Author Topic: Just a Tactical Observation  (Read 879 times)

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
Re: Just a Tactical Observation
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2009, 10:41:19 AM »
Instead of using a minimum number of aircraft, perhaps try a different approach. Say you give 4 attack objectives to a side, and you want the side CiC to field some buffs. In the objectives you can state that at least 2 attack objectives can only be hit by buffs, i.e., no JABO fighter can touch that objective. The other 2 attack objectives, the CiC can send buffs, JABO, or a mix of both. The CiC can pick which of the 4 objectives are buff only targets.

You can approach it from the other angle where you say out of 4 attack objectives, a max of 2 can be JABO targets. The objectives can say there are only two available groups of ground attack fighters for this operation, but four available bomber groups. That would mean the CiC could send bombers to every target, and heavy fighters to two of the targets for insurance if they wanted.

You get buffs in the air, but the CiC doesn't have to worry about the actual minimum number of pilots in the buffs. Yeah, the CiC can put a 4-6 squad in the buffs, but if those buffs fail, the side won't get any points from those objectives.
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Just a Tactical Observation
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2009, 11:02:22 AM »
All I can see this doing is handcuffing the CiC even more.

As I said (was it this thread or another one?) I think the better option is to wait until side assignments are announced before specifying aircraft minimums/maximums. The total minimum for all aircraft shouldn't exceed the total minimum for all SQUADS.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline TracerX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: Just a Tactical Observation
« Reply #17 on: August 10, 2009, 11:46:35 AM »
I like specific maximum/minimum requirements on aircraft types.  When I am making orders it sucks, but it is definately a case where this kind of restriction actually makes the event better on the whole.  LOL, the old ancient La-5 wound has reared its ugly head once again.

And back on topic, I agree with Stoney, the number of strikers needs to be just enough to get the job done with a few left over for attrition, all the rest should be escorts.  This idea does not guarantee success, but it is in general a better idea to approach attacks in this manner.

« Last Edit: August 10, 2009, 11:52:50 AM by TracerX »

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Just a Tactical Observation
« Reply #18 on: August 10, 2009, 11:50:05 AM »
Oh, I'm not saying do away with them, I'm just saying wait until after the sides are assigned so you can set min/max based on the ACTUAL side min/max.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.