Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: captain1ma on March 16, 2014, 07:30:33 PM
-
has there ever been a FSO month where it was a battle of attrition? I don't mean pilots, I mean objects. for instance, you get 6 carriers, if you lose 2 you only have 4 to work with. or if you lose a whole base, you cant take off from there? that sort of thing? just curious.....
-
if any of the FSO CM team would like to answer this question, id appreciate it...
-
if any of the FSO CM team would like to answer this question, id appreciate it...
Its been done in the past. But sometimes victory conditions or terrain playability isn't conducive to object or field attrition.
Typing from my phone here, I can explain more later.
-
Captain1ma has a great point here and the 325th VFG would like to see this type of scenario play out also. Tieing all 3 frames together into a larger objective would be more fun and motivational for tracking progress of your side (Am I winning or losing?).
I also believe that in this type of play the other pieces of AHII should be used and that we are all use to:
Take bases and then hold them - What you take in Frame 1 has to be defended in Frame 2 which might not be a good thing. Target selection and overall strategic planning come into place.
AC selection - Retain the "min" and "max" AC types as we do now for side balancing. But open up the "Ords" so that the CIC can select Ground Support or Air Cap as a mission subset.
Deep battle - Once side A pushes side B back, then Side B might make strategic moves into the enemy's rear like bombing or base capture. Likewise Side A might select to resupply a damaged location to consolidate advances made.
Ships and GV's - Should be a part of this and placed on the CIC "available" equipment list's. Doesn't mean he has to use them. Or GV's could be used as a second life after H+60 at a controlled location like we have done before. C-47's should be available all of the time to both sides as this adds into the resupply missions or base capture options.
Ship Grid's - take this piece out of confining the CV to a known grid. Let them start from a point with no intel and then let the enemy try and find them. Each side can move their CV's where they want to. In only 2 hours per frame they aren't going that far. Keep their location exactly as it ended in each frame as the start point for the next frame.
Points - remove the AC and GV point values all together. Bases only have point values and based on whether or not you own them. Count the bases at the end of Frame 3 only. Let the points fall where they do. But likewise the scenario could play out in how fast you move on the map sheet. Using the current scenario we are in now where the AXIS have a great disadvantage in AC capabilities relative to the historical period and ALLIED AC - The AXIS could win if they could slow down the ALLIES enough. Example the ALLIES have to gain "X" amount of bases by the end of Frame 3 to win. Removing the AC and GV point values would also remove the kamikaze approach some take when they know they have a 2 point AC attacking a 10 point AC. Having point values for the base only requires a more team effort.
I'm sure we would have to deal with the game issues like damage to a town or base done late frame would be back up to 100% again at the start of the next frame as it really happens 7 days later (Fri to Fri) but that's a minor issue and we can deal with it and would have to factor into planning of what you do and when.
Unlike the MA where all bases are available for capture the map could be set up to only allow the capture of some bases relative to the more historical scenario that played out. Such as the scenario we're playing out now. Could the ALLIES be moving up the "Slot" taking islands and bases? So use the existing map's and scenario's in use now but just tie the frames together into a more strategic operation.
I also don't think we need to over board on this either. Seems like we could slowly ease into this by using the parts and pieces we have used before. The idea being not to over tax the free and very generous time of the all volunteer CM crew.
Captian1ma's idea is a great one and one in which the CM's should take a look at. I know there has been comments on this before.
-
Captain1ma has a great point here and the 325th VFG would like to see this type of scenario play out also. Tieing all 3 frames together into a larger objective would be more fun and motivational for tracking progress of your side (Am I winning or losing?).
If memory serves me correctly, :old: this was done a long while ago (perhaps as many as 7 years ago). The problem arose when the player base of the losing side diminished as the event unfolded. It was about that time the point tally system became the overall deciding factor of a win or loss.
-
I don't like the idea of capturing bases as the main FSO objective at all. You think there is a problem now with squads getting shafted by getting bomber duty? You haven't seen anything yet until somebody gets C-47s of M-3s and didn't want them. Base captures, GV battles, and Fleet action should be only used as bonus objectives AFTER T+60. Don't make a habit of making squads perform duties they have no interest in.
-
Give up a Friday night to fly a GOON?
Yea, I do not even do that in the MAIN! I would NOT want to do that in FSO
Just my .02 not that it means much
-
I've seen it in the other game. It was cool, but the way people get frustrated in here I would question the effect it would have as your side's capabilities got degraded.
Wiley.
-
Give up a Friday night to fly a GOON?
Yea, I do not even do that in the MAIN!
Selfish selfish man! 5 licks! :old:
-
I've seen it in the other game. It was cool, but the way people get frustrated in here I would question the effect it would have as your side's capabilities got degraded.
Wiley.
If the whole base is killed. All ack guns and hangars why not count that as a base capture. Surely something like that could be worked out.
-
If the whole base is killed. All ack guns and hangars why not count that as a base capture. Surely something like that could be worked out.
Not really talking about the base captures as much as the attrition part of it. Losing your good planes means your capabilities are diminished the next week. It has a snowball effect. Not much fun for many on the losing side. I don't care what I'm flying, I try to do whatever I can with whatever I've got, but I've got a masochistic streak a mile wide. Many who fly FSO don't.
Wiley.
-
I don't care what I'm flying, I try to do whatever I can with whatever I've got, but I've got a masochistic streak a mile wide. Many who fly FSO don't.
In my opinion, if players won't come to FSO if they don't get the best rides (or if the design is set up for less-than-uber planes), then they don't belong in FSO.
-
In my opinion, if players won't come to FSO if they don't get the best rides (or if the design is set up for less-than-uber planes), then they don't belong in FSO.
I feel the same way. Play your role, fly what your told. With out the bombers its not FSO...it's king of the hill.
-
In my opinion, if players won't come to FSO if they don't get the best rides (or if the design is set up for less-than-uber planes), then they don't belong in FSO.
Honestly, it appears that the majority of the FSO community are the type of player that still shows up; even if they are assigned rides they don't like to fly.
I think a way that cap's "war of attrition" could work would be on setups that use strats as targets, tie the % destroyed into modifier rules. hypothetical examples: 75% of the fuel factory destroyed = fuel rations = only allowed to take off with 75% max fuel (or defence fighters take 50% to allow escort fighters and bombers to use 100% fuel), or 80% of ord factory destroyed = smaller bombload requirement for bombers.
Personally, as it is now I don't feel much of a desperate need to defend targets from attackers other than trying to midigate point gain/loss
-
There have been a few FSOs that included some sort of attrition - like this month's event with its limits on certain planes - but most have not. Even before I was invited onto the CM Team, most FSOs that I ever saw presented relatively minor variations of the objectives for all three frames, so that each Frame sort of stands on its own as an event. Personally, I find it interesting to see what three different sets of side commanders do with very similar situations.
I don't really like the idea of putting MA-style base capture in an FSO design. I'd rather pose some other, more realistic challenges and objectives.
And all of the above is my own personal take on things, definitely NOT any sort of official pronouncement. :salute
-
I was thinking more along the lines of this.... a target base.... it's also a take off base. if the defenders cant defend it, it gets bombed into oblivion. next frame that base is unavailable. I know no one would want to actually capture a base or fly goons I don't really blame them.
IE a carrier setup. if carrier at 3.15 dies, its not usable as a target anymore. now you have to use one of the other carriers as a target, etc etc. this way you'd still have bombers and fighters in play, but parts of the landscape are not available. this would simulate a victory as a battle, and maybe a over all victory of the month if enough of them are sunk
vbase same thing, bomber come in, take most of it out, its not usable anymore, not that we do(use a vbase for much) in the FSO, but you get the idea.
as for planes, the planeset would remain untouched or adjusted as the cm's deemed necessary. just a subtle little change in the gameplay.... nothing drastic
-
I feel the same way. Play your role, fly what your told. With out the bombers its not FSO...it's king of the hill.
I'll be the first one to agree with you. I really don't like any of the ricepaper planes at all (no offence) but thats what we were given so I fly them. You gotta take the bad with the good. I love the FSO ( I think it's the only reason I still play) and wouldn't even dream of not showing up cause I didn't get what I wanted to fly. So to all the ones that wine about it, SUCK IT UOP!!! Or don't even play. :salute
-
We'll be there in Wright Flyers with bricks if required.
:airplane: :cheers:
-
I think it'd be BA if you allowed a total restricted number of planes for each month. For instance:
12 F4U-C's for the entire 3 frames. If 11 are lost frame 1, then you only have 1 left.
80 B24's. If 8 are lost then you have 72 for frame 2 and if in frame 2 55 are lost, then you have 17 left for frame 3.
So on and so on. Depending on the victory conditions of the frame you could even award a % returned if a target base was completely destroyed.
For that matter you could award returns based on type of kill. if 10 pilots bailed bravely, 30% of that airframe are returned for next frame.
Just a thought. FSO studs like their realism. That's for real.
-
Restricted total plane numbers happen fairly often with 262's, arrado's and sometimes with the 163's
-
good ideas and comments I think. And I think most would agree what we have now is a Snap Shot type of event played out 3 times in a row. The frames need to tie together in some form where there is cause and effect to what you do or don't do.
-
Restricted total plane numbers happen fairly often with 262's, arrado's and sometimes with the 163's
I recall this. But frankly if Allies lose 80 out of 80 B24's in a set, they wouldn't have gotten 80 fresh ones the next week...
-
Lots of interesting ideas, most have been tried before in FSO but are definitely worth revisiting while still using standard objectives and victory conditions (points). I have used different twists in trying to make FSO trying to spice it up a little. I have used the evacuation goal where ships represent men evacuated or the Re-supply FSO in Stalingrad.
I will consider trying to incorporate some of these ideas into my remaining setups in 2014. :aok