Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: ramzey on April 13, 2003, 04:44:30 PM
-
pls post it here;)
and TY guys for fly and "die" under my command
ramzey
-
Even tho numbers were close (38 LW/35 VVS) the VVS totally smashed all LW flights and the LW tank squad saw no resistance?
Didnt VVS have any attack orders?
LW had about 17 guys in bombers and tigers but VVS mounted all there pilots in fighters, was it suppose to be like that?
And I also see that VVS was missing 1 squad with 8-12 pilots,If they will come in and play for the remaining frames and the same pattern will be followed (attack/defend) this SO will be no fun for the LW squads.
If only one side is too attack this side needs more pilots (maybe a 60/40 in attacker favor) not the opposite.
-
Orders told VVS to support tank battle in Leningrad area and defend it and A4. Next thing was that VVS had to expect Tigers.
VVS had nothing to kill or stop Tigers. Panzers can't do it and IL-2 the same.
1. Why feed the Tigers with easy targets? ;)
2. This is flight sim and not CMBB :D
Well, sad for the Tigers that they only could kill buildings, but good for the VVS pilots which had not to drive GVs to be targets for 11 Tigers and could have fights in their planes against axis Luftwaffe.
I'm pleased with the event and I don't care about loosing Leningrad to 11 Tigers. On the other hand, VVS had enough planes in air left and 1 hour to strafe Tigers till none is left and axis couldn't do anything against it.
So, Axis destroyed Leningrad but all forces were lost including the Tigers (theoretically). ;)
If you want, you can call it a Pyrrhos win for axis. :D
-
well, I'll say this:
the axis had 10 people in tigers. the soviets did not have the option of choosing tigers, and thus didn't put anybody on the ground.
the soviets had the primary objective of defending leningrad from air attack. They achieved this.
The axis air attack was not particularly well timed. The high 109 sweep was on the early side -- we were able to engage and neutralize (if not destroy them), and get back in position/alt before the bombers arrived. The 190 sweep ahead of the bombers was too low to be effective, and the ju88s themselves were overloaded with bombs (wing bombs are overload, guys), and thus were still climbing out (=slow) at 9k when we interceived them. Guys, the 88's primary defense is speed, but you gotta level out.
Only after we neutralized the air threat did we go after the ground vehicles. This, by the way, is standard doctrine. the 1-hour "respawn window" for GVs only encouraged this. why spend all that effort to kill a tiger if it's only coming back? Anyway, it took the whole VVS a good half hour to kill 6 tigers.
308 was slated to be in mossies to hunt ju88s and then tigers, but the 9 GIAP put us in a bit of a bind -- all the other fighter squadrons had fixed assigns, and ramzey needed a group in close C&C to respond to developing threats. In the end, this probably helped the axis, since our La5s were not as effective against the ju88s -- we had to get in close, and two of us clipped our wingtips on the formations as we shot through, necessitating emergency landings).
I'm sorry that it was a bit of a walkover. Perhaps the axis should consider less people in tanks next week. GVs have _never_ been successfully used in a scenario, and I don't think any of the SO squads would prefer to be on the ground than in the air (AH just isn't a good armor game). and those might enjoy a GV battle don't want (A) the A/C to G/V ratio to be higher than 1:10 or (B) to face an equal force of tigers in pzIVs (with the engagement ranges of AH, that's about as fun as Spit I vs. Spit XIV.)
And yeah, I don't care how it's scored. IS was scored an axis victory too, yet how many frames ended with the Fariz being the only axis guy left in a plane at t+1hour?
-
Im only concerned this event will be not so fun for everyone, if the above is true, with only LW attacking but outnumberd by VVS.
And then maybe LW numbers will drop of even more because I know I will not turn up for a event thats no fun.
U are right, the Tiger squad were too big, they shoud have been only 2-4, we needed them in the air, but thats up too the Country CO to decide.
-
I see your point, and I agree: if the objectives are asymmetric (e.g., attack-defend), the attacking side needs considerably more units than the defender; otherwise, yeah, it's a cakewalk.
Note however that the "formation" option for level bombers helps to rectify this imbalance. There weren't 7 ju88s, but 21; so the initial numbers were something like 59-38 vehicles, which is pretty reasonable. What happened was:
A) Axis had 10-11 people in tanks. Aircraft beat tanks every time. If you have an objective that requires you to drive a tank somewhere, take the minimum tanks you can get away with, and use air power to kill enemy armor (or strafe buildings, whatever).
B) the Axis attack was not well coordinated. The Allied defense wasn't either, but it didn't matter as much. The 109s went in and engaged VVS fighters originally with alt advantage. They surrendered that advantage, and got shot down before the bombers were anywhere near the target. An attack like that is a "force divisor": the VVS put all its planes on one spot, and took down first the 109s (1/3 of the pilots), then the 190s/ju88s (another third), and finally the tanks (the last third). It was a massacre like a bad kung fu movie. If you're going to blow through a defense like that, you need to achieve local air superiority: send the 109s in and have them knock the fighters low. They don't have to shoot them down; they don't have to chase them low; all they have to do is send the enemy fighters to an altitude below that of the bombers. (incidentally, sunday the 109s did achieve this -- we were scattered and out of position NW of len. Unfortunately, the ju88s were still on climbout, and the 109s followed us down to where our a/c had the performance edge). Right as the sweep takes the fighters out of position, the bombers come in, at level out and full speed, wih an escort to chase away (not to kill) anyone who tries to make a run at the buffs.
It's tough. It requires discipline and timing and planning (both beforehand and on-the-fly). Defense is a little easier.
-
We have destroyed 50 tanks today
(http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/Al-Sahaf.alsahaf.jpg)
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/
-
Originally posted by AndyH
We have destroyed 50 tanks today
(http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/Al-Sahaf.alsahaf.jpg)
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/
explain pls
-
Originally posted by Dinger
[B Defense is a little easier. [/B]
Especially when the CO ignores the orders from the CM and puts all his side in fighters.
The Admin CM for SO's dont hand out planesets and objectives just for the hell of it. By ignoring the objectives given out by the Admin CM, you basically doomed one squad on the opposing side to no action at all.
There is a reason why you are given targets to attack and targets to defend. This reason is that any targets you are scheduled to defend are targets that the other side is attacking and vice versa. Why dont we just save everybody some time in the future and just set the SEA to MA settings and let you furball for 2 hours? I am sure that Mister Fork appreciates you wasting his time. Almost as much as the LW squad who didnt have anybody opposing their ground vehicles appreciates you wasting their time as well.
-
Sling with all respect:
1. You should take this up privately with the side CO if there is a problem. Whining in an open forum is bad form, and just leads to flamings like the one I am about to lay on you.
2. You said: "By ignoring the objectives given out by the Admin CM, you basically doomed one squad on the opposing side to no action at all." I read the orders that were given to Ramzey. There was no specific requirement for the Allies to field GVs. If you are going to accuse people of foul play, make sure you know the facts of the situation.
3. If you CMs really want to cut down on people wasting their time, you should stop using AH's piss poor ground war model in supposedly historical scenarios.
-
we had squad ops last sunday?
-
(cough) I thank you all for your comments on the subject at hand but lets not get out of the real debate here.
I'm accepting all responsibility for this past Sunday but make no doubt, THIS SUNDAY will be correct with clearer orders for the CO's to make it an enjoyable event for all...
Next weeks orders are coming soon and I'd like everyone to take time to think about how they'd like to improve Squad Ops, not point out the bad points. I need constructive feedback.
If you have an idea or suggestions, email them to me at mr.fork@shaw.ca.
-
With whole respect but u are put heavy words on my head.
Yes i was Frame CO and i take responsibility for my side at this frame.
Originally posted by sling322
Especially when the CO ignores the orders from the CM and puts all his side in fighters.
i dont wont to say u are lier, but chek before u post not true
Since when Mosquito armed with 2000lbs bombs is a "fighter"?
Was only one? yes, but he was used
When i ignore orders from CM?
Originally posted by MR.Fork
Your Orders:
Primary: Defend Leningrad from Air Attack.
Secondary: Support the tanks at the battle south of Suvlajarvi (V74).
I dont know what mean in your language "support", but my dictionary explain this as HELP. Not to PLAY.
Originally posted by sling322
The Admin CM for SO's dont hand out planesets and objectives just for the hell of it. By ignoring the objectives given out by the Admin CM, you basically doomed one squad on the opposing side to no action at all.
Frame CO have free hand how he use his forces, and what plane he use from available. So i decide not use tanks. Why?
I chk both spown points from a 74 and a4. Armoured forces from a74 was less then 30 s way from fire position in to spowned tanks from a4. As everybody know Tiger have much more longer fire range than panzer4. Trees not give cover against shels. Panzer 4 need to drive about 5 minutes to be in effectiv fire range to damage Tiger. Pls chk how many rounds can fire Tiger at this time. And imagine how many panzers i should use to broke tigers defence. 50? 100?
Axis CO can chose which gv's he use. He not use any antiaircraft vehicycle and panzer4. Why? GA know, any of weapon we have can't stop Tigers.
So better for me to read axis whiners about not seen action, then read VVS troops about "we have no chance" or "SOps are waste of time"
Originally posted by MR.Fork
The #'s of each aircraft/tank is up to you. You could up your entire force
in tanks and AAA but you would be sitting ducks to air attack or you can mix
and match how you see fit. Remember, you're the CO, and how you use your
resources is up to you as long as you complete your objectives. :)
Originally posted by sling322
There is a reason why you are given targets to attack and targets to defend. This reason is that any targets you are scheduled to defend are targets that the other side is attacking and vice versa. Why dont we just save everybody some time in the future and just set the SEA to MA settings and let you furball for 2 hours? I am sure that Mister Fork appreciates you wasting his time. Almost as much as the LW squad who didnt have anybody opposing their ground vehicles appreciates you wasting their time as well.
Primary i care about my troops, i not waste them for nothing.
All squadrons under my command fulfull his duty very well.
Even if som mess in orders was by my foult. Axis lost all air forces. Noone bomb was drop close to leningrad. Oposite forces abdon his tanks in ruined town.
Mr. Fork give me clear orders, and i follow them.
If somone expect i drop my troops in to the bettle whichoe not give them chance to survive, make mistake.
If u think im a fool and newbie in commanding u think wrong.
I dont know where u saw furball, and how looks your definition f this term.
Looking for MA example , furbal u can seewhen forces from 2 hostile airfield fight each other . And all the time reinforcments inbound from this fields.
When in air , during SOps or any one life event, start fighting 2 or more squadrons u can name it AIR BATTLE, but never furball. Update dictionary pls
Im sorry, I thought, i play to win this frame, not to give others turkey tiger shotout chempionship. Suprised?
Now U shows up with a can of gasoline again.
Looks like U are incompetent and arrogant.
with respect
ramzey
-
Originally posted by funkedup
There was no specific requirement for the Allies to field GVs.
Yeah...and I guess we all just fell off the turnip truck yesterday and have never played in a TOD frame before, right?
C'mon FunkedUp....you're smarter than that and I believe the rest of your squad is as well.
-
Okay, enough. I am having Mister Fork send me the orders for both sides that he sent to both CiCs. I will also read the write up.
Please not this is the second Squad Ops in a row where a CiC did not bring up what they were thought issues before the actually frame. Please note that all CiCs need to bring up issues when they get the orders.
If this issue was brought up before the actual frame day then Mister Fork could have checked with the LW and dealt with it. One possible solution would have been for him to scrap the GVs for both sides altogether. Or, if the orders were not clear in what he originally sent, he could have clarified them further.
-
Please not this is the second Squad Ops in a row where a CiC did not bring up what they were thought issues before the actually frame. Please note that all CiCs need to bring up issues when they get the orders.
With all respect,
there were no issues to bring up here. The Allied CiC saw that he had no way of stopping the enemy's armored thrust, so he committed his units to air power. The Axis CiC should have realized, as Mr. Fork so elegantly put it:
"You could up your entire force in tanks and AAA but you would be sitting ducks to air attack".
It looks like the CM was perfectly clear on what the CiC's options were.
The strat choice here was simple: The Allies could not match 11 Tigers; But the Axis couldn't supply air cover for 11 Tigers, and they got pounded.
There's no problem with commanders' decisions here. The Axis decision to commit 11 potential pilots to tanks was a not a wise decision, but you can't blame the CO; squadops is a learning experience. Likewise, you can't blame a CiC for not noticing fundamental flaws in a scenario design. Scenario design is the CM's territory.
Hopefully, future leaders who experienced Sunday's frame have taken from it a valuable lesson that's remained the same from Afrika Corps to the present: commit to GVs the absolute minimum number of pilots necessary to achieve the objective. If the orders require "a squad" to be in GVs -- pick the smallest squad on the roster; if the rules require a minimum of one GV to achieve an objective, pick one GV; if the rules are open, select no GVs whatsoever.
There are two reasons for this:
First, every GV you put out there takes away from an aircraft you can field. Aircraft have higher survivability, higher speed, higher K/D, and higher ground lethality than ground vehicles.
Second, nobody wants to play GVs in a scenario. I'm sorry if this sounds inflammatory, but it's like I said above: some people may enjoy tank battles, but in a scenario, all it takes is a handful of planes to ruin your day. In squadops, most of the people are going to be in planes, and the size of squadops battles means that the tanks aren't going to escape notice.
so if you put people in GVs, you're likely to get a lower turnout, and those who do show up won't have much fun.
Yeah, yesterday the Tiger drivers might have had more fun if they had russians in panzers to blow up. And how much fun would that have been for the russians?
Don't blame this one on the CiC. The CM's statements were unambiguous. If the CM said "You must designate at least 6 targets to be blown up in panzers", then the CiC should have contacted the CM with serious problems.
-
I'm taking the blame for not having Ramzey send me his orders once written. My bad. Not his. I would of corrected it if I had remembered.
I ALSO told Ramzey he could use his resources as he saw fit (ie fielded more tanks) and seeing how english isn't his first language, I should of been more careful how I worded my orders.
I wasn't expecting no tanks however and the result was there were 30+ aircraft vs 20+ from the LW. It's just a numbers game.
I'll be more careful this week.
Sling - Ramzey, blame me.
-
Originally posted by sling322
Yeah...and I guess we all just fell off the turnip truck yesterday and have never played in a TOD frame before, right?
C'mon FunkedUp....you're smarter than that and I believe the rest of your squad is as well.
FYI I'm not involved in running the squadron. Ramzey is the CO now. I read the orders myself after the fact and I agree with his interpretation.
I'm not flying SquadOps and I'm not the sqn leader so I should probably just shut the F up. But I saw my buddy getting criticized for something that was not his fault so I spoke up. I said my piece and I'm outta here.
-
@Mr.Fork i not blame u, online u was flexible and i saw that. I appreciate that.
ramzey
-
Dinger,
With all due respect this is the second Sunday Squad Ops in a row that has had major complaints after a frame. By both players and CMs. This is also the second one in the row where the players claim the event was flawed.
I am trying to determine where the problems are stemming from. Also I am not shifting the blame to COs. However, things are a two way street and COs should bring up any issues they think will affect the frame before the frame. I have asked for Mister Fork's orders to see if this was the case. From earlier posts it seems to indicate that the Russians knew they should up some armor. Later posts from others and Mister Fork seem to indicate it was not specified. I need to see the orders to determine what was the case. The LW had 1/3rd of there force stuck in Tigers with no action. If they were supposed to be used to bombard a target .. no problem since there job was destroy objects. If they were supposed to have a tank battle .. obviously problem.
I need to review the orders to determine things.
This last thing, plus actions in the last squad ops, and severely low numbers (basically both sides fielding their minimum numbers at the min -2 level) for the past several squad ops has caused us to bring Sunday Squad Ops under review. We have to try to find out what the source of the problems are and see if they are minor and fixable in the short term or have to assess if they are major and if we need to take sunday squad ops off line for an extended time to address and fix whatever is causing the problems.
-
I enjoyed squad ops sunday. I think Ramsey did a very good job and made good decisions.
-
Never got any orders for this TOD. Wasn't sure there was one and I didn't show up. :(
-
I have received the orders that were sent to both sides for this frame and additional correspondence from the COs with their questions to Mister Fork asking for clarification on certain issues.
I am reviewing this information.
-
Was my first event in AH, new here from a game down the hall
I enjoy participating in events more then anything else!
I was a walk-on and directed to be a tank driver for the AXIS
(BTW,thank you for accepting me as a walk on)
It was actually my first time in a Tiger, and even though there was little defense of Leningrad, I still had fun !
driving over that bridge was awesome!
Even though the chances of fighting off Tiger tanks with Panzers would be futile, IMO there should have been an attempt to do so.
(if it was writtin in the write up of course, if not disregard)
As we are recreating an historical event, even though the CIC knows what type of resistance he may run into, they should still field the units as the event is writtin,
An example I'll use is.. recently we ran the Yamamoto scenario,
I was CO of AXIS and acted as Yamamoto flyin a betty with Zeke escort from Rabaul to Boaganville, I knew we would be intercepted by P38s, I could have easily changed flight plan to avoid the intercept and made it there safely, I didnt,, and we were intercepted/overwhelmed and i was shot down,,but we all had a blast.
Often when you recreate historical scenarios, one side is subject to the probability of being overwhelmed or faced with the potential uneven fight
Please know that im not tryin to step on anyones toes or disrespect any of you Vets here, and if it comes across that way, My apologies
I look forward to flying events in the future with you all < S >
Dont flame me to bad plz ;)