Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Bannor on October 15, 2007, 06:30:07 PM
-
I was just curious if the CM's might be planning a GV scenario in one or three frames in a future FSO night. Christmas is around the corner and that seems like a good time for a Battle of the Bulge type of scenario?:aok Just a thought! :D
-
You know I'd actually love to see a GV FSO one time. Actually having a chance to use real tactics etc...
Even better would be a combined arms type setup with limited jabo capabilities...using our normal 140 players a side to have 120GV's and 1 tac air squad a side with a real target to attack/defend. Do P47s and F8's or similiar or stukas and IL-2s...or lend lease havocs (hehe:aok )
-
wouldn't be to hard and there and there are always Ju87s and il2s for kurst type engagement.
say 50/50 air/ground
50/50 divebombers/fighters
60/40 russian/german
haven't check to see if there is a map though.
-
I'd like to see gvs in an FSO too. The question is how do you add them? I don't think it should be all gvs and they should not be a turkey shoot for the flyboys.
-
Greetings,
Hey, great idea! Take any SPI / Avalon Hill / GHQ scenario! Up the numbers appropriately (I am thinking we ain't got riflemen) so an RCT / Kampgruppe x2 level should work.
Regards,
-
Tank fighting would be a great idea. Lets say you get 50-70 gv's per each side and You get 1 tactical supply squadron appiece. The rest of the field would be air support / ground attack.
-
My opinion is split here. On one hand, I love to GV and think it would be a lot of fun.
...BUT....
Adding air support/defense will just make for easy GV kills. One life events would be quick due to the ease of killing a GV in the game with other GVs. One shot, one kill most of the time. It would be a jousting match with lifespans cut very short.
I thought about allowing only a small amount of fuel and ammo for GVs then enabling a C-47 squad to deliver supplies to the front line. These supply planes could be guarded by a fighter squadron and attacked by another fighter squadron. The drive of the attacking GV force would be metered by the success of the supply squadron and escorts getting their jobs done. Maybe a three life event for C-47s, two lives for GVs and single life for fighters.
This, of course, is my personal opinion and does not reflect the opinions or future plans of the Aces High CM Team or Events staff.
Still, very much a worthwhile discussion.
:aok
-
Interesting concept Repoman. I like the C47 air train. One thing about the begining of the Bulge battle, was the weather was too poor to allow any real air cover so ground attackers would be out of the question. The use of the C47 adds a little flavor to the campaign.
And then there's the Eastern Front with the T34, Panzer/Tiger Battle. I'm not sure exactly what objectives could be made with gvs, but to satisfy the non-gver, an air campaign can be used as a seperate attack on the map.
And lastly, I think it would be nice in the MA and in FSO if we could have some bridges to blow up.:aok
-
How about a timed respawn to reflect a unit being "rearmed"....
Example the usmc/71 is tasked with a meeting engagment with FATE scheduled to passthru at T+10 minutes. USMC's goal is to locate and establish contact and identify/create an axis of advance toward the designated objective. Fate's job is to engage and attrite at the designated point of attack and in turn will be passed thru at T+20 by a third unit. USMC survivors would "rally" to the 'inward shoulder of the advance to screen for a counterprobe and at T+20 would "respawn" to full strength and be replaced by the surviving members of FATE in the reserve roll as USMC moved forward to be passed thru.
Real life armored combat involves alot of "handoffs" as units become combat ineffective...the reality is that attrition was very high for all but the toughest tanks (tigers etc). In one chapter of deathtraps the author talks about a colume of 17 shermans that had just been refitted and rolled out at 10PM to join an attack in progress. By 3PM the same day 15 had been destroyed in combat.
-
All very good ideas gentlemen.
Bannor makes a great point too; Not everyone likes the GV game. I believe if the event is based solely in GVs, the attendance would suffer. The battle would need a good split, or even a little more aerial battle. It's tough to gauge how a GV event would fair with the our faithful attenders. We will be bringing this discussion into the CM forums though, don't you worry :)
:aok
-
Interesting ideas...
I actually like the GV component idea..
Yes they could be easy kills for JABO's but you could always give the fighters, bombers and JABO's differing targets and they are not to engage the GV's.. Give the a more tactical assignment, such as attacking supply depots and defending same from the air.
I also like the idea of a full "respawn" for GV'ers at a certain time within the scenario to replicate the unit being reinforced for combat operations..
It would also be intersting to add limited M-3's right into the operation to roll with the ground force as their supply unit in the field.. ( then again who would like the idea of driving an M-3 or C-47 for that matter in an FSO)..
Could really add another dimension to the FSO adding all sorts possibilities for scenarios, field captures, CV's spawning in LVT's to simulate attack landings to complete an objective.....
Nice idea!!!
<>
-
Watch for Operation Husky Mk2!
Mistakes were made in MK1, and lessons learned.
SALUTE!
Newman
-
Originally posted by sgt203
Interesting ideas...
It would also be intersting to add limited M-3's right into the operation to roll with the ground force as their supply unit in the field.. ( then again who would like the idea of driving an M-3 or C-47 for that matter in an FSO)..
Could really add another dimension to the FSO adding all sorts possibilities for scenarios, field captures, CV's spawning in LVT's to simulate attack landings to complete an objective.....
Nice idea!!!
<>
Perhaps the gv's having more than 1 life would solve that dilema if squad co's tasked their members at random with supply duty with one of their lives.
Thanks for the interest in this.
-
or, the squad that gets M3 duty first life, gets fighter second lives.
Great ideas guys.
:aok
-
During regular FSO we all pull "duty" we dont like. I think the rank and file would give it a try IF the various squad CO's were OK with the idea. I also think "slit squad would work. Lets say for every 10 guys you have 7 ground and 3 air. So you might have a squad that elects a M3 supply guy and 3 jabo. Another might use a jeep for supply/scout and 3 fighter/jabo.
In a way I think the ability to actually use "your" airpower might be appealing. Having your own squaddies stacked overhead a 12k while you feel around for the right pressure point and then roll your ords in....in effect you've got your own armor, FAC & TAC air. Smaller squads would have to band together for enough #'s of course.
-
I'd love to try a Blitzkreig where you can actually take the base and keep it for the next frame.
-
There have been a few occasions where gv's were used towards the end of a frame, and if memory serves(:rolleyes: ) it went over very well. I do think it would be hard to do just a gv campaign, but the ideas used above could make it a very interesting event. Of course the people in gv's would have to get at least 2 lives with the ease in which gv's can be killed... but over all I think it could be fun. Keep the ideas comin.... this is what makes FSO so great :aok
Mystic2
-
Some years ago there was a Kursk scenario that had a large GV component. I believe there was even a snapshot event also. Those were a ton of fun and drew a bunch of players who don't normaly participate in scenarios because of the lack of a GV component.
I was CO of the ground units for the axis and our side never had many empty slots.
I concur with the need to limit the a/c attack element because of the unrealistic modeling of dropped ords in AH. Maybe having attack a/c limited to only one or two frames and also limiting bomb size to the smallest available and having multiple lives for the GVers would be a good solution.
Limiting the number of Ostys will be an issue and should be addressed in the planning.
Also, one thing to consider is that the terrain needs much more detailed modeling and testing. GV spawn issues are tough to deal with during an event and require intensive testing to ensure all random spawn points within a spawn area are viable. The land/sea interface needs thorough testing also for obvious reasons.
I think a GV based FSO would draw squads into the FSO events who don't normaly attend because of the lack of a GV component in most FSO's.
Any FSO modeled after Kursk, Stalingrad, N. Africa < now that we have the B25H > or the Battle of the Bulge would be a blast and would help to expand the number of squads who participate in FSO's on a regular basis.
An Afrika Corps type FSO would interest me since my step-dad flew in the B25G in North Afrika mainly against shipping in the Med. I'm sure the addition of this plane, unless carefully implemented, would generate a signal to noise ratio unheard of in past FSO events :P
Just my .02
-
Originally posted by Flatbar
I think a GV based FSO would draw squads into the FSO events who don't normaly attend because of the lack of a GV component in most FSO's.
I think you are correct. I don't know for sure but I would bet that the LTARS would make a strong showing if the event had a GV components.
Keep it going guys, these are great ideas.
:aok
-
I have not read this whole thread, but I do want to point out some things regarding this subject, as I do have some knowledge of the history of this subject and FSO.
The last time GV's were used in great numbers in FSO the biggest issue was frame rates for most of the players in the GV's. Dozens of GV comanders reported frame rates in the single digits. Now that was a while ago and things might be different now.
I think it would be good if we could get some volunteers (50+) to help with a test in the SEA to see how well this is going to work when 50+ GV's are all in a small area.
Besides that, I am all for the use of GV's in FSO, and the combination of GV and AC use in FSO.
Maybe this next Friday (an off Friday) or the next FSO frame (11-2-07), we can get a large group of volunteers to help do this in the SEA.
-
If you can set it up then I shall endevour to be there.:aok
-
I remember the same scenario as Sled about a year ago this was tried. As I remember it was alot of fun. I recommend keeping it very simple and easy. Those FSO's tend to be the best.
Sled: During the FSO you talked about with the low frame rates there was only one GV engagement area thus we were all packed into a very small area. This probably had much to do with the frame rate issue.
In that scenario most of everyone upped in GV's for the first hour and then respawned when killed or at H+60 into Aircraft and fought over the same ground.
I would like to see that scenario again but instead of one large GV battle divide it up into the 3 target areas like most FSO's. That would help the frame rates. I also recommend a "Meeting Engagement" and not a defend vis an attack scenario for the GV's. If both sides are attacking the battle will be much better. Suggestion place a "Tank Town" like objective in the center and let both sides race for it. I recommend no supplies either otherwise very skilled players will never die and who wants to drive an M-3 all night,,,, really?. Also I would recommend a terrain with woods and limited hills as this would keep great tank gunners from killing guys at 2500 meters. That way we all have fun and not just drive for 15 minutes and get killed by a guy like Wonder from a mile away. Use the low valued GV's and no high energy guns like the Tigers or the Shermans. Make the battle get up close and ugly.
Let it stand at one ride one life. Once you die then back to the hanger for a plane with one life.
-
After reading this whole thread I have to tell you I'm excited about trying a GV based FSO, I think it would be alot of fun just because it's something different. FSO's are great but it would be nice to do something completely different from what we normally do.
I like the idea of having the woods and not many hills, because like Viper said you'll get guys who are really good in GV's who can kill you from over a mile out, you'd die never having even seen the enemy. I also like the idea of splitting it up into like 3 different battle area's, this would help the frame rate issue, and if you have us all in one area your just gonna get a TT situation where you have 75 guys in one small area and the fight might be very quick for alot of people.
I think we should also have a rule where a/c aren't allowed to bomb the GV's, let the GV's fight it out, and have the a/c fight it out. We could have a/c come over the GV battle field and do spotting for the GV's on the ground, but not let them bomb the GV's.
As for the M3's & Jeeps, I think that the guys in GV's just get 2 life's and I'm sure each squad could have like 1 or 2 guys who volunteer to do M3 or Jeep duty for one of their lives, after they drop off supplies they could then drive around and do some scouting for the other guys in the GV's. I just think the whole idea is great, and I think it's gonna be alot of fun.
-
So has there been any talks among the CM's about giving this a try, even for maybe atleast 1 frame of an FSO?
-
Concept is in the works. Not promising anything, but if we can figure out a way to do it, it will happen.
-
In the past in FSO there was an event where after the initial attack, downed fighters (or bombers -- don't remember) respawned as GV's. That was actually a lot of fun.
Something like that would work (it did before).
-
I do like this idea.
Have most players in GVs.
1-2 squadrons for resupply.
2-3 squadrons for fighter/attack (You cannot have a plane that carries too many bombs, if you get a whole squadron of those it would completely ruin the fun for the GV'ers)
Say a P-47 or F8, they carry ordinance, but not enough to take out the entire GV squads.