Should Have Been A Milk Run Final Score

[Edgar]

I wouldn't mind the axis and allied forums, although, I dont know how much good it would do as about 1/2 the people dont even take the time to read the orders until about 5 minutes before the scenario if at all. The other downfall I see is that the leadership by committee thing usually doesn't work. Its nice to develop a strategy on your own or with the help of a select few squaddies and then see how it plays out. When I was CM on my last time, I sent out an email anouncing that I was the CM and that if their was any special requests, please let me know. That seemed to have just worked out just fine for that frame.

I can imagine trying to develop orders in a timely manor and having to deal with the the pages and pages of endless crying when everyone doesn't get their way. We all have seen this here, can you imagine dealing with that and still trying to get something accomplished?

[Krusty]

I could be mistaken but adding forums and such requires the magical powers of Skuzzy, not the CM Team.

And it's a MAJOR pain in the head, neck, butt, and any other area... One guy has to go in there for EVERY forum ID and enter that person's name. Forget if they don't give the right forum ID, are unreachable... Forget doing this 500 times EVERY third week...

Forget it. Having seen that in scenarios (with numbers up to only 150 sometimes) it's way way WAY more trouble than you think. To do it on a constant-rotation is asking for a coordination nightmare.

[Edgar]

Correction to my last post: CM should have been CIC.
 
Edgar

[Bino]

SMF, the software that runs this BBS,  supports private member groups, i.e., squadrons.  The monthly upkeep *could* be merely allowing squads, not each individual pilot, into the right forums.

But that looks like it *might* require Skuzzy to update the entire BBS from version 1.1 to version 2 of SMF.  A non-trivial exercise, I bet.

[AKP]

Lets not forget that the Allies and Axis assignments CHANGE every month.  This would mean redoing the forum privileges for everyone, every month.  The chances of someone getting privileges to the wrong forum section increase every time it has to be changed. 

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the way we do it now.  CM emails objectives out to each side.  CiC's then draw up orders based on those objectives and email them out to their sides.  If squads need to coordinate, or have questions for the CiC or CM, they do it via email. 

The same people that do not check their email now, or wait until 10 minutes before the frame... are going to be the same ones that dont check a forum, or wait until 10 minutes before the frame to do it.  I see no reason to take all the effort to reinvent the FSO wheel here, when only a small percentage of us would use it.

Dont get me wrong, in a perfect world... it is a great idea.  But in practice, it would be a huge administration nightmare, and wouldn't add that much, if anything, to the event in my opinion.

[AKP]

One more thought....

Now if someone wanted to create a PRIVATE FSO forum for this purpose... which would NOT me associated with the main AH forums, that could easily be done... although it would still require extra management.  It would need to be limited to the REGISTERED squad members that are on the FSO email list now.  For example... to be granted acces to the forum, your user name would need to be the same as your AH Game ID, and the email the same as the one on the AH Events roster.  So only 4 squad members per squad would be allowed on the boards.

Each month, a new forum section would be created for that months FSO for each side... with the privileges granted to the squads on those respective sides.  This would allow older FSO sections to remain on the boards, and still be restricted to the squads they are supposed to be restricted to.

In other words, you wouldn't change the privileges of the SQUADS each month... only the privileges of the forum section for that month would need to be set for the squads that would see them.

I can do this on the forum I run for our squad now, so I know it is possible.

Now again... with all this said, this would need to be a DUPLICATION of the email system we use now... not a replacement for it.  The email system would still need to be the primary means of communicating objectives and orders.  A forum would be a secondary means.  Which brings up the next point...  do we really want a forum to discuss orders?  Orders are just that... orders.  If we open up a discussion forum on them, it gives people the opportunity to complain about them much more easily, and much more publicly.  Orders from the CiC should be simply executed... not discussed amongst a group and questioned... just more of my ramblings here.

[RSLQK186]

Question: Why not impose a tax on all participating squads to pay a legion of suits to hand deliver info to the CO and XO of each squad and require a signature after presenting a picture ID?
Answer: Much expense with no return. There are some that will not answer the door or be out of town without forwarding the responsibility to others. They volunteer to abide by rules and don't do as expected. This will always happen from time to time.

I also do realise that the "side forum campain" suggests that it will be beneficial in the planning process for the sides. Planning by committee is not the answer or intent of FSO. Around 4 days to provide orders does not give much time for debate. The responsibility is rotated fairly. Minimum of 2 individuals per week. Eveyone else can relax and just try to follow orders. Anyone that wants to contribute can by PM or in the case of officers, email. If a CO needs help, he has several options available.

COs that respond to their duty is the solution. It seems the issue rarely comes up unless some one has missed that point. The CMs have the means to deal with this. Luckily for some, they are not a trigger happy bunch. They invite participation despite our failings. You have to intentionally, repeatedly or grievously screw up to be on the outs with them. Lucky me      

[RSLQK186]

One more thought....

Now if someone wanted to create a PRIVATE FSO forum for this purpose... which would NOT me associated with the main AH forums, that could easily be done... although it would still require extra management.  It would need to be limited to the REGISTERED squad members that are on the FSO email list now.  For example... to be granted acces to the forum, your user name would need to be the same as your AH Game ID, and the email the same as the one on the AH Events roster.  So only 4 squad members per squad would be allowed on the boards.

Each month, a new forum section would be created for that months FSO for each side... with the privileges granted to the squads on those respective sides.  This would allow older FSO sections to remain on the boards, and still be restricted to the squads they are supposed to be restricted to.

In other words, you wouldn't change the privileges of the SQUADS each month... only the privileges of the forum section for that month would need to be set for the squads that would see them.

I can do this on the forum I run for our squad now, so I know it is possible.

Now again... with all this said, this would need to be a DUPLICATION of the email system we use now... not a replacement for it.  The email system would still need to be the primary means of communicating objectives and orders.  A forum would be a secondary means.  Which brings up the next point...  do we really want a forum to discuss orders?  Orders are just that... orders.  If we open up a discussion forum on them, it gives people the opportunity to complain about them much more easily, and much more publicly.  Orders from the CiC should be simply executed... not discussed amongst a group and questioned... just more of my ramblings here.

And then there is the squad that gets moved after Frame 1 for balance issues. Not sure how much of a problem for the CMs. They do seem to handle it well though. But I see a bigger problem with a second forum.

[AKP]

And then there is the squad that gets moved after Frame 1 for balance issues. Not sure how much of a problem for the CMs. They do seem to handle it well though. But I see a bigger problem with a second forum.

That was essentially the point I was trying to make... but you managed to say it in less than 500 words

[Bino]

...
The same people that do not check their email now, or wait until 10 minutes before the frame... are going to be the same ones that dont check a forum, or wait until 10 minutes before the frame to do it.  I see no reason to take all the effort to reinvent the FSO wheel here, when only a small percentage of us would use it.
...

You've definitely got a good point there.   

[thorsim]

the idea is using a pw protected form so the command structure gets the PW in their side assignment e-mail ...

the mod just changes the form passwords each series.

basically it is the same security wise as it is now, the difference is ...

1) we have a concise area to discuss, plan, debrief, adjust, adapt and suggest improvements to make each sides planning and performance better.

2) we have a record of the thought process of the combatant sides that the event designers and players can review        between series and understand each sides challenges and maybe adjust the events to be better for everyone. 

security does not change, level of possible participation does not change but it offers us a way to sort out issues and strategy in a very active manner without blowing up everyone's e-mail. 

i doubt anyone could argue that brainstorming would not be a very valuable resource to CICs not to mention a clear picture of the last battle to see what worked, what didn't and possibly why.

+S+

t

[AKP]

i doubt anyone could argue that brainstorming would not be a very valuable resource to CICs not to mention a clear picture of the last battle to see what worked, what didn't and possibly why.

+S+

t

Actually, it seems to me it would make planning a frame even more difficult.  As it is now, the CiC plans, and issues the orders. Any discussion, or brainstorming that takes place, takes place within the squad serving as CiC.  Once the orders are issued, there is no discussion.  The orders are executed.  Questions may be asked of the CiC prior to frame, but there is no "discussion" of the orders.  Just as within a real military command structure.

Debrief can occur (and already does) on this forum.

I see your reason for asking for it Thor, but I really do believe it would make trying to plan a frame a nightmare for a CiC if the orders were posted in a manner where players could respond with "why did I get that plane again" or, "why did we pull bomber duty again" or, "I have a better idea"...  and 1000 other comments of the like.

With all respect, the system works.  Objectives are issued, orders written and sent, then executed.  To add anything to that will only confuse everything.

[thorsim]

quality of planning is inconsistent in the FSO,
some sort of hive mind input and quality secure review of previous operations
should improve that part of the event greatly.

[AKP]

Guess we are going to have to just agree to disagree here thor.  No hard feelings on my part though.  It is the differences in each of us that make life interesting.

I think that part of what makes FSO fun, and challenging, is the variety you get with a different squad, and a different level of experience sending out the orders each week.  Sometimes you have a seasoned veteran writing the orders.  Sometimes, it is the CiC's first time in the big chair.  I know for my first time, I consulted previous CiC's and CM's for advice.  I would suggest any CiC with questions or concerns do the same.

But ultimately, the job of getting to a target, or defending one... falls on the squad CO's.  There have been many times all of us have been handed a "Leaky Bag of S**t"... and we have made something better out of it.  Yes... there are going to be bad orders.  But it is what we do with those orders that make the frame... for both sides.

A perfect example of why I think an orders planning committee based on a forum will not work, is the conversation you and I are having right now.  We are both set on our opinions.  Neither of us if going to sway the other with anything we say here.  We both think we are right. 

Now... think of this type of coversation about a set of orders, that we have to issue for 150 - 200 players... in 3 or 4 days.  And think of this conversation with instead of just 2 people arguing their points... there are 10, or 20.  And who is in charge?  The CiC for the week?  Or does the majority of squad CO's rule?  I foresee a huge mess, bruised egos, and heated arguments... followed by "See Rule #4".  All of which would hurt FSO more than it would help it.

There is an old saying that I find applies in just about all cases...

"Too Many Chiefs, Not enough Indians"

In my opinion, this is another one of those cases.

[Krusty]

I have to side with AKP on this one.