Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: SIM on August 09, 2008, 12:04:41 AM
-
What started out as a really nice idea quickly eroded into a cluster.........
Per the Allied Frame 1 Orders:
Offensive Targets:
A15 - Luzon - 06.15.03. (Small Airfield) (195 Points)
A24 - Luzon - 07.13.04. (Small Airfield) (195 Points)
C78 - Sibuyan Sea - 09.06.05. (Cruiser Fleet) (300 Points) PLEASE NOTICE THAT THE TYPE OF FLEET IS CRUISER
C79 - Sibuyan Sea - 08.08.05. (Cruiser Fleet) (300 Points) PLEASE NOTICE THAT THE TYPE OF FLEET IS CRUISER
C78 turned out to be a CARRIER fleet.
C79 turned out to be a CARRIER fleet.
IIRC carriers take more to destroy than cruisers. Has this been changed without anyone knowing?
I watched KI61's strafe ships with little or no damage during their runs. While I don't consider this to be any sort of wrong on their part, why isnt there a risk? AAA is apparently turned down to the point that it was TOTALLY ineffective. I understand not wanting the ack to ruin the flight for people. But strafing a ship would have risks. Gun positions were disabled so gunners could not be used.
Would not, allowing gunners, balance out the effect of enemy aircraft strafing down targets?
All in all, not a good night IMHO.
-
Sim -- the ack at 73 killed all 3 of my ki67's in short order. Torpedo runs on 73 were suicidal, I'd hoped that 1 of 3 planes would make it out, but two were dead before I really got to turn away after dropping and the third died just the other side of the fleet while it was still pelting me. I guess perspective and or rice planes versus armored allied birds.
I believe it was meant that the cruiser was the only valid target on those two fleets and not the carrier. I may be wrong, but that's how I read the objectives. And if could have been a snafu.
-
I do agree that a KI61 in no way shape or form would be able to strafe down a CV & the may have been some slight set up issue's.
I do in fact have some concern with the over all trend in the FSO event in regards to the plane set's.
The first thing I think we need to look at is the fine line between what planes were there & the fact that we are playing a video game. What was there at the time does not account for the numbers of advanced fighters or the quality of the pilots flying those advanced aircraft. Then we can add the flight model's into the mix and the "historical" aspect is so far off kilter it's not even funny.
What I see is a bunch of guy's trying to put up fun events on a Friday nights but not having the tools to do so. First off we nee the plane set for the CM's to get it right. I'm sure that is in the works. Then we need to cross the bounty of history vs. what plane's in our game do what to each other.
In short I think it's in the best interest of the FSO event as a whole to provide the following:
(1) a plane match up that is even but not based on history but more on our game.
(2) like this FSO stay on the attack & defence. A few FSO's in the recent past have been a bit simple in regards to the goals.
(3) a more even keel playing field with aircraft. Stay away from the internet match up's & focus on what planes would work best in flight in "our game" against each other.
There are a lot of people playing in the FSO event & every one of them deserve a fair shake every time. I'm sorry to report that the side adjustment's & plane selections don't seem to be keeping up with the times. I see an attempt to give a few players a hand up on the rest and that just makes it harder on all of us.
MGD
-
I had a perfect 90-degree dive on a cruiser, perfect lead for my alt (less than 5k at drop) and when I dropped and pulled up my bomb splashes were perfectly on the midships..... Only an entire ship's length to the SIDE. I saw several others that followed my run, were perfectly lined up, and their splashes were just as far off as mine.
Wind is wrong. Just wrong. It doesn't interact with aircraft that have wheels on the ground properly, and has TOO much impact on high speed projectile bombs that are quite aerodynamic and too small to be moved off target 1000 feet (?) in the space of 10 seconds or so for drop time to impact time. A combination of two entire squadrons of fighters dropped on it just to kill the DD.
Wind was screwing up even LOW alt drops. The only thing left were 4 destroyers. An entire squadron of A6M5bs and an entire squadron of Ki-61s made repeated entire-squad-strength bombing runs, rearmed, bombed, rearmed, bombed, and yes us a6m5bs even had a couple more that rearmed and went back out to bomb.
We sank 1 destroyer. Out of 4. Out of probably 80 combined ord loads from fighters. There were a LOT of Ki61s and a LOT of A6M5bs. We repeatedly hit over and over and over and the bombs were not landing on target because of low alt winds.
I waited on one of my runs until I was point blank on the bow of a destroyer and dropped at 1000 feet then ran out of the fricking ridiculously lethal ack. Never hit the ship.
I'm no slouch for ship bombing, especially when nearly suicidal like I was in this FSO. I can hit 90% of the time even if I don't survive.
COMBINED, about 30-40 pilots that all seemed semi-competent and well armed made 3 bombs, rearms, bombs, rearms, bombs, and landed with a total whopping 1 ship kill.
I cannot begin to describe how screwed up the wind system is in this game, and cannot agree with ANY CM that adds it (especially at low alts) in simply as an attempt to make things more realistic. It is as far from a realistic effect as you can get.
We're talking a system so buggy it will move an LVT 10mph down stream when the LVT spawns, and the LVT can't stop still to start its engine and shift into gear. That just doesn't happen, I'm sorry. The wind is bugged, stupid, and should not be used.
-
I had a perfect 90-degree dive on a cruiser, perfect lead for my alt (less than 5k at drop) and when I dropped and pulled up my bomb splashes were perfectly on the midships..... Only an entire ship's length to the SIDE. I saw several others that followed my run, were perfectly lined up, and their splashes were just as far off as mine.
Wind is wrong. Just wrong. It doesn't interact with aircraft that have wheels on the ground properly, and has TOO much impact on high speed projectile bombs that are quite aerodynamic and too small to be moved off target 1000 feet (?) in the space of 10 seconds or so for drop time to impact time. A combination of two entire squadrons of fighters dropped on it just to kill the DD.
Wind was screwing up even LOW alt drops. The only thing left were 4 destroyers. An entire squadron of A6M5bs and an entire squadron of Ki-61s made repeated entire-squad-strength bombing runs, rearmed, bombed, rearmed, bombed, and yes us a6m5bs even had a couple more that rearmed and went back out to bomb.
We sank 1 destroyer. Out of 4. Out of probably 80 combined ord loads from fighters. There were a LOT of Ki61s and a LOT of A6M5bs. We repeatedly hit over and over and over and the bombs were not landing on target because of low alt winds.
I waited on one of my runs until I was point blank on the bow of a destroyer and dropped at 1000 feet then ran out of the fricking ridiculously lethal ack. Never hit the ship.
I'm no slouch for ship bombing, especially when nearly suicidal like I was in this FSO. I can hit 90% of the time even if I don't survive.
COMBINED, about 30-40 pilots that all seemed semi-competent and well armed made 3 bombs, rearms, bombs, rearms, bombs, and landed with a total whopping 1 ship kill.
I cannot begin to describe how screwed up the wind system is in this game, and cannot agree with ANY CM that adds it (especially at low alts) in simply as an attempt to make things more realistic. It is as far from a realistic effect as you can get.
We're talking a system so buggy it will move an LVT 10mph down stream when the LVT spawns, and the LVT can't stop still to start its engine and shift into gear. That just doesn't happen, I'm sorry. The wind is bugged, stupid, and should not be used.
wind at 15 degrees, angle at 15 degrees, ack at 15 degrees, Krusty's bomb......14.743 degrees. O noes! :aok
-
I do agree that a KI61 in no way shape or form would be able to strafe down a CV & the may have been some slight set up issue's.
he said ships not CV
my CO nikomon finnish off a little destroyer that i had just previously bombed with my KI61
-
Maybe what they need to do is have no wind under say 5k, I think this would solve the dive bombing problem, but still require high alt level bombers to adjust for the wind at their alt.
-
Maybe what they need to do is have no wind under say 5k, I think this would solve the dive bombing problem, but still require high alt level bombers to adjust for the wind at their alt.
sounds good
-
You know you've had a good FSO when:
Top Pilots: Kills
fireplug (325th Checkertails VFG): 8
Joker1 (The Damned): 5
Selino30 (Righteous Vengeance): 4
spIVeyCH (~364th FG C-HAWKS): 4
VALDALS (Righteous Vengeance): 4
1pLUs44 (880 Sqn Fleet Air Arm): 4 :D :D :D :D
-
You know you've had a good FSO when:
Top Pilots: Kills
fireplug (325th Checkertails VFG): 8
Joker1 (The Damned): 5
Selino30 (Righteous Vengeance): 4
spIVeyCH (~364th FG C-HAWKS): 4
VALDALS (Righteous Vengeance): 4
1pLUs44 (880 Sqn Fleet Air Arm): 4 :D :D :D :D
You know you've had a bad FSO frame when your squad of new guys on a strike mission runs into a cloud of N1K2s.
You know you've had a terrible FSO frame when those Georges are piloted by The Army of Muppets, and 9GIAP.
At least they were quick about it and nobody suffered. :lol
-
I'll try to answer as much as I can, Other things I will touch up on later in the results.
4XTCH the Setup CM, incorrectly read the objectives. And instead of Destroying the CVs at 78,79, and 81 he destroyed the Cruisers.
The Ack Settings have always been reduced in FSO usually to the tune of less than 0.5, I have been using .3 most of my events. This is to avoid One Ping Ack Kills and testing shows that repeated passes will result in damage.
As far as the Plane set goes, It's not changing. Looking at the numbers briefly, The Axis only fielded 19 more players than the Allies, and only used 38 Franks and Georges. Now I haven't combed the logs yet, so we will see how much damage they really did. (I know personally that I respawned two of those Franks due to JS trouble). I would say 36 Franks and Georges out of nearly 260+ Pilots is pretty reasonable. MGD, I can't tell what your trying to convey. Who was in the advantage? Who had the upper hand? You never mentioned it in your post.
At A1 Bombers could not spawn on the Runway, Hangar was the only option. When they launched all the drones were killed by spawning on top of the Hangar itself. I apologize for that as I should of caught that in my testing. Then combine that with the re-arm issue with Drones, once again something I totally forgot about.
As far as the wind goes, I am going to confer with the team and see what can be done.
For me last night was a major flop. After my two aborted launches and re-logs to check my JS, I finally solved my problem and rolled with 25% fuel. I didn't catch it until about T+35, when my engine died. :o
-
As far as the Plane set goes, It's not changing. Looking at the numbers briefly, The Axis only fielded 19 more players than the Allies, and only used 38 Franks and Georges. Now I haven't combed the logs yet, so we will see how much damage they really did. (I know personally that I respawned two of those Franks due to JS trouble). I would say 36 Franks and Georges out of nearly 260+ Pilots is pretty reasonable. MGD, I can't tell what your trying to convey. Who was in the advantage? Who had the upper hand? You never mentioned it in your post.
Wasn't complaining about the plane set it was just bad timing on our part. As we came up on the target a large force of Allies were egressing the area. We were alone and heavy and had to hit A24 before 60 minute mark. The Georges arrived as we were in our dives, **** happens. ;)
-
I had fun :aok found the bad guy cv put my eggs on her and scored a few kill's to :salute
-
Maybe what they need to do is have no wind under say 5k, I think this would solve the dive bombing problem, but still require high alt level bombers to adjust for the wind at their alt.
Or maybe the dive bombers could plan and not bomb with the crosswind, but bomb into the wind.
-
It's one thing to try and compensate for wind, but when the carrier is being turned and doing loop-de-loops and figure 8's, there's really only a partial chance in a frozen hell you "might" hit the dang thing. Don't even TRY to line up with a Ki-67 and get calibrated. Either way though, I had a good time and was laughing it up for most of the night as were my squadmates.
-
I'll pm you Sled in the morning. I'll try to take it off the board's.
MGD
-
I'll pm you Sled in the morning. I'll try to take it off the board's.
MGD
What's wrong MGD?
-
A lot of problems from the sound of it. Mistakes happen and I know Nef (CM’s) try not to repeat them. As far as the plane set I like it, others obviously disagree. MGD mentioned plane match up’s that focus more on what would be an even match than on history. I heartily agree. It is always a balance between the two, (historical accuracy VS game play) but I think Nef has it for this event.
What Krusty said about the wind is a shame. Most (myself included) enjoy many aspects of the wind and its added realism, but if only part of what Krusty said is true then consider using the wind sparingly in any Squad Ops that has fleet operations. Or avoid using it in low alts as he also mentioned. I heard from someone the ‘downtime’ may have not been set correctly and that would account for some ships not being sunk.
Flop? Not by a long shot IMHO.
-
I heard from someone the ‘downtime’ may have not been set correctly and that would account for some ships not being sunk.
Down time WAS set correctly.
The reason the correct ships were not sunk was my fault, as I misread the orders.
Posted by: Nefarious
4XTCH the Setup CM, incorrectly read the objectives. And instead of Destroying the CVs at 78,79, and 80 he destroyed the Cruisers.
:frown:
From the looks of the logs, it appears that my gaffe hurt the Allies worse as they had to attempt to sink 2 Carriers and 4 Destroyers instead of 2 cruisers and 4 Destroyers. The IJN and IJAAF had to sink only 1 Carrier w/4 Destroyers in TG 80 instead of 1 cruiser w/ 4 Destroyers.
Sorry guys, it wont happen again.
4XTCH
-
Wind in this game isn't wind. It just adds sideways motion to everything, regardless of shape, form, or aerodynamics. Wind against the nose of an aircraft is going to have slightly less impact than wind on the wide flat side surfaces of the same aircraft turned 90 degrees.
In this game it's not really wind. It's just lateral motion regardless of how it really works. Setting wind to 5mph just means "move EVERYTHING thataway at 5mph." Ask a sniper if a 5mph wind is really going to blow his bullet 20 meters off mark. No, it might nudge it. Might make him miss by a bit. However most of the air fllows AROUND the bullet rather than a solid piston pushing it sideways. The total force of wind may be flowing at 5 mph but the effect it has hitting a 500lb fin-stabilized bomb hurtling downward at 600+ mph is NOT going to affect the bomb much.
AH2 just doesn't really do wind right.
-
From the looks of the logs, it appears that my gaffe hurt the Allies worse as they had to attempt to sink 2 Carriers and 4 Destroyers instead of 2 cruisers and 4 Destroyers. The IJN and IJAAF had to sink only 1 Carrier w/4 Destroyers in TG 80 instead of 1 cruiser w/ 4 Destroyers.
I'm not sure if this is the same TG, but the one USMC hit had the CV and the CA and the DDs all up. It was 100%.
-
It's wasn't a complete bust. At least the sun stayed turned on for the whole frame.
-
I'll try to answer as much as I can, Other things I will touch up on later in the results.
4XTCH the Setup CM, incorrectly read the objectives. And instead of Destroying the CVs at 78,79, and 81 he destroyed the Cruisers.
The Ack Settings have always been reduced in FSO usually to the tune of less than 0.5, I have been using .3 most of my events. This is to avoid One Ping Ack Kills and testing shows that repeated passes will result in damage.
As far as the Plane set goes, It's not changing. Looking at the numbers briefly, The Axis only fielded 19 more players than the Allies, and only used 38 Franks and Georges. Now I haven't combed the logs yet, so we will see how much damage they really did. (I know personally that I respawned two of those Franks due to JS trouble). I would say 36 Franks and Georges out of nearly 260+ Pilots is pretty reasonable. MGD, I can't tell what your trying to convey. Who was in the advantage? Who had the upper hand? You never mentioned it in your post.
At A1 Bombers could not spawn on the Runway, Hangar was the only option. When they launched all the drones were killed by spawning on top of the Hangar itself. I apologize for that as I should of caught that in my testing. Then combine that with the re-arm issue with Drones, once again something I totally forgot about.
As far as the wind goes, I am going to confer with the team and see what can be done.
For me last night was a major flop. After my two aborted launches and re-logs to check my JS, I finally solved my problem and rolled with 25% fuel. I didn't catch it until about T+35, when my engine died. :o
Ok Nef I'm not going to read through this mess to figure out what has been covered or not. In short:
I don't think the set up issue effected us much as it was global. Who cares.
The plane set does bother me I heard you made an adjustment but again.. who cares :)
The plane set in every special event is critical. I don't care much for the format of everyone will fly "X" planes withe the exception of the "lucky" few. Every plane in the air need's to have a fighting chance or this becomes.... UN-FUN. If that's not clear enough call me. My info is still posted.
This being clear now I will also say this. I for one didn't have a bad time on Friday night. I had a good time as a matter of fact. I got up with a bunch of good friends I've had for ten + years and in some cases we whipped bellybutton in others like my own case I was owned by fencer. I still had fun!
If you need a measure for the plane set take a look at the logs. Then one side score twice the assists as the other that mean's one side has to work twice as hard to have fun.
Here it is then I'm done (looking forward to whis week mind you), Get the plane set to be fair for evey squad every time & you have made a GREAT event. Short of that you made a bunch of guy's happy but pissed off many more.
Again call me if that wasn't clear enough.
MGD
-
This being clear now I will also say this. I for one didn't have a bad time on Friday night. I had a good time as a matter of fact. I got up with a bunch of good friends I've had for ten + years and in some cases we whipped bellybutton in others like my own case I was owned by fencer. I still had fun!
First of all, I don't know how I 'owned' you as from what I can tell your strike group was hitting C78 and I was helping defend C79. :huh
Secondly the fun in FSOs is the historical recreation of battles. The Japanese had 21 N1K1s available in the Phillipines during this time frame with a dozen or so others unservicable. There were also KI84s there, while I have not checked myself, probably in strength greater than the designer is allowing. I wonder if the American's had succeeded in downing them all in droves, would their numbers have increased or would we have seen more FM2s or more TBMs required in American playset. I doubt it. Personally I would always prefer to have a historical battle and let the players decide the results based upon tactics and ability rather than an "even" fight where the historical planeset is modified to level the playing field so both sides are equal.
Nefarious is doing what he feels he needs to to make this a 'fair' fight, and no matter what your opinion of mid stream modifications to an event is we should respect that. He is doing what he believes is correct for the overall good of everyone involved.
-
The plane set does bother me I heard you made an adjustment but again.. who cares :)
The plane set in every special event is critical. I don't care much for the format of everyone will fly "X" planes withe the exception of the "lucky" few. Every plane in the air need's to have a fighting chance or this becomes.... UN-FUN. If that's not clear enough call me. My info is still posted.
MGD
I agree the plane set needs to be looked after. The allies put up 174 of the most advanced fighters available to them while the axis put up 38 of the most advanced fighters available to them. :rolleyes:
-
Oh crud,
Maybe I needed to talk to Daddog before I ran off to no end. He summed it up better then I could have & with far better tact.
I don't care for the plane set nor do I care to arrive at a target to find out that it's going to be a bit harder to get the target down (while flying against the forementioned plane set).
The simple fact is that the miss communication that resulted in leaving the CV's Up & the CA's down was a bit more serious then the aar compensation wielded. This mistake commanded much more ord to be used on 78 & 79 & C80 was simply strafed down by a Ki-61 with 20mm (after the bombs fell).
I did have a good time on Friday but it didn't have much to do with the set up or the plane set.
MGD
-
First of all, I don't know how I 'owned' you as from what I can tell your strike group was hitting C78 and I was helping defend C79. :huh
Secondly the fun in FSOs is the historical recreation of battles. The Japanese had 21 N1K1s available in the Phillipines during this time frame with a dozen or so others unservicable. There were also KI84s there, while I have not checked myself, probably in strength greater than the designer is allowing. I wonder if the American's had succeeded in downing them all in droves, would their numbers have increased or would we have seen more FM2s or more TBMs required in American playset. I doubt it. Personally I would always prefer to have a historical battle and let the players decide the results based upon tactics and ability rather than an "even" fight where the historical planeset is modified to level the playing field so both sides are equal.
Nefarious is doing what he feels he needs to to make this a 'fair' fight, and no matter what your opinion of mid stream modifications to an event is we should respect that. He is doing what he believes is correct for the overall good of everyone involved.
Garbage.
They training was kaput & the pilots flying the planes where sub par. If what you are saying is true & we accurately recreated a battle in some way shape or form. There is no way we could be speaking English :)
MGD
-
No, we were given the ability to refight a battle. Don't blame the design for the results.
-
I firmly believe the F6f is an excellent plane and more than capable to deal with both the Frank and the George. I believe one thing to consider in regards to the apparent lopsidedness other than planeset might be to consider the relative fighter skills of the squads on each side. This most certainly is a factor in the outcome of a fight so should most definitely be considered when determining side-balance. In fact one CO basically states this, referring to his inexperienced squad being jumped by what he rightfully considers more experienced squads. I think it is a valid concern. Now this may already be taken under consideration by the staff, so it might be a mute point. But I was thinking that possibly developing a squadron FSO rating, that can be for staff eyes only, that can be used for setting up sid-balance might be something to consider. It would be a factor/percentage of squadron size versus average kills from let's say the last 5 FSO series. It would be a dynamic rating that would fluctuate with a squads size and its gaining or loss of experience. This number would then be used to balance the two sides as opposed to numbers alone. Again this might already be done, but in case not I figured I would throw the idea out there.
The plane set modification may have been a necessary thing to enhance play balance and fun for all. But I would hope to believe it wasn't considered the long term solution.
<S> and thanks to the guys that make the FSO possible. Best part of AH.
-
I firmly believe the F6f is an excellent plane and more than capable to deal with both the Frank and the George. I believe one thing to consider in regards to the apparent lopsidedness other than planeset might be to consider the relative fighter skills of the squads on each side.
Or maybe. Just, maybe. WxMans plan for the Axis was just extremely superior to MGD's.
I don't have a copy of the Allied Orders, But I would interested in seeing them. I would like to see the force dispersal for the objectives.
-
An FSO rating might be a good idea for one reason or another. However it's already tasking enough for the staff and CIC's to balance out things with numbers, and who flew what last. I'm not sure adding another thing to monitor or consider when planning a frame would be a good thing. Besides, the Muppets and 9GIAP have earned their skills through competetion, not because somebody made it easier for them. They smoked us because they were the better cartoon pilots.
We can live with it, pick oursleves up, dust off, and have another go at it without a major change in the planeset, rules, or assignements. If we can't do that, then we need to go fly somewhere else. The big boys fly in the FSO, and you better learn to run at speed or you get run over, simple as that. It is the best part of AH Bug I agree with you 100% there. I don't think it should be made easier for anybody, regardless of skill level. We need to earn our stripes just like everybody else.
<S>
-
Or maybe. Just, maybe. WxMans plan for the Axis was just extremely superior to MGD's.
Well I personally highly doubt that the orders would have such an impact, but I agree that it could be a possibility. But if it is a possibility that warrants closer examination then why was the planeset changed so quickly?
Mind you I flew a ki61 the first frame and would be happy with it for the next two. Just trying to be helpful and not critical of any decisions made.
-
An FSO rating might be a good idea for one reason or another. However it's already tasking enough for the staff and CIC's to balance out things with numbers, and who flew what last. I'm not sure adding another thing to monitor or consider when planning a frame would be a good thing. Besides, the Muppets and 9GIAP have earned their skills through competetion, not because somebody made it easier for them. They smoked us because they were the better cartoon pilots.
We can live with it, pick oursleves up, dust off, and have another go at it without a major change in the planeset, rules, or assignements. If we can't do that, then we need to go fly somewhere else. The big boys fly in the FSO, and you better learn to run at speed or you get run over, simple as that. It is the best part of AH Bug I agree with you 100% there. I don't think it should be made easier for anybody, regardless of skill level. We need to earn our stripes just like everybody else.
<S>
Now that I think about the numbers it would be just as easy as balancing the sides by a combination of numbers, average kills over last 15 frames and previous versus requested sides. I may be wrong but I don't see it being that much more work, especially after the first time.
As for making it "easier", I guess I wouldn't of chose that term for it. It has more to do with making it balanced. There is nothing to say an inexperienced squad still won't get jumped by an experienced one, it is just trying to help eliminate 4 inexperienced ones, on one side, getting jumped by 4 experienced on the other side. Having it play out 2 on 2 going both ways would be balanced for a side, but not necessarily easier for an inexperienced squad. Hopefully my babble makes sense.
I believe reducing the number of Franks and Georges is along the lines of making it easier. <S>
-
It was changed because 1/8 of the Axis Pilots managed to claim 1/3 of the Axis Kills while flying the N1K and Ki84.
-
It was changed because 1/8 of the Axis Pilots managed to claim 1/3 of the Axis Kills while flying the N1K and Ki84.
I'm sorry, call me thick, but you're losing me. My first post was saying that the cause of the result you state above might have been an imbalance in fighter skill to one side, not a plane set imbalance. You countered it might have been a superior plan. I really believe the plane set was not the issue and although I agree that an immediate fix is to reduce the Georges and Franks, I think it would be a case of treating the symptom and not the cause. Just my opinion of course. <S>
-
I believe reducing the number of Franks and Georges is along the lines of making it easier. <S>
I agree, I never asked for it, or even considered it.
It wasn't as much that we were in F6Fs and they were in N1K2s as it was we were heavy and commited to our strike. In fact we were nosing over when they started their attacks on us. We were they only Allies in sight and we ran afoul of the N1k2s flown by who in my opinion are two of the very best FSO squadrons. Heck we still have guys that can't spell FSO. ;)
Had we been in air to air mode and ready for a fight we may had fared a little better, however we were still outclassed in pilot skill, experiance, and tactics. In fact Fridays FSO was a good thing for us. We learned some things, I learned some things. Some sacred cow tactics I've held onto for years were finnally pulled from the unit playbook and put on the BBq grill.
<S>
-
I really believe the plane set was not the issue and although I agree that an immediate fix is to reduce the Georges and Franks, I think it would be a case of treating the symptom and not the cause. Just my opinion of course. <S>
I respect your and everyone's opinions, but I don't have very long to sit and look at every possibility of why things happened between frames. I looked at the logs and that is what I based my decision on. <S>
-
You need to quit your day job Nef.
-
You need to quit your day job Nef.
Not until I start getting paid to write FSO :rofl
-
I agree, I never asked for it, or even considered it.
Sorry, didn't mean to sound as if I thought you did. Was just talking about the quick fix chosen.
-
I respect your and everyone's opinions, but I don't have very long to sit and look at every possibility of why things happened between frames. I looked at the logs and that is what I based my decision on. <S>
As I respect your decisions. <S>
I understand and agree that the plane set change was a necessary quick fix to the current setup. But my discussion was based more on a long term fix for future FSOs. Which there is time to have discussions regarding beter balancing.
Looking past this FSO, what is wrong with balancing a side with the additional parameter of squad kills?
I appreciate your taking the time to reply Nef.
-
I have thought of that before over the years. Not the first time this has come up. Even came up with a system, but I never posted it.
Currently we have several multiple choices for squads to commit to when we are talking about attendance for the current FSO’s.
4-6 = 1
7-10 = 2
11-15 = 3
16-21 = 4
22-27 = 5
28-32 = 6
32+ = 7
As you can see I gave each bracket a number value. The larger the squad the larger the number value. Then each squad can be given another number based on their skill level.
Below average = 0
Average = 1
Above average = 2
CM’s could track the past performance of the last 3 FSO’s and come up with a formula that would rate them (0, 1, or 2) according to the number of kills they have VS the number of deaths they have per frame. The most a squad could have would be 9 if they were a VERY large squad and had an excellent kill to death ratio. The least a squad could have would be 1 which would be a new small squad with a below average kill to death ratio. Each squad is rated from 1-9 prior to the CM balancing sides. The CM then just adds up the numbers till both side have about the same total.
We could come up with 50 different ways to do this, but it is a simple and easy way to balance sides. Simply add up the numbers and balance by that and not just by squad size.
Having explained this there are three inherent problems with this method or any method really that would adopt squad ratings on performance.
1 – It does not account for rotating squads Allied and Axis. Currently unless a squad requests it, no squad should be Axis more than twice in a row. No brainer since most squads prefer to be Allied.
2 – It does not account for squads who have a specific ride. For example can you picture the 56th Fighter Group slotted to be Axis flying Ju88’s when they always want to fly the P-47’s.
3 – It creates more work for the Admin CM.
For me the above three issues were enough to never adopt that kind of system. It is vitally important CM’s running the FSO’s
1 – Rotate squads between Allied and Axis
2 – “Try” to give squads with particular rides that ride when possible
3 – Don’t create more work for themselves
Who knows, maybe the CM's will do something like this, but I never wanted to for reasons stated.
My two cents for what it is worth. ;)
-
Sorry, didn't mean to sound as if I thought you did. Was just talking about the quick fix chosen.
NP Tom, I didn't think you were implying that. I just wanted make sure we didn't get credit for the N1K2/Ki-84 cutbacks by somebody not paying attention. Then again since we were part of the large body count I guess we did contribute to it somewhat.
Thanks. <S>
-
Read through this whole thing, and it does surprise me in all this that 2 items in regard to aircraft was not even mentioned. My group was defending 15 in KI61's, so all I can attest to is what I saw there.
1. A couple of groups at different timings, main bodies were coalt or better when intercepted. These F6's were hvy and never took any evasive actions when initially engaged. They stayed for the most part on target and some dove from 15k to drop their ords. Not actually sure how many did auger into the ground, but it seemed like more than a few that went to sharp to fast to have any way to pull out. And those that did, only climbed up about 2k then reversed for another pass.
2. after the first grouping, almost all our guys were low over the feild. Another large group and inbetween some stragglers had more than a higher alt advantage. Many times we would call each other for "check 6" only to see the F6's steer past our own out of e aircraft to make a run on the base. Then climb out 2k and turn back in. Many of us was was scratching our heads as to why they wasn't even taking shots on us when they were 400 - 600 on our tail, but instead would slip to the side as if we were in a car in the slow lane.
I don't think the tallies, nor what has been said here gives a full reflection of what happened in that area. Not sure about the other areas, but we were confused as to the passing up of our 6's and just as dumbfounded as to why a F6 with a much better E state would fly through the base only to do a 2k yoyo right back into the KI's. In a few case, some even stayed turning around again and again right on top of the base with the odds 5 to 1 when they had the initial E to extend out after drop.
Don't get me wrong, not slamming anyone for their choice here. Just seems that people are using the tally stats here with the mind frame that this is proof of the mismatch of planeset or the outclass of planeset. This is just not the case from what I saw in the area we were at. It wouldn't have mattered whether we were in zekes, nik's or KI's, the decisions/actions made as I described above would have ended with the same result there.
-
Thanks for that detailed explanation Daddog <S>
Wasn't trying to ruffle any feathers, just trying to be helpful. I hope it wasn't thought otherwise :)
I had a great FSO last Friday, was full of action and still in awe of the great squad I was fortunate to hook up with. But I have had those nights of frustration and thought maybe there was an idea out there to help smooth things out. But after Daddog's post I can see it has been something considered in the past. I don't envy the CM's position and am very appreciative of their efforts.
Looking forward to this Friday! <S>