Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: daddog on April 03, 2011, 11:21:05 AM
-
Gents,
NoTch sent me a PM that got me thinking. I want to encourage any squad that is defending a target to contact the Setup CM if after 60 minutes the target has not been hit.
This can accomplish two things.
1. The Setup CM can find out if the target is still going to be hit by asking the CiC. If by chance the attacking force was intercepted, a mistake on the part of the CiC, no-show of a squad, etc. then the defending squad can possibly be redirected for some action elsewhere.
2. The Setup CM can also let the Admin CM know and he can apply any penalties when he scores the frame.
In the past I have asked the Setup CM to find out if a target is going to be attacked after we have been over it for an hour. It is rare, but it happens. If it does you should let the Setup CM know on 202. It is not any fun for anyone to fly around for an hour, let alone two hours without any action. If things go as planned everyone in FSO should see action, but sometimes not. Maybe the Setup CM can help.
<S>
-
IN, My thought was how to get some action on those low number nights :headscratch:
-
Could be sort of problematic since you check in with the setup CM and find out the original task force assign to hit the target is destroyed. However, say 20 minutes later the CiC on that side gathers up survivors of nearby operations / first strikes and re-assigns them to hit the base that was not attack by T+60.
So you could go T+62, original attack force is destroyed / not coming. Defenders thinking nothing is coming now do something else. Then at T+82 an adhoc attack force is now put together by the CiC and is coming. Base gets hit and defenders now go but the setup CM said it was not going to be attacked.
Sort of run the risk of damned if you do and damned if you don't when re-tasking.
-
Maybe the answer is somewhere in the middle. My original thought was if a mission to attack was aborted say due to a squad not showing up or not enough for a credible force, then said CiC would absorb or dissolve the original mission & quickly integrate the extra bodies into already formed plans. Let the admin CM know, and at that point the admin CM could leak to the opposing CiC that an attack will not be happening so they could absorb & redistribute the manpower. All before the frame starts or shortly there after :uhoh Then before you know it, Bob's your uncle :cheers:
I don't really know what would be the perfect solution to flying for a full hour, just to find out that there weren't enough enemy clobber. As morbid as that sounds. The reality of war was that when it happened that the enemy couldn't make it to target, the warrior was actually happy he didn't have to fight anybody. Kinda backward in our little slice of virtual battleground. But that is how we like it ;)
-
Yea it's a pretty difficult line to tow especially from a CiC perspective too.
I think that's why there's penalties in place.
What you could do is the following:
Your a squad defending a base and T+60 rolls around, and your sure that your target hasn't been attacked. You ensure this by sending at least 1 pilot down to assess damage.
I know while directing frame 1, a squad contacted me and said that A2 was not hit and it was past T+60, however when I jumped over there, a hanger and radar tower was down. The attacking force had just snuck in under them.
So you have ensured your target is pristine...
Contact your sides CiC on 150, and then remain on station.
The CiC then can PM the setup CM, who can contact the opposing sides CiC and inquire about the situation.
If the attacking force was intercepted, was delayed, is just late....he'll know. He should inform the Setup CM if he intends to divert planes and if so, responds that an attack is coming or not.
At this point the setup CM can relay information to the CiC of the target, and he can make the call to shift the CAP someplace else for action. This ensures that everyone gets to have some fun, hopefully.
It should incur a severe penalty however, if the attacking CiC states that no aircraft will be attacking that base, and then some do.
-
Chapel I disagree with the severe penalty about if the CiC says there will be no attack on a base and then some do. Basically until he evaluates the results of the others attacks and see what disposable forces he has left and rearmed he doesn't know if he will be able to conduct an ad hoc attack or not which might be 10, 20, or more later. So the only thing he can really answer is:
1) The originally attack force is late (giving intel to the enemy - they will already be penalized for being late)
2) The originally attack force is intercepted and not coming
3) The originally attack force is intercepted but survivors coming but will be late (again giving info to the other side)
4) The squad(s) assigned to the original attack didn't turn out.
At that juncture that is all he really knows and that now he has a target not hit and to start seeing if he can pull together resources to hit it.
Also lets says he goes, the original attack force is not coming. An ad hoc attack force will be coming. Then lets say that attack force is intercepted and destroyed or driven off by other defenders, not the ones assigned to defend the base. You would be back to the same situation.
Battle is fluid and things happen. If a CiC wants to pull his defenders and re-task after T+60 that is his choice and his gamble and many CiCs have retasked forces in the past. Some CiCs don't actively retask forces after evaluating results though which at times does leave squads in the lurch as a battle plays out. Also note that there is no penalty for defenders leaving their base for other missions at T+60.
-
I know while directing frame 1, a squad contacted me and said that A2 was not hit and it was past T+60, however when I jumped over there, a hanger and radar tower was down. The attacking force had just snuck in under them.
Yeah and a single plane could do that kind of damage. 1 hanger and a radar tower? Doesn't seem like much of an attacking force to me.
We saw a few cons IB however we ignored them and left them to other squads, one because we were in A6Ms and can't go over 50 mph and two because we were expecting B29s.
-
Spikes that depends. If -only- one plane was assigned to hit the base that is a rules violation. If a credible attack force was assigned and only 1 plane or 2 planes did damage to the base but snuck in and were not seen that is not a violation. Or if other squads slaughtered the attack force and only a few got through again it would be credible. As you point out this can happen when multiple squads are assigned to defend a single base. One of those squads could engage while others don't for various reasons.
-
What are we to do if the Task Group was not placed in the area that intl gave us. This has happen to my squad as we wasted 40 min of flying to our target and 20 min trying to find it. Come to finding out that the TG was not placed in the area before the event started.
-
Fire off a PM to the setup CM and ask him if the TG is actually located somewhere in the containment area. Him answering this is not giving any intel away since it is supposed to be there. But it will help catch if it was A) incorrectly set or B) sailed out of the containment area do to somebody setting a course that would cause that.
-
At this point the setup CM can relay information to the CiC of the target, and he can make the call to shift the CAP someplace else for action. This ensures that everyone gets to have some fun, hopefully.
It should incur a severe penalty however, if the attacking CiC states that no aircraft will be attacking that base, and then some do.
I agree Chapel. I can't see why a CiC would state no aircraft would attack a target, then some do unless their was a break down of communication. If they are gong to be late then let the Setup CM know who can pass it on. If they were intercepted then again he can let the Setup CM know and he can pass it on, or finally if they were a no-show the CiC should let the Setup CM know and the squad that has been circling for an hour still might have a chance for some fun.
The point of this thread is simple. Contact the Setup CM after T+60 and let him know. Hopefully he can find out what is going on and assist the CiC in getting that squad redirected if necessary.
Happened to my squad too oakranger. Use that Setup CM. :)
-
Yeah and a single plane could do that kind of damage. 1 hanger and a radar tower? Doesn't seem like much of an attacking force to me.
We saw a few cons IB however we ignored them and left them to other squads, one because we were in A6Ms and can't go over 50 mph and two because we were expecting B29s.
The Kommando's were assigned Zekes, and the orders laid out their plan to sweep low for NOE TBM's. Perdweeb contacted me concerned about the defenders not having enough aircraft, and not having any NIK's or Franks in the area. I told him that Zekes should be fine with the cover of Ki-61's because only F4U's and F6F's along with TBM's were going to be attacking that area, but that I had a large squad in NIK's able to shift if needed.
If you were under the impression that B-29's would be attacking that base, then it's because your CO was mistaken, and misunderstood his assignment.
A single plane COULD do that kind of damage, but at that point the A6M5's were supposed to be trolling low for TBM's attacking NOE anyway.
It sounds like your squad missed out on action, because you ignored the aircraft that your assignment was specifically supposed to defend against.
@Ghostdancer - After having thought about that, I'd agree that you can't just inform the opposing CiC that they don't intend to attack....because there's just to many wild card elements in FSO's, and it'd be completely plausable for a single aircraft, or even a squad to hit the base on their own at a later time. The CiC can't know everything, and imposing a large penalty based on that wouldn't be fair.
-
Agreed Chapel. A CiC can say my original strike was tasked to hit by T+60 is not coming but anything beyond that there are just to many variables. So after T+60 the defenders have to decided to stick around in case of an ad hoc attack, completely retask to do something else, or leave some in place while others retask to something else.
-
@Ghostdancer - After having thought about that, I'd agree that you can't just inform the opposing CiC that they don't intend to attack....because there's just to many wild card elements in FSO's, and it'd be completely plausable for a single aircraft, or even a squad to hit the base on their own at a later time. The CiC can't know everything, and imposing a large penalty based on that wouldn't be fair.
Right. What you guys are saying make sense, (after thinking about it too). :headscratch:
Still contact the Setup CM after T+60. See what is going on and maybe get some answers and action at another location or if an attack is on the way. Beyond that the Admin CM's can decide what penalty's if any need to be applied.
-
Why all the wrangling about contacting this guy or that guy.
The CM's made a rule, many years ago. All targets must be attacked by T+60. Seems simple enough to me. The premise has been if the target was not attacked by the deadline, no points would be allowed for any damage and a penalty would be assessed, no matter what the reason. Seems it is a win for the defenders of that target who then can go hunting or be reassigned by their CiC.
Stop making this more difficult than it has to be. Stop all the lawyering.
-
We had 4 squads there with good communication and not one reported anything other than maybe 8 heavy F4us. It was not a sneak its was a small attack. We had people right over the base when it was hit and it was a few low cons not worth diving for. We were holding alt for a main attack that never came. It seemed gamey and made for a long boring night.
-
Seems to me "8 heavy F4Us" constitutes a "squad-sized element with ords", which would fulfill the rule about attacking with ords by a credible force. Perhaps the Allied CiC decided that target was not worth a large strike force but the Axis CiC did?
-
Remember the Allies also had significantly less pilots assigned to them. This was so that the Axis would have more planes to deal with the B29 threat.
I know A38 was hit by around 16 F4Us since I was one of them. It was hairy there and we got shredded by the Axis defenders.
-
Very interesting topic of discussion. I agree you can't have attacking CO tell the CM there won't be an attack, for the reasons already stated (fluidity of combat, etc) but also because it leaves things open to severe gaming the game.
Attacker tells Defender "We're not going to hit A32. We got wiped out. Reassign units for more action as you see fit"
Then secretly he really means "I have 15 bombers about 20 minutes out and they have no escorts, please let me in unopposed"...
You can see how it would be abused, no?
Also:
IN,
You don't understand what that means and have not used it correctly.
-
Seems to me "8 heavy F4Us" constitutes a "squad-sized element with ords", which would fulfill the rule about attacking with ords by a credible force. Perhaps the Allied CiC decided that target was not worth a large strike force but the Axis CiC did?
I'm not sure how many hog's attacked the base in question, if it was 8, they did little damage from what I saw. All I ever heard was " a couple" I think your second line hit the nail square Dot, just seems to me that is what probably happened.
-
Looking into the event in question, it appears that one of the two squads that were tasked with A2 attacked the wrong target.
Sometimes orders get read wrong which leads to issues like the defenders at A2 seeing very little or no action. The only thing I can add about this instance is make sure you double and triple check your orders and confirm it with the CIC before the Frame starts to prevent problems like this in the future.
A2 was still attacked and the CIC allocated enough of his forces to attack A2, The failure of the squad to attack A2 was completely accidental therefore no penalty will be given.
-
Also:
You don't understand what that means and have not used it correctly.
Touche, Mr Krusty. You got me. I really, honestly don't know what that means. No sarcasm intended, I don't. I used it wrong & you did a great job of embarrassing me ~S~
In retrospect I tried to use it to say, since I didn't put myself out there on the board about this, that I would merely chime in. I feel like I used a cuss word at the wrong time & everyone is looking at me :O
Moving on. I have to concede to WxMan:Why all the wrangling about contacting this guy or that guy.
The CM's made a rule, many years ago. All targets must be attacked by T+60. Seems simple enough to me. The premise has been if the target was not attacked by the deadline, no points would be allowed for any damage and a penalty would be assessed, no matter what the reason. Seems it is a win for the defenders of that target who then can go hunting or be reassigned by their CiC.
Stop making this more difficult than it has to be. Stop all the lawyering.
Again it is the simple solutions that evade us. This is a very potent statement because it is full of truths. :salute
-
Notch: see PM
Wxman: The point of the T+60 rule, the very spirit of the event, is to have opposing sides meet in combat. They would wait, hem and haw, fly circles, and wait for it to be an unopposed target. Well the word of the rule is as you stated, but if the spirit of the rule is otherwise broken you are very much in the right to bring it up in discussion.
The discussion was about wasting time, never seeing the enemy, having a boring time.
Honestly: The scores are nice, but that's not what brings 500 people back every week. It's the experience they have that week that does this. If that experience turns to 90% waiting with no action, then RTB and end of frame, it doesn't matter if your team wins or not. it gets old.
While I agree the original suggestion doesn't work, I would strongly say it's all worth a good discussion. It shouldn't just be ignored because a rule was set in places many years back. I'm not disagreeing with that rule, and in fact I'm agreeing with it. However a rule is put in place only when the unspoken rules need to be spoken (i.e. chutes killing on hotpads). Things will always adapt and change and rules will need to be written, re-written, removed, or updated depending on those.
-
I also do not mean 8 planes together either there was 4 at about half way. There was maybe 2 low and 2 just wandering through. It was terrible there was no continuity between them and we had 3 full squads just chillin burning gas waiting for some FSO action.
-
The discussion was about wasting time, never seeing the enemy, having a boring time.
Honestly: The scores are nice, but that's not what brings 500 people back every week. It's the experience they have that week that does this. If that experience turns to 90% waiting with no action, then RTB and end of frame, it doesn't matter if your team wins or not. it gets old.
Agreed!
How can we keep this from happening?
-
Agreed!
How can we keep this from happening?
Perhaps FSO squads could actually read their orders when they come out, instead of logging in 10 minutes before liftoff and ask "what are we doing?". I know the majority of squads try to conduct themselves with a certain level of involvement and come fully prepared. Unfortunately, there are enough that do not; which makes for situations like what prompted this thread.
-
Spikes that depends. If -only- one plane was assigned to hit the base that is a rules violation. If a credible attack force was assigned and only 1 plane or 2 planes did damage to the base but snuck in and were not seen that is not a violation. Or if other squads slaughtered the attack force and only a few got through again it would be credible. As you point out this can happen when multiple squads are assigned to defend a single base. One of those squads could engage while others don't for various reasons.
Here's what I saw at A2:
4-6 F4Us fly to base, 2 dove to the base and bombed a hangar and a radar. That was the end. The F4U's flew South, intercepted and died. It was over.
-
Then maybe there should be less targets. BoG was fun, especially the road to Berlin in Frame 2. Just goes to show it's possible to have 400 people in 4 sectors.
-
Like I mentioned on page 1.
A credible force was allocated to strike A2. Unfortunately the larger of the two squads attacked the wrong target.
-
Notch: see PM
Wxman: The point of the T+60 rule, the very spirit of the event, is to have opposing sides meet in combat. They would wait, hem and haw, fly circles, and wait for it to be an unopposed target. Well the word of the rule is as you stated, but if the spirit of the rule is otherwise broken you are very much in the right to bring it up in discussion.
The discussion was about wasting time, never seeing the enemy, having a boring time.
Honestly: The scores are nice, but that's not what brings 500 people back every week. It's the experience they have that week that does this. If that experience turns to 90% waiting with no action, then RTB and end of frame, it doesn't matter if your team wins or not. it gets old.
While I agree the original suggestion doesn't work, I would strongly say it's all worth a good discussion. It shouldn't just be ignored because a rule was set in places many years back. I'm not disagreeing with that rule, and in fact I'm agreeing with it. However a rule is put in place only when the unspoken rules need to be spoken (i.e. chutes killing on hotpads). Things will always adapt and change and rules will need to be written, re-written, removed, or updated depending on those.
I have a problem with the "spirit" of any rule as it leaves it up to anybodys interpretation. From your post your "spirit" of the rule is certainly different from mine. Only a lawyer or judge can make a determination. Certainly we don't need that here. Why make things more complicated. The number of times this subject occurs is so infrequent, do we have to change the whole proceeding for it and add a bunch of exceptions?
-
Just goes to show it's possible to have 400 people in 4 sectors.
Not to get too off-topic but while it may be possible to have 400 people in 4 sectors, In two of the BOG frames my computer took a significant hit frame rate wise and I had disappearing Icons and it cost me my virtual life.
We don't try to have that much in action in a certain area because of this.
-
Actually the highest BoG per any frame was 328 people.
FR1 = 328
FR2 = 302
FR3 = 290
FR4 = 311
FR5 = 268
FR6 = 257
-
A credible force was allocated to strike A2. Unfortunately the larger of the two squads attacked the wrong target.
That explains that strange report that the factory was hit.. :lol
-
I have a problem with the "spirit" of any rule as it leaves it up to anybodys interpretation.
Then you're going to hate the entirety of American law and civilization.
For FSO what you're suggesting is a loophole factory. There is a spirit and intent when these rules are put down in text. They are left unwritten as common knowledge until some few people abuse the event for their own gain and at the expense of other people participating.
That is when a rule is written down. Now, you can't go legal-ese and type out a 1000-page brief accounting for every variation and every minor loophole that somebody will no doubt try to exploit. Instead, you follow the spirit of the 1-line-rule and that's all you need.
-
For FSO what you're suggesting is a loophole factory.
I'm not suggesting this, you are. I'm saying follow the strict adherence of the rule. It's much less complicated. You're the one suggesting that there should be loop holes. Don't misrepresent my words.
BTW I love American law and civilization. Most people know the rules/laws and follow them. It's just when you proceed to the "spirit" of the law, then you involve the lawyers and judges, because then you're in an area that eventually gets mucked up.
-
Intent and spirit of the law are important. An educated ruling is far better than a strict literal adherence. It is this literal adherence that leads to loopholes. What does that word mean? Well if you read the whole thing and you know why the rule is in place, then you know it applies to X situation. But if you just read the thing itself without care for why it's in place, you could and would argue it doesn't apply to X situation. When if you ask the CMs they'd say "yeah, we made that rule because of X"....
So intent and spirit are very important with regards to the FSO rules.
-
Nef is correct.
The squad in question is undergoing MAJOR changes in FSO admin. The planner made an honest mistake and attacked the wrong target with 2 minutes to spare (T plus 58).
After attacking the heck out of an undefended target, we egressed past A2 climbing right into the defensive CAP. We pretty much engaged and died rather quickly.
Many were frustrated, but the new guy doing the planning was probably the most frustrated.
It is a blunder for the books.
The result is that I am back on as Admin for this squad and will be planning the next 2 frames. I am trying to help establish a double check system to ensure the orders received are planned correctly and validated.
Sorry guys at A2. We arrived in the DAR ring at T plus 60 on our egress from the wrong target. We did not know this had happened until after we were all killed off trying to escape.
:bhead
We are good to go moving forward though. Shouldn't happen again.
:salute
-
It is this literal adherence that leads to loopholes.
:O I hope you're not a lawyer.
So the adhering to the literal interpretation of the T+60 rule stating that a side will be penalized for not meeting its objective on time leads to loopholes? I guess you're right because that is exactly what you're arguing for is a loophole to ignore the T+60 rule just so you may have some action at T+60++++++++++++++++. If that is the case, shouldn't you be arguing for the dissolution of that rule instead of a convoluted argument to get around it.
If you are a defender, it makes more sense to me to take the forfeiture of points and go hunting rather than waiting around the additional time. But if you would be happier sending texts to find out whether an attack is delayed or waiting an additional hour for it, far be it from me to water on your Lilly.
-
Just to jump in here in regards to the T+60 rule. It is literal but also subject to judgement by CMs.
An attack on a target with a credible attack force (as defined by the CM) must be planned to happen by T+60. However, since a battle is fluid there are several circumstances that might not trigger the T+60 penalty after a CM evaluates circumstances:
1) The attack force was wiped out before it got to target.
2) The attack force was intercepted and its survivors hit their target soon after T+60.
3) The attack force incorrectly attacked the wrong target do to A) a mistake in orders from the CiC or B) a mistake in the objectives from the CM.
Each scenario requires the admin CM to dig and discover the truth of the matter and then make a call as whether the T+60 rule was violated.
In this case we had a case of 3B, part of the attacking force confused their orders from the CiC and hit a non target. Upshot of this was that the defenders didn't see action but also the attackers completely blew any chance of scoring points. Nef rule no penalthy because it was not a willful violation and they did attack the incorrect target by T+60. It was just an incorrect target.
So yes, many of FSO rules are literal but they also require judgments to be made since there are some nuances that revolve around intent versus outcome.
Another example would be the credible force rule. Lets say a credible force is deemed to be at least 11 pilots. So the CiC assigns a 11-15 squad to an attack mission. However, that 11-15 squad only turns out 9 people. The CiC followed the rules but the squad in question didn't turn out. There was no willful planning to violate the rule in this case. Versus say the CiC assigning a 7-10 squad to the mission who could only meet the 11 pilot minimum if they had full turnout +1.
-
If you are a defender, it makes more sense to me to take the forfeiture of points and go hunting rather than waiting around the additional time. But if you would be happier sending texts to find out whether an attack is delayed or waiting an additional hour for it, far be it from me to water on your Lilly.
I haven't added anything regarding DD's original post as of yet, but I have to agree here.
I would add to at least contact your CIC and tell him your intentions. So he can be kept abreast of the bigger picture and if he wants you to do otherwise, like head a different direction, then follow his orders.
-
This is what you do after T+60 defending a base and hasn't been attacked yet.
(http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/ab142/AKKuya/oktoberfest_girls-0071.jpg)
(http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/ab142/AKKuya/oktoberfest_girls-0321.jpg)
(http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/ab142/AKKuya/oktoberfest_girls-0521.jpg)
(http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/ab142/AKKuya/oktoberfest_girls_2009_021.jpg)
You regale those beautiful barmaids on how you bravely defended your base by scaring the enemy from attacking you. :devil
-
My turn:
I CIC'ed a frame several years back where I had a Strike package directly behind another. Thought being let the first Strike Package open an hole and the second strike package will slip though and go to their target. Well that didn't work and both Strike packages got hit and hit hard and tangled up in a large furball. During the course of that the Ordnance carring AC dropped and defended themselves. Needless to say the second target wasn't hit nor did the Strike Package even get close. It was no ones fault in what happened. The plan went bad during execution plain and simple.
Common sense moment I tuned channel 202 and announced to the CM what had happened. And then turn back to fighting my battle. The CM notified the other CIC and he released the defenders from that base. All happening at about H+60.
CIC's have to control their piece of the battle from the start to the finish. This includes coordinating and notifying the CM's when anything goes not to plan that would effect the game play. Its the CIC's job to know, control and report.
If anything were to be done I would say having the CIC's "check in" with the CM on channel 202 for 30 seconds at H-10 to get the final guidance and coordination's out of the way would probably address this issue in the future. This would allow the CM's to cover anything they needed to and remind the CIC's of their obligations.