hopefully, one team wont be forced to stay in tower till the other team has every possible perch and advantage. and hopefully the towered team will actually have the planes that were announced as available and the choice of more than one fighter like the other team did and maybe that fighter will have more than 10mins fuel like the f6f had. hopefully the japanese wont be flying american ac like the germans were in the last scenario in north africa. maybe this scenario wont be completely rigged like the north africa scenario was.
Fear not. As you can see from the setup, none of that will come to pass:
http://ahevents.org/events/this-day-in-wwii/608.html?task=viewRegarding the North Africa setup, thank you for flying in it. I'm sorry that you didn't like it, but perhaps some of your displeasure is based on misunderstandings that I can correct. That probably won't make you like it, but it will help you see that I do my best for what these setups are.
Regarding the f6f, I think you mean the f4f, as we didn't have f6f's. The f4f has 60 minutes of fuel at 100% load and fuel burn rate of 1.0 (which is what was used in the setup) -- not 10 minutes. If you had 10 minutes of fuel, you must have loaded much less than 100% fuel.
Regarding aircraft choices, in the real Operation Torch, fighter aircraft in opposition were Vichy French (not German), and it included Dewoitine D.520's and Curtiss Hawk 75's. The bomber aircraft were Luftwaffe bombers (largely Ju 88's). We used Ju 88's, which is historically correct. The game does not have D.520's or Hawk 75's (which were American Curtiss aircraft sold to France starting in 1938), so we of course need substitutes. When I pick substitutes, I pick the aircraft that are closest in capability. Fortunately, the C.202 and Bf 109E-4 are reasonable analogs for the D.520, and the P-40 is a reasonable replacement for the Hawks (since Curtiss Hawks were the immediate predecessors of Curtiss P-40's). Each side had 3-4 aircraft types available at all times, not just one.
Regarding outcomes, I do not rig them to give either side victory. I make it as balanced as I can figure out how to do. In the Operation Torch setup, I gave each side equal numbers, each side equal points for the same things, and the fighters on each side are reasonably balanced in capability and were, in fact, contemporaries that did fight against each other in that time period. The one thing that is lopsided in the Torch setup is the naval forces, but that is made up for by the fact that the allies are working on amphibious base capture at the start, and if I made the naval forces equal, there would be not even a small chance of the allies taking a base.
Regarding scenarios, those are different events than "This Day in WWII" events. Scenarios are much more realistic, a lot more involved, run over the course of a month, and require more of players, such as knowing various player-enforced rules. "This Day in WWII" events are for players to jump in and quickly get into fun, themed action without having to know any rules whatsoever.
This is a long-winded response, intended to be respectfully submitted to you. I wanted to take the time to answer you in detail since you were kind enough to fly in Operation Torch and seem inclined to fly in Pearl Harbor. I wanted you to see what goes into these setups so that, if you don't like the setup, you at least know that I take care in crafting them and care about people having fun and the setup being balanced.
