Suggestions regarding next Scenario (October, 2016)

[swareiam]

The quickest method is to come into the airfield at speed, put your gunsight pipper right in the middle of the rearm circle, and hold it there until contact. 

 

[ROC]

I have been following this thread and I believe it is becoming so realistic that I will need a team of lawyers to figure it out. It reminds me of the ROE's imposed by the politicians during Vietnam Nam.

It comes from the design.  If it's an event based on accumulating score, and there are vague conditions to get to that score, then questions need to be asked.
If the event is "There's stuff to blow up, here's the stuff to blow it up, if you blow it up you win" then much of the rules and conditions go out the window.  If the design of the event places launch fields and target fields at equal distances, then no rules about rearm and formations need to be considered or questioned.  Clearly, if a bomber prefers to rearm instead of launching a new formation, that reduces his effectiveness by 2/3, that's his problem to consider.  If the spacing is not balanced, and rearming allows one side to get in faster than the other, then conditions like rearming over waiting for the next launch window matter.  If I can get a fast JU88 to a closer target in 4 times and the B17 has to wait for a launch window because he wants his formations, the JU88 can do more damage than a formation of 17s in the same time frame and these things add up, dramatically, over 12 hours.

We always beat these events up like this, but normally, I'm behind the scenes and you don't see the conversation, but it happens, every time, and events mid design have been utterly scrapped because they just would not balance.  It's good to see the conversation occurring out here, but that doesn't mean the conversation is new   The rules will actually begin to drop once the design starts to put the conditions on the setup as this thing evolves. 

[swareiam]

On the topic of immersion: each player has their own particular aspect that will give them maximum immersion. Some people like to think of themselves as an actual pilot with his one plane and want's to keep it going for the duration of an event. I had to disappoint a couple of guys during Dnieper by forcing them to tower and to take a new plane for purely tactical reasons one frame. There are some who get immersed by taking on the life of a historical pilot and try to experience this game as close to how it was probably lived. Some people enjoy the after action reports. There are those, like myself, who are immersed most by the aesthetics. I love seeing planes wearing the skins from the squads and areas of operation that are being  represented - and nothing irks me more than seeing one which is totally incorrect: IE: if I see some plane wearing a winter scheme or D-Day stripes in Tunisia.

The point is this: no factor of immersion is more important than any other and we should be encouraging all of them as much as possible as long as they don'y interfere with the event's balance.

Hear! hear!

[Brooke]

I have been following this thread and I believe it is becoming so realistic that I will need a team of lawyers to figure it out.

While this discussion is complicated, the rules are simple.

As an analogy, your new carpeting being beige or gray is simple -- it's either beige or gray.  Your discussion with your spouse on whether it should be beige or gray and why can be way more complicated.

If you were an axis fighter pilot, the rules are only:

    Please follow instructions from command, or you can be ejected from the arena.
    Axis players may rearm at a66, a7, and -- except for phase 3 -- a8.
    If you don't remember where you can rearm, please ask on country channel.

[Brooke]

Version 12 now up.  Please hit refresh on your browser to get it.

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201610_TunisiaFeb43/rules.html

Main change is to restrict rearms to only a certain set of bases.

Also, target for phase 3 was moved from a8 to a7.

Next up, I have to test ships to make sure no bugs in AH3.  We have some testing going on Saturday for that.

[Devil 505]

Brooke, you changing the Phase 3 Axis rearm base to A7 does not fix the problem it just changes which side has the rearm advantage. Sorry to be blunt - having all 4 V bases as targets does not work and it can't be made to work.



Look how much farther the Axis attackers have to fly to rearm than the Allies do. This is much worse than before considerring that the Axis has 110C's

I know you want lots of action in this area, but the solution is not in the number of Vbase targets, because it only works with 2. If you're worried about providing enough target objects, then you should adjust the object down time lower and raise the hardness. Treat the base objects like ships where no single plane can easily destroy one.

[Brooke]

Devil, thanks for looking into it.  I have thought a lot about your points (with particulars that follow).

I think that, as a scenario on a historical terrain, we aren't going to get everything 100% equal at every point.  There will be some advantage to a side at one point and a disadvantage somewhere else, and once we get it close enough, it will be good.

Here, you are looking at one part of phase 3 and distance from rearm to targets.  There, things are tied for the closest target, but the axis is at a disadvantage on the 2nd target.  OK.  But, like Dolby, I don't think rearms are going to be the largest determiner of success, with the following being a bunch of my thoughts in no particular order of importance:
-- I think fighters will more likely be used up in combat, not constrained by rearming.
-- The axis fighter set is faster than the allied fighter set.
-- Attack planes can run out of bombs, but they have a gigantic surplus of ammo.  Every single attack plane has enough to take out 3 vbases worth of ack (the FW 190F might have enough for 4 vbase worth), and they can use surplus ammo to strafe barracks, too.  If they live, they will kill the targets without needing rearm, and if they die they can't rearm.
-- For bombers, the allies don't have a closer bomber launch point than a65 and so have longer to travel to closest target.
-- I think time from launch to closest target might be a lot more important than rearm distances.
-- The allies' closest fighter/attack launch point is a vbase, not an airfield.  It will take longer to get a bunch of planes up from a vbase than an airfield -- very especially A-20's, which can only spawn in the hangar.
-- Nothing is forcing a side to go after both vbases.  It can go after the easiest one.
-- Bombers will see no difference in points hitting the easiest one twice vs. hitting one and then the other.
-- Attackers have enough ammo and fuel, so they could engage the easiest target, the living ones could egress to wherever and come back at any time at the harder one if they want, no rearm needed.

So, I think of it as a set of issues, some with advantages to axis and some with advantage to allies, but I think we are now close enough for decent balance.

[Brooke]

Version 13 up.  Please refresh browser to get latest:

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201610_TunisiaFeb43/rules.html

Only change is -- instead of giving points to the enemy only if he gets a kill on you -- you give points to the enemy if you are shot down, bail, ditch, or crash.  I.e., you have to get a "landed safely" to avoid generating points for the enemy.

[Crash Orange]

I guess I missed it somewhere in the last 27 pages of this thread, but was a final decision reached regarding the 109 G2/G6 and Spit V/IX/Seafire questions?

[swareiam]

Yep...

The Luftwaffe can take their choice of G2s or G5s for either Jagdgruppe.

No Spit IXs...

That's it.

[Devil 505]

The Luftwaffe can take their choice of G2s or G5s for either Jagdgruppe.

Not quite,

Jg 53 has only G-2's while Jg 77 has both the G-2 and G-6.

[puller]

I've stayed out of planeset discussion... But why would the Allies need spit 9s when the Axis get 6 190A5s against 25 bomber/attack planes...just kinda throwing that out there...scanned through thread and didn't find an answer...

[swareiam]

I've stayed out of planeset discussion... But why would the Allies need spit 9s when the Axis get 6 190A5s against 25 bomber/attack planes...just kinda throwing that out there...scanned through thread and didn't find an answer...

The issue is over. Why mention it.

[LCADolby]

I've stayed out of planeset discussion... But why would the Allies need spit 9s when the Axis get 6 190A5s against 25 bomber/attack planes...just kinda throwing that out there...scanned through thread and didn't find an answer...

I think Axis need at least 20 190A5s to balance, but trying to point that out is like.. well this is a visual representation; 

[Bruv119]

doesn't the 109 G6 have 3x cannon and the 190's 4x cannon and both can easily outrun all allied fighters?? 

shooting buffs is easy.