Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Squire on December 09, 2016, 06:19:02 PM
-
With the squad commitment levels. It's very important that the registered FSO squads show up with the # of players they are supposed to. As always we get that real life happens...but we are asking for squad leaders to try their best to get the bodies in there as needed. Frame 1 of "Tumult over Guadalcanal" had the Axis down by almost 30 pilots...that's not good. That's not singling anybody out...I am just showing what can happen when #s get out of whack. :(
We will be emailing any squad that goes under or over the commit levels as a reminder.
Squads that pull no shows...I was never a big "drop the hammer" guy...not my style but I will have to remove squads that do this. It's just too disruptive.
...As always the vast majority of you do a VERY good job of reaching the FSO #s frame to frame...without you there is no FSO. So our thanks as always!
:salute
-
All for the hammer. :salute
-
As a planner you need to account for the fact that PTO=LOWER AXIS TURN OUT
I am a dedicated AXIS player and I show up. I do not get excited to fly a rice paper airplane that catches fire with a single ping. I do not like flying a plane with only bullets that don't seem to do crap to sturdy blue planes. I DO NOT LIKE PTO. It is usually a single run across blue sea and no return flight.
On the plus side, it makes for a short night.
I have had some great nights though and some fun. Like I said I show up and fly what ever plane we get. But I have no life and you cannot kill that which has no life! :rofl
A lot of guys don't show for rice paper.
-
Pigs are committed.
:salute
-
Squire:
My comments, I have always believed that turnout was driven by the setup and the effort and orders put out by the CIC's. Good setups and good orders normally equal good nights which drive attendance and fun for all. As a CO and CIC planner I do my part as best I can to help.
This setup is among the worst, ever. Not the scenario, the setup. I would say that any experienced FSO pilot could have predicted the outcome of Frame 01 a week before it happened, yet we flew and it played out in a predictable manner. There was nothing good about the setup from the side allocations to the plane sets, targets and further AC min max restrictions. The same mistakes continue to play out, two many targets to attack and defend, to many restrictions on AC mins and max's. Did the Setup guys even count the available AXIS side predictable turnout numbers against the min max AC setup? For the last few scenario frames the AXIS turnout has been running about 75-95. Basically you allowed me to plan about 16% of my available AC strength, the remainder over 80% was dictated by the setup. To many targets means small fights which no one likes. And no one likes flying one way missions. I had no force structure for recon, deception or reserves. As a guy that loves to plan these operations there wasn't much I could do, you guys did it and restricted the remainder. Lastly the point setup further pushed the outcome that you see in the plans. All setup issues. And all very fixable.
So ejecting squads for low turn outs will not help the FSO community to grow. I do agree with ejecting a squad that hasn't shown up for several frames, and yes we all see that and know who.
If you want to grow this you CM's need to use the best scenario's and the very best setups to save whats left. The numbers continue to drop.
Whatever happened to the month of Dec being the "What If scenario month". Remember BOB 46'? How about B-29's in the 8th AF over Germany in 46', that would be a hoot. It would be different and fun and most important "NEW". We need more thinking outside of the box not ejecting pilots and squads in opinion.
-
Squire:
My comments, I have always believed that turnout was driven by the setup and the effort and orders put out by the CIC's. Good setups and good orders normally equal good nights which drive attendance and fun for all. As a CO and CIC planner I do my part as best I can to help.
This setup is among the worst, ever. Not the scenario, the setup. I would say that any experienced FSO pilot could have predicted the outcome of Frame 01 a week before it happened, yet we flew and it played out in a predictable manner. There was nothing good about the setup from the side allocations to the plane sets, targets and further AC min max restrictions. The same mistakes continue to play out, two many targets to attack and defend, to many restrictions on AC mins and max's. Did the Setup guys even count the available AXIS side predictable turnout numbers against the min max AC setup? For the last few scenario frames the AXIS turnout has been running about 75-95. Basically you allowed me to plan about 16% of my available AC strength, the remainder over 80% was dictated by the setup. To many targets means small fights which no one likes. And no one likes flying one way missions. I had no force structure for recon, deception or reserves. As a guy that loves to plan these operations there wasn't much I could do, you guys did it and restricted the remainder. Lastly the point setup further pushed the outcome that you see in the plans. All setup issues. And all very fixable.
So ejecting squads for low turn outs will not help the FSO community to grow. I do agree with ejecting a squad that hasn't shown up for several frames, and yes we all see that and know who.
If you want to grow this you CM's need to use the best scenario's and the very best setups to save whats left. The numbers continue to drop.
Whatever happened to the month of Dec being the "What If scenario month". Remember BOB 46'? How about B-29's in the 8th AF over Germany in 46', that would be a hoot. It would be different and fun and most important "NEW". We need more thinking outside of the box not ejecting pilots and squads in opinion.
18 pigs sat over A4-C67 area waiting for AXIS to do THEIR part for an hour and 45 minutes. Throwing that out there just so AXIS understand just because you don't like the setup or what not...just go with it so EVERYONE gets some action...then handle it afterward with a discussion...don't force your suckage situation on the rest of the participants...suck it up, deal with it later.
-
18 pigs sat over A4-C67 area waiting for AXIS to do THEIR part for an hour and 45 minutes. Throwing that out there just so AXIS understand just because you don't like the setup or what not...just go with it so EVERYONE gets some action...then handle it afterward with a discussion...don't force your suckage situation on the rest of the participants...suck it up, deal with it later.
Logs show C67 hit at T+40.
-
JG54 shows up no matter what. we always try to make our numbers and adjust them as necessary.
as for the hammer, not for it, because that's why people leave. too many pretend hard butts as it is.
-
All hail the 325th VFG!
Your exploits during this FSO really showed everyone what you were made of.
Axis showed with 7 Bettys and a pair of Vals (courtesy of the 327th Steel Talons).
The dedicated bombers were held back and never saw combat.
Instead the Axis put bomblets on Ki-43's and called it good. :banana:
-
Logs show C67 hit at T+40.
That garbage shouldn't even count...we were still in our standby area waiting for the main attack force....which if I'm readin this right...went on a Friday night stroll....
Explain what the Bettys did Vulcan....
-
The Title of the Post and OP from a FSO CM is asking for help from the FSO Community.
The logs for Frame 2 shows :
325th VFG
CUTT
22:03:10 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:30:11 Arrived Safely at Field #17
ImADot
22:02:55 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:34:10 Arrived Safely at Field #17
Kuhn
22:03:10 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:33:43 Arrived Safely at Field #17
lowtec
22:03:10 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:38:20 Arrived Safely at Field #17
swoop73
22:03:08 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:35:40 Arrived Safely at Field #20
tommygun
22:03:11 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:32:57 Arrived Safely at Field #17
Viper61
22:03:11 Departed from Field #14 in a G4M1 Model 11
22:34:33 Arrived Safely at Field #17
and
327th Steel Talons
KOOL
22:03:14 Departed from Field #14 in a D3A1
22:22:17 Arrived Safely at Field #12
Newman
22:03:12 Departed from Field #14 in a D3A1
22:22:16 Arrived Safely at Field #12
Side Assignments for this Setup also shows
325th VFG Viper61 7 - 10 Axis Yes, FRAME 2 on 2016-12-09 fighter
fighter
fighter
327th Steel Talons KOOL 4 - 6 Axis Yes, FRAME 3 on 2016-12-16 Fighter, Bomber
Fighter, Bomber
Fighter, Bomber
The Allied Team was asking where the Bettys and D3s were? No one had spotted them. Our thinking was that the Axis CIC had used JABO attacks for initial objective satisfaction. Then, hold the bombers for later attack when Allied strength was considerably lower.
No second wave of bombers ever appeared. The logs tell the story.
No negative implications waved towards Viper. I understand his reasoning from his post. He saved his planes from being shot down in a bad situation brought about by turnout. As a former CIC, I applaud his decision.
The CMs are asking for help. Seems they might need some positive feedback. I can sum this up real simple.
Just a bad night. Leave it at that.
They are working with the best experience with this event. The CMs know what they are doing. The Squad COs know what they are doing. The CICs know what they are doing.
If you have never been a CIC planner, then you will not know how difficult it can be to create Orders on the occasional bad turnout.
Why do some Squads and individual pilots refuse to fly certain aircraft?
Answer : They spend 99% of their time in LW MA and now Melee Arena flying the best of the best. Normally, that is what is needed to survive for enjoyable play. The old EW and MW arenas allowed for better use of the old LW hangar queens.
The vast majority of FSO veteran pilots are now experts at gameplay. We know what we are doing in the AC.
How can we help?
We as the FSO community to keep flying what we are assigned and do our part. See what fortune favors?
How can the complainers help?
Volunteer to be a CM and solve the problems they see. The FSO community will be appreciative.
Just my humble 2 cents.
-
Cowards in a video game....and people say I got the ego.
:bolt:
-
Cowards in a video game....and people say I got the ego.
:bolt:
That is very inflammatory coming from a CM in Training. Are you part of the Pigs FSO Command Team?
You were very vocal on text during Frame 2. The intent of FSO is to fight. The other side of the intent is to win.
Have you planned as a CIC al by yourself?
-
From the FSO rules...
CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that all initial attack aircraft reach their targets by T+60.
All initial attack aircraft. To me that would mean all aircraft carrying ords and ordered to attack should be attacking within T+60. Not attacking a target would be a violation of this rule IMO.
-
Please don't kick us out of FSO for bringing too many again this week... :banana:
Having all my guys showing up and a few extra friends made our night awesome... :rock
I'll up our preference for January...and I expect to be put back Axis... :noid
I for one am a huge fan of PTO....and was highly disappointed by getting banished to the Allied side...but we always show up...we might only have 2 guys show up but at least someone will be there :aok
-
Please don't kick us out of FSO for bringing too many again this week... :banana:
Having all my guys showing up and a few extra friends made our night awesome... :rock
I'll up our preference for January...and I expect to be put back Axis... :noid
I for one am a huge fan of PTO....and was highly disappointed by getting banished to the Allied side...but we always show up...we might only have 2 guys show up but at least someone will be there :aok
14 pilots! That is what we need in FSO, so WTG! :salute
-
14 pilots! That is what we need in FSO, so WTG! :salute
We probably won't ever have that many again :rofl
-
From the FSO rules...
All initial attack aircraft. To me that would mean all aircraft carrying ords and ordered to attack should be attacking within T+60. Not attacking a target would be a violation of this rule IMO.
I hate to take at least some credit for this rule but..
Years ago I was a frame CO. It was a Pacific setup like this. Want to say it was Midway. Had 88s subbing for the Betty we didn't have yet. I came up with a plan that took the bomber force all around the map designed to hit the target with JUST enough time to make it back home by end frame. Worked to perfection. The defenders were all low--bored and probably looking to tower out when we finally showed up. Totally wrecked the target. Lost only a couple of planes to a P-40 still up at altitude. Everybody landed with like 2 minutes to spare.
I was thinking that was a heckuva plan! That was until the forum started lighting up. Looking back I could see where that would totally suck if you were one of those defenders that actually showed up for the frame. Maybe that was their only few hours a week that they could get up flying? I'm kinda in that boat these days. So yeah that really would suck to just bore holes in the virtual sky for well over an hour when you could go to another arena and have some fun. Nobody would show up for nothing!
And so not long after that debacle the 60 minute rule came in.
It's hard to please everybody in these events. We all want to see action, of course, or we wouldn't be there. Some of us, like myself, enjoy the strategic planning element that can make these frames truely memorable. That whole "I love it when a plan comes together!" (tm The A Team) thing. I'd hate to see these things become completely scripted by rules and setup. I really think it'd ruin the nature of the event. It's a difficult problem striking that balance (for lack of a better word).
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
-
That is very inflammatory coming from a CM in Training. Are you part of the Pigs FSO Command Team?
You were very vocal on text during Frame 2. The intent of FSO is to fight. The other side of the intent is to win.
Have you planned as a CIC al by yourself?
I'm a KOTH CM...an FSO participant...
What would you like me to call not sending the Bettys toward the target??? Strategy?? That's one of the biggest problems in Aces High people avoid combat and call it strategy...what it would be called in Real War or combat is being a coward...hence my remark. Hopefully it does hit a soft spot and they understand that they shouldn't just be thinking about their end of the situation....they flew for 20-30 minutes without seeing combat....most of POTW (one of the largest participants in FSO these days) flew around for an hour and 45 minutes without seeing a single enemy aircraft....just because I'm the vocal one doesn't mean everyone on our squad channel left last night pissed off....then to come here and see it was a "setup" issue and they are "going to lose participants???" We had an Australian guy rush home from work to get back in time for FSO because he was excited about the action...he left early because of frustration of the lack of action. This same type of issue happened in the 12 hour scenario....you got a problem with the setup bring it up and get it changed before...don't take it upon yourself...you got to think about all parties involved....how do my decisions effect others??? That question wasnt fully answered when the decision was made to not send the Bettys in.
I stand by all my statements...If the reason to not send the Bettys in was because it was a suicide mission...that's cowardice....in a video game...
:salute
-
That is very inflammatory coming from a CM in Training. Are you part of the Pigs FSO Command Team?
You were very vocal on text during Frame 2. The intent of FSO is to fight. The other side of the intent is to win.
Have you planned as a CIC al by yourself?
I have. But it is possible to fight and win without violating the rules. :)
I agree with Junky's sentiments. While the task may be daunting or damn near impossible, you still have to try. There have been plenty of times where the squad I was flying with was stuck with planes like Ju88s, Ju87s, B5Ns, etc. Slow planes that, before the frame even begins have a low % chance of survival. However, we would NEVER not attempt to accomplish the mission. What is the worst thing that happens, you lose your pixel airplane and get to go to bed a bit earlier?
-
I hate to take at least some credit for this rule but..
Years ago I was a frame CO. It was a Pacific setup like this. Want to say it was Midway. Had 88s subbing for the Betty we didn't have yet. I came up with a plan that took the bomber force all around the map designed to hit the target with JUST enough time to make it back home by end frame. Worked to perfection. The defenders were all low--bored and probably looking to tower out when we finally showed up. Totally wrecked the target. Lost only a couple of planes to a P-40 still up at altitude. Everybody landed with like 2 minutes to spare.
I was thinking that was a heckuva plan! That was until the forum started lighting up. Looking back I could see where that would totally suck if you were one of those defenders that actually showed up for the frame. Maybe that was their only few hours a week that they could get up flying? I'm kinda in that boat these days. So yeah that really would suck to just bore holes in the virtual sky for well over an hour when you could go to another arena and have some fun. Nobody would show up for nothing!
And so not long after that debacle the 60 minute rule came in.
It's hard to please everybody in these events. We all want to see action, of course, or we wouldn't be there. Some of us, like myself, enjoy the strategic planning element that can make these frames truely memorable. That whole "I love it when a plan comes together!" (tm The A Team) thing. I'd hate to see these things become completely scripted by rules and setup. I really think it'd ruin the nature of the event. It's a difficult problem striking that balance (for lack of a better word).
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Last night we were holding out hoping that they met the 60 minute rule, with the zeak ki43 attack...which the host CM informed us that they did...and they were going to send the Bettys in the last minute just like you said you did....This wouldn't have been an issue if they would have done that because at least we got some action.
-
Last night we were holding out hoping that they met the 60 minute rule, with the zeak ki43 attack...which the host CM informed us that they did...and they were going to send the Bettys in the last minute just like you said you did....This wouldn't have been an issue if they would have done that because at least we got some action.
Even so without looking I'm pretty sure the rule is any initial attack prior to T+60 must be of "squadron strength". This is designed to exclude someone from merely coming into a target with a single plane, dropping say the radar at T+59, to game the rule, and then bring the "actual" attack much later in the frame not unlike mine described above. While you say you'd have been OK with that at least, it still would have been a really boring frame for you. That's the kinda crap the T+60 rule is designed to remove.
But like I said. It's tough to come up with a plan that contains a great amount of strategy given everyone knows what the targets are, what fields are in use, what planes will likely be coming and when they have to get there. FSO is already semi-scripted for those reasons alone. But given the short time frame I don't know what the alternative might be. No matter what the setup is it's still only a two hour event. Only so much you could do really. If you gave the whole two hours to the strategists I'd be willing to bet there'd be an awful lot of that just flying around stuff every frame!
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
-
I believe in fighting in all aircraft. That is what these setups are for. To get you out of your late war comfort zone and challenge yourself in other types.
What Viper as CIC and Kool did might be explained as a little protest against the current setup due to participation levels. Axis CIC didn't violate any rules as far as I can tell by the logs. I don't receive the Objectives anymore to know the individual Frame requirements. Just a rank and file pilot now.
Junky, I understand your anger and frustration. I also waited for the 2nd attack that never arrived.
My time as a rotating CIC, I always made aggressive plans as possible. That was when we had 500 pilots participating. When possible, I has secondary targets for strike groups. As I recall, Early War and PTO setups were the best for creative planning especially with Axis.
From your statements, I can deduce that you would prefer all players in the cartoon game to fight and die rather than survive? My question to you is would you fly the Bettys or D3s to target in low numbers to be easily shot down by Allied fighters?
-
I believe in fighting in all aircraft. That is what these setups are for. To get you out of your late war comfort zone and challenge yourself in other types.
What Viper as CIC and Kool did might be explained as a little protest against the current setup due to participation levels. Axis CIC didn't violate any rules as far as I can tell by the logs. I don't receive the Objectives anymore to know the individual Frame requirements. Just a rank and file pilot now.
Junky, I understand your anger and frustration. I also waited for the 2nd attack that never arrived.
My time as a rotating CIC, I always made aggressive plans as possible. That was when we had 500 pilots participating. When possible, I has secondary targets for strike groups. As I recall, Early War and PTO setups were the best for creative planning especially with Axis.
From your statements, I can deduce that you would prefer all players in the cartoon game to fight and die rather than survive? My question to you is would you fly the Bettys or D3s to target in low numbers to be easily shot down by Allied fighters?
No...I prefer them to come up with a decisive operation and execute it with violence of action, good communication, basic ACM and wingman tactics....if they all die, valiant effort...if we all die well done.
I'll fly whatever Pigs get assigned and then further whatever position Waystin2 assigns me...whether that be Leading our escorts, leading scouts, covering the Ace pilot ect ect...no complaints....I will perform to the best of my ability...
I sure won't "protest" during an event...I was pissed off last night...but I was still maintaining my post above A4 and 67.
-
No...I prefer them to come up with a decisive operation and execute it with violence of action, good communication, basic ACM and wingman tactics....if they all die, valiant effort...if we all die well done.
+1
-
Second strike was next to nothing as an axis defender last night as well. Maybe the higher numbers of allied planes showing in flight after T+60 were just the defenders, I don't know. But the only second strike we saw was 2 f4fs and two or three sbds at a11. C54 never got hit after the initial attack.
A11 only had radar and one or two guns hit. C54 lost the carrier but no other ships. The cv attack was very well executed though. Small squad of sbds pulled the cap down while the high altitude b25s sank the carrier. Very few of the sbds and escorts made it back but it was a successful attack.
I was hoping for more action late frame that never showed but I survived the frame which is always a welcome plus.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
IMO, the way the FSO played out, the allies needed more players anyway. War never knows how many troops the enemy will bring. The Air Raiders had attack planes too, so we all weren't fighters. I think the squad and allied really needed us. I was a walk on, I admit. But I can never actually plan if I'm going to play or not. I think the axis did just fine, but they choose not to attack and that was a mistake because a lot of the a6ms hurt our best fighters.
-
IMO, the way the FSO played out, the allies needed more players anyway. War never knows how many troops the enemy will bring. The Air Raiders had attack planes too, so we all weren't fighters. I think the squad and allied really needed us. I was a walk on, I admit. But I can never actually plan if I'm going to play or not. I think the axis did just fine, but they choose not to attack and that was a mistake because a lot of the a6ms hurt our best fighters.
When you were making FSO more often we really cleaned em up...thanks to you and Stokes for beefing up our fighters...both of you are always welcome :salute
-
Last night VF-17 had SBDs. Our first mission into A11 went about as well as it could considering our bomber talent. Losses and bomb accuracy were both minimal, but we made it home with most of us intact. We re armed and headed back to see if we could do some more damage. I'm pretty sure we all missed again but this time I'm pretty sure most of us died. Hell even if you know you're probably gonna die in your bombers at least try and make it fun. Most of VF-17s bomber runs end up being some of the most enjoyable simply because we know we suck in them, and the surprises can only be good ones.
Sure I have complaints about this setup, like making the USN use B5Ns but even if we were assigned them we would at least try and make it fun.
-
I don't recall ever seeing a squad not attack an assigned target just because they thought they were going to die. Is that what happened here?
If that is in fact what happened then someone needs to explain to the CiC or squad CO or whoever was responsible for that decision, that this isn't real life and it is expected that everyone do their part to accomplish their mission, regardless of losses.
There really is no need to kick anyone out or overreact in any way to this. We just need to make it clear to those who screwed up.
I know that it sux when FSO players don't get their share of the action but it happens sometimes. What matters is that it really don't happen that often and its easily corrected.
As always I enjoyed the event even if I did fly for the AXIS:) Thanks to all. :salute
-
Well said Joker.
-
If folks aren't showing up, you have to examine the root causes.
FSO requires some extra effort so it has to promise some extra reward.
Requiring both sides to attack AND defend is an issue.
Requiring multiple targets is an issue.
For squads that would like to practice in the FSO ride, changing airplanes every week and not issuing orders until late Wednesday is an issue.
I would suggest single targets for each side, one side defending and one side attacking and assigned rides for each squadron for the duration of each 3 frame series. Not having 5 different plane types on each side would make this much easier.
People like big fights with basically even odds. We don't really need all the hide and seek silliness. Just turn radar on only in the tower and let each side direct their forces accordingly.
-
It gets rough on the attackers when the whole enemy side is in fighters camped over the target waiting on them to show up with 10-20 less fighters than the defending side and when the defenders know exactly when and where to defend.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
THIS >>>>>> when the defenders know exactly when and where to defend.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There lies a big issue ( there are several more), and probably one that is the easiest to fix...... Think about that folks.
:salute
JDOG
G3-MF
-
The attack on 11 with vf17 we hit target before t+45...all but one of my SBDs made it home untouched...
But our fighters pretty well tied up the zeros from the onset of their attack on us...
They knew where we were and were unable to stop us from hitting 11...
Last month the bomber escort was unable to stop us from hitting their bombers...
You can know exactly what is fixing to happen and still be unable to oppose it...or be out of place when the attack or whatever occurs... :aok
And I agree that if that attack was deliberately called off last night the offending COs of those squads should be punished in some form...maybe no points for landed aircraft...not banned or anything like that...we already don't have enough squads in FSO...
-
If folks aren't showing up, you have to examine the root causes.
FSO requires some extra effort so it has to promise some extra reward.
Requiring both sides to attack AND defend is an issue.
Requiring multiple targets is an issue.
For squads that would like to practice in the FSO ride, changing airplanes every week and not issuing orders until late Wednesday is an issue.
I would suggest single targets for each side, one side defending and one side attacking and assigned rides for each squadron for the duration of each 3 frame series. Not having 5 different plane types on each side would make this much easier.
People like big fights with basically even odds. We don't really need all the hide and seek silliness. Just turn radar on only in the tower and let each side direct their forces accordingly.
I have to disagree with you on those 2 points.
most of the FSO designs featured both sides attacking and defending - more often than not it works well. It forces the CiC to choose to either stack the offense or defense. These are the critical decisions that bring variety to FSO. Furthermore, in single-side attack events the defending side suffers landslide defeats - just like last month.
single attack objectives for each side removes another element of variety as well because the decisions regarding division of available forces is made even less important. It becomes stale when you know where everything is going.
another factor to consider in why multiple objectives is better is the result on the squads stuck in the lesser aircraft. With more objectives, you had a reduced chance of having to contend with the enemy's best aircraft and being slaughtered.
-
Devil,
I am pretty sure I looked at the scores last month, and I think it was a Axis victory...... Like not even close in frame 1 and 2.
I agree with your last point.
Someone mentioned earlier that FSO is scripted. Not my words, but also hard to argue. Some of the scripting, and predictability just needs to go away....... Like POOF!!! Gone
:salute
JDOG
G3-MF
-
I have some ideas on the scripting issue. I'll post them later when I'm not drinking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Someone mentioned earlier that FSO is scripted. Not my words, but also hard to argue. Some of the scripting, and predictability just needs to go away....... Like POOF!!! Gone
Like? I am happy to take advice and gameplay ideas from the community, but if it doesn't promote combat, action, or fighting chances are it won't be implemented.
-
+1
And I agree that if that attack was deliberately called off last night the offending COs of those squads should be punished in some form...maybe no points for landed aircraft...not banned or anything like that...we already don't have enough squads in FSO...
-
Set Objectives known to both sides and the T+60 rule ensure that action is had by both participating sides and within 1 hour of the start.
That is the bulk of the scripting and predictability that is part of FSO. If you removed those two items, sure it would be less predictable and scripty, but it would also increase the chances of non-action and no fighting. That is the heart of Scenario Game play.
FSO rules and regulations are for making sure there is a fight, when no fight occurs something must be looked as to why it didn't happen.
-
Like? I am happy to take advice and gameplay ideas from the community, but if it doesn't promote combat, action, or fighting chances are it won't be implemented.
I'll PM you in the next week Nef. Take a gander and see what you think :salute
-
I am pretty sure I looked at the scores last month, and I think it was a Axis victory...... Like not even close in frame 1 and 2.
Problem is that you're judging by score. No more than 35 Axis pilots survived in any given frame last month. The fewest landed by the allies was 66.
Read here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,383331.0.html
-
I have to disagree with you on those 2 points.
most of the FSO designs featured both sides attacking and defending - more often than not it works well. It forces the CiC to choose to either stack the offense or defense. These are the critical decisions that bring variety to FSO. Furthermore, in single-side attack events the defending side suffers landslide defeats - just like last month.
single attack objectives for each side removes another element of variety as well because the decisions regarding division of available forces is made even less important. It becomes stale when you know where everything is going.
another factor to consider in why multiple objectives is better is the result on the squads stuck in the lesser aircraft. With more objectives, you had a reduced chance of having to contend with the enemy's best aircraft and being slaughtered.
The issue is in the requiring.
Requiring both sides to split their forces into quarters (two on defense, two on offense) is the issue.
Publish two targets for each side but make no requirements as to either being REQUIRED to be defended or attacked and turn the radar on with 100 mile range for each side.
Let the CIC's determine what they will attack and/or defend and give both sides the means to identify the threats and react to them during the frame.
As it is now, after launch there is no real need to coordinate anything because everyone is wandering around blind and everyone know the defense will be right over the target so I fly to target with the AP on and read a book.
On defense I calculate the earliest the enemy can get to the target and relax in my orbit directly over the target until that time hack.
It isn't very interesting.
-
Dawger, that would make attacking too easy. To cover that area, the defenders would be stretched too thin and picked off piecemeal when the attack group plows through them. The defenders need a reasonable chance to intercept the bomber stream before they drop. With a wide area to cover the bulk of the defense will almost always be out of position.
-
The FSO rules exist as a result of playing through more than a decade of frames and addressing issues we found.
-
I think the original post goes to getting squads to keep their mininimum numbers or change them so they don't have to move a squad over to another sides,
like they had to do this month.
from that it morphed into game play..... I think it is what it is, and unless people are willing to step up and get more involved and try to bring in more people,
not much is going to change. the minute they go to one target per side, its all over. then is just a orchestrated MA. not my idea of a good time. I don't even like it now
with 2 targets per side. you cant plan like you used to, you cant sneak in like you used to. you cant make it crazy. now its find bombers and kill them or die trying or
bomb target or die trying. whatever, we're here to the end. but think long and hard before you go to a one target per side.
now back to my original thought, before my tangent. we should ALL be actively trying to recruit to get more people in the FSO, be it building your squad, or getting other
squads to come in. we need more pilots, 300 or more would be nice. where we're at now is doable, but more is better. we need squads to meet their minimums. but like some other
squads, if im over, I wont turn anyone away. I want people to play and learn to enjoy the FSO. I want to build my squad to be bigger. I want everyone to have fun.
on a side note, as CIC I look at how many pilots showed up for each squad and average them. this is so I can figure out what to expect from a squad when they show up.
if a squad averages 3 players a week, I only expect 2 to show up. if a 7-11 squad averages 6 players, that's what I expect. then its easier to figure out what squads to put into what planes. the other thing I do is look at what squads like to do. I know that if a squad always request fighters and I have to give them bombers, I expect them to come in a little short.
this is because I know there are players that would rather not show up, then fly bombers. just a fact of the game. but this all works for me and I plan for it.
anyway I think if we all just try to get our squads to show up with our assigned minimums, it will make the CM's lives a lot easier! my 2 cents.
-
One bad frame of FSO does not mean the rules need to be retooled. CM's will be looking over what when wrong and why.
-
The FSO rules exist as a result of playing through more than a decade of frames and addressing issues we found.
Agreed.
The problem comes when people work to comply with the written rule, not the spirit of the rule, and the event.
-
Wow...
:headscratch:
Objectives are sent out.
As defense or attack, the squads SHOULD work together on planning. At launch, go according to plan. Whether you agree or not. Follow CiC direction per the side's orders. That's it!
Sometimes it is really tough or even seemingly impossible. I believe we have all been in that situation in a slow plane on attack, knowing you will likely not get away. But at least try.
If there is a problem with the design (or appearance of it) then lets talk it out and contribute information that will help the designers improve upon it.
But not taking assigned planes to an assigned target for the spirit of "saving the points" is rather unsportsman like. As a registered FSO squad, we are obligated to participate. Me personally, prefer to see the fight play out in its entirety. I am not going to discuss strategy or tactics in this post.
But as a CM for FSO, I would like to point out that the rules are what they are. No "spirit of". Simple black and white. Attack your assigned targets. Defend your assigned targets. Attack to occur by T plus 60. Minimum is a squad sized force. However, that would pertain to ALL attacking forces. Be attacking by T plus 60. That promotes the fight and guarantees action for everyone involved in FSO.
Come on guys. FSO is a spirited and intelligent community. And a great group of people I personally enjoy spending my Friday evenings with. Please lets not get all wrapped up in BS. Just play the game and if the design needs to be adjusted, send an email to the CM team so the designers can make necessary adjustments.
:salute to all of you for participating. And the feedback is always welcome. We have a good thing here.
:rock
SlipKnoT
-
Could not have said it better Slipknot.
-
Dawger, that would make attacking too easy. To cover that area, the defenders would be stretched too thin and picked off piecemeal when the attack group plows through them. The defenders need a reasonable chance to intercept the bomber stream before they drop. With a wide area to cover the bulk of the defense will almost always be out of position.
Thats why I want 100 mile radar. So defense can react and move the fight from directly over the target.
However its pretty clear that there is no serious intention to revise the current method of two targets required to be defended and attacked.
So I will keep my squad at the 4-6 committment level and hope for the best.
It does make the FSO briefing short.
Its either Fly to target and furball at T+ 50 or Orbit over target and furball at T+ 50.
-
Set Objectives known to both sides and the T+60 rule ensure that action is had by both participating sides and within 1 hour of the start.
That is the bulk of the scripting and predictability that is part of FSO. If you removed those two items, sure it would be less predictable and scripty, but it would also increase the chances of non-action and no fighting. That is the heart of Scenario Game play.
FSO rules and regulations are for making sure there is a fight, when no fight occurs something must be looked as to why it didn't happen.
But we already have the rule that if you haven't landed at an approved base by the end of the time frame for FSO you are counted as a casualty. I think that should be enough restrictions. If one side plans poorly, then that side will suffer the consequences (i.e. if they don't make it back to base because they took a route too circuitous in order to avoid detection or combat). Maybe the rule should be T+120 or T+90? Just my 2 cents.
-
Set Objectives known to both sides and the T+60 rule ensure that action is had by both participating sides and within 1 hour of the start.
That is the bulk of the scripting and predictability that is part of FSO. If you removed those two items, sure it would be less predictable and scripty, but it would also increase the chances of non-action and no fighting. That is the heart of Scenario Game play.
FSO rules and regulations are for making sure there is a fight, when no fight occurs something must be looked as to why it didn't happen.
Amen!
The design of FSO has evolved over the years into a format that encourages action for everybody. It does not succeed for every event - obviously - but that is the intent.
IMHO, the fundamental issue we now have is low player turnout which makes some of the old-style FSO designs less effective and less fun.
-
IMHO, the fundamental issue we now have is low player turnout which makes some of the old-style FSO designs less effective and less fun.
Adjustments have been made over the last several FSO's. Targets have been reduced and usually are 2 vs 2, although we have done 1 vs 1.
Can't scale down FSO any further than that. With 100 per side, 2 targets vs 2 targets should on paper put 25 pilots per side, per target. 1 vs 1 increases the number to 50 vs 50.. Which are pretty big engagements.
I think that traditional minimums should be looked at and it's something I have been personally avoiding in my writeups. Forcing you to use 12 of each 5 different airframes is 60 airplanes, stretch them over 2 targets, plus minimum force requirements THEN split them between squads of different sizes and it starts to get real difficult. Minimums are necessary, but they should be relaxed to make it easier for CICs. Smaller Minimums or minimums on less airframes allows for more flexibility for assignments.
-
As for the Frame 2 negative comments such as a "bad" frame. Here's my 2 cents:
I was the AXIS CIC - My job is to make a plan with the greatest chance of victory. Victory is scored by "points". My job is not to ensure everyone has fun or sees endless action. My job is to win for my side.
I will not make a plan in which sends squads to their deaths. I plan everything with some measurable chance of survival and always have. Have to admit very hard in this restrictive setup.
There were no FSO rule or special scenario rule violations by the AXIS side in the plan. I didn't see any in the execution either.
I watched the ebb and flow of the pilots in flight during the entire frame, it generally stayed very close right to the very end. So the plan I issued accomplished an outcome of gaining points towards victory and guarding any serous lose of points that would end with disaster for the AXIS side. And there was action up until H+90ish when both sides started to retire rearwards. All goals of any CIC or planning team.
To the comment above that I purposely planned a Frame in which to go out of my way and screw up the game play and wreck it for others. Bunch of crap and insulting. I plan to win and I stay within the rules. By the way the CIC plans are almost always reviewed (or at least offered for review) prior to distribution to avoid rule violations. And the CM is attached to the distribution list when the orders go out. And one last note there are several CM's flying on each side and if they see a rule violation they will state it very quickly. And this Frame was no different.
ALLIED squads not seeing as much action as they would have liked (that really means you wanted to shot down helpless AXIS bombers restricted to 20K or lower - yeaaaa fun for you). The AXIS side has no such advantages - The Frame 01 disaster proved that. I'll bet the points will show that the AXIS side lost Frame 01 by as much as 750 points or more. A complete disaster by any measure with most action over by H+60 (16 AXIS pilots left flying against 50 or 60 as I remember). Wheres the ALLIED outrage with Frame 01?? (crickets, crickets) So Frame 02 was planned differently. I protected my high point value AC and committed low point AC against high target point value targets. That's called risk to reward planning. What I had to do to win was to split the ALLIED forces and maximize AXIS combat power against ALLIED weakness at a location and time of my choosing, hard to pull off. Lastly I employed deception to win. I factored that the ALLIED defenders would sit defending waiting for bombers that would never appear until H+60 - 70. The fact that the ALLIED defenders sat at bases after H+70 was a great tactical error on the ALLIED side which i was very happy to exploit. Maybe instead of complaining about the AXIS plan, maybe you should be complaining to the ALLIED side that issued your orders which you followed and now you don't like. Or perhaps an internal squad review on your defensive strategy?
I don't know if the AXIS won Frame 02 or not, I know it was close by my count and 100% better than Frame 01. The sides had about the same amount of pilots flying at any given moment right up to the end. This implies that there was balanced action overall.
To the ALLEID CIC 68Wooly - <S> good plan on your part. With a great ALLIED victory in Frame 01 all he had to do was make sure that he didn't give the AXIS a great victory in Frame 02. He didn't and he played it very well. In fact the same thing I would have done if I had been on the ALLIED side planning. So now the ALLIED side goes into Frame 03 ahead of the AXIS side by a good measure. So all the ALLIED CIC has to do in Frame 03 is again plan to just hold ground and the ALLIED side will win the scenario.
NOTE - A great CM Setup team would now change the setup for Frame 03 and give the AXIS side a real chance at a lopsided victory to even out Frame 01 results - This would force some really good game play from the ALLIES - We'll see wont we, any beats??
For those of you that posted above complaining you didn't see enough action or that the AXIS didn't offer easy kills in a set piece battle as you thought it should have played out. Keep complaining and the CM's will place even more restrictive play for even greater canned events. Which will likely decrease the FSO turnout even further until only you are only ones left attending......
Its long over due to deregulate the FSO and open up the game play. The MA is very unrestricted and it seems to do very well. With some squads like the 49th posting MEGA Missions and getting more involvement than FSO operations. Most of us have been involved in base rolling with 60 plus guys. Were greatly restricted and you see what we have here. Putting my money where my mouth is: Id be glad to offer my imputes to the CM team off line in the hopes of creating better game play. But this means everything needs to be open for review, everything. Id even offer my time for BETA planning and testing if needed. Additionally - Id recommend the CM Team starting a separate thread site and open up the comments to everyone on how to overhaul the FSO. Theres lots of great guys in here and all with good opinions and ideas and the energy to help the community.
Viper61
CO 325th VFG
AXIS CIC Frame 02
-
So why did your entire squad land at T+30?
-
I was the AXIS CIC - My job is to make a plan with the greatest chance of victory. Victory is scored by "points". My job is not to ensure everyone has fun or sees endless action. My job is to win for my side.
Viper,
This is where you are wrong. Unless we all hop into a time machine and go back to the forties, this is not real. All of us are hear to have fun and enjoy some comradery with squaddies and friends.
Your job as the CIC is to give each player on your side the opportunity to engage in battle. That is what they show up for. Not too many people really even care about the victory. We are not taking it that serious, so why are you?
If you want to step down from the CIC position because you believe that neglecting this duty and not respecting your fellow players time and fun is important, than that is your choice.
Every player comes to this arena on Friday nights to see action. The CICs job is to get them into the thick of it. Your protest and ideology should only be points of conversation and expression in this forum and they should never come at the expense of any players time and fun.
-
I just have to know one thing. If your plan all along was to take off, land, and tower out. Why not just spawn and tower out?
Why even waste the 30 or so minutes you took to fly in the opposite direction of the enemy?
-
(http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/ralphmunnich/325thFrame2.jpg) (http://s205.photobucket.com/user/ralphmunnich/media/325thFrame2.jpg.html)
-
Proof positive of why landing bonuses are BS.
-
ALLIED squads not seeing as much action as they would have liked (that really means you wanted to shot down helpless AXIS bombers restricted to 20K or lower - yeaaaa fun for you). The AXIS side has no such advantages - The Frame 01 disaster proved that. I'll bet the points will show that the AXIS side lost Frame 01 by as much as 750 points or more. A complete disaster by any measure with most action over by H+60 (16 AXIS pilots left flying against 50 or 60 as I remember). Wheres the ALLIED outrage with Frame 01?? (crickets, crickets) So Frame 02 was planned differently. I protected my high point value AC and committed low point AC against high target point value targets. That's called risk to reward planning. What I had to do to win was to split the ALLIED forces and maximize AXIS combat power against ALLIED weakness at a location and time of my choosing, hard to pull off. Lastly I employed deception to win. I factored that the ALLIED defenders would sit defending waiting for bombers that would never appear until H+60 - 70. The fact that the ALLIED defenders sat at bases after H+70 was a great tactical error on the ALLIED side which i was very happy to exploit. Maybe instead of complaining about the AXIS plan, maybe you should be complaining to the ALLIED side that issued your orders which you followed and now you don't like. Or perhaps an internal squad review on your defensive strategy?
Don't talk tactics like you actually did something tactical with your bombers other then just hide them for points....at first we thought maybe you were doing some good tactics by sending in a small force to bring our scouts in then waiting until we started our rearm rotation to get your buffs in against a smaller force...but come to find out, you rather worry about points then actually engaging in combat....
Like Waystin said in his thread...if your going to do that let us know we just wont show up.
Oh and if you had an issue with FRAME 1 BRING IT UP....
-
There were no FSO rule or special scenario rule violations by the AXIS side in the plan
Wrong.
You violated both the spirit and letter of FSO by taking the ENTIRE Axis bomber force and landing them 30 minutes after frame start.
CIC's are expected to construct their orders in such a way that all initial attack aircraft reach their targets by T+60.
All initial attack aircraft (that includes bombers) will reach their targets by T+60.
In other words...they wont fly 2 sectors and land in friendly territory.
As if that needs to be explained!
-
I'd like to say this about the setup for this month.
No.1 I do apologize to the entire community. I honestly did not realize how bad this setup could potentially turn out. My hope with the design of this scenario was to design an early PTO event that would force both sides to use their planeset to their advantage. Early PTO setups are one of my favorites for fights. Regarding the mins/max's, I recieved a little guidance with that of course, but I also did not truly realize it would become a huge issue.
No.2 This was my very first setup as a CM and I want everyone to understand this. Yes, I did receive guidance from the CM Team, but this is my setup not Nef's, Warloc's, or anyone else. I take all the blame for everything that has happened during this setup. I did try to make a fun scenario, but that is not the case.
No.3 Do not blame the enitre CM Staff for the foul ups. We do have a very talented CM Staff all around. They know their stuff, and they are teaching me to create these events. This is a learning process for me, and I have learned so much from this setup, which I can carry over to my next one.
Please do not leave FSO/give the CM staff a hard time for this month's event. That is all on me. You may flame me all you want, but do not blame the entire staff. I hope to see a good turnout for Friday, and do hope to see you all in January.
BFOOT1
-
To the OP:
Yes, squad commitment is important. The AK’s lowered their commitment because we weren’t meeting ours some nights, or cut it really close. Keep in mind, this time of year folks are getting ready for the coming holidays, so perhaps next December lower participation should be considered. Others mentioned doing “something different” (B-29’s). Most of the bombers that are flown in FSO have almost useless defenses.
BFOOT1:
Don’t be so hard on yourself. In time, you will get better. It’s not an easy thing I am sure.
Viper:
I am personally offended in your tactic. It’s been stated that it was a violation of the rules, and IMHO was a violation of the spirit of FSO. Sadly, you weren’t able to make a good enough plan to hit your objectives, so you decided to sit it out. You should be ashamed. Your continued defense in the matter tells me you aren’t, but I hope that the CM’s never give you CIC duty again. For those in your squad, let me apologize to them for a waste of their evening.
I can say that the AK’s get put in bombers on missions that are clearly 1 way all the time. We frequently get decimated usually just as we see the base. There are times though that the CIC planned well and executed well, and we leveled the base, most of us returning to land. It’s a roll of the dice, but sometimes it works.
As long as I am CO of the AK’s, my S5 (CO of FSO) will NEVER create a plan such as Viper did. That plan was shameful, just shameful.
-
I agree with AkMeathd, BFOOT don't be so hard on yourself this is your very first setup, I'm sure you have learned a lot from it.
We do appreciate the voluntary CM team for putting together packaged entertainment for us each week. :cheers:
-
No need to apologize Bfoot1, and I think at this point Viper knows the tactic is not appreciated by the community. Let's move on, levy the penalty points, and get focused up on Frame 3 fellas. :aok
-
Bfoot1, not your fault...like I've said they should have brought up issues before or just wait until the end so the next setup you make you can incorporate that into the next one.
-
No need to apologize Bfoot1, and I think at this point Viper knows the tactic is not appreciated by the community. Let's move on, levy the penalty points, and get focused up on Frame 3 fellas. :aok
:aok
-
Bfoot, there is not much you could have done better with this setup. The fact that you knew to sub the B5N and not the TBM in place for the TBD tells me that you get it.
:salute
-
I'd like to say this about the setup for this month.
...
Do NOT apologize! You did a great job! Nothing is ever perfect, and this is all volunteer work. For critics of FSO and other events actions speak louder than words, and often these people will complain but never actually step up and deliver something better if at all!
Thank you for the setup, I am having fun (in one of those "rice paper" planes).
-
Don't apologize for Viper's attempt to totally game FSO. He obviously knew better and did it anyway.
-
What was really sad about this, he could have gotten the CV by sending the Betty's in on the water to do popup bombing while sacrificing his single engine bombers at alt. All the defenders were 15k and higher looking for a conventional level bomber force racing in at the last minute. I watched airjer get a cruiser with a box of Betty's that way once. And if they had hit it with even a single bomb, we would be in here toasting those guys for their balls and his ability as a leader to take advantage of our AH ADHD.
FSO has always had a good ride side and a garbage ride side. And grumbling variations by squads on not appreciating having to take one in the shorts for the sake of the spirit of FSO so we can keep the event alive three Fridays a month. Everyone knows if you are on the good ride side it's likely a night of free kills with very little effort because the enemy is under orders just like you, which limits their ability to gang hoard you. Who doesn't look forward to a night of that after the MA's gang hoarding?
Yes we would have slaughtered the bombers in a few minutes after they got a few bombs out, which they would have.
POTW takes it in the shorts for FSO when we get the garbage ride turn to help keep it alive since Waystin asked the squad to join him. What makes this CIC more special than the rest of us who take our turn knowing it's a one way trip? Hmmm...... "special" may say it all in today's climate.
-
He put his own crew in those bombers too. Presumably to prevent a squad like mine ignoring his order. Premeditated gaming and not in the spirit of FSO IMO.
-
Btw "landing bonus pts" was a player requested item that the FSO Team implemented. You guys asked for it. Just saying. ;)
-
Btw "landing bonus pts" was a player requested item that the FSO Team implemented. You guys asked for it. Just saying. ;)
So landing bonus points is a legitimate reason to avoid combat altogether?
-
It's an incentive to try and fly a little more like you would in actual combat and place value on the pilots.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Heck no it's an incentive to not just "throw away" your plane, that's all. Fight but rtb...unless you were Kamikaze...that was the idea.
-
I was kamikaze frame one, but some scumbag allied pilot shot my wing off as I was diving on the boat!! LOL
pull up wasn't an option!
-
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/84/8491c398f13707437cbb08acc49aa4c08e60282674955af34cacf7edc689dc7e.jpg)
Is it just me, or wasn't Viper on a soapbox this summer about culling the number of FSO targets to get MORE fighting in an area???
-
When it's obvious a group will take it in the shorts because of the rides. And that group is willing to show up in force and gut it out for the rest of us. Find some way to reward them for their sportsmanship even if it's only a big round of applause and thank you as a post from the Host's of this establishment. Even make up some signature stickers like "I took it like an FSO Hero!!" FSO has a lot of unsung hero's who care about FSO enough to saddle up and make the evening bright for others.
And have a big bucket of monster barff for the snowfalkes who can't man up. If SFO was really about score and winning, no fun people would show up.
I can attest over the years I've taken it a few times like an FSO hero, and in the face of all my good ride bad ride grumbling, I'm here for my fun friends.
Yall's establishment throws a good hoootinnanny... :salute :huh :O ;) :D