Help with design of upcoming Eastern Front scenario

[ROC]

Very happy to have the Pigs with us. 

We'll keep you wrapped up tight and comfy


Because the Evil Empire is going to want to go in a completely different direction with that



Your comrades will keep the evil Subway sammich maker from getting you.

[waystin2]

Very happy to have the Pigs with us. 

We'll keep you wrapped up tight and comfy
(Image removed from quote.)

Because the Evil Empire is going to want to go in a completely different direction with that

(Image removed from quote.)

Your comrades will keep the evil Subway sammich maker from getting you.

[Brooke]

Version 7 of the writeup is posted:

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201606_BattleOfTheDnieper/rules.htm

v7, 3/31/2016
-- Changed location of tank battle and spawn points based on battle test.

[KCDitto]

Just to clarify,

You also changed that ATTACK groups get .6 points for ANY target destroyed, not SPECIFIC targets destroyed?

[Brooke]

Yep.  The attack groups get 0.6 points per object destroyed.

Specifically, I will look in the log at summary for the groups named "SG 2" and "7 GShAP", take the number listed for "objects destroyed" by those groups, and multiply by 0.6.  (Except for any objects destroyed by tanks, which should be zero.)

I will look at the summary for the groups named "KG 3" and "35 GBAP", take the number listed for "objects destroyed" by those groups, and multiply by 0.2.  (Except for any objects destroyed by tanks, which should be zero.)

Objects destroyed by pilots in other named groups, regardless of what the pilot is flying, will not count for points.

So, it is important to get your attack and bomber pilots into the correct squad names.

[KCDitto]

 

 

[Brooke]

Version 8 of the writeup is posted:

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201606_BattleOfTheDnieper/rules.htm

v8 is same as v7 plus a disclaimer regarding AH3 not being out yet (which could require future changes).

I do not plan any more changes to the rules unless needed as a result of changes in AH3.

[Brooke]

Now that we have 3 frames under our belts, there are some folks who feel that the design is unbalanced in favor of the VVS, centered mainly on the qualities of the Tu-2.  In summary, my thought is that it is decently balanced, with the fighter set being about equal, the Tu-2 being better than the Ju 88, and the 190F being much better than the Il-2.

More details follow.

The Tu-2 is indeed an excellent bomber.  But it is the only Soviet bomber in the game, was in main-stream use by late 1943 (being introduced into combat in 1942), and was used in significantly larger numbers by the Soviets than any other bomber we have in the game (such as the B-25).  If we used only historical aircraft in this scenario, there would be fewer Tu-2's and more Pe-2's (which are actually faster than Tu-2's, so more Pe-2's wouldn't change that dynamic); and there would be Stukas and no 190F's.  There is no Pe-2 in the game, though; and I don't think even I would want to fly Stukas for 4 frames.

Using the Tu-2 in this scenario is perhaps like using the Ju 88 in Battle of Britain before we got the He 111.  The real BoB didn't have all Ju 88's -- it had He 111's and Do's as well, and there was much complaining about the Ju 88 being way too fast and powerful to be the only bomber represented.  But once we did get the He 111, it turned out that it did about as well as the Ju 88.  Also, in the case of Coral Sea, we use the TBM as the TBD, which folks have felt is much too powerful compared to the TBD.  But the B5N in Coral Sea does about as well as the TBM.

At any rate, the balance of a scenario design is about how the whole plane set matches up.  The fighter set, in my opinion, is about even, where I put the La-5 as the best (slightly), but the German planes better in a mix than the Yak's and P-39's (which aren't bad -- just not quite as good).  I also think that the fighter set is decently balanced because kills were pretty even in frames 1 and 2, when sides had closer to even numbers.  The Tu-2 is better than the Ju 88; and the 190F is significantly better than the Il-2.  This based on my flying of La-5's, 190A-5's, 109G's, and *lots* of Ju 88's in scenarios, as well as significant P-39, Il-2, and Yak-7b in the MA.  So, overall in my opinion, a wash.

[Brooke]

At the alts we are using, Tu-2's are about 10 mph slower than Boston III's.  No one has complained about Bostons.

Bf 109G-6's are faster than Tu-2's by the same amount in this scenario that Spit I's are faster than Ju 88's in BoB.  There were the same complaints in BoB about the Ju 88 that we have here about the Tu-2.  Yet BoB is proven historically to be well balanced, even when we had only Ju 88's and even when the RAF has a substantial number of much-slower Hurr I's.  In this scenario, the LW has nothing like the issue of Hurri I vs. Ju 88.  It's as if the RAF had all Spitfires.

The historical mix in this scenario would have Stukas for the LW and no 190F's, and a lot of Pe-2's for the Soviets, but the Pe-2 is actually faster than the Tu-2.

For playability, the LW has 190F's instead of Stukas.  That is a substantial step up in LW plane set.

The mix is:  fighters vs. fighters are about a wash; the Tu-2 is better than the Ju 88; and the 190F is better than the Il-2.  This is roughly even overall.

[Zimme83]

First frames were reasonably even when the numbers were matched. But it seems like VVS have had a better command structure and coordination. in frame 1 LW had 2 109 squads flying in a race track for 30 mins while the entire VVS were almost uncontested over a LW base.

[LCADolby]

Zimme you backed out and quit, because you expected a MA style free for all melee. If it wasn't for closed fields because we were sorting out walkons you would have taken off alone.

Brooke you are missing points I have made in another thread.

[Zimme83]

I've been in several scenarios and I know how they work, i have no problem in flying without seeing action - if there is a plan. But we waited 30 mins for a 109 squad in order to do a fighter sweep - then out of the blue the ju-88:s showed up and it became a bomber escort sortie. So obviously there was very little coordination.

[LCADolby]

Zimme, commanders have to change to what the situation is telling them.
Plans are only good up to the point of contact, this goes for every battle.
You're so ADD that 15min seems like 30mins to you, your commanders are concentrating on each group and the enemy, coordinating to find a solution to the situation as fast as possible. Every Scenario I have been in order changes have happened
As for you not seeing action, I believe I./JG52 squads kills and deaths would suggest there has been a tremendous amount of action. Were you off mission in the frame, leaving your squadron CO and the ones following their orders to themselves?

[Zimme83]

No i left, a scenario is not a one man show, I would not up and run my own show.

[Brooke]

Brooke you are missing points I have made in another thread.

I'll go back and look for things I missed responding to.  This week is unusually packed, so it might take me some days.