Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: perdue3 on April 29, 2014, 05:24:03 PM
-
I have a question for designers and participants. What single FSO setup simulated a battle in which one side was heavily outnumbered historically? Rephrase: Which battles have we simulated in FSO where one side was heavily outnumbered in the actual battle?
Thank you.
-
All PTO events from 1944 onwards.
-
We just finished one in March. RAF vs Luftwaffe 1945 "Operation Clarion". The FSO side split was 50-50. Historically of course it was not an even split in the Spring of 1945 in the ETO. I don't have an exhaustive list of other designs. There are others I am sure. Playability of course is usually the #1 reason we might not follow the real life strength differences.
-
i can remember a few that were 60%-40% allies.
-
We just finished one in March. RAF vs Luftwaffe 1945 "Operation Clarion". The FSO side split was 50-50. Historically of course it was not an even split in the Spring of 1945 in the ETO. I don't have an exhaustive list of other designs. There are others I am sure. Playability of course is usually the #1 reason we might not follow the real life strength differences.
I have seen 60:40 before, is it okay to do this considering the right format is implemented?
-
Not sure I understand what you are asking re
is it okay to do this
Ok in what way?
For the record 60-40 is likely the most one sided we would in FSO but there is no actual limit. Designers call.
-
Okay meaning would this idea be shot down immediately? I know 60:40 is the max for trouble begins at 2:1. However, if the format allowed for the outnumbered factor and it fit historically, could it be accepted?
-
I've seen many players (and on occasion seemingly whole squads) not show up because they either didn't get the side, ride, or the mission they wanted or expected. I don't see these types showing up if they were on the historically-accurate 40% side.
But, the designer gets to play the game of balancing accuracy and gameplay to make a hopefully fun event that people want to participate in. If they can come up with a fun event that pits a superior force against an overwhelmed force, then I see no reason to not let them try.
Ultimately it's player turnout that determines how historically accurate a designer can be. If an event only gets half the normal crowd, then that is in my opinion a failure no matter how accurate it is.
-
This is just for FSO...no, a 60-40 split would not be shot down immediately (who's doing the shooting btw?) as an idea. I think there are many ways that a setup can be done. Just as a reminder on what a designer can do:
* Alter the side split (50-50, 60-40 ect)
* Put a min-max # on a particular plane.
* Disable certain ordnance types and gun packages on certain planes.
* Assign a higher or lower point value to a plane in the victory conditions.
* Assign one side as just a defender.
* Adjust the points for objects destroyed by one or both sides.
* Alt CAPs for bombers and or fighters.
...and others. This ensures that we can make a setup playable and fair although its not as easy as it sounds especially if its an original design as most FSOs are. I have likened it to hitting a moving target.
What we can't do is control as an absolute the side #s per frame. We can only do that to a degree. That's too bad too because nothing unhinges a setup like one side being over strength and the other side being under strength because of attendance issues. SEA events are not mandated by law though ;) so we just have to make do.
-
All inputs were very helpful. I greatly appreciate them.