Sunday SO - Attrition and resupply system - Discussion

[lucull]

So, now that we used it last SOps. How did you like it?
What went wrong, what has been a push forward?

Let me start:

Worst thing for me was, that a squad who lost all his A/C and therefor all his points, got new points when they made enough damage/killed enough enemy A/Cs. More, they were able to get more points than before.
This leads to kills at all costs and not, as I thought the intention was, to bring back your A/C at first.

Rules for the new system were weak and not transparent. How were resupply points given? How does the CM judge this? This has to be written down and should depend on victory conditions. People should know what they would get for their actions before they decide what/how they do.
Before the event I thought, nearly everybody would fly 3rd line A/C in last frame. But we had squads with K/D <2 (loosing many, but shooting many down too) after first 2 frames with more points than they started with.
Also the overall points for the sides were nearly the same. I saw no big differences. That was not the intention of this as I understood with loosing so many planes every frame.

Rules for using more points than allowed have to be defined.
I wouldn't say that squads/sides have to be punished for using small number (1-2) more than allowed, but this needs to be fixed. Example, you have someone late and frame has started. You are up in 1st lines and have no points left. You can't push the late comer into 3rd line IMO.

That's it from me for now.

[ghostdancer]

Thanks for starting the thread Lucull. After running this experimental frame this is my perspective.

I do not think this attrition and resupply system added anything to the frame or the fun factor for the squads. I don't think the test rules destroyed the fun but I do know that they definitely made things contentious and put more of a work load on the frame CiCs.

The premise was (in previous BBS posts) that:

[list=1]

• Squads start frame 1 with the number of points equal to their max committment number (not counting the +2)
• They received resupply points in the following frames based on their actual turnout. A squad turns out 7 they get 7 for the next frame.
• Resupply points were affected by damage to that Squad's country facilities. Each facility was given a point amount (100 pts for bases) and light damage counted as -25, moderate -50, heavy -75, total -100. Then basically figured out a percentage from this.

i.e. Frame 2 Germans 200 points (2 bases), lost P38 -100 ... 100/200 = 50%. So we reduced each squads resupply by 50%.
[/list]

In practice there were many problems. Here are some:

[list=1]

• Tilt and ViFF pointed out that in frame 1 that by giving a squad a set number of points it actually can reward a squad for having a low turnout. If you are given 10 points and only turn out 5 pilots (min 7 -2 so legal) then actually that squad can up all 1st line planes. Instead of being confined to 2nd line planes.

So it can reward low turnouts or at the very least does not reward or encourage high turnouts.

• As lucull and Ramzey and others pointed out. Its next to impossible to make sure or know how many will turnout per frame until the frame actually happens. This makes it hard to plan. You plan on 7 turning out and 5 only turnout. Do you bank the points or upgrade two pilots.

Or as lucull stated you plan on 7 and 9 turnout. You don't want to punish the 2 who turned out by making them fly 3rd line planes. Again discouraging higher turnout for squads.

• Next once the C.O.s understood points it was fine but the information did not migrate down to the troops. On both sides I saw emails asking why they were confined to 2nd line planes (didn't know they didn't have points for 1st line) and also why they ran into 1st line planes in such numbers.

This contribute to a feeling of things being unfair. And truthfully on reflecting supply and attrition does make things unfair. A squad that does really well will have all 1st line. A squad who took a beating might end up flying 3rd line for two frames.

While such a situation is based on squads performances it does result in the possibility of some really lop side match ups after the 1st frame.

And its hard to educate all of your pilots about these point rules when you are never sure how many and who will turn out.

Again putting much more pressure on the squad C.O. to brief everyone.

• Being told by the CiC how to use your points caused some conflict also. Instead of being told fly LA5Ns and squad doing it, since plane types were left open and points usage left up to the individual squads .. well it decentralized things.

Both the Germans and the Russians had squads who were assigned certain plane types and then told to use points to upgrade but instead actually switched one second line plane type for another. While seeming almost a non-issue switching planes from one type to another without asking the CiC does impact his plans and causes him some confusion because he expects a squad to be in this 2nd line plane or this 1st line plane while the squad is actually in something very different.

The way the points rules worked out sort of encouraged this confusion and decentralization.
[/list]

So overall right now, as I said I don't think the fun factor was ruined by this experiment. But I personally would rate the experiment a failure and would not use these attrition and resupply rules again without major rework.

[ghostdancer]

Oh and yes 1st frame both sides started with the same amount of points. 2nd frame the Germans were down to mid 30s while Russians were up in 40s in 2nd frame. In third frame Germans had slight advantage in points over the russians.

But overall the system did not actually seem to increase the survival rates or affect the number of planes battling to the death. Plus, in last frame at CiC request (GA and Ramzey) we allowed for squads to donate points to other squads. Resulting in bomber squads giving their points to other squads to get better plane types.

Again as I said my personal belief is that these rules did not achieve their intended goal and did not add anything to the frame but complexity and increase rancor between squads.

[ViFF]

Ghost,

In hindsight, I think from the get go we used the point system to the wrong effect.

After experiencing it in the last event, I think the point system should have nothing to do with squads and pilots and airplanes. Points should simply be accumulated by one side against the other, through the achievement or failure of certain goals within the frame. The end tally would be an indication of who won the frame and what type of victory.

Notwithstanding, there can be a different point system to use, which would affect the outcome of only one thing between frames:  ressuply of aircraft.  An example of this could be that country A  has a factory complex that is its resupply center for aircraxt X. it produces 8 of them for every frame. If country B hits & destroys 50% of said factory in frame 1, then country A gets only 50% output for frame 2,  that means only 4 aircraft X instead of 8.

The idea I would like to promote, is that each side be assigned an initial asset list.

This list would entail how many a/c of each type would be avialable on the first frame, and from there it changes as the scenario unfolds thru the outcome of attrition & resupply in frames 1 & 2.

If you recall, just before the beginning of the second frame we had some emails going back and forth about a lack of an Initial Asset List which specifies how many aircraft of each type are available. The initial list is what you fall back on at the end of the frame, to know how many aircraft a country has left. Counting in resupply,  this is where attrition comes into play.

This eliminates the negative things like having to divy up the points between your squaddies, praying for a low turnout if you want to fly a 1st line a/c.

The CiC is the guy making the gameplan, he should be the one assigning a/c to each squad,  not the other way around. It should be his perrogative who to assign the 1st line a/c (it will probably be to his own squad)  and I think thats a good thing for two reasons:  It will get squads more interested to volunteer as CiC, and it creates an attitude of responsibility i.e. "hey we have the 1st line a/c,  if we lose them on this frame, the whole side will be pissed off at us, we better not fly carelessly !"

[ViFF]

I also want to pitch a second idea:
Motivating People to RTB a damaged aircraft, and rewarding them for it when they succeed.
Last frame, I saw Luccul  successfuly land a severely damaged  A20 during the middle of the frame (wtg btw ). After such hard efforts in landing the airplane, he had to go to the tower, and stayed there for the rest of the frame !

I would like us to figure out a way to use the asset list to such an extent that we let pilots who land damaged birds, deplane and take another available plane in the hangar. Availability would be based on the asset list.

It is my opinion that any pilot who manages to land a damaged plane safely should be rewarded with the permission to deplane, and take a new airframe from the hangar. Again, this would be limited to what is available on the asset list.

As it stands right now, any pilot who manages to land a damaged plane is actually punished for it.  He gets to go to bed, the frame is unfortunately over for him. This is wrong !

In several sceanrios I've seen quite a few enemy a/c go into "suicide mode"  a-la main arena mayhem when hit in oil or fuel,  cause they know the frame is over for them.  Its unfortunate that its like this, I really wish we could change this type of behaviour, make it worthwhile to land a damaged aircraft,  otherwise its promoting dweeby main arena mentality.

[ramzey]

Originally posted by ViFF
I also want to pitch a second idea:
Motivating People to RTB a damaged aircraft, and rewarding them for it when they succeed.
Last frame, I saw Luccul  successfuly land a severely damaged  A20 during the middle of the frame (wtg btw ). After such hard efforts in landing the airplane, he had to go to the tower, and stayed there for the rest of the frame !

It was not Lucull but Lolo, after this land he go to MA

I would like us to figure out a way to use the asset list to such an extent that we let pilots who land damaged birds, deplane and take another available plane in the hangar. Availability would be based on the asset list.

It is my opinion that any pilot who manages to land a damaged plane safely should be rewarded with the permission to deplane, and take a new airframe from the hangar. Again, this would be limited to what is available on the asset list.

As it stands right now, any pilot who manages to land a damaged plane is actually punished for it.  He gets to go to bed, the frame is unfortunately over for him. This is wrong !

i think u miss CAP event
SOps is ONE life, ONE plane event. If u got a disco after T+15, stuck on rearm pad, loose gear, stuck on airfield by bug or anything else what cannot give u back in air , you are out from frame. Its called "fog of war. If somone allow you to fix your own mistakes only buecose u are new in SOps not mean u can use preferential treatment all the time. Rules are one for everyone.

In several sceanrios I've seen quite a few enemy a/c go into "suicide mode"  a-la main arena mayhem when hit in oil or fuel,  cause they know the frame is over for them.  Its unfortunate that its like this, I really wish we could change this type of behaviour, make it worthwhile to land a damaged aircraft,  otherwise its promoting dweeby main arena mentality.

no comments;)

ramzey

[lucull]

Originally posted by ViFF
In hindsight, I think from the get go we used the point system to the wrong effect.

After experiencing it in the last event, I think the point system should have nothing to do with squads and pilots and airplanes. Points should simply be accumulated by one side against the other, through the achievement or failure of certain goals within the frame. The end tally would be an indication of who won the frame and what type of victory.

That's what is called victory conditions and what we have always used.

Notwithstanding, there can be a different point system to use, which would affect the outcome of only one thing between frames:  ressuply of aircraft.  An example of this could be that country A  has a factory complex that is its resupply center for aircraxt X. it produces 8 of them for every frame. If country B hits & destroys 50% of said factory in frame 1, then country A gets only 50% output for frame 2,  that means only 4 aircraft X instead of 8.

I see not much change. The effect of the "system" is not worth the work for CiC and CM IMO.

The idea I would like to promote, is that each side be assigned an initial asset list.

This list would entail how many a/c of each type would be avialable on the first frame, and from there it changes as the scenario unfolds thru the outcome of attrition & resupply in frames 1 & 2.

If you can't estimate the numbers, you can't work with this. Remember Niemen. Most groups had less numbers then expected and could loose all their A/C in a frame and still had enough to fly 1st line A/C.

If you recall, just before the beginning of the second frame we had some emails going back and forth about a lack of an Initial Asset List which specifies how many aircraft of each type are available. The initial list is what you fall back on at the end of the frame, to know how many aircraft a country has left. Counting in resupply,  this is where attrition comes into play.

This eliminates the negative things like having to divy up the points between your squaddies, praying for a low turnout if you want to fly a 1st line a/c.

This includes what I said in both points above. In general, it's the same and it's not practicable.

The CiC is the guy making the gameplan, ...

punt!

... he should be the one assigning a/c to each squad,  not the other way around. It should be his perrogative who to assign the 1st line a/c (it will probably be to his own squad)

The CiC can't assign 1st line/2nd line, because he doesn't know the numbers, so wether you use points or A/C numbers, it doesn't matter. All depends on how many show up. Secondly, for example the CiCs on allied side gave orders to take La7 or La5. The difference between them is not that big. Taking a Spit would have been a big difference, if the CiC wanted fast planes for the mission.

... and I think thats a good thing for two reasons:  It will get squads more interested to volunteer as CiC,

The CiC are set in by the CM. Every squad is in charge in this event some time. That's a basic rule for this event.

... and it creates an attitude of responsibility i.e. "hey we have the 1st line a/c,  if we lose them on this frame, the whole side will be pissed off at us, we better not fly carelessly !"

Frankly, I don't need a complicated not useable system to care about my squadmates life, my own life, the success of my country and lifes of people on my side in a one life, one plane event. This is the spirit of this event.

Conclusion, we should go back to what we had. The CM designs the event and influences the planeset by judging the frame(s) outcome before.

[ViFF]

Ramzey,  I don't think you understand  the term of "Fog of War".

Fog of War has nothing to do with mistakes you make in your aircraft, but rather things that happen in the battlefield that are either unlogical, impossible to explain, and/or completely unexpected from an intel perspective.


Your definition to what is a one life one plane event is different from mine. My idea is to have a limited list of 1st & 2nd line aircraft, so we have a bit more suspense in flying these events.
The other idea is to motivate people to land a damaged airplane, and when they do, they would be empowered by being rewarded another airplane limited offcourse to whats still available on the asset list.

This keeps squads longer in the event, instead of sending people away from the event.


Getting the first two responses in a negative attitude from the CO & co-CO of 308 Sqn was expected. I can understand your egos are hurt, and that you  are upset that I rejected your orders in the last frame. I apologise I had to do it, but I stand behind my decision 100%.  You are  free to open a seperate discussion about it, I had my reasons and I believe they are valid.

If you are responding negatively to my idea just because its mine,  and not being objective, then its a shame.

[ghostdancer]

Viff, Ramzey, Lucull,

I will be contacting you all about the issue ViFF just mentioned:

I rejected your orders in the last frame

ViFF and everyone (had some problems on the LW side like this also) Squad Ops was setup to give everyone a fair shake at running a frame and coming up with a plan. Its a more than a squad events its a team event meaning that you have to look to more than just your squad but also look toward doing things for your whole team (all the squads on your side).

By joining a squad ops event everyone squad basically is agreeing that they are voluntarily committing themselves to follow the battle plan drawn up by the frame CiC.

Granted their are frame CiCs that each of us might not like or their are frame CiCs that each of us think is better than another CiC. However, the whole point of Squad Ops is to give each Squad a chance to run a frame to draw up a battle plan and to have the people on his/her team do their best to follow the battle plan. The CMs do not pick or exclude people/squads from being a frame CiC based on their ability .. I have seen many plans on the friday Squad Ops that from the get go seemed like a poor plan. However, squads need to grit their teeth and bear through it.

I say this because otherwise the whole Squad Ops structure breaks down. You might think a plan is not good or objected to a certain part of the plan but you need to try to follow through with it. Otherwise when its your turn you can have squads rejecting your orders. And very quickly Squad Ops can turn from an event where every squad gets a chance to run a frame to a popularity contest where squads only work with or decide to follow orders of those CiCs that they like or agree with.

I am very concerned over the statement "I rejected your orders in last frame" and will be following up via email on this matter.

[ghostdancer]

As for the other points, back to subject, will give them some more thought. However, quick one off my head is that unfortunately their is no real practical way to allow a plane that landed safely but with damage to get out of his plane and replane.

The CMs do not have an easy method to verify the person landed safely or not leaving this open to abuse. Simply put we can't rely on the honor system of a person saying I landed safely but got out because of oil damage and can I now reup.

The CM would have to alt-tab out .. bring up the logs .. scan the logs to check and then alt-tab in. Very awkward and cumbersome and impractical if this happens multiple times.

The life limiter or deaths doesn't work properly so we can't just set it to one and have done with it. Their is no easy solution to this and unfortunately in the past it has been proven that we can't rely just on a person's word. We have had issues with people upping when we opened the fields for a disconnect or saying they discoed when they didn't (been taken care of). So same problem can crop up here and its difficult to verify during the frame.

[lucull]

This has nothing to do with with orders being rejected. You will receive an email by Ghostdancer soon.

I think like ramzey, all my squadmates and Ghostdancer (CM), that this system, is not worth using unless some big changes are done.

That's the reason why I started the thread and discuss in this thread and I'm adult enough that I don't need to jump on others due to base motives.

[ghostdancer]

I am willing to try other systems by the way. I just think the system that I tried failed. It didn't ruin the fun but it didn't add to the fun.

There are some valid points you bring up ViFF. I would love a repair ability that damaged planes can be repaired and then reupped. Especially on radiator or oil hits. Just no simple way to do it right now.

The idea of saying that one sides gets say a set number of best planes (i.e. Spit XIVs a frame) but if factory or facilites hit reduces the amount is worth looking into. However, we have to be flexible so that the CM goes .. okay you can equip one small squad with Spit XIVs now. Or 2 small etc., etc. .. CM has to make judgement calls.

[ViFF]

Ghost, this has nothing to do with damage repair.  It has to do with the fact that even in real life, an airforce usually has more planes available then pilots. Again, based on an asset list, a squad can always take a different aircraft from the "line" as they call it, if one a/c is damaged or returns from a sortie damaged.

I  was thinking of a practical solution along the following lines:
[list=1]

• Player gets damaged during a fight, but manages to RTB.
• Player lands and taxis on the runway near the tower where he is in full view.
• Player contacts CM on private to come inspect his aircraft.
  
• CM uses CMEYE view or switches to said field tower to inspect.
• CM gives player the permission to deplane into twr.
• Player contacts CiC asking for an available a/c from the asset list.
• CiC informs player which a/c are available or tells him specificaly what a/c to take.
• Player picks aircraft and relays CiC decision on what ac to CM.
• CM opens field, watching that only the player spawns.
  
• Player spawns his ac, CM immediately closes field.
[/list=1]

10 steps,  no extra work, player rewarded, squad rewarded, done deal.
Since the whole affair is handled on private, only the two know the fields are about to be opened for a few seconds, and is superevised by the CM.

The way to figure out what squad will use what type of aircraft and how many of them, is up to the CiC, when he sits down to make the gameplan. He sees the amount of a/c available from the asset list, and also the squad commitment level.  Lets  say the country has 10 Spit 14's & 20x Spit 9s available to them. CiC wants to give them to squad "a"  whos commitment level is 7-10, but you will never know if they will all show up. He can say to them : You may take 8 Spit 14s max,  and the rest in Spit 9s.  And for Squad "b" that are supposed to fly mostly Spit 9, he gives 2x Spit 14s. That way you are  sure to maximise use of your 1st line assets, without the danger of "overusing" them, i.e. having  Squad "a" show up with 12 or more pilots, and all taking Spit 14s.

ViFF

[ghostdancer]

Still would prefer a dot command .. something like .repair ViFF which would restore your plane. Instead of having to use the CM eye to move over to the field check to see if you are runway. Then have you exit then turn on field that you landed at let you reup.

Just a lot of extra work on the CM if say 10 damaged planes come in at once. Will think on it.

[ViFF]

rgr that ghost, thanks for thinking about it.
I don't know how many would want to take advantage of it, since after all, very few people ever make it back when damaged. But those that do are special pilots.. takes alot of effort to keep a damaged ship airborne, let alone even land it...

Perhaps we could give the system a test run in one of our next events,  get feedback from both players and CMs...

thanks again !