Author Topic: Suggestion. (Read 4092 times)

Fencer51 · « **on:** June 24, 2007, 05:27:07 PM »

I have been in three scenarios and in each both sides flew short every frame.

In AirWarrior we overbooked the scenarios because we expect people to not show, loose interest and have family emergencies occur.

Why does AH limit the registration to the maximum number of fliers? Why not over book by 20 or 30 percent or even 40 percent and let the CO's and their staffs handle the assignments and coordination.

ROC · « **Reply #1 on:** June 24, 2007, 05:39:44 PM »

Fencer, we don't "limit" them.

We open registration with limits to keep the sides registering evenly, and always increase the limits when the interest is there. But, the interest has to be there. It doesn't do any good to open up registration with 400 per side, only to have 300 join up Allies and 100 Axis. So, we would do something like 100-100 then as they get close to filling, increase to 150-150, and so on.

Fencer51 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 24, 2007, 06:29:50 PM »

Well when I tried to join Husky I was told the axis side was full. I believe the same was true of BoB when some people tried to join.

So obviously it was not done on Husky. And before you say it, the Allies were full too. So you once the slots were filled the registration did not advance.

Also you should enable the ability for squadrons to register as groups to fill a certain number of slots. That way they can internally adjust their attendance. If you give people the guarranteed ability to fly with the buddies I think you will get more solid attendance.

I think you CMs try and orchestrate the whole scenario too much (on numerous levels). Let the sides fill up naturally, people will migrate to the sides with a good balance.

As far as that goes, don't enable the BBs until 2 weeks before the event. If sides are uneven, then ask for volunteers to move to the other, and if that isnt going to happen, limit the number of the one side accordingly.

A staff can recruit people and generate interest. A good scenario can do likewise. You need to recruit COs way in advance to allow them time to get their sides in order and get people ready for the event.

But I am digressing. Back on topic.

We are constantly short on people each and every frame. In BoB we had 14 people who registered never even show up at all, let alone those who were in and out over the course of the event.

Something has to be done, your current system is not working.

Husky01 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 24, 2007, 06:47:08 PM »

The reason Husky's population wasn't raised is I believe the last slots on both teams didn't fill up till give or take 3 days before the scenario started. The interest for Husky was just not at the point it needed to be to up the player caps if they where to of upped the cap to lets say 150 120. Most of the players might have signed up for the Allies, then there would not of been time to even the numbers out before the frame causing a large influx of players to one side or the other.

To say the system isnt working I believe is a bad way of stating it. Even if the CMs for Husky put the numbers at 150/120 that still doesn't meen any more would show up then they did in the frames. The CMs cant control if the players that sign up show up or not, thats up to the players them self.

Easyscor · « **Reply #4 on:** June 24, 2007, 07:05:25 PM »

The lesson might also be that the CMs made a very accurate assessment of the interest and nailed it with the number of slots they made available.

So next time a scenario is offered, you might think about making sure you sign up early to guarantee your slot.

Fencer51 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 24, 2007, 07:22:17 PM »

Its not about my getting a slot, I did and would not have had a problem if I could not have gotten one. I would have just walked on, as you can guarrantee that there are 20 to 30 spots open on each side.

So Easycor, nice try but that is not what I am talking about.

It is about flying 30 people short on each side frame after frame. When you have a balanced scenario and plane sets made to achieve certain goals, it makes the scenario unbalanced when you then have to play short.

And it is broken. The fact that the sides at game time are short indicate that.

Now if the CMs are trying to have a little group here then fine, but I thought the purpose was to increase attendance and fill the scenarios.

The registration was 126 for Allied and 96 for Axis.

Frame 1 attendance was 79 Allied / 61 Axis

Frame 2 attendance was 96 Allied / 72 Axis

Frame 3 attendance was 87 Allied / 60 axis

Looks like we were 30 to 45 short for the Allies and 25 to 35 short for the Axis each frame.

How do you fix that? You get more people registered to play and they will fill the slots.

ROC · « **Reply #6 on:** June 24, 2007, 07:57:31 PM »

Fencer, you need to spend some time at this end trying to get people registered to begin with. That in itself is hard, now after that, we can't force them to show. That's up to the CO to attract and keep his people.

Every scenario, including the ones I attended before becoming a CM were a nightmare and nail biter to get people to commit to the event in advance.

There is also a line that must be drawn so the COs can work with a Known Quantity. They have to plan as well. So they will agree to lock the registration down so they can begin, and then have a contingency plan in place for the walkons.

As you show in your numbers, people did register. Now, I'm not clear on After they registered, how the CMs might force them to show up. If you have a suggestion, you know I'll listen, but frankly your own numbers show that it's really not our problem. What good, exactly, would it do to have allowed a larger registration? Do you know the timetable to get Those slots filled to begin with? Last Minute is when we got to those registered numbers. If in the last few days we reached 126/96 what good would it have done to have 250/200 slots opened? What would you have done if we opened the door with 250/200 and 200 went allied and 76 went Axis? Forced people to change? We'd be Exactly were we were now, attendance wise, except we'd have a good number of people ticked that they were forced to move.

It isn't quite as nice and tidy as one might think, it's not simple. How about we try this, keep the registration as it is and perhaps the COs might RETAIN through communication a tad better. Other than that, I don't see one thing that suggests simply upping the reg numbers would have done squat to change the attendance.

forHIM · « **Reply #7 on:** June 24, 2007, 08:05:01 PM »

As the one who wrote the code for the registration system, I know that it can only do so much. The purpose of the system is to get a list of names, emails, and contact information so that the scenario CO/XO can then communicate with his or her side. The system does have a spot to indicate which frames a player can commit to, but that is a bit tough when registration is 2 months before the event. It's about communication.

I didn't look, but did any of those players who signed up indicate frame attendance? If so does it match some of the observed numbers?

I don't fly scenarios due to the timing of them and my priorities as a family man. The one scenario I did fly in I found to have poor communications. Granted this was 3+ years ago, so things have probably changed.

Fencer51 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 24, 2007, 08:10:14 PM »

ROC,

Please don't think that I am attacking the CMs especially yourself.

What I am saying is that in AW we had an over booking of the slots.

We have a shortage on game day here in AH2.

Why not try and over book?

You get people who sign up knowing they are going to only be in one frame (ahem

) and they take the slot for the other two. There are countless other examples on WHY the COs themselves cannot make people show any more that the CMs can.

Maybe you guys are designing the scenarios too large?

Dunno, but it can be pure heck as a CO trying to plan when you KNOW you are going to be down 1/3 at least at kickoff. It limits options effects gameplay. Bet Gaidin wishes he had those 30 guys yesterday when he was trying to cover all Sicily from 8 Sectors away.

If 200 went Allied and 76 went Axis you would explain that only "X" number of people were going to start per side based upon the lowest side. You open up registration to allow people to switch (you probably don't have that option now) and then you limit the people based upon the date of sign up. People are not noobs (well most) and they understand that a balance must be struck.

But until you do allow the large registration you are not going to find out.

Again I suggest a squadron registration option.

Also I suggest you take a hard look at the numbers from the last 4 scenarios and see just how understrength the events were. Adjust your next scenarions to allow for that or overbook to allow for it. One or the other.

Cheers

Fencer51 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 24, 2007, 08:14:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by forHIM
As the one who wrote the code for the registration system, I know that it can only do so much. The purpose of the system is to get a list of names, emails, and contact information so that the scenario CO/XO can then communicate with his or her side. The system does have a spot to indicate which frames a player can commit to, but that is a bit tough when registration is 2 months before the event. It's about communication.

I didn't look, but did any of those players who signed up indicate frame attendance? If so does it match some of the observed numbers?

I don't fly scenarios due to the timing of them and my priorities as a family man. The one scenario I did fly in I found to have poor communications. Granted this was 3+ years ago, so things have probably changed.

I stepped up for BoB Allied and assigned the people to squadrons so I saw what the registration forms allows. I also did a check in on the boards and emailed those that did not check in.

I got nothing from them. We started out 14 short and only one of those actually did show up during any of the 3 frames. Then we had normal wastage of no shows, computer problems, people quitting etc.

Trouble was there was no pool of others to take up the slack.

Maybe you allow a reserve registration to indicate interest and give the COs a pool to pull from?

ROC · « **Reply #10 on:** June 24, 2007, 09:00:26 PM »

Fencer, I know you aren't attacking anyone, and also that I appreciate your involvement and ideas

trax1 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 24, 2007, 09:10:19 PM »

Some of your ideas I think would work great, like when someone registers have something where they can say which frames they will be able to attend, another is allowing them to pick a squad to register to when they sign up so say you and some of your squad mates are signing up you can be sure you'll get to fly together. As for upping the number of slots for the registration that would have done nothing as someone else mentioned it didn't fill up until a few days before it started, so upping the number of slots might have only allowed a hand full of more players to register.

Easyscor · « **Reply #12 on:** June 24, 2007, 09:25:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by trax1
Some of your ideas I think would work great, like when someone registers have something where they can say which frames they will be able to attend, another is allowing them to pick a squad to register to when they sign up so say you and some of your squad mates are signing up you can be sure you'll get to fly together. As for upping the number of slots for the registration that would have done nothing as someone else mentioned it didn't fill up until a few days before it started, so upping the number of slots might have only allowed a hand full of more players to register.

It used to be this way but no one signed for bombers, particularly Ju88s and Bostons but even B-26s. COs started shifting people into bombers and they didn't show because it wasn't what they signed up for. This way that argument is gone and they can still decline when the CO asks them to take a less desireable ride and in this way they're far more likely to attend.

FiLtH · « **Reply #13 on:** June 24, 2007, 10:51:54 PM »

Its hard to compare AW with AH.

In AW the scenarios when they happened was a breath of fresh air and it attracted alot of folks wanting a change of pace. Maybe the age groups were older and more apt to put the effort into a scenario. Not knocking all the yout hhere as many have the interest in scenarios.

In AH there is alot more variety, and maybe the hunger isnt so high to see alot of people flying together on a mission.

Im not sure what it is, but it is different.

zorstorer · « **Reply #14 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:50:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FiLtH
Its hard to compare AW with AH.

In AW the scenarios when they happened was a breath of fresh air and it attracted alot of folks wanting a change of pace. Maybe the age groups were older and more apt to put the effort into a scenario. Not knocking all the yout hhere as many have the interest in scenarios.

In AH there is alot more variety, and maybe the hunger isnt so high to see alot of people flying together on a mission.

Im not sure what it is, but it is different.

Other than Stalins 4th, which had a very tight ground/capture component, it seems that scenarios that involve the land grab just dont generate the interest like the ones involving pure air combat.

Looking back on the past four scenarios the only one that DIDN'T involve the capute component was the Battle of Britain, and not suprising that was the one I had the most fun flying in.

Oh well guess we are on to a new style of scenarios...