Future considerations?

[AKKaz]

Didnt want to hijack any other thread with a few oberservations/questions.

During this last frame, an issue arose that seems to keep coming up from time to time.  The AK's were tasked to be in gv's this last frame with a second life to launch at T+50.  The airfeilds that were assigned to be for the "2nd" launch were also targets of the opposing side.  Though one of the airfeilds (119?) was still somewhat intact, the others had no ords or hangers left up.

This issue does come up only every once in awhile, but it does come up.  If we cant launch from a close to front line feild, and all front line feilds available seem to be targets, it almost seemed useless to launch on a 2nd life at all.  Though we did launch from a26, one hanger did come back up, but 10-15 mins passed trying to figuire this all out.  Also, the only other airfeild left to us to launch from was 119, but the distance to anywhere would have made it impossible to make the round trip in the time allotted.

May I suggest that in future frames, that the events with second lives be looked at with a possible base being designated as a non target for those to lift.  With only around an hour left, it would help greatly on those maps where airfeilds are not as abundant and distances are a concern.

[ImADot]

I concur.  I fly with the 325th Checkertails in FSO and we were in GV's in Frame 3 as well.  Our 2nd life airfield was completely leveled and we had to up from another base after about 5-10 minutes of the Brass figuring out what to do with us.

[texastc316]

on the other hand. it puts a premium on defending that field during the first 50 minutes.

[Anaxogoras]

on the other hand. it puts a premium on defending that field during the first 50 minutes.

Haven't flown defense in FSO lately, have ya.

[68falcon]

We will discuss it. Thanks for your input

[texastc316]

quote; Haven't flown defense in FSO lately, have ya


yes. I have but not for long. wasn't enough available to defend with. which is my point. not enough emphesis was put on defense. if there is no reason to defend then why do it? But if your ability to up from a particular field is hampered by it being leveled, it makes defending it that much more important in the big picture.

just a thought. I don't have an agenda either way.

[BluTrain]

Perhaps a mid-alt airspawn  from a non-frontline, yet still close to the action base could be allowed for those "second lifers" ?

Just trying to be constructive - 

[Nefarious]

Perhaps a mid-alt airspawn  from a non-frontline, yet still close to the action base could be allowed for those "second lifers" ?

Just trying to be constructive - 

Air Spawns have to be built into the Terrain, In the case of the Japan Terrain there are numerous spawns, but they still have to be like you said in a non-front line position. But that's a good idea, unless those spawns are at a targeted field 

[Anaxogoras]

quote; Haven't flown defense in FSO lately, have ya


yes. I have but not for long. wasn't enough available to defend with. which is my point. not enough emphesis was put on defense. if there is no reason to defend then why do it? But if your ability to up from a particular field is hampered by it being leveled, it makes defending it that much more important in the big picture.

just a thought. I don't have an agenda either way.

I see.  I agree and would like to see more balance in attack/defense in FSO.  Part of the issue is that attackers are always willing to be sacrificial lambs in order to achieve their bombing objectives.  Maybe we should have a different thread on this topic.

[ghostdancer]

Couple of things. First their is an incentive to defend in the way I score thing (other CMs can and do score a bit differently). Each base is worth a certain value. The attacker gets the points for the damage done to the base, the defender gets the points for what is not destroyed. So if you do 50% damage to the base .. attacker gets 50% and defender gets 50%. So it is advantageous to the defend ones bases since the frame is affect by how much damage you to to the other side and how little you take.

Also in frame 2 and frame 3 the Russians did have a non target base to up from. The base their GVs spawned from was not a target. In frame 3 that was A106. Also in frame 3 the objectives noted that at the end of the GV battle (T+50) that A109 was to turn from a Japanese base to a Russian base and could be used by GVs to up for their second lives in planes. This base also was not a target.  Both of these bases were at most 1 sector (25 miles away or less) from all the Russian bases that were targets.

So the Russian CiC did have non target bases to up his GVs 2nd lifers from. He was also given the option to up them from any of the active airfields if he wanted. Of course as you pointed out doing so ran the risk of the base not having fuel, ordinance, hangars or even if they did have all this of the GVs upping just as the base came under attack.

[Nefarious]

Nevermind, I misunderstood.

[68falcon]

Didnt want to hijack any other thread with a few oberservations/questions.

During this last frame, an issue arose that seems to keep coming up from time to time.  The AK's were tasked to be in gv's this last frame with a second life to launch at T+50.  The airfeilds that were assigned to be for the "2nd" launch were also targets of the opposing side.  Though one of the airfeilds (119?) was still somewhat intact, the others had no ords or hangers left up.

GD answered above ;
AT t+50 Fields 106 and 109 should have been available and where not targets.

Probably a miss communication between the objectives and the orders. Not uncommon but something for us to fix.

[ghostdancer]

Yep, I will restructure the way I do objectives to try to better highlight notes and special items circumstances.

[ghostdancer]

The Axis also had 2 bases that were not targets that their GV  guys could have upped from, A119 and A25. These basically gave them good access to the the northern and central Japanese defense areas. In hindsight I should probably also opened up A28 as a launch base for Axis GVers to to have a possible non target spawn base close to A4 and A27.

As is A25 was 1 sector from V45 and A24,  2 sectors from A16, 2.5 sectors from A27, and about 4 sectors from A4.

[AKDogg]

The Axis also had 2 bases that were not targets that their GV  guys could have upped from, A119 and A25. These basically gave them good access to the the northern and central Japanese defense areas. In hindsight I should probably also opened up A28 as a launch base for Axis GVers to to have a possible non target spawn base close to A4 and A27.

As is A25 was 1 sector from V45 and A24,  2 sectors from A16, 2.5 sectors from A27, and about 4 sectors from A4.

This was not in our orders.  BTW GD, I posted in the CM board what AK's orders were for ya.