Aces High Bulletin Board

Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 12:04:01 PM

Title: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 12:04:01 PM
Please post any discussion or questions regarding the setup in this thread.

Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on February 28, 2009, 12:56:27 PM
You have the word "formations" in the A20 quotas.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 28, 2009, 02:32:06 PM
You have the word "formations" in the A20 quotas.

On that note, I really dislike formations because of their warps when the lead aircraft isn't going straight and level.  Any chance we can not have formations in this FSO? ;) :pray

Is this going to be a 50/50 side split?  You're probably already fudging the historical numbers, but the number of Spitfire VIIIs (48max) versus 190A-5s (28max) seems imbalanced for gameplay.  My $.02.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 02:51:54 PM
You have the word "formations" in the A20 quotas.

Good catch Moot, thanks.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Fencer51 on February 28, 2009, 02:52:32 PM
On that note, I really dislike formations because of their warps when the lead aircraft isn't going straight and level.  Any chance we can not have formations in this FSO? ;) :pray

Is this going to be a 50/50 side split?  You're probably already fudging the historical numbers, but the number of Spitfire VIIIs (48max) versus 190A-5s (28max) seems imbalanced for gameplay.  My $.02.

Gava, the 190s were very limited and were 190Gs.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 02:55:58 PM
On that note, I really dislike formations because of their warps when the lead aircraft isn't going straight and level.  Any chance we can not have formations in this FSO? ;) :pray

Is this going to be a 50/50 side split?  You're probably already fudging the historical numbers, but the number of Spitfire VIIIs (48max) versus 190A-5s (28max) seems imbalanced for gameplay.  My $.02.

Current numbers are planned at a 48% Axis to 52% Allied.  Allied will have 8 offensive/2 defensive objectives per frame with Axis having 2 offensive/8 defensive objectives per frame.  I've done a pretty thorough job of researching as many available Axis and Allied AOB's as I could get my hands on, and this aircraft mix is roughly proportional to what was in theater at the time.  I believe its pretty well balanced, but obviously, if frame 1 illustrates any glaring problems, I'll adjust.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 28, 2009, 02:58:39 PM
Oh, well then wouldn't the 190F-8 be a better choice than the A5?
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: 33Vortex on February 28, 2009, 03:02:19 PM
Yeah... wasn't the G a ground attack version? Perhaps the A-8 is more similar though, it really comes down to the armor plating.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Saxman on February 28, 2009, 03:06:59 PM
Wow, the two Axis offensive objectives should be interesting. That could make for a titanic air battle.

One of these days I'd love to see a frame where one side is pure attack and has ONE offensive objective. One massive air battle. It'd kill the frame rate, but man wouldn't that be crazy. :D
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Fencer51 on February 28, 2009, 03:09:38 PM
Oh, well then wouldn't the 190F-8 be a better choice than the A5?

Dunno..

Quote
Stab/Sch.G 2, II./Sch.G 2, II./SKG 10, and III./SKG 10 had Fw-190G fighter bombers in September in Italy and were engaged in the fighting for Salerno.  Seems they started getting 190A6s and A5/U8s in March 1944.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 03:10:13 PM
Well Sax, I empathize with that--I think a lot of us do.  However, current game mechanics prevent us from doing that.  With 10 objectives per frame, we'll average 50+ pilots per battle, which should be sufficient for decent action without framerate-jamming the participants systems.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Nefarious on February 28, 2009, 03:13:18 PM
Looks like a great writeup, 412th is requesting Allies after two tours flying Japanese Aircraft.

EDIT: The Squad Ops Welcome page still lists August Storm as the current FSO.  ;)
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 03:15:23 PM
Looks like a great writeup, 412th is requesting Allies after two tours flying Japanese Aircraft.

I'll see what I can do...    :rofl

Well, I changed the text hyperlink and forgot to change the graphic hyperlink...fixed now
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: TheBug on February 28, 2009, 03:16:02 PM
Really looking forward to this one!

Looks good Stoney.  :aok
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 28, 2009, 03:27:23 PM
Stoney, any thoughts on the 190F-8 as a better substitute for the 190G?
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 03:46:37 PM
The 190A5 bears a closer resemblance to the performance of the earlier G series 190's, IMO.  Outside of wing drop tanks, ordnance capacity is almost identical.  Plus, the in-game F model and its PB-1 rockets were not introduced until later--mid-to-late 1944 if I understand correctly.  So, short answer is no.  The A5 will stay versus the F8, unless someone can provide a more convincing argument.  Thanks for the question though.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: 33Vortex on February 28, 2009, 03:47:14 PM
 :aok

 :salute
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 28, 2009, 03:53:40 PM
The F8 could be restricted to only use the 4x50kg bombs on the wings to simulate the abilities of the G.  The 190G was a long range version of the 190F; the F has better range than the A5, which has extremely short range and can't carry both ordinance and a drop tank.

Second part of the argument:  the 190A-5 will be used as an air-superiority fighter if it's available, the 190F-8 would be used for what the 190G was used for.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Stoney on February 28, 2009, 05:11:40 PM
Sorry, we're going to leave the A5s as they are.
Title: Re: PRELUDE TO STALEMATE: OPERATION AVALANCHE DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Anaxogoras on February 28, 2009, 06:25:23 PM
You don't have to say "sorry." :lol  Just make the most accurate choice for the event and I'll be happy.