Aces High Bulletin Board

Special Events Forums => Scenario General => Topic started by: Tank-Ace on July 16, 2011, 08:58:46 PM

Title: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 16, 2011, 08:58:46 PM
Is it possible we could do an MTO one next? Possibly start with Baytown.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 17, 2011, 05:50:44 AM
Personally I'd like to see a North Africa or Eastern Front event
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: StokesAk on July 17, 2011, 10:25:17 AM
I have a strong feeling it will be in the MTO, with the new Italy map. But that's just me. A late war Pacific would be awesome too!
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: perdue3 on July 21, 2011, 04:20:39 PM
Eastern Front, mid war. Never happen though. Want to cancel another scenario? Then just announce PTO as the next one.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 21, 2011, 06:08:53 PM
Actually, PTO is not less popular than other battles except for late-war 8th AF (which is most popular historically).
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 21, 2011, 06:17:30 PM
Eastern Front, mid war. Never happen though. Want to cancel another scenario? Then just announce PTO as the next one.

Actually I was thinking 109K4s vs I16s just to keep you happy :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Fencer51 on July 21, 2011, 08:16:36 PM
What no 262s?  Now you are showing your Allied Bias Guppy!
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 21, 2011, 08:23:45 PM
What no 262s?  Now you are showing your Allied Bias Guppy!

It's funny, the very first time I upped a 262, I was killed by an I16
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 21, 2011, 08:25:10 PM
How about a variation of Der Grosse Schlacht. 

More like "Big Week"  February 20-25 1944...

B-17s
B-24s
B-26s
P-38J
P-47D-11
P-51B
SpitFire IX

vs

BF-109G2-6
BF-110G2
FW-190A5-8

Just as fun and more challenging...

 :salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Devil 505 on July 21, 2011, 09:12:20 PM
How about a variation of Der Grosse Schlacht. 

More like "Big Week"  February 20-25 1944...

Sounds like you missed "Battle Over Germany" which was run earlier this year. It was awesome.
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/BogF23.png)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 21, 2011, 09:18:38 PM
G6 also could mount a 30mm. If we're going to be hunting buffs, I think we should have 109G-14's at a 1/4 ratio with the 109G6.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Devil 505 on July 21, 2011, 09:22:53 PM
The 109s had escort killing duty, but we made a run at the bombers anyway to draw their escorts into a fight.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 22, 2011, 12:50:47 PM
Sounds like you missed "Battle Over Germany" which was run earlier this year. It was awesome.

Yep, I missed it for whatever reason.  :headscratch:

How long do we have to wait for another?

Or better yet, Can we do a version in the MTO centered around the landing at Anzio and the Battle for Rome.

Call it...

"Monte Casino" January - June 1944...

The line up would be slightly different:

Allies

B-17s
B-24s
B-26s
B-25s
Boston III or A-20G (British)
P-40Es
P-38Js
P-47D-11s
Spitfire V-IXs

AXIS

C.205
BF-109G2-6
BF-110G2
FW-190A5 Only
JU88s

What do you think Fencer?


:salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 22, 2011, 02:05:07 PM
Stukas woulda been in it, and if the A5 is present (an EW model) we would also have the G2. June 1944 would also give us the A8 IIRC.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Fencer51 on July 22, 2011, 03:19:47 PM
Guys, we have not a shortage of ideas ourselves and we have several designs either complete or in various stages at this time.

Thanks for your interest.

Our problem is that we have a great deal of great scenarios we can do, or soon will be able to do in the SE Pacific area.  However we are very concerned that no-one will fly Japanese.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 22, 2011, 03:34:53 PM
Stukas woulda been in it, and if the A5 is present (an EW model) we would also have the G2. June 1944 would also give us the A8 IIRC.

Actually not... By 1943 the allied air superiority in the MTO was so great and the attrition rate of the JU87 in the MTO was so unbelievable. In September of 1943 the last 75 Stukas in the MTO were moved to Greece for operations against the British. SG units in northern Italy were using the FW-190G series as there standard dive bomber. So, JU87s would not make this scenario.

As far as the A8 was concerned. Yes, it started production February of 1944 and in service shortly after. But the onslaught of USAAF daylight bombing campaign in europe proper kept the A8s in europe to defend the Reich. The only FW190s available for service for the Battle of Rome (Casino/Anzio) would have been A5-6s and G3s. The G series based on the design of the A6. So, no A8s in this scenario.

If you are referring to the BF109G2, it was pretty long in the tooth by then. The G6 began production in early 1943 and had been in service for almost a full year at the time of this battle. So, no G2s either... G10-14 series Messerschmidts were on the way, but not in large quantities.

Cheers...

 :salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: perdue3 on July 22, 2011, 03:44:43 PM
CM's talking trash? Oh no, CM's aren't allowed. BTW, if you are gonna talk smack, you should do a little homework. I dont like uneven matches (K4 v I16), I like em even and fair. Most importantly, fun. Go PTO Early War!

There is no Allied bias. BoG for example, we Luftwaffe hacked so ya'll should be complaining. Oh wait...

Honestly, IDC what next scenario is. I will be there no matter what it is. I do like Eastern Front and NO ONE here can say that we do too much Eastern front. CM's sure like PTO though.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 22, 2011, 03:45:40 PM
I'd like to see an MTO or an Eastern Front event for sure
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 22, 2011, 03:48:18 PM
Guys, we have not a shortage of ideas ourselves and we have several designs either complete or in various stages at this time.

Thanks for your interest.

Our problem is that we have a great deal of great scenarios we can do, or soon will be able to do in the SE Pacific area.  However we are very concerned that no-one will fly Japanese.

Fencer,

I hear your concerns over the flying of Japanese aircraft in scenarios. Many great campaigns went on in the SP. But, it is my opinion that the scenario needs to lean to the strength of the Japanese aircraft for a change. For instance, the second battle of Wake Island October 1943.


Allies:

F4Fs
F6Fs
SBDs
TBMs

AXIS:

A6M2-3s
D3As
B5Ns

There is balance in a scenario such as this. It is mainly dogfights and guys want to dogfight, so let them. We know your work. Brooke and yourself with the aid others always put on a fabulous show. Write in a possible disadvantage for the highly armoured hardware and see what happens.

BTW, The second Battle of Wake Island was where the Hellcat was introduced into combat for the first time...

Cheers...

 :salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: HighTone on July 22, 2011, 04:00:13 PM
I love and will always side with the Japanese any chance I get. People don't always like what they don't understand and I get that. But when you have a bunch of vets that seem to cherry pick only the winning teams on the most favorable side....Philippine Phandango...there is going to be a balance problem.

Maybe I'll just keep me and my guys out of the slow and predictable (boring) ETO and Eastern Front setups. Should be a real fun event with no NME.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 22, 2011, 04:34:05 PM
Retail, the balance problem is that no one wants to fly a zeke against a hellcat. Also for early war events, there is a serious lack of variety for the Japanese. For instance, this is what i proposed for a Solomon islands campaign, one that progresses like BoG

USN:
F4F - F4U-1 - F4U-1A
SBD - TBM (for SB2C)

USAAF:
P-39D - P-38G - P-38J
B-17G
B-25C

RAAF:
P-40E - F4U-1A
Mosquito Mk. VI (later frames for beaufighter)


IJN:
A6M3 - A6M5b
D3A
B5N

IJAAF:
Ki-61 (later frames, max 12 aircraft)
G4M-1

You see there is a major lack of variety, and this is the best I can come up with. I don't think there would be a whole bunch of appeal for the Japanese side, because I for one would not like to fly a zeke against corsairs, p-38js and mossies.


Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 22, 2011, 05:29:03 PM
Retail, the balance problem is that no one wants to fly a zeke against a hellcat. Also for early war events, there is a serious lack of variety for the Japanese. For instance, this is what i proposed for a Solomon islands campaign, one that progresses like BoG

USN:
F4F - F4U-1 - F4U-1A
SBD - TBM (for SB2C)

USAAF:
P-39D - P-38G - P-38J
B-17G
B-25C

RAAF:
P-40E - F4U-1A
Mosquito Mk. VI (later frames for beaufighter)


IJN:
A6M3 - A6M5b
D3A
B5N

IJAAF:
Ki-61 (later frames, max 12 aircraft)
G4M-1

You see there is a major lack of variety, and this is the best I can come up with. I don't think there would be a whole bunch of appeal for the Japanese side, because I for one would not like to fly a zeke against corsairs, p-38js and mossies.




Wildcat,

The issue here is campaign length. The Solomon's Campaign lasted from 1942 -1945. So, what battle are you referring to? Therein lays the inherent problem with a scenario such as the Solomon's. The Japanese Imperial command  wasn't really concerned about the survivability of their pilots. If this were the case, the design of the A6M would have either changed in 1943 or stopped on the production line. More armour and self-sealing fuel tanks were a no brainer in 1943.

So with that said, take the edge off by giving the Japanese a bit of an edge. A lower numbers of Hellcats and a greater number of Wildcats or FM2s to offset the Hellcats slight superiority. The F6F would be the uber ride for the scenario, but all Japanese fighters would be uber for this scenario. The fun would be in the possible retaking of Wake Island.  Sorry, no twin engine bombers unless you give the Japanese the G4M in smaller numbers. This would be a furballers scenario. Great dogfighters met on both sides of the line in this battle.

Cheers...

BTW, it's REDtail...

:salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 22, 2011, 05:34:53 PM
CM's sure like PTO though.

I like PTO about the same as everything else, not more.  It was part of the historical fighting, so I like to see it present.

It would be nice to have more Eastern Front action.  The terrains for that region have not been available, but that's changing, and when it does, I think that there will be more Eastern Front scenarios.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 22, 2011, 05:55:53 PM
Wildcat,

The issue here is campaign length. The Solomon's Campaign lasted from 1942 -1945. So, what battle are you referring to? Therein lays the inherent problem with a scenario such as the Solomon's. The Japanese Imperial command  wasn't really concerned about the survivability of their pilots. If this were the case, the design of the A6M would have either changed in 1943 or stopped on the production line. More armour and self-sealing fuel tanks were a no brainer in 1943.

So with that said, take the edge off by giving the Japanese a bit of an edge. A lower numbers of Hellcats and a greater number of Wildcats or FM2s to offset the Hellcats slight superiority. The F6F would be the uber ride for the scenario, but all Japanese fighters would be uber for this scenario. The fun would be in the possible retaking of Wake Island.  Sorry, no twin engine bombers unless you give the Japanese the G4M in smaller numbers. This would be a furballers scenario. Great dogfighters met on both sides of the line in this battle.

Cheers...

BTW, it's REDtail...

:salute


Sorry, typo :D

The Solomon campaign I'm talking about is from guadalcanal to bougainville.

But there will never be a "furball" scenario, because they are most often based on campaigns, and include all aspects of the game. Plus, you cannot simply handicap one side for the sake of balance because it becomes historically inaccurate. Look at BoG. For the early frames, the allies had a theoretical advantage, p-38s, p-47s and p-51s vs. 109gs and 190a-8s. Yet the axis won a majority of those frames due to tactics and planning. You have to work with the tools given to you. you cannot add extra craft for the sake of balance, I.e. fm-2s were not active until 1944, so they would not be available for the battle you are proposing. TFB had some balance issues as well, 109Ks and 190s against spit 16s, p-51s and typhoons, a theoretical disadvantage, but still axis pilots scored a very many kills. Same thing goes for a majority of eastern front events.

Scenarios are designed for historical accuracy to provide a deep sense of immersion. You won't ever see an event designed to handicap one side over the other.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 22, 2011, 07:06:14 PM
I'm not big on PTO events. It seems one side or the other usually has a good sized edge in one aspect or another (Be it in heavy movers, speed, firepower, maneuverability, etc). Road to rangoon was pretty even, though excessive numbers of P-40E's to put against the G4M's, IMO  :noid.

I also enjoyed Philippine Phandango, although it seems the axis kind of got shafted on the strategic targets (strats are stationary, and can be hit from high altitude with bombs, ships necessitated a torpedo run).

Love Afrika, love Italy, both areas look great (Afrika in games, Italy in real life  :D).
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: perdue3 on July 22, 2011, 07:21:05 PM
I love and will always side with the Japanese any chance I get. People don't always like what they don't understand and I get that. But when you have a bunch of vets that seem to cherry pick only the winning teams on the most favorable side....Philippine Phandango...there is going to be a balance problem.

Maybe I'll just keep me and my guys out of the slow and predictable (boring) ETO and Eastern Front setups. Should be a real fun event with no NME.

We won BoG.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 22, 2011, 07:29:53 PM
That quote had nothing to do with BoG. Didn't even mention or reference it, did it  :headscratch:?
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 22, 2011, 08:31:20 PM
Sorry, typo :D

The Solomon campaign I'm talking about is from guadalcanal to bougainville.

But there will never be a "furball" scenario, because they are most often based on campaigns, and include all aspects of the game. Plus, you cannot simply handicap one side for the sake of balance because it becomes historically inaccurate. Look at BoG. For the early frames, the allies had a theoretical advantage, p-38s, p-47s and p-51s vs. 109gs and 190a-8s. Yet the axis won a majority of those frames due to tactics and planning. You have to work with the tools given to you. you cannot add extra craft for the sake of balance, I.e. fm-2s were not active until 1944, so they would not be available for the battle you are proposing. TFB had some balance issues as well, 109Ks and 190s against spit 16s, p-51s and typhoons, a theoretical disadvantage, but still axis pilots scored a very many kills. Same thing goes for a majority of eastern front events.

Scenarios are designed for historical accuracy to provide a deep sense of immersion. You won't ever see an event designed to handicap one side over the other.


Wildcat,

I see your point; the second Battle for Wake Island was a battle and not a campaign.  Nonetheless, the scenario would involve every aspect of your standard scenario. For example level and dive bombing by TBMs and B5Ns on ships and shore targets. Some form of amphibious landing to take the island. Plus it would be historically accurate as it was in October of 1943. Yes, we can drop the FM2s. Still the challenge stands for the USN to achieve a victory with pretty good historical accuracy and not an overwhelming amount of beef. The right scripting should attract more players, either by desire or default to fly Japanese aircraft.

The Philippine Phandango was historically accurate, but as lopsided as it could be. I was KKEN's XO for the scenario. It was tough trying to plan against the hardware. The KI-61s were getting ripped apart by P-38Js and P-47D-25s. Even the FM2s were as fast or faster than the KI-61s, not to mention more maneuverable. That is the type of scenario that turns players off. The design was great. The planning was great. Fencer did a fantastic job putting it together. But, the hardware was a historical setup for the Japanese to be defeated, against some super tough and resilient American aircraft.

So, level the playing field for the sake of fun for both sides. When you get started into a scenario where everything is great except for the hardware on one side, folks tend to withhold their interest and commitment to participate for the whole scenario. Try giving the second Battle for Wake Island another try. Relatively short, historically accurate setup and guaranteed to be action packed QUICKLY!

Cheers...

:salute

Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Fencer51 on July 22, 2011, 11:20:33 PM
Its an interesting problem.  We can get people to fly the later Japanese planes. (KI84/N1K2)  Yet the balance is way against them in those.  Yet the early battles where the balance is even (1942-Mid 43) we have problems getting people in the Japanese side.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 22, 2011, 11:23:36 PM
The issue is most people are only willing to fly the uber LW rides. They don't seem to realize that you have the same advantages, everything is just slowed down about 50mph in the EW arena
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 23, 2011, 02:10:34 AM
CM's talking trash? Oh no, CM's aren't allowed. BTW, if you are gonna talk smack, you should do a little homework. I dont like uneven matches (K4 v I16), I like em even and fair. Most importantly, fun. Go PTO Early War!

There is no Allied bias. BoG for example, we Luftwaffe hacked so ya'll should be complaining. Oh wait...

Honestly, IDC what next scenario is. I will be there no matter what it is. I do like Eastern Front and NO ONE here can say that we do too much Eastern front. CM's sure like PTO though.

But you are so easy to get going Perd.  As for BoG, I'm still waiting for you to come out of the ack! :)

Just so you know, my dream scenario would be 1943 RAF v Luftwaffe Channel Front.  About as even a fight as you can get.  Spit V and IXs, Tiffies, 190A5s, 109G6s, Mitchells, Marauders and the occasional Mossie.  Ju88s, 110Gs and 109F8s standing in for those tip and run raiders the LW was using against the south coast.

I suppose the LW guys wouldn't like to fight Spitfires though :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: ROC on July 23, 2011, 02:29:43 AM
Are you guys really going to make me drag out my "it's not the plane or terrain" rant?
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 23, 2011, 04:14:21 AM
While a plane or terrain doen't MAKE a scenario, it can certinaly make one much more fun, or a pain at times.

If guppy had said we should sub in the spit 16 for the spit 9 because it more closely resembles the later 9 models, I'd probably stay home. Or at least start asking for the G14 in place of the G10 ;).


Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: HB555 on July 23, 2011, 12:13:02 PM
Personally, I like to fly what was actually flown, and usually try for the side that actually lost to see if I can make a difference in the historical win/loss book.
But then, that's just one old dogs opinion.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Devil 505 on July 23, 2011, 12:52:23 PM
Are you guys really going to make me drag out my "it's not the plane or terrain" rant?
While I mostly agree with that statement, I believe that the planeset led directly to Coral Sea '11 not getting off the ground.
In the last year there have been 3 scenarios, two of which were PTO. I think that the community is a little burnt out from PTO setups. Even a great setup like Coral Sea can fall victim to poor timing, which it did.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 23, 2011, 03:02:21 PM
HB555, the issue is that you can only affect you're single corner of the fight. Maybe you're side won a dogfight it didn't win in real life, but individual pilots can't change the strategic picture.

For example, if a carrier is sunk, there is no reduction in the number of aircraft flown against you in the following frame. And if you win a frame, it doesn't stop the other side from advancing (on the ground, possibly resulting in airfields closer to their strategic targets).

Unless we (the participants) are given control of the strategic situation, it can be difficult to change the outcome of a battle.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 24, 2011, 01:21:33 PM
Personally, I like to fly what was actually flown, and usually try for the side that actually lost to see if I can make a difference in the historical win/loss book.
But then, that's just one old dogs opinion.

 :aok

Me, too.  I also am fine with flying the less-popular plane models in the setup.  Folks flew those planes in the real battles, and I get satisfaction out of flying such a plane and doing decently.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 24, 2011, 01:59:54 PM
IMHO - There seems to be less interest from the staff in scenario from the mid years MTO. Why is that?

Other than Operation Husky, there were many great campaigns that spanned every aspect of the scenario experience.

Especially in mainland Italy.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 24, 2011, 05:11:27 PM
We also have yet to see a Battle of France scenario, which would be COMPLETELY doable with the aircraft we have now. Not a single one is missing that can't be filled in for with a very similar aircraft or tank.

Allies
P-51B/D
Spitfire mk IX/VIII
Typhoon
P-38J
P-47D25/D40
Mossie VI
b-24
B-17
Lancaster
A20
M4(75)/M4(76) (the '76 added in July, mixed at a ratio of 4/1)
Firefly

Axis
Bf109G2
109G6
109G14
Fw 190A5
Fw190A8
Fw190F8
110G2
Ju-88
Panzer IV and Panther (mixed at a ratio of 5/1)
Tiger I/II (Starts in the Tiger I and switch to the tiger II in mid July)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 24, 2011, 06:26:34 PM
IMHO - There seems to be less interest from the staff in scenario from the mid years MTO. Why is that?

A lot of what we run has to do with what terrains are available.  I like mid-war MTO as much as everything else.  In fact, what was supposed to be running right now was mid-war MTO.  It was ready to go, but there was an issue that we couldn't get around, and late in our process we substituted Coral Sea, as the terrain was all up to date, tested, and the design was done.

I don't dislike any theater or time period.  I like them all.  What I like best in scenarios is representation of what battles were fought and variety.  I like it best when we are able to vary the theater, time period, and style of combat from scenario to scenario.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Devil 505 on July 24, 2011, 07:44:04 PM
In fact, what was supposed to be running right now was mid-war MTO.  It was ready to go, but there was an issue that we couldn't get around,

Are you at liberty to elaborate on the issue? Has it been corrected? Will it be corrected?
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 24, 2011, 08:15:14 PM
Are you at liberty to elaborate on the issue? Has it been corrected? Will it be corrected?

Probably the damage issue with the transport ships on the Italy terrain
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Devil 505 on July 24, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
Probably the damage issue with the transport ships on the Italy terrain
Maybe, but that didn't stop FSO from happening.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 24, 2011, 09:29:23 PM
Yep, it had to do with being able to destroy ships (an important part of the scenario that was in mind).  I do think that it will be fixed, but it sounds like it isn't easy.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 24, 2011, 10:22:48 PM
IMHO - There seems to be less interest from the staff in scenario from the mid years MTO. Why is that?

Other than Operation Husky, there were many great campaigns that spanned every aspect of the scenario experience.

Especially in mainland Italy.

You based this statement on what exactly?

A profile I did for my youngest son. This is his fictional Red Tail Mustang.   I note you have an interest in Red Tails as well. You should see what his room looks like!  So as far as interest in the MTO, I'd suggest you are incorrect, and my interest isn't limited to just the 332nd :)

(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/MattsMustang-3.jpg)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 24, 2011, 10:36:26 PM
Why haven't we had a Normandy one or the battle of France? We have the maps for it, and we have all the needed aircraft.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 24, 2011, 10:56:23 PM
Why haven't we had a Normandy one or the battle of France? We have the maps for it, and we have all the needed aircraft.

Due to 8th air force bombing of German oil stations before the landings, luftwaffe operations were few and far between in Normandy. By the time of the breakout, most gruppen were pulled back to Germany to defend the Reich. If there were any credible gruppen left in France, they were severely ill-equipped
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 24, 2011, 11:06:11 PM
Why haven't we had a Normandy one or the battle of France? We have the maps for it, and we have all the needed aircraft.

Normandy would be an easy one.  2 190 pilots, 800 flak panzers and 1000 Allied fighter bomber pilots :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 25, 2011, 12:06:44 AM
Normandy would be an easy one.  2 190 pilots, 800 flak panzers and 1000 Allied fighter bomber pilots :)

Yup :aok
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Fencer51 on July 25, 2011, 01:44:14 AM
Due to 8th air force bombing of German oil stations before the landings, luftwaffe operations were few and far between in Normandy. By the time of the breakout, most gruppen were pulled back to Germany to defend the Reich. If there were any credible gruppen left in France, they were severely ill-equipped

Little more research there.  The Luftwaffe reinforced after the landings.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 25, 2011, 02:03:45 AM
Little more research there.  The Luftwaffe reinforced after the landings.

Doh!!

Shows you how good my research abilities are
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Tank-Ace on July 25, 2011, 12:54:12 PM
OK, so Normandy and/or battle of France is completly possible. I say we need to run it  :rock.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 25, 2011, 06:31:01 PM
A lot of what we run has to do with what terrains are available.  I like mid-war MTO as much as everything else.  In fact, what was supposed to be running right now was mid-war MTO.  It was ready to go, but there was an issue that we couldn't get around, and late in our process we substituted Coral Sea, as the terrain was all up to date, tested, and the design was done.

I don't dislike any theater or time period.  I like them all.  What I like best in scenarios is representation of what battles were fought and variety.  I like it best when we are able to vary the theater, time period, and style of combat from scenario to scenario.

Brooke,

I want to assure you that no harm was meant by my comments. The staff performs a remarkable service for the AH community. Thanks for all that you guys do... I do understand now that there are limitations to each scenario and the resources are not always available to mitigate some of the technical issues. As long as the thoughts are being given to a great period and theater of aerial combat. That's good enough for me.

With that said and when the maps are fixed...

Please consider "The Battle of Salerno"  :aok

Epic battle with American low end hardware., P-40s, P-38Gs, P39Ds, B-25s-26s against FW190A-5s, BF109Fs, G2s-G6s, C202s, C205s, JU87s and  Ju88s...  :airplane:

It was truly confidence and experience that allowed the Yanks to survive.  :salute

Thanks again...

Redtail7
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 25, 2011, 06:50:38 PM
You based this statement on what exactly?

A profile I did for my youngest son. This is his fictional Red Tail Mustang.   I note you have an interest in Red Tails as well. You should see what his room looks like!  So as far as interest in the MTO, I'd suggest you are incorrect, and my interest isn't limited to just the 332nd :)


Guppy,

EXCELLENT! Do you skin? If you do, I will fly your skin. Just incase you do decide to create a 332nd FG skin. Please give thought to this one;

P-51C-10, 42-103956 #7 100th FS, 332nd FG "Miss-Pelt" Flown by 1st Lt. Clarence "Lucky" Lester Italy 1944.

As I mentioned to Brooke, my comments were not meant to be inflammatory. I know that the CM staff is well read in all of the WWII theaters. I have had an interest in the Redtails as long and as far back as I could remember who they were and what they did. That's been quite a while now. This was a history unlike any other.

 :salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 25, 2011, 07:12:57 PM
Guppy,

EXCELLENT! Do you skin? If you do, I will fly your skin. Just incase you do decide to create a 332nd FG skin. Please give thought to this one;

P-51C-10, 42-103956 #7 100th FS, 332nd FG "Miss-Pelt" Flown by 1st Lt. Clarence "Lucky" Lester Italy 1944.

As I mentioned to Brooke, my comments were not meant to be inflammatory. I know that the CM staff is well read in all of the WWII theaters. I have had an interest in the Redtails as long and as far back as I could remember who they were and what they did. That's been quite a while now. This was a history unlike any other.

 :salute

No worries :)

Check your PMs regarding Red Tails :aok
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Brooke on July 25, 2011, 07:30:48 PM
No problem here, either.  Also, I would love to fly in a scenario like you describe!  :aok
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Delirium on July 26, 2011, 09:47:09 PM
Just so you know, my dream scenario would be 1943 RAF v Luftwaffe Channel Front.  About as even a fight as you can get.  Spit V and IXs, Tiffies, 190A5s, 109G6s, Mitchells, Marauders and the occasional Mossie.  Ju88s, 110Gs and 109F8s standing in for those tip and run raiders the LW was using against the south coast.

+1

I love the Circus match-ups, although I lean more towards late 1942/ early 1943 to keep some of the speed monsters out of the scenario.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 26, 2011, 11:04:43 PM
+1

I love the Circus match-ups, although I lean more towards late 1942/ early 1943 to keep some of the speed monsters out of the scenario.

Well we haven't winged in Spits since the Airwarrior Italy scenario.  Probably about time to try that again :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Delirium on July 27, 2011, 11:55:11 AM
Well we haven't winged in Spits since the Airwarrior Italy scenario.  Probably about time to try that again :)

Don't tell anyone I was in a Spit, I can imagine the comments I would receive because of it.

That one fight was something I will never forget; prior to voice comms the 2 of us dominated a fight vs 3 high Fw190s, with 2 of them dead and the other running home with damage. Frankly, that was probably the most fun I have ever had in any online flight sim. It is like a drug, you want that feeling again but the conditions aren't the same to recreate it and it adds to the frustration.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 27, 2011, 01:17:24 PM
Well we haven't winged in Spits since the Airwarrior Italy scenario.  Probably about time to try that again :)
Don't tell anyone I was in a Spit

 :huh :confused: :headscratch: :uhoh......

 :bolt:
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Guppy35 on July 27, 2011, 03:26:21 PM
:huh :confused: :headscratch: :uhoh......

 :bolt:

Ahh but it was classic Wildcat.  Us in low Spit Vs bounced by higher 190s.  Remember we're having to type the plan since there was no vox.  You break right, I'll go left....It works.  Dell kills the guy that follows me, I shoot up the guy that follows him and we scare the other one away cause we can't catch em.  We should have been easy pickings.

And as Del says, there are moments in scenarios that grab you and you want that feeling again as it's not something that can be replicated in anything but a scenario.  Probably shouldn't mention the 602 Spit IXs then either :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 27, 2011, 06:42:34 PM
I know what you mean, corky. I'm getting that lutfwaffe urge back from tfb  :)
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 27, 2011, 07:08:15 PM
Ahh but it was classic Wildcat.  Us in low Spit Vs bounced by higher 190s.  Remember we're having to type the plan since there was no vox.  You break right, I'll go left....It works.  Dell kills the guy that follows me, I shoot up the guy that follows him and we scare the other one away cause we can't catch em.  We should have been easy pickings.

And as Del says, there are moments in scenarios that grab you and you want that feeling again as it's not something that can be replicated in anything but a scenario.  Probably shouldn't mention the 602 Spit IXs then either :)

Great tale...

Hey Brooke we need a scenario!!!

:D
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: skribetm on July 28, 2011, 04:25:56 AM
is it BoG time again? count me IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!!!!!!!!!!!  :rock :O :O :O :lol :lol :lol
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: BoilerDown on July 28, 2011, 04:29:06 AM
The Philippine Phandango was historically accurate, but as lopsided as it could be. I was KKEN's XO for the scenario. It was tough trying to plan against the hardware. The KI-61s were getting ripped apart by P-38Js and P-47D-25s. Even the FM2s were as fast or faster than the KI-61s, not to mention more maneuverable. That is the type of scenario that turns players off. The design was great. The planning was great. Fencer did a fantastic job putting it together. But, the hardware was a historical setup for the Japanese to be defeated, against some super tough and resilient American aircraft.

This scenario came with canned mission assignments for each aircraft group that had to be followed.  The Ki61s were often assigned to jabo vs. ground and water targets with Nikis flying air cover.  I don't know if that was done for historical reasons or not, but that is entirely backwards.  The Ki61s are outclassed in the scenario to begin with, the only way to make them useful is to use them correctly, and that would be to have them always flying air cover, and never jabo.  The Niki with its cannons is far better suited to taking out ground and sea targets.  Unfortunately this was out of KKEN's hands, he had to follow the canned mission assignments.

The other problem is that squad sizes were really really random even before no shows were taken into consideration.  To keep it fair to everyone, all squads should be around the same size, because when two opposing squads meet in the air, the one with greater numbers has a big advantage.  In PP, the Ki61s had really small squad sizes while my Niki squad had up to 14 slots.  This just doesn't make sense unless it was done for historical reasons.  For balance, if anything the outclassed aircraft should be given larger squad sizes, certainly not smaller.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 29, 2011, 01:36:36 PM
This scenario came with canned mission assignments for each aircraft group that had to be followed.  The Ki61s were often assigned to jabo vs. ground and water targets with Nikis flying air cover.  I don't know if that was done for historical reasons or not, but that is entirely backwards.  The Ki61s are outclassed in the scenario to begin with, the only way to make them useful is to use them correctly, and that would be to have them always flying air cover, and never jabo.  The Niki with its cannons is far better suited to taking out ground and sea targets.  Unfortunately this was out of KKEN's hands, he had to follow the canned mission assignments.

The other problem is that squad sizes were really really random even before no shows were taken into consideration.  To keep it fair to everyone, all squads should be around the same size, because when two opposing squads meet in the air, the one with greater numbers has a big advantage.  In PP, the Ki61s had really small squad sizes while my Niki squad had up to 14 slots.  This just doesn't make sense unless it was done for historical reasons.  For balance, if anything the outclassed aircraft should be given larger squad sizes, certainly not smaller.


BD,

This is exactly my point about a scenario like the second Battle of Wake Island. The scenario starts early enough in the war that the uber aircraft are not that uber and everyone would base success in the air on their skill level rather than 500 more horsepower or twice the fire power.

Cheers

 :salute
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 29, 2011, 01:57:15 PM
The issue is most people are only willing to fly the uber LW rides. They don't seem to realize that you have the same advantages, everything is just slowed down about 50mph in the EW arena

Tank,

I thought about this for a few minutes. It's not that they only want to fly LW uber birds of prey. It's just that they have seen too many film shots of burning Japaneses fighters after a single hit from a .50 cal API shell from 1500 yards astern.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htE4KpXKE2I&feature=player_detailpage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htE4KpXKE2I&feature=player_detailpage)

At least we have icons.  :lol

:D
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: Krusty on July 29, 2011, 04:17:54 PM
Redtail, you are both factually and conceptually wrong. Most guncam footage would be 150-200 yards max. 300 yards was considered "out of range" in most cases.

Further, that's not why people don't like the scenario in question. You and Tank are wrong that it has to do with "I want to fly my plane only!" and the MA mentality. That's a beginner mindset. Scenarios are filled with people that have already progressed PAST that stage. The reason they WANT scenarios is because of the history, the matchups, because they like the planes in it (say you love C205s for example). We have a proven scenario base so we know several hundred people feel this way consistently and over the years keep returning for many different scenarios.

Claiming poor turnout is because there are no LW MA monster rides is ludicrous.
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: swareiam on July 29, 2011, 05:04:01 PM
Redtail, you are both factually and conceptually wrong. Most guncam footage would be 150-200 yards max. 300 yards was considered "out of range" in most cases.

Further, that's not why people don't like the scenario in question. You and Tank are wrong that it has to do with "I want to fly my plane only!" and the MA mentality. That's a beginner mindset. Scenarios are filled with people that have already progressed PAST that stage. The reason they WANT scenarios is because of the history, the matchups, because they like the planes in it (say you love C205s for example). We have a proven scenario base so we know several hundred people feel this way consistently and over the years keep returning for many different scenarios.

Claiming poor turnout is because there are no LW MA monster rides is ludicrous.

Krusty,

If I am not the first to tell you that you take things a bit too seriously. I may be the one hundred thousandth.
Yes Krusty… It was meant to be a joke. You can laugh now… HAHAHA  :headscratch: :lol

Cheers...
Title: Re: Next Scenario
Post by: skribetm on July 29, 2011, 11:51:29 PM
for me, its just planeset accuracy, thats all.
if i dress up in my jap pilot uniform, htc should at least provide historically accurate planes.  :D