Another Broader Rule Question...Logic in motion..

[oneway]

The logs clearly show that no A-20 violated the rules of engagement (as defined by the rules and interpreted by the CM's) and no damage (assist or kill) was inflicted in any frame yet the perception of a violation had a profound affect on the outcome...to the point where it may very well have determined the final outcome. To me this is the underlying core issue, a player (or in this case a significant number of players) basically walking off a scenario midstream over a perceived infraction that did not in fact occur.

That whole sordid affair about the A-20 and the alleged tank bombing was indeed unfortunate, though I only heard bits and pieces of it...I was not privileged at the time to view the forums...nor have I bothered to look into to the details of it now that the forums are open...

The program that I have written and continue to write would have ended that discussion in 5 minutes by simply running the log for the frame in question and then outputting the BBS code showing clearly that no violations had occurred. What started as a spark, and grew to a conflagration would rarley happen with this tool at our disposal; here is yet another tremendous benefit of such a tool.

Rapid response to such claims and innuendo is the surest way to stop that sort of thing from happening... 

As to A-20's during the Scenario...like all groups or plane types, they had their share of issues including multiple life, invalid departure fields, invalid strat targets, rtb to wrong base...

Oneway

[Strip]

Your analysis of the A-20 situation is a bit off, Fencer immediately tried to put that fire out. He had a detailed post about his findings within mere hours after being made aware of it. He specifically said not one A-20 violated the rules that frame. That was a bomb looking for a fuse, regardless of having ended the discussion as far as rules were concerned. A few players made up there minds with apparently little regard for what really happened.

No amount of software or code could have stopped that in my opinion....

Edit: I started to question my timeline and looked back at the particular thread I had in mind. It was a little over two days before Fencer posted his findings, my mistake. Still stand by my comments tho....

Strip

[oneway]

Your analysis of the A-20 situation is a bit off, Fencer immediately tried to put that fire out. He had a detailed post about his findings within mere hours after being made aware of it. He specifically said not one A-20 violated the rules that frame. That was a bomb looking for a fuse, regardless of having ended the discussion as far as rules were concerned. A few players made up there minds with apparently little regard for what really happened.

No amount of software or code could have stopped that in my opinion....

Edit: I started to question my timeline and looked back at the particular thread I had in mind. It was a little over two days before Fencer posted his findings, my mistake. Still stand by my comments tho....

Strip

48 hours is a long time to wait...maybe it wouldn't have made a difference to have an answer in 5 minutes...again I was not privileged to what went down and the time line...I just picked up bits and pieces of it via PM's...spanning a few days...

I stand by my comments that it would make difference, and it certainly wouldn't hurt a thing to be able to able to respond rapidly and definitively.

[humble]

To me the issue wasn't the possibility of an infraction, it was the response. The moment that I read the relevant post on the BBS I immediately posted a link to my film for review. It clearly showed not only the actual event but the context. If nothing else this made it very clear that my intention was to actually mark the tank in question, very different from someone actually trying to hit the tank missing and then claiming another intent. Regardless of any individuals feelings on the subject both my intent and the event itself were clearly within the rules. To be candid the response was (and actually still is) very disturbing to me. My goal was to contribute in any way possible (within the rules) to achieve our goals for the frame. To me this little bit of ad-lib was exactly what a scenario is all about, finding a way to get the job done within the structure of the scenario. Obviously reading the axis forums its clear this was an ongoing issue predating this scenario and that a faction within the side had a very distinct agenda (curious if this caused the internal issues). When they got spanked they chose to focus on an perceived wrong and use it as an excuse to cut and run vs man up and do better the next frame.

To me this all ties in to the original post in that we're looking more and more to police transgressions. Specific to the A-20's I am unaware of any A-20 departing from anything other then the correct base at any time in the 4 frames. I am also unaware of any issues specific to multiple life's, invalid strat targets. RTB to "wrong base" is perfectly fine as long as a life is deducted...

I didn't read the oui oui oui thread till the next morning, Fencer responded in the thread in less then 3 hours, jolly also confirmed that I was in fact coordinating with him and that the tactic did in fact enable him to located the tiger in question. The issue isn't the action or the "lag" in response, its the reaction from those who disagrees with both my action and the CM's decision. Having a program that confirmed no actual damage was done sooner wouldn't have changed the response by the "offended parties". So in the end I'm somewhat upset that I inadvertently pissed in someones cheerio's and caused such discontent...but i'm more angry that a small group felt they had some unalienable right to manufacture an artificial sandbox to play in and caused what I feel were tremendous issues for the axis if we consider that the Tiger unit was unquestionably the lynch pin for both the axis ground defense and offense. To unilaterally bail over this is an unpardonable breach of scenario etiquette and i'm dismayed it wasn't dealt with more severely.   

[oneway]

----

RSKS output...without rules applied...

Refining BBS code output and crunching data....accurate and thorough scoring capability is just around the corner....

The switches are ready to be flipped according to the rules of the NEXT Scenario....

It will be in the hands of the switch designers and switch flippers if accuracy and totality is welcomed and/or warranted...

The capability is near to apply pure rule logic to the data sets...

Look out in the 2-3 weeks to see the comprehensive report output  and capabilities of this program, ranging from Overall Scenario Stats to Individual Pilot Reports...including Fighter to Fighter, Machine vs Machine, Friendly Fire, and the dreaded 'Dark Side Report'... and much more...

Oneway

========================

Red Storm / Krupp Steel Frames 1 through 4:

Allied					Axis
Pilots	193				Pilots	188
Kills	776	Bailed	34	|	Kills	635	Bailed	42
Assists	471	Captured	64	|	Assists	340	Captured	55
Deaths	451	Crashed	58	|	Deaths	548	Crashed	58
Landed	1130	Ditched	42	|	Landed	513	Ditched	28
Destroyed	2353	Diso'd	47	|	Destroyed	1338	Disco'd	38
Killers:		Destroyers:			Killers:		Destroyers:
Sethbag	39	Sethbag	141	|	dr7	36	KKEN	106
WMLute	29	cactus	140	|	Sloehand	34	TheMaj	82
COLLEEN	28	GypsyB	134	|	Coprhead	22	Nutzoid	68
DrBone	26	Tippo	132	|	shamus	19	whiskers	67
Dantoo	23	Krusty	118	|	HiSpd	17	pope14	63
SirNuk3	23	Strip	116	|	kansas2	17	lothmog	61

The People:

Kills:	Sethbag	39
A2A Kills:	WMLute	28
A2G Kills:	A8Moray	9
G2G Kills:	Sethbag	38
G2A Kills:	COLLEEN	3
F2F Kills:	Dantoo	18
F2B Kills:	SirNuk3	15
B2F Kills:	Soulyss	6
Assists:	Snefens	17
Awarded:	flight17	3
----
Destroyed:	Sethbag	141
Base Objects:	Sethbag	93
Strat Objects:	GypsyB	117
----
Departures:	Tippo	56
ReArms:	HiSpd	8
Landed:	USRanger	37
----
ShotDown:	XXXX	22
SD-Captured:	XXXX	1
SD-Crashed:	XXXX	7
Bailed:	XXXX	3
Captured:	XXXX	4
Crashed:	XXXX	4
Ditched:	XXXX	2
Disco'd:	SD67	4

The Machines:

Fighter	Sorties	Kills	Deaths	K/D	Destroyed	Field	Factory
La-5FN	145	79	25	3.16	108	37	71
La-7	250	241	51	4.73	98	89	9
P-39Q	148	33	19	1.74	164	56	108
Yak-9U	249	153	62	2.47	16	16	0
Bf 109G-14	90	80	41	1.95	1	1	0
Bf 109G-6	121	38	61	0.62	2	0	2
Bf 109K-4	119	82	52	1.58	3	3	0
Bf 110G-2	28	6	14	0.43	161	0	161
Fw 190A-8	40	10	7	1.43	1	1	0
Fw 190D-9	162	143	59	2.42	1	1	0
Fw 190F-8	183	99	78	1.27	477	145	332
Bomber
A-20G	78	18	20	0.90	264	15	249
B-25C	152	29	25	1.16	1078	157	921
Il-2 Type 3	141	31	67	0.46	166	163	3
Ju 88A-4	91	9	60	0.15	505	137	368
Tank
Sherman VC Firefly	163	70	82	0.85	62	59	3
T-34/76	3	0	0	----	0	0	0
T-34/85	166	100	65	1.54	236	188	48
Panzer IV H	93	30	60	0.50	27	11	16
Tiger I	104	121	70	1.73	67	23	44
AAA
Ostwind	28	0	1	0.00	41	11	30
Wirbelwind	76	14	14	1.00	150	5	145
Troop
M3	124	2	27	0.07	30	14	16
SdKfz 251	106	1	37	0.03	21	21	0
FieldGun
Gun Ship or Field	157	14	0	----	12	12	0
Gunner
Gunner-Observer	93	8	2	4.00	0	0	0

BBS Code Generated by AcesHigh.Scenario.LogReader Class
A Scenario Planning, Management & Analysis program written by Oneway in C# .NET 3.5
Number of Auto-Generated Chars = 8953

[oneway]

Allied La-7 Group Leaders,

The Kill/Death ratio of the La-7 in RSKS is an astounding figure when you consider its predicated not on pilot ability, but the Machine driven...and more importantly the leadership of the La-7 groups....

Well done Allied La-7 Leaders....

A supreme effort to say the least

 

Oneway