Please note the Ship Placement Rules

[Devil 505]

I think you truly underestimate the Allied advantages in this setup. ALL the CVs are active and surround the target islands. meaning that Axis defenders must anticipate attack from any angle. The CV defenders have a good idea of where the Axis attackers will originate from and can anticipate the attack approaches relatively easily. Even if the CVs were stationary, the Allies have the advantage. Therefore, the CV objectives should be worth more points, and are justly so.

[amulford]

No, my complaint is that you are being allowed to limit my tactics. Regardless if it is a tactic I would use or not.  You are placing a restriction on how I might deploy my assets.

I was given objectives and worked within the stated operational limits to try and achieve those objectives.  I did not complain about a "what if" scenario and ask for the operational limits to be revised in order to accommodate my fears.

Pure and simple, you are complaining and being catered to.  End of story.

What SHOULD be going right now is you SHOULD be playing the hand you were dealt and making the best you can with what you were dealt.  Not asking for the cards to be changed.

With all due respect, I am formally protesting.

[Devil 505]

As this change from the usual FSO standard of CV containment was just announced yesterday, I fealt the necessity to establish THREE potential exploits of the announced change. This is my duty as a FSO player, squad CO, and as is just so happens, Frame 2 Axis CiC to ensure a balanced event for BOTH sides.

If your plan did not aim to benefit from these exploits, then you should not have to change your plan, as I have not limited your tactics in the least bit.

[Nefarious]

Imagine if a Non Objective Task Force would have been attacked and sunk, and the Objective Task Force was not, while sailing together.  This slight change to the location of TF6 is doing nothing more than preventing that from happening. No advantage is being given or removed.

Sorry that you feel the need to protest, but I need to prevent the possibility of this happening for all players involved.

[j500ss]

As this change from the usual FSO standard of CV containment was just announced yesterday, I fealt the necessity to establish THREE potential exploits of the announced change. This is my duty as a FSO player, squad CO, and as is just so happens, Frame 2 Axis CiC to ensure a balanced event for BOTH sides.

If your plan did not aim to benefit from these exploits, then you should not have to change your plan, as I have not limited your tactics in the least bit.

 For the record, this change has been on the books since day one when the write up was released.  Also for the record I am not going to pick a side.   However,  personally from my perspective,  Nef should have not even brought it up in the first place here.

The set up was written and objectives sent out.  The CV placement issue was there from day one, if someone failed to read it, or understand it, they should have brought it up long before this.

 I will say that IF it is possible to group 2 CV's together within the first hour, well common sense says that shouldn't be allowed to happen, however after hour 1.  Game on folks!!

I mean no disrespect in any way to anyone on this, especially Nefarious, love his set ups and the challenges they bring to FSO. 


   JDog

[Nefarious]

For the record, this change has been on the books since day one when the write up was released. 

In all fairness, it was announced when I distributed the objectives last Saturday.

I should have been more clear on it I suppose. Attached is the approximate T+60 range of a TF when going in a straight line from the start position. Obviously any deviation would prevent the TF from reaching it's max range.



In frames 2 and 3, Objective TF's will placed as to not be able to reach another TF within T+60, and tonight in frame 1, TF6 will be placed just out of range of TF5.

Thanks for your understanding.

[Devil 505]

In all fairness, it was announced when I distributed the objectives last Saturday.

Fair enough. Initially, I didn't see the lack of noted confinement area as more than an oversight. Then you made the announcement and the intent of the change became clear.

 

[Trainee]

If the verbage no containment zone or something along that line were used in the objectives it would have stood out. Guess different squads must use different terms. All was good, enjoyed it regardless the outcome. We had fun.