Aces High Bulletin Board

Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: ghostdancer on March 13, 2011, 10:54:23 AM

Title: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ghostdancer on March 13, 2011, 10:54:23 AM: Frame 3 objectives will be out today to both side. GVs have been removed from frame 3.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: gyrene81 on March 13, 2011, 10:57:35 AM: you just made a lot of squads happy... :lol
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: Bino on March 13, 2011, 11:15:36 AM: Quote from: ghostdancer on March 13, 2011, 10:54:23 AM
Frame 3 objectives will be out today to both side. GVs have been removed from frame 3.

:aok
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: TUK on March 13, 2011, 02:24:08 PM: WD40 had the allied tanks for frame 2. We hate to see them leave the FSO.
The tank battle was a nice change for my squad. We only wish that the axis would have showed back up with more numbers for the second go at it.
To the CM and CIC that gave us the tanks, we :salute you. Thanks for the ride, it was fun! There are many squads in FSO that enjoy tanking.
I hate to see the gv portion leave because of some fighter jock's can't play the (whole) game. That being said , we honor the FSO teams overall decision on any subject of FSO. Tuk151
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5520527266_e97bd5c4d3_b.jpg)
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ghostdancer on March 13, 2011, 02:31:48 PM: GVs were taken out of the third frame me because of players or squads comments about them.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: climber on March 13, 2011, 08:24:55 PM: Thats a bummer guys.

I'm not normally a gv person but I respect the idea of having some gv's in FSO. When I think of the north Africa campaign the first thing I think of is the Rommel/Montgomery battles. When I read the initial writeup for this month's FSO I envisioned my squad in stuka's laying some hurting on allied tanks :)

I'd like to be a vote in the direction of occasionally having a gv battle in fso. +1

Climber
CO 2nd Wing
77 FS "Gamblers"
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: daddog on March 13, 2011, 10:15:03 PM: Not to worry. I am sure some future FSO's will have GV's again.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: jolly22 on March 14, 2011, 06:33:15 AM: I dont think its fair to take out gvs because some people complain about gvs. They just need to adapt to thier situation and have some fun!
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ghostdancer on March 14, 2011, 08:39:15 AM: I did not take them out because any player complaints. I took them out do to other considerations from frame 3.

This is not a general statement on FSO or affects any other possible future design or use of GV.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: UncleKurt on March 14, 2011, 03:19:46 PM: :banana:

Perhaps a sign up of squad interest could document the desire for a GV only FSO Frame in the future??????? Based on The Bulge, Kursk, Afrika???????? Food for thought. What say you?
Kurt
<S>
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: WWhiskey on March 14, 2011, 03:30:11 PM: Quote from: UncleKurt on March 14, 2011, 03:19:46 PM
:banana:

Perhaps a sign up of squad interest could document the desire for a GV only FSO Frame in the future??????? Based on The Bulge, Kursk, Afrika???????? Food for thought. What say you?
Kurt
<S>
I would be in! I hoped to draw GV duty this FSO , and am disappointed we will not have a chance to!
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: Der Jude on March 14, 2011, 06:41:48 PM: blah blah blah good riddens to the GV's. I'm not surprised to see an allied player commenting on how great the battle was with no opposition
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ImADot on March 14, 2011, 07:36:58 PM: Quote from: Der Jude on March 14, 2011, 06:41:48 PM
blah blah blah good riddens to the GV's. I'm not surprised to see an allied player commenting on how great the battle was with no opposition

I was out of town and couldn't fly Frame 2. How many Axis GV'ers decided to not come back after the reset? Not a flame, just a question.

And how many A.D.D. boyz across the board (on both sides) couldn't be bothered to come back? I guess that'd be a good litmus test to see who really cares about FSO, and thus should be assigned missions and rides accordingly...
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: Tull on March 14, 2011, 07:47:46 PM: TUK,

When DH and I were picking our noses and scratching our butts trying to decide who to put into the GV Fight after getting it wrong on the first draft. It was a decision between you, the Jokers Jokers and the Air Raiders, because you all listed GVs as one of your preferences (Yes some of us that do the OPORDs do take that into consideration). You wanted the tanks and were the best match out of the original Air Tasking Order. Happy we could oblige. :joystick:

PS: I bet that the Fireflys were more fun than the B-26s.

Tull
XO 367th FG,the Dynamite Gang

"They're trying to kill me," Yossarian told him calmly.
"No one's trying to kill you," Clevinger cried.
"Then why are they shooting at me?" Yossarian asked.
"They're shooting at everyone," Clevinger answered. "They're trying to kill everyone."
"And what difference does that make?"
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ghostdancer on March 14, 2011, 08:38:14 PM: Der Jude I believe most of the people here were not commenting about this specific GV fight in frame 2 but were commenting that they liked GV fights and hope that this is only a one time occurrence and that admin CMs will still consider GV elements in future design.

As I have stated here and elsewhere for various reasons, that has nothing to do with player input on whether they like GVs or not, I decided to removed them from frame 3 of Tunisia.

I understand that there is a group of people who like them and those who don't. Please keep the discussion civil.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: noTch on March 14, 2011, 08:55:07 PM: Quote from: WWhiskey on March 14, 2011, 03:30:11 PM
I would be in! I hoped to draw GV duty this FSO , and am disappointed we will not have a chance to!
Ditto from JV44 Butcher Birds. after messing up & not putting GV's in our preferences on the first go around, we
were really looking forward to mixing it up in some heavy steel :bhead Well maybe next time :cheers:
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: Bino on March 15, 2011, 10:20:46 AM: Personally, I prefer airplanes.

If there's enough popular support for the idea, I would not object to including tanks. But please do it in a different way from what was tried in Tunisia. I would NOT like it if I was REQUIRED to spend time in a tank early in the frame. Making tanks optional is fine, but please do not create a setup that could force me into a tank.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: ghostdancer on March 15, 2011, 10:55:49 AM: Bino noted and that was why it was 45 minutes and then second life in a plane.

The same argument can be made about being forced into flying certain plains like the Ju87. I didn't require them in this setup but I have in others. So you can say I forced some people into planes they don't want to fly at all. Recognizing this is why a second life is offered.

Same holds true on the fleet battles. We know that some people don't care to be put on cruisers and destroyers and engage each other. So again it is limited to a certain amount of time and a second life is offered.

If GVs are required having people load out in them at the end of the frame doesn't work. Simply put you can't go fly planes until T+115 then land and load out in GVs. First off a person might still be engaged at that time. Next he might not be able to get home from a previous engagement at that time. Meaning the GV battle would have to wait until everybody was on the ground. Finally if you were killed earlier to say T+115 are you really going to wait around x many minutes to load out in a tank? That reasoning was why I shortened the tank battle to T+45. Possibly it should be shortened to an even smaller window than that. It is a consideration. But putting at the end of the frame is more problematic than the beginning.

The last part of the equation is that when GVs are in a design (irregardless of mission type, objective, etc.) is for squads that like them and hate them to speak up. I think CiC's would much rather put a squad who likes GVs in them than one that doesn't. Of course there is always the chance that all squads on one side says I don't like them and then CiC just has to choose. But usually there is at least one squad that likes them or doesn't mind them.
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: Tull on March 15, 2011, 03:10:30 PM: Ghostdancer,

I have worked for the Army and National Guard in Simulations both virtual and constructive for the past 17 years. Scenerio design is not an easy task. Y'all have developed an effective design for GV integration in to a complex scenario environment. All have to add to this thread is WELL DONE! :aok

Tull
XO 367th FG

"They're trying to kill me," Yossarian told him calmly.
"No one's trying to kill you," Clevinger cried.
"Then why are they shooting at me?" Yossarian asked.
"They're shooting at everyone," Clevinger answered. "They're trying to kill everyone."
"And what difference does that make?"
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: 49Jester on March 15, 2011, 08:29:34 PM: GV's?... sign us up, we'll willing try anything.... anytime.. :joystick:
Title: Re: FSO: Tunisia - No GVs FR3
Post by: caldera on March 17, 2011, 10:53:51 AM: I'd much rather bomb GVs than drive them and sure wouldn't mind being forced into the Ju-87. :devil