Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Nefarious on May 18, 2013, 11:05:57 AM
-
June's FSO is active and modification is open. CICs will be selected by May 30th.
http://ahevents.org/fso-current-next-event.html
Frame 1: June 7th
Frame 2: June 14th
Frame 3: June 21st
Key points of interest for this setup...
Destroyer Scoring - Destroyers will be scored like I did for a setup back in 2011, Decision at Dunkirk. To add a different element in scoring, the number of Destroyers surviving at the end of the frame will count as personnel rescued. Each Destroyer represents 2,611 men Romanian, German, and Soviet Volunteers, prisoners and civilians rescued or left behind.
Each frame will have 12 Axis Destroyers in the Evacuation zone. 1 set of Destroyers (NO CVs or CAs) must be placed in each grid. (4,7 - 5,7 - 6,7 - 6,6) All Destroyers can be attacked and destroyed every frame and will remain down once sunk for the rest of the frame. Anything above %50 will be an Axis victory and anything below %50 will be an Allied Victory.
New Aircraft scoring system - I have created a new scoring model, I'm calling it the Life or Death system. I will be using it from now on in my setups starting with this setup. It will be a different change of pace to the typical scoring standards we have done in the past.
Kills of enemy aircraft will not be directly scored, Points will only be rewarded for returning your aircraft successfully to base, successfully bailing or ditching in friendly territory. These points are based on three main factors: Air crew, engines and air frame. For each of my FSO's, there will be a chart that breaks down the scoring of each aircraft.
You will not be rewarded for captures or deaths, the goal is to ultimately stay alive and return to fight another day and lowering the other side's score by shooting down enemy aircraft.
-
:aok
III./JG11 updated.
Note to fellow kommanders:
With the summer months upon us, the III./JG11 has adjusted it's commitment level down to (11-15).
<S>
-
Let the Allied passiveness commence with this Fighter system. Do us a favor Nefarious, don't design a late war Western Front setup with that system.
Looks fun, cant wait.
-
Let the Allied passiveness commence with this Fighter system. Do us a favor Nefarious, don't design a late war Western Front setup with that system.
I am interested in seeing how it develops. I have scored frames with it already, comparing them to the traditional scoring. It produced the results I expected. Of course, no one knew and it didn't allow anyone to change any behavior going into the event. I expect there to be some aspect of wanting to preserve life over going into a massive low furball or a small fight near the end of the event, but their are still objectives to complete and they must be completed within T+60. Holding your forces and not completing your objectives will not be able to secure a victory. Likewise, Suicide Jabo attacks and small groups of defenders are not going to be helpful in stacking up points in this system.
CICs will now be able to go into a frame with a rough estimate of how many points their side is worth. Using the Minimum numbers of required aircraft and the minimum and maximum number of pilots available they have now have another factor to include with the Offensive and Defensive Objectives. They can also roughly estimate how many points the other side is holding going into the frame.
-
AK's Updated.
-
I can see some positives. I can see many negatives as well. Only the future will tell. Let us hope FSO does not become a ghost town.
-
I can see some positives. I can see many negatives as well. Only the future will tell. Let us hope FSO does not become a ghost town.
Well, you can be certain that if it starts affecting the fun level of FSO that I will make changes or even pull the system. With the limited amount of time I get to try all the things I want in FSO design, I try to anticipate every thing I can.
-
Well, you can be certain that if it starts affecting the fun level of FSO that I will make changes or even pull the system. With the limited amount of time I get to try all the things I want in FSO design, I try to anticipate every thing I can.
On paper, it looks like you are limiting FSO to a one-sortie (no re-arm) event. I hope I am wrong.
-
VF-17 Updated.
Nice change of pace with the scoring system. Survival has always been important to me in FSO, now we have an opportunity to be rewarded for it. :salute
-
I have finally had a chance to sit down and read the new fighter system. Before I share my comments (for those of you that only know me through BBS, complaints) I'd like a few questions answered by Nefarious:
1. If a pilot that is not the Ace kills 5 enemy aircraft how many points does his side receive (all fighter kills, no bombers)?
2. If 3 of those 5 enemy pilots (that were shot down in Question 1) bail and 2 of them explode how many points does the enemy receive?
3. Pilot A is Allied, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 4 enemy aircraft, and lands. Pilot B is Axis, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 0 enemy aircraft, and lands. Who receives more points and how many points does each pilot receive?
Thank you.
-
You will not be rewarded for captures or deaths, the goal is to ultimately stay alive and return to fight another day and lowering the other side's score by shooting down enemy aircraft.
Individual pilots will not earn points for shooting down planes. They will be denying the other
side from earning points for each pilot that RTBs. I suppose squads can still recognize their best
by painting kill marks on their fuselage and awarding them a medal (even if it's posthumous).
Side scoring, however, will be the side that gets shot down less not the side that dies the most
when trying to get kills.
-
Individual pilots will not earn points for shooting down planes. They will be denying the other
side from earning points for each pilot that RTBs. I suppose squads can still recognize their best
by painting kill marks on their fuselage and awarding them a medal (even if it's posthumous).
Side scoring, however, will be the side that gets shot down less not the side that dies the most
when trying to get kills.
That answered 0 of my 3 questions. Answer them directly if you understand it. Thank you.
-
That answered 0 of my 3 questions. Answer them directly if you understand it. Thank you.
It addresses question 3 quite adequately, actually. Read better.
(http://www.roadkilltshirts.com/Assets/MoreImages/PS_0772_CAN_EXPLAIN_PIC2.jpg)
-
It addresses question 3 quite adequately, actually. Read better.
(http://www.roadkilltshirts.com/Assets/MoreImages/PS_0772_CAN_EXPLAIN_PIC2.jpg)
That's helpful Arlo.
Can someone else explain it please. I must be having a dumb moment and I do apologize. Hopefully one of my squaddies will explain it to me later :P. In the meantime I would greatly appreciate a direct answer to each question. Thank you.
-
That's helpful Arlo.
Can someone else explain it please. I must be having a dumb moment and I do apologize. Hopefully one of my squaddies will explain it to me later :P. In the meantime I would greatly appreciate a direct answer to each question. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Even without a specific number, I'll wager the scoring will be the same for each side.
For instance, let's say the KNs fly 7 pilots in frame one and VF-17 flies .... 17. If the
KNs lose three pilots (shot down or captured) let's say they lose 5 pts per pilot
for a total negative amount of 15 points. But they were able to shoot down 4 VF-17
pilots that same frame (killed or captured) ... resulting in the Allies losing 20 points.
Now .... if each side's starting points are tabulated by how many pilots are flying (say
150 axis and 160 allied) they would start out with 5 points per pilot/airframe (possible
additional airframe points for drones but let's keep it simple without formations) then
the Axis start with 750 pts and the Allies with 800 pts. For the part that KN and
VF-17 play it reduces the axis points to 735 and the Allies to 780.
As far as pilots go, it's a war of attrition. Granted, there may still be object destruction
score, I don't yet know if that's attrition modeled or not. Hopefully that may give you
a running start counting beans for the squad. :)
Alternatively it can be a matter of negative numbers. ;)
-
Speaking as a player reading the new scoring system, these are my answers:
1. If a pilot that is not the Ace kills 5 enemy aircraft how many points does his side receive (all fighter kills, no bombers)?
His side only gets the points from his landing/ditching/bailing. The enemy is denied the landing/ditching points for each plane that got shot down, but could get the bailing points if the pilot bailed in his own territory.
2. If 3 of those 5 enemy pilots (that were shot down in Question 1) bail and 2 of them explode how many points does the enemy receive?
Bailed pilots, if they bail in friendly territory, get the points based on the plane they were flying. Dead pilots get no points. The guy who shot them all down gets only the points for his aircraft type if he himself lands/ditches/bails.
3. Pilot A is Allied, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 4 enemy aircraft, and lands. Pilot B is Axis, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 0 enemy aircraft, and lands. Who receives more points and how many points does each pilot receive?
They both get the points based on the plane they were flying; shooting down planes is not a factor other than for bragging rights.
There are no points for shooting down bad guys, other than denying the bad guys from gaining points for their side for returning from the fight. So the more bad guys you shoot down, the fewer points the bad guys get for that frame. Simply taking off, circling for a few minutes and landing without fighting, would not yield many points for your side.
-
Speaking as a player reading the new scoring system, these are my answers:
There are no points for shooting down bad guys, other than denying the bad guys from gaining points for their side for returning from the fight. So the more bad guys you shoot down, the fewer points the bad guys get for that frame. Simply taking off, circling for a few minutes and landing without fighting, would not yield many points for your side.
If every pilot on one side or the other does it, it would yield whatever points each pilot gets for a safe RTB.
However, if there's a penalty assessed for dereliction of duty (logs would reflect such) then I may suggest
that those pilots were court-marshaled and no points were received as a result of such dereliction. Just
sayin' :)
-
So essentially (considering the amount of points for landing, etc.) it is all about bombing points. Normally a bomber is worth 15 pts, in this case if you land 2 successfully you are awarded 14 or 16 pts and give no points away to the enemy for dying. Rather than a 10 pt swing from bomber to fighter, there is only a 4 and 5 pt swing. So killing enemy aircraft is not as important as it always has been. This has nothing to do with the new system, only the points tied into it. It is all about getting those non-moving, no skill required points on the ground.
On paper, this looks like it could be very bad for the event. The Allies could and will get slaughtered and still only lose by 100 points or, God forbid, WIN! We will all know more after the month of June. Thank you ImaDot for your clear answer.
-
Upon reflection, while I applaud looking into a scoring system that takes into account
pilot and airframe attrition, the system being suggested doesn't seem balanced. It
appears to reward elimination of all risk taking (and may even promote both sides
maintaining a defensive posture - after all, it's easier to RTB if you stay in your own
territory).
Might I respectfully suggest that instead of turning the scoring system completely on
it's head we consider making an RTB a multiple of one, whereas ditching, being captured
or dying reduces the points earned for kills and objects by a multiple
of .5, .25 and .1, respectively. Or .75, .5, .25 if that seems too steep.
From the school of helpful suggestions and not mere criticism - :salute :) :salute
-
Make ditch worth 3 points and bail worth 1. Problem solved.
-
Make ditch worth 3 points and bail worth 1. Problem solved.
Multiplying by .5, .25 and .1 too difficult? :D
-
1. If a pilot that is not the Ace kills 5 enemy aircraft how many points does his side receive (all fighter kills, no bombers)?
2. If 3 of those 5 enemy pilots (that were shot down in Question 1) bail and 2 of them explode how many points does the enemy receive?
3. Pilot A is Allied, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 4 enemy aircraft, and lands. Pilot B is Axis, is not the Ace pilot, shoots down 0 enemy aircraft, and lands. Who receives more points and how many points does each pilot receive
1. None. Only the Ace pilot as used in my setups can score points for shooting down aircraft.
2. If they bail in friendly territory that would be three points (1 point for each bail) and the deaths would be zero points. If you bail or ditch in enemy territory and are captured, that would be zero points.
3. Pilot A and Pilot B would be rewarded 3 points each (or whatever the score sheet says) for returning to base successfully.
As far as pilots go, it's a war of attrition. Granted, there may still be object destruction score, I don't yet know if that's attrition modeled or not.
As of now, Objects destroyed will still be scored the same way no matter how your night ends, although I am working on something in regards to that.
-
Upon reflection, while I applaud looking into a scoring system that takes into account
pilot and airframe attrition, the system being suggested doesn't seem balanced. It
appears to reward elimination of all risk taking (and may even promote both sides
maintaining a defensive posture - after all, it's easier to RTB if you stay in your own
territory).
Might I respectfully suggest that instead of turning the scoring system completely on
it's head we consider making an RTB a multiple of one, whereas ditching, being captured
or dying reduces the points earned for kills and objects by a multiple
of .5, .25 and .1, respectively.
From the school of helpful suggestions and not mere criticism - :salute :) :salute
Interesting idea and it's one I will consider possibly implementing should it need revision.
In the end, targets must be attacked by T+60. So maintaining a complete defensive posture will not win the frame and will be against the rules. I'm hoping it will bring some balance to defense and offensive operations instead of light defenses and horde like heavy strikes or vice versa.
The CICs this month of June will have some new things to consider when planning these frames.
-
If the 68th are up for or even close to CiC duty then we will take it!
-
Upon reflection, while I applaud looking into a scoring system that takes into account
pilot and airframe attrition, the system being suggested doesn't seem balanced. It
appears to reward elimination of all risk taking (and may even promote both sides
maintaining a defensive posture - after all, it's easier to RTB if you stay in your own
territory).
Might I respectfully suggest that instead of turning the scoring system completely on
it's head we consider making an RTB a multiple of one, whereas ditching, being captured
or dying reduces the points earned for kills and objects by a multiple
of .5, .25 and .1, respectively. Or .75, .5, .25 if that seems too steep.
From the school of helpful suggestions and not mere criticism - :salute :) :salute
Now this I like. :aok
Multiplying by .5, .25 and .1 too difficult? :D
Yes. :devil
-
Now this I like. :aok
Yes. :devil
:cheers:
-
Basically the way I understand it is this. Say each side starts with 100 fighter aircraft and fighters are worth 1 point each. The side already has 100 points at launch and can only lose points from then on. Lets say 75 of the original 100 aircraft survive. Therefore the side scores 75 points.
The points are yours to lose basically.
Anyways thats the way I understood it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
-
Looks good, lets give it a shot. Couldn't hurt to try :cheers:
-
FB$ Updated. Is it June yet?? :salute
-
Thanks Boss! Launch at Dawn in Frame 1, Land at Dusk in Frame 3! It's the little things that make me happy! :cheers:
-
VF-17 Updated.
Nice change of pace with the scoring system. Survival has always been important to me in FSO, now we have an opportunity to be rewarded for it. :salute
There has been points awarded for landing your plane in past FSO's. Nothing new here.
(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t234/firejack007/Aces%20High%202/5-22-201310-33-09PM_zps049ba103.jpg)
I am interested in seeing how it develops. I have scored frames with it already, comparing them to the traditional scoring. It produced the results I expected. Of course, no one knew and it didn't allow anyone to change any behavior going into the event. I expect there to be some aspect of wanting to preserve life over going into a massive low furball or a small fight near the end of the event, but their are still objectives to complete and they must be completed within T+60. Holding your forces and not completing your objectives will not be able to secure a victory. Likewise, Suicide Jabo attacks and small groups of defenders are not going to be helpful in stacking up points in this system.
CICs will now be able to go into a frame with a rough estimate of how many points their side is worth. Using the Minimum numbers of required aircraft and the minimum and maximum number of pilots available they have now have another factor to include with the Offensive and Defensive Objectives. They can also roughly estimate how many points the other side is holding going into the frame.
What are the objectives? Is there a set # of points earned if objectives are completed? Do they have to be completed fully or is it broken down by obj. dest. or is it just a pass/fail feature by doing something to that target/objective? Targets are better. The problem with objectives is that they can too easily be fulfilled. For example, like in the past, a target has to be hit by t+60. We've had cases where a few planes hit it and fulfills that requirement. You could look at a target like a base flag. Allies destroy it (or % there of) they get the points it's worth. They don't Axis gets the points. I did notice that targets were listed as a full # of points, not individual objects within (ie:hanger,barracks). So,eg., how does one get the 200 pts for a town? Shades of scenario and Shuffler doing recon runs to photograph damage. It just makes it hard for us to know what's going on by looking at the logs.
This brings up another issue which is points for bombers. A bomber has the ability to get so many points through objects destroyed which doesn't equal the points if that bomber is shot down in past FSO's systems. So in your system, a bomber can get the objects destroyed but only lose 7 pts if it doesn't land. But that's assuming he's getting obj. dest. points.
One problem I'm sure you're aware of I can see is figuring out the scoring will need to be a lot more detailed. You can't just count the number of landings because the system counts landings for people who take the wrong skin or fuel load, lands after FSO has started and then reups the right plane. So I'm hope what each individual did is looked at and not just number totals. I keep tally of stats for KN so I've already been through this. Which this is going to make this much harder as I'll essentially be doing the same you will be doing only on a single squad basis.
I do see that keeping a plane from landing, ditching or bailing would be equal to a kill system but just less pts for each (3 pts vs 5 pts). It's just in a negative method instead of positive. So you shoot down 5 fighters (somebody else not me, I never get that many) and it subtracts 15 pts (5x3) from them. (more if bombers) If you land you don't lose 3 pts. Guess it's interesting to try but I do fear that it will affect gameplay having experience of Scenarios. Unfortunately there just are people who play with the system.
-
There has been points awarded for landing your plane in past FSO's. Nothing new here.
I know there has, just saying as far as I know it's never been the main focus.
-
What are the objectives? Is there a set # of points earned if objectives are completed? Do they have to be completed fully or is it broken down by obj. dest. or is it just a pass/fail feature by doing something to that target/objective? Targets are better. The problem with objectives is that they can too easily be fulfilled. For example, like in the past, a target has to be hit by t+60. We've had cases where a few planes hit it and fulfills that requirement. You could look at a target like a base flag. Allies destroy it (or % there of) they get the points it's worth. They don't Axis gets the points. I did notice that targets were listed as a full # of points, not individual objects within (ie:hanger,barracks). So,eg., how does one get the 200 pts for a town? Shades of scenario and Shuffler doing recon runs to photograph damage. It just makes it hard for us to know what's going on by looking at the logs.
Each object at a base is a set number of points. Every CM scores these differently (for the most part). A town is worth 200 points because the total number of objects and guns equals 200 points. A large Airfield is 572 because all the objects totaled up are worth 572.
This brings up another issue which is points for bombers. A bomber has the ability to get so many points through objects destroyed which doesn't equal the points if that bomber is shot down in past FSO's systems. So in your system, a bomber can get the objects destroyed but only lose 7 pts if it doesn't land. But that's assuming he's getting obj. dest. points.
Bombers were a bit tricky I admit, It will be the most detailed part of researching the logs too. Heavier 4 engine bombers (B-17 and B-24) will be worth more than the Boston and Ju88. As mentioned above, I am working on a "manageable" system for ground objects but I wasn't ready to go all in with it. Perhaps with some discussion after this event we can get that ironed out.
One problem I'm sure you're aware of I can see is figuring out the scoring will need to be a lot more detailed. You can't just count the number of landings because the system counts landings for people who take the wrong skin or fuel load, lands after FSO has started and then reups the right plane. So I'm hope what each individual did is looked at and not just number totals. I keep tally of stats for KN so I've already been through this. Which this is going to make this much harder as I'll essentially be doing the same you will be doing only on a single squad basis.
Yep, this is going to more work for me. The logs the players see and the logs I use are different and allow filters and are exportable to Excel. I already am well aware that every single pilot record will have to be looked at and FWIW I have been looking at every pilot record for nearly all of my setups for quite some time.
Guess it's interesting to try but I do fear that it will affect gameplay having experience of Scenarios. Unfortunately there just are people who play with the system.
Again I agree, but I think FSO behavior has already started down a road of playing the system using the existing scoring systems in place. I'm hoping that this will make some subtle changes in FSO "behavior" and curb some of the "gaming" out of it.
Thanks, everyone's opinion is certainly appreciated! and ideas like Arlo's will be considered.
-
Well to me it only seems like the focus is slightly different.
In the past your side got points for killing enemy planes. Each plane (fighter and bomber) had a point value assigned to it. Your side started with 0 points and added points by killing things.
Under Nef's scoring system you get points for each plane that survives. Each plane (fighter and bomber) has a point value assigned to it. The difference is your side starts with xxx many points instead of 0 and points are subtracted from this total by each plane you lose to enemy action. So you kill enemy planes to deny the enemy points, reduce their total points instead of starting from 0 on your side and adding points. Really this is not to different than what has been done before since still all planes have a point total associated with it.
The wrinkle now is that Nefarious is giving partial points for a plane that bails or ditches over friendly territory instead of full points for a landing. That is something new and we will have to see how that plays out. It looks like he is trying to put a greater emphasis on surviving in his designs. Yes, you still need to fight to 1) deny enemy points and 2) deny the enemy points for destroying you facilities and 3) getting your bombers to their facilities and bombing them. So you still have the same reasons for fighting as before (e.g. if you go off and circle a non targeted field all frame that will just allow the enemy to get in and bomb their target unopposed and gain points).
As for wracking up points for bombers. Well that to was the same case as before since bombers and their drones in all previous designs had points assigned to them. Say you have 30 bomber pilots and with their drones you have a total of 90 bombers. Each is worth 10 points. Before you started with 0 points and earned points by killing the bombers but you had a maximum point pool of 900 points here. Now instead the bombers starts with 900 points and each one you kill or doesn't make it home reduces that pull. So if you killed 30 in the previous scoring system you gained 300 points. If kill 30 in Nef's new system you reduce the other side by 300 points. Basically same thing just doing math in a different direction.
The big difference here is the bombers might lose points after an engagement as drones die flying home do to battle damage since the emphasis here is now on landing and everything else subtracts points from the total your side starts with. So a drone with an oil leak or fuel leak could be lost a significant after being attacked. In many of the previous scoring if a drone was lost and nobody received a kill credit no points were gained. Under Nef is a drone lossed and nobody receives kill credits your side still loses points.
-
The only real issue I see here is that you can't guarantee that each side starts with the same point total. Since their starting point total depends on turnout. So the side that turns out less starts out at point disadvantage. Now things can still even out because the side with less pilots might still end up destroying more ground objects and killing more enemy planes (deny that side points) but they will inherently be at point disadvantage which could be harder to overcome depending on how many more points their side starts out with (how many more pilots they have in the air than your side).
-
There's been a lot of interesting discussion in this thread about the nuts and bolts of how the new scoring system will work (or won't work) and how past scoring systems have worked, etc...and I've been fascinated by most of it because I have never even entertained the notion of planning one of these events. I'm just a grunt, and am content to remain a grunt, and I doff my hat to those smart enough to manage this awesome feat. I just love showing up and doing my best to contribute to our success as a squadron. But as I read and re-read these posts, one thing has become clear: whatever scoring system is used, I'm still gonna fly to 1) make it to the objective without augering or getting killed, and 2) making it back to our base alive, and then landing without cracking up. I really don't give a rat's behind about points, or even (blaspemy!) which side "wins". For me it's all about flying and wisecracking with my buds, and doing the best I can for them and my side, in general. I'll let those in charge worry over the points and such, so long as there's a FSO to fly in.
Nef, I just realized that what I wrote in the paragraph above may sound ungrateful. Please don't think that. I am very appreciative of your efforts to make this a better experience for all of us. It's because of you and those like you that I (we) get to participate in such a cool event on a regular basis. :salute
-
double post. D'oh!
-
... whatever scoring system is used, I'm still gonna fly to 1) make it to the objective without augering or getting killed, and 2) making it back to our base alive, and then landing without cracking up. I really don't give a rat's behind about points, or even (blaspemy!) which side "wins". For me it's all about flying and wisecracking with my buds, and doing the best I can for them and my side, in general. I'll let those in charge worry over the points and such, so long as there's a FSO to fly in.
Nef, I just realized that what I wrote in the paragraph above may sound ungrateful. Please don't think that. I am very appreciative of your efforts to make this a better experience for all of us. It's because of you and those like you that I (we) get to participate in such a cool event on a regular basis. :salute
:D :D :D :cheers:
You're always fun to wing with. :)
-
The only real issue I see here is that you can't guarantee that each side starts with the same point total. Since their starting point total depends on turnout. So the side that turns out less starts out at point disadvantage. Now things can still even out because the side with less pilots might still end up destroying more ground objects and killing more enemy planes (deny that side points) but they will inherently be at point disadvantage which could be harder to overcome depending on how many more points their side starts out with (how many more pilots they have in the air than your side).
Two sides to this issue that I see. The side that brings more pilots to the show gets rewarded. Or, calculate the ratio between the 2 sides and use it as a multiplier for the low sides total points:
Example:
Axis have 75 pilots, they land 50 points. Allies have 71 pilots, they land 45 points.
Multiplier = 75/71
Multiplier = 1.056
Axis total points is 50
Allied total points is (45 x 1.056) 47.52
-
Two sides to this issue that I see. The side that brings more pilots to the show gets rewarded. Or, calculate the ratio between the 2 sides and use it as a multiplier for the low sides total points:
Example:
Axis have 75 pilots, they land 50 points. Allies have 71 pilots, they land 45 points.
Multiplier = 75/71
Multiplier = 1.056
Axis total points is 50
Allied total points is (45 x 1.056) 47.52
This is an interesting concept and would be beneficial in setups that have significant side split's like 60/40 or 55/45. It would also be great when there is a 20+ large side difference for whatever reason. Great idea.
-
This is an interesting concept and would be beneficial in setups that have significant side split's like 60/40 or 55/45. It would also be great when there is a 20+ large side difference for whatever reason. Great idea.
IDK about giving them a curve. Percentage makes much more sense.
-
IDK about giving them a curve. Percentage makes much more sense.
A ratio is not a curve, it is the comparison between two things. In this case number of pilots per side.
-
Interesting. But if the Allies (in this case) have the bombers, there's a good chance they will get a large sum of O.D. pts. The reason for eg:60/40 splits in the set up is to take into account the bomber factor. Sometimes it's just how the real scenario was. One side may have had less pilots but they may also have had formations. Technically 3x the 1 pilot.
Each object at a base is a set number of points. Every CM scores these differently (for the most part). A town is worth 200 points because the total number of objects and guns equals 200 points. A large Airfield is 572 because all the objects totaled up are worth 572.
When you go to sum things up, I think you'll see that a bomber pilot who makes it to target will get a lot of +pts that will negate the -7/-8. You'll probably see a lot of bails from bomber pilots after they drop or get into friendly territory. In Frame 2 of Into The Tigers Den Jan.11,2013 I got 4 targets in a GM4 formation totaling 60 pts (per setup). In some FSOs buffs were worth 20-25pts which equalizes their possible bomb damage pts.
Yep, this is going to more work for me. The logs the players see and the logs I use are different and allow filters and are exportable to Excel.
Think it's an option everyone should have. I'll still be counting and adjusting by the setup manually.
Thanks, everyone's opinion is certainly appreciated! and ideas like Arlo's will be considered.
I appreciate someone taking the time to try and improve things. As long as it's kept an eye on and is adjusted. :salute
-
This is an interesting concept and would be beneficial in setups that have significant side split's like 60/40 or 55/45. It would also be great when there is a 20+ large side difference for whatever reason. Great idea.
When dealing with some type of ratio to normalize the scores, don't forget to factor in the reason for having a side split like 60/40. Just because one side has more planes by design does not necessarily mean that side has a greater opportunity to land planes. In PTO type events for example the Axis typically loose a lot of planes and they are given more to start with. I have not gone back and looked at the logs, but just for illustration, let's say both side landed the same number of planes in the last event. It would look like they fought to a draw under the new scoring system. If the Axis had more planes to start with, the ratio would hurt them and you are moving back to the system of getting point for kills since the Axis lost more planes and the Allies got more points.
Coming up with a scoring system that gives both sides the sense they have an equal chance of winning is not easy. It also has to be relatively simple so a CiC can figure out how to allocate his resources. :salute
-
- Ack has been reduced to 0.4
- I have updated the Destroyer placement rules. The Axis destroyers groups in the evacuation area must now sail together and remain in one group. The group can be placed anywhere in the 4 grid evacuation area.
Thanks!
-
- Ack has been reduced to 0.4
Thanks!
No, thank you!!! I'm glad you decided to change the ack setting,having to attack a fleet with .5 ack would end a lot of players nights early! :aok
:salute
-
One of the things I most appreciate about the FSO and the CMs that
work hard is the historical study they put into it and share with the rest of us:
Allied Aces
FRAME 1 - Alexandr Klubov - P-39Q - Klubov joined the VVS in 1939.In November of 1942 while flying an I-153, he crash landed and was horribly burned. He returned to combat with 16 GIAP in May of 1943 flying the P-39. He was very successful with the P-39 and shot down several aircraft in the Crimea. Klubov was killed in landing accident while transition to the La-7 in November of 1944. At the time of his death he was credited with 31 individual and 19 shared victories and awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union twice, the second posthumously.
FRAME 2 - Mikahil Ivanovich Grib - Yak-9T - Grib flew 500 sorties throughout the Great Patriotic War. During the desperate defense of Sevastopol in 1942 he gained four victories. He was awarded the HSU that November of 1942. he would see heavy action in the Crimean campaign and shot down several aircraft during this time. His final score by wars end, by which time he had risen from a Lt to CO of 6 GIAP 3rd Squadron was 17 victories and 4 shared.
FRAME 3 - Grigoriy Rechkalov - P-39Q - Rechkalov saw his first combat on the first day of the war flying an I-153 his first kill 5 days later against a Hs 126. At the end of 1942 the 16 GIAP was re-equipped with the P-39 and was awarded the Gold Star of the HSU on May 24th, 1943. He was removed from command in May 1944 for pursuing the enemy alone yet still was awarded his second HSU two months later. He ws credited with 56 confirmed victories and 6 shared. He passed away September 21, 1990.
Axis Aces
FRAME 1 - Alexandru Şerbănescu - Bf 109G-2 or G-6 - Şerbănescu was a veteran of the Stalingrad Front. Between June and August of 1943 he shot down 28 Soviet Aircraft and was awarded the highest Romanian military decoration, Order of Michael the Brave. Şerbănescu fought against the Soviets in the Southern sector until American Allied aircraft started appearing in the skies over Romania. He was killed August 18th 1944 by American Mustangs and Lightnings. He was credited with 47 confirmed kills and 8 probables.
FRAME 2 - August Lambert - Fw 190A-5 or F-8 - Lambert joined the Luftwaffe in 1937 and was a flight instructor. In 1943 he flew with SG2 in the Crimea and he alone accounted for 70 kills in in 3 weeks. Including 3 double digit streaks of 12, 14 and 17 in single days! Lambert was awarded the Knights Cross on May 14, 1944. He would return to instructing but would be back at the front in the final weeks of the war. He was killed by American Mustangs on April 17, 1945.
FRAME 3 - Constantin Cantacuzino - Bf 109G-2 or G-6 - Cantacuzino was a skilled aerobatics pilot before the war and joined the ARR when the war began. He began the war flying the Hurricane Mk I and after the capture of Odessa was sent home. He returned to active duty in 1943 but became sick and was sent home once again. He returned once again in Feb 1944 and succeeded Şerbănescu in command of the 9th FG after his death. Cantacuzino would join the fight against the Germans after Romania left the Axis. He would be credited with 43 confirmed kills and 11 probable. He passed away in 1958.
Thanks! :aok
-
One of the things I most appreciate about the FSO and the CMs that
work hard is the historical study they put into it and share with the rest of us:
Thanks! :aok
Awww shucks... You're making me blush. :o
I am always thinking on new elements of gameplay for FSO. Things like Ace Missions turned out to be a very successful aspect of my setups.