FSO: Fully shafted, over.

[PFactorDave]

Were the F4Us that we ran into heavy?  If so, then maybe the staff needs to consider how the scoring is done.

The F4Us started with an altitude advantage, if they were heavy they must have all skinned their ords and gone into fighter mode.  We were, locally, vastly outnumbered.  When I finally went down there were at least 6 F4Us on me.

It seems to me that there needs to be a greater emphasis on completing the assigned mission.  If the entire strike package dumps its ords at the first sign of the enemy, there willl never be any attempt on the target.

In my case, 2 F4Us would have been more then enough to deal with me, the other 4+ could have easily pushed on to the target and either completed their mission or at least given the rest of the defenders a crack at them.

[lothmog]

Were the F4Us that we ran into heavy?

The 334th engaged the N1K's at around 25k, we were escorting the strike package below us.  And for the record, we spotted 5 N1K's versus our 6 F4U's.  Seems fair to me.  No more than 5 minutes after our little engagement, the 412th and the 334th got swarmed by superior numbers.  It works both ways Dave, just sayin'.

[PFactorDave]

The 334th engaged the N1K's at around 25k, we were escorting the strike package below us.  And for the record, we spotted 5 N1K's versus our 6 F4U's.  Seems fair to me.  No more than 5 minutes after our little engagement, the 412th and the 334th got swarmed by superior numbers.  It works both ways Dave, just sayin'.

If you weren't heavy, then I don't have a problem with how it went down. 

[StokesAk]

It just seems to me that heavy fighters attacking strat targets does not makes sense. Specially when the strike package them selves were used as sacrifical lambs.

So...what happened to the "There will be no more than 8 sets of B29s attacking one target". Wasn't that made to stop the allies from massing thier froces and punching a hole through one area while leaving the rest of the Japanese defenders 100 miles away with no clue what is going on?

[caldera]

Total waste of two hours (including required early arrival in arena) on a Friday night.  Nothing fun about high alt patrolling, realistic or not.  
Never saw a single con.  Just about landed it before dying of boredom.  

[Nefarious]

In Frame 3 the Allies had the number of B-29s upped to 48 and with the terrain update were now able to hit every target in Japan.

Obviously the Allied CIC chose to handle the objectives a different way. In FSO we as the event designers can only do so much and the rest of the job is left to the CIC who design the orders for us Squad COs and pilots.

Had the B-29s attacked every target like I was anticipating some of the attitudes here may be different this morning. I'm sorry you guys a had a crappy time. In hindsight, perhaps I should of dropped the entire USN plane set for frame three.

[PFactorDave]

In Frame 3 the Allies had the number of B-29s upped to 48 and with the terrain update were now able to hit every target in Japan.

Obviously the Allied CIC chose to handle the objectives a different way. In FSO we as the event designers can only do so much and the rest of the job is left to the CIC who design the orders for us Squad COs and pilots.

Had the B-29s attacked every target like I was anticipating some of the attitudes here may be different this morning. I'm sorry you guys a had a crappy time. In hindsight, perhaps I should of dropped the entire USN plane set for frame three.

With all due respect Nefarious, you told us that there would be no more then 8 formations tasked to each target for frame one, and that that restriction could be raised or lowered for frames 2 and 3.  Is this what happened?  It seems to me that rule changes made in the middle of the setup should have been made known to all.

The forces of B-29s will have to be split up, 24 Formations of B-29s will not be attacking 1 Target. Going into Frame 1, There will be three targets for the B-29s... Equally divided that would put 8 Formations over each target. (24 Ships). This can be raised or lowered going into frame 2 depending on the results of frame 1 and the same goes for the ALT CAP, It can be raised or lowered depending on the results.

And from Ghostdancer

Well Nef has implementing three things so far to try to balance out the design.

1) Forcing the B29s to hit multiple targets to make sure there is not one massive force of them (no pig piling)>

2) Enforcing an alt limit on the B29s (no 32K alt strikes from them).

3) Japanese forces will have the numerical advantage on the U.S.  Exact advantage TBD once all squads have indicated their preferences.

[Nefarious]

In all due respect you misunderstood me. Obviously the bombers had to be split up. All 24 formations could not attack all three targets as FSO rules prohibit them from that. They had no choice but to split up the bombers because USN Attack Aircraft were not available in the Western area in Frames 1 and 2.

The forces of B-29s will have to be split up, 24 Formations of B-29s will not be attacking 1 Target. Going into Frame 1, There will be three targets for the B-29s...Equally divided that would put 8 Formations over each target. (24 Ships).This can be raised or lowered going into frame 2 depending on the results of frame 1 and the same goes for the ALT CAP, It can be raised or lowered depending on the results.

I never listed that they had to have 8 formations per target as a rule in the setup at ahevents.org or in my objectives. I was referring to the number of B-29s that could be raised or lowered not indicating the number per target. It's not my decision how to distribute forces in FSO unless I am the CIC that frame, I was just using a possible situation when describing 8 per target.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Nefarious]

And from Ghostdancer

Ghostdancer did not write my event.

[PFactorDave]

Ghostdancer did not write my event.

Then you failed to correct him when you had plenty of time to do so.

Tell me this.  As designer, did you intend for the B29s to be used against multiple targets in Frame 3?  Can you understand how the Axis CiCs and Squad COs might have been lead to believe that the B29s would be forced to split between targets?  Either by what you had said, or by what Ghostdancer said (and never was corrected)?

There seems to be a disconnect here somewhere.  I love FSO, I'm just trying to point out where things seem to have gone kerflewy here, so hopefully future setups will be better.

[DCCBOSS]

Then you failed to correct him when you had plenty of time to do so.

Tell me this.  As designer, did you intend for the B29s to be used against multiple targets in Frame 3?  Can you understand how the Axis CiCs and Squad COs might have been lead to believe that the B29s would be forced to split between targets?  Either by what you had said, or by what Ghostdancer said (and never was corrected)?

There seems to be a disconnect here somewhere.  I love FSO, I'm just trying to point out where things seem to have gone kerflewy here, so hopefully future setups will be better.

 +++1

[Nefarious]

Yes. I was under the impression once I opened the entire map to the use of B-29s they would be used as such by the Allied CIC. It didn't happen that way.

And yes, I can understand that the Axis might anticipate being attacked by B-29s at every target as I mentioned in the objectives that its possible for them to do so. But looking at the setup and the objectives, it would be impossible to rule out they would not be attacked by USN aircraft too. Allied Carriers were clearly in range to strike all those targets and they were clearly available to the Allied CIC to use. All that information was included in the Axis Objectives too. It was also never written in the setup or the objectives that X number of B-29s had to hit each target, it was just by the nature of the design that B-29s had to hit multiple targets in Frame 1 and 2. In Frame 3 the map was wide open for the Allies, Both USAAF and USN had the option of hitting target anywhere on the map.

I try to balance how much control I have over the event. I try to make sure the CICs have options and understand those options without writing specific rules every FSO. I try to use the game limitations and settings as a foundation of the design without using a laundry list of rules so the CICs can make there own decisions.

Everyone is going to have their own strategy when it comes to writing FSO orders. One CIC is going to approach FSO Objectives a totally different way than someone else might. It's just really unfortunate when it ruins peoples Fridays. That was never my intention or the CICs and I am sorry.

[elc7367b]

Someone with a little more smarts figure this one out:  Was the below listed rule violated?

- CICs shall not organize a mission with orders to attack more than one objective in succession.  More simply stated, one objective, one mission.  If there are 8 offensive objectives for one side during a frame, the CIC shall ensure that there are eight attack missions, each assigned to attack a single objective.  This rule is intended to prevent CIC's from overwhelming the defenders of a single target. For example, a large combined force of 60 aircraft attacking three bases that are each singly defended by a squad of 15 or 20. Please see the following examples.


Muttman
Sick Puppies

[Nefarious]

Someone with a little more smarts figure this one out:  Was the below listed rule violated?

No. Each target was assigned an attack group.

[EagleDNY]

CHawks took our target and left 15 guys over an enemy strat with nothing to drop on. I'm glad their squad had a good time, shame our evening was ruined because of it but that's FSO, "it happens" with startling and consistent frequency.
Yes, I'm pissed about it. I'm pissed it happened, I'm pissed no-one (CHawks) thought to tell anyone they'd taken other targets so we could re-task. I'm pissed I was chat banned and couldn't tell the CHawks exactly and precisely what I thought about them then and think about them now.

I'm not the CO, but I think I'll respond anyway since I flew the mission...
1.  The order I have in hand, and the only one I received, says nothing about any particular squad hitting any particular factory.  They say quote "Entire large city complexes are to be targeted.  They consist of a HQ, AAA Fac, Troop Fac, Radar Fac, Ammo Fac, and Fuel Fac.  Destroy as much as you can at each city."
2.  We grouped up after air launch, followed the lead squad and escorts to Tokyo.  Along the way, our squad leader who had been coordinating with another squad ordered us to save bombs for a 2nd strike on Nagoya.  We dropped half our bomb load on the Tokyo strats as ordered, then turned left, went down to Nagoya and put the other half on the strats there at about T+75.  We then turned SSW and landed at 125 at about T+115. 
3.  AT NO TIME were we told to hit only one factory.  Our squad leader was in contact with other bomb groups and our fighter escorts (who did a terrific job btw) so if there was some sort of coordination error take it up with allied high command. 
4.  Our squad flies plenty of FSOs, we take any ride or any dirty job handed to us and fly it in a calm, professional manner as best we can.  You won't see us whining in the FSO forum or bad-mouthing some other squad if something goes wrong during a mission.   
5.  I don't really give a rats rear-end what you think, but I can see from the way you run your mouth why you got chat banned.