Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: RufusLeaking on April 09, 2021, 11:31:21 PM
-
For discussion, some possible adjustments to give the Russian side some hope of being competitive:
Remove max from LA-5s
Add cannons to C.205 (MiG 3s)
Let 2nd hour planes be the same as 1st hour.
Allow 2nd hour launch (even 1st hour launch) closer to target.
Put a lower altitude limit or low overcast deck.
Add a better Yak.
I'm typing this now because the Russian field to defend was destroyed, and only one hangar was down on the target field. It was a three sector flight against almost 2:1 odds. I am a huge fan of FSO, but, based on points, it made more sense not to up and give kills to the Axis with so little chance of scoring hits on the target.
-RufLeak
-
Listen, if the pilots in the LA's you have refuse to engage, you have not right to complain.
-
lol, your CIC had alot of fighters go to A204 to defend your A20's which they failed to do so. There was only 14 of us AK's defending A204 and we each had 2 to 3 fighters on us. Allied need to distribute there fighter cover better. The Allied fighters successfully capped A204 but didn't protect the A20's. We killed them then the Fighters finally came down on us and overwhelming us by 2:1 if not 3:1 odds.
-
Yak had no problems shooting one of my Ju-88's down.
Second hour we flew around for 45 minutes seeing no enemy. It wasn't until we dropped to the deck at A86 did we see anything.
-
The frame is unbalanced. Let's look at the numbers for two frames.
Frame 1:
Allies: 66 pilots got 49 kills. Objects destroyed: 34
Axis: 63 pilots got 92 kills. Objects destroyed: 45
Frame 2:
Allies: 63 pilots got 56 kills. Objects destroyed: 2
Axis: 60 pilots got 88 kills. Objects destroyed: 32
In both frames, the Axis completely destroyed their targets.
Compare weapons loadout and performance on the opposing aircraft. "It's the pilot, not the plane" is not always the answer.
Listen, if the pilots in the LA's you have refuse to engage, you have not right to complain.
Since the Axis actually lost the war, I do have the right to complain.
Yak had no problems shooting one of my Ju-88's down.
Second hour we flew around for 45 minutes seeing no enemy. It wasn't until we dropped to the deck at A86 did we see anything.
I didn't re-up 2nd hour as their was nothing to defend and bad aircraft options to attack a medium field.
On a more positive note, Darkwood, keep posting the videos. :salute
-
maybe its about tactics and not always about numbers? our tactics seem to work pretty good?
-
maybe its about tactics and not always about numbers? our tactics seem to work pretty good?
Tactics like carry more bombs, fly faster and perform better at altitude are definitely winners.
-
I didn't re-up 2nd hour as their was nothing to defend and bad aircraft options to attack a medium field.
On a more positive note, Darkwood, keep posting the videos. :salute
The second hour was straight dogfighting and it was very fun. The videos are just for fun and mainly a recruiting tool for FSO. Getting the numbers in FSO up is my main goal. :aok :rock :joystick:
-
He has a valid complaint.
The Yak9T, C205 (- cannon), Yak7b, P39d, P40e are no match for the Me109f or g, and the Fw190. The German fighters can dictate the fight at will with their superiority in climb, speed, maneuverability, and weapons load out.
I really don’t care, I am enjoying being the underdog and I know how hard it is to balance these FSO’s but be honest, if the roles were reversed, those dismissing these concerns would be complaining also.
Especially you Devil 505.
So cut the guy a break and listen to his suggestions like adults. There aren’t many of us left these days so it’s better to insure all participants are heard and their concerns are considered.
Salute mates.
-
He has a valid complaint.
The Yak9T, C205 (- cannon), Yak7b, P39d, P40e are no match for the Me109f or g, and the Fw190. The German fighters can dictate the fight at will with their superiority in climb, speed, maneuverability, and weapons load out.
I really don’t care, I am enjoying being the underdog and I know how hard it is to balance these FSO’s but be honest, if the roles were reversed, those dismissing these concerns would be complaining also.
Especially you Devil 505.
So cut the guy a break and listen to his suggestions like adults. There aren’t many of us left these days so it’s better to insure all participants are heard and their concerns are considered.
Salute mates.
You should know me better than to just complain without having a leg or two to stand on. Unfortunately, bad arguments are exactly what RufLeak is making.
-
You are correct Devil, I know you.
You are just being you. It seems you will never be able to see another persons point of view.
A humble person should always consider someone's opinion and after discussion, the relative merits of the opinion can be addressed.
You know as well as I that there are sometimes lopsided FSO's. Its part of the limitations of the plane set and actual historic realities. The community goes to great lengths to create FSO's that are balanced and enjoyable for all participants. Most of the time they succeed but when a problem arises it should be discussed regardless if you agree with the complaint or not.
Just because you don't think its valid does not make it invalid.
-
The frame is unbalanced. Let's look at the numbers for two frames.
Frame 1:
Allies: 66 pilots got 49 kills. Objects destroyed: 34
Axis: 63 pilots got 92 kills. Objects destroyed: 45
Frame 2:
Allies: 63 pilots got 56 kills. Objects destroyed: 2
Axis: 60 pilots got 88 kills. Objects destroyed: 32
In both frames, the Axis completely destroyed their targets.
Compare weapons loadout and performance on the opposing aircraft. "It's the pilot, not the plane" is not always the answer.
Let's look at your numbers compared to just the success of the LA-5's in these frames.
In Frame 1, the Allies had 18 LA's. The managed only 10 kills in total, 9 of which were in the first sortie.
In Frame 2, the Allies only used 10 of the 16 LA's they were allowed to use. Those 10 pilots only achieved 7 kills in total, 2 of which were in the first sortie.
I'm highlighting the first sortie numbers because both frames were decided before the 2nd hour planes were enabled. Looking at the total kills does not paint the true picture.
So before you complain about the lack of firepower in the Yak-9 or C.205, you need to figure out why your side is failing to find success with your best overall plane.
The LA is a close match to both 109G-2 and 190A-5 at 20K. Below 12K it is completely dominant over the G-2 and A-5. The gun pack of the LA-5 packs a punch but has poor ballistics and firing rate, but the plane's performance should mean that you are able to close in on an enemy to a place where those issues are mitigated. Aggressively flown LA's are nearly impossible to shake in a either a 109G-2 or 190A-5. If the CiC fails to put the LA's in a place to be flown aggressively, and with a strength to do so, that's his fault. Frame 1, they were in a bad place. Frame 2, they were under strength.
I'm not saying that the Yak-9T pilots aren't in a difficult position, but it's really hard to quantify the disparity when the LA's are performing so poorly. If the kill totals showed that the Yaks were struggling while the LA's were scoring kills in bunches, I'd give credence to your thesis. But that is not the case.
Regarding the Yak and C.205,
Adding the C.205 mitigates the Yak's speed disadvantage at altitude. This should have allowed the Allies CiC to use the Yaks better to its strengths. It's a very good fighter at lower altitudes and the 37mm cannon is a monster against large targets. For the 109's to match that firepower, it requires using the performance sapping 20mm gondolas. Yaks and C.2's should be successful against 109's outfitted with them, and LA's will dominate them at every altitude.
Since the Axis actually lost the war, I do have the right to complain.
You really need to know when to play the "Historical Accuracy" card better.
First, there is no "Better Yak" as in January 1943. The Yak-9, M with 20mm cannon or T with the 37mm, is the best there was at the time - and January 1943 might be too early for either. The vast majority of Yaks at this time were Yak-1s and Yak-7's. The Yak-9U did not enter service for another year and a half. Your suggestion for a "better Yak" is as unfounded as the Axis would be asking for 109G-14's or 190A-8's.
Second, the MiG-3, which the C.205 represents, had a total production run of 3172 airframes, only 52 of which had 20mm cannons. That's .016% of the total built. All other MiG-3's had a combination of 7.62mm and 12.7mm machine guns, just like the C.205 minus the cannons. Furthermore, the final 30 cannon armed MiG's were built in April 1942 and it's anyone's guess which units received them or how many survived the 8 months of combat leading up to the battle of Velikiye Luki. The point being, the chances of there being even one cannon armed MiG-3 at Velikiye Luki in January 1943 is essentially zero.
Third, The Allies have the LA-5FN which is a type not introduced for another 6 months. The units in January had standard LA-5's with worse performance, higher weight, and worse visibility. Because AH only has the FN, The Allies have a better fighter than they should. By the same margin, the AH 190A-5 is worse than the 190A-3's and A-4's actually used at this battle. The performance differences within plane types (LA-5 to LA-5FN or 190A-4 to 190A-5) are not significant, but the performance gap between sides would be wider if we had the correct models. Would not not make a huge difference, but since you want to play the "Historical Accuracy" card, here we are.
The fact is, in January 1943, the Soviet air force struggled to compete on an equal footing against the Luftwaffe because they failed to employ their assets properly. Seems that this FSO is not far from history in this regard.
Here's the upshot, the Allies are at a natural disadvantage in fighters, but it's no worse than the Axis typically faces when the Allies have Jugs, Ponies, or Corsairs. Your side is doing poorly mostly because your pilots and planners are failing to use your assets to their strengths.
-
You are correct Devil, I know you.
You are just being you. It seems you will never be able to see another persons point of view.
A humble person should always consider someone's opinion and after discussion, the relative merits of the opinion can be addressed.
You know as well as I that there are sometimes lopsided FSO's. Its part of the limitations of the plane set and actual historic realities. The community goes to great lengths to create FSO's that are balanced and enjoyable for all participants. Most of the time they succeed but when a problem arises it should be discussed regardless if you agree with the complaint or not.
Just because you don't think its valid does not make it invalid.
Except that I have. Read the long post I have made addressing his points.
My initial post may seem dismissive, but it does reflect what I've seen through two frames. In both cases, I saw full squadrons of LA's at 20K pass by/through my squad's formation and they kept on going without a second look. I never saw them again after the first pass. They were a non-factor for the most part.
Regardless of how good or bad the Yak-9 is, the Allies have no hope of winning when LA's are a non-factor. The Yak's have performed decently well in spite of the LA's.
-
You really need to know when to play the "Historical Accuracy" card better.
If the goal of FSO is to exactly recreate history, then why bother playing?
I posted this on the encouragement of several Allied players as we commiserated on the loss. I'm open to reasonable suggestions on how to make it more balanced. Given the inherent superiority of Axis players, it should present no problem.
Anyways, I stopped trying to win the forums 15 years ago. :bolt:
-
If the goal of FSO is to exactly recreate history, then why bother playing?
Is that not what you were advocating for by saying this?
Since the Axis actually lost the war, I do have the right to complain.
Not sure how your statement is relevant otherwise.
What you wrote indicates to me that you think the Allies should not have a disadvantage in FSO because they eventually won the war historically.
-
Except that I have. Read the long post I have made addressing his points.
My initial post may seem dismissive, but it does reflect what I've seen through two frames. In both cases, I saw full squadrons of LA's at 20K pass by/through my squad's formation and they kept on going without a second look. I never saw them again after the first pass. They were a non-factor for the most part.
Regardless of how good or bad the Yak-9 is, the Allies have no hope of winning when LA's are a non-factor. The Yak's have performed decently well in spite of the LA's.
I Have read your post and it makes sense. Explaining the reasons for your opinion is what I was looking for. Your historical comparison is accurate except for the fact that the Russians had an enormous advantage in numbers. But that is not the point. You addressed another players concerns without being dismissive.
I have been around long enough to have seen many FSO's criticized. Many are discussed and very few are altered during the event. But because things are discussed, those that design and run these events are able to adjust future FSO's to make for a better experience for all.
I think this is what we are all interested in after all, an enjoyable, fun friday night, drinking and laughing with our friends while we play this game.
-
Is that not what you were advocating for by saying this?
Not sure how your statement is relevant otherwise.
What you wrote indicates to me that you think the Allies should not have a disadvantage in FSO because they eventually won the war historically.
I am just looking for balance. Who won in real life history is already written. FSO should be a fun challenge with balance.
Like Joker312 said:
I think this is what we are all interested in after all, an enjoyable, fun friday night, drinking and laughing with our friends while we play this game.
-
I am just looking for balance. Who won in real life history is already written. FSO should be a fun challenge with balance.
Ok good. That's what I want as well.
Every time I've seen someone make the "But the Allies won the war" argument it always been in an attempt to justify a gross advantage or been in a sour grapes post after the Allies lost. It is the weakest of arguments and I'm sorry for being hostile, but it's exactly what your posts looked like to me.
I think in this case that there are reasons beyond any plane set balance issues that have contributed more to the poor performance of the Allies over the last two frames. I've seen Eastern Front setups where the Allies have dominated with pretty much this exact plane set. I really do think the Allies have the tools to be successful with the plane set as it is now.
It's up to Nef if he want to make more adjustments, but I think adding new planes, cannons to the C.205, or a bunch more LA's will be overkill.
-
I appreciate the feedback folks.
I understand the frustration, in fact... We were here before about 2 years ago with a similar setup.
https://ahevents.net/index.php/fso-setups/86-eastern-european-theatre/1265-green-hearts-and-red-stars
There was much discussion about the set being lopsided featuring the Bf 109G-2 and 109F-4 vs the C.205, Yak-7B, and P-40C/E.
You can read much of that discussion here: https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,396586.0.html
I used this discussion to fit a later period of the Eastern Front to include a 2nd hour and inserted the Yak-9T as that was the major point of discussion in the above link. I also included the La-5FN to counter the Fw 190A-5 on the same MAX number. As mentioned above, 3 of the 4 fighters used in hour 1 are both later variants of what was historically used, I was hoping that this would even it up to similar Combat Challenges and other FSOs we have run using the identical or similar plane set.
lol, your CIC had alot of fighters go to A204 to defend your A20's which they failed to do so. There was only 14 of us AK's defending A204 and we each had 2 to 3 fighters on us. Allied need to distribute there fighter cover better. The Allied fighters successfully capped A204 but didn't protect the A20's. We killed them then the Fighters finally came down on us and overwhelming us by 2:1 if not 3:1 odds.
This was actually a planned sweep and when we encountered your 190s, you guys actually turned away from us and flew away. We were chasing, but either you guys didn't see us, or chose not to engage the handful of 205s we had chasing you... Either way, we couldn't catch you. We had met a few 109s before reaching the target area and we had some pilots engaging them and a few more that were found near the target. The 190s slipped away, we turned back to the target and next thing I heard they were attacking the bombers on the deck.
That being said, I have made some changes for Frame 3.
1 - I have moved both sides fields a little closer.
2 - I have reversed the Min's and Max's on the Yak-9T and La-5FN... meaning the Yak-9T will be required to fly 16 - and the La-5FN Maximum will be removed. This will add more La-5FNs, probably to the tune of 10-15 more than frames 1 and 2. (25-30 total) Not sure it will make or break anything, but at this point I don't think it matters, at least score wise.
3 - I am looking into the creation of a low level overcast cloud file of around 10K. This may or may not be available for frame 3 and even if available will have to be tested for appearance and effect. If possible, we might incorporate it into Frame 3.
Thanks for your continued participation.
-
This was actually a planned sweep and when we encountered your 190s, you guys actually turned away from us and flew away. We were chasing, but either you guys didn't see us, or chose not to engage the handful of 205s we had chasing you... Either way, we couldn't catch you. We had met a few 109s before reaching the target area and we had some pilots engaging them and a few more that were found near the target. The 190s slipped away, we turned back to the target and next thing I heard they were attacking the bombers on the deck.
The 190's were suppose to keeel the bombers.
-
I just wanted to throw in my two cents on this FSO. I would agree that the 2nd hr planes are unbalanced and the allies don't have a decent second strike option, or a fighter that can handle the frank. But from my experience I don't think the first hour planes are that out of balance.
First the c.205s were keeping with us 190s, we chose to avoid the sweep so we could find the bombers and were barely able to do so. We were barely able to keep ahead of the 205s and our tail end Charlies were forced to engage, which ended up helping the rest build seperation. You guys pushed us to the south edge of the dar ring and had timing been different the bombers would have made it in unopposed. As it was there were a lot of things going right and more than a little luck that put us in position over the bombers unopposed. We pretty much stumbled upon them while trying to get back. Just minutes after we took out the bombers we were wiped out. Not one AK landed our first hour plane, we were just overwhelmed down low.
Frame one we ran an noe mission and were wiped out over target. A couple of us managed to get bombs off but died seconds after. Again not one AK landed our first hour plane.
My point is we fought hard to accomplish our assigned missions and the fact we have yet to land a first hour plane shows we did not have an easy time of it. A good overall plan and some luck won the day for the axis.
Change 1 : no issues with moving fields closer as long as the defense can make it to target before noe bombers. Goes for both sides.
Change 2 : as stated above I don't think the 205s are outclassed, at least compared to the 190s, and adding unlimited la5s may swing things the other way. But I can't say it's not worth a try.
Change 3 : I don't see what a 10k overcast layer would do that lowering the base alt limits wouldn't. And allied holds every advantage under 10k, especially with change 1 and 2. A strategy that drags the fight to an alt that supports one side I absolutely agree with, an artificial limit that forces the fight to alts that supports only one side doesn't feel right to me.
Anyway as said just my thoughts. I don't think the score tells the whole story.
-
Tactics like carry more bombs, fly faster and perform better at altitude are definitely winners.
i carried 2X 500kg bombs and was capped at14k, im not sure how that figures into your formula?
-
Switch sides and play it again next month. The boredom of repetition might be worth the information gained.
Oh yeah and move the start time to 9pm EDT. ;)