Devil comments

[Spikes]

This is player to player...

You're speaking to this instance as if FSO didn't just happen. The scenario bomber choices were the B-25C or the B-26B. As we saw from this past Friday night, the B-25s were slaughtered. They were laid upon the altar and sacrificed. How do I know this? Because I was there helping to slaughter that poor formation of bombers. The B-25s were all but defenseless as they ran headlong into the meat grinder that was the base CAP. The fighter escort striped away with BF110s baring down on them as they prepped to drop their bombs. There were 12 formations of B-25s that yielded a radar, one hangar, and 56 town objects. There was 1 in 12 formations that made it back to base. What bomber pilot wants to do that for three hours?

So now what I am continuing to hear is that the most lethal bomber killer(s) ever built are likely not to be able to hammer away at the B-26s until there all dead. I think I am hearing that no casualties should be taken even attempting to get at the bombers. The eight bomber pilots should be solely relying on the fighter escort for their protection. The bomber pilots don't have to do any work to be successful, just show up... A bunch of Hot Luftwaffe sticks with thousands of simulated combat flying hours in these same aircraft that already know how to intercept bombers through much trial and error, can't get the job done? I am hearing that the Luftwaffe can't win this thing. 

I think I am hearing this all wrong. I think what I am hearing is that, "NO MATTER WHAT THE ALLIES PUT UP, WE'RE KNOCKING IT DOWN".

Yeah, that's what I heard. I am pretty sure of it...

To be fair...in FSO the target is known and it has to be attacked by a certain time by a certain amount of force. These rules aren't the same in Scenarios and there are many more possible targets spread over a much wider area. To directly compare the two may have skewed results in terms of bomber deaths.

Also I imagine the most lethal bomber killer(s) ever weren't operational yet. But we should not be taking into account who is flying said airplanes, only what each airplane is capable of versus its counterpart.

[Brooke]

20 Jugs at 17-21K escorting all 10 sets of B-25's at 14K. Defense was four 190's and six 109G-6's

Your odds are vastly better in Anzio.

Now, I've shot down a lot of B-17's in my 109G-6 in a scenario.  And I've shot down a lot of Spits in my 190A-5 in a scenario.  But I have never before flown a P-40 in a scenario.  People tell me that P-40's totally dominate 109G-6's and 190A-5's.  So while your odds are vastly better in Anzio, beware those P-40's! 

[Brooke]

But make no mistake, this scenario sucks with ANY bomber.

Nah -- it will be great fun. 

All scenarios have bombers, and the battles we theme on had bombers.  Yet scenarios have plenty of fighter-on-fighter combat, too.  Something for everyone.

By the way, in looking back at some bomber action, I was looking at my 109G-6 in Big Week.  I was using a skin you made for that.  Thanks for the skin! 

[Devil 505]

20 Jugs at 17-21K escorting all 10 sets of B-25's at 14K. Defense was four 190's and six 109G-6's


How was the B-25 attack last Friday organized?

Sorry, I forgot to factor in the other defenders who arrived during the B-25's dropping bombs or after the drop.

True numbers of Axis defending pilots in that frame are as follows:

15 Fw 190's
7 Bf 109G-6's

[Devil 505]

Your odds are vastly better in Anzio.

Now, I've shot down a lot of B-17's in my 109G-6 in a scenario.  And I've shot down a lot of Spits in my 190A-5 in a scenario.  But I have never before flown a P-40 in a scenario.  People tell me that P-40's totally dominate 109G-6's and 190A-5's.  So while your odds are vastly better in Anzio, beware those P-40's! 

I doubt that. Check out the revised numbers.

I've also killed sets of bombers with G-6's and Spits with Fw 190's in scenarios. My point is not what any individual pilot has done before but what is likely to happen based on data gained by many pilots.

[Devil 505]

All scenarios have bombers, and the battles we theme on had bombers.  Yet scenarios have plenty of fighter-on-fighter combat, too.  Something for everyone.

You still fail to see the fundamental problem that this scenario presents. It should have been obvious without even having any plane models named. It is the most basic of design failures.

One side has an entire squad of bombers capable of scoring points while the other does not. You have not provided any assets for the side without bombers to account for the bombers their opponent has. There are no extra fighter to kill the bombers. There are no extra fighterbombers to gain attack points. There is not even a points consideration to attempt to balance the event via scoring.

This should have failed a basic logic test at the outset.

[Brooke]

I doubt that. Check out the revised numbers.

Your revised numbers, then, are same as what we'll have in Anzio, only we have 30% fewer bombers than you did.

I'm guessing your fighter pilots arriving after the drop didn't care as much about bombers compared to before drop because bombers in scenarios are not too hard to shoot down when you have fighter parity.  Well, unless 999000 is one of the bomber pilots. 

My point is not what any individual pilot has done before but what is likely to happen based on data gained by many pilots.

Excellent -- then you'll love Anzio because I'm a very data-driven guy! 

My Ph.D. involved lots of data analysis and modelling, and then I did it professionally in the finance industry (as a "quant" in industry lingo).  So, to come up with scenario numbers and scoring, I go back through many past scenarios (and thus data gained by many hundreds of pilots over decades) and crunch the numbers to figure out what the data tells me on what works and what doesn't.  I pull out things like what seems OK as rules of thumb for (number of bombers):(number of attacking fighters), (number of defending fighters):(number of attacking fighters), points per drop, whether or not a particular plane type is too dominant, etc.  That way, it is data driven and not developed only by personal opinion and anecdotal evidence, which is notoriously unreliable and variable.

Come on in, fellow data aficionado!  Anzio is for you! 

[Brooke]

You still fail to see the fundamental problem that this scenario presents.

Actually, you can go back and look at all scenarios to see what ratios work, and you can run the scoring system on every frame of past scenarios to see how it would have turned out.

The goal is system where half the frames are won by one side and half by the other.  This is complicated by the fact that sometimes one side has much better plans and execution than the other -- so you need enough data for a statistical analysis, not one scenario.

Bombers these days are scored to be sort of a neutral asset.  Roughly speaking, they generate -3 points (i.e., +3 points to the enemy) if they are all shot down and +3 points if they all live, drop on target, and all make it back to base.  If half of them get shot down, it is net zero points.  If all of them drop on target but all get shot down in the process, it is net zero points.  And so on.

Now, maybe you need it to be +2.5 points per successful drop instead of +3, or +3.5 instead of +3, etc.  +3 was used as a rough ballpark of what you'd expect to work, but data can tell you.  You can go back and run this scoring system on every frame of every scenario where one side had bombers and the other didn't, and see how it does.

Our current system of bomber scoring is vastly more balanced than the past ad hoc scoring systems people made up because it worked in their heads without crunching the data on past scenarios to model it.

[Brooke]

By the way, even though we try for perfect balance, no matter how we do scoring -- data driven or not -- it is never going to be perfect.

You can refuse to play in any scenario that isn't scored the way you want.

Or, you can contribute, help your friends by flying with them, and decide that a formula isn't the keeper of your fun.

Come on in, Devil!  Perd and the axis folks want to fly with you!  I'd like to fly with you, too. 

[Shuffler]

Devil.... sounds like you should grab a bomber.

[Brooke]

We'll call the group Devil's Destroyers!    (Sort of like George Thoroughgood and the Delaware Destroyers, but in bombers!)

One of these days, I would love to get Perd, Spikes, Devil, and Ditto in bombers, and we can have a grand ol' time!

Maybe in torpedo bombers! 

[swareiam]

Anyway, the good news is that you can consider all the bombers in this event to be B-25J's if you want. 

 

[Spikes]

We'll call the group Devil's Destroyers!    (Sort of like George Thoroughgood and the Delaware Destroyers, but in bombers!)

One of these days, I would love to get Perd, Spikes, Devil, and Ditto in bombers, and we can have a grand ol' time!

Maybe in torpedo bombers! 

Ar 234? Don't mind if I do.

[swareiam]

To be fair...in FSO the target is known and it has to be attacked by a certain time by a certain amount of force. These rules aren't the same in Scenarios and there are many more possible targets spread over a much wider area. To directly compare the two may have skewed results in terms of bomber deaths.

Also I imagine the most lethal bomber killer(s) ever weren't operational yet. But we should not be taking into account who is flying said airplanes, only what each airplane is capable of versus its counterpart.

Not in this case. A much smaller operations area for both sides, very close targets with good adjacency to spawn points and bases. As far as the comment about who's flying the hardware; contrar contrar... Only one of you needs to know how to intercept the bombers and I see who is registered. So throwing that one out.

Can we all take one other thing into account? This is a game that we are not staking our lives on. We are not really defending our own territory or our homes or our loved ones. The most we are getting is a historical perspective into what it may have been like for each side. In addition to that, we are getting an awesome virtual CHALLENGE. Clearly we all see the challenges. Because we are still talking about them.

In the true history of this event, did the Luftwaffe negotiate the terms of the battle before it started? The designers worked together to present the best balance that was possible for both sides. All or most historical information was taken into account. So now, let's play ball and laugh about it afterward.

 

[Brooke]

Ar 234? Don't mind if I do.

Can Ar 234's launch torps?  Let's do it!