Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: daddog on October 26, 2003, 10:31:02 AM
-
I am looking for what you guys think about Squad Operations. Good and bad, Friday and Sunday. Not that I want to change anything, I think I run them perfectly ;), but I would like to see an open, honest, yet “considerate” discussion on the strengths and weakness of this popular weekly event.
If you can’t be civil then don’t post.
------------------------
CO CM daddog
332nd Flying Mongrels (http://www.332nd.org/)
Roster (http://www.332nd.org/squadroster.htm)
Noses in the wind since 1997.
(http://www.ropescourse.org/cdaddog.jpg) Democracy is a process by which the people are free to choose the man who will get the blame. - Laurence Peter
-
Hey cool thread :)
Ok, I have a few things that I have been pondering on for a few months. Take these as discussion points if you will. I make these comments as a player and squad CO of an S.O. squad.
*Frame COs. I think that Squad Op COs should command all three frames, not just one. There is a "disjointed feeling" to having a different CO every frame. A CO may just get the hang of it, get to know his squads, the objectives, ect, and then "thats it" he's done, and a new CO gets the next frame. Consistancy will bring a higher caliber of command. In the end, you wont CO any more frames in a given year, its just you will do your "stint" in one S.O., rather than 3 or 4 seperate ones.
*Possibly, a "corps of COs" that are both willing, able, and dependable to do the above.
*Aircraft use. Again, this is a consistancy point. Rather than have a different ride, I would propose that squads are either assigned a "light" or "heavy" role in the event, and where at all possible, fly the same a/c for the 3 frames. Each squad say does a "heavy" stint" about 1/3 of the time, in bombers or jabo. This allows some skills to be developed, and again, improves play over all. The other 2/3 are "light" assignments.
.
*Radar in events where it makes sense to have it?
*Attacker-Defender ratios improved. If we do a S.O. that has one side all in fighters defending, the ratios should reflect that, 50-50 will not work.
*Possibly, a loosening up of objectives that allow more leeway to the COs to prosecute the campaign. Objectives are given, fields assigned, the rest is left up to the COs. For the Sunday Op, the lower #s would need to ensure a tighter grp of targets than the Friday Op.
*Set down guidelines for the Friday and Sunday S.O. that are the same. Max # of squads per base, whatever other rules need standardization?
There you be.
-
Ditto on the same COs for all three frames, good idea.
There should also be some way of the CM "evening up" numbers imbalance", for example removing some targets that needed to be hit by the side with lower numbers. This would have to be coupled with stricter enforcement of the "you must attack/defend all targets on the list" (to prevent the massing of forces on one base).
One thing I have noticed recently is that almost all COs seem to mass 90% of their resources in one area, we end up with either a mass furrball or a one sided fight. This could be prevented by forcing n% attack and n% defence in the orders to the side COs. However we need to do this without completely restricting the side CO's tactics. Another way would be to enforce all or certain bases to be attacked within the first hour.
-
An interesting point that Squire (Warloc) has made. As a SquadOp Admin CM I have been putting in many hours between Frames (Saturday so I can get orders out Sunday) updating maps and putting out new orders for the next Frame CO. As is my style, I try to allow lots of leaway for their own imagination in tactics. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. I think this is largely due to the changeover of Frame COs. Some are really into it with lots of experience, and some are new at it. Some have the time, but many don't. Anyway, from my perspective:
PROS:
Reduces Admin CM involvement in the SquadOp after the design is implemented.:aok
Will allow for an enthusiastic Frame CO to run with a design. :cool:
May help the immersion aspect for the players.:D
Reduces the chance that the next Frame CO is out of touch (work, RL, apathy, drunkeness...);)
CONS:
It may be a bit too much to ask a Frame CO to do three in a row.:(
If we get an enthusiastic Frame CO who is totally out of touch with the Squad COs, it could put a real damper on the experience.:eek:
-
Other thoughts on SquadOps.
I rarely fly Sunday due to fatherly duties. Fridays are pretty much my goof-off night so I fly and design them (halloween excepted)(and what is that Guy Fawkes day about?:confused: ) . If there was one event that could be dropped it would be the Sunday SquadOp (slams helmet on head and drops into fox hole).
The old arguement about alt caps should be carefully considered by the SquadOp Admin CM. They should be implemented only if there is some overwhelming reason for them (none come to mind).
I try to even out the numbers, although there are times where one side should have more than the other. For example, in the last frame of Bomber Wars I added another late joining squad to the American side as they were fielding a lot of bombers and fighters at that time, and I felt that it would be reasonable to do so while not hindering the German abilities to hit the buffs.
There are HUGE gaps in our abilities to stage fights for the early years of the European war, in Russia, and in South-East Asia due to lack of appropriate aircraft. It's a pity, but I can understand the reluctance of HTC to design aircraft that will be little used in the MA. The point is, with these limitations, we need more experimental or imaginative ways to use what we have available. We could take a look at some of the Snap Shots for ideas that we can expand on for Squad Op designs.
We might want to try a SquadOp Team/Terrain Team discussion on a forum about what additional things could be done with terrains that would improve overall game play. In particular, the addition of more ground items in ALL terrains would be welcome for me as a designer, as then there are more targets to hit, different variables to play with. After all, much of the war in aircraft was about hitting things on the ground and preventing the other side from interdicting your ground forces. We really could use more:
- boats of all sorts
- vehicle/train convoys
- facilities to attack (factories, towns, ports, bridges, etc.)
- areas of buildings that could be hit (cities)
- flak batteries
I know the terrain team is busy, and updating old terrains may not be cool, but it couldn't be as time consuming as doing it from scratch.
-
Not enough jugs ! :D
seriously daddog, I enjoy SO very much.
-
I think I speak for my squad when I say we enjoy them a lot. I think my favorite scenarios are those with bombers and their escorts vs fighter defense. The targets don't have to be revealed to the fighter defense but the defenders should be given a list of probable targets which do include the actual targets.
I don't say it often enough but I very much appreciate the effort that goes into planning these things.
-
Squad Operations is my favorite event ever in any Flight Sim.
There seemed to be a dip in the "fun factor" when we came back from the 2002-2003 Holliday season, but this probably had more to do with me than with Squad ops, because we've (the Shills) have been having a blast over the past few months.
As a squad CO, and possible Side CO, I'm not very interested in running all three frames. But I do think it is important to have the CO assignments posted at the start of the Op, so that ifi there is a conflict arangements can be made.
The only problem I've had was Squads blowing off a frame, or blowing off an assignment, which (at least for Friday Squad Ops) has been gone over already.
-Sik
-
Squad ops has gone WELL for the DAMNED Squadron overall.
The GOOD
We are getting better quality Write Ups and clearer instructions from the CM's.
Detailed maps and Coherent planning for the most part by the Frame CO's. Most Frames got into a lot of detail. Some frames don't require a lot of planning and stuff - "Go here and DEFEND"
Good match up of planes as can be expected from the Plane set. Not many glaring bad choices or combinations of plane types that oppose each other.
The BAD and UGLY
Really just the last Frame I was CO in. We were give the n whole map to defend without at least some knowledge of some targets the enemy might hit. This was a frame where an ALT CAP of the Bombers would have been nice since 1/2 of my planes could barely reach the ALTthe bombers were at when they were able to even try to engage.
Getting ALL of the Squad CO's to reply to the FRAME CO when they get a request as to what plane type / mission thier squads wanted. This forces the Frame CO to guess as to potential assignements. Also getting the Squad CO's to reply that they got and understood the orders that are sent out so you KNOW they understand what they are supposed to do - this helps cut down on all of the question 5 mins before the Frame STARTS !
Overall I think FRI Squad ops had improved over the last few months.
None of the Squad have been a problem to work with. Most let the Frame CO know what they want or make suggestions to help fix a Frme plane if I come up with a real goofy idea.
-
As a frame CO I found that getting answers from the squad CO's the biggest problem. I had no Idea what most of the squads where proficent in or what rides they preferred or even if they understood the orders and there objectives. I did screw up at one point and sent out 2 wrong targets, correction was made and emailed, but found out that most squads didn't know there was a mistake to begin with.
Suggested that there be a forum for the Friday night event where the Frame CO could post everything and the squads and players could check in and read what is expected of them and there squads. Making it say by (DAY ?) evening all Squad CO have to post that they read and understood there assignmnets.
-
My problem with Squad Ops, all AH events in fact, is pilot survivabilty. I can't count the number of times one side or even both have been decimated in the very short span of 45 mins. I know that it has a lot to do with the furball mentality, but can't something be incorporated that rewards those that land their planes, versus those who dive into a furball kill three but just end up getting themselves killed?
If I want Axis/Allied rides and furballs I can just go to the CT. Events should be more than that. IMO of course.
I know it 's the competition but for reference(if you haven't already) check out http://www.s3events.com follow their lead. It is by far the best online event I've ever flown in. Too bad ya can't say the same about the sim anymore :)
-
First let me say that I really enjoy the squad ops but I think there a couple of things that could make it better.
1. Keep the same basic planeset for every frame and assign each squad to the same AC for each frame. The larger squads should also have the option to fly a couple of different AC. For example the MAW could fly bombers and provide there own fighter escort.
2. IMO there has to be a bigger penelty for death. The way it is now if a squad gets wiped out there arent really penelized for the next frame. What I would like to see is if a squad takes say 60% losses they should be placed in a 2nd line AC. For example the first frame a group is in 51Ds and they take 60& losses, next frame they would be in 51Bs. If the take heavy losses in the 2nd frame then 3rd frame they would be in a 47 D11.
3. Get rid of the airstarts, its gamey and causes more confussion then anything. Its not going to kill anybody if they have to spend an extra 30 minutes climbing to alt. Plus it would add a little more realism when the escorts try to rendevous with bombers.
4. Historical squads need to be given first choice when it comes the sides and rides in a setup that involved there RL namesakes. In a late war ETO setup the 56th FG should be flying jugs for allied not 109s for axis. It would be nice to see all squads put into a couple of different groups. USAAF, RAF, USN, VVS, IJN/IJA, LW and Unaffiliated. In a pacific setup the USN and IJN groups should get first choice and the rest will fill in as needed.
5. The last thing is pretty minor but it would be a nice addition. I would love to see what the victory conditions where before the series even started. The would give everybody an idea of the big picture. Also campaign ribons for the squads to put up on there websites would be a nice addidtion.
Thats it, my gripes are done. to the CMs, you guys are doing a great job.
-
Hey Daddog! <
> same here man (wouldn't change a thing)
~~~~~Also i think u do good with the squad ops also....lol (truth)
<><><>
-
"2. IMO there has to be a bigger penelty for death. The way it is now if a squad gets wiped out there arent really penelized for the next frame."
Big Ditto here, I like the rest of your points too.
-
Interesting points Biz. Let me address them.
[list=1]
- While the same planeset is used throughout a 3 frame squad ops (most of the time) it is up to each CiC to assign squads to the planes. We don't want to tie their hands by assign specific squads to planes and then locking them in. Also obviously their are always better rides in the planeset and once again we don't want anyone locked into a certain plane all 3 frames. Basically while most squads don't ahve a problem say .. flying a Boston III for a frame .. doing it 3 frames in row is a different story.
There we leave it up to the CiC to the frame to assign as he see fit but encourage him to rotate squads around so nobody gets stuck with certain planes all 3 frames.
- Agreed .. but we did try a system in Sunday Squad ops to award and penalize more for death. The consensus of the sunday squads is that it did not add to the fun but just made things more complicated. Daddog will start weighing the results more for survival. Meaning hit all your targets but all die doing so and the other side will probably win the frame. The more survive and hit targets the better your side does in the final analysis for the frame.
But we are thinking on other things and welcome suggestions.
- Air starts are built into some maps. You either hate them or love them. Yes, they are gamey. But at the same time trying to get a fully loaded Lanc or B17s up to 26K alt takes considerable time. Plus, the frame length is only 2 hours. So also have to deal with some time constraints. But I believe only the German map has air starts.
- Hate to say this but Historical squads will never get precedence for a certain aircraft in squad ops just because they are historically based squad. All squads have the right to ask for certain planes to be assigned to them and then its up to the CiC to decide.
In most cases you simply just have to ask the CiC for a certain plane type and they will do what they can to accomodate.
Same in assigning squads to certain sides. But again no squad will have the right to insist on just flying for Allies because they are a historically based allied squad. Their request will be taken into consideration but because of play balancing and the fact that most squads prefer flying allies .. well all squads have to be willing to fly Axis. And at times compromising and flying planes that they do not prefer.
This is to give all participants a fair shake without establishing preferences or bias toward any one group. All can make requests which will be evaluated by the CM and CiC. You just can't get what you want all the time is all.
- Not sure on Friday Squad Ops .. but victory conditions usually sent out on the Sunday Squad ops with each objectives write up. Along with description of results from last frame.
Ribbons would be nice .. just have to get the time to make them.
[/list]
-
Cant say I have a single complaint about squad ops. As for plane asignments when I am CO I try to give squad the planes they want. But its first come first serve. Some times numbers issues wont allow certain squads in certain aircraft. If we only have 15 xxx plane I cant put the nightmares in them. Also when I CO I tend to give my own squad the worst assignment. Just so there is no complaining about giving my own squad the best rides. If nothing else I always try and be fair.
-
Air starts are built into some maps. You either hate them or love them. Yes, they are gamey. But at the same time trying to get a fully loaded Lanc or B17s up to 26K alt takes considerable time. Plus, the frame length is only 2 hours. So also have to deal with some time constraints. But I believe only the German map has air starts.
Hungary (the next terrain I will use) now has 4 air starts per my request from the terrain team. :p They are used for the exact reasons you stated ghostdancer. If not for the time consraints I would not use them bizket. :)
-
Never a complaint that I'm aware of from within the ranks of MAG33 during the Tour of Duty. (Squad operations) Well, except that Vulcan used to steal all of our kills :D
-
I agree Ghost Dancer, your points are realistic, and very logical. Live long and prosper Spock. :D
As for the suggestions on #2, "the death penalty," I think there will need to be some flexibility. Here are two suggestions.
1. In late war IJN scenarios, it is increadibly difficult to accomplish any objectives and survive, especially if your assigned a Kate or Val for an IJN event. But generally, if every plane that survives and lands is worth some landing bonus, say, three times as much as a single air combat victory, then there might be more caution, or fear of engagment. Whatever the penalty, it should be sufficient to cause a pilot to return to base when dammaged, or consider more carefully engaging in massive furballs. However, it can't be too high since the whole point of the event is to engage the enemy. We can't have people flying around for 15 minutes, landing, then saying Nya Nya Nya from the tower as the enemy circles in anticipation of a fight. That is why I think that a flexible 2-3 point survival bonus should be a good measure, depending on the event.
2. Another alternative is to have expected loss rates. On a bombing mission for example, the objective is worth half the points possible, the other half is how well they do in beating their expected loss rate. If a loss rate of 20% is expected (High in real life, but not in TOD), then up to half the points could be awarded based on how well the loss rate is achieved.
Example: I envision a loss rate score being assigned and a loss rate percentage in this way. "Tonights loss rate for the Allies is expected to be 23%, and the casualty score is 30." Then the ratio of expected losses to actuall losses would be applied to the score of 30 to find the total score. Here is the formula:
Expected Loss Rate
------------------------- X Casualty Score = Loss Rate Score
Actual Loss Rate
If the Allies loose only 15%, then the Loss Rate Score would be 45.9 (46 rounded). If the Allies loose 50%, then the Loss Rate Score would be 13.8 (14 rounded).
I am not sure how complicated the scoring is now, but something along these lines might be what your looking for.
-
Interesting ideas. Thanks Tracerx.
-
Hey flossy did u get my application? :) (so i can be a CM?)
-
A new squad?! Excellent! Welcome to Squad Operations! :)
-
Daddog yes daddog i hope to to make it as a CM like u :D
-
Originally posted by Marco50
Hey flossy did u get my application? :) (so i can be a CM?)
Yes I got your application and will be putting it to the rest of the team for consideration. There are several aspects we need to take into account before a decision can be made. Thanks. :)
-
Originally posted by Flossy
Yes I got your application and will be putting it to the rest of the team for consideration. Thanks. :)
Thanx Flossy i hope i am good enough for the job!!! :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marco50
-AH DemoTeam-
-
I like the idea of a single CO for all three frames.
Something that I would like to see is some sort of meaning to the whole thing after it's over. Right now, aisde from the logs, there is really nothing for either side to look at and see who really won. There's no "bragging rights" because after it's over, it's just over.
I said this before, but personally, I would like to see a setup where each side has X resources to be used and an overall objective that needs to be accomplished by the end of frame 3.
For example, a country gets 50 of plane type X and 60 of an older plane type y. Only x% of plane type x will be replenished for the following frame, so if too many losses are suffered, then that side has to use more of plane y in the next frame.
For objectives, perhaps something like a certain factory needs to be destroyed. In oder to destory it, the total damage done by the end of frame 3 needs to be 210% (i.e. it could be 75% destroyed in frame 1, followed by 60% in frame 2, followed by 82% in frame 3, for a total of 217%, or totally destroyed) This way, even if 100% damage was done in one frame, the objective is still not met because another 110% has to be done in the next frames combined.
To go with the above, airfields could be destroyed in a frame and made unusable for the next frame. This way, airfields closest to the main objective could be taken out, making it harder for the enemy to defend the objective because they will now be based further away.
I also like the idea of death penalty or some sort of scoring bonus as has been discussed by others in this thread.
Overall, I like Squad Ops, but as it is now, it is difficult to get the immersed feeling and really get into what we are doing.
-
Originally posted by daddog
I am looking for what you guys think about Squad Operations. Good and bad, Friday and Sunday. Not that I want to change anything, I think I run them perfectly ;), but I would like to see an open, honest, yet “considerate” discussion on the strengths and weakness of this popular weekly event.
If you can’t be civil then don’t post.
thats mean Ramzey dont reply? ;-)
if not sorry for late reply ;-)
im sorry for all this quote's below
Originally posted by Squire
*Frame COs. I think that Squad Op COs should command all three frames, not just one. There is a "disjointed feeling" to having a different CO every frame. A CO may just get the hang of it, get to know his squads, the objectives, ect, and then "thats it" he's done, and a new CO gets the next frame. Consistancy will bring a higher caliber of command. In the end, you wont CO any more frames in a given year, its just you will do your "stint" in one S.O., rather than 3 or 4 seperate ones.
Idea is not bad, but i see troubles here. Hard to fing s much time 3 weeks in row to take care about frame command. In result we can have worse CIC performance.
From secound side if somone have enough time to spend for comunity and skills in command, we can try. Im worry only about how many will be able to do this.
*Possibly, a "corps of COs" that are both willing, able, and dependable to do the above.
well, as above. Command corps works not briliant in CAP event ( thats not mean bad), but allways that better then nothing.
*Aircraft use. Again, this is a consistancy point. Rather than have a different ride, I would propose that squads are either assigned a "light" or "heavy" role in the event, and where at all possible, fly the same a/c for the 3 frames. Each squad say does a "heavy" stint" about 1/3 of the time, in bombers or jabo. This allows some skills to be developed, and again, improves play over all. The other 2/3 are "light" assignments.
imo its up from design (special in SSO), but unwrited rule of SO said "CiC allways assign his own squadron to havy duty or fly crap plane". All that to be sure main objectives will be reach in correct way. Cuz SL who is Cic know what his own squadron can do and to avoid missunderstandings in action.
Designs mostly (last months? ;-) ) "jump" between years of ww2
Frame one 1940, frame 2 1941, frame 3 1944, or something like that. So i can say its all up from design.
I agree!
*Radar in events where it makes sense to have it?
yes its sense, but with correct and resonable delay. Just to make sure both forces have chance to see each others in flight. Somtimes is no need. 5-7 min delay and short range are good enough for any event
*Attacker-Defender ratios improved. If we do a S.O. that has one side all in fighters defending, the ratios should reflect that, 50-50 will not work.
Agree, are you read my post with proposal of design SSO? TY
*Possibly, a loosening up of objectives that allow more leeway to the COs to prosecute the campaign. Objectives are given, fields assigned, the rest is left up to the COs. For the Sunday Op, the lower #s would need to ensure a tighter grp of targets than the Friday Op.
I agree,
Allmost cry when reminde som time agoo i was kicked in prettythang$ for walking that way ;-)
*Set down guidelines for the Friday and Sunday S.O. that are the same. Max # of squads per base, whatever other rules need standardization?
yes!!! more real flying and webpage for SO :)
thx great imput
Originally posted by AndyH
There should also be some way of the CM "evening up" numbers imbalance", for example removing some targets that needed to be hit by the side with lower numbers. This would have to be coupled with stricter enforcement of the "you must attack/defend all targets on the list" (to prevent the massing of forces on one base
thats mean you like to do missions more like in RL, in place of usual lemming missions from MA?
if yes, i agree. But we need to remember 2 hours of flying and not meet enemy can be bore people.
Originally posted by AndyH
One thing I have noticed recently is that almost all COs seem to mass 90% of their resources in one area, we end up with either a mass furrball or a one sided fight. This could be prevented by forcing n% attack and n% defence in the orders to the side COs. However we need to do this without completely restricting the side CO's tactics. Another way would be to enforce all or certain bases to be attacked within the first hour.
Souce of behavior like this base on tactic "establish air superioriy in target area , then hit when you bombers are safe"
For me better will be work set targets couple sectors away one from secound, or just avoid design like " 2 sides hit and defend same time". Design like that is good when you have 200 planes on arena, for SSO its just sloughterhaus.
Originally posted by Holder3
An interesting point that Squire (Warloc) has made. As a SquadOp Admin CM I have been putting in many hours between Frames (Saturday so I can get orders out Sunday) updating maps and putting out new orders for the next Frame CO. As is my style, I try to allow lots of leaway for their own imagination in tactics. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. I think this is largely due to the changeover of Frame COs. Some are really into it with lots of experience, and some are new at it. Some have the time, but many don't. Anyway, from my perspective:
PROS:
Reduces Admin CM involvement in the SquadOp after the design is implemented.:aok
Will allow for an enthusiastic Frame CO to run with a design. :cool:
May help the immersion aspect for the players.:D
Reduces the chance that the next Frame CO is out of touch (work, RL, apathy, drunkeness...);)
CONS:
It may be a bit too much to ask a Frame CO to do three in a row.:( If we get an enthusiastic Frame CO who is totally out of touch with the Squad COs, it could put a real damper on the experience.:eek:
;-)
Originally posted by Holder3
Other thoughts on SquadOps.
I rarely fly Sunday due to fatherly duties. Fridays are pretty much my goof-off night so I fly and design them (halloween excepted)(and what is that Guy Fawkes day about?:confused: ) . If there was one event that could be dropped it would be the Sunday SquadOp (slams helmet on head and drops into fox hole)
and as somone say it will be Ramzey's foult ;-)
Originally posted by Holder3
The old arguement about alt caps should be carefully considered by the SquadOp Admin CM. They should be implemented only if there is some overwhelming reason for them (none come to mind).
is up only form design, as i think
let them fly 40k when all action is on 5 k ;-)
I think is question of score system, must depends from "target is hit" vs "target was defended". SO when somone cap at 30 k just have no chances to defend against low jabo attack. That can enforce "layers" of fighters in air. But frankly speeking i have no clear idea how to score it. Maybe somone have?
Originally posted by Holder3
I try to even out the numbers, although there are times where one side should have more than the other. For example, in the last frame of Bomber Wars I added another late joining squad to the American side as they were fielding a lot of bombers and fighters at that time, and I felt that it would be reasonable to do so while not hindering the German abilities to hit the buffs.
imho its depends form design and "good press". When people start like design, numbers will be more stable and easy to predict (in consequence better balance of sides)
Originally posted by Holder3
There are HUGE gaps in our abilities to stage fights for the early years of the European war, in Russia, and in South-East Asia due to lack of appropriate aircraft. It's a pity, but I can understand the reluctance of HTC to design aircraft that will be little used in the MA. The point is, with these limitations, we need more experimental or imaginative ways to use what we have available. We could take a look at some of the Snap Shots for ideas that we can expand on for Squad Op designs.
som Snap Shots are not good enough, so be careful when you spell your wish ;-)
and about planeset , its shame for HTC ;-) and reason to work on this
Originally posted by Holder3
We might want to try a SquadOp Team/Terrain Team discussion on a forum about what additional things could be done with terrains that would improve overall game play. In particular, the addition of more ground items in ALL terrains would be welcome for me as a designer, as then there are more targets to hit, different variables to play with. After all, much of the war in aircraft was about hitting things on the ground and preventing the other side from interdicting your ground forces. We really could use more:
maybe in AH2, but i agre with you, except small thing. NO gvs or boats ;-)
here i must stop and go to bed
will "quote" others tommorow ;-)
regards
ramzey
-
well part 2
I like tracerx idea about scoring, maybe with som modifications
But i think more importand will be correct visualisation of score system. Just not penalized squadrons but give them awards for performance during frame and during whole tour. An overall establish whole rank system. Better squadron better scoring.
Where most importand part will be lavel of survival ;-)
Here is place for Gremlon to modifi score page a bit and rank squads 1,2,3.....place , not only short message "ih this frame best pilot was ...... from ......." etc, etc.
sorry for this likn but as i think is best score system i ever saw, where you can compare squadrons performance couted by many diferent parsters
http://scores.wbfree.net/cgi-bin/wbstat.cgi?showlist=19&type=f&istop=on&tod=current
plus we need something what was done for CAP event,
list of aces, streak........... and som other small things. Whichine can give you somethingexciting to read saturday morning or monday mornig, when you chk all boards.
Its complicated and not easy to do. Not easy to update (need couple peooples or good parster whichone catch everything from logs.
About design i was writing in other post when i trow som ideas about next (current allready) SSO.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=98521.
But as i saw most of peoples writing here have same ideas.
Separate design to one side hit secound defend, maximise fighters use in place of bombers (or if we have some bomberd dedicated squadrons use them correct, if they like to fly bombers)
Minor use of better planes is good idea, but spanking squadrons for performance and put them to crappy ride just wont work.
Allways somone can put squadron to worse plane by personal dislike, or give for his own squadron best ride. We try it and results was not good.
As somone state above , frames should not jump between years but concentrate in one battle. All that due lack of correct planeset, special for UJN and Russia battles.
And pls no more experiments with alt and som other ideas, just simply desighn. FLy to target, hit him, take som fight and head home. I think best funn peopl have when saw som battle and safe return home, thats give best satisfaction
regards
ramzey
-
Hey daddog,
As a lowly participant (and usually cannon-fodder) Friday squads-ops are great fun :) Its one of the few evening scenario-like events that will fit with my family schedule (kids sports etc).
Suggestions:
#1 No more night scenarios please until hitech and co discover the instrument panel light bulb and possibly navigation lights :)
#2 Lots of great input already but it would be great to see more points for surviving the frame (to discourage suicide missions and other gamey behaviour). Since numbers can be an issue I'd hate to see folks excluded from subsequent frames as a death penalty though.
#3 Although I'm not a buff driver I have no problem with swapping planes each frame so that no one group has to bear flying the "less-fun" planes for all frames.
#4 We should catalog desired map changes and submit requests to the cm terrain team. After all, scenarios, squad-ops, and the like are what the team is here for :)
Good day,
Sqrl
-
I hope folks don;t mind me putting in my two penn'orth, even though I am not currently involved with Squadops games...
I'm a veteran of the S3 games in Warbirds, and a bit of a "realism" nut. I like flying no-GPS (I'm a bomber specialist, specifically LW/Axis bombers), I do not like having any kind of radar when airborne, and I like to be given the chance to do proper flight-planning (essential if flying no-GPS).
That means I like to be told asap (pref a few days before, if pos, at a pich the day before. Tell me half a hour before and I'll grit my teeth at you but get the job done anyway) what my target is, and any considerations HQ would like taken into account, then I get back to HQ asap with suggested flight plan, including time at target and various points along the way, etc. This worked very well in the S3's. What I don;t like is being handed a flight plan by someone who simply doesnt understand or have a "feel" for the finer (and more interesting) points of buffing... generaly such plans have us flying full throttle more or less directly at the foe with close escort. Generally those plans result in many buff casualties.
In short, I'm attempting to make a case for allowing non-dayfighter specialists do what they do and enjoy best. I'm also in favour of continuity of command, where possible. Over time, in the S3's one became aware of who was good at CO'ing, and who was not, and occasionally one might make (cough) "slight adjustments" to ones orders in order to achieve the effect desired by the CO. This was widely understood to happen, although outright disobedience was, of course, very much frowned on. But then, good CO's tended to know what they could rely on from each unit. At the point I last flew in S3s, IIRC, we still had a new side CO per frame, generally, but there was some trend away from that.
I and the rest of KG2 very much want to take part in organised, realistic unit-based games, with chain of command, proper orders, etc. Our numbers in AH are slowly picking up. If Squad ops can offer us what we are looking for, we might well be happy to sign up (if timing allows), as a full-time Axis bomber unit (don't mind flying fighters in "defence of the Reich" type scenarios. They tended to stuff buff pilots into fighters towards the end in RL)., although if there's no place for such in a particular game, we don't mind flying other stuff for whatever side occasionally. Flying fighters is not EVERYbody's idea of the best way to have fun in AH.
As an aside, it's the fact that AH, in common with most games of this type, has in the past been too skewed in favour of fighters (especially late-war ones) and clear blue skies and getting lots of kills that buffing isnt as much fun as it could and should be, generally. It's only within the confines of organised games with tolerably realistic conditions that buffers have a chance to shine and actually have fun, instead of just being fighter-fodder.
As for numbers, etc. - ultimately what counts is what the scenario needs in order to be fun. Sometimes having even numbers ruins a game (like BoB, or "defence of the Reich". The defenders SHOULD have lesser numbers in those; and there SHOULD be rather more buffs than fighters in both). For most of my online WW2 flightsim career, I've been flying against the odds, sometimes heavily so, and I can honestly say that some of the dullest games I've been in have been ones on which I was on the side with the largest numbers.
I have to be frank, though.. the lure of the S3's in WB is still very strong, and with WBIII starting to look like it might be something I'd be happy to fly again, I personally may just stay with the odd general event over here and get back into the S3's over there.
Feel free to try to persuade me I'd be happier signing up here... :-)
Esme
Geschwader CO, Kampfgeschwader 2 "Holzhammer"
(Douwe is our Gruppe CO in AH).
-
Originally posted by EsmeNhaMaire
If Squad ops can offer us what we are looking for, we might well be happy to sign up (if timing allows), as a full-time Axis bomber unit (don't mind flying fighters in "defence of the Reich" type scenarios. They tended to stuff buff pilots into fighters towards the end in RL)., although if there's no place for such in a particular game, we don't mind flying other stuff for whatever side occasionally.
Does this mean you'd be OK flying "in defense of the Empire" as well? One problem that a lot of very specific historic squads have with SO, is the multi-theater aspect of the game. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the ETO stuff (shocking, I know lol) but don't mind taking up a Ju-88, or FW-190 when needed for squad ops, and that is one of the things that makes it a strong event in my opinion.
-Sik
-
(Chuckle...) No. That's why I said that type of situation. Don't even mind whether it's teh Japanese or British Emire involved, either.
All I'm saying is that my unit has a speciality, and it so happens in our case that it is a fairly rare, because of its being unpopular, speciality, namely operating in the manner of a LW bomber unit. We have in our time also flown as an IJN bomber unit, padded out the numbers as extra fighter pilots in the JGs (we emphatically are NOT a fighter unit, and we do not train as one, though all of us have, I believe, been a member of or flown along with "serious" fighter units at one time or another, often concurrently with being in KG2.
All of us know the basics, fighter-side, and some are OK as individuals, but if we're to fly fighters, we're best merged with a specialist fighter unit), and as an Allied bomber unit. I gather that in the next S3, I./KG2 will, in fact, be playing the role of an Allied torpedo-bomber unit.
In short, the multi-theatredness is no problem at all to us. Neither is having to fly for either side. What CAN be a problem is if, when we are given bombers to fly, not being allowed to use the skills we have. That takes all the fun out of it for us. Fighter pilots want to find the foe and rack up kills. We want to avoid the foe, sneak in, bomb, sneak out and get home safely without seeing any other aircraft at all, if we possibly can. A very large chunk of the satisfaction we get is in putting together plans to try to make it so then executing 'em as best we can.
Ground and sea warfare is another matter, of course, and we'll happily take our turns at that the same as everybody else. Indeed, I personally am quite fond of the Panzer IV. :-)
Esme
-
Originally posted by EsmeNhaMaire
I hope folks don;t mind me putting in my two penn'orth, even though I am not currently involved with Squadops games...
I'm a veteran of the S3 games in Warbirds, and a bit of a "realism" nut. I like flying no-GPS (I'm a bomber specialist, specifically LW/Axis bombers), I do not like having any kind of radar when airborne, and I like to be given the chance to do proper flight-planning (essential if flying no-GPS).
im realis nut too, but most of players not
i just got idea, all what we need is "superuser" right for CIC
Honestly only CiC need radar to have overlook on all his pplanes.
Usual we fly without dot radar anyway.
So if HT would be so kinde and give admin arena rights to set one or two men's per side, radar on. And all the rest radar off , we can have this problem from head.
Its should be work for BOB and many future events.
If i wrote to complicated, small example:
knights - radar off
bishops - radar of
set player Andy H - radar on (as co of axis)
set player warlock - radar on (as co of allies)
if this option can be set for more players we can have less problems with planing "radar defence"
Skuzzy you not read this?;) right?
ramzey
-
Unfortunately admin rights only allow for admins to load terrains, change the arena settings (which affect all includind admin), field settings, planes available, Gods Eye view (no radar), and mute and eject.
If you set radar for one side to be none all the people flying for that side .. including the admin have no radar. If just dot dar then all have it.
So while good idea unfortunately that is not the way the programming works. All country settings apply to everyone on that side whether an admin or normal user.
-
Ghosthdancer! hey my application is in am and ready! :)
Marco50
-AH DemoTeam-
-
I been talking about this on another BBS, I cant understand , well take Kadesh.. all week before frame 1 in the MOTD was the orders to leave from a1 and to take v44 for the win... then I orders you tell attackers to take off from here and go to there,.. then defenders to attack base were leaving from and to cap what were attacking. I think just cause furballers want kill numbers instead of mission, I was told it is planed so all can have action.. Which to me is dumb. I am thinking that most of the full grown guys can take 2 hr. out of there furball time to do these missions right. Some attack and the defenders have to find us.
last Sat I came on 30 mins early as requested, we started late as it has become a habit. take off in a hvy 51, fly at 200 ft noe, then the other side you already told where were leaving from and what were attacking. 20 mins noe, and of course you really don’t know how lucky all those 262 waiting for us, found us... we die I wasted about 60 mins, to auger the p51 cause I was to low and slow and hvy to turn out of way of pouncing 262s so I hit water and die.
I know the answer before you say anything. they get bored looking for us so the numbers have been falling.. guess what the ones that like mission types less furballing don’t like this either to waste 60 mins to get killed. So numbers are dropping from them also. take the well they get bored action out of it and have a mission like you suppose to in actual combat since we are doing Historical , I am about to end SEA tours cause of this so numbers will drop again. I will finish kadesh but wont sign up for any more. If I want to furball I can do that 24/7 in all the arenas ,
I guess historically we told the enemy were we are going to and leaving from all the time. so they could wait for us so there pilots could go home and talk about their kills , take some of the gamy stuff out of historical replays of actual events and make them more real.. I think the ones that hate to look for fights can managed for 2 hrs and go back to ma CT DA to get their kill fix.. defenders should send out scouts and use radar for attack coming in like they did for real then up to defend . but guess Us nonfurballers don’t count in these event.
Our squad upped all gvs one time and a20's were there to meet us. by the time my gv stared and I got to go forward for evasive action and then to man gun we were all but wiped out in 3 mins.. tell me where the fun is.. OK whine done..lol was one of my first since almost 2 yrs Bring back actual historic events like they were..
-
I agree with Sarge's general sentiments. Anyone wanting quick-fix furballing can go to the MA. Anyone interested in realism needs to accept that that means that fighters may actually have to patrol in order to find the enemy, and even - shock, horror, gasp! - they might be unlucky and not see any enemy at all if they are unlucky!
It seems to me that online WW2 flightsimming in general hit a bad patch a while back where what was happening was that the lowest common denominator was being catered for, and not a lot else. various reasons for why, and I don;t intend to go into them here. But the more that is true, the less involved and involvimng the games, the less interesting they are, and the quicker people will tire of them.
Another thing I've noticed. In the civil flight sim community are many people that look down their noses at combat flight sims, as they think them to be very arcadish. Some truth in that - they havent been aimed much higher than that level, and many folks flying em play them as if they were just 3D arcade shoot-em-ups in planes (although the games dont HAVE to be played like that). Amongst the civil flight simmers are virtual airlines. That's folk that will happily fly simulated RL air routes that take hours to fly, and they do all the proper navigational stuff, and flight-planning beforehand, etc.
Meanwhile, some in the WW2 flight sims seem to think that no-one wants to fly a bomber for three hours to get to a target and back, heck, some folk think that even an hour in the air is a long time! Am I the only one to see a missed opportunity here? As in add in just enough to make good flight-planning pay off (so fuel use rate needs to vary with throttle setting, and fuel load needs to be definable in smaller than 25% chunks, AND plane fuel loads need to be accurately modelled, as a minimum), to try toattract more folk who like both making long flights AND WW2 planes. It means making crewing buffs more interesting, and IMO Otto is imperative. Flak accuracy in AH needs to be reduced (it can stay as deadly when it hits; its the insanely over-accurate low-level flak that kills realistic NOE bomber attacks). Damn, I'm digressing into other stuff.
Anyway, overall, the experience in the S3s was and is that greater realism attracts more people in the long run. The real sense of achievement when a difficult mission is pulled off against the odds, or even knowing that your fighter units very presence dissuaded the foe from attacking a vital spot - it makes up for the bits where things are slow, or when things go wrong. As the games in S3 got better and better, they acquired a reputation, and curious newcomers came to see what they were like - and most stayed. Why? Because it was so different to the MA. Because it was nail-bitingly exciting (one frame, one life (in the air) ). You knew that the object of the excercise was to fly it as if it was for real, which meant that you had to go into hostile skies, do your job AND do your damndest to get back to base. If you didnt, you hurt your sides chances of winning. Sometimes we would even abort a raid or sortie, when we ran into unexpectedly heavy opposition, to give us a chance of flying again later in the frame somewhere where we could do some good, rather than just get killed for no gain.
That's the thing that haunts my memory, that is luring me back towards WB. And it;s that kind of thing I'd love to see here.
Anyway, I think I've wibbled on quite enough about what I'd like to see. My apologies for having unintentionally diverted teh thread a tad.
Esme
-
Originally posted by Sarge
and of course you really don’t know how lucky all those 262 waiting for us, found us...
Sarge, I was one of those Meteors.
Dont let one bad experience put you off scenarios, remember the fun we had in Okinawa?
-
Back from the thinking corner. :D
Esme, you are not the only one thinking like this. ;)
On SSO we have 60 people in SEA and 300+ people in MA.
On S3 you have 200+ and 50 in MA.
SquadOps has to be something unique giving you the feeling of WW2 flying packed in 2 hours frames. We need designs to encourage that and players who wanna play like that. Last sunday SO frame was a huge step into this direction compared to "V1-Hunters". ;)
-
Originally posted by lucull
Back from the thinking corner. :D
Esme, you are not the only one thinking like this. ;)
On SSO we have 60 people in SEA and 300+ people in MA.
On S3 you have 200+ and 50 in MA.
I have looked at the last few events in warbirds. The last scenario lite had about 25 participants. Ouch!
Not all squad-ops are going to be popular. Typically we see a decrease in attendance every frame. Some of your ideas and suggestions can be implemented I'm sure and with some hard work (and commitment from the players) the event will get better every week.
-
Little more complicated than that.
Friday squad ops field 180-200 players per frame. Sunday Squad Ops is back to closing in on 70 (we did 67 on this past sunday). And actually would have been hire except for some unfortunate events such as MAG-33 disbanding and such.
We could have hit over 80 actually based on past participating except for these events that sidelined 3 squads.
So part of it does dealw with design but also part of it does deal with the day and the fact that we have many events running.
Squad Ops Sunday and Friday. Saturday CAP, Snapshots, and KOTH, etc. While this does offer events on many days for many people it also tends to dilute the events player base as people tend to only fly in one event on average.
While I can turn out 20-30 pilots on friday nights (11 pm EST to 1 am EST) I have had not luck turning out people also on sunday. The group chose friday as their special event night in my case.
So yes, what is offered plays a part but its not the sole reason. Fridays we do turn out 200+. Sundays we are working on expanding the base.
-
On SSO we have 60 people in SEA and 300+ people in MA.
On S3 you have 200+ and 50 in MA.
That is not a fair comparison. That reflects the over all health of Warbirds Vs Aces High, not a reflection of Events. Plug in Friday and you have:
FSO we have 200 in the SEA and 400+ in the MA
S3 you have 200 in the SEA and 50+ in the MA
I am not going to debate pro’s and con’s of Warbirds Vs Aces High, but IMHO one of the main reasons Warbirds is still alive and kicking is he quality events that are put on. Many of those guys were instrumental in my design of Snapshots and TOD’s/Squad Operations and for that I will always be grateful.
I have been reading all the posts here, and will post in a day or two with a long response to much of what has been suggested or questioned. But the above post had to be addressed promptly.
-
Geezus, one little post and 3 CMs answering. :D
Don't get into defense directly guys. I just wanted to support esme in his view-point. ;)
I keep it short. The discussion is indeed a little more complicated, because we have friday and sunday SO. The basic concept is the same, but I think we can agree that there were differences in the past and I don't mean the numbers only.
Also, talking about events/scenarios, the game itself has only little effect on the percentage of players it attracts, which was the reason why I posted those numbers above. O fcourse it's a generalization, but there is something behind it.
It's more about the difference between MA and SEA. The smaller the difference between both of them, you will get the effect of people going were they find higher numbers.
Conclusion: if you make something unique and a special experience the players like and can only have in the SEA, you get higher numbers and also with the side effect, that new people are attracted, cause all the others who are already in the SEA can't be that wrong. :D
I think you, the CMs, have enough "feedback" now to attract even more people to the SEA and especially in the long run.
I didn't want to write and risk skuzzy stepping up again, but esme was speaking just from my heart and I wanted to let him know that in public.
For me, MA is like fastfood. Easy and fast to saturate your hunger. The SEA is like a restaurant where you have the great culinary stuff, you normally don't eat. :D
-
Don't get into defense directly guys. I just wanted to support esme in his view-point.
Not defensive in the least. :) Just pointing out the shortcomings of that truncated comparison.
P.S. Esme is a Lady. ;)
-
Not being defensive .. just was a long day at work and I decided to ignore work and post a bit today.
Sunday Squad Ops is hopefully stabilizing. First frame of Channel Strike roughly equalled previous peaks last month with 3 less squads.
Also Friday Squad Ops is starting to pick up numbers. So things are picking up again to an extent.
-
You know, I was just pondering the numbers thing. I may go off on a tangent here, I apologize in advance ;)
There must be many squads in the MA that have absolutely no interest in events. I dont know how many we have on fridays, but I do know the squads themselves tend toward a higher turnout. MAW will usually turnout 12-15, sometimes more. We have such numbers because we are a HUGE dang squad! with 15 showing its less than 1/3 what our our membership was a few months ago. Even now I think we have around 40 members. Some guys come and go, some are regulars. I fly whenever I can, since events are really what I joined up for in the first place.
Now (I'll try to make a point...really) how many members of non event squads might actually wish they were in events? Sure, some of these could fly as guests, many do I'm sure. But what if they were encouraged to form "event" based squads, outside their MA affiliation? I considered trying such a thing myself at one time, but figured I am not well enough known to pull such a thing off. Plus the fact that I would only be able to fly half the SSO's due to CM duties. Attempts to put together a MAW group to fly sundays has resulted in only 2 interested responses. Could be other squads with similar problems who might "band together".
Interesting tales of the events, told to MA squaddies afterward, could lead to added interest in SSO and boost numbers.
Or not. :p
-
are they worry about, somone judge his skills on sops? ;-)
-
BlkKnit
As far as MA members who are in a squad that are not participating in Squad events you have a point. We have a few who fly with us on Friday nights. Also have had a few that have joined us because of our participation in other then the MA.
We make it a point to let people know that the MA is only one aspect of AH.
IMHO Sunday is just that Sunday not conducive to other then family events and get togethers. Possibly recuperation from Friday and Saturday in preparation for Monday work. I do not believe that Sunday will ever meet the numbers of Friday night.
It is not the scenario or the CM's or the plane set or the tactics, it is Sunday.
Well that is my opinion
-
Originally posted by lucull
Geezus, one little post and 3 CMs answering. :D
I too was not being defensive .. I did have a look at the warbirds site and viewed the results of the latest events. Seems the only populated ones are the Target for Tonight events. Not being a warbird vet I have no idea what that is.
I have watched this thread closely and feedback and suggestions are important. I personally like many of the ideas and will discuss a few among the team and try to make a few happen.
-
is not , S3 running by players and all the rest by IEN crews?
-
I agree, that friday is the more attractive day/daytime, therefor sunday might never reach their numbers. I see you have a point that sunday is the family day, but in reality you have everytime at least 250+ people furballing in the MA while SSO. Is that reflecting family day? :D
We should try to get them away from Burger King into the "restaurant". ;)
How?
1. SSO needs to run smooth (incl. designs, constant numbers, spirit, ...)
2. we have to get it in the players heads, there is such an exciting event (advertising)
3. players need to read what this event is all about (portal site)
4. players have to speak with other players to get other squads to try it out (personal approach is always better than an announcement in the MA; secondly we want whole squads and not single players)
5. if you start growing you get a snowball effect and numbers grow even more
6. mission accomplished.
:aok
I think we started last sunday with point #1 :)
p.s. The points above are only directed to SSO and can only be partly transfered to FSO, even though it's based on the same concept.
-
Some good points Lucull.
Sunday squad ops is at that time of day where I am up to my neck in kids. The Friday squadop takes place after my kids are in bed ,,, I think that is a big reason why the numbers are this way.
I can jump into the MA for a few missions while I have 2 kids on my lap and spend 10 mins .. a two hour event is out of the question.
-
How old are your kids? I mean recruiting can never be too early and you could fly and do something together with your kids! ;)
... or when they are too young...
"Sit down kids and watch daddy fly. For every kill you get a ball of icecream later."
I bet they will sit beside you and act like little cheerleaders. :rofl
However, I agree with you, but it should be possible to drag some from MA to SEA at least some europeans.
-
"Sit down kids and watch daddy fly. For every kill you get a ball of icecream later."
ROFL! Only a guess here, but you don't have any kids do you? ;) That really made me laugh. :D
-
Sit down kids and watch daddy fly. For every kill you get a ball of icecream later
Yeah...my kids would get pretty hungry :p
-
A wee bit of history for those that don't know this:
Most of my direct personal experience of S3's was back in WB2, and numbers then, for what was a 3 hour game on a Sunday were straining what the arena could handle severly, ie: about 300. When WBIII came along, numbers overall dropped, not only because of the far more powerful system required to run WBIII, but also because WBIII was released in a far from satisfactory state, and over time many of the players into S3-type games simply left, some ending up in AH.
It is my understanding, but I may be wrong on this, that numbers overall in WB are still not back to what they were when WB2 was in its heyday. One has to bear in mind, that a direct comparison of numbers between AH and WB is not comparing like with like, because
- WBIII is far more graphically intensive than AH, therefore far fewer people CAN run it
- WBIII is still recovering from circumstances that looked horribly likely to kill the company, at one point., AH is not.
- when AW folded, it seems as if AH picked up more of the AW players than WB did
IMHO, with regard to the organised games, it's more sensible to compare AH now with WB2 in its heyday.
For the record, I don;t have any axes to grind with regard to particular games; I sincerely hope that all the current WW2 combat flight sims succeed. I do, of course, have my own agenda with regard to what I feel is necessary for the best WW2 flight sim experience, and speak out as I feel necessary in each game.
Esme
-
Originally posted by lucull
How old are your kids?
I have 3. 6, 4 and 19 months. As you can imagine even on Friday night squad-op I am going AFK to deal with crying kids, the usual stall tactics of 'my tummy hurts' 'can I have a drink of water?' or my favorite 'I have to go poop' .......
I don't even bother flying during the day any more. My son is showing alot of interest but he wants to fly himself and not stand on the sidelines and watch. I plunk him in front of the computer and let him fly offline. He once flew through a hangar and I nearly peed myself laughing at him. He mostly just stalls and thunders it in after running out of ammo.
-
I flew S3s in WB2 for 3 years.
They were a good event, and in many ways similar to the Squad Ops. There are a few things I liked better about them and other things not as much.
I would like to see the S.O.s take the best of the S3s, and fold that into an already very succesfull AH event. Namely CO and a/c continuity, and perhaps a closer look at ratios sometimes. There have been other suggestions as well, many of them look good.
I think this has been a great thread.
P.S. WBIII has so many in S3s because a large part of what player base they have left fly in them. When WB was "the" sim...you had 200 in the MA and 150 in the S3 on a sunday night. That was back in 2000. Not that that has zippity doo da about the subject at hand :)
-
Originally posted by skernsk
I have 3. 6, 4 and 19 months..........
congrats:) :aok
I flew S3 twice this year. FIrst time around feb/mar
and secound jun or juli. Both times numbers was 200+
-
Towards the end of WB2, there were 300 players or so in the S3s, regularly. As I remarked, it was straining what the arenas could handle to teh limit. So much so that the last few S3s prior to WBIII actually had staggered start times for squads, each squad generally only being allowed to fly for two hours (exceptions being bombers rtbing; so long as they returned before frame end, that was OK).
If there were any S3's in WB2 that had as few as 150 people in whilst I was flying in 'em, it must have been early on in my S3 career, when I wasn't as aware of the overall picture. IIRC, the Axis numbers were alyways in three figures, and we were nearly always handily outnumbered by the Allies.
The IMPORTANT point, though, is that it was a quality event which was started by a couple of squads (JG14 and, I think, Daddy's FG, 52nd?) and attracted more and more people because of the quality of the event. Bomber crews loved it because it allowed us to do what we like doing best the way that we like doing it (buffing is a "long", game, as compared to fighters being a "short" one).
There is no reason why AH cannot have events of similar quality. I know that the CMs have certainly been trying to improve things, but I think that part of the problem has been a failure by large chunks of teh community to appreciate just how different the bomber side of things to the fighter side, and that accomodating what is good for the bombers only means improving things further for the fighter side (If more buff pilots are having fun, there;s more buffs to shoot down, right?). Some seem to think that because the fighters are more popular that it isnt worth expending much energy on the buff side, but that just creates a vicious circle which ensures that buffing won't be much fun, and so few will want to do it. It's a short-sighted view which makes no real sense any way that you look at it
Current AH is generally something like WB2+ (major negative with AH being fuel use/management, ever-present GPS, and some oddities in the FM (I've never been convinced about the accuracy of the axial inertia in AH - but then that isn't such a big deal to bomber pilots). It looks as if AHII will be providing even more in the software for us to play with. Well and good - so it's down to the quality of what is DONE with the software, and as some past games in both AH and WB have shown, well-organised games can help transcend some of the limitations of the software to produce truly outstanding game experiences.
As I;ve said - I have not been present in Squad ops for quite a while, therefore I cannot comment on them directly. But I hope my contributions here have helped promote ideas which can improve things all round for everyone.
Esme
-
There is no reason why AH cannot have events of similar quality.
Who says we don't? Have to fly in them to know the answer to that esme. ;)
Ok, ok.. that was defensive. :D
For the most part comments have been very constructive, but lets avoid passing judgment on events in Warbirds vs the Events in Aces High shall we?
-
hey daddog rn't u a CM in the SEA? :)
-
Actually Daddog I would not say that is defensive at all.
Rendering a judgement of the quality of an event that a person has only flown once in out the last 79 frames (stretching back almost a year and half) can not be construed in a constructive or positive manner.
Warloc, Ramzey, and Lucull do participate in squad ops on a regular basis and know from first hand experience how it operates, the quality of the participants, the quality of the designs, etc. Because they participate on an ongoing basis they can make value judgements and comparisons between events (Squad Ops and S3s) and provide feedback on what they like and what they don't like and making suggestions on how to improve things using comparisons to the two.
Its hard to make a valid comparision between the two when you don't participate at all in one of them.
-
Yes Marco I am.
-
Originally posted by BlkKnit
MAW will usually turnout 12-15, sometimes more. We have such numbers because we are a HUGE dang squad! with 15 showing its less than 1/3 what our our membership was a few months ago. Even now I think we have around 40 members. Some guys come and go, some are regulars.
We are a similar sized squad but we also only get a portion to come to the events. For EST people these events happen really really late at night and a "bad" frame here and there makes it real hard to get guys to come back again.
I don't know if alt caps are the answer, but this is one element I wish would get looked at. I have most often found that I am spending quite a large portion of event on autopilot just getting as high as I can. It would be more fun (especially this late at night) if we could reduce the "alt-grabbing contest" phase and get to some sort of action/objectives faster.
I do not know the best way to go about it, but I would enjoy an air start like the Air Warrior auto scenarios used. They cut out the autopilot grabbing phase (mostly) and you were given preset waypoints in the event design that decided (unknown to you) where contact would occur.
-
(edited for typos only)
The question of my experience of squadops has arisen.
Very well; it was very much inferior to that of the S3s, at my last experience of each. One of teh MAJOR issues being what I have intimated with regard to bomber operations. Aside from what the software does and does not provide to make buffing interesting and enjoyable, there was also the issue, as I have already explained, of specialist bomber units not really being catered for. As I've remarked, it's no fun being told to fly a mission profile that you can be almost certain will get you killed when you;re perfectly capable of planning one that will improve your chances of survival, if given enough notice.
I do not intend going over why KG2 actually left Squadops, which has nothing to do with the nature of the squadops game per se.
I would also point out that it is a mistake to take the view that I was in some way attacking Squad ops. I do not doubt that many enjoy them as they are, all well and good. I have merely expressed my views about what I personally am missing - and which was certainly absent when last I was flying squad ops. If Squad ops is not catering for the kind of thing that I want - and no-one so far has suggested that it does - and if it is not likely to do so, then OK, I'll just keep on waiting until I find something that DOES cater for what I want. Which, once I have a PC powerful enough to run WBIII, might mean my flying the S3's back in WB again.
On the other hand, it could perhaps mean seeing if there are enough others here in AH that want something similar to what I do, and seeing if we can get something new going. Or both.
Please do not try to paint my position as being particularly critical of AH and Squad Ops in particular and supportive of anything else. For the record, when last I saw it, I hated WBIII. That is why I left WB. But I get feedback from KG2 members that fly in it and hear how it is developing, and how my unit is doing in the S3s there. What I am hearing suggests that things are picking up nicely over there. Whether I'd be happy flying over there again remains to be seen (and I won't be able to find out until I have upgraded my PC)
As I remarked earlier - feel free to try persuading me that Squad Ops is an enjoyable place to be for a dedicated bomber pilot that loves proper flight planning, flying no-GPS, etc. Or not, as you wish. I'd LIKE to find something I could feel happy flying in reasonably regularly in AH. What I experienced in Squad Ops before just didnt excite me sufficiently. So, now that you know what I'm after, anyone care to tell me if it's likely to be worth my trying Squad Ops again now?
If it is a crime to explain what it is that one enjoys and has found absent in games, so that CM's may better know what people want (I might be the only one that wants that - there might be dozens that want the same. If I dont speak up, though, you can;t know, eh?), then I am guilty as charged. If it is a crime to enquire whether Squad Ops nowadays includes that which I am looking for which was absent when last I took part in Squad Ops, then again, guilty as charged.
Any other reading of what I have posted is down to overactive imagination and paranoia.
Esme
-
Originally posted by EsmeNhaMaire
Any other reading of what I have posted is down to overactive imagination and paranoia.
lol, that will go a long way towards promoting understanding.
-Sik
-
I think making sure that bomber ops are "doable" by ratios, several targets, and better mission planning is an area I can agree on. Bombers are the cornerstone of many of the frames. Thats something we need to ensure continues.
Lets keep the thread positive shall we? its been a good one so far.
Esme, I would like to hear your thoughts on bomber ops, and what mught be done to improve on them. Just stick to that, never mind the "what you all think" stuff. Stick to what we can use, what a CM could say "hey, that we can do".
-
The "walkons not allowed" thingy will throw off some people.
I'm sure it's a dilemma; to get people on and still have an organized event.
My squad rarely, if ever, participate in such events. We have trouble even getting together for MA squad-days.
Just a thought...
BTW check out my post in this board and invite me for this sunday ;)
-
Walkons are not allowed to fly fighters. This is do to a couple of reasons. One of which is side balancing. Squad Ops unlike scenarios has only 1 setup CM during the event and does not have a dedicated person setup for handling walkons.
However, CM's don't usually have a problem with people gunning buffs. Also if you contact a squad before the event and not actually in the arena just before the event is to run you are more than welcome to fly.
Its a key point that many squads overlook at times. People just have to make arrangements before the event to fly in it. As long as the squad doesn't go over its max committment +2 there is not a problem.
So its perfectly acceptable to contact a participating squad and ask if you can fly with them or to be put on their email list for the event and you will participate when you can.
In the case of the Nightmares we send out emails about each frame to 56 players. 38 of those are from our squad and 18 of those are to players who have approached us about flying with us when they can (3 independents and 15 players from other squads in the MA).
From this we normally field from 24 players on average per frame.
So my advice Jodgi is to look over the squad listings for the sunday event and friday event and just ask a squad if you can fly with them / be put on their contact list for the event. And participate when you can.
Most squads are thrilled to have more players to fill out their ranks. And when you get enough interest you then can move on to field your own squad in the event.
-
well, i not agree
"no walkons" its only excuse for som people
when i start fly AH was no problem to ask on country channel for assignment. Usual i was asking somone for invite me (mostly for friday Sops) . And allways i was able to find good soul who pick me up, and give me uniform. So i flew with 56FG, Arabian Knights, JG2.............
All what somone need is to ASK on country channel for assignment
But this "walkons not allowed" looks scarey when Flossy write it;-)
ramzey
-
Originally posted by ramzey
But this "walkons not allowed" looks scarey when Flossy write it;-)
LOL, Ramzey :lol I'm not saying that doesn't go on and in many cases where someone is 'known' it can be acceptable, especially if they arrive in good time well before the start - heck, I did it myself at the US Con. ;) However, it is generally discouraged for the majority of people who might wander in on their way to the MA, minutes before or even after the start, and have no clue what the event is about.
-
I know Flossy:) for regular SEA player its nothing unusual;)
Maybe we need just " This is organized event for squadrons, walkons are accepted only before frame start"
and when somone late "pls try next week before frame start" ;)
but when somone like to fly squad ops this is poor excuse, as i said before
ramzey
-
perhaps,a "generic" squad could be created to deal with walk-ons. also could be used to help balace teams. just a thought:)
-
Not a bad idea! It would help for all (Especislly the CM's)~~~
The group people could check to see if a walk-on comes in~ so that the CM's dont have to get away from their job to deal with it! A really good idea~ :)
-
Sorry to say .. doesn't solve the problem. We need to know fixed numbers (within a certain range) so that we can balance the sides for the event before frame 1.
A generic squad such as this, made up of walkons that come in during a frame, has two problems:
[list=1]
- We have no idea how many pilots there will be in it from frame to frame. So hard to tell which side to put it on. And actually even up to the T-30 mark would not really have an idea .. so hard to put it on a side.
- It needs a C.O. to brief people on mission and targets. Without a permanent C.O. there is nobody to organize it, explain rules to newbie walkons, and attempt to accomplish a mission.
So in the proposed form it really would not work.
Now, alot of people think that you have to be in MA squad to be in Squad Ops or that only MA squads can participate. This is not true .. you need two people (C.O. and X.O.) for a squad and then they can put together people from anybody who is interested. They don't have to be C.O.'s and X.O. in MA or from same squad.
We just need point of contacts that who will fullfill the leadership duites and make sure that the squad turns out its committment levels.
-
Yes Ghstdncr, that has to be taken into consideration :) Yet the idea is fresh but like u said that will not really solve the problem
:( but may come close?!?! Huh?>........... Ghst? :D
-
Originally posted by bizket
2. IMO there has to be a bigger penelty for death. The way it is now if a squad gets wiped out there arent really penelized for the next frame. What I would like to see is if a squad takes say 60% losses they should be placed in a 2nd line AC. For example the first frame a group is in 51Ds and they take 60& losses, next frame they would be in 51Bs. If the take heavy losses in the 2nd frame then 3rd frame they would be in a 47 D11.
Wouldn't that tend to amplify any errors in balancing sides, and to amplify them in the way that most damages the fun for people playing? Suppose the CM just gets it wrong, and one side gets severely creamed, across the board. Do you then put the whole side in second-line aircraft, making it even more likely that they'll take heavy losses in the next frame?
Better, IMO, to assign a point penalty to taking excessive losses. That way, if the balancing for a frame is off, the error is reflected only in the score, and doesn't affect the next frame.
-
Actually we experimented with an attrition system on sunday squad ops. Each squad was assigned a certain amount of points they could use to purchase aircraft.
Worked like the perk system .. you land you keep them. You lose your plane they were gone. Plus, there was resupply of points based on how much damage enemy did to against your facilities.
The overall opinion was that it did not add to the fun of the game play but added to the work load of each squad C.O.
Now we could come out and say you have say enough P51s to put everyone in your side in one. As losses happened they can't be replaced and you go down to the designated 2nd line aircraft.
Problem here is as runny points out. If a side gets creamed the frames become more and more imbalanced as one side does a better job of keeping its first line aircraft alive. To me this is not a problem but based on past experience I am not so sure that the rank and file will not have a problem with it.
Lets say for example that by frame 3 the RAF has taken an extreme beating and almost everyone is now in Hurricanes while the LW still has half of its guys in 109F4s and the others in 109Es. Advantage LW. Now the question comes down to is the RAF rank and file going to be okay with that or upset at having to fight against superior airplanes .. even though it was caused by their previous actions/losses? Or will we just see people not turn out in said situation?
-
Oh ok Ghost i get it :)
-
I would like to start addressing some of the points brought up in this thread. Some I agree with but we are unable to do, others we can do but choose not to for reasons that will be explained and finally some I just don’t agree with. Ghostdancer has the final say in Squad Operations so if you can persuade him then your good to go. :)
Frame COs. I think that Squad Op COs should command all three frames, not just one. There is a "disjointed feeling" to having a different CO every frame. A CO may just get the hang of it, get to know his squads, the objectives, ect, and then "thats it" he's done, and a new CO gets the next frame. Consistancy will bring a higher caliber of command. In the end, you wont CO any more frames in a given year, its just you will do your "stint" in one S.O., rather than 3 or 4 seperate ones
I see several of you agree with this and in the initial design when fdski and I were hashing it out I wanted the same Frame C.O. for all three frames. He explained and rightly so that the S3’s have separate Frame C.O.’s. Squad Operations is loosely based on the excellent S3 events. Many of the CM’s were instrumental in answering questions for me when I had them. Frankly it would be too much pressure, time, and responsibility for one player to deal with for three weeks. Sure some of you could do this and would if asked, but many C.O.’s can’t even make all three frames. No way could they do it for three weeks. If we had 20 “jordi’s” then I would be for this, but we don’t. Having a different Frame C.O.’s may not be my first choice, but IMHO it is the best choice to keep us from having a whole event ruined. Too much would rely on a single player and real life is and always will be too much of a factor.
From this idea I was talking with Skernsk and he had an idea that I will chat with Ghostdancer about. CM’s could open up a:
Friday Squad Operations Frame C.O.’s Allied
Friday Squad Operations Frame C.O.’s Axis
Ditto for Sunday Squad Operations
From what I understand it would now be pretty simple for CM’s with permissions set by skuzzy to add 3 players to each forum. Each one of the Frame C.O.’s would still have a frame that is their responsibility, but they could have more freedom and opportunity to discuss tactics and bounce idea off each other. As it stands now I don’t know of any Frame C.O.’s that have discussed tactics with each other. Would be a nice compromise from having one player do all three frames.
Aircraft use. Again, this is a consistency point. Rather than have a different ride, I would propose that squads are either assigned a "light" or "heavy" role in the event, and where at all possible, fly the same a/c for the 3 frames. Each squad say does a "heavy" stint" about 1/3 of the time, in bombers or jabo. This allows some skills to be developed, and again, improves play over all. The other 2/3 are "light" assignments.
This would be possible and more practical if we had the same Frame C.O. in all the frames. Yet, this idea has merit, but I think some squads would really suffer in attendance. As it is some squads have a poor showing just for a single frame of a ride they don’t like. For all three it would be pretty low. Picture your squad having to fly Kates three frames in a row. Again I know many would do it, but the idea is to have fun. ;)
Possibly, a loosening up of objectives that allow more leeway to the COs to prosecute the campaign.
Not for Squad Operations. What I have said from the beginning when I designed the Snapshots and Squad Operations is that the way to ensure the death of an event is lack of action. You must ensure action for players and the only way to do that is to have a specific list of targets to attack and defend for both sides. There is enough variety to give Frame C.O.’s a chance to plan. Unknowns still include the number of AC, what alt, what direction, what type of AC to keep everyone on their toes. If you start give broad areas that may or may not be attacked you will have some squads fly around for 2 hours and not see a thing.
Set down guidelines for the Friday and Sunday S.O. that are the same.
I could not agree more. Both should be ran the same, exactly the same.
I think I speak for my squad when I say we enjoy them a lot. I think my favorite scenarios are those with bombers and their escorts vs fighter defense. The targets don't have to be revealed to the fighter defense but the defenders should be given a list of probable targets which do include the actual targets.
If Frame C.O.’s are not given specific targets to attack and or defend then something is wrong IMHO. Orders should be very clear on what to attack and defend. If CM’s don’t write them that way then the chance for a squad to fly around for 2 hours in boredom greatly increases. When that happens unless there was a no show by a squad it is the fault of the CM. This should never happen in Squad Operations.
As a frame CO I found that getting answers from the squad CO's the biggest problem. I had no Idea what most of the squads where proficent in or what rides they preferred or even if they understood the orders and there objectives.
When we get a event site up and running with everything we want an idea I had from this post of yours Jim. Each squad listed could have listed not only how many will show up for the frame, but that squads area of expertise. For example…
AC of most experience
Rate your JABO
Rate your level bombing
Rate your dive bombing
Rate your straffing
Rate your ACM
That way Frame C.O.’s could see how squads rate themselves. In time maybe logs could rate the squads performances also. :)
IMO there has to be a bigger penelty for death. The way it is now if a squad gets wiped out there arent really penelized for the next frame. What I would like to see is if a squad takes say 60% losses they should be placed in a 2nd line AC. For example the first frame a group is in 51Ds and they take 60& losses, next frame they would be in 51Bs. If the take heavy losses in the 2nd frame then 3rd frame they would be in a 47 D11.
and
My problem with Squad Ops, all AH events in fact, is pilot survivabilty. I can't count the number of times one side or even both have been decimated in the very short span of 45 mins. I know that it has a lot to do with the furball mentality, but can't something be incorporated that rewards those that land their planes, versus those who dive into a furball kill three but just end up getting themselves killed?
TheBug I think this would be good to start incorporating into our events. One of the ways mentioned and I would like to see happen is have squads that lose a lot of AC have to fly a AC of an earlier version then before. For example a squad is given 20 A6M5’s for their AC. They fly frame 1 and lose 5. Frame 2 they have to fly only 15 A6M5’s, and 5 A6M3’s. Frame 2 they lose 10 more A6M5’s those in turn would be again replaced with A6M3’s. This is not a new idea, but difficult to implement for two reasons.
1 – We don’t have the AC variety in Aces High to support that kind of system.
2 – Squads don’t fly the same AC each frame.
I think once we took care of #1 then we could have some Squad Operations where Squads fly the same AC all three frames. I just doubt we could do it when you have some Kate’s or Val’s I the frame. The only way around using those AC would be to give those that fly them a 2nd life in a different AC. That we have done before with success.
Get rid of the airstarts, its gamey and causes more confussion then anything. Its not going to kill anybody if they have to spend an extra 30 minutes climbing to alt. Plus it would add a little more realism when the escorts try to rendevous with bombers.
If you look at some of the terrains we use and the distance some heavy laden bombers have to fly using airstarts is an excellent way around making the frames 3 plus hours long or forcing players to fly for 2 hours just to reach a target.
-
As for the suggestions on #2, "the death penalty," I think there will need to be some flexibility. Here are two suggestions.
1. In late war IJN scenarios, it is increadibly difficult to accomplish any objectives and survive, especially if your assigned a Kate or Val for an IJN event. But generally, if every plane that survives and lands is worth some landing bonus, say, three times as much as a single air combat victory, then there might be more caution, or fear of engagment. Whatever the penalty, it should be sufficient to cause a pilot to return to base when dammaged, or consider more carefully engaging in massive furballs. However, it can't be too high since the whole point of the event is to engage the enemy. We can't have people flying around for 15 minutes, landing, then saying Nya Nya Nya from the tower as the enemy circles in anticipation of a fight. That is why I think that a flexible 2-3 point survival bonus should be a good measure, depending on the event.
2. Another alternative is to have expected loss rates. On a bombing mission for example, the objective is worth half the points possible, the other half is how well they do in beating their expected loss rate. If a loss rate of 20% is expected (High in real life, but not in TOD), then up to half the points could be awarded based on how well the loss rate is achieved.
Example: I envision a loss rate score being assigned and a loss rate percentage in this way. "Tonights loss rate for the Allies is expected to be 23%, and the casualty score is 30." Then the ratio of expected losses to actuall losses would be applied to the score of 30 to find the total score. Here is the formula:
Expected Loss Rate
------------------------- X Casualty Score = Loss Rate Score
Actual Loss Rate
If the Allies loose only 15%, then the Loss Rate Score would be 45.9 (46 rounded). If the Allies loose 50%, then the Loss Rate Score would be 13.8 (14 rounded).
I like this idea tracer. One will be looking at. :)
Historical squads need to be given first choice when it comes the sides and rides in a setup that involved there RL namesakes. In a late war ETO setup the 56th FG should be flying jugs for allied not 109s for axis. It would be nice to see all squads put into a couple of different groups. USAAF, RAF, USN, VVS, IJN/IJA, LW and Unaffiliated. In a pacific setup the USN and IJN groups should get first choice and the rest will fill in as needed.
We do this already. CM’s generally try to give Squad their choice especially if it involves their favorite ride. Beyond that it is up to the Frame C.O.’s who fly’s what AC.
The last thing is pretty minor but it would be a nice addition. I would love to see what the victory conditions where before the series even started. The would give everybody an idea of the big picture. Also campaign ribons for the squads to put up on there websites would be a nice addidtion.
Once we have a point system worked out we should be able to do this. :)
For objectives, perhaps something like a certain factory needs to be destroyed. In oder to destory it, the total damage done by the end of frame 3 needs to be 210% (i.e. it could be 75% destroyed in frame 1, followed by 60% in frame 2, followed by 82% in frame 3, for a total of 217%, or totally destroyed) This way, even if 100% damage was done in one frame, the objective is still not met because another 110% has to be done in the next frames combined.
In a way this is how I approached the current frames. Several objectives and they were to destroy as much as possible of each. With visual pictures and check the logs I was able to determine what % of the target was destroyed. With each target valued at 500 points the attackers would gain a % of the 500 points.
To go with the above, airfields could be destroyed in a frame and made unusable for the next frame. This way, airfields closest to the main objective could be taken out, making it harder for the enemy to defend the objective because they will now be based further away.
The problem with this is it can start to take away from the fun for the losing side. No one wants to fly in a frame which they have little or no hope of winning. Sooner or later when you reduce the quality of the ride, force them to up from a farther field, carry over damage done to fields from frame to frame, you will have a side that did so poorly in frame one they have no hope of winning in frames 2 or 3. So why show up? We have to strike a compromise. Everyone who participates in Squads Operations should have a good chance to fly and engage the enemy with some reasonable expectations to shoot someone down and land it. Of course the skill of the pilot, his squad, and numerous other factors will affect the outcome of that engagement. But cumulative penalties carried over frame to frame become problematic and reduce the quality of game play for a large percent of the players.
plus we need something what was done for CAP event,
list of aces, streak........... and som other small things. Whichine can give you somethingexciting to read saturday morning or monday mornig, when you chk all boards.
I agree. In time I don’t see why we can’t do this.
And pls no more experiments with alt and som other ideas, just simply desighn. FLy to target, hit him, take som fight and head home. I think best funn peopl have when saw som battle and safe return home, thats give best satisfaction
:) Agree.
No more night scenarios please until hitech and co discover the instrument panel light bulb and possibly navigation lights
Agree.
We should catalog desired map changes and submit requests to the cm terrain team. After all, scenarios, squad-ops, and the like are what the team is here for
Good idea.
i just got idea, all what we need is "superuser" right for CIC
Honestly only CiC need radar to have overlook on all his pplanes.
Usual we fly without dot radar anyway.
So if HT would be so kinde and give admin arena rights to set one or two men's per side, radar on. And all the rest radar off , we can have this problem from head.
Its should be work for BOB and many future events.
If i wrote to complicated, small example:
knights - radar off
bishops - radar of
set player Andy H - radar on (as co of axis)
set player warlock - radar on (as co of allies)
This would be nice. :)
You knew that the object of the excercise was to fly it as if it was for real, which meant that you had to go into hostile skies, do your job AND do your damndest to get back to base. If you didnt, you hurt your sides chances of winning. Sometimes we would even abort a raid or sortie, when we ran into unexpectedly heavy opposition, to give us a chance of flying again later in the frame somewhere where we could do some good, rather than just get killed for no gain.
I think we will and are working toward this. Many of the above suggestions point toward this.
1. SSO needs to run smooth (incl. designs, constant numbers, spirit, ...)
2. we have to get it in the players heads, there is such an exciting event (advertising)
3. players need to read what this event is all about (portal site)
4. players have to speak with other players to get other squads to try it out (personal approach is always better than an announcement in the MA; secondly we want whole squads and not single players)
5. if you start growing you get a snowball effect and numbers grow even more
6. mission accomplished.
Good points. Glad that last frame when so well on Sunday :)
I think making sure that bomber ops are "doable" by ratios, several targets, and better mission planning is an area I can agree on. Bombers are the cornerstone of many of the frames. Thats something we need to ensure continues.
I think bombers should be in most Squad Operations frames. Not many, but some squads like to fly them all the time. They also help keep the frame from turning into an MA or CT hour and add a sense of responsibility which can only add to the game play. At least the kind we all want.
The "walkons not allowed" thingy will throw off some people.
I'm sure it's a dilemma; to get people on and still have an organized event.
True, but we have other walk on events. Wed, Thurs, Saturday and even the large Scenarios player can walk on. Squad Operations should never be a walk on event. It is not that hard to post here and contact a squad about flying with them as a guest.
Phew. That only took a couple of hours.
About my bed time. :)
-
great summary Daddog
i own you beer when we meet next time:)
now we need to run this live;)
-
Here's a non-hypothetical example of how it's not just a matter of "furball mentality" that leads squads to gettiing wiped out.
In the last Friday Squad Ops "Two Front War, Frame 1" The Shills upped 6 La5s on a Fighter Sweep. 1/2 way through our Patrol, we spotted what turned out to be about 10 FW190s. Thinking that they were likely 190A8s hunting Bombers (because despite and Alt/numbers advantage they did not engage us) we felt we had a good chance of taking them out if we could force an engagement. As we were following them, we spotted more cons approaching. A trap?
We fought and ran all the way back to our home field. It turned out to be 18 FW190D9s vs. 6 La-5s. We managed to get 3 of them, but were wiped out in the process. From a mission perspective, we kept those 18 190s from engaging the bombers, and as I mentioned, when we chose to engage, we thought it was about 10 v. 6 190A8s v. 6 La-5s.
I can not think of any other way I would have performed on this mission (with the exception of zigging instead of zagging at the end there lol). And it wasn't dictated by any furball mentality, we just got slaughtered. Should we have run back to base when we first encountered higher contacts? I was proud of our fighting retreat.
-Sik
-
Sickboy,
As there are more frames to this scenario I can't elaborate on what happened to you other then to say. The CO of the last frame, Tracerx, used some very well thought out tactics and plans and they where, as you attest to, carried out in most cases extremely well. The orders and battle plans curtailed furballing.
The outcome of the frame may not have been as good as was expected but I for one will be using his tactics.
-
Originally posted by Jim
Sickboy,
The outcome of the frame may not have been as good as was expected but I for one will be using his tactics.
Jim,
I had a lot of fun, and hope we made it sporting for the MAW and DoW. I'm just using this example to show how getting your whole squad wiped out doesn't have to be because of a "furball mentality" and ask the question: Should the Shills be punished for getting wiped out, as has been advocated elsewhere in this thread.
-Sik
-
Sikboy,
I was leaning towards the penalty option for getting your squad wiped out until this week. The orders and plans for the mission where written in such a way that furballing was not an option. The squads had to work as a team and in so doing knew that losing pilots hurt the overall objective.
Your experience is another good reason why punishment for defeat is not a good idea. How can they be sure what caused the total lose of a squad and/or was that squad more or less sacrificed for the completion of the objective.
Furthermore the new scoring is going to curtail the unnecessary furballing, points lost for not bringing back your planes.
With the experiences of Tracerx's planning and tactics, Sikboy's retreating fight I do not agree with the penality option being discussed any longer.
-
Another real world (well SSO) example for the problem with penalizing squads (outside of the score for a side) for being wiped out.
On the other side of the map from the Shills and Sikboy, the Nightmares and AKs drove in against the LW target from the SW. You had 20 P51s and 13 buff formations that were the first in. By this I mean that Jordi and his buff force and escorts took a different route which had them hit the target after we did.
Net result was that the LW forces swarmed the AKs and us. Nightmares lossed 17 out of 20 planes the AKs took a heavy beating losing 5 complete buff formations out of 13 and most of the drones of the others. However, the escorts got the buffs to target and betweenthe two groups shot down 43 enemy planes. That is almost half of the LW forces in that frame.
So in the case also it was not a case of furball mentality at all that resulted in the heavy losses. Plus, the fact that allies hit first with this force drew the LW away from the other force and helped to use up the LW fuel and ammo in the planes. Contributing to the lighter resistance of the north buff group.
Basically we ended up sacrificing to the south group to allow a delayed attack from the north to get through with more planes; is the way things worked out.
Net result though was that the south groups took horrendous losses and not many got home after striking target at all.
So the point reduction that Daddog is a good way to judge these things. Your buff hits and gets home .. 100% of the points. It doesn't then less of the points, etc. But demoting to second line aircraft becomes tricky as Sikboy pointed out and our case too. Our force also was outnumbered but instead of a fighting with treat .. did a fighting escort where all we did was put some lead into enemy planes to try to scare them off the buffs and then returned the buffs.
I agree that is hard to tell the reasons all the time why a squad suffers heavy losses. And at times you know a CiC might send a squad in first or on a diversion run where he expects them to take massive losses and its part of the plan so that he draws enemy forces out of place for a different force to get in.
-
Only 1 problem with Squad Ops...not enough chutes. More people should eject.