March FSO: The Last Battle of Kharkov - August 1943

[Zoney]

I hate to burst your bubble but this is a video game. Everyone knows in real life when the Germans had a case of fratricide the Russians received 5 points!

"Like in real life" is what I said.  Does that make you think I believe this isn't a video game?

FSO's are the most desciplined part of our video game.  This new rule will make that more so not less so.

Both sides have the same rules and will be rewarded or penalized exacctly the same.  The more desciplined side will have an advantage.

[kilo2]

"Like in real life" is what I said.  Does that make you think I believe this isn't a video game?

Yes I read what you typed. My point still stands.

The other side should not receive any points for fratricide.

[Krusty]

Perd, you say you shoot your CO down but the enemy team gets 5 points. That's not the case. They don't just look at planes that didn't make it back. They count kill awards. So if there's a landing bonus your team won't get that, but the other team won't benefit other than not having to worry about 1 more enemy plane.

[mthrockmor]

So who is flying the 190A5?

[USAFCAPcTSgt]

Just shoot at everyone and sort out the bodies later for scoring.

[weiser]

162nd updated, ready for orders

[ELD66]

AK's Set. Didn't have the time to vote like usual though.
Last month you were a day early, this month 5 days late...

 

[Bino]

...
Per the old scoring, if I shoot down Sukov (my faithful XO and squaddie) I obviously am not credited with an enemy kill. However the Allies receive 5 points for his loss (not to mention the loss of a potential 5 points for the Axis for a landing). So in that situation the Axis get 0 points (no chance at a 5 pt bonus) and Allies get 5 points. I get an earful from my XO.
...

Perdweeb, your initial assumption is incorrect: under the old way, a friendly fire death scores no points at all, for anyone.

[perdue3]

Perdweeb, your initial assumption is incorrect: under the old way, a friendly fire death scores no points at all, for anyone.

Right on. Therefore, at any rate this rule sucks. It is ridiculous to say that friendly fire will be avoided more with the new rule. It won't be. It doesn't happen too often in a frame anyway. I dont see a need for this penalty at all. I can guarantee you my squad will fly no differently. Under my command, there is a rule in place for multiple squaddies on one soon to be dead Allied pilot. It is there for two reasons but one is to avoid killing each other.

Zoney, I agree with you for the most part. I want FSO to stay as real as possible. There is a line though. Scenarios, for me, are over that line and have been for 2 years. FSO is not. It is as real as I want it to be. Discipline wins the day in events, we all know this. To ask us to be more discipline is ludacris. Every CO should have something in place for that situation. But a little ignorance is shown when you compare FSO to real life. We are all here becaused we love the event. But considering only 5-10% of the people flying FSO can actually take off a taildragger and land it successfully in real life. I am more than sure that less than 1% can take off a real Bf 109. I know I cant and I have got all my time in a Luscombe 8E. Not saying I am some awesome pilot or anything, I just know I cant do it.

To the CMs: It is hard for me to believe that you guys thought of every little detail that goes into friendly fire. There is penalty enough in shooting down a friendly. I have already listed them. The hardest part is knowing you shot down a friendly and are held responsible for his early night to bed and lack of fun. If you all thought of that, kudos. The chance of a 5 point landing bonus is erased and one plane is taken out of the fight and not by an enemy. There are already plenty of reasons to be careful shooting around friendlies. We do not need a substantial, potential game changing scare tactic that is the new friendly fire penalty. Yes it is fair and even because both sides have it in place, but why? It is not necessary. It will not help FSO in any way. It may increase some people's sense of realism and immersion, but not everyone's.

[Bino]

Problem with the write-up:
The 30mm Mk108s are not something you can disable. They are the default weapon configuration and present in all other loadouts. These are the internal top nose guns.
...

This has been confirmed.  As you can see, we're still learning the limits of the weapon configuration CM tool.  My intent in this setup was simply to have bombers be bombers and fighters be fighters.  Oh, well...

[morfiend]

This has been confirmed.  As you can see, we're still learning the limits of the weapon configuration CM tool.  My intent in this setup was simply to have bombers be bombers and fighters be fighters.  Oh, well...

  I guess that answers my question Bino!  As you said,Oh well....   would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to diable guns they should be removed so you dont carry the weight needlessly! 

  A moot point I guess.


   

[STXAce8]

  I guess that answers my question Bino!  As you said,Oh well....   would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to diable guns they should be removed so you dont carry the weight needlessly! 

  A moot point I guess.


   

Needlessly carry mk108s , morf, go kill yourself right now.   

[Poppy]

I hate to burst your bubble but this is a video game. Everyone knows in real life when the Germans had a case of fratricide the Russians received 5 points!

Absolutely just a game . . based on reality. The more realistic the better! Perdue3 makes a good point and I respect that, so does everyone that commented but I agree with the remarks made by those 'for' this ruling if only for the realism; the points are the the game part while the rest is the part of the game we fight for real. (the after action debates verify this, they're real yet based on the game) Hell, I want friendly collisions and pre dawn takeoffs too! Anything to make it as close to real, even if it means draconian rules as Bino presented. After all, anyone that has served knows it ain't a democracy in the military. FSO should be as realistic as possible for the up to 6 hours we all fight it every month. I ask: what is the friendly penalty for fraticide and what is its benifit to an enemy in real life? Just my thoughts and opinion, respectfully...

[Poppy]

  I guess that answers my question Bino!  As you said,Oh well....   would be nice if we had more control over the armament system,so long as it removes the equipment and not just disables it. It's fine to disable rockets or bombs but if you are going to disable guns they should be removed so you don't carry the weight needlessly!  

  A moot point I guess.


  

I would prefer to fight against a 110 with the full gun package. I see a more formidable foe in the 110 G2 without the full package because it's so much more maneuverable without em yet retains the same ability to devastate an opponent with just a touch. Now if the weight remains and the guns aren't there, well that wouldn't be fair even though it would be to my benefit as an Allied flyer...

[perdue3]

Read this statement:

This is just a game that is based on reality. The "friendly fire penalty" adds realism to the game. The points deducted is the game's way of penalizing those who partake in fratricide.



Does that not sound incredibly ridiculous and negating? Every aspect negates another. Just so you guys are not confused, in real life I am sure they tried hard not to kill each other, my squad (as I am sure all of the others do) tries hard not to kill each other. In real life, a man dies and an aircraft is lost. In this game a squaddie's night ends early and we lose an aircraft. Again, this is just a game therefore we are already somewhat "historically accurate." I dont see why the rule is needed. I have tried to make my point three different ways and all the CM Team has to say is "your assumption is wrong, no points are given to the enemy...".

So please CM's, get involved in this. Explain to all of us how and why this will make FSO so much better than it already is. What kind of thought process went into this decision? Thanks.