Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)

[Brooke]

You really want to discourage walk-on's don't you. 

Of course not -- don't be absurd.

What I want are these things, but they are mutually exclusive:
1. I want more walkons.
2. I want registered pilots to have no disadvantages compared to walkons.
3. I want there to be P-40's and C.202's in the game.
4. I want people who registered for P-40's and C.202's not to be at a disadvantage.

#1 means, let walkons fill any open slot.
#2 means let registered pilots fill any open slot.  If you don't, then walkons are getting a better deal than registered pilots.
#3 means you need to put people in P-40's and C.202's.
#4 is one of the biggest problems.  If you let people switch out of P-40's and C.202's, there aren't going to be many people left in them.  The heroic pilot who registers for P-40's or C.202's will be left with himself and a buddy in those planes while everyone else if flying 109's, 190's, P-38's, and Spitfires.  He will go "screw that" and either want out himself or be unhappy.

I've never flown in any scenario where every registered pilot made every frame.  Never. 

Me neither.

Those spots were most often filled by walk-on's.

Yep.

It's never been a problem in the past so why is it suddenly such a big issue now?

If by "it" you mean "dearth of pilots in less-popular planes", then, yes, it has been a problem many times in the past.  Most recently, in the previous scenario.

It is always an issue.  Some Scenarios don't worry about it, and you effectively end up not having the less-popular planes in the conflict.  Some Scenarios use other methods.

In this 12-hour format, we will get larger variation in player numbers over the course of the event.  Some of the techniques used in 4-frame Scenarios won't work in this one.

Again, 2 choices:
1.  Let everyone fill in open slots.
2.  Keep registered pilots in their registered planes, but allocate walkons to P-40's, etc.

The usual way is #1.

I think that will result in no P-40's and C.202's for most of the event, and maybe they should then just be deleted.  But then we are into designing Scenarios that are far less historical, and we are just going to use the dozen or so l33t rides of AH.

[KCDitto]

We have NOT filled entire squadrons and disbanded them before. The MALTA one we did not have the C202s as we put every pilot in the 109s

So let the CO and command staff deal with it.
I guess that is #1

[Brooke]

Brooke, I have suggested several times that you need to count these objects.

I did.  It's sheet 2 of my spreadsheet.

This one is based on (1) neither side running out of objects and (2) each side having about equal estimation of objects they'll destroy per sortie.

If both of those are achieved, the fight will by definition be balanced.

#1 is, I think, clearly met.  I don't think it is possible for either side to wipe out all 3 towns and all the various base objects every 30 minutes.

So, the debate is over whether or not #2 is correct.

We don't have identical plane sets on each side, so 2 requires judgement and estimation, and not everyone will have the same judgement and estimation.  To me, the attack forces and bomber forces are reasonably balanced in what they are likely to achieve on average.  The fighter set might need some of the Spit V's to become Spit IX's -- that's one to ponder.

[Devil 505]

The advantage in registering is choosing your plane. Walkons take their chances. That chance is key, if all walkons are by rule to go into only P-40's and C.202's then you will have no walkons to put into those planes.

I think the solution is to lock registered pilots to their plane. That way there will probably be a slot or two per squad for walkons at any given time. And once a walkon is assigned, he can only be removed for another registered player of that squad.

In any case, you're not going to get many pilots to register for the P-40 or 202, because they will always be at a disadvantage. Those that do register know this and will feed off that disadvantage. So no matter what, many walkons will be going into those planes.

[Devil 505]

So, the debate is over whether or not #2 is correct.

We don't have identical plane sets on each side, so 2 requires judgement and estimation, and not everyone will have the same judgement and estimation.  To me, the attack forces and bomber forces are reasonably balanced in what they are likely to achieve on average.

Based on what exactly? I have presented you with a copious amount of data to the contrary. I have also provided you many solutions to the to the balance issues.

Before I continue on this topic I want an answer to the following question: What is the max bomb load that you will allow for the A-20?

[Brooke]

This is a bit of a philosophical question -- but I'm interested in people's thoughts.

Folks, if you you feel that walkons would rather not participate than fly a C.202 or P-40, then that sentiment should apply to registered pilots as well.

In that case, should we have Scenarios that have only MA-popular planes regardless of what was there historically (i.e., no P-40's, P-39's, and C.202's in Scenarios like this)?

What do people think?

[Brooke]

Based on what exactly? I have presented you with a copious amount of data

And I have presented you back a copious amount.

Before I continue on this topic I want an answer to the following question: What is the max bomb load that you will allow for the A-20?

We are in drafts and discussing, so nothing is settled yet.

My inclination is 2000 lbs, as I said above.

[Guppy35]

This is a bit of a philosophical question -- but I'm interested in people's thoughts.

Folks, if you you feel that walkons would rather not participate than fly a C.202 or P-40, then that sentiment should apply to registered pilots as well.

In that case, should we have Scenarios that have only MA-popular planes regardless of what was there historically (i.e., no P-40's, P-39's, and C.202's in Scenarios like this)?

What do people think?

If that's the case then they should not be historical scenarios, but just events built around different terrains.  I admit I'm a sucker for the less potent rides, flying a 39 in the last one for example.  If it's all about the best ride then folks have lost the plot. 

Obviously the best thing would be for the vets and best sticks to take the challenge of flying the lesser rides, but I don't know how often that happens.   Might as well run all 1945 scenarios then

[Brooke]

I just did a long test of A-20G vs. Bf 110C in AH3.

In the A-20G, I can manage about 20 ground guns with the full 2100 rounds of ammo (105 rounds/kill).  I can manage 2-3 ground objects with the bombs.

In the Bf 110C, I can manage 49 ground guns with the full 360 cannon rounds (7.3 rounds/kill), not touching the .303 rounds (with which I can manage more ground guns).  I can manage 1-2 ground objects with the bombs.

So, for me, I would kill more things with a Bf 110C than an A-20G.  I am much better in these planes and in ground attack than the average ground attack pilot flying with me will be.  For them, explosion radius of cannons will help, and they are likely to have trouble in the A-20 hitting single isolated ground objects with bombs.  So, for the average attack pilot, too, the Bf 110C is better than the A-20G.

Now, that being said, given that the large majority of points in attack will come from strafing, it won't make much difference if the A-20's take 250 lb bombs, 500 lb bombs, or no bombs.  I would set it to 250 lbs and be done with the arguing, except --

The only place where the bomb load is likely to matter is against ships.  The 110 and 190 are way better at placing bombs than the A-20 because of its bad roll, absolutely horrible negative pitch response, and ripping off wings above 6 g's on pullout.  So, to make damage to ships more even (although I don't expect that to be a major a source of points for the attack planes), I think the A-20 should be able to carry 500 lbers.

Devil, if you do your own testing and it is significantly different than this, then I will invite you into a custom arena with me, and we will go through it together.

[BaldEagl]

...

If the squadrons, the planes and the number of pilots are limited (collectively the resources) then let the CiCs and GL's decide how to deploy their resources.  You've given no consideration to the fact you may be hamstringing an entire side.

In a far flung extreme if no one registered to fly Axis all they'd be able to fly under your rule would be 202's.

People are going to register for every available ride.  Some in larger or smaller numbers.  Again, let the CiC's and GL's decide if they need more or less of something.  I think it was Winter Sky, Death Ground I flew a Spit XVI and our group never exceeded 3 players.  IIRC we had two in at least a couple of frames.  Regardless, I have a lasting memory of dogfighting 5-6 109's at 30K and 3-4 more on the deck and living to tell about it.

I have a feeling all the Spit slots will fill in this scenario and I won't have a chance to register for one. Similarly the 190A-5 slots are extremely limited.  In that case, If I'm forced into a P-40 or a 202 this scenario will be the first I've missed in years and scenarios are the only reason I maintain my AH subscription.  I haven't flown in the MA since January and have averaged less than 3 sorties per month over the past year.  This may ultimately be the reason to finally cancel my subscription.

Ultimately, do what you want.  It seems you've already decided on this, the balance and the design.  Why put on a pretense of asking for input?

[Brooke]

It seems you've already decided on this

Nope.

I'm interested in what people think, with discussions and reasons and exploring the ramifications.

If it's something I'm completely set on, I don't ask.  Someone else might bring it up (which is fine, and then we discuss it), but I don't ask.

[Brooke]

A separate topic:

Decide what Brooke should fly
Let your vote be heard! 
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,380537.0.html

[Brooke]

Just to refocus the discussion, the following are the two biggest outstanding things to decide.

------------- Let's Decide A ------------------

Do we have all Spits be Spit V's or half of them be Spit V's and half Spit IX's?  After thinking about it, my opinion is slightly on the side of some Spit IX's for better fighter balance given that the Spit group did get some Spit IX's in March, 1943.

------------- Let's Decide B ------------------

For dealing with walkons, do we:
1.  Allow any pilots (registered or walkon) to fill any open spot.
or
2.  Restrict walkons to P-40's and C.202's.

Keep in mind that #1 means we probably will often not have many P-40's or C.202's flying around.  I prefer #2, but almost all comments are in favor of #1, so I'm predicting we will go with that unless we see #2 gaining enough support.

[Brooke]

I'll be flying Axis

I know you just got done being a CO -- and many thanks to you for that.  By any miracle, would you be willing to be CO again?  The axis needs its Air Marshall!

If you do, I will send you a bottle of Woodford Reserve or if you prefer Balvenie Double Wood. 

[ROC]

By any miracle, would you be willing to be CO again?

Nope.