Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Bino on February 20, 2013, 04:00:26 PM
-
The March FSO, "The Last Battle of Kharkov - August 1943", is posted on the AH Events web site:
http://www.ahevents.org/fso-current-next-event.html (http://www.ahevents.org/fso-current-next-event.html)
Squad CO's, please update your side and ride preferences.
-
III./JG11 - updated.
-
Problem with the write-up:
"5.) 110G-2 30mm MK-108 cannon and Wfr.Gr.21 rockets are disabled."
The 30mm Mk108s are not something you can disable. They are the default weapon configuration and present in all other loadouts. These are the internal top nose guns.
Perhaps you're thinking of the gunpod option, which is an additional 2x20mm guns?
-
What's the intention of scoring double negative points for friendly-fire shoot-downs?
With the way kills are assigned to users, this could be problematic. For example, you hit a friendly with an errant 50 cal. doing little or no damage. Same pilot subsequently collides with a bad guy. Both pilots are killed. If the bad guy dies first, you'll be assigned the kill. Seems harsh.
What do other think?
-
I agree there. There is a difference between "killing" and "being awarded the kill but not killing" ... Unless the server can track the difference it isn't fair.
I spray a guy with a single .303 30 minutes in, and he crashes on landing 2 hours later but I get penalized? Just a fictional example, but it happens. It's happened before with bomber losses, too. One bomber pings another, and lost drones later or safe ditches due to lost oil, etc, add up to a number of friendly fire incidents.
-
Based on recent questions and discussions in this forum, it seemed like a good opportunity to see if penalizing those few incidents (instead of simply not scoring the kills) would ultimately make any real difference. Friendly fire normally only accounts for perhaps as many as three planes on each side in the FSO logs that I've examined.
As for the 30mm on the Bf-110, I will ask the Setup CMs if they have access to configuring that weapon option.
-
Why would you get rid of the taters?
-
Honestly, you can't:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/Bf_110G-2
There are other options, but 30mm is always present. As to why they're disabled: The 30mm guns weren't available in numbers until 1944. Until then, 110Gs removed the 7mm nose guns and carried the twin gunpods, making a platform that had 4x20mm and no 7mm or 30mm. These were often used against bombers, mainly. The 7mm were retained in many 110Gs that engaged in ground attack and strafing, where the thousnds of rounds of ammo wreaked havoc on unprotected ground targets. For AH use, though, these would be pretty weak.
Because of the date of this setup, I think they wanted to limit the 30mm firepower the 110s might have, so they're not overpowered.
-
This is a ridiculous rule and here is why:
Per the old scoring, if I shoot down Sukov (my faithful XO and squaddie) I obviously am not credited with an enemy kill. However the Allies receive 5 points for his loss (not to mention the loss of a potential 5 points for the Axis for a landing). So in that situation the Axis get 0 points (no chance at a 5 pt bonus) and Allies get 5 points. I get an earful from my XO.
In the new system, I shoot down Sukov (my faithful XO and squaddie) I obviously am not crdited with an enemy kill. However the Allies receive 5 points for his loss (not to mention the loss of a potential 5 points for a landing). Axis loses 10 points because I killed Sukov. So the end result is Allies 5 points, Axis -10 points and perdweeb gets an earful from Sukov.
Wrap up:
Old way: Axis 0 (no chance at 5 pt. landing bonus); Allies 5
New way: Axis -10 (no chance at 5 pt. landing bonus); Allies 5
My point is that shooting a friendly down is penalty enough in itself without the points penalty. Not only have I given the enemy a free 5 points, guaranteed the Axis of not receiving a 5 point bonus, and shot down my friend and ended his night early but I have also taken a friendly out of a sure to be hard fought battle that finds the Axis in desperate need of numbers of fighters on fighters.
That is the fighter aspect, the situation where it would most likely be relevant amongst my ranks in Kommando Nowotny. It happens more often in bombers. I know there have been multiple times where KN gets 7 kills in Ju 88's, 3 of them being friendly Ju 88's.
So let us say that I shoot down one of Sukov's drones purely on accident obviously. In the old system we have given the enemy 15 points, (if on bomb run) lost ordnance on the target, and lost the possibility of a 5 point landing bonus for that bomber. Not to mention I took Sukov's defense down a bit by killing one of his bombers.
In the new system we have given the enemy 15 points, lost 30 points for a friendly accidental bomber kill, possibly took ordnance off the target, reduced Sukov's chances of survival, and guaranteed the loss of a 5 point landing bonus for that bomber.
Bomber wrap up (using this month's point system):
Old way: Axis 0 (no chance at 5 pt. landing bonus); Allies 15
New way: Axis -30 (no chance at 5 pt. landing bonus); Allies 15
This friendly fire system could be a real game changer. We have all seen the FSO's that came down to less than 100 points. I have shown you the difference in points for both the new and old systems. Keep in mind I have used 1 plane being shot down by friendly fire. Not 2, 3, or 5; ONE. One bomber is a 45 (maybe 50) point swing. One bomber is a 45 (maybe 50) point swing. One last time, ONE BOMBER IS A 45 (MAYBE 50) POINT SWING.
Remove that rule please. As I said there are multiple hidden, if you will, penalties associated with friendly fire. There is absolutely no need for a point penalty also.
-
I promise to aim better. :airplane:
-
I have discoed with a couple BBs in my plane from a friendly. The friendly received a kill on my bomber.
I don't see why any one should receive points for friendly fire.
-
Great point Sukov.
Why should the enemy be rewarded for something they literally had nothing to do with?
If friendlies PURPOSELY shooting down friendlies was a real issue in FSO, by all means add the penalty. But that is not the case. I personally do not see how you can justify such a staggering penalty for accidents.
-
This new rule will mean you must be more careful who you hit, like in real life.
It will be a BIG DEAL now if you shoot down your comrade, like in real life.
Communiccation between close proximity allies will have to be ON to help eliminate friendly fire deaths, like in real life.
FSO fighter ops will be more stressful with the new rule, like fighter ops were in real life.
FSO's. I don't want them easy. I don't want it to be relaxing. I don't want it to be for "everybody" who just wants to fly and casually does not really care.
-
This new rule will mean you must be more careful who you hit, like in real life.
It will be a BIG DEAL now if you shoot down your comrade, like in real life.
Communiccation between close proximity allies will have to be ON to help eliminate friendly fire deaths, like in real life.
FSO fighter ops will be more stressful with the new rule, like fighter ops were in real life.
FSO's. I don't want them easy. I don't want it to be relaxing. I don't want it to be for "everybody" who just wants to fly and casually does not really care.
I hate to burst your bubble but this is a video game. Everyone knows in real life when the Germans had a case of fratricide the Russians received 5 points!
-
Why should the enemy be rewarded for something they literally had nothing to do with?
The enemy ccertainly would have something to do with it. They were there, in close proximity to your allies whom you should be careful not to shoot. "It looks like I may hit a friendly if I fire", then hold your fire and wait for a cleaner shot.
-
I hate to burst your bubble but this is a video game. Everyone knows in real life when the Germans had a case of fratricide the Russians received 5 points!
"Like in real life" is what I said. Does that make you think I believe this isn't a video game?
FSO's are the most desciplined part of our video game. This new rule will make that more so not less so.
Both sides have the same rules and will be rewarded or penalized exacctly the same. The more desciplined side will have an advantage.
-
"Like in real life" is what I said. Does that make you think I believe this isn't a video game?
Yes I read what you typed. My point still stands.
The other side should not receive any points for fratricide.
-
Perd, you say you shoot your CO down but the enemy team gets 5 points. That's not the case. They don't just look at planes that didn't make it back. They count kill awards. So if there's a landing bonus your team won't get that, but the other team won't benefit other than not having to worry about 1 more enemy plane.
-
So who is flying the 190A5?
-
Just shoot at everyone and sort out the bodies later for scoring. :devil
-
162nd updated, ready for orders
-
AK's Set. Didn't have the time to vote like usual though.
Last month you were a day early, this month 5 days late...
:devil
-
...
Per the old scoring, if I shoot down Sukov (my faithful XO and squaddie) I obviously am not credited with an enemy kill. However the Allies receive 5 points for his loss (not to mention the loss of a potential 5 points for the Axis for a landing). So in that situation the Axis get 0 points (no chance at a 5 pt bonus) and Allies get 5 points. I get an earful from my XO.
...
Perdweeb, your initial assumption is incorrect: under the old way, a friendly fire death scores no points at all, for anyone.
-
Perdweeb, your initial assumption is incorrect: under the old way, a friendly fire death scores no points at all, for anyone.
Right on. Therefore, at any rate this rule sucks. It is ridiculous to say that friendly fire will be avoided more with the new rule. It won't be. It doesn't happen too often in a frame anyway. I dont see a need for this penalty at all. I can guarantee you my squad will fly no differently. Under my command, there is a rule in place for multiple squaddies on one soon to be dead Allied pilot. It is there for two reasons but one is to avoid killing each other.
Zoney, I agree with you for the most part. I want FSO to stay as real as possible. There is a line though. Scenarios, for me, are over that line and have been for 2 years. FSO is not. It is as real as I want it to be. Discipline wins the day in events, we all know this. To ask us to be more discipline is ludacris. Every CO should have something in place for that situation. But a little ignorance is shown when you compare FSO to real life. We are all here becaused we love the event. But considering only 5-10% of the people flying FSO can actually take off a taildragger and land it successfully in real life. I am more than sure that less than 1% can take off a real Bf 109. I know I cant and I have got all my time in a Luscombe 8E. Not saying I am some awesome pilot or anything, I just know I cant do it.
To the CMs: It is hard for me to believe that you guys thought of every little detail that goes into friendly fire. There is penalty enough in shooting down a friendly. I have already listed them. The hardest part is knowing you shot down a friendly and are held responsible for his early night to bed and lack of fun. If you all thought of that, kudos. The chance of a 5 point landing bonus is erased and one plane is taken out of the fight and not by an enemy. There are already plenty of reasons to be careful shooting around friendlies. We do not need a substantial, potential game changing scare tactic that is the new friendly fire penalty. Yes it is fair and even because both sides have it in place, but why? It is not necessary. It will not help FSO in any way. It may increase some people's sense of realism and immersion, but not everyone's.
-
Problem with the write-up:
The 30mm Mk108s are not something you can disable. They are the default weapon configuration and present in all other loadouts. These are the internal top nose guns.
...
This has been confirmed. As you can see, we're still learning the limits of the weapon configuration CM tool. My intent in this setup was simply to have bombers be bombers and fighters be fighters. Oh, well...
-
This has been confirmed. As you can see, we're still learning the limits of the weapon configuration CM tool. My intent in this setup was simply to have bombers be bombers and fighters be fighters. Oh, well...
I guess that answers my question Bino! As you said,Oh well.... would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to diable guns they should be removed so you dont carry the weight needlessly!
A moot point I guess.
:salute
-
I guess that answers my question Bino! As you said,Oh well.... would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to diable guns they should be removed so you dont carry the weight needlessly!
A moot point I guess.
:salute
Needlessly carry mk108s :huh, morf, go kill yourself right now.
-
I hate to burst your bubble but this is a video game. Everyone knows in real life when the Germans had a case of fratricide the Russians received 5 points!
Absolutely just a game . . based on reality. The more realistic the better! Perdue3 makes a good point and I respect that, so does everyone that commented but I agree with the remarks made by those 'for' this ruling if only for the realism; the points are the the game part while the rest is the part of the game we fight for real. (the after action debates verify this, they're real yet based on the game) Hell, I want friendly collisions and pre dawn takeoffs too! Anything to make it as close to real, even if it means draconian rules as Bino presented. After all, anyone that has served knows it ain't a democracy in the military. FSO should be as realistic as possible for the up to 6 hours we all fight it every month. I ask: what is the friendly penalty for fraticide and what is its benifit to an enemy in real life? Just my thoughts and opinion, respectfully...
-
I guess that answers my question Bino! As you said,Oh well.... would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to disable guns they should be removed so you don't carry the weight needlessly!
A moot point I guess.
:salute
I would prefer to fight against a 110 with the full gun package. I see a more formidable foe in the 110 G2 without the full package because it's so much more maneuverable without em yet retains the same ability to devastate an opponent with just a touch. Now if the weight remains and the guns aren't there, well that wouldn't be fair even though it would be to my benefit as an Allied flyer...
-
Read this statement:
This is just a game that is based on reality. The "friendly fire penalty" adds realism to the game. The points deducted is the game's way of penalizing those who partake in fratricide.
Does that not sound incredibly ridiculous and negating? Every aspect negates another. Just so you guys are not confused, in real life I am sure they tried hard not to kill each other, my squad (as I am sure all of the others do) tries hard not to kill each other. In real life, a man dies and an aircraft is lost. In this game a squaddie's night ends early and we lose an aircraft. Again, this is just a game therefore we are already somewhat "historically accurate." I dont see why the rule is needed. I have tried to make my point three different ways and all the CM Team has to say is "your assumption is wrong, no points are given to the enemy...".
So please CM's, get involved in this. Explain to all of us how and why this will make FSO so much better than it already is. What kind of thought process went into this decision? Thanks.
-
Needlessly carry mk108s :huh, morf, go kill yourself right now.
I'm not sure what you mean by this but if you have disabled guns why would you want to carry the extra weight needlessly?
That was my point not that the Mk108's are needless,personally I'd like to see the option to mount the MK 101 on the 110C and the BK 3.7 mounted on the 110G.
As for killing myself,I'll leave that to others,thx!
:salute
-
Oh, I read that wrong, I thought you said you just wouldn't want to take the mk 108s. :O
-
Just as an FYI to the folks planning these, the CM tool only allows the disabling of certain weapons options. Just that entire option.
So, theoretically on a C205 you could disable the 20mm cannons and leave the 7mm wing guns, but you could NOT disable the 12.7mm cowl guns, because these are present on both (all) loadouts.
So you cannot disable a specific gun. You CAN disable a hangar loadout selection. If the gun you want to disable shows up in only one of those, yes you can disable it by not allowing those hangar choices, but if that gun is present in all selections you cannot remove all hangar options.
-
Read this statement:
This is just a game that is based on reality. The "friendly fire penalty" adds realism to the game. The points deducted is the game's way of penalizing those who partake in fratricide.
Does that not sound incredibly ridiculous and negating? Every aspect negates another. Just so you guys are not confused, in real life I am sure they tried hard not to kill each other, my squad (as I am sure all of the others do) tries hard not to kill each other. In real life, a man dies and an aircraft is lost. In this game a squaddies night ends early and we lose an aircraft. Again, this is just a game therefore we are already somewhat "historically accurate." I don't see why the rule is needed. I have tried to make my point three different ways and all the CM Team has to say is "your assumption is wrong, no points are given to the enemy...".
So please Cm's, get involved in this. Explain to all of us how and why this will make FSO so much better than it already is. What kind of thought process went into this decision? Thanks.
OhhhKayyy, so what point do you understand in such a derogatory and demeaning manner? Was a simple statement having no negating factors considering each support the other to do with this subject. Can ya show a bit of class to others giving you the benefit of respect up front, I believe I did. So your not for it and I am, we can still be civil about it. I think the individuals doing the shooting can only improve their gunnery skills with this rule being kept in mind. I'm no lover of regulation for sure but like setbelt rules producing a mindset of a penalty instead of exercising safety applies in a relative manner. As in real life we don't simply walk away from these kind of happenings, hence a little more realism through being penalized for an improper action. Alt cap is pretty unrealistic to me yet it's here for some reason. Enforcement of it is another. I don't know where this will be by Friday but individuals being forced to better themselves at this particular skill has to make flying FSO better, yes? Kill shooter on wouldn't be realistic but the penalty would be immediate and final. A side note: I'm guilty of "helped shoot down" a friendly and have been shot down by the same, if this rule was in place back then I would've thought twice before taking that shot and the friendly that got me would've done likewise I believe. Sometimes it just can't be avoided and was truly an accident but most of the time a bit of enforced discipline makes the difference. If I shoot down a friendly or visa verse it is only fair to penalize them for that act of incompetence. Only my opinion, not a duel of wits Perdue...
-
President Merkin Muffley: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room." ;)
Back in September there was a fair bit of discussion in here about a friendly fire penalty in FSO when I posted the final scores for "Leaning Into France". (I suppose I brought that down upon myself by posting the spreadsheets that I had used for calculating the total scores. :) ) Afterwards, we tossed the idea around among the FSO Admin CM team, and I concluded that it was worth a try. Honestly, I do *not* expect it to make a huge dent in any of the final scores, because we rarely see so many as three friendly fire deaths on each side. One or two FF deaths per side seems to be the norm. Please think of this as an experiment. Obviously, if there are lots and lots of people who object strongly, I won't include it again in my FSO setups. I invite you all to give it a try.
Thanks. :salute
-
President Merkin Muffley: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room." ;)
Back in September there was a fair bit of discussion in here about a friendly fire penalty in FSO when I posted the final scores for "Leaning Into France". (I suppose I brought that down upon myself by posting the spreadsheets that I had used for calculating the total scores. :) ) Afterwards, we tossed the idea around among the FSO Admin CM team, and I concluded that it was worth a try. Honestly, I do *not* expect it to make a huge dent in any of the final scores, because we rarely see so many as three friendly fire deaths on each side. One or two FF deaths per side seems to be the norm. Please think of this as an experiment. Obviously, if there are lots and lots of people who object strongly, I won't include it again in my FSO setups. I invite you all to give it a try.
Thanks. :salute
More power too you and those helpen ya out, it's a lot to do and I appreciate it. :aok I don't know how you guys actually get to the bottom line from all that data and I'm curious wether kills awarded to friendlies for kills on friendlies has any other value or benefit to do with the final tally other than simply listing the parties involved. There are no points given to anyone in this situation is what I understand. From what I see this is the same for late incidents after fields are closed like disco's, accidental ejections or crashes and so on, they are just listed for what they are or do they have a value? How does an accidental shoot down late in a frame tally when an enemy aircraft scores hits first? Is there a posibility that if a friendly is damaged by an enemies fire and isn't going to make it back to land and that if another friendly shoots em down it would negate that kill to the enemy? I'll bet you guy's already discussed this and is why your experimenting with it, just realized this so I'll post it anyway just incase asked something not already thought of . . :salute
-
FYI:
I went back and checked all three frames of the January FSO, and counted all the friendly fire incidents. Here is what i found:
| Frame | | Allied | | Axis |
| 1 | | 1 | | 0 |
| 2 | | 1 | | 1 |
| 3 | | 1 | | 1 |
President Merkin Muffley: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room." ;)
Back in September there was a fair bit of discussion in here about a friendly fire penalty in FSO when I posted the final scores for "Leaning Into France". (I suppose I brought that down upon myself by posting the spreadsheets that I had used for calculating the total scores. :) ) Afterwards, we tossed the idea around among the FSO Admin CM team, and I concluded that it was worth a try. Honestly, I do *not* expect it to make a huge dent in any of the final scores, because we rarely see so many as three friendly fire deaths on each side. One or two FF deaths per side seems to be the norm. Please think of this as an experiment. Obviously, if there are lots and lots of people who object strongly, I won't include it again in my FSO setups. I invite you all to give it a try.
Thanks. :salute
-
It seems one factor has been left out. That is a person killing friendlies on purpose. Seems like the new rule would award them more as more points are subtracted from the side. It's the individual causing the problem yet the whole side is penalized. A person like this would be more than happy to see this new rule. Say for example someone who changed sides just to do this. I understand this would probably be their last FSO but damage done.
I think the best way to handle this is not to subtract points. Isn't there a way to establish that a friendly did indeed do a direct kill and not just damage? If there is then I would say no points subtracted just because you shot some holes in someone. After all that's not what brings him down. For the ones you can find out that it was a direct kill, they don't get to fly the next Frame. That way you penalize the individual and not the side. After all, subtracting points is suppose to be a fine for action against the other country like going into the no fly zone for example, aghm..... Looking at Bino's stats it doesn't affect hardly any at all. So two guys don't fly next Frame. For you realism folks seems like this is what would happen in real life. A grounded pilot. You wouldn't fine all the pilots of the entire country. Having someone needlessly shot down, not landing and adding points is a big enough penalty for the country. :salute
Well unless it's Ace8, then it's a plus. :devil
-
It seems one factor has been left out. That is a person killing friendlies on purpose...
FSO squads have taken care of that as a matter of internal discipline. And swiftly, too. It never seems to recur. :devil
-
FSO squads have taken care of that as a matter of internal discipline. And swiftly, too. It never seems to recur. :devil
:D
-
I get it. LOL