Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Grayarea on March 30, 2003, 04:10:21 PM
-
Hi all,
Please post your AARs along with any other comments I am sure you might have.
This frame was somewhat messed up with daylight saving causing problems.
Another issue that is sure to come up is the length of the frame. SquadOps are 2 hours long with no extension. Any planes not RTB'ed at the close of the frame are considered lost in action.
In this instance the Allied CO ordered some of his bomber force to use a route that meant they could not possibly RTB in the frame.
He knew the cost of this action, and it is a CO prerogative to make this kind of decision, if you like it represents a mission that was likely to cause severe casualties.
I think that the ability of the Co to make tactical decisions of this kind helps to keep SquadOps new and interesting.
-
why then is pyroman going to fix the logs to show they landed?
i have screenshot of it if you need.
-
Sorry for complaining about the extension during the event, but I have complained about this before. The TOD rules clearly state that all aircraft still in the air will be considered lost.
If the CO can not plan a route that allows the aircraft to RTB then it should be brought up before the event starts. Please do not change the rules at the last minute, the opposing side's plans are based on the fact that this is a 2 hour event.
We need to stick to the 2 hours, some of us have to work you know :-)
-
Re the time limit: I think the practise used in the recent scenario worked pretty well - 2 hours action followed by a 30 minute extension to land planes.
One other suggestion for this particular event in the future: Enemy buff formations even at high altitude would have been clearly visable from the ground throughout much of their route. IRL the LW fighter controllers would have been well aware of their progress even without radar. The fog of war certainly adds a fun element, but to have base flashing fully disabled was a bit too much IMO.
Overall I had a lot of fun though, especially in the final frame. 30K combat against p51s and p47s was quite a change from MA dweebery :) Was the initial fight against a 190 group directly over the buffs, or were they still some distance away? If the former, cloud hid them from us very effectively.
Allies for some excellent fights.
-
Let me clarify something here .. Pyroman and in fact all CMs do not have the ability to fix, edit, or delete logs.
What Pyroman was doing was taking down the names of those still flying so that he can bring up the issue to the Admin CM so that the Admin CM can look things over and decide if he should modify the scoring one way or another.
Setup CMs are only responsible for setting up the arena according to the instructions sent to them by the Admin CM. They also enforce the rules of the scenario and at times make judgement calls on the spot since based on issues during game play.
-
Originally posted by ghostdancer
Let me clarify something here .. Pyroman and in fact all CMs do not have the ability to fix, edit, or delete logs.
What Pyroman was doing was taking down the names of those still flying so that he can bring up the issue to the Admin CM so that the Admin CM can look things over and decide if he should modify the scoring one way or another.
Setup CMs are only responsible for setting up the arena according to the instructions sent to them by the Admin CM. They also enforce the rules of the scenario and at times make judgement calls on the spot since based on issues during game play.
TY for the explnation Ghst... all i saw was what was typed on blue CM text.
i truly respect you and thank you for all the work in the SEA you have done. <>
-
Okay Greyarea, thanks for assuming our route made RTB impossible.
The assigned targets in this frame were A33 and A30. We were told to take B26s from A52 to hit A33. B17s were tasked to the closer target, A30.
so our flight was from 3 12 to 17, 10
That's over 350 miles. The nearest friendly base to A33 is 275 miles away. 625 miles. We flew 60 miles 135 then 090 to target, and 270 back to the nearest base. Cruising at 12k, we had 280 mph TAS. We flew straight to the target and straight under the major furball between allied and axis forces. We flew straight back.
Even if we had taken off from the very tip of england, there's no way we would have made it to the target and back in the 2 hours. I don't know whether the CM or the CO is responsible for A52, but even if the CO had the choice of a closer field, the CM had no business allowing bomber ops from a field so far from the target.
The b26 is a fast bomber, but it is not a jet.
I also find it highly unprofessional that someone in your position would immediately assign the blame to a commander making poor decisions. Yes, I've encountered cases in the past where someone makes bomber routes that do not take into account time considerations. Yes, the allied commander should have done some timings and realized that this mission design was screwed. But AFAIK the Allied CO is new to SquadOps, and ultimately, the responsibility for poor design falls not his shoulders.
This is the second week in a row the objectives given to the allies in squadops have had problems. At least this time I didn't wake up to find that in addition to pointing out an error -- which is his responsibility -- , the CM had presumed but to change the Allied CO's orders -- which is not. In that case, fortunately, I was able to sort it out without sending spitfires on a deep escort mission.
Finally, I don't like to see CM referees having to face decisions such as this (extend the frame) while the frame is in progress. But that is why they're there: ultimately, they have to make the thing work. And contrary to what was claimed today, they should have final say on the rules and the design. Greyarea set the frame up; Pyroman refereed it. Pyro can say "I'm not going to do this"; but "Blame Greyarea" or whoever is not an option.
--
I'm not too upset about this. Personally, I don't expect much, and I don't check the scores. But I would like to see things like squadops run in a professional manner.
--
oh and vladd, yeah, the B26s wer ein a tight formation in the clouds
we'll get you a screenshot
-
hi
AAR first
roster
band
dinger
lucull
krotki
lolo
ramzey
Frame start with 1 hour delay, from reason time change in europe
We flew as order say and straigh painted route. When we enter france we spot layer clouds and we hide inside. At 12k and fly inside 40 miles:). We saw fight far our 6 when high cover was engaged by enemy, but during whole 2,5 hour flight not saw any cons.
Just before trg we spot secound layer clouds , just over trg. We descending alt and all hit target. Complete flat them /all hangars down, fuels, amno/ Amazing we hit!!!/ after that we head west and fly back.
No losses, trg destroyed , all safe land in England
Ty fighters for keep enemy away from us
ramzey
-
In regards to their being a time extension in Squad Ops. Every setup CM is allowed to extend the time of a frame or reduce it based on situations that arise in the Squad Ops.
Most of the time what happens is that both sides decide to call it because both are heading home and no longer fighting and there is not enough for another round. So everyone is told to go home and logs close when everyone landed.
There has been cases where logs are left open up to 15 minutes longer than official frame end do to situations in the frame.
Pyroman made the call to have the logs go another 15 minutes. He will bring up the reason why to myself and Grayarea. If Grayarea disagrees then its a simple matter of looking at the raw logs and counting everyone in those last 15 minutes as lost.
Anyone who was able to land in those last 15 minutes was close to their home bases to begin with and not under threat by enemy forces. Pyroman did it as courtesy to those players who had spent hours in the air and were within sight of getting home and landing. As stated they can still be counted as loss if Grayarea decides so.
But to be able to discuss the matter info needs to be recorded and then a decision can be made. If no info recorded sort of hard to discuss.
-
Nobody should be blaming anybody, we just need to make sure it does not happen in future. We need to make sure that we are all working to the same rules to make a reasonably even and fun event.
Nobody should be getting too upset about this, this is an improvement process.
-
Originally posted by ghostdancer
In regards to their being a time extension in Squad Ops. Every setup CM is allowed to extend the time of a frame or reduce it based on situations that arise in the Squad Ops.
If this is so please amend the rules page:
http://events.simladder.com/tod_rules_sat.php
Frames will last 2 hours. After 2 hours logs will be closed and the arena reset. Aircraft will be considered lost if they have not landed and exited
-
personnaly I wish these long ranged frames would be extended as necessary.
In this particular frame, we had B-26s going to no more then 17k at full throttle, directly from their launching fields to target and back.
it took them almost 3 hours to complete the round trip.
I don't have a problem with that as long as we extend the frame as necessary.
-
First off, no one said this was a blaming game. All I said is that I'm the Setup CM not the Admin CM. If you have a problem with how it's ran to leave a post on the BBS.
Yes I did say that Grayarea was the Admin CM.
Now with that being said, I said I was the Setup CM, and for now on I'm only going to say it once.
People make mistakes, and I hope you guys understand that. I'm not saying you were unruley in the frame because you weren't but did also didn't let dead dogs lie either.
So, mistakes are going to be made. DO NOT turn this around like I"m against Grayarea because I"m not. I just love how people put words in your mouth. We are a team, we just didn't have the communication this week like we try to have.
Bare with us, I'm new and not use to working with him yet. It will get better I promise :)
-
Reading GreyArea's post again I would like to say that I strongly disagree with the notion that if aircraft are overdue past the 2 hr frame limit they would be counted as dead.
This for two reasons:
1. Specificaly for this frame, it was impossible. Like I said in my previous post, the 308 Sqn B-26s took a direct route to the target at 17k and at top speed, and still it took them 3 hrs to make the round trip.
2. Limiting us to 2 hour frames on long ranged buff missions forces us to put all the forces on a direct path to the target. With no capability for implementing some deciept tactics, this is like lining us up like sheep into the slaughter house.
What I would suggest is implementing an airborne launch at cruise speed, so we don't lose our formations like we do in the Germany terrain.
In my personal opinion, I don't have a problem with a time limit, but 2 hours is impractical. I would like to have these events extended to 3 hours, I don't think its too much time.
-
AndyH,
Fine I will have the rules also publically state that setup CM's have the authority to extend a frame or end a frame earlier based on their judgement and the circumstances/situations within the frame.
Also realize that the arena is not always reset after an event so that the Admin CM can determine BDA afterwards.
I will have Flossy look things over and we will modify the rules to reflect the current reality of the event. Which is to say the rules on guests are outdated, that we now do have a log parser, etc.
However, realize that all setup CMs have to be flexible and make on the spot calls depending on their judgement of the situation at the time. For these calls they have to answer first to the Admin CM, then to me as team Lead.
-
from dinger
oh and vladd, yeah, the B26s wer ein a tight formation in the clouds
as 1 of the escorting p51's of 308's b26's i had them below me for all but a short time they where in cloud and yes they kept a nice tight formation.
and wtg on that field 308
salute from 332viking squad ;)
-
easy guys
rules need som improvments.
Follow word by word rules writed on web page we go nowhere.
Look like Flossy resolve this problem over 6 months ago.
One tod frame we have very long flight on spitfires and lancesters
After frame time end flossy call logs closed beucose fight was end.
And give us 2 option u can exit now or fly home and land. Both cases your exit was counted as landing safe.
Flossy was so kinde and patience, she give time to return and wait till all return. She chk before all fights was end and all rtb.
/other case was nobody tould me it was night frame till frame start;)/
So i not see problem here. Only patience of setup CM and admin CM. Thats all.
Last frame was long and bored for som ppls who not care about relity of frames. That other case. Think guys what fun u looking for.
Simulation game or arcade?
Score kills are not importand for me personal. Most importand was flying with my squadies and fun "we cheat virtual death again". If we start together and fly so long time i expect settings give us back home. Not kick us in the middle of return trip.
If for somone fun like this are not importand, im sorry.
Follow rules and direcives step by step not mean u cant be elastic and give us fun, what we like.
I was so proud, my squadron fly untouched whole last frame, make succesfull bombrun and even not loose any drone. Som of my squadies stay longer only to land together , even if som wifes stand over them:)
pls correct me if not this kinde of fun u looking for
ramzey
-
okay:
I stand corrected: Pyroman was only the Setup CM. I'm sorry for suggesting he was the Admin CM. In that case, of course, I would suggest that the Admin CM be present to make the calls. During the mission, whoever's in blue in the arena is the boss.
Viff's orders clearly do make it impossible for the B17s to get to their target on time. But even if they'd flown directly to the target (like we did) they still couldn't make a round trip in three hours.
I had great fun in the mission. We flew at 17k for speed until we spotted a cloud bank. We descended and flew _tight_ in the clouds.
As we were IFR SW of A28, our sweep fighters - the 56th FG, called a high alt engagement 5 mles in front of us. We poured on the last two inches of manifold pressure and watched from our top turrets as a bunch of high dots ran into our high six cover, and the engagement swirled. They fought for quite a while, and we could only hope we wouldn't be found. Flaming planes dropped down behind us. Then we burst out of the clouds to clear skies. Ddriag maintained his escort. A high Me262 flew overhead, but didn't seem to notice us.
We all dropped on the target, not near it. I put my bombs in band's craters.
Left turn to 270 and an uneventful flight home. Most of our escorts went and picked up the B-17s coming in.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
Okay Greyarea, thanks for assuming our route made RTB impossible.
As the Admin CM, I saw the orders and knew that the B17 could not make it RTB.
I hoped that the B26 would RTB ok.
-
Fine I will have the rules also publically state that setup CM's have the authority to extend a frame or end a frame earlier based on their judgement and the circumstances/situations within the frame.
Perhaps I haven't been following this as closely as I should, but here is what happened to me as a 109 pilot...
The first "15 minute to land" message was given and confirmed. I lost all my altitude and was very close to landing.
Then I hear that that the frame is going to be extended by 15 minutes. There was no point in my trying to regain alt to engage. .
Of course, if I hadn't followed the original "15 minute to land" message I could have had the chance to engage. This must have happened to others too.
Seems like we are being penalised for following the rules... and then the rules are changed at a point where we have no opportunity of taking advantage of the extra time
If CM's (or anyone else) are allowed to do that kind of thing very often then it really messes things up.
DStar
The Wings of Death
-
Originally posted by DarkStarStv
Of course, if I hadn't followed the original "15 minute to land" message I could have had the chance to engage. This must have happened to others too.
DStar, as I understand it, the only reason the frame was extended was to allow the Allied buffs to land (they had much further to go!) - it was not an extra 15 minutes to get more kills in.... :)
-
Hi Flos.
So are you saying that the extra 15 minutes was to give one side a chance to get more points by landing?
But no chance of the other side getting more points?
If the Allied buffs needed longer (and I don't think 15 minutes was enough for them to make it home anyway), then I suggest that this "scenario" is not suitable to be repeated in its current form.
If these "snapshot-like" events last much longer than 2 hours (plus being there 30 mins in advance and debrief etc) then it is getting a bit too long for me. Dont know how others feel.
Many"snapshot-like" events have actually managed 2 runs in the 2 hours.
I like long buff missions (as a buff and as a "hunter"). Probably the only way to do it in a 2 hour time frame is with the "quickstart" approach. Seemed to work quite well in a recent event, (with a little bit of practice :)
-
Not more points by landing , but fly whole mission from start to land. For som ppls its much more importand them 1 hour more spend on SEA.
Somtimes back home on domaged buff is a core of fun.
"Quick" starts are not real, same like closing logs for pilots who have 100 mils home and many fuel for rtb
ramzey
-
If I wanted to fly a "snapshot-like" event, i would go fly a snapshot or CAP.
Way I see it is that the SquadOps events are much more complex, and should not be limited by a hard 2 hr deadline, but extended as necessary to allow people to rtb.
Now I do agree that a certain time frame needs to be kept, or some people might take it too far. I planned for the buffs to arrive on the target at 90 minutes from frame start, next scenario somebody else CO'ing will plan for the buffs to arrive after 3 hours... so a limit needs to be placed.
What I would suggest is that future scenario orders for CO's include a mandatory "Time On Target" (ToT) objective, i.e. the primary/secondary targets must be hit by XX:XX into the frame.
-
Originally posted by ViFF
What I would suggest is that future scenario orders for CO's include a mandatory "Time On Target" (ToT) objective, i.e. the primary/secondary targets must be hit by XX:XX into the frame.
This is the best suggestion I have heard to sort out this recurring problem, if the CO thinks that it is not possible then he can bring it up before the event.
At least we will all be working to the same rules, and not leave the CM with a difficult decision. I would not like the squad ops to turn into an open ended event on Sunday night, not when I need to be up at 5:30 am.
If a frame needs to be planned for more than 2 hours we need to know before it starts, then we can make a decision before we commit.
-
Originally posted by DarkStarStv
So are you saying that the extra 15 minutes was to give one side a chance to get more points by landing?
But no chance of the other side getting more points?
Unless the orders stated there would be points awarded for landing, I don't think this applies? As far as I am aware, the extra time was simply so that the bombers could land. However, this issue is under discussion and is something we will be looking at closely over the next few days.If these "snapshot-like" events last much longer than 2 hours (plus being there 30 mins in advance and debrief etc) then it is getting a bit too long for me.
You can't really compare SquadOps with Snapshots - they are two totally different events! :) SquadOps are generally more complicated due to the squad-based nature of the event. Snapshots tend to be simpler due to being mainly walkon events, with no pre-prepared orders.Probably the only way to do it in a 2 hour time frame is with the "quickstart" approach. Seemed to work quite well in a recent event, (with a little bit of practice :)
Agreed, and they are used frequently for SquadOps; however, we are currently limited to one(?) terrain with this option at the moment, so it is not always possible.
Anyway, we do welcome your comments and this issue is being looked at seriously at the moment to see if we can find a way which is acceptable to both sides for future SquadOps. :)
-
Fair enough. As admin CM you could *hope* the B26s would make it back. You could also hope no children get bombed in Iraq.
but may I ask again, as admin CM and the supreme referee for this event, where were you? We don't start events without a commander for each side. Why is it that when it's clear the rules are screwed up and we need someone with authority, the only response in blue we get is "I'm not the Admin CM". Sort it out folks.
And whoever is the design CM screwed up. If you're making a bombing scenario, you want to ensure that a formation (and not just a single ship at full throttle) flying direct to the target can make the round trip well under the alotted time. If that round trip is over the alotted time, like it was for all bombers yesterday (go ahead and try it. 2.5 hours for the b26s and something like 3 hours for the b17s), you get a screwed up situation. If oyu make the round trip exactly the alotted time, the game becomes "let's see if the allied CO can figure out the one way in which this mission is possible."
I know the CMs are human and I hold them to unfair expectations (viz. some veneer of professionalism), but a well crafted and executed scenario is neither an easy nor a trivial matter. Do it right, and the praise is never enough. Do it wrong, and we end up fighting the CMs more than each other. And I'm sick of fighting CMs.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
Fair enough. As admin CM you could *hope* the B26s would make it back. You could also hope no children get bombed in Iraq.
Gray: There was closer bases than the one you used.
but may I ask again, as admin CM and the supreme referee for this event, where were you? We don't start events without a commander for each side. Why is it that when it's clear the rules are screwed up and we need someone with authority, the only response in blue we get is "I'm not the Admin CM". Sort it out folks.
Gray: in a 190d9 nobody contacted me. Also the Admin CM does not have to be there. I for one have to drive 180 miles every Sunday night straight after SquadOps to be in the right place for work on Monday, some times I have to leave early and cannot make the frame at all, yesterday I was there.
And whoever is the design CM screwed up. If you're making a bombing scenario, you want to ensure that a formation (and not just a single ship at full throttle) flying direct to the target can make the round trip well under the alotted time. If that round trip is over the alotted time, like it was for all bombers yesterday (go ahead and try it. 2.5 hours for the b26s and something like 3 hours for the b17s), you get a screwed up situation. If oyu make the round trip exactly the alotted time, the game becomes "let's see if the allied CO can figure out the one way in which this mission is possible."
Gray: I knew from the first moment not all bombers would make it back. That was my design decision in order to use another part of the map and allow hi-alt fighters.
I know the CMs are human and I hold them to unfair expectations (viz. some veneer of professionalism), but a well crafted and executed scenario is neither an easy nor a trivial matter. Do it right, and the praise is never enough. Do it wrong, and we end up fighting the CMs more than each other. And I'm sick of fighting CMs.
Gray: It gets progressivly harder to bring in new elements to SquadOps, some work, some do not.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
but may I ask again, as admin CM and the supreme referee for this event, where were you?
whoever is the design CM screwed up.
Are you directing that question at me? I can only presume so, as you seem to think the Admin CM and the "design CM" are two different people. To answer your question, if this is the case..... I am not the Admin CM and there was absolutely no requirement for me to be present at the SquadOp. The Admin CM is the "design CM", and I believe he (Grayarea) was there for the whole frame as a participant, having done his part before the frame started.
However, I would just like to say that if there are any problems during a frame the Special Events Arena is not the place to discuss it. Bringing any issues to this forum where they can be discussed amicably is far better than complaining to the Setup CM who is doing his best to keep the peace. The Setup CM does not write the event, but sets up the arena according to the wishes of the Admin CM, who does. He is there to host - answer some general questions, deal with discos and generally keep things running smoothly..... he is not there to be bombarded with complaints or disagreements about the design of the event.
-
Just to add another twist, dont forget if the bombers cannot make the trip in time then same applies to the escorts.
-
some clarifications:
"Admin" and "Design" are two separate functions. They can be filled by the same person (although many would argue that they should not), but it is not necessary. Maybe I misunderstand. If the "admin" person has supreme authority, he should be making the calls. I haven't seen many events where a CM was not called upon to issue a judgment.
I had no idea that referees could also participate, refuse to make decisions when they were called upon to do so, or that they could leave before the frame was done. Since the CMs are all volunteers and are not being reimbursed in any way whatsoever, I'll accept this as policies befitting the amateur "pick up" style of play being encouraged. I shouldn't expect you guys to take this seriously. After all the point is for the CMs to have fun, and forget the rules. This isn't a serious enough event to merit a full-time referee. If the scenario has serious problems, and all the guy in blue can do is appeal to some other guy in blue who's too busy playing to referee, we should just come back to the BBS and badmouth the CMs like we always do.
As I pointed out above, even if all bombers were flying out of A40, there was no way we could make the round trip in the alotted time. I have no problem with rules extending the time for RTB, or changing the RTB conditions so that, say being past a certain line counts, but I don't particularly like being lost before we roll, or forcing the bomber pilots to fly an absolutely predictable route to have a *hope* of returning.
As for novelty: the war's been over for sixty years. We don't ask for "new" things; we ask for entertaining missions. This is like soccer, not a soap opera. A team sport has its own rewards, and doesn't need new twists and complications.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
some clarifications:
"Admin" and "Design" are two separate functions.
As far as the CM team is concerned, there are Admin CMs and Setup CMs in the SquadOps team. Admin CMs design the SquadOp, deciding which terrain should be used, which planes/fields, etc and set the targets. It is the Admin CMs who pass the orders for each frame to the Side COs, and to the Setup CM so that he can set up the arena as required.
If, during a frame, there are issues and the Admin CM is present (preferred but not essential), any questions can be directed to him for any rulings to be made; otherwise, if the Admin CM is not present, any issues should be brought to the forum, or by email to him and/or myself and Ghostdancer (SquadOps Team Leader). I had no idea that referees could also participate, refuse to make decisions when they were called upon to do so, or that they could leave before the frame was done.
Not sure what you mean by referees? The Admin CMs can take part if they wish, as their work is already done, but are not obliged to do so, or even to be present. The Setup CM is also the host and is not allowed to fly, though we do allow them to gun after the first 30 minutes have passed (when discos are no longer allowed to reup, so the bulk of the work is done). Which person are you referring to? Since the CMs are all volunteers and are not being reimbursed in any way whatsoever, I'll accept this as policies befitting the amateur "pick up" style of play being encouraged. I shouldn't expect you guys to take this seriously. After all the point is for the CMs to have fun, and forget the rules. This isn't a serious enough event to merit a full-time referee. If the scenario has serious problems, and all the guy in blue can do is appeal to some other guy in blue who's too busy playing to referee, we should just come back to the BBS and badmouth the CMs like we always do.
As a matter of fact we do take our jobs seriously, and I resent accusations that we do not. We want to create events that are fun for the players and a lot of hard work goes into doing just that - especially in the SquadOps, but also in our other events. I do discourage having too many CMs typing in blue during an event, as I appreciate this can cause confusion..... only the Setup CM should normally type in blue - all other CMs present should use channel 1. If I have to become involved, I will tend to use the yellow CM channel to at least keep any confusion to a minimum.I don't particularly like being lost before we roll, or forcing the bomber pilots to fly an absolutely predictable route to have a *hope* of returning.
I agree that is not an ideal way to run a bombing mission, but the issue of not having time to RTB is being discussed and we will hopefully have a new policy in place soon for these sorts of occasions.As for novelty: the war's been over for sixty years. We don't ask for "new" things; we ask for entertaining missions. This is like soccer, not a soap opera. A team sport has its own rewards, and doesn't need new twists and complications.
That is your opinion, to which you are entitled. However, some players are looking for something different, and I don't see any harm in events were new things are tried - indeed, I would encourage them.
-
Let my try to be a little less polemic.
It seems there are two issues here:
1) I don't fully understand the way the CM duties are divvied up.
2) There was a failure in the system on Sunday.
I've been using these two points to argue that the way they're divvied up right now is less than satisfactory.
There are also two sub-issues:
3) The design for Sunday's scenario was less than optimal, particularly with reference to the bomber route. A good design allows a chance for "success". An impossible mission (like what we had) doesn't allow for success. Even if I conceded that it was possible for a squad of B26s to fly NOE from A40 to A33, drop bombs and return in two hours (which I will not), I would still argue that issuing rules enabling "impossible" fields is just as bad.
4) general design principles for bombers in scenarios (bombers want to fly, have some tension, see some enemy planes, bomb, return home safely some of the time, and land), and for scenarios in general.
I'll leave 3 and 4 for some other post. I'm happy to talk about them
I've been arguing from my understanding of how CM duties should be divided. Feel free to disagree with me on any point, but here's how I see it.
There are four times in scenarios that call for an arbitrary controlling authority (CM), they are:
A) Writing the scenario rules (I've referred to this as the "Design CM")
B) Preparing the arena, balancing the sides and implementing the environment (what I've seen as "Setup CM")
C) Enforcing and interpreting the rules during the scenario (this is what I thought you meant by "Admin CM")
D) Summarizing the event and scoring it.
At each of these times, there can (and often are) be more than one CM, but the relationship is usually hierarchical. There is always one person with absolute authority. Usually this works in the same way as the CO/XO model: one commands and one controls. For example, in A), someone can draw up the broad lines (say B17s and B26s with P51s aga inst Me262s and 163s), and someone else work on the details (these bases). Or in B), there may be one CM per side, and an overall administrator.k
The same person often fills many of these roles. In fact, the same overall authority should be in C) and D): the person who made the calls on the field should score it. Some of these roles don't work too well together. As we've seen time and again, it requires a lot of maturity to be overall CM in A) and C); people seem to identify themselves too much with their work and discard the flexibility necessary to make their work work.
Now, I'm not sure what happened on Sunday, but I think we can get there:
First, if there are more than one CM, in speaking to the sides or individuals, they must speak with a unified voice. That means they need to be in communication with each other. While each may have a sphere of responsibility, if they're speaking in blue, they speak with the authority of all the CMs.
Second, someone with supreme authority must be present for the whole frame, and must not participate in any other way. I'm sorry. This is common sense. You can have subordinate CMs flying on sides, but not the head honcho.
Third, at each of the times, there must be something with absolute authority. I have never seen any scenario setup or rules that were perfect. Last week, it was only by sheer luck that a serious typographical error in the rules was spotted before the scenario started (and sides would have been playing with different sets of rules). Had this gone through, whoever was running C) would have to do some fancy footwork. This week, the design had rules that made it absolutely impossible for any bombers to return home without being counted as lost, and – as far as any of us in the field knew – made no provision for this necessity. In these cases, someone has to be available and answerable during the frame to compensate for these defects and to make a decision. After the decision is made, then we can go and squeak all we want on the boards. But what I found was, thirty minutes into the mission, there was nobody with such authority.
Fourth (and this is beside the point), the CM is a referee, and should never presume to usurp the authority of the side CO. If a side CO cc's the CM with the orders, and the CM sees an error in the rules, or if the CM sees that the mission as planned is grossly inadequate (e.g., a rookie CO has given bombers an impossible route to fly in the given time), the CM can and probably should send a message to the CO. The CM should not CC all commanders and change the orders.
---
Sorry: I wrote this while you posted. The point boils down to: whoever writes in blue has to have the authority to interpret rules, and to compensate for design flaws, especially with untested stuff. I'm confident that person won't go "out of bounds", but don't pass it to the designer (as you stated, the "Admin CM's" job is done). Make the call, and we can hash it over later.
-
Let me clarify the roles of CMs. There are two roles.
Admin CM
- Designs Event. This entails picking the time frame, the terrain, the plane set (decides which planes to substitute if necessary), the victory conditions, and creation of any special rules.
- Makes sure that all squads have confirmed for an event and have confirmed their squad committment levels. Although I as team leading have taken over the responsibility for both Friday and Sunday now.
- Divies up the squads into roughly equal sides. Doesn't always has to be equal but roughly tries to make sure that both sides have a shot of winning.
- Sends out orders/objectives/targets to the CiC of both side.
- Makes the setup CM aware of all the setup details and special rules.
Setup CM
- Creates the tables for the frame. This means he activates bases, setups what planes can up from what base, setups fuel burn rate, setups radar settings, icon range, weather, etc. The setup CM basically sets up all the actual game parameters for the event that the Admin CM requested.
- Setup CM makes sure that everyone is in a squad and ejects those not in a squad.
- Setup CM deals with reup issues do to disconnects after 15 minutes into the frame and before the 30 minute cut off.
- Setup CM deals with any in game problems that happens and tries to fix them if possible through the game tools we have.
- Setup CM make judgement calls .. basically they are referees and have to make the game call when a situation arises. Keep in mind that most setup CM's don't want to deviate too far from frame design that has been given them. However, setup CM's can alter a frame to compensate for things that they think are way out of wack. In my case I did it in a Pacific Frame where the fuel rate was set to high and both sides were running out of fuel. So I dropped it from 1.5 to 0.75 because neither side would have found each other to fight in time and neither side would have enjoyed flying for 1 hour to just fall out of the air.
In Pyroman's case he decided to let the logs run a bit longer so that bombers that were close to England could actually land, be recorded as a landing and then sort things out later instead of trying to reconstruct information that was not recorded.
As pointed out he did then ask for other people to tell him who was up so that he could pass that information along that a large percentage of the allied planes were still in the air at the end of a frame.
[/list]
Up to the actual game time the Admin CM is god. During the game time the setup CM is god. However, if the setup CM throws out or rewrites completely the Admin CM's stuff .. well he better have a good reason for doing so because if he doesn't the Admin CM will raise hell. Just like you not liking somebody coming in and changing the CiC's orders that have been issued.
-
I had no idea that referees could also participate, refuse to make decisions when they were called upon to do so, or that they could leave before the frame was done. Since the CMs are all volunteers and are not being reimbursed in any way whatsoever, I'll accept this as policies befitting the amateur "pick up" style of play being encouraged. I shouldn't expect you guys to take this seriously. After all the point is for the CMs to have fun, and forget the rules. This isn't a serious enough event to merit a full-time referee. If the scenario has serious problems, and all the guy in blue can do is appeal to some other guy in blue who's too busy playing to referee, we should just come back to the BBS and badmouth the CMs like we always do.
You can be polemic, but try to be less opprobrious.
You have raised some good points as others have, but you are also really insulting some folks who are just trying to provide the community with quality events. I will not address some of the errors that were made with this particular Sunday Squad Operations, but I will address the issue of the roles of Admin and Setup CM.
Tell you what. I will step down as Admin CM and train you to take my place. I will also train you to be the Setup CM and you can run some Squad Operations. Do that for 6 months, which is only 3 Squad Operations and then tell me again you think it should be ran by one person. And no, I am not kidding.
You have no idea of the work involved. None.
-
Thanks Ghostdancer, that's exactly the way it should be.
And Daddog, I never said that we only needed one CM; quite the contrary. What I did say, is that there should be one person in charge of the event. The buck has got to stop somewhere, and that somewhere has to be someone in the arena at the time of the event.
What happened on Sunday (and I'm sorry you weren't there to witness it), was that there was one guy running it. There were problems with the rules, undoubtedly complicated by the orders. 30 minutes into the frame, I contacted the "setup CM", and informed him that nobody on the allied side was going to be RTBing within the alotted two hours, and that he should be prepared to be flexible. The response I got was "Grayarea is the Admin CM; I'm only the Setup CM; there's nothing I can do about it". Read this thread -- there's a lot of confusion over who was in charge in the scenario. And not all of the confused people are yours truly. The argument I was getting was that the CM with referee authority over the event was flying a Dora. Now that Ghostdancer has clarified that, in fact, that was not the case, the rest is administrative.
Nor do I doubt that it takes a lot of work to CM in any capacity. Take for example, scenario design. A side CO has to calculate flight times, escort RVs, CAPs, refueling patterns and chain of command for only one plan. A CM has to do that for several plans, for both sides of the event. If a side CO messes up, the individual squad leaders have enough leeway to somehow avoid a total disaster. If a CM screws up, well it gets ugly.
Finally let me repeat that I enjoyed the frame on Sunday. I was one of the last allowed to RTB. (then the CM inadvertently loaded the default tables and gave England to the Axis) I don't look at or care about the scores. There was just a bit of confusion on the matter, and I felt the need to press until someone cleared up the issue.
Thank you
-
Not more points by landing , but fly whole mission from start to land. For som ppls its much more importand them 1 hour more spend on SEA.
Sometimes back home on domaged buff is a core of fun.
"Quick" starts are not real, same like closing logs for pilots who have 100 mils home and many fuel for rtb
ramzey
If there were no additional points for landing (or saving of negative points) then I have no problem with extending a frame for as many hours as people want :)
Clearly, "Quick" starts are not real. However, after the first minute or so then things are back to normality. And they do offer the possibility of more varied mid and end games that can be completed in about 2 hours.
Personally, any event that approaches an overall time of 3 hours or more (including turn up 30 mins before etc) is not something that appeals to me on a weekly basis.
-
Rather than making new rules and such, wouldn't it be just so much more sensible to make sure future targets are not so far away? Two hours is a long time to fly, and should surely be enough time to do what is required.
-
Well it takes 75 minutes (1 hr+15 min) for a fully loaded B-17G formation to climb to 25k, and then another 20 minutes for it to accelerate to cruising speed (270 mph true airspeed). So for that matter placing the targets closer to the front won't help much when B-17s are included in the frame.
-
Wow this thread got sorta ugly.
When running events you need to use the K.I.S.S method. Having 4 CM's as you suggested Dinger (if I read it correctly) is definately not using that method. That's too many chiefs and not enough Indians. That's just going to make more problems and you would be right back in here screaming about it offering some other suggestion.
With all due respect, unless you are a CM and know what it's like DOING the job and have some experience in it, I don't believe it's your place to tell us how to do ours.
I don't think you would like me going to your place of employment and making a big stink because I thought you made a mistake and offered suggestions on how to fix your problem when I have no clue what your job entails.
I'm not trying to offend you, but maybe you should go back and read what you wrote. I was very insulted. I don't appreciate some of your comments.
I did what I thought was best. I first went to Flossy about starting the frame late and she agreed that was the best idea. Then I went to GhstDncr about extending the frame and the logs. I just didn't make a shoot at the hip decision.
Everyone's a critic.
You know what President Lincohn said. "You can please some of the people some of the time, most of the people most of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time". I went with the majority on my decision. Just a select few have major issues with it.
Yes I did tell you that it was Grayarea's place to make changes not mine. I sure wasn't trying to pass the buck. I was telling you what my limitations were. For you to say Grayarea and I were pitting against each other is ridiculous. Don't assume things. Grayarea and I have a very good working relationship, but things go awry at times.
I could go on, but I fear I'd be wasting my time.
Dinger you're a good person and I don't want to hamper my relationship with you and keep it professional, but put yourself in my shoes and read what you wrote. Not very professional throwing out accusations. :)
-
@Pyroman
are u know proverb about messenger?
ramzey
-
When CMs make mistakes, players have two choices:
1. Say nothing, and endure the same mistakes being repeated over and over. Bad for squad morale, bad for the events.
2. Say something, and hope it gets fixed. Preferably in private.
The private option is nice, but when CMs and opposing players make false claims in an open forum, which don't reflect well on frame participants, it's pretty hard to hold one's tongue. So sometimes a polite public response is appropriate.
In the future I will try to make sure my guys keep this stuff private though.
*Edit* removed some stuff that didn't really serve any purpose.
-
Funked I agree with your comments. People should speak up when they don't agree with something. You are absolutely correct. I don't think they should keep it in private.
Now with that being said, pointing out mistakes is one thing making accusations is another. No person no matter what thier job is should have to deal with that.
Dinger started off making some great points, but it turned into saying Grayarea and I are undermining each other. Now I know he didn't say that in so many words, but it's obvious that's what he meant.
I'm not arguing with what your saying. Your post was well put and to the point and I respect that
I just don't want you to think I'm getting on you with this post because I"m not. Just stating what I observed with his post. :)
Sorry if I sounded like I was whining with my last post. I was a little heated after I read Dinger's post. I have no beefs with Dinger what's so ever. He's a good guy and really cracks me up during Squad Ops. I just want to let people know where I"m coming from that's all. :)
-
Pyroman
I appreciate the work you guys do.
I can understand why you might "get your back up" over player comments. I can't do your job, because I don't have that kind of self control, as has been demonstrated in past scenarios.
Thank you for tolerating us "back-seat-drivers".
-
Actually funkedup the players have every right to squeak and bring up things that they are believed are mistakes or unfair. However, we asked them, and Pyroman did, to post it in the BBS. Most of the time giving the setup CM a hard time in an event is pointless because he simply can not do anything about it.
The main thing problem that really happened is that people expressed they were upset. Fine, it was acknowledge by Pyroman during the event. He told them to post it in the BBS so that Flossy, myself, and Grayarea could see it and their logic. Several people continue to rip into him. He told them again fine that he couldn't do anything about it (by this mean major changes even though he didn't say that) and to post in the BBS. Same people and others then ripped into him again.
As you stated funkedup the way to handle this is to express your concern either on open channel or privately and then post on the BBS or email myself (ghostdancer@hitechcreations.com) or flossy (flossy@hitechcreations.com) if you are really upset.
What I am not happy about is the lack of civility I saw by several people in the event toward the end. Which carried over to some extent onto the BBS.
I understand that the allied complaint about not being able to get to target and home in the time alotment. And I understand the LW arguement that hey don't change the rules on us at the very end when are whole strategy was based on killing and tying up allied bombers to end frame so they don't count as landings.
Both have valid points that are being looked into and lessons will be applied for the next design.
If the mistakes were politely pointed out there would never had been a problem. If the mistakes were posted on the BBS there would not have been a problem. Where everything stems from is that mistakes were not politely pointed out in the last 30 minutes of the event but instead the setup CM was castigated by several people. That bled over to this board.
-
As you stated funkedup the way to handle this is to express your concern either on open channel or privately and then post on the BBS or email myself (ghostdancer@hitechcreations.com) or flossy (flossy@hitechcreations.com) if you are really upset.
Yep. I will try hard to make sure my guys stick to that.
What I am not happy about is the lack of civility I saw by several people in the event toward the end.
For a while, the CMs had a policy of ejecting guys like that, which I support.
I don't let my guys do that, and if they do it when I am not there, I need to know about it at funkedup at raf303 dot org.
-
Sorry pyroman;
the point of that little logical exercise was that, in the mudslinging, I felt my point, and the points of others was getting lost in a confusion over terms (a setup CM that administrates the frame; an admin CM that doesn't).
The model isn't "4 CMs", but rather 4 different times for cming. If you look up there, you'll see I state:
The same person often fills many of these roles.
And if you look at what Ghostdancer's division is, it effectively assigns duties A and D to the "Admin CM" and B and C to the "Setup CM".
-
Dinger read our Wing Command forum please before any further posts.
-
funkedup actually the CMs still have a policy of ejecting people for behavior like that or muting them. However, it all comes down to the individual CM. Some of us our more strict and no nonsense than others.
Pyroman would have been in his rights to mute or eject the ones that really got on his case. He tried to reason with them and to direct them to the BBS, etc.
My gut feeling is that next time he will be less lenient, which is a shame.
-
I am probably out of line jumping in here this late and making any type of comment, but I am gonna do it anyway.
It seems to me that this whole ordeal springs from squads being assigned targets that were way too far away from the starting point. As a frame CO, when you are given your assignments, if you can see that they are impossible, why not go back to the Admin guy and tell him so. Maybe the COs being chosen arent looking at their objectives ahead of time to see if they are doable. I am sure that had this been brought to Gremlin's attention, he would have been able to adjust the targets accordingly. So, some of the blame here has to lie with the side COs.
As far as pinning down the Setup guy with questions and such about whats going on....that just dont fly with me. Many times, I have no idea what the objectives are for each side when I do setup. In fact, I dont want to know. Its just better that way for me. So if anyone has a problem with the event design, I have no problem telling them to ask somebody else. I am just the guy with the keys to the arena. I come in and turn on the lights and set it up and I close it up and turn off the lights afterwards.
And just me personally, when I tell you that there are 15 mins left and its time to RTB....you damn well better start doing so. I dont get paid overtime to hold the logs open for folks who dont understand what a 2 hour event is. But thats just me.
-
You're kidding right ? cause otherwise I think what you are saying is very inflamatory, and irresponsible.
Dumping the responsibility of recognising an incorrect design on the CO's is bull****.
The CM organisation doesn't have a system in place for "quality control" of the designs it creates.
The orders I recieved were so cut & dry (i.e. here are your targets, heres where you launch from, heres what a/c you use -good luck!) that I needed to get in touch twice with the design CM to understand what was going on other then the few dry facts I was given.
When something goes wrong you just can't dump it on the CO's, thats bad PR. Keep doing it and you'll find yourself without any COs or squads.
While you volunteer and take the time to do the job as CM, other people volunteer to do the job of CO. Going that extra mile for your game colleagues is truly appreciatted, but it doesn't give you the right for a "holier then thou" attitude.
-
Alright, this has gone on long enough, and I am calling a halt to it. Nobody is infallible and I think some valuable lessons have been learned all around, but now we are just going in circles and getting nowhere.
I will not tolerate having my staff treated in this way a moment longer. They do this job in their own time to give you, the players, something a bit different from the MA to participate in. They are not here to be insulted because things didn't quite work out in an event. If this sort of behaviour continues we will have to seriously reconsider the future of the Sunday SquadOps! I am sure nobody wants to see them disappear, so I am asking you all now to cease and desist from any further insulting posts.
Enough is enough! The subject is closed.