next scenario

[HB555]

I have had the pleasure of riding The Collings Foundation B-17 "909" a total of 6 times. Two paid rides around Reno, and 4 rides from Reno to the next stop, where my loving wife drove to haul my sorry butt back home.
The B-24, previously known as "The All American" from 1989 to 1997,and "The Dragon and his Tail"  from 1998 to 2004, has been redone for this years tour. It is now in the configuration of the 467th Bomb Group, 760th Bomb Squadrons famous "Witchcraft", the original of which amassed a total of 130 missions without  a loss or injury of a crewman, or without turning back due to mechanical problems.
Yup I am a Collings Foundation Volunteer, and can truthfully say that after each and every ride in those planes I always say the same thing..."That was THE MOST fun I have EVER had with my clothes ON!
http://www.collingsfoundation.org

Sorry, Brooke and Fury got me going...

[Joker312]

The most important aspect to any scenerios are the available planesets.  At this time we are handicapped.

I have flown in almost every scenerio over the last 4 years or so and have enjoyed them very much, but we continue to do the same ones over and over due to planeset limitations.

Now I realize that there are many other more pressing things on Dale's plate but until we get more planes, both early war  and late war, the designers dont really have alot to work with.

Sure we can do Germany vs heavy bombers again but wouldnt it be nice to do Norway, Deippe, France, Pearl, any late war Pacific engagement, Finland, the Spanish Revolution, ect?

Dont get me wrong, I await the next scenerio like all of us but we need more planes.....

a few that come to mind.... Betty, Judy, Jack, DO-17, HE-111, PE-2, Mig-1, SM-79, I-16, MS-406, G50, KI-43 Oscar, LaGG-3, Ki-44 Tojo, Buffalo, ect.... and it would also be nice to get some more weapons choices for the planes we have..... no 37 mm option for the Stuka is one, a 75mm for the b25....

Oh while we are at it.... some other ships like Jap CV's, any real BB's, CA and CL's for Italy, Japan, Russia, GB and USA.....

HEHEHEHE pretty large wish list I know but maybe, just maybe we get 3 or 4 and can do something new as far as scenerios go.

[jordi]

Here Here !

[Nefarious]

Great Ideas, Everyone.

Afool, I havnt forgot about Dieppe.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by CPorky
I think one of the problems is the same problem that is prevelent in the MA; scoring. Once a single side begins to fall in the scoring process (or get stuck in rides they don't like because of it or rules changes during the scenario) the individuals involved don't log on.

Scenarios need to move away from the scoring process and encourage the player to fall into 'the role' and enjoy the enviornment.

People need stories to promote this role, like the write ups we did after most of the old scenarios to keep them interested. Otherwise, its just a bigger MA mission with fewer different types of aircraft involved.

Not that I'd agree with Steve on anything about scenarios

But going back to our AW days what he's describing is what made the events fun.  Folks getting into the history and playing the 'role' so to speak.

Yeah as Jordi could tell ya, I'm one of the worst offenders at this (+Tiff btw Jordi)  HAd to have an accurate name for the group, instead of some number, flight names, fill the boards with images and stories.  Get people into the mood that way.  Combat reports in the right format for the time,

Even went so far as to do YANK covers for a few of the scenarios.  This one still on the HD for an old AW Scenario "Carthwheel" where Porky and Corky flights made up the 80th Headhunters.

Jeez I'm having flashbacks

That and you guys need to throw a weekday frame in there for us poor saps who work both weekend days

Dan/CorkyJr

[ramzey]

Operation Bodenplatte.
2 weeks before and 2 weeks after new year

p38, typhons,tempests,  spits14, spits 9, p47, p51 b&D, b26,b17,A20, t34, lvt , m3, (fireflys?)
vs
190 d9, a8,f8,bf 262, bf163, pzkw4, pzkw6,m3 ju88, bf110g2, bf109 g8, g10

hmm?

[Flossy]

Originally posted by Guppy35
But going back to our AW days what he's describing is what made the events fun.  Folks getting into the history and playing the 'role' so to speak.

I couldn't agree more +Tiff (sorry can't get used to you being a tropical fish ) - that is something I really miss from AW scenarios.  Occasionally some people have tried to do similar here, but with such a lack of response to their efforts they have not usually continued, and I think its a great shame.  I always enjoyed reading your stories and definitely had a greater sense of taking part after reading them.  The stories and the hilarious Briefing Room encounters are two elements of scenario playing which really made me feel I was involved in 'something special' and wanting to come back for more.  

[CPorky]

There is one big reason why I dislike scenarios like this; we can't model one side having better trained pilots with more hours behind the controls. It quickly becomes a 'what-if' question and those turn into a screaming match on the scenario forums.

(to give the paragraph above some validity) The results from 'Baseplate' were so poor that one Allied aviator had said that the Germans at that point 'couldn't even hit parked aircraft, it was pitiful' (mind you, I'm paraphrasing). How can you recreate this, much less a sneak but still scheduled attack? I think Bodenplatte would make a better Snapshot than a full length scenario...

Originally posted by ramzey
Operation Bodenplatte.

[CPorky]

I'll never forget that B17 test pilot and combat pilot (that had end-stage cancer) we had at work one time, he was dismayed we were enjoying a game that trivialized their struggles during the war but was very enthusiastic when I told him of the scenarios. As he told me, "At least people will know what happened after I'm dead and gone."

I ended up bringing in pictures of the Longbow scenario in for him and I think it added some satisfaction during those last days of his life.

Win or lose, I'd like to stay in the 'role' and allow others to examine what happened during the period. I think too many rely on the 'winning' of the scenario and and less on the historical enviornment.

Originally posted by Guppy35
Folks getting into the history and playing the 'role' so to speak.

[ROC]

It's very difficult to build an historically accurate scenario.  The whole premise is re-creating what happend, which means there is no ability to "win or lose" or try to come up with a better plan.  There is nothing creative about it, and I feel it best to simply watch the Discovery channel and  see what happened as opposed to spending months to do exactly as they did during the actual battle.

There is no challenge in this.  The whole ground pounding, adreneline charged motivation behind a great scenario is to take, as close as possible, the conditions that were upon them at the time, and try it another way, or duplicate the winning strategy, or whatever you can do to immerse yourself in the event to "make a difference" and make it yours.

We just came off a very enjoyable Coral Sea event where Nothing really went down the way it did in the original fight other than the original goal.

Granted, we could have dispatched an historically accurate attack pattern, targeted only the ships that were actually damaged, sunk only those that were sunk, and ended the event reliving history as it were.  Then, for all the enjoyment that this suggests, switch sides and do it again from the other point of view.

Does not, in any way, shape, or form, sound even remotely enjoyable.

Coral Sea, to me, wasn't about any score.  Don't know what the score was, Don't care.  I was the CO and the last thing I know is what the end score was.  The objective was clearly to win.  Win by taking out the other side, regardless of what the score said.  A few hundred points means Nothing to a Carrier sinking.

I did, however, fully enjoy the planning, strategizing, wondering what the other side was going to do.  How much time and energy will really be spent flying in an event where you Know exactly where the other side will be, and the outcome of the fight?

Historically accurate or what if.  The "what if" wins hands down.   We take the Historically Accurate conditions, and add real people to it, and see what we can do with it.  

I think too many rely on the 'winning' of the scenario and and less on the historical enviornment.

The historical environment WAS winning.  That was the point of the fight to begin with, no one went up to play fair and make sure the sides were balanced.  They went up to kick the crap out of the other side.   How can we be exposed to the historical accuracy of the experience if we can't chose what we would do in the situation?

[Newman]

Originally posted by ROCrats


I did, however, fully enjoy the planning, strategizing, wondering what the other side was going to do.  How much time and energy will really be spent flying in an event where you Know exactly where the other side will be, and the outcome of the fight?

I would have to agree with ROC.. Being on the stinky side of the stick in Coral Sea, Team Zulu HQ staff spent a lot of time working out a strategy that may have worked.. but it didn't

That, by no means made it a bad scenario for me. It was more of a learning experience, and it's experience I will take to the next scenario. I just wish killshooter was off in the MA so I could shot ROC down just once..  

Hey ROC, I'm less than a 2 hour drive from Portland.. Be happy to pick you up and drop you off "somewhere" near Bremerton..



SALUTE!

Newman

[Guppy35]

Think you gents are on the same side  No one is saying the outcome should be pre-ordained.  

It's just being able to do it well enough that the history can be a part of it, while the outcome can still be in doubt.

Mustangs taking the Forts and Libs deep can let someone really get caught up in the role, while not neccesarily meaning the LW fighter drivers have to lay down and die.

38s over Rabaul vs th JAF is the same thing.  

For some of us, part of the fun is learning all we can about the Group we're pretending to be and applying it to the scenario flying.  It sure helps when those moments come about where you get sucked into the computer/cockpit and it starts to feel as real as your imagination can make it feel.

It doesn't happen often, but I can still vividly remember those times where it did and for me that makes the scenario experience about the best thing going.

Dan/CorkyJr
Now about those weeknight frames

[afool]

Originally posted by Nefarious
Great Ideas, Everyone.

Afool, I havnt forgot about Dieppe.

OK, found it...
This was written over two years ago, when I was actually playing Ace's High.


Dieppe "Operation Jublee"
The falled invansion on Aug 19, 1942.
A proposed scenario for Ace's High.
********************************************

It has all the elements and at this point of time, with the few tanks and no ground warfare, in AH, it's as close to D-Day as you can get.

A battle fleet - landing vechile launch and cover.
No Aircraft carriers
Landing craft and tanks.
A large scale air battle.

Basic idea of this scenario:
The British covering the fleet, landing vechiles and close air support.

The Germans trying to sink the fleet and landing craft, plus drive the Canadians in the channel.

The Aircraft,

British;
Boston III, Spit Mk V, Spit Mk IX, Typhoon, Hurricane Mk 1 and IIc, 24 B-17's

German;
Ju88 A-4, Fw190 A-5* and Bf 109 F-4
* only the A-4 was avalible, but there is no A-4 in AH.
"Now that the Ju87 been added that could figure in, remember this was written over 2 years ago"

Landing Craft;
LVT A2

Tank;
British;
LVT A4*
* there is no Chruchill Mk 1 in AH, the Chruchill was waterproffed for the landing at Dieppe, LVT A4 makes a good sub. Chruchill has a 2 pounder in turrent, 3 pounder in hull, plus heavier armor.

German;
I would be inclined to use the LVT A4 as a Panzer sub. To keep the lack of armor plate on equal footing. The Chruchill's armor was equal to Panzer armor at the time.

Shore Battery;
use what is in AH now.

PT Boats
Axis: E-boats. Scout recon.
The invasion force was discovered by E-boats in1942.
Air/Sea Rescue

Allied: Air/Sea Rescue

Launch the LVT's in the dark to similate the actual landing, just before/ at dawn. Fleet than withdraws to a safe distance if so desired by CO.

Objectice based.

Allied,
Land and Hold the port. Protect the fleet with air cover from
England.

Axis,
sink the fleet, drive the Canadians back into the channel.

This will be a historic scenario.
The classic Spitfire / Typhoon -vs- FW190 fight.
Just like it was in 1942.

Four frames.
2 frames than a side switch.

Frame 1
Allied: landing and taking the port. Protect the fleet.
Axis: Try and stop the landing, break the air cover, sink the fleet, put back the Canadians.

Frame 2
Allied: Cover the Canadian withdrawl, protect the fleet.
Axis: same as frame 1.

Map
Europe, A-3 (old AH1 map) looks like Dieppe. Some editing would be needed to place German airfield and shore batteries.

Finally...
I am aware that this is by no means a "finished" scenario. It is only a set of ideas for a scenario. All input, ideas, comments and concerns are welcome....

****************************************************

afool

Flame away...

[Fury]

Is it possible to regurgitate old AW or Warbirds scenarios, or would it take just as much time to adjust them to AH as it would to come up with something from scratch?

Is the CM team looking for volunteers, and if so is there a 'job description' for the team?

[jordi]

I used my old AW Midway scenario as a basis for the AH Midway scenario I designed.

I think the same goes for a Pearl scenario or Ploesti - take all the good parts from the AW version and incorporate all the new good stuff from AH - Like moving fleets for Pearl or B24's for Ploesti.

Not sure if they are recruiting new CM Members or not ?