Do you need to do that every time? I would say I hope not.

There are also many factors that have to be taken into account, the map size and the terrain it includes, and doesn't, the 2hr time frame, and playability issues, such as expected attendance of both sides rosters, ect.

Scoring, is completely subjective. You have to quantify it somehow. If you don't use points, then you would use some other, just as artificial method. There were no "points" or "frames" in WW2, its a game function. At the end of the day you have to have a quantifiable way to say "this is how you did", because its a game, and players want a tally, and so, we give them one.

Hope that clarifies a few things. Im not going to get into some lengthy debate here, but I thought a few points were warranted.

Thanks for the heads up.  It is apprecaited.  <S>

I didnt mean any disrespect when I questioned the parameters of the set up.  But it seems as if the forces are established, the airfields are made public, and the start time is given, with a "meet in the middle" mentality.  Why are the fleets not allowed to be in a bigger area?  There is no chance to miss the fleet.  There is no need for scouting.  Just point nose on and GOGOGO when the "Fields are open" call is made.  I have a lot of respect for the planners and admin, it takes a lot planning and time to set things up.  But for ideas or constructive critisms not to be shared would do no one any good.    

How would I mix things up? ...  

Not all aircraft would be allowed to up at the start.  Both sides would have fighters on patrol.  Both sides would have scouts in on missions.  Both sides would have a lot of aircraft on the ground when hostiliteis began, more so the Japs than anything.  The yanks/kiwis would simply up more aircraft if the "major engagement" or "fleet found" call was made.  Simply put, the alts would be different mostly due to differences in launch times), the ranges away from base would be different 9due to launch times), and the sudden DIVINE WIND of aircraft wouldnt be so omnious for both sides.  I would limit the B24's to 18k, the B25's to 13k (both very feasible and proper operating alts), the Betty/Peggy would be near 18k as well, iirc from my readings.  SBD/D3A alts would be maxed near the same.  Blanket settings for ALL aircraft of a certain type isnt typical of offensive operations in either WWII theater.  Base the max alt on their typcial bombing alts for that theater or time frame (B24's flew at 18k or lower and the B25 was at 13k at its highest typically vs land based targets in PTO, vs shipping they were much lower as constant visual updates were needed by the pilot/bombidier on target variables.  
  
I would place alt limits on fighters to help mimic true to historical scenario facts.  What alt did the zeke's fly at for normal operations in late 43 in the SW PTO?  Yeah, I thought so.  What about the P38's, 39's, and 40's?  Hmm...  I know there are a lot of things that cant be regualted by the servers, but to a certain degree the planners/admin can step in and say: "Because it was THIS way in the actual event we shall require it here.", etc.  I would also draw borders or limit fuel (no DT's) on certain aircraft so that not just every and any aircraft can be everywhere on the map.  That may sound restricting but it does prevent a swarm of enemy aircraft over a target that would otherwise be more true to the norm.  Last but not least in this tidbit... do NOT make it known where each side is upping from.  Keep as much info as private as possble until the night of the event.  I realize there is a need for planning flight paths and all... bu to publich that "it will be from A10 or A12" give the Jap (or the yanks depending on perspective) a direct line of attack KNOWING that there are enemy aircraft in teh air *right there*.  

Make it extremely costly to lose an aircraft.  I still see a lot of guys bounding into battle when in the real work they'd wait for more of their wing to arrive prior to jumping into the ring vs overwhelming odds, advatage or not.  This goes for both sides.  Better yet... give those pilots that engage and are able to shoot down, get an assist, destroy an OBJ, etc, give those pilots a "bonus" score for getting their plane back.  Not enough ephisis isplaced on surviving.  There is still too much of an MA "tora tora tora" attitude in the SEA, imo. Just an observation.
  
FWIW... I am designing a scenario of my own.  I am designing an "Invasion Normandy" campaign that will have mostly Allies air/sea vs Axis ground and token LW in Phase I, Allied air/ground vs Axis ground/token LW for Phase II, and for Phase III the Pzrs will have been unleashed from the north as well as some larger LW reserves!  I'm diving into a treasure trove of sources for as much unit, weapons/vehicle/aircraft, and material data as I can.  My scenario wont be about meeting in the middle as much as it will be about the Germans slowing the tide as much as possble.  I'm trying to plan an actual beach invasion with LVT2/4, supported by destroyers and attack aircraft vs light armor (M8's, 251's, M16's, jeeps) and a limited number of tanks (Pzr4), supported by  at veh bases for a Utah/Omaha/Sword/Juno beach.  We'll see how it works out.  The points scale will be much more dynamic for the Germans.      

  

[Anaxogoras]

Make it extremely costly to lose an aircraft.  I still see a lot of guys bounding into battle when in the real work they'd wait for more of their wing to arrive prior to jumping into the ring vs overwhelming odds, advantage or not.  This goes for both sides.  Better yet... give those pilots that engage and are able to shoot down, get an assist, destroy an OBJ, etc, give those pilots a "bonus" score for getting their plane back.  Not enough emphasis is placed on surviving.  There is still too much of an MA "tora tora tora" attitude in the SEA, imo. Just an observation.  

This is the only point I really agree with, but the cost of aircraft losses is already accounted for in score.  On the other hand, I always like it when aircraft that land safely count for points.

[Becinhu]

That was one of mine. We had 9 but ran into 880sqn and about 30 more A6M5's 4 of us got killed then the rest dove out to 40. Then the rest attacked KI67s a few more got killed. Then the last 3 got into a fight with a6ms 2 died there and then the last went back to 40 and defended to the end. But 613th did get 2 in Top Pilot:Kills allied and on Top Squad:Kills list both squad firsts for us.

I wasn't wasn't discrediting his tactics. I was merely using it as a reference for how the fight progressed.  I just thought he would have severed the other defenders better by using his planes advantage over my zekes to better assist the 40s and 39s.  His long extensions allowed my boys to slice and dice the 40s and 39s alot easier than if he had stayed closer and put us on more of a defensive.  Big  on your leaderboard status sir. It is a thrill to see your name up in lights, unless it's for friendly frags...

[Bino]

...
I always like it when aircraft that land safely count for points.

  

Points for kills is OK, and yet more points for each safe landing is even better!