Design discussion for Fjord Fury (June 2018 Scenario)

[Spikes]

If the Lanc makes it to target against the K4, A8, and 152, someone should be fired.

[perdue3]

If the Lanc makes it to target against the K4, A8, and 152, someone should be fired.

Agreed.

[Brooke]

Actually, Devil, you are right -- this is not the topic for discussions of transparency.

I thought about it more and I suspect such a topic would just end up being arguing about stuff that has nothing to do with this topic.

This topic is about the design of Fjord Fury -- best to keep it about that, as you suggested.

[Brooke]

So, back onto the topic at hand.

-- Should the allies have more fighters and if so, how many more?  (Lots of axis-oriented guys are arguing that it should.)
-- Is the scoring system OK?
-- Ship hardness seem OK?

For folks who think the Lancs can't make it, are you taking into account The Final Battle scenario?

The Final Battle, among other things, had Lancs, Spit 14's, Tempests, P-51's, 109K's, 190D's, and Ta 152's.  The allies won that scenario soundly, but it's scoring system was different than what we have here.  Also, Lancs did at times make it to target and back.  It wasn't easy for them, but it wasn't a total wipeout on each mission either.

[Brooke]

Compared to The Final Battle, Fjord Fury so far has similar alliedFighters:axisFighters, but much higher alliedTotalAircraft:axisTotalAircraft and much higher bomberAircraft:axisFighters.

[perdue3]

So, back onto the topic at hand.

-- Should the allies have more fighters and if so, how many more?  (Lots of axis-oriented guys are arguing that it should.)
-- Is the scoring system OK?
-- Ship hardness seem OK?

For folks who think the Lancs can't make it, are you taking into account The Final Battle scenario?

The Final Battle, among other things, had Lancs, Spit 14's, Tempests, P-51's, 109K's, 190D's, and Ta 152's.  The allies won that scenario soundly, but it's scoring system was different than what we have here.  Also, Lancs did at times make it to target and back.  It wasn't easy for them, but it wasn't a total wipeout on each mission either.

It would be better to ask Dantoo, considering his position in the Final Battle. But, the Lancasters flew some very odd sorties mostly NOE. We lowly G-14s in the north did nothing but obliterate RN fighters and cap air spawns the entire scenario (to great success). The Allies did not win simply because of the Lancaster's success. That being said, the one time Jonah and I found Lancasters in our G-14's, all of them died. In this setup, Lancasters will be forced above 15k.

[perdue3]

With regards to scoring:

It says that 9 points are awared for 20-39 objects, 9 for 40+, and 12 for sinking. Does that mean that the Allies get (9+9+12) 30 points for sinking the Tirpitz or 12? Also, the hangar VP is odd. It says "each of two frames," will there not be four frames?  Or will Bergen only be target for 2 frames?

Let us assume that the Allies get 30 points for sinking a ship. If the Axis kill ALL Lancs, they will get 48 points. So, if the Allies kill both ships (60 pts) the Axis cannot negate this by killing bombers alone. To me, that seems to swing in favor of the Allies. But, this is under the assumption that one ship = 30 points.

[Brooke]

But, the Lancasters flew some very odd sorties mostly NOE.

They did that in frame 4.  They were high alt in frames 1-3.  I attacked high-alt Lancs in frames 1-3 in my K-4.

That being said, the one time Jonah and I found Lancasters in our G-14's, all of them died. In this setup, Lancasters will be forced above 15k.

That's why I prefer facing K-4's than G-14's.

As a bomber pilot, I am way happier at high alt.

[perdue3]

That's why I prefer facing K-4's than G-14's.

We didn't take gondolas. I am not sure if any die hard G-14 sticks would take Gondolas. If I could commit to this event, I would be leading the G-14's, but I would never take gondolas. Like I said, we were not tasked with killing Lancasters and Dan would be the better person to ask regarding their flight paths and strategies.

[Brooke]

With regards to scoring:

Currently, yes, if the allies kill Tirpitz, they would get 9 points for 20-39 objects, 9 points for 40+, 12 points for sinking = 30.

So, if they sink Tirpitz and Lutzow, they would get 60 points.

Yes, if the axis kill all Lancs up in one sortie, they get 48 pts.

However, it currently takes 42,000 lbs to sink Tirpitz and 42,000 lbs to sink Lutzow.  I think it will take more than 16 bomber pilots worth to sink both Tirpitz and Lutzow.  I don't think they would sink both in one sortie of 16 aircraft.  I think it would take two sorties.  In that case, if axis shot down two sorties worth, they would get 96 points.

Also, the hangar VP is odd. It says "each of two frames," will there not be four frames?  Or will Bergen only be target for 2 frames?

There are 4 frames, and the allies get extra goodies if they destroy all hangars at Bergen in two of the four frames.  They have to do it twice.

[perdue3]

Maybe I did take Gondies.

[Brooke]

We didn't take gondolas. I am not sure if any die hard G-14 sticks would take Gondolas. If I could commit to this event, I would be leading the G-14's, but I would never take gondolas. Like I said, we were not tasked with killing Lancasters and Dan would be the better person to ask regarding their flight paths and strategies.

I'm OK with axis taking G-14's without gondolas instead of K-4's.

However, several people said that they would not like G-14's, and that it would be hard to recruit people into G-14's as opposed to K-4's.

This scenario is in part about letting people fly late-war prop planes that they don't get to fly in scenarios much.

I would rather let people fly what they want and, if that's too powerful, give the allies more aircraft as opposed to restricting the monster planes.

[perdue3]

Currently, yes, if the allies kill Tirpitz, they would get 9 points for 20-39 objects, 9 points for 40+, 12 points for sinking = 30.

So, if they sink Tirpitz and Lutzow, they would get 60 points.

Yes, if the axis kill all Lancs up in one sortie, they get 48 pts.

However, it currently takes 42,000 lbs to sink Tirpitz and 42,000 lbs to sink Lutzow.  I think it will take more than 16 bomber pilots worth to sink both Tirpitz and Lutzow.  I don't think they would sink both in one sortie of 16 aircraft.  I think it would take two sorties.  In that case, if axis shot down two sorties worth, they would get 96 points.

There are 4 frames, and the allies get extra goodies if they destroy all hangars at Bergen in two of the four frames.  They have to do it twice.

1 set of Lancs can carry 39k (I think?) so it would only take four individual bombers to kill one ship. So, you have an efficiency rating 1/6. That being said, it will be easy killing for the Axis, but I find that 1/6 is a bit too low. Get some Allies to weigh in on this.

EDIT: A set of Lancasters can carry 42k max. That changes the efficiency rating to 1/8, even lower.

[Brooke]

1 set of Lancs can carry 39k (I think?) so it would only take four individual bombers to kill one ship. So, you have an efficiency rating 1/6. That being said, it will be easy killing for the Axis, but I find that 1/6 is a bit too low.

Even folks who are right on target will get only a portion of their bombs causing damage (as the spread of bombs means some will not cause damage, and bombing from 20k or so in scenario combat conditions means folks are not generally pinpoint accurate).  Then there will be folks who completely miss because we have a wide range of experience in bomber pilots in scenarios.  And there will be folks in between.

If 16 bomber pilots head to a base and half make it, they generate 8x3 = 24 points.  If 16 bomber pilots head to Tirpitz/Lutzow, half make it, and they sink Tirpitz, they generate 30 points.  I figure hitting Tirpitz is harder for some of the guys than getting a ground object (because if you are off target at a base, there is the chance that you take out something else instead and still get points, but that is not the case with Tirpitz).

So, I think it's OK.

But if more folks think it's off, and Ditto's OK with it, I'd be OK with reducing total points for ship to 24 from 30.

[perdue3]

Even folks who are right on target will get only a portion of their bombs causing damage (as the spread of bombs means some will not cause damage, and bombing from 20k or so in scenario combat conditions means folks are not generally pinpoint accurate).  Then there will be folks who completely miss because we have a wide range of experience in bomber pilots in scenarios.  And there will be folks in between.

If 16 bomber pilots head to a base and half make it, they generate 8x3 = 24 points.  If 16 bomber pilots head to Tirpitz/Lutzow, half make it, and they sink Tirpitz, they generate 30 points.  I figure hitting Tirpitz is harder for some of the guys than getting a ground object (because if you are off target at a base, there is the chance that you take out something else instead and still get points, but that is not the case with Tirpitz).

So, I think it's OK.

But if more folks think it's off, and Ditto's OK with it, I'd be OK with reducing total points for ship to 24 from 30.

All of this makes sense and will likely be fine.

The point I was making is that if the Allies achieve maximum bombing points AND the Axis destroy every Lancaster, the points should cancel each other out (be even). At current, it will not as the Allies can achieve (60+48) 108 while the Axis can achieve (48+48) 96. This, of course, is theoretical with many factors removed which is where you must begin when deciding on a scoring system.

To be fair, the people flying the event will not worry with these numbers or scoring at all. That is only for the Command Staff, and the top of the Command Staff at that. So, honestly, it is not something that really needs discussing in public as it will not weigh heavily on anyone's decision to fly the event or not.