Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: ghostdancer on June 13, 2009, 09:59:39 AM
-
Gentlemen,
I have revised the frame 1 results slightly. One Axis squad did not turn out at all in frame 1 and was a no show again for frame 2. I am not going to penalize the Axis for their no show in Frame 1 where they were tasked with flying JU88s.
That said the Axis had to field a minimum of 40 JU88s, they only field 22. Giving the benefit of the doubt (saying the no show squad would have field their max +2 of 12) the axis were 6 JU88s short. So a penalty of -60.
Revised frame 1 score is now:
2863 = Frame 1 Allies
2476 = Frame 1 Axis
Frame 1 & Frame 2 Score is:
5234= Frame 1 Allies
5041= Frame 1 Axis
Here are the results for frame 2. Both sides upped the bomber component force of the side and did better on bombing. Although the Allies are still doing better in the bombing than the Axis but the Axis are still doing better in air to air.
As for the Amphibious assault element, it is the first time I attempted to work this in since the GVs were fixed so that a HE round actually had an affect on other armor (in 2005 an HE round did no damage to other GVs). I think all involved will admit that the Amphibious assault needs work.
First we dont know exact distances that GVs spawn from a fleet. This resulted in the GVs being a bit to close to shore but still in the water. Not giving them time to maneuver before being fired on. Especially since the Axis VH basically is almost on the beach. Overall it definitely needs tweaking and constructive criticism / suggestions are welcome so that we can come up with a better Amphibious assault sometime in the future.
For right now I am going to leave in the GV results.
ALLIED SCORE
===========
1158 - Allied Bombing Results
0528 - Allied Defense of their bases / fleets
0670 - Allied Air Victories
0025 GV Victories
-010 - Friendly Fire Incidents (shot down 1 friendly 1 bomber)
2371 = TOTAL SCORE
AXIS SCORE
===========
0906 - Axis Bombing Results
0282 - Axis Defense of their bases / fleets
1005 - Axis Air Victories
0185 GV Victories
0192 Maintained Possession of V5
-005 - Friendly Fire Incidents (shot down 1 friendly fighter)
2565 = TOTAL SCORE
Here are stats on turn out, force composition, and loss composition for both sides.
ALLIES
=====
176 - Fighters (69.3% of total force)
078 - Bombers (30.7% of total force)
254 - Total Planes flown
094 - Fighters lost (53.41% of fighter force)
043 - Bombers lost (55.1% of bomber force)
137 - Total Planes lost (53.9% of total force)
AXIS
====
165 - Fighters (65.7% of total force)
086 - Bombers (34.3% of total force)
251 - Total Planes flown
066 - Fighters lost (40% of fighter force)
034 - Bombers lost (39.5% of bomber force)
100 - Total Planes lost (39.8% of total force)
Here are the bombing results for both sides. Basically the bombers performed well on both sides and inflicted a higher amount of damage to their targets than in frame one.
The Allies had a little trouble with A18 (64.8 destroyed) and were unable to sink any of the ships of C106.
As for the Axis they seemed to have trouble at A47 but otherwise destroyed all their land base targets. They also did much better against the fleets in frame 2 than in frame 1. They sank 2 CVs, 1 CA, and 1 DD.
ALLIED BOMBING
============
288 (out of 288) A11 (100% destroyed)
186 (out of 288) A18 (64.8% destroyed)
396 (out of 396) A26 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) A57 (100% destroyed)
000 (out of 180) C106 (0% destroyed)
80.5% of all targets destroyed
AXIS BOMBING
============
098 (out of 288) A47 (34.1% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) - A103 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) - A114 (100% destroyed)
120 (out of 300) - C10 (40% destroyed, 1 CV)
210 (out of 270) - C7 (77.8% destroyed, 1 CV, 1 CA, 1 DD)
63.2% of all targets destroyed
-
I am still thinking on the GV portion of frame 2.
-
Sir with all due respect the gv part needs lotta work as you said to use the points seems to be a reward to axis for simply showing up as logs show no lvt even had a chance.while i think its a great idea and trial and error is a great part of learning do you not think its wrong to award the points ?
-
Also another problem arose while I do not think it made a difference somehow cv c7 and cv110 were locked down we could not move them till somewhere around t+30 68gaidin finally caught that they were locked out of our control he did great job in working with us to figure this out
just something needs watched in future events
-
I think points should be allowed because allies are ahead anyways. Might make frame 3 a little closer than a blow out if they are taken away IMHO. ALL in all was a good frame had a great time. :salute
-
Yep, I put the GV results in for now as the preliminary results. I am thinking on how to handle them.
If I do not use the GV kills and the base points for V5 then the score changes to
2346 Allies
2188 Axis
Allies win the frame 158 points instead of Axis winning the frame. Allies would win by 194 points instead of Axis winning by 158.
Either way the allies would still have the lead for frame 1 and frame 2 either by 193 points or 351 points.
I am just still thinking on how to handle this since both the Allied GVs and Axis GVs went into the battle in good faith and the results were affected more by the fleet being placed to close to shore (my mistake). The other suggestions of 2 fleets would be good but I also think if the fleet was farther out it would have given the allied GVs the ability to maneuver and try flanking attacks, etc. instead of coming under fire just shortly after they spawned.
So as I said I thinking on what would be the best way to handle these points, use them as stands, give no points for the amphibious invasion, or maybe give only half of the points.
-
ALLIED BOMBING
============
288 (out of 288) A11 (100% destroyed)
186 (out of 288) A18 (64.8% destroyed)
396 (out of 396) A26 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) A57 (100% destroyed)
000 (out of 180) C106 (0% des
How does this figure? The claim jumpers sent 24 jugs to the wrong target and leveled A56. A57 was never hit.
-
As frame2 cic took lotta heat on this gv part guys were not happy about being target practice for m8's I apologize to them but our hands were tied we followed the orders as given to us.
-
ALLIED BOMBING
============
288 (out of 288) A11 (100% destroyed)
186 (out of 288) A18 (64.8% destroyed)
396 (out of 396) A26 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) A57 (100% destroyed)
000 (out of 180) C106 (0% des
How does this figure? The claim jumpers sent 24 jugs to the wrong target and leveled A56. A57 was never hit.
-
Looking into now A56 was hit not A57.
-
Thank you.
Gd,
We let them strike. We intercepted them before target, and after seeing they went for the wrong base, let them attack it, before engaging them.
-
We let them strike. We intercepted them before target, and after seeing they went for the wrong base, let them attack it, before engaging them.
Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake. :aok
-
Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake. :aok
Indeed.
-
Claim jumpers hit what they were supposed to
-
Claim jumpers hit what they were supposed to
How is that? Were they ordered to hit the wrong target?
or
Were we ordered to defend the wrong one?
-
our map from ghostdancer showed 56 as target not 57
-
One Axis squad did not turn out at all in frame 1 and was a no show again for frame 2.
I'm sure the proper measures are being put into motion...
I for one hope to never see this squad's name (whatever it is) listed in FSO again - especially on my side.
Crappy ride or assignment, or not...if you sign up to participate in a team event, you dang well better show up. I can see a couple people saying "screw that, I'm not coming" and the squad show up with less than their commitment level - but for the whole squad to not show up [TWICE] is hard to let slide.
-
DEFENSE Obj.
A11 288 pts 19200 lbs Small Airbase
A18 288 pts 19200 lbs Small Airbase
A26 396pts 26400 lbs Medium Airbase
A57 288 pts 19200 lbs Small Airbase
C106 180 pts 10000 lbs CA and 4 DDs (CV is not a target and should not be present)
NOTE: The fleet, C106, must stay in the containment area:
Sectors 16,7 17,7 16,6 17,6
These are the defence objective I received.
-
our map from ghostdancer showed 56 as target not 57
Better check Objectives.
-
That is a CM mistake. On the written for both sides A57 was designated the target. On the map for both sides A56 was circled.
A57 and A56 are right next to each, with one n the souther coast and one on the northern coast. There is roughly 11 to 12 miles distance between the two. So looking at the battle plans the Axis defended A57 and the Allies were told to attack A56. With them being so close I am sure you guys mixed it up and fought quite bit in the area and even pursued the bombers after they egressed. However, it is my mistake and I will be firing off a note to the CiC of both sides and the squads involved about how to score the issue.
-
I see that chappy our matrix went off map and that was 56 have to let ghoshtdancer decide but either way was no fault of claim jumpers they did as ordered
-
That is a CM mistake. On the written for both sides A57 was designated the target. On the map for both sides A56 was circled.
A57 and A56 are right next to each, with one n the souther coast and one on the northern coast. There is roughly 11 to 12 miles distance between the two. So looking at the battle plans the Axis defended A57 and the Allies were told to attack A56. With them being so close I am sure you guys mixed it up and fought quite bit in the area and even pursued the bombers after they egressed. However, it is my mistake and I will be firing off a note to the CiC of both sides and the squads involved about how to score the issue.
No.
That is not the case, and I have film. We let them attack, before engaging. While the allies may have hit what they were told to hit, they were told to hit a different target than we were told to defend.
Written objectives must be the deciding factor, not a map graphic error.
-
Thanks for clarifying stampf. So you attack the bombers after they dropped, yes?
Okay let me think on this (totaly my screw up both sides did what they were supposed to) and then talk to all those involved about the issue and possible resolutions.
-
Thanks for clarifying stampf. So you attack the bombers after they dropped, yes?
Okay let me think on this (totaly my screw up both sides did what they were supposed to) and then talk to all those involved about the issue and possible resolutions.
Attack planes, not buffs. Yes, we let them attack A56, before engaging them. We spotted them between the two fields. They turned north to our surprise and dropped on A56. We followed them and after they dropped their ords, we attacked.
-
Gentlemen,
I have revised the frame 1 results slightly. One Axis squad did not turn out at all in frame 1 and was a no show again for frame 2. I am not going to penalize the Axis for their no show in Frame 1 where they were tasked with flying JU88s.
That said the Axis had to field a minimum of 40 JU88s, they only field 22. Giving the benefit of the doubt (saying the no show squad would have field their max +2 of 12) the axis were 6 JU88s short. So a penalty of -60.
Am i missing something?...
Operation Husky - Frame 2
Summary for the Axis
Side Statistics Pilots 243
Sorties 315
Landed 147
Deaths 65
Captured 22
Disco'd 10
Crashed 53
Ditched 5
Bailed 13
Kills 182
Assists 141
Objects Destroyed 170
# of Bf 109F-4 used 30
# of Bf 109G-2 used 44
# of Bf 109G-6 used 5
# of C.205 used 36
# of Fw 190A-5 used 50
# of Gunner-Observer used 37
# of Ju 88A-4 used 86
# of M8 used 27
-
Attack planes, not buffs. Yes, we let them attack A56, before engaging them. We spotted them between the two fields. They turned north to our surprise and dropped on A56. We followed them and after they dropped their ords, we attacked.
There's the rub, right there. If GD decides to score it the egg's on your face for letting them drop before engaging. If he doesn't, he's penalizing a squad that followed the instructions they were given.
Maybe this is just me, but whether they turn to the wrong target or not my squad hits them before they get there either way.
-
There's the rub, right there. If GD decides to score it the egg's on your face for letting them drop before engaging. If he doesn't, he's penalizing a squad that followed the instructions they were given.
Maybe this is just me, but whether they turn to the wrong target or not my squad hits them before they get there either way.
:huh
Glad you usually allied.
24 P47's vrs. 14 BF109F's ?
No sir. We needed some kind of equalization, and that was letting them blow their 25 k of alt before engaging, but you lead yours and I'll lead mine. :aok
-
Thanks for clarifying stampf. So you attack the bombers after they dropped, yes?
Okay let me think on this (totaly my screw up both sides did what they were supposed to) and then talk to all those involved about the issue and possible resolutions.
A map with no key is not an order.
Clearly written Defense objectives are an order.
Did the Allied attack obj. state to attack 56? Or was it only an interpretation of the map?
:salute -Assi
-
As for the Axis they seemed to have trouble at A47 but otherwise destroyed all their land base targets. They also did much better against the fleets in frame 2 than in frame 1. They sank 2 CVs, 1 CA, and 1 DD.
ALLIED BOMBING
============
288 (out of 288) A11 (100% destroyed)
186 (out of 288) A18 (64.8% destroyed)
396 (out of 396) A26 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) A57 (100% destroyed)
000 (out of 180) C106 (0% destroyed)
80.5% of all targets destroyed
AXIS BOMBING
============
098 (out of 288) A47 (34.1% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) - A103 (100% destroyed)
288 (out of 288) - A114 (100% destroyed)
120 (out of 300) - C10 (40% destroyed, 1 CV)
210 (out of 270) - C7 (77.8% destroyed, 1 CV, 1 CA, 1 DD)
63.2% of all targets destroyed
Maybe this is already known, maybe not. 332nd was assigned A47, we went in 24 strong in JU-88's. Kermit's squad did best they possibly could <S>, they were 8 strong I believe. That was all the escort we had, 1 squad was no show :frown:. Can't help but believe they would have made some difference. It got ugly quick once we made contact with allied spits.
:salute
-
In frame 1 only 22 JU88s were used. The minimum was to have 40. One 7-10 squad was a no show (for frame 1 and frame 2 .. they have been suspended now for frame 3 and at least next FSO). So if they turned out say their max of 12 the Axis were still 6 planes short. That is where that penalty came from.
86 Ju-88s were used in frame 2 not frame 1.
-
Why no points deduction for the Axis not hitting 110 within the first hour?
-
This is going to get out of control axis got a free run on lvts allied got a free run on 56 why dont we let scores stand and let frame 3 decide this?
-
Maybe this is already known, maybe not. 332nd was assigned A47, we went in 24 strong in JU-88's. Kermit's squad did best they possibly could <S>, they were 8 strong I believe. That was all the escort we had, 1 squad was no show :frown:. Can't help but believe they would have made some difference. It got ugly quick once we made contact with allied spits.
You had the misfortune of being assigned the base where all of the GV guys were allowed to spawn in fighters at T+50. So, in addition to the fighter CAP that was assigned there, you ran into about 40 extra pilots. All of whom were a little pissed and out for blood after the LVT disaster that we were put into.
-
This is going to get out of control axis got a free run on lvts allied got a free run on 56 why dont we let scores stand and let frame 3 decide this?
I think clarification only helps in the long run rather than just shrugging and ignoring it.
-
Clarification is that written objectives said A57 while the map said A56. Neither CiC spotted my mistake and asked for clarifications. This is a CM mistake, mine, and not a CiC or squads involved mistake.
Fortunately both sides did see combat and had action up in the A56 area. The issue is the bombing results which is what I am considering and consulting with those involved.
-
Clarification is that written objectives said A57 while the map said A56. Neither CiC spotted my mistake and asked for clarifications. This is a CM mistake, mine, and not a CiC or squads involved mistake.
Fortunately both sides did see combat and had action up in the A56 area. The issue is the bombing results which is what I am considering and consulting with those involved.
It wasn't a mistake to defend 57.
It was a mistake to attack 56.
Trusting a map with no key is the only mistake IMHO.
Of course, I was axis. :devil
-
You had the misfortune of being assigned the base where all of the GV guys were allowed to spawn in fighters at T+50. So, in addition to the fighter CAP that was assigned there, you ran into about 40 extra pilots. All of whom were a little pissed and out for blood after the LVT disaster that we were put into.
Yep, your correct Dave, but we only had 8 escort to begin with. The squad we were missing is a fair size squad. Not saying it would have made a d** bit of difference, but more is always better :lol
:salute
-
True DMBEAR .. but actually the written objectives were the mistake on my part. I meant for A56 to be the actual objective.
-
Will look into when A110 was attack .. within T+60 or after.
-
Yes, the axis attack on A47 was badly hurt by a squad escorting them being a no show. The Axis attack on A103 and A114 had a little more than 1 escort fighter per bomber. The axis attack on A47 had 0.36 escorts per bomber of 9 escorts and 25 bombers. This played a very big role on how things played out there and also highlight that is is very, very important for all squads in this event to actually turn out. A no show can have some very disastrous results and ruin the fun of another squad .. in this case the 332nd were butchered even with the herculean effort of the ~~~The Killuminati~~~ (the escort squad that did show up) defending them.
-
I show A56 was the target on or spreadsheet and maps and wished we had a closer target. We could have finished off that last fuel bunker and got back to rearm. I see on the 6-7 target was listed as A57 and the 9th A56 and the 10th map details to A56. Sorry about your airfield, better build a new one. Fli
Chappy, still going hunting with us in Nov? I look forward to walking the fields with you. Tom
952-210-7245
Fliifast@msn.com
-
In regards to C110 it was attacked before the T+60.
First spawn of the night was an Axis M8 by captdan at 22:03:09. First damage done to a ship of C110 was at 23:04:09. So they hit it at T+59 according to damage logs.
-
you know ghost as I was eating lunch I do feel both chappy and I share some blame for NOT asking 56 or 57 as allied cic I will stand by your
judgement on this I really dont care about score claim jumpers did as I ordered :salute stampf 11 miles you had every chance to engage
and didnt you had same map you knew 56 was a possible target you decided not to engage as 367th co if roles were reversed we would not let any bomber to either field we can play this game all day long I wont chappy axis :salute great frame allied :salute good job by all
look forward to frame 3
-
you know ghost as I was eating lunch I do feel both chappy and I share some blame for NOT asking 56 or 57 as allied cic I will stand by your
judgement on this I really dont care about score claim jumpers did as I ordered :salute stampf 11 miles you had every chance to engage
and didnt you had same map you knew 56 was a possible target you decided not to engage as 367th co if roles were reversed we would not let any bomber to either field we can play this game all day long I wont chappy axis :salute great frame allied :salute good job by all
look forward to frame 3
Dh,
Don't get me wrong sir. I am also fine with whatever Ghostdancer decides. It was an honest error by all involved. As far as engaging a superior force - had they went for A57, (the valid target, we believed at the time), then of course we would have engaged at altitute, but when they turned north, (toward what we believed was a wrong target), we saw it as a chance to even the situation up a bit, by letting them get low and engaged in their attack before running in on them. Also...we did not have 11 miles of pursuit. More like 1 mile. At 25k, the targets (both of them), were basically right below us.
IMHO, any commander who jeopardises the lives of their flight, for the sake of engaging alone is bonkers. We had 14 obsolete planes against 24 enemy rides. The clear choice under the given (albeit erroneous circumstance), was to let them dive and then engage.
But...like I mentioned earlier - We all lead as we see fit.
At least we all saw action and had fun.
:salute
-
you know ghost as I was eating lunch I do feel both chappy and I share some blame for NOT asking 56 or 57 as allied cic I will stand by your
judgement on this I really dont care about score claim jumpers did as I ordered :salute stampf 11 miles you had every chance to engage
and didnt you had same map you knew 56 was a possible target you decided not to engage as 367th co if roles were reversed we would not let any bomber to either field we can play this game all day long I wont chappy axis :salute great frame allied :salute good job by all
look forward to frame 3
Thats BS. They were assigned a target to defend and did so. There could have been other planes going A57 as well.
Quit making it sound like they were doing anything less than that.
:salute JG11 you defended your target per frame II objectives.
-
Well I have narrowed things down to two choices.
1) Let the GV and A56 attack scores stand. Resulting in the Axis winning the frame by 194 pts.
or
2) I don't count the GV battle and the A56 attack (both the bombing and the 11 kills that Axis had up there and 8 losses). Which results in the Axis winning by 115 pts.
Got to run but more later.
Oh, and DMbear the point is that neither side could no which was the correct target without asking me for clarification. The map was the actual correct target so by your logic you are wrong. By my logic neither side was wrong because I made a mistake in the objectives. So the point really is moot and possible outcome or what would have been correct or incorrect tactics, etc. is just conjecture.
-
Stampf none takin sir didnt mean any smack towards you was just saying how I would have loked at sir im sure you did as orders said and as you saw fit I was not in your seat if I was might very well did the same thing :salute
-
What ever GhostDancer decides, our team had fun anywhere we go. This is going to make frame 3 alot more high stakes! Fli
-
:huh
Glad you usually allied.
24 P47's vrs. 14 BF109F's ?
No sir. We needed some kind of equalization, and that was letting them blow their 25 k of alt before engaging, but you lead yours and I'll lead mine. :aok
Frankly, I'd have wet myself for joy if I was capping a field and had only 2 to 1 odds to deal with, all of them Jabos.
-
On a happier note, where are the stats? Like who shot down who? LOL
I searched but cand find em for some reason... :salute
thanx
d
-
Stampf none takin sir didnt mean any smack towards you was just saying how I would have loked at sir im sure you did as orders said and as you saw fit I was not in your seat if I was might very well did the same thing :salute
:salute
Cya next week.
-
First spawn of the night was an Axis M8 by captdan at 22:03:09. First damage done to a ship of C110 was at 23:04:09. So they hit it at T+59 according to damage logs.
Would that not be T+61 ?
-
All this bickering about a score, that means nothing, is sad.
-
In regards to C110 it was attacked before the T+60.
First spawn of the night was an Axis M8 by captdan at 22:03:09. First damage done to a ship of C110 was at 23:04:09. So they hit it at T+59 according to damage logs.
My math may be off, but wouldn't that make it 61 minutes? :huh
-
oh well this brrad is just like the game...
I dont need to know the chitt anyway...screw it....thanx for nothin! :furious
-
oh well this brrad is just like the game...
I dont need to know the chitt anyway...screw it....thanx for nothin! :furious
http://ahevents.org/eventlogs.html
-
1) Let the GV and A56 attack scores stand. Resulting in the Axis winning the frame by 194 pts.
Sounds good to me. :aok
<S> Stampf Good work JG2 would have done the same sir :salute
:salute Allied CIC great frame
:salute AXIS :x
-
According to our orders (that I have) CLAIM JUMPERS were assigned A56, and destroyed A56. End of story in my book! Thank You!
-
Sounds good to me. :aok
CHAPPY,
The difference is the GV battle was virtually unfightable for the allies. It was like they were spawning in the hangar with 20 Tigers behind them. The Allied LVTs had no choice in the matter.
In contrast Stampf's crew had every opportunity to engage the CJ's before they dropped on 56, Stampf (per his own admission) just elected not to.
-
ok no gv score and no score on 56 due to CM mix up.
CHAPPY,
The difference is the GV battle was virtually unfightable for the allies. It was like they were spawning in the hangar with 20 Tigers behind them. The Allied LVTs had no choice in the matter.
In contrast Stampf's crew had every opportunity to engage the CJ's before they dropped on 56, Stampf (per his own admission) just elected not to.
In contrast all we did as AXIS is follow orders SAXMAN. If you have a problem with that then i guess you need to talk to the CM's. :salute
-
Still waiting to hear about the CV's, was axis cv within assigned cords....I sent a group looking for it with nothing to report. And I know its been 10 years since I was last in school...but by my math I am counting t+61 mins on first contact with allied CV
<S>
Gun
-
In contrast all we did as AXIS is follow orders SAXMAN. If you have a problem with that then i guess you need to talk to the CM's. :salute
Don't get snippy with me, CHAPPY. The CJ's THOUGHT they were, too, so there was nothing invalid with what I was saying in that there WAS still a difference between the two situations.
However it's moot anyway if both scores were invalidated (which hadn't been announced on the boards here by the time I made my post, BTW).
-
Don't get snippy with me, CHAPPY. The CJ's THOUGHT they were, too, so there was nothing invalid with what I was saying in that there WAS still a difference between the two situations.
However it's moot anyway if both scores were invalidated (which hadn't been announced on the boards here by the time I made my post, BTW).
Telling Stampf the egg is on their face for not attacking the jugs is where you started turding up this thread.
-
Telling Stampf the egg is on their face for not attacking the jugs is where you started turding up this thread.
"If GD decides to score it..."
Operative part of the phrase. No "turds," just a simple observation on what happened, so I'm sorry if you misread what I was saying.
And as I said above, it's a moot point anyway, so there's nothing more to talk about.
-
Why no points deduction for the Axis not hitting 110 within the first hour?
My math may be off, but wouldn't that make it 61 minutes? :huh
Not trying to be mean or anything but you try flying a Ju88 a little over 100miles then searching for a CV that could be anywhere in a four sector section of ocean with 7 mile visibility.
Are you really asking for point deduction because we were 1 minute late? I mean its not like we knew where the target was and just flew in circles waiting for T+60. We split up into two groups and the group I was in was so spread out looking for the TG that our escorts couldn't cover but a few of us.
-
"If GD decides to score it..."
Operative part of the phrase. No "turds," just a simple observation on what happened, so I'm sorry if you misread what I was saying.
And as I said above, it's a moot point anyway, so there's nothing more to talk about.
As I stated, the comment on Stampf was where you started turding up the thread. Obviously, it continued w/ your accusation that Chappy's statement was "snippy".
Saying that it was all moot and there's nothing more to comment about on the original subject hardly closes the door on your comments or our rebuttals. I won't ignore your zing just becase you say it's all moot. :rolleyes:
-
Honestly I think the scores should stand as the logs represent them. JG11 made a decision (good one in my opinion) on poor information, did this happen in 1943 during the invasion of Italy, abso-freakin-lutely. Were there circumstances where men, tanks, lvts, ect.. were thrown into a turkey shoot during WWII accidently, abso-freakin-lutely. Fog of internet war, it sucks, I would like to say JG11 did an outstanding job at defending our objective and we defended what we thought was our objective outstandingly. Claim Jumpers did their job and to take that away from them would be a slap in the face to me if I was in their position.
Human error makes the immersion that much more for me. :salute
-
Is this the full half hour or just the five minute argument? :rofl
- Any targets not initially attacked or defended in the first hour may result in a penalty....
CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that the main attacks reach their targets by T+60.
Point of order: An attack starts well before the first bomb successfully strikes an object. If a bomb hit a target at 61 mins, you can take it that the attack started somewhat earlier.
The justification provided for the rule is stated as, "This is to insure all squads will see action within the first hour." If the defenders saw action within the first hour then all is well. I don't believe it has ever been viewed otherwise.
It's always been about the planning. CICs must plan to hit the targets within the first hour. Lots of stuff can go wrong. On occasion, it's taken me more than an hour to fight my way to a target. One time, the wind settings actually made it impossible. Stuff happens. When you've got a large area to search for a moving target, combined with limited visibility, it becomes a real lottery whether you actually find it inside of 2 hours not just one.
That strike for C110 went down our right hand side as we moved into position for our own attack. If we had strayed head first into them instead, they might not have found their target for some longer period. Wouldn't have been deliberate or their fault. This stuff is supposed to be about fun.
Edit: Just did a quick check of logs and:
Thawk
22:03:22 Departed from Field #110 in a Seafire Mk IIc
23:01:37 Shot down a Ju 88A-4 flown by roadkill.
Roadkill was shot down inside of 60 minutes and that should just about cover it.
I just got to finish with a salute to The Damned because I know they are extremely frustrated after the first round where nothing showed up at all. I bet it was getting tense at about the 50 minute mark again this week ;) Those poor 109s that rolled up a minute or two later must have wondered what hit them :)
-
I always look at the historical/strategical point of the battle. Not the scores
-
:pray
To quote Jack Nicholson in Mars Attacks,"...why can't we all just get along?".
It was a fun frame tho, and a good attack on 56, Right! Hee <S> ALL.
Kurt
-
Mistakes were made...big deal. It will not be the last time. Human nature.
JG/11 were tasked to defend an assigned base. They did. As far as time on attacking a target.
Looks like it was close enough for me.
I'm here to have fun and for the immersion that the MA can't possibly offer to anyone.
Score is somewhat important. It however is not the be all to end all. It is combining History
and trying to win along with most importantly having fun.
Let's can the childish crap and look forward to frame 3. I am! :D
-
OK I give up on T+ anything. FSO has rubber rules and always has. Don't know what I was thinking. :salute all
-
GD I agree with chappy lets let the gv and 56 scores stand put this to rest and look forward to frame 3 both cic's of frame are in agrement.
Each side did with honest intentions of doing the right thing. As far as cv 110 like dantoo pointed out the ju88 attack started well before T60
no reason to harp ob that subject. :salute
-
GD I agree with chappy lets let the gv and 56 scores stand put this to rest and look forward to frame 3 both cic's of frame are in agrement.
Each side did with honest intentions of doing the right thing. As far as cv 110 like dantoo pointed out the ju88 attack started well before T60
no reason to harp ob that subject. :salute
:salute
DH367th Had a great time good work on CIC, see ya next frame.
-
Whew!
:x
-
Edit: Just did a quick check of logs and:
Thawk
22:03:22 Departed from Field #110 in a Seafire Mk IIc
23:01:37 Shot down a Ju 88A-4 flown by roadkill.
Roadkill was shot down inside of 60 minutes and that should just about cover it.
It doesn't matter to me on the whole score issue, as all scoring is subjective to each CM on hosting the event. Plus, scoring I know is important to some and not important to others.
But have to say, if using this as meeting the T+60 rule as a definition does creat a whole issue with planning and timing. Does a attack force lifting off have to just meet any attacker on the way to target?, or just the defensive attack crew of the target? What if the defense assigned is pulled to another location before the attack group reachs target, does this count if late? Does the forward escort intercept the defense count as in time?
The rule, and I understand its purpose, calls for an attack by a credible force using rockets/bombs on released on target by T+60. Though many targets get hard to find and just getting to some is hard enough within that time frame, and it does seem ridiculous for 1 min being outside the window and penalized. But by using the ands, if's and but's as leeway there really is no need to have the rule. If it gets to be subjective to according to all parameters, then the subjectivity opens up to visibility, cloud layer, winds, etc.
As far as other aspects or the frame, the written orders are the orders. The maps themselves that are sent with the orders are for ease and aid of the units. It is up to each tasked squadron enforce the orders as written, and the routings and maps are subjective and given out as aids to everyone.
each tasked squadron can make their own assessment as to whther to follow the flight path given or make adjustments to the "mapped" version sent to best suit the situation that is required. The written orders are the directives and it is up to each unit to either support or target assigned objectives.
Again, just my interpretation (which doesnt mean alot). Since I have many concerns and disagreements with the scoring program in most FSO's, it doesn't matter if everyone was given a thousand points for just showing up. I would hate to see anymore things rearanged because of "scoring".
-
First off yes my math was wrong and it was T+61 when the ship first took damage.
Second yes the T+60 attack rule is a little flexible. By this I mean that it is up to the CMs interpretation. This is why I request the Axis and the Allied orders to their squads. I take look at these orders and see if the CiC has planned an attack that can hit their targets within T+60. Or if they planned a strike that has no chance of even getting within the same sector by T+60.
Now that said quite a few things can happen along the way during the actual frame. An attack force may be intercepted, like what happened in frame 1. The Axis force meant to hit A25 in frame 1 ran smack dab into an Allied force. Results was no Axis planes assigned to A25 made it. As a CM would I penalize for this? No I wouldn't but I would go back to the each sides orders and check their plans, do a little more digging, to find out what happened and to make sure it was just do to the flow and ebb or battle and not something planned by the Axis.
We implemented the T+60 rules and the credible force rule to make sure that players / squads on each side got to see action or the possibility of action in an acceptable time frame. Previous years, like back in 2003 and such I squad might fly around until T+90 with no contact because the other side planned to hit their targets late in the frame hoping to catching the defenders landing t refuel. This result in many complaints over players not enjoying flying around for 90 minutes bored. Hence the T+60 rule.
The T+60 rule is that you must plan and try to execute your attack by T+60. Obviously good defenders should pick up and start attacking and incoming force as soon as they are detected .. meaning when I go to the logs when somebody raises a question over T+60 I go and look to see if and when the attacking force took damage (I just didn't do it in this case since I was pressed for time this weekend). If they were engaged then I can judge what happened and if they were making a good faith effort to hit their target as planned in their orders by T+60.
In this case they were in my opinion.
Now on top of the T+60 rule we had to implement the credible force rule. Why? Because back in 2007 CiCs started sending in just 1 or 2 aircraft to buzz a target. Basically flash it and engage it defenders, which technically fulfilled the T+60 rule and then allowed them to hit the base at later time .. again trying to catch the defenders out of place or refueling. However, sending in just 1 plane .. yeah technically acceptable but definitely did follow the spirit or the event or make for a good time for the defenders. So we put the credible force rule in place.
Also on the flip side we an issue with some CiCs deciding to abandon the defense of bases all together; sacrificing one base so they could beef up their forces elsewhere. So we also applied the credible force rules to defenders. Now while most attackers would prefer no defenders at a base, some did find it boring. Also besides that it lead to some attack forces being much largers than expected leading to pig piling (attack force got the added amount of defenders not defending) or the reverse and attack force ran into a massive defense force over one base. Being outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1 also was not a good thing and nobody like that.
So credible force was applied to both attack and defense.
Both rules try to give CiCs some flexibility on timing there attacks and deploying their forces. But they are also aimed at ensuring or the possibility of fun (action) for those involved and with a reasonable chance of success (not 6 defenders facing off versus 40 attackers). As CMs we constantly tweak to try to make sure tat the event is fun and challenging and for us not to get to restrictive but put things in place that for lack of better words makes sure their is some balance if you understand what I mean.
So yes, each CM interprets the rules, research each issue brought up and decides if their was a violation or not.
-
Thanks Ghost
For those anal about counting minutes or seconds when trying to find a CV group 6 sectors from the start point feel comfortable with our buddy blackboy (From the logs)
Blackboy
22:03:40 Departed from Field #57 in a Ju 88A-4
22:59:27 Captured by enemy forces
An attack is when the run begins not when something is hit, because sometimes nothing is hit. Blackboy was taken down with 33 seconds to spare. Are ya's happy now?
Some here need to get a life and stop nit picking everything in the game.
We have a small amount of people setting up a pretty complex scenario in a short time frame. Then we have CiC's that have to put orders together in a couple of days and try to make 250+ people on each side happy. When all is done and most have had a great time, all we can say is You were a minute or 2 late? and not great job and good game?
Get a life already.
Edit: Oops forgot :salute
-
Every effort was expended to find the CV before T+60, if our target would have been static there would be no debate :salute
-
Honestly, quibbling over T+61 when it is clear that the attack group was operating in good faith is silly. Definitely within the purview of the CM running the Frame to make that call in my opinion... The complaint over the A56/A57 issue is a bit more debatable. Perhaps the fairest option would be to calculate the possible extremes and split the difference. For instance... If the attack planes had turned toward the target that the 109s were protecting, the 109s would have engaged before bomb release... Thus reducing the effectiveness of the attack. However, engaging at the high altitude would have put the 109s at a disadvantage... So also reduce their effectiveness. We know that the Jugs did a X number of points on their target because they were allowed to attack unopposed... Then got mauled by the 109s doing Y points of damage because they were low and slow. So, give the Allies half credit for the Jug attack on the base, and the Axis half of the points for shooting down the Jugs... I don't know where that would leave the totals, but it seems fair to me.
The stickier subject, in my slightly biased view ;), is the LVT assault on V5. The CM design was unwinnable for the Allies. I cannot think of a scenario where the Allies changed tactics and won the battle presented. That score should simply be discarded, in my opinion. Not considered toward the victory or loss of the frame for either side. It isn't fair to penalize the Allies for bad design. And the Axis powers really aren't cheated, since it was such an unfair episode to start.
It really doesn't matter though. I love FSO, but I couldn't tell you for certain which side won or lost any of the past few months worth of events.
:salute
-
It may come across as a biased opinion... but I say this sincerely. Who cares about the score in the end? This is parallel to the fight vs score debate of the MA... most people just want to create an experience and simply view the stats as a bi-product. :salute
-
Concerning the Axis attack on the CV:
From the Squad Ops Rules Page:
- All targets must be attacked within 60 minutes of the start of the frame. They must be attacked with explosive ordinance, (rockets and bombs) by a full squadron.
IMHO rules are rules, even though I disagree and lobbied against the second part of this rule when it was added because I expected situations like this.
If we start making exceptions, we will need lawyers for each frame as precedences will have been set.
My suggestion is to score this for the Allies.
Concerning A56/A57:
Yes a mistake on the map was made. However the map is used as a guide, a few CM's include only a blank map with their objectives. The written objectives have always been the official document. The objectives sent to every squad had the correct target. Not only did the Allied CiC make a mistake, but by my count at least 67 individuals that received the objectives on the allied side failed to catch it also.
The long and short of it that Axis defended the correct field and the Allies attacked the wrong one.
My suggestion is to score this for the Axis.
Concerning the GV's:
Everyone knew going in that this part of the frame was experimental. Not all facets could be known. It truly was unfair to the Allies. However as a result, some good suggestions to improve this portion were offered.
My suggestion is to abandon the score for the GV portion.
IMHO the CMs as a group should be consistent in applying the rules from event to event so that Cic's have a rock solid basis as they prepare their orders.
:salute
-
Gentlemen,
Enough is enough. To put it simply I decide if it is a valid attack or not.
I got the Axis orders and an attack was planned to hit the target before T+60. A question was brought up, which is a valid question, if they did or did not. You do not have the logs that I do.
22:03:09 = First spawn by an Axis player
22:03:22 = First Spawn of 353rd Fighter Group (Axis Bombers)
22:04:15 = First Spawn of The Blind Bats (Axis Escort)
22:50:38 = First damage done by allies on Axis bombers (per CM damage logs .. First damage involving Damned SE, DmdGordo fires on and hits Taz)
22:50:39 = First damage done by axis bombers on allies (per CM damage logs .. First damage involving 353rd, Taz fires on and hits DmdGordo)
23:01:37 = RoadKill (JU88) killed by Allies
23:03:09 = T+60
23:03:12 = Axis escort does first damage to allies (per CM damage logs .. First damage involving The Blind bats)
23:04:09 = First damage done to a ship of C110 by Axis bombers (bomb hit)
23:04:12 = Axis escorts scores first kill
I have already stated that rules have to be flexible because an exact interpretation of the rules, advocated by some, would mean that if the 353rd were wiped out to a man before doing any damage to the ships at C110 they would have violated the T+60 rule. This is why we have CMs to look into the facts and interpret what happened since there are many variables that happen in game play. Such as a squad getting wiped out or a squad missing with all their bombs or torps (especially if somebody is trying to torp). Things are not exactly black and white and the CM must step in and determine what happened based on the information we have from the CM logs and make a ruling. The CMs are very consistent into digging into the logs and doing their best to interpret results.
The Axis attack group was engaged by Allied fighters at 22:50:38 (T+47.29). The above time marks show when the first Allied fighter took damage (Damned SE was assigned to cap C110 for the allies), the first Axis bomber took damage, and the first Axis escort took damage. So my interpretation is this:
1) The Axis battle plan showed that the attack force to hit C110 did load out with ordinance and were instructed with orders to hit C110 in the T+60 limitation.
2) The Axis attack force (353rd and The Blind Bats) were engaged at T+47.29 with allied fighters piercing the escort screen and engaging the bombers
3) Additional damage longs indicate to me that we had a running fight that lasted all the way through the Axis bomb run on C110 (see time of first damage, the loss of RoadKill, and first kill scored by escorts).
4) First bomb damage to a ship by the JU88s was at T+61. Bombers were under aerial attack for 13 minutes and 31 seconds before their first drop.
All of this I, as the CM interpret as a valid axis attack on C110 according to the T+60 rule, the attack force carrying ordinance (the CM logs show they loaded out with bombs), and attacking with a credible force rule.
I don't usually go through and publish all my findings but this is the process I go through (when I don't post typos or mistakes in math) to determine if an attack was valid or not when somebody brings up the question if a target was hit. First I find I look at the orders published to make sure the CiC wasn't doing anything funny (he wasn't). Then I try to piece together what happened (attack force destroyed enroute or not or something else) and then I dig into the death and object damage logs and then I dig in the damage logs.
The attack was valid. Bombers were attacked 13 min 31 seconds before drop. They then hit with a bomb at T+61 (logs don't record misses by the way). So it is a valid attack and exceptions were not made to the rule. The damage to the ship was done by a bomb not bullets.
Now based on the above information, if the allied defenders HAD killed all the attacking JU88s or if the JU88s missed with their ordinance (an yes I can via the CM logs tell what they loaded out with so I can confirm if it was with bombs or torps) I would still interpret this as a valid attack based on the information above and with more digging would figure out if they were either all killed or maybe mostly killed and then missed with their ordinance. This is what I mean about being flexible with the rules and interpreting since I have to figure out what happened from time markers since we can't put a CM with gods eye view over each target to report back to me what happened and when.
P.S. In regards to the Blind Bats, the escorts, first instance of damage. That is the first time their bullets hit an allied plane. The CM logs do not show when the start firing so I am assuming they were in there doing their best to drive off the attackers and mixing things up before that time mark.
-
CiCs do have a rock solid basis as they prepare their orders.
1) Arm an attack force with bombs, rockets, or torps (special rules may modify which of these can be or can not be used)
2) Come up with a plan and route for that attack force to hit the target by T+60
3) Pray that the allies do not intercept and kill your force or destroy it cohesion or scatter it or etc., etc.
4) Pray that if your attack force does get through the allied defense that they actually hit with bombs or torps or rockets
As you see the first two points are under the CiC control. The other 2 points depends on how the frame plays out and individual squad and pilot actions when they do run into the enemy.
-
The Amphibious assault and A56/A57 situations do not apply to other CMs. One was an inclusion of a new element by me (no other CM is obligated to try an Amphibious assault in any shape or form) and the other was do to a mistake made by me. So these are unique situations stemming from myself and can not be projected on other CMs.
-
Which Axis CV are you referring to? I had C106 in the designated sectors. :salute
-
I was taught not to make a rule that u can't or won't enforce properly. What I see happening here is to many rules that are beginning to have no meaning or that can be interpreted differently from 1 CM to another. I personally think that there should be consistancy between all CM's on how they interpret the rules. This is where the CM trainers come into play. We need consistancy.
Same with scoring. What is wrong with having a baseline or the same scoring system for each FSO? Having 4+ different scoring systems to me is assinine and difficult sometimes for the players/squads to follow.
-
I don't care about the score anymore. Especially if you count an attack on an undefended base. It was fun to look at to get a picture of what happened, but it could not be more meaningless now.
:salute
-
The rules are in place and FSO CMs have lattitude. You can't enforce a strict consistent rule that is absolute in battlefield situations.
As I posted .. the FSO CM finds out
1) If a credible force was tasked to hit a target
2) If they carried the proper ordinance
3) If the battle plan would enable them to hit the target by T+60.
After that things become less absolute and where interpretation comes in because player actions come into play. As stated an attack force may be attacked and stopped before target. They may make it target but completely miss with their ordinance.
This is where the FSO CMs must do research to determine what happened. In this case roughly 13 minutes before T+60 a credible attack force which was tasked to the target was intercepted by the defenders and a running battle developed. The attackers then hit their target at T+61 with bombs while under attack.
In this case I count that as a credible attack. Remember you can attack or plan attack and not be successful. The rules does not say they have to be conduct a successful attack by T+60.
If the attack force had not been engaged at all by the defenders I would not count at it as attacking the target by T+60.
If the attack force was slaughtered to say just 1 JU88 which then hit the target at T+75 I would count that as an attack under T+60 rule.
If the attack force escort engaged the enemy and the bombers fell back (took no damage at all) and then hit the target at T+70 I would not count that as an attack by T+60.
What you are not taking into account is the actions and results of combat in the air. Unfortunately we can't come up with set of exact guidelines and rules to cover every possibly contigency. The admin CM inspects things on a case basis to determine what happened from the raw data and makes a ruling on the conditions that developed and affected things.
The CiCs and squads know they have to do the following:
1) Come up with a battle plan that has the ability to put their planes carrying ordinance over the target by T+60 and to release ordinance at target. Obviously it is much better to actually plan to try to give yourself a cushion by planning to hit by T+50 or T+55.
2) A credible force with ordinance must be tasked to accomplish this.
From the CiC perspective their is no grey area here. From the squad perspective there is no grey area here.
The only grey area is what actually happens in battle and determining why it happened and the motives of those flying. As said what would not be acceptable to me would be if the escorts engaged the defenders and then the bombers basically fell back and loitered for another 15 minutes past T+60 or longer waiting for the defenders to be wiped out, waste all their ammo, or need to land and refuel.
-
First off I have not made a decision on the what to do about A56/A57 and the GV battle. The Axis CiC and Allied CiC have wayed in with their opinions. I am considering that.
However, since both situations were caused by mistakes made by myself as the admin my take is it only fair not to count either event. In the case of the GV event besides the setup being flawed there was also the mistake of the GVs spawning way to close to the shore. This was an oversight of mine. On the A56/A57 situation again my fault. So only thing to do is for me to apologize to those involve and simple not count the points.
-
I was taught not to make a rule that u can't or won't enforce properly. What I see happening here is to many rules that are beginning to have no meaning or that can be interpreted differently from 1 CM to another. I personally think that there should be consistancy between all CM's on how they interpret the rules. This is where the CM trainers come into play. We need consistancy.
Same with scoring. What is wrong with having a baseline or the same scoring system for each FSO? Having 4+ different scoring systems to me is assinine and difficult sometimes for the players/squads to follow.
I agree here on all points. Unfortunately it's never been able to be hashed out.
I came to the conclusion that the FSO team is like a board of directors or city council. Everyone has different ideas on how to improve the company or city. They bring ideas up for discussion, some ideas are approved, some are shot down. Some never agree, some always agree, some agree to disagree.
In the end, I think allowing the CMs to do what they want to do inside of a set of specific rules is the only way you can effectively have one team of people making the best events Aces High will ever see. A standard scoring system could possibly be agreed upon, it just needs to be reached by agreement by the FSO team.
Will that happen? I doubt it. Too many factors at play. The main reason is without the liberty to adjust the scoring I don't think it would be fair for certain events to be scored the same way.
I would like to see it happen though :aok
-
P.S. In regards to the Blind Bats, the escorts, first instance of damage. That is the first time their bullets hit an allied plane.
Blind Bats.
Sorry to hear it's the first time your bullets ever hit an allied plane :rofl :rofl :x
However congrats are in order.
Also as a thought.
During the battle of midway, the first US waves were wiped out and no ships were hit.
If this was FSO some would say the ships weren't attacked.
In FSO things happen the same way. We once had a frame where we followed the designed path but never found the task force. Just good planning on the CiC's part and not necessarilly a penalty on the attacking force. :salute
-
I thought it went well. the V5 assult could have been better. At least give the LVT's a chance! wtg guys. :salute