Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Lusche on June 19, 2013, 12:35:33 PM
-
I have read a few times now that one reason why attacking the strats would be "pointless" is the 'fact' that they are allegedly resupplied so fast.
But how fast, and more importantly: How efficient is it really? Let's take a closer look at this specific question:
The attacker:
It takes one 90 minute B-29 sortie for a single player to get 3 fully up key factories down by about 25-30% each. That would double the downtime to about 60 minutes of all corresponding items on all bases.
The resuppers:
Factory downtime is 180 minutes. A one way goon trip (ditching at the strats) takes 6-8 minutes depending on map, let's assume 7.*
How long does it take until one factory has been resupped back to 100%?
0 player 180mins
1 player ~115 mins = ~1.9 manhours of effort
2 player ~85 mins = ~2.8 manhours
5 player ~50 mins = ~4.2 manhours
10 player ~30 mins = ~5 manhours
And thats just to restore one factory. Compare that to the 1.5 MH used to hit three of them.
*= Bomber and resupply run numbers based on my detailed logs of more than 300 strategic attacks and more than 50 resupply runs
-
You think that actual statistical facts involving math will change the perception of people in this game. :rofl
I do enjoy your fact finding though keep it coming. :aok
-
You think that actual statistical facts involving math will change the perception of people in this game.
Not really, I've been around her for too long :noid
Whatever players want to believe, they will believe, no matter what :old:
-
Not really, I've been around her for too long :noid
Whatever players want to believe, they will believe, no matter what :old:
:aok
-
Well, that seems fine by me. What am I missing, L? The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects. The lost strats will either hamper their side due to 3 hours of country-wide logistical problems or as few as 30 minutes of country-wide logistical problems with 30 players pulled from action and dedicating themselves to rebuilding the strats (all three). If more strat runs get through (with little or no effort to intercept) then it's quite possible that a dedicated strategic bombing of one side or another will assist the guys left that are attacking bases and may result in the coveted map-reset win thing. Luckily, all sides have strategic bombing capability as well as the ability to interdict (whether through high alt fighter patrols just as dedicated to flying long hours in AH just to stop the strat bombing ... or ... rocket planes, which don't require such long hours and dedication).
In real life the destruction of a factory by bombers was quicker than the rebuilding of it. If that wasn't so, there wouldn't have been strategic bombing.
-
In real life the destruction of a factory by bombers was quicker than the rebuilding of it. If that wasn't so, there wouldn't have been strategic bombing.
In real life strategic bombing was incredibly inefficient at creating a real dent in the industry. It took hundred of bombers to severely damage one factory and usually production was only slowed down a little but never halted. I personally think that the whole strategic bombing campaign of WWII was a net loss to the allies, but that is just me.
-
Well, that seems fine by me. What am I missing, L? The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects.
Actually in terms of score the return is very little. It totally pales in comparison to hitting town centers. Hitting the probably most important strategic target, the City, is particularly horrible for the score.
If more strat runs get through (with little or no effort to intercept) then it's quite possible that a dedicated strategic bombing of one side or another will assist the guys left that are attacking bases and may result in the coveted map-reset win thing. Luckily, all sides have strategic bombing capability as well as the ability to interdict (whether through high alt fighter patrols just as dedicated to flying long hours in AH just to stop the strat bombing ... or ... rocket planes, which don't require such long hours and dedication.
On a global scale, the strategic gameplay part didn't really develop on the player side. While the attacks on the strats had definitely increased, the strat game is still largely uncoordinated and random. And after 9 months now, I doubt it will change.
While I never expected that the new strats would be a total gamechanger, with everybody suddenly leaving the old "tactical" paths, I initially would have expected that there may appear one or two "strat squads", which would really use the new opportunities to support their side.
And the potential is there: A small squad of 5-10 players could very much cripple one front: 2-4 B-29s Hitting the strats systematically, with the rest quickly porking front line bases two sectors deep. They could help their side while taking a leave from the same old "smash & grab missions".
But I didn't see that really happen on a regular scale. Guess smash&grab is still more attractive, an evening is a wasted one if you didn't get a "base XX was captured by" message. ;)
-
In real life strategic bombing was incredibly inefficient at creating a real dent in the industry. It took hundred of bombers to severely damage one factory and usually production was only slowed down a little but never halted. I personally think that the whole strategic bombing campaign of WWII was a net loss to the allies, but that is just me.
Perception of how efficient strategic bombing really was or was not (as well as opinion of how much
it did or did not accomplish) aside;
Here's where it gets tricky: There is no way AHII can practically emulate hundreds of inefficient bombers.
What's done in place are flights of efficient bombers. In AHII there is not enough industry spread across
the map to emulate slowing industry down by small percentages (and not enough player instant gratification
in such). AHII is a microcosm, compared to the real war. Yet it still attempts to offer players the excitement
of the strategic bombing experience (for those who prefer that). Such also offers the challenge of
intercepting them ... for players interested in that.
-
Actually in terms of score the return is very little. It totally pales in comparison to hitting town centers. Hitting the probably most important strategic target, the City, is particularly horrible for the score.
On a global scale, the strategic gameplay part didn't really develop on the player side. While the attacks on the strats had definitely increased, the strat game is still largely uncoordinated and random. And after 9 months now, I doubt it will change.
While I never expected that the new strats would be a total gamechanger, with everybody suddenly leaving the old "tactical" paths, I initially would have expected that there may appear one or two "strat squads", which would really use the new opportunities to support their side.
And the potential is there: A small squad of 5-10 players could very much cripple one front: 2-4 B-29s Hitting the strats systematically, with the rest quickly porking front line bases two sectors deep. They could help their side while taking a leave from the same old "smash & grab missions".
But I didn't see that really happen on a regular scale. Guess smash&grab is still more attractive, an evening is a wasted one if you didn't get a "base XX was captured by" message. ;)
Score is score. That's an easy adjustment by HT. But the system you describe sounds
solid. So ... it's the players.
-
Score is score.
Of course it is. I was just correcting the notion that "The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects" :aok
-
Of course it is. I was just correcting the notion that "The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects" :aok
Depends on what they hit, specifically, from what I read in your post. The original
discussed three factories. I'm willing to bet a flight of 3 B-29s rack up quite a lot. :)
-
Depends on what they hit, specifically, from what I read in your post. The original
discussed three factories. I'm willing to bet a flight of 3 B-29s rack up quite a lot. :)
It's still pales in comparison to town centers. You gett much less score points, and the bombing hit % will be much smaller, as the strat targets are much more dispersed.
-
It's still pales in comparison to town centers. You gett much less score points, and the bombing hit % will be much smaller, as the strat targets are much more dispersed.
I'm not sure I would promote condensing them, myself. I would suggest more strat targets spread out
over the rear lines of every chess-nation.
Then again, that's a map-remaking chore of high degree.
Are you arguing for greater score there to attract more strat runs? I would think the attraction
would involve more than score for the run. Maybe not.
-
Are you arguing for greater score there to attract more strat runs?
Not being an AH subscriber, I try not to argue explicitly for or against any changes in the game. ;)
-
Not being an AH subscriber, I try not to argue explicitly for or against any changes in the game. ;)
You were playing last month, Snailman.
So pie-chart baking and analysis is now your true hobby and it has nothing to do with
opinion, desire or anything? ;)
-
So pie-chart baking and analysis is your true hobby and it has nothing to do with
opinion, desire or anything? ;)
In some way, yes. Foremost it has something to do with curiosity. If you see my chart positing history, you will see that most of it had just been posted for information purposes, for example the big yearly stat reports. I started my very first analysis because was just curious about the distribution of fighter hit %.
Of course, when I'm arguing for or against something, I may use stats and charts to prove my point or to correct some myths.
You were playing last month, Snailman.
Ehmm yes. I was playing until I canceled my account. I did the last sorties in the first few days of May. Since then I'm not an AH subscriber any more.
-
In some way, yes. Foremost it has something to do with curiosity. If you see my chart positing history, you will see that most of it had just been posted for information purposes, for example the big yearly stat reports. I started my very first analysis because was just curious about the distribution of fighter hit %.
Of course, when I'm arguing for or against something, I may use stats and charts to prove my point or to correct some myths.
I've seen your charts and analysis also involve presumption of factors you
could not actually chart or analyze .... but that's beside the point.
You appear to be in myth correction mode, so it's curious how you backed
down when I asked you what you are arguing for or against. I'm not against
such an argument. I may even be an ally.
Ehmm yes. I was playing until I canceled my account. I did the last sorties in the first few days of May. Since then I'm not an AH subscriber any more.
Too bad.
-
You appear to be in myth correction mode, so it's curious how you backed
down when I asked you what you are arguing for or against.
I did what? :huh
-
i'm curious where you got the 90 minute trip in b29s...is that one way bomb and bail? or lower than 30,000 feet?
i'm also curious about the affects of the current strat system. maybe it's just that no one has done a 100% leveling of them yet, at least not while i've was online. haven't noticed anything like country wide dar down, or limited fuel and ords.
-
I did what? :huh
Quote from: Arlo on Today at 14:03:59
You appear to be in myth correction mode, so it's curious how you backed
down when I asked you what you are arguing for or against.
If you're not supporting a solution, need for a solution or lack of need for
a solution what is the point of your observation?
-
You think that actual statistical facts involving math will change the perception of people in this game. :rofl
I do enjoy your fact finding though keep it coming. :aok
While working projects I hear all kinds of opinions. What it takes to sway these opinionated people is facts and data. Even if looking at data doesn't get the reaction you hoped for, it still makes a difference.
Thanks Lusche, what you do does help, even if it may not appear to.
-
If you're not supporting a solution, need for a solution or lack of need for
a solution what is the point of your observation?
Does someone really needs an agenda when trying to clarify things or even to dispel some myths? ;)
As I stated in my intital post, I have heard/read about this specific issue a few times. I knew it's not the way some people think, and I just posted a detailed explanation why. For informational purposes. That's all.
Maybe I#m old fashioned. I believe in knowledge & reason. I have the time at hands, and to discover facts, to find out how things work, to program tools that help me doing so is just fun :)
And on the subscriber/non subscriber thing: I always had the opinion that someone not paying & playing the game should show some restraint when asking for this & that to be changed in the game. You know, guys not having an account for years and still strongly opposing plane or GV wishes in the Wishlist forum and stuff like that ;)
-
Does someone really needs an agenda when trying to clarify things or even to dispel some myths? ;)
As I stated in my intital post, I have heard/read about this specific issue a few times. I knew it's not the way some people think, and I just posted a detailed explanation why. For informational purposes. That's all.
Maybe I#m old fashioned. I believe in knowledge & reason. I have the time at hands, and to discover facts, to find out how things work, to program tools that help me doing so is just fun :)
And on the subscriber/non subscriber thing: I always had the opinion that someone not paying & playing the game should show some restraint when asking for this & that to be changed in the game. You know, guys not having an account for years and still strongly opposing plane or GV wishes in the Wishlist forum and stuff like that ;)
I'm not saying that because your account went inactive a few days ago that you
shouldn't post observations and opinions. I'm engaging you about whether you
have an opinion as to whether your observation supports a working system or a
broken one and what you would recommend in either case (even a working system
may require a specific approach to make it more beneficial). If all you wanted to do
was post something for others to appreciate and use, that's fine, as well. :)
-
Does someone really needs an agenda when trying to clarify things or even to dispel some myths? ;)
As I stated in my intital post, I have heard/read about this specific issue a few times. I knew it's not the way some people think, and I just posted a detailed explanation why. For informational purposes. That's all.
Maybe I#m old fashioned. I believe in knowledge & reason. I have the time at hands, and to discover facts, to find out how things work, to program tools that help me doing so is just fun :)
And on the subscriber/non subscriber thing: I always had the opinion that someone not paying & playing the game should show some restraint when asking for this & that to be changed in the game. You know, guys not having an account for years and still strongly opposing plane or GV wishes in the Wishlist forum and stuff like that ;)
Look, everything is an agenda; the only difference is wether your agenda is trying to replace the one you are contradicting or not. If you plan to construct some idealogical following based on your observations to divert from the main unified flow, then we have a problem. Otherwise, post away in happiness and joy!
-
i'm curious where you got the 90 minute trip in b29s...is that one way bomb and bail? or lower than 30,000 feet?
i'm also curious about the affects of the current strat system. maybe it's just that no one has done a 100% leveling of them yet, at least not while i've was online. haven't noticed anything like country wide dar down, or limited fuel and ords.
I helped the FB's level the Bish strat one late night with a 60 bomber mission. After that it was a cake walk to flatten Bish bases if you targeted the fighter and GV hangers first.
The current strat setup would have been ideal for the AH1 Rook Joint Squad Operations on Sunday nights before ENY was introduced. 300+ players in bombers and fighters from rookland swamping the strats of bish\nitland at the same time bombing both down to zero along with the HQ's. The Rook squad leaders back then proved numbers count in this game. And that you can find a way to organize hundreds of players to show up one evening a week without anyone finding out what is going on.
I think at the moment our game's average mental scale of reward to effort is smaller than the enormous sand boxes we are currently running around in. Who we were when Lusche first started playing this game is not who we are now. As a body the players lobbied in here over that time for larger and larger maps, or a bigger environment to play in. For a short time we filled that environment because average LWMA populations were 400+ most nights. At this juncture we have organically pulled back and our actions tend to stall across 2 or 3 specific fronts comprised of 2-5 fields augmented with CV if they are close enough.
Larger maps give the illusion our tootsie pop really does last longer even if our scope of play scale at each front is primarily 2-5 fields. Small maps maximize our smaller mental scale of reward to effort robbing us of the illusion that our fun can last all night long. A short period of maximum fun then, oopsies, someone wins the map due to the sandbox is scaled to the current energies of the players.
Makes me wonder if shortening the map rotation cycle for each map to 48 hours or 72 hours would be a good thing at this juncture. The player base in this game aren't much different than the 5 cats I have in my house. They get bored with toys quickly and signal that in many unproductive ways when their tipping point is reached.
Like our current conversation.
-
Put the snail dude on the payroll :old:
-
i'm curious where you got the 90 minute trip in b29s...is that one way bomb and bail? or lower than 30,000 feet?
There was a foot note in my original post. That's real sortie times. I have flown 168 out of my 332 strategic attacks from Sept 12 to early May 13 in B-29s and kept detailed logs. My average B-29 mission duration was 102 minutes, but that includes a lot of City busting sorties which took a lot longer. My average initial bombing altitude was 28k. If some would like to see it, I could easily post a chart or two showing the summary of my bomb runs with all necessary information.
Edit: For the 3- factory attack in the example, I used to select the 8x2k loadout. My average mission duration for my 40+ strat attacks with this specific loadout was 97 minutes @ averagly 27.5k bombing altitude.
i'm also curious about the affects of the current strat system. maybe it's just that no one has done a 100% leveling of them yet, at least not while i've was online. haven't noticed anything like country wide dar down, or limited fuel and ords.
The strats just increases the max downtime of items, up to 120 additional minutes if the corresponding strat is at 0%. If the ammo factory is at 75%, porked ords will stay down for 60 instad of 30 minutes. If the factory had been at 50%, the downtime would be 90 minutes.
And getting a factory down to 75% is easy to achieve. With the B-29, you can either drop 2 factories to ~50% with 4K bombs, or 3 to 70-75% with 8x2k bombs. TZhe City requires far more bombs, but a good strike with 56x250lbs loadout can cut it down to 40-50%, resulting in town downtimes of 90-102 minutes. That's a lot more m3 runs your enemy suddenly needs to bring the town back up.
-
I agree with lusche.
I do think HQ needs some adjustment as drove a tank to enemy hq just as somebody destroyed it and watched 5 loads of C47 bring it back up within 15 minutes as I kept trains from reaching it.
-
Lusche X. :aok
-
Look, everything is an agenda; the only difference is wether your agenda is trying to replace the one you are contradicting or not. If you plan to construct some idealogical following based on your observations to divert from the main unified flow, then we have a problem. Otherwise, post away in happiness and joy!
His "agenda" is to satisfy his curiosity as to what is really happening. If the facts contradict a theory than that theory isn't valid. Its one of the bases of scientific inquiry.
-
I have read a few times now that one reason why attacking the strats would be "pointless" is the 'fact' that they are allegedly resupplied so fast.
I would hazard a guess that the perception of pointlessness is based on the asymmetry between the perception of a gain vs a loss of the same magnitude. The pain of losing the destruction of a strat that you have destroyed is twice as large as the pleasure you experience destroying it. Fundamentally the only point to the game is pleasure since all accomplishment is ephemeral to a marked degree. In this sense the use of rational analysis of efficiency of man hours without adjustment for the true commodity of the game, eg. pleasure, is doomed. On the other hand perhaps the dissemination and recognition of the facts that you are discovering will enhance the sophistication of the game players perception of the game and the attendant increase in nuance will lead to a more complex appreciation and greater pleasure for them.