I think the preferences discussion is very good and I hope that many, especially CO's, can take something away from this discussion. The main point here is that preferences and requests are just that, preferences and requests. They, unfortunately, do not mean that you will get that side or those aircraft. It is more difficult than many might think to balance the sides AND give squads what they want. Most of the time, someone will not get what they requested. Nineteen times out of twenty, that will be a squad that has to fly Axis. This is the first time in recent memory where some did not get Axis as requested.
Spikes summed it well for me. I give squads their dedicated side first, then move on to the other squads. Maybe this is not the best way of doing it? I know that 9GIAP wants VVS and I know that 56th FG wants jugs, so they will get those sides. In a situation like this one, is it fair to give all three dedicated Luftwaffe squads (JG 11, JG 54, Kommando Nowotny) Axis? In my opinion, it absolutely is. They are the first three names on the Axis board. Unless one of those request Allied, they should be given Luftwaffe by default; just as G3-MF and VF-17 are given USN and the US FG's (364th and 56th) are given US aircraft. These are dedicated squads. The situation changes when we have non-dedicated squads that have not received the side they requested multiple times in a row.
There really should be no reason why any squadron is not given the side they want more than twice in a row. Twice in a row is understandable because of numbers, campaign theater, etc. But, if a squad has been shafted, as it were, twice in a row they should get what they want the third time. The Admin's have the ability to see what was requested and that should not happen.
The what-if that was mentioned is an entirely different matter. I think, as a designer, it comes down to designer tastes. I like a very complex and accurate setup whereas others like it to be loose. I have some very strong opinions about what-if's in AH events that are not necessarily pertinent to this conversation. I will say that there are varying degrees of what-if. That may sound ridiculous, but allow me to explain. The committee designed Conquest at Casablanca was a what-if in many ways. For those of you that do not remember, this setup pitted the Vichy French against the Americans at Casablanca during Operation Torch. P-40F's (L) lifted from the USS Ranger and F4F's fought alongside them. Rabat was used as an airfield, as it was in the operation and Casablanca's largest Axis airfield was bombed and strafed by SBD's. Likewise, the port of Casablanca was bombed by SBD's. All of this actually happened. What makes it a what-if was the fact that the Vichy French had as many numbers as the Americans. In reality, there were about 20 serviceable aircraft that we have in AH or have a decent sub for. Also, the Vichy French bombers never attacked the CV group or the USS Massachusetts. So, the designers had to fictionalize some things to make the event an event.
This is going to be the case with many FSO's. Just last month, Frame 2 was complete and utter fiction. Frames 1 and 3 were simulated sorties of May 7 and 8, respectively. But, we have 3 frames in FSO, so I made some stuff up for objectives in Frame 2. But, this is a necessary evil and must be considered as very small shying from accuracy. Casablanca is a stretched event, whereas Coral Sea was pretty much spot on save one fictional frame. My point is, I have no problem with stretching actual battles and campaigns to make a fun and interesting event, à la Casablanca, but complete fiction (for three frames) I cannot condone. But, this is opinion and preference. It simply means that I will probably never design a USAF vs. RAF event. However, I would be open to Battle of France with subs for the French's best aircraft.
