Design discussion for Fjord Fury (June 2018 Scenario)

[Brooke]

We're trying to nail down numbers of aircraft.

I would really like the axis not to be deprived of all 152's.

Ideas that fit into this so far:

A.  -8 axis fighters.
B.  +2 P-51B's, +2 Spit 14's.
C.  +2 P-51B's, -2 109K's.
D.  reduce 152's, increase (190A's or 109G-14's).

I prefer solutions that don't increase the current total size of registration.

[Brooke]

Also, I'd like to have attackingFighters/defendingFighters be > 0.8.  Since Lancs are considered especially weak in this mix of aircraft, maybe about 0.9 is a good pick.  This is based on statistical analysis of all past strategic-bombing scenarios.

A, B, and C above accomplish that.

D would accomplish it only if more 152's were subtracted than 190A's or G-14's added.

So, how about (see following post).

[Brooke]

How about one of these (all give A/D > 0.85) then:

A.  -8 axis fighters
B.  +2 P-51B's, +2 Spit 14's
C.  +2 P-51B's, -2 109K's
D.  -6 152's, +4 G-14's  <--- I really hope folks don't want this one so axis can have some 152's
E.  -2 152's, +2 P-51B's

[oboe]

D!   

[Devil 505]

How about one of these (all give A/D > 0.85) then:

A.  -8 axis fighters
B.  +2 P-51B's, +2 Spit 14's
C.  +2 P-51B's, -2 109K's
D.  -6 152's, +4 G-14's  <--- I really hope folks don't want this one so axis can have some 152's
E.  -2 152's, +2 P-51B's

How do you figure that all these options equate the same?

Option A is an 8 plane swing, whereas B,C and E are each 4 plane swings. Option D is a 2 plane swing, but you don't want that one anyway.

[Brooke]

How do you figure that all these options equate the same?

I don't.  They are all different.  If they were all the same, there would be no point in looking at various options.

[Brooke]

All we are doing is this:

-- Several people all say they think Lancs will get massacred under current numbers.
-- OK, let's adjust plane numbers, making allies stronger and/or LW weaker.

How much is open to interpretation.  Do we need an 8 plane change?  6 planes?  4? 2?  Different people have different ideas.

[Vudu15]

I think the removal of the TAs would be the best option. after that my thoughts of a mulligan being in order will persist.

[perdue3]

Should the Allies severely outnumber the Axis only because they have Lancasters?

[Vudu15]

Should the Allies severely outnumber the Axis only because they have Lancasters?

Only in a world run by bad ideas...but no they shouldn't. The firepower issue is easy enough to fix but the honcho has tied himself in a sack as clean as can be.

The removal of the TAs should be replaced with an equal number of 109s or maybe a mixed bag of 109/190s. I think another issue we have here is no real presence from the allies, where are our regular bomber guys to see what they think of this issue as it pertains to them?

[Brooke]

I don't think the allied fighters should outnumber the axis fighters.

If you mean should the allies in total outnumber the axis, then, yes, of course.

All we are doing here is going from:

26 allied fighters, 16x3 allied bombers vs. 32 axis fighters <----- folks all say Lancs are doomed

To this:

26+N allied fighters, 16x3 allied bombers vs. 32-M axis fighters <--- determine N and M so that Lancs aren't doomed

Yes, I want axis to have some 152's.  They almost never get them.  We can adjust things to make it OK, I firmly believe.

However, if Swareiam and Ditto both want to get rid of 152's completely and I don't, we will do it even though I don't.  I'm part of the team, not all of the team.

[perdue3]

I just don't see why adding Allied fighters and/or removing Axis pilots is an option. I know what you are trying to accomplish, but I feel this is the incorrect approach. My point was, if Axis are allowed 6-8 152's, the Allies could outnumber them 2:1 and the Lancs will die. You must keep in mind what the 152 can do and who will be flying them. Throw in some Doras and A-8s in the back, lots of dead Lancasters. The amount of escorts will not change that fact, it will only change how many Axis fighters survive.

[Brooke]

I know they are great planes and that they'll have great pilots.

But I really want the axis pilots to be able to fly some Ta 152's if they want because the opportunity to do so is so rare -- even just 4 of them.  And I think that at some point, as you add allied aircraft and/or lower axis aircraft, Lancs go from doomed to OK even if there are 4 Ta 152's in the scenario.

However, I'll forgo that wish if Ditto (as axis CO) also believes all Ta 152's must go.

One thing to consider.  If you have N allied fighters, 16x3 Lancs, and 58-N axis fighters, and you define f(N) as the fraction of Lancs that survive, because you know f(0) = 0 and f(58) = 1, by math, you know there exists an N such that f(N) crosses through 0.5.

[perdue3]

I know they are great planes and that they'll have great pilots.

But I really want the axis pilots to be able to fly some Ta 152's if they want because the opportunity to do so is so rare -- even just 4 of them.  And I think that at some point, as you add allied aircraft and/or lower axis aircraft, Lancs go from doomed to OK even if there are 4 Ta 152's in the scenario.

However, I'll forgo that wish if Ditto (as axis CO) also believes all Ta 152's must go.

One thing to consider.  If you have N allied fighters, 16x3 Lancs, and 58-N axis fighters, and you define f(N) as the fraction of Lancs that survive, because you know f(0) = 0 and f(58) = 1, by math, you know there exists an N such that f(N) crosses through 0.5.

I understand all of that, but I still believe it is the wrong approach. Fighters that want to kill bombers will have 1 guaranteed run on the buffs. Even if they are outnumbered 2:1. That means that however many Axis fighters attack buffs, that many buffs will die. Now, the Axis fighters may die immediately after considering the advantage given to the Allies, but many Lancasters will be dead. It is not like running against B-17s, where some Axis may die or some B-17s will live because of durability, the Lancasters will die.

My point is, if your goal is to increase the survivability of Lancasters, you are achieving nothing by adding or subtracting the number of pilots. You will, however, increase or decrease the survival percentages of said fighters. In the end, no one seems to care. So, I would make a decision and move on.

[Guppy35]

Here goes.

I think the best move would be to go back to the drawing board.  This one seems to be pushing away the scenario regulars who are in smaller and smaller numbers to begin with.

I think you take the two COs, hash out the design with them, post it, and restart the run up to the event so there is time to get people involved and invested.

I hate to say it, but scenarios are why I still play and I’m doing what i can to talk myself into caring about this one, but it feels flawed and rushed and I’m worried about the impact on what I see as an already struggling scenario community in AH