How did you guys like......

[Sled]

A great discussion guys, that has no right or wrong opinions.


There is a standard style to FSO that will be adhered to (while I am Lead CM), there are certain things we will not try, and some things we might.

I refuse to squash all new ideas, that don't fit into the "style of past FSO design", just because they are different. That is just not my way. If an Admin wants to try something different, (with in reason) we will most likely approve of it. If it is a mess? Then we won't do it again.

This event we tried a new approach to attack and defense. With a mystery base that was not going to be attacked, and from what I can tell it didn't work out to badly. Could it have been a disaster? Maybe, but it was thought out well enough that I felt it was worth a try, and had the potential to add a dimension to FSO that has not tried before, and with that a new possibility of entertainment.

We will go back to the standard FSO "way" in frame 3, no mystery base. We gave it a try for 2 frames and it seemed to be OK. It will remain as a tool for possible use in FSO's in the future.

Thanks for the comments.

[Odee]

Originally posted by Stoney74
I thought it diluted the defense.  Gives the offense a bit too much initiative possibly.

Kind of like the Real Deal huh?

[TheBug]

I believe a lot of trouble in using the "cannon fodder" stems in the scripted nature of most FSO orders.  Which I do understand is there to help insure action for all FSO pilots.  But I wouldn't be opposed to trying out more options in regards to targets and freer reins for COs.  Say many targets with varying points assigned to them and also strategic target that can impact the next frame.  Kinda of give the FSO a wargame feel played out without human chess pieces.  But a setup like that could leave some out of the action.  If I remember correctly the S3s in warbirds used a broader set of orders but my memory has failed me before  Wish I had an old set to compare and steal ideas from.