Incorporating a Ground War element in a Scenario.. how do we do it?

[USCH]

1st off vary well put IMO sethipus.

2nd looking at the logs
frame1 had 190's killing 3 GV's Vs the Il's killing 6
frame2 had 190's with 11 GV's killed Vs. Il's 0
frame3 had 190's with 3 GV kills Vs 1 for the Il's
frame4 had 190's with 8 Vs 1 kill by IL's

true the 190's and IL's may have tracked or turreted many more or helped a Tank by tracking or turreting a tank
but as we can see the 190's at first glance did a way better job than the IL-2's. the 190's won 25 to 8, that's 3x more kills credited to the 190's

As i said and as i see sethipus say, some tanks may have gotten credit for a kill after an aircraft attacked.

I would have to agree that we worked hard on our GV plan and if some guys want to call it quits because the plan they made failed then so be it.
Scenarios to me, are about having fun and planning with what you have to work with.

[5PointOh]

I think many of you are making assumptions. Only a couple of Axis players have said that they were not thrilled by the scenario. As I said in a early post, I had a great time. Until you poll every single GV player I think your assumptions are misguided.

The other thing I thought about as far as the ground war goes, maybe V-bases should not be made a capturable target. In my opinion it is to easy to capture a V-base.  To shell down three hangers with 4-8 gv is not a difficult task.  Also I would like to hope that the next scenario with ground vehicles the offensives and defensive are equal for both sides.

[Strip]

If only a few axis had problems what is this discussion about? If both sides had fun minus a few players I would say you have hit on a successful mix then. Thats the goal of a scenario have a large portion of the players that had a good time. Is it not?

If there are no issues thats great, we can use this layout with a few minor tweaks.

Strip

[USCH]

If only a few axis had problems what is this discussion about? If both sides had fun minus a few players I would say you have hit on a successful mix then. Thats the goal of a scenario have a large portion of the players that had a good time. Is it not?

If there are no issues thats great, we can use this layout with a few minor tweaks.

Strip

[Tilt]

Frame 4 is interesting

The relative success of  F8s agin GV's is interesting. You will note that only 4 x F8's were able to despatch a significantly higher number of enemy gv's.

Of course Kudos goes to the inherent skills involved but also look at where these F8's were in action. They were often able to re arm at the very fields they were defending! The LW had air superiority at this alt for these critical periods and inflicted damage way above their weight. Consider the rate of attrition on the allied gv's if these F8's were at full strength.

Now look at the 8 x IL2's. Logs seem to indicate that they spent much more time under attack from axis air superiority fighters than (proportionately) the F8's. Indeed when they had the luxury of working in an area of Allied air superiority they were used agin structures. From this we see they were never allowed to tip the balance in the ground war.

So we have the LW succeeding in denying IL2's access to the battlefield whilst the LW was able to get its F8's over the battlefield.............. and yet the Allies won............. why?

Well there were 14 Allied GV's to 8 Axis Gv's and deaths due to A2G did not count! they were merely inconvenient(requiring a respawn)! The LW's success to attrit via A2G did not carry the reward it should have. IMO  the lesson to be learned here is that A2G deaths should count as much as any other. Indeed in an air combat scenario A2G deaths should take precedence even if other gameplay balances have to be added to maintain a viable ground war.

[Tilt]

Nice analytical thoughts, Tilt 

Just thinking, likely an AI driven ground war is quite a long step to the future, but would it help at all if we had GV drones? ...like bombers do.

GV drones would pad out numbers but the discrepancies would still be massive. Plus there may be a mis balancing effect on the individuals game play. (e.g 2 players may be able to tip the balance agin 4 enemies....but could 2 +4 drones do such a thing agin 4 + 8 drones) A local mis balance in actual player numbers may  magnify the numerical advantage of one side.

Is AI ground war so far off?

If we look at the offline mission planner already in game............

If we look at the Combat Air Patrol mission ware developed.................

Is a server driven AI ground war really so far in the future?  If our virtual air battles took place over a terrain which itself was locked in a gv battle with which we could interact and influence how would that enhance our game play?

In Frame 4 The massive ground war that was the EF was represented by 14 Allied players v 8 Axis players! If it was 5 times that number we would still be short ! Now imagine those 14 or 8 adding their weight tactically (like a reserve) to key GV battle points influencing the local outcome.

[Strip]

Tilt,

Given unequal numbers the side with the most numbers will usually come out ahead. Who to blame for that is another matter.....

USRanger and the Allies put out advertising for drivers from frame 2 on for both sides. Naturally they pushed the for people to come for Allies a majority of the time. I did not see any public advertising for Axis specifically in any public forum setting. If I did not see it you can bet a large portion of the MA players did not. I think the current setup is very good as is and would like to see it tried again. Whether you included A2G kills is another discussion and debate. To question a setup that worked fairly well except for side balancing is unfortunate. Given equal numbers I think the results might have been closer to what they might have been expecting.

Another thing to consider is the Axis had the use of the best tank in AH. A small numbers penalty is to be expected once you consider the Tigers involvement. Perhaps next time Tiger drivers get one life less but equal number compared to enemy.

Strip

[Tilt]

Tilt,
Given unequal numbers the side with the most numbers will usually come out ahead. Who to blame for that is another matter.....

........................ To question a setup that worked fairly well except for side balancing is unfortunate. Given equal numbers ..............Strip

There is no one to blame.............. side miss balances will occurr particularly when only so few players are used in such a critical element of game play.

Setup may benefit from the  assumption that there may be an element of attendance misbalance..........there are several methods to over come this you alude to one. The designer is challenged to use one that has "best fit" into the gameplay and game rules.

The bias against A2G kills thwarts the  objective of airsuperiority over the battlefield IMO.


To repeat .................from my perspective this was a fun scenario..............but then I was in an La7

[5PointOh]

I wouldnt exactly call the tiger best in AH, the M4 is quite lethal to a tiger. If you are going to say 1 life for a Tiger, might as well say it for the M4 as well.

[Strip]

I wouldnt exactly call the tiger best in AH, the M4 is quite lethal to a tiger. If you are going to say 1 life for a Tiger, might as well say it for the M4 as well.

Judging by perk cost, eny, and K/d its certainly considered by the masses to be the best. Expert GV drivers may disagree but its as good of measure I can find for comparison. Although, I asked for 1 life less, ie instead of 4 the Tigers would get 3, and each side would have equal numbers.

In some ways a gun is a gun regardless of the tank its on.....

Strip

[5PointOh]

We were only alotted 6 tigers to your 8 M4s and and not sure on how many T-34/85 you were aloud.  So thats two MA perked GVs, I don't see how changing the lives based on equipment will help GV scenarios.

[Strip]

You cant see how having eight Tigers (3 lifes) against eight M4 (4 lifes) would change things over the six vs eight (4 lifes each) under the current setup?

Strip

[fudgums]

You cant see how having eight Tigers (3 lifes) against eight M4 (4 lifes) would change things over the six vs eight (4 lifes each) under the current setup?

Strip

I dont believe you flew in Dob....

[5PointOh]

You cant see how having eight Tigers (3 lifes) against eight M4 (4 lifes) would change things over the six vs eight (4 lifes each) under the current setup?

Strip

I misread the 8 tigers, none the less, its still the same. 24 lives for the tigers and 32 lives for Shermans, and T-34/85s.  To me thats just manipulating the numbers.

[Strip]

Your right, I did not fly DOB, though an explanation on how the two relate would be welcomed.

I have read the rules for nearly every scenario, Krupp Steel is unique in many ways.


Strip